by (Recorder of Georgia) Under a new plan that a prominent state lawmaker says he may push next year, Georgia could soon assume an inspection role to ensure grass-fed beef lives up to its labeling.
In order to shield customers from potentially deceptive marketing, state representative Robert Dickey, who chairs the House Agriculture and Consumer Affairs Committee, stated that greater transparency is required in the way cattle are grown in the grass-fed beef sector.
According to the Musella Republican, people are yearning for healthy food and a thriving beef business. All we want to do is make sure they are receiving what they paid for. We want to specify if an animal is pasture-raised, corn-fed, grass-fed, or organic.
As health-conscious consumers look for fresher cuts of meat through farm-to-table programs that promise no preservatives, hormone injections, or genetically modified organisms, grass-fed beef has gained appeal.
In the latter days of the 2025 parliamentary session, Dickey, a peach farmer, presented his suggestion in April. At that time, a similar labeling bill that targeted the shrimp sector gained momentum in the House but ultimately failed in the Senate.
In order to provide consumers with openness, HB 117 required restaurants to disclose the source of shrimp on their menus. Its writers, Reps. Jesse Petrea, a Republican from Savannah, and Al Williams, a Democrat from Midway, anticipated that if it were adopted, it would also benefit the state’s struggling shrimp business, which has been struggling recently against competitors from other countries with lower labor costs.
The bill failed to maintain pace in the Senate after passing the House 165-7.
According to Dickey, he is currently unsure of the specifics of the proposed legislation, including how the term “grass-fed” would be defined, what farmers would have to demonstrate in order to be certified, and whether inspection fees would apply.
If he were to make a formal proposal, he would now seek feedback from the cattle industry, beef producers, and consumers on what they would like to see in legislation. If the input convinces him to proceed, the state Department of Agriculture may also serve as an advisor.
He stated, “We want to create something that is feasible for the cattlemen and ranchers.” Our goal is to ensure that customers are aware of what they are getting, not to impose restrictions.
Lawton Stewart, a professor of beef and cattle at the University of Georgia, stated that the U.S. Department of Agriculture retracted their regulation of the labeling of grass-fed beef in 2016. The gap was filled by outside inspectors including A Greener World, the Food Alliance, and the American Grassfed Association.
According to Stewart, defining grass-fed beef is the industry’s biggest obstacle. Although the majority of cattle are grown on grass, they may be fed grain to gain weight before being processed. Others that are grass-finished may transition to an all-grass diet prior to processing, although they can still consume grain early in life.
Grass-fed and grain-fed do taste different, so it truly depends on your own preferences, he said. The fat profile is what matters. Compared to grain, the fatty acid profile produced by grass is different. Additionally, because grass-fed animals consume fewer calories, they tend to be slimmer.
State beef farmers had differing opinions about Dickey’s proposal.
Although he supports transparency, Will Harris, owner of White Oak Pastures in Bluffton, a pioneer in the grass-fed beef sector, believes the market is already overloaded with labels. It would be preferable to standardize the marketing of grass-fed beef and make sure that consumers can easily identify beef produced in other nations.
Harris noted that he allows customers to visit his farm to observe how cattle are raised, proving that transparency is more than just a label. Our policy is open to everyone.
Marview Farms in Arabi’s Fernando Mendez concurred. According to him, the public must be made aware of the distinctions between calves raised using grass-fed, grass-finished, grain-fed, and other ways in order for the labeling to be effective.
“Grass-fed, grass-finished is how we talk about it,” he added, adding that most people just hear the term “grass-fed” and are unaware that it has additional meanings. That is a misunderstanding.
According to Phillip Bridges, who runs The Georgia Beef Company in Lexington with his brother Alan Bridges, he is against a state-mandated examination. He is already a member of the Georgia Grown program, which works with farmers to ensure that their food is reliable and safe before approving it.
“I think it’s more government bureaucracy to add another layer of inspection,” he added.
He said that grass-fed producers lose business if they misidentify their product. “If someone has a problem with my meat, they talk to me,” he said. I refuse to perform a third-party verification. Paying someone to tell my consumers the truth is not something I regard as necessary.
In the event that this idea is eventually passed into law, Georgia Agriculture Commissioner Tyler Harper stated that he will collaborate with state officials. He stated that the road map is not yet apparent and that the conversation is still in its early stages.
Harper stated that legislation must take into account farmers’ production costs and strike a balance between the demands of producers and consumers.
In the end, he stated, it’s about treating farmers and consumers fairly as well as making sure that the products aren’t mislabeled.
