The Rural Voice, 2000-10, Page 57PERTH )11111t
County Pork Producers NEWSLETTER
Jim Van Herk, President
519-595-4863
* The Rural Voice is provided to Perth
County Pork Producers by the PCPPA.
An update on environmental issues
Any opinions expressed herein may
not necessarily reflect the views of the
Perth County Pork Producers'
Association.
The Perth County Pork Producers
Association held their regular
monthly meeting at the Mitchell
Legion on September 6, 2000. Our
main topic for the meeting was the
environmental issue, which is front
and centre at the present time. We
were fortunate to have in attendance
Sam Bradshaw, who is the fieldman
for environmental issues at Ontario
Pork.
The Task Force on Intensive
Operations in Rural Ontario released
its report recently, which summarizes
the information which was gathered
from the 140 presentations made at
hearings held earlier in the year. The
information from the report will be
used by the Ontario Government to
establish new legislation in regards to
farm environmental practices. The
government was encouraging
comments in regard to this report and
the forthcoming legislation. The
deadline for submissions to the report
was September 15, 2000.
We spent a considerable amount of
time at our meeting reviewing Ontario
Pork's response to the government.
The proposed legislation intends to
define categories for livestock
operations according to the number of
livestock units of manure produced on
the farm. Standards would then be
developed for each category,
becoming more stringent as size
increases. This legislation would also
provide some kind of authority to deal
with operations which are in violation
of some aspect of the act. Finally, the
government is looking for input into
the penalties and fines would be
levied in the case of violations.
As we discussed the position
paper, it became apparent to
councillors that this legislation will
have many far-reaching effects on our
industry. Nutrient Management Plans
will almost certainly become
mandatory on all livestock operations.
Several areas of concern were
expressed. We are concerned that
some of the regulations are based on
emotion, rather than sound science
and fact. For example, the soil level of
60 ppm of phosphorus is a figure
which crop advisors agreed in the
1970s, was a level at which they
concluded there was no further
economic benefit to add more
phosphorus fertilizer to the soil. Since
then, crop yields have increased
considerably, technology has
changed, and our knowledge has
increased. We are concerned about
this particular level, of nutrient
because, as it stands now, if fields
have phosphorus at this level, under
current nutrient management
guidelines, no additional manure
could be applied to this field until the
level has dropped. Additional land
may be required by an operation in
order to be meeting the farm's
nutrient management plan. Should not
some of these established figures be
reviewed to ensure that they will not
cause undue hardship to farm
operations if they are to be included in
this legislation?
Another example is the livestock
unit. When first established, animal
units were based on the amount of
nitrogen produced by the animal.
Later, the unit was changed to reflect
the odour potential of the animal, and
the name changed to livestock unit.
For pigs, the number of market hogs
per unit dropped from 15 to 4. We
would challenge the science used in
determining this number. In our
submission to the report, we will be
encouraging the idea that some of
these figures need to be reviewed, and
the proper research applied, so as to
be fair and equitable to all livestock
producers.
As for enforcement of the new
legislation, we would encourage
several levels of enforcing bodies. In
our own county, and several others
across the province, local peer review
committees have been established to
deal with environmental problems or
concerns from local residents. In our
opinion, these committees have been
an effective means to deal with
situations which have arisen locally.
Incidents which involve spills are
automatically dealt with by the
Ministry of the Environment. The new
legislation will set in place new
enforcement powers. These may be
given locally to municipalities or to a
new provincial body. This
Enforcement will appease those who
in the past have criticized the present
laws because they have not been
enforced.
We are concerned that the
government may be moving too fast
on this legislation, and not be
allowing the time needed so as to
properly write this legislation. It will
be a tough job to balance the need to
protect the environment while not
causing undue hardship to livestock
producers. We hope that the
government is not rushing this
legislation through just to show the
public that it is doing something,
especially in the wake of the
Walkerton water crisis. Agriculture
has been tried and found guilty,
without the proper facts being laid on
the table. The facts, and not emotion,
must prevail.0
An update on food
bank program
Since December, 1998, the PCPPA
has been co-ordinating a program
where producers can donate a hog to
local food banks or charities who can
use pork. Julie Natywary had become
the new co-ordinator for this program.
If any Perth pork producers wish to
donate a market hog for this program,
they can contact her at 595-4754 and
she can fill you in on the details. The
cost of butchering the hog is covered
by the food bank, and you will receive
a charitable tax receipt for the value of
the hog.0
— Submitted by Jim Van Herk
PERTH COUNTY PORK PRODUCERS' PORK PRODUCTS
• Smoked Pork Chops • Fresh Pork Chops • Stuffed Loin Chops • Smoked Sausage
• Smoked Cheddar Sausage • Bacon Burgers • Teriyaki Pork Steaks • Vittorio's BBQ Sauce
AVAILABLE FROM:
Steve Hulshof (Kinkora) 348-8167 Walter Bosch (Monkton) 356-9000
Martin van Bakel (Dublin) 345-2666 Ted Keller (Mitchell) 348-9836
OCTOBER 2000 53
1