The Rural Voice, 1986-06, Page 46ODHIC has definite flaws
The almost one -year-old On-
tario Dairy Herd Improvement
Corporation, ODHIC is experienc-
ing growing pains. Combined with
the challenges of joining the
former Record of Performance
(ROP) program, and the Dairy
Herd Improvement (DHI) pro-
gram, the new organization is also
trying to adjust to a new computer
program. All that change brings
some chaos with it.
"We hoped, and were led to
believe, that they would take the
best of both programs and put
them together. But it looks like we
got the worse of both," says
Donald Stevens of Stonetown
Farms Ltd., in St. Marys. Another
St. Marys area dairy farmer, Mur-
ray Grant echoes the same ideas:
"They took the best of both pro-
grams, and we got what was left."
he says.
These are two of the farmers
who were concerned enough to
meet with their local MP and MPP
Dr. Harry Brightwell and Hugh
Edighoffer, respectively. "We met
not as a radical group, but to make
them aware that there are pro-
blems," says Grant who has a
purebred Holstein farm in Perth
County.
Grant believes that the final
responsibility for making the pro-
gram effective is in the hands of
senior staff. "I personally wonder
if Lorne Small, the (ODHIC)
general manager needs changing.
The board of directors is 100 per
cent behind him. They are reluc-
tant to make him take responsibili-
ty." Grant says.
"None of us would say that
what we're doing (in terms of pro-
viding good service) is what we
want to do. We're not satisfied.
We have a long way to go," says
Small when the concerns of these
and other farmers were passed on
to him by The Rural Voice in a re-
cent telephone interview.
Small says that the change in
computer programs was planned
four years in advance. It would
have taken place even if ROP and
DHI had not become one. Other
provinces in Carada will be mov-
ing to the same Agriculture
Canada designed computer pro-
gram and will probably also have
some problems and adjustments.
When asked if ODHIC is having
problems in turnaround time,
Small says, "You want to believe
it! We've had difficulty." He says
the delays affect many producers.
To date, he estimates that most
producers are getting their results
back within 30 days. "It's substan-
titally improved over the previous
month." Their goal is to reduce
turnaround time to 14 days, Small
says.
Grant would 'ike to see milk
samples tested the same day they
are taken. Courier services often
deliver the sample to the lab the
next day, Grant says this is no pro-
blem in the winter but he believes it
could be in the summer. Samples
sent by courier could sit overnight
in a hot warehouse, he says. As a
precaution to ensure sample quali-
ty, a preservative pill is placed in
the sample, but Grant questions
the merits of this practice. He
wonders if the preservative could
affect the test. Perhaps if the tests
could be done the same day the
samples were taken, a farmer
needing immediate somatic cell
count of butterfat information
could get it in two days, he
hypothesizes.
Further, Grant suggests that
perhaps one of the ODHIC testers
could pick up the samples for the
day and drive them directly to the
lab. The system he suggests could
work in some arms and may not
cost any more that the courier, and
be more effective, safe, and quick
at the same time. Small
acknowledges this suggestion as a
good idea that could be con-
sidered.
Along with speed, Grant is con-
cerned about the accuracy of
reports. He says many farmers
received BCA projections that
were erroneous. Projections for
two -year-olds were especially bad.
Mr. Small confirms that this is
true. "We are not the least bit hap-
py with some reports." He at-
tributes the inconsistent projec-
tions to a change in computer pro-
grams. ODHIC switched to a new
program supplied by Agriculture
Canada. "The production curve
was wrong," says Grant.
Recognizing the problem in BCA
projections especially those for
two -year-olds, ODHIC went back
to the proven method of projec-
tions which had been used for 10 to
15 years previous.
Grant is pleased that the proven
method of projections has return-
ed. "Wrong projection could give
us a credibility problem in the ex-
port market," he says. Some pro-
jections were out as much as 30 to
40 points; these are easy to spot,
but some projections incorrect by
15 per cent could be mistakenly ac-
cepted as correct and could lead to
embarrassing situations with
buyers.
He is concerned that incorrect
BCAs or BCA projections could
also interfere with culling practices
for commercial producers. He
notes that breeders and commer-
cial producers do have different
expectations from the reports they
receive from ODHIC, because of
the specific use of data in different
operations. Grant thinks it would
be a good idea to have two dif-
ferent sets of reports, one for
breeders and one for commercial
producers. He says much of the
data, he, as an exporter found very
helpful on the former ROP
reports, is no longer recorded on
the new reports. He would like to
see that changed.
Small acknowledges that the
program is designed to meet the
basic needs of all producers. Ex-
porters do have special needs. For
example, people merchandising
cattle to the U.S. may want their
figures recorded in pounds of fat
and pounds of milk rather than in
Canada's metric measurements.
Likewise, American buyers prefer
pound measurements to BCA, a
measurement they don't necessari-
ly understand, says Small. He says
the board is aware of exporters'
concerns and it hopes to address
that issue within two months. "I
can't make any announcement
about it today." says the general
manager who expects he may be
making such an announcement as
soon as mid July.
44 THE RURAL VOICE