Canadian cattle producers and some of their American counterparts will have to agree to disagree on the need for country-of-origin labelling.
Representatives from South Dakota, North Dakota, Kansas, Wyoming and Colorado met with Saskatchewan producers during Canadian Western Agribition last week in Regina for their annual round table discussion.
And while Silvia Christen, executive director of the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, said they found common ground on issues such as the need for research and innovation and succession planning, COOL was a different matter.
“The South Dakota Stockgrowers Association has, from the very beginning, been very strong supporters of country-of-origin labelling, and we continue to support it,” she said.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
“We feel that it’s something very important for our country and our producers. However, we understand that we need to be WTO compliant.”
The association’s support for COOL centres on promotion and labelling of U.S. beef. Christen said all types of food products are labelled with country of origin, and there should be a way to do that for beef and still comply with the World Trade Organization.
However, the North Dakota Stockmen’s Association has a different view. It supports labelling through free enterprise and entrepreneurship rather than a government-mandated program.
Aaron Jacobson of Noonan, N.D., lives 10 kilometres south of the Canadian border.
“As an individual, I’ve been opposed to COOL since it was first proposed,” he said. “COOL has impacted me negatively.”
He said there are fewer Canadian animals at the stockyards in Williston, N.D., and there is a negative basis between the northern part of North Dakota and the area closer to South Dakota.
He said he pays the same price whether he buys Canadian or American bulls.
“Yet when I take that bull with a load of bulls to sell for slaughter, I’m discounted anywhere from 10 to 15 cents, strictly because it has the CAN (brand) on its right hip.”
He also said people are losing their jobs as American plants struggle to cope with COOL.
Christen said the South Dakota association is aware of those concerns, but she said other issues are also at work, such as market concentration.
“We need to be realistic about what those market forces are,” she said.
Mark Elford, chair of Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association, said COOL was costing Canadian producers $40 to $60 a head. Now, with Tyson out of the market because of COOL, that estimate is $100 per head.
Elford said he was happy to hear South Dakota producers say they want to comply with WTO, but the issue has to be resolved soon.
“We’d like to see it get fixed through the farm bill,” he said, rather than waiting for the WTO process to play out.
