My Cow Game Extracted Your Facebook Data – The Atlantic

For a spell during 2010 and 2011, I was a virtual rancher of clickable cattle on Facebook.

It feels like a long time ago. Obama was serving his first term as president. Google+ hadn’t arrived, let alone vanished again. Steve Jobs was still alive, as was Kim Jong Il. Facebook’s IPO hadn’t yet taken place, and its service was still fun to use—although it was littered with requests and demands from social games, like FarmVille and Pet Society.

I’d had enough of it—the click-farming games, for one, but also Facebook itself. Already in 2010, it felt like a malicious attention market where people treated friends as latent resources to be optimized. Compulsion rather than choice devoured people’s time. Apps like FarmVille sold relief for the artificial inconveniences they themselves had imposed.

In response, I made a satirical social game called Cow Clicker. Players clicked a cute cow, which mooed and scored a “click.” Six hours later, they could do so again. They could also invite friends’ cows to their pasture, buy virtual cows with real money, compete for status, click to send a real cow to the developing world from Oxfam, outsource clicks to their toddlers with a mobile app, and much more. It became strangely popular, until eventually, I shut the whole thing down in a bovine rapture—the “cowpocalypse.” It’s kind of a complicated story.

But one worth revisiting today, in the context of the scandal over Facebook’s sanctioning of user-data exfiltration via its application platform. It’s not just that abusing the Facebook platform for deliberately nefarious ends was easy to do (it was). But worse, in those days, it was hard to avoid extracting private data, for years even, without even trying. I did it with a silly cow game.

* * *

Cow Clicker is not an impressive work of software. After all, it was a game whose sole activity was clicking on cows. I wrote the principal code in three days, much of it hunched on a friend’s couch in Greenpoint, Brooklyn. I had no idea anyone would play it, although over 180,000 people did, eventually. I made a little money from the whole affair, but I never optimized it for revenue generation. I certainly never pondered using the app as a lure for a data-extraction con. I was just a strange man making a strange game on a lark.

And yet, if you played Cow Clicker, even just once, I got enough of your personal data that, for years, I could have assembled a reasonably sophisticated profile of your interests and behavior. I might still be able to; all the data is still there, stored on my private server, where Cow Clicker is still running, allowing players to keep clicking where a cow once stood, before my caprice raptured them into the digital void.

The authorization dialog for the game Candy Crush. (King / Facebook)

To understand why withdrawing data was the default behavior in Facebook apps, you have to know something about how apps get made and published on Facebook. In 2007, the company turned its social-network service into an application platform. The idea was that Facebook could grow its number of users and the time they spent engaged by allowing people and organizations to build services overtop of it. And those people and organizations would benefit by plugging into a large network of users, whose network of friends could easily be made a part of the service, both for social interaction and viral spread.

When you access an app on Facebook’s website, be it a personality-quiz, a game, a horoscope, or a sports community, the service presents you with an authorization dialog, where the specific data an app says it needs is displayed for the user’s consideration. That could be anything from your name, friend list, and email address, to your photos, likes, direct messages and more.

The information shared with an app by default has changed over time, and even a savvy user might never have known what comprised it. When I launched Cow Clicker in 2010, it was easier to acquire both “basic” information (name, gender, networks, and profile picture) and “extended” user information (location, relationship status, likes, posts, and more). In 2014, Facebook began an app review process for information beyond that which a user shared publicly, but for years before that, the decision was left to the user alone. This is consistent with Facebook’s longstanding, official policy on privacy, which revolves around user control rather than procedural verification.

App authorizations are not exceptionally clear. For one thing, the user must accept the app’s request to share data with it as soon as they open it for the first time, even before knowing what the app does or why. For another, the authorization is presented by Facebook, not by the third party, making it seem official, safe, and even endorsed.

Cow Clicker on Facebook, 2010. The game appears to live natively inside the Facebook interface, but it runs—and stores its data—on a separate server. (Cow Clicker / Ian Bogost / The Atlantic)

The part of the Facebook website where apps appear, under the blue top navigation (as seen above), introduces further confusion. To the average web user, especially a decade ago, it looked like the game or app was just a part of Facebook itself. The page is seamless, with no boundary between the site’s navigational chrome and the third-party app. If you look at the browser address bar while using a Facebook app on the website, the URL begins with “,” further cementing the impression that the user was safely ensconced in the comforting, blue cradle of Facebook’s care.

That’s not what really takes place. When a user loads an app, Facebook’s servers pass those requests to a remote computer, where the individual or company that made the app hosts their services. The app sends its responses to Facebook, which formats and presents them to the user, as if they were inside of Facebook itself.

The authorization process happens once, the first time the app is accessed for a specific user. After that, every time the user loads the app, Facebook sends it a payload of basic user data to facilitate the app’s operation (additional data can be requested separately when needed). For years, these transmissions were even conducted unencrypted, until Facebook required apps to communicate with its service over a secure connection.

Beyond its own terms of service for applications, which many developers probably didn’t read or feel compelled to heed, Facebook “secured” user data shared with third-parties by requiring every app to publish a privacy policy. Because data sharing was seen as a form of user-control, not corporate policy, Facebook doesn’t appear to review platform-developer privacy policies. As far as I can tell, all the platform did was to insure that accessing the URL for an app’s privacy policy didn’t result in a page-not-found error. Facebook was checking that privacy policies existed as reachable web pages, not that they existed as privacy policies, let alone policies that provided any specific protections. And besides, users probably never read the policies, which were linked unassumingly from the application-permissions interface. They might easily, and reasonably, have assumed that Facebook was simply reiterating its own privacy policy when presenting new access to an app. They would have been wrong.

In essence, Facebook was presenting apps as quasi-endorsed extensions of its core service to users who couldn’t have been expected to know better. That might explain why so many people feel violated by Facebook this week—they might never have realized that they were even using foreign, non-Facebook applications in the first place, let alone ones that were siphoning off and selling their data. The website always just looked like Facebook.

In the case of Cow Clicker, which only ever aimed to let people click on pictures of cows, I was able to access two potentially sensitive pieces of data without even trying.

The first is a player’s Facebook ID. This is a numeric, unique identifier attached to every Facebook account. Once I have your Facebook ID, I can look up your profile programmatically, or I can just load it in the public website by appending it to “”—Mark Zuckerberg’s is 4.

These days, Facebook generates a unique, app-specific ID for each user, in order to prevent an app from connecting someone directly to Facebook profiles. But back in Cow Clicker’s heyday of 2010, Facebook didn’t do this, and every app got your actual ID. Those data could be correlated against other information—data collected from Facebook, fashioned by the app, or acquired elsewhere. Because I collected and stored my users’ true Facebook IDs to be able to count their clicks and build their pastures and the like, I still have them, and, in theory, I could use them nefariously. A 2014 terms-of-service update prohibits some of that activity, but not everyone cares about violating the Facebook terms of service.

The second type of information is a piece of profile data Cow Clicker received without asking for it. Back in 2010, Facebook still allowed users to join “networks”—affiliations like schools, workplaces, and organizations. In some cases, those affiliations required authorization, for example having an email address at a domain that corresponds with a university. Over time, verification became less important to Facebook, and now users can affiliate with schools or workplaces arbitrarily. The less friction, the more data.

In 2010, on my friend’s couch in Brooklyn, I noticed that Facebook was shipping user affiliation data over the wire to me, so I decided to store it. Facebook allowed apps to store data for which user permission was granted, but urged developers not to request or store more than it needed to operate. Putting affiliation data in the Cow Clicker database allowed me to provide leaderboard rankings by network, allowing my players to compete for clicks with their work colleagues or classmates.

That’s neither a terribly interesting feature nor a particularly wicked one. But because I stored the numerical identifiers for user affiliations, I still have them. Until 2016, I could use a database-query tool called FQL, Facebook Query Language, to retrieve the details of those networks, and correlate them back to my users. Had I wanted to, I could have recombined that information with other data and used it for retargeting.

Cow Clicker’s example is so modest, it might not even seem like a problem. What does it matter if a simple diversion has your Facebook ID, education, and work affiliations? Especially since its solo creator (that’s me) was too dumb or too lazy to exploit that data toward pernicious ends. But even if I hadn’t thought about it at the time, I could have done so years later, long after the cows vanished, and once Cow Clicker players forgot that they’d ever installed my app.

This is also why Zuckerberg’s response to the present controversy feels so toothless. Facebook has vowed to audit companies that have collected, shared, or sold large volumes of data in violation of its policy, but the company cannot close the Pandora’s box it opened a decade ago, when it first allowed external apps to collect Facebook user data. That information is now in the hands of thousands, maybe millions of people.

To be honest, I’m not even sure I know what the Facebook platform’s terms of service dictated that I do with user data acquired from Facebook. Technically, users could revoke certain app permissions later, and apps were supposed to remove any impacted data that they had stored. I doubt most apps did that, and I suspect users never knew—and still don’t know—that revoking access to an app they used eight years ago doesn’t do anything to reverse transmissions that took place years ago.

As Jason Koebler put it at Motherboard, it’s too late. “If your data has already been taken, Facebook has no mechanism and no power to make people delete it. If your data was taken, it has very likely been sold, laundered, and put back into Facebook.” Indeed, all the publicity around Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica crisis might be sending lots of old app developers, like me, back to old code and dusty databases, wondering what they’ve even got stored and what it might yet be worth.

Facebook’s laissez-faire openness surely contributed to the data-extraction free-for-all that’s playing itself out now via the example of Cambridge Analytica. But so did its move-fast-and-break-things attitude toward software development. The Facebook platform was truly a nightmare to use and to maintain. It was built like no other software system then extant, and it changed constantly—regular updates rolled out weekly. Old code broke, seemingly for no good reason. Some Facebook app developers were dishonest from the start, and others couldn’t help themselves once they saw the enormous volume of data they could slurp from millions or tens of millions of Facebook users. But many more were just struggling to eke out a part of their living in an ecosystem where people might discover them.

Millions of apps had been created by 2012, when I hung up my cowboy hat. Not only apps apparently designed with duplicity in mind, like Aleksandr Kogan’s personality-quiz, which extracted data that was then sold to Cambridge Analytica. But hundreds of thousands of creators of dumb toys, quizzes, games, and communities that might never have intended to dupe or violate users surely did so anyway, because Facebook rammed their data down our throats. On the whole, none of us asked for your data. But we have it anyway, and forever.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

United States Dry, Condensed, And Evaporated Dairy Products Market 2018 – Analysis And Forecast to 2025 … – Business Wire (press release)

Dry, Condensed, And Evaporated Dairy Products Market – Analysis And
Forecast to 2025”
report has been added to’s

The report provides an in-depth analysis of the U.S. dry, condensed, and
evaporated dairy products market. It presents the latest data of the
market size and volume, domestic production, exports and imports, price
dynamics and turnover in the industry. In addition, the report contains
insightful information about the industry, including industry life
cycle, business locations, productivity, employment and many other
crucial aspects. The Company Profiles section contains relevant data on
the major players in the industry.

Product Coverage:

  • Dry milk products and mixtures
  • Milk products, shipped in consumer-type cans, excluding substitutes
  • Concentrated milk products, shipped in bulk (barrels, drums, and tanks)
  • Ice cream mixes and related products
  • Dairy product substitutes
  • Dry, condensed, and evaporated dairy product manufacturing

Key Topics Covered:

1. Introduction

1.1 Report Description

1.2 Report Structure

1.3 Research Methodology

2. Executive Summary

2.1 Key Findings

2.2 Market Trends

3. Market Overview

3.1 Market Value

3.2 Trade Balance

3.3 Market Opportunities

3.4 Market Forecast to 2025

4. Domestic Production

4.1 Production from 2008-2016

4.2 Production by Type

4.3 Production by State

4.4 Producer Prices

5. Imports

5.1 Imports from 2007-2016

5.2 Imports by Type

5.3 Imports by Country

5.4 Import Prices by Country

6. Exports

6.1 Exports from 2007-2016

6.2 Exports by Type

6.3 Exports by Country

6.4 Export Prices by Country

7. Competitive Landscape

7.1 Industry Snapshots

7.2 Industry Life Cycle

7.3 Business Locations

7.4 Employment

7.5 Annual Payroll

7.6 Industry Productivity

7.7 Establishment Size and Legal Form

8. Company Profiles

  • Nestle
  • The Hain Celestial Group
  • Mead Johnson Nutrition Company
  • Dairy Farmers of America
  • Darigold
  • Kaneka Americas Holding
  • Cytosport
  • Standard Candy Company
  • Bongards’ Creameries
  • Davisco Foods International
  • Lifeway Foods
  • Associated Milk Producers
  • Saputo Dairy Foods
  • Gerber Products Company
  • Blyth
  • O-At-Ka Milk Products Cooperative
  • Musclepharm Corporation
  • Valentine Enterprises
  • Agropur Msi
  • Nestle Holdings
  • Synutra International
  • Plainview Milk Products Cooperative
  • The First District Association
  • Dean Holding Company

For more information about this report visit

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Elephant and cow manure for making paper sustainably – Science Daily

It’s likely not the first thing you think of when you see elephant dung, but this material turns out to be an excellent source of cellulose for paper manufacturing in countries where trees are scarce, scientists report. And in regions with plenty of farm animals such as cows, upcycling manure into paper products could be a cheap and environmentally sound method to get rid of this pervasive agricultural waste.

The researchers are presenting their results today at the 255th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS).

The idea for the project germinated on Crete, where Alexander Bismarck, Ph.D., noticed goats munching on summer-dry grass in the small village where he was vacationing. “I realized what comes out in the end is partially digested plant matter, so there must be cellulose in there,” he recalls.

“Animals eat low-grade biomass containing cellulose, chew it and expose it to enzymes and acid in their stomach, and then produce manure. Depending on the animal, up to 40 percent of that manure is cellulose, which is then easily accessible,” Bismarck says. So, much less energy and fewer chemical treatments should be needed to turn this partially digested material into cellulose nanofibers, relative to starting with raw wood, he conjectured.

After working with goat manure, Bismarck, who is at the University of Vienna, Austria, his postdoc Andreas Mautner, Ph.D., and graduate students Nurul Ain Kamal and Kathrin Weiland moved on to dung from horses, cows and eventually elephants. The supply of raw material is substantial: Parks in Africa that are home to hundreds of elephants produce tons of dung every day, and enormous cattle farms in the U.S. and Europe yield mountains of manure, according to Mautner.

The researchers treat the manure with a sodium hydroxide solution. This partially removes lignin — which can be used later as a fertilizer or fuel — as well as other impurities, including proteins and dead cells. To fully remove lignin and to produce white pulp for making paper, the material has to be bleached with sodium hypochlorite. The purified cellulose requires little if any grinding to break it down into nanofibers in preparation for use in paper, in contrast to conventional methods.

“You need a lot of energy to grind wood down to make nanocellulose,” Mautner says. But with manure as a starting material, “you can reduce the number of steps you need to perform, simply because the animal already chewed the plant and attacked it with acid and enzymes. You inexpensively produce a nanocellulose that has the same or even better properties than nanocellulose from wood, with lower energy and chemical consumption,” he says.

The dung-derived nanopaper could be used in many applications, including as reinforcement for polymer composites or filters that can clean wastewater before it’s discharged into the environment, Bismarck says. His team is working with an industrial consortium to further explore these possibilities. The nanopaper could also be used to write on, he says.

The researchers are also investigating whether the process can be made even more sustainable, by first producing biogas from manure and then extracting cellulose fibers from the residue. Biogas, which is mostly methane and carbon dioxide, can then be used as a fuel for generating electricity or heat.

Story Source:

Materials provided by American Chemical Society. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

PwC faces MPs over accusations of 'milking the Carillion cow dry' – The Guardian

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

The Guardian

PwC faces MPs over accusations of 'milking the Carillion cow dry'
The Guardian
Frank Field, the chair of the Commons work and pensions committee, said: “PwC had every incentive to milk the Carillion cow dry. Then, when Carillion finally collapsed, PwC adroitly re-emerged as butcher, packaging up joints of the fallen beast to be

and more »

Source link

Madison farmer whose cow was shot will reopen trail on his property … – Press Herald

MADISON — A local farmer has agreed to reopen a portion of a snowmobile trail on his land that he closed last month after one of his pregnant Angus cows was shot and killed, he believes, from the trail.

The cow killer has yet to be identified.

The Abnaki Sno Riders club announced on its Facebook page Feb. 15 that the section of trail it calls Club Trail 27 would be closed for the remainder of the season.

That section of trail runs through the farm property of Clayton Tibbetts, who lives with his fiancée, Christine Stevens, and their children, on River Road in Madison.

But as of Saturday, Tibbetts apparently has relented. According to the snowmobile club’s newest social media post, the trail that runs from the intersection of ITS 87 on River Road from Conjockty Road to what it calls the Bunny Trail, off Adams Road, is back open.

“The landowner, Clayton Tibbetts (formerly Thompson’s Farm) on the River Road in Madison has allowed us to open this trail back up,” the group posted Saturday on its Facebook page.

Club members thanked Tibbetts in the comment section of the post.

Club secretary Leeann Newton said in messages Monday that game wardens have leads on the shooting, but so far have not identified the people who were responsible for the death of the cow the family’s kids called Fluffy.

“Out of the kindness of their hearts, Mr. Tibbetts and his family decided to reopen the trail because they wanted snowmobilers to continue to enjoy the use of their land for the remainder of the season,” Newton wrote.

The Tibbetts family as well as snowmobile club members were shocked and dismayed at the shooting of the cow.

“They shot her between the eyes,” Tibbetts said in February. “It had to have been at close range. We raise beef. We’re just farmers. Got draft horses, cows, do a little logging – agricultural people.”

Tibbetts, 39, said the snowmobile trail is 25 to 30 feet from the field where the cow’s carcass was found.

He said he has never had a problem before and still does not know who shot the animal or if it even was someone on a snowmobile. Tibbetts said a taxidermist told him the cow had not died giving birth, as Tibbetts initially had thought, but had been shot.

The cow was due to give birth in May. Tibbetts said he didn’t dare to try to salvage the meat. Financially, the loss exceeds $2,000, not including the lost calf and the cost to feed the cow.

Tibbetts was on the road Monday and could not be reached by cell phone. A message left for Warden Chad Robertson, who is investigating the report, was not immediately returned Monday.

Doug Harlow — 612-2367

[email protected];


Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Beef heifer and cow selection impacts herd – High Plains Journal

The drought conditions during recent years led to cattle producers selling cows and downsizing, but Rick Funston, beef cattle reproductive physiologist at the University of Nebraska said cowherds are growing again.

Reproduction is the single most important factor for profitability in the cowherd and Funston said producers are selecting more of the right cows to add to the herd.

“Cows need to have calves first before we worry about what they are like in other areas. And time of calving affects production too,” said Funston.

He suggested using tools to improve reproduction. Artificial insemination and the use of synchronization are tools that can be used to make the calving season shorter and determine which heifers and cows are most fertile.



University of Nebraska beef cattle reproductive physiologist Rick Funston told producers during a session at the 2017 Angus Convention that selecting the right heifer to add to a herd is important for the longevity of the herd. (Journal photo by Jennifer Carrico.)

“There are several different synchronization programs out there. Reviewing them can help you determine which would work best for your operation,” he said. “By using AI in the herd, fewer bulls would be needed to follow.”

Funston said even with a synchronization program, cows won’t all calve on the same day and won’t cycle back at the same time, therefore large groups can be done at the same time to shorten the amount of time extra labor is needed.

“A cow that calves in the first 21 days of the calving interval will increase her time in the herd and become a part of the group to stay in the herd for the long term,” he added.

Funston said producers need to know their cowherd well enough to know if they should buy or raise their replacements. If purchased, the background of the herd heifers are purchased from is important for the longevity of the females.

Nutrition is also important when breeding heifers and cows. Funston said heifers can be bred at a lighter weight with a shorter breeding season and still successfully raise calves.

“If heifers are weaned on Nov. 1, weighing about 500 pounds, the producer has 180 days to get the 250 pounds on the heifers for breeding on May 1,” he said. “Post breeding feed availability is important at that point to be able to have the heifers grow to the weight and develop the calf to what it needs by calving time.”

Sire selection determines 85 percent of the genetic potential in a herd. Heifers without dystocia problems breed back sooner, he said. Proper selection of sires makes a big difference for the first calf and for the future of both the calf and the cow.

“When using EPDs (expected progeny differences) to select animals for your herd, remember there needs to be parameters,” said Funston. “Too much one way or the other on an EPD can cause problems. Having highly fertile heifer calves can lead to those calves being bred while on the cow and that causes problems as well.”

Expectations are high for cows and Funston said it’s important to be able to provide the necessary resources. Quality feedstuffs, minerals, hay and grass are needed to improve conception rates.

“Protein, energy, minerals, vitamins and water need to be available for a cow to be ready to raise a calf,” he said. “Body condition at calving should be 5 to 6. From calving to breeding is important, but cows who are thinner are less fertile.”

For more information regarding supplementation of heifers and cows and synchronization programs, visit

Jennifer Carrico can be reached at 515-833-2120 or

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

'Alien-like' rabbit foetuses, cat skin rug for sale on Trade Me | … –

This stuffed rabbit is up for auction on Trade Me.

This stuffed rabbit is up for auction on Trade Me.

What do you do when your farm cat dies of old age?

If you’re Andrew Lancaster, you skin it, stuff it, and sell it on Trade Me.

The Tauranga-based taxidermist has been selling cat- and possum-skin rugs, alongside mounted rabbits, magpies, weasels and ferrets, under the user name getstuffed1 for years.

More than 70 people have added these unborn,

More than 70 people have added these unborn, “alien-like” rabbits to their Trade Me watchlists.

His most recent listing includes a rug made out of his deceased farm cat – which he said he had found dead in an outbuilding – and five rabbit foetuses which have been preserved in a jar.

* Taxidermist auctions off cat-skin rug
* Taxidermy cat bag sells for $545
* How I developed a taste for exotic pest meat

Bidding on the cat-skin rug had reached $158 on Sunday morning, with two more days still to run.

Before being made into a rug, this farm cat kept rat and mice populations down, Lancaster said.

Before being made into a rug, this farm cat kept rat and mice populations down, Lancaster said.

The rabbit foetuses were proving less popular, with bids sitting at $30.

“Looking alien-like, these five unborn baby rabbits were found inside the mother which was recently taxidermied,” that listing said.

“Cool object for home, office, shop display. Looks great when lit up.”

Lancaster was also selling a possum-skin rug, a stuffed magpie and a stuffed rabbit.

Ad Feedback

The rabbit had “probably had a few fights over the years with one ear a bit ragged”, the listing said.

In 2013, Lancaster told Stuff he usually steered clear of stuffing cats and dogs.

“You get a lot of people who say they’re pets and should be left alone and not stuffed.”

He said he sometimes received “nasty” comments about his work, but everybody was entitled to their own opinion.

“Some people like taxidermy and some people hate it.”

Comments on the cat skin rug listing were mainly positive, with people saying the sale was no different from that of a cow hide rug.

“A cat is not somehow more valuable or sentient than a pig or a dog or a cow,” one said. 

Another commenter said they did not understand how people could label Lancaster’s taxidermy ‘sick’ or ‘cruel’. 

“Bet they all eat meat and wear leather and don’t even realise what that animal went through.”

 – Stuff

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link

Kansas farmer's cows say 'hi' to space with satellite image | The … – Wichita Eagle

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Wichita Eagle

Kansas farmer's cows say 'hi' to space with satellite image | The …
Wichita Eagle
Kansas farmer Derek Klingenberg and his cattle say 'hi' to SpaceX and Starman with cow art, as proven by satellite images. The cows could be seen from space.
Farmer's cattle say 'hi' to SpaceX, Starman – News – The Garden City …The Garden City Telegram

all 1 news articles »

Source link

Y. Hata, Kunoa Cattle Company team up to launch local beef line –

PUHI — The locally grown and produced beef is finally here.

During a recent invitation-only launch event at the Grove Farm Company, it was announced that Y. Hata, a locally owned and Hawaii-
based broadline food service wholesale distributor, was selected to support the recently honored Mana Up awardee Kunoa Cattle Company in launching its local beef production line on Kauai.

“We are pleased to announce the launch of a trilateral partnership to support the local community and create food sustainability on Kauai,” said Kurt Osaki, a Y. Hata brand and marketing consultant.

Kunoa Cattle Company is a Kauai-based ranch with the state’s largest USDA-inspected harvesting facility located on Oahu. The term “kunoa” translates to “stand free.” The company was also named “Best New Business” in 2017 by the Pacific Edge magazine, and was a selection in Mana Up’s inaugural cohort of 10 businesses.

Bob Farias, a Kunoa co-founder, said Kunoa currently ranches about 2,000 head of cattle on about 4,000 acres of land on Kauai and Oahu. He is a third generation rancher who combines progressive grazing practices with Hawaii’s paniolo traditions as a steward of the land.

“We have great ranchers,” Farias said. “Nearly all of the beef consumed in Hawaii is imported. But there was no way to finance the processing plant we needed to get our beef to the next level of delivery. No one wanted to own a processing plant. All that existed were slaughter houses which was limited in what we could do. That’s when we met Jack Beuttell who brought a business sense to the industry.”

The goal of the arrangement is to elevate food sustainability, not just on Kauai, but potentially for the state by being the leader in best practices for ranching, harvesting, processing and distribution in Hawaii, and beyond, said Jim Cremins, the Y. Hata chief of operations.

“We deal with Y. Hata a lot,” Farias said. “They really first heard about Kunoa through our Beef Bars. In the first four months, they couldn’t keep enough of it. The Kunoa Beef Bar with original seasonings is made with 100 percent Hawaii-
raised beef, spending their entire life in Hawaii with no added hormones, or antibiotics, ever.”

Kunoa Cattle Company incorporates a sustainable systems approach to its business that incorporates holistic planned grazing, animal welfare technology, renewable energy, and nose-to-tail whole animal utilization. Kunoa models produce a high quality, healthier, and consistent product for the consumer.

“This is fantastic,” said Michael Young, executive chef for the Sheraton Kauai Resort. “We currently have a locally produced beef supplier, but this is a great option to have. It’s exciting to see another outfit filling the need for locally produced beef.”

Russell Hata, president and CEO of Y. Hata, said for the past 105 years, Y. Hata has dedicated its business to serve the people of Hawaii, and to be the distributor of choice by offering the best food service solutions and value to its customers.

“We are excited about the partnership with Kunoa because we share similar values and common goals,” Hata said. “Kunoa Cattle Company has made an impressive commitment. We are selling his mission, and this is exciting to see the island take another step in food sustainability.”

Beuttell, a co-founder and CEO of Kunoa Cattle Company, also was pleased.

“Partnerships and collaborations are what will move us from net food importers to net food exporters,” Beuttell said. “Hawaii has amazing natural resources and talent to produce world-class food products. We’re excited to team up with Y. Hata to show the globe that Hawaii can produce beef worth writing home about.”


Dennis Fujimoto, staff writer and photographer, can be reached at 245-0453 or

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link