Groups plan to take small flock fight to tribunal

© AgMedia Inc.


here we go again......wasting alot of time and money
CFO members own quota ...simple as that .....anyone else raises 300 birds

By owning quota, CFO members effectively own consumers, or at least the right to extort money from consumers. The 300 bird people want to put an end to that extortion - why should they have to waste a lot of time and money persuading anybody that extortion is bad, and that consumer choice, and lower prices, are good? When are we, in agriculture, going to figure out that we're the bad guys in this sordid drama?

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

No,the "300 bird people" just want to bump it up to 2,000 and sell to the same processors that Supply Management people sell to and earn the same money that SM does pre/bird but of course getting around owning quota.l didn't see anything in the articule that would suggest lower chicken prices.

I've been so-long surrounded by the "bad-guys" sanctimoniously trying to protect their own agricultural extortion rackets, that it's hard to tell who wants to get rid of the rackets and who wants to not just join, but also not have to pay to do so. It's little-more than squabbling over how to ignore that only a short drive away for many Ontario consumers, US retail chicken prices make the Canadian chicken industry look like something that fell out of the south end of a north-bound cow.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

I have bought chickens from some small flock farmers on a couple of occasions and I can tell you - I have never paid less for it than for a bird from the supermarket raised under the SM system.

Quite the contrary - it seems to me that I have to pay more for my meal for the privilege not supporting the SM sector...

For any one even thinking that chicken will and should be cheaper bought direct off the farm , those people are dreaming . Only a farmer would sell at less than the real cost of production .

Back in the mid to late 80's my parents raised chickens and sold them . The price back then was $2.95 a lb . Fast forward 25 years and people still want to sell them for less . No one seems to comprehend the real things involved in figuring a COP . Many just figure oh well I have it any way so it did not cost me any thing . That would be the same as some one feeding pigs saying oh well the corn is in the bin anyway so why figure in the cost . Any large chain knows the cost of every thing on their shelf down to the 10th of a cent or lower . This just goes to show how really most farmers are not business people .

the small flock chicken will definately be more expensive then SM product ...because they give it a special description/story or whatever to sell it from their farmgate ..price ranging from $3.50-$5.00 plus per pound
g kimble

Is it because most small flockers do not properly know how to look after their birds and the death loss is too high ? Most will think you just get them and let them run FREE !!!!

Chicken Farmers of Ontario did a small flock assessment to the best practice standards and the regulatory requirements. The report found that "The majority of surveyed SFG [Small Flock Growers] in Ontario adhere to biosecurity practices consistent with industry standard."

I would suggest that SFG success with the more recent biosecurity best practices would tend to indicate that SFG's do even better with the animal husbandry issues.

Therefore I suggest that SFG's are equal to or better than the large commercial chicken factories.

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada

its the "marketing beyond the farm gate" wording that suggest to me they have no chance.

looks like my comment about reopening the issue of free 2000 meat birds was not allowed on this forum. PFO have been told 2 times how the system works. Either purchase quota or raise 300 birds.
going to the tribunal is a waste of time and taxpayers money.

1. Your comment was not posted because you said more than a mouthful and did not put your name on it. 2. PFO and Glenn Black know how the system works, probably more than you do. 3. On the issue of purchasing quota, what did you pay for your last increase? 4. Upon reviewing OMAF's website it would appear to me that SM takes up the bulk of the tribunal's time when it comes to commodities, so yes, SM is a waste of taxpayer's money. Raube Beuerman, Dublin, ON

so now we know who the editor of this forum is!!!
no wonder there are so many negetative postings allowed

g kimble

It would seem that the people who harp about "positive" when it comes to agriculture, are either on the receiving end of legislated largesse, or well-over the age where they actually want to expand their farms, or, more-likely, both. What could ever be positive about a system which allows less than 15,000 quota-owning farmers to make economic slaves out of over 33 million consumers, and turn non-supply managed farmers into second-class farmers in their own communities? What could ever be positive about allowing grain farmers to make second class farmers out of livestock farmers? What could ever be positive about ignoring basic economics when it comes to green energy? The truth of the matter is that primary agriculture is ham-strung by structural dysfunctions promoted by, and staunchly defended by, farmers themselves, and done so out of greed, smugness, and the willing blindness to economic reality, on the part of farmers themselves.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Don't blame Supply Management for the higher Canadian dollar,or higher feed prices,or the declining processor sector,or the increased imports of Pork and Beef and l haven't even got to COOL yet ! l have said this before,SM has been around for almost 50 years and in many of those years the Pork and Beef industries flourished,feed lots were full,new hog barns were everywhere and NO one said a peep about the evils of supply Management or how consumers were being ripped off.What is happening now is about a world economy were every country looks out for themselves first! The NON-Supply management people have just relied on our big brothers to the South to fix all our problems and never given a thought to our own domestic shortcomings.Now we have our Fed's trying desperately to get new trading partners but its a hard sell.

Every economics instructor in every economics class, especially every ag economics class, has warned about the evils of supply management for almost 45 years. We've warned that consumers were getting ripped off, we've warned that the farm community was becoming a have/have-not society, we've warned that supply managed farmers were going to become aristocrats caring about nothing, and nobody, but themselves. We've warned that supply management was nothing more than a regressive food tax paid disproportionately by those who could least afford to pay. We've warned about the ballooning valuations of quota and the damage it causes to everyone except those with quota for sale. We've warned that it's only a matter of time before younger, non-supply managed farmers, simply mutiny against a system which, if not eliminated, is going to make them second-class citizens in their own communities for their entire lives. It doesn't matter that, in your mind, nobody said a peep about the evils of supply management, partly because it's absolutely NOT true, and partly because that was then, and this is now. It doesn't matter that the farm community has been wilfully blind to the evils of supply management for 40 years, being wilfully blind for 40 years doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist - it just means you've been successfully ignoring it for 40 years. You may be old enough, and wilfully blind enough, to not be adversely affected by the supply management evil, but the entire Generation X of non-supply managed farmers isn't going to put up with the double-standards created by supply management for their entire lives the way we baby-boomers have so-stupidly done, and seemingly, and blindly, want to continue doing, even if it means guaranteeing a life of misery, and double-standards, for the entire next generation of farmers.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

your living proof that only in Canada can we blame the farmer down the road for our own shortcomings!

We can, quite-legitimately, blame today's short-sighted, and self-centred, baby-boomer farmers, for creating huge problems for the next generation - they will repay us by scorning us, as well as all the protectionist, and divisive, nonsense we so-strongly believe. We baby boomer farmers have to be both the dumbest, and the greediest, generation of farmers ever, and the next generation of farmers will pay a huge price because of it.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

So, now you are saying the ever expanding BTO's who cashed in the quota to become even bigger BTO's will rue the day when their sons as in next generation of farmers won't be able to be farmers. Give your head a shake and get over it. The perception of the public is that most BTO farmers have new houses new 4X4 Denali vehicles and new equipment shops plus new livestock barns. The reality is, farmer numbers are dropping like a stone and there is nothing to suggest this trend of consolidating bigger and fewer to the point of only a few farms per township or county won't continue to happen.

Unfortunately the same can be said of baby-boomers in general, particularly their love of massive deficit spending to maintain their lifestyles at the expense of their children and grandchildren.

"Don't blame Supply Management "
"Now we have our Fed's trying desperately to get new trading partners but its a hard sell."
This is laughable because it's Supply Management that is the hold up with the trade talks!!

Would you like to see all farmers in Ontario as second class farmers? I don,t believe there is any second class farmers in Ontario period. Consumers buy what they want and could afford and I don,t think anyone lives on dairy , eggs and poultry , do you.

It's fundamentally obvious you are not an under-forty non-supply managed farmer from Huron, Perth, or Oxford County - just because the problem doesn't exist in your mind doesn't mean it doesn't exist. In addition, you seem to be subscribing to the economic fallacy that you can't bring people "up" by taking economic priveleges away from the favoured few. One of the most basic principles of economics is that consumers, and the economy, (and therefore the majority of the farm community) are all better-off when tariff protection is taken away from the protected, and pampered, few. The ending of the Corn Laws in England in the 1840s proved that principle once, and for all, in part because it opened up a market for Canadian exports that just wasn't there before.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

As I said before there is more than just 3 counties in Ontario or Canada. You talk like the world revolves around you or the 3 counties , but surprise it doesn,t. Farming makes up a huge income in Canada but its not the only money maker, some people think its the only thing that keeps Canada from bringing every thing here for free.

Only Canadian farmers would see nothing wrong with allowing fewer than 15,000 quota-owning farmers to turn over 33 million consumers into economic slaves (remember DFO admitting, in late 2010, that Ontario consumers were paying almost 38% more for milk than US consumers), and pit farmers against one another in the process. There is nothing right, nothing fair, and nothing balanced, about a system which does either of those things, yet supply management does both.
In addition, you're still pretending that Generation X (those people in their thirties and early forties) simply doesn't either exist, or matter - yet they do exist, and they do matter. If supply management supporters are going to continue to deny the legitimacy of what the next generation of farmers (and consumers) want, they do so at their own considerable peril. In other words, if supply managed farmers want any sort of quota buyout, they'd better do it now, because Generation X farmers are dead-set against it.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Well I must be in the wrong country when I look at the prices of dairy products in both countries, because I never see 38% difference. Just maybe I need a computer to figure out just what is the difference because I for all I figure never can come up with that number. Well is there no one under 40 in SM farming another point , I do see some in it or well maybe I need glasses and be checking their ID. If non Supply farmers are denying that you can have a steady paycheck like working at a the office through SM farming then they should take a look at some of their milk checks and see the difference .

Thompson should know there are other areas in Huron where not even a SM farmer stands a chance at buying land . And if he thinks that a young guy is even going to stand a chance against some of the bidders/buyers then he is wrong period !

Anonymous comment modified by editor

Just because the problem exist in your mind doesn,t mean it exist in real life now does it. Some people have really big imagination as to the going on in the real world and hate,s it when they get a taste of reality.

That was then, this is now. Who cares about the corny laws in 1840s? The grain market might have opened up with the passage of the corn laws but the movement of grain opened and closed all through history. You are just focused on a small window of time.

You never explained why the corn laws were in place and then why they ended.

Your are just cherry picking the argument.

And just how much of that export corn made it to England let alone made it in any condition that it would be usable ?

Quite a run of comments towards Thompson this week. But hey, posting anonomous empty arguments, non factual stupidity and attacking people is never easy. Raube Beuerman, Dublin, ON

Prove it wrong that many ships did not survive the trip back to Europe and that the goods on board were not damaged goods when they arrived there .

Maybe you pork people need to start shipping twice as much pork half as far . That would help supply and demand !!

Anonymous comment modified by editor

You will always pay more direct from the farm than in the store because, 1- they say its fresh
2- They know what they,re fed
3- The cost of slaughter and preparing it, which costs a lot more than being done in a big plant on a mass scale.

Some may but not always because
1 ) fresh does not always relate to better .
2 ) Not every one knows or even reads what is on the feed tag but I am sure any SM farmers could tell you right down to the miligram . When chickens are free range raised what are they eating ? Dirt , bugs , old treated seed , who knows what !
3 ) The cost of slaughter may not always be figured in along with transportation to and from the plant , time to catch & put in crates , did the farmer pay the guy who owns the trailer he borrowed to transport them get paid for the use of it or was it considered to be free , and what about hydro and labour for the flock . Many do not know what it really takes but a SM farmer could tell you !!

Only if they picked it off the road and you seen it.

There are many ways to determine a "fair price".

Some choose to base it on what competitor's are charging, plus or minus or equal. They assume competitors know what they are doing, or that is the best price that the market will bear; neither of which is necessarily true.

Some take the approach of pricing based on their immediate, out-of-pocket costs. This is similar to those who drive a car and think the cost is limited to the gas consumed. They forget or ignore the oil changes, tires worn out, wear & tear on the vehicle, dropping resale values as a higher km gets recorded on the odometer, depreciation, insurance, etc. For a car, this is the difference between $0.10/km for gasoline alone vs. $0.50/km for the all-in cost; 5 times more than gasoline alone.

Some choose to price based on the next-best alternative. It matters not what the actual cost is when you have a better "mouse trap". For example, a CD has the same cost of production, whether it contains music or software programs.

Some Small Flockers see their eggs and meat production as their way of giving back to their community, just the same as being a volunteer at one of the many community groups.

Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada recognize this "calling" of being a Small Flocker, when we drafted Principle #13:

"Unlike the over-riding priority for maximum efficiency and profit sought by quota-based poultry farming, small flock farming is also about participation in the circle of life, an expression of life and participation in it, a spiritual practice that transcends the acts themselves; part of a higher purpose."

Wikipedia lists a total of 22 different pricing strategies (see ).

In the end, Small Flockers suggest that it isn't all about money.

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." William Bruce Cameron, 1963.

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada

did i just read that??? you got to be kidding me? where is the economic professor on this one?? lol
and this is the basis for your crusade against CFO to enable your "calling" omg that s a good one...

I am not suggesting that small flock farming is a "calling" for all small flock farmers, nor that this is the first and foremost motivation for the majority.

Most small flock farmers grow only for their immediate family. Some grow for their extended family as well. A limited number grow for their friends, neighbours, and their community.
In almost all cases, it would be cheaper & easier to buy their eggs and poultry meats at the store when they go grocery shopping.

But, year after year, they raise poultry. Why do they do this, if the only consideration was money? Is it that they are bored, and need something to keep themselves busy?

Based on our limited research, there is a underlying feeling among a significant number of small flock poultry farmers that it is more than just the $. It was this principle that I tried to capture in the wording presented as Principle #13.

Perhaps this is an excellent time to expand our limited research, to get a bigger and more diverse sampling of the sentiment of small flock farmers from all across Canada.

My questions to all small flock farmers are:

1) Do you raise small flock poultry exclusively for the reasonable expectation of financial gain?

2) Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada has adopted the following as Principle #13:

"Unlike the over-riding priority for maximum efficiency and profit sought by quota-based poultry farming, small flock farming is also about participation in the circle of life, an expression of life and participation in it, a spiritual practice that transcends the acts themselves; part of a higher purpose."

As a small flock poultry farmer, do you understand & support this Principle #13 for yourself, or for other small flock farmers?

Being a preacher , minister or priest is to follow a calling . OMG I can't believe this .

So what you are really saying is that your fight against the CFO and Supply management is for a "limited" number of small flockers to get up to that 2,000 bird limit, of course you would be one of those yourself?
My family always had chickens,it was roasted chicken every Sunday,egg nests in places that would make a Easter Bunny blush.We sold a few eggs and probably sold/gave some chickens to relatives but certainly nothing big and would hesitate to say it was a "calling".2,000 birds in my view is way past the friends,relatives and neighbours stage and am pretty sure that's the thinking in CFO as well.

You seem to question the motives behind the 2,000 bird limit, versus the "generous gift" from CFO for 300 birds per year with their no cost quota exemption.

For me personally, I can raise a maximum of 70 meat birds at one time in my coop. As I am off-grid, I have to restrict my chicken growing from Spring to Fall, as I can neither afford nor deliver the necessary heat & light to grow year round, so we are limited to April to Oct.; 7 months. We believe is a "slow grow" free-range, pastured chicken, for better bird health, and therefore better meat nutrition. That means 12 to 14 week grow cycles per year, so we can get in 2 grow cycles per year. At 75 birds per grow cycle, I'm limited to about 150 birds per year. My wife and I would eat the equivalent of 2 chickens per week, so we need 110 chickens per year just for ourselves. We have 4 kids, 4 grandchildren, sisters, Aunts, Uncles, grandparents who would like some chicken too. We also live in a food dessert, where our neighbours and community would like the food security, food safety, and nutrition from locally grown, sustainable, small flock chicken.

For reasons I hope you will understand and respect, this group of people have decided that they trust us, and would appreciate the opportunity to buy our chickens, rather than being forced to rely on the mega-corporation Supply Management system with known bacterial contamination issues, and dubious chemical & antibiotic feeding techniques.

Others may have similar, or somewhat different reasons for chaffing against the 300 bird limit.

CFO permits a minimum of 14,000 quota units per farm, and with 6.5 grow cycles per year, that's 91,000 chickens per year. There are only 10,000 full-time residents on our island, so that CFO minimum is way over-kill. To make that $1.5 Million investment in quota in a small, remote, Northern Ontario community is financial suicide. It would also force us to accept all of the wrong-headed assumptions about how "factory farmed foul" must be done. We don't want anything to do with these mis-guided methods to grow chicken, nor to eat the end result.

There are others who want and need to be farmers via broiler chicken raising. CFO has admitted that the 300 bird limit was chosen as it is impossible to live on the proceeds of growing just 300 birds. They have used their monopoly powers to ensure they keep their monopoly, violating the rights of small flockers to grow food for themselves and their community.

Why was this expropriation without compensation allowed to be done to Canadians?

Between 33% to over 50% of First Nation families cannot afford the food they need to feed their families. If they had the right to raise chickens to feed their community, perhaps these Third World conditions would be reduced. Instead, our "factory farmed foul" system of SM charges Canadians between 2 to 3 times more for chicken than what is available in the rest of the world.

I agree that a 2,000 bird limit will be beyond what some small flockers would be interested in doing. If the limit is raised from 300 to 2,000 then each of them can make that decision for themselves. Today, they are denied the right of choosing their own destiny.

Freedom is all about being allowed to make your own choices in life, rather than having a bureaucrat at CFO or OMAF or elsewhere dictate to you.

"A man having no freedom cannot be conceived of except as deprived of life."
Leo Tolstoy, "War and Peace"

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada

Its clear that many people here seem to be missing the point groups like the Practical Farmers of Ontario, are only asking for the same rights as many farmers in other parts of Canada already have.
In Sask they raised the limit to 4,000 birds last year because its been so successful for small farmers and they recognize the fact that a small farmer takes on 100% of the marketing, processing, transportation, and promotion and so they have a product that is priced higher then chicken from a mega barn, so small farmers charging a premium are not a competitor to those selling at a much lower price because of their economy of scale, Same is true in BC and Alberta where they can raise 2,000 birds, and Manitoba 1,000 birds, but it should also be noted that from talking with these boards they have no enforcement officers like we do here in Ontario. The system in the rest of Canada see's the value of working together there is absolutely zero support from CFO to work with small farmers, with a minimum start up level of 14,000 units of quota its clear they are running a steam roller and working to keep small farmer out of the system.

SO lets get real small farmers here in Ontario are only asking for the same right as many other farmers in Canada already have and the one big advantage Ontario has is the huge population in comparison to the number of farmers we have, so any fool who thinks small farmer raising 2,000 birds annually is going to over throw the SM system is either a moron or has zero insight into the industry and the numbers or is Un-Godly greedy and self focused....

Sean McGivern

The appeal of Glenn Black of Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada has been filed with Ontario Ministry of Agriculture's Tribunal.

Copies of the 272 page Notice of Appeal can be viewed or downloaded from SFPFC's Blog at

The appeal against CFO (Chicken Farmers of Ontario) and FPMC (Farm Products Marketing Commission) seeks:

1. Recognition of the rights for small flock poultry farmers;

2. Increasing the quota-exempt limit from 300 to 2,000 chickens per year;

3. Open, transparent, and accountable management and reporting of CFO. Supply Management is supposed to balance the best interest of public, producers, and processors. What has been occurring for the last 50 years is anything but balanced.

4. Significant changes to improve the Supply Management system for chicken.

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada

I will come in from a full day of farming anxiously run to my keyboard to see what time these guys are wasting ..Mr Black/Thompson/and McGivern

Stan Holmes

You say you work hard while we waste efforts complaining about SM.

There is no doubt that these issues take a tremendous amount of personal time.

If you are like me, you likely have many personal priorities which can occupy more time than you have available. Who in their right mind takes on a project of this magnitude on behalf of all Canadians, rather than focusing their efforts on their selfish self?

There are million of volunteers throughout Canada who visit and help patients and family members in hospitals and long term care facilities. People fund raise for the Lion's Clubs, Kinsmen, cancer and many other groups. One of the best food banks in Canada is in Sudbury ON, where they have 1.5 paid staff members, and over 100 volunteers who do everything else.

In this case, Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada and many other groups have found the common vision that Supply Management has slowly mutated into a system that is a net detriment to Canada and Canadians.

Rather than saying "Oh well" and going about our selfish personal agendas, we have decided to take a stand, similar to David vs. Goliath. In 1010 BC, most felt David was crazy and would soon pay the ultimate price, taking all of the Israelites with him. Your attitude to us now is no different than the crowd's attitude towards David before his battle against Goliath in Elah Valley. You're in the majority today, just like the crowds in 1010 BC.

There are 12,529 dairy, 2,700 chicken, 1,000 egg, 531 turkey, and 245 hatcheries operation under SM, for a grand total of 17,005 farms. At 34.9 Million Canadians, this means there are very few (0.49% of Canadians) who reap huge benefits from SM, while the majority of Canadians get stuck with the bill for that forced generosity.

Everybody helps in some way to the important causes in and around them, whether it's by funding the cause, hands-on work, cheering from the sidelines, or staying off the playing field so that they don't get in the way.

Unfortunately, there will always be those who accidentally gum up the works, or do so purposefully (eg. thieves who steal money from charities, assassins, spies, mercenaries, etc.).

You can freely choose your role in our fight for freedom and justice in reforming or removing SM.

What role do you choose to play?

As for me and my family, we choose to help ensure the greater good for all Canadians.

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada

Interesting analogy Glenn. The ole David and Goliath, the misfits and underdog analogy of Biblical times.

There are 2 camps of people when it comes to Biblical stories, in my opinion.

The first camp believes the bible is composed of fanciful stories to teach mankind lessons. Do they believe the stories are true? No, but a useful tool to shape society.

The second camp believes in the bible literally, word for word. For these people, the bible is a book of truth. When the first pioneers settled Ontario, to receive a land grant, the settlers swore an oath with one hand on the bible and one hand on their heart. Our production rights rests with those hands on the bible.

So it begs the question, which camp are you in? If you believe the bible is merely a collection of fanciful stories, your analogy is nothing short of grandstanding based on a bizarre imagination.

But if you believe the bible is based on fact and truth, to complete your analogy, you must have a firm belief giants existed. And as you would know, giants were the spawns of fallen angels (Gen. 6:4). They were evil creatures.

But David saw weaknesses in the giant creatures and he took full advantage of their disadvantages.

So, are you saying that giants were real? If they were, then your analogy makes Supply Managed Corporations the spawns of evil?

How are legislated supply managed corporations evil? Supply managed corporations were created by legislation. That means, the our elected representatives created the corporations and gave them powers for the greater good.

Do you think using the 'misfit and underdog' analogy is appropriate?

joann vergeer.......just curious

Joann, thanks for your reply and questions of clarification on my previous posting. You question how I used the metaphor of David & Goliath to explain the building situation between small flock poultry farmers vs. CFO and the "factory farm foul" crowd under SM (see ).

Misfits and underdogs. You seem to be quoting the title from Malcolm Gladwell's book: "David & Goliath: Underdogs Misfits and the Art of Battling Giants" (see ).

Yes, I do recommend this book. For those who are slow getting into a new book, Malcolm did a nice video on TED that explains David & Goliath in a whole new way (see ).

I believe the Bible contains many historical facts, proverbs, allegories, parables, and metaphors. Jesus often quoted passages from the Bible to explain his point or to answer questions, as well as taught using these techniques.

I am not a biblical schollar, but Goliath was only 6' 9" tall; likely different from the "giants" of Genesis. One interpretation of Genesis giants were "fallen angels", but there are other ideas too. Gladwell repeats the hypothesis than Goliath suffered from acromeglia; a run away pituitary gland and excess hormones.

As I have said before, I do not see SM farmers as necessarily evil.

I think SM farmers have been tempted, consumed and co-opted by a dysfunctional system called SM. Likely most of us would have suffered the same or similar fate if the roles had been reversed.

Today, some or all SM farmers are addicted to the power and benefits that flow to them from this dysfunctional system. They need help and understanding, not scorn and judgement, to overcome this SM addiction.

As Jesus said: 1) Rebuke 2) Await reformed behaviour; 3) When the prior behaviour has reformed, forgive.

That seems appropriate in this case with our SM colleagues. Today, we are still at Step 1.

On one hand is the multi-Billion dollar SM industry with 50 years of experience, deep roots in society, thousands of people, and virtually unlimited resources (including prov. and fed. governments) and significant consequences if they lose.

On the other had is a small group of activists struggling to inform and awaken the public, government, and the few enlightened SM individuals who are aware or willing to listen. They have little structure, are newly formed, virtually no resources, but a strong and motivating Mission and Vision.

To me, it seems David & Goliath is very appropriate for the Small Flockers vs. SM situation. I can think of no better metaphor.

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada

I am guessing Mr.Holmes must be a person who would fall into the baby boomer generation, who likely has got the mind set that he worked way harder and then that past generation and that life on the farm should be a monoculture and that when he sells out he has only one thing in mind and that is the biggest price possible for his farm and no generational transfer in mind.
Very A typical of the the sort of fella's who come on here to bash any one who wants to change thing for the better and help the younger generation out.

Sean McGivern

I am a VERY small farm, I raise rabbits, sheep(6 ewes), laying hens and some meat birds. I started because I enjoy animals and wanted to be my own boss. I really would rather see the lower limit and be able to sell them at farmer's market which in my personal opinion is an extension of farmgate. I also can only raise chickens from April to October so even a 1000 would be more than I can raise per year. We aren't a threat to the big guys, do the math. The people I sell to for the most part say free-range has more flavor and they like to know the chickens were raised in a friendlier environment (not in a windowless building with artificial light). I could go on but the point is I enjoy farming ( even getting up to -30 temp. and going out to feed them), all most of us want is to do what we are doing and make a living at it. Kathy Flagler

so after posting all winter about the unfairness of the many meat birds are you raising this year?

Stan Holmes

Post new comment

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
We welcome thoughtful comments and ideas. Comments must be on topic. Cheap shots, unsubstantiated allegations, anonymous attacks or negativity directed against people and organizations will not be published. Comments are modified or deleted at the discretion of the editors. If you wish to be identified by name, which will give your opinion far more weight and provide a far greater chance of being published, leave a telephone number so that identity can be confirmed. The number will not be published.