The Rural Voice, 2003-07, Page 57PERTH 1R*
County Pork Producers NEWSLETTER
Increasing regulations require increasing
Any opinions expressed herein may
not necessarily reflect the views of
the Perth County Pork Producers'
Association.
There has been a disturbing trend
occurring over the past few years
within the swine industry. An ever-
increasing number of demands that
have little to do with product quality
have been placed on the industry and
you guessed it, the costs have landed
squarely on the little guy, the
producer. These requirements are a
reflection of a society that demands
increasing accountability from
everyone now including farmers. We
are somewhat unique as we have
little control over the price we
receive for our product and therefore
have little chance of passing the costs
on.
Some of these new demands
include Nutrient Management Plans
and strategies, Canadian Quality
Assurance on-farm food safety
program (CQA), grower pesticide
safety courses, swine medicine
courses and certification. While none
of these are intended to hurt the
farmer, all of them cost time and
increasing money to prepare and keep
track of. Quality Assurance, Grower
Pesticide safety courses and swine
medicine courses are things that don't
really change existing practices, as
we have always done the things we
now are "certified" to do. CQA and
Nutrient Management plans really
create a time-consuming paper trail
for us to "prove" to others that we are
doing what we say we are doing.
There are other things in the
planning and research stages like
animal traceability and new feed
mixing regulations, as well as a really
new one, animal welfare audits. I am
sure there are others that I am
missing as well.
Traceability is an interesting
concept. Through DNA tests on
actual meat products in the store or
for that matter right on the
consumer's dinner plate, it is hoped
that the dam of the pig that produced
the meat will be readily identified.
This would be awesome for our
government (CFIA), as food products
could immediately be traced to their
source. This would be awesome for
the packing industry because now
they can truly make the claim when
selling abroad that they can positively
trace product right to the farm and the
litter it was born into. This sounds
like storybook pork to me.
Unfortunately, along with the
benefits of this process, come the
liability and the cost. Without a
change in producer price, it would
appear that all the benefits of market
and food safety go to the packer and
society and most of the cost will
ultimately be borne by the producer.
What will our farm liability coverage
need to be? Do we need $500 million
coverage? What if some mysterious
salmonella or something else shows
up somewhere and product needs to
be recalled? Do we as producers now
bear the cost? The DNA lab test is
estimated to cost $70 per test and go
down to somewhere in the $5 range
when everyone is testing. There will
be sample collection costs and over
sampling if it's done right as well as
the paper trail. Who collects the
DNA? If it is to be the producer of
the female pig, then the cost will end
up being borne by the user of that
pig, the producer.
Please don't misunderstand what
I'm saying. I am not against these
programs or this type of technology.
As one BSE cow has shown, our
country needs accountability and
traceability. The trouble is that the
costs have a history of falling on the
producer without adequate
compensation. We need to keep our
eyes open on this one.
The costs of these programs are
fair if they are the same for everyone
globally. If they are costs that we as
Canadians or Ontarians bear while
the price of our product is set globally,
we are at a competitive disadvantage.
I had the privilege of travelling in
England and visiting some producers
there three years ago, before foot and
mouth disease hit. The farmers were
Pat Louwagie, President
519-393-6424
The Rural Voice is provided to Perth
County Pork Producers by the PCPPA.
compensation
hurting badly because of a lot of the
same things that are now happening
to us. A common comment was that
the big food retailers made demands
of the farmers such as no stalls and
other costly "welfare" items and
would not buy product that was not
produced according to its wishes. The
British farmers complied with those
demands. Within two years the big
retailers quietly went outside of their
country to buy where they could get
product the cheapest and where the
same regulations did not exist leaving
the farmers high and dry!
It would be nice as an industry to
start keeping track of the collective
costs of all of these programs.
Perhaps it's time they started
showing up on our Ontario Pork
statements as separate items outside
of the price we receive for our pigs.
Perhaps along with the check offs for
grading, research, etc. there should be
premiums for as an example: CQA
+$.25, traceability+$5, CFIA
regulations+$.25 etc. Those items
could be collected directly from those
who require or benefit from them. I
realize it is vastly more complicated
than this, but we need to start
thinking along these lines. When was
the last time you bought a car for its
base price?
If we stay on the path of ever-
increasing regulations and other
product enhancing programs without
some financial compensation or
benefit to the producer we may create
an industry that is no longer
competitive.0
— Submitted by Joe Kolkman
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
Ted Keller (Mitchell) 348-9836
JULY 2003 53