US plans to produce ‘Iberian’ ham in Texas and Georgia
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
The difference with the real thing (black label) is night and day. This will possible be a passable "jamón ibérico" like the one you can buy here in the supermarket, this is, the pigs are from the ibérico race but they are not fed the traditional way. It's not bad but trust me, at least once get yourself a true black-label "100% ibérico de bellota", if it can be imported into the US.
Also I would add that it's completely disingenuous to describe this operation as "US Plans" as though this were some sinister plot by the US Federal Government to destroy the market for this beloved Spanish meat product. This is a pair of ventures which have been undertaken by Spanish-American farmers. These farmers are completely within their rights to raise pigs this way. As long as they don't call it jamón ibérico de bellota, they should be fine.
Why? In the USA that should be allowed, I believe. They just wouldn’t be able to export with that labeling.
The best producers in Spain have very little to worry about as long as they continue to produce a high-quality product. It's the others that have to worry - selling a mediocre product internationally at a high price. These farmers in the US are certainly aiming at them and their profit margin.
Someday, they may be able to produce a product on par with the best of Spain. But then they will just join the club rather than push the Spanish producers out of business.
If they choose to they will be able to make black-label as good as any.
That's too bad. Where are you shopping?
An example of 1 of 1000's of small ranches scattered through out the state.
Even the Grocery stores carry local grass fed beef that is incredibly affordable and absolutely delicious.
The breed of cattle
I tried to order their prime ribeye, but it's sold out. Can you recommend some other places where I can purchase and get it shipped?
To give an example, I've bought plenty of "feta style" cheese over the years and not a single one was as good as real Greek feta. I wouldn't mind buying "feta" by Arla if they produced the same quality, but they don't. There are also sometimes other things to consider, e.g. the Iberian porco preto is free-ranging, and I also prefer it because of that. (Note that many "porco preto" products only contain some percentage, you need to make sure it's 100% porco preto.)
Don't get me wrong, I agree that there should be no reason they couldn't produce great ham in Texas. But if they have a good product they don't need to copy something from Europe.
I think it is only in recent years that it was allowed for import though.
"Produced in the Valle de los Pedroches, a region in Southern Spain, the ham is from Iberico Breed pigs that are fed a vegetarian diet of acorn and grass and raised free-range..."
(And just in case, no, not apples, Apple)
PS: I think ‘5 jotas’ is the most international brand of iberian products, try their ham or other iberian derived products, they are one of the best available.
The production of jamon iberico de bellota is strictly regulated, among other things each pig has to have at least 12500 m^2 of their natural habitat (dehesa) to roam freely and eat from the oak trees. That's what gives the meat the intense taste and infiltrated fat, the pigs grow freely roaming vast areas of their natural habitat and eat what they love most.
[0] Other animals and their lifestyles are available..
In this case, one could almost think of the product as supporting a nature reserve.
In the USA they typically do something different: put the name in whatever product that barely resembles the original, like they did with their “manchego” cheese, a label put in all kinds of cheese-like products.
As for the Chinese ham, their propaganda reached even German TV where a supposed documentary (Galileo) claimed that Spanish «jamón» was brought from China by Marco Polo. Never mind that the Romans already knew it and there was a 2000 y.o. ham found in Conesa, Catalonia: https://www.incarlopsa.es/mundo-jamon/historia-jamon
I’m sure they can produce excellent meat products in Texas; they just shouldn’t call it “ibérico” as it isn’t, just call it “texan ham” or even “jamón tejano” which actually sounds quite good!
I would totally buy “Jamon Tejano” at Whole Paycheck.
Loads of garbage PUFA.
For non-Germans, Galileo has a reputation for bullshit and lies.
> You cannot help it, Signor Sarsi, that it was granted to me alone to discover all the new phenomena in the sky and nothing to anybody else! This is the truth which neither malice nor envy can suppress!
There were plenty of people working in the field (most well-known Harriot, Marius, Fabricius, Scheiner), but Galileo does not seem to have thought much of them.
Grassi published a work on comets in 1618, and Galileo read it. We still have Galileo's copy, which in the margins has the following notes: “piece of asininity”, “elephantine”, “buffoon”, “evil poltroon”, “ungrateful villain”. He was not a fan. (Grassi was more correct on this topic.)
For all of Galileo's intelligence, he was a somewhat of an ass, and alienated a lot of people. His Il Saggiatore (The Assayer) was an attack of Grassi's view; Grassi responded with Assagiatore (Winetaster—insinuating that Galileo was drunk when you wrote his book).
Academics (and politics) was a blood sport back then.
Galileo did a lot of good work, but at the end of the day, I'm not sure we needed him for progress to have been made. The word "revolutionary" being used towards Copernicus' heliocentrism is probably warranted. Tycho Brahe's hard work in making observations were key in the effort, and it was Johannes Kepler's idea of breaking free of circular orbits (that everyone else was using) over to elliptical ones that was a real innovation in modelling.
(Galileo preferred the Copernican system, while Grassi preferred Tychonic. Kepler, with elliptical orbits, ended up being correct.)
For many cheeses they don't have much off a choice. Since (young) raw milk cheeses can't be sold in the states they try to get as close as they can, but usually only succeed in looks, rarely in taste.
A cheese expert told me most of the Parmesan sold in the US is actually Asiago.
As a Texan I am all for calling this pork product jamon tejano or just Texas ham. Hell, let’s go all Texas and feed them pecans instead of acorns.
Or with cheddar cheese! How awful is that substance they mark with the word cheddar and sell in stores in the states! Argh!
Plus the original suggestion does make it clear what it's supposed to be similar to: normal texan ham would be called "ham".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jam%C3%B3n
Non-Ibérico ham is usually called "jamón serrano".
So logically, ham made in Texas from Black Iberian pigs could be called Texan Iberico. But I like the ring of "jamón tejano" -- I would certainly buy that! (Texas has a positive halo effect when it comes to meat products)
That is not from the Iberian peninsula. This is like having a sticker "intel" on a computer when there is no intel inside, but an equivalent AMD chip.
For people whose geography / chip knowledge is low, the difference may seem superficial. Doesn't mean the advertising is correct though.
That is by no means a hard and fast rule. Consider:
- Alaskan salmon
- Napa Valley Cabernet
- Michigan Cherries
- Georgia Peaches
All of these refer to the places they are produced.
And of course there are examples where the place name has fossilized into the product itself:
- Monterey Jack cheese
- Arkansas gold apples
If I was a Texan I would understand it.
This the same case with the Iberian Ham.
If you name your product Champagne, in my mind it's totally fine for someone to start making Californian champagne.
These are products which are literally defined by their geographic origin.
Champagne is a sparkling wine from the Champagne region, that’s what it means.
Your logic means that there is nothing wrong with a “Californian Champagne” made in Texas.
The issue isn't so much that there are / are not geographic monopolies, but that you have 2 different IP/economic/governance models expecting to be speaking the same language -
Appellations are connected to producers associations which ultimately have their roots in feudalism/guilds/etc. Generally, it's not the region that promotes an appellation, it's the producers association of that product/region.
Producers associations are essentially a "cartel" in modern economic terms which would be illegal under modern IP/economic regulatory regimes. Where appellations are used, this is not the case, and the associations are allowed certain legal space, some of which include creating appellations, which to some extent provide a way to 'brand' and so add value to otherwise commodity products.
So, to allow for appellations, you create some provision in the legal system to recognize them. However, since allowing appellations ultimately means granting some political legitimacy to organically occurring cartel-like organizations rooted in feudalism, this can be problematic if using a post-feudal legal framework. The US comes down more radically anti-feudal and pro capitalist in it's legal code than other western countries, and so you have more resistance to appellations.
In this model, 'champagne' itself is the brand and the trademark. Nothing else is champagne. Unfortunately, no specific entity 'owns' this brand, because the 'brand' was developed according to an informal patchwork of local organizations, customs and traditions, and so you have some systems (e.g. USA) denying the legitimacy of the claims to the 'brand'/'trademark' since it isn't 'owned' by 'someone'.
Something made elsewhere can be similar? Yes it can, it's a whine. Will it be the same? I doubt it.
The region is known to produced it since roman times, adopted by french royalty for more than 1000 years... but because it's a region shouldn't be entitled to it?
If Champagne is a whine, why not call it Californian Foamy White Whine?
Even better, stop referring to it exclusively by the location, as if Champagne, France is not capable of producing other wines. Then you can have "Champagne sparkling white wine" and "California sparkling white wine" (or even "Champagne-style California sparkling white wine"). Of course, colloquially people will still refer to it as champagne, but I'm talking about what's printed on the bottle / marketed.
Well some cultures have different words specifically for that.
>Even better, stop referring to it exclusively by the location, as if Champagne, France is not capable of producing other wines.
I don't understand this part, because I see no where implicit that Champagne doesn't have the capacity of producing other wines, just by calling Champagne to Champagne.
For example, where I'm from - Portugal - we make the distinction between Champagne and "sparkling wine" (I couldn't find a better translation, the word is Espumante) - even if the outcome is an attempt to make it similar to Champagne, it's not champagne. It's two different words that define different things.
You go to a restaurant you ask for Champagne, you get Champagne. You ask for Sparkling Wine, you get Sparkling Whine.
Because when you buy Champagne you want wine with particular properties that are particular from the region. If you don't like Champagne, you don't want wine with those qualities and you ask for something else that is not Champagne, but yet can still be a white wine with foam.
Plus you talk about this like this is a gimmick.
It's not something "new", it's been like this for centuries, it's in our dictionary. Not mandated by law, or trademarks, - it wasn't a marketer that woke up one day and decided to make that "growth hack" - it's cultural.
To us it's like calling two distinct fishes the same name just because they are blueish and have spots.
Same for example, to Porto. Porto Wine is done Porto region, has a particular taste. You have other liquors, but Porto is Porto.
This is just about salting the right ham type and letting it dry at the right conditions. Not exactly rocket science.
The article was pretty spot on:
> However, the US has tended to be cavalier about such things.
My real thoughts are that many European cuisine customs are arbitrary and ignorable. Okay, a tradition of end of life pigs eating acorns and drying their meats for 36 months, and then later you found out that there was a certain omega fat created from this process? Yeah, get outta here. To me, this is right up there with Sardinia poisonous maggot cheese.
There is also a possibility that people might like this offbrand version more, taste wise. We are about to fortune cookie Spanish cuisine. (Fortune cookies origins have competing claims from multiple Americans, Japan and China in the same time period and at this point it doesn't matter. Its an American-Chinese-American novelty, yay globalization!)
Trademarks on food are fine. Trying to copyright an animal is... I really don't have the words.
They're not.
From the article "must come from Iberian blackfoot pigs that spend the last months of their lives eating acorns on the dehesa, a traditional Spanish or Portuguese pasture shaded by mature oak trees"
It's all of those conditions required. I'm not making any judgements, just pointing out.
> Martínez rejects the argument that, as a variety, the blackfoot pig can’t be protected by a denomination the way champagne and parmesan cheese are, pointing out that the Japanese wagyu enjoys just this sort of protection.
They are trying to set limits on where the pig is allowed to be brought. Not "the pigs must be from so-and-so region to be Iberian blackfoot pigs", but "Iberian blackfoot pigs must not be allowed to be exported [from Iberia I suppose?]". I'd say that copyright and software licenses are an apt metaphor for what they're trying to do.
I couldn't find figures, but remember from talks from producers that around 30-40% of Spanish Iberian Ham is actually from portuguese pigs raised in alentejo (the 90% figure above can be found in export reports, the 30-40% is hearsay from talking and negotiating with the producers a few years ago)
4-5 years ago I was working with a lot of breeders here, and they all complained that the 'low' development work was done by them, but the 'high' product as the smoked/dried hams were from spanish producers.
Portugal always had this issue where we can 'produce' the lower chain stuff, but getting into the higher chain marketplace has been an issue. It is a shame really.
But having said that, I lived in the south of Spain (andalucia) for a while, and I love you guys. Even if you pretend you don't understand us :P, it was some of the most fun and happy times I had.
("Remember, it's only tear gas if it comes from the Gazeuse Region of France and bears the CS label. Otherwise you're only being treated to sparkling mass repression at the hands of the State.")
Help help, I'm being repressed.
https://www.inta.org/fact-sheets/international-trademark-rig...
But also lawsuits.
For example, some years ago the Indian government sued and won a case against a Texas company (owned by the Prince of Liechtenstein) that got a patent on Basmati rice:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RiceTec
After the patent was revoked, they renamed it "Texmati". Maybe we'll see a "Texjamon" in the future.
I don't see why we can't make Pizza Nappoletana in Delhi, Camembert Cheese in Valdosta, Wagyu cows in Cape Town without pissing off people who have even passed laws to prevent others from copying the style.
Like there was a restaurant owner that trademarked "Taco Tuesday" and tried to sue the US Navy for their misuse in Aircraft carrier canteens. That didn't go well.
This is extreme. I’m fine with the present state. The EU regulates, and that’s fine. The U.S. doesn’t, and that’s fine too. Best of both worlds.
That being said, today's Spanish farmers are not responsible for their ancestors deeds. However, true "Pata Negra" ham is actually so expensive, I don't think people who used to buy the real thing will buy the cheap American alternative instead as it doesn't have the Omega-9, taste and status. Only people who randomly bought super expensive Pata Negra and now decide to get the cheap alternative could affect their revenue, no idea how much this would make up.
I know what you mean though; there's still something skeezy about it because it exploits consumer confusion. Hooray American capitalism.
This is not twitter, leave your 500 years old hatchet by the door.
That's exactly what I did if you read up to my second paragraph, still ironic though. Let me paste it again for you:
> That being said, today's Spanish farmers are not responsible for their ancestors deeds.
There there.