Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Earls had a choice. They chose to place a higher value on an American lobby's trademark than on supporting Canadian producers. That is their right, but don't pretend they were left with "no choice".
|
.... I said that those were exactly the choices they had. Either abandon the label or change suppliers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
You are making a great many assumptions here. First and foremost, that some American lobby group's "certification" is (a) meaningful and (b) actually demonstrates a higher level of 'humane' treatment exists. The lack of a "certification" simply indicates that most Canadian producers don't see value in sending good money south for this group's program.
Personally, I wouldn't blame them. "Green" certifications are all the rage these days, and too many of them are scams that really only exist to separate people from their money. One big example that comes to mind for me is CompTIA's "Green IT" certification scam that only lasted a couple years. So if Canadian producers are skeptical of this certification, their decision not to certify indicates only that they are skeptical.
|
Yes the certification might be BS but until someone provides actual evidence of this, I'm going to assume it's not some organized fraud racket and that Alberta farmers simply don't meet the standards.
You know that saying one farm in the states has better standards than precious alberta beef is not the same as saying all farms in the states have better standards... right?