Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

A story on the front page of the Regional Country News today about puts it over the top with regard to burdensome regs. on slaughter and meat processing plants. The ridiculous standards imposed on this highly important segment of the farm business infrastructure are beyond bizarre.

When these small facilities are gone, they usually do not come back. Without them, small enterprises like mine might as well shut the door because in the recent years our only positive cash flow comes from our direct-to-consumer marketing side, small as it is.

After reading the story, I am working on forming a small group of like-minded people who would be able to carry an "impactful" and articulate message to the people in charge of the inspection bureaucracy.

This group would ideally include beef/pork producers who understand the value and importance of the local butcher shop, some from the "buy local" movement, etc. Small enough to be agile and fast, and big enough to offer full representation.

Do you have any suggestions?


Views: 1521

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Count me in for your group. I sell pork/beef and chicken to local people and have worked hard to get my clients. This is overkill and we need to stand up to the rule makers who have no common sense. I have been following the story in the Stratford Beacon-Herald and I believe that the comments about safety of product in small butcher is simply untrue. We would not be returning to these places of business if that where the case. If our government is supporting the buy local and the 100 mile diet this sure defeats the ability of the consumer to do so.
Hi John:

It looks like the smaller processors are being driven out of business by the food safety bureaucracy....

Because the small percentage of the meat trade going through small processors...I would bet it is not important to the government to try and put policies or programs in place to protect these small mostly rural businesses and their farmer suppliers....

They spend lots bailing out the auto business....I think they should be supporting these rural, canadian, companies...
http://www.stratfordbeaconherald.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2435099

From the article linked above, it appears that there is already some action starting on this issue. Perhaps any further energy might be best directed through an organization that already has spoken on the matter.

But I'm open to putting another shoulder to the wheel.
Hi John:

Sorry to hear about all the hardships that you have gone through. For many years I think almost anyone that has had to deal with government over an issue that impacts there business has been left in bewilderment. The government has not been proactive in trying to help but rather has created jobs "red tape" by spreading fear that the food we eat is somehow now unsafe and dangerous without their complete involvement.

Now that our balance sheets have been basically beaten down to zero and the only people profiting off our businesses are the regulators, its definately time for all of agriculture to stand up together and beat this rediculous way of thinking down. Its very hard to have respect for a system that keeps adding more and more unnessary costs without regard for the primary producer. For me it makes it very clear that polititions are all about control and their own destinys and definately are not worth what they get paid.

I apologize for rambling here but I am passionate about the injustices that keep accuring at many levels of government.
I read the Stratford article....the NFU was helping on this.

Do the other farm organizations have a position supporting locally owned and operated meat processing?

I thought I saw an article a few days ago that the Federal govt had a slaughter investment fund that they loaned money to local meat processros for new equipment etc.

In this time of the high Cdn dollar, we need to figure out how to hold our domestic markets...local would make sense to me.
Hi John.

Not sure where you're located but Slow Food Perth County is very concerned about this issue and interested in supporting this cause as we have local abattoirs and farmers whose businesses are at risk - and consumers who stand to lose their local option where meat is concerned.

I invite you to join us for Slow Drinks, a casual conversation amongst those interested in discussing Good, Clean, Fair food. This month's gathering is taking place at Down The Street Restaurant and Bar, 30 Ontario Street, Stratford on April 15th from 8pm - ?

Please visit our site for more details. http://www.slowfoodperthcounty.ca/events.html

Thanks John.
Laurie
Laurie,

Thank you for the invitation. I would enjoy being there and will plan accordingly. Just so happens that I have to cook for myself anyway that evening!

I am in northern Huron County..

John.
Some good news - Feds investing in local meat processing.

Joe

MITCHELL, Ontario - Canada's Economic Action Plan is delivering real results for hog farmers and the meat processing sector in Ontario. Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz and Member of Parliament Gary Schellenberger (Perth-Wellington) announced an investment of nearly $4.5 million to help Great Lakes Specialty Meats of Canada Inc. improve and expand its facility allowing the company to pursue new niche markets.

"Canadian farmers have a great product to sell and there is growing demand for it worldwide," said Minister Ritz. "That is why our Government continues to make key investments to drive innovation that will grow new opportunities for our producers and packers."

This funding will be used by Great Lakes Specialty Meats of Canada Inc. to improve plant capabilities to produce high quality value added products using modern and efficient equipment and technology such as the leading traceability systems for improved food safety. These improvements will position Great Lakes Specialty Meats of Canada Inc. to increase sales of its high quality Canadian pork products and be competitive in the marketplace. This will create more jobs in the Mitchell area and keep hog processing in Southern Ontario.

"By providing resources to allow Great Lakes Specialty Meats of Canada Inc. to fill niche demands, the farmers of Perth-Wellington and surrounding region will benefit from expanded markets," said MP Schellenberger. "Investing in a stronger meat packing and processing sector in Canada benefits the entire value chain."

"We commend the Government of Canada for recognizing the importance of improving processing capabilities in Canada through the Slaughter Improvement Program," said David Schwartz, President of Great Lakes Specialty Meats of Canada Inc. "Improving and expanding the production capabilities at Great Lakes Specialty Meats will help us supply the increasing demand for value added pork products - domestically and internationally - and will ultimately mean more jobs for people in the Mitchell area."

The Government of Canada's $50-million Slaughter Improvement Program, as part of Canada's Economic Action plan, makes federal loans available to support sound business plans aimed at reducing costs, increasing revenues and improving operations of red meat packing and processing operations in Canada. The 2010 Budget provided an additional $10 million for the program.

With more than $20 billion in sales, the red meat industry is Canada's single largest employer in the food industry.

Funding is subject to the project meeting all eligibility requirments and the signing of a contribution agreement.
I would like to learn more about Great Lakes Specialty Meats. Who does this funding benefit (other than GLSM directly)? Small farmers selling locally? Large-scale commodity farmers? Both? Please advise.
Thank you.
Laurie
Laurie, I think the probable response would refer to the "trickle down effect" as has been alluded to in the article. Jobs, (oh, good, now a hog farmer can go work at the slaughter plant in order to further subsidize the production of his/her own hogs) better market opportunities for the pork producers . . .

It seems that any ag-related funds form government are directed at the processing or agribusiness sectors which are, in most cases, really not directly involved in food production.

The intent is, I think, to strengthen farmer's bottom lines through improved market opportunities.

We can all see how effective that approach is.

The "trickle down" is pretty skimpy by the time it gets to the farmer/producer. More of a dust-up, really.

Call me skeptical, but in the end I would be surprised to learn that the processor will pay out one dollar more for the hogs that go through that plant.
Hi Laurie:


I believe this operation is part of Quality Meats and markets under the Legacy Pork brand

www.legacypork.com

Talk to you later,

Joe
Sent Gary Schellenberger email this morning (cc'd Legacy Pork) re: this press release and the $4.5M in funding.

http://terroiriswhereweare.blogspot.com/2010/05/how-do-we-best-supp...

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

2025-2026 Year in Review Showcases Impacts of Beef Producer Investments

What have your investments in the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off accomplished for the industry lately? The Beef Cattle Research Council’s 2025–2026 Year in Review highlights how producer investments and input are advancing research, addressing industry priorities and delivering practical value back to Canada’s beef producers. “The BCRC continues to enhance coordination across the broader beef system, bringing researchers and industry groups together so we can make the best use of limited resources and move solutions and benefits to producers more quickly,” said BCRC Executive Director Tracy Herbert. “The BCRC’s collaborative approach is essential as we address complex challenges and position the Canadian beef industry for long-term success.”   The 2025-2026 BCRC Year in Review provides a broad funding overview by program area and source. In the past fiscal year, the BCRC received on average $0.66 (unaudited) of every $2.50 of the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off collected by provincial

Pre-harvest products and how to use them

Canola growers have three primary reasons for a pre-harvest spray application: Weed control ???????Desiccation Manage uneven crop ??????????????Use scenarios for pre-harvest spray Weed control Pre-harvest can be a good time to manage weeds, especially when straight combining. The act of swathing and curing can also provide weed control. Effective control is challenging on big weeds: apply product at the recommended rate with high water volumes to penetrate the crop canopy and achieve thorough coverage. Note: Set reasonable expectations on preventing seed set. Charles Geddes, weed management scientist with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Lethbridge, Alberta, says: “There is no easy way to tell if weeds will have mature seed, but in my experience, it happens earlier than one might think. I suggest that the latest a weed should be left is until it is flowering. Once it starts to flower, then some of the seed can mature on the plant after it is terminated. From a weed management p

Pre-harvest glyphosate staging tips help produce market-ready crops

As harvest approaches, Keep it Clean is reminding Canadian canola, cereal and pulse growers to follow proper staging practices for pre-harvest glyphosate application to help protect crop marketability and preserve access to domestic and export markets. Applying pre-harvest glyphosate for weed control too early can result in unacceptable product residues in harvested grain. Keep it Clean’s Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Staging Guide provides visual examples to help growers identify when grain moisture content in canola, cereals and pulses is less than 30 per cent – the only stage at which pre-harvest glyphosate may be applied. Where allowed, glyphosate is registered for pre-harvest weed control and is not to be used as a desiccant. Pre-harvest glyphosate may only be applied when grain moisture content is less than 30 per cent in the least mature part of the field, including any areas of regrowth that may produce seed. “Glyphosate is an important tool in the grower’s toolbox for crop manage

Safeguarding Cereals Against Allergens

Maintaining a reputation for clean, safe grain is essential for both domestic and international markets. Shipments contaminated with allergenic grains can lead to costly rejections, recalls and long-term damage to market confidence. Unintentional mingling of allergenic grains with cereals is a concern for export markets and must be actively managed.  Certain crop types can be allergen sources in our export markets. When these crops are unintentionally mixed with cereals, they can pose serious food safety and market access risks.   Common allergen sources in grain exports include:  Mustard   Soy   Buckwheat   Buckwheat is considered highly allergenic, and even very small amounts mixed into wheat, barley or oats can cause severe reactions in some markets. Because of these risks, many export markets apply strict limits for allergenic material in cereal shipments.  How allergens can contaminate grain  Allergen contamination most often occurs through shared equipment and handling system

Canada Launches First Private Forest Owner Survey in Over 20 Years, Farmers Invited to Participate

Canadian farmers who own woodlots or private forests are being asked to participate in the first national survey of private forest owners in more than 20 years.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service