Inciting paranoia
Your editorial “Honesty a defence for farm practices,” (WP Oct. 4) seems incongruous in light of the article “Animal welfare here to stay” in the same edition of The Western Producer, which proclaims that there are animal welfare issues in the livestock industry which, to date, have not been addressed.
Instead of wasting time inciting paranoia, perhaps you should inform your readers of the issues that are of concern to the public.
The industry could then thoughtfully consider solutions.
The defensive reaction to Mr. Read’s book, especially the reluctance to expose schoolchildren to both sides of the issue, confirms that there is, indeed, a problem.
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?
– Debra Probert,
Executive Director,
Vancouver Humane Society,
Vancouver, B.C.
Bluetongue danger
I am writing in response to an article by Barry Wilson that appeared in the Aug. 23 Western Producer: “Cattle producers in agreement over freer border.”
In the article, the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association comes out as being in favour of allowing bluetongue-infected animals from the United States to come into Canada year round, putting the bluetongue-free status of the Canadian beef herd in jeopardy while attempting to sidestep yet another trade action from our U.S. counterparts.
As a cow-calf producer, I am concerned that the health status of our beef herd is being taken for granted, not only by our beef organizations such as the CCA, but by the beef producers, who have benefited over the years from being free of diseases such as bluetongue and anaplasmosis.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has worked diligently over many years to maintain our enviable herd health status, but their ability to continue to keep our herd disease-free is being eroded by a lack of political resolve at the national level.
Bluetongue virus, or as it is also called pseudo foot-and-mouth disease, is an insect-borne disease of sheep, cattle, goats and deer that poses great danger and financial losses to United States agriculture.
The disease is spread from animal to animal by biting midges commonly called no-see-ums. Bluetongue is considered a List A disease, the most serious disease classification.
To date, Canada is recognized as being free of all List A diseases. Bluetongue virus infects cattle throughout most of the southern and western United States, where in some states 50 to 80 percent of cattle test positive for BTV antibodies….
Canada has maintained its bluetongue-free status by a policy of blood testing live animals coming into Canada from the U.S., except those animals originating from bluetongue-free states such as Hawaii and Alaska.
Recently, Canada has allowed the import of live U.S. calves during the winter months when the insect responsible for spreading the disease is not present. Bluetongue antibodies are routinely found in these calves.
If Canada bows to pressure from the interest groups who are looking to ship these infected calves north in the summer months, our ability to remain free of the disease will be compromised. This political pressure is not only coming from U.S. sources but more so from Canadian feedlots who are looking to source American calves to fill newly expanded Alberta feedlots.
Canada is a trading nation and as such it is important that we maintain good trading relations with our U.S. neighbours.
However, I believe we have gone the extra mile by establishing protocols that allow for the import of U.S. calves during the winter months without blood tests. And in the summer months, a simple blood test is all that is required from those states designated as low risk for the disease.
It is hard for me to accept the American notion that bluetongue is a “trade disease” while on one hand the Americans rigorously test all live cattle imports from any nation that cannot demonstrate a bluetongue-free status while on the other hand we are asked to accept American calves year round, including the summer months, without blood tests.
Canadian producers should note that in the event that Canada were to lose its bluetongue-free status, our American counterparts could immediately insist that all live cattle moving south from Canada will need to be blood tested for bluetongue before entry.
It’s time beef producers stopped taking the health of their cattle herds for granted and realize there are threats to the health system that has maintained our enviable disease-free status for many years. Once these diseases get a hold on our herds, there is no turning back. Grassroots producers need to get their voices heard on this issue.
– Rob Somerville,
Endiang, Alta.
Ethanol potential
Having been, for many years, an outspoken advocate in favour of more production and use of ethanol in Canada, I welcome what appears to be an accelerating competition among all three of Saskatchewan’s political parties in support of ethanol manufacturing in our province.
If they follow through in a constructive manner, it signals some genuine determination to make sure that Saskatchewan gets its full share of what should be a growing new enterprise – taking advantage of new science, creating new markets for agricultural byproducts, and combating climate change by cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
This new keen interest in ethanol production also demonstrates an increasing willingness to think and act in innovative ways to help build a stronger, more diversified and value-added rural economy.
This is so important, because we cannot afford to allow ourselves to be boxed in by history or geography, politics or defeatism, or a fear of change.
To maximize ethanol’s potential, there are technical, fiscal, marketing and infrastructure challenges to overcome. We also need to perfect and apply the newest technology, which utilizes straw, chaff and other cellulose (not the grain itself) to generate the biggest environmental and economic gains.
The necessary work to deal with these issues is under way, long supported by the government of Canada.
Our federal objective is to quadruple, at least, our Canadian production and consumption of ethanol. And Saskatchewan now seems poised to seize its share of this opportunity.
But we need more. With the progressive thinking of organizations like the Saskatchewan AgriVision Corporation and the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce, we all need to work together to advance all reasonable ideas (including, but also beyond ethanol) for a broader and growing rural economy – one that is less prone to being sideswiped by circumstances beyond our control, one that extracts more value from every acre of land.
The government of Canada has been working in that direction since 1995. The positive momentum must continue to build.
– Ralph Goodale, MP
Minister of Natural Resources,
Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board,
Ottawa, Ont.
Pasture leases
An open letter to the Honourable Clay Serby, Minister of Agriculture for the Province of Saskatchewan: On Sept. 27 the Saskatchewan Party printed a News release
news directed to Clay Serby asking that the Crown land pasture lease rate formula be amended to reflect actual productivity of the land and be more responsive to drought.
While I agree that the overall formula needs to be amended to reflect the productivity of the land in the long term, something the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association has been seeking for several years, there has already been a precedent set for the immediate term.
I am now referring to the Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food 1999-2000 annual report in the section concerning crown land administration.
I quote:”Rentals were waived on 21,308 acres of land in southeastern Saskatchewan in recognition of the excess moisture that prevented seeding in the spring of 1999. This was done in accordance with normal operating procedures and is indicative of our ability to respond to this type of natural occurrence.”
I think that a lack of moisture qualifies as a “natural occurrence” every bit as disastrous as excess moisture, perhaps even more so considering that even if the rainfall next year is normal it will be many years before the pasture recovers.
Many ranchers have been unable to fully utilize their lease and in some cases have had no use at all, this being the second or third year of drought. Anyone who has received their lease notice realizes lease fees have gone up again this year. We are paying more but getting less or nothing.
The instruments are in place to measure the severe effect the drought has had on the lease land but there appears to be no will to address the problem.
Thank you for your kind attention to this urgent situation.
– Mary Jane Saville,
Chair of SSGA Zone 4,
Ravenscrag, Sask.
Positive pictures
Thank you for your wonderful pictorial celebration, Harvest 2001, in the Oct. 4 edition of The Western Producer.
Gratefulness for having the lifestyle that I have had since 1974 filled my heart. My husband and I had an enjoyable conversation about the many positives of our chosen occupation of farming and ranching.
Thank you for reminding us how fortunate we are to have a little peace in this world in turmoil.
– Bonny Voice,
Bradwell, Sask.
Get in line
A few weeks ago, I wrote about the resumption of Parliament and how as a result of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in the United States, there would be some tough decisions to be made. One of those decisions surrounds our national airline, Air Canada.
Since the attack in New York and Washington, Air Canada says, “the conditions of business travel and work have been fundamentally altered. Air Canada, like other airlines in North America, is engaged in an unprecedented struggle for its survival. Air Canada does not have the luxury of time.”
One week after the attacks, Air Canada demanded a federal government bailout of $3 to $4 billion, citing reduced travel revenues and the new costs associated with increasing security.
What Air Canada has been hesitant to reveal, however, is that they went to the federal government for financial assistance prior to Sept. 11, but won’t disclose how much they requested.
Union leaders who represent Air Canada employees believe the airline is using the tragedy as an excuse to seek the cash injection, cut jobs and reduce service.
I happen to agree. I flew Air Canada several times in the weeks prior to the attacks and service cutbacks were already evident but hadn’t been publicized….
And what about the other industries just as important to the Canadian economy who need assistance? If you took the quote from Air Canada as above and rewrote it to reflect the agriculture crisis it would sound like this: “The conditions in the agriculture sector have been fundamentally altered by international subsidies and severe drought. Agricultural producers across this country are engaged in an unprecedented struggle for survival. Farmers do not have the luxury of time.” Need I say more?
As much as I believe people across this country need access to a strong, dependable airline for domestic and international travel, I also believe we have to be responsible about any assistance.
Many businesses and industries, in fact the economy as a whole, are shaky as a result of the peace that was shattered one month ago. How do we help them?
Air Canada must present an incredibly strong case to explain why and what kind of assistance they were seeking from the federal government prior to the terrorist attacks. Until then, Air Canada should get in line.
– Carol Skelton,MP,
Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar,
Saskatoon, Sask.
CWB credit
Recently the official opposition has raised concerns regarding the government guaranteed loans taken out by the Canadian Wheat Board.
The 2001 Public Accounts of Canada state that the CWB borrowed $85 billion during the 2000-01 fiscal year (page 9.17, table 9.7, Volume I, Public Accounts of Canada: 2001).
Our concern surrounding the volume of CWB borrowings began with the publication of last year’s public accounts, which also listed CWB borrowings at over $85 billion.
Since last year’s numbers were released, we contacted the CWB’s board, the minister responsible for the CWB, the Honourable Ralph Goodale, the president of the Treasury Board, and the minister of Public Works and Government Services for an explanation of this amount.
Because we did not receive any satisfactory explanation from any of these sources, we were forced to take our concerns public.
The CWB has explained why it requires a revolving line of credit to carry out its mandate. There is no question about this need. However, this answer does not come close to explaining the volume of CWB borrowings.
Approximately every 30 days the CWB enters the international money market to renew borrowings of $7 billion to $9 billion (total of about $85 billion for the 2000-01 fiscal year).
Why does the CWB need to borrow this massive amount, especially given that its total annual sales are only about $4.5 billion? Combine this with the fact that credit sales only make up about 20 percent of annual CWB sales ($900 million) and the volume of CWB borrowings becomes even more perplexing.
Farmers and taxpayers must have honest, open, and completely transparent information from the CWB. The CWB cannot claim that these numbers are confidential, because they are already freely available.
I cannot understand why the board is being so defensive about the discussion of their borrowings. A clear explanation of the public accounting of the CWB’s borrowings would increase farmer confidence in the board and improve the relationship with our trading partners….
It is not only suitable for the official opposition to examine the figures in the Public Accounts of Canada, it is our responsibility. …
– Howard Hilstrom, MP,
Chief Agriculture Critic,
Official Opposition,
Ottawa, Ont.
