For a long time I have wondered why our neighbour (peer) doesn't follow the practices we do and why another neighbour doesn't do what that neighbour does. Especially when as a group we mostly sell product into an identical market.
So one could only think we as producers all think we know how to do it best, or it could be that the feedback we receive from our customers fails to give us direction, or perhaps they have never in the past wanted an even product and they have been happy with whatever we turn up with on sale day.
Keeping this in mind if we don't have the ideal product (teeth, weight, fat, shape) the compensation only drops the value paid for product.
That turns the product into a commodity which can then only be labeled with the AUS-MEAT grade of “A”, which clearly tells the consumer it is a sub-grade product and the producer was discounted significantly for failing to meat the highest of industry eating standards.
Of course this was then, but now we are moving away from the systems of old to look for ways to give feedback that is clear, concise and eventually will leave us without doubt on which genetics and grazing patterns will make us leading edge producers and our consumers wanting more.
This eventual change hasn't come without its awkward times from way back in the late 1970s when producers lobbied to be understood that if it was about eating quality and yield the signals being given were completely misleading.
Finally thanks to a ray of light in MLA and a parliament that must have had some knowledge of the complete confusion at producer level we have had an enquiry into how and why the current way isn’t the right way.
I believe DEXA Machine (Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry) will complicate things while we gain an understanding of where we stand as producers but ultimately we will at least be able to understand how much of the product we deliver is useable for the purpose it was produced.
Moving forward, the producer and our customers (processors) are going to go through a new phase in our relationship.
The feedback will become more accurate as to what we send and some of us will really like it while others will wonder how we got it so wrong.
This is a game about meat and its edibility. Not about what looks good in the paddock or how little work it takes to deliver the product (organics).
If this is done with the consumer in mind and not the pockets of those in between it should have a beneficial outcome for all involved.
– Will Wilson
