Livestock Traceability in Canada - Is it do-able?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rocky on October 6, 2009 at 8:07am

I think it can be - but the question I always wonder is who is paying for it? I'm not going to argue with the concept - I think it's good -- I just think it's really expensive that doesn't equal real results. I mean - shouldn't beef guys be making money with all the improved traceability and market access they've gotten? Is having a system for pigs going to help them make money? I don't think so.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Dales on October 6, 2009 at 5:00pm

Hi Sara:

I agree with some of the points Rocky makes.
The technology is certainly available to implement a system.

The issue is the cost/benefits - governments can mandate a system like in beef but can a system create the added value from a marketing price perspective to warrant the extra costs.

Are we generating a premium for Canadian Beef because of traceability over non traced beef on the world market or in any market.

Identity Preserved soybeans do generate a premium for the producer so they can decide to do the extra work for the extra revenue...so there are market driven models that do work.

Thanks,

Joe

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by pigsrgr8 on October 8, 2009 at 12:39pm

Pretty low priority on hog farms these days.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Twynstra on October 8, 2009 at 9:21pm

Not a chance for the non-SM sector....I give the SM sector a 95% chance of pulling it off. There will be a traceability scheme....a la gun control, eHealth, etc., but as far as being real-time current this will only be a dream. Without a clear and bankable economic benefit for participants it will be in perpetual disarray. Throw in the myriad of 'hobby' livestock practioners and I shudder at the resources about to be wasted. Not to say that it isn't a necessary idea, but the approach has been all wrong. Unlike IP crop production where the marketplace expects and rewards traceability, I just don't see the same pressure along the generic export livestock food chain beyond what is already existing. As for the idea of traceabilty to combat disease outbreaks...I see too many feathers flying overhead or wildlife around in its natural state to take much consolation. Unlike certain equipment dealers that record every size and make of every machine in their market area for competitve reasons, I just don't see the same degree of impetus driving this agenda by the processors.

However, if livestock processors or exporters are driving this agenda then WHY is public money and government so involved? Not content to lobby for the demise of local abattoirs thru overbearing food safety regs, or to rest after successfully passing the murder of 22 citizens thru tainted meat onto government, they have now successfully convinced decision makers to ante up public dollars to rebuild and enhance their marketing efforts. Will National Grocers be more content and pay a premium to stock Ontario livestock products over foreign product? I think our dollar approaching par will have more say. Now please tell me where I am wrong and what I am missing?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve Twynstra on October 8, 2009 at 9:22pm

..just another way for decision makers to divert their attention from the REAL issues facing Canadian agriculture!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bristow on January 10, 2010 at 2:11am

It is a joke and puts extra cost on the product, if the meat is not edible all those meat inspectors are not doing their job are they. Plus the retard who came up with this whole concept should be run out of town as carpet bagger, and the money should be spent on something more practical. The consumer doesn't care and will only buy the cheap imported meat. An other example of miss management, and pricing your local product out of the market. An if you are a farm and don't see what it is, then more fool you. Doomsday book rember that passed history.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion