Beef Business November 2018

Beef Business ‘

Saskatchewan’s largest circulated industry magazine Saskatchewan's Premier Cattle Industry Publication Saskatchewan`s Premiere Cattlecattle Industry Publication November 2018

A Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association Publication Publication Mail Agreement #40011906

Working for Producers

Conference SASKATCHEWAN’S PREMIER BEEF EVENT

For more information or to register visit: www.saskbeefconference.com

% 00

AN I AD N CA F

Delta Regina Hotel

1

JANUARY 16TH - 18TH, 2019

BEE

Contents

Beef Business

Cover photo courtesy of Tania Beierbach, Whitewood, SK

A Proud Saskatchewan Tradition Since 1913

A Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association (SSGA) Publication

Industry News 6

Canada Strikes Eleventh Hour USMCA Trade Deal

9

PMRA to Meet with Stakeholders on Strychnine

9

U of S Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence Opens

11

LFCE Gets New Director

12

LFCE Research and Facilities

15

Ministers Tour South SK Conservation Projects

16

Livestock Producers Receive Tax Relief for 2018

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 17

Weekly Chart

18

Retail Meat Price Survey

20

Southwest Sask Wildfires: Recovery One Year Later

22

Wildfire Recovery One Year Later: Rebuilding the Ranch

23

New Animal Protection Act Enhances Rules Around Care

27

Antimicrobials by Prescription Around the Corner

Subscriptions Box 4752, Evraz Place, Regina, SK S4P 3Y4 Tel: 306-757-8523 Fax: 306-569-8799 email: ssga.admin@sasktel.net

Features

Subscription Rate: 1 yr $26.50 (GST included) Published 5 times per year Design and Layout: Jackson Designs Candace Schwartz Tel: 306-772-0376 email: cjacksondesigns@gmail.com

Science and Production 30

Canfax Updates Market Mobile App

32

Your Registered Livestock Brand

34

Where's the Beef? Missing Livestock Files

36

Securing Landownder Rights With Temporary Workspace Agreements

38

Grassland Conservation on Private Land: Instruments and Incentives

40

Stretching Conservation Funding? Prioritizing Recovery Funding in Species Conservation

41

Agri-Ed Brings the Farm to Students

42

Devastating Dry Spells: DUC Delivering Programs to Support Producers Through Tough Conditions

44

How Cattle Ranching Can Help Preserve Species at Risk in Canada's Grasslands

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

Stewardship

Association News, Reports and Events SSGA Launches Third Annual Beef Drive

47

Director Profile: Ashley Kattler

48

SSGA President's Report

50

Calendar of Events

51

Advertisers Index

52

Business Directory

Contributors

e

Re

cycle This M a

zin ga

e

Follow us on

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

Ple as

46

facebook.com/skstockgrowers @SK_StockGrowers NOVEMBER 2018

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.

Fonda Froats Bill Huber Marusia Kaweski Chad MacPherson

Chelsea Manz Jeremy Pittman Jason Pollock Diego Steinaker

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

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 5

Industry News Canada Strikes Eleventh Hour USMCA Trade Deal Negotiations on the trilateral free trade agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico finally wrapped up on September 30 in a last-minute flurry of meetings before a looming deadline.

Previously known as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the updated $1.2 trillion deal has a new name – the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). This complicated deal took a year of negotiations to hammer out. Some parts had to have technical updates to account for modern technologies and procedures. Certain sections were newly written, while others saw rewrites.

For the Canadian beef industry, the past year has been a period of uncertainty and instability. The industries on both sides of the border were concerned that a tariff regime might be applied. However, the USCMA maintains and ensures the dutyfree access of cattle and beef that has been in place for the last 25 years.

To discuss the recent developments surrounding the USMCA and other foreign trade issues, Beef Business spoke with John Masswohl, director of Government and International Relations for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.

The USMCA The negotiation process has not been clear sailing. Masswohl summarized the negotiations. The U.S., Canada and Mexico held a series of meetings early in the year to push for progress in the talks in light of anticipated slowdowns later in the year.

The talks looked positive until May when events became unpredictable. The U.S. implemented tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum products to which Canada retaliated with its own tariffs. Negotiating activity ground to a halt between Canada and the U.S. and Mexico in the summer months.

In August, Mexico and the U.S. sat down and reached a bilateral deal on some aspects. The media and some analysts had speculated that Canada was being excluded from the process. Masswohl disagreed. “I tend to call it more of an 6

understanding between the US and Mexico about things that they would do that are relevant to them,” stated Masswohl. “Then the intent was to come back to Canada and deal with the things that were bilateral and trilateral involving Canada.” Canada then joined the bilateral process with the U.S. in early September with intense negotiations continuing throughout the month. As discussions progressed from this point, he observed a slight change of dynamic that was not geared to agriculture issues. “In that whole time, there was one meeting of the agriculture officials,” he noted. The U.S. had been focused on broader issues – the auto rules, dispute settlement, culture and steel tariffs – and was not prepared to concede on smaller issues. “Everything was happening at the higher level outside of agriculture,” Masswohl said, describing the dramatic moments in the days before the September 30 deadline.

It was important that the deal was reached by the end of September because the U.S. side had to submit the agreement to Congress for signing with 60 days notice. This means that the USMCA would be signed on November 30, which is also the last day that outgoing Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto is in office.

Once the USMCA is signed, each country would begin their legislative process to bring it into effect.

Over the months of negotiations, the Canadian beef industry worried that the new agreement might bring unwelcome changes like tariffs to the beef and cattle trade. The Canadian beef lobby had two objectives in its work, Masswohl explained. “The big objective was that we keep what we had. We liked the NAFTA agreement. It’s been very good to the Canadian beef sector for the last 25 years.

And a lot of people built their business on that,” he said. “It was very important that we preserve the unlimited dutyfree access that we’ve enjoyed for quite a number of years.” Masswohl noted that some elements in the U.S. hoped to restore Country of Origin Labelling as part of the NAFTA renegotiation, but they were

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

not changed. “We enjoy the rules of origin the way they are,” he said.

“The other key objective that we had was to say let’s see how we can modernize this agreement and kind of bring it back into this decade and maybe remove some of the burdensome regulatory practices at the border,” Masswohl stated.

He explained that instead of a change to the border protocols, there are two new chapters in the agreement, one called competitiveness and the other good regulatory practices. These chapters provide an institutionalized pathway to resolve these issues. “We have essentially a process that we did not have before to address regulatory burden,” he stated.

With the USMCA, the beef industry has been able to lock in the access that it has

We liked the NAFTA agreement. It’s been very good to the Canadian beef sector for the last 25 years. had for the past 25 years, despite earlier concerns that tariffs could be applied. “We are very happy not to see any changes. We have had no tariffs on beef and live cattle exports into the United States and we continue to have no tariffs,” Masswohl said.

“The other thing that we were pleased to see has been maintained is the dispute settlement provisions,” Masswohl said. The dispute settlement provision, Chapter 19, provides an avenue other than the U.S. courts to address anti-dumping charges.

“Chapter 19 gives you probably more expedited processing going through the U.S. courts,” he added. Canada views this chapter as extremely important in dealing with Mexico. Under NAFTA, Chapter 20 was a broader dispute settlement which has been preserved in the new agreement as Chapter 31.

NOVEMBER 2018

Industry News Although negotiators have shaken hands on the USMCA text, there remains the outstanding question of the steel and aluminum tariff placed by the U.S. on Canada in May. As the U.S. explains it, Masswohl said, “Those tariffs that were put in place on steel and aluminum are part of what they call a 232 investigation. And 232 is an exemption that the US takes from trade agreements when it believes imports threaten its national security.” Canada has argued that the tariffs are illegal. Masswohl sees it as troubling that the United States has taken the position of viewing economic competition as a threat to its national security. The entire basis of a trade agreement is undermined if it can opt out of the agreement. It was widely viewed that the U.S. applied the tariffs to wring concessions from Canada. Now that the deal is struck there is the expectation that tariffs would be lifted. For now, he said, the steel and aluminum tariffs remain outside of this agreement and that is an issue that Canadian negotiators still need to pursue with the U.S. Mexico Relations Masswohl stated that Canada has established a good trade relationship with Mexico: “They are one of our top export markets.” In the cattle industry, he noted that Canada and Mexico meet regularly – at least three or four times a year – to hold meetings called the International Beef Alliance with other producers from the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and Paraguay.

While these countries may compete for consumers at the grocery store, the group has identified several common issues that go beyond competition: the environment, having open borders and developing youth leadership. In fact, there has been close collaboration between the cattle industries from Canada, Mexico and the U.S. on the NAFTA renegotiation. “We’ve all been on the same page saying, ‘Hey, you know what?

We like NAFTA.’ We like the fact that we have unencumbered trade, and no tariffs between our three countries. It’s been good for all three and let’s keep it going,” Masswohl said.

Although Mexico is a large beef producer, it is not expected to be a competitor for Canada in trade with the U.S. Masswohl sees the relationship as complementary. “There’s a lot of Mexican feeder calves down in the continued on page 8

NOVEMBER 2018

†12-month duration of immunity against lepto hardjo-bovis.

The label contains complete use information, including cautions and warnings.

Always read, understand and follow the labels and use directions.

Vira Shield, Elanco and the diagonal bar logo are trademarks of Elanco or its affiliates. © 2018 Elanco or its affiliates.

CACTLVSH00012

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 7

Industry News Trade Deal cont. from pg. 7 feedlots in Texas, Kansas, Arizona and Oklahoma, where it’s a lot hotter down there and they need a different kind of cattle,” he explained. Also, Mexico is in close proximity geographically to these southern cattle-producing areas of the U.S. The Canadian cattle going to feedlots in the U.S. are generally sent to northern and mid-U.S. destinations. “Both the distance and the heat are factors in the kind of cattle we have,” he stated.

Although the beef industry was not directly impacted by provisions in the USMCA, cattle producers are still impacted by secondary effects from changes to other sectors. However, Masswohl sees the USMCA as having an overall positive impact, strengthening the domestic economy overall. “One of the things that I am very pleased to see is the whole issue of the automotive rules of origin. I think that comes out very good for Canada and for auto workers in this country,” he said, adding that this provision translates into a strong Canadian economy. It also means good marketing opportunities for Canadian beef on the home front. “We always have to remember that our biggest market for Canadian beef is our domestic Canadian market. We need the domestic Canadian market and the economy in Canada to be doing very well because beef tends to be a luxury item,” he added.

When the economy is strong, people will eat more expensive cuts either at home or in restaurants. In economic downturns, people tend to eat at home and purchase less expensive cuts.

The end of September brought a conclusion to the USMCA negotiations, but much work remains to be completed.

Masswohl explained that the next step involves bringing the agreement into effect. “It’s probably not going to come into effect until some time next year, and in the meantime, NAFTA is still in place, so everything just continues on,” he added.

500 million consumers and a combined economy worth $13.5 trillion. Both the federal government and the Conservative Opposition promised to give Bill C-79 on the CPTPP swift passage through the House of Commons. “Both the Liberals and the Conservatives are supporting it, though the NDP is not,” he said. By midOctober the bill passed final reading in the House and moved to the Senate, where it speedily passed both readings. The CPTPP received Royal Assent on October 26.

The CPTPP was signed on March 8 but will enter into force 60 days only after six countries have ratified the deal.

Mexico, Japan and Singapore had already approved the deal previously.

New Zealand ratified the agreement on October 23, followed by Canada on October 26. Days later, Australia completed the process on October 30 becoming the sixth country to ratify the CPTPP. This means that the CPTPP will come into force on December 30, 2018.

These six nations will immediately benefit from reduced tariffs and improved access to the lucrative Japanese market, but the other members of the agreement will have a delay. “The reason we want it in this calendar year is because you get the first tariff cut in the calendar year that it is implemented and then the second tariff cut on January 1 of the next calendar

HOG HITH

FARM & RANCH EQUIPMENT Ltd

E OU TST

1974

ANDING

♦

N BRA

D

2018

year,” he explained. “If we implement it on December 31, we get tariff cut number one, and we get tariff cut number two a day later.” Once the CPTPP is implemented, 99% of Canada’s current exports to CPTPP markets will enter tariff-free.

CETA September marked the one-year anniversary of the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union. “It’s still early days in terms of the beef trade, but our exports are up.” Masswohl noted. The first seven months of 2018 compared to the first seven months of 2017 saw exports to the EU increase by 20% in volume and 21% in value. Canadian beef shipments appear to be receiving prime value. Masswohl encourages beef producers to enter the European market which holds significant market potential for high quality Canadian beef. “I just believe we need to spread the word and get producers enrolled in that European program,” he said. “I think it will be very positive for us.”

After a period of market uncertainty on both sides of the border while the negotiation of the USMCA had been underway, the beef industry can now focus on returning stability to markets and growing trade. B

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

FREE corral and handling system design

Professional Ranching Tools

Hydraulic & Manual Squeeze Chutes

Are your corrals in safe working order?

• • • • •

Gates (4’ to 20’ long)

• U-spreaders

< Adjustable Height CPTPP Update Panels • Frames w gates Loading Chutes, Panels w man gates • Steel posts Canada has become the fifth country to Stationary or Mobile Overhead spreaders • Paddock slabs ratify the Comprehensive and Progressive U-frames w gates • And more...

Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Proudly serving Canada’s ranching community for over forty years (CPTPP), the 11-nation trade deal between Pacific nations. The deal targets almost 8 | ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com NOVEMBER 2018

Industry News PMRA to Meet with Stakeholders on Strychnine Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) will be meeting later in November with Saskatchewan’s agriculture sector and stakeholders on ending the use of strychnine to control Richardson’s Ground Squirrels (RGS). Health Canada in midsummer announced that it intended to end the use of products containing strychnine for RGS control. This decision followed the PMRA’s re-evaluation that raised environmental concerns about the potential poisoning of non-target animals.

The PMRA opened a 90-day consultation period on its re-evaluation decision that closed on September 29.

Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association (SSGA), together with other agricultural

associations in Saskatchewan, raised concerns that the timing of the PMRA consultation is not conducive to participation from the agriculture sector because it was being run during the peak of the agricultural season. The SSGA petitioned Health Canada to extend the comment period for an additional 30 days to provide agricultural producers with an opportunity to submit their comments.

The PMRA did not extend the consultation period, but now has agreed to a meeting with stakeholders from the Saskatchewan agriculture sector to provide their input and concerns.

Gophers are native to short grass prairies and a core area of their habitat is located in Saskatchewan. Their overpopulation

and infestation have led to significant damage to agricultural operations in Saskatchewan, including injuries to livestock, damage to farm equipment and extensive destruction of crops.

The careful and appropriate use of strychnine has shown to be the most effective and safest tool for agricultural producers to manage the RGS population and prevent infestation. There is currently no option available for controlling RGS on agricultural lands that is the equivalent or an adequate alternative to strychnine.

The loss of strychnine to control RGS could have a major financial impact on Saskatchewan producers. B

U of S Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence Opens The $38 million Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence (LFCE) was officially opened at its new facilities south of Clavet on October 9. The opening, which was emceed by Dr. Ernie Barber, featured speeches by guests and dignitaries and a tour of the world-class complex.

The centre aims to be a global leader in innovation, promoting increased profitability and sustainability for the livestock and forage industries.

“This centre was built on a very long history of the University of Saskatchewan working with producers, industry and government,” stated Mary Buhr, dean of the College of Agriculture and Bioresources.

LFCE is a partnership of the University of Saskatchewan, the livestock and forage industries, and the provincial and federal governments. The Strategic Advisory Board, which includes producers, is chaired by Duane Thompson. The centre’s new director is Dr. Kris Ringwall, who comes from North Dakota State University.

He takes over from Interim Director Kathy Larson.

“The LFCE brings together all of our resources under one roof. It’s more NOVEMBER 2018

Dignitaries and guests presenting at the opening of the Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence on October 9. (Back row, l-r): Minister of Agriculture David Marit; Ernie Barber, co-chair of former Livestock and Forage Steering Committee; Dr. Doug Freeman, dean of the Western College of Veterinary Medicine; Mary Buhr, dean of the College of Agriculture and Bioresources; Kris Ringwall, new LFCE director; Scott Schultz, Termuende family member, Murray McGillivray, former LFSC member; Kathy Larson, LFCE interim director. (Front row, l-r): Tim Oleksyn, former LFSC member and Strategic Advisory Board member; Rhonda Gaw and Marce Schultz, Termuende family members; and Karen Chad, U of S vice-president of Research. Missing: Duane Thompson, chair of the Strategic Advisory Board; John McKinnon, U of S professor.

Photo Credit: David Stobbe

than bricks and mortar. It’s more than animals and land and people and technologies – the LFCE is a generator of ideas and innovation. It’s a platform that brings together so many different perspectives,” stated Doug Freeman, dean of the Western College of Veterinary Medicine. Minister of Agriculture David

Marit concurred, “The LFCE enhances our industry by pooling research capabilities and bringing together everyone in the beef cattle production chain.”

Funding came from the University of Saskatchewan with $11 million; the federal continued on page 10

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 9

Industry News Forage Centre cont. from pg. 9 and provincial governments providing $10 million under the Growing Forward 2; Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association providing $1 million; A&W with $5 million; Western Economic Diversification with $4.47 million; Farm Credit Canada providing $100,000; and contributions from several other organizations, corporations and individuals, as well as gifts-in-kind.

“This unique centre will research and model all aspects of raising livestock on the Prairies, helping to meet the needs of producers and consumers in Canada, while also helping to sustainably produce food for a growing world population,” said U of S President Peter Stoicheff.

Students and faculty from the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, the College of Agriculture and Bioresources and the College of Engineering will conduct research and teaching at the state-of-the-art barns, feedlot, cattle handling, research and teaching labs.

“It foresees the transfer of research results and novel technologies not just to producers but to vets, economists, environmental engineers and consumers,” noted Karen Chad, the U of S’s vicepresident of research.

After consulting with the livestock and forage industries and the U of S, the LFCE Steering Committee was struck in 2014 on the initiative of then-Minister of Agriculture Lyle Stewart to review research, training and outreach capacity of the livestock and forage facilities within the province. For Aaron Ivey, co-chair of the former Livestock and Forage Steering Committee, the centre brings together the best of research and industry, “Without strong research going forward, we cannot maintain a competitive industry in the province. Without a strong industry and without an engaged industry, we don’t have strong research either.”

stage for our young people to embrace animal agriculture – whether it be to get an education and go back to the ranch and excel on the production side, or to develop new technologies that will enhance an already vibrant industry.”

To cap off the opening, Dr. John McKinnon, Saskatchewan Beef Industry chair, and members of the Termuende family, who gifted their land to the U of S that was the home of the former Western Beef Development Centre, were honoured with road signs bearing their names that will be used on the roads leading into the new facility.

The opening concluded with the unveiling of the new LFCE brand – rafter L backwards F – signifying the coming together under one roof of livestock and forage. Two original farm boards were branded – one that will remain at LFCE and the other will be presented to former Minister of Agriculture Lyle Stewart. B

The Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence received its own brand – rafter L backwards F. Photo Credit: David Stobbe

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 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

Duane Thompson, chair of the LFCE Strategic Advisory Board, hopes that the centre will attract a new generation to agriculture: “This centre will set the 10

Minister of Agriculture David Marit and Murray McGillivray, steering committee member, make two imprints of the new brand for the Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence.

Photo Credit: David Stobbe

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

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

61 Registered Sales So Far in 2018!

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

NOVEMBER 2018

Industry News LFCE Gets New Director The University of Saskatchewan’s Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence south of Clavet not only unveiled its new facilities on October 9, but also presented its new director, Dr. Kris Ringwall, who starts on November 1. Ringwall succeeds Kathy Larson, who has served as the centre’s interim director since February. As the centre is an independent unit at the U of S, he will report to the deans of the College of Agriculture and Bioresources and the Western College of Veterinary Medicine. Ringwall will also work with the centre’s Strategic Advisory Board that includes representatives from the livestock and forage sectors.

Ringwall’s responsibilities include helping researchers to get their projects completed, supervising the additional building and construction that will take place as well as overseeing the land’s management. An important role will be meeting with producers and industry.

Specializing in beef cattle, Ringwall holds a BSc in Agriculture, a Master’s in animal science and a PhD in animal breeding.

His research areas feature genetics and reproductive physiology and beef, sheep and goat management. He was director of North Dakota State University’s Dickenson Research and Extension Centre and will be bringing that experience in beef and range work as well as livestock and forage to the U of S.

Members of the Livestock and Forage Steering Committee for the Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence (LFCE) received a commemorative imprint of the LFCE’s new brand.

(Back row, l-r): Shawn Gibson, Murray McGillivray, Dr. Elisabeth Snead, Dorothy Murrell, Dr. Jim Bassinger, Tim Oleksyn, Kathy Arney, Dr. Ernie Barber, Dr. Doug Freeman.

(Front row, l-r) Ryder Lee, Janice Bruynooghe, Aaron Ivey, Chad MacPherson.

Photo courtesy of David Stobbe

Ringwall sees the centre as an opportunity for researchers to make their contribution to the LFCE. “As I listened to the grand opening today, to me, it felt like a relay where you are passing the baton each lap.

I really see the opportunity is in passing that baton.” He explained that the torch concept fits with the centre’s vision: researchers have only so much time to make advances before they hand off to the next generation.

He also shares the LFCE’s concept of the research being a collaborative effort for the benefit of agriculture. “It’s a sharing, a holistic coming together. You can study part of a system, but then you eventually need to start bringing those pieces into the whole, for the benefit of the whole,” the new director explained. He believes that researchers appreciate this kind of collaboration which provides them with a perspective of how their work fits into the larger picture.

Dr. Kris Ringwall, on the right, becomes the new LFCE Director and takes the helm on November 1. He was presented with an imprint of the LFCE’s new brand.

NOVEMBER 2018

Ringwall agrees that beef producers are central to the development of research. “I think everything stems from the producer.

If you are not doing something that benefits the cow-calf operation, then you need to revisit what you are doing,” he said. The industry has to remain solid for future advances. That happens by attaining the base levels of sustainability and profitability. Ringwall also hopes to bring in other disciplines into the research mix, including economics, to be able to study cow-calf profitability as well as soil science. “When that soil is producing properly, then it lowers inputs costs,” he said. Although the new facilities are the physical centre of the LFCE, Ringwall anticipates future activities and projects can take place at other ecosites. The goal will be to see how livestock work in other ecosites.

He also believes that the centre brings opportunity for education and understanding to be more produceroriented in the research directions. “Let’s balance between good production research and understanding biology and all of the different components,” Ringwall maintained. At the same time, he is looking for producer input. “It’s a two-way continued on page 12

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 11

Industry News LFCE Research and Facilities Research at the University of Saskatchewan’s Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence (LFCE) south of Clavet will be carried out by Canadian and international scientists, including students and faculty from the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, the College of Agriculture and Bioresources and the College of Engineering. The research is critical to the advancement, sustainability and profitability of the livestock and forage industries. “Graduate students are a big part of the research that goes on here,” explained Dr. John McKinnon, professor in the College of Agriculture and Bioresources and Beef Industry Research Chair. “We train Master of Science and PhDs in our graduate program, and they will do most of their research here at the centre. Undergraduate students are also involved in a variety of ways: We hire them to work with the animals and they do their summer projects here.”

“This centre’s teaching capabilities and research into forage breeding, cattle health, management practices and more will contribute tremendously to the long-term growth, profitability and sustainability of cattle production,” Minister of Agriculture David Marit told guests attending the LFCE opening.

The new facilities of the University of Saskatchewan’s Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence (LFCE) located south of Clavet officially opened on October 9, 2018.

This new centre will have an opportunity to investigate areas that impact the beef industry starting from conception in the breeding program right through to quality, according to McKinnon. “Basically, right from pasture to plate,” he stressed.

The topics of research include industry challenges and emerging issues related to beef cattle health, reproduction, nutrition, bison care, feedlot health, genetics and public safety, as well as plant breeding for forage crops, grazing management, sustainability and environmental issues facing the livestock and forage industries.

Mary Buhr, dean of the College of

Agriculture and Bioresources, described the research as pulling together the lifecycle and livestock production chain.

“The Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence will be our link from the lab to the land by providing cuttingedge research to ranchers and other producers,” said Duane Thompson, chair of the centre’s Strategic Advisory Board. McKinnon noted that the centre will place an emphasis on collaborative approaches. “We’ll be able to look at continued on page 14

LFCE New Director cont. from pg. 11 street. We seek input and then they have to give input.” He noted that one direction for the LFCE’s educational role should also be to include consumers, “In today’s world it behooves us to educate and bring understanding to all parts, and that includes the consumer and what is good nutrition.”

As he takes up his role, Ringwall is committed to listening to producers, industry researchers and consumers.B

The LFCE facilities located south of Clavet include the Beef Cattle Research and Teaching Unit (in foreground) and the Forage and Cow-Calf Research and Teaching Unit (in background).”

Photo courtesy of U of S

12

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

NOVEMBER 2018

Industry News LFCE Research cont. from pg. 12 nutrition, animal health, genetics, the environment – not just from the individual scientist’s perspective, but we’ll be able to look at it from the group approach where veterinarians are working with nutritionists and nutritionists are working with environmentalists, for example, to basically understand a systems approach to issues affecting the beef industry,” McKinnon explained. The centre will be able to produce applied research. It will integrate research from a very basic level looking at very detailed scientific principles of how animals resist disease and how they digest feed and move it “from the laboratory to proof of concept to applied research where producers can use the information,” he added.

As part of its educational and outreach activities, the centre will offer field days, demonstrations, industry presentations and seminars.

will model all aspects of raising livestock on the prairies meeting the needs of producers and consumers,” said Karen Chad, vice-president of research at the University of Saskatchewan.

The LFCE consolidates fields and labs in one place. The facility consists of 27 quarters of land in two locations. It will operate three units: the Beef Cattle Research and Teaching Unit, the Forage and Cow-Calf Research and Teaching Unit, and the Goodale Research Farm.

Previously, livestock and forage research was conducted in separate facilities that operated independently. “This centre

The facilities include a 1,500-head capacity feedlot at the Beef Cattle Research and Teaching Unit. The first animals arrived in July 2018 and the first research trial began in August. The unit has several labs and sample prep areas equipped with a walk-in fridge, walkin freezer, industrial drying ovens and sample grinders. The metabolism barn contains 24 stalls with waterbeds for

the cattle, individual feeding troughs and water bowls to allow for individual data collection. The cattle handling area has a long chute system that enables researchers to sort all the cattle from one pen simultaneously. It allows for precision animal handling and data collection. The feedlot has 44 large pens holding up to 15 animals each and four additional large pens for 200 animals, simulating the size of an actual feedlot. Researchers are also able to monitor water and feed intake. The environmental monitoring is constructed on greenfield land that has not been used by livestock to assess the impacts of livestock production on soil and water.

The Forage and Cow-Calf Research and Teaching Unit has a calving barn with 10 stalls, cattle handling area with hydraulic alley and handling chute, five cattle pens holding 60 head, and 12 research pens for 20 head. It will be welcoming 300 breeding females and 18 herdsires from the Western Beef Development Centre in the fall of 2019. A research study involving about 130 backgrounders begins in fall 2018. The Goodale Farm near Floral includes 165 breeding cows as well as horses, bison and deer for research. It will be upgraded in May 2019. B

14

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

NOVEMBER 2018

Industry News Ministers Tour South SK Conservation Projects Saskatchewan Minister of Agriculture David Marit and Environment Minister Dustin Duncan joined representatives from Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association and South of the Divide Conservation Action Program Inc. on a tour of Species at Risk Partnership on Agricultural Landscape projects south of Mankota, Saskatchewan, in September. The ministers had an opportunity to speak with beef producers about their experience managing grasslands for species at risk habitat.

Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association has received $2.58 million over five years from Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Species at Risk Partnership on Agricultural Lands (SARPAL) program. South of the Divide Conservation Action Program Inc. have been contracted to do on-the-ground delivery with landowners. To date, SSGA has signed agreements with over 30 producers managing nearly 200,000 acres of grasslands in southwestern Saskatchewan. B

Minister Dustin Duncan (centre-right) and Minister David Marit (to right) listen to a presentation on a project for managing grasslands in southwestern Saskatchewan.

You are invited to attend the Commercial Cattlemen’s Beef on a Bun Friday November 23rd

owing Immediately foll l Cattle Show the Commercia hange in the Stock Exc 6 pm) (approximately

Proudly Sponsored by: NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 15

Industry News Livestock Producers Receive Tax Relief for 2018 On October 31, the government of Canada released a list of additional regions in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec and New Brunswick where livestock tax deferral has been authorized for 2018 due to drought.

“This past year, extreme weather conditions have caused feed shortfalls for Canada’s livestock producers in several provinces. The Livestock Tax Deferral Provision will help give producers the resources needed to help rebuild their herds and get back to business,” stated Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Lawrence MacAulay.

2018 Livestock Tax Deferral - Prescribed Drought/Flood Regions Legend Prescribed Regions

#

#

Yellowknife

#

#

Fort St. John

#

Producers also have access to assistance through existing Canadian Agricultural Partnership Business Risk Management programs, which include AgriInsurance, AgriStability and AgriInvest.

16

St. John's

#

Edmonton

#

Kamloops Vancouver # # Victoria

Calgary

#

#

Charlottetown

#

Saskatoon

#

Regina

#

The Government initially announced on September 14 a list of regions in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec for livestock tax deferral purposes. The livestock tax deferral provision allows producers in prescribed drought or excess moisture regions to defer a portion of their 2018 sale proceeds of breeding livestock until 2019 to help replenish the herd. The cost of replacing the animals in 2019 will offset the deferred income, thereby reducing the tax burden associated with the original sale. Only those producers located inside the prescribed areas are eligible for the tax deferral. They can request the tax deferral when filing their 2018 income tax returns.

Charlottetown

Iqaluit Whitehorse

Quebec

#

Winnipeg

#

Halifax # Fredericton

#

Montreal

Thunder Bay

Ottawa # #

#

Toronto

#

Windsor

#

Copyright © 2018 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

* This map is for illustrative purposes only

Prepared by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's National Agroclimate Information Service (NAIS)

Created: 10/25/2018

www.agr.gc.ca/drought

Saskatchewan – List of Prescribed Regions Municipalities – Consolidated Census Subdivisions Based on the 2016 Statistics Canada Census Aberdeen No. 373* Abernethy No. 186 Antler No. 61* Argyle No. 1 Arlington No. 79 Arm River No. 252 Auvergne No. 76 Baildon No. 131 Bayne No. 371* Bengough No. 40 Benson No. 35* Big Arm No. 251 Big Quill No. 308 Big Stick No. 141 Biggar No. 347 Birch Hills No. 460* Blucher No. 343* Bone Creek No. 108 Bratt’s Lake No. 129 Brock No. 64* Brokenshell No. 68 Browning No. 34* Buckland No. 491* Caledonia No. 99 Cambria No. 6 Canaan No. 225 Carmichael No. 109 Caron No. 162 Chaplin No. 164 Chester No. 125 Clinworth No. 230* Coalfields No. 4* Colonsay No. 342* Corman Park No. 344 Coteau No. 255 Coulee No. 136 Craik No. 222

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Cupar No. 218 Cymri No. 36 Deer Forks No. 232* Dufferin No. 190 Dundurn No. 314 Eagle Creek No. 376* Edenwold No. 158 Elcapo No. 154 Elfros No. 307 Elmsthorpe No. 100 Emerald No. 277 Enfield No. 194 Enniskillen No. 3* Enterprise No. 142 Estevan No. 5* Excel No. 71 Excelsior No. 166 Eyebrow No. 193 Fertile Belt No. 183* Fertile Valley No. 285 Fillmore No. 96 Fish Creek No. 402* Flett’s Springs No. 429* Foam Lake No. 276 Fox Valley No. 171 Francis No. 127 Frontier No. 19 Garden River No. 490* Glen Bain No. 105 Glen McPherson No. 46 Glenside No. 377* Golden West No. 95 Grant No. 372* Grassy Creek No. 78 Gravelbourg No. 104 Grayson No. 184 Griffin No. 66

Gull Lake No. 139 Happy Valley No. 10 Happyland No. 231* Harris No. 316 Hart Butte No. 11 Hazelwood No. 94* Hillsborough No. 132 Hoodoo No. 401* Humboldt No. 370* Huron No. 223 Indian Head No. 156 Invergordon No. 430* Ituna Bon Accord No. 246 Kellross No. 247 Key West No. 70 King George No. 256 Kingsley No. 124 Kinistino No. 459* Lac Pelletier No. 107 Lacadena No. 228 Lajord No. 128 Lake Alma No. 8 Lake Johnston No. 102 Lake Lenore No. 399* Lake of the Rivers No. 72 Lakeside No. 338* Last Mountain Valley No. 250 Laurier No. 38 Lawtonia No. 135 Leroy No. 339* Lipton No. 217 Lomond No. 37 Lone Tree No. 18 Longlaketon No. 219 Loreburn No. 254 Lost River No. 313 Lumsden No. 189

Mankota No. 45 Maple Bush No. 224 Maple Creek No. 111 Marquis No. 191 Marriott No. 317 Martin No. 122* Maryfield No. 91* McCraney No. 282 McKillop No. 220 McLeod No. 185 Milden No. 286 Miry Creek No. 229 Monet No. 257 Montmartre No. 126 Montrose No. 315 Moose Creek No. 33* Moose Jaw No. 161 Moose Mountain No. 63* Moosomin No. 121* Morris No. 312 Morse No. 165 Mount Hope No. 279 Mount Pleasant No. 2* Mountain View No. 318 Nipawin No. 487* North Qu’Appelle No. 187 Norton No. 69 Old Post No. 43 Paddockwood No. 520* Pense No. 160 Perdue No. 346 Piapot No. 110 Pinto Creek No. 75 Pittville No. 169

continued on page 51

NOVEMBER 2018

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

2015 260

2016 2017

210

2018

160

280 2015

230

2016 2017

180

2018 130

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

310

Price per hundred weight

360

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

SK Weekly Average Price 500-600 lbs Steers

Source: CanFax

AB Fed Steer Prices

Weekly Canadian Dollar 0.98

200 190 180

2015

170 160

2016

150

2017

140

2018

130

CDN $ - US terms

Price per hundred weight

210

0.88

2018

0.83

2017

0.78

5 yr avg

0.68

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

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

0.93

0.73

120 Source: CanFax

Source: Bank of Canada

Lethbridge Barley Price

Alberta Weekly D1 & D2 Cows 290.00

160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60

2015 2016 2017 2018

Price per tonne

270.00 250.00 2015

230.00

2016

210.00

2017

190.00

2018

170.00

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

150.00

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

Source: CanFax

Source: CanFax

For more information visit www.canfax.ca

NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 17

Markets and Trade RETAIL MEAT PRICE SURVEY as of October 29, 2018 ($/lb)

CO-OP

SAFEWAY

Ground beef/lean

5.00

5.00

SAVE-ONFOODS 6.99

Ground beef/regular

4.40

5.30

Roast/cross rib

5.50

CUTS

SOBEYS

SUPERSTORE

5.00

3.64

5.30

5.30

3.18

9.40

8.00

6.00

6.53

*

10.00

*

*

*

Roast/outside round

5.00

*

15.41

8.90

5.43

Steak/rib eye

11.51

17.12

20.03

20.33

13.18

9.41

7.50

8.40

5.44

Roast/rib

Steak/round Steak/sirloin

13.02

9.91

8.00

12.01

7.81

Steak/T-bone

10.00

*

*

17.02

*

*

*

*

*

*

Steak/tenderloin

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

35th Annual Convention

Regina, SK

November 18-20, 2018

Momentum– Advancing the Bison Legacy

Come join us at the 2018 Convention Dr. Sylvain Charlebois - Known as the “Food Professor” - Faculties of Management and Agriculture at Dalhousie University in Halifax. He is also the Interim Scientific Director of the Institute of Agri-food Analytics, also located in Halifax. Dr. Charlebois’ presentation will focus on “Red Meat- The Bison Journey.”

Michelle Miller - CEO at Delta Genomics, Michelle is working towards expanding the use of genomic technologies in various livestock industries through the promotion of research and development. Michelle will provide information on the genomic tool development for the bison industry.

Here a sampling ofDr.the speakers onworking topicsonpertinent to all bison producerer Dr. AlexisMcIsaac - Some of McIsaac’s files inpresenting this role saw him BSE surveillance testing in Saskatchewan, disease response efforts and outbreaks of Anthrax / Influenza / Tuberculosis in Bison / Chronic Wasting Disease / Equine infectious Anemia and Infectious Salmon Anemia. Dr. McIsaac will be sharing information on the importance of biosecurity.

Jackie Wepruk - She facilitates a NFACC partnership between governments, farmed animal industries, the veterinary community, the humane movement, food companies, and other allied groups. Jackie will be discussing the status of the transportation code of practice development.

Canadian Bison Association 1-306-522-4766 email: cba1@sasktel.net www.canadianbison.ca

18

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

For CBA room rates and reservations: The Delta Hotel (306) 525-5255

NOVEMBER 2018

Vision Unanimous 1418

Fall Bull Sale 4M Element 405

Thursday, Dec. 6, 2018

At the Ranch, Wood Mountain, Saskatchewan

Selling 170 Black Angus Two Year Old Bulls

Cull Bull Incentive Program

Bush Easy Decision 98

This year weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re offering the best cull bull incentive program you will find anywhere. With the cull bull market down a bit from previous years we are going to help you get the most out of those old broken, down worn out bulls. Why take a chance on bunch of open cows this fall when you can replace them with fresh strong new bulls. All you have to do is email us prior to the bull sale or bring a copy of your bill of sale from the auction market after selling your cull bulls and you will receive a $500 credit on each new replacement bull you buy. (eg: If you cull 5 bulls you will receive a $500 deduction for each of the 5 replacement bulls you buy.) Credits must be used on a per bull basis and you cannot use more than 1 credit toward a new bull.

View Sale Book at www.peakdotranch.com or phone Carson Moneo 306-266-4414 Clay Moneo 306-266-4411 Email:peakdot@gmail.com

Hoover No Doubt

Schiefelbein Attractive

NOVEMBER 2018

Janssen Earnhardt 5003

SAV Radiance 0801

SAV Top Soil 4354

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 19

Feature Southwest Sask Wildfires: Recovery One year Later In October 2017 devastating wildfires swept through the border communities in southern Saskatchewan. Near Burstall, fires damaged approximately 80,000 acres of cropland and pastureland. The fires also burned homes, fences, outbuildings and other structures. One volunteer firefighter James Hargrave died battling the blaze and numerous cattle were lost.

One of the major concerns in the aftermath of the fires was how the grasslands and pastures would recover.

Cattle ranchers wanted to know when they would be able to graze again and whether to rebuild their operations.

Beef Business spoke to Dr. Eric Lamb, associate professor at the Department of Plant Sciences at the University of Saskatchewan, to find out how the land is recovering one year later. He is leading a multi-year research project studying recovery of the native prairie after the southern Saskatchewan wildfires of 2017.

The Research Lamb is also collaborating with Dr. Cameron Carlyle at the University of Alberta. Carlyle is looking at the effects of last year’s wildfires on the Alberta side,

20 20

while Lamb is researching the fire effects on the Saskatchewan side. According to Lamb, their five-year study wants to show how forage productivity recovers after a wildfire. “The effect of the wildfires in 2017 were quite obvious and quite devastating,” he added. He observed “a certain amount of variance in the literature and in the management recommendations as to how long one should defer grazing after a major wildfire.” He hopes that his research can answer some of these questions.

“There is an opportunity to get some fairly definitive data over a large area as to how these recoveries proceed,” Lamb said.

This research could contribute to better forecasts about how long producers can expect to defer before grazing again.

Lamb’s research began this spring.

Together with Carlyle’s team, they set up sites for measurement plots in Saskatchewan and Alberta in the areas of the Hilda-Burstall fire and the Acadia Valley fire. Most sites were on native grassland. Lamb explained that they selected a broad range of sites to account for variations in topography and other factors. “We tried to find sites that covered the whole area,” he added. In this way, the

©BEEFBUSINESS BUSINESS || www.skstockgrowers.com www.skstockgrowers.com || ©BEEF

research can provide relevant information for different areas.

Starting in July, a field crew set up a standardized monitoring program and collected data to measure available forage biomass. The research is looking at the productivity and quality of the available forage. The biomass clippings have been sent off for forage quality analysis. Lamb also wanted to determine the species composition of the grassland, and how the biomass might be shifting in relative composition of different species. “We were able to find spots to compare the productivity of an adjacent place that wasn’t burned to one that was burned,” said Lamb. “This can give us an idea what the change in productivity was.” The way that the fire was driven by the high wind left patches of grass unburned. Sites were set up to measure regrowth of burned and unburned plots. Over the next four years, Lamb can go back to the same sites and resample to track recovery over time.

Lamb’s research will also be synthesizing data from past studies about fires. This data, together with his weather station data and good historical weather

NOVEMBER2018 2018 NOVEMBER

Feature sources, will help Lamb make more robust conclusions about the effects and recovery from fire. As part of the project, they also set up portable weather stations at select sites across the area. Lamb is just collecting data now and will track weather patterns over a number of years. This will allow a comparison of conditions between different fire events to understand the weather’s impact on recovery rates in a specific fire. “It’s clear that post-fire weather conditions are pretty key on how fast recovery is. We just don’t have a large enough sample yet of different fires under different conditions,” he said.

The Damage The wildfires of October 2017 were fastmoving fires pushed by winds over 100 km/h. The fires destroyed infrastructure, fences and water structures. However, the fire raced very quickly across the grassland consuming the standing biomass and accumulated forage lying on the surface of the ground. In its wake, it left ash and the remains of root crowns. “Because the fire was going so fast, the soil wasn’t being heated up,” he explained. “At that time of the year, most of the plants are dormant and they’ve put most of their energy reserves down into their root systems.

Those plants can re-sprout quite quickly in the spring.” To illustrate, Lamb noticed that in early May many of the burned areas had new green grass sprouting, but there was no old litter left behind.

One of the effects that Lamb is looking out for is a shift in species composition of the regrowth. “What I’ll be looking for when I look at species data is am I seeing a systematic shift in the relative abundance of these species that will identify the ones that have withstood the effects of the fire,” he said. The unburned areas will provide a comparison point for grass composition before the fire. Once his data has been processed, Lamb will identify which species have withstood the effects of the fire. Unlike in forest fires where the trees die and new growth starts from seed, in a grassland fire the root systems of plants are rarely injured. The vast majority of the plant survives underground and is recovering from already established root systems. “That’s the thing that really speeds recovery. It’s not starting from

NOVEMBER 2018

zero,” said Lamb. He noted that species with an underground stem system (rhizomes) are well adapted to survive fire because the main growing parts are quite deep in the soil, whereas the bunch grass is more vulnerable because the crown is right at the soil surface.

With regrowth, new species can arise through several mechanisms. A change in species may come about because there are species that are more adapted to germinating from seed. Some plant species are triggered to germinate from compounds in the smoke or ash. “We may see some species having a higher germination rate,” Lamb explained. “We do have a certain amount of bare ground post-fire that can be a seed bed for other species like weeds.” Nevertheless, Lamb points out that the grassland is a resilient ecosystem with fire and the native invasive perennial plants are mostly resprouting very quickly. “There aren’t a lot of open spots for weeds to get in like a cultivated field,” he added.

Lamb will be on the look out for weeds as well. In terms of weedy species, “there are a lot of native annual species that are not desirable on a rangeland,” he stated.

Lamb does not expect weedy species to stay long: “Even if they appear in the first couple of years, they are going to disappear fairly quickly without causing any major problems.” The real concern is seeing a growth of invasive perennial weeds like Canada thistle or leafy spurge because “those species will persist and potentially displace native grass down the road.” The research project will classify the weeds that appear into groups of ones that are expected to decline and those that are bigger concerns.

Deferral For cattle producers, the big question is how long before they can begin grazing and for the grass to return to its pre-fire condition. “That’s the key question that we are going to be following for the next two years,” Lamb said. Although waiting on more data analysis, he noted that, so far, the median productivity across the sites for grasses was showing to be around 40% lower in the burned areas compared to the unburned. However, he cautioned that

there are large variations between sites.

Some sites, he said, had a much greater impact on grass productivity, although he even saw one site with grass productivity far higher in the burned area.

At the same time, the broadleaf species saw a 75% drop in productivity in burned areas compared to unburned spots.

“One of the key things that’s telling me is that the grasses actually rode out the fire better than the non-grasses,” Lamb concluded. He will be following this development to see if there will be a shift in the vegetation towards grasses as the study proceeds.

From a range management perspective, one of the main concerns is that a lot of stockpile forage and a significant volume of the litter was burned, Lamb noted.

“Litter is very important for maintaining soil moisture. We might expect to see declines in productivity if the loss of the litter layer has reduced water infiltration from snow and if it has increased evaporation from the soil in the spring,” he stated. He added that some plants having a root crown right at the surface may have some injury to their crown. This can also contribute to a loss of productivity until there is enough growth to replace the lost litter layer. Lamb also observed that there was no litter in the burned areas and normal amounts of litter in unburned areas. “Because producers universally chose to defer this year, we should see a decent accumulation of litter in next year’s data,” he added. The litter begins to recover quickly especially in that first year of deferral. Lamb is expecting to see in his early data some potential impacts from the loss of the litter layer and has a good idea of the extent of the fall in productivity levels. The dry conditions this summer would have contributed to a compound effect.

Understanding the productivity of the regrowth will help producers make decisions on herd size and deferral. They would have to make different decisions based on one year of low productivity compared to three or four years. “What the potential explanation is will affect the ultimate management recommendations continued on page 34

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 21

Feature Wildfire Recovery One Year Later: Rebuilding the Ranch The wildfires of October 2017 in southwestern Saskatchewan were damaging to the land and to the lives of the ranchers and farmers. Beef Business spoke to Syd McCurdy from Empress, one of those affected by the fire, to understand how they coped in the aftermath of the fires and how they are recovering one year later.

In the months that followed those affected by the wildfires began to put their lives back together and each family has its own story of rebuilding. “It’s been hard emotionally for the people,” McCurdy described. It affected everyone differently. Personally, I just tried to keep busy.”

McCurdy noted that, immediately after the wildfires, the affected communities banded together around those affected.

He described the generosity of his neighbours who donated everything from calves to feed, although they too experienced losses. “I had great support from people all over, in Alberta and Saskatchewan, and even people in the livestock industry in Ontario,” he said. “I would have been bankrupt of it wasn’t for all the people’s support.”

At first, he was dealing with clean up before any rebuilding could take place.

“Personally, my cows were all buried

the next day.” The neighbours and municipality brought equipment to help.

In the area others had cows that escaped the fire, but had to be treated for injuries.

Some had to be sold off, while other cattle didn’t show aftereffects until a month or more later.

Next, McCurdy and his neighbours had some tough decisions to make about rebuilding. McCurdy suffered a substantial loss – 94 cows and 91 calves were lost as well as nine miles of fences and six quarters of grass. He had some cows left, but was not in a position in life to expand operations. He noted that most people in the area opted to rebuild. Bit-by-bit they have been getting things back in order.

“Personally, I’ve only rebuilt half the fence that I lost because the grass won’t be able to be used for awhile,” McCurdy added.

Because the fires occurred in the fall, there was an immediate need to get surviving cattle through the winter and spring. Donations of feed and hay made a huge difference in getting those affected through the winter months. “It was a tough winter and people used a lot of feed,” McCurdy said. With spring the next issue was grazing. He estimated that it would be three to five years before pastures recovered. Some people found other grass for the summer. McCurdy said his cows went into community pastures.

This was only a temporary fix and he expects to see a bigger impact down the line. “The grass that I lost was a lot of my fall grazing,” he explained. McCurdy estimated that he will be feeding by the end of October whereas, most years, he doesn’t feed until early December. “That’s how it’s going to be affecting me more.

I will be feeding a month earlier than usual.”

McCurdy says that the grass now is not ready to send cows out to graze. At an inch or two high, it looks like it has been overgrazed. “Most people are thinking three years but if we have more years like this it could be up to five years,” he said.

The dry conditions this year compounded recovery plans. “We didn’t get a lot of rain this year and people were stretched thin trying to find grass for their cows. Nobody raised a lot of feed this year so feed prices are high,” McCurdy added. “People might have had enough grass to get by this year, but they might not have any carry over for next year. We’re not out of the woods yet. It could show up next year if we have a dry year, then people will have to make decisions.”

When asked if the fires have changed people’s behaviour, McCurdy said that everyone has thought a lot more about insurance now, going over their policies and talking to agents. “I don’t think anybody who had cows that died that day had them insured,” he said. “I know lots of people have insured them now.” Dealing with the insurance has been tough on those with losses and there were both bad and good experiences reported. McCurdy cautions people to read the fine print of polices and ask questions.

Also, people have become more aware of fire safety on farms. They have thought about having a water tank and a pump handy in case of fire. He observed that fire bans were imposed right away during the dry spell this year and they remained in place. There was also more care in allocating burn permits. McCurdy

Ranching families affected by the October 2017 wildfires. SSGA staff delivered donated materials for them as part of the SSGA’s Wildfire Relief Fund.

22

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

continued on page 23

NOVEMBER 2018

Feature New Animal Protection Act Enhances Rules Around Care The Ministry of Agriculture proclaimed The Animal Protection Act, 2018 in late September that replaced the previous provincial Act from 1999. The 2018 Act combines old with new, updating provisions, strengthening definitions and adding new sections.

Definitions According to Don Ferguson, executive director for Animal Protection Services of Saskatchewan (APSS), most of the changes in the Animal Protection Act were made to definitions. The 2018 Act expanded the definition of “distress”, which is a central term in animal care. Under the previous Act, an animal was in distress if it was deprived of food, water and shelter, was injured, sick, in pain or suffering, or appeared neglected.

According to the new Act, “an animal is in distress if it is deprived of food or water sufficient to maintain the animal in a state of good health, care or shelter, or veterinary care or medical attention,

is in need of reasonable protection from injurious heat or cold, is wounded, ill in pain, suffering, abused or neglected, or is kept in conditions that are unsanitary, will significantly impair the animal’s health or well-being over time, cause the animals extreme anxiety or suffering or contravene the prescribed standards, codes of practice or guidelines, or is abandoned by its owner or by a person responsible for the animal in a manner that causes, or is likely to cause, distress resulting from any or all of the factors listed in this section.”

The updated definition is more detailed and comprehensive. It takes into consideration other aspects of the animal’s care, including its general state of health as well as those responsible for the animal. Because animals are considered the property of a person, a clear definition of distress would provide animal protection agencies with the ability to intervene in cases of suspected animal cruelty.

Ferguson points out that this definition applies to all animals whether they are production animals like a beef cow, or a household companion animal. He also notes that the expanded definition has included a component for the causation of the animal’s suffering, i.e., unsanitary conditions that will significantly impair the animal’s health. In addition, the enhanced definition identifies the “person responsible” for the animal as either the owner of the animal, the person in custody or control of the animal, or the person in charge of a minor who is the owner of the animal.

It should be noted that this definition only applies to owned animals, not strays or animals at large. Ferguson explained that an animal protection officer would try to identify the owner of a stray animal in distress.

The Act also includes some new terminology. An “animal protection continued on page 24

Wildfire Recovery cont. from pg. 22 speculated that the fire might change farming practices, such as how much grass they carry over. The fire even prompted a change in crop coverage which now makes available wildfire insurance for tame and native pastures.

On a personal level, McCurdy noted that he saw the best in people after the fire.

“Your faith in mankind is restored with all the help I got.” The communities held fundraising suppers and gave donations.

“The community really came together and tried to do what it could to help the people who were affected,” he said.

Neighbours offered practical help. “People in the livestock industry make sure to look after their own,” he added. Most people on the whole moved on, McCurdy noted.

“You don’t completely forget about it. It’s probably changed things. I know I won’t have as many cows as I did.”

NOVEMBER 2018

As part of the Wildfire Relief Fund, SSGA staff delivered the donated fencing supplies and minerals to those affected in the Hilda-Burstall area.

“I would like to thank everybody for the support I got,” McCurdy concluded.

“I got lots of support.” He is especially appreciative of the SSGA for establishing the Wildfire Relief Fund and of all the donors that made a big difference to many producers getting through the year.

McCurdy has tried to stay positive as he looks to the future. “Personally, I’ve tried to put it behind me and move on and get on with life,” he said. B

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 23

Feature New Animal Act cont. from pg. 23 agency” is a non-profit corporation that has as its main objective the prevention of cruelty to animals. The term refers to an organization, including humane societies, designated as animal protection agencies that enforce the new Act and employs animal protection officers (APO). The APSS, Regina Humane Society, Saskatoon SPCA and Prince Albert SPCA will enforce the new Act. Another definition that has been added is “abandoned animal”. An abandoned animal refers to an animal that is apparently ownerless and not running at large; is found on rented premises after the expiration or termination of the tenancy agreement; is found on premises after the owner has sold or vacated the premises; or by agreement between an animal’s owner and another person, according to the Act. Notably, this term does not include animals that are running at large, which are not on the owner’s premises or under the immediate control of the owner. The new Act allows an APO to take an abandoned animal into custody and deliver it to an animal protection agency or caretaker.

Another core definition that has been enhanced is “cruelty”. The APSS identifies two main types of animal cruelty: neglect and deliberate physical abuse. Most complaints investigated by the APSS involve some form of neglect, which may or may not be deliberate. The signs of neglect can include very thin animals, lack of access to proper food, water or shelter, injuries or illnesses that are not treated, matted coats, overgrown hooves, unsanitary conditions, and animals that are deliberately abandoned. Physical abuse is more difficult to spot, such as unusual or re-occurring injuries. It is also important to understand that in a case of suspected cruelty, not only is the owner of the animal responsible, but so are those who have control or custody of the animal. Many times, abuse complaints come from those who have witnessed the abuse taking place. It should be noted that Canada’s Criminal Code, which is federal law, contains several sections 24

referring to animal cruelty. Therefore, a complaint leading to a Criminal Code conviction carries the consequence for the violator of having a criminal record.

Care Responsibilities Along with enhanced definitions, the 2018 Act also contains a new section that details animal care duties in depth.

This includes providing the animal food and water sufficient to maintain a good state of health, adequate veterinary care or medical attention if the animal is wounded or ill, and adequate shelter and reasonable protection from injurious cold or heat. This section clarifies what constitutes an acceptable level of care for animals and what is considered ill treatment. Notably, animals cared for according to a code of practice or standard for a species are understood to be in compliance with the provisions in this subsection.

The Act also stipulates a new condition of care whereby a person shall not significantly impair the animal’s health or well being by confining the animal to an enclosure or area with inadequate space, unsanitary conditions, inadequate ventilation or light, or without providing an opportunity for exercise.

According to the Act, no person shall cause an animal distress and no person responsible for an animal shall cause an animal distress. However, this does not

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

apply if the distress results from activity related to standard practices such as dehorning.

According to Ferguson, the new Act has enhanced the criteria for the persons who can be held responsible for an animal. This includes a person who owns the animal, has custody or control of the animal, or has custody or charge of a minor who owns the animal.

Codes of Practice Ferguson pointed out that an important feature of the updated definitions in the new Act is that the The Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle is now associated with The Animal Protection Act, 2018. The reason that the Act refers to codes of practice, says Ferguson, is to allow for exemptions. As long as the person is following the code of practice that is consistent with that standard or guideline, the animal is not regarded as being in distress. An animal can be considered as being in distress if the code of practice is contravened.

The codes guide what is considered appropriate practice for use with the various species of animal. Most production animals have a code of practice, Ferguson explained. Different species of animals have different requirements for care. There are current codes of practice for beef cattle, bison, continued on page 26 NOVEMBER 2018

Do you own or care for livestock?

Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is proposing amendments to the Health of Animals Regulations to strengthen the livestock traceability system by reducing the time it takes to trace livestock.

CFIA intends to use animal identification, premises identification (PID) and animal movement data submitted by livestock operators to the Canadian Livestock Tracking System (CLTS) database to improve information accuracy and availability in the event of an emergency.

Prepare in TWO

1 2

STEPS

CONTACT THE SASKATCHEWAN PREMISES REGISTRY to confirm or acquire a valid PID for your livestock site T: 1-866-457-2377 | premisesid.saskatchewan.ca CONTACT US to confirm or acquire a CLTS database account and enter your valid PID number into it.

Check out our refreshed website at canadaid.ca

NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ŠBEEF BUSINESS | 25

Feature New Animal Act cont. from pg. 24 dairy cattle, equine, chickens, turkeys, farm deer, farm fox, farm mink, goats, pigs, laying hens, rabbits and sheep. The Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Dairy Cattle was one of the first to be developed, while The Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Bison is one of the most recent. There is also a specific code for animal transportation, which is a national code of practice.

Ferguson sees this link between the Act and the codes as an important addition because there are many procedures that are considered standard practice to those in the industry, but may not be understood outside of the industry. For example, procedures like dehorning and castration cause an animal distress, but if the producer follows the way prescribed in the Beef Code, this practice is exempt from being regarded as causing distress.

Another common concern is about cattle grazing in extremely hot weather or being outdoors in extreme cold. In the case of extreme temperatures, the Beef Code stipulates that cattle must have access to areas either natural or man-made that provide relief from weather which could seriously risk their welfare. In addition, the code recommends that producers promptly intervene if cattle display signs of an inability to cope with the adverse weather. For example, with high temperatures and humidity, producers should monitor for signs of open mouth panting with the tongue protruding, laboured breathing, drooling or frothing around the mouth. The code also makes recommendations for strategies to alleviate heat stress, such as providing shade, avoiding the handling of the cattle, feeding during the cooler dusk or dawn, moistening areas of the pen and even sprinkling the cattle with water.

At the same time, not all working animals on farms and ranches have their own codes of practice. Commonly, cattle dogs and horses are used to assist with handling livestock. While there is an equine code of practice, Ferguson points out that there is no difference between

26

a working cattle dog and a house pet.

They are both treated equally under the legislation and both require food, water and appropriate shelter and protection from injurious heat and cold.

Ferguson advises cattle producers to make sure that they are familiar with the codes of practice and that their operation is in compliance with the code of practice for the species that they are producing.

Reporting Animal Protection Services operates according to a reactive policing model and is also a complaint-driven process that relies on members of the public to report suspected violations. At the same time, animal protection officers (APO) have expanded authority under the new Act to make an inspection without a warrant during regular business hours of a vehicle, place or premises where animals are kept for sale, adoption, slaughter, hire or exhibition, or for the provision of service with respect to the animal.

A major change in the new Act is the requirement for veterinarians to report suspected cruelty cases. While veterinarians have always had an ethical obligation to report such cases, they were not required by law to report. If a veterinarian goes out on a call and suspects a contravention of the Act, they are now required to report it to an animal protection officer, Ferguson said.

Moreover, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not a complaint when it is coming from a vet, but a report of a violation, he added.

This section of the new Act provides the veterinarian and APO with a tool to educate the owner about animal care and standards of practice to help a producer become compliant with the code.

Enforcement The new Act details the actions an APO can take for the intervention and relief of distress of an animal. Following guidelines set out by the Act, APOs are permitted to take any action to relieve an animal in distress. In the new Act, APOs can take

| ŠBEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

a more proactive approach and act to prevent distress of animals, rather than acting after distress has already occurred.

The APO may also issue a corrective action order to the animal owner or caregiver.

For example, if an animal was found to be in distress, the APO could give the owner an order that requires corrective action.

It outlines specifically the action needed and when it needs to be completed. If the person fails to comply with that order, they can then be charged. The APO is also authorized to follow up and inspect for compliance of the order, explains Ferguson. For APOs, they first seek to achieve compliance, whereas laying charges is seen as a last resort.

Penalties If a person is convicted under the Act, there are a number of penalties that could be applied, Ferguson said. For a first offence by an individual, there is a fine of up to $25,000 and up to two years in prison. For a second offence, the individual could face larger fines and up to two years in prison. Commonly, there is also a ban or restriction on owning animals for a period of time. Corporations can also receive penalties and face large fines. There is a $25,000 fine for a first offence. For a subsequent offence, there is a fine of $1,000 a day for each day or part of a day in which the offence continues after the first day that it was identified.

APOs would be able to inspect a residence to ensure compliance. Failing to comply with a court order is a criminal offence.

Thus, the new Animal Protection Act, 2018 brings positive changes for animal protection through enhanced definitions, and clarifications about who is responsible for animals and the duties of animal care.

National codes of practice are tied now to this updated provincial legislation.

Cattle producers may wish to familiarize themselves with the Beef Code and check that their operations are compliant. B

NOVEMBER 2018

Feature Antimicrobials by Prescription Around the Corner Starting December 1, 2018, Health Canada will introduce major changes to how livestock producers can access medically important antibiotics (MIA) for therapeutic use in livestock production. All livestock producers will need a prescription from a licensed veterinarian to purchase MIAs. “What has changed is that now all medically important antimicrobials will be on the Prescription Drug List and any drugs that are listed on the Prescription Drug List are only accessible by prescription,” explained Dr. Judy Currie, registrar of the Saskatchewan Veterinary Medical Association.

Health Canada has taken this step as part of a global response to antibiotic resistance. Antimicrobial resistance has become a growing concern in livestock production. This measure supports the appropriate use of antibiotics in animal agriculture to ensure that MIAs remain an effective treatment.

According to Health Canada, the labels of MIAs will also change. In-feed and inwater MIAs will carry a responsible use statement on the label. The labels will also have a “Pr” symbol to indicate that the item is a prescription drug. The new policy applies to injectable products as well as some boluses, calf scour treatments, in-feed and in-water antibiotics, and implants that contain MIAs. Cattle producers will need to familiarize themselves with the drug products now needing a prescription. For example, producers will no longer be able to buy a bottle of penicillin or tetracycline to treat common infections without a valid prescription. Feed mills will only be allowed to sell certain medicated feed formulations if they are given a valid prescription and will no longer be able to sell antibiotics directly to producers for on-farm mixing. Producers should also consider that penicillin, for example, is not necessarily the drug of choice for common infections such as foot rot, pink eye or mastitis, and they may wish to explore other treatment options.

NOVEMBER 2018

The VCPR This change in access to MIAs has highlighted the Veterinary-Client-Patient Relationship (VCPR). “Most producers already have a VCPR if they are already working with a veterinarian,” stated Currie.

All producers will need to establish a VCPR before they can obtain a prescription for MIAs for a given amount of product over a specified period of time.

Most producers already have a VCPR if they are already working with a veterinarian.

Before prescribing antimicrobials, veterinarians have to show a medical need for the MIAs and they must be able to prove that an appropriate VCPR relationship has been established with the producer. A detailed medical record plays a key role. It’s also important for the producer to be keeping records about health care and treatments given to their herd and to share this information with their veterinarian.

The VCPR is a relationship of trust between the veterinarian and the producer, Currie explained. Part of this involves being aware of herd health and setting up treatment protocols. The veterinarian needs to understand a producer’s cattle operation, its management practices, herd and common health issues well enough to provide meaningful advice and oversight. The veterinarian could make farm visits, examine the sick animal or view the herd. For example, a cowcalf producer can design a herd health protocol with their veterinarian, based on a working knowledge of their operation, health records and herd history. This protocol may anticipate medical need for treatment of specific conditions and then a prescription can be written to

cover the estimated amount required throughout the year. The producer can buy medication as needed up to the estimated amount, or up to the expiry date of the prescription. To establish and maintain a VCPR, producers need to stay in regular contact with the veterinarian and administer treatments to their animals as recommended. Notably, a VCPR can be terminated at any time, either by the producer or by the veterinarian.

With the change to MIAs access, cattle producers do not necessarily have to have a veterinarian visit the farm for every ill animal. Each case is different and will also depend on whether they have established a VCPR. If there is valid VCPR in place, veterinarians will use their medical judgement and knowledge of the herd’s health to determine if a farm visit is required. Producers don’t always need a new prescription if there is a herd health protocol already in place.

Producers worry that it will be difficult to establish a VCPR given the shortage of veterinarians in Saskatchewan, particularly in rural practice. They can establish a VCPR with a veterinarian who is not in the local area, but the individual must be licensed to practice in Saskatchewan. It is a good idea to consolidate medical records at one location if a producer is using multiple veterinary practices. Otherwise, it would mean that no VCPR has been established with any of the veterinarians. B *For further information about the VCPR and antimicrobials, visit the SVMA booth at Canadian Western Agribition in Regina on November 19 to 24.

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 27

Approved Certification Body for Sustainable Beef in Canada

Verified Beef Production in

SASKATCHEWAN PROVING RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT

CERTIFYING SUSTAINABLE BEEF

DRIVING CONSUMER CONFIDENCE

SIMPLE

PRACTICAL

TRUSTED

Canadian Beef is raised SUSTAINABLY. Let’s become VERIFIED and PROVE IT! Get REWARDED for your efforts with real INCENTIVES...

Canadian Beef Sustainability Acceleration (CBSA) Pilot

Equipment Rebate Funding in SK 50% UP TO

$15,000

IT PAYS TO BE SUSTAINABLE

E

Certified OF: PReOdibility Sustainable Beef Cr Framework TH

A MARKET OPPORTUNITY

Under CAP in SK ONLY. VBP+ Certified

Initiative led by Cargill, VBP+, and BIXS.

The Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable

Beef Producers in SK may qualify for

Intended to create supply for Sustainable

Beef approves VBP+ to certify Sustainabie

funding towards eligible equipment:

Beef Market. Cattle that qualify must go

Beef Production Standards. Meaning

•

Squeezes, Alleyways, Crowding Tubs

through a fully verified supply chain (VBP+

cattle from VBP+ operations can

•

Loading Chutes, Bud Boxes, Tip Table

operations) and be processed at Cargill.

qualify for the Sustainable Beef Market.

•

Calving Cameras, Calf Catching Carts

•

Financial Credits - Q1 to Q3

McDonalds Canada will be sourcing 30%

•

Livestock Scales, Feed Scales

•

of its’ beef from Sustainable Sources.

•

Visit, saskatchewan.ca/CAP

•

$10 - $20 per animal, per producer Visit, CBSApilot.ca

Visit, crsbcertifiedsustainablebeef.ca

VISIT BOOTH 108 - INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE @ AGRIBITION To learn more about Visit verifiedbeef.ca or contact Coy Schellenberg, VBP+ in Saskatchewan: SK Coordinator, at 306.859.9110 or SK@verifiedbeef.ca Funding to Deliver VBP+ in Saskatchewan Provided by:

CAP - PRODUCER REBATE

NEW FUNDING IN SK 50% up to $15,000

IN THE NEWS: “McDonald’s Canada to Serve SUSTAINABLE Beef!”

VBP+ Beef Producers in SK may qualify Eligible Livestock Equipment:

SQUEEZES, ALLEYWAYS, CROWDING TUBS/BUD BOXES, LOADING CHUTES, CALVING CAMERAS, SCALES, ETC.

TO LEARN MORE, VISIT saskatchewan.ca/CAP “CRSB Approves VBP+ as Certification Body for SUSTAINABLE Beef!”

WANT TO BECOME CERTIFIED WITH VBP+?

FINANCIAL CREDITS Q1 - Q3:

$10 - $20

PER ANIMAL, PER PRODUCER

VBP+ CERTIFICATION STEPS •

contact our office to request a validation on-farm audit

•

complete: Enrollment Form, SelfAssessment, and VBP+ Training

•

we will help prepare you for the audit, ensuring that you understand our program and that you are ready

•

the auditor will connect with you directly to schedule the audit

•

Audit Fee Rates in SK:

• •

$650/cow-calf $850/feedlot

•

50% Audit Fee Rebates under the NEW CAP Program saskatchewan.ca/CAP

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

Feature Canfax Updates Market Mobile App Canfax has just unveiled an updated version of its mobile app CFX Pro. The app is a free mobile web-based system that provides comprehensive information for beef producers across the value chain to assist in their business management decisions. Moreover, CFX Pro provides prices and results specifically for Canadian producers about the Canadian cattle market.

The original app was developed for iPhones in 2014. This new upgrade of the CFX Pro App is a new web-based system which lets users access the information and calculators from any device or desktop and most browsers. CFX Pro contains key features that producers need to make informed business decisions.

With the app, users can check the markets for cattle futures, the Canadian dollar, the most recent Cattle Price Insurance coverage levels and settlement indices.

the Canadian dollar or the futures market on their business.

Canfax, which is the market analysis division of the Canadian Cattlemenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Association, received industry support for the development and distribution of the CFX Pro app. The original app was funded by foundation partners â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the Saskatchewan Beef Industry Development Fund and the Feeder Associations of Alberta. Financial support and sponsorship for the app upgrades came from Farm Credit Canada.

The CFX Pro app is free to all users. It can be accessed at: https://cfxproapp.canfax. ca/. Mobile devices can save a website shortcut to the home screen for direct access to CFX Pro. B

Other key features include break-even calculators for those buying calves for backgrounding or finishing, and price projection calculators for calves or feeders for the current market or for feeders sold in the future. With markets constantly changing, having CFX Pro tied directly to the futures market aids users in quickly assessing how market changes will affect their projected prices or break-evens on their cattle.

These calculators use Canfax data including historical basis levels, and feedlot cost of production benchmarks and combines them with live futures market information to provide specific Canadian cattle price information that applies to all sectors of the cattle business, from cow-calf to backgrounder to feedlots.

The CFX Pro app also has an option to add specific costs. For example, app users can update the cost of barley which is a key input that impacts prices and break-even results. For less tech-savvy users and those not as familiar with following the markets, this app provides an excellent guide to demonstrate the impact of fluctuations in

30

Premises Identification A premises identification number is now required to access funding under any program administered by the Ministry of Agriculture. Be prepared: get your premises identification number today.

Register at premisesid.saskatchewan.ca

| ŠBEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

NOVEMBER 2018

PROGRAMS 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

Nutrien Forage Program This program provides $100 reimbursement for each 50lb bag of Nutrien seed purchased and seeded.

Z

Forage in Rotation Program â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 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 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 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

Science and Production Your Registered Livestock Brand

by Jason Pollock, CEO, Livestock Services of SK

Has branding livestock run its course?

Some livestock producers say it is a needless practice. The fact is that not all cattle producers are subject to the same types of operational challenges and for those that brand it serves a purpose.

The brand is still an effective commercebased tool for the livestock industry. It is a legislated instrument that protects both producers and creditors. At times, the brand and brand inspection records have been used to serve health-based needs for disease trace-out investigations.

Unlike your health-based CCIA tag, the brand purposefully displays ownership information to the public. That information is made readily available through the brand registry. Much like the VIN for your vehicle or the title to your ranch, the brand serves as a method to identify assets. It is prima facie proof of ownership for livestock that are offered for sale and for those that escape the barbwire to graze the ditches.

In this article I will touch on some of the laws governing the use of a brand along with some practical information that I hope will assist you with registering and maintaining a brand that best suits your operation’s needs.

Brands and the Brand Inspection System The Animal Identification Act (the “Act”) states that a “mark” means a brand or any permanent mark applied to the exterior of an animal or any device implanted beneath the skin or within the body of an animal. The Act also states that the presence of a registered mark upon or within an animal is prima facie proof that the animal is owned by the person in whose name the mark is registered.

This means that on first sight the brand inspector interprets ownership by the brand. In cases where the contributor does not own the brand or if there are multiple brands, the inspector will request documentation to clear the brands.

32

Things to Consider Prior to Registering a Brand The Act states that a brand can be registered to a “person”. This includes a partnership, association or other organization. It is best practice to limit brand registrants to only those who have a true ownership interest in the livestock.

When an animal is offered for sale, the manifest needs to acknowledge release by all the brand registrants. If settlement for the livestock is directed to other than how the brand is registered, the inspector will take steps to ensure that all registrants agree with who receives the proceeds from the sale through the signatures on the manifest. A brand registered to “John Doe & Sons” can complicate this task as the inspector would need to determine who are the “sons” and do they all truly have an interest in the livestock offered for sale. Also, before registering a brand in multiple names, consideration should be given as to how an adverse event to one of the registrants could impact the others.

Brands and Estates In the case where a brand is registered to an individual who passes away, settlement for that person’s livestock will be directed to their estate. For brands with multiple registrants, the settlements would need to acknowledge the estate of the deceased registrant. Settlements will continue to be directed to the registrant’s estate until the brand is transferred or all livestock have been sold. The estate executor will need to settle the registrant’s liabilities from the estate’s account, not through redirection of assets through the manifest. An inspector will not acknowledge succession of assets to remaining registrants unless directed by a court order to do so.

Expired Brands Brands can be registered for a four-year period, personal lifetime or corporate lifetime. A four-year brand expires December 31 in the third year following the year of its registration. A corporate

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

lifetime brand expires on the twentieth year of its registration, or when the corporation dissolves, while a personal lifetime brand expires upon the death of the registrant. Four-year and corporate lifetime brands are held in suspense for a period of five years after they expire.

When the suspension period has passed, the brand is released to the public for registration. The ramifications of allowing the brand to expire could include having your proceeds withheld or losing your brand and having it taken by another producer. It is a contravention under the Act to continue to use an expired brand.

If you ignore a request by the brand inspector to renew your brand, you would be liable upon summary conviction to a fine of up to $1,000.

Offences and Penalties The Act takes measures to maintain the integrity of the brand by assessing a penalty to those who tamper with the mark. Section 23 of the Act states that any person who: (a) marks, or directs, aids or assists any person to mark any animal with a mark that is not a registered mark;

(b) marks, or causes, directs or permits to be marked, with his own or with any mark, any animal of which he is not the owner without the authority of the owner of the animal;

(c) blotches, defaces or otherwise

renders illegible or alters any mark upon or in an animal, or directs, causes or permits any mark upon an animal to be blotched, defaced or otherwise rendered illegible or altered; or

(d) violates any provisions of this Act

or the regulations or neglects to do anything required by this Act or the regulations; continued on page 34 NOVEMBER 2018

160 HEIFERS bred to proven Red Angus bulls for 48 days from June 5th-July 20th • 105 RED & RED BALDIES – Red Angus x Simmental & 25 TANS exposed June 5th-July 28th NEW this year – 30 Red & Red Baldies due in February, exposed May 13 to June 29

Sale broadcast live on

DLMS.ca These heifers are fully guaranteed and we deliver. A program designed to produce females to use with Charolais bulls For more information on the 550 head in the sale, visit www.rocksolidbredheifer.com

Haubrich Farms Fall 2017

NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 33

Science and Production Active Missing Livestock Files November 2018

Area missing from

Number of head

Animal description

Livestock Branch contact

Date reported

Milestone

1

Red steer calf

LH

Milestone

Moosomin 306-435-4582

September 26

Redvers

1

Rwf heifer calf

LR

Carlyle

Moosomin 306-435-4582

October 18

Dafoe

11

Mixed yearling heifers

RH

Lanigan

Moose Jaw 306-694-3709

September 23

Neudorf

4

Cows

LR

Melville

Yorkton 306-786-5712

October 9

4

Calves

LR

Melville

Yorkton 306-789-5712

October 9

Brand description

Brand location

RCMP subdivision

FOUND

Information provided by Livestock Services of Saskatchewan

Your Brand cont. from pg. 32 is guilty of an offence and, in addition to any other penalty to which he may be subject by law, is liable upon summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000.

In a perfect world there would be no need for VINs, titles or livestock brands. The practicality of the brand has withstood the test of time. The brand is virtually tamperproof and is still the most effective method to sort your black calf from your neighbour’s hundred black calves without running them through a chute. For those who continue to use a brand to secure their assets, the future may offer practical and affordable technologies with the same or possibly better security. In my view, when those solutions are available, the brand will have run its course. B 34

SW SK Wildfires cont. from pg. 21 because if it is soil moisture loss caused by litter loss, then that suggests that deferring is a really important strategy until your litter layer recovers,” he said.

Other reasons may suggest that litter recovery is not as critical as assumed.

This means that cattle can begin grazing sooner.

Lamb is also interested in the forage quality. He noted that, regarding quality, protein content increased in the regrowth after a fire, although quantity is reduced.

“It can make for more valuable grazing even if you have less quantity,” he said.

With higher protein, it means that light grazing could take place to benefit the animals, yet a fair amount of the plant

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

biomass would still be left behind to build up that litter layer.

The results of this study have a lot of practical applications for government aid, insurance and producer decisionmaking. Lamb will be sharing his data with the producers who are offering their land for the study sites. There will also be reports to funding agencies and academic publications with a thorough analysis of the data. He also plans to develop an industry fact sheet and a summary report for media. B The aerial photo on page 20 is courtesy of Paul Noerenberg

NOVEMBER 2018

Bench Angus

First AnnuAl •black angus bull & female sale•

•On Offer•

35 Long Yearling Bulls 10 Yearling Bulls 20 Purebred Bred Heifers •PrOgeny sired by• Crescent Creek 1136 Rito 61B Crescent Creek Chisum 2A Bar S Range Boss 4002 Vermilion Dateline 7078

Bench Angus Bench Farming Co. ltd.

Shaunavon, SK S0N 2M0 Ph: 306-297-1331 ext. 301 or 726 bhbangus@gmail.com

Sale managed by:

December 14, 2018

Chris Poley 306-220-5006 Shane Michelson 403-363-9973 Ben Wright 519-374-3335

View the catalogue online at BuyAgro.com NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 35

Science and Production Securing Landowner Rights With Temporary Workspace Agreements During construction of projects in the energy sector, companies may require additional workspace for a short time which is located outside of the right-ofway that has been granted in a permanent easement or lease agreement. This additional space is called a temporary workspace and it is characterized by several features. David Mitchell from the West Central Saskatchewan Surface Right Organization pointed out that with a temporary workspace the soil is not disturbed. There is no digging and work occurs only on the surface. The surface use typically involves providing extra workspace for storing soil, pipe welding, construction equipment traffic or parking, among other uses, that facilitates a permanent project. A temporary workspace does not have any permanent structures or facilities. According to Mitchell, another characteristic of a temporary work space is the time duration – the additional space is used for a short period of time which is designated in an agreement.

If a company requires temporary workspace to facilitate construction, operation or maintenance of an oil or gas project, it must negotiate directly with the landowner and enter into a Temporary Workspace Agreement (TWA). These agreements have been mostly used in the

province’s oil producing areas in the south west. The TWA is a formal agreement concluded for a period of usually one to two years stipulating the use of a temporary work space, Mitchell explained.

This temporary agreement gives the company and its contractors authorization for a short period of time to operate outside of its existing easement area. The TWA is separate from the permanent right of way lease or easement agreement.

The additional temporary space must be surveyed, and the area dimensions specified in the agreement. A TWA often will have a map attached designating this workspace.

From the landowner’s perspective, a TWA typically needs to stipulate the temporary use of the space, define compensation terms and amounts, survey the temporary space and specify the dimensions of the space, and designate the specific purpose.

In negotiating a TWA, landowners should seek to limit the surface impact made by the company’s use of the space and to clearly define the duration of time that the company and its workers may use the agreed area. Factors that could influence the size of temporary workspace and permanent right-of-way are the size and type of a pipeline, soil conditions and regulatory requirements.

Notably, a temporary workspace agreement differs from a lease agreement or easement. A lease agreement is a permanent agreement that involves granting surface rights to a company, such as for drilling an oil well. This agreement often involves paying an annual rent. An easement is also a permanent agreement, but most often involves a singular payment for a project like laying a pipe.

There is no ongoing rent because the land can be reclaimed and reused.

Compensation is a major issue with the TWA, Mitchell observed. A TWA stipulates that landowners are to be compensated for the use of the temporary workspace in addition to compensation for the permanent right-of-way. The landowner should be compensated for the loss of use of the land for the duration of the agreement as well as for the loss of any future use of the land for crops or grazing. A standard part of the agreement, Mitchell described, is that the company is required to restore the land. “As a landowner, make sure the workspace land is cleaned up and restored to the way it was when the project was started,” he noted. He cautioned that there are cases of the reclaiming work being poor or incomplete. Landowners are advised to monitor land clean up and restoration processes. continued on page 47

Landowner Resources • The Surface Rights Acquisition and

Compensation Act of 1978 governs the relationship between the surface owner or occupant and the mineral rights owner or lessee. It is the template or backdrop for negotiating a surface lease or easement agreement.

• Negotiating Surface Rights,

published in 1998 by the University of Saskatchewan’s Centre for Studies in Agriculture, Law and the Environment, outlines various considerations in negotiating a surface lease with an oil or gas company.

36

• When the Oilpatch Comes to

your Saskatchewan Backyard: A Citizen’s Guide to Protecting Your Rights, published in 2004 by the Saskatchewan Environmental Society, is a guide to help landowners understand their legal rights and the rights and responsibilities of oil companies operating in Saskatchewan. To download: http:// environmentalsociety.ca/wp-content/ uploads/2014/08/When-the-OilpatchComes-to-Your-Backyard.pdf

• The Federation of Saskatchewan

Surface Rights Association provides

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

assistance to surface rights owners dealing with reclamation, compensation, or environmental issues related to oil and gas development, rail lines, pipelines and other industrial land use. Contact: Saskatchewan Surface Rights Organization at (306) 387-6650.

• The Surface Rights Board is an

arbitration board used as a last resort when a landowner and an oil and gas or potash operator are unable to reach an agreement for surface access to private land and related compensation.

Contact: 306-463-5447.

NOVEMBER 2018

WORK IT WEIGH IT WRAP IT FEED IT

HAUL IT

MIX IT

SPREAD IT

Whether you’re putting up feed or spreading manure, Norheim Ranching has you covered.

Our full line of livestock products are focused on you.

Visit us online or give us a call anytime.

NEED IT!!

See what NOR can do for you Visit us in the Eventplex November 19-24, 2018 in Regina SK

Your Livestock Equipment Specialists

Lee : 1-306-227-4503 Owner

Kelcy : 1-306-690-5209 SW Sask

Sheldon : 1-306-52-7545 Redvers SK

WWW.NORHEIMRANCHING.COM

NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 37

Stewardship Grassland Conservation on Private Lands: Instruments and Incentives

By Diego Steinaker, SK Prairie Conservation Action Plan

Parks and protected areas on public lands are essential components for grassland conservation. Nevertheless, they cannot be considered sufficient to achieve conservation as they represent a small fraction of the entire ecosystem, and their effectiveness in isolation is questionable, studies have shown. Thus, the role of private lands in maintaining landscape connectivity and sustaining biodiversity is crucial.

However, integrating private land into conservation planning and management is very challenging because of the complexity of social and economic interests associated with land use.

Within this context, there are a number of strategies that support grassland conservation in private lands, from regulatory prohibitions to direct incentives for actions to landowners.

These strategies may be categorized as involuntary (e.g., compulsory land acquisition, or imposed restrictions) and voluntary (conservation easements, action-based incentives, market-based incentives, among others). In this article, I will focus on the latter.

An effective voluntary instrument for protecting critical habitats is the “Conservation Easement (CE)”. A CE is a legal agreement between a landowner and a holder (government agency, conservation organization) that place restrictions on land titles for a specified time or in perpetuity. In Saskatchewan, a CE holder could be some conservation organization (e.g., Ducks Unlimited, Nature Saskatchewan, Nature Conservancy of Canada, among others) or most government agencies or rural municipalities. The terms of the agreement are negotiated to meet the interests of the landowner and the conservation objectives of the holder.

It is an opportunity for a landowner to formalize their commitment to long-

38

term conservation of their land that ensures the land will continue to have careful stewardship by future owners.

A conservation agency may offer to compensate a landowner for a CE. A landowner that donates a CE may be also eligible for special income tax incentives.

Private lands play a crucial role in maintaining landscape connectivity and sustaining biodiversity.

Cost-shared incentives are also important instruments for prairie conservation in private lands. These incentives provide payments to producers for reimbursable costs associated with different management actions (or equipment and material purchases) that contribute to conservation. Examples of cost-share incentives are “habitat management” and “habitat restoration” agreements that the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association, in partnership with the South of the Divide Conservation Action Program, are offering to qualified producers. In these cases, producers who own or manage identified critical habitat for species at risk, or who own or manage currently cultivated (i.e., tame grass) qualifying sites, are compensated for all costs associated with implementing sustainable management and/or restoration practices.

Another type of incentive is the payment for the achievement of targets. These “results-based” incentives are generally aimed to provide habitat for a specific target species (e.g., Greater sage-grouse, Sprague’s pipit, among others). “Results” refers here to quantifiable habitat requirements that a producer can manage under normal industry standards for

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

livestock production, for example, grass height, brush and forb density, and litter cover. If the requirements are met, then the producer receives the agreed payment. These agreements are generally non-prescriptive, meaning that the producer is the decision-maker. There also exist payments that can be one-time or periodic for the “avoidance of activities”.

This kind of incentive involves providing payments to ranchers if they have avoided a set of predefined activities on their properties that are known to have a negative influence on conservation goals (e.g. tilling, overgrazing).

Finally, “market-based incentives” are yet another type of mechanism to promote habitat conservation. These programs provide producers with a market premium for their commodities if they are produced in a way that supports conservation goals.

An example of market-based incentives is the “certified beef programs” used to market beef raised on grasslands that are managed for conservation purposes.

These programs attach attributes to a beef product that the consumer values and, therefore, will select over other products and be willing to pay a premium.

Examples of these programs are “Carnes del Patizal” from the South America Alliance for the Grasslands and “Country Natural Beef” from Oregon in the U.S. Instruments and incentives have proven to be effective mechanisms to promote ecosystem and species at risk conservation on private lands because of their ability to motivate stewardship behaviour. It is necessary that these mechanisms continue growing to convert private lands into effective counterparts of parks and protected areas in their role to conserve native prairies. B

NOVEMBER 2018

Stewardship Stretching Conservation Funding?

Prioritizing Recovery Funding in Species Conservation Agencies that oversee recovery of endangered species face tough choices.

Too often, they lack funds to implement complete recovery plans and they must select management strategies to implement without knowing which ones are most effective at achieving species recovery goals. Dr. Tara Martin at the Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences at the University of B.C. was part of a multi-author study that developed a unique approach which could help these agencies prioritize their recovery funding.

Beef Business sat down with Dr. Martin to discuss her team’s method for prioritizing strategies for endangered species management based on the likelihood of achieving species recovery goals per dollar invested, as well as how they came to use South of the Divide’s Action Plan for Species at Risk in their work. “The motivation for doing this research was that we have a biodiversity loss crisis around the world. In Canada, recovery of species at risk is generally failing. We’re not doing a great job of recovering species or stopping species from becoming endangered in the first place,” she explained. As a result, there are now more species at risk than resources to recover them all.

“Agencies have to make decisions on how those resources are going to be used.

Those decisions have consequences and one of the consequences is that some species are not getting any funding,” Martin added. She pointed out that, without a rigorous way to make these choices, conservation agencies might be channeling a lot of investment into species which are least likely to recover.

“That’s not a very effective way to use our resources most efficiently if the goal is to recover as many species as possible,” she said.

Martin’s research uses the South of the Divide’s Action Plan for Multiple Species at Risk in Southwestern Saskatchewan as a case study because they regarded it as one of the best action plans.“We 40

applied our approach to the Action Plan because it was the best multi-species plan developed to date,” said Martin. The Action Plan addresses the recovery of 13 species listed under Canada’s Species at Risk Act and co-occurring in the South of the Divide, an area covering over 1,415,700 ha and partly containing remnant native mixed-grass prairie.

of each of the distinct actions making up the management strategies identified. As the study explained, cost effectiveness is an economic tool increasingly used in conservation and natural resource management to inform investment decisions by evaluating the costs of achieving a noneconomic benefit, in this case the recovery of endangered species.

The study’s approach evaluated an action based on the potential benefits for species recovery, cost, and the feasibility of implementing each strategy over a 20-year period. This time frame allowed for multiple generations of animals to be considered. “In general, 20 to 25 years is also a good time frame because it’s also in the realm of experience for those people in the room who are providing that knowledge,” she pointed out.

In terms of cost, it is very difficult to place a value on a species, says Martin.

“Some species have a very high tourism value (southern resident killer whales) or a direct value (salmon),” she added.

This leaves conservation efforts open to political pressure, as is the case now, to save the most charismatic animals or the ones generating stronger views.

“But for the majority of our species at risk, it’s very hard to put a price on their value,” she said. Instead, this study developed a pragmatic and rational tool that adopted a different type of benefit metric – achieving the recovery goals for that species, or the likelihood of saving the species. “What our method does is it makes everything transparent,” Martin explained. The method breaks down the costs to save all species, the cost to save an individual species, as well as the funding gap. It also identifies species that we are unlikely to recover because we’ve simply left it too late. This is important for determining further investment. For example, putting additional resources into unrecoverable species will bring no benefit and these resources could be used to recover other species which still have a high likelihood of recovery.

Fourteen management strategies were evaluated made up of 47 underlying actions. In addition, four combinations of strategies were evaluated. These management strategies include habitat conservation, land stewardship, habitat restoration, management of development and linear infrastructure, disease management, and population augmentation.

The analysis relies on an economic approach called cost-effectiveness analysis. It is similar to a cost-benefit analysis, but, as Martin clarified, it has a key difference. In the conventional meaning, the standard cost-benefit analysis from economics stipulates the economic benefit of doing something divided by the economic cost. In the case of a cost-effectiveness analysis, the benefit that is being measured is the likelihood of recovering a species, not the economic benefit of saving a species. “The benefit is the likelihood of achieving the recovery objective for that species at risk as laid out in the recovery strategy for that species,” she explained.

Another term, cost, is also used beyond conventional terms. Cost refers to the cost

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Feasibility is also an important criterion in the methodology. It considers the likelihood that a strategy would be successful and would be adopted.

Some strategies are not feasible for various political and social reasons.

“Even if something has a high benefit, it may have a very low feasibility, and therefore, it may not be implemented as a result of social-political pressure,” said Martin. In this case, those implementing a management strategy may need to NOVEMBER 2018

Stewardship conduct an educational campaign about the need and benefits of an action in order to change public perceptions.

For this reason, many strategies include educational and communication components as well as a monitoring component to measure achievements.

Another key term is recovery, which differs for each species. “Recovery in this study means that we’ve met our population and distribution objective of the species,” Martin explained. These were drawn from the recovery objectives for each species at risk as outlined in their respective recovery strategies under the Species at Risk Act, our federal legislation for endangered species. It has a distribution objective which considers the species original spread over the landscape.

Each species, whether endangered or vulnerable, has a different starting point with its own distribution and population objective.

Despite the best laid plans, a species may not recover. “There is a lot of uncertainty.

We don’t know if an action will achieve the benefit we thought it would,” said Martin. Therefore, the recovery strategies also include monitoring on the ground to determine if the benefit is being reached as expected. “If not, we have to go back to the drawing board,” said Martin. In this type of adaptive process, if actions are not achieving the expected benefits, the model is revised according to the findings.

action and which action can recover the most species for the least investment as well as what combinations of strategies are going to provide the most benefit.

Martin says that, the challenge of using an Action Plan as currently developed, is that they typically do not contain information about the benefit of those actions, cost or feasibility – all criteria that are evaluated in her study’s method. As a result, there is a gap between what is presumed by the plans and the actual implementation of an action. Normally, Action Plans miss out on addressing the key question about the benefit of taking a particular action with respect to recovery of species.

Another advantage is that Martin’s methodology incorporates an estimate to account for the uncertainty of how ecosystems respond over time. It takes in such factors as the changes in climate, drought years and other types of events as well as the changing use of the land.

The methodology also provides a lot of flexibility because it draws on expert knowledge from landholders, industry, science, among others. Martin notes that much of the knowledge of species at risk is held by those living on the land and interacting with a species for generations.

While this study applied the approach for the first time to a Canadian action plan, Martin says that it is already being applied in New South Wales, Australia. “I would love to see it as a part of recovery and action planning in Canada,” she said. “When an action plan is developed, it should contain this analysis.” There are some discussions about using this approach as part of the policy around action planning in Canada. Martin and her colleagues believe that, by considering information about the cost, benefit and feasibility of a strategy, the best actions can be determined, and the actions can be prioritized according to their effectiveness for species recovery.

This methodology shows a lot of promise for species recovery in Canada. It is also a blueprint for investment. Donors will be able to have a clear picture of their return on investment and time frames for implementation of actions, thereby helping to leverage the funding gap for conservation. B *To read more about this approach to prioritizing funding, see: Martin, T.G., Kehoe, L., Mantyka-Pringle, C., et al. (2018).

Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species.

Conservation Letters, 2018;e12604

Agri-Ed Brings the Farm to Students

According to Martin, the study’s approach offers several advantages over other methodologies. One advantage is that it draws heavily on expert knowledge, including from ranchers managing the land. She noted that this expert knowledge is especially valuable because it comes from years of experience in understanding the dynamic between grazing animals, vegetation and habitat conditions. “A lot of this information about actions and their benefit and costs and their feasibility is not information that is written in the scientific literature, it’s in the heads of ranchers and land managers,” she added.

The methodology also has the advantage of identifying the most cost-effective

NOVEMBER 2018

Jay Bohrson of Hanley, Saskatchewan, speaks to Grade 4 children about “Where Beef Comes From”. Bohrson made his presentation at AG-Experience, which was held on October 2-4, 2018, at Prairieland Park, in Saskatoon.

Photo courtesy of Prairieland Park.

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 41

Stewardship Devastating Dry Spells

DUC Delivering Programs to Support Producers Through Tough Conditions

by Chelsea Manz, Communications Specialist, SK, Ducks Unlimited Canada Drought conditions occurring since 2017 have left many producers across Saskatchewan coming up short: Short on grass, fresh water and winter feed.

“The DUC Hay and Grazing Program provided an opportunity for feed. This allowed us to maintain our herd numbers through the winter months when other people were sadly talking of possibly having to downsize,” said Erin.

“I don’t know when the last time was that it was this dry. It has left many producers scrambling,” said Jodie Horvath, Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) conservation program specialist.

Horvath works with producers located in east-central Saskatchewan. Specifically, she works in the Touchwood Hills, South Quills and Conjuring Creek area. Her mission is to work through issues with producers and deliver solutions to help them cope with conditions like the ongoing drought.

“Working with DUC and being a farmer myself makes me sympathetic to the numerous issues producers face.

Everything from the weather to the markets dictates our future and we have so many challenges. It is satisfying to offer our producer partners different opportunities to further their business,” Horvath said.

Hip Hip Horray, DUC had Hay: The Yewsuik Family Horvath has seen immense interest in DUC’s Haying and Grazing Program.

Through the program, DUC land is seeded to forage with the primary goal being nesting habitat for waterfowl. DUC recognizes the value of this cover as feed and then uses cattle as a management tool.

This keeps the forage stand healthy, reducing weeds, controlling brush regrowth and increasing longevity. The available DUC lands for tender are advertised locally in early June and tenders are open until mid-July. Hay can be cut only after midJuly.

“We know that waterfowl have a greater chance at nesting success if we allow them time. So, by waiting until July 15 to 42

The Yewsuik family working with cattle.

cut the hay, we can be assured that we gave the waterfowl the best chance at survival,” stated Brian Hepworth, DUC’s manager of Saskatchewan operations.

Waiting until July 15 to cut hay was no issue for Eric and Erin Yewsuik. Located south-east of Wynyard near Wishart, the couple raises about 50 head of Red Angus cattle.

“We have always been aware of DUC and their programs,” said Erin Yewsuik.

“As young producers, DUC offers us the opportunity to add to our land base in a way that is affordable, sustainable and aligns with our belief in taking care of the land. Being able to work with Jodie as our area representative is another feather in the DUC’s hat for us as she knows her stuff given that she’s a producer herself.”

The Yewsuiks were the successful tender on DUC hay land located 48 kilometres from their home. When drought conditions are prevalent, going 48 kilometres to cut, bale and trailer the hay home is not nearly as costly as purchasing feed from out of province or selling part of a herd.

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Trickle Down Economics: The Youngs Feed is not the only concern to Saskatchewan ranchers. Water shortages also have been hitting areas of Saskatchewan hard. Many producers have been rotating their pastures as the water runs out. If there is no runoff and snow this year, the forecast for Spring 2019 will be bleak in some areas.

Terry Young and his wife Loretta farm north of Earl Grey and have a purebred cattle operation. They faced water issues during the last dry spell before 2010 and had looked to DUC for solutions.

The Youngs had recently took over a section that had been in the family for over 100 years, but there were few water sources on the property. The main source of water, a wetland, began to have salinity issues, so they needed to look for new options, and fast. Of the various options they researched, the most feasible at the time was to drill a well and use a solarpowered system to pump the water from the ground to a large trough.

With the water available in only one spot, Terry knew that he had to graze his cattle in rotation to ensure the pasture remained in good condition and that the cattle didn’t always stay near the water source. He contacted DUC and asked what options they had to make sure his cattle continued to have access to both clean water and healthy pasture.

DUC’s fencing program was the answer.

By partnering with DUC, the Youngs were able to fence areas that allowed them to rotate their cattle giving them constant access to the fresh water.

NOVEMBER 2018

Stewardship “The fencing doubled my cow-calf carrying capacity and still left me with healthy grassland for my cattle,” said Terry. “I can still run about 55-60 cow-calf pairs out here and not lose sleep over them having access to fresh water. In time, I will also look at the wetland restoration program DUC offers.”

A Short List of Solutions Delivering Long-term Benefits As agribusiness evolves, so do DUC programs. Horvath knows that the organization will continue to work with ag producers and she is excited for the future.

“We have evolved DUC programs and now offer forage programs, fencing programs, tenders, lease agreements, wetland restoration and conservation easements.

Our programs are flexible and are based on offering solutions to problems that all landowners face. This has allowed us to be viewed as a valued partner,” says Horvath.

“It’s promising when producers can be successful in both business and protecting the environment. It means we are all one step closer to being truly sustainable.”B

The Yewsuik family.

The Pedigrees are Similar, The Cattle Consistent.

Photos courtesy of DUC *For information about the DUC Perimeter Fencing Program, Hay and Grazing Tenders or other programs offered by DUC, call 1-866-252-3825 or email du_regina@ducks.ca.

4th Annual

Gemstone Cattle Hereford & Angus Bull & Female Sale December 5, 2018 Bow Slope Shipping Association, Brooks, AB – 1 PM Red Gemstone Magua 32C

This Bull sired 72 calves as a yearling in a multi sire pasture.

He bred over 50% of the cow herd. He is moderate framed, easy keeping and is one of the best footed red bulls we have seen.

Red Gemstone Magua 32C

PCC OH Axel 9516A

Axel is a 3.5 frame score and weighs 2170 lbs - developed on grass and hay only. His sons are thick, easy fleshing and have a great disposition. Axel sons will sire calves your neighbor’s will envy!

Bulls can be wintered at no cost to the buyer.

PCC OH Axel 9516A

WWW.GEMSTONECATTLE.COM

Sons of these bulls SELL!

Stop by anytime to see the cattle or check out our website for more info.

Daniel & Kimberly Doerksen PO Box 13, Gem, AB T0J 1M0 Res (403)641-2886 Cell (403)633-0530 Email: daniel@gemstonecattle.com

Arno & Wanda Doerksen PO Box 1, Gem, AB T0J 1M0 Res (403)641-2498 Cell (403)363-0253 Email: arno@gemstonecattle.com

The Young family’s Flying TL Simmentals.

NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 43

Stewardship How Cattle Ranching Can Help Preserve Species at Risk in Canada’s Grasslands

By Jeremy Pittman

I grew up on a farm in rural Saskatchewan.

We grew mostly wheat and lentils and raised some pigs. There were always small pieces of grassland nearby – I remember my grandfather pointing them out and telling us how they used to call them ‘prairie wool.’ But by the time I was born, much of the grasslands – aside from those found in marginal agricultural areas or “out in the hills,” as we used to say – had been converted into croplands. I don’t think any of us realized the extent to which we had modified the temperate grassland ecosystem.

When I was in Grade 4, my class raised money to protect a small piece of the Amazon Rainforest in Brazil as part of a school project on environmental sustainability. It wasn’t until I was much older that I realized Saskatchewan’s own temperate grasslands also needed protection.

The temperate grasslands that once covered much of western North America – in the United States and Canada – are one of the most imperilled ecosystems in the world. A 2017 report by the World Wildlife Fund found that we are actually losing more temperate grasslands annually than we are the Amazon Rainforest. These grasslands are key to the survival of many species of mammals, plants, birds, amphibians, reptiles and insects. A few have weathered the changes and adapted, but there are some that have proven more vulnerable to the onslaught of land use change. These are the ‘species at risk’ – a legal term in Canada referring to species that we must protect or risk losing forever.

The list of species at risk for the grasslands is quite long, but includes the swift fox (Vulpes velox), Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), and Mormon metalmark butterflies (Apodemia mormo).

These species require grasslands for food and shelter, and the advance of the plough has literally turned their homes

44

upside down. Imagine moving from a mansion in the suburbs to a cramped downtown apartment; that’s what cropland agriculture has done to these species, and if we don’t act soon, even the “downtown apartments” may disappear.

To save these species, we must save their homes, which are the scattered patches of temperate grasslands that remain.

However, we’re in luck, because many of these grass patches are already protected, in their own way, by the hardworking ranching families who have managed these lands for more than a century.

If done properly, cattle ranching can play an important role in the future of species at risk conservation and biodiversity protection on the Prairies.

The Ecological Role of Ranching On the Prairies, a farmer is someone who grows crops such as wheat, lentils, canola, flax, chickpeas, oats, barley and rye.

Ranchers, on the other hand, raise cattle.

They rely on large pieces of intact grass to feed their animals. These tracts of pasture are often the same places where we currently find species at risk, which is no accident. Pastures can provide excellent habitat for species at risk, if managed properly – and many of them are.

Many of the same practices adopted by ranchers to deal with drought – the worst nemesis of people living in the Prairie provinces – also provide co-benefits for species at risk. These practices include things like leaving enough grass behind for future years and resting pastures of native prairie for years at a time. Taking it a step further, ranchers can also

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

manage their lands in such a way as to intentionally produce habitat for species at risk. These practices include things like deferring grazing to times when species are less vulnerable, herding cattle with range-riders to improve control of grazing, or luring cattle with water or salt licks to areas needing grazing pressure. These practices produce a mix of vegetation types and heights on pastures, which mimics the kind of heterogeneous grassland habitats in which many species thrive.

Cattle, in a sense, can take on the ecological role of the bison, which once roamed the temperate grasslands throughout North America. The vast herds of bison essentially disturbed the grasslands for centuries, and the temperate grassland ecosystem evolved in light of the bison’s disturbance. Bison grazed and trampled the prairie here and there, leaving behind a tapestry of vegetation that wasn’t too short or too tall for many of the other species found there.

Ranchers can achieve comparable results by managing their cattle in ways that produce similar landscapes to those left by the bison.

Cattle ranching and species at risk can go hand-in-hand, and there are a number of exciting new programs emerging to bring the two together. For example, Parks Canada and the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association recently announced the creation of a grass bank project.

Grass banking, in this case, involves allowing ranchers to graze public lands in Grasslands National Park for a reduced fee, provided they can produce habitat on their own lands as well.

The project essentially provides two benefits for species at risk: cattle grazing on Grasslands National Park helps produce habitat, and existing habitat outside the Park on privately managed lands is preserved and monitored.

NOVEMBER 2018

Stewardship The South of the Divide Conservation Action Program Inc., a collaborative partnership of ranchers, government, environmental non-government organizations and industry, is charged with setting and monitoring the habitat targets for different species at risk. If habitat targets are reached, the Species at Risk Partnerships on Agricultural Lands (SARPAL) program, which is funded by Environment and Climate Change Canada, provides results-based incentives to the ranchers.

This project demonstrates the type of collaboration necessary to conserve species at risk, protect temperate grasslands, and support local livelihoods – key components to ensure that future generations of species at risk, and future generations of ranchers, can enjoy the prairies.

NOVEMBER 2018

These projects also demonstrate the environmental benefits of cattle production, which receive little attention outside of the Prairies conservation community. It’s true that we need to be mindful of the environmental impacts of beef, specifically the carbon footprint of beef production, but – if done properly – cattle ranching can play an important role in the future of species at risk conservation and biodiversity protection on the Prairies.

Finally, these projects also demonstrate a policy paradigm shift in Canada. The shift centres on recognizing the role of agriculture in biodiversity conservation and finding synergies between the two.

I believe these synergies are important to find and highlight because they help us ensure that both food production and wildlife thrive on certain parts of

Canada’s vast landscape and that wildlife conservation is not just something that occurs in protected areas, but everywhere. B *Jeremy Pittman is an assistant professor in the School of Planning at the University of Waterloo and a Liber Ero Postdoctoral Fellow researching the conservation of species at risk on Canada’s native grasslands.

Reprinted with the author’s permission from Canadian Geographic, July 24, 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 45

Association News, Reports, and Events SSGA Launches Third Annual Beef Drive Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association (SSGA) launched its third annual Beef Drive for the Food Banks of Saskatchewan (FBS). Inspired by the success of its two previous Beef Drives, this year the SSGA has set a goal to collect 10,000 pounds of beef donations.

“We launch our third Beef Drive encouraged by the tremendous support of our membership donating to this worthy program over the past two years,” SSGA President Bill Huber announced.

New this year, SSGA welcomes Cargill Animal Nutrition as the sponsor for the third annual Beef Drive. “We would also like to thank Cargill who comes onboard as a sponsor this year as well as the three processors who have previously partnered with the SSGA. Sponsorship support is an important aspect of the Beef Drive as it helps to cover the costs of processing the donated animals,” the SSGA president added.

“Our Canadian Cargill Animal Nutrition Beef team is honoured to support our SSGA members on this very important initiative,” stated Beef Brand Manager Shannon Borden for Cargill Animal Nutrition Canada.

Through its Cargill Cares program, Cargill will be matching private donations dollarfor-dollar up to $5,000. Cargill has over 350 employee-led Cargill Cares Councils

worldwide. The councils provide support for local charitable and civic organizations and programs such as food relief agencies, school and youth programs, and local environmental projects.

“We encourage all industry stakeholders to motivate their peers and continue to support SSGA on the Beef Drive,” Borden added.

The SSGA initiated its first Beef Drive on World Food Day in the fall of 2016 as a way for beef producers to support the 28 food banks in Saskatchewan. As part of the beef drive, beef producers and other individuals donate an animal or make a cash donation to help defray the costs of processing the donated animals. The SSGA has been working with three processors – Treen Packers, West Bridgeford Meats and Western Prime Meat Processors – to process the beef into hamburger which is delivered to the FBS in Regina and is then distributed across Saskatchewan.

Saskatchewan’s beef producers have shown their generosity. The first beef drive aimed for 1,000 pounds in beef donations but achieved a remarkable total of 8,500 pounds of fresh ground beef. The second year surpassed its goal of 10,000 pounds of beef. In total, the first two beef drives collected for the FBS over 22,000 pounds of ground beef which has a retail value of over $100,000. For the previous Beef Drive, Elanco Animal

Health contributed $10,000 from its 100 Communities campaign which assisted with the beef processing.

“The Beef Drive fills an important need for the province’s food banks because fresh ground beef is a healthy, high protein food source, but it’s difficult for food banks to provide due to its cost and perishable nature,” the SSGA president pointed out.

“Food Banks of Saskatchewan is committed to working with a variety of producers to provide quality nutrition to food banks across the province. This partnership demonstrates the impact that can be achieved when we work together to address hunger in our communities,” stated Laurie O’Connor, executive director of Food Banks of Saskatchewan.

“We are very grateful that so many generous, hardworking cattle producers are on board for the third year in a row to provide an exceptional source of protein to people who need it the most. We send a huge thank you out to Saskatchewan farmers, SSGA, Cargill, and the processors for their generosity and hard work in making it all happen,” the FBS executive director stated. B TO DONATE If you would like to make a donation to the Beef Drive, or if you would like more information, contact the SSGA office at 306-757-8523.

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

46

...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

NOVEMBER 2018

Association News, Reports, and Events Director Profile: Ashley Kattler commercial Boer goats. Like the cattle, they are selected based on similar traits.

The couple has also developed a customer base for their own ranch-raised meat.

The SSGA Board recently welcomed Ashley Kattler of Indian Head, Saskatchewan, as the affiliate director representing Saskatchewan Goat Breeders Association (SGBA).

Ashley and her husband Ryan started their mixed farming operation in 2007 and farm together with their two young children, Flint and Summer. They farm 1,300 acres of cropland into canola, wheat and flax.

In addition, the couple is growing a small herd of high quality commercial and purebred Red Angus cattle. Their focus has been on producing functional cows that are low maintenance with above average maternal traits. They like to use AI as a tool to improve their herd whether they are breeding for replacements or selecting for carcass traits on feeder animals.

Ashley and Ryan's operation also has a mid-sized herd of purebred and Landowner Rights cont. from pg. 36 Another sticking point is the amount of compensation, which has to be negotiated with the landowner. A TWA also stipulates the values of compensation for restoring the space to its previous condition. There should also be additional compensation given for damage caused directly from the operations in the workspace. The agreement should address compensation for payment of taxes and rates on the land during the period the workspace is in temporary use by the company. There are also differences between compensation amounts for temporary workspaces and compensation for permanent right of NOVEMBER 2018

Ashley explained that she and her husband have built their farm with their own blood, sweat and tears, “just like every other rancher in the province, I think!” She feels that a producer must be immersed in the trenches of their own business to be successful. For Ashley, this means that she could tell you anything about a specific cow, doe or their offspring. “When it’s something you’re passionate about, it’s just so easy to be that into it,” she said. She wouldn’t want to raise her children any other way and knows that they are truly a rarity in the area. “You just don’t see many young people coming from a fully working farm anymore,” Ashley added.

Although Ashley considers herself a “newbie” on the board, she says she can tell from this short time that the SSGA is truly working for the livestock sector in this province. She sees the advantage in SSGA’s ability to bring industry issues to the forefront with the people that can help make a difference.

Ashley feels there are several major challenges and concerns facing the livestock industry. Firstly, there is the way in easements and leases. Surface rights associations observe that there is a tendency for compensation to landowners to be only about half of the surface value of the lease amount because the surface is not being disturbed as is in a permanent right of way space.

When making agreements, Mitchell cautioned landowners to ensure they understand the purpose of the project and the time needed to complete it as well as the time needed for clean up and for land recovery. “As long as the project is being undertaken, there is no surface use of the of the land. This is the same as any other lease or easement agreement,” he explained. With the permanent right of way, a landowner cannot reclaim the work space area until the development is

challenge of meeting the demands of the consumer, she commented, since “we live in a country where everyone has a choice.

How do we stay as their number one choice?” She stressed the need to show consumers “that livestock producers are truly the ultimate stewards of the land.”

Ashley identified two key challenges influencing the ability of livestock producers to remain competitive as the rising cost of inputs and the conversion of land already productive as hay/pasture to annual cropping.

Finally, commenting on an issue specific to goats, “there are no import tariffs on goat [meat] entering the country,” she stated.

Consequently, a considerable volume of meat in the domestic market comes from Australia and New Zealand. Although, she considers the Canadian product superior, the supply does not meet demand and the domestic goat herd is too small to influence political change. Ashley feels that this is also partially because growing goats in Canada, “isn’t for the faint of heart.” This results in a Catch-22.

Moving forward, Ashley feels that many good things can happen with a group of committed people working together, such as the SSGA.B

reclaimed. However, with the temporary workspace, a landowner can reclaim a workspace much faster given that TWAs are short-term.

Landowners who have questions about negotiating surface agreements can contact landowner groups. Alberta has well-developed farmer advocacy resources to assist landowners on surface rights. The Grassroots Alberta Landowners Association works with groups of landowners when their property is affected by pipeline and powerline projects. Saskatchewan has fewer landowner and advocacy resources and landowners can seek advice from landowner groups if they have questions. B

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 47

Association News, Reports, and Events A Report From Bill Huber President, Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association The SSGA supports Premier Scott Moe and the Saskatchewan Government in opposing the carbon tax and supporting the Saskatchewan people. SSGA is trying to meet with Regina MP Ralph Goodale to discuss the carbon tax, and we are still awaiting his response.

Since my last report, the beef industry received some good news about international trade. We saw the successful conclusion of negotiations of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which gives the industry continued tariff-free access to the U.S. and Mexico for our beef and cattle. The U.S. is a very important trading partner for Canadian beef and live cattle. While we look forward to continuing the good trading relationship, there are still some concerning aspects, especially regarding the Saskatchewan dairy industry.

We’re also pleased that Canada ratified the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) which will now take effect on December 30 since New Zealand and Australia also completed their ratification processes in late October. This provides our Canadian beef industry with more export opportunities at lower tariffs in the growing and competitive markets of the Pacific Rim countries.

Despite this good news, we have a real concern about the impact that the federally-imposed carbon backstop will have on our beef exports. The federal government just announced it will be applying the federal carbon backstop to Saskatchewan. The carbon tax will raise our cost of production making our beef less competitive on world markets.

The SSGA kicked off its third annual Beef Drive in October. We set a goal of collecting 10,000 pounds in beef donations for the Food Banks of Saskatchewan. We would like to thank Saskatchewan beef producers for their tremendous support of our beef drives in the past and encourage you to consider donating to this year’s Beef Drive. This year, we would like to thank Cargill Animal Nutrition for coming forward to support this worthy cause with a $5,000 donation.

We continue to work with Treen Packers, West Bridgeford Meats and Western Prime Meat Processors to process the beef. So, if you have an animal that you would like to donate, call the office at 306-757-8523 to let us know.

It’s been a busy fall with a number of meetings and events to attend. It started off with chairing my first board meeting as president in late August. We were fortunate to have in attendance the new Minister of Agriculture David Marit, who is no stranger to agriculture. It’s a privilege to have the opportunity to work with him.

Recently, I attended a forage insurance meeting with Ministry of Agriculture and Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corporation (SCIC) officials. It was an opportunity to review enhancements and to identify new opportunities, such as forage corn insurance. It was also a chance to provide our feedback on improving gaps in coverage and offering more weather stations. We will continue to work collaboratively with them to improve coverage.

In September, I joined SSGA representatives, SODCAP representatives Tom Harrison and Kelly Williamson and Minister of Agriculture David Marit, Minister of Environment Dustin Duncan along with local ranchers on a tour of SARPAL projects south of Mankota.

This was a unique opportunity for the ministers to speak one-on-one with producers about species conservation and the role of cattle in managing grasslands.

SSGA representatives attended the Throne Speech at the Saskatchewan Legislature on October 24. Thanks to First Vice President Kelcy Elford and GM Chad MacPherson for being present as I was unable to attend. We were pleased to hear that trespassing legislation will be debated this session. Our AGM resolution on trespassing was referred to the Ministry of Justice this summer and the government recently held a public consultation on the Trespassing Act. We appreciate that the government has considered the trespassing issue and is supporting the rights of landowners.

SSGA representatives also attended the opening of the University of Saskatchewan’s new Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence (LFCE) located south of Clavet. There was an opportunity to tour the impressive $38 million facilities and learn about the research being conducted on improving both the cattle and forage aspects of production. The SSGA was a part of the LFCE’s steering committee.

The SSGA sent a petition to the Pest Management Regulatory Agency asking for a month extension to a 90-day public consultation they held on canceling the use of strychnine on gopher-control products. We felt that our producers would not have a suitable opportunity to participate in the consultation in the middle of harvest and the calf run. They did not extend the date, but they did continued on page 51

48

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

NOVEMBER 2018

NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 49

Calendar of Events NOVEMBER November 7-11

FarmFair International

Edmonton, AB

November 7-10

Yorkton Harvest Showdown

November 8-9

BeefTech

November 14-15

Canadian Forage and Grassland Association AGM

Calgary, AB

November 18-20

Canadian Bison Association AGM

Regina, SK

November 19-24

Canadian Western Agribition

Regina, SK

November 23

Commercial Cattle Mixer & Bull Pen Alley People’s Choice

Regina, SK

December 3-5

4th Annual Transboundary Grassland Workshop

December 5

Cudlobe Bull Sale

Stavely, AB

December 5

Gemstone Cattle Bull & Female Sale

Brooks, AB

December 6

Peak Dot Ranch Bull Sale

Yorkton, SK Edmonton, AB

DECEMBER Lethbridge, AB

Wood Mountain, SK

December 6

Farms at the Table Conference

December 10

Diamond K Bred Heifer Sale

Saskatoon, SK Piapot, SK

December 10

Y Coulee Bull & Heifer Sale

Lloydminster, SK

December 11-12

Foraging into the Future Conference

Swift Current, SK

December 14

Bench Angus Bull and Female Sale

December 14

Advertising Deadline for January Issue of Beef Business

January 16-18

Saskatchewan Beef Industry Conference

Regina, SK

January 30

Moose Creek Red Angus 2 Year Old Sale

Kisbey, SK

Shaunavon, SK

JANUARY

FEBRUARY February 1

SSGA Zone Scholarship Application Deadline

February 2

Hill 70 Quantock Ranch ‘Barn Burnin’ Bull Sale

Lloydminster, SK/AB

February 6-8

Western Canada Feedlot Management School

Regina, SK

February 12

Advertising Deadline for March Issue of Beef Business

SSGA BOARD OF DIRECTORS THE EXECUTIVE

DIRECTORS AT LARGE

Bill Huber President/Zone Chair Lipton, SK

Phone: 336-2684

Kelcy Elford 1st Vice President/Director at Large Caronport, SK

Phone: 690-5209

Garner Deobald 2nd Vice President/Affiliate Director Hodgeville, SK

Phone: 677-2589

Jeff Yorga Finance Chair Flintoft, SK Phone: 531-5717 Shane Jahnke Past President Gouldtown, SK

50

Phone: 784-2899

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

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

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

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

478-2658 375-2934 436-7121 478-2558 662-3986 379-4523 642-4961 421-1495 642-5358 544-2660 295-3852

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 Ashley Kattler - Goat Breeders, Indian Head 695-7340 Jeff Yorga - Limousin Affiliate, Flintoft 531-5717

APPOINTED DIRECTORS

Dr. Andy Acton- Veterinary Advisor, Ogema

459-2422

SASKATCHEWAN CCA DIRECTORS

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

NOVEMBER 2018

Advertisers Index Allen Leigh Security & Communications

53

Grassland Trailer

53

Norheim Ranching

37,56

Apollo Machine & Products

52

Hand N Hand Livestock Solutions

53

Northstar Seed

52

ArcRite Welding

52

Hi-Hog Farm & Ranch Equipment

8

Paysen Livestock Equipment

2,49

Arm River Red Angus

54

John Brown Farms

54

Peak Dot

19

Barr & Olney

54

Johnstone Auction Mart

53

Pneu Dart/Target Cattle Concepts

52

Bench Angus

35

Kelln Solar

52

Saskatchewan Angus Assoc.

54

Canadian Cattle Identification Agency

25,55

Kramer Trailer Sales

53

Saskatchewan Beef Industry Conference

4

Cudlobe Bull Sale

3

Kyle Welding & Machine Shop

53

Saskatchewan Bison Association

18

Cowtown Livestock Exchange, Inc.

53

Lane Realty Corp.

10

Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture

30

D&R Prairie Supplies

46

Linthicum Ranch

54

Saskatchewan Verified Beef Production Inc.

28,29

Diamond K Ranch

33

Man-SK Gelbvieh

54

Simply Ag Solutions

52

Ducks Unlimited Canada

31

Manitou Maine-Anjou

54

Smeaton Fencing

52

Edward Jones

52

Masterfeeds

53

Sweet Pro

52

Elanco

7

Moose Creek

13

Vetoquinol

39

FeedMax Corporation

53

Western Litho

53

53

N.M. McMahon Chartered Professional Accountant

52

Frostfree Nosepumps Ltd.

54

54

45

GBT Angus

Nahachewsky Charolais

Y Coulee Land & Cattle Co.

Gem Silage

52

New Life Mills

52

Gemstone Cattle

43

New Vision Agro

53

President's Report cont. from pg. 48 agree to meet with stakeholder groups in Saskatchewan in November. I did have an opportunity to discuss the use of strychnine for gopher control at a recent meeting in Ottawa with PMRA officials.

They were receptive to our presentation on the importance of strychnine for ranchers.

The calf run has started up and prices started strong but have dropped off 5 to 10 cents by late October. By all indications, the fall calf run should continue strong into the rest of the fall. This is good news for producers as we rebuild market stability following the uncertainty of NAFTA and as we grow our beef industry in the province.

November promises to be a busy month starting with our next board meeting on November 8 and followed by the Canadian Western Agribition which gets underway on November 19.

NOVEMBER 2018

Tax Relief cont. from pg. 16 In closing, I hope to see everyone at the Agribition. I encourage everyone to stop in to our SSGA trade show booth in the Exhibit mall and join us for some socializing at the Commercial Cattlemen’s Mixer on Friday, November 23. B If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to give me a call!

Bill

Pleasant Valley No. 288 Poplar Valley No. 12 Prairie Rose No. 309 Prince Albert No. 461* Reciprocity No. 32* Redburn No. 130 Reno No. 51 Riverside No. 168 Rocanville No. 151* Rodgers No. 133 Rosedale No. 283 Rudy No. 284 Sarnia No. 221 Saskatchewan Landing No. 167 Scott No. 98 Shamrock No. 134 Sherwood No. 159 Silverwood No. 123* Snipe Lake No. 259* Souris Valley No. 7 South Qu’Appelle No. 157 St. Andrews No. 287 St. Louis No. 431* St. Peter No. 369* Stanley No. 215 Star City No. 428* Stonehenge No. 73 Storthoaks No. 31* Surprise Valley No. 9 Sutton No. 103 Swift Current No. 137 Tecumseh No. 65 Terrell No. 101 The Gap No. 39 Three Lakes No. 400* Torch River No. 488*

Touchwood No. 248 Tullymet No. 216 Usborne No. 310* Val Marie No. 17 Vanscoy No. 345 Victory No. 226 Viscount No. 341* Walpole No. 92* Waverley No. 44 Wawken No. 93* Webb No. 138 Wellington No. 97 Weyburn No. 67 Wheatlands No. 163 Whiska Creek No. 106 White Valley No. 49 Willner No. 253 Willow Bunch No. 42 Willow Creek No. 458* Willowdale No. 153* Winslow No. 319* Wise Creek No. 77 Wolseley No. 155 Wolverine No. 340* Wood Creek No. 281 Wood River No. 74 Wreford No. 280 *Second Designation

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 51

Smeaton Fence Supplies Ltd. Box 222, Smeaton, SK Canada S0J 2J0 Phone or Fax (306) 426-2305

TOM JENSEN, President

SUPPLIER OF AG FENCING PRODUCTS

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

52

| ©BEEF BUSINESS | www.skstockgrowers.com

Pneu-darT

Graham McKenzie

306.861.7074

INC.

Dale Watson

306.861.4618

NOVEMBER 2018

STOCK WATER TROUGHS Made of 12 gauge galvanized metal

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

Wash rack facilities for livestock

www.johnstoneauction.ca

Popular sizes: 400, 500, 1000 Imperial gal.

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

“Bud Williams” Livestock Marketing & Proper Stockmanship

with Richard McConnell & Tina Williams

Perry, MO — Dec 3-6, 2018 Springfield, MO — Feb 4-6, 2019

Kyle, SK 306-375-2271

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

kylewelding@sasktel.net | www.kylewelding.com

CT

Cowtown Livestock Exchange Inc. Maple Creek, SK

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

www.cowtownlivestock.com

Your AD could be here!

Contact 306-757-8523

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

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)

NOVEMBER 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

Your AD could be here!

Contact 306-757-8523

Check with us before you buy! www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 53

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

54

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

NOVEMBER 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

ORDER TAGS

Online: tags.canadaid.ca Toll-Free: 1-877-909-2333 or Email: tags@canadaid.ca

“Your staff is excellent to deal with and the tags come real quick.

I’m impressed.”

Ray McDougald Saskatchewan Beef Producer

Call us! 1-877-909-2333 or ORDER ONLINE at tags.canadaid.ca FREE SHIPPING on orders of $500 or MORE NOVEMBER 2018

www.skstockgrowers.com | ©BEEF BUSINESS | 55

Available at

Your Livestock Equipment Specialists Welcome to the

Next Generation of Feed Processors

Lee Norheim - Owner

1.306.227.4503

Kelcy Elford - South West Sask

1.306.690.5209

www.supremeinternational.com 1.800.563.2038 WWW.NORHEIMRANCHING.COM