Ticks, parasites, fungi and other pests could become more common in Western Canada, if climate change forecasts bear out.

Last year went into the record books as the warmest year ever, and now NASA’s mid-year climate analysis for 2016 says it has been the warmest since weather records began in 1880. The planet has been 1.3 C warmer so far this year.

This change can affect ecosystems and the ability of pests to thrive and spread, said Kim Ominski of the faculty of agriculture and food science at the University of Manitoba.

“It may require increased vigilance on our part and maybe new vaccination strategies,” she said at the Canadian beef industry conference held in Calgary Aug. 9-11.

Weeds, fungi, insects and bacteria may be able to overwinter and reproduce faster during warmer summers.

Anaplasmosis, which affects the red blood cells of ruminants, is spread by a bacteria via ticks. The American dog tick seems to be spreading into new territory, while the Rocky Mountain tick has stayed in its environment.

However, if these species spread farther, there could be a greater risk of anaplasmosis in new regions of the country.

Anthrax is caused by bacteria, and spores can exist in the soil for up to 200 years. Outbreaks occur when the spores have risen to the surface during extreme events like flood or drought.

Liver flukes have increased in wetter conditions. Snails carry the problem and are transferred from the pasture to the animal. They can cause a black tracking appearance in the liver and the organ is condemned.

A recently published paper from Felicia Wu of Michigan State University also found climate change induced mycotoxins could in-crease and pose an economic risk to crops.

Western Canadians have learned to manage through climate variability and extreme events.

“That vast variability really masks those specific trends that we see,” she said.

Prairie winters have warmed by 2 to 2.5 C since 1950. In the future, there could be less snow and a longer frost-free period from spring to autumn.

Precipitation is highly variable across the Prairies. Many areas of Western Canada are often dry but can also experience major floods over large agriculture areas.

The annual temperature increase is likely to be 1 to 4 C. That could make it possible to grow more warm weather crops, but there may also be less water.

Barley and canola will likely remain popular, she said, but farmers could consider planting more soybeans, corn, millet and sorghum.

On the beef side, Ominski said there could be an increase in winter grazing across the West.

Forage crops may yield more and livestock will not need as much feed for energy because the winters would not be as cold.

Weather extremes with more freeze-thaw cycles, snow at unexpected times or extreme cold at calving or weaning could affect vulnerable animals.

If summers are warmer, heat stress and decreased productivity could be more common. Water supplies could be affected during hot, dry periods when animals need more to drink.

Even if there is no change in precipitation, water deficits would likely occur because of increased evapo-transpiration leading to greater water limitations. More effort should be directed at capturing and storing water during periods of excess, she said.

The processing and transportation sectors could face difficulties. The processing industry needs lots of water and could face challenges during restrictions.

More innovative strategies to reduce energy and water use should be explored, said Ominski.

Freeze-thaw periods and flooding are hard on roads. Short-term interruptions are costly for the transportation sector and food distributors who operate on tight delivery schedules, she said.

Canada is mostly insulated from big climatic effects that may be seen in other parts of the world but there is a caveat.

“We are going to see an increase in extreme weather related events,” Ominski said.

Insurance claims due to catastrophic weather damage and crop insurance claims are going up across most of Western Canada. The result is higher premiums.

The round table consisting of 93 members from agriculture producers to major food corporations commissioned Deloitte to conduct the life cycle analysis in 2014 to look at the social, economic and environmental impacts of beef production in Canada.

Released at the global conference on sustainable beef, held in Banff Oct. 4-7, the following offers highlights of the assessment:

WATER

The beef industry uses 235 litres per kilogram of live animal or 631 litres for one kilogram of packed boneless beef. From a value chain perspective, the farming stage accounts for 74 percent of the industry’s blue water footprint, followed by consumption at 10 percent, processing six percent, retail and transportation four percent each and packing two percent. The study considered blue water use, that is, the volume of surface and groundwater consumed as a result of production of a good or service.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

The beef sector is responsible for a total footprint of 11.4 kg carbon dioxide equivalent per kg of live weight.

Soil carbon stock is 1.5 billion tonnes of carbon stored in the land from cropland to native grassland.  The average stock per acre of carbon in cropland is lower than grassland’s capacity.

LAND USE

Land used for beef production accounts for 33 percent of arable land and 68 percent of the potential wildlife habitat on the agricultural landscape. That means 51 million acres of land are required for beef production and the  majority is pasture on marginal land not suitable for annual grain production, said Brenna Grant, research manager for Canfax, which contributed information to the study.

Native rangeland and unimproved rangeland provide the greatest opportunity for biodiversity. Less than 20 percent of Canada’s native grassland remains intact.

WASTE

For every 1.9 kg of beef produced, one kg is consumed and the rest is wasted due to shrink, processing losses, throwing away spoiled meat and consumer waste.

SOCIAL ASSESSMENT

Social assessment considered production practices as well as workers, local communities, value chains and regulations from farm to the finished product.

The industry has invested in training and policies to ensure health and safety, but there is room for improvement.

The rate of fatal and non-fatal injuries across the country averages 2.7 per 100,000 employees

The roundtable has set goals to further promote farm safety and working conditions.

The study showed excellent animal care practices have been implemented, but continuous improvement must be the goal.

Antimicrobial use has been responsible, but there is support for further development of best practices.

ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT

The long-term cost of production shows an industry struggling with low profit margins.

The average cow herd is 62 and many producers have a mixed operation or off farm income to stay afloat. Between 74 percent and 85 percent of cow-calf operations rely on off-farm income.

Cost of production is estimated at $120 per hundredweight on a cow-calf operation and $106 per cwt. at a feedlot.

Average cow-calf profitability is $93.03 per cow but at the feedlot level it is minus 20 cents.

The full report may be viewed at http://crsb.ca/wp-content/uploads/resources/NBSA_and_Strategy_summary_report_web1.pdf.

Contact barbara.duckworth@producer.com

During the Canadian beef industry conference held last month in Calgary, four major players ex-plained their approach to achieving that goal. It involves better genetic selection, adoption of technology and improved information exchange.

All the players spoke about the need to work more co-operatively and share information.

“We are in the beef industry and we need to stop fighting each other for our piece,” said seedstock producer Kevin Blair of Blair’s.Ag Cattle Company, based at Lanigan, Sask.

“We will be far more productive if we pull as one.”

The Blairs run a fourth generation family operation with 1,200 registered red and black Angus, as well as Herefords. They sell their herd genetics to six countries. Blair’s also operates farm service outlets and employs 105 people.

Blair said the hardships of the drought of 1988-89, and the market collapse caused by BSE in 2003, forced the industry to change for the better. People had to learn new ways of doing things.

He says productivity is too broad to measure because it means different things to different segments of the industry, such as seedstock producers and feedlots.

“Stay focused on your own business sector. You are responsible to your customers and your stakeholders. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be educated, but you need to stay focused,” he said.

The seedstock industry has to be educated as it works to provide better breeding stock to commercial operators. It also needs to entice more young people who have studied science, marketing and branding within a global context.

“You need highly intelligent, motivated, driven people in the seedstock industry if we are going to increase productivity by 2020,” he said.

Darren Bevans, who manages the Alberta operation for at Deseret Ranches, which operates ranches throughout the United States and Canada, said strength in numbers is key to the Alberta division.

The division operates on 110,000 acres and maintains 7,000 cows and 2,000-3,000 summer yearlings.

“It is easy when times are good and cattle prices are high, but when things get a little tough that is when things like productivity and focused management really pay off,” Bevans said.

Five years ago the company made major changes. Rather than each operating independently, it was decided to change to a vertically integrated system.

New ideas have been adopted, such as swath grazing in winter and selecting cattle for better feed efficiency. A geneticist helps develop better bulls to improve cow herds. Top genetics are developed and replicated through artificial insemination at the larger ranches to produce bulls used on all their commercial cows.

The company bought a Kansas feedlot and for the last five years it has shipped all production through that yard. Information on performance is shared.

“That has helped us and our strengths and weaknesses have become very clear to us.”

Bevans said some of the biggest opportunities in the Canadian beef industry rely on working closer together.

“We don’t have to be integrated but can work together through alliances and sharing information through systems and finding ways to capture value all the way through rather than fighting against each other,” he said.

Feedlot operator Leighton Kolk of Picture Butte, Alta., said increased efficiency starts with people.

The family owned operation was also willing to adopt new technology. Roller compacted concrete flooring was installed in pens to reduce mud. Cattle carrying too much mud are 10 to 20 percent less feed efficient, he said.

Chute side computers are used to get instant data on every animal wearing an electronic ear tag as it passes through at processing.

The company also uses near infrared technology to assess dried distillers grain, pellets and other feedstuffs to measure moisture, protein, digestible energy and fat content. A computer program is also used to deliver the correct ration to every pen of cattle.

Staff was taught low-stress handling techniques and new handling facilities were installed.

“It cost a lot of money to install originally, but it pays back day after day,” Kolk said.

They also use ultrasound so every heifer is pregnancy checked upon arrival because they do not want calves being born in the yard.

Improved carcass quality is part of the beef strategy to produce more salable meat. At present, cattle are being fed to larger weights and consequently many are carrying too much fat, which has little value.

“Genetics is one of the fastest ways we are going to get efficient in this business. When we are putting this much bark on the back of an animal to get Choice or AAA and then cut that fat off for four cents a pound it is not efficient,” Kolk said.

His company developed a computer program to project when cattle have achieved the target weight to earn the most profit.

“We want to maximize the carcass weight before the packer is going to take money out of our pocket for making it too heavy. But we don’t want to sell it before it’s time,” Kolk said.

Norwich Packers, a small processor in Ontario, has had to carve out its own niche in a competitive market, said Matthew Heleniak of the family-owned company.

It processes about 350 cattle per week and has about 2,500 to 3,000 head a year in three feedlots. There is also a 110 cow-calf operation.

His grandparents started with a custom butcher shop. The company experienced considerable growth in the 1970s and by the mid-1990s a new business plan was needed. It needed to get bigger or develop a niche.

“We did not want to compete on a price basis or a commodity basis with a lot of those big players,” he said.

They feed Limousin and other Continental breeds that are high-yielding. Animals get special rations and are tagged to monitor weight gain and health. The company emphasizes humane handling to keep cattle calm and produce better beef.

“Tenderness is a huge part of productivity. I think we lose a lot of productivity in the beef industry,” he said. “Poor beef hurts the whole business.”

While some productivity measures can cost more, these operators contend that the result is a better, more valuable product.

Yield is most important but they want less fat. Butchers trim steaks and roasts to a quarter inch fat depth.

“We have to maximize our buying abilities to make sure I get product that has a maximum eating experience for everybody but at the same time leads to less waste at the end of the day,” he said.

None of the 12 member countries have ratified the deal, but if the United States turns it down, the entire agreement could fail, the CCA foreign trade committee was told during the Canada Beef Industry conference held in Calgary Aug. 9-11.

“It is a carefully constructed 12 party agreement and if one of the 12 were to decide not to be a member, I think that would certainly change the math for a whole lot of people,” said Doug Forsyth, executive director for Agriculture Canada and Canada’s chief agriculture negotiator.

Canada joined negotiations in 2012 to gain additional access to the lucrative Japanese beef market. Japan has agreed to gradually reduce beef tariffs from 38 percent to nine percent for all participants.

“Japan will probably pass it this October, but it is a question mark as to what is going to happen in Washington. It doesn’t look promising, if you listen to some of the election rhetoric,” said John Masswohl of the CCA.

Australia has an agreement with Japan and receives better access with lower tariffs than Canada.

Last year, Canada exported about $100 million worth of beef to Japan but paid nearly $40 million in tariffs, said Masswohl.

Canada needs to have another plan ready, say CCA members.

“Just sitting back and waiting until an opportunity presents itself instead of being prepared for it in my mind is dropping the ball,” said Dennis Laycraft, executive vice-president of the CCA.

Japan is not interested in another deal at this time.

“The focus for now is for the TPP for Japan and Canada. That is Plan A. Plan B is speculative right now, notwithstanding what is going on in the United States,” said Forsyth.

Canada went through seven rounds of talks with Japan to build a bilateral agreement, but when the TPP was proposed that was set aside.

Members of the U.S. based National Cattlemen’s Beef Association also want the deal signed.

“Trade agreements are never easy and they are never popular, but they are very economically important. In absence of trade agreements, realistically, we would degrade into chaos,” said NCBA president Tracy Brunner at the meeting.

Japan is seen as a key market that takes many meat products not popular in North America.

If the Japanese trade is lost, those products will have to be sold domestically, said Kent Bacus of the NCBA.

The head of corporate affairs for JBS USA said the deal is critical for North American beef producers and exporters.

“We must have access for these products. The demand long term is not going to be in Canada, it is going to be elsewhere. We need to have the opportunity to deliver quality Canadian product all around the world,” said Cameron Bruit.

Such a large agreement could also pressure China to allow more trade even though it is not a member of the TPP. Canada is allowed to ship frozen boneless beef but U.S. beef does not have access to China.

“TPP will allow us to put significant pressure on China to be responsible traders in the marketplace,” Bruit said at the beef conference, which was attended by more than 650 people.

He is confident the anti trade rhetoric will abate after the presidential election in November.

However, Douglas Porter, chief economist of the Bank of Montreal, is pessimistic.

“I happen to believe that the TPP is dead. There is a slight chance they might get it done in the lame duck session, but based on what both candidates have said it is very tough to see that approved,” said Porter.

Republican candidate Donald Trump is openly anti-trade and some of what he says is problematic for the markets, said Porter.

Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton has also said she does not favour the agreement as a concession to left-wing party supporters.

He was pleasantly surprised when people showed a genuine interest and wanted to learn more about his home and how he produces beef.

“They really want to connect with what you do. That really surprised me,” said the chair of Canada Beef Inc.

“As producers, we are not ones to go and say, ‘look at us.’ We stick to ourselves and we don’t do any bragging. We have a story to tell, and what surprised me is people want to hear it.”

That self effacing style could be the foundation of future Canada Beef promotion campaigns to build brand loyalty around the world.

International polling of consumers, producers and processors in Canada, China, Mexico and Japan have found that potential customers associate Canada with wide open spaces, a clean environment and nice people who follow the rules.

There may be negative aspects to eating beef, such as worries about fat or the effect of cattle production on the environment, but those appear to be minor concerns among those surveyed, said Nick Black of Intensions, an international marketing research company.

“A focus on the positives is really what is driving consumers’ behavior and thinking,” he told Canada Beef’s annual forum in Calgary Sept. 17-18.

The survey found that the highest weekly beef consumption was in Mexico and the lightest in Japan.

The Chinese had the most positive response.

“They are even bigger fans of Canadian beef than Canadians. There is a huge untapped market potential there,” Black said.

Ranchers from Canada are thought of as busy, dedicated, honest, ethical and trustworthy people. The beef was considered a high quality, tasty product raised in a clean environment.

“You guys have a lot of trust out there in people’s minds,” he said.

Canada needs to capitalize on that good opinion and build a story, said Bill Baker of BB & Co. Strategic Storytelling.

Customers need to think of the Canadian landscape as the ideal place for raising beef by hard working farmers in a well governed country with high food safety standards.

“Canada in many ways is the world’s perfect place for raising bee–f. That is a fact that we need to start leveraging,” Baker said.

“This isn’t about chest beating or flag waving, saying ‘Canadian beef is the best beef in the world,’ because that would feel kind of un-Canadian to say that.”

The technical information about Canadian beef can still be used for certain customers who request it, but the brand needs to focus on good impressions that already exist.

“That admiration, that desire already exists. What Canada Beef needs to do is simply ignite it,” he said.

A new campaign to be launched in January will be based on successful projects already in place. Partnerships with Karisma Resorts in Mexico, where Canadian beef is featured on hotel menus, as well as a three year venture with the Canadian Football League will continue with more to come, said Rob Meijer, head of Canada Beef.

Canadian beef sales around the world were close to record levels last year.

Exports were up 14 percent in volume and 46 percent in value totaling $1.94 billion. This is the third largest export value on record for the Canadian industry.

Nearly 25 percent of exports went offshore last year compared to 15 percent in 2002.

Contact barbara.duckworth@producer.com