Feed ingredients
I don’t agree with the concept that meat and bone meal from ruminant animals should not be banned from all livestock and poultry feeds. Canada’s cattle industry has been totally devastated by one case of BSE. Do Canadian hog and poultry producers think their industries are immune to a similar disaster? One disease outbreak in the hog or poultry industry linked to meat or bone meal byproducts could totally destroy either industry on the world markets.
Livestock and poultry producers now live under the world’s microscope in the 21st century. The rules of meat production are changing – traceability from the supermarket to the farm or feedlot is no longer an option. Ultimately, consumers will demand a paper trail for every animal or bird slaughtered.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
Records that account for every segment of production will be demanded of producers. Accountability for feeds and medications will be a necessity, not an option to be ignored. Educated consumers are demanding answers about the safety of Canadian meat production with each new disease outbreak. Maybe it’s time we totally banned meat and bone meal additives to all livestock and poultry feeds before we have another BSE-style crisis in the hog and poultry industries.
– Wilfred Ross,
Kenville, Man.
Strange twist
The recent announcement by Rob Meijer of Cargill Foods, that Cargill will no longer accept American-owned cattle is a strange twist to this huge problem in Canada’s cattle industry that will hurt cattle producers even more.
Without American investment in feeder cattle, this fall, if the border does not open by fall run time, calves and yearlings will be much cheaper and the packing industry will be the beneficiary, as they continue to purchase cheap feeders and get a larger control of the Canadian cattle industry.
The packing industry is currently making approximately $500 per head on every animal processed and using this profit to purchase cheap feeders. These are the same people that get huge government subsidies on cattle that did not lose money.
How can Rob Meijer say “we need to make sure our producers are looked after,” when Cargill is making $500 on every animal processed?
Using Americans as scapegoats for the BSE problem will not solve anything and may stall further the movement of Canadian cattle.
I sympathize with the frustrations cattle producers are going through, but the tactics being used are not the answer.
– Lloyd DeBruycker,
Dutton, Montana
Heinz boycott
Lawrence Gurek has it wrong when he suggests boycotting Wal-Mart would have a negative effect on the U.S. economy thereby forcing them to open the borders to live cattle. What might get their attention would be to ask your local grocer and Wal-Mart managers to boycott all Heinz products. Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry would like to keep the borders closed indefinitely. His wife is heir to the Heinz fortune.
Being mad at Cargill because greedy unions caused the collapse of most of the packing plants in Canada is equally asinine.
You might also try reminding the Prime Minister to use some decorum when speaking about our closest neighbour and largest trading partner. His speeches in France showed him to not be a lot better than his predecessor.
– Eleanor Roth,
Dewberry, Alta.
Beef anger
Open letter to western beef farmers:
I must live in a different country other than Canada. It seems for almost two years now I keep reading about cattle farmers in the West, that are either going under, or have gone under due to the BSE outbreak. There is an overload of cattle ready for market and nowhere to send them.
As an average grocery shopper here in Ontario, I would like (to) yell the call “where’s the beef.” …
I’ve been looking in the steak counter every week here on a regular basis, and just refuse to put out what they are asking to buy one piece of meat for the barbecue. I literally hate the middle- man (packers) in this process. They can use every excuse they want in the book, but someone in that organization is pocketing one hell of a pile of money.
As far as I’m concerned, the farmer is held in a blackmail situation and the consumer in the East is left paying for a product that has now become a treat for anyone’s dinner table.
Why hasn’t the government come down on this situation and done something about it? If the Yanks don’t want your beef, there has to be enough others here in the eastern provinces that sure wouldn’t mind trying it, sold at a fair price. The entire story makes me feel that I don’t even live here in Canada. I feel so bad about the farm situation in the West. If it isn’t the drought, it then moves into BSE. But we here in the East do care as distant as what you feel we may be. Why can’t the western farmers organize and create their own packers and set beef prices that the average Easterner can afford to buy? Surely to God, our government isn’t that stupid as to see who’s getting the dollar, and how things are being run. …
– Patricia Morris,
Hanover, Ont.
Dam unnecessary
It was with disappointment and sadness that I read in The Producer of July 22, 2004 that there is a campaign promoting construction of a dam on the North Saskatchewan River near North Battleford. Although there was no specific statement that the major purpose of the dam being promoted is, or will be, to provide water for irrigation.
There was an item in the same issue of the Producer about a recent water-needs conference in Lethbridge. The reference to Dr. Sandra Postel’s comments was very brief. A couple of decades ago, in Lethbridge, Dr. Postel said that about 25 percent of all ever irrigated land globally is now either significantly deteriorated or no longer cropped due to salinization or water logging. About 25 percent of the irrigated area in Alberta’s major irrigated areas was significantly deteriorated due to either salinity or water logging. At that time that fact was known, but not publicized. …
However, in my opinion, the major cause of usually modest success of irrigation farming in Saskatchewan has been the fact that the government of Saskatchewan just could not subsidize irrigation in the lavish way the government of Alberta has subsidized irrigation. Massive subsidization of irrigation continues in Alberta unabated and unknown to most Albertans.
The government of Alberta has released various figures publicizing the economic importance of irrigation in Alberta. The example in the Producer article stated “In Alberta four percent of the agricultural land base is irrigated but is responsible for 20 percent of the province’s output.” However, more of the cattle in feedlots in the irrigated areas were reared to about half market weight on non-irrigated lands. Moreover most of the grain fed to the animals in those feedlots was produced on non-irrigated lands….
The farmers misled into trying irrigation farming and public treasuries bear most of the costs of uneconomic irrigation projects. The firms that design such projects seldom overestimate the costs and of course when large amounts of money have been poured into an irrigation project, public treasuries cannot afford to abandon a project. The Oldman River Dam project in Alberta was commenced on contracts totalling less than $400 million. The actual cost was about 50 percent higher than in the original contracts.
There are many other interests that profit from irrigation projects. Businesses in local towns or cities benefit; so do machinery companies (locally and globally) and there is employment for many workers. Towns or cities can afford new amenities.
Without continuing subsidies from public treasuries farmers, their communities and ordinary citizens have to foot the bill for unwise irrigation projects.
I hope the proposed North Battleford Dam project will not go forward without assurance of its success and without continuing subsidization.
– C. F. Bentley,
Edmonton, Alta.
Harper near-victory
… You most certainly are aware that 39.1 percent of the Canadian electorate did not vote. Why not? Who are these people? I can partially answer both questions.
When I sincerely tried to sell memberships on behalf of the new Conservatives I failed completely. Now, I may not be the world’s most successful salesman, but I do know that under normal circumstances I would have found a few subscribers.
In every instance – I estimate that I approached some three dozen potential members – this was the response:
A. Mine (western vote) does not count anyway.
B. You can’t tell them apart when they get down there (meaning Ottawa).
C. They’re all a passle of crooks and liars and thieves who do not do what their constit- uents want or need.
D. I won’t buy a membership, but if I vote I will vote
Conservative.
Check the dictionary for the definition of the word cynicism and who may these 39.1 percent of the electorate be? We all know them by the dozens …
… It is time for a “This I believe” and “This I/we will do” platform and policy. I commend the Liberal strategists on their (this time) victory, but even they were running scared this time. Why else did the newly coronated PM, Paul Martin, spend the last three days begging for socialist NDP support?
The counter to the above? Simple. Tell the truth. Do not back down from the attack(er). Be honestly conservative.
– Raymond W. Toews,
Glaslyn, Sask.
Trudeau salute
I greeted Ag Canada’s announcement that they would not be continuing to fund research with Monsanto into developing Roundup Ready wheat, with disgust. …
… Under the matching grants policy, Ag Canada puts up money to fund a research project and the companies are supposed to put up equal funds in money or staff or whatever. With the Roundup Ready wheat, at the end of the project, Monsanto walks away with a product they can charge technology fees worth millions of dollars. Ag Canada and the taxpayers of Canada, even though they funded half the costs, get nothing. To me, that is misuse of taxpayers’ money.
Then we have the secret confidential agreement. When Ag Canada and Monsanto agreed to joint funding to develop Roundup Ready wheat, they signed a secret agreement that terms and conditions would not be made public. Whoa here! What is Ag Canada doing taking taxpayers’ money and signing secret agreements? This should not happen. This is public money and taxpayers have the right to know what they are receiving for their tax money.
And then there is the conflict of interest. Ag Canada is the joint developer of Roundup Ready wheat. Then, who is the regulator that is responsible to license this variety that is to be used in Canada? Well, it’s Ag Canada. How impartial are you to judge whether to license this variety or not if you also have spent money developing the variety? This is a direct and outright conflict of interest. You cannot be the developer and regulator too.
Ag Canada does a lot of good things but in this you need the Trudeau salute. Not your finest hour.
– Victor Hult,
Waseca, Sask.
