Lower Beef Prices May Cause Stampede

“I don’t eat meat anymore” has become as popular a conversational gambit as “What’s your sign?” was 20 years ago. But it may be time to think of a new pickup line.

In 1994, beef made a comeback; in 1995, it may make a stampede. After falling steadily since the mid-1980s, beef consumption jumped by three pounds per capita in 1994, the first increase in nine years. And the beef industry expects Americans to chow down on even more burgers and steaks this year.

So what’s going on here? Wasn’t red meat the nutritionally incorrect edible of the ‘80s?

The biggest reason for the increase has to do with price. Beef cost less in 1994 than it did the year before - an average of six cents less per pound, according to the National Cattlemen’s Association. And prices will dip even lower this year, a trend expected to continue until 1997, the association says.

The reason is simple: There are more cattle. When supplies increase, prices go down. The number of cattle is expected to grow by 2 million this year (to 104 million in 1995, and 107 million in 1997), according to the association.

Why more cattle? Beef prices were high in the early ‘90s, so cattle producers expanded their herds to increase profitability, said Chuck Lambert, economist for the National Cattlemen’s Association. Now we’re seeing the results of that expansion, since it can take up to three years for a calf to go from grazing to ground beef, Lambert said.

What this also indicates is that Americans are motivated more by price than by nutrition, a trend corroborated by surveys, including one recently conducted by the NPD Group, a Park Ridge, Ill., marketresearch firm.

“Price and convenience are today’s driving force in feeding Americans,” said Harry Balzer, NPD vice president. “All in all, there is just a more relaxed attitude about health issues.” The NPD Group also found there is less concern about the fat in meat.

Americans are also saying one thing and doing another. Two years ago, as part of its ongoing survey of eating habits, MRCA Information Services, a Chicago market-research firm, asked 4,700 people from 2,000 households nationwide if they agreed with this statement: “Adults should eliminate meat from their diets. True or false?” About 25 percent said it was true. About half said it was false, and the remainder said they didn’t know.

The firm also asked respondents about their meat consumption. Only 1 percent didn’t eat meat at all.

But the most revealing finding was that another 2 percent of respondents who considered themselves vegetarians ate meat, as did the 5 percent who called themselves “meat avoiders.” In fact, both groups ate only about an ounce less meat a day than self-reported meat eaters. And the self-reported “vegetarians” were consuming only about six fewer grams of fat per day than the meat eaters.

“People are reporting their intentions as opposed to their actions,” said Mary Abbott-Hess, a dietitian and consultant to the National Livestock and Meat Board, which is publicizing MCRA’s data about meat. And they also appear to be very confused about meat’s role in the diet, said Carol Smeja, vice president of nutrition marketing for MRCA.

One action that people seem to be doing more of is going out for steak. In 1992-93, steak orders at steakhouses increased by more than 16 percent, according to the National Restaurant Association.

In fact, the restaurant group’s most recent findings about eating habits suggest people may not be as concerned about nutrition when they eat out. The proportion of diners who were thoroughly unconcerned about nutrition jumped from 32 percent in 1992 to 37 percent in 1994, making them the largest group of restaurant patrons, according to the group.

Still, a lot of people have cut back on meat and dine carefully at restaurants. It’s difficult to generalize about Americans’ eating habits because there’s no average person, Abbott-Hess said.