Editorial
Time for truth
It's time for farmers to take a hard look at what politicians are telling them about the future of supply management.The latest strike against the system comes from provincial Agriculture Minister Noble Villeneuve, who found it necessary earlier this month to overrule a Farm Products Appeal Tribunal decision and seek an increase in chicken quota for Niagara Country Fresh Poultry Inc. from 100,000 kgs to 500,000 kgs for quota period A-20.
Villeneuve's edict could be a telling blow for an allocation system that has always left processors crying foul. But chicken farmers could see this one coming. During his speech to the Chicken Farmers of Ontario annual meeting in March, Villeneuve questioned the Ontario chicken industry's ability to meet processor and market demands. He pointed out that he was a supporter of supply management, "But, have we allowed ourselves to become complacent? Has that cost us market share? I believe it's time to regain our markets."
It's also difficult to find enthusiasm for supply management at the federal level. With the 1993 GATT it became evident that supply management's future would hinge on the federal government's ability to maintain tariff levels. But there is precious little evidence that the government is willing to do anything but reduce tariffs. Following two days of meetings with the 15-member-nation Cairns Group, federal Agriculture Minister Lyle Vanclief signed on to a final communiqué that states, "Tariffs must be removed and tariff peaks curtailed. The 1999 negotiations must result in deep cuts to all tariffs, tariff peaks and tariff escalation."
While Vanclief and Villeneuve continue to pledge their support for orderly marketing, a decidedly pessimistic view is emerging from bureaucrats who have historically hidden beneath their desks when the public spotlight shone.
Last month, when dairy farmers sat at the Canadian International Trade Tribunal hearing on butteroil imports, bureaucrats such as Robert Lancop of the federal competition bureau were quite frank in their assessments: Traditional supply management, with only tariffs to protect it, has a very short life expectancy.
That's not a shock for many farmers. Skyrocketing dairy quota prices have been fueled by farmers looking to cash flow and to pay off expansion plans before tariffs fall to levels that no longer protect the border. Some, seeing quota reach $16,000 per kg of fat in March, are deciding to cash in their chips and get out of the game. But many mid-sized farmers, with yet another generation ready and willing to take over the farm, are struggling to find what the future holds for them.
It's time for politicians to start telling farmers the truth about supply management. Do they intend to vigorously defend the system at the next round of trade talks? Or is the battle already lost? What will happen to the $11 billion in equity Canadian dairy farmers hold in quota. In Ontario alone, chicken producers have $775 million invested in quota.
Farmers need straight answers from their politicians. It's a sad
day when
elected politicians can't muster the courage to speak the truth
and leave
the job to bureaucrats.
back
OPINION
ON THE HILL
Vanclief says no to opening wallet
Agriculture Minister Lyle Vanclief knows pressure is building in the farm community for a bit more government generosity.Farm incomes are on the way down this year, margins are tightening and farmers are watching as governments proclaim the end of deficits and the sudden ability to inject new funding into priority areas.
Ontario is targeting health care. Ottawa is targeting education. No one has yet targeted agriculture, despite farm leader warnings that the massive cuts from government supports during the past several years have left farmers vulnerable.
It was with that background in mind that Vanclief recently faced down Opposition suggestions the government should enrich farm safety net programs, restoring some of the hundreds of millions cut since 1995. He basically told MPs on the Commons agriculture committee that he does not accept the farm lobby argument that more dollars are needed.
He noted that safety net programs are being studied and will be up for review at July's federal-provincial agriculture ministers' meeting. And he promised that at least through the life of this government, the $600 million scaled-back federal commitment to farm safety net funding will be maintained.
But he would go no further, rejecting arguments from New Democrat Dick Proctor and the Canadian Federation of Agriculture that $600 million is not enough if times get tougher and farmers need help.
"I'm confident these types of safety nets will ensure stability," Vanclief said. "We're confident it is sufficient." Yet it is 30 per cent less than just three years ago when spending cuts started.
In the meantime, hundreds of millions of dollars in other government help has been slashed in areas ranging from subsidies on grain transportation to dairy, making farmers more vulnerable to market fluctuations. And pressure on the safety net program funds has been eased by the fact that tens of thousands of farmers do not take part, including supply managed sector farmers and most cattlemen.
If all farmers took the government at its word that safety net programs are universally available, those funds would be stretched to breaking. Yet Vanclief resisted all temptation to even hint that farmers may be able to benefit directly from expected government surpluses in future. He said farmers simply must become accustomed to living with smaller profits per unit of production. "The margins are increasingly challenged. There's no doubt about it."
When challenged about cost recovery and farmer complaints that it is making their operating costs uncompetitive, the minister noted the impact of government-wide cost recovery is being studied but he said user fees are lower in Canada than in some other countries. Again, he offered no hint that the farm lobby might win this argument. "Cost recovery is one of the realities of the day."
As the summer progresses, this could become a more difficult political position to maintain if it looks like a low income year looms and the farm lobby can sustain the pressure.
In mid-July at Niagara-on-the-Lake when Vanclief meets his provincial counterparts, it may become the agricultural equivalent of health ministers recently getting together to jointly agree on limiting compensation to victims of the bad blood scandal.
Both levels of government are under pressure to open up the
public wallet
some. They may conclude that if they do not stand together to
resist
funding demands, they may be spending separately.
Barry Wilson is an Ottawa-based farm writer.
back
LETTER FROM EUROPE
By Norman Dunn
Animal welfare concerns have feathers flying
When the U.K. was in the throes of the Gulf War, a member of the British parliament told me he was getting a steady stream of letters from distraught mothers wanting an end to the Iraq conflict. But these letters were only a fraction of the daily mail this MP was getting at the same time calling for a ban on sow stall and tether systems - where the pigs are kept tied by the neck.If it wasn't clear before, it's now become very plain which lobby has the real power in Britain. Soldiers are still being rushed to theatres of war around the world, but new stall and tether systems are banned in Britain now - and other European countries are being forced to change, too. The changes in pig housing are costing the industry millions of dollars, but farmers are discovering that loose-housed sows can perform just as well as tethered ones. Most agree that pigs grunting in deep straw give a better public image, too.
With this example of animal welfare power in Europe, you'd expect that battery cages for egg layers wouldn't stand a chance. The system is, in fact, already banned in Switzerland and in some parts of Austria. But for the rest of Europe, there's a battle of conscience going on. Veterinarians would like to see the system go, but even the most high-powered scientific committees cannot find anything better - better for hen health and better for egg hygiene. Theknowledgeable animal welfare supporter has to agree. In fact, in Sweden, where the plan was to ban battery cages by 1999, the idea has been dropped for lack of welfare-oriented alternatives.
The majority of consumers with animal welfare pretensions have put the brakes on cage banning for another, much more cynical reason: The price of eggs from any other system is 10 to 50 per cent more. The experience of Sweden, with the proposed battery ban forgotten and 80 per cent of eggs sold still coming from caged birds, is being echoed through the EU.
Perhaps the biggest barrier to layer "liberty" is the beak trimming issue. The EU has agreed that beak trimming for layers be banned as soon as possible - it's already illegal in Sweden and is being phased out over a few years in the Netherlands. In cages - as long as there is no overcrowding (European rules allow a minimum 450 cm2 per bird, an allowance probably rising to 650 cm2 soon) - birds can get along without any huge mortality through feather pecking or cannibalism with unclipped beaks.
Alternative systems have a big problem here. Along with generally less hygienic conditions in non-cage systems, the feather pecking syndrome means mortality with on-the-floor and free-range layers is much higher on average. Caged bird deaths in Europe run from three to nine per cent, but often exceed 10 per cent in the other systems. EU Veterinary Commission members have admitted to me that there is considerable sympathy in their circles for the adoption of non-cage systems.
With the banning of beak trimming obviously coming soon in
Europe, some of
these experts have only one answer: Breed hens that won't attack
one
another the minute they get the chance. This sounds way out, but
one
well-known veterinary scientist has demonstrated that there's a
very close
correlation between high egg-laying performance and natural
aggression in
hens. Breeders worldwide have been increasing laying performance
at the
rate of three extra eggs per hen per year. This means there's
some very
angry hens about nowadays, and the latest demand from European
welfare
groups is that breeders start now selecting parent stock with
more peaceful
genes.
Norman Dunn, based in Ludwigshafen, Germany, is Farm & Country's
European
correspondent.
back
A breath of new life on the farm
The week wasn't off to a good start. We were in the barn at the usual time, only to find a dead calf in the stable cleaner trench. It was a heifer, of course.If we'd gotten up earlier, we'd have been able to save it. If (oh, how I hate that word!) we'd moved the cow into the maternity pen, the calf would probably have survived an unassisted calving. As it was, we'd been watching an older cow for a week, and she was occupying one of our limited box stalls.
Next day, another heifer calf - a valued future replacement - died. Although I knew we couldn't have prevented that one, I found myself wondering what the third strike would be. Shaking my head, I realized that the throbbing from my sinus cold had just gotten worse.
Fortunately, there were no more mortalities that week. Instead, we found that among the three days' telephone messages we'd been unaware of, there was one from the Holstein type classifier, stating he'd be at our place Wednesday. Tomorrow.
In the past, we've spent days washing and clipping the cows to have them looking their best for the classifier. That just wasn't going to happen this time. Instead, we moved the candidates around to the better stalls, though truth be told we wondered if the classifier would even look any further than the old, overcrowded structure.
Our preparation time dwindled to almost nothing as chores took longer with the fresh cows and minor emergencies had to be dealt with. Then company arrived just prior to and during the classifier's visit. A currying and a fresh beddening up was about all we could manage: The cows would have to do it on their own.
The two-year-olds were first to be scrutinized. They all scored Good Plus, half in the high range. We were pleased with them, and the two Very Goods that passed muster. Then, since this event only happens about once every eight months, we figured there wasn't much to lose by having the classifier look at a couple more animals. In the end, we had everything to gain.
"Congratulations, folks. You have an Excellent cow here," came the unforgettable announcement. Twenty years ago, in April, 1978, the original herd of 11 cows was transferred to Neil from his father. We've seen lots of other people get Excellent cows in the duration, but we'd given up dreaming it could happen here. A few years ago, we were so discouraged with the classification rounds that we hesitated to continue them. They'd been getting more costly, and when the cattle scored poorly we didn't think we needed insults badly enough to pay for them!
The fact that Antoinette is home-bred made the achievement even more of a victory. More than that, though, is the new life it has brought into our entire situation.
We'd been feeling a little down, thinking of the long list of needed farm and household improvements, the money we'd spent on land, what we were considering spending on expansion, how our son would fit in when he completes agriculture school and joins the operation, let alone the day-to-day challenges of keeping the herd healthy. The news on Antoinette convinced me to enjoy the moment a little longer and try to do what I do better.
I've noticed a change in Neil since the "Excellent" was stamped
on our
Blackstar's pedigree. For one thing, he always wants to be the
one to wash
and milk the Excellent cow. Seriously, though, the production has
come up
per cow, and it's largely because there's more incentive to do
just a
little more, keep on top of problems before they start, and
manage things -
including the myriad of ups and downs in this business - the best
way we
know how.
Margaret Comfort, husband Neil and their three children partner
a dairy
farm in St. Catherines.
back