DON’T CRY IN YOUR BEER
IT’S THE END OF THE LINE
All is well despite widespread reports of a malt barley shortage » PG 2
Eight years and $230 million later, ALMA is now part of government » PG 3 Publications Mail Agreement # 40069240
V o l u m e 1 3 , n u m b e r 2 2 O c t o b e r 2 4 , 2 0 1 6
Where’s the beef? Increasingly, it’s in the premium product section Leave the lower-end market to other meats and ‘come to terms’ with the global push to reduce meat consumption, says ‘Dr. Food’ By ALEXIS KIENLEN AF STAFF/BANFF
T
he beef sector needs to position its meat as a premium product and forget about trying to duke it out with farmed fish and commercial chicken production, says one of the world’s bestknown food-marketing experts. Fish and chicken are “the two big meats” because they have the best feed conversion ratios, David Hughes said at the recent Global Conference on Sustainable Beef. “In developing countries where incomes are increasing, as they change their diets, the meats they move towards are chicken and fish because they are more affordable,” said Hughes, emeritus professor of food marketing at Imperial College, London whose expertise has earned him the moniker of ‘Dr. Food.’ “What’s the message from a beef point of view? Keep a long way from that fight. Because if we get involved in that fight, we’ll get our clocks cleaned.” And being in the premium market can be a good thing for the beef sector, he added. “As I wander around the world, looking at the price of beef in retail stores, it’s at least twice the price of the next meat down,” he said.
Farmers fear big price hit from carbon tax The focus has been on the price of fuel, but the effect of a carbon tax on the price of fertilizer, chemicals, and machinery could be much greater
A carbon tax is going to make fertilizer, chemicals, and machinery more expensive — and those aren’t costs Canadian farmers can pass on, says Stephen Vandervalk. PHOTO: SUPPLIED
PREMIUM BEEF } page 8
BY JENNIFER BLAIR AF staff
S
ixty miles south of where Stephen Vandervalk farms lies the American border — an invisible line dividing farm country with the same growing conditions producing crops that will be sold to mostly the same customers. But the Fort Macleod producer worries that being north of the line is going to be a huge disadvantage when the provincial carbon tax comes into effect in January. “How do you compete?” he asked. “This tax is going to apply to us and nobody else in the world. To a certain extent, we’re
Builders hailed
already not very competitive on the world stage because of where we live. We’re already at a freight disadvantage. “This just adds more fuel to the fire.” While farm fuel will be exempt when Alberta’s carbon tax of $20 per tonne (rising to $30 per tonne in 2018) comes into effect, other input costs — such as fertilizer, transportation, and crop protection products — will still be subject to it. That’s Vandervalk’s key concern on his 10,000-acre grain farm. “It’s just going to increase costs, and as primary producers, we can’t pass that cost on to our consumers,” he said. “It’s literally just going to come out of our margins, and there aren’t any margins in farming to allow for that.” Vandervalk is a director for the Western
Canadian Wheat Growers Association, which is circulating a petition calling on the federal government to scrap the proposed carbon tax. That tax will start at $10 per tonne in 2018, so it won’t affect Alberta at first. But it will increase $10 per tonne per year until it hits $50 in 2022. “For the next few years, Alberta’s carbon tax is actually going to be higher than the federal one, so it’s not until about 2020 when both plans say the carbon tax will be $30 per tonne,” said Naomi Christensen, a policy analyst at the Canada West Foundation. “After that, the federal plan could affect Alberta if the tax is raised and Alberta’s stays the same.”
CARBON TAX } page 6
trio now in ag hall of fame } PAGE 41