Livestock Notes I
(Continued from Pago D 3)
safety: “Even the best production
and processing practices do not
eliminate these organisms from
raw meat."
In the executive summary of its
new report, USDA said, “The use
of cooking procedures, together
with sanitary handling, proper
refrigeration or freezing, and strict
separation of cooked products
form raw products from the time
of cooking until the product is
packaged for sale provided a high
degree of confidence that the pro
duct is safe.”
Pork Residues Low
William R. Henning
Penn State Assoc. Prof.
Animal Sciences
Results of a study supported by
the National Live Stock and Meat
Board have bolstered earlier evi
dence that U.S. pork is safe from
chemical residues. Researchers
sampled ham and pork sausage
collected from supermarkets in
three geographical regions, and
subcutaneous adipose tissue from
pork carcasses in slaughter plants
representing 16 states. Samples
were tested for 29 different chlori
nated hydrocarbons, organopho
sphate pesticides and their
metabolites.
Adipose tissue samples from
pork carcasses, tested over a six
month period to ensure absence of
seasonal variations, showed no
pesticide residue greater than the
0.05 ppm detection threshold.
None of the ham contained detect
able levels of organophosphates
(greater than 0.003 ppm) or chlori
nated hydrocarbons (greater than
0.02 ppm). Six of the 27 sausage
samples contained trace amounts
of organophosphates, but these
levels of chemical residue were
well below tolerances set by the
\| \\ Construction
Needs
COS c^ ,sc :
Agriculture - Residential - Commercial
Buildings • Basement • Floors
Retaining Walls • Footer
SCS Approved Manure Storage Pits
All Types Of Flat Work
liwiiai In Concrete, Quality work That Will Laat A Llftnim*
CALL FOR FREE ESTIMATES
AND SEE HOW AFFORDABLE
CONCRETE WALLS CAN BE
PRECISE
CONCRETE
WALLS, INC.
601 Overly Grove Road. New Holland. PA 17557
FDA. No samples contained tran
quilizer or drug residues at the 1
part per billion detection
threshold.
These results agree with test
results of the National Residue
Program by the Food Safety
Inspection Service (FSIS) of the
USDA, which found zero viola
tive levels of either chlorinated
hydrocarbons or organopho
sphates in the 740 market hogs
sampled.
Recommended Beef Grading
Changes
William R. Henning
Penn State Assoc. Prof.
Animal Sciences
TWO MAJOR REVISIONS
ARE REQUESTED:
1. Reduce all “B” maturity carcas
ses with “Slight” and “Small”
degrees of marbling to the “Stan
dard” grade.
2. Implement yield-grade changes
to separate the Y 2 and Y 3 grades
into two grades each, and combine
the Y 4 and Y 5 grades.
Current Grading
YGI = 8.6%
Proposed Grading
YGI = 8.6%
Current Grading
YG2 = 40.9%
Proposed Grading
YG2A = 16.0%; YG2B = 24.9%
Current Grading
YG3 = 39.9%
Proposed Grading
YG3A = 24.4%, YG3B = 15.5%
Current Grading
YG4 = 9.6%, combined
with Y G 5 = 1.0%
Proposed Grading
YG4+ = 10.6%
13’ Diameter Circular Manure Storage
The National Cattlemen’s
.Association (NCA) recently
'passed a resolution to request
‘ changes in USDA beef grading
standards, as reflected in the table
to the left Changing the quality
grading standards will require a
rule change by the USDA, includ
ing publication of the change in
the Federal Register’followed by a
comment period. The proposed
changes could be more through a
specification rather than a grade
change. This would allow the
proposal to be adopted faster and
without a hearing and review
process.
The maturity grade “B” is the
physiological designation for car
casses of cattle from 30 to 42
months of chronological age. Var
iability in tenderness is the prim
ary problem with inconsistency in
all quality grades of beef, and the
current grading system does not
adequately measure this variabili
ty. Research data demonstrate that
carcasses of "B” maturity, which
are currently eligible for the
“Choice” and “Select” grades, are
more variable in tenderness than
are “A” maturity carcasses of the
same grade.
This change will not affect a
large number of carcasses in the
current supply, but will discour
age the industry from marketing
older maturity cattle as “Choice”
or “Select” Most of the cattle cur
rently in this category are the
“heiferettes,” or first-calf heifers,
which are weaned early and
placed on feed, or cattle which
have been backgrounded on
forage.
Packers have begun to question
the relevance of the maturity
'■>ll< ■! I, ill. III! ‘h
Manure Storage
k "UK 1 'I i''. ■ I, it |;M 1 ||
In i i ’ 11. 1> >i
AlliiVl I.MIIHH
CONTACT
ROT SBNSENIG
717-355-0726
scores to the actual age of the
cattle. Some have complained that
loads of young cattle are some
times grading as “C” maturity
(over 42 months of age) when it is
known they are less than 20
months. One such experience
occurred when a purebred heifer
that was slaughtered was “C”
maturity, yet less than 24 months
of age. This raises the question,
that there may be nutritional or
physiological factors which dra
matically accelerate the ossifica
tion process.
While such observations may
be aberrations, they point out the
subjective nature of quality grad
ing. In my travels through beef
plants across the country, the most
subjective and variable designa
tion is the estimation of maturity.
Graders tend to be tougher on
maturity in plants here in the East,
especially those with a significant
cow slaughter. The graders are
expecting cows and tend to be less
lenient than on similar carcasses at
an all-steer plant. I guess we have
to accept that as the human factor.
Does that grading change affect
one area or type of cattle more
than another? I don’t think anyone
knows the answer to that yet
The NCA Task Force found
yield grading to be an accurate and
adequate method of identifying
differences in cutability. Howev
er, as the industry moves toward
closely trimmed boxed beef, and
cutability receives greater empha
sis for cattle, the current yield
grades are viewed as too broad to
allow for effective evaluation.
The proposal calls for Y 2 to be
split into two grades; 2A, from 2.0
¥Let Your Crops
Dine On Alpine
The Company That
Offer* You
High Quality Plant Food
At Competitive Prices
Talk To Us About Seed Banded Plant Food And
Foliar Feeding
Place Phosphorus Where It Does Most Good
(Seed Banded)
6-24-6 9-18-9 3-18-18 5-IS-15
Check Early Order & Quantity Price
Zimmerman Lime & Fertilizer, Inc.
(717) 733-7674
235 W. Burkholder Dr. Lititz. PA 17543
Lancaster Farming, Saturday, April 23, 1994-05
to 2.49, and 2B from 2.50 to 2.99.
Yield Grade 3 would be similarly
split; 3A from 3,0 to 3.49, and 3B
from 3.50 to 3.99. Yield Grade 5
would be dropped, and Yield
Grade 4 would be open-ended.
The current and proposed yield
grade distributions arc shown in
the table to the left.
The NCA Task Force also
recommends that very high indus
try priority be given to the deve
lopment and application of an
instrument grading procedure that
rapidly measures tenderness at
typical chain speeds in modem
packing plants.
U.S. Senator Slade Gorton
(R-WA) sent a letter to Agricul
ture Secretary Mike Espy calling
on USDA to expedite a petition to
the Food and Drug Administration
for approval of irradiation for
beef.
“I believe that irradiation, if
approved for beef, will provide an
important tool in the reform of our
nation’s food safety system,” Gor
ton told Espy.
Gorton’s letter followed the
death last month of a three-year
old boy who contracted hemolytic
uremic syndrome after he con
sumed E. coli Q157;H7, presu
mably from a hamburger he had
eaten.
Call For Irradiation
William R. Henning
Penn State Assoc. Prof.
Animal Science
(Turn to Page 06)