Held captive; Problem dog; Bankable?; Outcry unjustified; Less class
Held captive
Dear holders of my key: I am a captive western Canadian farmer, mother of a third generation farmer, and a hostage all of my life to date, like my father before me, of the Canadian Wheat Board marketing jurisdiction imposed as a war measures act upon farmers of Western Canada for 56 years.
Some defend the CWB for reasons that escape logic.
If the government of Canada is willing to allow western farmers to be captives of the CWB marketing system, at the very least make the thing accountable and of some value to hostages in the West.
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.
At $1 a bushel less, it is $525 million, or revenue loss of half a billion. Most figure the CWB loses us $2 per bu., which is $1 billion.
At least make the system accountable.
– Vicki Dutton,
Paynton, Sask.
Problem dog
Re: “Stray dog causes havoc among Island sheep flocks,” (WP May 14).
My 10 years experience protecting sheep and lambs from predators, and six years experience dealing with homeless and abandoned pets, including “rez dogs,” compels me to comment on this situation.
I do not understand the overpowering urge to save this dog. What is the point of assessing a dog like Duke? You already know his problem: lack of proper socialization.
If this dog had been properly socialized as a pup, you would be able to catch him. If you cannot get near a dog and have to trap it to catch it, that is an undersocialized dog. In other words, a fear biter in the making.
How can you reach the conclusion that he “wants to be a big lap dog” when you can’t even get near him?
Why is there such a high value placed on all dogs in society, to the point where that one dog matters more than the 30 sheep it killed? What about all the lambs they would have had for those producers?
And even if the dog is responsible for “only 10 killings,” does that make it all right? Even just one kill was too many.
If you do catch him and “rehabilitate” him, what then? Someone will step up to adopt Duke just because he’s the famous Duke, and a shelter dog will sit unadopted in its cage.
So what would I do if I were in that position? If I trapped him, I’d take him to the vet for euthanasia. If he attacked my sheep, I’d shoot him.
One of the hardest lessons you have to learn in animal rescue is that you really can’t save them all.
This is not a dog problem, it’s a people problem. Until people realize you cannot abandon an animal to fend for itself, these kinds of incidents will continue to happen.
Much as you feel sorry for the dog, he does not matter more than the sheep, particularly since he will continue to kill until he’s stopped.
– Lorri Nelson,
Meadow Lake, Sask.
Bankable?
AgriStability is the most bankable farm program ever. For 2007, so far only 16 percent of farmers are getting any help at all. It would seem that 84 percent of farmers are just raking in the cash even though I can’t figure out just where they are.
For many years, our farm margin was approximately $80,000 per year but since 2003 that has eroded and we are being directly blamed for that. For 2007, somehow they said our expected margin was $16,000 and that is having calved out 140 cows and 604 acres of cropland, plus pasture acres on top. …
Now for the 2008 tax year they say $13,000 is our margin even though we added cows and calves and crop. Why are there any farmers in Canada if that is what they are supposed to expect to receive? I figure if all these staff that are being paid to process these gruesome AgriStability forms were laid off and the wages were divided among all farmers, everyone would be way further ahead. Oil companies working is the only reason we stay afloat, and now we don’t even have that.
– Brenda Brown,
Innisfail, Alta.
Outcry unjustified
The Alberta government’s tabling of Bill 43, which proposes to convert the mandatory beef check-off levy to a refundable one, has caused some controversy.
When you read the proposed legislation, however, there seems little to justify the outcry. It is a simple change that will allow producers the choice on whether their levy deductions continue to fund the Alberta Beef Producers as their lobbying organization.
Producers now have the option to support alternate farm organizations whose policies are more closely aligned with their own views or indeed withdraw the funds and put them to a different use altogether.
What could be more democratic than letting producers decide who should represent them?
Since the agriculture minister announced this bill on April 28, there has been a vociferous campaign by ABP to defeat the bill with claims that it is a totally undemocratic move and that producers now have no voice.
I would suggest the truth is rather the opposite. In recent years there have been calls from beef producers in every corner of the province to axe the automatic levy funding of ABP because that organization does not adequately represent their interests.
ABP as an organization is viewed by many producers as being undemocratic and run from the top down in an almost dictatorial fashion….
If ABP represents producer interests adequately, their continued funding will not be an issue, as Bill 43 introduces an element of accountability to ABP and this is seemingly what they don’t like. …
As a producer that has long called for a change to the levy structure of ABP, I am appalled by the antics of the organization in recent days.
The advertising campaign launched to oppose this bill has likely cost several hundred thousand dollars already, money contributed by all levy paying producers whether they support or oppose the ABP campaign.
I want the right to direct my levy money to an organization that better represents my interests and beliefs but have been denied that right repeatedly by ABP.
When the agriculture minister moved to allow producers like me the freedom to choose who to fund, the ABP decided to spend my levy money running an ad campaign against that decision. Where is the democracy in that?
The central tactic of the advertising campaign has been an attempt to portray Bill 43 as a feedlot sector takeover of a cow-calf organization, thus creating further division among producers. Does that sound like an organization that is making a good job of representing all beef producers?
To rub salt in the wound, the ABP are now claiming they wanted a producer plebiscite on the issue.
How ironic that when producers tried hard over the last three years, using the democratic process, to have a plebiscite held, it was opposed at every turn by ABP leadership….
I applaud (agriculture) minister (George) Groeneveld’s tabling of Bill 43. Based on recent history and the current actions of ABP, it appears to have been a sound decision.
– Iain Aitken,
Rimbey, Alta.
Less class
Not too many years ago our would-be MPs and MLAs displayed a certain amount of class, integrity and pride. They were prepared to go forth and meet all their constituents, often accompanied by the leaders of their parties, at numerous town halls.
Today they rely on TV, radio and the internet. These 60 second blurbs fall into the same category as Viagra, Molson and L’Oreal – highlight what they want the electorate to buy into with no opportunity to question, no list of side effects and no solutions to current or future issues.
Now attack ads, a direct import from the Bush era. What an insult to the majority of Canadian voter intelligence.
Those who are so prone to indulge in attack ads consider themselves among the elite and ordinary Canadians as having a mental capacity hovering at kindergarten levels.
– Joan Adams,
Alsask, Sask.
