Cowboy Logic
To the Editor:
I was shocked to read a letter from another reader, Juanita A. Polegi, downgrading Ryan Taylor’s “Cowboy Logic”column, saying he was using undue violence in his ranching practice.
Everyone has their own style, thank you! And a rancher may choose his if he likes.
If the cow required a two-by-four, then a point was being made, i.e. some cows are stubborn SOBs and require a little of their own medication.
I support Mr. Taylor all the way and always find “Cowboy Logic” funny and right in tune with real life.
Read Also
Crop insurance’s ability to help producers has its limitations
Farmers enrolled in crop insurance can do just as well financially when they have a horrible crop or no crop at all, compared to when they have a below average crop
Furthermore, I encourage him to keep it up and not to change just because of some tender-footed whatever. Looking forward to the next “Cowboy Logic” column.
– Beaulah Mahan,
Dapp, Alta.
CWB scores?
To the Editor:
Another “Home Run” in support of the Canadian Wheat Board – Elwin Hermanson, a non-supporter of the CWB, was defeated in the recent Federal election. Ralph Goodale, a strong supporter of the CWB, won his seat.
Democracy with co-operation does work.
– Victor Murray,
Watrous, Sask.
Megabarns
To the Editor:
I am writing in reply to a Letter to the Editor in the June 26 edition of The Western Producer titled “Bear Hills hogs” by Mr. Murray Anderson of Biggar, Sask.
It is most refreshing and reassuring to once again be told about the misconceptions regarding the strict ILO regulations developed by Saskatchewan Ag and Food in 1996.
These new regulations are laced with weasel words such as should be, perhaps, it is recommended, etc., etc., etc.
Mr. Anderson, if you have access to the old regulations, you would no doubt see how the new ones are seemingly compliant to the large producers and disregard the rights of individuals in the areas that these mega-projects decide to bombard.
It seems that the large producers are encountering fierce opposition in some of the southern States where these mega hog factories have been operating for 10 to 20 years.
They are now starting to realize the serious consequences that have surfaced.
A two-year study was done by three universities in the south with a full complement of people with PhDs, dealing with issues concerning water and air pollution, physical and mental health problems of both area residents and barn employees, quality of life, and misrepresented economics.
Needless to say, they have brought forward some very disturbing information.
One must ask “why are these mega operations suddenly so good for Saskatchewan?”
Is it because of cheap feed grain, fresh clean air and water, large expanses of land, lower taxes, little or non-existent regulations, or all of the above?
Can we not take the advice of others and learn from their mistakes?
We are always hearing about the cutting-edge technology that Saskatchewan claims to possess.
For example a large hole in the ground filled with manure is what experts call a state-of-the-art lagoon.
The effluent can then be transferred to snow-covered fields, despite promises that this never happens, and you may get the smell of money once in a great while, yet people living in a three-quarter to three-mile radius state most times the odor is unbearable.
If anyone finds they can no longer tolerate the stench, an appointed board can tell them that this is only a nuisance and is considered a normal farming practice …
Any information we have received from people living with these barns state that they destroy community spirit and in many cases tear family and friends apart.
Perhaps Heartland could, as you say, lead the way and ask for stricter regulations and environmental protection on each barn site.
This would go a long way in proving their sincerity in a community. In conclusion, it seems that no environmental impact studies have ever been done in Saskatchewan for these hog factories …
– Peter Patrick,
Kelvington, Sask.
Political flux
THE FRINGE
by Keith Dryden
Right-wing politicians are dreaming dreams about bringing together the Progressive Conservative and Reform parties into one juggernaut that would sweep all before it. The question I haven’t heard addressed is: which will swallow which?
Or will they diplomatically become the Reformed Progressive Conservative Party of Canada Unlimited and thus avoid anything gustatory?
The history of political movements suggests that if a union does take place there will still be a lot of jugs who won’t join the juggernaut.
The Reform Party came together because its founders were not satisfied with the establishment. The founders came from the Conservatives and Social Credit, as well as some dissident Liberals and NDP.
Reform is still in the process of flux. There will be more Jan Browns who become disenchanted with the Preston Manning establishment, once they discover that their ideals are not at the top of the priority heap.
Perhaps some of the new Maritime PCs will become restive in dealing with the Tory Blue Machine centered in Toronto. Since the Maritimers are looking for more government involvement, not less, they aren’t likely to look to Reform.
Will the PCs go the way of the now weak but once-powerful British Liberal Party, or will Reform sputter out as the Progressives did 70 years ago? Then again, we may go the route of France and Italy and have political movements for every conceivable interest group, including dog and cat lovers.
The next four years should be among the most interesting in Canada’s political history.
