FUTURE FORECAST
I am very surprised that federal minister of agriculture Gerry Ritz felt the need to take time from his busy schedule and reply to my letter (WP July 31).
It must be obvious, even to him, that so-called “marketing freedom” is not delivering for farmers, and he needs to keep the propaganda machine turning out positive spins.
At least 99 percent of people in Canada do not know what “marketing freedom” is and don’t give a damn about it, but the flagship of the Conservative ideology must be protected/saved.
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?
Last election, only 24 percent of eligible voters voted for the (prime minister Stephen) Harper government, and at that time there wasn’t any alternative. This time, voters have good alternatives and the Tories will have to work hard to get peoples’ respect back. With the popular Conservative vote falling by 15 percent in Saskatchewan, they have a long way to go.
Ritz accuses me of living in the past, but I do look back in history and also try to forecast the future. In this open market system, it is easy to see what will happen to producers, as we only have to observe the American farmer who operates in an “open market.”
U.S. producers have to depend on the U.S. government for subsidies to cover their income shortfalls from the “open market” since marketing freedom in the U.S. only produces a one-in-10 year history where producers actually make any money.
It’s too bad Mr. Ritz did not have the foresight to investigate the American situation before destroying the farmers’ single desk at the now defunct CWB.
I predict Gerry Ritz will have a new job after the next federal election, building mailboxes for Canadian producers who will not get enough income from the “private market” and will have to depend on Canadian taxpayers to subsidize their income, just as producers in the U.S.A.
Eric Sagan,
Melville, Sask.
HUMAN FOLLY
It has been quite a few years since certain people, and certain scientists, decided the humble cow was responsible for greenhouse gases and too much water intake.
If these people were to read the journals of the early explorers — or should that be exploiters? — they would learn that they estimated the bison, which spread across the Great Plains, to be in the millions. They must have created a lot of gas; they must have consumed a lot of water.
Was there global warming caused by these animals, which must have numbered far more than the entire cattle herds of Canada and the U.S.A. at the height of the once numerous cattle herds? Were the bison blamed for drinking too much water?
A little hoof-note here: cattle urine is tremendously beneficial to the land, more so than manure.
I do not dispute whether these particular scientists are correct in saying it takes a lot of water to create a pound of beef; someone else can do that.
What I will do is mention a few things about human use of water.
I have seen women toss a dead fly into the toilet, then flush it.
When people shower at bedtime, why do they take another shower in the morning?
When people cut their lawns too short, which they usually do, they soon see browning and immediately turn on the water, even leaving it on for so long that the water runs down the street.
Then the golf courses: mowed and mowed, then watered and watered and watered.
Just a few years ago, the people in charge of public money used at a new health facility in our region allowed a so-called landscaper to install a computerized watering system, which erupted every few hours, even when it was raining. One outlet was stuck and never stopped running and soon had a miniature canyon going.
When some of us complained, we were told it was computerized and couldn’t be shut off. The new grounds manager agreed with us and shut nearly all the system off. All that was really needed was some lengths of garden hose and some sprinklers when needed.
When it comes to washing vehicles, I usually employ a bucket and sponge. On the rare occasions that I go to a car wash, I see car after car going through with only a film of dust on them. A bucket and a sponge would do the job, no need for barrels of water to be used. Many of these people take their car to the car wash every week.
And what about the huge amount of water used, gone forever, to get one barrel of oil out of the ground? These scientists do not attack Big Oil.
I do not ignore the fact that cattle can cause harm: witness cases in usually overgrazed pastures where dugouts or dams and creeks are not fenced and the cattle not watered away from the water source.
There we see trampled, manure-covered water edges, ruined creek banks. Is this pollution and degradation the fault of the cattle?
I did not stay in to listen to a scientist on CBC radio today, Aug. 12, going on about how we can save the world by eating less beef. I went out to save the world by killing weeds.
It is just one more example of the urbanization of thought, and as the city population grows and the farming/ranching population shrinks, it shall just get worse and more prevalent.
The cause of global warming and of water shortages is humans, including scientists.
C. D. Pike,
Waseca, Sask.
ANOTHER BOONDOGGLE
(Agriculture minister) Gerry Ritz and (prime minister) Stephen Harper have fallen for the organic ruse again, hook, line and sinker. (Sean Pratt, “Feds invest in organic research” WP online Aug. 13)
A whopping three-quarters of all the organic food sold in Canada is imported from countries with lax environmental standards like China, Mexico and Argentina. And, according to the CBC, half of this food tests positive for prohibited pesticides, a direct result of the fact that there is no field-testing under Canada’s organic standards. It’s a complete free-for-all, just as Dr. Patrick Moore and I described in our full report on the Canadian organic sector for the Frontier Centre.
The lion’s share of this $8.5 million subsidy will be funneled into political activism against the science of genetic engineering, a field of science which has been made into the avowed enemy of organic activists in spite of (former U.S.) president (Billl) Clinton’s attempts to get organic stakeholders to allow GMO crops into organic production on a case-by-case basis.
As Dr. Moore and I stress in our report, America does require field-testing of organic crops to ensure they’re genuine and safe. Canada does not.
And since Canada is America’s largest trading partner in agricultural products, we urge Canadian authorities to bring Canada’s organic standards into the 21st century by rewriting them, eliminating all the useless record-keeping and record-checking and replacing it with once-annual, unannounced field testing.
Sadly, none of this money will go toward the testing of organic crops to ensure they’re safe and genuine. None. And very little will go toward actual research into organic production.
What little does go toward crop breeding and reducing tillage on organic farms will be wasted by politically connected academics who will, as always, reiterate the things organic farmers already know.
None of this money — repeat, none — will go to actual Canadian organic farmers who are being squeezed right now out of their own market by phony, cheap CFIA-certified organic products from abroad. And this is because the organic industry in Canada uses an elaborate royalty-fee structure through which any money that does go to an organic farmer ends up being paid to his certifier in the form of a franchise fee.
That’s right, private and not-for-profit agencies that are supposed to keep an eye on organic farms on behalf of the CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) receive royalty payments on each bushel of crop sold by these same organic farmers, even if they’re in China.
In other words, if an organic certifier discovers what might be fraud, they have no incentive to pursue an investigation because it will only result in the loss of that royalty payment.
So much for helping Canadian farmers.
Mischa Popoff, former USDA
contract organic inspector
Osoyoos, B.C.
