The Rural Voice, 1985-09, Page 94PERTH COUNTY PORK PRODUCERS' ASSOC.
Letter sent to Jack Riddell by Perth Pork
Producers' Association:
Dear Mr. Riddell:
The pork producers of Perth County are very
concerned about the financial status of the
Ontario Swine A.I. Association. As you are
aware, a lot of revenue was lost because of con-
taminated shavings resulting in unsellable
semen.
One of the featured speakers at this year's
Ontario Pork Congress was John Reily, the
Director of Britain's Government Swine
Specialists. After touring several local hog
farms and talking to industry people, one of his
comments was that Ontario producers will
have to start using more artificial insemination.
The implication was that we have to be more
concerned about obtaining the best genetic
material available in a manner which entails a
minimum health risk.
Many Perth pork producers believe this is true.
Perth has 140 producers — approximately 10
per cent of the total producers in Perth — who
are members of the OSAIA — 120 of them are
active, which is 10 per cent of the membership
of the association. Our producers purchase 12
to 15 per cent of the total liquid semen produc-
tion of the Al Unit, 10 per cent of total semen
sales if frozen and liquid are combined. As you
can see the Ontario Swine A.I. depends on
Perth for a large percentage of its sales. But
more important, many of our producers de-
pend on the O.S.A.I.A. to provide them with
high quality semen on a regular and cont':,uing
basis. John Reily's comment suggests that as
our pork industry continues to adopt new
technology in its efforts to maintain its com-
petitiveness, A.I. will be even more important
in the future.
Perth County pork producers see government
assistance of the O.S.A.I.A. at this time of
financial crisis as one important way an already
beleaguered agricultural community can be
helped. It will allow producers to continue to
help themselves as well as be an investment in
the future of agriculture in this Province.
Perth County Pork Producers certainly ap-
preciate OMAF's past and present association
but see government centred assistance of the
OSAIA at this time of financial crisis as one
important way an already beleaguered
agricultural community can be helped.
We strongly urge you to continue your support
of the OSAIA Association.
On behalf of the 1,300 pork producers of
Perth, the Directors of the Perth County
Pork Producers' Association.
O.P.P.M.B. Board Meeting: Countervail and
Stabilization
The U.S. countervailing duties and stabiliza-
tion were the most pressing issues when the
OPPMB Directors held their regular meeting in
Toronto, July 29 and 30.
The U.S. decision on countervailing duties,
though bad, was not as bad as it could have
been. While the duty remains on live hogs it
was dropped on pork products. This should
stimulate exports and increase the number of
hogs slaughtered in
Ontario. It should take several weeks before
the market reflects this change. So far the
board estimates that the duty has driven
92 THE RURAL_ VOICE
Canadian prices down by around 52.50 a hun-
dredweight.
The only long term solution to the counter-
vailing problem is free access to U.S. markets.
Now that the dust has settled, the OPPMB will
be pushing the federal government to do
everything it can in this area. On July 18, the
board called a special meeting to decide what
should be done on the stabilization issue. The
board was outraged by the last-minute changes
made in the national tripartite program. Just
before the enabling legislation was passed on
June 28, it was amended to allow provinces to
keep their provincial support programs. These
programs have distorted the market and caused
major problems for the Ontario industry. The
board had lobbied hard to do away with the
provincial programs. The damage, however,
has been done.
The OPPMB is now working with the
western provinces to come up with a tripartite
program for at least part of the country.
Because of the delays in a national tripartite
program, the board has been pushing the pro-
vince since the beginning of the year to set up
an equivalent bipartite program. The board
wants it in place immediately. As well, the
board has asked the new provincial agriculture
minister, Jack Riddell, for additional help
above bipartite. The request is to help cover the
losses caused by countervailing duties and
other downward pressures on the market.
In the next few weeks the board will be con-
tacting the local county pork producers'
associations. The board wants to mobilize pro-
ducers to get government action to help the
hard-pressed Ontario pork industry.
Summary of American farm bill proposals.
compliments of Jim McGuigan.
AMES, IOWA — What would be the conse-
quences of the legislative proposals for the
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1985 now
before the Congress? A partial answer to this
question is given in a report just released by the
Council for Agricultural Science and
Technology.
The report summarizes the expected impacts
of two benchmark sets of policies and provides
a basis for a partial evaluation of a number of
other currently introduced bills.
According to the report, the administration's
food and agricultural program would have the
following projected impacts relative to an ex-
tension of current legislation at 1984-85 pro-
gram levels.
• Net farm income would be about 20 per
cent lower in 1987 and more than 30 per cent
lower in 1990.
• Direct government payments to farmers
would be about the same the first two years,
but would be reduced to zero by 1990.
• Variability in commodity prices and farm
income would be greater as the price floors
provided by loan rates were lowered and
acreage set-aside programs were removed.
• Demand for commercial storage services
would be lower as government storage pro-
grams were eliminated and the overall amount
of stocks were reduced.
• The decline in net farm income would ac-
celerate the trend toward fewer and larger
farms and would increase the share of total in-
come earned by larger farms.
• The decline in land prices would be greater.
Land prices probably would decline under
either program.
• Acreage in production would increase as
acreage set-aside programs were removed, but
less inputs would be used per acre.
• Demand for farm machinery would be
lower because of lower farm incomes.
• The level of processing and marketing ac-
tivities would not be affected appreciably.
• Consumer food expenditures would
decrease by .3 to .4 per cent.
• The economic and nutritional well-being of
low-income consumers would be lower as food
distribution programs (including school lun-
ches) were reduced and food stamp eligiblity
tightened.
• The lower farm incomes would be reflected
in lower economic activity in rural com-
munities.
• The "sodbuster" provision would protect
land not currently tilled. However, neither the
Administration's proposal nor current legisla-
tion has deliberate, broad -ranging soil conser-
vation objectives.
The analysis was made by multi -disciplinary
task force of 31 scientists assembled at the re-
quest of the Joint Economic Committee of the
Congress. Chairing the task force was J. Bruce
Bullock of the University of Missouri's Depart-
ment of Agricultural Economics.
The complete work of the task force is
published as CAST Report No. 104 entitled Ex-
pected Impacts of Agricultural Legislation:
Comparison of the Administration's Proposed
Food and Agriculture Program with an Exten-
sion of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981
as Amended.
Submitted by Don Dietrich
OPPMB
SEMI-ANNUAL MEETING
Thursday, September 12
at the Skyline Hotel, Toronto
Contact local directors
for more information