NEAC Mobile Meat Processing Project

At the very time that the demand for locally and responsibly raised meat is increasing, small farmers and ranchers who are best suited to meet this need have been losing access to the small meatpacking operations that would enable them to take advantage of this growing market.  Consolidation of the meat processing industry in recent years has resulted in fewer locations where animals can be processed under USDA inspection. This has created a major obstacle for producers who lack the resources to transport small numbers of animals over long distances, and would prefer to avoid the stress that this places on the animals. This system makes it difficult to sell USDA inspected meat in the communities where it is produced, and directly to consumers.
The Nebraska Environmental Action Coalition is engaged in a project to find ways to provide and strengthen an infrastructure needed to allow local farmers to market USDA certified meat to local consumers. After consulting with a small group of farmers, representatives of The Nebraska Food Cooperative (www.nebraskafood.org), a representative from The Center for Rural Affairs (www.cfra.org) and others who are familiar with this problem, we have determined that a USDA inspected mobile meat-processing unit could be an important step to alleviating this situation. A NEAC committee has found that several of these units have been manufactured in Washington State and are currently in operation around the country.
The purpose of a mobile meat processing unit (MMPU) is to allow "on farm" slaughtering of large animals (beef, pork, lamb, goats etc.). The carcasses would then be transported to facilities for further cutting and packaging to schools, grocers, restaurants, consumers or other institutions in want of locally raised meats.
The Nebraska Food Cooperative is currently providing a distribution system that collects and distributes meats, vegetables, dry goods, and other rural small producer products that are grown and/or manufactured by Nebraska farmers and residents and delivered to customers throughout the state.
This unit may require the establishment of new local USDA inspected cut and wrap facilities or the upgrading of existing facilities to meet USDA requirements.  With this type of local processing, farmers and ranchers could choose how to finish their animals to meet customer demand and easily market meat to local establishments.
We are in the early stages of developing this project. We know this is being done in other places and are planning to visit some existing facilities for a model to base what would work best for Nebraska red meat producers.
If you are interested in the development of this project or would like information about NEAC please contact us at mrs@clarks.net and we will keep updated on our progress.
Diane Schroeder
Co Director NEAC




SURVEY SHOWS HOW HIGH PRICES, LOCAL FOOD, ENVIRONMENTAL AND FOOD SAFETY CONCERNS SWAY CONSUMER VIEWS


AMES, Iowa -- Rising fuel and food prices, coupled with increased concern about environmental impacts and safety of the food supply, are changing the perceptions of American consumers, according to a recent nationwide survey conducted by the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture.


The survey showed that consumers are re-assessing their shopping and eating habits to cut fuel use, would consider carbon food labels as long as their costs do not increase, worried more about natural habitat loss than greenhouse gas emissions, and were much more likely to view local food as having traveled 100 miles or less from the farm to point of sale than coming from their state or region.


These are the views of a representative, nationwide sample of more than 750 consumers who participated in a web-based survey conducted by the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture in August 2008. Their responses are summarized in a new Leopold Center report, "Food, Fuel and the Future: Consumer perceptions of local food, food safety and climate change in the context of rising prices." The paper was written by Rich Pirog, who leads the Center's Marketing and Food Systems Initiative, and Iowa State University graduate student Becky Rasmussen.
# Objectives of the study were to gauge consumer perceptions about: Food purchases and transportation use in response to higher food and fuel prices,
# Food safety, within the context of where their food comes from and how it is grown,
# Impact that various scales and production methods of the food system have on greenhouse gas emissions,
# Willingness to pay for a food system that achieves a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and
# Meaning of local food in terms of distance and location.


Survey respondents were more likely to respond to rising food and fuel prices by taking fewer vacations, buying more food items on sale, eating out less, and purchasing fewer desserts (compared to other food categories).A minority of respondents (17 percent) were very likely to cope with rising prices by increasing their purchases at farmers markets or by canning or freezing more fruits and vegetables.


Pirog said that while 55 percent of the respondents perceived the U.S. food system to be safe, that number had dropped from 70 percent in a similar Leopold Center survey conducted in July 2007. There was clear concern with a global food supply chain system – only 15 percent of respondents viewed such a system as safe, compared to 74 percent for a local system and 73 percent for a regional system.


“The respondents believed that a food safety seal or inspection certification, along with more information about who has handled and produced the food, along with country of origin, would increase their confidence in the food supply,” Pirog said.


Respondents also were asked a series of questions about their perceptions of greenhouse gases in food supply chains, including labels that showed a food's carbon footprint (amount of greenhouse gas emissions), and how greenhouse gas emissions and climate change compared with other environmental problems. More than 50 percent of respondents saw value in retailers putting carbon labels on their food products, with the vast majority only willing to encourage the labels if their costs did not increase. Fifty percent of respondents perceived the loss of natural habitat as more important an environmental issue than climate change, with more than 40 percent viewing water pollution as more important.


How far can food travel and still be considered "local"? The survey offered respondents a menu of options from which to select their definition of locally grown. More than two-thirds said that local food traveled 100 miles or less from the farm to point of purchase, while only a third viewed the definition as grown in their state or region. Respondents from larger western states were less likely to choose the option “25 miles or less” and more likely to choose “grown within their state” as their definition of local than their counterparts across the rest of the country.


Pirog noted that “as the demand for local food products increases, it is critical that retailers, distributors, and farmers develop clear and authentic messages about these products to maintain consumer confidence and trust.”


In 2001, he led some of the first research in the United States on the concept of "food miles," the distance that food travels from where it is grown to where it is purchased for consumption. He also has investigated consumer perceptions of local, place-based and organic foods.


The 47-page report is available on the Leopold Center web site at:www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubs/staff/consumer2/report.html.