WAINWRIGHT, Alta. – The Elks Hall may not seem like the place to write future agriculture policy.
Yet farmers who recently spent eight hours around scuffed tables normally used by bingo players hoped nuggets of their wisdom would be carried forward to the final policy document that will shape their futures.
“This is an opportunity to really put forward pointed messages what we need as producers,” said Bill Dobson, a farmer from nearby Paradise Valley, Alta., and president of the Wild Rose Agricultural Producers.
It’s a scenario that will be repeated 29 times in hotel banquet rooms and community halls across Canada in an effort to update the country’s agriculture policy framework. It was developed in 2001, implemented in 2003 and set to expire in 2008.
Read Also
Sugar beet harvest underway in southern Alberta
Alberta Sugar Beet Growers hosts field tour to educate the public on the intricacies of the crop, its harvest process, and contracts with Lantic Sugar
Of the 60 people at the consultation meeting in Wainwright, 22 were registered as farmers.
Neil Gorda of Willingdon, Alta., drove two hours to take part in Round 2 of the consultation process.
“Whenever government is forming policy I feel the grassroots input is very important,” he said.
“If I stay home and say nothing my opinion is not being heard.”
Gorda’s message was clear. He wanted provincial and federal officials at the meeting to know farmers need to receive more money for the grain and livestock raised on their farms.
“If we had cost of production, 90 percent of our problems would be solved.”
Most of the day-long discussion centred on a proposed vision and six themes: business risk management; innovation and science, markets and trade; renewal; food safety and quality; and environment.
However, Gorda thought the vague phrases of innovation, prosperity and opportunity didn’t address the real problems facing agriculture.
“You’ve missed the vision completely. How do we make the farm survive? That’s the issue.”
Irving Bablitz of Bruce, Alta., was also concerned the day’s discussion wouldn’t focus on the real problem facing farmers – not enough money.
“We’re being manipulated by fine phrases. It’s diluting the problem,” Bablitz said.
During the day the theme emerging from farmers was clear: when farming becomes more profitable many of its problems will disappear.
“There’s only one thing going to make this industry go ahead and do all these things: make it profitable,” said Eric Jarvis, a cattle producer from Redwater, Alta.
“The minute it becomes profitable you’ll see people come back.”
Albert Wagner, a farmer from Stony Plain, Alta., and director of the Alberta Barley Commission, believed the proposed vision did capture the possibilities for the future of agriculture.
“I don’t think it’s going to create a formula to guarantee success, but it may create an opportunity to succeed and grow.”
Wagner didn’t know how much of what farmers had to say at the Wainwright meeting would be included in the final document, but he thought it was important that governments were asking farmers for their opinions and not just relying on industry officials and bureaucrats.
“I think government is on the right track by going to consult with producers and the agriculture industry as a whole,” he said.
Bryan Perkins, a farmer from Wainwright, cast aside doubts that his day may have been better spent at home instead of offering his ideas about the future of agriculture.
“I hope this has some value, and hope it isn’t just a government pretending to consult with producers across Canada to develop something.”
The key message from Perkins was that changes are badly needed for the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program, improved market access for products within Canada or export, and changes to regulations so that they don’t dump all the costs on farmers.
“Regulations are good, but producers perhaps are carrying the costs unfairly,” said Perkins.
The need for questionable, repetitive or expensive regulations that only add more financial burden to farmers was a recurring theme throughout the day.
Food traceability, increased environmental protection and regulations on how livestock are handled and transported are important, but farmers argued that they shouldn’t be the only ones paying the costs of those regulations.
“Regulations we have now are too restrictive,” said Stewart Gilroy of the Canola Council of Canada.
“The regulations are coming faster than we can handle them, and we end up paying for them,” Gilroy said.
After listening to the day’s discussion, Levi Hofer of Silver Creek Colony in Ferintosh, Alta., said he believes even more strongly in the importance of supply management to Canadian agriculture.
“After I hear all the belly aching from beef and grain producers I feel satisfied with the way supply management operates,” said Hofer, who is a director with Alberta Turkey Producers.
“It’s an industry that’s not broke.”
Greg Strain, director of the Agri-Environmental Policy Bureau with Agriculture Canada, said it will be a “daunting task” to sift through the multitude of comments and opinions from the 29 producer meetings and mailed-in opinions.
“It’ll be really challenging to put it together and put together a cohesive policy that will work to all the industry.”
Strain said he had been communicating with a colleague who had attended a similar meeting in St. John’s, Nlfd., and was surprised by the similarity of discussion.
“I’ve been impressed with the level of discussion,” Strain said. “People are really passionate about it.”
A third round of discussion will be held this spring and Strain hopes a draft document will be ready for the federal and provincial agriculture ministers meeting this summer.
