Vegetarian Discussion: What Is Western Grasslands Beef?

What Is Western Grasslands Beef?
Posts: 19

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Rudy Canoza
2005-09-07 12:03:31 EST
What is Western Grasslands Beef?
Western Grasslands Beef is:

* Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally
flavorful
and tender beef.

http://westerngrasslands.com/


It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.

Derek
2005-09-07 12:24:00 EST
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:

>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>
> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
> and tender beef.
>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>
>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.

False. While the meat pushers on these vegetarian and
animal- related forums try to convince vegans that grass
fed beef is that: grass fed, and therefore has a much lesser
association with the collateral deaths caused by farmers
growing animal feeds, they neglect to mention that
grass fed beef is also fed grains at the feedlot just like
any other steer, and therefore has a larger association
with collateral deaths than they would like to admit.

Meat-labeling guidelines are all over the place, allowing
producers to make whatever claims they want to with
impunity, so U.S.D.A. has "proposed minimum
requirements for livestock and meat industry production/
marketing claims, when adopted, will become the United
States Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing
Claims." They are as follows;

[SUMMARY: These proposed minimum requirements
for livestock and meat industry production/marketing
claims, when adopted, will become the United States
Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims.
.....
Grass Fed Claims--Background: This claim refers
to the feeding regimen for livestock raised on grass,
green or range pasture, or forage throughout their
life cycle, with only limited supplemental grain
feeding allowed. Since it is necessary to assure the
animal's well being at all times, limited supplementation
is allowed during adverse environmental conditions.
Grass feeding usually results in products containing
lower levels of external and internal fat (including
marbling) than grain-fed livestock products.

Claim and Standard:
[sbull] Grass Fed.--Grass, green or range pasture, or
forage shall be 80% or more of the primary energy
source throughout the animal's life cycle.

Dated: December 20, 2002.
A.J. Yates,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 02-32806 Filed 12-27-02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-02-P]
http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/ls0202.txt

These "proposed minimum requirements mean that
grass fed beef can in fact be fed up to 80% grains for
60 days in a feedlot, just like any other steer, and still
qualify as grass fed beef.

Comments from disgruntled grass fed beef producers
bear this out and reveal the lie behind grass fed beef;

[Grass Fed Claims; This would appear to be the
most commented upon topic in this docket. We
will not belabor all the points of concern which
are addressed but will focus on the areas of
concern to our cooperative of growers. While
Grain Fed addressed specifically what the method
IS, Grass Fed seems to try to define what it IS
NOT. This dichotomy is confusing. We feel that
you need to define both as what they ARE since
that is what is motivating the consumer.

While the intent of this language would suggest
that Grass Fed animals are not Grain Finished,
especially in Feedlots, the language as written is
not at all clear to that end. In fact by allowing
80% of consumed energy to be concentrated at
the finishing stage, our data suggests that beef
animals could be fed 50% forage /50% grain for
70 days at finishing. Likewise an animal could be
fed 85% grain for 60 days and still qualify under
these guidelines. This is absolutely not in line with
consumer expectations as is borne out in the
website comments.]
http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/comments/mc213.pdf

and

Dear Mr. Carpenter,

The proposed definition of the claim ?grass fed,? as it
may appear on future USDA approved beef labels, is
meaningless in the context of the current United States
cattle market and would violate consumer trust if put
into effect.

The huge majority of all beef cattle in the United States
are ?finished? on a grain-based ration in a commercial
feed lot. Even so, virtually all American cattle spend
80% or more of their lives on pasture eating grasses,
legumes and naturally occurring seeds (grain). Calling
these animals ?grass fed,? as proposed in the new label
claim definition, ignores the fact that in most cases their
whole diet for the last few months of their lives contains
no grass at all. Calling these animals ?grass fed? therefore
becomes meaningless since virtually all cattle are grass fed
as in the proposed definition.

However, for the last decade, a small, but growing number
of producers, including ourselves, have been marketing
cattle finished exclusively on pasture and hay without the
use of unnatural levels of grain-based seeds. This grass-
finished beef has been marketed as ?grassfed? or ?grass-
fed?, and these terms have come to be recognized by
millions of consumers. The enormous publicity over the
last year for grassfed meats (following on best-selling
books such as The Omega Diet and Fast Food Nation)
has reinforced the perception that ?grass fed? is
synonymous with grass-finished and, by extension, that no
supplemental grain has been provided to the animals.

So, I feel that to call an animal that has received as much
as 20% of its total nutrition in a grain feeding finishing
program ?grass fed? could be misleading and confusing
to the consumer. Grain finishing of ruminants is an artificial
feeding practice born of our unique circumstances here in
the United States. Grass feeding is the basis for ruminant
health consistent with the genetic structure and nutritional
requirements of the animals. The claim ?grass fed? as used
on a USDA-approved label should mean that a grassfed
animal has received no grain other than that which is naturally
occurring on pasture or in hay feeds.

I am glad that the USDA is attempting to bring some order
to the grassfed meat discussion, but I join those voices that
have been raised calling for a larger forum in which to discuss
the definition of the grassfed claim as well as other new claims.
I ask that the March 31, 2003, deadline for public comment
be extended indefinitely to give all citizens, most particularly
those who have been building the grassfed meats market, our
customers, and those who support our efforts, the opportunity
to have our perspective thoroughly considered.

Thank you for your serious consideration of my comments.

Sincerely,

Ernest Phinney
General Manager
Western Grasslands Beef]
http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/comments/mc102.txt

Grass fed beef, then, isn't exactly what it's name
implies, and has just as much an association with
the collateral deaths found in crop production as
any other steer in the feedlot. Don't be fooled by
the meat pushers, here or anywhere.

Rudy Canoza
2005-09-07 12:25:49 EST
Derek wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>
>
>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>>
>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>> and tender beef.
>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>>
>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>
>
> False.

True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.

Derek
2005-09-07 12:47:55 EST
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>
>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>>>
>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>>> and tender beef.
>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>>>
>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>>
>>
>> False.
>
>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.

His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
as that used by U.S.D.A. I've no reason to believe him
or any farmer.

Rudy Canoza
2005-09-07 12:51:22 EST
Derek wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>
>>Derek wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>>>>
>>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>>>> and tender beef.
>>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>>>>
>>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>>>
>>>
>>>False.
>>
>>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
>>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
>>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.
>
>
> His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
> as that used by U.S.D.A.

False. His definition means 100% grass-fed.

D*@.
2005-09-07 12:56:22 EST
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 17:47:55 +0100, Derek <usenet.email@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>Derek wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>>>>
>>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>>>> and tender beef.
>>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>>>>
>>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>>>
>>>
>>> False.
>>
>>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
>>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
>>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.
>
>His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
>as that used by U.S.D.A.
_________________________________________________________
Western Grasslands Beef cattle are:
[...]
Never fed animal byproducts or any artificial feeds including
grain-based supplements and feeds.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>I've no reason to believe him
>or any farmer.

We know you're a liar Goochild. It has been proven above
once again. We know that you don't care about the animals,
or you would care about the truth. So we know, from you
proving it, that you are more interested in promoting lies than
you are about the animals or the truth. You have proven it!

Derek
2005-09-07 13:30:16 EST
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:51:22 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>>Derek wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>>>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>>>>> and tender beef.
>>>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>>>>
>>>>False.
>>>
>>>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
>>>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
>>>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.
>>
>> His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
>> as that used by U.S.D.A.
>
>False. His definition means 100% grass-fed.

I don't believe him. Just as you don't believe Kent
Lundberg concerning his claims about his produce.
I've every reason to believe that he uses the definition
set out by usda where so-called grass fed beef steers
are fed grains in the feedlot like any other steer.

Derek
2005-09-07 13:31:28 EST
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:56:22 -0400, dh@. wrote:

>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 17:47:55 +0100, Derek <usenet.email@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>>Derek wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>>>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>>>>> and tender beef.
>>>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>>>>
>>>> False.
>>>
>>>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
>>>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
>>>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.
>>
>>His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
>>as that used by U.S.D.A. I've no reason to believe him
>>or any farmer.
>
> We know

That's good.

Rudy Canoza
2005-09-07 14:33:35 EST
Derek lied:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:51:22 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
> >Derek wrote:
> >> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
> >>>Derek wrote:
> >>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
> >>>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
> >>>>> and tender beef.
> >>>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
> >>>>
> >>>>False.
> >>>
> >>>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
> >>>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
> >>>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.
> >>
> >> His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
> >> as that used by U.S.D.A.
> >
> >False. His definition means 100% grass-fed.
>
> I don't believe him.

You have no reason not to believe him.


> Just as you don't believe Kent
> Lundberg concerning his claims about his produce.

Lundberg never said his rice is "CD-free", you liar. He wouldn't - he
KNOWS, with certainty, that animals are killed. He disputed, rather
hysterically, diderot's claim about a green waterfall. Lundberg
doesn't have any idea how many animals are killed, and he didn't
attempt to say.

Now, you are lying about what Lundberg said.

Lundberg attempted to sweep the issue under the rug, so to speak.
Because he doesn't know, I claim with authority that Lundberg's claims
are self-serving and deceptive.


> I've every reason to believe that he uses the definition
> set out by usda

No, you have no reason to believe that, and lots of reason to believe
he's telling the truth.


Derek
2005-09-07 14:42:31 EST
On 7 Sep 2005 11:33:35 -0700, "Rudy Canoza" <notgenx32@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:51:22 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>> >Derek wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:25:49 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>> >>>Derek wrote:
>> >>>>On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:03:31 GMT, Rudy Canoza <someguy@ph.con> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>What is Western Grasslands Beef?
>> >>>>>Western Grasslands Beef is:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> * Always natural, 100% grassfed, exceptionally flavorful
>> >>>>> and tender beef.
>> >>>>>http://westerngrasslands.com/
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>It *is* 100% grassfed - no grain.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>False.
>> >>>
>> >>>True. The letter from Mr. Phinney, the general manager
>> >>>of Western Grasslands Beef, makes clear that they
>> >>>produce 100% grass-fed beef; NO grain.
>> >>
>> >> His definition of grass fed beef is likely to be the same
>> >> as that used by U.S.D.A.
>> >
>> >False. His definition means 100% grass-fed.
>>
>> I don't believe him.
>
>You have no reason not to believe him.

I have no evidence other than his word, so I've
every GOOD reason not to believe him. I would
be a fool to rely on anecdotal evidence to base
any conclusions upon. You should know that.

>> Just as you don't believe Kent
>> Lundberg concerning his claims about his produce.
>
>Lundberg never said his rice is "CD-free", you liar.

He said that he takes great care to avoid as many
collateral deaths as he can, yet you refused to believe
a single word he said, so why should I believe a
single word from the farmer who claims to produce
grass fed beef when the definition of it allows for
grain fed animals fed in feedlots? You can't have it
both ways.
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron