Last call for 1/2 or 1/4 beef and hog. Details HERE

Why are the grocery meat prices rising?

written by

Joe Wanda

posted on

January 8, 2022

Have you seen how much meat prices have increased over the past couple years at the grocery store?

Maybe that is what lead you to our farm?

I never notice because we obviously just eat our homegrown meats. 

However, I hear from new customers and from the media constantly how much prices are increasing and how much the quality has decreased.

Recently, I had a friend send this YouTube video to me.

It did a good job explaining there's a monopoly that four major meat packers have on 85% of the beef market. A bit scary. Which you already know this if you've been following me for a while.

Most of all it explained how the beef farmers are actually not benefiting from the increase in beef prices at the super market. Many family farms are still struggling despite the record high prices in the grocery stores!

Current markets for commodity beef farmers have increased recently a little, but not to the same rate that their counterparts (packers) are selling retail beef and meanwhile expenses are continuing to rise for the farmers. And these big meat packers are having record profit margins over the last 2 years and these farmers are still struggling. It doesn't seem right. 

We are talking 3rd and 4th generation family farms that can't pay their bills. Finally selling out to a bigger player that has the economies of scale and special contracts with the big meat packers. It's sad and I sympathize for these farmers

However, I'm not a believer in playing the victim mentality, I do believe the world and times are always evolving and farm business should be changing with the times too.

As I ruminated on this subject and after watching the video, maybe this is the wake up call for big change?

It's an interesting time we are in and I'm un-sure what the exact answer to the solution is.

We could make revisions in the farm bill to help these family farmers with more subsides, but the truth is, most of these farmers don't want handouts! They take pride in working hard for a living independently.  

Then we could pass legislation for anti-trust laws that controls these big corporate meat packers.  

But yet again, are we just putting a band aid on an already broken system? Do we really want this way of food production to continue long term?

Again, I don't know what the answer is and this is a complicated and difficult issue.  

I do think though this is a great time and opportunity for family farmers to sell direct to the consumer. Take the retail profit margins back to their family farm.

Also this creates a better opportunity for the consumer to voice to the farmer how they want their animals raised vs. the big meat packers having control of the farmers and what they present to the consumer. 

This would continue to drive up the demand for small meat processors. This could create more local butcher shops and help break the monopolies.

I do believe this could radically change and improve our rural farming communities. 

What I fear though is many of the farmers aren't willing to make the necessary changes. 

I recently had a conversation with an old farmer and I shared about how we raised all the animals out on pasture. He responded to me and said, "I remember farming like that as a kid, but then they (the university or publications) told me, we need to be bigger and more efficient by putting the cattle in the barn and truck feed to them." He said he was thankful to not having to go tracking through the mud no more now that the cattle are all on concrete.

He wasn't happy about the current situation, but also wasn't hurting enough to want make any changes anytime soon.

It was the same message when I went to college too, "we need to grow more and faster to feed the growing world". But we never had conversations about the nutrition of industrial food has on our health and the environmental impact. Nor did we talk about the impact consolidation is having on the health of local economies.

I'd like to see more conversations about these issues in the education system. 

It is awesome to see how over the last 2 years more consumers have looked for a farmer to provide them their food directly and are voting NO to the industrial food system. I know I've said this many times, but will continue. Your food dollars are the best way of voting for a better system, rather then hoping someone else fixes it.

I am optimistic for the future and think that more farmers will get on board, as they see the direct to consumer farms succeeding and the consumers voicing their unhappiness with the industrial farm model.

I envision a future where the consumers are healthier and happier with their food, family farm businesses are healthier, livestock are raised in humane conditions, environment improved for generations to come, and a healthier local economy.

While we pursue those endeavors, let's go enjoy a Wanda Farm steak and feel good knowing we supported local business not a major meat packer, as we all continue to solve the world problems together. 😊

Be on the look out for my email next week, as I have a special announcement on how you can have food security at a locked in price for 2022.

Blessings,

Joe

More from the blog

mRNA Use in Agriculture

Big Pharma’s mRNA vaccine arrives in Agriculture It is evident that our farm serves some of the most informed consumers. When I'm just busy farming… I receive text messages, dm's, and emails sharing concerns about new technology or recent food health concerns…. All well before I knew the issue existed! Last month, we were overwhelmed with inquiries concerned about the use of mRNA vaccines in our livestock.  Short answer:We don't use mRNA here on our farm....and don't foresee ever using this technology in the future....Period Recent reports in the last months shared mRNA vaccine technology is being developed and already being used in hog livestock agriculture.  Leaving many consumers concerned about their food source.  I set out to do more research on this topic and take an unbiased view, but quickly realized this could turn into a college thesis with how deep the topic could go. I'm not a doctor and won't claim to have it figured out, the science behind mRNA technology is a bit over my head.  For now, let's just stick to some basic facts that I found and I encourage everyone to spend the time researching it for yourself to make your own decision whether this technology is safe or not.   Ultimately, our view is to serve health conscious consumers and if our customers are skeptics, then we will avoid it at all costs, just as we have taken a stance against GMOs, glyphosate, antibiotics, and other questionable food technology.  THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL STANCE AGAINST SCIENCE. Believe me when it comes to new technology, I am all for improving our well being and making life better. I'd be Amish and not writing this email, if I didn't believe in new technology advancements. When did mRNA vaccines arrive? While vaccines have been around for decades, the mRNA is new to the game of agriculture and creating quite the stir of controversy.  It is stated that mRNA vaccines started being researched a decade ago and first used in 2015 on clinical trials with hogs.  However, it wasn’t until the beginning of this year that it became a hot topic, as it started to go viral on social media and many raised concerns.  Part of the popularity on social media was due to many state lawmakers raising their concerns.  I found an article explaining more of their concerns thanks to reporter, Kevin Killough Lawmakers in Arizona, Idaho, and Missouri have introduced legislation related to the use of mRNA vaccines in food. The Arizona bill only restricts labeling such food as organic. The Idaho bill amends state law to prohibit the sale of such foods unless conspicuously labeled that the presence of the vaccine is in the food. The Missouri bill requires a conspicuous "Gene Therapy Product" label. Missouri State Rep. Holly Jones, who sponsored the Missouri bill, said it doesn't ban the use of the vaccines, but informs consumers if it was used.  "The public deserves to understand what is in their food supply," Jones said.   She said that mRNA technology is being used without the right amount of studies on safety and efficacy, and she doesn't think the "gene therapy" label would be problematic. Jones said that we already have labels we put on products, such as "grass-fed beef" and "non-GMO."   "There needs to be something specific to gene therapy labeling, especially when it comes to our food supply," Jones said. "We have to be specific enough that people understand what they're putting in their body. I believe consumers deserve to have that information."   Jones said that her bill would support farmers who would become vulnerable to lawsuits without those labels.   "This is actually pro-business," Jones said.  (Source found here) What are mRNA vaccines? Vaccines are nothing new, in fact they have been around for a long time and the first one was developed in 1796. It is a substance used to stimulate immunity to a particular infectious disease or pathogen, typically prepared from an inactivated or weakened form of the causative agent or from its constituents or products. Vaccines in the past have fallen into 2 main categories.  1. MLV (modified live virus) or killed virus. Which worked by injecting a small amount of the virus into the body to create an immune response from the body and form memory cells to fight it in the future.  2.Toxoid vaccines use a toxin (harmful product) made by the germ that causes a disease. They create immunity to the parts of the germ that cause a disease instead of the germ itself. That means the immune response is targeted to the toxin instead of the whole germ. However, the mRNA vaccines are something new that I expect to take quick adoption in the vaccine world as the technology speeds up the development process and is claimed to be much less expensive to produce.  An mRNA vaccine is different because it uses a copy of a molecule called messenger RNA to produce the immune response. In theory, after the laboratory mRNA is injected into the body, it sends a code to the cells to produce a protein that mimics the virus. This protein then stimulates an immune response and creates antibodies against the virus.  Currently, I found that mRNA vaccine technology is only available for pigs, dogs, and cats. It is not licensed for beef or poultry at this time. (found here) Should we be concerned?   Many are concerned about this new technology and its long term effects.  1. Will it have negative side effects to the health of the animal long-term? The FDA/USDA assure that it is completely safe to use and won't have negative long term health effects on the animal's health. 2. Will we be ingesting this mRNA when consuming meat from mRNA vaccinated animals?  They also share that the mRNA will denature in the body after a few days. Most vaccines already have meat withdrawal periods of 30-60 days (animals can't be processed for consumption after withdrawal period) on their product labels, so I anticipate a similar withdrawal period for the mRNA also. Claims are also made that ingesting the mRNA would not survive the acid stomach environment and there's no need to be concerned about this either. However, supposedly they are working on creating an edible mRNA vaccine through plants (Link here). So maybe it has a longer life period than they claim?  This is where I think all of it gets over my head. Here's 2 scientists below that are on opposing sides that have both been scrutinized for being paid off. Click on the link below and listen to both and decide on your own. Dr. Malone claims mRNA needs more research  Dr. Folta claims mRNA is safeI do pray and hope that this technology is safe and the hype is for naught.  Does Wanda Farm Use mRNA vaccine? As I stated above, we have never used mRNA technology nor will ever in the foreseeable future.  Full transparency on all other vaccines.  I don’t have a stance against or for them. I think it depends on each farmer’s situation. Currently: All our chickens are not vaccinated from start to finish. All our hogs are not vaccinated from start to finish.  Almost all our beef cattle are not vaccinated.  I say almost because we work with several different cow/calf farmers that raise calves for us (all to our strict grass-fed only standards). “No vaccines” has never been a requirement for our farm partners. While the majority choose not to vaccinate, I do have one farmer that chooses to vaccinate for a respiratory bacteria to his calves at weaning (it’s the old technology of MLV, not the mRNA).  Also will note, I have not been required or do I know of any farmers that have been mandated to use this new vaccine technology.  I do believe this will be an independent decision for each farmer, but most likely will be accepted with open arms to the industry.  I think overall the farm industry is pretty receptive to new biotechnology.  Why do we choose not to vaccinate? There’s really 2 main reasons we choose not to vaccinate our livestock.   First, what type of farm do you think these vaccines are going to benefit the most? Obviously the industrial, factory farms need these vaccines.  The livestock at these factory farms are raised in enclosed buildings with poor ventilation, in their own feces, un-natural diets, and many times under stressful environments.  All weakening their immune system and creating susceptibility to disease.  Not to mention they are crowded in the buildings, so disease can quickly spread from animal to animal.  Not to blame these farms, they are under so much economic pressure to prevent livestock sickness, that vaccines will be a viable option for them. For our farm, we raise our livestock in a natural environment outside on pasture.  That said, we feel there’s not near the same disease pressure our livestock experience outside. They have better air quality, cleaner environment, more vitamin D, natural diet, and a less stressful atmosphere.  All this said, when they do get exposed to a pathogen, they have a stronger immune system to fight it off! We will also offer our cattle a free choice mineral and salt to help boost their immune system.  This is really the main reason I choose not to vaccinate our livestock.  The second reason follows my first.  What’s the economic benefit?  If our animals are healthy, why give money to big pharma for a vaccine that’s not necessary?  Not to mention the whole process and time of catching the animals to give shots is neither enjoyable for us or the animals.  Animal Husbandry all starts with prevention and that means giving our livestock a low stress and natural environment as nature intended.  Summary I am very thankful for all the technological advancements in science and medicine. They all have helped make our lives easier and better, however, not everything is black and white.  I encourage everyone of you as consumers to spend time researching this mRNA technology yourself and make you voice to legislation that you want them to regulate this in our food system.  You deserve to know how your food was produced.  Our farm will continue to be skeptics of new bio technologies and listen to our customers' concerns.  We seek to honor God’s creation and feed families safe, healthy, nutritious food. God Bless,  Farmer Joe 

Is Beef The Worst Food For The Climate?

Have you heard that beef is the worst food for the climate?Recently, I watched this YouTube video called “Why beef is the worst food for the climate” sharing how it is contributing to climate change.Feel free to watch this video for yourself, she almost convinced me that beef is the worst food for the climate until I put on my critical thinking cap. 😉This might surprise you, but I actually agree with her title almost, just would add one more word to it. I share shortly.Let me quickly unpack what the video shares in a nutshell.The video gives a visual bar chart of how common foods in everyday consumption contribute to climate change. First, the lady breaks down each food’s CO2 emissions from the processing, transportation, packaging, and selling of these foods. Second, she shares the CO2 emissions from growing and processing food for each common food. Next, she points out the biggest contributor of emissions in certain foods is the farming process and land use change.The farming process in the case of ruminant animals (cows, sheep, goats) she points out have a large impact on the emissions, because they emit methane from the rumen due to enteric fermentation (the process of microbes breaking down the grass fiber). Methane holds more heat and therefore global warming potential is 21x higher than CO2.Lastly, she points out that land use change is highly impacted in cattle farming, due to cattle ranches deforesting land. In her conclusion, to decrease emissions and prevent climate change, we should stop eating beef because beef is the largest contributor climate change compared to all other common foods we consume.Based off her research and bar chart, it sounds like the right conclusion.As I shared above, I agree with that statement but would add one word to the statement. “Why FACTORY beef is the worst food for the climate”We can criticize cattle all we want for contributing to climate change, but maybe we are to blame how we raise cattle, not the cow?Let me first explain factory farming beef today.Most cattle are raised on what is known as a cow calf operation. They usually are on pasture, however, most of these farmers do not understand responsible grazing. The pastures usually end up being overgrazed on these farms and farmers spend a lot of time, energy, and fossil fuels to making hay or purchasing it to feed to their cows due to lack of pasture. I’ll explain why the over grazed pastures are a problem in a little bit and how deforestation of land to overgrazed pasture does have a negative effect to green house emissions.Then once the calves are weaned from their mother, they will get shipped out to a feedlot and grain becomes their diet until slaughter. Here’s the issue with the feedlot model. Each year, the farmer and his tractors expend fuel, time, energy to till the fields and plant the crop. Then again, the tractor goes out to spray and fertilize the crops a few times during the summer. Finally, then the combine harvests the crops in the fall and trucks the feed to a storage sight. Wait, it doesn’t stop there, then the corn/grain usually needs to be dried down by a giant dryer (burns a lot of fuel to dry) to keep good in storage. Then when the farm needs corn to feed the cattle, the grain it trucked to the farm. Then it is ground and loaded into the feed truck. The feed truck deliveries the grain to the cattle. Then the cattle hang out eating the grain on these concrete or dirt lots (no pasture), pooping and farting. But now the farm needs to do something about all the manure that building up in this feedlot. They now need to remove all the manure and spread it out on the fields with machinery. Finally, the cattle are fat and sent to the processor for beef. Meanwhile the farmer was lucky to make a profit after all that work.Now this sounds like quite the process to raise and feed the cattle, I know, because I worked on a farm like this. It is a lot of work. However, how much fossil fuels were burned with all the equipment…. tractors, trucks, drying, grinding, fertilizer, chemicals? How much time and energy were spent by the farmers for this process? A huge one is how much carbon is released into the atmosphere every time the field gets tilled. Unfortunately, many farmers are becoming addicted to tractors, and never stopped to think, a cow has 4 legs and a mouth? What if I moved the cows to their feed and let them harvest the feed themselves? Meanwhile they can spread their manure out on the field as they are eating.Also, I just want to clarify in case you didn’t know, but most pastures are perennials, if they are managed correctly, reseeding the pastures isn’t necessary. So once it’s established, we don’t need to worry about doing all that I explained above year after year with the tractors. Corn is also a grass, but it’s an annual and requires all that I explained above to grow year after year.Now can you see how having the cattle out grazing can eliminate a lot of fossil fuels, carbon releases, and arguably a lot of time and energy from the farmer?Right! What if we managed the cattle differently and how would that improve their so-called contribution to global warming?What I explained above is only a portion of this issue. She said the cow’s farts and belching are the biggest problem because they are ruminants. How does having them on pasture solve that problem?Let’s address this problem, because I hinted in the beginning with how most cow/calf farmers haven’t managed their pastures well and also contribute with their farming methods.Cattle are a key part to the ecosystem and as herbivores they have a symbiosis relationship with grasses. As grass lands grow, the grass has a very vital time for grazing. When it isn't grazed, it goes into a dormant stage where it is old and strawy, it's effectiveness in photosynthesis (the process of capturing sunlight and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere) decreases. Photosynthesis is a key part of this system, as it breaks down the CO2 in our atmosphere, it puts the carbon molecule into the soil, which we call “carbon sequestration.” If the cattle continually over graze the grass, they stunt the grass and likewise won’t be affective in photosynthesis just as the over mature grass. Ideally, we want the grasses to be at a mature stage for grazing, not too short, nor too old, because this is when we maximize photosynthesis in the grasslands (also this is when the grass is best nutritionally for the cattle). Manage the cattle to graze the grass lands at the right time, with rest periods, and they are contributing to more carbon sequestration than many forest. This is the power of having livestock managed on the land vs on a concrete lot and what we are trying to achieve as regenerative farmers. Some of my mentors that I follow, they call themselves the “carbon cowboys” for this very reason. They are farmers teaching how crucial it is to responsibly manage our pastures and animals.Here's a quick little chart of a farm called White Oaks Pastures. They have been practicing holistic regenerative farming practices for 25 years now and have seen dramatic results. A study performed on their farm showed that they in fact have a -3.5-carbon footprint on the environment based on their farming model. Check out the chart.As you can see from the chart, this management practice doesn't stop the cow's methane belches and gas, but the holistic grazing puts so much carbon into the soil is more than makes up for the problem.Now that you can see the benefits regenerative farming is having, you can see how eating beef from a responsible grass-based farmer is crucial for protecting our climate. If you got the time, I encourage you to watch this Ted Talk.This is a reason, why when I go out to eat, I usually just don’t eat beef, unless I know it was responsibly raised by a regenerative grass-based farmer. My food dollars vote for my future world I want. ( and some say I'm a food slob haha)Keep eating local, grass-fed, and know your farmer’s philosophy and you will be helping to reduce the carbon food print. 😊Blessings,Farmer JoeP.S. On a side note they also compared their farm's beef to the “impossible burger," we’ll have to discuss this one in the future as it’s super interesting!