First, the best good news. Technomic, one of the best and most respected food survey firms in the U.S. also tracks Canadian food trends. It recently released data showing that more Canadians are ordering burgers when they eat out. Of Canadian consumers who eat burgers, 70 per cent of them typically ate a fast food burger at least once a month this year, up from 66 per cent in 2017.

Technomic points out that as the burger category expands, “spicier and bolder flavours” will be important to differentiate one restaurant’s burger from another.

If you follow the restaurant industry closely, know that one of the big battlefields currently involves delivery. There’s the fight for many chains and independents on whether to do delivery, what third-party service to use if you use one and whether to establish your own delivery capability. Shoppers, especially younger ones, are so used to ordering things online or by smartphone, that delivery is (perhaps) the next big thing.

Competing here means making sure your product is delivered hot and tasty, regardless of how suited to delivery your menu is. Then there’s the question of how to pay the delivery service and how much, often by a percentage of the order total. The big question: Will my restaurant have any money left over after all this for profit?

So some of Technomic’s questions relate to delivery: for example, 41 per cent of burger consumers were concerned about the quality and freshness of delivered burger orders.

Then there’s the millennial question: 42 per cent of 18- to 34-year-old burger customers expect restaurants to offer at least one plant-based burger option.

Down here, the initial interest in fake-meat non-burger burgers has been high. My personal definition excludes anything but beef in a “burger,” i.e. there is no such thing as a turkey burger or veggie burger and an impossible burger is not possible. The vats they brew these products in have had a hard time keeping up. We are inquiring of our sources to see if Technomic or anyone has data on what the reorder rate is on these fake meat products. How many people are becoming regular eaters of such things?

The optimistic view is that it keeps some people coming in to burger restaurants that might not otherwise be there. And the aroma of real burgers might be enough to eventually get them back. I don’t know if these things — talk about Frankenfood — smell like real meat but I find it hard to believe they can duplicate that chemistry without the fat and juices that are in meat.

Sorry, I haven’t yet summoned enough nerve to try one yet. When I go in to a burger place, it means I’m hungry. That means I am not interested in something brewed in a giant vat. When I want something out of a giant vat, I want bourbon or Canadian whiskey (yes, I am a fan of the latter, too), not some kind of protein fakery.

It boggles the mind that the young folks who scream “natural” food, few ingredients and traditional farming and ranching methods will accept something that requires weeks and dozens of complicated processing steps to produce something that is not natural, is definitely marketed as imitation something and is natural only insofar as it takes some edible things and processes and tortures them at great lengths to produce a patty.

But I digress.

Politically speaking, those of you who are not Liberal party stalwarts were handed another chink in your prime minister’s political armour with his latest scandal involving evidently overdeveloped drama talents. That, added to his other scandal, could change your government very soon. We aren’t guessing that will affect the CUSMA ratification, even though it was his party that negotiated it. Down here, even Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was caught saying that ratifying the treaty isn’t about handing President Trump a victory, it’s about doing something for the American people. Gasp!

The rest of the good, and good news with reservation, involves the U.S. and Japan likely reaching agreement to get U.S. tariffs in line with the CPTPP levels Canadian beef enjoys. With the lower tariffs, your beef exports to Japan were up 62 per cent through the first half, according to government data. We have been figuring the Japanese consumer’s demand for U.S. grain-fed beef would jump if the agreement materializes, given a roughly 11 per cent price drop from what they had been paying. While your price advantage would go away with a Japan-U.S. agreement, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association’s John Masswohl sees the potential for a two-way win for Canadian cattle producers: continuing to sell more Canadian beef directly to Japan and selling more beef to the U.S. for Americans to sell to Japan.

Win/win.

The post Dittmer: Good news and potential good news appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

These concerns deserved serious investigation. In response, the Beef Cattle Research Council and Alberta Agriculture and Food supported a study led by Mark Klassen (Canadian Cattlemen’s Association) and Xianqin Yang (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Lacombe Research Station) to assess whether changes to Health Canada’s cooking recommendations were warranted. A panel of five additional scientists was assembled to review and approve the experimental design and methods before the research started.

What they did: Nine E. coli strains (both pathogenic and non-pathogenic strains) were tested for heat-resistance under laboratory conditions. The most heat resistant strain was incorporated into beef patties by adding approximately 100 million E. coli bacteria per patty. The burgers were cooked to Health Canada’s recommended internal temperature of 71 C, allowed to cool for three to five minutes, then the number of viable E. coli were evaluated.

What they learned: No E. coli survived after the burgers were cooked to the recommended internal temperature 71 C and cooled for three or five minutes, even though the beef had been artificially contaminated with very high levels of E. coli.

Burgers aren’t eaten straight off the grill; it takes a few minutes to carry them inside, gather the kids, melt the cheese, pass the relish, etc. The burgers continue to cook during the first part of this “cooling period.” In this study, internal temperatures continued to rise for two minutes after they came off the grill, sometimes reaching as high as 75 C, and maintained at least 71 C for another two minutes after that. This extended the length of time E. coli is exposed to lethal temperatures.

What it means: Health Canada’s cooking recommendations are still valid. Your burger’s still done at 71. That means at least “medium.” Using a meat thermometer is highly recommended to ensure the proper temperature is attained.

This study found that cooking burgers to 71 C killed all the E. coli, even though it had been contaminated with extremely high levels of bacteria. Results may have been different if the burgers had been cooked to a lower internal temperature. Cooks and servers should never ask their families or guests “how” they would like their burgers cooked, even if they’re using a “source grind” burger or ground the beef themselves. Do them, yourselves, and our entire industry a favour — let them know that medium-rare or rare hamburger is not a risk worth taking. Medium to well-done is the only option for burgers.

Canada’s beef industry has made tremendous progress in combating E. coli in packing, further processing and retail sectors. However, beef is not the only potential source of E. coli. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s website reports that there have been 11 E. coli O157-related recalls since January 2014, but only one of those recalls involved beef. That means that cross-contamination from other foods in the same shopping cart, bag, refrigerator, kitchen or grill can also pose an E. coli risk to consumers. To reduce the risk posed by E. coli O157, cooks in homes or commercial kitchens need to keep it cold (refrigerate meat as soon as it arrives and refrigerate leftovers as soon as possible), keep it clean (wash hands, surfaces and utensils frequently when handling food — and always between handling meat and other food) and keep it covered (keep meat and meat products separate from other foods).

In Canada’s National Beef Strategy, the first target outcome under the Competitiveness pillar’s “Supportive Regulatory Environment” focus area is to advocate and uphold a scientific risk-based regulatory system. This project is an important illustration of how industry expertise and public researchers can work together to effectively address an emerging food safety concern and objectively determine that more stringent Health Canada recommendations would not effectively improve food safety. The Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off has increased from $1 to $2.50 per head in most provinces, with approximately 75 cents allocated to the Beef Cattle Research Council to support work like this. Canada’s National Beef Strategy outlined why the check-off increase was needed, and how it would be invested.

The Beef Research Cluster is funded by the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada with additional contributions from provincial beef industry groups and governments to advance research and technology transfer supporting the Canadian beef industry’s vision to be recognized as a preferred supplier of healthy, high-quality beef, cattle and genetics.

The post Your burgers are still done at 71 appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

When folks make decisions at the fast-food counter it is not going to be driven by a farmer’s emotional response to an ad, incentive or program. Regardless of the personal feelings of the men and women who own cows — consumers will buy largely on convenience, cost and most certainly on taste. The recent research shows that taste is still king in the quest for a great eating experience.

Part of that taste experience is fresh product and the commitment to fresh Canadian veggies, potatoes, bread, eggs and most things in between makes decision-making easier for the person ordering on the other side of the counter. It is an amazing journey to go through both websites and note the Canadian food used by the two burger chains. There is a lot of commitment in buying Canadian because the volume of use is staggering and a constant supply is so critical to customer satisfaction.

People will choose to buy from a place of core values and beliefs and yet sometimes they are just hungry and tired and want to know they can eat a burger and be safe in that choice. The beef producers have to give them a little more credit and not drive them away with negative comments. Talking publicly about one personal beef over another may result in an alternate response — ordering a chicken burger. The reality is that there is a ton of work behind the scenes to secure consumer loyalty and as both companies are pushing beef — the beef industry should not be pushing back.

• More ‘Straight from the hip’ with Brenda Schoepp: We live in a vulnerable world 

Beef producers have a choice to provide beef for either burger company. Farms and ranches also have a choice to be organic or natural or sell to a domestic butcher or grocery. They have a choice to work with others to create marketing strategies and new markets or to sell directly to an export market based on the commitment to production protocols. Farmers have a choice to leave land for future generations or to sell it. This is Canada and these choices are for everyone. There is no right or wrong decisions and personal values are reflected in actions.

My concern is that the industry is pushing towards conformity — a sameness that poisons the tall poppy or the entrepreneur. This is the beginning of the end to creative thinking and unique deliverables. And there is a world of difference between the outcomes of a monoculture of conformity and the expression of free enterprise, a principle that the Canadian beef industry was built on.

I think of those I have met and shared a meal with who do not have our range of choice. After nearly 80 meals of rice and beans — I recall not really caring where the meat offered came from just as long as it was cooked! It is often overwhelming to come home from travel to the obscene amount of abundance that Canadians take for granted. There are many folks in the world who have choice too — blue shirt or blue shirt — walk five miles for water or walk five miles for water — eat cassava boiled or eat cassava boiled — stand in line for bread or stand in line for bread. Simple choices. Their problems are few, and greater in the context of their lives.

If they could see those in the Canadian beef industry fighting it out on the streets over an ad campaign or from the other side, the fear of regulation by a food company, what do you think their impression might be? I am certain they would be happy with either burger, grateful in fact.

Just to be clear, the Canadian beef industry is just part of the Canadian food scene. Canada is the world leader in food waste at 40 per cent and we pay the least for food. Canadians eat $6.8 billion more of imported processed or value-added food than we export and we continue to ship 60 per cent of all our food out of country for further processing before bringing it back again. Food processing in Canada is a greater contributor to GDP than oil and gas, employs more people than manufacturing and beef remains the weakest point in all processing. Like wheat that goes to Italy, Canadian cattlemen still ship live cattle, not beef, to the U.S.

When it comes to offering a menu, it is up to food companies to respond to the expressed desires and needs of their clientele. It may offend a producer, but there are more customers than there are cattlemen and the idea is to keep customers coming through the door. As an industry, Canadian beef leaders and producers need to move beyond the stale argument to create opportunities for further value adding within the country and promote the continuous support of unique opportunities to our youth throughout the beef industry. There are good farmers and good companies both doing great things for agriculture.

To live in Canada is to live in a society of privilege. Agriculture contributes and keeps our rural communities alive and sets the stage for our future generations. At the end of the day the beef industry prospers and these long-standing farms and communities give our children something very special, it gives them choice.

Contact Brenda through her website. All rights reserved. Brenda Schoepp

The post Schoepp: The consequence of a society of privilege is choice appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

This raises an interesting dilemma. Consumers want safe beef, but they also value price, appearance and taste. As part of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association’s E. coli O157 Research and Education Strategy, Zeb Pietrasik and Nicole Gaudette of Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development’s Food Processing Development Center in Leduc worked with Mark Klassen of the CCA to identify whether hot water treatment can improve the safety of beef trim without compromising consumer acceptance. This research was funded by the Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency. The first phase of the research compared bacterial counts on untreated beef trim (65 per cent or 85 per cent lean) to trim sprayed with 85 C water for 20, 40 or 60 seconds. They also compared the colour and processing characteristics of ground beef made from treated or untreated trim. The second phase examined consumer acceptability of ground beef made from hot water-treated trim.

In Phase 1, treating trim for 20 seconds did not reduce aerobic bacteria compared to untreated trim, but treating trim for 40 seconds reduced bacterial counts by 90 per cent. Treating trim for 60 seconds provided no further improvement. The 40-second treatment also had negligible effects on the colour, cooking characteristics or texture of cooked ground beef.

Based on the results from Phase 1, Phase 2 compared untreated trim to trim treated with 85 C water for 40 seconds. The trim was refrigerated for one, seven, 10 or 14 days before being ground into 70 (regular) and 85 per cent (lean) ground beef. Some ground beef was packed in chubs and refrigerated for two or four weeks before being assessed for colour and spoilage. The remaining ground beef was formed into ground beef patties and assessed for microbiology, colour, odour, appearance and shelf life over a three-day period in a simulated retail meat case. Some patties were frozen for six to eight weeks then assessed for oxidation and cooking characteristics.

Trim: Regardless of lean content (65 per cent versus 85 per cent), treating trim with 85 C water for 40 seconds did not cause the trim to gain or lose weight. Treated trim had lower bacterial counts than untreated trim throughout the storage period. Treated and untreated trim smelled similar early in the storage period, but spoilage odours were less noticeable in the treated than in the untreated trim after 10 to 14 days.

Refrigerated ground beef: Chubs of ground beef made from treated trim spoiled much slower (four weeks) than chubs made from untreated trim (two weeks). No colour differences were detected between ground beef made from hot water-treated trim versus untreated trim.

Fresh patties: Bacterial numbers stayed lower for a longer period of time in patties made from treated trim than those made from untreated trim. As a result, hot water treatment extended the retail shelf life of burger patties by four days. Patty colour varied with how long the trim was stored before grinding, fat level of the burger, and how long the patties were in the simulated retail case, but these colour changes were similar regardless of whether patties were made from treated or untreated trim.

Cooked patties: Hot water treatment did not affect the cooking characteristics (weight loss, shrink) or texture (e.g. hardness, chewiness) of ground beef patties. A panel of 300 consumers did not report any differences in the appearance, colour, flavour, juiciness, texture or aftertaste of beef patties made from treated versus untreated trim.

Treating trim with 85 C water for 40 seconds reduces bacterial counts and extends the shelf life of ground beef, with no negative impacts on consumer acceptability of the retail product. Subsequent focus group testing found that consumers viewed hot water treatment of trim in a positive light.

The Beef Research Cluster is funded by the National Checkoff and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada with additional contributions from provincial beef industry groups and governments to advance research and technology transfer supporting the Canadian beef industry’s vision to be recognized as a preferred supplier of healthy, high-quality beef, cattle and genetics.

Dr. Reynold Bergen is the science director of the Beef Cattle Research Council

The post Hot water treatment of beef trim appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

It would stand to reason that the surge in biting into burgers would displace high-end steak houses but in an anomaly that cannot be explained, high-end steak houses continue to thrive. The difference, the cut is smaller and designer burgers join steak at the heart of menu offerings.

When it comes to middle meats, the place where the tenderloin and its cousins reside, there is a weak market overall. In grocery stores, the middle meats were traditionally the profit centre and retailers struggled with selling end meats. Today, there is little challenge to sell lower-cost end cuts and the high-end middle meats have declined in domestic market share. From the perspective of shelf economics the middle meats are pulling down profitability.

• More ‘Straight from the hip’ with Brenda Schoepp: Eco-politics and the French connection

In a recent study released by American Meat Institute (AMI), researchers found that folks always buying the middle cut were members of the $100K club, those who make enough money to support their delicious habit. When it comes to dining out, the demographic is not so clear-cut. In fact, customers of all walks of life still flock to steak to celebrate special events. Young people, including students will share a large steak or tend to order smaller portions. At the end of the day, steak, prime rib, tenderloin and the other cuts represent a passage of sorts, the all-North American dream of affording the best in taste for those special times in our lives.

Chefs indicated they need steak on the menu to create traffic — as it is the drawing card for all clientele. They also said that people who eat steak are diverse in income and age and they need to be provided with more than a memorable eating experience. They also need to know where that animal came from and how it was raised. Although you and I know the mammoth task of correctly pinpointing which steak came from where and how it was handled, it still behooves all eating establishments to try and find out. In other words, taste alone will not keep the middle meats alive in the future, but selling the story may.

We have all at some time been to a steak house offering the “free” meal if you can eat all 64 ounces with trimmings. This type of grunt and gulp mentality has been replaced by a request for smaller offerings of five to six ounces and a more intimate experience. In addition, a little familiarity or perception through branding goes a long way as 77 per cent of respondents in the AMI study said they liked the flavour of Angus beef (CAB).

At our house we don’t touch the tenderloin from our beef program, it is reserved for the international guests who visit. Much like we see in mainstream society, the best of beef is for special occasions. This has not, however, solved the problem of the diminishing position of middle meats on the beef shelf. The price may be up per unit but it is not enough to restore profitability at retail.

As was found in the 2012 ALMA Canadian Consumer Retail Meat Study, consumers are driven by a varied and fresh selection. A lack of newness in the middle meats keeps coming back to haunt the beef industry. Everyone understands that they like a steak but the absence of new offerings and new value-added presentations is driving the middle cuts to service only a complimentary economy, the elite who can afford it.

As most Canadian beef is exported, we have lost control of the value in middle meats at a level which will be exceedingly difficult to restore. Fostering continued interest with export partners other than the U.S. remains critical in renewing the value in middle meats. Although easy to sell offshore, we face a question of supplying appropriate volume and adhering to production protocols that are acceptable to buyers. As an added threat, the pending opening of the American market to all EU meats will have a strong effect on Canada’s ability to capture premium pricing on both end and middle meats exported to the U.S.

Canadians of all walks of life enjoy celebrating with steak — a smaller steak perhaps but still with steak. And although they want to know more about their meat they also want to spend less — and that is the tipping point for beef. How do we as an industry ensure that the celebratory meal of choice remains affordable for everyone and more importantly, how will we realign or redesign the middle meats so they regain their share of the overall beef category at the retail shelf?

New trade agreements that are country specific in nature and company-to-country specific will also influence the success of middle meats. While we stew about market access in regards to production protocols, nimbler trading partners are cutting deals with our future markets. It is not simply a declining value problem, but an internationally complex one, and the Canadian beef industry has more at stake than just a slippage in domestic volume.

Brenda Schoepp is an inspiring speaker, consultant and mentor who works with young entrepreneurs across Canada and around the world. She can be contacted through her website. All rights reserved. Brenda Schoepp 2015

The post Canadians celebrate with steak appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

One could conclude that this is so because of economics. The less folks have to spend the more they will go to the ground product. This is true to a point. As beef prices continue to climb the choice of product becomes more important. Although the dollar value on beef sales has increased, the volume has been stagnant. Now all products are expensive at the counter and ground beef is the protein of choice. Eighty-three per cent of all consumers are eating ground beef at least once per month, and that is a repeatable and predictable pattern that is not seen on other beef offerings. Consumers of all ages and in all walks of life buy ground beef. Half of the consumers buy a fresh prepared or frozen patty.

At the end of the day, the evolution of ground beef has been based on convenience. With 98 per cent of all ground beef sales from the supermarket being prepared as a meal at home, there is much to be said about a foolproof product that any person, regardless of culinary skill, can prepare. Most beef patties hit the frying pan or the microwave and that data is a stunning contrast with regard to consumer data that focuses on health. In fact, it is ground beef that consumers ignore in the health debate. To put it frankly, convenience and taste override health concerns. Everybody loves a burger and that includes the wealthy client. This is evident in the growing offering of high-end and expensive hamburger offerings as consumers look for a premium beef experience that they can afford.

• More ‘Straight from the hip’ on the Canadian Cattlemen: “Buffalo” wings and the value of brand marketing

Whole muscle grind is just starting to gain in popularity but if taste and quality are secondary drivers, then this concept hits the mark. Companies are looking at ways to deliver the goods and the market most certainly has been spiced with the demand as 85 and 90 lean now sell at a premium to the overall cutout value of beef. The key here is that lean is in and that conversation takes on a whole new direction.

Several authors have posed the question suggesting that cattle should be raised and fed specifically for this market. The concept is not new but outside of the cultural norm. I call it butcher’s block, or the inability to conceptualize the data and put an action plan together to meet consumer need and demand. Should Canadians consider the value of ground beef in the market place and examine the traditional feeding patterns that have added value to the grain industry?

Feeding for the grind involves forage fed cattle for a longer period of time. That means owning the inventory longer, which may translate into risk. Traditionally this would be the conversation. Today, producing ground beef on certain sets of cattle can be aided or dare we say — directed — by genomics. When cattle are predetermined not to quality grade, they most certainly fit the bill for the lean ground trade. Can we be lean in our approach to the future of the Canadian beef industry?

All things are possible but between the data, science and the technology, there is most certainly an economic incentive to value-add to a subset of animals. Capturing the cutout value at the ranch level takes another set of skills but most certainly the capability to travel up the chain with partner in hand is not nearly as formidable as it was a decade ago. In addition, the added value of perception and the opportunity to brand the process is looming as large as a mountain landscape.

Once seen as the poor country cousin in the meat case, the ground section has garnered new respect. This love affair with the burger is not limited to our domestic market as the burger transcends cultural and generational gaps. Canada’s reputation in terms of food safety is rather impeccable from an international perspective and that is highly desirable. Our willingness to embrace these opportunities, though, is somewhat sluggish and we tend to have a great fear of colouring outside of the lines because of the economic interconnectivity between grain and cattle. In all fairness we must consider the even stronger economic connectivity between cattle and grass and the lean approach to production.

Convenience, taste and quality all resonate with the consumer of the day. Both systems offer this in the product. When it comes to health consciousness, ground beef (especially lean ground) is forgiven because it is a North American addiction. High-end burgers are one of the fastest growing areas in food service and now featured on more than 50 per cent of all menus. The product has evolved and is now heavily branded and value-added. Burgers contain flavour, vegetable, cheeses and a variety of spices, and are available as patties, bulk, chub, and in value-added presentations and as part of prepared meals.

Information and technology allow us to be lean in our approach and direct in our target marketing while preserving our cultural heritage and reducing overall production costs — a strong set of considerations when more than half of consumption is ground beef.

Brenda Schoepp is a motivating speaker and mentor who works with young entrepreneurs across Canada and around the world. She can be contacted through her website brendaschoepp.com. All rights reserved. Brenda Schoepp 2014

The post Lean in our approach appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.