Top ag story, top ag newsmaker

© AgMedia Inc.

It has been a busy year in Ontario agriculture. So what is the industry’s top story for 2010 and who is its top newsmaker? Have your say

Description (Tag): 

Comments

As the article question is posed I feel the top story was the story never written. Despite all the headlines and even some first time alliances no benchmark directional change has been accomplished! (save and accept in-put cost sky rocketing)

There is still no federal support despite unprecedented financial hardship in multiple sectors like red meat.

Trade issues (domestic and international) for other sectors go unaddressed by the signatories of the governments that are to protect domestic markets (not to be confused with supply management)often traded off for the advanced markets opportunities attained by the agri-food sector.

Urban votes bought with Government download of increased environmental services for with no compensation has not even made lobby headlines.

Betty Jean's plea for re-election was she needed more time but no plan of action was presented.No new leadership presented its self and the same do nothing was re-elected.

Some have said the need for a checklist of accomplishments for not only those that speak for us but also those that are elected by us would be a good thing. That story was not written nor did it come from any of the profound changes in marketing boards or coalitions

The unwritten story is the shareholders of primary agriculture, rural Ont., and family farms should be calling for non confidence votes for most boards, GFO's and government for lack of significant addressable progress rather than a year of flapping around like gas fed ducks.

Are we any better off now than 1 yr ago? other than a feel good party between pork and beef with no real action plan and nothing of late?

As for top news reporting, and a forum to present other views, thanks to BF. The top news maker has to be all those that helped to fo-fill the conspiracy of not being accountable to those they would serve.

OFA's fine example of accountability for it's handling of ON Communications would receive dishonorable mention.

As an Ontario farmer I say thank you to the person who wrote the above reply. You said it with knowledge, all correctly, sentence by sentence. Glad to see others are observing farm politics flaws, and why needed meaningful results never happen.

The character and human nature of Ontario /Canadian farmers, ranges from honourable to greedy. Some farmers know the art of farm politics practised trats, verses half tuth spin .

All Ontario farmers could show anger and mistrust and benefit from the above reply if they would through independent investigate sentence by sentence discover the documentable meanings and results of how each sentence has affected and costed farmers both financial and emotional pain because of government and farm leader actions.

Plain and simple farmers are aging not getting good economic government farm programs and young farmers have little chance to start without off farm income

Farmers are no different than people with drug or liquor disease
if we do know and dont want to help ourself others can not help us.
The officals who make decisions over farmers will continue to give us the same poor results.

The unwritten story is the shareholders of primary agriculture, rural Ont., and
family farms should be calling for non confidence votes

for most boards, GFO's and government for lack of significant addressable progress rather than a year

How do you start a no confidence vote with out being stone walled by rules and parliamentary procedure?

This year can be remembered as the year (and the decade) when agriculture and reality, permanently parted company - it's been a long time coming, but now it's undeniable.

For example, after having the Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) claim, for 40 years, that the ultimate advantage of supply management was retail price equivalency for milk between Canada and the US, to have DFO now turn around and argue that even though Ontario consumers are paying almost 38% more for milk than US consumers, supply management is just as good for them as it was when they were paying nothing more, is completely preposterous - this, if nothing else, is not just the story of the year, and the story of the past decade, but the story of the last half-century.

In addition, if DFO wasn't completely disconnected from reality, grains farms come close by seeming to always want to advance the preposterous proposition that having up to 5 billion bushels of corn disappear annually into ethanol, doesn't harm hog feeders.

If the above two stories aren't considered to be the "story of the year", the fact that we, in agriculture, are definitely proving that we really are not "all in it together", has got to be a close runner-up.

If that isn't enough to do the trick, the obvious fact that agriculture has permanently descended into any number of "towers of Babel" - completely unable, and/or unwilling, to understand the other, should be the story of the year, and the decade.

My observations may not be popular, especially with dairy and corn farmers, but the truth never is popular.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton

How long will we tolerate continual government download. How long will we accept to be used for our skills and equity to facilitate a cheap food policy offsetting an expensive energy policy?

The OSPCA has raided the North Pole farm of Santa with a police escort and charged Santa with 54 violations and impounded his reindeer at exorbitant usury rates for pound fees. Santa began to show visible signs of agitation during the raid so he was lucky he was not tasered a few times.
The North Pole has been declared an ESA for reindeer by the Federal Government. As a result Santa's farm is now considered "natural heritage non-conforming use" and his ability to mortgage the farm for operating capital has been dramatically reduced. As there is no one to sell to other than the government for park purposes Santa's normal practice of borrowing money to provide funding for all those gifts people expect has been dramatically reduced.
Santa indicated he would be compliant with his nutrient management plan and he would switch from reindeer to a magic ski doo, but a consortium of environmental NGOs normally focused on the Greenbelt accompanied by a fellow Mcabb and a Communications company chanting carbon credits threatened a huge anti-Santa Climate Change Campaign because of the fossil fuels and extended carbon foot print so he backed off.
While visiting Toronto during the G20 Santa was caught in a kettle and roughed up by riot police with no name tags at Spidina and Queen His Christmas spirit greatly disillusioned he is in no mood for anything much now.
Some Wikileaks US cables implicate Santa by innuendo claiming the CIA was using a sleigh pulled by reindeer to confuse Taliban leaders somewhere along the boarder between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Vice President Biden also suggests arresting Santa on some secret anti-terrorism law for questionable citizenship and for violating air regs flying low over the White House many years in a row.
The Northern Polar Bear Association NPBA has just completed a study showing it is not greenhouses that are effecting their ice-packs but rather a phenomena called "Gov gas" that seems to emanate in the south from two sources to be found with most politicians and bureaucrats. This Gov Gas is continually pushed north under the guise of northern sovernty.

The sad truth is we do not find this ludicracy insane enough to call it for what is is. Hopefully we will one day soon, write the real story for what it is. It was not written in 2010. Maybe we should make it a 2011 resolution. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

BF has allowed the above satire references to tell farmers flaws of their profession.
When you look through the many past windows of Christmas and Easter you start to see how the quality of life and farm life are changing with selfishness, greed.

We need Time proven common good things achieved and exposure of selfish greed,vise, good ol boyism be it farmers, farm leaders govt or polticans with appropriate follow up, legal or otherwise

What is most disturbing is that these examples of what ever vise are so embeded and normalized,,,, that finding an unaffected neutral entity to referee removing the political or private cancer is near impossible with out some liability

What a December 25 message to have to deliver, but needed.

Will we ever get some lead in our pencil and start standinup for true useful values and results?

All users of corn would of course be better off if they were the only users of corn, however the actual s/d numbers do paint quite a bit different story than the one you choose to paint.

The major expansion of corn usage for ethanol began around 2002.

The average corn production in the US at that point was 9-9.5 billion bushels and ethanol usage consumed about .6 billion bushels net removal of corn after ddgs recovery. This left 8.4-8.9 billion bushels for other uses including feed and exports. The last several years corn production has risen to 12.5-13 billion bushels with a net corn removal for ethanol after ddgs recovery of 3.2 billion bushels leaving 9.3-9.8 billion available for other uses including feed and exports, up about a billion bushels despite far gretaer usage for ethanol.

The situation in Ontario paints a similar picture. Corn production increases have more than made up the net removal of corn for ethanol. This year's production of 305 million bushels, a record to be sure, is up more than 100 million from where it was 8 years ago.

The price of corn may indeed be higher today and ethanol usage can likely be attributed with a certain amount of that increase but the truth is there is more corn available now than there was prior to the increased usage for ethanol.

No one is happy with the negative margins facing livestock producers but the solution probably isn't a return to perpetual negative margins for corn growers either.

Blaming the victims, while always a popular strategy for those who are ahead, does nothing except antagonize the victims, and stiffen their resolve to get even with those who patronize them - and they will.

You are completely ignoring the point, and the question, which all ethanol advocates always ignore - "Does ethanol increase, or decrease, the price of feed corn?"

In addition, you are also completely, and conveniently, ignoring the point which is that the price benefit ethanol provides to corn producers has to be, by first principles of both economics and accounting, exactly offset by the increased costs faced by feed corn users.

You just can't create money out of nowhere, yet that's exactly the completely-self-centred proposition ethanol advocates keep trying to advance. Thanks for your comment, you have more than completely proven my point about the noticeable increase in selfishness at all costs in the farm community.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

The original poster who noted that ethanol expansion started about 2002, triggered some research on my part. In late 2001, supposedly the last pre-ethanol year, I sold corn for $3.32 per bushel - yet, in late 2002, the year ethanol was purported to have "taken-off", I received $3.85 per bushel, while the current price is somewhere close to $5.25 per bushel. (an over 58% increase from 2001 to now)

Ethanol people seem prepared to do anything except admit that corn purchasers (even the proverbial starving child) simply don't care whether 13 billion bushels of corn are produced in North America, or 1 billion bushels, it still takes the same amount of corn to feed either a hog or a starving child, and, therefore, the only important thing to them is what it costs to buy what they need - and by that measure, a close to 60% increase in the price of corn during the ethanol years, means that ethanol is guilty as charged.

Once again I stand by my original posting which is that the "story" of 2010 is the extent to which certain sectors of agriculture are prepared to use both bad economics, and bad accounting, to justify bad public policy which benefits only a small sector of the farm community, while at the same time substantially harming many others.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

So I guess you will be selling your corn to a hog farmer this year for $3.32? The problem with the hog industry is not high price corn it is more of supply demand issue to much supply not enough demand. So what you are saying is that when something like ethanol comes along and puts the demand out for corn we should ignore it and keep going at the same old price? How is Agriculture ever to move forward if everyone thinks backwards like this? I don't hear any dairy farmers complaining about feed cost. Maybe that system has a little good in it after all?

All of BF farming stories and replies has one thing in common
No matter if it is Ontario livestock or grain the problems are never solved after, many decades past and present farmleaders and ministers of agriculture effective solutions never come .
Who farmers turn to for positive action solutions?

Breach of Fiduciary Duty Law & Legal Definition

A fiduciary duty is an obligation to act in the best interest of another party. For instance, a corporation's board member has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders, a trustee has a fiduciary duty to the trust's beneficiaries, and an attorney has a fiduciary duty to a client.

A fiduciary obligation exists whenever the relationship with the client involves a special trust, confidence, and reliance on ithe fiduciary to exercise his discretion or expertise in acting for the client. The fiduciary must knowingly accept that trust and confidence to exercise his expertise and discretion to act on the client's behalf.

When one person does agree to act for another in a fiduciary relationship, the law forbids the fiduciary from acting in any manner adverse or contrary to the interests of the client, or from acting for his own benefit in relation to the subject matter. The client is entitled to the best efforts of the fiduciary on his behalf and the fiduciary must exercise all of the skill, care and diligence at his disposal when acting on behalf of the client. A person acting in a fiduciary capacity is held to a high standard of honesty and full disclosure in regard to the client and must not obtain a personal benefit at the expense of the client

The proliferation of wind turbines and industrial solar developments should have been a top news maker in 2010. It will also be an industry which we will come to regret. The sheer cost of green energy will make Ontario a very expensive place to conduct business. How many more companies are going to be forced to move their businesses elsewhere in the world? Several European countries saw the light this past year and significantly cut how much they are willing/able to pay for green energy. There is no reason why Nanticoke OPG in particular cannot be upgraded to drastically reduce the emissions coming out of the stacks.

The wind turbines will be a blight on our landscape - likely to affect tourism. Also, a well balanced, scientific epidemiological study has yet to be conducted in the province of Ontario. I sure hope Ian Hanna will win his day in court. If he wins, a province-wide moratorium of wind turbine construction will be imposed until such time that it will indeed be determined whether they are safe or not. Dr. Robert McMurtry said, "There's no authoritative guidelines for the siting of wind turbines because there's no good evidence as to when they will be safe or not. This is not an acceptable state of affairs when we're planning to plunge ahead on such a large scale, a tenfold increase in Ontario."

Industrial solar developments are also in the works. Too bad that they are being built on prime ag. land. Yes, I know class 1 and 2 are not allowed, but there is lots of good class 3 land which IS being built on. This also is very expensive way to "make" electricity. Not to mention that the electricity actually has to be transported to main transmission lines once it is generated, prompting the erection of yet more poles and towers, etc.

The issue of stray voltage is a real one. There is a dairy farmer who lives 7 km away from the nearest wind turbine. However, a transmission substation was built across from his farm. Ever since, he has had stray voltage issues which have wreaked havoc on his farm. Financial ruin is around the corner for him. The fear is that many others will also be impacted due to our outdated, antiquated hydro lines.

We were approached by wind turbine companies to allow a lease on our land. No Thanks.
We were offered an "option to buy" lease from an industrial solar developer. No Thanks.

I can understand why many landowners did sign up for leases. Heck at $12,000-$15,000 per year per turbine is very attractive. However, the rest of us who did not want turbines near our homes do not have a choice. They will be built whether we like them or not. How does "one's enjoyment of life" come into play with this?

Again, I believe it is an industry we will come to regret, however, by then it will be too late.

Big yields, big prices, big vacuum in farm leadership, great big communication mess.

We just listened on radio to ...

Comment modified by editors

Listening to radio reports hearing farm leaders say what they have done for the year is most disgusting when you cannot see results and verified

More disgusting is asking for someone to list these farm leader 2010 accomplisments and then Comment modified by editors

News makes money, unearthing facts to help understand and make intelligent decisions is border line trashed

just the same old, same old. And it is getting worse. Many have been identified - but still the question remains, top news story. From the area of Simcoe County is a small regional group of farmers in the Holland Marsh that continue to press a lot of the issues to gain results for them. They talk with consumers, met customers (retailers), work with all government levels and agencies, are very vocal in a fight against bad land usage and poor provincial energy planning and go unrecognized in the ag community but are very well known in the mainstream. The farmers have done radio, television (including a show), advertisements (in movie theatres), and continue to do so much more to get a positive message about about farming, food, and the realities of feeding a growing population. This is a group that doesn't look at commodity grown or raised, instead, working with all types of farmers and bringing their points of view into the public realm. But, they don't use the ag media and that is why many of the farming community don't know of them. They are a good news story for the past year. They fight because no one else wants to do so. Which goes back to many of the points - where is the leadership, and why are they not out in front to win the hearts and minds of consumers (who are voters as well)? Yes, they are small, but they have proven that farmers, from all different sectors, can work together. They have members and their staff person sit on chamber of commerce, boards of trade, and a number of other organizations so that their input isn't lost. They ran candidates that won in the last municipal election. They aren't shy about working with folks, even conservation authority, to better the lot of the farmers in this area.

They have gone about their business without fanfare and accolades, not seeking faint praise from others, but just getting the job done. Isn't that the way the ag community always did their thing instead of pleading for more time, hoping that government jobs will be handed out before the next election? These folks in the Holland Marsh and area have shown it can be done. In 2011, it's time to move a farming agenda forward that works for everyone, so next year, the truth, as Stephen likes to say, will set us all free.

M.D.
Keswick, ON.

Comment modified by editors

the truth, as Stephen likes to say, will set us all free.

Will be a hugh task, when Ontario agriculture politics has many standards of "its who you are" and who and when you support

I'm not so much fond of saying "the truth will make us free", as much as I'm obliged, as an ag economist, to point out which half of the many half-truths being propagated in, and by, primary agriculture, is false, and which half is true.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Unfortunately farmers are not in it all together No body wants to discuss this Hugh problem because so many people are involved as active leaders who would have to admit some degree of failure. To make matters worse there are few who can and will step up to replace present leaders

just the same old, same old. And it is getting worse.

more and more farmers know this true but they have no where to turn to get honest help . So many times when they thought things were changing, Change was short circuited, evaporated, or negated by cost increases.

England's Prince Charles has 149 servants, prince William and Kate want no servants

35000 servants in ontario as farmers support and give a good living to farm organizations and civil servants

Satire

1) Turmoil in the pork industry followed/accompanied by a new marketing structure that is bound to cost already hard-hit producers more.

2)Sharply rising prices paid for land. No matter how you slice it this means higher costs for cash crop farmers.

The top ag story would have to be the economic recession.

Currencies instabilities, interference of investors driving up commodity values as a result of derivative markets, gold price increases, etc. translate into investors trying to hang onto their net worth through tangible assets such as land coupling it with the fact that no sane minded child of a farmer would invest their time in actual farming.

Farm land is increasing in value for investment purposes while the actual number of farmers are dropping dramatically. Domestic farmers will disappear the same way the auto industry is disappearing.

The top ag story is the disappearing younger generation of Ontario farmers and land being used for investment purpose instead of food production.

Is it possible the baby boomer aged farmer of near retirement are saying its my turn to reap years of low profits by selling high priced land, that they dont care the purchaser cant cash flow the cost.They know the younger generation is being screwed but it is them or the tired out babyboomers

Or is it the Canadian agricultural government ministers being used by career ministry management civil servants saying screw the farmer to secure their own $100000.00 yearly pay with perks then receiving entitlement through golden handshake pensions

We just listen to a farm organization weekly commentary, we wont say who it is because the editors will modify the comment, It talks about most of the subject matter on BF stories ,but after listening to the commentary if you had no , normal Ontario agriculture contact from any other source or was isolated no doing farm business for the last 5 years you would believe things were getting better

Something is dramatically wrong.

I wonder whether they would still modify your comment if you had revealed your identity? In other words would criticism of an organization be more acceptable if it was done in a transparent manner?

When you attack a GFO, hiding behind anonymity for example, how do I know whether you are a member of competing farm group simply bashing the competition?

Much as I love the free exchange of ideas that happens here because of anonymity I want to read ideas that shake things up not a bunch of negativity.

Names aren't always a good thing. I can't post here using my name. When speaking publicly I have to represent my organization even if I don't agree with all the fine points of their positions on every issue.

I'm a proud member of the OFA, as well as currently being on the Board of Directors of, and a four-term Past-President of, the Huron County Federation of Agriculture, yet I'm also a well-educated ag economist, and therefore have a professional obligation to obejct to not just fine points of OFA policy, but major points of OFA policy when appropriate - and as regular readers of this site know, I do.

However, the OFA, to its credit, seems to be the only general farm organization able to shoulder much, if any, professional criticism. I don't criticize the OFA very often, yet they don't censure me when I do - nor would they even dare try.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

I don't agree with some of your views or even your manner at times but I have a huge respect for your willingness to think problems through and put your ideas forward. We need more thinkers like you.

Why do you think we don't have more farm leaders (marketing board or GFO directors like you) engaging in public debate?

Happy New Year Steve

Most farm leaders stay relatively-silent because they're afraid of looking like they don't have a sound grasp of the entire scope of the issues - and, unfortunately, for the most part, their fears are well-founded.

Elected public office just doesn't attract the best and the brightest, and that's true not just in agriculture, but everywhere in our society.

As for myself, I couldn't care less if my manner rubs people the wrong way at times - if that's what it takes to get people's attention, and slays sacred cows in the process, so-be-it.

Maybe the story of the year should be the rather-obvious unwillingness of the farm community to emgage in any sort of public debate about the many serious issues facing primary agriculture. For example, while Canadian hog and livestock farmers appear to be completely complacent about being rail-roaded by ethanol, US hog and livestock farmers have banded with their food industry to take the ethanol industry to task, and even possibly to court.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton Ont.

while Canadian hog and livestock farmers appear to be completely complacent about being rail-roaded by ethanol, US hog and livestock farmers have banded with their food industry to take the ethanol industry to task, and even possibly to court.

Depending on the above US actions with results the ethanol livestock problem for Canadian farmers could hit before or at about time the baby boomer farmers start retiring wanting to sell their expense land and could be at the time interest rates spike up. On top of that the UN and WTO could be on Canada about ending supply management. By this time much younger politians and civil servants will be rulng and be disconnected to understand agriculture's farmers value to the economy. Will there have to be debt review forgivness of mortgaged high priced land of recent years?

If this senerio all come together in the wrong sequence it will put the 1960's Canadian dairy farmers fractures ( before supply management) to shame in a much bigger scale.

In 2008 the US financial sector and auto industry was too big to let fail very interesting how agriculture's farmers will fare. Canada Usa past Politics demands cheap food, now what? World Volatility has not ended. This is not negativity but hard cold facts of possibility and there can be winners with discussion taking blinders off.

Guess what Canada politics will do!

The hog and beef farmers should be accustom to being railroaded. The packing plants and food industry have been doing it for years to them. So now its the ethanol industry that's dragging them down? Come on. Top Ag story the death of common sense.

For a leader to inspire and influence his followers, he first needs to gain their trust. Nothing helps gain trust more than showing congruency.

Congruency means having your thoughts, words and actions are all aligned. It means practicing what you preach. Doing so proves a person’s dependability and trustworthiness. A leader who says one thing but does another will find it very hard to gain his followers trust.

You are a very indepedent deep thinker ,but in 2011 year end 363 days from now, how and why will farmers be feeling pleasure or satisfaction over Canadian Ontario farm program legislation regarded as highly honorable or creditable to oneself as proud is defined at Dairy-Do.com to the general economic status of Canadian farmers ? Where will the pride be with any of our 3 farm organizations and GFO if they secure little valued results as past years show?

When does the confidence and pride wain? What is the future view of farm operator structure? Will the Canadian government be willing to finance this decade's retiring generational rollover of farm land and assets and at what price?

There are all sorts of reasons why a person might wish to post anonymously. Anyone who works for a large agribusiness supplier/lender etc is going to very careful about saying anything publically; you can be very sure that no Cargill or Farm Credit employee, as examples, are going to be on here spouting off about anything that could be seen as controversial. Many of us who hold executive positions in publically traded companies are specifically precluded from posting on web chat groups. So I guess we can either accept anonymous contributions or limit ourselves to a much smaller group of potential contributors.

I would suggest that perhaps we ought to consider the content of a post rather than worrying about who it was that did the posting. Frankly I'd rather be judged on what I am saying today than what I might have done in graduate school a generation ago.

The story concept of the Ontario grain RMP was started in 2002 as a good idea.

In 2010 the RMP halo is dimming and crawling like a sick skunk unable to raise it's provocative tail waiting for a political liberal deodorant with conservative support by yearly elected leading wizards.

Satire

Farmers need to have A 2011 Canadian Farmers New Years resolution to find out what the needs of farmers are, quit playing games with politics, reward leaders for excellance but cast out non performance, rule of law with accountability , promoting benchmarks for economic non inflation achievement programs

Farmers need to find and expose the foxes in the farmer's industry chicken house

If Stats Canada data and most the stories in farming show no change for the better for average farmers , how does farm leadership try to keep saying they are with success?

New Years eve is all about change

Material protected by copyright. Post deleted by editors.

Many readers have said there was not a defining story, but rather too much unfinished business. If you are a livestock producer you have to wait for a political decision for a BRMP that has been the focal point of OASC for over a year. Unfortunately, nothing positive to report on that front. The overhaul of CAIS to Agristability/Agrinvest is still not complete. We have still not received our 2008 or 2009 Agriinvest deposit notice. And finally, what is the federal government going to do with all those outstanding ACC loans. Some producers can pay the loans back, but some obviously cannot. Will the federal government collect on 100% of those personal guarantees. As some hog farmers enter farm debt mediation, will the government cut some deals and leave others to struggle with repayment. I think 2010 was actually a setup year for all the positive news that needs to happen in 2011.
Phil Anwender.

In any business venture, as in any aspect of life, the positive news is almost always the news we create ourselves. We just can't rely on anyone else to do it for us - yet farmers continue to act like we're 19th century pioneers, completely dependent on each other, rather than fierce 21st-century competitors.

Moreover, it's hard to expect government to do rational things when, for example, our hog industry seems to be more worried about administrative things like ACC loans, rather than structural things like the sledge-hammer blow of ethanol, plus the fact that we're got to go through COOL to get to any sort of decent-sized, two-shift packing plant.

Based on my experience representing farmers in farm debt mediation, as well as other "life-or-death" situations, AgriStability, ACC loans, AgriInvest, and even BRMP, are all "small potatoes" and do nothing to help the fundamental inconsistency of hog production in Ontario which is high feed costs, and low hog prices, when compared to competing jurisdictions. In other words, even if all of the above programs were in place, and working well, the Ontario pork industry would still continue to be over-a-barrel - and that should scare anyone trying to advise Ontario hog farmers about their long-term viability. It scares me to no end.

With respect, too many, especially in the hog industry, are almost literally "betting the farm" on positive news in 2011, and seem to have not only no "Plan B" if it doesn't come about, but also seem to have no concept of what a "Plan B" even means.

The nub of the issue is that no Canadian government is going to do anything for the hog industry, unless and until, our hog industry takes the ethanol industry to task the way US hog farmers are doing there.

If the Ontario hog industry can do that, and it has to if it expects to survive, while it certainly wasn't the story of 2010, it WILL be the story of 2011.

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

I sure sounds like the "we are all in it together " and farmers feed cities are on it's death bed

if we farmers go to fierce 21st-century competitors most farmers will be disappear amd the Ontario general farm organizations will do what then?

farmers are, what a dogs breakfast

All the work and hope those 19th centry farmers wives have gone down the tube , today rural schools and churches disappearing

So five years ago when corn prices were still low the hog industry was still suffering, now its ethanol that's the problem is it. I'm a corn producer and thanks to ethanol I'm finally seeing decent returns. As much as I think Agriculture of any type is one big family, I think high feed prices are the tip of the problem for hog and beef producers the biggest enemy is and will always be the packing plants and food industry. So instead of being dependent on the corn industry like a "19th century pioneer" become "fierce 21 century competitors" and go after the ones really sticking it to you.

At the outset, you have given some good reasons to show why the story of 2010, is the lengths to which corn producers will go to deny responsibility for both food price increases and the problems facing others in the food chain.

You seem to have not noticed that the common enemy of packing plants, the food industry, and livestock farmers, is ethanol. And, in the US, all three industries have banded together, and have taken your advice to "go after the ones sticking it to you" - and that is ethanol.

What is it, now that food prices are as high as they were several years ago when food riots broke out, about being the entire iceberg for livetsock producers, for packing plants, and for the food industry, that corn farmers just don't understand?

Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON

Its funny food cost keep rising because of ethanol you say but no rise in cattle or hog prices, both have gone up in the grocery store the packing plants are still making big profits but yet beef and hog prices stay as flat as ever. Beef and hog farmers need to take control of their industry instead of others dictating it for them. As much as I hate to say this they should take a few lessons from the Dairy and Feather industry at least they have some control of the prices they receive. As a corn producer I'm not responsible for high food prices I'm simply selling my product to the highest bidder. I like what ethanol has done for my industry and if I had to sell my corn at a price level that the beef and hog industry could afford I would be broke. I say instead of dragging our industry down to your level why not try to raise yours up to compete. I will quote Red Green " We are all in this together".

We as farmers should be ashamed of ourselves and profession allowing this tangled web of inter related failed progarms and screw ups.

Please take the time and read the list of events in the archives of BF, eastern ontario farmers forum, ontario farmer of the last decade that prove ,verify show how little progress has been made in improving in real terms the economics ofOntario farmers. One has to wonder why we farmers have allowed the last 3 Ontario ministers of agriculture to bring what ever and of little value for rural Ontario. Over whelming is the amount and sources of data showing unmistaken failure to act.

We should ask forgivness but hope someone in our farm and GFO leadeship gene pool comes to the conclusion the events of farm press archives show their inefectiveness

The agriculture platform shows so many examples, the difference of definition of MP and farm leader Politician Vs. Statesman

Politician and statesman are two terms that are used to define a political individual, and usually collaborate in their meanings. Many times, these two works can be used as synonyms when describing an individual, but they do have their subtle differences. Both a politician and a statesman are defined as "man who is a leader in local, provincal, national or "a man who is a respected leader in a given field".

Although these two words are termed the same, they do have their differences in their actual meanings. A politician is someone who attempts to gain personal advantages, most likely by scheming or maneuvering. Also, a politician belongs to a political party, and most likely is far more interested in the betterment of their party then that of the nation in whole .

On the other hand, a statesman is a person who, belongs to a political party, but can put their party obligations aside and do what is in the best interest of the country now and vision for later generations. In a long-term perspective, statesmen who put the needs of their country before their personal or party needs will better benefit out nation

Has the quality of character of farmers changed so much or been changed so much by their every day events that we ignore what is happening? If so we deserve what we get.

the biggest news stories of 2010 is solar and ethanol. solar is saving farmers or say [land owners], ethanol is saving farmers or oil, in the end the goverment is real happy that they made some happy voters at the cost of the people who needs it to survive in life. win some lose some.

I just love all the comments from corn growers criticizing the hog industry for their position on ethanol and its' negative impact on our margins. The only thing corn growers have to be thankful for is that their new customer is government subsidized in Canada and the U.S. The governments in both countries have supported one industry at the expense of the livestock industry to make political gain. The reality is that without ethanol tax credits and offsets, corn would not have gained 50% in value in the past few years. As a hog farmer I'll compete and survive, but when I have to compete against government supported industries for my largest single expense, that's unfair.
Phil.

How long do you beat your head against the wall I was a beef farmer I jumped from that sinking ship when mad cow came along and started growing corn. I didn't get paid to quit either like hog farmers did, but I guess that's not government support is it! With the current high price of fuel and demand for ethanol it would survive with out the subsidies. World demand is up for all crops not just corn the population is growing as is production of crops we now grow more corn than ever was needed to fill the ethanol demand.

Post new comment

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Image CAPTCHA
We welcome thoughtful comments and ideas. Comments must be on topic. Cheap shots, unsubstantiated allegations, anonymous attacks or negativity directed against people and organizations will not be published. Comments are modified or deleted at the discretion of the editors. If you wish to be identified by name, which will give your opinion far more weight and provide a far greater chance of being published, leave a telephone number so that identity can be confirmed. The number will not be published.