Beef Business May 2018

UR YO SIT VI

N. IO AT M OR NF EI OR RM FO ER AL DE DS EE RF TE AS LM CA LO

45

‘

CELEBRATING

Beef Business Saskatchewan’s largest circulated industry magazine Saskatchewan`s Premier Cattle Industry Publication Saskatchewan`s Premiere Cattlecattle Industry

BeefBusSKStockGrw_EarLug.indd 1

2018-03-21 4

May 2018

IN PUBLISHING

A Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association Publication Publication Mail Agreement #40011906

Working for Producers

Do YOU own or have care of a regulated livestock species ?

E xpected Canadian Food Inspection Agency animal identification and livestock

traceability regulatory amendments will require all livestock operations to identify their premises with their local government premises registry and use their valid premises identification (PID) number to report ruminant livestock movement event data to the Canadian Livestock Tracking System database at www.clia.livestockid.ca

PREPARE in two easy steps 1. Contact your local PREMISES REGISTRY to confirm or acquire a valid PID number for your livestock site and to verify your emergency contact information 2. Contact CANADIAN CATTLE IDENTIFICATION AGENCY to confirm or acquire a Canadian Livestock Tracking System database account and enter your PID into it by telephone at 1-877-909-2333 or email at info@canadaid.ca

FIND your local PREMISES REGISTRY BRITISH COLUMBIA: 1-888-221-7141 ALBERTA: 310-FARM (3276) SASKATCHEWAN: 1 - 8 6 6 - 4 5 7 - 2 3 7 7 MANITOBA: 1-204-945-7684 ONTARIO: 1-888-247-4999 QUEBEC: 1-866-270-4319 NEW BRUNSWICK: 1-506-453-2109 NOVA SCOTIA: 1-800-279-0825 PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND: 1-866-PEI-FARM NEWFOUNDLAND & LABRADOR: 1-709-637-2088 YUKON: 1-867-667-3043

YOU’VE PUT IN THE TIME. NOW PROTECT YOUR INVESTMENT. Purchase calf price insurance online or at your local crop insurance office by May 31.

We know what it takes to prepare your livestock for market — and how an unexpected turn can impact your profits. That’s why The Western Livestock Price Insurance Program is there to help you protect your business.

Choose from a range of coverage options every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. www.wlpip.ca

Contents Cover photo courtesy of Right Cross Ranch - Sarah Anderson, Kisbey, SK

A Proud Saskatchewan Tradition Since 1913

A Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association (SSGA) Publication

Industry News 6

Farming in Peril: The Rising Costs of Farmland Cloud the Future

8

New Regulations for Veterinary MIAs Coming

9

Problems Associated with Excess of Sulfur in Drinking Water Sources: Livestock Producers Perspective

12

New DUC Program Helps Producers Expand Operations

General Manager: Chad MacPherson Box 4752, Evraz Place, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4 Tel: 306-757-8523 Fax: 306-569-8799 email: ssga@sasktel.net OR ssga.admin@sasktel.net Website: www.skstockgrowers.com Communications Manager: Marusia Kaweski Box 4752, Evraz Place, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4 (306) 757-8523 (306) 569-8799 (fax) ssgacommunications@sasktel.net

Markets and Trade 14

Retail Meat Price Survey

15

Weekly Charts

Features 16

The Future of Meat: Exploring the Gap Between Producer and Consumer with Dr. Sylvain Charlebois

19

Threat Looming for Canadian Cattle Industry: The Impact of Carbon Pricing on the Beef Sector

24

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Managing Livestock Predators in Saskatchewan

26

Buying? Selling? Producers have options, and Responsibilities

28

Where's the Beef? Missing Livestock Files

Design and Layout: Jackson Designs Candace Schwartz Tel: 306-772-0376 email: cjacksondesigns@gmail.com

Stewardship 29

Multiple Approaches to Habitat Conservation: SARPAL Program Report

30

Drones are Migrating into Prairie Grassland Research Projects

31

Frank Linthicum Inducted into CWA Hall of Fame

32

SSGA AGM

34

SSGA Zones Hold Annual Meetings

35

2018 Zone Meeting Resolutions

36

A Report from the SSGA President

37

SSGA Welcomes New Director Ian Leaman

37

Calendar of Events

38

Advertisers Index

39

Business Directory

Prairie Conservation Action Plan (PCAP) Manager: Carolyn Gaudet Box 4752, Evraz Place, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4 Tel: 306-352-0472 Fax: 306-569-8799 email: pcap@sasktel.net

Association News, Reports and Events

SSGA reserves the right to refuse advertising and to edit manuscripts. Contents of Beef Business may be reproduced with written permission obtained from the SSGA Manager and proper credit given to the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association. Articles submitted may not be the opinion of the Association.

SSGA assumes no responsibility for any actions or decisions taken by any reader from this publication based on any and all information provided.

Publications Mail Agreement #40011906 Return undeliverable Canadian addresses (covers only) to: Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association Box 4752, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4

Did you know that the SSGA is Saskatchewan's oldest agricultural association?

Re

cycle This M a

e

Ple as

e

Contributors

zin ga

Follow us on facebook.com/skstockgrowers @SK_StockGrowers MAY 2018

Subscriptions Box 4752, Evraz Place, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4 Tel: 306-757-8523 Fax: 306-569-8799 email: ssga.admin@sasktel.net Subscription Rate: 1 yr $26.50 (GST included) Published 5 times per year

Science and Production

?

Beef Business

This magazine is printed on paper that is comprised of 50% recycled paper and 25% post-consumer waste.

It is acid-free, elemental chlorine-free and is FSC certified

Tara Mulhern Davidson Fonda Froats Tom Harrison Shane Jahnke Janet Kanters Marusia Kaweski

Chad MacPherson Andrew A. Olkowski Jason Pollock Wendy Wilkins Chris Wojnarowicz

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 5

Industry News Farming in Peril: The Rising Costs of Farmland Cloud the Future As a major asset for farmers, farmland values are putting it out of reach for young farmers and those entering the industry. The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry presented its report on this topic and more in A Growing Concern: How to Keep Farmland in the Hands of Canadian Farmers, in March. It was tasked by the Senate to investigate the acquisition of farmland in Canada and the potential impact on the farming sector. Committee Chair, Senator Diane Griffin, spoke to Beef Business about the investigation’s results and recommendations and how rising land prices affect the future of Canada’s farming sector.

“There was a lot of concern through the Senate about the price of farmland in Canada,” Griffin explained the motivation for the Committee. “It may be causing a problem for farmers, especially young farmers to get into the business. So, it seemed an opportune time to produce a study and find out exactly what’s going on and make any recommendations that are applicable to the role of the federal government.”

profitability of the agricultural sector.

The report made recommendations to the federal government, which has a reduced function in land matters. Yet, “it could play a useful role in the future of ensuring that farmland remain accessible,” Griffin stated.

“Generally, it is the provinces that control land use.”

The crux of the issue, according to the report, is that productive agricultural land must be preserved if Canada hopes to remain competitive internationally and protect its biosecurity and food security.

Retaining productive farmland is also an important moral issue, the Committee maintains. By 2050, at least 70 per cent more food needs to be produced to feed the growing global population.

“All farm families feel the same way. There is quite an attachment to land.”

Roots of the Report The report’s title reflects a growing concern the Committee saw during their other work. The family farm has been the backbone of rural Canada for generations. The Committee members had been hearing about the rising costs of farmland in Canada and concerns families had about the ability to pass their farms to the next generation. “It’s just because of the rapid increase in land prices that it has become more obvious and more of a concern,” Griffin stated. “Also, the average age of the farmer is getting to be rather senior, and the problem is we are going to have a huge turnover in the next generation.”

Key Contributing Factors Prices for farmland fluctuated across and within provinces for a range of reasons, the report determined. In Ontario they fetched the highest prices, at about $10,000 per acre, according to Statistics Canada, while Alberta, Manitoba and Quebec saw the largest leaps in values by 10 per cent or more. Saskatchewan had the lowest farmland values at almost $1,200 per acre. “Saskatchewan was one of the places where farmland has not increased in value as rapidly as it has in many other places,” stated Griffin.

“There are a number of reasons for that.”

Productive farmland varies by province and one reason is that land isn’t as scarce in Saskatchewan as it is in smaller provinces.

The Committee members examined three questions: causes of the increasing value of Canadian farmland, the concerns of agricultural stakeholders and the challenges they face in acquiring farmland, including farmers’ financial capacity, ownership types and the

The senator pointed out that many factors contribute to the rising prices of farmland, and each province had its own unique combination. These include economic, environmental and demographic factors, and commodity prices. One factor stood out. “The closeness to cities seemed to be

6

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

a major factor everywhere,” said Griffin.

Urban development around large cities offer higher prices for agricultural lands making it harder for farmers to compete.

A main factor of concern was that farmland acquisition by non-agricultural investors, financial institutions, pension funds, private investment firms and private companies as well as foreign entities, were not focused on practicing agriculture, but on getting an investment return, driving up land values. There was a concern that farmers would be competing with foreign investors for land that could be taken out of farming, influencing production structure.

The report showed that some private companies invest in the agricultural sector by partnering with pension funds in the form of sale-leasebacks. “They usually rent it back to farmers,” said Griffin. In leasing, farmers have less financial stability. “The problem is farmers don’t usually have the same long-term security through a lease mechanism as they would for ownership.

So, it puts them at a disadvantage in terms of their long-term planning and their security,” Griffin stated. As well, with land ownership, the farmers invest in their communities and land over the long term. As the senator noted, “Whether or not they actually sell the land, or whether they pass it on to the next generation and family, the point is – they have a vested interest when they own the land, compared to when they are leasing land.”

The Committee also heard from stakeholders concerned that the environmental activities of some conservation organizations could affect the price of farmland. However, environmental stakeholders reported to the committee that holding land is expensive and they were more likely to partner with farmers on environmental projects. The report determined that environmental activities could have an impact on small areas not on a large scale.

Further, livestock producers worry that grazing lands might be taken back for environmental measures. “No, I can’t see MAY 2018

Industry News that happening because grasslands are going to be exceedingly important as a carbon sink,” said Senator Griffin. “I can’t see in Canada that we would ever want to decrease the amount of grazing land. I can see us actually increasing it.”

The report identified demographics as another factor. With the average age of farmers at 54 years in 2011, stakeholders said that selling land was a way for some farmers near retirement to have a source of funds. Converting lands to non-farm use brings them higher prices. As a result, urban development has come to occupy the best agricultural land leading to rising farmland values. At the same time, this high land value poses a barrier to young or new farmers trying to access farmland and enter the industry. “At the end of the day, the thing that stood out that is similar everywhere is that farmland prices have been increasing and it does make it increasingly more difficult for young people to get into farming because they just don’t have the capital to get started,” Griffin said. Young farmers have said that the only way to enter the business was through leasing. The growing amount of leased land concerned stakeholders because leasing makes farmers employees rather than owners, exposing them to additional risks. As a result, the Committee recommended supporting young farmers to maintain the sector’s activities.

Recommendations The Committee developed five recommendations based on their report findings. The first recommendation was made to the Department of Finance Canada about the lifetime capital gains exemption. “It was sure drawn to our attention by farm experts who presented to the Committee that this was an issue for them in terms of people being able to sell their land and pass it on to the next generation, and it’s causing issues in terms of facilitating the transfer,” Senator Griffin noted. Although the federal government actually has a limited role to play in land values, Griffin indicated it can make an impact at the financial level. “One of the big things that the federal government plays a role in is related to the capital gains tax. Right now, the maximum amount of capital gains tax exemption that is available for an eligible farm is $1 million,” she stated. “Especially near larger cities and for larger farms, this amount is MAY 2018

inadequate to cover what the value of the land would be. So, we are recommending that the exemption limit be reviewed.”

“Farmers have a vested interest when they own the land compared to leasing land.”

Secondly, the Committee recommends that Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Statistics Canada and Natural Resources Canada continue to cooperate to improve the data on the classification and use of farmland. In turn, they could assist provincial departments, informing them about technological advances in imaging and remote sensing, and the way in which the resulting soil maps could assist provincial land-use planning. The third recommendation is that Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada renew the funding for the National Research Project on Farmland Protection through the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

The fourth recommendation is that the federal government work with its provincial counterparts to take advantage of initiatives such as the National Research Project on Farmland Protection to enhance tools for better tracking of land transactions. The final recommendation is for the federal and provincial governments to work together to protect and promote the use of land for agricultural purposes.

Status of Farming A variety of factors have contributed to the rising value of farmland across Canada, so no one factor is to blame.

“It’s a cumulative effect of a number of factors coming together,” she added.

Some causes brought to the Committee’s attention were the importance of economies of scale, non-agricultural investors, environmental issues and policies, demographic pressures, and an aging population as causes of this increase. Farmers, including the next generation, sometimes do not have the borrowing capacity to handle these higher prices. The high prices of farmland will have a general impact on Canada’s food security. “If we had a large corporation, either a pension fund corporation, or non-resident corporations, only owing

Canadian farmland, that doesn’t give me a very comfortable feeling for the food security for the future,” Griffin stated.

To better protect farmland and its use for agriculture at the provincial level, the report recommends strengthening the legislative framework for farmland protection. Under the Constitution, the provinces have jurisdiction over Canadian farmland ownership. Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan restrict land ownership by foreign interests. Saskatchewan has amended its legislation to restrict the types of investments allowed by tightening the definitions of pension plans, administrators of pension fund assets, and trusts as non-Canadian-owned entities in order to prohibit them from purchasing farmland.

Farming in Canada has traditionally been based on the family farm model. However, changes to financing and production structure may threaten this model. The senator doesn’t think the family farm will go by the wayside anytime soon, but she did point to the rise of other types of farming models. “There are many models.

There are smaller specialized niche farms that may be organic and may be producing crops and selling into a fresh market and a nearby town or city,” she described. “Then there will continue to be large farms, such as the large wheat farms, that are still owned by one family.”

The challenge for the family farm in the future, said Griffin, will be farm succession given factors like smaller families and more options available off the farm. “It‘s going to get increasingly difficult for them to pass the farm down to the next generation in the same family,” she added.

Nevertheless, the senator forecasts that the face of farming will soon be changing in Canada. “We now have the aging baby boomers who are now looking to make their decisions. If they haven’t made them about what they’re going to do with their property. So, we’re going to see quite a change here in a few years.”

Where Does the Report Go Now “It’s been presented in the Senate and we’ll shortly be moving it on to the government,” the senator explained where the report is headed continued on page 8

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 7

Industry News Farming in Peril cont. from pg. 7

HOG HI-

next. The Committee drafted their recommendations, aiming for the government, since legislation wasn’t the primary goal of the report. “We see policy and financial instruments as being the place where this report plays the greatest role,” Griffin said. “And by financial instruments, I am referring to the capital gains tax exemption being raised for eligible farm property.”

After tabling the report, Senator Griffin and her committee remain hopeful for the future of farming in Canada, reflected by the sincerity of the stakeholders who participated in their work. “We’re dealing here with very knowledgeable people, some of whom have been on the land all of their lives. They put their heart and soul into it, and they’re looking ahead into the future – both for themselves and for their land,” she concluded. B

TH

FARM & RANCH EQUIPMENT Ltd

E OU TST

1974

RA ANDING B

♦

ND

2018

Hi-Hog Farm & Ranch Equipment Ltd. www.hi-hog.com 1-800-661-7002 Outstanding Livestock Equipment Professional Ranching Tools

Calf Alley & Calf Tipping Table with neck extender

Are you ready for something better?

• • • •

Get your corrals in order.

Gates (4’ to 20’ long) Panels Panels w man gates Overhead spreaders

• • • •

U-frames w gates U-spreaders Steel Posts Paddock Slabs

Adjustable Loading Chute >

Proudly serving Canada’s ranching community for over forty years

New Regulations for Veterinary MIAs Coming Livestock producers will need to be aware that new regulations regarding access to medically important antibiotics (MIA) for veterinary use will take effect starting December 1, 2018. All livestock producers will need a prescription from a licensed veterinarian before they can purchase a MIA for use in livestock production after this date. They will need to establish a veterinarian-client-patient relationship (VCPR) before they can obtain a prescription for a MIA. MIAs are drugs considered to be essential for the treatment of bacterial infections in humans, as classified by Health Canada.

Health Canada took this measure as part of a global response to antibiotic resistance issues. The main goal of the directive was to ensure that antibiotics are used appropriately in animal agriculture to avoid or slow the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. It also strengthens public trust by showing responsibility and appropriate use in that products are only used when needed, at

8

the appropriate dose and duration, and observing proper withdrawal times.

knowledge of the operation, health records and livestock history.

The new policy applies to injectable products, all oral antibiotics including boluses, and in-feed and in-water antibiotics, as well as implants that contain MIAs. Producers will no longer be able to buy a bottle of antibiotics containing MIAs to treat common infections without a valid prescription. Feed mills will only be allowed to sell medicated feed formulated with antibiotics if the buyer presents a valid prescription. They will no longer be able to sell antibiotics directly to producers for on-farm mixing.

Each province differs on how prescriptions are dispensed. Some provinces may only allow veterinarians or pharmacists to sell antibiotics, while others may approve other distribution channels.

In Saskatchewan, only veterinarians and pharmacists are legally allowed to dispense prescription medications. This means producers will no longer be able to purchase antibiotics at feed and farm supply stores.

Once a valid VCPR has been established with a licensed veterinarian and a medical need for the drug is confirmed, a producer will be able to get a prescription for a given amount of product over a specified period of time. For example, a veterinarian may work with a livestock producer to design a livestock health protocol for a group of animals, based on a working

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

The Beef Cattle Research Council and Alberta Beef Producers produced a fact sheet called The Way You Purchase Antibiotics is Changing, releasing it in March 2018. It outlines the key changes in the regulation of access to livestock antibiotics, provides a list of antibiotics that will require a veterinary prescription, and provides some practical guidance about the regulation. See http://skstockgrowers.com/mia-list B

MAY 2018

Industry News Problems Associated with Excess of Sulfur in Drinking Water Sources: Livestock Producers' Perspective

by Andrew A. Olkowski, DVM, MSc, PhD, Scientist Emeritus, University of Saskatchewan, and Chris Wojnarowicz, DVM, MVetSc, Veterinary Pathologist, Prairie Diagnostic Services Inc. Water is an essential nutrient required to sustain life, and animals must have unrestricted access to good quality drinking water to be productive. However, it is important to understand that the water that we offer to animals as “drinking water� is not just water, but rather a complex mixture of various substances where water is merely a solvent. So, it can be said that any components of drinking water that are not water should be classified as contaminants.

Currently, it is estimated that in Saskatchewan, 30 to 40 per cent of farm water sources have excessive levels of sulfur. In many areas sulfur present in drinking water may be a major contributor to the overall intake of sulfur.

arsenic, cadmium, lead), and the occurrence of these toxic compounds in drinking water should always trigger a hazard evaluation. On the other hand, many mineral contaminants commonly found in water sources, e.g., calcium, magnesium, manganese, sodium, potassium, copper, carbonate, or phosphorus have low (if any) potential to cause harm, but these minerals may indirectly impact water hygiene and biosecurity.

Sulfur as a Risk Factor Sulfur is probably the most common contaminant of water sources for livestock in Canada, and especially in the Prairie provinces. Based on our survey of many farms in the province of Saskatchewan some 25 to 30 per cent of livestock operations use water with sulfate levels between 1,000-1,500 ppm, and in some 5 to 10 per cent of examined farms the sulfate level in drinking water may exceed 3,000 ppm. In a few instances, drinking water contained as much as 5,000 to 7,800 ppm of sulfate.

Many drinking water problems are attributed to chemical contaminants, most of which can be associated with naturally occurring mineral contaminants or contaminants of industrial origin.

Some minerals commonly present in various water sources have high toxicity potential and may present significant risk of chronic or even acute toxicity to animals. Of particular importance concerning water quality are those mineral contaminants that have high inherent toxicity potential (e.g., sulfur, fluorine, nitrites, selenium, mercury,

Total Intake of Sulfur is Important A high level of sulfur in water alone is sufficient to cause livestock health problems, and even to cause significant mortality. However, it is important to understand that, even at moderately excessive levels, sulfur in water can be associated with a wide range of metabolic problems affecting productivity of livestock, and thus the bottom line.

Sulfur has high potential of toxicity in ruminant livestock, especially in cattle and sheep. From the perspective of water quality for livestock, sulfur is probably the most significant water contaminant affecting ruminants, having considerable impact on both health and performance.

However, one has to be mindful that the problem of sulfur toxicity is not only continued on page 10

Table 1. Examples of calculations showing the impact of factors, such as sulfur in water and feed, and water intake associated with ambient temperature, on total sulfur intake.

Cold Day

Hot Day

Cold Day

Hot Day

Cold Day

Hot Day

Cold Day

Hot Day

Feed Sulfur (%)

0.15

0.15

0.15

0.15

0.25

0.25

0.25

0.25

Water Sulfate Level (ppm or mg/l)

500

500

1000

1000

500

500

1000

1000

Water Consumption Rate (l/kg feed DM)

3

10

3

10

3

10

3

10

Dietary Sulfur from Water (g/kg feed DM)

0.50

1.67

1.00

3.33

0.50

1.67

1.00

3.33

Dietary Sulfur from Water (% feed DM)

0.05

0.17

0.10

0.33

0.05

0.17

0.10

0.33

Dietary Sulfur from Feed & Water (% DM)

0.20

0.32

0.25

0.48

0.30

0.42

0.35

0.58

Note: Dietary Sulfur from Feed and Water (bottom row) highlighted in green represent levels generally considered as normal (no risk); those highlighted in yellow represent dietary sulfur of moderate risk of adverse effect; and those highlighted in red represent a high risk of adverse effects, morbidity, and mortality.

MAY 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 9

Industry News Excess Sulfur cont. from pg. 9 relevant to water sulfur content. Notably, many feedstuffs can also contain excessive levels of sulfur. As well, many mineral supplements may contain very high levels of sulfur because frequently other essential minerals are supplements in the form of sulfur salts. Therefore, the assessment of potential hazards associated with sulfur in livestock should be considered from the perspective of total dietary sulfur intake from all sources, which should include water, feed, and mineral supplements.

Another important consideration in assessing sulfur exposure is large variability in water consumption, which is affected by the type of feed. In other words, the drier the feed is the more water animals will drink. Further, water intake is also dependent on ambient temperature. For instance, water intake during hot days of the summer will be tremendously increased in comparison to cool days in the winter, spring or fall. So, during hot days of summer, when the water intake is increased, sulfur level in water that could be well tolerated by animals in the spring, winter, or fall could cause health problems and increase the risk of mortality.

Another factor that must be taken into consideration when assessing risk associated with sulfur present in surface water sources, especially small ponds or dugouts, is that during a hot summer a considerable amount of water may evaporate, thus, the levels of the mineral in water may increase to toxic levels. The impact of this appears to be associated with many mortalities of livestock in Saskatchewan.

Sulfur Toxicity Dietary sulfur at 0.4 per cent has been recommended as a tolerance level but more recent research suggests that lower levels may cause adverse effects. For instance, some studies have shown that brain lesions occurred in calves consuming a diet containing less than 0.4 per cent sulfur. Further, it has also been shown that sulfur in excess of 0.2 per cent of dietary dry matter may have a detrimental effect on average daily gain, feed intake, and net energy value of the diet.

10

One has to remain mindful that assessment of the risk of potential problems in livestock associated with sulfur overload is not an effect of a single factor such as water, but rather the interactions of all dietary factors and climatic conditions. Examples showing how a combination of sulfur in water and feed, as well as water intake associated with ambient temperature may change sulfur intake is presented in Table 1 [See page 9].

From the examples in Table 1, it is clear that water intake is a major factor affecting total intake of sulfur. However, the impact of water sulfate at 1,000 ppm (generally considered as high) can be managed by a proper balance of sulfur in the feed. On the other hand, water sulfate at 500 ppm (generally considered as normal) can be problematic when water intake is high, and particularly in situations where feed sulfur is already marginally high. High to excessive sulfur is inherently present in some feedstuffs as indicated in Table 2 [See below]. Therefore, in the situation where drinking water contains excess sulfur, in order to avoid problems, feed sulfur must be monitored carefully.

However, it has to be recognized that sulfur intake by cattle depends on numerous dietary and environmental variables, and in many practical situations the factors contributing to dietary sulfur may be extremely variable, and frequently difficult to control.

Table 2. Examples of feedstuffs containing high levels of sulfur used in ruminant rations.

Feed

Sulfur content (% DM)

Alfalfa

0.40

Soybean meal

0.49

Molasses

>0.40

Rape seeds meal

0.50

Sweet clover hay

0.47

Turnip

0.43

Yeasts

>0.45

Wheatgrass

0.47

Dehydrate whey

>1.12

DDGS

| ŠBEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

0.32 - >1

Figure 1. Typical brain lesions in cattle associated with high levels of sulfate in drinking water. The photograph was taken from the surface of the brain illuminated with a special lamp emitting ultraviolet light in the dark. The areas that are glowing indicate brain tissue affected by necrotic lesions, which are clearly distinguished from the appearance of the background normal brain.

Health and Production Effects The problems associated with excessive intake of sulfur have been intensively studied, but it appears that the importance of sulfur as a water quality issue is not completely recognized at the field level.

Comparing the basic toxicity issues associated with sulfur that have been studied in the distant past (1940s to 70s), it is evident that the range of responses of ruminants to excess sulfur appears to be evolving. For instance, more recent research papers provided evidence that an excess of dietary sulfur in cattle and sheep causes the central nervous system disorder, cerebro-cortical necrosis (CCN), commonly also known as polioencephalomalacia (polio or PEM). Typical lesions seen in the brain of affected animals are shown in Figure 1 [See above].

Undoubtedly, high levels of sulfur can induce devastating lesions in the brain.

However, another issue, perhaps more troubling, is the fact that the tolerance of livestock to sulfur has been decreasing over the last three decades, which means that more and more animals are affected at lower and lower levels of exposure.

In the past, the level of sulfur needed to induce lesions was higher, and the disease would occur mostly in isolated cases, with sporadic incidences of polio occurring occasionally on some farms. Over the last two decades or so, the number of cases has

MAY 2018

Industry News been increasing, and over time outbreaks of the disease have been reported where multiple cases became more the norm rather than the exception. These events tend to be more severe and affect larger and larger numbers of animals at a single location.

frequently can be seen to take the shape of “spectacles� around the eyes. An example of hair change in cattle associated with subclinical copper deficiency is shown in Figure 2 [See below].

Apart from morbidity and mortality associated with polio, the problems associated with sulfur in water in livestock must be considered in the context of specific metabolic features of ruminants.

Because of the unique nature of sulfur metabolism, ruminants are at considerably higher risk to develop a serious adverse reaction associated with excessive intake of sulfur.

Metabolic effects of high levels of dietary sulfur are mostly associated with nutritional interactions. Excess dietary sulfur interferes with the metabolism of several essential nutrients. Dietary sulfur may interact with several essential minerals, but especially copper. Decreased bioavailability of copper is due to the formation of insoluble copper complexes, particularly when high levels of molybdenum are present along with high levels of sulfur. Therefore, subtle effects associated with excessive intake of sulfur may occur in some form of metabolic disturbances, but in a practical situation in Saskatchewan, this most likely would be associated with copper insufficiency.

Copper Deficiency Copper deficiency, particularly at marginal levels, may be difficult to recognize because of the lack of specific clinical signs. In general, the key production problems that can be attributed to copper insufficiency include the following categories: (1) ill thrift or reduced growth rate, weight loss; (2) diarrhea, which can be profuse or watery; (3) neonatal ataxia: inability to suckle, incoordination, stiff gait, particularly in newborn and young calves, and (4) reduced fertility and delayed puberty, reduced semen quality in bulls, low ovulation and conception rates.

The common and readily recognizable signs indicative of possible copper deficiency include coat hair changes. Hair becomes rough or poor quality, with faded colour. The red hair turns yellowish, and black becomes brown or gray. Faded hair

MAY 2018

Figure 2. Typical changes in texture and color of the coat hair in cattle associated with high levels of sulfate in drinking water.

Impact of High Sulfur Water on the Livestock Industry In published reports, the health problems and animal death associated with sulfurinduced brain lesions is high and the trend is increasing. One report showed a 15 per cent incidence of polio in cattle drinking water containing 3,100 ppm of sulfates.

The increased number of reports in recent years indicates that problems of acute cases associated with high sulfur intake in livestock are on the rise, and so are the economic losses associated with higher morbidity and mortality.

The severity of the problem of nutritional sulfur toxicity may depend on numerous nutritional and management factors. Subclinical problems associated with excess dietary sulfur do occur, however, there is no data available about their significance.

Subtle effects due to excessive intake of sulfur may represent a wide range of metabolic disorders.

The economic impact associated with non-specific effects of dietary sulfur may be difficult to assess. However, there are scientific data indicating that, nowadays, considerably lower levels of sulfur in water can trigger a decline in performance.

Hence, the metabolic capability of contemporary animals to tolerate adverse

effects of sulfur in water is declining.

Of course, this can be a result of many contributing factors.

Management of the Problems of Sulfur in Water In the evaluation of exposure of cattle to sulfur, it is important to consider all sources, including feed, water, and environment. In milder cases, once identified, the problem of secondary metabolic disturbances in domestic livestock animals may be corrected via nutritional supplements and clinical management of the problem.

There is no better management substitute for providing only good quality water, so if good quality water is available, it should be used. If economically justifiable, water purification for livestock should be considered. However, if water purification is not a practical solution, several strategies can be developed to manage the problem.

Low to moderately high levels of sulfur in water can be managed reasonably well.

Standard management procedures should include nutritional safeguards. Levels of the dietary pool, as well as reduced sulfur compounds from the environment, should be taken into account while assessing the risk associated with the water content of sulfur compounds. If possible, the total dietary sulfur intake (from both feed and water) should be kept below 0.3 per cent.

Preventative measures to be considered should include balancing the ration to decrease excessive intake of sulfur and supplementation of nutrients likely affected by sulfur. In problem areas, an attempt should be made to decrease the load of dietary sulfur by avoiding feedstuff containing high levels of sulfur. Dietary supplementation of copper and thiamine in quantities exceeding the normal dietary requirement may decrease the risk of adverse effects associated with sulfur. B Editorial Note: Following an interview, Dr. Olkowski indicated he is working on a promising technology for the removal of sulfur and other minerals from water that is in the process of development.

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 11

Industry News New DUC Program Helps Producers Expand Operations end of October,” he notes. From there, we bring them home, wean the calves and feed them out over the winter. Then we grass them all and sell them as yearlings off the grass at approximately 900 pounds the first week of September.”

While expansion of ranching operations may be positive in some agricultural circles, in others it creates problems when it comes to accessing affordable land.

Darren Keown is a cow-calf producer near Roblin, Man., who continues to grow his operation. The problem is finding suitable land in Saskatchewan and Manitoba that is listed at a fair price.

Many producers are realizing how incorporating environmental programs is increasing their bottom line and offsetting costs.

“The competition for land has gotten extremely high,” he says. “Land prices have really gone up and the downside of that for the cattle guy is that we can’t afford to walk cattle on this expensive land.”

In addition, adds Keown, a lot of pasture and hay land that has been used in the last 5 or 10 years has been converted to grain land, creating growing competition for grassland.

Complementary to Cattle

Gaining Ground

Darren Keown and family acquired ranch land from Ducks Unlimited near Stornoway as part of the Revolving Land Conservation Program

Enter the Revolving Land Conservation Program (RLCP) from Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC). Under this program, DUC purchases land and restores the wetlands and upland habitat. Then DUC lists the land with a sale condition being that the buyer agrees to allow a conservation easement on the land title.

“I started my involvement with Ducks in the spring of 2016 when I purchased one of their ranches at Stornoway, Sask.,” says Keown. “The first ranch was 14 quarters… they had put all their easements on it and then sold it as a grazing ranch where it is only allowed to be in grass production going forward.”

According to Kevin Rozdeba, conservation program specialist with DUC, the benefit of the RLCP to the local cattle producer is that it makes the land more affordable.

“They [ranchers] can acquire lands at a reduced value. The easement restrictions are simply that they can’t drain any wetlands or fill them in, and the land must remain as pasture or hay land."

Following his initial purchase of 2,240 acres (906 hectares), Keown then acquired an additional four quarters using the DUC RLCP, along with a few more acres on his own to expand the size of his ranch.

With about 1,000 head of cattle and a backgrounder feedlot, the land is highly productive.

Darren Keown’s cattle graze on the grassland with conservation easements.

12

“We calve in May and June and those cattle stay on the grass until usually the

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Jodie Horvath, conservation program specialist with DUC, works with livestock producers to manage the already converted lands. In Keown’s area near Roblin, she says the land is not always conducive to good crop production because the area has a lot of potholes.

Keown says the advantages of working with DUC don’t stop with the sale of land to the rancher. “They’ll help pay for grass seed to get it established. And in some cases, they have fencing budgets. They will put little ditch plugs in low spots so there are places for the ducks to find water without being in the big sloughs,” he says.

“That’s been beneficial to the cattle as well in the fact they have a hard-bottomed area to drink from. The cattle can stand on them and drink rather than having to wade into a slough through bulrushes and getting stuck in the mud and having foot rot issues.”

“It’s not only just about the cow,” he adds.

“It [the program] works good for the ducks and the wildlife and the cattle producer to keep that land in grass and in its natural state.”

“It’s definitely a symbiotic relationship for sure.”B *Available Ducks Unlimited Canada land under the Revolving Land Conservation Program is listed on http://davemolberg.point2agent.com *For related story on farmland values, see page 6

MAY 2018

PROGRAMS Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) provides financial incentives for programs that preserve, protect and restore habitat on the land for waterfowl and wildlife.

In addition these programs also provide other benefits for improvement of soil health, prevention of soil erosion, and flood and drought prevention.

Here is a list of our current DUC programs that are offered in our priority areas:

Conservation Easements (CE)

DUC signs a CE with the landowner who agrees to protect the natural value of the land (wetlands, native prairie, and tame grasslands) in perpetuity in exchange for financial compensation. Haying and grazing are allowed on the uplands while the wetlands are kept intact.

exchange for a fee, then we invest those proceeds back into local conservation programs. Contact your local DUC office for more information on this program.

Forage Programs

DUC currently offers several types of forage programs including the following:

Z

Crop Production Services (CPS) Forage Program This program provides $100 reimbursement for each 50lb bag of CPS Proven Seed purchased and seeded.

Z

Forage in Rotation Program – DUC agronomists will work with you to implement a rotational forage program and provide financial compensation for those areas that are seeded.

Z

Marginal Areas Program – DUC agronomists will work with you to find areas on your land that are growing poor crops due to excessive moisture or salinity, and work with you to seed those areas to forage. DUC will also provide financial compensation on those forage lands. The remaining cultivated acres remain farmed to maximize your crop yield and profit on the most viable cultivated acres of your field.

Purchase of Land

DUC purchases land for the purpose of restoring and protecting the habitat on the parcels. DUC pays fair market value for land and retains ownership of these lands in perpetuity. DUC also buys land as part of our Revolving Land Conservation Program (RLCP), where we purchase the land, restore any upland or wetland habitat on the parcels and then sell the land with a CE.

Long-term Lease

The long-term lease program (minimum 10 years) provides annual compensation to landowners based on current fair market value for land (cultivated and grassland). DUC pays for all restoration (grassland and wetlands) and manages the land for the period of the lease.

Rangeland Programs

Z

DUC provides financial assistance to landowners for costs associated with constructing a new perimeter barbed wire fence (up to a maximum of $5,000) in exchange for protecting the wetlands and upland habitat on the parcel.

Z

DUC manages its lands through haying and grazing tenders, and we invite producers to use portions of our land in

Wetland Restoration

If wetlands have been drained or altered on your land, we can help you restore them back to their natural levels. These projects are usually combined with other programs such as our CE, lease or forage programs.

Some conditions apply. Contact DUC for more information at 1-866-252-DUCK (3825) or du_regina@ducks.ca

Markets and Trade RETAIL MEAT PRICE SURVEY as of April 16, 2018 ($/lb)

CO-OP

SAFEWAY

SAVE-ONFOODS

SOBEYS

SUPERSTORE

2.99

5.99

6.19

5.99

2.98

*

*

*

4.29

2.93

6.99

6.99

7.98

6.99

6.21

*

6.99

*

*

*

Roast/outside round

7.98

*

7.48

*

8.61

Steak/rib eye

10.99

11.99

18.49

17.99

18.14

Steak/round

5.99

5.99

7.79

5.99

6.11

Steak/sirloin

11.34

10.99

7.99

*

6.30

Steak/T-bone

12.99

9.99

16.99

9.99

13.10

Steak/tenderloin

19.99

*

24.49

23.99

20.13

CUTS Ground beef/lean Ground beef/regular Roast/cross rib Roast/rib

* these items were not in the display case on this date

14

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

MAY 2018

Wk 1 Wk 4 Wk 7 Wk 10 Wk 13 Wk 16 Wk 19 Wk 22 Wk 25 Wk 28 Wk 31 Wk 34 Wk 37 Wk 40 Wk 43 Wk 46 Wk 49 Wk 52

Price per hundred weight

2016

210 2017

2018

160

180

170

130

160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 Source: CanFax

190

2015

160 2016

150 2017

140

2018

2015

2016

2017

2018

Source: CanFax Source: CanFax

Wk 1 Wk 4 Wk 7 Wk 10 Wk 13 Wk 16 Wk 19 Wk 22 Wk 25 Wk 28 Wk 31 Wk 34 Wk 37 Wk 40 Wk 43 Wk 46 Wk 49 Wk 52

260

Source: CanFax

Wk 1 Wk 4 Wk 7 Wk 10 Wk 13 Wk 16 Wk 19 Wk 22 Wk 25 Wk 28 Wk 31 Wk 34 Wk 37 Wk 40 Wk 43 Wk 46 Wk 49 Wk 52

SK Weekly Average Price 500-600 lbs Steers

210

AB Fed Steer Prices

200

120

Alberta Weekly D1 & D2 Cows

Wk 1 Wk 4 Wk 7 Wk 10 Wk 13 Wk 16 Wk 19 Wk 22 Wk 25 Wk 28 Wk 31 Wk 34 Wk 37 Wk 40 Wk 43 Wk 46 Wk 49 Wk 52

2015

Price per hundred weight

310

CDN $ - US terms

Wk 1 Wk 4 Wk 7 Wk 10 Wk 13 Wk 16 Wk 19 Wk 22 Wk 25 Wk 28 Wk 31 Wk 34 Wk 37 Wk 40 Wk 43 Wk 46 Wk 49 Wk 52

Price per hundred weight 360

Price per tonne

Wk 1 Wk 4 Wk 7 Wk 10 Wk 13 Wk 16 Wk 19 Wk 22 Wk 25 Wk 28 Wk 31 Wk 34 Wk 37 Wk 40 Wk 43 Wk 46 Wk 49 Wk 52

Price per hundred weight

Markets and Trade SK Weekly Average Price Heifers 500-600 lbs

280

230 2015

2016

180 2017

130 2018

0.88

0.83

0.78

230.00

For more information visit www.canfax.ca Source: CanFax

Weekly Canadian Dollar

0.98

0.93 2018

2017

0.73 5 yr avg

0.68 Source: Bank of Canada

Lethbridge Barley Price

270.00

250.00

210.00 2015

2016

190.00 2017

170.00 2018

150.00

Source: CanFax

Feature The Future of Meat: Exploring the Gap Between Producer and Consumer with Dr. Sylvain Charlebois powder. Diets have come and gone in the past – high fiber, low-carb, lowfat – boosting the popularity of various celebrities. Nevertheless, the question arises whether this emphasis on protein is just another fad, or does it signal a change in food culture.

Producers have been raising cattle in Saskatchewan for well over a century, but the future of beef looks uncertain in light of media debates about a meat tax, protein alternatives entering the marketplace and consumers voicing environmental and health concerns about beef production.

Beef Business spoke with Dr. Sylvain Charlebois about today’s food trends and policies impacting consumer views about the beef industry. Charlebois is Dean and professor at the Rowe School of Business, School of Public Administration, School for Resource and Environmental Studies, and Department of Business and Social Sciences at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia. His research covers food distribution, policy, safety and security and traceability issues.

Along with his books and many scholarly articles, Charlebois regularly writes for popular Canadian media publications, such as La Presse and The Globe and Mail.

Charlebois shared his perspective on Saskatchewan’s beef industry and some tips for connecting with consumers.

Trendy Proteins Protein diets, such as the Dukan Diet, Ketogenic Diet and Atkins Diet, have become trendy in recent years, reflecting new outlooks on food and health. In response, a number of protein alternatives have been entering the market. For example, this spring, Loblaws introduced its own brand of President’s Choice cricket

16

“It is not happening as quickly as some may believe, but there is a trend around the country about vegetable proteins in general,” Charlebois said. Furthermore, in a recent report on vegetarianism and veganism, a very high number, 52 per cent, of young people under the age of 36 regarded themselves as vegetarians.

“More and more people are interested in different types of diets,” he observed about changing eating patterns. The food policy specialist concluded that there is a shift in how the younger generation considers food. “They actually embed personal values into the nutrition they consume every single day,” Charlebois added.

Another protein trend down the road that could edge out traditional animal beef on dinner plates is “clean meat”. This refers to meat grown in vitro in a laboratory.

“It’ll be interesting to watch how things will be received with artificial meat, but there’s more investment in that area, more countries looking at producing in vitro meat just because the environmental footprint is greatly reduced,” he stated. So far, the production costs are very high for lab-grown meat, making it inaccessible to most consumers and giving it a rather large environmental footprint.

According to Charlebois, it’s difficult to compare the environmental footprint of artificial meat and traditionally-raised beef at the moment. “For now, there is no comparison,” he said. He noted that even for traditional animal-raised beef, the science is still uncertain about the environmental impacts and how it is measured. “With beef, there are some studies that show the environmental footprint is actually less and is actually limited,” Charlebois said, while “there are some studies that suggest the beef industry is responsible for the majority of

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

greenhouse gases emissions. So again, the jury is still out there.”

Charlebois pointed out the paradox that exists in offering the choice of artificial meat to consumers. Some of these same consumers of artificial meat also reject the idea of genetically-modified seeds.

He believes the future of artificial meat remains uncertain, “I’m not that sure there’s a future for clean meat, but you never know, with technology, things change so fast.”

Food Policy Consumer choices and food trends are also being shaped by Canada’s official food policy. The Federal Government plans to introduce front-of-package (FOP) labelling on processed foods targeting saturated fat, salt and sugar. Charlebois sees the FOP label as a binary approach, “You either have too much fat or not enough. So, you basically either have a label or not.” Charlebois favours leaving food choices in the hands of consumers.

He prefers the classic weight system that “gives the consumers the opportunity to assess the risks.” He added, “It is up to the consumer to decide what they want to consume or buy down the road.”

Charlebois also highlighted the influence that the FOP label could wield over consumers, and its subsequent sales impact on certain products. “If you use a binary approach – like what we’re seeing right now – what’s likely to happen is that most of the products with a FOP label will not be bought,” he maintained.

As for the FOP label on ground beef, “ground beef has additional value,” he stated, commenting that the FOP label will be “basically discriminating against many good products out there, which is not necessarily a good idea,” from the perspective of nutrition.

As a food policy analyst, Charlebois is curious to see the contents of the updated Canada Food Guide. “I’m really looking forward to seeing what the new food guide will look like. I suspect the new food guide will be a complete departure

MAY 2018

Feature from what we’ve seen over the last few decades,” he said. One major change – with implications for the beef industry – will be the elimination of the meat group and the merger of proteins into one group. “From a food nutrition and policy perspective, over the long term and based on the principles that we saw, we’re seeing a government perhaps that is trying to encourage people to adopt a plant-based diet, which is actually quite specific,” he said. Both the new Canada Food Guide, due out later this year, and the front-ofpackage labelling are promoting a diet of certain foods among consumers.

A further step that has received a lot of media attention recently is a “sin tax” on meat. Back in December, a UK investor group, Farm Animal Investment Risk & Return (FAIRR), put out a report called The Livestock Levy: Are Regulators Considering Meat Taxes? The group issued a corresponding statement arguing in favour of a meat tax, citing the “negative environmental and health impacts of high meat consumption will put meat on the same pathway to taxation as goods such as sugar, carbon and tobacco.” Charlebois commented that calls for a meat tax in the past used to come from special interest groups, which did not have much financial or political clout. But this group is different. “It’s a group of investors, and they represent billions of dollars worth of investment into the agri-food sector,” he observed. The group takes a rather dogmatic approach in declaring a meat tax “inevitable”.

Charlebois identified the group’s three specific challenges against the meat industry, and beef in particular. “One, there is mounting evidence that the livestock industry is not necessarily environmentally friendly – and now that can be disputed in many different ways, but that is what they claim. We are just looking at the evidence being raised by the scientific community,” he said. “Second is the whole issue of animal welfare, which seems to be a concern, and the third one – and that’s probably the most important one – is health.”

Several years ago, the World Health Organization came out with a report that targeted processed meats that has become very influential. “And that’s why a lot of governments, including ours, MAY 2018

are really thinking about encouraging consumers to eat other kinds of food instead of meat, or at least reduce the kinds of meat we eat,” Charlebois has observed changes in eating habits.

“We are noticing that Canadians aren’t necessarily leaving meat generally, but we are seeing signs of people reducing the amount of their consumption overall – whether it’s adopting a flexitarian diet, or just by looking at other protein sources that they haven’t considered before.”

“Consumers know little about the livestock industry, let alone beef production. Right now, interest groups and companies exploiting various knowledge gaps in the marketplace are controlling the narrative.”

In terms of food policy, Charlebois is not in favour of taxing meat. “I still don’t think the meat tax is a good idea, but when you start seeing signs like this, I think the industry has to start thinking about what this means to the future of the entire industry.”

He noted that one of the biggest drivers of food policy these days is social media. It can change policy at a rapid pace, despite not being backed up by definitive science.

“Right now, you cannot underestimate how social media can influence policy,” he said. Rather than being examined as a whole, scientific research is being cherrypicked to support a particular position which is then proliferated through social media. Charlebois cited instances from Europe on how dubious science had been used to support food policy regulations.

What Consumers Want Charlebois advises the beef industry to be responsive to consumers, at the same time, noting that there is really a lot of confusion surrounding beef in the marketplace. “Right now, what I’m seeing is a market that utterly misunderstands the industry and won’t make an effort to understand it,” he observed.

With demographics changing rapidly in the past couple of decades, urban consumers have become distanced from beef production. It is likely that few have

visited beef producing farms in Western Canada and lack awareness about modern sustainable beef production. “You have to accept the fact that some people don’t know about beef in general,” Charlebois said. The food policy researcher believes that beef producers need to gain a better sense of the consumer demand in the large urban centres.

The question then arises – what do consumers want? According to Charlebois, producers can take the first step in answering this question by appreciating how confused the market has become.

He also advises producers to stay on top of consumer market demand and to recognize that it is divided and diverse.

“The other thing I think should be happening is directing attention to how fragmented meat demand is,” he said.

“I mean a lot of people are looking for hormone-free products, some people are actually looking for natural meat – whatever that means. People are looking for humanely-raised beef.” It is a plethora of niche markets.

De-bunking Myths Beef producers will likely have to undertake additional strategic mythbusting if they hope to change the minds of the new wave of consumers, particularly the largest consumer group today, the Millenials. A report by National Geographic published a few years ago greatly exaggerated the environmental impact of the beef industry as greater than the transport, oil and gas industries combined. Although the claim was later withdrawn, the impression has stuck.

“There’s an overpowering narrative that is going on right now, particularly with people in the city, that beef is actually bad,” Charlebois explained, giving an example of a personal encounter of hearing a person talk about how “beef was unsustainable and bad for the environment.”

“So, there is actually something going on here,” Charlebois noted. “There seems to be a growing number of people saying that beef is not friendly, not a good thing, and that needs to change.” He emphasized that the beef industry has taken steps to minimize its environmental footprint, “There’s lots of great things happening in the beef industry.” continued on page 18

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 17

Feature Future of Meat cont. from pg. 17 Moreover, these urban consumers seem to be easily swayed by biased reports from special interest groups. “Consumers know little about the livestock industry, let alone beef production. Right now, interest groups and companies exploiting various knowledge gaps in the marketplace are controlling the narrative,” Charlebois said.

The FAIRR report cited environmental, health and animal welfare concerns.

However, this group and others appear to be unaware of the sustainability practices being adopted by the beef industry in recent years, including traceability programs, low emission forage, grazing management, and research and breeding, to optimize genetics to produce high quality beef with a reduced environmental footprint.

Producers need to impart that they already are responding to consumer demands and reducing the footprint of the livestock industry. “You have to connect with consumers and understand them before doing anything,” stated Charlebois. Cattle producers also need to take charge of their own narrative. The beef producers “are experts of the field.

They actually know how to raise cattle.

Most city dwellers don’t, so they will accept that whatever is written in the book Clean Meat is true and cannot be challenged,” he said. Charlebois observed that a lot of people don’t know about efforts for sustainability in beef production.

Conclusion Trend or not, consumer tastes are changing and that is something that beef producers will have to grapple with in the future. “That’s a reality. People are going to be consuming beef very differently and will see meat very differently moving forward,” said Charlebois. “I think what is happening right now is the entire world is moving in one direction and the beef industry is struggling to follow,” he added.

traditions have been expressed through food for millennia. These traditional food choices are also expressions of cultural identity. Holidays, festivals, ceremonies and special events are all accompanied by specific traditional foods. “It is very difficult to just get rid of some of these products overnight,” he said. “Beef, chicken and pork, the trifecta of meat, have been part of our food culture for centuries.

We celebrate all sorts of holidays with these central meat products around the table. You can’t just get rid of that right away. I think we need to be careful how we do things.” Added to this, he believes measures like The Canada Food Guide can be very influential over time in shaping consumer food choices.

Charlebois concluded with a final comment about food trends regarding beef. He stated, “What I am concerned about is that there seems to be some momentum against the industry. I would be concerned about that if I were a stakeholder in the industry.” Charlebois shared his perspective on what he sees as a solution for producers. Domestic beef demand could drop as a result of the consumer protein trends, but at the

In a recent posting on his food blog, Charlebois wrote that livestock producers are one of the most trusted groups in the Canadian economy and that they are ideally positioned to renew their social contract with the public. “They are the most trusted group, but the gap between farmers and the rest of the field is slowly narrowing. Transparency is a powerful tool and so is understanding how the industry works.” The key for producers is taking back the narrative and connecting with consumers about what beef production is really like. B

LANE REALTY For the most VALUE & EXPOSURE that you deserve when selling your farm or ranch property, contact one of our Farm & Ranch Specialists today!

BOB LANE – Broker (306) 569-3380 B MURRAY MURDOCH – Rosetown / Saskatoon / Davidson (306) 858-8000 DALE MURDOCH – Swift Current / West Central (306) 774-6100 JASON BEUTLER – Yorkton / Estevan (306) 735-7811 ED BEUTLER – Yorkton (306) 735-7780 DARRELL HERAUF – Regina District (306) 761-1863 JASON SELINGER – Regina / South Central SK (306) 539-7975 DOUG JENSEN – Melville / Raymore (306) 621-9955 STAN HALL – Strasbourg / Watrous / Humboldt (306) 725-7826 MORWENNA SUTTER – Prince Albert / Melfort / Kelvington (306) 327-7129 ASHLEY MURDOCH – Outlook Country Residential (306) 860-8686

The recent shift in consumer tastes seems to run counter to thousands of years of human development and food culture.

“That’s one thing that concerns me. Meat products have been part of culinary traditions for centuries,” Charlebois agreed. Scientific research studying human development shows that cultural 18

same time, he pointed out that “global demand for Canadian beef has lots of potential.” “Our genetics and our practices are some of the best in the world. Our brand as a nation is also very strong,” he said, adding that Canada could capitalize on beef exports as many nations become more affluent. Although he spotted a recent food guide in China sending similar signals to Canada, Charlebois doubts that the Asian country would develop the same kind of movements that have been seen here in Canada.

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

"Now representing purchasers from across Canada, and overseas!"

124 Registered Sales in 2017!

PH: 306-569-3380

WITH OVER 36 YEARS IN THE BUSINESS

Visit our website at www.lanerealty.com to view current listings and virtual tours

MAY 2018

Feature Threat Looming for Canadian Cattle Industry: The Impact of Carbon Pricing on the Beef Sector While the federal government forges ahead with its carbon pricing plan, Canadian cattle producers worry about how carbon pricing will affect the industry. They fear their competitiveness will fall on global markets because top rivals, like the U.S., don’t have a carbon levy.

Dr. Brandon Schaufele, assistant professor at Graburn Economics and Ivey Business School at Western University in London, Ontario, spoke to Beef Business about a report he prepared on the impact of Canada’s carbon pricing plan on the cow-calf and feedlot sectors. The report called Carbon Pricing and the Canadian Beef Sector was based on data from four provinces with different carbon pricing systems, and was prepared for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, the British Columbia Cattlemen’s Association, Alberta Beef Producers, Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association, Manitoba Beef Producers and the Beef Farmers of Ontario.

Carbon Plan After signing on to the Paris Accord, the federal government developed a carbon plan aiming to curb fossil fuel emissions and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) to 517 megatonnes by 2030.

Schaufele explained that governments can take two approaches to emitters – either by imposing regulations on technologies, product availabilities and consumer choices, or by using marketbased measures as incentives to reduce emissions, like the carbon tax. “In the short run, if I’m a cattle producer, I can’t make that many changes in a year or two,” he explained the mechanism. “But maybe five to 10 years down the road, I can start doing things that have bigger effects.

These are things that are going to save me money and reduce my carbon footprint.”

According to Schaufele, most economists prefer a market-based program, which they maintain are more cost-effective, give consumers choice, and achieve

MAY 2018

greater GHG reductions. “Rather than forcing these businesses to use potentially inefficient technologies, prices provide incentives to find the least cost method to improve environmental performance,” he said.

The federal Backstop Carbon Pricing Policy, establishing minimum standards, was to take effect in January. It was delayed nine months to give the provinces without carbon plans more time to develop their own carbon pricing systems.

Although Schaufele submitted his report before the extension, his conclusions don’t change, “The only meaningful change in terms of the policy landscape is that the federal government granted the provinces an extra nine months to formulate their own carbon policies.”

The federal government has set a minimum standard for carbon pricing at $10 per tonne carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e), which increases by $10/tCO2e annually to reach $50/tCO2e by 2022. “This tax only applies to 70 per cent of total emissions,” Schaufele said, pointing out that emissions from manures, soils and enteric fermentation are not included in Canadian pricing. He commented that the federal price is actually too low to meet the emission targets, and some economists have even been advocating for higher carbon prices.

“The federal government has left it to the provinces to determine the system of pricing, and they are encouraging each province or territory to design their own carbon pricing system for their particular needs,” Schaufele said. At the time of his report, four provinces had adopted pricing: Alberta and British Columbia have a tax, while Ontario and Quebec have a cap-and-trade system. “Saskatchewan is an odd case for a number of reasons,” he said. It hasn’t committed to the federal carbon pricing system and, instead, the province unveiled its own climate change program. The Government of Saskatchewan launched its constitutional

reference case in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal on April 25 to challenge the federal government’s ability to impose the carbon tax on the province.

He didn’t include Saskatchewan in the report because “without an actual policy in hand for what Saskatchewan is really going to do, it’s hard to make any precise statements.” Still, he projects effects on the province will be similar to Alberta.

Industry Issues Because cattle markets are globally integrated, unintended consequences of carbon pricing for the cattle industry could be difficult to avoid. “With 45 per cent of Canadian beef production exported, the beef sector is susceptible to both domestic and international pressures,” Schaufele stated. “We have other factors to consider,” he added.

“We compete with the U.S., especially in agriculture, especially in cattle. If our costs increase, that means the U.S. will essentially steal a market share from us.

They’re going to grow and we’re going to shrink.”

Carbon pricing is also meant to decrease output, thereby reducing emissions. For the cattle sector, lower output means fewer calves sold and less profit for the sector. The report forecasts that since Canada is acting alone on carbon pricing, its beef industry would contract, while other cattle-producing countries would respond by increasing their output to fill the market gap. In the end, carbon pricing would achieve nothing for the cattle sector and bring no environmental benefit, leaving global emissions the same.

Schaufele’s report also forecasts a growth in input costs for producers, including on fuel, electricity, fertilizer and feed, because other sectors would be passing on their carbon costs to the cattle industry.

A further issue for the sector is whether producers will be able to pass their continued on page 20

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 19

Feature Threat Looming cont. from pg. 19 carbon pricing increases down the supply chain. “The tax base is substantially more important for the agricultural sector” than what the actual tax is, noted Schaufele.

“It is exceedingly unlikely that Canadian producers – at either the feedlot or cow calf levels of the market – have any ability to pass through carbon price cost increases.” In other words, they will bear most of the cost of the price increases.

In response to these consequences, the backstop policy and the pricing in Alberta and B.C. have exempted on farm use fuel. Schaufele noted that all Canadian carbon pricing policies also exempt emissions from enteric fermentation from cattle digestive processes. “The implicit exemption embedded in the definition of the tax base is of much greater economic relevance,” he said.

Cow Calf Production Schaufele determined that cow-calf producers will face two costs from carbon pricing. “First, there is a technical cost effect, which reflects the carbon price’s direct and indirect increases in input costs,” he explained. Carbon pricing make inputs, such as fuel and feed, more expensive and reduces producer surplus at all output levels. The second cost comes from the output effect, which measures how much the industry decreases in size due to carbon pricing. His research showed the “elasticity of supply is larger at lower prices than higher prices, which implies that the output effect grows – and the costs of carbon pricing increase – as output prices decline.”

In addition, Schaufele considered different scenarios for each of the provinces.

Carbon prices would have two effects on producers for Alberta and Ontario, and Saskatchewan is expected to have similar outcomes. The report forecasts that there will be a 3.5 per cent increase in fertilizer costs and 0.1 per cent for agrochemicals.

Feed is the largest single cost for Canadian cattle enterprises and that cost could see an indirect effect from carbon pricing. The exemption of on farm fuel has a central role in determining a cow calf operation’s indirect cost increases through inputs.

Further, the report projects that the

20

potential increase in electricity prices due to carbon pricing may be large, especially in Alberta and Saskatchewan, which rely on coal fired electricity generation.

Schaufele notes that when the carbon tax reaches its peak pricing in 2021, gross margins will drop by almost one quarter to one third, even with a fuel exemption.

Feedlot Operations Schaufele determined that feedlots face two costs from carbon pricing: The increase in input costs and the change in the industry’s size. Fuel is an essential input into the feedlot sector. Changes in the commodity costs of fuel will eventually lead to changes in fed calf production and, in turn, to changes in fed calf prices. In the feedlot sector, the impact of carbon prices will depend on the extent to which the sector responds by shrinking output.

“Both the cow-calf and the feedlot are fortunate in they’re not that energy intensive compared to other sectors,” Schaufele stated. “They don’t use that much carbon-emitting energy, but they are trade exposed which is a risk.” He explained that other countries would be able to displace Saskatchewan’s production. “What really matters for the sector is less the carbon tax and more the output price. If output prices are high, then the carbon tax doesn’t have that big of an effect on the industry,” Schaufele said.

According to Schaufele, a carbon tax on cattle producers for both cow-calf and feedlot would reduce the supply, and producers would receive less per cow after tax, while consumers would pay more. In exporting, producers would also receive less per cow, bearing the full burden of the tax.

Other Factors The report touched on other factors related to carbon pricing and the beef cattle industry, including interactions between carbon taxation and business risk management programming, and the importance of enteric fermentation.

Carbon pricing has the potential to interact with a wide range of existing

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

agricultural policies under Growing Forward 2 and the Canadian Agricultural Partnership. BRM programs become more valuable to individual producers due to the carbon pricing policy.

Schaufele warned the cattle industry about the potential for per animal charges on digestive emissions down the road.

“People in the industry must be cognizant that emissions coming from cattle are a major source of GHG emissions,” he said.

These emissions are difficult to measure and complicated to tax. Although no jurisdiction in the world currently prices these emissions, he noted, the potential for eventual taxes on non fossil fuel emissions poses a much larger risk to the Canadian cattle sector than does the existing carbon pricing systems. If enteric emissions were to be priced, he predicts that the industry likely would shrink to a fraction of its size.

Therefore, increasing research on emissions reducing techniques should continue to be a strategic priority for the sector, the report recommended.

At the same time, Schaufele recognized that producers have already made a lot of progress to reduce emissions. Should emissions ever be taxed, the report also recommended that Canadian beef engage in low carbon branding to differentiate itself and be able to obtain premium prices in specific niche sectors.

Safety Valves The report underlined that carbon pricing plans do recognize the potential high costs to the beef sector. Therefore, different safety valves and revenue recycling mechanisms have been designed to mitigate some of these effects. The report considered four key mechanisms that provinces can consider: exemptions, lump sum rebates, output based allocations and offset credits.

Sector specific exemptions are commonly given under carbon taxes. For example, fuels for on farm use are not included in the carbon tax base in Alberta, B.C. and the federal backstop policy.

MAY 2018

Feature Direct, sector specific payments, such as the lump sum payment, also alleviate pressure in competitively disadvantaged sectors. For example, both Alberta and the federal carbon pricing backstop have adopted an alternative to lump sum transfers in key sectors known as output based allocations. Output based rebates establish a benchmark technology and then measure performance against that standard. However, the report pointed out that establishing benchmarks in agriculture is difficult. “It is implausible that producers could replicate a best in class technology by altering their land quality, rainfall or summer temperatures,” the report stated.

Offset credits have received a lot of attention in agriculture, the report noted. It is one of the main claims that Saskatchewan and Manitoba have made about carbon sinks when voicing their concerns about the federal carbon tax, Schaufele stated. With the offset, producers could reduce emissions by making large investments, earning credits that could be sold to other firms in the economy. For example, soil sequestration investments would be made by reducing tillage and manure management. In carbon plans, the sticking point is the concept of additionality, which means that investments not otherwise made need to be undertaken to receive the offset credit. “If they are additional, we have to determine how much they are additional compared to how much they would have existed anyhow,” he explained.

Schaufele noted that the science around offset has to be improved before it can be considered by governments: “The second issue – and I think this is really the heart of it – is that it’s really hard to tell how much carbon is being sequestered by these sinks. Is it a little bit or a lot? How much credit should the province get?”

There needs to be a systematized and consistent method for measuring carbon sequestration, he added. “The challenge is on the science of sequestration rather than on the science of damage, and that’s where a lot of the attention gets paid,” he concluded.

MAY 2018

Provincial Effects The report’s chief conclusion was that if beef prices are high, the impact of carbon pricing would be small, but as prices drop, the impact becomes disproportionally larger. It also showed that carbon prices interact with other features of the cattle market. For example, higher fuel prices could result in decreased profits, reduction in herd sizes and more producers leaving the industry. Further, the report also determined that producers probably won’t be able to pass on any of the carbon price at any stage of the supply chain, and this will especially apply to the export market.

The report found that both systems of carbon pricing could lead to a drop in provincial herds. Schaufele’s conclusion

was based on an analysis of provinces with existing carbon policies, B.C. and Quebec. A carbon price of $25/tCO2e led to a drop of 100,000 in provincial herds. After B.C. exempted farm fuel, it restored 80,000 head, the study found.

This example also showed that farm fuel exemptions provide meaningful relief to the cattle sector, he said.

Therefore, Schaufele recommended in the report that there be limited input specific exemptions, such as the farm fuel exemption, or price contingent exemptions. In the end, he said, “it doesn’t matter what carbon system the provinces have, what matters most for beef producers is the exemption on farm fuel.

That’s a key detail that’s important.”B

Premises Identification A premises identification number is now required to access funding under the Canadian Agricultural Partnership. Be prepared: get your premises identification number today.

Register at premisesid.saskatchewan.ca.

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 21

Connecting Sustainability and Beef Production in Canada

VERIFIED BEEF PRODUCTION PLUS

IN SASKATCHEWAN

DRIVING CONSUMER CONFIDENCE

A PRACTICAL APPROACH TO VERIFYING SUSTAINABILITY

PROOF OF RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT

Canadian Beef is Sustainable, Safe and Wholesome.

Let’s become VERIFIED and show consumers why!

Photo credit: Sam Wirzba samwirzba.com

THE

OF: Complete the PRO Y DIBILIT

Take the Training

Apply SOPs on the Beef Operation

On-Farm Audit

IN-PERSON WORKSHOP OR ONLINE

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES

VERIFICATION OF THE OPERATION

Education on Food Safety, Animal

Industry-led practices focused on Food

Care, Biosecurity, and Environmental

Safety, Animal Care, Biosecurity, &

Stewardship Management Practices:

Environmental Stewardship during beef

•

Inject in the Neck, Reduce Broken

production are being used on the cattle

Needles, Meet Withdrawal Times

operation:

•

Keep Records (Treatments, Deaths)

•

Beef Code of Practice, Disease Prevention, Manure Management

CRE

Our 3rd party auditors are also beef producers and understand the industry. It takes about 3.5 hours and is mostly done in the comfort of your home, through discussion and review of your records.

•

Feedlots: 3 months of Records

This 3rd party verification gives credit

•

Cow-Calf: 6 months of Records

towards the excellent things you do.

ENHANCING CONSUMER CONFIDENCE IN THE WHOLESOMENESS OF BEEF To learn more about Visit verifiedbeefproductionplus.ca or contact Coy Schellenberg, VBP+ in Saskatchewan: SK Coordinator, at 306.859.9110 or SK@verifiedbeef.ca

The dairy, pork and poultry industries have all implemented some type of Quality Assurance program similar to ours.

Retailers and consumers are looking for it.

This is our opportunity to use an industry created program to enhance our social license to produce beef, and to increase consumer trust. There is strong potential to increase local consumption and global exports of Canadian beef. VBP+ validates sustainable production practices, onfarm. Let’s show the world why Canadian beef is the safest, highest quality protein product on the planet!

WANT TO BECOME REGISTERED WITH THE VBP+ PROGRAM? VBP+ REGISTRATION STEPS •

you need records as per the Must Do’s in the VBP+ Producer Manual and complete the VBP+ training (workshop or online)

•

then contact your provincial VBP+ office to request a validation audit

•

we will help prepare you for the audit, ensuring that you understand our program and that you are ready (Producer Checklist & SelfAssessment)

•

VBP+ IS A NATIONAL PROGRAM RECOGNIZED BY THE CFIA

then the auditor will connect with you directly to schedule the on-farm audit

•

Audits Rates in SK: $650/cow-calf & $850/feedlot

To learn more about Visit verifiedbeefproductionplus.ca or contact Coy Schellenberg, VBP+ in Saskatchewan: SK Coordinator, at 306.859.9110 or SK@verifiedbeef.ca

Feature The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Managing Livestock Predators in Saskatchewan Livestock in Saskatchewan share their grazing spaces with a variety of predators.

“For the most part, these predators feed on their natural prey like deer, but some turn to livestock,” stated Ian Esson, Provincial Predation Specialist for the Feral Wild Boar and Wildlife Predation Program which is administered through Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation. With a declining human population in the rural areas, both natural prey and predators have expanded their habitats, moving into spaces populated by livestock.

Common Predators The most common predators in Saskatchewan that beef producers will encounter are the coyote, wolf, cougar and bear, said Esson. Producers are probably most familiar with the coyote.

“They are found all over the province, but it’s the predominant predator in the southern part of the province,” Esson explained. “Not all coyotes are killers,” he cautions, advising producers to leave a coyote unit intact if it is not causing harm.

While coyotes may be denning near cattle pastures, it doesn’t mean that they will turn to cattle for food.

“Coyotes are very territorial, so they keep other coyotes out of their area and can be a benefit,” stated Esson. A coyote family unit will have a denning area covering approximately three square miles. If they are removed, a new group could move in that may not be so friendly. Therefore, he recommends that producers take precautions to keep coyotes from preying on their livestock. For example, deadstock should be properly disposed of and not left available for predators; and during calving, animals should be in areas where they can be easily observed.

However, producers still need to be watchful. Coyotes are opportunistic hunters, characteristically preying on the weak like new-born calves. There are some typical signs of a coyote attack. Like other canines, the coyote will attack from behind and try to hamstring the prey. A carcass would show coyote bite marks on

24

the legs at the back and bite marks on the face area where it tries to suffocate the prey. A coyote consumes the back part of the carcass first. Esson said that the length of teeth marks in the hide helps to identify which predator made the kill. A coyote’s teeth marks are usually about 1.5 inches long.

The wolf is another one of the province’s main predators, although it’s observed more commonly in the north. The wolf has a larger territory than the coyote of about 25 to 30 square miles. “It’s a bigger predator. It has to travel a little bigger area to make sure it has enough food to keep itself and its family going,” said Esson. Wolves also are very territorial and won’t tolerate any coyotes in their area.

Signs of a wolf attack are chasing and attacking prey from behind, biting in the hindquarters and nose and throat areas, and having a longer bite mark of two inches long.

The cougar is another key predator that can be observed all over Saskatchewan.

“There seems to be a higher concentration down in the southwest corner surrounding Cypress Hills,” Esson pointed out. Cougar have a large range with the male known to patrol areas of about 120 square miles. Being shy and nocturnal, there are few cougar sightings. An attack can be difficult to spot because they typically cover their feed with leaves and hide it in some way.

Esson identified some characteristic signs of a cougar kill. “You are usually going to find bite marks on the neck, on the top of the spine onto the throat area,” he said. “You’ll find bite marks on the head.

There’ll be claw marks on the shoulders across the top of the back.” Commonly, hair can be scattered around the carcass because the cougar rasps the hair off the hide with its tongue. Cougar typically feed on the organ meat first, starting with the heart, lungs and liver. Unlike the canine predators, a cougar won’t eat the stomach or intestines, and these can typically be found rolled to the side.

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Another common predator, bear, are widespread in the northern part of the province, but they have been sighted further south as well. Bear migrate down river systems searching for food. They are known to be opportunistic, taking advantage of any food source. Bear can kill cattle of any age, even preying on mature cows. Esson notes that a bear attack is clearly distinguishable. “The carcass has a lot of damage,” he described. It attacks from the top. The carcass would show a lot of blood, bruising, broken bones and trauma.

Wild Boar Program Although the SCIC hasn’t received claims of wild boar predation on cattle, the feral wild boar can destroy crops, damage property, seriously damage native flora and fauna and chase livestock off their feed. They can also carry diseases and parasites that can harm livestock health.

Very intelligent, they have a low centre of gravity, powerful jaws, tusks, and can weigh up to 600 lbs or more. Wild boar are primarily found in the Parkland area of the province. Males can cover a territory of 1820 square miles, while the female and the young cover about 8-10 square miles.

SCIC now administers the Feral Wild Boar Control Program that operates as part of the Wildlife Damage Compensation Program. Landowners and RMs can have wild boar removed if they are a threat to the environment, farm operations and livestock. The SCIC’s Darby Warner stated, “The intent is to eliminate wild boar in Saskatchewan. The numbers are small enough now that maybe we have a chance with them.” He encourages wild boar sightings to be reported to the SCIC, which has teams of qualified hunters and trappers to investigate sightings and deal with the boar according to a response protocol. The SCIC is also working with researchers from the University of Saskatchewan to track wild boar movement through monitoring and radio collars.

MAY 2018

Feature Predator Attack To be eligible for the compensation program, producers should contact SCIC as soon as a predator attack on livestock is discovered. From the program’s perspective, says Warner, the SCIC predation specialists don’t get involved in animal control until there is damage and producers are reporting losses. “We have about 250 temporary adjustors who work for SCIC across the province,” he explained. Claim assessments are based on carcass evidence, the attack site and indicators of the presence of a predator.

Esson recommends preserving the attack site if weather conditions permit by covering it in plastic, for example. Twothirds of a carcass should be present to evaluate an attack. He also advises that the producer “take lots of pictures of the kill site”, as many as 25-30 to capture the carcass and the ground area surrounding the carcass. “It makes the adjuster’s job that much easier,” he said. Esson also advises taking photographs of the bite marks. He suggests placing a small ruler or object next to the marks to provide an estimate of the size.

The adjustor will have to assess whether the animal was taken live by the predator or was scavenged by a predator after it died from natural causes like illness. “If it is scavenged by a predator, it is not covered by the SCIC program,” explained Warner.

Esson described some of the typical signs that an animal was alive when the predator attacked. “You can skin the animal out, and if the animal was predated upon, you are going to find bruising under the hide,” he said. Important signs of an attack are puncture marks, bruising and pooling of blood. In contrast, a sign that an animal died naturally and was then scavenged is that the legs are tucked up underneath itself. No bruising around the teeth marks is another sign that the animal was scavenged after death.

From the compensation perspective, the inspectors only need to find evidence of a predator. However, Esson finds that producers usually want to know which predator attacked the animal. “The length of the bite marks can help to identify the predator. A fox has a bite incision of threequarters to 1.25 inches long, a coyote is 1.5 inches, a wolf is slightly bigger at 2

MAY 2018

inches, a cougar is 2.75 to 3.5 inches,” he explained. Predation specialists also need to identify the predator if they are called upon to mitigate a problem.

How to Prevent Predation In the first place, producers can manage predators when they are encountered.

“Any time you have predators harassing your livestock you can control those predators on your own,” Warner noted.

Esson notes that even simple measures like making noise, making regular patrols of fences, and having lights on can keep predators like coyotes at bay. “You make a lot of noise to keep them pushed back,” he added.

Usually, a predator must be causing a problem before it is removed. “There are good predators and bad predators,” said Warner. He cautions against removing good predators. “If you get a bad predator that moves in and starts to harass your livestock, you have problems that you didn’t have in the first place,” he stated.

Predation specialists are experienced hunters and trappers who can provide effective control of problem wildlife.

They may remove the problem animal and provide the producer with written information or training methods to resolve future problems. SCIC specialists can make a farm visit to assess a situation and help advise producers about effective predator control to prevent further attacks. “The predation specialist can work with them to mitigate that risk,” he said, adding that sometimes the solution can be as simple as repairing a fence.

Producers can take several measures to control predators, including installing effective fencing that is specific to the animal, record-keeping and daily monitoring of livestock. Esson advises producers to remove any sources of food that would draw in predators. “When you have livestock, you are going to have deaths whether from lightning strikes or disease. Make sure your dead animals are disposed of by either putting them in a pit or burning, and to keep those areas at least a mile from where you are wintering your livestock or calving out, or where you have your sheep,” he added. “I would say that well over 90 per cent of producers have a very good protocol to look after that.” continued on page 28

SCIC Predation Program

The Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation (SCIC) has a program that provides compensation for producers for injury or death to eligible livestock, fowl or specialty animals by predators.

The program includes compensation for predation by coyote, bear, cougar, lynx, fox, wolf, bobcat, birds of prey, scavenging birds, raccoon, skunk, badger, mink, weasel or any other wild animal that causes injury or death to eligible livestock.

The SCIC recently made changes to the Predation Program. The main adjustment is to the calculation of the minimum value paid for a lost calf. The rates were changed to reflect the actual lost value of the calf based on the fall marketing price regardless of when the animal is lost to predation.

The minimum values for compensation are $1,400 for cows, $1,150 for beef calves, $450 for foals, $60 for lambs and goat kids, and $250 for ewes. For beef calves, pricing will be determined using market sales data the week before, the week of, and the week after the loss. The producer will be compensated for the highest of these three values. If the market price is lower than the set minimum, the producer will receive the minimum amount.

Compensation will be determined based on confirmation of predation. Producers receive full compensation for animals if the predation can be confirmed. If livestock are injured, producers can receive up to 80 per cent of the animal’s value to cover veterinary costs. If predation is suspected but cannot be confirmed, half the compensation will be provided. If there is no evidence to prove a predator attack, no payment is issued.

Producers may appeal compensation decisions. *For more information on the SCIC Predation Program and Compensation: www.saskcropinsurance.com/wildlife/ predation-prevention/ *For more information about the Feral Wild Boar Control Program or to report a wild boar sighting, contact your local SCIC office or call 1-888-935-0000.

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 25

Science and Production Buying? Selling?

Producers have options, and Responsibilities

by Jason Pollock, CEO, Livestock Services of SK

It is in most people’s nature to be mindful of their dollars and to get a good deal.

Cattle producers are no different, and when it comes time to make decisions on how to buy or sell livestock, producers have options.

Whether buying or selling the transaction platforms vary from the traditional method of using a brick-and-mortar auction market to conducting an on-farm auction or using an electronic marketing service. Some will prefer using more independent methods like the classifieds or the services of free websites such as kijiji or even social media. Each of these platforms have their associated pros, cons and costs. When making your decision, it is important to assess the pros and cons of these platforms to identify what fits best with your operation. This may vary depending on if you are planning to buy or sell livestock.

What I would like to address in this article relates to regulatory items to be aware of for marketing cattle through both dealer and private transactions. My objective is to give you some information to consider that makes your sales or purchases through these commerce platforms as risk free as possible. The sad fact is that not all people are honest.

When money changes hands, there is an opportunity for dishonest people to cause harm. The livestock industry addresses this issue by providing input for rules that are incorporated into legislation by government lawmakers. For all the platforms listed above, some sort of regulation exists based on the needs identified by industry to keep livestock production and commerce viable and incheck for the public good.

The focus for this article will be on The Livestock Dealer Regulations, 1995 (the Regulations) pursuant to The Animal Products Act. The Regulations dictate licensing requirements and rules for the purchase or sale of “all livestock” in the

26

province. On the surface, this may seem quite prescriptive but as we dig further into the Regulations (the rules), there are some allowances. One of them is the allowance for bonified livestock producers to trade livestock without a license if the title to the livestock is retained for 30 days. It is this allowance that permits private treaty sales of livestock between producers.

"If you sign an agreement to extend payment past three days, you are extending credit and forfeit your right to claim on that dealer’s bond."

From a seller’s perspective, utilizing the services of a licensed dealer, either through their market or for on-farm transactions, should be relatively safe.

However, there are some details a producer should be aware of, even for these transactions. Most importantly, a dealer must make payment within three business days. Other operational items a dealer must adhere to include providing settlement to the contributor indicating the date, the weight, the description of the livestock and the manifest number.

The dealer is responsible for calling for a brand inspection and for deducting and remitting Saskatchewan and National Check-off and inspection fees. The dealer must also maintain a livestock dealer bond in an amount prescribed by the Regulations that is based on the number of cattle traded. It is important to note that, if you sign an agreement to extend payment past three days, you are extending credit and forfeit your right to claim on that dealer’s bond.

Producers selling livestock without the services of a dealer are not excluded from submitting Check-off fees. It is the seller’s responsibility to remit these fees. There is no security from a bond for non-payment,

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

as such, they should take measures to ensure that a sales contract does not relinquish ownership of the livestock prior to satisfying full payment. Sales contracts that imply an extension of credit will complicate efforts to resolve nonpayment issues.

From a buyer’s perspective, livestock purchased through a dealer are to be free of any liens or encumbrances. If you are buying private treaty livestock, take adequate measures to ensure that the seller of the livestock has free title.

Saskatchewan producers purchasing livestock through private sales are not required to obtain a brand inspection, however, it is highly recommended that they do so. A brand inspection can help resolve misunderstandings caused by the lack of, or a poorly-worded, sales contract.

Producers being contacted by buyers from other provinces claiming to be licensed and bonded should be aware that those licenses and bonds only cover transactions for the jurisdiction in which the license was issued. If you wish to verify a Saskatchewan dealer license or bond, you can call the LSS Brand Registrar at: (306) 546-5086, or email: brands@lssc.ca, or search dealers online at: www.LSSC.ca.

Ownership disputes can cause a significant resource draw on all parties involved, including those of LSS. Whether buying or selling, you want to ensure that you have a clear understanding of the platform you are choosing and the steps required to keep yourself safe. The regulations are in place to assist both the buyer and the seller. Whatever side of the coin you happen to be on, ensure that you are aware of the risks involved and associated responsibilities. Finally, take the adequate time required to put into place the right documentation and inspection services to protect yourself from problems down the road. B

MAY 2018

Early-Bird Registration open until June 15

Driving Demand

with keynote speaker Rex Murphy A trusted face and voice across Canadian media. Rex will simultaneously inform and entertain with his provocative commentary.

August 14 – 16, 2018 London Convention Centre, London, ON Register at canadianbeefindustryconference.com facebook.com/canadianbeefindustryconference @CDNBeefConf #CDNBeefConf

Science and Production Active Missing Livestock Files April 2018

Area missing from

Number of head

Animal description

Stoughton

1

Cow

Stoughton

1

2017 calf

Spiritwood

1

Gelding

Brand location

RCMP subdivision

Livestock Branch contact

Date reported

Left Hip

Fillmore

Moosomin 306-435 4582

April 2, 2018

NVB

Fillmore

Moosomin 306-435-4582

April 2, 2018

NVB

Spiritwood

North Battleford 306-446-7404

March 7, 2018

Brand description

Information provided by Livestock Services of Saskatchewan

Good, Bad, and Ugly cont. from pg. 25 Esson stated that guardian dogs, llamas and donkeys, are also very effective for controlling predators. The SCIC has a Guardian Dog Rebate Program which provides $100 to help producers offset the cost of purchasing a livestock guardian dog. “We have a program to alleviate the cost of getting some of those pups. There

are 7-8 specific breeds of guardian dogs,” said Warner.

Producer Obligations To participate in the compensation program, producers do have some obligations when it comes to dealing with predators. They are expected to use the recommended prevention programs to help protect their livestock from

predators. They are also expected to follow good livestock husbandry practices to minimize the potential for predator problems. If the recommendations are not followed, then further predator control services and compensation may not be given. B

It’s FINALLY Here!

The World’s first cordless, hoseless fence stapler...

Stockade staplers are a great addition to our full line of Gallagher products...

Power Fencing as well as Livestock Weighing & Electronic ID management systems.

Call any time to discuss Union Forage options.

F O R A G E

Roger Meyers

Saskatchewan | 306.221.1558

Darren Keown

Manitoba | 204.937.7333

Partnered with Global Forage Leaders to test & select the best products for Western Canada Committed to Local Research & Testing

World Leaders in Annual forage for grazing / stockpile / swath grazing

www.unionforage.com

28

...The Revolutionary ST400i Quietly & effortlessly drive up 2 - inch barbed staples to desired depth with the simple pull of the trigger.

Available from D&R Prairie Supplies 306-221-1558

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

We have an experienced, knowledgeable support staff to help select the proper annual Cocktail Cover Crop or Perennial Forage blend for your operation.

Roger Meyers • D&R Prairie Supplies • (306) 221-1558

MAY 2018

Stewardship Multiple Approaches to Habitat Conservation SARPAL Program Report

by Tom Harrison, Executive Director for SODCAP Inc.

The Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association (SSGA) has just finished up the third year of delivery of the Species at Risk Partnership on Agricultural Lands (SARPAL) project called Multiple Approaches to Habitat Conservation: Finding the Right Fit Encourages Producers to Manage for Species at Risk Habitat, with program delivery support from South of the Divide Conservation Action Program Inc. (SODCAP).

This project has an annual budget of $600,000 provided through Environment and Climate Change Canada. An additional $100,000 was leveraged from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in 2017-2018 and will commit through next year as well.

SSGA is exploring several programming options, including signing a number of conservation agreements with ranchers and agricultural producers who own or manage critical habitat for species at risk. It is hoped that these conservation agreements with producers will be recognized as effective protection of the critical habitat. With the official signing of the Action Plan for Multiple Species at Risk in Southwestern Saskatchewan: South of the Divide in November, one million hectares of critical habitat has been officially designated. The critical habitat is almost a direct overlay with native grasslands that exist in the South of the Divide.

As of the end of March 2018, SSGA held a total of 30 conservation agreements with agricultural producers. These agreements impact over 200,000 acres with an annual investment of $365,000 paid directly to producers in 2017-2018. The Results Based Conservation Agreements were the most popular and widely-accepted option of all the programming options provided to producers. There are 11 agreements in place affecting 40,000 acres. Annual payments are based on $3.50/acre as long as habitat targets are met.

MAY 2018

Agreements are in place for producers who manage habitat for Greater Sage Grouse (GRSG) and Sprague’s Pipit (SPPI) and, for the most part, habitat targets are being achieved. However, the dry conditions that existed this past year did influence the habitat. In addition, habitat targets are being continually evaluated and refined in consultation with wildlife biologists. SSGA is also working on a significant grass banking partnership that will employ a results-based concept to provide incentives to producers who are grazing conservation lands and meeting habitat objectives on their own ranch.

An announcement will be forthcoming on upcoming projects. In addition to the GRSG and SPPI, other species at risk include the swift fox, McCown’s longspur, Chestnut collared longspur, northern leopard frog and long billed curlew.

The more prescriptive type agreements involve habitat management and habitat restoration conservation agreements.

These types of agreements define the activities that producers commit to and there is no requirement for ranchers to produce habitat that meets specified targets. Setting stocking rates and grazing management is a part of the habitat management agreements, and they are much more than just fencing beneficial management projects. Activities include not only grazing plans, but also invasive species control, avoidance of destructive activities and monitoring of both habitat and wildlife. In some cases, active intervention is needed as in the case of the control of leafy spurge on native grasslands. In many cases, because their habitat is in good shape, all we need to do is document the producer’s management strategy and sign an agreement that allows them to continue “as is”, or make some minor adjustments in management. There are currently 11 habitat management agreements in place and five habitat restoration agreements in place.

Another program is the Niche Product Branding option where SSGA has developed a logo and aided in media development for producers who are directly marketing beef to consumers and, at the same time, managing critical habitat for species at risk. Producers can put the logo on their product. SSGA also has conservation agreements with these producers that verifies that these producers are sourcing their livestock from native grasslands that are critical habitat.

The last option being offered under the SARPAL project is the concept of term conservation easements. While there are four producers that have expressed an interest in term conservation easements, and fair market evaluations have been performed on the lands in question, SSGA has to create a foundation that can hold conservation easements. This process, plus a valuation of term conservation easements, are currently underway.

The SARPAL project will continue for two more years. SSGA will be developing strategies to obtain additional funding to continue signing conservation agreements with producers. B *For additional information on these projects contact: Tom Harrison, PAg, Executive Director with SODCAP at: (306) 530-1385 or ED@sodcap.com

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 29

Stewardship Drones are Migrating into Prairie Grassland Research Projects

by Tara Mulhern Davidson

Drones have become a hot ticket item in the past few years for recreation, agriculture, and filmmaking. Producers are using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, to understand more about plant growth or even to count cattle, because they can see what people on the ground cannot. Leila Benmerrouche from Saskatchewan Polytechnic recently explained the applications of UAV technology for natural resource management during a PCAP Speaker Series webinar.

UAVs have the potential to determine ecosystem health and identify areas of concern for rangeland, such as the spread of invasive weeds or fire recovery.

Drones also have the potential to be used to understand grazing patterns and quantify wildlife and species at risk habitat. “Traditional satellite images can be quite spotty,” said Benmerrouche, whereas UAVs can effectively collect dense images in real time, providing the user with very tangible results. “You can go out and collect data the day you need to collect data, and the images are very high resolution,” she added.

Polytechnic currently has a fleet of four different vehicles. “This allows us to complete a multitude of different projects,” Benmerrouche described, such as forestry, wetland or grassland work.

“Different crafts all have a different niche when it comes to natural resources.” Cost, ease of use, ability to operate in different weather conditions, and fixed wing versus helicopter-style design, all factor into the type of work to which the UAV is suited.

For example, a fixed wing UAV requires a clear area for take-off and landing and, therefore, is not well-suited to forest ecosystem research.

Drones can be equipped with different types of sensors and cameras depending on the goals of the user. RGB colour sensors collect images in visible light, which means the photos appear similar to how they are viewed by the human eye. These types of sensors are useful for mapping forests and different habitat types. “There are also sensors that operate on the infrared spectrum, and see things that our eyes cannot,” said Benmerrouche.

Both Near Infrared (NIR) and thermal sensors are useful for detecting wildlife

The Right Tool for the Right Job There is a wide range of UAVs on the market right now, and Saskatchewan

This fixed wing UAV is useful in open grassland areas to collect vegetation and habitat information.

Photo: Leila Benmerrouche, Saskatchewan Polytechnic

30

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

movement, canopy cover, range management and vegetation indices, or other complex layers.

Yet another sensor, the multispectral sensor, or MSS, combines both visible and infrared technology, which means you can capture even more information with a single sensor. “With all these sensors, we have a huge capability to document almost any type of natural habitat,” Benmerrouche explained.

Everything has limitations, however, and Benmerrouche explained that drones weighing less than 25 kg are currently limited in the area they can scan compared to traditional satellite imagery which collects data for larger areas. It was also noted that tilting has caused some discrepancies in data comparisons, and mentioned that some animals, such as birds and bison, do not always react favourably to flying objects.

In addition, individuals or organizations interested in using UAVs for research, business, or fun, need to ensure they meet Transport Canada’s regulations.

Depending on the size and weight of the UAV, location and purpose of use, different regulations apply.

MAY 2018

Stewardship Current Applications Saskatchewan Polytechnic is collaborating with the University of Saskatchewan on an ongoing prairie project at Nature Conservancy of Canada’s Old Man on His Back heritage site in southwest Saskatchewan, near Claydon. “It’s a fantastic project, really bringing a lot of groups together,” she said. They are assessing grazing patterns of cattle and bison, and that information will be of interest to ranchers in the area as well, she added. The project is incorporating existing vegetation points from the university. “With this information, we are able to tell the computer this is the vegetation that’s here, now let us know what else is in this entire area,” Benmerrouche explained.

Saskatchewan Polytechnic is also working with the Redberry Lake Biosphere Reserve,

near Hafford, Saskatchewan, on a riparian and habitat stewardship project. “We are looking at how well our sensors can pick up riparian health,” she said, by comparing UAV images with known riparian health information to verify accuracy. Their collaboration also includes species at risk mapping, and they are also creating maps for other research projects in the area.

Airport Tower prior to flying in such close proximity to their space.

Invasive species management is yet another opportunity for drone technology. A recent project was initiated by a Saskatchewan Polytechnic student who looked at existing locations of European buckthorn, the invasive shrub, in Wanuskewin Heritage Park.

By developing mosaic images of the infestations, the student predicted areas where the buckthorn could occur. This particular project was unique because they needed to notify the Saskatoon

“Since UAVs have become more streamlined, and more mainstream too, they have become much more cost effective,” said Benmerrouche, adding that it will be interesting to see how far the technology goes. B

UAVs are also seeing use in crime scene analysis and for conservation law as well.

A drone was effectively used to implicate a poacher recently during an incident where a moose cow and calf had been illegally shot near Alvena, Saskatchewan.

*See more of this PCAP presentation: https://youtube/AtFlgaNg_oc

Association News, Reports, and Events Frank Linthicum Inducted into CWA Hall of Fame The Linthicum family attended the posthumous induction of Frank Linthicum into the Canadian Western Agribition (CWA) Hall of Fame. The presentation was made at the CWA’s Volunteer Appreciation Night on April 5 in Regina. The Hall of Fame recognizes those deserving for their outstanding contribution to the success of CWA. Born in Rockglen, Sask., the late Malcolm (Frank) Linthicum began ranching full-time south of Glentworth in the 1940s. Over the years, Frank was very involved in showing commercial cattle and volunteering for over 40 years for CWA and its committees until he stepped away in 2010. B

MAY 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 31

SSGA 105 th

AGM & CONVENTION June 10 - 12, 2018

Stockade Building - Kinetic Park, Swift Current, SK

AGENDA SUNDAY, JUNE 10 Sunday program is being held at Heartland Livestock Services 5:00 p.m. Caregiver Impact on Cattle Health, Performance and Well-being Tom Noffsinger, DVM, Production Animal Consultation 5:45 p.m. Live Cattle Handling Demonstration 6:30 p.m. President’s Reception

MONDAY, JUNE 11 8:00 a.m. Registration, Breakfast, Trade Show 9:00 a.m. Greetings and Welcome - Shane Jahnke - President, SSGA Address from Saskatchewan Agriculture - Honourable Lyle Stewart, Minister of Ag. Address from City of Swift Current - Ryan Plewis, Deputy Mayor of Swift Current 9:15 a.m. NAFTA Update - Karen Hodgson - Deputy Director Trade Negotiations, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 10:00 a.m. Networking Break and Trade Show 10:30 a.m. VCPR Explained Judy Currie, DVM - Registrar, SK Veterinary Medical Association 11:00 a.m. Livestock & Forage Strategy 2.0 Shelley Jones - Livestock Development Manager, SK Ministry of Ag. 11:30 a.m. Canadian Cattle Industry Update David Haywood Farmer - President, Canadian Cattlemen’s Association 12:00 p.m. Lunch and Trade Show 1:00 p.m. Tracking the Rapid Expansion of Invasive Wild Pigs Across Saskatchewan: Implications for Livestock Producers Dr. Ryan Brook - Associate Professor, University of Saskatchewan 1:45 p.m. How to ‘Beef Up’ Your Business Risk Management Strategy Shea Ferster - Business Advisor, MNP 2:30 p.m. Networking Break and Trade Show 3:00 p.m. Livestock Water Quality Leah Clark - Livestock & Feed Extension Specialist, SK Ministry of Ag. 3:30 p.m. Ecosystem Goods & Services from Rangelands in the Canadian Prairie: Carbon Storage and Biodiversity Dr. Cameron Carlyle - Assistant Professor, University of Alberta 4:15 p.m. Multi-Species Cover Crop Grazing Ben Stuart - Technical Director, Union Forage 5:00 p.m. Closing remarks 32

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

6:00 p.m. Cocktails 7:00 p.m. Banquet and Entertainment: Awards (TESA, President’s) Auction (Silent & Live auction)

TUESDAY, JUNE 12 9:00 a.m. Registration, Breakfast and Trade Show 9:30 a.m. Call to Order, Welcome and Introductions Approval of the Agenda Minutes from the 2017 Annual General Meeting President’s Report 2nd Call for Nominations 2nd Call for Resolutions 10:00 a.m. Western Canadian Cow Calf Survey Kathy Larson - Research Associate, University of Saskatchewan 10:30 a.m. Networking Break and Trade Show 11:00 a.m. Financial Report Zone Chair Ratifications Final Call for Resolutions 11:30 a.m. Traceability Update Mark Elford - Chair, Canadian Cattle Identification Agency 12:00 p.m. Lunch and Trade Show 1:00 p.m. Beef Cattle Market Outlook Anne Wasko - President, Cattle Trends Inc. 1:45 p.m. Networking Break and Trade Show 2:15 p.m. Voting Procedures/Results & Resolutions Other Business Final call for Nominations and Elections Closing remarks Adjournment *Agenda subject to change without notice

ACCOMMODATION

Registration fees do not include accommodation. A block of rooms is reserved until May 31, 2018 at the Home Inn & Suites, Swift Current for $111/night. When booking your room, indicate you are with the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association. To reserve a room call the Home Inn & Suites at (306) 778-7788.

MAY 2018

Thank You to Our Sponsors Heritage ($2,500)

REGISTRATION (includes GST) Early Bird

Regular

Full Conference

(before May 31) (after May 31) $225.00 $250.00 ___________

Spousal Full Conference*

$200.00

$225.00

___________

Single One Day  Mon  Tues (check one)

Crescent Point Energy Corp.

MNP LLP Real Agriculture Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association Western Litho Printers Western Producer

$135.00

$160.00

___________

Spousal One Day*  Mon  Tues $110.00 (check one)

$135.00

___________

Gold ($1,500)

Sunday Only

$25.00

$30.00

___________

Ducks Unlimited Canada Merck Animal Health Vetoquinol Canada Inc.

Banquet Only (Monday)

$40.00

$45.00

___________

Silver ($1,000)

*Include additional name(s) on this form for name tag(s)

Total registration and ticket fees:

BMO - Bank of Montreal Canadian Cattle Identification Agency Canadian Western Agribition Gibson Livestock 2017 Ltd. Titan Livestock Inc. Westway Feed Products

PERSONAL INFORMATION

Bronze ($500)

City:

Name: Organization/Ranch Name: Mailing Address:

Boehringer Ingelheim Canada Ltd. Heartland Livestock Services South Country Equipment Tru-Test Group VIDO-InterVac Weyburn Livestock Exchange

Postal Code: Fax:

Email: PAYMENT

Canadian Cattle Identification Agency Innovation Credit Union Merck Animal Health Norheim Ranching Paysen Livestock Equipment Inc. Proveta Nutrition Ltd. Range Ward Inc. Saskatchewan Bison Association Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association Saskatchewan Charolais Association Saskatchewan Forage Council Saskatchewan Verified Beef Production Inc. Saskatchewan Veterinary Medical Association MAY 2018

Province:

Phone:

Trade Show

As of April 30

___________

As of April 28, 2017

Total Registration Fees Enclosed: Payment must accompany registration. Registration form must be received on or before May 31, 2018 to qualify for early-bird rates. Cancellations received prior to May 31 will be refunded less a $50 administration fee. Cancellations received on May 31 or later will not be refunded. Make cheques payable to “Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association” and send to PO Box 4752, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4.

Registrations with credit card payment may be faxed to (306) 569-8799 or call (306) 757-8523.

Method of Payment (check one):

 Cheque (enclosed)

 Visa

 Mastercard

Card Holder Name: Signature: Card Number: __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Expiry Date: __ __ / __ __

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 33

Association News, Reports, and Events SSGA Zones Hold Annual Meetings March was a busy month for annual meetings of Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association zones across the province.

The Zone 4 annual meeting took place in Eastend on March 9. Zones 3 & 12 held their meeting in Swift Current on March 10. Zone 2 held its annual meeting in Weyburn on March 28, while two meetings took place on March 29 - Zone 7 in Beechy and Zone 1 in Alameda.

Resolutions were adopted at three zone meetings [See Resolutions on page 35].

events. The meetings also featured guest speakers presenting topics on predation, Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation programs, emergency preparedness, the carbon tax and advocacy. Student scholarships were also presented at the annual meetings. In Beechy, Mason Ringrose received the SSGA Zone 7 scholarship. Zone 3 &12 presented two scholarships – to Graycin Johnson and Lexi Hicks. Bailey Kozma received the scholarship in SSGA Zone 1.

Along with meeting business, each location held a supper and fundraising

A special auction of a custom-made hat was held at the Zone 4 annual meeting in

Eastend on March 9. All the proceeds from the hat auction went to the SSGA Wildfire Relief Fund and the auction raised $6,000.

The winner of the hat was Brent Weiss.

Gold Spring Custom Hats Ltd. from Nanton, Alberta donated the hat made

by Vern Elliott. A sample hat valued at $1,000 was on display, but the winning ticketholder will have a hat made to order. The hat was made from 100 per cent beaver felt, which Elliott considers to be the ultimate in durability. It would be rated at 500X by the American Hat Company. B

Brent Weiss of Maple Creek, on the right, was the winner of the custom-made hat, presented by Brad Howe, chair of Zone 4. The hat raised $6,000 in an auction to raise funds for the SSGA Wildfire Relief Fund.

Mason Ringrose was on hand to receive the SSGA Zone 7 scholarship from Brian Braun, on the left, at the annual zone meeting in Beechy on March 29. He is from Beechy and is now studying heavy duty mechanics at Saskatchewan Polytechnic.

Graycin Johnson from Mankota was the recipient of the SSGA Zone 3 &12 scholarship. She has just completed her second year at the Western College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon.

34

| ŠBEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

MAY 2018

Association News, Reports, and Events Lexi Hicks of Mortlach received the SSGA Zone 3 &12 scholarship. She recently completed the first year of her BA in Policy Studies at Mount Royal University in Calgary, Alberta.

Bailey Kozma received the SSGA Zone 1 scholarship. She is from Carievale, Sask. Presently, Kozma is studying for a Bachelor’s Degree in Nursing at Medicine Hat College in Medicine Hat, Alberta.

2018 ZONE MEETING RESOLUTIONS Zone 4 - Resolution 1 WHEREAS there is funding for the study of Johne’s Disease in beef cattle, but not in multi-grazing species, i.e., goats and sheep, BE IT RESOLVED that SSGA lobby to have funding included for multi grazing species.

Zone 7 - Resolution 1 WHEREAS the Government of Canada recently announced a $1 billion Nature Fund for the securement of private land for conservation purposes; and WHEREAS land securement has been shown to be ineffective and expensive.

BE IT RESOLVED that the SSGA lobby the Government of Canada to invest a significant portion of the Nature Fund into conservation programming with private

MAY 2018

landowners that does not involve the purchase of privately managed land or conservation easements in perpetuity.

WHEREAS scientific data does not support Health Canada’s existing recommendations for saturated fat and sodium; and

Zone 7 - Resolution 2 WHEREAS The Trespass to Property Act puts the onus on landowners to visibly post their land; and

WHEREAS the implementation of the front of package recommendation would likely cause harm to Canadian health.

WHEREAS posting land creates additional work and costs for landowners.

BE IT RESOLVED that the SSGA lobby Health Canada in opposition to the current front of package label proposal.

BE IT RESOLVED that SSGA lobby the Government of SK to amend The Trespass to Property Act to implement a mandatory permission requirement into the trespass act.

Zone 3 & 12 - Resolution 1 WHEREAS the high cost of purchasing firefighting equipment makes it unaffordable for individual RMs to purchase them.

Zone 7 - Resolution 3 WHEREAS Health Canada is proposing to implement a Front-of-Package label for foods high in saturated fat, sodium and sugar; and

BE IT RESOLVED that SSGA lobby SARM to encourage neighbouring RMs to work together to collaborate on purchasing fire-fighting equipment.

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 35

Association News, Reports, and Events A Report From Shane Jahnke President, Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association to show its commitment to agriculture as this year’s budget is quite like the budget released last year. Funding for the Ministry of Agriculture is estimated to be at $378.6 million. Of the allocated funding, $258.2 million will go to fund the business risk management programs of Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation, AgriStability, AgriInvest and Western Livestock Price Insurance. The agriculture sector budget also includes approximately $32 million for research programs, including support for the Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence.

As it is my last president’s message for Beef Business, I must say that two years have really flown by. I have been very fortunate to have a great Board of Directors and Executive to work with during this time. I would very much like to thank Chad for the countless hours of hard work that he puts in on behalf of the organization, as well as the excellent job that Fonda is doing as the Program Manager, Sharon for keeping the finances in line and Marusia for having a great start with SSGA. I would not have been able to hold the honour as President of SSGA without the support of my wife Natasha and our children Savannah and Colt. I am thankful to my ranching partner Ben Jahnke, who spent quite a few hours doing extra work to cover things at the ranch while I was in meetings.

During my time as SSGA President, I have also appreciated the support of many SSGA Past Presidents who were always able to give me advice or their two cents on any issues arising. For those that have been involved in boards and committees, you are aware that one might not always agree with everyone, but it is damn good to get as many perspectives as one can get. I will continue to take pride in being a part of this group in the future.

With the provincial budget recently being released this past month, I believe that the provincial government has continued

36

Producers should keep in mind that WLPIP calf insurance is available for purchase until the end of May. WLPIP can provide producers some peace of mind when it comes to market risks looking towards fall.

Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation (SCIC) has knowledgeable staff available for producers who have questions or are unable to complete the process online.

will always go above and beyond for our livestock to ensure the care, health and well being of the herd. Producers within our industry spend many sleepless nights to ensure this.

In closing, I would like to invite everyone to SSGA’s 105th AGM and Convention which will be held in Swift Current on June 10-12. The conference speaker lineup will be sure to provide a learning opportunity for everyone with a chance to get together and enjoy good food and company. More information is available in this issue of Beef Business or by contacting SSGA at (306) 757-8523.

Like always, if you have any questions or concerns, feel free to pick up the phone and give me a call. B See you at the convention!

Shane Jahnke

SCIC has recently announced some updates to their Predation Program which should be welcomed by producers. The main change is to the calculation on the value paid for a lost calf, which will now reflect the actual lost value of the calf based on the fall marketing price regardless of when the animal is lost to predation. Pricing will be determined using market sales data the week before, the week of and the week after the determined loss and producers will be compensated for the highest of these three values. If the market price is lower than the set minimum, the producer will receive the minimum amount. The new set minimum values for compensation are $1,400 for cows and $1,150 for beef calves.

Compensation will be determined based on confirmation of predation.

I hope everyone can enjoy the spring weather that we are now receiving and put this past calving season behind us.

With the array of extreme weather that producers have endured in the past couple of months, it again shows that we

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

MAY 2018

Calendar of Events JUNE June 10-12

SSGA 105th AGM & Convention (See page 32-33)

Swift Current, SK

June 13-15

Marketing & Stockmanship School

June 21-22

Saskatchewan Native Prairie Appreciation Week and Tour

Saskatoon, SK Beechy, SK

JULY July 1

TESA Application Deadline

July 26

Soil Health Field Day

Wood Mountain, SK AUGUST

August 8

Saskatchewan Pasture Tour

Macklin, SK

August 10

Advertising Deadline for September Edition of Beef Business

August 14-16

Canadian Beef Industry Conference

London, ON

Association News, Reports, and Events SSGA Welcomes New Director Ian Leaman Ian Leaman joined the SSGA Board of Directors in January 2018 as Affiliate Director, representing the Saskatchewan Shorthorn Association.

Ian and his wife Rhonda Heinrichs operate Melba Stock Farm Ltd. at Chaplin, Sask.

The farm has over 100 years of history with registered Angus and Shorthorn cattle.

The operation also has a commercial cattle herd, sheep and both conventional and organic grain production. In addition, Melba Stock Farm operates a small backgrounding lot on a site at Ethelbert, Man.

off the farm at Chaplin. The couple has three children: Sam, Wilson and Elizabeth.

Ian sees global markets, especially U.S. trade agreements, the public perception of beef products, and the increasing cost of production as the biggest challenges facing the livestock industry. Working on public awareness to educate consumers about beef production is one of the directions Ian sees for SSGA. Further, Ian feels that Stock Growers should work with immigration and schools to promote careers in agriculture and gain skilled labour to help address the agricultural labour shortage. B

Ian and Rhonda, who is also a veterinarian, operate Living Skies Veterinary Services

MAY 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 37

Advertisers Index Adair Sales

14

Golden Thread Livestock Images

40

Nahachewsky Charolais

42

Allen Leigh Security & Communications

39

Grassland Trailer

39

New Life Mills

40

Apollo Machine & Products

40

Hand N Hand Livestock Solutions

39

New Vision Agro

39

ArcRite Welding

40

Hi-Hog Farm & Ranch Equipment

8

Norheim Ranching

44

Arm River Red Angus

42

John Brown Farms

42

Northstar Seed

40

Barr & Olney

42

Johnstone Auction Mart

41

Paysen Livestock Equipment

2

Canadian Beef Industry Conference

27

Kelln Solar

40

Pneu Dart/Target Cattle Concepts

38,40

Canadian Cattle Identification Agency

3,43

Kramer Trailer Sales

39

Saskatchewan Angus Assoc.

42

Cowtown Livestock Exchange, Inc.

41

Kyle Welding & Machine Shop

39

Saskatchewan Cattlemen's Assoc.

INSERT

D&R Prairie Supplies

28

Lane Realty Corp.

18

Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture

21

Ducks Unlimited Canada

13

Linthicum Ranch

42

Saskatchewan Verified Beef Production Inc.

22-23

Edward Jones

40

Liphatech Rozol

INSERT

SCIC

4

FeedMax Corporation

39

Man-SK Gelbvieh

42

Simply Ag Solutions

40

Frostfree Nosepumps Ltd.

39

Manitou Maine-Anjou

42

Solar West

39

GBT Angus

42

Masterfeeds

1,39

Sweet Pro

40

Gem Silage

40

Titan Livestock

39

Gibson Livestock Ltd.

N.M. McMahon Chartered Professional Accountant

40

39

Western Litho

41

Visit us at the Farm Progress Show June 20-22, 2018 Located in Hall 12

Canada Centre

38

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

MAY 2018

“Bud Williams” Livestock Marketing & Proper Stockmanship

Give us a call when it’s time to market your cattle.

with Richard McConnell & Tina Williams NS

Pincher Creek, Alberta — June 4 - 7 Saskatoon, Sask. — June 13 - 16

LE

titanlivestock.com

www.handnhandlivestocksolutions.com info@handnhandlivestocksolutions.com 417-327-6500

STOCK WATER TROUGHS Made of 12 gauge galvanized metal Popular sizes: 400, 500, 1000 Imperial gal.

TT CA

TO

RE

R TU

John Lawton President C E 780-487-8769 NN Cell: 780-712-0140 CO john@titanlivestock.com G TIN

RYAN GIBSON BUS: 306.692.9668 CELL: 306.631.0070

FAX: 306.692.3252

TOLL-FREE: 1.800.667.7176

COWCAM

Wireless & IP Systems DEALER FOR:

Makes your calving €easier, safer & more profitable!

• Smartphone compatible • Save more calves • Stop disturbing them and check more frequently

GOOSENECK

GRAIN AND FERTILIZER BINS

20', 25' AND 30' LENGTHS TWO DIVIDER GATES TORSION AXLES

Allen Leigh

Security & Communications Ltd.

Cam

Kyle, SK 306-375-2271 kylewelding@sasktel.net | www.kylewelding.com

545 Assiniboine Ave, Brandon, MB I TF: 1.866.289.8164 T: 204.728.8878 I info@allenleigh.ca

www.precisioncam.ca Trusted Quality,

Trusted Support,

Trusted Service!

BUMPER-PULL

15'& 20’ IN STOCK • 16" WHEELS DIVIDER GATE

kramertrailersales.com

FOR ALL OF YOUR BEEF NUTRITION SOLUTIONS CALL:

Humboldt / 1-306-682-2668 Regina / 1-306-790-5576 Saskatoon / 1-306-384-2144 Swift Current / 1-306-773-3001

NEW VISION AGRO Box 479 Hague, SK S0K 1X0

BEEF & BISON FEED AVAILABLE IN: COMPLETE FEED PELLETS SUPPLEMENTS MASH FEEDS

CALL TOLL FREE 1-866-FEEDMAX (333-3629)

MAY 2018

PH: (306) 225-2226 FX: (306) 225-2063

email: newvisionagro@sasktel.net www.newvisionagro.com

Dealer & Distributor For: - Jay-Lor Vertical Feed Mixers - Masterfeeds - Cargill Rite Now Minerals - Baler twine, netwrap, silage bunker, covers, plastic wrap, Grain Bags

Check with us before you buy!

Pump Kit

There is a Dealer near You!

Solar West 500

Calmar, Alberta

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 39

www.edwardjones.com

Forage Seed Mixes Corn Seed

Know your goals so you can choose your investments.

Tyler Knibbs

Financial Advisor .

461 King Street Unit 3 Estevan, SK S4A 1K6 306-634-4870 www.edwardjones.com

Neil McLeod 306-831-9401

Member – Canadian Investor Protection Fund

Machine & Products Ltd.

• ROLLER MILLS ~ Electric or PTO models ~ 10 sizes available ~ Increase the nutrition value of your feed! ~ Manufactured in Saskatoon • SILAGE COVERS & GRAIN BAGS We regroove roller mill rolls - most brands

2502 Millar Ave, Saskatoon 306-242-9884 or 877-255-0187 apm@sasktel.net www.apollomachineandproducts.com

Working to create opportunities for farmers in Saskatchewan We are a Canadian distributor for Pneu-Dart Habitat Protection & Enhancement Phone: 306-955-5477 / 1-866-298-7222 www.simplyag.ca

40

Pneu-darT

306.681.5340 sarah@goldenthread.ca www.goldenthread.ca SARAH BUCHANAN

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Graham McKenzie

306.861.7074

INC.

Dale Watson

306.861.4618 MAY 2018

All types of commercial and purebred livestock auctions and farm sales.

Wash rack facilities for livestock

www.johnstoneauction.ca

CT

Wayne or Scott Johnstone Box 818, Moose Jaw, SK 306-693-4715 (Bus) Fax 306-691-6650

f each o e l the sa Beef m o r f ian $10 anad e Wildfire C I h s to t e o g t und.

F t-shir f e i l Re www.skstockgrowers.com

Cowtown Livestock Exchange Inc. Maple Creek, SK

$25 plus GST and shipping

306.757.8523

Regular Sales every Tuesday @ 10:00 a.m.

Locally Owned & Operated Call for info on Presort & Other Sales Phone 306-662-2648 Toll Free: 1-800-239-5933

SK Stock Growers Box 4752, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4

www.cowtownlivestock.com

SSGA Meeting Notice SSGA ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING & CONVENTION June 10-12, 2018 Stockade Building – Kinetic Park Swift Current, SK 1st Call For Nominations Please submit nominations to: Doug Gillespie, Box 44, Neville, SK S0N 1T0 Phone: 306-627-3619 Fax: 306-627-3645 Cell: 306-741-6533 email: maplecoulee12@gmail.com

1st Call For Resolutions Please submit nominations to: SSGA, Box 4752, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4 Phone: 306-757-8523 Fax: 306-569-8799 email: ssga@sasktel.net

SSGA BOARD OF DIRECTORS THE EXECUTIVE

Shane Jahnke President/Director at Large Gouldtown, SK

DIRECTORS AT LARGE Phone: 784-2899

Bill Huber 1st Vice President/Director at Large Lipton, SK Phone: 336-2684 Kelcy Elford 2nd Vice President/Director at Large Caronport, SK

Phone: 690-5309

Jeff Yorga Finance Chair Flintoft, SK Phone: 531-5717 Doug Gillespie Past President Neville, SK Phone: 627-3619

MAY 2018

Jerry Chanig, Mankota Keith Day, Lacadena Gerald Duckworth, Courval Glen Elford, Avonlea Calvin Gavelin, McCord Joe Gilchrist, Maple Creek Paula Larson, D'Arcy Norm Nordgulen, Assiniboia Lee Sexton, Hanley Barry Olney, Estevan Roy Rutledge, Assiniboia

ZONE CHAIR DIRECTORS Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 - Zone 5 - Zone 6 - Zone 7 - Zone 12 -

478-2658 375-2934 394-4211 436-7121 478-2558 662-3986 379-4523 642-4961 544-2660 421-1495 642-5358

AFFILIATE DIRECTORS

Garner Deobald - Charolais Affiliate, Hodgeville 677-2589 Jack Ford - SaskMilk Affiliate, Wishart 328-4700 Tara Fritz - SImmental Affiliate, Shaunavon 297-3147 Ian Leaman - Shorthorn Affiliate, Chaplin 631-3694 Laird Senft - Angus Affiliate, Fort Qu’Appelle 332-4823 Corbin St. John - Goat Breeders Affiliate, Brock 460-7361 Jeff Yorga - Limousin Affiliate, Flintoft 531-5717

APPOINTED DIRECTORS

Dr. Andy Acton- Veterinary Advisor, Ogema

459-2422

SASKATCHEWAN CCA DIRECTORS

Henry McCarthy, Wawota Stephanie Deg, Weyburn Rod Gamble, Pambrun Brad Howe, Empress, AB Bill Huber, Lipton Brent Griffin, Elbow Kimberly Simpson, Kyle Kelly Williamson, Pambrun

739-2205 891-9894 582-2077 661-0409 336-2684 854-2050 375-5534 582-6102

Pat Hayes, Val Marie Lynn Grant, Val Marie Reg Schellenberg, Beechy Duane Thompson, Kelliher

298-2284 298-2268 859-4905 675-4562

Listings of email and fax numbers can be found on the SSGA website at www.skstockgrowers.com

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 41

B R E E D E RS Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association, Advocating for Independent Cattle Producers in Saskatchewan for 105 Years.

SSGA MEMBERSHIP

The Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association has entered into a partnership with Flaman to increase Memberships and Subscription readership.

Drive (306) 567- 4702

Box 688, Davidson, SK S0G

Helen Finucane

phone: 306-584-2773 cell: 306-537-2648 Carlyle, SK

As of September 1, 2008 the Saskatchewan Stock Growers will be offering a major prize Annual Online draw 2 Year Old Bull Sale for all paid new and renewal of existing 12’ BERGEN STOCK TRAILER memberships as follows: Specs: Full rear door, side door, 3rd Friday in March The sponsored membership prize by Flaman will be a

slots for side window slides, rock guard, 2-3,500 lb toreflex axles

The member that sells the most SSGA new memberships will receive a free registration for two to the2009 SSGA AGM.

Trevor, Cheryl, Brett & Carter Branvold Box 205 Wawota, Saskatchewan S0G 5A0 Ph: 306 739 2924 | Cell: 306 577 9141 gbtangus@sasktel.net | www.gbtangus.com

PUREBRED LIVESTOCK

New or Existing Memberships:

1 year

$105.00

1 entry

2 year

$194.25

2 entries

2 year spousal

$97.12

1 entry

3 year

$262.50

3 entries

3 year spousal

$131.25

2 entries

Life

$1050.00

10 entries

Life spousal

RR #1 Norquay, Saskatchewan S0A 2V0

Your AD could be here! $525.00 4 entries

306-757-8523

All draws will be made at the Contact 2009 SSGA Annual Convention

For more information or to become a member, please contact the SSGA office at 306-757-8523

Email: nahachew@yahoo.ca Phone: (306) 594 2627 | (306) 290 6005

Membership type: Member

Associate

Membership status:

Affiliate (call for rate)

Renewal

New

1 Year $157.50...................

Spousal $78.75 Spousal $145.69 2 Year $291.38 ....................

3 Year $393.75 ....................

Spousal $196.88 Lifetime: $2625.00 ............

Spousal $1312.50 Junior Membership 1 Year $26.75 2 Year $52.50 3 Year $78.75 Subscription 1 Year $26.25 2 Year $47.25 3 Year $68.25

42

Name _______________________________________________ _ Address_ ____________________________________________ _ City/Town______________ Prov_____

Postal Code _________

SSGA MEMBERSHIP

Drive

Phone (________) _________________________________Email ______________________________ Ranch/company name___________________________________________Herd Size ________________ Fall Sale Dates___________________________Spring Sale Dates ________________________________

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

MAY 2018

In order to be eligible to receive the prize a member, subscriber or advertiser who’s entry is drawn must answer a g skill question. testin The chances of winning the sponsored membership prize draw is dependant on the

CONTACT US

for

C O M P L I M E N T A R Y livestock traceability support & approved indicators for beef starting under $3

MAY 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 43

Your Livestock Equipment Specialists FREE DELIVERY AVAILABLE ON FULL PALLETS

NET WRAP 64” x 8,000ft 67” x 8,000ft

High Quality net wrap at competitive prices

SILAGE WRAP & SILAGE COVERS Norheim Ranching carries a wide variety of silage plastics.

Contact us for pricing on your silage plastic needs

Lee - Saskatoon 1.306.227.4503

Sheldon - Redvers 1.306.452.7545

Welcome to our new Territory Manager

Kelcy Elford - SW Saskatchewan 1.306.690.5209

Follow ‘Norheim Ranching’ on Facebook for the most up to date product information and announcements

NORHEIMRANCHING.COM