The (slight) Chipotle difference

Several weeks ago, Chipotle founder Steve Ells published a column headlined "Conventional vs. Grass-fed Beef." As you've probably heard, Chipotle prefers the latter—the fast-casual burrito chain has a lot to say about agricultural reform, ethical food, etc. But here the subject is more complicated than the title suggests: Ells was defending Chipotle's decision to stop buying exclusively domestic beef in favor of importing some of it from Australia, where the grass-fed supply is better.

It's a classic food-ethics connundrum: should you go with the higher production standard, or the food produced closer to home? Chipotle chose the former, a perfectly defensible choice if you just have the two. While the company has sometimes come off as trying too hard in promoting its commitment to sustainability issues, there's no question that a degree of commitment exists. Chipotle deserves some credit for being a different kind of company.

But really, only a little different. Last week, Chipotle communications head Chris Arnold talked to AgWeb about the Australian-beef decision, which has caused some controversy with American ranchers. "It would be our preference," said Arnold, "to have all of our beef coming from the United States." He means they'd like for U.S. supply to be able to meet both Chipotle's standards and its ever-growing demand.