News 
 National Rural News 
 Livestock 
 News 
 The farmer gets $5 a kilo. You pay $69 

The farmer gets $5 a kilo. You pay $69

21 Jun, 2010 05:04 AM
KEL SHARMAN, a Tasmanian beef farmer, was astonished to find out that meat from a beast he sold for about $5 a kilogram last month was on sale at a Surry Hills butchery this week for $69.

"You're joking," Mr Sharman said. "I'm in the wrong line of business."

In theory, every piece of meat sold in Australia can now be identified and traced to its source paddock via the bar code on its packaging.

In practice, it is extremely difficult to do because of the complex, often disjointed relationship between the shop and the farm, abattoir, transport, storage and distribution companies. Many retailers are unable to say where their produce comes from on a given day.

But the Herald has traced the origin and carbon footprint of a basket of groceries, using methods and data from the CSIRO and the federal Department of Climate Change.

Even though most of the items were grown and processed in Australia, the most conservative estimates say the food travelled almost twice the circumference of the earth by road and ship before it reached the supermarket shelf.

After being fattened for more than a year in a paddock near the Tasmanian village of Sassafrass, Mr Sharman's beast was herded into a truck and taken about 160 kilometres west to an abattoir at Smithton. The best fillets were carved from its carcass in a boning room and loaded on to a refrigerated lorry bound for Burnie, 90 kilometres to the east.

From there the meat travelled to Port Melbourne in a sealed container, where it was loaded on to another truck and dispatched up the Hume Highway for a journey of at least 880 kilometres. On reaching the distributor Andrews Meat at Dulwich Hill, the beef was transferred to a smaller van and delivered to Hudsons Meats at Surry Hills where it was on sale for $69 a kilogram.

Based on the vehicle fuel types and average trucking speeds, the half a kilogram of beef generated about 460 grams, or almost its own weight, in carbon dioxide emissions along the way.

This amount of greenhouse gas is much lower than that generated by most commercial meat, mainly because the cattle were grass fed.

The figure does not include energy used to refrigerate and store the meat while it aged, nor the much larger amounts of energy consumed and emitted by the beast when it was being fattened for slaughter.

Mr Sharman's steak can be traced via the National Livestock Identification System, under which a microchip is attached to the ear of every calf destined for slaughter. The system tracks individual beasts as they are moved, an extensive accounting exercise but one that makes the industry more accountable to its customers. "There is no doubt it has made it more difficult for us but I think it is something the public is asking for now," Mr Sharman said. "Ten years ago it was a lot simpler with a lot less paperwork."

Mr Sharman's distributor, Greenham Tasmania, said it wanted to make its meat easy to trace because transparency gave it credibility in the eyes of its overseas customers.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
The price difference between what the farmer gets, and what consumers are prepared to pay is so huge. That it actually encourages these sorts of inefficiencies in the supply chain, to develop and thrive.
Posted by Qlander, 21/06/2010 5:56:10 AM
i wish they paid $5 kg in wa id be rich
Posted by shaun, 21/06/2010 11:18:11 AM
Who gets the $64? Apparantly not the butcher, not the agent, not the saleyard...who then?
Posted by haras, 21/06/2010 2:56:39 PM
Why is this article not a front pager in the national papers? It would also make economical and evironmental sense to rebuild some smaller distributed processing plants to stop carting all the waste material around the country. The so-called free market has quite a few flaws that need to be recognised.
Posted by pepper, 21/06/2010 3:42:34 PM
$5 to $69. Should try getting $1.70 and see it being sold for $35. It is a rort. Cannot wait for the day when the farmgate price is put on produce. One could go on about the 'Fat Cats' in the middle processing, but we have heard it all before.
Posted by ash, 21/06/2010 5:53:06 PM
I agree Shaun - If they gave me $5 a kilo I could give up the day job.
Posted by Darren Donald, 21/06/2010 6:30:27 PM
I don't understand why farmers don't sell direct to public. I guess it is hard to do.
Posted by Anita, 21/06/2010 7:21:27 PM
Mr Sharman should kill his own steer, break it down and then market it himself. He should load it into the boot of his car and drive to NSW from Tasmania and find someone to buy his prime cuts. Should take him about a week and 2000km of travel. What pathetic journalism and then having to put up with an estimation of carbon emissions. Get real this is Australia, a bloody big country.
Posted by MABEL PEYTON SMYTH, 21/06/2010 9:27:23 PM
This issue has been done to death with numerous studies indicating that there is no price gouging at retail. Reality is that a beast doesn't consist of only fillet steaks, t-bones and porterhouses. The supply chain to get the beast to market is long and complex. If this gentleman thinks he is getting ripped off, then sell the farm and buy a butchery and watch the money roll in. Simplistic journalism like this is emotive and gets us no-where. Worse still it reinforces the view that farmers are whingers...always complaining about someone ripping them off.
Posted by ProFarmer, 22/06/2010 5:30:45 AM
'Even though most of the items were grown and processed in Australia, the most conservative estimates say the food travelled almost twice the circumference of the earth by road and ship before it reached the supermarket shelf.' How does this work out? It went from Tassie to Surry Hills with a few zig zags in between...twice the circumference of the earth. Would hate to buy carpet from you. By the way...the butcher is probably selling lamb at a loss at the moment.
Posted by Profarmer, 22/06/2010 5:36:30 AM
1 | 2 | 3  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
16 June, 2010
POLL
Q: Are you concerned about the increasing amount of foreign investment in our agricultural resources?

Yes
(82.2%)

No
(17.8%)

Total Votes: 702
Poll Date: 20 June, 2010

Most popular articles

Advertisement

Irwin Hunter 160x160


Farm Weekly







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...