Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1978-02, Page 23running arouna competing with each other." Mr. Proudfoot has even discontinued the common debeaking program used to halt attacks. "We have no problem with fighting," he says. "They are subdued enough that they don't seem to bother with it." An additional factor is demand for a lower -protein finishing diet. Broilers are normally fed a diet containing about 24 per cent protein for the first 28 days, and then a 19 to 20 per cent protein diet for another 28 to 49 days until they are ready for market. "We have found that with the low -lighting, the finishing diet's protein content can be cut to 15 oo 16 per cent and the birds still perform well," Mr. Proudfoot says. The starter diet is not changed. In terms of actual saving. the cost of the lower protein finishing ration is about $36 a tonne less than the normal ration. With some broiler operations housing thousands of birds. each eating about five pounds of finishing ration before market. that can represent a considerable saving. Another aspect of the system is energy savings. The lowlight system demands less energy than traditional systems that simulate daylight for up to 24 hours a day. Pesticides in time capsules improve efficiency Tiny time capsules developed by drug companies for slow-release cold medica- tions may also have a use in agriculture. Instead of medicine though. the pinhead -sized capsules will contain pestic- ides. "Many pesticides now used break down rapidly once they're applied in the field." explains Ian Williams. a pesticide chemist at Agriculture Canada's Vancouver. B.C., Research Station. "This makes them safer for the environment than earlier chemicals such as DDA and dieldrin, but farmers have to apply the new pesticides more than once during .the growing season to get good insect control. The added cost is borne first by the farmer and later by the consumer who buys the food the farmer produces." But time capsules could prolong the effectiveness of pesticides. Mr. Williams says small droplets of an active compound can be'covered with an inert and protective material. As the protective substance breaks down, the pesticide will be released. In addition to controlling the rate of release. the capsule coatings would make the chemicals safer for farmers to handle. "Encapsulated insecticides are already being used for foliar sprays. The capsules stick to plant leaves where insects eat through them and consume the toxic chemicals," Mr. Williams says. Scientists at the Vancouver station now are studying encapsulation of soil pesticides. "Pesticide release can be by diffusion through the capsule wall or by a break -down in the capsule caused by moisture or especially if capsules have varying wall thicknesses to give different rates of release. "The key now is to develop the best material for the capsule walls. It must break down fast enough to provide adequate protection, but slow enough for the pesticide to remain effective during the whole growing season," Mr. Williams says. Nylon, polyurethane, gelatin and gum acacia are among the materials being studied for pesticide capsules. The Vancouver researcher has had good results using gelatin -gum acacia capsules to apply diazinon. Diazinon is used principally for controlling insects on fruit and vegetable crops. "In one experiment, diazinon was released at a high and steady rate over a six-week period from the capsules. Normal applications were reduced to half their original strength in less than four weeks," Mr. Williams says. "It is too early to predict unqualified success with the capsules, but our results are promising. After further tests we should know whether the method can work in different types of soil where the number of micro-organisms may hasten or retard breakdown of the capsules." The encapsulation technique was origin- ally invented to produce carbonless copy forms. Dye is coated with a protective material and applied to the back of the paper. It is released when pressure is applied by a person writing on the top copy. New explosives regulations in effect Farmers who are now holding or plan to purchase blasting explosives should take note of new federal explosives regulations. As of March 31, 1978, anybody in possession of blasting explosives, blasting caps or detonating cord must have an Explosives Purchase and Possession Permit. The permit is obtained from the vendor at the time of purchase. It is valid for a period of up to 90 days and covers the purchase of up to 75 kg of blasting explosives and detonating cord as well as 100 blasting caps. Larger quantities of explosives must be used within 24 hours of delivery, and safe guarded during loading operations. Any explosives now being stored must be used, destroyed in accordance with recognized safety practices or returned to a vendor before the March 31 deadline. If any help is needed to get rid of existing stocks of explosives, the local police force should be contacted. "Some farmers have had explosives or blasting caps in storage for years in barns and sheds," says Ted des Rivieres, headquarters inspector for the Explosives Branch of the Department of Energy. Mines and Resources. "These explosives are a grave threat to children or anyone not familiar with the use of explosives. "The new explosives regulations are designed to eliminate this danger. "Farmers use explosives for a variety of jobs around the farm," Mr. des Rivieres says. 'They usually purchase them in small amounts and use them for building drainage ditches, removing stumps or large rocks or demolishing old buildings. Often they use only part of their supply and store the rest, sometimes for long periods of time." Under the federal regulations. all explosives must be kept under lock and key and it is illegal to abandon explosives or explosive devices. O.F.A. presents brief to Newman The Ontario Federation of Agriculture recently presented a brief to the Honourable William Newman, Minister of Agriculture and Food. in response to the ministry's Planning for Agriculture - Food Guidelines. Ralph Barrie, the O.F.A.'s First Vice -President pointed out that the brief strongly endorses the Food Guidelines declaration to, "maintain a permanent, secure and economically viable agricultural industry for Ontario". Mr. Barrie added, however, that, "while we generally endorse the guidelines, we must take issue with several aspects." "One of the most important is, that it does not give any clear direction to provincial or federal government agencies to live by these same guidelines." "As well, we are concerned about how it will be implemented. It is questionable whether such important decisions should be left to civil servants or politicians. We recommended a Provincial Land Use Commission composed of both farmers and planners," said Mr. Barrie. "Another problem is the Agricultural Code of Practice. At present, this is far from perfect and it needs revision. It should not be enshrined in municipal by-laws as is now proposed. O.F.A. recommended to Mr. Newman that the Code of Practice should only be used as a guideline by Municipalities in their land use planning activity." Mr. Barrie also pointed out that, "One of the major weaknesses of the Green Paper was its failure to provide positive incentives to redirect urban and industrial development into areas with poorer soils. Without this, the development pressures of the last 20 years will continue on our best farm land." THE RURAL VOICE/FEBRUARY 1978, PG. 23.