Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 13 · column 4 of 5 · from the scan, no model involved
grades of beef. This would be achieved by the proposal to eliminate conformation—shape of the carcass—as a quality grade factor. Conformation has no effect on the eating quality of beef, but does relate to the yield of retail cuts in a carcass and thus to its value.
Yield grades, however, are a better measure of. the contribution of conformation to retail value, AMS says. Hence the proposal to drop conformation as a quality grading factor and require that when carcasses are graded they be identified for both quality and yield grade.
PIERCE explains that dropping conformation would mean a more uniform quality in each grade because under the present system it is necessary to arrive at a “compromise grade” when quality and conformation differ. For example, a carcass with Prime quality meat, but only Good conformation, is graded as Choice even though it has none of the characteristics of the Choice grade carcass. Dropping conformation would eliminate this form of “compromise grading” and thus increase the uniformity and consistency of the eating quality within each of the grades.
AMS is soliciting public comments on' these proposed changes. Consumer comments are invited. They should be sent, in duplicate, to the Office of the Hearing Clerk, Room 112-A, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250. Comments must be filed by December 10 and will be available for public inspection.□
97.4%