An Argentine official has been suspended after he suggested early this week that the Córdoba provincial government was looking into feeding poor children with pigeon meat.

Oscar de Allende, the environmental director of Córdoba, had Argentines in arms after he said they were considering cooking up the birds as a part of the Integral Program of Assistance (Paicor).

“We are not thinking about that,” said the chief cabinet minister of Córdoba Oscar González, “We have never looked into using pigeons as a part of Paicor.” Paicor is a program which helps feed disadvantage school children.

On Tuesday Allende said the unique initiative was a good idea because of the invasion of pigeons in the region, he estimated about 600mn live in Córdoba.

“We need to change the concept that pigeons are a plague,” he said on Tuesday in an interview with Cadena 3, “They are an abundant resource not a plague. A plague signifies death but we should call them otherwise, they are full of protein.”

He insisted that pigeons are a healthy alternative and that in countries in Europe they are highly prized for their meat. Some pigeon dishes are, “very expensive and considered to be delicacies.”

After his comments there was an immediate backlash of protests forcing Allende to appear on television in which he denied there had ever been a proposal.

“There are no projects. I would like to make that very clear, it was just an idea,” he said on C5N Television.

Since then, numerous senor officials have come out stating the claim was false and that no such plans exist. Yesterday Córdoba Governor Jose Manuel de la Sota suspended Allende for “controversial statements on pigeon consumption.”

Despite all the controversy, Allende defended his proposal.

“I am not going to take back what I said, but the topic was poorly presented,” he said, “We’re not going out and hunting pigeons . . . It is an idea for future projects. We need to see what we can do to avoid wasting so many kilos of food.”

Argentina has submitted a formal complaint to the World Trade Organization (WTO) against both the United States and Japan claiming their restrictions on Argentine exports are “unjustifiable.”

The Foreign Ministry submitted the complaint claiming that both the US and Japan have been putting up unfair barriers against Argentine meat and citrus fruit.

In an official statement the Foreign Ministry said, “There is no scientific justification for the long delay in recognizing Argentina’s health status and sanitary conditions, which is already recognized by the World Animal Welfare Organization.”

They argue that the refusal to accept Patagonia as a region free of foot-and-mouth disease is unfounded and that fresh, chilled and frozen meat is perfectly safe.

In addition, the ministry questioned the delay in the reopening of the North American market for citrus fruit. The US has been limiting and denying Argentine lemon export permits for the past seven years.

Japan, on the other hand, has been putting up barriers against Argentine packed meat.

“Argentina leads various developing countries in the conception of sanitary measures and technical regulations without fundamental science that normally restricts agricultural exports from developing countries in an arbitrary and unjustified manner,” claimed the Foreign Ministry.

They added that these restrictions create an “unbalanced trading system” that even further widens the gap between developed and developing countries.

Argentina’s beef industry is the third largest in the world behind Brazil and Australia. However, beef exports are not an essential part of the Argentine economy, in large part because Argentina consumes most of its beef. This has prevented it from becoming solely an export industry.

Right now the US has set an annual restriction on importing Argentine meat at 20,000 tonnes.

The production of citrus fruit has increased in the country according to a semi-annual US Department of Agriculture report on the Argentina citrus industry for 2010/11. However, exportation rates do not reflect the spike in production, as they are expected to increase only slightly.

The citrus industry includes lemons, oranges, tangerines/mandarins, and grapefruit.

Beef consumption is down in Argentina while chicken and pork consumption has risen according to a report by the Argentine Chamber of Meat Industry.

In October, it was estimated that per person, Argentines eat an average of 53.8 kilos of beef a year. The figure represents a decrease of 6.7% in annual consumption and the worst in the last 91 years.

Reasons for this decrease are attributed to a more than 130% increase in the price of beef, the reduction of availability, and a larger population base in the country.

An official from the Center of Fowl Processing Businesses said, “We estimate that in 2011, we will end up with an average chicken consumption of 40 kilos per person, which is one and a half kilos more than last year.”

Additionally, pork consumption has increased 9.2% in the last two years.

Traditionally during winter in Argentina, animals are lead to the slaughter and their meat turned into food. Kristie Robinson participated in a traditional ‘carneada‘ in Argentina. This is a weekend-long activity where an animal is slaughtered and the cuts separated for some to be cured and others to be made into sausages. Traditionally, neighbours would all help one another do this, rotating during the winter from farm to farm, so all the food is prepared for the coming summer months. As the activity is normally done over a two-day weekend, the Saturday night would involve a feast with folkloric music.

Warning – these photos contain graphic images.

The victim - a 250 kilo pig.

Traditionally the animals are slaughtered slitting their throat to them bleed them immediately and save the blood for the morcilla, but the animal tends to suffer substantially and for a 250kg pig it was deemed better to shoot it, killing it instantly.

The pig is then stabbed in the throat immediately after death and the bleed for the morcilla

Using boiling water, the fur is then removed

Once stripped of fur, the animal is hung upside down and split open

Cutting the carcass in half is hard work and takes a while

Stacking meat up and separating the cuts

The meat is then put through a mincer and condiments are added into the mix and it is all mashed together

This is then put through a sausage maker to make chorizos and salame

Santiago proudly stands by the salame (left) and chorizos (right) which are now hung up to dry

A typical carneada lasts two days, and traditionally on the middle evening there is a feast with folkloric music

The salames are hung out to try in a dry space for months to cure before being ready to eat

'Chicharrones' (pork scratchings) are made by frying the fat in its own fat and then pressing the pieces of fried fat to remove excess grease and liquid

The finished chicharrones are commonly baked into bread or used as a topping on salads

To Rolando Daniel Epstein and Alberto Teskiewicz

Campo (Photo: Juan José Richards Echeverría)

Sirloin, rib eyes, T-bones – around one hundred pounds of prime meat distributed in Coral Gables. Cuts selected to be eaten practically raw and slathered with barbecue sauce, the way they like them there. Daniel turns onto Collins Street and feels a stab of annoyance. They think they know how to prepare meat better than the Argentines, with their gadget-laden toy barbecues, in their ant-free, odorless back yards. “They’re your bread and butter,” Vera always tells him. So better just to keep his mouth shut. But that doesn’t prevent him from evoking, from so many childhood summers and so many childhood places, the aroma and the sound of crackling branches, the joy of gathering them together on the damp grass. If he half-closes his eyes, he can even see the fine column of smoke rising from the mound he and his cousins have assembled. To do it right requires an ample yard, a yard that’s part forest, not those self-important sandpits, those buzz-cut lawns, like a marine’s head. They deserve their goddamn charcoal, he thinks, and once more he recalls Vera’s common sense: “You’ve got to adapt, let go of your pointless nostalgia.”

As proof of her adaptive ability, she’s given him these pants, the one’s he’s wearing now: a pair of American carpenter’s pants with at least ten different-sized pockets that he’ll never figure out what to keep in. How strange that Vera hasn’t shown signs of life yet, hasn’t sent him a single message, considering the way she usually drowns him in loving concern. Daniel shifts in his seat. He knows he’ll have to make a decision soon. He ought to move in with her. Or leave her:  risk it all on that unspoken dream, the one that’s still waiting for an extraordinary woman to appear. Where did he get that crazy notion? Forty years old, practically bald, no money – and he’s still waiting for the Princess of Kappurthala? When the Princess of Kappurthala finally shows up on his doorstep, she’ll be drooping and in rags.

Mirror Eyes (Photo: Steve Johnson)

Daniel takes his order book out of the glove compartment and rests it on the dashboard. As he waits for the light to change, he confirms that he’s already made stops at La Estancia and Chikito Way; he’s picked up orders from Johnny Meat and Che Chorizo. The only one left is El Danzón, Mariel and Omar’s mini-market. He likes Cubans – some Cubans, anyway – but to call a mini-market El Danzón, what an idea! Like the guy who named his ice cream parlor Socorro Ramírez, in honor of his wife, a formidable mulatto who aroused only obscene thoughts: a chocolate body bathed in peanut crème, warm syrup, and here and there a glistening bit of fruit  . . . He’s drifting into his reverie of subtle sweetness when the traffic light shocks him back to reality. Daniel pokes his head out the window and catches a sideways glimpse of himself in the rear view mirror. He’s startled. Every time his reflection unexpectedly appears, the same thing happens. Who’s that bald guy with bags under his eyes? A closer glance reveals a man who looks more and more like his father. His father, too, if the situation had arisen, would have been capable of naming an ice cream parlor Esther Sidelnik. And yet, the Cubans in Miami were doing well, no matter how flagrantly they ignored the laws of marketing. And the Argentines? The Argentines were always on a roller coaster, like him. A crisis hits, leaving him sprawled on the canvas; another one suddenly comes along and lifts him up, dumping a few bucks in his pocket. Enough to take on the adventure once again.

Now Miami, with his little Argentine beef business – Uruguayan beef, really, temporarily Uruguayan, until the outbreak of hoof-and-mouth disease eases up, which should be very soon, a matter of days according to his contacts in Argentina, an outbreak that was announced just as he and his partner were getting the business off the ground. He can’t quite figure himself out, if he’s a poor fool plagued by bad luck, a putz, or a guy that will surprise everyone in the long run, beginning with himself. Every time he thinks about that, he remembers his Bubbeh’s face. How she would look at him when he was a kid, with one of those expressions described by detective novels as “inscrutable”.

Daniel turns onto Camino Way and slows down at the entrance to El Danzón. The parking lot is nearly empty. He continues toward the shed out back, where a few cars are sheltered from the fierce morning sun, and he parks in a single, deft maneuver. One of the pleasures of living in Miami is the Savannah Diesel he and his partner have bought, a sharp model whose quiet humming and purring constantly reassure them that around here things still work.

Meat (Photo: Matthew Jacobs)

Daniel gets out, stretches, and walks toward the back. He opens the refrigerated compartment, hops in, and goes over to the corner where the boxes for Omar are stacked. Another thing he’s happy about are their newly-designed packages, with oval labels and an elegant sketch of an Argentine cattle ranch. No one would ever doubt you’re a gourmet when you’re carrying a package of South American Beef, a piece of the mythical Argentine Pampa. He recalled those small-town butcher shops, with their bloodstained marble counters and flies buzzing around. How things have changed – how sophisticated –and perverted, he thinks – meat markets have become, when suddenly he hears a click and finds himself plunged into darkness. His heart goes click, too, even though he realizes that all he has to do is get to the door, which has treacherously closed behind him, and feel around for the inside handle, because everything has been planned out, contemplated, foreseen, especially the possibility that a poor South American might leave the door ajar without factoring in its likely trajectory, its weight, the tendency of things to return to their normal condition, because nobody wants to change: everything, people and objects, want to keep on being what and where they used to be. In the case of the door, that means: closed. But it’s not the door’s decision, Daniel thinks, it’s man’s, the engineer who designed that van, and he sidles along the cold walls of the compartment  toward the door, where he sees, right by his head, the little red thermostat light, a glow that gradually becomes brighter as his eyes grow accustomed to the new situation: two degrees centigrade, so that the meat – his, too, now added to that of the River Plate bovines – will stay cold in the center, he thinks, as a shiver runs down his spine. His hand locates the handle, turns it downward, and as soon as he does, he knows all is lost: the handle wiggles loosely, like a toy. No mechanism responds to his command. He repeats the effort, shaking the handle, yanking it backward and forward.  He refuses to accept what is evident: the handle is broken. He gropes his body. What did he expect to find? A hammer? A pair of pliers? He’s nearly naked in his undershirt and his pants with their useless pockets, as smooth as a fish. Besides, he reasons, as he tries wiggling the handle again, it’s not as if a piece has come loose or fallen off, something he might be able to adjust; it’s something internal, inaccessible. Daniel slides down to the floor and grabs his head. “It runs like a Mercedes,” the previous owner had said, a guy who delivered fish, but not one goddamn thing about the inside handle being broken. Daniel curses him out, shifty Yankee, fucking son-of-a-bitch. He remembers his healthy, rosy cheeks, his bullish neck, and swears that if he ever runs into the guy again, he’ll strangle him. In an instant he goes from fury to impotence. But he finally gets up: no reason to despair, you have to stay calm, think about afterwards, when all of this will be a funny story, a few days from now. Because he’s going to get out of here very soon, even though right now only the direst possibilities are running though his mind. He knows that his cell phone is up front on the dashboard, where he usually leaves it. What a blunder:  the only thing left to do is kick the door, yell, count on his good luck, wait for somebody from the two or three cars he saw in the parking lot to hear him. He hurls himself against the door, pounding it frantically with fists and feet. The important thing is to stay cool, two degrees centigrade. How long will it take for his flesh to grow cold from hypothermia? How long can one last under these conditions? What is it like to freeze to death?

He has to garner his forces: no hysterical pounding; just breathe deeply and kick every five, three, two minutes. Meanwhile, march constantly around the compartment in order to stay warm. Who would imagine that something’s happened to him? Nobody. When would someone start worrying about his absence? He reviews the unlikely identities of those “someones” in Miami. Only two or three people. While he keeps up his gymnastic pace and his pounding on the door, he engages in the most bizarre speculations. His mind fogs a little and the hands on the clock confuse him. The big one is for hours, the little one for minutes. There’s no second hand. He must have flung himself against the door around twenty times. He taps his forehead gently against the wall as if that might straighten out his thoughts. Could a half-hour have gone by? An hour? Suddenly he sees his Great-Uncle Gregorio, the one in the daguerreotype, shrugging his shoulders as if asking his forgiveness. Because he’s the guilty party and he knows it. The family idiot, the one who began the saga in which Daniel might well turn out to be the last, sad link. An insult by fate, to die of suffocation after having escaped the pogroms and concentration camps. He recalls the refrigerated delivery trucks in Buenos Aires, so spacious and ventilated, those half-sides of beef hanging from their hooks, and here he is, not even about to die shoulder to shoulder with his beloved Argentine cows, “like embracing a steer,” he thinks, laughing through chattering teeth.  No, he’s going to end his days frozen alongside a pile of presumptuous little packages, stacked up like candy boxes. He feels a tickle in his stomach, as if a spider were walking inside him. Trapped, just like him inside the truck. Like Russian dolls, he thinks, one nestled in the other, and he thinks of Gregorio again, brave, foolish Gregorio, crossing the Moldau with all the family’s coins sewn in the lining of his overcoat.

1925 Boat Passage (Photo: William)

Gregorio showed his true colors right away, yes sir: as soon as the boatman saw him he realized what a coward Gregorio was, and then and there, without even waiting to reach the middle of the river, he took nearly his entire fortune, leaving him with only one bill to pay half his passage to America, hidden under the insole of his shoe. It was supposed to have gotten him as far as New York. The whole family had been depending on him, Daniel thinks. If only Gregorio had disembarked in New York, he’d be singing a different tune today:  he’d be a prosperous merchant; he wouldn’t have document problems; he’d be sunbathing on a yacht in Miami, not locked in a refrigerated compartment. But no, he got Argentina instead. The military dictatorship, inflation, devaluations, restrictions on bank withdrawals. Not to mention everyday adversities, little swindles, shortages, impossibilities, things that didn’t work. Who could resist a cocktail like that? Gregorio hadn’t understood the weight of his responsibility. The extent of his stupidity, which becomes apparent when you look closely at the daguerreotype:  those shrugging shoulders, that scraggly beard. Because he had more than one chance, Gregorio did. He could have gotten off at some Brazilian port. He could have stayed in Montevideo. They’d be poor, but humble. He wouldn’t have become poisoned with Argentine arrogance. And he’d even been in Montevideo for two days, while the ship loaded and unloaded merchandise. He had been walking along a little downtown street when he looked into a window where a tailor was working. Der arbl is shlekht geneyt, Gregorio had said to the man when he saw him laboring to sew on a sleeve. The Uruguayan tailor, who was also a Landsman, understood and challenged him: So you think I didn’t sew it right?  Well, if you’re so great, why don’t you sit down and do it yourself? Gregorio did, and as he had learned the trade from his father from a very early age, first he basted the sleeve and then sewed it on with fine stitches, leaving the shoulder perfectly attached, without a single wrinkle. The Uruguayan offered him a job on the spot. That was when Gregorio made another mistake, refusing out of pure fatalism, because his ticket, which at first he thought was for New York, was for Buenos Aires, and he wanted to follow the path marked for him by destiny.

And so, through that compendium of errors, which later grew and multiplied into others, he, Daniel Sidelnick, was now here, like the last of the Buendías, born with a pig’s tail, exhausted from kicking against a closed door. He hated Gregorio and his Aunt Ethel, who had dragged the rest of the family, including his Grandfather Julio, and weighed anchor in Argentina; he hated his Uncles David and José and their mediocre textile factories, and their snotty children, his older cousins, who had passionately adopted the tango, yerba mate, pool, Peronism, and later on, Italian pasta and the tarantella because in turn several of their kids had mixed with Italian blood. He felt dampness on his face, tears no doubt, possibly the last ones of his life. “Don’t cry, vein nisht,” his Bubbeh used to tell him, and then he knew exactly how she had looked at him. Sacrificial flesh, he thought, and those two words fell upon him with Biblical gravity. Then he thought he heard the first bars of “Eight Days a Week”. It took him a minute to recognize the tune: it was his cell phone ringing. But, how could he hear it if his phone was up front, in the cab? The music stopped for a few seconds, and then, with the same incongruous gaiety, started up again. It was coming from somewhere close by, very close by. It seemed to be emanating from his own body. The first hallucination? He patted himself up and down, and then, trembling, he discovered in one of the ten pockets of his ridiculous pants, the lowest and narrowest of all, up against his calf, something incredible, miraculous: his cell phone! It took him a while to dig it out, and when he finally succeeded, he could read Vera’s tender message on the luminous screen: “Don’t forget I love you.” Despite the cold that had already anesthetized his feet, he felt a rapturous flash of warmth, and with a numb finger that now seemed vaguely divine, Adam-like, he punched in the number of El Danzón. Yeaahh? said Mayito, the clerk, in her screechy voice. Daniel tried to speak, but a combination of voice and sobs clogged his throat, and the clerk impatiently hung up. Daniel dialed again, and again Mayito’s voice responded, intermittently cut off by the bad connection: Hello? Omar, Omar! Daniel shouted. Where you at, chico? In back; go call Omar. Back? You want Omar to call you back? You gonna call back? No!  I’m in back, in the garage. Or should I say parking lot, “aparcadero,” “parqueo?”What you say, chico? Chico, my ass, you stupid bitch! Go call Omar, concha de tu madre! Concha ain’t here; she comes on Saturday  . . . waiiiiit a minute, I’ll get Omar, said Mayito, trying to calm him down.

Door Knob (Photo: Stephanie Carter)

The silence intensified his terror.  Would this false hope be the last of his torments?  But a moment later he heard Omar’s happy, sonorous voice:  Daniel, is that you? Yeah, Omar, I’m behind  . . . You’re running behind? No, in back, behind your store, your little market, your “marketa”, here in the van, the truck, the “troca”, I’m locked in! LOCKED IN, ENCERRADO! He blessed the word, the same in Cuba as in Argentina as in Spain as in the rest of the world wherever the Spaniards had disembarked, leaving their precious language.

Defeated, he could hardly breathe until the van door opened at last. The flash of light blinded him at first. Then, little by little, he saw the outline of Omar’s smiling face, and Mayito’s peering in from behind him. And behind them he imagined he could see Vera embracing him at night, and his Bubbeh scolding: When are you going to stop running around already, Daniel, when will you find a nice girl from the community and get married? Yes, his Bubbeh was right: he should marry Vera. But right now he needed to catch his breath, warm up, think things over a little more. Maybe, he mused, he should return to Argentina. And then, standing behind his Bubbeh, he thought he saw Uncle Gregorio, with his puny little shoulders and scraggly beard, give him a wink and disappear.

To read an exclusive interview with Inés Fernández Moreno, click here.

During the 2011 Lenten season as Argentines say good-bye to their traditional diet of beef in preparation for Easter, little do they know that they may be making a long farewell, far beyond the strictures imposed upon them by religious beliefs. Never have been domestic prices been so high, and never has consumption of beef been so fraught with risks, both as a result of economic interests and political mishandling.

Where’s the Beef?

The proud gaucho stands in his stirrups gazing into the horizon as dozens of cows swarm around him against a backdrop of deep green pasture and immense blue sky.  The cows look fat, sleek, and happy. Quintessential Argentina, you think.

Not anymore.

Gauchos and cattle, quintessential Argentina. (Photo: Eduardo Amorim)

The days of the gaucho have long been a romantic anachronism, but it would seem that cattle ranching is heading in the same direction. Gone are the days when cattle ranged freely in the pampas, arguably some of the finest pastureland in the world, and just reason for the renown and quality of Argentine beef and dairy products. In 1991, the feedlot made its debut in Argentine territory, and despite the fact that the relation between E. coli infection and beef deriving from cattle enclosed in feedlot operations has been widely established, the feedlot continues to prosper in Argentina even today, largely as a result of nearsightedness on behalf of policy makers, and greed reflected in the beneficiaries of the feedlot system, primarily abattoirs and meat distribution  plants. Not unexpectedly, Argentina has the world’s highest mortality rate of Uremic-Hemolytic Syndrome, a disease related to E. coli (strain 0157:H7) contamination.

Nearsightedness

During the early 1990s, the prices of soy and corn (maize) futures soared, and many cattle ranchers opted to make the transition from cattle ranching to grain cultivation. Acres and acres of high quality pastureland were tilled and planted, and remain so to this day. An obvious consequence of this situation was that fewer and fewer acres remained for cattle ranching; a not so obvious one was the actions taken by the government to limit the profits gained by soy and corn farmers, in order to protect domestic food supplies. Even in today’s market, livestock production simply is not as profitable as grain cultivation.

A 1993 report by the National Institute of Agricultural Technology (INTA) could still affirm that cattle in Argentina “are almost exclusively grass fed”, yet the feedlot was already making headway in the nation’s rural areas. Originally, the feedlot model was adopted as a stopgap measure, a way to mitigate loss of capital, as well as a way to feed the cattle in a limited space. Nevertheless due to the limitations of available pastureland, beef production was lowered and domestic prices for beef went up. In an attempt to keep beef prices down, legislation was developed which provided for subsidies for the corn fed to the cattle in the feedlots. These subsidies were understood as ‘compensation’ for the producers, who in turn did not raise beef prices to the consumer.

In contrast to the Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFO) adopted in the United States, Argentine feedlots operate on a smaller scale, but also with fewer regulatory demands, sometimes consisting of a makeshift corral on private property with no proper design or functionality. The National Service for Agro Food Health and Quality (SENASA) is the government organism responsible for registering and testing for common cattle borne diseases such as Hoof and Mouth or Spongiform Encephalopathy (Mad Cow), but the municipal structures by which domestic feedlot operations should be managed and controlled are largely inexistent. Now, more than 20 years into the model, feedlots have become part of the scenery. By subsidizing the grain with which cattle are fed in feedlots, the government guaranteed beef production at a low price to the consumer, and feedlot and abattoir operators were caught up in the business of producing beef at a loss, yet still making money thanks to the ‘compensation’ given to them from the government. It remains to be said that this compensation was never received by grass farmers, giving an unfair advantage to grain finishing operations and driving more and more producers to feedlots or bankruptcy.

Since the money perceived in feedlots came from a government subsidy, and maintaining calves and females in the herd no longer was significant, many producers led them to slaughter thus provoking an overall loss in stock numbers. This practice, in addition to aggravation by an extended drought has resulted in a scarcity of beef, and the government has indefinitely cut off the subsidizing of the grain fed to cattle. Now a recovery in stock numbers due to the lack of calves and females will take years and prices reflect this scarcity, the result of years of poor practices and speculation regarding a true Argentine institution. This state of affairs, and the co-responsibility implied therein, however has not impeded the Chamber of the Beef Industry and Trade, a group of nationwide feedlot/abattoir operators, from blaming the current federal administration for the increase in prices to local consumers: “(the government) couldn’t even avoid the diminishing of the meat supply to the local market by prohibiting its exportation.” (03/03/11). However meat prices can no longer be a question of political convenience, since the government cannot control or subsidize what no longer exists. Hence feedlots today are operating at a loss while the government maintains a ceiling on beef prices and exports. In the current state of affairs, it will be difficult for the common man in Argentina to eat his yearly quota of beef, an estimated 55 kg per year. (NOTE: As this article goes to press, the government organism responsible for managing agricultural subsidies, the ONCAA, has been disbanded while its officials are accused of graft and corruption (26/02/2011).

Hidden Costs of Feedlot Operations

where beef comes from (Photo: wongaboo)

There are other, hidden, costs implicit to feedlot operations, and these are perhaps of even greater importance than the explicit costs. According to the Guide for Environmental Management of Feedlots, published by the INTA in 2009, in Argentina “provincial legislation is either non-existent or incipient for feedlot facilities. Most projects have not taken into account social or environmental aspects beyond those associated with product quality or production efficiency. In some cases, social reactions have led to some changes or adjustments in the management of effluents and smell derived from production establishments. However, there is a marked lack of permanent adjustments and adaptations in order to redress or prevent after-effects. Within the Argentine context but with international experience, the imposition of requirements and restrictions should be directed towards alerting and preventing these effects in order to avoid the cumbersome and expensive task of environmental remediation and the relocation and redesigning of feedlots.”

In general, the idea persists that feedlots or grain-finishing cattle is complementary to grazing. Many operators combine grazing with feedlot finishing without taking into account the damages incurred by the environment, and by the animal itself. Advocates of feedlots insist that the efficiency shown by the model (e.g. fatter animals in less time) more than justify the risks involved. Nevertheless, the most gentle solution for the environment and animal rights would be a return to 100% pasture-fed and -finished beef production.

Public health is another hidden cost. Argentina has the world’s highest mortality rate of E. coli (strain 0157:H7) related deaths.

E. Coli

According to data provided by the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Uremic-Hemolytic Syndrome (UHS), a complication resulting from infection by E. coli 0157:H7, is endemic to Argentina. In 2006 there were 464 new cases, 64% of which were infants, a sum that triples the rest of the world’s cases in general. This particular strain of E. coli is mainly associated with beef, but has also been found in water, fresh fruit and vegetables, dairy products and other processed foods. Studies have found that the bacteria are resistant to almost all environments except those of extreme heat.

Yet, considering that Argentina has one of the highest rate of beef consumption per capita in the world, a disease that primarily affects beef eaters seems to go largely unnoticed by the population. According to one medical publication (Prensa Médica Argentina), “the difficulties of accessing updated and reliable statistics allow for the supposition that in Argentina, infection by E. coli 0157:H7 is underestimated and under-diagnosed.” Local media coverage is practically nonexistent, averaging one or two articles yearly, nothing in comparison with the attention given the swine flu virus a couple of years ago.

“The Hamburger Disease”

There is no way to tell if food has been contaminated by this strain of E. coli. There are no differences in taste, smell or colour. This is why it is important to treat all foodstuffs as if they had been in contact with E. coli, washing hands and surfaces thoroughly and cooking meat until it reaches 140ºF internal temperature (80ºC). Ground beef is particularly susceptible to contamination because the grinding of the meat puts exposed sides of meat (which might otherwise be seared and thus safe to consume) in contact with all other cuts, infecting all.

Most public health initiatives directed towards protecting the consumer aim at educating with regards to proper food handling in the home as well as in businesses (i.e. restaurants, butcher shops, grocery stores, etc). While this is indispensable given the present situation, it is also important to understand the relationship between modern food production techniques and E. coli contamination.

Established Consequences

Cattle in Argentine feedlot along route 51 outside of Saladillo (Photo: Patricia Di Filippo)

Cows being fed a grain-based diet within an enclosed environment, such as a feedlot, have been consistently tested to show high acid levels in the rumen, otherwise known as acute or sub-acute ruminal acidosis (SARA). This is a result of the breakdown of dietary carbohydrates (e.g. starch), particularly from cereal grains such as corn and barley. This in turn leads to a chronic digestive disorder in the herd, impaired cow health and involuntary culling of the herd. According to the American Association of Bovine Practitioners: “acidosis is the most important nutritional problem that feedlots face daily and is a major challenge for dairies as well. Both the dairy and feedlot industries have continued to opt for the use of more grains in their feeding programs. Relatively cheap grains have provided an excellent and economical energy source. But this has also resulted in an increasing problem with acidosis. The severity of acidosis may range from mild to life threatening.” The cattle are then administered antibiotics to mitigate the problems arising from acidosis, adding to the list of additives that are undesirable for human consumption. In fact, cattle consume 70% of all antibiotics administered in the US but this does not imply that the sick animals are culled from the herd. On the contrary, they proceed to be slaughtered along with the healthy animals.

The problem then becomes one of evolution. E. coli which lives naturally in the digestive tract of many organisms becomes acid resistant in the cow that is fed grain. So acid resistant, in fact, that it can survive beyond the low pH of the human stomach, and go on and cause gastroenterological problems in humans, among others, UHS.

What is less known is that cattle that are grass-fed do not suffer from acidosis in general. In fact beef from grass-fed cattle is higher in omega 3’s, lower in saturated fat, and less susceptible to contamination from E. coli. Cattle that have been removed from a grain-based diet to a grass diet recover their normal pH after two weeks of grazing. This implies that feedlot operations have been misguided regarding grain feeding cattle and that human consumers have been exposed to intolerably high levels of acidity and E. coli contamination in the beef that they consume.

Ruminants were never intended to be fed grain. In fact, most grains have to be laced with molasses in order for the cattle to even try it.

Much has been said regarding the superiority of grass-fed beef over grain-fed beef, but said superiority may not be a question of nutrients. A consumer probably would not be able to tell the difference between grass-fed or grain-fed beef inasmuch as flavour, tenderness, marbling, or other sensory qualities are concerned. Nonetheless it is true that cattle raised on pasture “have a positive impact on fatty acid tissue profile…which affect the nutritional value of fat because polyunsaturated fatty acids have beneficial effects on human physiology and health, preventing the occurrence of coronary heart disease, hypertension, inflammatory and immune disorders, and neurological dysfunctions” (Beef Lipids in relation to animal breed and nutrition in Argentina; Science Direct). It would seem that the win-win relation between human health and bovine health generated by pasture grazing would be an easy matter to defend in a political arena. Nevertheless, there are many interests in maintaining the status quo.

Double Standard

The grass farmer during the past two decades has been unable to compete against the feedlots, on the one hand, and on the other, grain cultivation. He has been able to survive, for the most part, by exporting to other countries, primarily the European Union, and by fulfilling international standards for grass-feeding, grass-finishing, and organic (no antibiotics or hormones administered) beef production. One producer, EcoPampa, states that 99% of its organic grass- fed beef finds its way to supermarkets in the UK, under the framework of the Hilton Quota, an international tariff agreement whereby Argentina and other nations enjoy duty preferences as suppliers of “high quality fresh, chilled, or frozen beef” to the European Union.

The Hilton Quota would be one way of financing grass-fed beef production, an attractive one for most grass farmers. Unfortunately at current standards of grass-fed beef production, Argentina is not fulfilling the permissible quota. This represents a lost opportunity for most domestic grass farmers who either have not completed the certification process by which they are included in the registry of producers, or for one reason or another, cannot be certified. It must be noted here that the rigorous certification process for exporting beef to the European Union is upheld and respected by Argentine producers and inspectors.

Nonetheless, there is a double standard regarding norms and standards in Argentina’s beef production industry. On the one hand, there is an established infrastructure of standards and certifications which qualify beef for exportation, the APAC, or Approval for Food Products and Derivatives, but on the other hand there is no such infrastructure for meat destined for domestic consumption. In theory, according to one SENASA employee, the same rules apply to both markets; in practice, there is a world of difference.

Let the buyer beware (Caveat Emptor)

According to the Chamber of Bovine Livestock Fattening (CAEHU), in 2001, 10% of all beef produced in Argentina came from feedlots. The director of the Institute for the Promotion of Argentine Beef (IPVCA), Dardo Chiesa, in a 2009 interview declared that 75% of beef intended for domestic consumption came from feedlots. While there is some discrepancy based on the time of the year the statistics were taken (there is a greater presence of grain-fed beef during the winter months than during the summer), there can be no doubt that there has been a tremendous increase in the amount of grain-fed beef consumed domestically. The transition from grass-fed beef to grain-fed beef that in the US took place over a period of 50 years, in Argentina has taken place in less than ten. Perhaps for this reason, the Argentine consumer is largely unaware of the change. Theoretically it is possible to buy grass-finished beef in Argentina; the problem is telling the difference between grass-fed and grain-fed. Beef intended for local consumption is not labelled, marked, tagged, or graded in any way. For purposes of E. coli contamination, for example, it makes no difference if the cow were grass-fed or grain-fed because once the carcass has arrived at the slaughterhouse, there is no standing system which differentiates between the two. Once the grass-fed beef has entered into contact with the contaminated grain-fed beef, the result is the same for both.

In spite of the fact that grain-fed beef implies hidden costs in the form of environmental damage and public health issues, the feedlot appears to be here to stay. There simply is not enough pasture on which to raise cattle. Therefore it is necessary to bring feedlots under the framework of government regulation in order to assess risks and damages

Dr. Anibal Pordomingo, Senior Research Fellow for the INTA (Photo: Patricia Di Filippo)

Dr. Anibal Pordomingo, Senior Research Fellow for the INTA, in an exclusive interview for the Argentina Independent, considers that Argentina “is not prepared to manage feedlots on a large scale.” In addition, the production process which leads from farm/feedlot to abattoir, to butcher/grocery, to consumer leaves much to be desired. Traditionally the carcass is carried over the shoulder, hung from hooks in trucks that may or many not be refrigerated, and transported to the different distributions points in the country where it is then cut, packaged and sold. “The exposure to bacteria is tremendous,” says Dr. Pordomingo. “There are no irradiation processes, and no policies for environmental management that function. The slaughterhouses don’t cover registries of origin. During one study, six of eight carcasses showed E. coli contamination. No one speaks of it.”

This apparently is the result of inadequate government regulation. Certification for a slaughterhouse in Argentina, for local consumption, is a mere bureaucratic application, costing approximately $300 (US$80).

To invert this situation, Dr. Pordomingo recommends the following steps:

1. The regulation and control of feedlots, especially risk assessment and damage control of environment and public health. Reveal the hidden costs.

2.The regulation and inspection of slaughterhouses. Meat should be cut, packaged and sent out in refrigerated trucks to distribution points. There should be no double standard regarding meat intended for exportation and meat intended for domestic consumption. Meat should be adequately tagged and marked, showing its origin, whether it is grass-fed or grain-fed, inspection number etc.

3. New legislation should maintain and control the distribution chains

4. If possible, grass farmers should invest in the concept of ‘Boutique Meat’, high quality grass-fed beef (in addition to other types of meat) to be sold at competitive market prices locally and internationally. Local consumers could then express a preference which now is denied them.

Eating beef in Argentina is a risky proposition.

Asado (Photo: audrey_sel)

Definitely. Although there can be no doubt that the quality and nutrition of the beef produced in Argentina is among the finest in the world, the lack of controls and regulations on beef intended for local consumption makes eating it a risky, oftentimes lethal, affair. Therefore please take into consideration the following suggestions regarding the purchase, preparation and consumption of beef while in Argentina.

1. Cook your meat thoroughly and demand that the beef you buy in restaurants also be cooked thoroughly (Internal temperature of 80º C or 140º F). Be especially careful with ground beef and ground beef products such as hamburgers. Wash hands and surfaces after coming into contact with uncooked meat. Do not wash or cut other foods on surfaces that have come into contact with raw meat. Grass-fed or grain-fed meat is no replacement for hygiene and good culinary practices.

2. The hidden costs of feedlot operations are paid by society in the form of damages to the environment and health care. Raise consciousness by inquiring at butchers and grocery stores about the origin of the beef sold there. If possible, demand that the meat you consume be labelled adequately as to its origin and processing method. Buying grass-fed beef is a vote in favour of the environment and human health.

3. By refusing to buy and consume meat that is inadequately handled, packaged, and marked, there is more likelihood that control standards and norms given for beef intended for exportation be applied to beef intended for domestic consumption.  If you are not convinced as to the equality of standards regarding local beef handling and packaging, do not buy it; instead, demand the meat products safeguarded for export inasmuch as possible.

Lead image by NDSU Ag Comm

You might be drawn subconsciously over the road – La Poesia seems much more appealing at first sight, the warm orange-tinted lights and laughter spilling out onto the pavement mean it picks up the majority of the foot traffic on the corner of Chile and Bolivar.

But I would encourage you to stray to the opposite corner. The partially frosted windows add to the intimacy once inside, but make it hard to work out what awaits from the street. But venture in to El Baqueano and there is a Pandora’s box of culinary treasures awaiting you.

El Baqueano offers an intimate dining experience in San Telmo (photo/Rafa Lopez Binaghi)

Born out of the idea that there are many animals native to Argentina that the visitor never tries due to the inundation of parrillas, Fernando Rivarola, from the south of Buenos Aires Province, opened El Baqueano in 2008.

The name was an explicit choice – ‘Carnes Autóctonas’ (meaning native meats), is a purposeful aim to come back to national cuisines.

From yacaré (a local caiman), hare, wild boar, ñandú (a local ostrich) and a range of seafood in a variety of guises, unless you are going to visit the four-corners of the country you will have a hard job trying these delicacies elsewhere.

“Beef isn’t even native to Argentina,” Fernando is quick to point out, highlighting the Spanish conquistadores’ decision to introduce cows nearly 500 years ago. Beyond the country’s famous pampas, cows don’t roam very far, and there are many regions where beef is not the traditional meat at all. But Argentina’s massive centralisation comes into play, and the popularity of beef from the famous pampas, combined with the industrialisation of the food chain, means other meats barely get a look in.

El Baqueano’s response is a tasting menu of five or seven courses that changes on a monthly basis, with options ranging from llama carpaccio, yacaré brochettes, hare risotto, wild boar bruschetta, and seafood such as langostinos from Puerto Madryn.

When asked how they get such a range of animals to the capital, Fernando explains they have slowly built up a network of faithful suppliers and they tend to buy the animals whole and do all the preparation themselves, both ensuring the butchering is done correctly and the maximum usage of the animal.

The tasting menu is a conscious decision too – the restaurant used to offer regular starters, main courses and desserts as well as the tasting menu, but they realised most clients were reluctant to commit to an entire course of one strange animal or unknown flavour, and would be more conservative in their selection. As a result they moved away from the traditional menu to a full tasting menu recently, giving clients the option of trying a variety of different foods, all prepared in ways that maximise the culinary experience.

The staff are well-versed in the produce and happily explain the menu (or reassure their clientele where necessary) as if keen to convert as many people as possible.

Langostinos from Puerto Madryn (photo/Rafa Lopez Binaghi)

Fernando’s partner, Gabriela, is training to be a sommelier, and is on hand to make suggestions about the extensive wine list, which includes organic and biodynamic wines from around Argentina. As with the food, the wine on offer includes many grapes not commonly associated with Argentina viticulture, where Malbec reigns high. We tried a refreshing Pinot Gris from the Lurton bodega and a rose by Villa de la Luna, as well as a couple of lesser-seen reds. If clients prefer to bring their own bottles, El Baqueano does offer a corkage service.

The two desserts on the seven-course menu include a savoury and a sweet option. The savoury is a tasting of five cheeses, including a fondue and something that could be described as a savoury alfajor, both of which were a delight to someone who is on a constant search for cheese with a kick. This also went on to break some prejudices, proving there is cheese with flavour beyond blue or goat’s cheese. That tasteless yellow rubber-cum-elastic combination, which is unfortunately often the standard fare, does not have to be the norm.

A trip to El Baqueano will have you wondering if perhaps more cows could be used to make such cheeses, and more menus would explore Argentina’s other native meat options. If you are bored of bife and up for experimenting, I recommend you try this place.

Ask any Argentine on the street if they’ve noticed the drastic leap in the price of beef since the beginning of the year and you’re assured to receive an emphatic yes, likely followed by a well practised tirade on market mismanagement and corruption. Both the government and producers admit that prices have risen, but to what extent, why and how the issue should be resolved have become divisive issues between the two. Argentines, who consume more beef per capita than any other nation at 68kg annually according to the Argentine Agrarian Federation (FAA), have maintained their high demand on beef despite the price hikes, but are none too pleased with footing the hefty bill.

Photos by jlastras

Carniceria.

Photos by Luis Echanove

Beef.

The disagreements begin with just how much the price of beef has actually risen. The government’s National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INDEC) claims a 7% increase from December to the middle of February. Various consumer defence organizations estimate a rise between 25% and 50%, and most butchers lean towards 50%. The leeway for debate stems from INDEC´s figures, especially those relating to inflation, being increasingly called into question by independent organizations in the last couple of years as the organization has become more politicized and a handful of top officials have stepped down.

The most fundamental cause for the rise in price is the severe decrease in the quantity of cattle in the last few years. The FAA reports a loss of two million heads of cattle from 2008 to 2009, leaving the total at 50m – the lowest in 45 years. During this time the Argentine demand for beef has remained constant and thus the price has risen. To illustrate the  importance of beef among Argentine commodities it is worth noting that Argentina’s population is just under 41m. Throughout it’s modern history Argentina has relied heavily on the exportation of beef and at the same time sustained a very high internal demand.

This substantial depletion in the quantity of cattle is most attributable to harsh droughts in recent years that have sapped the vitality of Argentina’s vast pampas, seemingly endless expanses of grasslands. These droughts greatly reduced the pastures that ranchers  normally offer to their herds, and forced them to supplement their cattle’s diets with grains. However, due to the high price of grains, which have also risen drastically in recent years, this proved to be an unsustainable solution and ranchers were forced to slaughter many more cattle in their reproductive prime than they usually would.

During this time many producers chose to abandon cattle ranching altogether, and instead joined the ranks of those who had already turned to the more profitable cultivation of soy beans. Since its production was heavily subsidised by the government following the  financial crisis of 2001, soy production in Argentina has been growing at an annual average of over 20% according to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Driven by China’s massive demand, a robust international market for soy has developed since the mid 90′s and the Argentine government embraced its exportation as a prime vehicle for economic recovery.

While the production of soya has brought in tremendous export revenue, the government anticipated its effect on livestock production and in 2006 attempted to maintain domestic beef prices by imposing such measures as minimum slaughter weights, higher export taxes and license restrictions and instituting price ceilings. These initiatives have been extremely unpopular with ranchers and slaughter houses. Eduardo Buzzi, the president of the FAA, has claimed that the decrease in the quantity of cattle is the result of “the horrors of Kirchnerismo”. Jorge Srodek, Buenos Aires provincial deputy and former head of the Confederation of Rural Associations of Buenos Aries and La Pampa (CARBAP), stated : “The Kirchners will leave power with the shameful achievement of destroying one of the most competitive sectors of our country.”

Photos by Beatrice Murch

Argentine Cattle Disappearing.

The president has fired back by claiming that the rise in price is due to the greed of the producers who have taken advantage of the increased rainfall this year and kept their herds in the pastures longer, allowing them to fatten up while unsatisfied demand drives the price up. Also, in a bit of bizarre political theatre, the president advocated that Argentines consume more pork as a substitute for beef by promoting it as beneficial to sexual health. In a widely published, and derided, statement the president said that “it’s a lot nicer to eat a bit of barbecued pork than take Viagra”. She went on to state that she and her husband, former president Nestor Kirchner, had already tested the theory.

The more substantive part of the president’s advice, for Argentines to curb their beef consumption and diversify their selection of meat, is also what most consumer defence groups are calling for. Osvaldo Riopedre, the executive director of the Association for Defence of Consumers and Users of Argentina (ADECUA), explained that while it will be difficult to change a habit (eating large quantities of beef) that’s in every Argentine home, the best solution to the price hike is to lower consumption and to look for alternatives and substitutes. As far as other proposals, he said that “maximum prices are not healthy, only for a moment, but in the end they hurt the market”, and also that a boycott on beef in Argentina simply isn’t realistic.

Riopedre’s comment about price ceilings being unsustainable was in response to the steps that the government has already taken. In February Guillermo Moreno, the interior commerce secretary, imposed new quotas on exports and expanded subsidies on grain to feedlots. While producers agree that these steps will help lower the price over the next few months they are not pleased with the long term prospects. Raul Castel, a representative for the Mendizabal group, one of the major intermediary agencies that help ranchers sell their cattle to slaughter houses, stated that “this government will not help, quite the contrary, since the Menem government (throughout the 90′s) the livestock sector hasn’t received any support, the current government is only concerned with the agricultural sector.”

While prices will most likely stabilize over the coming months this should not be interpreted as a return to normality in the Argentine beef market. Most producers believe that even with drastic, and unlikely, changes of policy to encourage production the supply of cattle would not return to a level of equilibrium with demand for another four to five years. Rather, the recent price hikes are probably better understood as further evidence of a prediction that for decades Argentines would have found preposterous: that Argentina is likely to become an importer of beef in the near future.

For an informative and entertaining graphic on how prices of certain cuts of beef have risen since 2007 check out this article from La Nación: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=1231417&pid=8284713&toi=6258

In an attempt to curb the rising price of beef in Argentina, the government has introduced a ban on exports. The agriculture industry was quick to respond and has warned that there will be a hard reaction: they warned that strikes were very likely.

The president of the Federación Agraria Argentina, Eduardo Buzzi commented that this measure demonstrated the failure of government policies in the sector. Speaking to Todo Noticias he said: “The act of stopping exports rather than calling a discussion about livestock policies is a new aggression that demonstrates the failure of the government for this sector: do not rule out a strike by producers to reject the measure.”

The price of beef has risen dramatically in the last few months. Since December the price per kilogram has risen by 50%. The government has blamed farmers, claiming that price increase is due to them withholding supplies and waiting for the prices to rise. The agricultural industry deny the accusation and claim that the decreased supply is due to structural problems caused by a lack of government incentives for beef production.

The president of the Sociedad Rural Argentina, Hugo Biolcati, warned that this new tactic by the government was going to make the situation worse. He said, “We’re running out of meat and this will deepen the problem. It is madness to think this will fix it, it is the failure of production incentive that has led to this.”

The ban was made without a resolution, decree or a ruling from a court and will apply to all beef exports, except those that fall within the Hilton quota which refers to high-quality beef exports.