The whole “wagyu” label has become such a mess. It’s difficult to even talk about wagyu since everyone comes to the conversation with different understandings.
there’s a lot to say on this topic. but in short,
- wagyu should have legal protection, and it should apply to true Japanese beef, whereas hybrid cattle or Australian/American etc. kind of beef “in the style of” wagyu should be titled as such.
- the reason what the name “wagyu” means outside of Japan is confusing is largely because of deceptive or misleading advertising by restaurants/companies trying to ride the coattails of wagyu. it doesn’t sound as good on a menu to say “Japanese-style American beef.” the distinction of “washugyu” as opposed to “wagyu” on menus is probably still a bit obscure to diners.
- fat injections to mimic wagyu are shameful, gross, and should have some kind of regulation itself
- there is a slight misconception outside of Japan that wagyu is necessarily super fatty, marbled, etc. and A5 / BMS 12 etc is what it’s about. the best wagyu at the top restaurants in Japan usually is not so fatty, or at least not so rich / oily in taste. export wagyu, say “A5 Miyazaki” beef one might see at many, many tasting menus in America and/or Europe, is not the be all end all representative of what the top Japanese restaurants consider best beef. in fact, the profile is quite different. it’s fine for people to not like wagyu or to prefer another type of beef, say Galician, Piedmontese, American, etc. but if his or her experience with wagyu is simply A5 Miyazaki export beef at a Michelin 2-3 star that flirts with Japanese food, then I’d say please reconsider and try other wagyu offerings in Japan, and his or her perspective may change.
Good post, and I’m largely, maybe entirely, in agreement. Do you know of any butcher shops in LA (or the US, if not LA), that regularly carry true Japanese Wagyu that is below BMS 8?
I’m not aware of any, but it’s not something I research as I’m not interested in purchasing any for myself.
To expand on the above, I think that there should be some easy distinction between true Japanese wagyu, “fullbood” non-Japan wagyu, and “purebred” / mixed or halfbred non-Japan wagyu. Preferably in a way that doesn’t confuse the consumer and isn’t so easy to fake. It’s not enough to just use the geographical location of Japan, Australia, America, etc.
I’ve heard people say Wagyu cross or F1 hybrid but both terms are a little clunky for guests at a restaurant with out further explanation imo. Not sure there is an easy answer
As discussed in the article, the genie’s out of the bottle. The Japanese wagyu industry had a chance to control things internationally but didn’t make the effort until it was too late.
Yes, damage has been done - e.g. “Kobe sliders.” But what is precluding the Japanese wagyu industry from now trying to protect its products legally or at least amongst consumers, similar to how champagne gained AOC protection around 1936 (and the CIVC forming in 1941)? Champagne had been around and exported before then. Does something make it too late legally or just you mean by now consumer attitudes have already formed?
Even if not legally, then at least some ways to make important distinctions to consumers. Perhaps the Japanese wagyu industry can make its all of its exports carry some official designation, like “True Japanese Wagyu” with certification. Those without it - whether its fullblood, purebred, or hybrid Australian/American would be known as not True Japanese Wagyu. Fullblood traceable 100% Japanese lineage in Australian farms, for example, would be “Australian beef of 100% Japanese original lineage.” Anything “purebred” or lower would have to state the percentage of actual wagyu. That way, a diner seeing 50% wagyu, 75% wagyu, etc. on a menu would understand that washugyu or hybrid are not the same as Japanese wagyu. Using the term “purebred” can be easily misinterpreted to basically mean “fullblood.” Clunky, yes, but I don’t have an answer ultimately.
Good Idea perhaps ‘Hon Wagyu’ so if you are exporting to Paris you aren’t carrying an english lable
The law. They didn’t trademark it or protect it in the US, now it’s too late.
There is a trade agreement between the US and EU that regulates the term Champagne. It just grandfather’s in company’s like Korbel that were using it before 2006. They just have to put ‘California champagne’ on the label.
but the fight began in 1985 when France started regulating the term méthode champenoise. Many winery’s voluntarily switched to calling themselves California sparkling wine like Shramsburg
