Certification cost
I have read Mr. Popoff’s “Organic guarantee still a myth” article (WP, April 17), and felt the need to respond as chair of one of the lobby groups based in Alberta.
To place a foundation under my opinion, let me first say our farm has been certified organic for 23 years. We were organic when organic wasn’t cool.
During that period we have watched the organic industry crawl, trip and fall, take baby steps and lunge forward. Our industry has weathered criticism, refuted skeptics and all the while continuing to grow at rates and scale unparalleled in agriculture ….
Read Also
Rural emergency room closures continue to be vexing problem
Staffing issues are at the root of disruptions and closures in hospital emergency departments, both in rural and urban Canadian locations.
I openly welcome the government to enter into regulating the organic industry. My only caveat to introduction of any regulation is having a mechanism to gather input, relay information and democratically introduce changes as needed to amend problems. The Organic Federation of Canada is that mechanism.
Around the globe, other countries have created rules, enforced by governments, to give consumers confidence in the organic products they buy. We started this industry as farmers certifying farmers, and it worked well in our infancy. Now, in order to access trade in these federally regulated countries, we must also have a federal regulation for our industry to be credible.
Ultimately, we are an industry producing food in a manner demanded of us by a consumer willing to pay more. … Natural and free range (labels) operate under no regulation and are priced accordingly. If organic were deemed to mean all products are to be residual tested, that certainly could be done, but the cost would be staggering and passed on to the consumer.
Currently, we operate under rules of production practices that are verified by an independent third party inspector. Out of that process, we do offer a product that is traceable back to the producer….In all of this lies opportunity. If we are foolish enough to ignore the customer, then others will capitalize. …
– Steven Snider,
New Norway, Alta.
PST rules
We are Alberta farmers who recently advertised in the Producer and subsequently bought and picked up a tree spade in Saskatchewan.
The vendor charged us provincial sales tax and said we could apply for a refund from the Saskatchewan Department of Finance.
Not so.
According to Rob Dobson, director of Provincial Sales Tax Branch, “PST is a tax that is payable at the time of sale. However, if the purchaser arranges to have the goods delivered to a location outside the province by the vendor or by a common carrier, the sale is considered to have been completed outside the province and PST does not apply.”
That is logic we can’t grasp. Nonetheless, there is a lesson to be learned here.
– John and Mary Chalmers,
Calgary, Alta.
Can but won’t
The difference between “can’t” and “can but won’t” is why conventional farmers pay big, unpredictable dollars for buy-backs and organic farmers pay only small, pre-set amounts.
The “can’t” is illustrated in the April 3 Western Producer article “CashPlus still alive …” in which CWB spokesperson (Maureen) Fitzhenry states that the open market can’t be done under the current legislation.
This is exactly the same misinformation that Organic Special Products Group proved was wrong, forcing the Canadian Wheat Board to change from “we can’t let you out” into “we can let you out, but we won’t” and they then took the pressure of that situation off themselves with the cheap organic buy-backs.
The act does not favour organic farmers over conventional. It is CWB bureaucrats who are not treating farmers equally. The CWB is a servant of the crown, particularly regarding national licensing, which the CWB does on behalf of the government, so because the CWB can and actually does let some farmers out of the monopoly by granting licences, the Governor in Council can certainly order the board to stop arbitrarily discriminating and grant licenses to all farmers….
Either the CWB or the government can give farmers marketing choice for both wheat and barley under the present legislation. The question is: will they or won’t they? Expect no decency from the present CWB, so if you want marketing choice, you and your farm leaders need to put the pressure on (federal agriculture) minister (Gerry) Ritz and the Conservatives.
– John Husband,
Wawota, Sask.
Biofuel good
(The April 3) Western Producer published an article penned by the National Farmers Union condemning the production of biofuel. It is surprising to see the farmers union take this stand, considering the many benefits a biofuel industry would provide to agriculture and the environment.
The main thrust of the article was that biofuels require more energy to produce than they produce. While estimates on the energy efficiency of biofuels vary widely, there is recently published information that indicates the production of ethanol from corn can produce a net benefit.
In 2004, the United States Department of Agriculture published a study that pegged the energy output/input ratio at 1.67.
Similarly a 2006 study published in Science magazine that the production of ethanol used less petroleum than the production of gasoline and showed that earlier studies had ignored the value of co-products and failed to account for recent technological innovations.
The production of biodiesel from crops like canola is generally considered to be more energy efficient, since no fermentation step is required. The Science article indicated that some of the environmental effects of biofuels are as yet poorly understood, but it is difficult to imagine that the production and consumption of biofuel produces more carbon dioxide than the production of synthetic oil from oil sands projects, which is now the largest single source of petroleum products in Alberta.
Opponents of the biofuel industry are using the current rise in grain prices as fodder for their argument. However, it is likely that grain prices would have risen with or without a biofuel industry. Very few farmers were prepared to continue growing wheat or barley or canola for the prices that were received as recently as two years ago. The biofuel industry has only accelerated a trend that was already in the making.
It is said that the best cure for high prices is high prices. No doubt this is what will happen to the current grain price bubble. …
The problem that agriculture has faced since the advent of market economies is the inelasticity of demand for food. People do not eat less if food prices are high, nor do they eat more if they drop. Therefore, small changes in supply can have dramatic effects on price.
The solution is either to carefully match supply with demand or to have alternate uses for excess agricultural production.
My preference is for the second option. I would far rather produce a product that people want and people would pay for than rely on government planners to keep me afloat. I can think of no better solution to problem of excess agricultural production than biofuels.
– Terry James,
Vegreville, Alta.
Cougar kill
I say, hats off to Harvey Holloway. I feel he did the rightful thing in shooting the cougar (WP, April 10.) Sometimes common sense needs to rule.
The animal could have killed a child. This way he only lost his gun and no human life was lost. I can’t believe folks can be so blank as to think that this critter deserved to live if he was acting strange like that. I had the understanding that the cougar was a shy, timid creature. This one didn’t seem normal.
I live in the northeast of (Saskatchewan) and a couple of years ago I saw a cougar as have several others between east of Carrot River, west to Fort a la Corne and south many miles, and only a few miles north of my home, so I’m sure there’s enough of them out there to reproduce more than the one that was shot.
Sorry, Mr. Holloway, that you had to lose your gun just because you were being Mr. Nice Guy in saving human life, but then, what’s fair these days? If the animal had killed a child first, would it have been OK with the authorities?
– G. L. Hanson,
Gronlid, Sask.
