Agriculture students will debate the pros and cons of controversial food labeling legislation in a public presentation Thursday. The presentation will begin at 11 a.m. in the Union small auditorium.
Students in Keith Coble’s “Public Problems in Agriculture” class will comprise the two sides in a discussion investigating mandatory country-of-origin labeling for meat products, fish and perishable produce.
Country-of-origin labeling, or COOL, made its legislative debut in the 2002 Farm Bill. It requires that all beef, lamb, pork, fish, pea-nuts and perishable produce contain a label citing any country the livestock resided in or where the product was grown.
The labeling was originally slated to remain voluntary for a period of two years and become mandatory in September 2004. Assistant extension professor in agricultural economics John Anderson said because of the controversy surrounding implementation of COOL, the voluntary period was extended. Mandatory labeling will now take effect in September 2006, except for wild and farm-raised fish and shellfish.
“It affects quite a few products,” Anderson said. “It affects some very important industries and it affects a lot of people.”
Anderson said the idea behind the legislation is to give consumers the benefit of knowing exactly where their food is coming from. The process can become complicated, however, he said.
By its current standards, the new law would require that anywhere an animal lived throughout its life be documented on the label. This can become a lengthy process for livestock or produce that has been moved through several different countries. Anderson said that USDA cost estimates of the documentation process range from just under $580 million to over $3 billion.
Participants in the debate will essentially be arguing the consumer benefit versus the cost of mandatory labeling.
To prepare for the presentation, students in Coble’s class were divided into two teams-one for mandatory country-of-origin labeling and one for voluntary labeling.
Sarah Thomas, a senior agribusiness major, is a member of the team advocating mandatory labeling.
Thomas said her group will focus on the consumer demand and benefits of COOL.
“The consumer demand for it is there,” she said of her team’s argument.
Thomas said other countries such as Mexico and Canada have already implemented a country-of-origin labeling program.
Brad Fuller, a junior agribusiness major, will be supporting voluntary labeling. Fuller said that requiring a label of origin would not actually make foods any safer. It would only give consumers a false sense of security.
“Our argument is basically that it is not the issue that the people pushing for it are making it out to be,” Fuller said.
The presentation on Thursday will mark the third year Colbert has used the debate format for student projects.
Anderson said the presentation helps raise awareness of issues and gives students an idea of how agricultural policy systems work.