| SUBSCRIBE MARKETS WEATHER LINKS HOME |
Behind the LinesNotes from behind the linesJanuary 1, 2000
We knew the coverage of genetically modified crops in our first two issues would cause a stir. There was only room for a small sampling of letters to the editor in this issue, but you'll get the flavour. It was satisfying to see that, despite the highly charged emotions surrounding this critical issue, very few who called or wrote found it necessary to "shoot the messenger." In Short Takes you'll find an update on the previously elusive Canadian Farm Business Management Council. Chair Anne Forbes insists the Council has been victim of a smear campaign. And in his column, The Hill, Barry Wilson, who was hit by tear gas while covering World Trade Organization talks in Seattle, concludes the collapse of the talks may be the "catalyst which finally makes Canadian politicians confront the long-term family farm question." While we're on the subject, watch for our February issue where Loyalist College agricultural journalism professor Joe Callahan begins a photojournalism series, "In search of the family farm," which will run occasionally throughout the year. In his first offering, Joe looks at the Farrell family, veteran eastern Ontario pork producers. History shows one can never be too sure when predicting the future of the pork industry, but at press time prospects look brighter than they have for some time. The 30-day time limit on elimination of U.S. countervail passed without any appeal and new contracts were signed recently at Olymel, Quebec's largest pork processor, so ending the threat of potentially devastating interruptions in Ontario hog marketing. American fresh pork exports to Russia are well behind schedule, suggesting that if the political winds remain favourable, a lot of pork will be pulled from domestic markets in the coming weeks. Although it's hard to believe when we read about Paul Mistele and his food bank efforts (page 44), recent demographic studies show more people in North America are joining the middle class, pushing meat demand up. Despite all that great news, we at Better Farming would like to think that the best news of all for Ontario Pork Producers is the upcoming launch of our new magazine, Better Pork, on Feb 1. It will be mailed free to all pork producers in the province. Former Pork Producer writers like Norman Dunn in Germany and veteran U.S. pork industry writer Steve Marbery will be featured, as well as a wide range of familiar contributors from across Canada.
And lastly, kudos to the departing OMAFRA field office staff left jobless after this winter. You know you were appreciated by farmers. Be assured that as one door closes behind you, another opens wide, leading to new opportunities. December 1, 1999
When we first called executive director Jim Laws at home at noon one Saturday he insisted we call him at the office Monday morning. The printing presses couldn't wait then but we saved space in this issue to get Laws response The Frank story cited "an annual $3 million handout of public money from AgCan," and accused CFBMC of lavish spending. Headlined "taxpayers milked for millions as farm advisors live high off the hog" the feature also mentioned "luxurious 3,000- sq. ft. of prime downtown office space (half of which lies fallow)," occupied by just four staffers. As instructed, we called Laws at work, allowing lots of time before deadline this time. He was reportedly out of town when we called on a Friday afternoon but he did return our call the following Tuesday. After listening to a few unflattering comments about Frank and its writing we managed to begin our inquiries by asking whether it was true that 22 directors hold $50,000 meetings six times a year. "I'm not going to get into a discussion on the issues, have a great day" responded Laws, before hanging up. Inside this issue, as promised, University of Guelph crops professor Ann Clark takes a swipe at biotechnology and gene manipulation, pointing out that a major European bank has warned that life science companies are a bad investment. (see page 37.) Pioneer Hi-Bred's Art Stirling has a rebuttal. Further to that, he reports no lack of interest in Roundup Ready soybeans. But notes that corn growers appear to be hedging their marketing bets by double-booking genetically enhanced corn seed and unenhanced corn seed. The soybean and corn seed are two very different markets, he says. Seed corn buyers might want to take their cues from news reports out of Seattle. The world-wide market for genetically altered corn will depend heavily on the outcome of the first round of trade talks taking place late November, Stirling believes. The pressure on life science companies is growing. There are reports that giant Monsanto may break up into smaller units to increase its value to shareholders, with an agricultural side merger with Novartis mentioned in early November in the Wall Street Journal as a possibility. It would be ironic if the pressure being put on life science companies by biotech's opponents resulted in the world wide seed business being held by even fewer hands. Rumours abound about provincial government spending cuts for agriculture. Eastern Ontario francophones represent the strongest opposition as they once again rally in support of Alfred College. Many predicted the college would close following reports of a $1.5 million funding cut which represents more than half the college's budget . Watch the January issue of Better Farming for an in depth look at what's in store for Alfred as well as other provincial support for agriculture.
Finally, Christmas will soon be upon us, and also a New Year, and depending on how you count, a new century, and a new Millennium. We at Better Farming wish you all happiness in the coming holidays and also a happy bug-free Y2K. The Editors November 1, 1999 Issue October is supposed to be devoted to harvest. But politics and policy have made deep incursions into the season usually spent taking this year's bounty from the fields. At Better Farming's press time the United States Department of Commerce confirmed an earlier decision that Canada's beef industry has indeed been dumping live cattle into the American marketplace and a crippling countervail will stay in place, at slightly higher levels. The winners are Canadian packers. Producers are the losers, of course, but their official lobby organizations are under fire as well. (See Cross Border Beefs, page 51, a story written on the eve of the decision.) Alberta producer Rick Pascal expresses deep concern that the Canadian Cattlemen's Association chose to send three people to talk about the beef industry to an injury determination hearing filled with politicians. If Canada lost, there would be hell to pay, Pascal said. Canada lost. Stay tuned to this issue. The Genetically Modified Organism issue (Genetically Enhanced,if you prefer, cover story page 20) just won't go away. Just when you thought you had a market for your Roundup Ready and Bt corn the nation's producer groups split on how to deal with the issue of labelling the food products of biotechnology's labours. As an aside, the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, Bob Friesen, admits that the national organization supported voluntary labelling because it "is where the Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors is going... We can't undermine confidence in the food that we produce and the markets that we address. So we supported the initiative." Also in this issue, former CBC farm reporter Brian Slemming writes about an agreement between farmers and ballooners that should keep the high-flying, well-heeled adventurers from trampling the bejeebers out of farmers' fields while showing a little respect. And former Huron County dairyman Andrew McBride loves his new home in New York State. Fewer regulations, lower startup costs, no quota, and a dairy-friendly environment. On the other side of that debate, eastern Ontario dairyman Eric Jaring tells why his family left the United States to find a new home in Canada and hasn't regretted it.
We had hoped to bring you a rebuttal to a story in the Ottawa-based satirical magazine Frank, which caught our eye just as this issue was being readied for press. "Taxpayers milked for millions as farm advisors live high off the hog," reads the headline for a story about alleged financial waste at the Canadian Farm Business Management Council (CFBMC). The article claims, among other things, that 22 CFBMC directors earn $50,000 each for six meetings a year. It suggested executive director Jim Laws "has done his best to p** away the $3 million budget," in "his grand fiefdom." There is also mention of consultants being hired "to the tune of $80,000 for a few weeks of shepherding the wandering 22-member flock through strategic planning sessions." Even though we were long past our editorial deadline we reasoned that this is the kind of story that could sow the seeds for federal bureaucrats to grab more money from agriculture. We called Laws at home at noon on a Saturday, explaining that we had held space to set the record straight. His response: "You've probably got my number at work? It's the weekend." Stay tuned.
ROBERT IRWIN & DON STONEMAN |