by SUSAN MANN
Chicken Farmers of Ontario representatives will be using the information gleaned from consultations being held this winter to help shape decisions on how future growth in the industry is distributed to both farmers and processors.
The consultations are a project of Chicken Farmers, the Association of Ontario Chicken Processors and the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission. Chicken Farmers says on its website growth in established and emerging chicken markets “presents a real opportunity for the industry to review existing mechanisms of allocating growth.” The idea is to assess the current system and explore new ways to administer growth to both producers and processors.
Michael Edmonds, Chicken Farmers’ director of communications and government policy, says the plan is to hold 10 meetings for Chicken Farmers of Ontario members, plus additional meetings for others in the industry, such as processors and retailers. There are also two public meetings being held later this month. Sixteen meetings are being held in total. More may be added if they’re needed.
Written submissions are also being accepted at: www.ontariochicken.ca/chickenindustryconsultations.
The farmer meetings began in December 2014 and are just wrapping up now. “We are very pleased with the high level of attendance and participation at those meetings so far,” he says.
Chicken farmer Ted van den Hurk, who farms near Stayner, attended the Orangeville meeting Jan. 6 and agreed there was a good turnout. “The room was packed.”
The high turnout shows there’s a huge interest among farmers in the consultations. “It will determine how the future growth will be distributed to the farmers,” he says. “That is very important to farmers to know how that can happen.”
He declined to give his personal opinions on how future growth should be distributed. “Every comment is recorded and saved as is, so for me to say: ‘This is the way I think it should happen would destroy the whole process.’”
Background documents on the Chicken Farmers’ website say the consultation process will help generate input and feedback on how to allocate growth in a manner to successfully position the Ontario chicken industry for additional future economic growth and success.
In particular, the consultations are focused on:
- Determining how Chicken Farmers of Ontario can help evolve the allocation systems for farmers and processors to improve the flexibility and responsiveness in capitalizing on growth opportunities in the marketplace.
- Coming up with ways to create value by serving the needs of growing and emerging markets.
- Initiating ideas to encourage innovation and new business building ideas.
- Exploring how best to serve the needs of existing markets.
- Identifying the components of a predictable and stable system.
- Exploring how best to encourage quality, efficiency and value creation.
Mike Terpstra, executive director of the Association of Ontario Chicken Processors, declined by email to say what their ideas are on how growth should be distributed. The AOCP “will put its views forward on the distribution of growth through the consultation process,” he says.
Edmonds described the consultations as a “very extensive process. We’re reaching out to as many stakeholder groups and stakeholders as we can to encourage full participation for all those who are interested in the chicken sector in Ontario.”
Once the consultations are done, it will be up to the consultation committee, called Team Ontario, to decide what happens next and when a report will be released, he says. A deadline or time for when any new type of system will be in place hasn’t yet been determined.
John Slot, general manager of the Ontario Independent Poultry Processors, which represents small chicken processors, couldn’t be reached for comment. BF
Comments
They're all completely-insane. I can't tell if they don't know anything else but how to gaze at their own navels, or it they are doing so in order to avoid facing the reality that price is by-far the best way to "serve the needs of existing markets" as well as to "create value".
Ah, yes, but this is supply managment, the last remnant of Soviet-style "command and control" central planning. To these cold-war era, quota-owning dinosaurs, consumers just don't matter - they're considered to be merely "growth" to be raped, pillaged, and "allocated" to the quota-owning victors.
AAAARRRGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Chicken has always been and will continue to be a staple in households.
If beef and pork continue to be overpriced at the retail level,the growth in chicken will continue to be phenomenal.
Looks like CFO is looking input from everyone. Maybe this is the place to get the voices of Small Flock Chicken Producers heard
G Kimble
In response to "Here's the Forum Mr. Black" http://betterfarming.com/comment/15304#comment-15304
Perhaps you're right. I have seen Practical Farmer's call for small flockers participation. Is there a true commitmemnt to listen, or is this a ploy to distract and placate Small Flockers?
Not long ago, OMAFRA admitted they had made a mistake with the draconian regulations that forced the shutdown of many small abattoirs. They were seeking help and ideas to make it better.
I attended the meeting in Sudbury, and heard the live comments of participants from satellite sites. Virtually all attendees were in agreement about the problems with ythe current system, and what should be done. I submitted many pages of suggestions and discussion of the current regulations and the proposed changes.
From the best that I could determine, not one idea or suggestion that was made from Northern Ontario ended up in the regulations.
The government people knew what they wanted to do, but they needed to cover their tracks, and make a politically correct move behind which they could hide their motives and plans.
What makes it different this time?
Neither CFO, AOCP, FPMC, or CFC have admitted their past errors. They think everything is great! Why would they change now?
Agri007 explained how the biggest chicken barns will receive most of the future quota allocations, as the biggest of the big is where the majority of barn space exists.
CFO will use these hearings to shut out the Small Flockers, and use these as the excuse to give the quota to the friends of Big Food.
CFO recently did a review of their Small Flock exemption Regulation without consulting any Small Flockers. I can understand why they didn't want to talk to me, but talk only to their staff and their millionaire friends in AOCP? How do we explain that?
A waste of time. I'm not convinced by CFO's propaganda, smoke, & mirrors.
Glenn Black
Small FLock POultry Farmers of Canada
Its the same with Dairy,if you have 50 members get up to give you their suggestions on Quota allotment or future growth,you probably get 50 different opinions.
..and since Mr. Black seems only interested in scaping the current system his views would be the first to be disguarded.
In the dairy industry, quota and quota policies are the antithesis of growth, both now and in the future.
It's like this - you can believe in dairy quota or you can believe in growth, but it is definitionally impossible, unless you own quota, to believe in both at the same time.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
When CFO purports to be looking for input from everyone, what they really mean is that they only want to hear about how to "re-upholster the deck chairs on the supply management Titanic", rather than any warnings about icebergs.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
it's attitudes like yours that will never get groups working together. CFO has opened public meetings to hear from farmers. Why are you always so negative and close minded to the possibility of change?
G Kimble
Discussing supply management with a quota-owner is like discussing evolution with a fundamentalist preacher - the possibility of change is and always will be zero.
In addition, the chances of farm groups working together on legislative issues that divide them financially is also zero, and has been that way ever since Cain and Abel had differences about the crop and livestock sector.
More to the point, the "bad attitude" in the farm community is entirely on the part of quota-owners who refuse to believe supply management screws consumers and other farmers.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
you are full of assumptions ...what makes you think I am a quota owner
you need to open your mind to the chance that farmers can work together.
It must be difficult to live with such a negative bitter mind.
G Kimble
It's actually a lot of fun to be able to ridicule the inconsistencies, the ironies, the double-standards and the pompousness of the agricultural community, especially when it comes to those who try to preserve legislative entitlements which give some people an absolute advantage over others.
The proposition that, for example, ethanol advocates can work together with livestock producers, is infantile, moronic and asinine - and any farmer who believes this sort of co-operation is possible is dreaming in five shades of technicolour.
In addition, we've been under the boot-heel of supply management's absolute advantage over everybody else for forty years - they don't see the need to work with consumers or other farmers, and never will.
I am simply trying to get farmers to "wake up and smell the coffee" by realizing that the proposition that farmers can work together is a pipe dream conjured by those farmers who don't understand the concept and never will.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
The term "Chronic Victim' comes to mind.I'm not talking about people who have been legitimately victimized.Chronic victims are a pain to others and themselves,they are chronic blamers and complainers.
We have Beef,Dairy,hogs,chicken and sheep farmers living in our neighbourhood and thank goodness none of them are chronic victims!
In my dictionary, "chronic" means "persistent" and/or "long-lasting" - and since supply management has legislatively victimized both consumers and non-supply managed farmers for over 40 years, the above poster simply doesn't know what he/she is talking about.
In addition, the chronic complainers on this site are the miserable, anonymous wretches who support supply management's ability to make long-term victims out of anyone who doesn't own quota.
The statement that non of the poster's neighbours are chronic victims is, by definition, impossible nonsense because some of these people are able to hide behind 200% tariff barriers to be financial bullies and some are not, and this poster would also portray agriculture to be a serendipity any non-supply managed farmer under the age of 40 would staunchly deny.
It's this kind of definitional stupidity on the part of anonymous, supply management supporters on this site which, once again, epitomizes why supply management is not well-liked and why it will not be misssed especially by non-supply managed farmers under the age of 40.
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
Post new comment