39 Comments
User's avatar
Jimmy G's avatar

This post is nothing but propaganda. Instead of investing $1billion + into low-quality meat ‘trimming’ from south America we should be investing that $1billion into American ranchers into expanding their grass fed cow operations . It’s a no brainer.

And oh great, they are ‘looking into’ whether they can do country of origin. Just do it already! The American people deserve to know where their food comes from. This is insanity. And this post is just MAHA trying to put lipstick on a pig. The pig being our current food supply problem.

Kyle Young's avatar

Exactly.

Politicians created this problem by writing meat inspection laws that put thousands of small producers out of business in the 1960's (including my dad), by nixing country of origin labels, by allowing themselves to be bought by the big four meat packers, and by numerous other ill conceived practices that helped corporate producers to consolidate the market while putting small, local producers out of business.

The solution is simple: Just put everything back the way it was in 1955 when my dad could slaughter a steer in the yard of our farmhouse and sell that meat to anyone he wanted to.

MAHArd's avatar

You can still do all of that, less the sales in some states. Federal law still exempts slaughtering animals of one's own raising and preparing the meat exclusively for the owner, household members, nonpaying guests and employees. The Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act were enacted in 1906, and the 1967 Wholesome Meat Act (and 1978 Humane Methods of Slaughter Amendment) didn't change that. They regulated production of meat entered into interstate commerce.

On-farm slaughter rules vary considerably by state. Some states expressly allow the owner to slaughter on his property; some allow the producer to do it; some require particular circumstances or a licensed custom facility. Some allow low volume in-state sales, others don't.

Kyle Young's avatar

I know of no state where someone can do what my dad did - slaughter a steer in their front yard and sell it to anyone; the local grocery store, a local restaurant, a neighbor, etc.

MAHArd's avatar

Fair enough. Under current federal law, meat from personal-use or custom-exempt slaughter cannot be sold. But there are some state-level arrangements involving direct sales of meat from animals owned by the customer (“animal shares”) or meat from custom-exempt slaughter, and the legal landscape is changing.

SD, ID, IL (maybe) and several others have (relatively new) provisions whereby animals raised by the producer and slaughtered/processed at state-run facilities can be sold to local neighbors, restaurants, etc.

CA, CO, TX, UT, VT, NH, MA, VA, WI, WY, and several others have provisions allowing on-farm slaughter/field dressing or animal ownership arrangements, but those provisions generally operate within the personal/custom-exempt framework. Some have "animal share" or coop-type programs. Technically, still in violation of federal law (which doesn't seem to be stopping the huge, multi-billion dollar cannabis chains).

Maybe Brooke and Bobby could consider working on something useful, instead of the full-time performative nothingness.

User's avatar
Comment removed
Sep 20
Comment removed
Truth Seeker's avatar

Some of us are here to evolve (love spelled backwards)

Very simple, stop eating dead animals. Stop the killing.

Health comes from learning and employing those behaviors

known to facilitate. Regenerative Ag equates to building soil.

There are a thousand details that do not involve "raising" animals

for killing and eating. Chronic degenerative disease the result.

Truth Seeker's avatar

a "brainer" might entertain the best possible decision, as in all of life

Howz about comprehending that dead animals are not "food" except

for those with little knowledge about health or is causation/

Truth Seeker's avatar

There is a fix. And it could not be simpler. Stop eating dead animals.

Best for the animals, best for the planet, best for the people.

In the best interest of spiritual evolution.

Some of us figured this out decades ago...

Dead animals are not "food" they are dead animals...

Dead cows are not "beef" they are dead cows, yeah??

Jef Spalding's avatar

Figures that trump would attach a foolish, ecologically detrimental delisting to wolf protection, instead of protecting keystone species like Mexican wolves. These wolves are erroneously deemed evil, yet are essential to maintaining and stabilizing the grassland ecosystem of their native range

TeeJae's avatar

Exactly! That part really troubles me, as well.

Jef Spalding's avatar

Yes, it clearly illustrates the unsustainable integrity of the economic interest (s) driving government policy

MAHArd's avatar

Why didn't you mention trump's coziness with Brazilian billionaire Joesley Batista, whose company JBS was the single largest donor to Trump’s inaugural fund? The way all of the great dealmakers’ business gets done. The trump crime family has magaworld pulling out all the stops for Flávio Bolsonaro.

SaraMarie's avatar

Did you hear this rumor or do you actually have a name that we can research?

MAHArd's avatar

One of the guys he's railing against in public - owner of JBS - WSJ had a story recently.

Batista, whose company JBS was the single largest donor to Trump’s inaugural fund through one of its subsidiaries, met with the president in the Oval Office and lobbied him to lift a 26% import duty on Brazilian beef, according to the Wall Street Journal.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/09/03/how-a-brazilian-billionaire-won-a-us-tariff-exemption-for-beef-the-eu-wont-buy/

SaraMarie's avatar

Thank you. Much more useful.

SaraMarie's avatar

Back scratching aside, this news flies in the face of the Maha goal of making our food supply safer.

I’m off to see what happened to the beef market in the EU. Thanks.

[The EU said in May it would halt Brazilian imports because it wasn’t convinced Brazilian meatpackers were meeting its requirement that antimicrobials not be used for animal growth. The EU was seeking guarantees covering the whole life cycle ​of animals, an EU spokesperson told Reuters, and Brazil didn’t provide any such guarantees. The ​EU prohibits giving animals antimicrobials that ​are ⁠used to treat humans, including antibiotics, because overuse of can create resistant bacteria that spread to ⁠people through ​food, contact or the environment, ​making some human infections harder to treat. The ban on Brazilian beef went into effect Thursday.

SURPRISING FACT

Brazil was EU’s second-largest beef supplier in 2025, behind France.]

Alfalfa's avatar

Back scratching is the King's prime motivation for most everything. And "flying in the face of the Maha goal .." Like everything. With more things han most here know about (or acknowledge). We've all been had.

MAHArd's avatar

I can't respond to you at Jake Broe - glitchy, or he blocked me.

That Petey performance was beyond cringe. He's a caricature of an animation.

SailingAway's avatar

Stratospheric beef prices are far more Trump's fault than egg prices in 2024 had anything to do with Biden’s actions.

Alfalfa's avatar

Let's hope more children get the protective measles. Beef demand is not up, despite booby's ramblings about beef tallow. I'm so looking forward to that magnificent Arch.

Ike Yeadon's avatar

Given existing issues, perhaps a bit more thought should have been given to the wild and wildly unpredictable tariffs and retaliatory trade barriers - which raised costs for fertilizer, machinery, grain and other inputs while reducing US ranching and agricultural exports.

Trade disruptions with China, and our beef export markets, and sharply reducing US soybean and other agricultural sales to China.

Restrictions on immigrant farm labor, threatening labor availability and increasing processing and harvesting costs.

The need for $12 billion in emergency farm "bridge payments" following trade-market disruptions and increased production costs.

In short, the administration has provided substantial farm assistance while simultaneously pursuing trade and immigration policies that have created additional costs and market disruptions for farmers and ranchers.

SaraMarie's avatar

“Restrictions on (cheap) immigrant (illegal) farm labor, threatening labor availability and increasing processing and harvesting costs.”

True. So what I’m hearing is that it is better to take advantage of the illegals. Now, if we do not have American citizens available or willing to work, then there should be a work program to bring in outside Labor.

But the USA demands a living wage and benefits, yet also demands cheaper products. Can’t make everyone happy. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

Ike Yeadon's avatar

Not necessarily. But abrupt, carelessly conducted high-profile actions and operations to please the base can have ramifications. And most working in US meat processing facilities are not "illegal." Except for those who had their legal protections abruptly stripped away - illegal overnight.

Making entire communities fearful gets to undone self deportations - and other consequences too.

Ike Yeadon's avatar

Worldwide economic and uncertainty due to the trump-bessent-navarro tarriffs-by-tantrum policy has nothing to do with things. And fuel prices play no role.

Margretta Chase's avatar

I won’t buy till I am more comfortable with quslity

NorBrubeck's avatar

***So we are importing 300000 tons of mystery trimmings to save a few pennies on burgers while telling our own cattlemen to just dodge the wolves and deal with a 10 percent pay cut. Brilliant. At this rate we will need a search warrant just to find a cow born in the USA. If a steak doesn’t have an American passport I don’t want it on my grill. Let’s actually protect our own turf for once instead of outsourcing dinner.

“Bananas is My Business!”

Debbie's avatar

Why not allow ranchers to buy cows from foreign countries at a lower price and let them increase their herds?

Lynn Mathias's avatar

Did no one realize that pushing meat as the answer to good health would require more meat? In a country that already eats an awful lot of meat? Where the main meat people eat is ground beef in fast-food form or occasionally thrown in a pan on the stove? And that we're stuck with this model because everyone is too "crazy busy" to cook anything else or teach their kids to eat anything else? And that, final irony, in a few years the pendulum is going to swing back when those of us who actually thrive on the Mediterranean model start dropping dead from clogged arteries rather than high blood sugar and we're once again going to try to wrestle cheeseburgers from the nation's hands? In short, we keep pretending our options are limitless and they're not. Our aspirations may be, but that's an entirely different thing. Maybe it's time to emphasize self control as a national characteristic.

karen christie's avatar

DO NOT DE-LIST THOSE WOLVES. There are so many examples of the backlash following negative choices in all connected to this planet. Support the small farmers, ranchers. Give them the freedom to sell directly, to slaughter... Just glue big farma's hands into their pockets and end their influence. See, it isn't the 4-legged wolf that's in question. It's that 2-legged Big Farma wolf.

TeeJae's avatar

NO, NO, NO on the delisting of gray and Mexican wolves! The Endangered Species Act is NOT a "burdensome regulation!" I'd much rather have my beef come from outside the country than jeapardize the lives of those majestic creatures!

Truth Seeker's avatar

"Regenerative Agriculture" howz about soil building strategies some of

us have known about for many decades? Howz about the connection

between soil and gut "microbiome" Howz about crucial minerals?

Howz about the fact the animal "protein" is grossly inefficient

water wasting stupidity??