Family Tree Meats

Tom never does anything half-way.  When he decided to open a "butcher shop" he got busy and did his homework.  He studied the "rules" and can site many Kansas and FSIS regulations from memory.  Probably as many or more than the state inspectors can.  He is passionate about educating his customers as well as other processors on what they can and cannot and should and should not do in their businesses.  We quickly joined the Kansas Meat and Poultry Association (KMPA) as a way of learning more about our new business.  Before too many years, Tom became a member of the KMPA legislative board helping to write and discuss legislation with our state legislators concerning our industry.  He has made many trips to Topeka, along with other KMPA board members, fighting for common sense as well a beneficial legistation to be the rule instead of the exception.  There were some minor successes but it is really hard to "fight city hall".  Tom spent the last two years as President of KMPA and the following are a few articles he wrote for our KMPA newsletter.  He writes from the heart as well as the head and hopefully, someday, someone will listen.  I try to!  -- Paulette

Food for thought.      

The present situation in our nation’s capital centers around two main issues.  1)  The Debt and 2) How much should the government do?  The practical implications of these two could be stated this way.  Do we have enough money to continue to spend and should we regulate more and more?  This article approaches our state meat inspection from this perspective.

            First let’s state some facts.

1.  FSIS will provide the oversight of meat processing facilities in Kansas at no additional cost to Kansas taxpayers.  The cost of the Kansas State Meat Inspection program for Kansas taxpayers is 1.8 million dollars.
2. At this point in time, the Kansas Meat Inspection system is not just “equal to” but is “identical to” and in a few instances is more restrictive than FSIS.
3. KDA serves at the request of Kansas Meat Processors and they would no longer serve if we so desired.  At some point in time, Kansas Meat Processors believed that it was a benefit to have a state program thus we now have a state program.  It should also be evident that if the state program is not beneficial to state processors or Kansas consumers, then the program could cease to exist.

The next logical question is – What are Kansas taxpayers getting for their 1.8 million dollars.  Or, stated this way – What is the purpose of a state program?  In fact, the KMPA board asked KDA this very question.  We have never received an answer.  It can’t be just to provide safe meat because FSIS will provide this service with no cost to us!

Here are some reasons for a state program. There may be others that are equally important.  If these reasons can’t be met or aren’t being met, or won’t be met, then we must ask ourselves as businessmen and taxpayers – Can we justify spending 1.8 million dollars for a state program that oversees 56 inspected and 27 custom facilities?

Let me be clear.  I believe there could be good reasons for a state program that is equal to and yet different than the FSIS system, if, in fact, FSIS would allow us to be “different than – yet equal to”.  Since FSIS decides what “equal to” is, the deck is stacked in their favor and any change would take a good deal of work.  However, change can and does take place if we pursue it.

The State Meat Inspection could be a buffer against over-regulation by big government.  In Kansas, all of the meat processing plants are very small businesses.  It is obvious that very small plants have specific benefits that large plants do not have – such as production rates and also specific challenges such as return on investment, limited man power, etc.  It’s also obvious that the very small plants in Kansas operate basically the same way. 

KDA could argue to FSIS that their regulations or application of regulations are impractical for very small plants and that the same end can be accomplished by different means, thus being “equal to”.  It is my observation that KDA operates in a reactive mode, not in a proactive mode as suggested above. 

It is my fear that FSIS is going to impose more and more regulations that will eventually make very small businesses such as ours non-existent.  This, in my opinion, is not good for Kansas or America.  It seems to me that having a strong state program could be our only hope against over-regulation.

When KDA was updating the Kansas laws on meat inspection the KMPA board proposed a different way to look at state meat inspection.  This view was centered around cooperation and education with regulatory enforcement as a last resort.  The idea of cooperation could take the form of KDA working with K-State and the processors to find interventions that actually are feasible in very small plants, validation of these interventions, and the scientific papers to back them up.  The idea of education could take the form of KDA saying “here are scientific papers that we accept, or here are interventions that work, or here is an acceptable HACCP form, etc.”  Obviously, we all understand regulatory enforcement.  It takes the form of “shut up and do what you are told – or else.”  We can get this from FSIS at no charge to the Kansas taxpayer. 

Other suggestions have been made to KDA which seem to have fallen on deaf ears.  Some of these suggestions, if fully developed, could save money for KDA and for us meat processors and for Kansas consumers without compromising food safety.  They could also make inspection and living with inspection easier to accomplish.  As fiscally responsible taxpayers we must examine the government programs we are involved in, not just complain about too much government spending. 



What’s Humane About Slaughter?

In a world where people generally have very little understanding of how their meat is produced, it behooves us to educate our customers on as many aspects of meat production as possible. One area is what is generally known as “Humane Handling of Animals.” In my estimation, there is much confusion about this issue. This article is a brief attempt to address this issue. In any discussion it is important and enlightening to define the words being used.

Slaughter – n – The act of killing especially the butchering of cattle and other animals for market. - v.t. – to kill for the market; butcher.

Human – adj. (1) of, belonging to, or characteristic of man (2) Having or showing the attributes of man.

Humane – adj. – (1) having or characterized by kindness, sympathy, tenderness, etc.; compassionate, benevolent. (2) Tending to refine or civilize.

Humanize – v.t. – (1) to make human; give human characteristics or qualities to. (2) To make humane; make gentle, kindly, etc.

Humanitarian – n – (1) one who seeks to promote the welfare of mankind by eliminating pain and suffering.

Husbandry – n – (1) The occupation or business of farming (2) Careful management; economy; thrift.

To Husband – vit. _ (1) To manage prudently use or spend wisely, conserve.

Animal Husbandry – the branch of agriculture specializing in the breeding, raising and care of animals.

Animalism – n – 1. The state or condition of a mere animal, actuated by sensual appetites only. 3. The belief or doctrine that man is entirely animal, having no soul or spirit.

The issues at stake are - the nature of this world, the nature of man, the nature of animal, the relationship of these and by whose authority do you decide. Here are some views on these issues.

1. Humans and animals are basically the same, with humans being the more advanced animals. See definition of “animalize”. Among these adherents there are vegetarians and meat eaters. As an evolutionist holding this position, you would not worry about the treatment of animals, or for that matter, other humans, since one of the tenets of evolution relies on the survival of the fittest.

2. Buddhism – “please don’t harm the cows, or the rats, for that matter. They could be reincarnated humans or gods.” This could even extend to bugs!

3. Mother Earth adherents: the earth is supreme over humans and animals.

4. American Indian – animals were to be used for food but a sacredness was attached to this process.

5. Judeo-Christian – God created the universe, the Earth, humans, and animals and placed these under the stewardship of humanity. Humans are the only beings created in God’s image and animals are given as food for humans. Thus the long accepted term “animal husbandry”. (See definitions above)

These views are generally exclusive i.e. you hold one or the other, not a combination. Today animals are humanized by Disney, fought over as “children” in couples divorcing, politicized by groups wanting to “save” them (whale, dolphin, polar bear, etc.); meanwhile true humans are starving, dying of ethnic cleansing, being aborted, etc.

Recently the use of gestation crates for hogs was in the news. One leading animal care expert posed this question: How would you like to live in a 2’ x 8’ area? This, my friend, is a loaded question! My wife’s response to this is “No, I would not like to live like that, nor would I want to eat “slop” or roll in the mud or eat feces or eat my young or lie on my babies and kill them. Nor would I like to be a dog and eat road kill or rotten meat or my own vomit.” My response is, if we answer the question “No, I would not like to live like that,” without further explanation, then we tend to humanize animals and thus open ourselves to the next logical question. “Do we want to be fattened up and slaughtered?” If you think this is not what “humane handling” is about, consider the position of the Humane Society of the United States. The following is taken from an article on HSUS’s web site dated April 19, 2012 and entitled “Standing Up For Animals, One Bite At A Time.”

“There are so many reasons people choose vegetarian foods. Some do it for their health, others for the health of the planet. Nobel Prize winner Isaac Bashevis Singer offered another compelling explanation: When asked if he was vegetarian for health reasons, Singer responded, ‘Yes, for the health of the chicken.’

Farm animals, like the dogs and cats we welcome into our families, are individuals with personalities, needs, and preferences – and most important, the capacity to suffer. Yet our industrial food system treats them like mere units on a production line with little regard for their suffering. In fact, many standard agribusiness practices are so inhumane, so out of step with mainstream American values about how animals should be treated, they would be illegal if the victims were dogs or cats.”

The position that Paulette and I hold is that God revealed to humanity, that humans are stewards of the animal kingdom and animals are to be used for mankind’s benefit. So what is humane about slaughter? Nothing. These two words are incompatible. Humane applies to humans, not animals.

Because words have specific meaning and consequences, we choose words that educate our customers on the nature and relationship of humans and animals as God has revealed.



Butcher Shops - Are We A Dying Breed?

First a look at what I remember about butcher shops.  Starting in the butcher business at age 50 and now being 65 I do not have the memories that many have of a life time in the butcher business.  But I do have memories of small town life where there were butcher shops in many small communities.  My community had a butcher shop that was run in conjunction with a grocery store.   

This butcher shop was in two locations.  The slaughter house was across the street from my grandparents and the cooler and processing was in the grocery store 3 blocks away.  So the animals were slaughtered one place and carried in the back of a pickup to the grocery store for cooling and processing.   I can guarantee you the pickup was not sanitary.  I was talking to my cousin about the slaughter house and she said she had a memory about it, an unpleasant one.  It seems I took her over there and showed her what was in some barrels that were left outside.  She then promptly threw up.  I have no recollection of that and I can’t believe I would ever do such a thing!  But that was 55 years ago and things have changed.  Fifty-five years ago there was a butcher shop 7 miles, 15 miles, 18 miles and 30 miles away.  Now all are closed and we started our business 16 years ago.

The disappearance of small butcher shops is true throughout the state with approximately 50% of the butcher shops gone in the last 50 years.  Are we truly a dying breed?  Is this trend going to continue?  How did we end up here?  What will the future bring?

Some obvious answers are 1) the customers have moved to the cities.  For the first time in American history, more people live in large cities than in rural areas.   2)  A generation of customers have died and have not been replaced.  3) Business owners died or retired and no one wanted to continue the business.  4)  Changing economic times, such as offal sometimes being an expense instead of a revenue producer.  5)  EVER INCREASING GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS.  6)  Large scale corporate food chains.  And the list could go on.  So that brings us to the here and now. 

We now have the majority of people one or two generations removed from the production of meat.  They only know meat produced by large corporations sold at large chain stores.  For the vast majority of these people there is a case to be made for locally sourced Kansas meat with its benefits of quality, taste, cost,  accessibility and the effect on the local economy.  What a wonderful opportunity.  A salesman dream!  So many people and so little time!   We have what they want.  They just don’t know it yet. 

In our shop we slaughter and process approximately 575 beef and 525 hogs for consumer use each year.  This supports us, two full time butchers and two full time wrappers along with a few seasonal employees.  Our customer base is approximately 2500 - 3000 customers per year.  If 2500 customers represent a family of 4 then we need 10,000 people to support us.  Wichita has around 400,000 people.  That would support 40 butcher shops our size.  I know of only 3 butcher shops in Wichita.  That leaves a lot of potential customers that could expand existing businesses or build new ones.

What could the future of butcher shops be or your butcher shop be if new customers were found to buy quarters and halves of Kansas meat?  What a boon to our local economy.  What farmer wouldn’t love to supply the animals to produce the meat?  Let us not despair over what seems to be a dying industry,  but let us  introduce a new generation to the benefits of Kansas grown meats.  Let’s tell our story.  Let’s not die without a fight.  Small butcher shops have what many people want.