Attention hunters
This is how Saskatchewan Environment treats the people that raise the province’s elk.
In the winter of 2006-2007, the elk came into my hay. Saskatchewan Crop Insurance pays around $.01 per pound for the hay the big game eat, then only paid me for 80 percent of the loss.
Do I now own 20 percent of the elk that I fed? Standing hay in this area also sells for $.01 to $.02 per pound. I guess I have to put the hay up for nothing.
Read Also
Worrisome drop in grain prices
Prices had been softening for most of the previous month, but heading into the Labour Day long weekend, the price drops were startling.
In the spring of 2007, a conservation officer told me that they will not be feeding the elk this coming winter at the feeding station 2.5 miles away.
I then applied for a hay fence and was denied. I built my own fence at a cost of $4,000. In the spring of 2008, I was told that I was approved to build my fence, so I sent my bills in, but because they were dated 2007, they would not pay.
In the winter of 2007-08, I had elk eating with my livestock.
On any given morning in January or February, I could show you around 100 elk within one mile of my yard.
Saskatchewan Environment used to rent hay for a share on hunter-owned wildlife land.
Now they sell it standing. Their share had to be placed at their feeding station, and they hired someone to feed it out during the winter.
Now I guess that it is cheaper for me to feed the elk for nothing.
– Keith Galbraith,
Endeavour, Sask.
Horse slaughter
In regards to the last Open Forum letter by Silvia Altvater (July 17th WP) concerning horse slaughter.
I, as an employee at a provincially inspected meat plant, can sympathize with the employee caught on video stunning a horse. Although I have never and hope never to have to kill a horse, if it was me, I, too, would be uptight and nervous, knowing I soon would be on video for all to see and criticize.
First, if CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) went in and audited the plant and found nothing noteworthy to criticize, I would say it has to be pretty good because I know first-hand how picky they are with inspection.
I do not mean to criticize anybody, but one thing, if you don’t mind my repeating it, went like this “they (horses) are a lifetime commitment, like a child.”
It concerns me when I realize that some people truly do think of horses as being almost equal with people.
A horse does not know what is coming when they are brought to a slaughterhouse.
All they know is that something out of the ordinary is happening.
Also the difference in stress between euthanizing and stunning is very minimal.
One last parting thought: if slaughter is banned in this beautiful country of ours, what will become of all these horses?
Will they be shipped to Mexico on double decker trailers where the inspection and humane level is only half of what we have here, by people who find a way around anything?
Will they be neglected? Will we, as Canadians, be overrun by these horses?
As long as it is done properly (as I believe it is) I see nothing wrong with it.
– Kevin Janzen,
Kenabeek, Ont.
Horse care
In regards to the slaughter of horses, these animals may be our friends for pleasure either riding or driving them.
But the time comes when they grow old, it’s far better for these animals to be put down humanely rather than die from not being cared for.
These animals don’t deserve to be abandoned to starve to death.
We have to realize that these animals are used for food. Why aren’t more countries using horsemeat to feed their starving people?
We raise draft, light and miniature horses and we care very much for ours. But (when) the time comes, if you have ever put an animal down whether a horse, cattle, dog or cat, it’s very hard to do.
Maybe these tree huggers should take a deep breath and stop and think what they’re doing by forcing the government to close the slaughter plants, but maybe governments should be a little more aggressive and not fall into the animal activists’ arms.
If the cattleman doesn’t look out, the cattle will be next.
These animals are not pets, they are large animals. I call a pet an animal that can be in the house and held on your lap.
It’s no different taking our (human) loved ones to the crematorium and scattering their ashes or leaving them at the cemetery after the funeral.
– Elaine Cozart,
Brownlee, Sask.
They’re animals
Regarding Silvia Altvater’s letter in the July 17th edition concerning horse slaughter plants.
I am a 15-year-old farm girl. I agree with you that there are more humane ways of slaughtering horses then shown on the CBC’s National in June, but that was one slaughterhouse in the whole country.
It was originally intended to be used as a cattle plant not for horses.
Twyla Francois’ efforts to shut all slaughterhouses is unthinkable.
I own horses and I know they are beautiful animals, but that’s just it, horses are animals – not children.
I understand you feel an obligation to be seen as a hero for all animals, but if you were to close all slaughterhouses hundreds of people would be without a job. And I, for one, think people’s rights come before horses’.
By the way, anyone who has ever met a meat buyer knows they are not cruel or evil people, they are just making a living doing something different than you do.
Also ranchers and farmers are businessmen and just like any other business if a product no longer makes a profit for the business that product would be discontinued.
If horses no longer made a profit for ranch and farm families what would be the use of raising them? And those bleeding hearts who think that closing slaughterhouses is going to save the species are sadly mistaken.
They are pushing the species closer to extinction.
And as we all know people who raise animals not lease them are the ones who actually keep the species alive.
– Kalista Jack,
Rama, Sask.
Special favours
Stewart Wells attacks the Prime Minister for trying to give every farmer in Western Canada the freedom to decide how we market our grain. I suppose none of us should be surprised at the ferocity of his attack.
As an organic farmer, Mr. Wells gets preferential treatment from the CWB. While the rest of us are faced with exorbitantly high buybacks, Mr. Wells is among the two percent of prairie farmers who can buy back their wheat for less than 10 cents per bushel.
Mr. Wells is a typical socialist. Force everyone into your collectivist scheme and then make sure the strongest supporters of that scheme are granted special favours.
Mr. Wells, instead of attacking the Prime Minister, perhaps you should save some of your venom for those CWB directors who bestow favours on the “chosen few” at the expense of the rest of us.
– Stephen Vandervalk,
Alberta vice-president,
Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association,
Fort Macleod, Alta.
Encouraging news
Some important and encouraging news articles in the June 26th edition of the WP:
1) Remarks following a court hearing regarding a gag order imposed by the Conservative minority government on the Canadian Wheat Board – that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative caucus ought not to act like Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe in suppressing dissent and opposition. How ironic that now the Harper government wants to impose sanctions against Zimbabwe for conducting a questionable and undemocratic election. Was the CWB barley vote a credible and democratic vote?
2) Curt Vosson, President of James Richardson, talking common sense about the ethanol debate: “It makes no sense to use the quality wheat that we grow in Western Canada as the feedstock for an ethanol industry … If we really need ethanol we should buy it from Brazil.” Exactly what many of us believe.
– Frank Orosz,
Creston, B.C.
