View Single Post
Unread 02-26-2013, 10:12 AM   #60
Pitmaster T
Babbling Farker
 
Pitmaster T's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-03-11
Location: Dickinson, Texas
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorge View Post
I won't tell you what I think, but I will tell you why I think some people interpret the new rule to mean Pork can be legally separated after inspection.

The 2013 rule contains language that requires pork to be cooked whole, as well as prevents meat from being returned to the cooker once it's parted. Both items were removed from the 2014 rule.

Regardless of intent, I don't think it's unreasonable for a cook to interpret that parting is now legal since language that prohibited the practice has been removed.
VIDEO BELOW IN NEXT POST

Thanks Jorge. Allow me time for a serious response in this forum. Allow me to be constructive; but from a catering perspective.

The "Shake" is something I have been doing to do two reasons... one, increase the bark ratio, and two, allow for a large clientele to have a little miniature pork butt of their own (with a nice bark) usually served with veggies as the entree... and typically not as a sandwich. Plus they cook wicked fast. The Shake maybe a plus for someone who has nothing to lose.

Yes, I know its not a pork butt but a part of one. But these really come out GREAT.

So the way I read the rule as well, this dish sans the onions would work. Or not. No, not saying it will win, but ponder on the possibilities of choosing the perfect two out of 8 segments a typical but can offer?

Comments?

Last edited by Pitmaster T; 02-26-2013 at 02:22 PM..
Pitmaster T is offline   Reply With Quote