We are committed to providing our customers with complete transparency from pasture to plate, so you know exactly what you are getting when you eat Estancia Beef.
We also believe it is important to educate customers by providing academic studies, newspaper articles, and research that demonstrate the benefits of producing beef the Estancia way. The more informed you are, the more you’ll understand how good our beef is.
Research and Information from Around the Web
The Meatrix: Learn about industrial meat production and why grass fed is important
Research
Grass Fed Certification
January 2008
Uruguayan grass fed beef industry analysis
UN Food and Agriculture Environmental Impact Study
January 2008
Study on the environmental impacts of raising animals as grass fed and those with grain fed and the production of the feed.
Environmental Sustainability Index
January 2008
Paper ranks Uruguay 3rd behind Finland and Norway. Uruguay produced nearly one third the amount of beef produced in the US and it's mostly grass fed beef.
Food That Travels Well
Opinion urging the comparison of the carbon footprint of a product vs. the food miles
Kansas State looks at Grass Fed Beef and the USDA certification of Grass Fed Beef from Uruguay
Estancia's take on the environmental impact of producing grass fed beef under our protocols in Uruguay and Argentina. The pros and cons of producing Grass Fed Beef with an overall carbon foodprint and other positive effects.
Health Benefits of Grass Fed Beef (vitamins, CLA, Omega 3s)
Grass-fed beef, or beef produced from cattle finished on forage only diets, has been touted as a more nutritious beef product...all substances reported to have favorable biological effects on human health.
Effects of pasture vs concentrate feeding...
Finishing cattle on pasture enhanced the unsaturated fatty acid profile of intramuscular fat in beef including CLA and omega-3 fatty acids specific to grass fed beef and even more beneficial to free range grass fed beef
Grass Fed Beef Lipid Profiles
Study of Lipid profiles and affects on human health. Estancia Grass Fed Beef meets the standards analyzed in this study.
Natural Beef Protocols
USDA defined "Natural" protocols as applied to INAC (Uruguayan Institute of Beef) oversight of "Natural" and "Processed Verified".
Newsweek looks at carbon footprint of producing efficient foods and shipping. Estancia Grass Fed Beef fits into this analysis.
Newsweek looks at the carbon foodprint of "local" food production vs more efficient production. Specifically pertaining to Estancia grass fed beef production.
New York Times analysis of Local food production vs more efficient food production that ships from farther away. Specifically Estancia Grass Fed Beef compared to "local" corn fed feedlot options
Estancia Verification
Certified Natural Protocols (PDF)
Certified Plant (PDF)
USDA / INAC certified beef with Third Party Auditor Firm LSQA
Relevant Books
The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollen
Fast Food Nation by Jared Diamond
Heat by Bill Buford
Estancia Beef is not certified organic, but we are confident that we exemplify the original meaning of the organic principles.
We exceed many of the stated “organic” protocols as defined by the USDA; so in many ways you could say we are beyond-organic.
Our animals never see a feedlot and only eat green grass. “Organic” standards allow for animals to be fed corn or hay in industrial feedlots. Neither corn nor feedlots are what most people believe are the organic principles and they produce beef that does not have the health benefits of grass-fed beef.
While producing a less healthy beef, most organic beef companies also produce beef with less flavor (in the case of corn-finished beef) or grassy flavor (in the case of using hay and alfalfa).
Furthermore, the environmental cost producing and feeding cattle in a confined space are significantly less sustainable than grass feeding and the animals are subjected to four months living in a feedlot.
The areas in which we fall short of the organic principles are those in which we think the consumer will agree with us are acceptable compromises: We sometimes use fertilizers and we will use antibiotics as necessary.
We use fertilizers on our grasses (about one time every five years) to make the grass grow lush enough to finish the cattle on green grass. Most grass-fed beef on the market uses hay and alfalfa to feed their cattle. Hay and alfalfa can impart a grassy taste to the meat and furthermore it requires considerable amounts of fossil fuel to grow, harvest and deliver this feed to the animals. At the end of the process, it uses a significant amount of fossil fuels.
We will use antibiotics to help a sick animal, as you might for your own child. With that said, there will never be any antibiotic residue in the beef we sell.
Only about one-third of 1% of our animals we sell have received antibiotics, which is an audited number by the international audit firm of LSQA (lsqanet.com).
Even organic ranchers will give antibiotics to a sick animal – but they pull the animal from the organic herd and sell it on the market. Although we could follow the same process, we feel the health of our beef is unquestionable and we can offer it consistently and at prices that make it available to many people that care about the overall health of their food.
At the end of the day, these “non-organic” practices are neglible -- and they are outweighed by the other benefits of our beef: health, taste, and availability.
Estancia Beef comes from Uruguay. But we say it is just as sustainable as the meat that comes from your area.
The main issues with buying local is freshness and the carbon footprint of the process.
Freshness. The freshness of local meat is a myth; all good beef is aged 20-50 days for the best quality.
Carbon footprint. We feel it important to look at the whole picture. By producing beef that only eats green grass, we do not use any fuel producing hay or corn.
Corn takes a tremendous amount of energy to produce and only one pound of beef is produced for every seven pounds of corn fed to the animal.
Hay and alfalfa are dried grasses, but they also require, planting, harvesting, and delivery to the animal, all of which require fossil fuels.
When you compare shipping beef from Uruguay in containers to the production of beef using hay, we think it’s an even trade. Compared to corn in a feedlot, we impact the environment significantly less. (We are working with an audit firm to come up with an accurate audit of our carbon footprint.)
In addition to the carbon footprint, we have spent many generations and lots of genetic research (not genetic modification) to produce animals that can get fat on grass. Most of the U.S. producers have spent the last 50 years producing animals that get fat on corn in feedlots.
Although we are working with ranchers in California and Virginia to produce beef to our standards, it is very difficult to produce grass-fed beef that is consistent, due to both genetics and natural grass productivity.
We require that our beef is fed green grass and that it meets our standards every month of the year so we will always need to mix local beef with our beef from Uruguay.
There is simply not enough grass 12 months of the year to produce and finish grass-fed animals. Even with irrigation, the seasons make it hard to finish enough animals 12 months of the year. We hope to get this mix to 30% Virginia and California with about 70% from Uruguay and Argentina.
The demand for natural, healthy beef needs to be filled and the world needs to produce the corn and grass the fill this need. With that in mind, our beef is certainly more sustainable than most local alternatives.
