FoodBanter.com - View Single Post

(Alex Rast) wrote in
:

> at Wed, 27 Oct 2004 03:05:41 GMT in
> >,
> (Michael Odom) wrote :
>
>>On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 06:04:03 -0000,
>>(Alex Rast) wrote:
>>
>>>Diestel. Personally I think their main organic line, "Heidi's Hens"
>>>isn't as good as Shelton's organic. However, they have a better line,
>>>"Heritage" which is pretty good.
>>>
>>>Irritatingly, none of them seem to be available fresh,...
>
>>>It would seem as though, somehow, there aren't many people who care
>>>that their meat is frozen if they're buying organic. Furthermore, it
>>>would seem as though the distribution systems that prevail in the USA
>>>make it *incredibly* difficult for an organic producer to get fresh
>>>meat to market....
>>>
>>>Any answers to these, anybody?
>>
>>'Round these parts (NE Texas) the health and food safety laws pretty
>>much put the kibosh on finding never-frozen organic meats unless you
>>slaughter your own. It's not a matter of what I would like to have,
>>it's a matter of the scale of production which proves prohibitive for
>>small producers to meet the fresh meat regulations. At least that's
>>what I think is going on.
>
> Yeah, people say that the regulatory environment is tough, but what I
> don't understand is, how can the legislators draft legislation that
> would make it tough for organic producers to sell fresh? I don't mean
> what motivation or excuse they can use to justify this - it's always
> possible if not probable that legislators are in the back pocket of
> large, industrial meat producers who would naturally wish to see the
> regulations favour *them* - that, I have no problem understanding.
> What I don't get is, what specific provisos do they have in the law
> that makes it so hard? It seems to me that you'd have to do something
> like explicitly set an absolute minimum on quantity of meat shipped in
> order for it to be able to be fresh. If so, where are the activists,
> for surely a law like this is so manifestly preferential to industrial
> businesses that the activists could create a media circus over it? If
> not, it would seem to me that the worst they could do is make the
> resulting meat more expensive. And if that's the case, is the number
> of people who recognise that there is no free lunch and would be
> prepared to pay more for fresh, organic meat really that small? If so,
> why is that?
>
>
>

Having the organic food products frozen expands the provider's market,
allows for cheaper shipping methods and keeps the product's quality under
control.

An example is I live in Canada but eat New Zealand Lamb.

I remember when there wasn't a lot of pre-frozen stuff and most veggies
were canned...pre-frozen is way better taste-wise, and packaging and
frieght rates are cheaper due to less weight...(no metal can); even when
figuring in the expenses required for freezer capable trucks, ships, trains
and airplanes.

Businesses like to make money...they're funny that way. So they prefer to
sell lots at a cheaper rate/lower profit margin, then to sell few with a
higher mark-up. Therefore organic products that aren't local truck stop
type stuff are pre-frozen if at all possible.

So if I was Joe's organic turkeys, I'd pre-freeze to sell more over a
larger area. Also it is cheaper to put the slaughter houses where the meat
is raised and ship from there to where large population centers are.

--
Starchless in Manitoba.