The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
1
2
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
Consider the Value of Nutrients By Les Klekte Many farmers consider their forage fields a dumping ground for manure and the Fertility Expert with Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives (MAFRI) said they should rethink that strategy. John Hird does not recommend going for the strategy of applying manure on forage fields but rather suggests producers consider the value of nutrients in the animal waste and match them with the requirements of the forage being produced. Hird was one of the presenters at a Manitoba Forage Day in Neepawa sponsored by MAFRI. He said matching the needs of plants and the material applied will benefit forage by making more efficient use of the waste product. Hird said that animals grazing a field deposit the nutrients back onto the field and do a fair job of spreading them across the field. When the crop is harvested and fed in confinement the manure is spread. That is not the case if the crop is sold and fed elsewhere; the nutrients taken by the crop need to be replaced. “A well fed crop will produce
more,” said Hird. “Higher yield and higher protein in the plant.” He said that forages produced on poorer quality soils are particularly susceptible to a nutrient deficiency and producers need to be aware of what the plant is taking from the soil so that they can replenish it. “Make sure you replace what you remove or else you are drawing down the quality of that soil long term.” Hird recommends that producers become familiar with the characteristics of the variety they are producing. “Alfalfa can have luxury consumption of nutrients,” he said, referring to the uptake by the plant of more nutrients than it actually requires producing a crop and additional nutrients may be taken from the soil without a corresponding increase in quantity or quality of the crop. Hird said that producers should consider the amount of a nutrient they are applying and what the plant can use as well. “The best we can get with phosphate is a 30 percent uptake, so you have to consider that with applications.” He said being aware of the amount used by the plant not only influences the
amount of nutrient applied but also if the remainder stays in the soil and is available for subsequent crops. Phosphate on alfalfa will result not only in a greater number of shoots but bigger shoots with increased weight. “Forages are efficient at using surface applied nutrients,” said Hird. “You should consider your application method and how quickly that plant can use that.” John Hird center of MAFRI tells producers to consider the nutrients their crop draws from a field and at minimum replace at least what is taken from the field. Photo by Les Kletke
Full Market Access for Canadian Beef Exports to Chile
Canadian beef producers will now benefit from full market access to Chile for beef exports. The announcement was made during the state visit to Canada by Sebastián Piñera, President of Chile. Effective immediately, Canadian exporters will now have unrestricted access to Chile’s beef market. The Canadian beef industry estimates that this renewed access is worth up to $5 million annually with potential growth of up to $10 million in three years. After the outbreak of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) disease in 2003, a number of markets, including Chile, ceased importing Canadian beef. In Chile, efforts included high-level discussions between both countries, as well as visits to Canada by Chilean authorities to review and approve the Canadian beef inspection system. This led to the negotiation of export certificates, resulting in renewed access to Chile for all Canadian beef products. Since the 1997 signing of the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement, two-way merchandise trade has more than tripled, reaching almost $2.5 billion in 2012.
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
3
Retaliation Efforts Ramp Up over M-COOL By Harry Siemens The Federal Government hopes the threat of retaliation on certain products the United States exports to Canada will help the Americans see that their stance on M-COOL is not beneficial for either country. Ed Fast, Minister of International Trade and the AsiaPacific Gateway, and Ag Minister Gerry Ritz said recently in a joint statement on U.S. Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) that despite consistent rulings by the World Trade Organization (WTO), the U.S. government continues its unfair trade practices that damage severely Canadian industry and jobs. “Our government is extremely disappointed that the United States continues to uphold this protectionist policy, which the WTO ruled to be unfair, and we call on the United States to abide by the WTO ruling,” they said. The Canadian government is preparing to launch the next phase of the WTO dispute settlement process on the new U.S. rule, something that could have been avoided if the United States had lived up to its trade obligations. “The Canadian government, with the full support and active engagement of Canadian industry, has fought against this unfair treatment, which is also hurting U.S. industry and consumers,” said Ritz. “We are also releasing a list of U.S. commodities for possible retaliation to be published as soon as possible in the Canada Gazette, as a way to formally launch the consultation process.” The agricultural community was quick to respond. The Manitoba Pork Council (MPC) and Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP) like the announcement made by the government. Beef and hog industry stakeholders on both sides of the border have argued from day one COOL requirements are not reasonable given how integrated the industries are between Canada and the U.S. “Manitoba hog producers are very supportive of the announcement made by Minister Gerry Ritz with the release of the retaliatory list that will be put into place if the U.S. does not comply with the WTO ruling,” said MPC Chair, Karl Kynoch. “This issue has cost the Canadian hog industry $500 million per year for the last four years and needs to be resolved. The Manitoba Pork Council will continue to support the Government of Canada in any way possible in this matter.”
The industry still hopes a new U.S. Farm Bill will introduce changes to COOL that bring the program in line with WTO requirements. “Trade is crucial to the ongoing success of Manitoba’s agriculture sectors,” said KAP President Doug Chorney. “The WTO rulings have made it clear that the U.S. is discriminating against Canadian imports with COOL requirements, and is failing to meet its WTO obligations. MPC and KAP hope this
action by the Federal Government will provide some relief in the immediate future for Manitoba hog and cattle producers who have suffered severe financial stress due to COOL regulations. COOL is not cool, the WTO said so and agreed with Canada and Mexico’s position. The Canadian Pork Council (CPC) also welcomes the action. “The new rule, if anything, increases the discrimination
against imported animals and we believe that a legislative change is required to fix COOL,” said CPC’s Chair, JeanGuy Vincent. “The release of the list of potential targets by the Federal Government is a clear indication of how determined Canada is to see COOL fixed. The government is standing up for our rights in this dispute. U.S. legislators who were content to do nothing while we suffered will now have an incentive to legislate a solution, hopefully in their
next Farm Bill.” Regulations implementing the 2008 Farm Bill provisions on COOL for beef and pork also place a heavy burden on American feeding operations, processors and retailers and effectively require that cattle or hogs born or raised in Canada be completely segregated from U.S. cattle and hogs. “We commissioned an analysis that shows the COOL impact on the Canadian hog sector from lost exports
alone is $500 million annually,” said CPC’s past, Chair, Jurgen Preugschas. “This does not include any other impacts on Canada’s hog producers such as domestic price suppression or additional impact from the new COOL rule that went into effect in May.” Damage to the Canadian livestock industry has been horrendous. Since COOL was introduced in, 2008 exports to the U.S. of Canadian hogs have fallen by 41 percent and exports of cattle by 46 percent.
Trade War on Horizon? By Harry Siemens In a recent telephone interview, Agricultural Minister Gerry Ritz told media that Canada is counting on pressure from within the United States to help bring resolution to the Mandatory Country of Origin Labelling issue. Last month, in response to a World Trade Organization (WTO) order to bring Mandatory Country of Origin Labelling into compliance with its international treaty obligations, the U.S. announced amendments to provisions covering muscle cut covered commodities, which will require additional labelling information and eliminate the mixing of products from different countries. Both Canada and Mexico say they will return to the WTO to seek authority to impose retaliatory tariffs on imported U.S. products and have released lists of products they could target. Ritz told reporters in the conference call that he has discussed the labelling issue with allies in the U.S. pork and beef sectors, the American Meat Council and the U.S. retail sector and support for the Canadian position on this issue is quite strong. Except, it appears where it really counts, with the Obama administration where protectionist supporters are seem to swat the administration. “I know there are discussions going on within Congress and the Senate down there,” Ritz said. “The farm bill is being debated as we speak. That’s why we felt it was incumbent that we get out the list of possible sanctions that
could be applied and the products covered as quickly as possible, as did our Mexican allies. I know that our American allies, the Meat Institute, the beef growers, the pork sector, all of those are also talking about putting pressure on their own government.” Ritz said the Americans have identified several hundreds of millions of dollars it will cost them to implement the system in the U.S. He’s hoping by helping those people making these speeches in the Senate to have a change of heart and make the changes that Canada and Mexico feel need to be made and measure up to the spirit and intention of the WTO action. Ritz said Canada is putting pressure on the Americans to resolve the labelling issue by opening new markets and depending less on the Americans. In light of Ritz’s comments, the National Pork Producers Council (NPCC) in the U.S. is pledging to do all it can to head off trade retaliation by Canada and Mexico regarding MCOOL rules. Under the revised rules, U.S. retailers must now indicate where each production step, born, raised, and slaughtered, occurred. They can’t mix meat originating from one country with meat from another. NPCC president Randy Spronk told reporters that NPPC would do everything it can to avoid potential trade disruption with Canada and Mexico. “Each country stated that it will consider retaliatory measures against the United States by way of increased tariffs on both
U.S. agricultural and manufactured goods should the WTO determine that the rule does not comply with the WTO rules,” said Spronk. “While U.S. pork producers believe the United States must live up to its WTO obligations, NPPC does have concerns with the new rule. We do believe a solution can be found that satisfies U.S. WTO obligations, provides sufficient label information to consumers and does not cause economic disruptions in the pork industry. NPPC will do everything it can to avoid potential trade retaliation by Canada and Mexico.” In a revealing statement, Spronk said the NPPC believes the North American swine industry and products from Canada and Mexico should be treated the same. Fast Genetics General Manager, Shannon Meyers said the uncertainty created by this altercation continues to create problems for pork producers. The company’s business model is setup to sell primarily weaned pigs
into the U.S. Midwest and while difficulties are expected, producers need some certainty of a longterm plan. “With the announcement last year with COOL looking like it’ll straighten itself out and then May 23, maybe even tougher rules to follow it just creates a whole pattern of uncertainty,” said Meyers. “It affects our customers who are weaned pig producers. It also affects our customers in the U.S. who are buyers of weaned pigs. They’re looking at this too, asking what this will really mean over the next six to 12 months. Will I be able to purchase these pigs?” The other aspect as a genetic supplier is they have customers on both
sides of the border but some of the U.S. customers take production born in the U.S. from a genetics perspective. Perhaps, gilts born and raised somewhere south of the border will be relatively unaffected by this. On the other hand, some customers in the U.S. will buy gilts, for example, or breeding stock out of Canada, which also has some implications in terms of cull stock and what they do with their breeding herd, creating a ripple effect in their own herd. Meyers said the fact that U.S. producers and packers, for the most part, do not like M-COOL suggests there’s something inherently wrong with the legislation.
4
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
Seeding. In July? It is the end of June and I am sitting down to write a column about seeding, and no, it is not a recap of the spring’s activities. Last month I spoke to Don Johnston who was putting down his chalk after 37 years of teaching the Farm Machinery course at the School of Agriculture, and we talked about the changes he had seen over the years. Yes, I mentioned some changes in the students with the expansion of the student base and the spectrum of farm knowledge when they entered the course went from zero to those who were using the most modern technology and knew how to program it. Seeding equipment was just the example he used to show changes in the industry that he had seen. When he started teaching setting a discer hitch was a valuable skill. Now it rates just above being able to start a fire with two stones. In his words, discers did a good job of spreading the seed, but not much for precision. That has changed and today proper placement of the seed is a prime concern. Then last week I visited with Pat Beaujot of Seed Hawk and he talked about 20 years ago when he began the company and his competition was the early air seeders that were basically tanks mounted on a heavy cultivator. Pat went on to explain that most of his work has been on a unit that allows for accurate placement of the seed in diverse moisture conditions. What’s the point? No, it is not that seeding equipment has changed, we all know that. The point is technology is coming to agriculture at a rate faster than ever before, and that is true of most industries, but our industry is getting a double whammy, or benefit, depending on how you look at it. Not only is agriculture getting the benefit of technology, as most industries are, but we have moved up the priority list. Suddenly our industry has drawn the attention of research departments and blue-sky research where “real-world” applications are not immediately apparent. Instead, research is looking for advancements and a new generation of farmers is looking for them. Some of us are still complaining that our new phone has too many features and we don’t know how to answer it but there are a lot of people now in the industry looking for a new app that they can apply to their farm. The point of a seeding column in July is that there is a new dawn happening in this industry and I just hope the next generation allows people my age to come along for the ride. It is an exciting time. Please remember us old guys who have trouble answering our phones. Call again. I will try to answer.
Fill Your Fridge with Local Canadian Products
By Ron Bonnett BBQ season’s here, and fresh, local products are ready for the picking. What are you going to buy at the grocery store? Will it be local? It used to be the case that as consumers, we wouldn’t think twice about what we bought or the long-term effects on our communities - so long as it was the right price. But when manufacturing jobs started disappearing at an alarming rate and as Canadians have become
increasingly interested in what they eat, ‘local’ became a powerful term. Canadians are reacting valuing where and how their food is grown, and wanting to support those who grow food closer to home. Defining local is being discussed at the federal level, with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) charged with the task of developing criteria, and consultations with consumers and industry underway. Defining local is especially tricky in a large, diverse country like Canada. Distance is often necessary - population can be sparse, processing infrastructure isn’t always readily available, local markets can get saturated, and growing conditions and water availability guide what can or cannot be produced in a particular region. Bringing in
The Sweet Life Changes made in the 2008 American farm bill to the sugar program, cranking up price supports, restricting import quotas, and putting taxpayers on the hook for getting rid of surplus supplies have, to no ones surprise, made a bad policy even worse. That is the conclusion of a study released on June 3 by Agralytica. It’s a textbook example of government choosing winners and losers. The end result was record-high sugar prices, ballooning unemployment in the sugar-using food and beverage sectors, and now an oversupply of the sweet stuff. Sugar producers were undoubtedly happy with the arrangement, at first, but the policy has caused no end of grief for others. Now, thanks to Penners the subsidy-induced surplus, prices have come back Points down again. Consumers alone have paid an extra $3.7 billion per by Rolf year, with prices averaging 46 cents a pound vs. the Penner 28 cents that prevailed in the good old days of the ’02 rolfpenner@agripost.ca farm bill. From another angle, the price has consistently been anywhere from 64 to 92 percent higher than the world price of refined sugar. But, because refined sugar imports were severely limited, the market’s bias towards seeking advantage from price differences, could not properly take place. Agralytica calls subsequent job losses in the industry “significant”. U.S Census Bureau data showed a loss of nearly 127,000 jobs in sugar-using industries. Countries with access to more reasonably priced sugar significantly increased the amount of sugar-containing products they exported to the U.S. Yes, the farm bill is a powerful piece of legislation, but it can’t stop everything, even when it tries. Compounding the problem was the fact that in 2008, U.S and Mexico freed up the sweetener trade between the two countries. In and of itself this was a good thing. It finally enabled sugar producers on both sides of the border to respond to the same market and policy signals, which only makes sense. However, the farm bill kept supplies so tight that refined sugar prices, previously relatively stable, rose dramatically, giving producers a great incentive to plant way more acres, which they did. Throw in some good weather, and boom! you have a great recipe for overproduction. This overproduction caused sugar prices to come back down to somewhere around 30 cents per pound. Essentially, right back where it all started. The only thing really accomplished was a major destabilization of the American sugar market by, “Making both shortages and surpluses worse than they needed to be.” According to the farm bill, the surplus sugar is supposed to go into the production of fuel ethanol. This is where the taxpayer gets hammered. Because the commodity is sold to ethanol producers at, you guessed it, a subsidized price. The rationale is that sugar has to be cheaper than corn if plants are going to buy it. Agralytica estimates the cost of this subsidy in the neighbourhood of $250 million for the next two years. In the end, no one is really ahead. Arguably, most, if not all of the players involved, are worse off than they were before. Agralytica has a number of recommendations for improving the situation, but frankly, they don’t go far enough. This is certainly not the first time that well meaning, yet hamfisted bureaucrats with no skin in the game tried to manage the supply and demand of a particular commodity, and the results are far too familiar. Government needs to get completely out of the way and let market forces do what they do best. Until that happens, things will keep going sour. Agralytica is a U.S. company based in Alexandria, Virginia, operating globally, providing strategic marketing, business, economic, and policy consulting. food or shipping food from a different provinces or regions is often necessary for many communities and producers to sustain themselves. At Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA), we define local as Canadian. We believe buying Canadian is the safest, freshest option and that when you do; you are supporting our country, our farmers and the security of our food system. Buying Canada and supporting the Canadian brand is an important pillar of the industry-led National Food Strategy (NFS). When players along the food system sat down to discuss what our food system should work towards and what future agricultural and food
policy should reflect, promoting Canadian products at home was top of mind. The first goal in the NFS is Canadian grown, fresh and processed products are the first choice of Canadians. We strongly believe in supporting the Canadian Brand. Here’s why: Economy - Spending your money in Canada, supports Canada. It’s as simple as that. From retailer through to farmer, the ripple effect strengthens our economy. Environment and Health and Safety - Canada is a world leader in innovation and food safety standards. When we buy Canadian, we can be assured it has met Canada’s impressive environmental and health
and safety standards. Community - By choosing Canadian as your local option, you are promoting local economies across Canada, allowing them to further develop their infrastructure. Pride - Contributing to the brand simply because we’re proud of our rich agricultural heritage, the quality of our products and our farm families. Marketers are monitoring consumer trends. Your choices at the grocery store do count! Learn more about Canadian agriculture and the CFA at www.cfafca.ca. Ron Bonnett is CFA President and a Cow/ Calf Operator.
The Agri Post
Tariff List Make Sense Is it or isn’t it a big deal, the feds threatening the Americans with retaliatory tariffs? Initially, my thoughts were 60 - 40 that this was only showcasing and getting the livestock industry off their collective backs. Well, I’m sometimes prepared to change my mind. Yes, even I because of my good American friend, Steve Dittmer, who writes a newsletter called the Agribusiness Freedom Foundation Sentinel, which promotes free market principles throughout the agricultural food chain. Steve is my friend in long and good standing, I appreciate the things he writes, and reports on often giving a viewpoint others fail to see. After receiving his latest newsletter, I called him up to say thanks for the great work. Here is why. He listed the products Canada wants to retaliate on and gave his reasons why he thinks they picked those products. He doesn’t for one minute blame us Canadians for taking this action because he thinks M-COOL is stupid and is not afraid to say so. Steve said many of the items on the list need no explanation, as it is not surprising to see beef and pork on the list of items that Canada would penalize coming into Canada. Others are part of the strategy of targeting State and Congressional districts. He said two of the biggest proponents of M-COOL are representatives from South Dakota, Republican Congresswoman Kristi Noem and Democratic Senator Tim Johnson. Montana’s Senator Max Baucus and Jon Tester also support it. “Spring wheat, from which pasta is made, is grown primarily in the Dakotas and Montana, so pasta’s appearance on the list is an obvious attention getter for those four,” said Dittmer. “The rest is primarily grown in eastern Oregon and Washington – both state’s senators have voted pro M-COOL – and all through California, therefore, targeting Senators Boxer and Feinstein.” When I saw those targeted states and the reasoning behind it, it warmed my heart. I can’t believe I’m thinking this way knowing full well these trade wars can get messy if both sides dig in their heels. The next area of attack by the Canadians centres on corn and cereals where Steve said corn is an obvious strike against the pro M-COOL National Farmer’s Union whose membership includes a lot of corn farmers and Corn Belt members of Congress like Iowa’s Senators Grassley and Harkin. The cereal industry also imports lots of grain from Canada. In fact, nearly all the oats for Cheerio’s comes from Canada but selling cereal north will be more difficult as it is on the list. “While food products dominate, there are products and manufacturing components on the list targeted at someone’s vote,” said Dittmer. “Food products include maple syrup, cherries and apples, cheese, rice, prepared or preserved beef, glucose and fructose syrup, chocolate, bread, pastries and cakes, potatoes, frozen orange juice, wine, and ketchup and tomato sauce.” The list continues with non-food items such as wooden office furniture, swivel seats, grinding balls for iron and steel mills, precious metal jewellery, parts of non-electric heating appliances and certain stainless steel welded pipes and tubes. According to Steve, the other interesting item is ethyl alcohol, which is the chemical name for both drinking alcohol and ethanol. “The tariff coding indicates this designation may not include finished drinking alcohol but we couldn’t confirm. A tariff on blending ethanol would be another strike at the corn industry, should that be included.” Steve said sources tell him, given the well-trod nature of this case at the WTO, the dispute panel could rule on the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) attempt, or non-attempt, at compliance as quickly as 60 days from the May 23 deadline. Then the process of negotiating the final retaliation list with the WTO, appeals and other parts of procedure would follow. It would be likely year’s end before tariffs and trade disruptions began. Dittmer said that American packers continue losing money because of a reduced cattle supply from Canada, threatening the viability of individual plants, large and small, by supply and segregation difficulties. Here is the kicker. This threatens the livestock feeders’ market access to plants and Canadian cattlemen and pork producers would suffer losses through lower prices and reduced market access. The harm to U.S. consumers is mainly in higher prices due to tighter supplies and increased processing costs. Study after study has shown nearly all consumers pay little attention to origin notations on labels because price, quality and brand or store reputation play much bigger factors in purchase decisions. “The fastest, most effective way of solving this problem is for Congress to remove this obvious, artificial barrier to trade among the three countries,” said Dittmer, the freedom fighter. “The false promise of higher prices to livestock producers via a premium for ‘American beef’ has not happened; nonactivist consumers are needlessly paying higher prices.” “Good to hear from you. Wish we could get our government to quit beating up on our friends as well as our citizens. Keep after ‘em,” Steve said to me in conclusion.
E. coli Review Recommendations Will Strengthen Canada’s Food Safety Systems By Gina Teel The Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) welcomes the Independent Review of XL Foods Inc. Beef Recall 2012 tabled in the House of Commons recently by Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Gerry Ritz. Canadian cattle producers strongly support the ultimate objective of reducing, and if possible eliminating, E. coli related illness associated with beef. We believe that the independent review contains important recommendations that will further strengthen Canada’s food safety systems. In the period following the recall, the CCA developed an E.coli O157 Research and Education Strategy, which includes research supporting many of the recommendations contained in the review regarding E.coli interventions. Prior to this, Canadian cattle producers have for many years supported food safety research including work related to preharvest interventions. Most recently, CCA has submitted the required documentation to renew our 1998 petition to allow for the irradiation of beef in Canada. We are extremely pleased to see that the report recommends that industry make such an application and that Health Canada give it prompt attention. Indeed the Canadian beef and cattle industry’s ongoing and sustained commitment and
June 28, 2013
5
Pig W elfare Set to Get Welfare Even Better in Canada The hog industry, especially producers, is in for an intense time. First, getting to know what changes they must make to their business, secondly to comment on the draft Pig Code to make sure it works for them down the road, and thirdly, not to get down on themselves for feeling they’re doing a lousy job, because they’re not. Hence the title ‘pig welfare set to get even better in Canada’, not ‘set to improve’. Hog farmers for the most part, are doing a great job looking after their animals and therefore this isn’t just about the pigs, it is also about the people who handle them. After three years of intense negotiation, the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies (CFHS) welcomes the release of the draft Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Pigs. Confidential until the release, the CFHS said it worked tirelessly to negotiate directly with farmers for the past three years to improve the welfare for pigs in Canada. The draft Code of Practice sets standards for the care of the 27 million pigs raised on Canadian farms. A significant step forward, this draft code reduces the reliance on the controversial practice of gestation stall use. The draft Pig Code allows for limited stall use (up to 35 days each cycle) thereby aligning itself with science and moving toward the public expectation of 100 percent stall free pork. This new requirement, not in full effect until 2024, reflects a growing trend with companies and producers committed to phasing out the use of sow stalls such as Tim Horton’s, McDonald’s, Burger King, Olymel and Maple Leaf. “The animal welfare science has shown that when confined in sow stalls, pigs experience extreme stress and frustration because they are unable to turn around or express natural behaviours,” said Barbara Cartwright, CEO of the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies. “It’s like being stuck in an airline seat for your life.” Advocating for only those farming practices that provide good welfare for the animals raised, the CFHS encouraged farmers to strive to employ management practices and housing systems that meet both the physiological and psychological needs of the animals. “The new Pig Code requires environmental enrichment. As well, it outlines pain control measures for castration and tail docking, which are some of the most progressive in the world beating out Australia, Germany and the UK,” said Dr. Carol Morgan, pig welfare specialist and the CFHS code representative. “However, Europe is phasing out castration completely by 2018. That’s the ideal solution, but meat processors in Canada refuse to accept uncastrated males. It’s a problem with processors, not producers.” Canada’s Codes of Practice for the care and handling of farm animals lays out national expectations for animal welfare arrived by consensus between the farmers, veterinarians, scientists, government agencies, and SPCAs and humane societies who are members of the National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC). The CFHS hopes to receive broad input from the public, industry and other stakeholders during the 60-day comment period to ensure it improves animal welfare and reflects the values of Canadians. Pig Code Development Committee Chair and CEO of Saskatchewan’s Big Sky Farms Inc., Florian Possberg said Canada has a sophisticated process for updating the codes that brings together all interested stakeholders. “It’s meant to be more than just an industry thing,” said Possberg. “It’s meant to come up with acceptable practices that the general public can have confidence in. The code covers all aspects of the care and keeping of our animals, our hogs. It’s not just about feed and water and shelter.” He said it is about handling pigs, what to do with compromised animals and how to house the animals. But, the key part is how producers house their sows, with so much discussion around gestation stalls and loose housing, and the Pig Code tries to deal with that. “Also what the space allocation needs to be for our growing animals and we deal with that, too,” said Possberg. “Probably the next in line would be painful procedures, things like castration, and we deal with that as well.”
investment in this area is a key reason why Public Health Agency of Canada statistics indicate a declining trend in E.coli O157 related illness in Canada today. Improved food safety continues to be a top research priority in the Canadian beef industry. Recent and ongoing research funded by the Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC) strives to find practical, economical and effective solutions to reduce or prevent E.coli O157:H7 contamination throughout the production chain. The CCA, in collaboration with our Pre-Harvest Expert Advisory Group of scientific experts, reviews the currently available research supporting pre-harvest approaches and recommends studies to determine if best management practices or specific interventions can be implemented to enhance the safety of Canada’s beef supply. We have carefully considered the results of a study just completed in Alberta, which examined pre-harvest interventions, and we support the view of the researchers that further work on these interventions is required before broad implementation can be recommended. The CCA works with processors and the academic community to explore initiatives with the potential to ensure the highest level of food safety possible. There is an assumption in the report about the recall negatively affecting beef consumption. Per capita beef consumption was up 1.1 percent in 2012 at 20 kgs while total Beef consumption was up 2.2 percent at 954,740 tonnes (carcass weight) in 2012, according to the latest Statistics Canada report. Finally, the CCA also supports the recommendations to improve upon and streamline the flow of communications to industry stakeholders. Gina Teel is the Communications Manager for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.
6
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
Making Money with Hay or Silage By Les Kletke Are you a forage or an animal farm? The question took some attending the Forage Day sponsored by Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives (MAFRI) by surprise, but for Ray Bittner a Farm Production Advisor, it is one of the most basic decisions that must be made on the farm. “What are your profit centres?” asked Bittner who is well known as a number cruncher along with his extensive experience in the beef business. “If your profit centre is hay you have more of a challenge. If forage is an
input for your livestock enterprise you have a different situation,” he said. He did not suggest, this would allow producers to pay less attention to putting up good quality feed, but it may affect the type of feed they put up. Bittner is aware that in the field things do not always work out the way they are planned out during the winter. “There are some times that you just cannot get on the field. When it continues to rain you cannot make hay,” he said. “The advantage of silage is that you can put it up wet and normally you get it off in June. The quality of feed
deteriorates after June.” Bittner is clear about the value of silage and not treating it as a last resort or something that can be done when the weather does not allow for haying. “It is more expensive to put up but it can be cost effective. If you’re going to put up silage then plan on doing it and do it properly to get the best feed value from the silage and make it cost effective.” He said that custom silage operators are a good option and if there was a guarantee they would be available at the time your field was ready to be cut, they are a very attractive option. The economies of scale al-
Heat is Hay’s Enemy By Les Kletke A University of Wisconsin researcher tells hay producers that traffic on their field is devastating. Dan Undersander, of the University of Wisconsin, said that wheel traffic on a forage field five days after cutting is having a devastating effect on the next crop. Undersander told those attending a Forage day in Neepawa that leaving bales on the field for an extended period of time is costing them lost production, “At least get them to the side of the field as soon as possible, our research shows that traffic more than five days after cutting has a detrimental effect on the next crop.” He used the example of a producer driving across his hay crop to look at his wheat crop. “He wouldn’t think of it if the situation was reversed, so why would he drive across his hay crop to look at the wheat field? Your hay crop is just as valuable and you have to reduce the traffic on it.” He does not recommend duals saying they just do more damage and the reduction in compaction is not enough to avoid damaging the crop. Undersander said that time is of the essence in every stage of quality forage production and the sooner they can get the moisture content below 60 percent and get the crop bailed the better. He recommends cutting when moisture levels are between 7080 percent and then getting it down as quickly as possible. He recommends a wide swath to help in the
process. “Put it into a wide swath. We recommend the swath cover 70 percent of the ground area, that way the sun can dry out the leaves and it is ready to bale sooner,” he said. Undersander said putting feed up wet has extra expense but also has advantages and properly wrapped feed can be maintained with a moisture level from 25-70 percent. He said the greatest enemy of hay quality at that time is heat. Heating in the bales at that time is using up sugar and proteins,” he said. “That is what you want to keep in your feed. The process of heating is called
Malliard reaction and is much like the process of browning a steak on a grill. That is good for steak but is stealing feed value in your feed.” Undersander said that targeting higher yields means better management of the crop and that requires greater testing. He said that some nutrients can only be effectively measured with tissue testing and producers should count on testing their crop. “Spend the ten dollars for the test to find out if you need to spend the money on nutrients. You might be saving yourself a lot on the fertilizer bill.”
low them to be cost effective and the larger equipment can put up a lot of feed in a short time. He said the challenge is having them at the right time. He recommends that silage should be processed at 55-68 percent moisture, and a simple way to determine the moisture content is to weigh a sample of feed and dry it in the microwave and then weigh the remaining dry matter. He also had some advice on microwave precautions and recommended a Pyrex dish as the container of choice. Bittner said that for producers who are putting up bales, wrapping is a necessity in maintaining the quality of the feed, “Five or six layers of wrapping is necessary to insure that oxygen does not enter the wrapping and add to the deterioration of the feed.
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
7
8
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
New Record Set with 5,500 Acres of Help
Jon Forrester, operating Ian Forrester’s 45-foot seeder, putting in spring wheat seed on CHUM project’s 150-acre field north of Altona on June 6. It was one of the later projects seeded for the Canadian Foodgrains Bank this spring. Photo by Elmer Heinrichs
By Elmer Heinrichs Harold Penner, the Manitoba Regional Coordinator for the Canadian Foodgrains Bank (CFGB), in a June 10 update said, “things are now looking good for our Manitoba CFGB farm. We’ve expanded this year to over 5,500 acres! That’s a new record.” One of the later projects to be seeded was the 150-acre CHUM project based at Plum Coulee as they seeded a late field north of Altona to spring wheat around June 6. At a special event on June 13, members celebrated the 30th anniversary of the CFGB, which featured a story about the founders of the Foodgrains Bank.
The Wait is Not Over as Crop Quantity and Value Are Just a Guess By Les Kletke The wait for U.S. crop estimates is far from over and the year is proving to be an oddity with seeding reports and yield estimates affecting markets at the same time. Moe Agostino is a Managing Commodity Specialist with Farms.com in London, Ontario. He provided a look at global trends in grain marketing at the Farm Progress Show in Regina. He said while some acres of the U.S. Midwest did not get planted this year, it is too early to make the call on whether grain prices might go through the same time of run up they did last year as drought spread across the U.S. and yield estimates dropped. “It would appear the drought has ended in the eastern part of the Midwest but not in the west, and if things turn hot and dry through the summer the drought could spread from the west to the eastern regions,” said Agostino. His numbers show that as of June 18 only about 10 percent of the U.S. corn crop was rated as drought while last year at this time that area was 83 percent of production. He cites U.S. ending stocks as being lower than they have been in the past and that could be a positive impact on price but not as much as the lack of production last year. He calls for corn prices to be in the $4.50 - $6 a bushel range. Agostino said that a drought usually takes a long time to
Moe Agostino with Farms.com says it is a matter of wait-andsee for grain markets heading into the new crop year. Photo by Les Kletke
recover from as soil moisture levels have been drawn down and may take several years to rebuild. That was the case for western Canada following the drought of 1988, “But soil moisture was replenished surprisingly quickly with two wet years in many areas. “We are seeing some recovery with a wet year this year, and the cool June has also helped with moisture but it will depend on what happens over the next few weeks, any weather forecast of further than 6 days out is not too reliable so it is a matter of wait and see what happens.” Agostino said the high commodity prices last year have stirred land prices to new levels in several areas of the continent, and he said that farmland he bought in southern Ontario just a few years ago might prove to be the best investment he has ever made.
He said the one thing that could slow the increase in land prices is an increase in interest rates. “If we see a 2-3 percent increase in interest rates it would be the equivalent to the double digit interest of the 1980s and much of the generation that is farming now does not remember that time, but it is possible that we could see an increase in interest,” he said. Agostino said that while most farms are not leveraged to the same degree as farms were in the 1980’s, an increase in interest would have a dramatic impact. “We are seeing land prices escalating and for other reasons than farmers basing the price on productive capacity, there are funds in the market as well as foreign investors that are bidding up the price of land and productive capacity is no longer the determining factor of land prices.”
The Agri Post
Silence is Violence By Les Kletke After a spring that had seeding and spraying overlap and perhaps a few other things go wrong, some farmers may be asking for a bit of peace and quiet to regroup and settle the jangled nerves. Elaine Froese agrees with this and said maybe a day at the lake is in order for everyone, including the farm employees. Froese said that silence is unacceptable and can lead to real problems in discussing the difficult issues around the farm and the planning for the next generation. Froese was one the keynote speakers at the Farm Progress Show in Regina and borrowed from her personal experience telling the story of how her in-laws dealt with her entry to the family farm and that she planned to stay with the operation. Froese and husband Wes operate a pedigree seed farm at Boisevain. She also told the audience that she was gaining a daughter-inlaw this summer when her son marries and that will mean some Elaine Froese of Boissevain was a keynote a Farm Progress Show telling her audience that not speaking about issues on the farm is the worst strategy they can choose. Photo by Les Kletke
June 28, 2013
9
changes in their family dynamics. “She is a nurse and has concerns about food storage,” said Froese with a chuckle. “So I have become more careful with how long things are in the fridge and I have a lot more Tupperware than I used.” She said she had also decided what kind of mother-in-law she wants to be and has planned her behaviour accordingly. Froese, who writes extensively on inter-generational issues and provides coaching for families working through the transfer issues, gained instant rapport with the audience talking about difficult issues that most could relate to and then providing simple workable answers that may be a lot more difficult to put in place than they seemed to be when she outlined them. “Counselling is about recovery, coaching is about discovery,” said Froese, advocating that discussion between a family and the discovery of other members’ goals can lead to development of a plan that accommodates everyone. “It may not be the perfect solution for each individual but it does allow for a plan that everyone finds acceptable and buys into.” Froese brings an understanding of the farm and family together to help her audience deal with the difficult issues. In her closing remarks she asked the audience to “touch your head, that is where you make the logical decisions, touch your heart, that is where you make the decisions based on feeling, and touch your gut; that is where your intuition is, and they are all a part of the decisions that you make, respect them all.”
10
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
Seeding of Manitoba Crops All but Wrapped up By Elmer Heinrichs Manitoba farmers are in the final stages of seeding their 2013 crops with only a few remaining acres of green feed, millet, barley and oats left to go, based on Manitoba’s crop reports. Seeding of spring cereals neared completion as Manitoba AgriInsurances deadlines for wheat, oats and barley came on June 20.
Some reseeding of springseeded crops also took place due to factors such as soil crusting, insect activity and disease. Weed control operations progressed rapidly but were hampered by windy weather conditions in some areas. Weed control will remain a priority for farmers as crops and weeds continue to advance. Insect activity increased over the past week or two.
Control measures for flea beetles and cutworms were necessary in some fields and monitoring will continue. In central areas, moderate temperatures and rain showers with minimal accumulations for the most part were seen across the region. A narrow strip of hail went through the Sewell/Lowe Farm area June 10 with a few areas seeing 15 mm of rain. The same storm system
went through the eastern region. Hail and strong winds hit fields in a line affecting Tyndall/Garson to just south of Beausejour, through the Anola/Garven Road area to Elma. About mid-month dairy producers had taken their first cut of hay with reports of average yields. Showers and minor hail were also seen over the June 15-16 weekend in the Elm Creek, Fannystelle and Homewood areas. However, seeding did continue, and the wettest areas in the southwestern part of the region saw dramatic advancement in seeded acres. Broadcast seeding accounts for some of the progress. All areas report soil moisture as being
adequate to surplus. The report also noted that stands of many crops are uneven and that cereal crops are in the seedling/tiller stage. Some cereals, particularly oats, were reseeded due to seed rot. Canola development ranged from just emerging to the rosette stage. Cooler temperatures resulted in slower growth, and flea beetle feeding is a concern in much of the region. Corn crops are improving in colour and herbicide applications continue. There are some reports of cutworm damage. Many winter wheat fields have been reseeded, particularly in the western half of the region. Winter wheat failed to germinate because of dry conditions last fall. The remaining winter cereal acres are improving thanks to warmer temperatures. Higher temperatures are also benefiting the soybean crop in southern Manitoba. “It hasn’t been as warm as we’d like to be,” said Kristen Podolsky, Production Specialist with the Manitoba Pulse Growers Association. “Most of the province is anywhere from 80 to 90 percent of the accumulated growing degree days compared to normal.” She said heavy rains earlier in spring set the crop back in some areas. “There’s been some leaf damage, some isolated hail, and some soil crusting, which caused problems with emergence,” she explained. “We’ve also had some reports of seedling diseases popping up.” The rains also prevented growers from rolling their soybean fields. “If they didn’t get
in to roll right after planting, they do still have some time, but they will want to wait until the first trifoliate stage,” said Podolsky. Seeding is essentially complete in the eastern region with some late seeding of oats. Some acres are at early heading and corn is at the V1 to V5 stage. Cool soil temperatures delayed soybean emergence in May and early June. Plant stands in a number of fields have been reduced. Growers will have a better picture of crop stands later this month when they enter fields to estimate plant counts. Length of time to soybean emergence was noted. Dry soil conditions and deeper seeding is delaying emergence in those cases. There are also reports of seed rot in soybeans and seedling diseases in spring cereals. Sunflower acres are up slightly in the region. Growers have reported cutworm damage but no disease concerns so far. Hay conditions in the region are rated as 60 percent to 80 percent good, 20 percent fair and 20 percent poor. By midJune, haying was underway with most of the activity in the dairy sector; up to 25 percent of the first cut is complete. Forage stands to be used for beef herds were still standing. Average first-cut yields are alfalfa, 1.2 tons, grass/alfalfa, 1.5 tons, other tame hay, 1.6 tons and wild hay, 0.6 tons. Pasture conditions in the east are rated as 75 to 80 percent good with 20 to 25 percent fair. Water supplies, including dugouts, are rated at 100 percent adequate.
Have You Been to No-Tillville? By Les Kletke No-Tillville might be one of the fastest growing communities in western Canada but it does not exist in reality. The website NoTillville provides farmers with an opportunity to discuss and compare their experiences with reduced tillage practices. The site was unveiled at the Farm Progress Show but is open to anyone who takes the time to register and wants to stay abreast of the development in reduced tillage agriculture. It was developed by the Marketing Den, a Saskatchewan based ad agency with extensive experience in agriculture. The firm also works with Seed Hawk. Pat Beaujot, President of Seed Hawk, is one of the early contributors to the site. It is hoped that the site will catch on with farmers worldwide. “Pat has a tremendous following in Europe because of his work with zero till seeding equipment,” said a representative of the Marketing Den. “This will give those farmers who don’t get to see him, an opportunity to interact with him and ask their questions.” The site is not run by Seed Hawk and welcomes information from all types of seeding equipment. “It is much bigger than that, we want to have people from around the world exchanging information of what has worked for them on their farm.” The Marketing Den is providing the expertise for the site to keep it running. The site already has information from Australia where lack of moisture is a common problem and any practice that conserves moisture can make the difference between a crop and no crop at all. The site offers various areas of discussion including agronomic and regional practices as well as an equipment forum. No-Tillville may just prove to be one of the most popular destinations for Canadian farmers this winter, and it will allow them to discuss the issues of zero till with international counterparts without having mosquitoes getting in the way.
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
11
12
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
Watch the Plant, Not the Calendar By Les Kletke The cool late spring may have had producers out in the field later than usual, but that was no reason to sacrifice the quality of feed or to mismanage a field with a second cut. John McGregor has long been involved with the Green and Gold Program (Optimum Alfalfa Harvest Date) that aids producers with their decision on when to cut their alfalfa. The program monitors fields and distributes the information about relative feed value. He was on hand at Forage Field Day at Neepawa to promote the Predictive Equation Alfalfa Quality (PEAQ) program and to explain to producers how to use the PEAQ stick. In the world of technology and microchips the stick seems somewhat of a throwback to earlier times. The metre long stick is marked with numbers indicating the relative feed value of alfalfa by comparing the height of the plant and its stage. The stage of the plant eliminates the consideration for date and concerns of an early or late spring. The stick only recognizes the height of the plant with no consideration for the calendar. PEAQ allows the producer to monitor his field and get an immediate read on its relative feed value to make a decision when to cut the field, based on its conditions. “To get the best results you should sample four or five places in the field,” said McGregor. “And
John McGregor demonstrates the PEAQ stick measure the height and stage of a Forage crop at a Field Day near Neepawa. Photo by Les Kletke
use the full height of the plant for the measurement. Then you can examine the plant for its stage from early vegetative to flower and get a reading from the stick.” The measure stick provides different values for the feed value considering the stages from early bud to flower. McGregor said that producers have to make the call on their own, but the PEAQ stick gives them a measure in their own field and allows for some consideration of the conditions involved such as the height of the plant. Traditionally the crop is cut at late bud or the appearance
of the first bloom but climatic conditions may delay the appearance of the bloom and PEAQ takes that into account. The optimum 150 relative feed value (RFV) tends to appear before the late bud stage and recommendations are to cut the crop earlier than was done in the past. The RFV may drop by as much as five points a day as the crop matures and normally a loss of about 20 occurs from cutting to hay being stored, so producers who are targeting 150 relative feed value in the barn are advised to cut the crop when values are in the 170 range.
The Agri Post
Agricultural Trade Partnerships Continue to Grow with Greater China During his most recent trade mission to Hong Kong and China, Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz highlighted the mutual benefit of stronger agricultural and trade ties between the region and Canada in meetings with government officials, investors and industry. “Our Government is committed to working with our trading partners from Hong Kong and China, to generate economic growth and prosperity on both sides of the Pacific,” said Ritz. “We continue to strengthen our agricultural trade ties, building on longstanding collaboration built with our Hong Kong and Chinese partners over many years”. China is a rapidly growing market for Canadian farmers with export sales of agricultural products to China worth $5 billion in 2012 and Ritz reiterated Canada’s commitment to doubling bilateral trade by 2015. In 2012, Hong Kong was Canada’s fifth largest agri-food export market with agriculture and agri-food products totalling $753 million, representing an increase of 26% over 2011. In Beijing, Ritz met with his counterparts from the Ministry of Agriculture and from China’s General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine. The two governments discussed next steps on a commitment to increase exports of Canadian beef and tallow to China. According to Canada Beef Inc., the Chinese market for Canadian beef and tallow is expected
From left to right: Minister Ritz with his counterpart from the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), Han Changfu, following a meeting where agricultural trade partnerships were strengthened.
to be worth $110 million once full market access is achieved. China imported over $10 million of deboned Canadian beef in 2012. Ritz signed two agreements with his Chinese counterparts, including a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish an animal health-working group. He also signed a second agreement on Grains and Oilseeds that aims to provide long-term, stable and predictable market access for Canadian wheat, barley and soybeans to China. To minimize the risks of trade disruptions and contribute to global food security goals, China has also approved a number of new genetically engineered crop applica-
June 28, 2013
21
tions that are essential to continue to foster innovation in both Canada and China. Ritz also witnessed the signing of another MOU between the Canadian International Grains Institute and Wilmar, a Chinese agribusiness group interested in buying Canadian wheat and pulses. In Hong Kong, Ritz met with his counterpart, industry and investors to discuss sales opportunities for Canadian products and attended promotional events to raise the demand for Canada’s high-quality agricultural products that will provide additional export opportunities for Canadian businesses. These events were attended by Canadian industry, media, importers, retailers and investors with the goal of raising Canada’s profile and increasing the demand for Canadian agricultural products.
y a D t n e m e v e i h c A 4-H
Young Aurora Mikkelsen guides her pony through its paces at the Rapid City Chutes ‘n Boots 4-H Rodeo Club show in Rapid City on June 16th. Photo by Joan Airey
22
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
The Agri Post
Agriculture More than Ever By Les Kletke Farmers are more optimistic about the future of their industry than ever before and FCC wants to tell the world about the industry and the optimism in it. Lyndon Carlson is the Senior Vice President Marketing Farm Credit Canada (FCC). He told an audience at Regina’s Farm Progress Show that their corporation has conducted a study to measure optimism in the industry and nearly 4 out of 5 farmers think the future is the brightest it has ever been for the industry. Carlson said the study, conducted just over a year ago, found that 78 percent of farmers were more optimistic about the future than they had ever been. “It is time to [tell] the world that agriculture is cool,” said Carlson. “And to 17 year olds cool is important. You make some pretty important life decisions when you are 17, decisions like what you are going to study at University and what you are going to do with your life. We want to tell people that agriculture is a cool place to be.” He points out that it is not just a feel good campaign about the industry that FCC has conceived in ‘Agriculture More Than Ever’, “We are going to have 50,000 new jobs in this industry in the next decade and we need people to fill those jobs.” The campaign has signed on 170 from all aspects of the industry and distributed over 7,500 t-shirts with the Agriculture More Than Ever slogan in the last year. More importantly, the campaign has over 50,000 hits on face book and has placed 71 videos on You-tube. Carlson said that the first year of the program has been great, “But it is just the beginning, we need to get the message to more people and to do that we need more people to get involved.” He said that agriculture needs a change in attitude and he sees it coming through the campaign but would like to see it happen faster. “We need to change our attitude from one of apologizing about our industry and asking for handouts to one of taking a place of being one of the most important industries in the country, because we are.” Carlson does not advocate a series of handouts from governments but rather sees support systems that are an investment in agriculture and the future of a sustainable industry that provides safe food for the country’s consumers. “Governments invest in industries all the time, and it makes sense,” said Carlson. “Agriculture is a good investment for the taxpayers of this country and it is a good industry to be involved in.” The Agriculture More
Than Ever campaign is heading into its second year, and Carlson said the plan is to keep spreading the
message that it is a good place to be and a great career choice for young people who are deciding their future.”
Tractor TTrek rek FFundraiser undraiser a Success Thirty-eight trekkers participated in Steinbach’s Mennonite Heritage Village’s Tractor Trek hosted recently and collectively raised over $29,000. These funds will be split between Mennonite Heritage Village and Eden Foundation and will go a long way in helping each organization with their operating and programming costs. During the course of the day over 50kms were travelled around the southeastern part of Manitoba. Awards were presented to the “trekkers” in many different categories. The People’s Choice Award went to Alvin Brandt for his 1954 IHC Super W4 tractor and the Trekkers Choice (Bruce Reimer Award) went to Werner Rempel for his 1949 John Deere R tractor.
June 28, 2013
23
24
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
Serve the Best Grower and Finisher Diets to Dairy Holstein Steers Holstein steers are no longer fed as a sideline for the beef market in western Canada. With the advent of rising feeder and corresponding fat prices for all beef animals in the last few years, the interest in raising Holstein steers has been taken on full-scale proportions by many cattle feeders. These people have penciled out a favourable opportunity of taking weaned Holstein calves and putting them through vigorous grower and finisher feeding programs until slaughter. They also know that feeding Holstein steers has its own unique set of rules and challenges, but when overcome, it leads to income revenue and profits. Aside from four hooves, many cattle feeders express that feeding a Holstein steer is really feeding a different animal compared to a more traditional beef-breed steer. From its classic black and white appearance, Holstein steers are large, tall and lean animals, which have thin hides, short hair coats and carry less external back fat. While this makes for an animal that is less adaptable to our cold weather, it doesn’t stop them from consuming about 10-12 percent more feed (dry matter basis) and achieving favourable average daily gains. When they are finished in a feedlot, Holstein steers are usually marketed between 15-16 months of age and have large mature bodyweights of about 1,3001,400 lbs. It’s these basic fence-line impressions that are augmented by realistic carcass data, which has been collected on finished Holstein feeders. At comparable weights, Holstein steers have less external back fat, less muscling and greater bone to muscle ratios compared to beef-type breeds. They tend to have lower yields of desired boneless cuts, yet what lean muscle is laid down tends to be well marbled. Trim pieces removed from dairy carcasses also yield leaner cutouts. Overall, Holstein steers have dressing percentages at the packers that are generally 6-8 percent lower compared to beef breeds. Such “meat and bone” differences exhibited by dairy steers are attributed to a large energy requirement in the first place and the subsequent pathway in which this dietary energy is metabolized. It has been demonstrated by university and extension field work that Holstein steers require about 10 percent more energy for maintenance of larger body frames and up-keep of vital functions. They also showed that growing dairy steers use dietary energy more efficiently for laying down protein tissue and are less efficient in fat accumulation compared to most beef cattle. Consequently, fat deposition in Holstein cattle is not particularly linked with their average daily gain and feed conversion (re: feed to gain ratio) is significantly increased toward marketable weights. This means that feeding programs should be designed for Holstein steers that puts them on a higher plane of nutrition compared to those for conventional beef cattle in order to maximize feedlot performance. The most successful Holstein feeder programs are usually broken down into a two-
phase feeding series; (1) a grower phase, which targets a 2.5-3.0 lb average daily gain for 350-700 lb Holstein steers and (2) a finisher phase that targets a 2.8-3.2 lb average daily gain for 700-1,200 lb (to market) Holstein steers. The respective initial grower diet should contain a substantial amount of nutritious forages (30-50 percent) supplemented with grain concentrates that supply a modest amount of dietary energy (50-55 Mcal NEg/ cwt, DM); given some allowance for young Holstein calves that need to grow in frame-size. The second phase diet should contain much less forage, which makes it largely made up of high-energy grain (80-85 percent) that supplies high dietary energy (62-68 Mcal NEg/cwt, DM). This high-energy diet maximizes good Holstein finisher gains and conserves the number of days needed to reach an economic marketable weight of 1,200-1,400 lbs. Despite the focus upon the high-energy diets to drive good Holstein performance, it is also important to ensure that other essential nutrient levels are met. By the time they enter the feedlot young animals should be provided with a ration with about a 13-14 percent protein level and then a finisher diet of about 11-12 percent protein. Calcium levels of 0.6-0.7 percent are respectively recommended with a half a bag of extra limestone often added to the mixer wagon toward the end of the finisher phase. Most of the time we do not worry about adding phosphorus to both grower and finisher diets because increasing grain levels tend to supply enough of this macro-mineral. In contrast, both Holstein grower and finisher diets must contain a strong trace-mineral pack (copper, zinc, manganese, iodine, cobalt and selenium) and vitamins A, D, and E. These essential trace minerals and vitamins not only are vital to the good maintenance and growth of these animals, but also play a vital role in immune function, which helps Holsteins fight disease and remain healthy. An ionophore such as monensin sodium should be added to the diets at 22 g to 33 g levels to help improve feed efficiency and prevent coccidiosis. Consequently, here is an illustration of sample diets of grower and finisher diets for Holstein steers marketed at 1,400 lbs, coming into the feedlot as 500 lbs calves and gaining 2.8 lb/head/day on the grower diet and 3.2 lbs/head/day on the finisher diet:
These diets for the growing and finishing Holstein steers are suggestive only. Their actual formulation and set up on a farm will also be based on individual factors such as weight and health status of incoming Holstein cattle, degree of segregation, desired performance and existing farm facilities and labour resources. Furthermore, the basic cost of the above rations will vary too; calculated at $2.15/head/day for the grower and $2.71/head/day for the finisher diets (i.e.: corn silage @ $67/tonne and $6.00/bu for barley). Most people will eventually choose and feed high-energy balanced diets geared for Holstein steers that work for them. There might be minor or major differences among these diets, but the best ones should always put the most profitable pounds on Holstein steers in the feedlot.
Making Sense of Hay Sheds By Les Kletke Does a hay shed make sense for Manitoba producers? The answer is clear; it depends on the individual’s situation and the value of the hay he is producing. That was the message from Tim Clarke of Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives (MAFRI) who was one of the presenters at the Manitoba Forage Day in Neepawa. “It’s a tough question,” acknowledged Clark, who provided budgets on a range of sheds in both size and style. “One of the prime factors to consider is the quality of hay and how much is lost in the quality of the feed and the resultant cost.” “The work done by [The Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute] PAMI was done in 1988, which was a very dry year,” he said. “The measured losses of the hay were probably less that year than they are most years in Manitoba.” The value assigned for the loss of hay that is exposed to the weather is also dependant on the value of the hay; it probably doesn’t make sense on $0.4 per lb for hay.” He said the one place where the answer is clear is with silage, “You should always cover silage with plastic. That is one that makes sense.” Clarke said that tarps may provide an economic alternative. “Tarps are much cheaper, and while they do require more labour they are effective,” he said. His numbers showed that with an expected life of three years a tarp would cost $1.38 per tonne of hay protected per year, a good return on even medium quality hay. His budget for an 80ft x 200ft structure has a cost of $228,000. Put the price of storage at $212/tonne and the producer inputs their own numbers for the quality of hay being preserved in order to find what the return would be. On smaller sheds the cost could be as high as $242 per tonne. “The producer also has to consider if he has another use for the shed when it is not being used for storing hay or if the shed will be used for hay storage year round,” said Clarke, “The numbers for the cost of the shed are the easy part. It is up to the individual to consider their situation, and if a shed makes sense for them, it certainly does preserve the quality of the hay.”
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
25
26
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
The Agri Post
Seed Hawk Continues to Grow By Les Kletke Pat Beaujot said the single greatest feature of the Seed Hawk air seeder is the opener for seed placement, which is controlled hydraulically so that the pressure can be changed to match field conditions. But, judging by the traffic stopping by the Seed Hawk display at the Farm Progress Show the size of the tank on the unit is an important feature as well. The display at Regina’s Farm Progress Show featured a seed tank that had four different compartments to accommodate seed or dry fertilizer. The unit was a proto type that is not yet market ready but has been tested in the field. The length of the unit, at nearly 50 feet, meant that there were some challenges in getting a uniform airflow to the seeding unit. Beaujot, President of Seed Hawk which is based in Langbank, Saskatchewan said he is sure that the challenges can be overcome as so many have in the 20 plus years the company has been manufacturing seeding equipment and coming to the Farm Progress Show. “We started coming to the show in 1992,” he said. “The company was brand new when we came with our first model. At that time air seeders were on a heavy frame and did not do well in wet conditions, they sunk away.” He credits the lighter frame for the machines popularity in Manitoba, “they are often seeding in wetter conditions and the lighter machine helps, but the hydraulics still allow the farmer to get the proper pressure on the opener.” “Since 2008 we have had individual section controls and that allows a section to be turned off just at the boom on a sprayer so there is no overlap on odd shaped fields,” said Beaujot. “On an 80-foot unit that can be a significant saving on the amount of seed.” Currently the 80-foot width of machine is the widest offered by the company but that may also change in the future. While the overall size of the unit has grown, the importance of seed placement by the individual openers remains a key feature of the machine. “We have done well in areas where there is significant canola acreage, like Manitoba,” he said. “The unit allows for proper placement of the seed, which was a significant improvement over the air seeders of a few years ago or discers which basically spread the seed with very little control.” He said it was the early adapters that tried the Seed Hawk and liked the placement of canola, “It
The Seed Hawk opener allows for precision placement of the seed while being mounted on a lighter frame which allows travel in wetter conditions.
Photo by Les Kletke
June 28, 2013
27
was the bread and butter, or in their case, bread and margarine of the machine.” In 2006, Seed Hawk partnered with Väderstad-Verken AB of Sweden a large, family-owned company that manufactures and sells seeding and tillage equipment around the world. When Väderstad-Verken became a minority shareholder, the partnership helped with expansion of sales globally. Recently Seed Hawk announced plans to begin work on two separate expansions to their facility in Langbank. In June, they will break ground on a 15,000 square foot addition to their manufacturing shop and work on a second, larger 81,000 square foot addition to their manufacturing shop will begin in January 2014. Expanding the complex in Langbank will allow Seed Hawk to carry and assemble more of Väderstad’s products. It will also provide the space necessary to support a new corn planter and expand their line-up of zero-till seeding solutions.
Rental Reimbursement If have an insurance claim for any of your machinery, you will likely need to rent a replacement until you have the damaged one repaired or replaced. This can be a costly experience for you unless your insurance policy covers the expense. The Machinery Loss of Use Coverage will pay the rental cost of the replacement machinery if the damage to your equipment is covered by the insurance policy and if you can show that, you need the replacement. It will not pay if you simply experience a breakdown and will not pay the full cost of custom work service. But, it may pay a portion. In all cases, the rental unit has to be approved by the adjuster. In a number of cases, we have seen the Loss of Use claims add up to be more than the Machinery claim. You also need to make sure you have enough coverage. It used to be that $2,000 per day rental coverage was enough. However, today machinery rental rates are higher and daily rentals can reach $3,000. For a minimal difference in cost, you should consider insuring at the higher level. Be sure to seek advice and purchase insurance from those who understand your business! Andy Anderson is an Associate Insurance Broker specializing in General, Life and Group Benefits for Farm, Commercial/Agri-business Ph: 204-746-5589 Tf: 866 765 3351 andya@rempelinsurance.com /rempelinsurance.com / valleyfinancial.ca.
28
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
Beef: Conservation in Action
Manitoba’s beef producers are the single largest collection of conservationists in the province. That may sound like a radical statement to some, but it is in fact a reflection of reality. It is also a fact that is increasingly becoming recognized by legislators and policy makers. When announcing the new
legislation to protect ecosystems, Honourable Gord Mackintosh, Manitoba Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship stated, “grazing is an important management practice to maintain healthy grassland ecosystems and populations of species at risk.” At an event on June 14, which announced federal funding for wetland and grassland protection, the Chair of the Manitoba Habitat Heritage Corporation, John Whitaker, noted, “We like cattle producers.” The view of the general public on beef and the environment is often tainted by commentary on flatulent cows contributing greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. When I hear these stories, I often wonder if these commentators have ever stopped to consider the collective gas production of the millions of bison that roamed the Prairies. It has been noted that the research, which led to this point of view, is flawed and incomplete. At best, these comments are simply not reflective of cattle production in Manitoba’s northern climate. Nevertheless, the view of beef production as an environmental problem has been stuck in the public mind set. It is time to change that misperception. Why should our province’s ranchers be acknowledged as being at the front line in habitat and species protection? Because maintaining land in pasture production helps protect biodiversity for a broad range of species-from plants, animals and birds to insects and amphibians. Species listed under Manitoba’s Endangered Species Act and the federal Species at Risk Act make their homes on both privately and publicly owned pastureland in the province. This is demonstrated by work done on the 409,000 acres of grasslands that are preserved in the community pasture program in Manitoba. Research has shown that these pastures alone provide a home to 33 different species at risk. This does not consider the millions of other private pasture and Crown land leased for grazing. I have heard it said that if you want to preserve habitat and endangered species you should try to preserve beef producers. Protecting Lake Winnipeg and moderating flooding should be added to the list. In addition to species and habitat protection, many pastures are home to wetlands and Prairie potholes, helping to both store and filter water. These are two key functions that are inevitably highlighted whenever the perennial Manitoba topics of flood prevention and the health of Lake Winnipeg are raised. What is the alternative to grazing this land? Clearing and extensive drainage. Some people may say, “Just leave the land alone for nature.” But removing grazing and simply setting grassland aside is as bad a conservation practice as clearing and draining. Why? Because nature is not static. Without cattle and grazing, the habitat we see today will be lost as the ecosystems change and evolve. This erosion of habitat is as damaging as any other loss. I am pleased to see the beginning of recognition of the environmental services provided by Manitoba’s beef producers. Governments are searching for ways to increase protection for vulnerable habitat and species at risk. I believe there are straightforward, market-based solutions that will help society accomplish its conservation goals and give producers the opportunity to continue, and expand, the practices that generate environmental benefits. To date, producers have not been compensated for the external environmental benefits that they provide to society. If governments were to amend this shortcoming and provide market-based compensation for the ecosystem services already provided, producers would have adequate economic incentives to increase conservation management practices. Ecological goods and services pilot projects have been run in Manitoba. One example is the joint Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada/Ducks Unlimited Canada research project at South Tobacco Creek near Miami. Manitoba has also played a leadership role in the investigation of agri-environmental incentive initiatives, such as the development of the AgriExtension Environment Program and other Best Management Practices (BMP) programs. Enough work has been done to unequivocally state, that programs designed to compensate producers for the delivery of ecological goods and services will increase conservation management practices and accomplish many of society’s environmental objectives. Additional research is not required prior to launching such initiatives. These societal benefits can be accomplished without rigid legislation and regulation. Market-based environmental incentives are flexible and can be easily adjusted to changing circumstances and new knowledge. I strongly hold that the most effective stewardship programs are those that are developed in co-operation with the producers who manage the land and water. Programs designed to be voluntary are the most cost-effective ones for Manitoba taxpayers, they will be most successful in delivering long-term environmental results and they will encourage the growth and development of Manitoba’s economy.
Costs Are the Same, So Take the Big Crop By Les Kletke Dan Undersander tells forage producers that their costs on a good crop and a poor crop are virtually the same, “So you might as well get a good crop and reduce your cost per ton.”Undersander is recognized as one of the continents leading forage experts and works at the University of Wisconsin, which conducts North America’s largest forage trials. He spoke to producers at Neepawa and the Manitoba Forage Day via a teleconference. He said that fixed costs are the same, production costs are similar and harvesting costs are similar on a one or two ton per acre crop, “So, if you get two tons your cost per ton is reduced and it is easier to make money on your cattle.” Undersander, always the pragmatist, recognized that sometime factors like weather can affect quality of feed but it is important to recognize what you have and use it accordingly. He said testing and being aware of Relative Feed Values is a must in deciding where feed should go. Undersander, who deals primarily with dairy producers, said that the milking dairy herd has the highest feed requirements and should get the best feed, followed by heifers or beef cows, then young heifer or dry cows. “Quality is important and has to be weighed against the volume of feed,” said Undersander. “Yield peaks in the flower stage and by that time you are losing leaves. Tonnage and quality drops after the flowering stage.” He said the plant health is to be considered as well as the forage yield, and root reserves are a prime consideration. He estimates that a million acres of forage is lost in Wisconsin annually because of not having proper root reserves. Undersander surprised the gathering of beef and dairy producers with the grass crop information and how quickly they deteriorate after the optimum harvest date. “Grasses decline faster than forages and after the peak, you are losing as much as half a percent a day (of feed value),” he said. “Stems and the height of stems is what determines the quality of grasses and the leaves won’t change but the digestibility of the stems declines after a certain date.” His data shows that in forages, protein drops by a quarter of a percent per day after peaking and non-digestible fibre by 0.4 percent a day, “That means you are losing nearly 1.0 percent every two days. Timing is critical.”
Opportunities for Canadian Canola in China A year long joint Sino-Canadian study released to key decision-makers in China has proven that the use of Canadian canola meal in cattle feed in Chinese dairies can significantly increase quantity produced. In a market where demand for milk is skyrocketing and milk quality is a concern for both dairies and consumers alike, the study marks a turning point in the development of China’s dairy industry. It also opens up potential opportunities for Canadian canola meal in China. Assuming the entire Chinese dairy industry included Canadian canola meal, milk production in China would increase by about seven million litres per day. The study, coordinated by the Canola Council of Canada (CCC) with funding from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, was conducted by leading Chinese academics, in cooperation with China’s largest dairy companies. “We are delighted with the success of this joint research project with China,” said Canola Council President Patti Miller. “Canola meal has now proven its value as a feed product in Chinese dairies, opening the door for China’s milk industry to enhance quality and increase production without significantly increasing cost.” The research was conducted by Dr. Li Shengli and Dr. Wang Ruojun of the China Agricultural University at dairy farms operated by China’s five largest milk producers. The study proved that when used in dry rations, meal from Canadian canola could increase daily milk production by .6 kilograms per cow, a substantial increase. One kilogram of milk is roughly equivalent to one litre. Over the past 30 years, research done in various countries with Canadian canola meal has shown a cumulative average increase in milk production of one litre per cow per day, so this most recent study in China is consistent with long-term studies. “This study does more than just demonstrate a link between canola feed and the quantity of milk produced,” noted Dr. Ruojun. “It makes clear that canola provides an answer to a challenge that has vexed Chinese dairies for years: how to raise both the quality and quantity of milk produced without raising cost disproportionately. Our research shows that use of canola is not only effective; it is economical for Chinese dairy farmers as well.”
The Agri Post
June 28, 2013
29
The Horse Industry in Brandon
Brandon in the 1880’s established itself as the draft horse centre on the prairies and became the headquarters for many leading Canadian horse dealers such as Colquhoun and Beattie, Trotter and Trotter, Alexander Galbraith, J.B. Hogate, J.A. McMillan, Ben Finlayson, J.D. McGregor and others. How Brandon managed to attract a large number of horse dealers is a combination of factors. Brandon had good rail connections east and west plus as the largest town in the area, Brandon attracted settlers into Brandon on a regular basis. Brandon also benefited from the settlement pattern of the time. Settlers had to travel well west of Winnipeg in the 1880s to obtain homestead land due large blocks of land being unavailable in the area between Winnipeg and Brandon because of purchase by speculators, being reserved for various ethnic groups or because of land grants to the Canadian Pacific Railway. When the flood of settlers began in earnest in the period 1895 to 1914, there was a correspondingly large increase in demand for draft horses, the predominant source of power on the farm in that period. Brandon was well positioned to fill this demand. Brandon horse dealers brought in stallions and mares from Scotland, England, France, Belgium, Ontario and the USA. The better animals were used for breeding purposes with the offspring sold to farmers. As well, farmers would bring their mares into Brandon so they could be mated with a quality stallion that a horse dealer owned. This was a cheap method of improving the bloodlines of a farmer’s horses. Stallions being somewhat more unpredictable and less easy to handle were not animals well suited to a draft horse team and so many farmers would not want to keep a stallion. Lesser quality animals were also purchased by dealers from areas outside the prairies and resold to western farmers. While many stories abound of farmers being sold problem horses by unscrupulous horse dealers, some accounts by dealers tell of farmers being somewhat less than truthful when
selling horses to the dealer. In one account by a dealer, a farmer was telling the dealer that the horse was in middle age when the dealer informed the farmer that the horse was that age when the dealer brought the animal to the Prairies 10 years previously! It would appear that horse-trading was not for the gullible and naïve! With Brandon being a centre for draft horses, the Brandon Summer Fair rapidly became known for its draft horse classes. By 1889, the fair could claim the biggest and best draft horse show in western Canada. When the Brandon Winter Fair came about in 1908 it became known for the size and quality of its draft horse show with local sellers and dealers from other areas. To draft horse judges, the two fairs were known as no vacation to work because of the quality of animals entered and an audience that knew horses and was not shy about voicing concerns on the judging. The Brandon Winter Fair in particular became known to judges as the “Stallion Storm Centre” and to the dealers as the “Supreme Horse Court”. Draft horses remained the primary power source on the farm until the late 1920s when tractor design and manufacture advanced to the point where economical and reliable tractors were being offered for sale. With the coming of the Great Depression, draft horses again became a more economical power source than tractors and remained so for most of the 1930s. The coming of World War II resulted in tractor manufacturers switching to war production and so horses remained a signifi-
A Clydesdale horse class in the show ring at the 1912 Brandon Summer Fair. The white building in the background is one of the horse stables that existed on the fair grounds in 1912. Photo compliments of the McKee Archives, Brandon University.
cant source of power through the war years. However, with the end of the war, farm mechanization was relaunched and by 1950, the draft horse was largely retired from farm work. The 2013 Threshermen’s Reunion Expo features Horsepower plus Massey and related companies. The Horsepower Expo celebrates the role of horses in agriculture. At this time, approximately 20 draft horse teams are set to appear and the Expo committee is working to get ready a number of horse drawn implements for use in demonstrations. As well, the Clydesdale Expo is set to return. So the 2013 Reunion is the place to be if you are interested in draft horses! If you have horse era implements in your collection, please think about displaying them at the Expo.
The 2013 Threshermen’s Reunion runs from July 25-28.
Join the Massey Equipment Family at the Museum The Model 20 was introduced in 1938 making 2013 the 75th anniversary of this design, the first commercially successful self-propelled combine. In 1911, Massey Harris (MH) recruited an Australian engineer, Tom Carroll, a specialist in harvest machinery to work on a MH Model 1, a stripper type combine. When this proved less than successful, he helped redesign the MH Model 3 combine. In 1917, he had progressed to the MH Model 5. By 1936, Carroll had come to believe in a self-propelled combine. Carroll was aware of the Sunshine Combine produced in the 1920s by the Taylor McKay Company of Australia by doing business with them and being a part owner. Carroll had also seen in Argentina pull type combines that had been converted to self-propelled machines. Carroll had an ally in MH’s newly appointed General Manager, James S. Duncan, who readily agreed to allow Carroll’s design team to work on a self-propelled combine design. In 1938, eight pre-production prototypes were delivered to farms in Argentina for a field test program. Feedback on their performance was so positive that production was authorized immediately with new combines being delivered to customers early in 1939. The Model 20 was equipped with a 16-foot table, which was wide by 1930’s standards. More importantly, the machine was equipped with a 37-inch cylinder, which gave good capacity for the time. The layout of the MH-20 was similar to a modern combine. The operator station was right of centre of the machine, just behind the table, which gave an excellent view forward. The table could be equipped with a pick up or a knife and reel making the machine capable of straight cutting given proper crop conditions. The grain tank was behind the operator position on the left side of the machine. The MH-20 was built on a steel girder chassis and was powered by a Chrysler six cylinder truck engine. This engine and some driveline components were used in some models of MH tractors. The engine was hung out on the right side of the combine where it was accessible but exposed to the elements. While the MH-20 was heavy and expensive, it was popular with customers who were pleased with its manoeuvrability and capacity. Sales of the MH-20 totalled 925 machines over two years, 1939 and 1940. The Model 20 was succeeded by the
The Museum’s Model 20 combine had its engine placed on the right side making it accessible although exposed to the elements. For 1938, the machine offered the ultimate in operator comfort with a sunshade over the operator’s position.
Massey Harris Model 21, which sold in the thousands giving MH a majority share of the rapidly emerging market for selfpropelled combines. Carroll’s role in the success of the MH-20 was recognized with the award of a Gold Medal in 1958 by the American Society of Agricultural Engineers to recognize his contribution to combine development. Along with the first successful selfpropelled combine, Carroll helped introduce to the farm machinery business, mechanical improvements such as welding, roller chain, oil bath gear sets, ball bearings and detachable tables that made combines easier to transport. The MH-20 that is operating condition at the Museum comes from the Westwood Family of Rapid City. Harold Westwood, who farmed in the Rapid City area and operated the Massey Harris dealership in the town of Rapid City, purchased the combine new in 1938. Westwood farmed through the 1950s and sold the combine to a nephew sometime in the early 1960s. The nephew used it for a few years and then parked the machine. Westwood’s’ grandsons, Allan and Laurence Westwood, purchased the machine in 1983 and returned it to operating condition donating it to the Museum. The Expo at the 2013 Threshermen’s Reunion features the Massey family of companies. If you have equipment built by Massey Harris, Sawyer Massey, Massey Harris Ferguson, Massey Ferguson or any of the firms purchased by the Massey family such as Wallis or Wisner, you should consider bringing it to the Massey Expo by contacting the Museum office at (204) 637-2354 to make arrangements.
30
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post
The Big “M” Celebrates 50 Years During the early 60’s, Morris was home to some good agricultural fairs. However, in 1963, the fair barely broke even and it was felt that a drastic change had to be made or quit altogether. In October of 1963, a meeting for local supporters was sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce to discuss the idea of holding a rodeo. A 7- person committee was formed from this group to find out what they could do about putting on a rodeo. The Rural Municipality of Morris was willing to guarantee $2,000 a year for three years and the Town of Morris $1,000 a year for three years. Two local members, Bruce MacKenzie from Morris and Arthur Vermette from St. Jean Baptiste attended the Cowboys’ Protective Association meeting in Calgary and came back with a favourable report. After a public meeting held on December 11, 1963, the decision was to go ahead. Local promoter, Cliff Claggett who was instrumental in getting the NorthWest Round Up started at Swan River was contacted along with rodeo producer, Harry Vold who was originally from Ponoka, Alberta to attend a meeting to check over the grounds and facilities. They made several recommendations and agreed that if the Valley Agricultural Society would provide the necessary facilities then they would guarantee a show and the Stampede was born. A contest was held to arrive at a name for the event. “The Manitoba Stampede and Exhibition” as the full name and the “Big M” logo was born. Bruce MacKenzie was elected the first Rodeo Chair and Lyman Sadler also living in Morris became the first Rodeo Secretary. Most of the surrounding towns and municipalities appointed a representative to the Board of Managers with this practice continuing for several years. Planning started immediately with a mere $200 in the bank and only 22 acres of property. The cost for the event climbed to $17,000 since the existing facilities were entirely inadequate. The finance committee decided that the support of everyone was needed. People were approached with the idea of loaning the Society $100 each, with no guarantee of repayment. As a result, 108 individuals, companies and organizations came through and by the end of March; the Society had $10,800 to work with. With the promise of another $25,000 from the bank, the Stampede was on its way. Negotiations for additional property were already under way, improvements began with the construction of a new track started with local municipalities and contractors supplying the necessary equipment and a contractor was hired to construct the grandstand. Despite delays in timber shipments due to flooding in Oregon, the stands were completed only minutes before the first spectators started filing in. In 1967, the first five-day rodeo known as the Big “M” was attended by 27,000 people and revenue from the gate and grandstand totaled $54,629. At the annual meeting of the Canadian Rodeo Cowboys Association in 1968, the Manitoba Stampede and Exhibition was recognized as the second biggest stampede in Canada and in 1969, the Stampede adopted the “Red Hat” as its symbol in 1969. Much has happened since; the Big “M” is no longer the second largest stampede. However, the Big “M” has retained the only Manitoban professional rodeo status and has consistently provided top-notch family entertainment.
From Thursday, July 18 to Sunday, July 21, Morris will host its 50th Big M with special event planning underway to make the 2013 Manitoba Stampede the best ever.
Sale of Smithfield to Chinese Company Looks Good Say Industry Reps By Harry Siemens The recent sale of Smithfield Foods a Virginia based pork producer to Shuanghui International Holdings, China’s largest pork producer for $4.72 billion appears to bring out accolades so far for various reasons but the main one is the Chinese need the protein for 1.3 billion people and this purchase gives them some food security. “I think it will, in the long term likely create some opportunities for Canadian hog producers in the United States market,” said Perry Mohr, General Manager of H@MS Marketing Services Co-op in Winnipeg. “Well, they are doing this for food supply security. It should and likely will increase exports of U.S. pork to China. This could create a void for pork in the U.S. and Canada is strategically placed to fill it.” Mohr said today M-Cool effects pork going south, but again in the long term, he thinks that will become somewhat of a lesser factor. “Either it will go away completely or everyone will figure out how to work with it,” he said. A direct Smithfield pipeline to China might stimulate exports if it can minimize red tape. Steve Meyer, of Paragon Economics in Iowa recognizes the Smithfield deal is a big opportunity for a country of 1.3 billion people that do not have the capacity to produce 50 pounds of pork per person. Meyer said the bottom line is that the Chinese deal for Smithfield is bullish for long-term exports, which helps lift deferred futures. Traders fret that intermediate-term interest in buying pork could sag. Pork gains suggest that immediate demand remains firm. “This is a major purchase by a company from a country that some expect to eventually become our largest pork export customer,” said Meyer. “Remember the ‘China Principle’: 1.3 billion times any number is a very big number!” He said let’s keep this in perspective. While Smithfield is a behemoth both as a packer and hog producer, it is a drop in the bucket compared to hog numbers, pork production and pork consumption in China. Smithfield’s importance in the U.S. industry is roughly a 26 percent share of U.S. hog slaughter capacity and a 16 percent share of the U.S. sow herd. Meyer said that 862,000 sows, roughly the number Smithfield has, will produce somewhere in the vicinity of 20 to 22 million market hogs per year, China in 2012 had 49.28 million sows and slaughtered 694 million hogs. Smithfield’s U.S. numbers would account for 1.7 percent of the Chinese sow herd and 3 percent of China’s 2012 slaughter. So what are the implications of this purchase for the U.S. pork industry? “The purchase does not change the structure of the U.S. industry at all and thus should have no impact on the competitive landscape,” he said. “In spite of the predictable outcry by small farm advocates and even some U.S. lawmakers, the purchase doesn’t change concentration levels or remove any competitors from the U.S. marketplace. There is no reason that U.S. antitrust laws should come into play in any review of the transaction.” “The sale is subject to review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) but we understand that that group’s major focus is on national security issues and we don’t see that this one poses any such threats,” he added. Does this potentially transfer U.S. technology to China? Smithfield may have some unique systems or procedures but Meyer doubts that there is much, if any, technology in Smithfield’s plants or hog farms that Chinese firms could not access already. U.S .firms have been actively working with Chinese companies for years and, again, raising and processing pigs probably doesn’t involve much spying or missile technology.
Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Outbreak in U.S. An outbreak of Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea (PED) virus in the U.S., the first time this disease has been confirmed in North America. This virus has been widespread in Europe and Asia and active in China since 2010. The outbreak appears to be widespread in the U.S., with no apparent linkages found among affected areas. Several investigative teams are currently working to establish the source of the infection. PED is caused by a corona virus distinct from Transmissible Gastroenteritis virus (TGE). Like TGE, the virus damages the villi in the gut thus reducing the absorptive surface, with loss of fluid and dehydration, resulting in loss of fluid, dehydration, and often death. Since this disease is new to North America, Canadian herds have no immunity and impacts would be severe. “This disease would have a devastating impact on our Canadian industry,” said Jean-Guy Vincent, President of the Canadian Pork Council. “Since this disease has never been in Canada, our Canadian herd remains very susceptible to PED. Production losses from this disease would have severe impacts on competitiveness of the sector, and all producers have a key role to play in protecting against PED in Canada.” “The most important thing producers can do is tighten their on-farm biosecurity,” said Florian Possberg, Chair of the Canadian Swine Health Board. “Producers should ensure all trucks entering their farms that may have been in the U.S. have been effectively cleaned and disinfected. Good biosecurity can stop the spread of this and other pathogens.” The Canadian industry is fortunate that our northern climate, vast open spaces and low population densities provide an excellent growing environment for the commercial production for high quality premium hogs and excellent breeding stock. The sheer scale of Canada land mass enables the country to be a major food producer with less than 5 percent of its land dedicated to agriculture. Livestock production is spread over such a large area that animal density is low, despite the size of the industry. The CSHB’s Canadian Swine Health Intelligence Network (CSHIN) is the industry’s eyes and ears monitoring swine diseases, and this virus has not been reported through CSHIN. Producers are encouraged to ensure their veterinarians are participating in CSHIN to even further protect their herds. How this pathogen reached North America is still unknown, but Canadian stakeholders are working closely with their U.S. counterparts. The Canadian Association of Swine Veterinarians (CASV) is working in conjunction with the American Association of Swine Veterinarians to learn more about this pathogen and its transmission routes. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is also working closely with their counterparts at USDA. Producers seeing signs of widespread diarrhea in their herds should contact their veterinarian for a specific diagnosis, and take care to avoid exposing other farms. Producers are also encouraged to reference CSHB’s National Swine Farm-Level Biosecurity Standard, as well as protocols for effective cleaning and disinfection of trucks, available at swinehealth.ca.
The Agri Post
ey How Much Mon in Does Heat-stress and s w o C f e e B r u o Y Calves Cost? By Peter Vitti Manitoba often has several days that start at the beginning of July and might
continue toward the end of the summer, when hot weather can cause significant heat-stress in grazing beef cows and nursing calves.
Those animals that look really uncomfortable under the glare of the sun are most likely suffering from heatstress and may be costing you money! Heat-stress in cattle can easily burn up hard-earned cash in two big ways: (1) create open cows that for no other reason should be pregnant and (2) slowdown or stop good growth in healthy spring calves. At best, a hot weather open cow might only delay her future calf sales generated by an operation, because there may be the
promissory option that she could be put into a fall calving herd and then be successfully re-bred later on. At its worst, an operation may be forced to sell a good cow that gives lots of milk, which drives good calf performance or has exceptional genetics that could have been passed onto future replacement heifers. Such lost bred brood-cow income due to heat-stress is often intangible. By comparison, one should be able to calculate income lost when their heat-stressed spring calves don’t gain weight for any extended period of time during the summer. Even slightly heatstressed calves often have poor appetites and this lack of consumption dovetails into lower gains on pasture. Consider the following example: a 300 cow-calf operation suffers from a two-week heat wave. The calves in this virtual sample would normally be gaining about 2.2 lbs (1.0 kg) per head each day. Instead, we assume that their feed intakes are askew and they only consumed enough nutrients to support basic maintenance requirements. When these calves are sold in the fall, the calculation for lost gain and thus lost dollars are as follows: 300 spring calves x 2.2 lb/hd/d x 14 days x $1.55 (demonstration autumn price - weaned 550 lb steers) = $ 14,322.00. That’s over a $14,000 setback due to only two weeks of relentless heat! To understand the full scope of such a negative economic impact, we should review how heat-stress can easily affect a herd in the first place. A good rule of thumb is most heat-stress in cattle starts at air temperatures above 27 C and a 5060% relative humidity. Simple field observations of “hot” cows and calves will show that they are visibly lethargic, vigorously panting and have little desire to feed. In contrast, they visit available dugouts,
June 28, 2013 waterers, and water tanks more frequently as the humidex (reference; the Weather Channel) pushes higher. It is estimated that cattle in heat-stress situations will increase their water consumption by more than 50% compared to more comfortable weather conditions. Such outward signs of heat stress in cows and calves are also balanced by what we cannot see taking place in their bodies. Oklahoma State University reported that beef cows in a moderately heat-stressed state had a 64% pregnancy rate compared to 83% in an environmentally comfortable control group. It was also discovered that if the former cows suffered from heatstress at 8-16 days after becoming pregnant that the weight of embryo plus fluids weighed less, sharply decreasing the fetus’ chance of survival. Other references support these findings by stating that heat stress can have a negative effect upon follicular development about 40 days before and up to 40 days after ovum fertilization. Like beef cows, their calves suffer, internal struggles from heat stress as well. There is some speculation that heavy panting calves may blow off so much carbon dioxide that it leads to a great loss of natural buffering bicarbonate (via the urine) and may cause a general acidosis build up in their bodies. In turn, the rumen microbes that digest forage fibre and other feedstuffs, such as creep feed, start to die off. As a result, what little pasture and creep feed that calves consumed during hot weather may not be properly digested by the calves, which contributes to less weight gains by the end of the summer. When such scorching heat strikes both cows and calves there are a few steps that can be taken to reduce its negative impact upon cow
31
reproduction and calf growth: 1. Water is essential to cope with heat-stress. Lots of cool clean water must be provided. Some field studies show that water temperatures over 25C can actually increase the water requirement in heat-stressed cattle. It should be recognized that the water’s surface area should be sufficient for a large number of cattle to drink at the same time, and the water flow within the waterers and tanks be able to replenish water quickly. 2. Cows and calves should access to trees and other forms of shade. Open buildings and pole-sheds with light coloured roofs can provide some shade. Windbreaks will provide some shade, but they often reduce air movement and sometimes contribute to heat-stress. 3. Pasture management techniques might be adjusted. If one is using a rotational grazing system, rotate the cattle through pastures more quickly. This change allows cattle to graze more digestible pasture forages, which in turn may lower the internal generation of heat from fibre fermentation. 4. Feed a nutritious and palatable creep feed to nursing calves. It is also a good idea to frequently check the creep feeders and not allow them to go empty. 5. Provide salt and a good commercial mineral at all times. There are some pasture studies that suggest cattle need more sodium, potassium, and magnesium under heat- stressed conditions. 6. Implement a good fly control program. Many producers implement insecticide ear tags and use cattle back-rubbers, dusters and oilers. Eliminate shallow pools, muddy areas and other fly breeding spots, wherever possible. By the middle of summer, even a few weeks of hot weather can seem unbearable to beef cows and calves. We can help these heat-stress sufferers on pasture by implementing some coping techniques, which may result in a reduction of potential reproduction and growth performance problems as well as loss of autumn income.
32
June 28, 2013
The Agri Post