Shawn Snider, who lives near Mountain, about 25 km south of Ottawa, has come up with a web site called, "Breeders Connect", http://www.rr3.com/breeders/. Designed for breeders of registered livestock, it provides a linked pedigree chart and a linked progeny listing for each animal.

Instead of a lot of isolated pages such as you would find in a conventional catalogue, "breeders are linked together by the blood of their animals," is how Shawn explains it. Cost to list on his site is $25 per farm home page and $25 for each animal you want to list.

Shawn spent six months designing the specialized site-management software before launching the project at the end of March. When I spoke with him this summer he had received one inquiry from an artificial insemination unit and had lined up only a few participating breeders and animals. "Is anyone out there to see them or is it just us" web designers? Shawn wrote me recently. That's a common question on Internet and especially relevant for those involved with Ontario agriculture right now.

More and more Ontario farmers are building personal web Is anyone there to see these home pages? We know there are a few thousand farmers signed up for agricultural mailing lists, but as mentioned here before, that doesn't necessarily mean they are able to visit the web.

One answer is get a Hit Counter.

This will show the number of times a page has been requested from a server. For many web page owners this simply means requesting the proper HTML tag from your ISP.

Those who can't get help from their ISP have a variety of options including the Web-Counter Home Page http://www.digits.com/web_counter.html that offers a free counter for non-commercial use. You can configure the counter display in a variety of colours and digits designs and positions.

Internet Audit Bureau http://www.internet-audit.com is another free service. It will appeal to those who want to know what's happening with their page but don't want to display their numbers to visitors.

This counter won't record visitors who use a text-based browser or those who turn off their graphics to travel the net at higher speed. In other words, it will undercount your hits. Both of the above counters and all of the other free ones I've seen are fun, at best. They don't supply the kind of information needed to make business decisions.

They can also be used to make a page seem more popular than it really is. Because the origin of the hits is unknown, nothing prevents an unscrupulous operator from repeatedly hitting his own site if he stands to collect advertising revenue based on hits.

There are a lot of commercial counters which for just a couple of dollars per month, will identify who has visited your page and when. I'll e-mail a selection of these to individual readers on request.

Write me at: rirwin@hawk.igs.net if you've seen something new in farm computing, or are willing to share your favourite agricultural URLs.
Robert Irwin is Farm & Country's resident computer guru.

back

Subsidies inflate quota

A report prepared for Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) board members last winter says Quebec and Nova Scotia farmers have benefited more than their Ontario counterparts from a combination of federal and provincial subsidies. The subsidies, the report asserts, have been capitalized into quota purchases, inflating the price paid for quota.

Some farmers fear that Ontario producers will be at a disadvantage against their Quebec and Nova Scotia counterparts while bidding against them for quota on the single exchange, which will be part of the proposed six-province pooling agreement. There are already concerns because Quebec quota is priced higher than Ontario quota on their respective exchanges.

DFO vice-chairman Peter Oosterhoff, Beamsville, was not available for comment on the economist's report at press time. But the report has increased concerns in the eyes of some farmers about the pooling agreement which the DFO is getting ready to sign at the end of this month.

The report, written last winter by DFO economist Attaher Maiga and obtained by Farm & Country, uses an Agriculture Canada study to show the differences in government assistance programs in Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia in 1989 and 1990. The report says that subsidies putting more money into farmers' pockets likely increased the price bid for each litre of milk quota or kg of butterfat quota. The price of butterfat quota in Ontario increased by $2.12 per kg in 1989 and by $2.40 per kg in 1990. In Quebec, the price was inflated by $2.96 per kg in 1989 and $3.24 per kg in 1990.

The report says these differences represent "an 84 cent per kg or 2.1 per cent advantage in favour of Quebec producers," based on a price of $40 a kg for quota. The federal government has since stopped publishing these figures from an Agriculture Canada committee of experts, the DFO report says, because of fears that they would be used against Canada in international trade negotiations. As well, Quebec quit taking part in the study in 1991.

Maiga considered other federal reports on agricultural expenditures to be too broad to be applied to the dairy industry alone. But general trends in program expenditure show that Ontario's agri-food industry in general has had its support cut by 33 per cent from 1989 to 1996.

Maiga's report asserts that the gap between the two provinces in support and its effect on butterfat quota prices are almost doubled, from 84 cents a kg for butterfat in 1989 to $1.63 in 1996. That's a four per cent advantage for Quebec producers on the exchange price, based on $40 a kg bid for butterfat quota. Peter Van Sleeuwen, Glengarry county milk committee chairman, feels when these programs are taken into account, Ontario dairy farmers shouldn't be compensating Nova Scotia for taking part of its fluid market with the six-province pool, and that the $10 million one-time compensation from Quebec should be increased because of the sharing of Ontario's bigger fluid pool.

Van Sleeuwen says the average price for quota in Ontario for the last 12 months was $34.75 for unused, and $28.01 for used. In Quebec, he asserts, the price for unused quota was $49.93 a kg higher. Unused quota was priced $8.21 a kg higher than in Ontario.

The good news on the horizon, the DFO report said, is that Quebec is expected, like Ontario, to be less generous with its agricultural sector handouts in the future. Budget cuts in Quebec are expected to slash provincial spending by 30 per cent over the next three years. - DS

back

Pasteur's process passé?

By ALEX BINKLEY Special to Farm & Country

A food engineering professor at the University of Guelph has developed an electrical pulse system that can pasteurize fruit juices and milk products at less cost than traditional pasteurization methods and without any loss of flavour or vitamins.

The system sends electrical pulses through the products in microsecond bursts, then repeatedly reverses the charge between negative and positive, which breaks the resistance and then destroys microbes and bacteria.

Gauri Mittal says the system uses 30,000 volts with up to 10 microsecond pulses, depending on the product. He calls it the instant charge reversal pulse process. "It is successful because there is no temperature increase in the product, which is why there is no degradation to the vitamins or in the taste."

So far Mittal and his team, working in co-operation with the engineering faculty at the University of Waterloo, have developed a compact pulse system which would cost about $10,000. It will take a couple of years of additional testing before it is ready to present to the health and agriculture departments for approval.

Mittal and his group started working on their pulse system in 1989, based on work done earlier in Canada as well as in several other countries. "There are a lot of people who are interested in this process," Mittal says. Among them are Canadian dairy and food companies such as Ault Foods and Weston Foods along with Labatt's Breweries and food equipment manufacturers such as KSI Industries of Toronto.

One of the tasks facing Mittal is to scale up his system, which now is designed to handle only 1,000 litres an hour. He would like to increase it to 10,000 litres an hour. He also wants to try it on a greater variety of products. It has worked with fruit juices and milk products but he is sure it would work in any food product composed of fine particles that is in a wet enough state to conduct the electricity.

One area being tested is cereals where there are many different bacteria and microbes to destroy.

back

Worm picking with a needle

By DON STONEMAN

With beef prices in a turmoil and the chances of turning a profit slim, producers are trimming costs everywhere they can. But cutting parasite controls may be counterproductive to increasing your returns, some livestock health experts warn. Based on 1989 prices, using a broad-spectrum parasite control product was worth $7 a head - after the drug was paid for. Last fall, with recalculated prices to account for high feed costs, using the drug was worth $13 a head.

"When feed prices are high is when you can't afford not to use it," says Tracy Ward, Merck Agvet, who co-ordinated many of the studies. She says the product pays for itself in increased weight gain and better feed conversion.

The benefits of deworming are included in a report produced by Meristem, an independent communications company based in Alberta. Contributors to this special report include Dr. Ken Leslie, Ontario Veterinary College Professor, Dr. Carl Ribble, professor of epidemiology in the Department of Herd Medicine and Theriogenology at the Western College of Veterinary Medicine and Merck Agvet's Tracy Ward, who co-ordinated many of the parasite research trials.

Deworming has generally been aimed at the feedlot industry. Ward cites a 1989 study which showed that treating calves going into a feedlot made farmers $7 a head after the cost of the drug was covered. The economic benefits of treating yearlings is a little less dramatic, about $4.50 per head, because of the reduced time spent in the feedlot.

Deworming doesn't just benefit cattle going on feed, she says. Sixty trials with all classes of beef cattle and some dairy trials showed that treated cows averaged nine to 10 pounds more weight on each weaned calf the following year. These studies were repeated in eight trials in six locations across the country.

Trials showed that cattle treated with Ivomec gained as much as 16 kg extra on body weight. Over a number of trials, the weight gain averaged nine pounds.

Until a few years ago people assumed that internal parasites were a concern only in warm climates and Canada's cold climate prevented them from being a burden. But Ward says the worms, including the brown stomach worm, have adapted by going dormant in their larval stages when the weather turns cold. In spring, just before the traditional calving period, they become active and produce eggs which are shed in manure. These are picked up by young calves through the summer as they graze. Cows shed more eggs when they are stressed, with fecal egg counts being highest in the spring. In calves, egg counts peak in the fall.

It's better to treat cows in the fall as opposed to waiting until spring, Ward says. Losses while over-wintering are prevented and pasture contamination is reduced the following spring.

The Ontario Veterinary College's Ken Leslie says loss of productivity is a combination of two factors, the number of cattle infected and the damage caused by a particular parasite. The parasites most prevalent in Canadian cattle are the brown stomach worm, the cattle bankrupt worm or small intestinal worm, and the thin-necked intestinal worm.

The stomach worm is the most damaging because it over-winters in the animal's guts and, when dormant, is resistant to many ordinary parasite controls. It damages the stomach lining and secretory glands, impairing digestion.

The bankrupt worm impairs digestive function by damaging the small intestine and decreasing the absorption of nutrients. This affects productivity. Feed efficiency is impaired and weight gain retarded. In heavy infections, animals lose overall body condition.

The thin-necked worm may be most prevalent, but it causes little damage except in very young calves or severely stressed and debilitated animals.

Seven trials on calves raised by ivermectin-treated cows showed that weaning-weight increases ranged from 2.6 kg to 9.4 kg and averaged 4.2-kg improvement.

Ward attributes these results to the fall-treated cows carrying fewer parasites over the winter. With improved feed efficiency and increased milk production, her calves have an advantage in weight gain from birth to weaning.

And treated cows are less apt to shed eggs so calves aren't as likely to be infested during the grazing season. Replacement heifers for both beef and dairy operations, when treated in the fall, had better rates of gain and feed conversion. Furthermore, with extra weight on them, they had regular heat cycles and were ready to breed sooner.

In beef herds, heifers are ready to calve earlier and have an older, heavier calf at weaning time.

Furthermore, the critical mating weight (CMW) of heifers is achieved sooner in their life span. CMW is the average weight of a group of heifers at which 84 per cent would conceive in a 45-day mating period. Unless a replacement heifer reaches CMW between 12 and 14 months of age, she won't be mature enough to cycle on time and will be either bred late and calve late or not conceive at all. Getting replacement heifers bred during a short mating period is crucial to the long-term productivity of the beef herd.

back

Weaning advice: plan now

By Shannon Williams Special to Farm & Country

As the weaning stage in the cattle process nears, farmers should be planning, says Cheryl Russwurm, livestock adviser for the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

Although farmers see weaning as a straightforward process, a lot of time and preparation need to be taken, says Russwurm. Farmers, she says, should have a check list and go through it step by step.

Always dehorn and castrate calves three to four weeks prior to the actual weaning, while the calves are still with their mothers.

Next, young calves should be encouraged to eat a starter ration. The feed must be palatable, and "have high energy and protein content," says Russwurm. The starter ration should be highly digestible with a cereal base.

Ration sweeteners may be added to enhance the taste of the mixture. Check with local feed mills to see what's available. Abruptly removing milk from the diet may cause the calf to lose weight for a few days, after which there will be sufficient feed intake to meet the needs of the calf and growth will continue.

For older beef calves that are being weaned, the trauma may not stem from the loss of milk, but may appear when the calf is separated from its mother.

Farmers should also vaccinate calves two to three weeks prior to the actual processing of the animals. On the day of weaning, calves should be given a final booster shot. "To ensure a healthy transition, farmers are encouraged to take the cows away from the calves. This lets the calves stay in an area that is familiar and reduces the amount of stress they will encounter," says Russwurm. At this time, calves will walk the pen or yard looking for ways to get back with their mothers. "Be sure fences and gates are secure."

The best time to wean your animals is "the end of September to mid-October," says Russwurm, "and try to do it on a nice day. The less stress calves receive, the better."

While weaning, "the best thing farmers can do is weigh the calf as it comes off the cow," she says. Now is also a good time to cull out any cows that haven't produced strong, healthy-looking calves.

Putting the calves through the press several times may cause stress, and, in the long run, lose money for the farmer, she says.