Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Supply Management for Pigs

Here's a story from CFCO radio in Chatham...

Hog producers who had been hoping for a supply managed system, similar to the dairy and egg boards may be disappointed with a study out of Ridgetown. Researcher Ken McEwan says there are probably too many negatives to let the idea work. Partially that’s because Canadian farmers produce a lot more pork than the nation needs. Overall more than 60 per cent of the hogs, or pork products that originate in Canada are exported. In Ontario the figure is closer to 40 per cent but McEwan says it still means about half the industry would have to be shut down. McEwan says it would also shut a lot of processing and packaging companies that fill export demand. A third problem would be potential retaliation. McEwan says trade restrictions could be contrary to the requirements of Nafta and WTO.

http://farmradio.ca/2009/09/supply-managed-pork-likely-a-non-starter/


Do the challenges really outweigh the benefits? It's time to look harder at this rather than give up because it might be tough. ITS TOUGH NOW!!!

Views: 551

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Roadrunner on September 24, 2009 at 1:43pm
I think it is likely a little too late...time to do it was 40 years ago before the industry was so interconnected through out North America....
Permalink Reply by John Beardsley on September 27, 2009 at 11:09am
ken is assuming you would give up on exports and close the borders. what about setting up a northamerican sm plan. and if us won't join then try a bilateral with mexico. it could also limit pork production for export. you are absolutely right about don't give up. challenge authority. if the status quo ain't working then change it. who doesn't want less work and more money?
Permalink Reply by Wayne Black on September 27, 2009 at 1:55pm
If you merge US and CDN markets to create a SM industry it would create an economic crisis on it's own.
"China is both the world's largest producer and consumer of pork products. In 2008, China produced 46.2 million tons of pork, accounting for 45 percent of total output of world pork production.
Despite China's high self-sufficiency rate in pork production, it still imports a considerable amount of pork each year from the US, the EU and Canada, which are the three top pork exporters to China."
Exports from the US to China in the first six months of 2009 was 56,785 tons of pork (down 70% from 2008). In 2008 the US was a NET exporter of almost 2 million tons of pork. In 1994 they were a net importer.
So not only will CDN producers have to cut back - with a North American SM scheme the US producers will also have to cut back substantially. (mind you the bulk of the imports and export numbers are with Mexico and Canada - China and Russia will still suffer to a mild degree).
Tough industry to be in when productivity gains are exceeding consumption gains.

John Beardsley said:
ken is assuming you would give up on exports and close the borders. what about setting up a northamerican sm plan. and if us won't join then try a bilateral with mexico. it could also limit pork production for export. you are absolutely right about don't give up. challenge authority. if the status quo ain't working then change it. who doesn't want less work and more money?
Permalink Reply by pigsrgr8 on September 28, 2009 at 4:34am
I am glad someone took the time to have a look at this.....the current system is not working for alot of the producers who are being financially destroyed.

I like the idea of having revenue locked in with a cost of production formula.

Sure there are alot of reasons against setting a system like dairy but we need to look for new ways of doing business...the old ways are not sustainable for most Ontario pork producers.
Permalink Reply by John Beardsley on September 29, 2009 at 9:24am
it is never too late to fix something that is broken something that isn't working. all you need is someone with the balls to see it through.

pigsrgr8 said:
I am glad someone took the time to have a look at this.....the current system is not working for alot of the producers who are being financially destroyed.

I like the idea of having revenue locked in with a cost of production formula.

Sure there are alot of reasons against setting a system like dairy but we need to look for new ways of doing business...the old ways are not sustainable for most Ontario pork producers.
Permalink Reply by JoAnne Caughill on October 21, 2009 at 8:38am
Ken's report looked in Supply Management on a Canada-wide basis, which the other systems (Dairy, chicken, etc) eventually ended up being - national. I understand that they did not all start out that way - but were Provincial first. If this is true, Ontario is well-positioned for a Provincial SM system. Any comments???
Permalink Reply by pigsrgr8 on October 22, 2009 at 10:02am
Does anyone have a link to Ken M's report?
Permalink Reply by Andrew Campbell on October 23, 2009 at 3:40am
Try this...

http://www.ontariopork.on.ca/User/Docs/Research/reports/09-23-09_su...

pigsrgr8 said:
Does anyone have a link to Ken M's report?
Permalink Reply by Andrew Campbell on October 28, 2009 at 6:07am
Here is another new report from the George Morris Centre - and their thoughts on SM in beef and pork.

http://www.georgemorris.org/aspx/Public/Utils/DbFileViewerPopup.asp...

pigsrgr8 said:
Does anyone have a link to Ken M's report?
Permalink Reply by Roadrunner on October 29, 2009 at 12:38pm
Here is the GM plan summed up after they say Supply Management won't work - their suggestions will work great....lets do this......LOL


At this very difficult point in time, the Canadian beef and pork segments would be better served
by focusing on more tractable alternatives than supply management. For the reasons outlined
above, supply management currently serves as a distraction to more realistic approaches for
addressing challenges in beef and pork marketing. Proposals that involve licensing of producers
or production capacity appear to stop short of a supply management scheme. However, there is
no marketing-related reason to license if there is no intent to regulate production, and the
apparent reason to regulate production is to influence prices1. The same points that bring into
question the efficacy and practicality of implementing a supply management scheme apply, in a
more general sense, to licensing.
The beef and pork segments need to challenge themselves and pursue marketing alternatives that
leverage Canada’s natural advantages as exporters, and set aside apparently simple (but
practically difficult) solutions like supply management. This will require focus, as alternatives
will be more challenging to envision and develop than a mandated supply management scheme.
This will likely involve different relationships between producers and processors; reckoning with
a structurally stronger currency and lagging processing efficiency, and an assimilation of
Canada’s natural resource endowments, product information system, and regulatory inspection
system advantages. As it stands, the supply management debate fragments the beef and pork
segments and detracts from this focus.
1
Permalink Reply by Joe Dales on November 10, 2009 at 4:05am
Shaun Haney forwarded his audio interview with Kevin Grier from the George Morris Centre.

Here is the link so you can listen to the interview.

http://realagriculture.com/2009/11/09/should-canadian-pork-and-beef...

Here is Shaun's Opinion on the issue:

"In my opinion neither the pork or the beef business in Canada will ever become supply managed for many of the same reasons that Kevin discusses in the interview. Never mind that I don’t think you would ever get the domestic stakeholders to buy in, but the bigger obstacle is getting this sort of massive change past the WTO. Canada will be under growing pressure to absolve its dairy and chicken quotas in the future so adding to the list of supply managed industries is slim at best in today’s environment."
Permalink Reply by pigsrgr8 on November 18, 2009 at 3:30am
So supply management won't work?

What other options are out there...the news is getting worse each day.

This is a north america issue...I saw Big Sky in SK is asking for creditor protection and in the US big players like Coharie Farms and Coastal Plains have filed for bankruptcy....

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

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

Low commodity prices and high input costs a double whammy for Manitoba farmers

Manitoba farmers are facing a perfect storm of low grain prices and soaring fertilizer costs that are threatening profitability for both the current harvest and next year’s crop. Current harvest delivery prices have fallen to $7 per bushel for hard red spring wheat, $13.25 for canola, $11 for soybeans and $4 for oats, representing harvest pricing typically seed at the lows of a pricing cycle. On the cost side, fertilizer costs have climbed significantly from the numbers used in Manitoba Ag’s 2025 crop cost of production guide, which was compiled last November.  Urea has jumped to $850-900 per metric tonne, about 30 per cent higher than the $690 per tonne used in those calculations. Data from Manitoba Ag show a surge in crop production costs in 2022.  Those have stayed elevated and, when combined with current grain prices, the cost pressure is particularly acute.

US wheat finds new markets in Asia

Flour millers in Asia have ramped up imports of U.S. wheat in recent weeks, driven by competitive prices from American suppliers and delays in shipments from the Black Sea. Indonesian importers have finalized deals for around 500,000 tons, while buyers in Bangladesh secured about 250,000 tons and millers in Sri Lanka acquired around 100,000 tons. Millers are taking both U.S. soft white wheat and hard red winter wheat varieties. Apparently, there were some weather issues which delayed cargoes from the Black Sea region, and U.S. prices have been pretty competitive. This is additional demand for U.S. wheat in Asia, complementing purchases by traditional buyers such as Thailand, the Philippines and Taiwan.

Federal, Provincial and Territorial Ministers of Agriculture (FPT) Meetings Highlight Farmer Concerns

Industry leaders and government officials kicked off the FPT meetings at a Manitoba farm. Farmers and representatives from the Canola Council of Canada (CCC), CCGA, and provincial commissions shared their concerns directly with Minister MacDonald and Parliamentary Secretary Kody Blois. A key message was clear: farmers cannot borrow their way through these trade disputes, they were not of their making. Farmers are feeling the damage directly in their pockets. With canola selling at a discount between $60-$100/tonne...on an average 20MMT crop, that translates to estimated losses of $1.2–2.0 billion from lost exports to China. Federal Announcements: Some Support, but Gaps Remain The federal government announced $370 million in biofuel funding and additional trade diversification support. While these measures are a step in the right direction, they fall short of addressing the direct impact on canola farmers and exporters in lost bookings. Concerns remain over the lack of timelines for re

The Last Word (For Now) on Rest Stops During Long-Distance Transport

When the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) began to muse about requiring that cattle be unloaded and provided with a rest stop after 36 hours of transportation, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) and Canada’s beef industry funded a series of research projects led by Karen Schwartzkopf-Genswein’s team at AAFC’s Lethbridge Research Station to determine whether a rest stop would benefit weaned calves. The research began before the regulations were revised, but the regulations were revised before the research could be completed. Three consecutive research trials conducted in 2018, 2019 and 2020 found that providing a rest stop during long haul transportation offered no consistent, measurable benefits for animal welfare. A companion project led by Trevor Alexander at AAFC Lethbridge looked at bacterial populations in the respiratory tract of those same calves. In September 2023, this column described how microbiological testing from the 2018 transportation trial found that rested

Federal Plastics Registry has new compliance requirement

The federal government has created new reporting requirements under its new Federal Plastics Registry. The registry is being phased in over a few years, however phase 1 requires Canadian brand owners to report on plastic packaging placed on the market by September 29, 2025, for the 2024 calendar year.

© 2025   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service