Callicrate states “NO” for Missouri “Right To Farm” – In MO Vote NO on Amendment 1

Multinational and foreign corporations aren’t family farmers and they aren’t citizens of Missouri. Family farmers already enjoy the “Right to Farm” in Missouri. These strip mining, wealth extracting corporations shouldn’t be allowed protection under the Missouri constitution for their economic, social, and environmental destruction in the state. Vote NO on Amendment 1, protect the interests of family farmers and consumers in Missouri.

LEARN MORE: Missouri Amendment One; An Easier Road to Multinational Corporate Food Takeover:
VIDEO: “This is our constitution, corporations stay out!” – Lt. Governor Joe Maxwell

Posted in General Advocacy | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Food Hero: Will Harris, Sustainable Livestock Producer Winner of the Growing Green Awards 2014


Will Harris turned his back on conventional farming and adopted a profitable business model for sustainable livestock production. (Youtube)

Every year, the Growing Green Awards honor exceptional leaders and innovators committed to sustainable food and agriculture. Hosted by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Berkeley Food Institute (BFI) in San Francisco, the 2014 awards have been given to four individuals chosen among hundreds of other candidates across the United States. Winners have been awarded in four categories: Sustainable Livestock Producer, Sustainable Food and Farm Educator, Pollinator Protector, and Regional Food Leader.

“We are delighted to recognize these inspiring leaders. They have undertaken remarkable work to advance sustainable food and agriculture systems through innovative approaches,” said Ann Thrupp, Executive Director of the Berkeley Food Institute.

Will Harris, from the White Oak Pastures farm in Georgia, is the winner in Sustainable Livestock Production.

After decades of raising cattle on pastures purged by pesticides and finishing them on a diet of grain, hormones and antibiotics, Will Harris drastically changed his practices and converted to organic and grass-fed. His Southwest Georgia farm, White Oak Pastures, has been in Harris’ family since 1866. Yet, by the mid-1990s, Harris started to rethink the conventional shortcuts he used to push his cows to the feedlot. Instead of applying toxic chemicals and synthetic fertilizers, Harris learned to prevent overgrazing, protect water resources, and generally promote soil health through intensive land management and rotational grazing. He went further, sending multiple species (five kinds of poultry, hogs, sheep and goats) through his fields in sequence to control weeds and insects. Green pastures now nourish his animals, which in turn aerate and enrich the land with natural fertilizer. In order to respect his livestock from birth to death, Harris constructed a humane-kill abattoir on site (designed with help from Temple Grandin). He proved his business model is scalable, growing White Oak Pastures from a half million dollar enterprise to the largest organic certified farm in Georgia, taking in over US$25 million, annually.

Read Will’s blog post: From Factory Farm to Grass-fed Money Maker

by Nicolas Giroux, Research and Communications Contributor

Young French passionate about sustainable agriculture, Nicolas has an international background in business and cooperation. http://tiny.cc/NicolasGiroux

Posted in General Advocacy | Leave a comment

Like GM, Food Companies Place Profits Over Safety and Security

Our nation’s food system is at risk!

By Mike Callicrate

Putting people at risk to save a buck isn’t isolated to the automotive industry. In today’s global economy, where the biggest cheater wins, foreign imports of beef and the recent return of Pink Slime add insult to injury for the few remaining independent producers and meat processors struggling to survive. Food companies from Walmart to Chipotle to the mom and pop restaurants that rely on a Sysco food truck are acting contrary to U.S. interests with every transaction involving foreign meat; even worse, when that meat is blended with Pink Slime, food security, food safety and the reputation of our nation’s beef industry is damaged.

droughtThe beef cartel that has monopolized and decimated the U.S. cattle and beef industries is searching the world for the cheapest beef for trading into the most profitable markets. The impact isn’t limited to U.S. ranchers. Australian cattlemen have suffered a disastrous market failure with the loss of their competitive marketplace. In Australia, smaller local and regional packers that once competed for livestock have been driven out of business by bigger global players. In drought-ravaged regions, lack of markets and slaughter plants are forcing cattlemen to watch their cattle starve to death. Others, closer to the few remaining large packing plants – which have mostly been taken over by multinational companies like JBS and Cargill – had no choice last week, but to sell at 48% of the value of the U.S. cattle market. Companies importing this beef, or multinational companies that bring it in from their foreign locations, have around a 30 percent cost advantage over U.S. companies that are committed to sourcing cattle and beef exclusively from domestic sources.

Lack of labeling in restaurants and wholesale markets keeps consumers in the dark when they shop or eat out.

Isn’t this likely the real reason that Chipotle has stopped doing business with local producers in favor of sourcing cheap meat from a huge multinational supplier than can bring it in from anywhere in the world? As the Texas Ag Commissioner pointed out in a recent letter, many domestic producers struggling to keep their ranches afloat would be happy to fill that demand.

Lack of labeling in restaurants and wholesale markets keeps consumers in the dark when they shop or eat out. Country of origin labeling (COOL) only applies to the retail grocery marketplace and only for certain items. There are no rules requiring food service companies or restaurants to disclose where food comes from.

BNRLocal and regional companies selling to wholesale accounts and sourcing strictly U.S. beef have no chance to compete in the wholesale sector, which represents over 50% of total beef sold in the U.S. Even beef marked, “Born and Raised in the U.S.A.” offers no marketing advantage when sold to foodservice companies and restaurants, without it being mandatory that the person buying the meal is informed about its source. Big food companies, along with USDA, write the rules of trade, intending to keep sources of meat secret, disadvantaging smaller packers and processors and denying consumers the information they need to make informed choices.

After an extraordinary consumer backlash, Pink Slime (a.k.a. Lean Finely Textured Beef) has snuck back into America’s meat. Companies are again increasing their profits by secretly blending Pink Slime into their meat mixes. No label is required on the package. And even though the trim used for the process has proven to consistently contain live pathogens following the manufacturing process, there is no testing of the raw material or pathogen kill-step required – Consumers Beware!

Pink Slime, hidden in the grind of imported meat, gives big companies even more of an advantage over competitors that insist on selling high-quality locally produced meat. Without the ability to clearly differentiate their product in a fair and open marketplace, our best and most valued producers – those who believe in quality and believe in supporting their local economies by keeping their business local – will continue to be driven out of business.

If we want a safe and secure national food supply that ensures our ability to feed ourselves, it’s time to restrict foreign imports and domestic trade in a way that protects all producers from predatory multinational meat companies. Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) should be mandatory for all meats sold to consumers, including the wholesale marketplace and restaurants. Dangerous additives like Pink Slime should be banned, or, at the very least, require prominent labeling on products, menus, and signage at eating establishments.

General Motors grapples with safety crisis

Posted in General Advocacy, Pink Slime | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

9 Disappointing Facts About Chipotle

The company says it serves “Food With Integrity.” What does that mean?


9 Disappointing Facts About Chipotle
posted on June 25, 2014, at 2:56 p.m. by Deena Shanker BuzzFeed Staff

1. Chipotle doesn’t do all of its own cooking: Some is done by an outside company, the same one that makes McDonald’s McNuggets, Big Macs, and McRibs.Chipotle doesn’t do all of its own cooking: Some is done by an outside company, the same one that makes McDonald’s McNuggets, Big Macs, and McRibs.


Flickr: calamity_hane

Chipotle’s website says its “fresh cooking” is done “using classic culinary techniques — no shortcuts.” But Chipotle doesn’t do all of its own cooking: Two outside processing companies in Chicago, OSI and Miniat Holdings, braise the carnitas and barbacoa, trim the steaks, cook the beans, and make the bases for the restaurant’s green and red tomatillo salsas, all according to Chipotle’s specifications. (Everything else, said Chris Arnold, Chipotle’s Communications Director, “is made entirely in the restaurants.”)

OSI, a global meat processing corporation with facilities in 17 countries, also supplies McDonald’s with its burgers, nuggets, and other “value-added protein items” on its menu.

2. Some of Chipotle’s locally sourced food travels thousands of extra miles so it can be processed in Chicago. Some of Chipotle’s locally sourced food travels thousands of extra miles so it can be processed in Chicago.


chipotle.com

“The less distance food has to travel,” Chipotle’s website says, “the better.” Sourcing locally — defined by the company as within 350 miles from the restaurant — has long been part of the Chipotle mantra. It’s good for local economies, the environment, and the consumers, who get to enjoy the freshest foods.

But the ingredients for the carnitas, barbacoa, beans, and salsa bases, even when raised or grown just a short distance away from the restaurants serving them, have all traveled through Chicago, either through OSI or Miniat facilities. This is for consistency purposes, even if it has the potential to add thousands of food miles to your burrito. “You get cuts delivered and packaged to our specifications,” Arnold said. “It’s prepared in a really efficient and consistent way by having that done in fewer places than you would doing it in multiple places.”

3. Chipotle’s animal welfare standards may be better than other national restaurant chains, but they are still unclear. Chipotle’s animal welfare standards may be better than other national restaurant chains, but they are still unclear.


chipotle.com

A big part of Chipotle’s “Food With Integrity” philosophy is sourcing what it calls “responsibly raised” meat (originally called “naturally raised”). However, “responsibly” and “naturally raised” are not terms regulated by the government, and Chipotle does not require producers to have a third party certification, such as Certified Organic or Certified Humane. “‘Natural’ is on the honor system,” wrote food expert Dr. Marion Nestle in her book What To Eat. “Some producers of ‘natural’ meats may be honorable, but you have to take what they say on faith.”

Chipotle’s version of responsibly raised meat has three main requirements: animals have received no added hormones, no antibiotics ever, and were humanely raised. BuzzFeed asked to see the full definition of the responsibly raised standards, but the company declined to share them. “We struggle with getting people to understand the most basic elements,” said Arnold, “and adding details really runs the risk of muddying that understanding further.”

When the company can’t meet its needs with responsibly raised meat, they use conventionally sourced meat — meaning it’s from animals that were raised with growth hormones, sub-therapeutic antibiotics, and in conditions generally not considered humane — to fill the gap. In 2013, that came out to 7.8 million pounds of its beef (15% of its beef) and 88 million pounds of its chicken (less than 1% of its chicken). (All of the pork served fit their standards of responsibly raised.)

Several food and animal welfare experts recognize Chipotle for its efforts. “My reading of this is that they would like to be sourcing all of their meat from natural, sustainable, antibiotic-free, and cage-free farmers but can’t always get it,” said Nestle.

4. Chipotle is importing grass-fed beef from Australia, despite American producers lining up to work with them. Chipotle is importing grass-fed beef from Australia, despite American producers lining up to work with them.


Flickr: krossbow

Last month, Chipotle CEO Steve Ells announced that the company was sourcing grass-fed beef from Australia, saying “the U.S. supply isn’t growing quickly enough to match our demand.”

Many American producers, though, disagree. “We firmly believe that [Chipotle] could find domestic sources for all of their beef,” said Marilyn Noble, the American Grassfed Association’s Communications Director.

The Texas Agriculture Commissioner also wants in. “Texas ranchers want to be successful,” Bryan Black, Director of Communications for the Texas Department of Agriculture told BuzzFeed. “If there is a major market for grass-fed beef, then you can be sure many Texas ranchers would jump at the opportunity.”

But Chipotle did not contact these organizations before the announcement, nor did it respond to AGA’s email offering more domestic suppliers afterwards. “The price premium on grass-fed beef in the United States makes it a less viable solution unless we’re willing to raise prices,” Arnold said in explanation of the company’s decision.

Environmentalists would like Chipotle to find a way to source domestically. “We hope that importing from abroad is a temporary measure while they work to improve and transform the U.S. supply chain,” said Doug Sims at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Clearly, the best option is to minimize transport costs and impacts and have more U.S. sources of better beef.”

In the meantime, the savings on Australian beef may not last. Thanks to increased global demand for it, prices for Australian beef will go up in the second half of 2014 according to The Daily Livestock Report notes, “implying higher costs for beef processors and ultimately US consumers.”

5. Chipotle will not disclose which Australian companies are supplying its grass-fed beef, making the environmental impact of importing it widely unknown. Chipotle will not disclose which Australian companies are supplying its grass-fed beef, making the environmental impact of importing it widely unknown.


Flickr: gusveitch

By telling consumers that the Australian beef is from 100% grass-fed cattle that have never been given antibiotics or hormones, Chipotle is providing more information than most companies do about the origins of their meat. But without the names of the companies, consumers can’t fully understand or assess the environmental impact of importing grass-fed beef instead of using conventional beef from closer to home.

Grass-fed beef isn’t necessarily better for the environment than the conventionally raised kind. “To be ‘better’ or ‘sustainable,’ producers must verifiably follow best practices,” said Sims, noting that “climate smart” ranches take steps to maintain soil health and limit their release of carbon dioxide. “To verify whether their beef comes from a responsibly managed ranch, consumers increasingly want to see an independent, third-party standard and certification. The Sustainable Agriculture Network’s cattle standard, used by Rainforest Alliance, offers one such program for beef.”

Arnold says that all imported beef have “USDA label claims and is certified by AusMeat,” but neither address the questions about environmental impact.

6. Chipotle’s ingredients include GMOs and trans fats. Chipotle’s ingredients include GMOs and trans fats.

Flickr: lainetrees

Although Chipotle initially resisted calls to disclose their ingredients, it published a comprehensive list in March 2013, becoming the first national restaurant company to do so.

The annotated list on the website reveals that despite backing GMO labeling, Chipotle’s tortillas and tortilla chips are still made with GMO corn and soybean oil. The tortillas are also made with hydrogenated oils, better known as trans fats.

Arnold said the company “hope[s] to have GMOs removed from all of the ingredients by the end of this year.” Chipotle chefs are also looking for ways to make tortillas without hydrogenated oils, which Arnold said is “so little it rounds to zero under labeling rules [which require listing trans fats only if they are above .5g/serving].” Reconfiguring the tortilla recipe, Arnold said, “isn’t simple” because both of the available substitutes — lard, which isn’t vegetarian, and palm oil, which is environmentally destructive — present their own problems.

7. Chipotle’s advertising campaigns are as much fiction as fact. Chipotle’s advertising campaigns are as much fiction as fact.


youtube.com

Chipotle’s advertising campaigns (including the Willie Nelson tracked commercial Back to the Start, The Scarecrow featuring music from Fiona Apple, and the Hulu original series Farmed and Dangerous) all compare the horrors of factory farming with idyllic, beautiful sustainable agriculture.

But viewers should not confuse these fictional stories with Chipotle’s, or their competitors, actual practices. For one, Chipotle does rely on conventionally raised meat when it can’t find enough of its responsibly raised meat. (Importing beef from Australia will help but not solve the problem, Arnold said, as it’s “filling at least some of that gap.”) So it is not as removed from industrial agriculture as the ads imply.

Second, several of the messages these commercials convey are just not true, including that competitors use GMO animals (they do not), that Chipotle uses no GMOs (they do) and that their naturally and responsibly raised animals live in outdoor, open pastures. (That may be true, but can’t be verified without the full definition of its standards.)

8. The restaurant’s “Cultivating Thought” campaign features the work of ten writers, but none of them are Mexican or Latino.


vanityfair.com

The creative campaign features ten pieces of original work from American writers printed on the restaurant’s packaging. But there were no Latino writers on the roster.

“Personally, I was puzzled by the lack of Mexican American voices for an organization that built itself as a restaurant that’s a Mexican grill,” says Professor Alex Espinoza of California State University, Fresno, who has launched a Facebook page in response. “By not paying attention to the contributions of Mexican-American writers, it says in a very subtle way that Mexican-Americans are not capable of creating stories, that we’re not capable of creating art, and the only thing that we’re capable of doing is standing behind the sneeze guard shoving a burrito full of beans.”

Arnold told BuzzFeed that Chipotle reached out to more than 50 writers, including Latinos, but that none wanted to participate. “It was never our intention to omit any group of writers and there were several Latino authors on the initial list,” he said. “If we do more of these, we’ll continue to broaden that outreach and hopefully add to the diversity of voices.”

9. Chipotle’s two CEOs were paid a combined $49.5 million in 2013, while the average entry-level employee salary starts at $21,000. Chipotle’s two CEOs were paid a combined $49.5 million in 2013, while the average entry-level employee salary starts at $21,000.


CRAIG F. WALKER / Denver Post via Getty Images

Steve Ells and Montgomery Moran, who share the CEO title, have each made more than $100 million since 2011, the New York Times reported in May. Each earned more than the CEOs of Ford, Boeing and AT&T. An average entry level employee “would have to work more than a thousand years to equal one year of the co-CEO’s pay,” wrote David Gelles in the New York Times.

“Given the amount of money that Chipotle’s paying its executives, I think it can do a better job of paying its workers and American ranchers, without having to go to Australia,” said Eric Schlosser, the writer and producer of Fast Food Nation (both the movie and the book).

Arnold told BuzzFeed that Schlosser’s suggestion was nonsense.

The day after the Times report on the salaries, investors voted against a CEO compensation plan that would continue to pay Ells and Moran on that scale.

RELATED: Mike Callicrate’s Chipotle Experience: “Chipotle Selling Idealism – Delivering the opposite
Posted in General Advocacy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Meat That Tests Positive For E. Coli Is Cooked And Sold In Human And Pet Food

And this might not be such a bad thing.

Meat That Tests Positive For E. Coli Is Cooked And Sold In Human And Pet Food posted on May 29, 2014, at 12:32 p.m. by Deena Shanker BuzzFeed Staff

Pre-cooked meat, like the patties used in fast food burgers, may have once tested positive for pathogens such as E. coli. Flickr: roboppy

The USDA and food processing company employees continuously test raw meat for pathogens such as E. coli before it is distributed to the public.

But when a batch tests positive, the meat does not necessarily get thrown away. It can be cooked according to a USDA-approved method then sold as processed food that you’d find in a supermarket freezer aisle, at a fast-food chain, or as pet food. Many Americans — and even several food experts contacted by BuzzFeed — are unaware that a secondary market for pathogen-tainted meat exists (or that it is regularly processed into safe, consumable food). But because the process is considered safe, even by consumer awareness experts, and uses meat that would otherwise go to a landfill, many see it as an efficient and economically savvy method of reducing waste. The existence of the secondary market for tainted meat, however, points to weakness in an increasingly industrialized and consolidated food system as industry leaders will not share information about how much meat is processed this way.

Since 1998, the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (“FSIS”) has required every slaughterhouse and processing plant in the U.S. to have a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (“HACCP”) plan to handle and reduce occurrences of “food safety hazards.” One type of hazard addressed by these plans is the appearance and spread of pathogens such as E. coli. Under HACCP, companies are required to continuously sample and test the meat in their facilities. If a sample tests positive for a pathogen, the company has the option of cooking the meat for a specific length of time and at a specific temperature, proven to kill it (called the “lethality step”). This process is scientifically validated and FSIS-approved as safe. Not all slaughterhouses and processors have the resources for this kind of cooking, though, so they can sell their tainted meat to another facility that does.

The meat can also be rendered into pet food through a process that involves collecting the meat, adding heat to it and then removing and straining all the resulting liquid to leave behind a “meal” of fat, bone, and protein.

Workers at the Sam Kane beef slaughterhouse in Corpus Christi, Texas on June 10, 2008 dissect, sort and separate beef parts. USDA FSIS inspectors are on site to ensure the beef is processed in accordance with regulations. Flickr: usdagov / USDA / Alice Welch

It is difficult to gauge the size of this secondary market. The USDA told BuzzFeed that it does not specifically track these numbers, but is in the process of collecting the information to respond to our request. A spokesperson for American Meat Institute, the largest trade association representing the U.S. meat and poultry industry interests, said the organization “certainly [doesn’t] track that,” and that she is “guessing the data doesn’t exist.”

Customers cannot differentiate between a cooked product that is made from meat that once tested positive for a pathogen and one that is made from meat that was always safe because large food companies do not need to inform customers about whether its meat has undergone an FSIS-approved process to kill contaminants (or disclose who supplies their meat).

Colorized low-temperature electron micrograph of a cluster of E. coli bacteria Flickr: microbeworld

Food safety experts agree with the USDA that the process is safe.

“We don’t have a problem with this approach because it means that companies are at least testing and if they find E. coli then they are rendering the product fit for consumption,” says Christopher Waldrop, Director of the Food Policy Institute at the Consumer Federation of America. “By cooking the product, the company is destroying the pathogens and preventing consumers from being exposed to contaminated product. That’s a good thing.”

However, meat processors like Mike Callicrate of Ranch Foods Direct says effective prevention of pathogens is better practice than killing them when they appear. Callicrate has been operating his processing facility since June 2000 and says his products have never had a positive E. coli test, in his meat or even in his animals’ feces where E. coli originates. He attributes this to several factors, including the size of his operation — at most, he only processes up to 20 head per day as compared to 6,000 for a large plant — a better diet and a zero-mile distance traveled between his feedlot and slaughter unit as opposed to the 600+ miles traveled by some conventionally raised cattle.

Posted in Daily News, General Advocacy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment