Bite the bug before you're bitten
Now's the time to ensure your farm can survive the millennium bugBy Robert Irwin
A little smug in the knowledge that you've spent the past year meticulously following all the recommendations for dealing with the year 2000 computer problem, that first coffee on Jan. 1, 2000 tastes extra-good.You have assurances from Boumatic that, like the rest of the company's equipment, your computerized milking system will perform flawlessly. Your new Pentium II PC has the latest version of Quicken for accounting. Even your VCR is, to use the jargon of your suppliers, year 2000 or "y2k" compliant.
Unfortunately, on this first day of January in the year 2000 there's no power.
Farfetched?
With 465 days to go before the dawn of a new millennium, computer hardware and software makers are scrambling to make sure their products compute after the champagne corks hit the floor. But the techies don't hold a monopoly on millennium angst. That's shared by most everyone in our computerized world - and in this province everyone from Ontario Hydro to Ontario farmers are wrestling with the problem.
Like many who provide goods and services to Ontario farmers, Hydro - like most North American utilities - still isn't sure what y2k means to the electrical grid.
According to the utility's web site, local blackouts and brownouts are more likely than a continent-wide outage, but as the clock ticks toward the millennium there are more questions than answers about the computer bug that expertsseem to agree is a $600-billion problem worldwide.
Barbara Warner, a Dalhousie University senior law student serving last summer as year 2000 co-ordinator for the Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA), says its time farmers in the U.S. and Canada began "pressuring their utilities for answers." Warner says during her research cooperation "from many companies has been excellent," while others have frustrated her efforts to get answers about farm equipment and inputs.
"Although the technical people may have been working on the problem for years, public relations isn't necessarily involved yet, so the company line isn't really known yet," she theorizes.
Rather than cataloguing information about specific companies and equipment, Warner says CFA has compiled a "beginners how-to guide, to empower farmers." It will be released next month in booklet form and available on the CFA web site.
Most commodity boards and organizations have concentrated on internal troubleshooting, but "we feel it's very important to see that producers aren't going to have any problems," says Bruce Grewar, producer relations liaison and a member of Manitoba Milk Producers seven-person year 2000 committee.
"We've approached all the dealers that supply automated feeding equipment and milking equipment to see if there's any problem with the systems they've provided, but so far we've only had two responses," he says.
Grewar reveals that Boumatic has assured the board their equipment is all y2k compliant. Alfa Laval indicated a few details still need to be worked out.
Of Manitoba's five major processors, only Saputo Foods Ltd. of Souris has provided written assurances "and has actually approached us and asked us if we are" compliant ourselves, Grewar chuckles.
Winston Isaac, OMAFRA services manager, warns suppliers who don't disclose y2k information "could be opening themselves up to litigation." Isaac has installed a y2k section on the OMAFRA web site for producers.
Lloyd Whiting, director of information services, Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO), declined to say how much y2k has cost his board, but explains the amount was minimal because most applications were rewritten in 1995 and are covered by warranty. Last month DFO published a y2k overview in its magazine.
At Ontario Pork computers are almost a dirty word these days because of serious delays in producer payments resulting from the recent installation of a new system. On the bright side, however, spokesman Keith Robbins says the fact everything is new rules out y2k problems.
Some suppliers don't reveal whether their equipment is vulnerable to the millennium bug to safeguard competitive secrets or out concern about legal liability, according to Mike Mercier, project manager y2k co-ordination and planning group, John Deere. Mercier says John Deere agricultural equipment is fully compliant because the "non- IT [information technology] chips in tractors and combines don't rely on dates."
Global positioning systems (GPS), which do rely on dates and times, don't use a traditional calendar system. Mercier says GPS date tracking depends on a military-controlled protocol that "rolled over successfully in August, 1998."
Some manufacturers have begun posting information on their corporate web sites, but Mercier confirms "we do not make any information available to the general public. John Deere disclosing how much money it's spending could trigger a competitor to step up to the plate."
He says farmers should write the company if they require written confirmation that their equipment is compliant.
Alfa Laval has had about 25 inquiries from Canadian farmers asking whether they will be able to milk cows in the new millennium, reveals marketing director Patrick Lecavalier. "All our equipment will accept the rollover," Lecavalier assures.
However, he predicts many farmers will suffer losses. "It scares me that farmers won't be prepared," Lecavalier confides.
He says Alfa Laval, which sells in about 50 countries, is "Canada's leading supplier of milking, feeding, cooling and sanitation products, with a market share of more than 45 per cent." The company has sold dairy management software for about 11 years, and Lecavalier warns customers could be at risk if the computer running the software isn't ready for the millennium.
He recommends producers check with computer manufacturers to make sure their equipment is safe. He warns farmers should not follow advice - appearing in some farm publications - that simply advocates moving the date on a computer forward to simulate the machine's performance when the millennium arrives.
"That's bad news," Lecavalier warns, because it simply makes any problem occur sooner than it had to.
The y2k issue surfaced at New Holland around May, 1997. The company supplies tractors and implements world wide.
"Each company that produces services to a farmer has an obligation, an accountability, to do an assessment and inventory of those products and services and fix them," says Charles Hershey, the company's year 2000 information consultant. New Holland expects the results of a "complete inventory," due by the end of this year, will enable the company to tell farmers whether a specific machine is likely to have difficulty with y2k.
Hi Tech Feeding Equipment, Mitchell, has supplied a variety of solid and liquid feeding systems to Ontario pig farmers. Manager Matt Ueckermann says farmers who use personal computers to manipulate information generated by the feeders could have a PC-related problem if their equipment isn't up to date.
However, Ueckermann says most hog feeders use "process computers that simply feed pigs." He has brochures on hand from manufacturers that provide y2k assurance.
Ueckermann says just to be safe he tried advancing the date to the year 2000 and found his equipment performed flawlessly.
How the bug got its bite
In hindsight, it's hard to believe anyone could be so short-sighted. But the y2k problem dates back to when programmers, faced with costly computer memory and data storage, felt compelled to conserve every byte.They decided to use just two digits to identify calendar years. So 1999 became 99 and 2000 became 00.
Although 2000 is a higher numeral than 1999, computers perceive 00 as less than 99.
Since much of a computer's activity is date driven, it's a safe bet that any machine not y2k compliant will shut down or process data improperly.
There are four areas that could be affected.
Hardware comes with a Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor (CMOS), which keeps the time and date when the computer is turned off. Hardware also contains a Basic Input/Output System (BIOS), which retrieves the time and date from the CMOS at startup and provides it to the applications and operating system (OS) when needed.
The OS or operating system is responsible for the date and time while the computer is being used. It updates the BIOS and CMOS memory when required. It also provides the information to applications.
Some applications get the date and time from the OS, while others retrieve it from the BIOS or CMOS. Applications have macros and codes that need to be y2k compliant.
The database gets information supplied by the applications. Larger operations with more than one computer frequently have the machines connected through a network. One non-compliant computer connected to a network could corrupt the database.
The problem extends beyond computers and includes so-called imbedded chips, which control machines and systems like VCRs and farm machinery.
Many computer programmers and operators have archived data for which they wanted no expiry date with the designation 9/9/99. Systems with this quirk won't make it to the millennium - they'll begin malfunctioning Sept. 9, 1999.
It's not too late
There are still steps farmers can take to avoid losses caused by the computer millennium bug. Farm & Country's web siteThere are also good resources on the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) web site www.agr.ca/policy/y2k/
Next month the CFA will release a booklet outlining the results of its survey of suppliers and specific advice on how to make your farm y2k compliant. The information will be posted on CFA's web site www.cfa-fca.ca
OMAFRA, AAFC and CFA say the first step is to complete an inventory of hardware and software. It's also important to identify equipment, systems, documentation or software that could rely on a date.
The OMAFRA checklist suggests conducting "a risk assessment to determine which services, production equipment or other farm implements must be upgraded first, and which can be upgraded at a later date - even after 2000.
It's important to insist vendors and suppliers provide a written commitment about specific equipment and assurance of their willingness to underwrite any remedies. One goal should be to clear up any ambiguity about who is responsible in the event of a y2k problem.
The year 2000 problem could rob farmers' income, but it will almost certainly fill lawyers' pockets. "If the number of disputes arise that we are anticipating, the system will become so bloody jammed that we won't be able to get anywhere," predicts lawyer Norman Fera of Lang Michener, Ottawa.
Fera, one of a small group of Canadian lawyers specializing in computer issues, warns obligations of producer-supplier relationships are not spelled out in writing, increasing the likelihood of y2k litigation.
"When the problem arises you're going to immediately look around and say who is responsible for this," Fera anticipates. And exactly who is responsible?
"We don't have court cases and precedents to tell you yet," he says.
Farmers should gather up their contracts, invoices and sales brochures - they could help determine the terms equipment was purchased under. Fera says the question of who is responsible could hinge on whether a farmer detailed his needs and asked a supplier to fill them.
"Just because a contract is oral doesn't mean it can't be enforced," he says.
Fera says in Canada "we're not at the point where the floodgates on the lawsuits have opened up yet." However he notes a few large corporations have gotten the ball rolling in the United States.
In one U.S. case, an apparel manufacturer is suing a consulting firm over a 10-year-old computer system expected to malfunction in 2000.
Large corporations are suing first, because they are simply
further ahead
than farmers and small business in trying to avoid the problem.
But small
entrepreneurs are feeling heat from large corporations as lenders
and
insurers have begun turning down businesses that haven't
addressed y2k.
back