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: 708

▶ 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

Guinness World Record attempt to take place in St. Albert on Aug. 22

?ST. ALBERT – If you have ever wanted to witness an attempt at a Guinness World Record, then you will want to be in St. Albert, Ontario on August 22 when an attempt will be made to set a record for the most plow blades pulled simultaneously.

Why Alignment Matters: Domestic Check-Off and the Import Levy

When Canadian beef producers sell cattle, they contribute to the national beef check-off. That investment supports work that benefits the broader Canadian beef industry, including market development, consumer demand, public and stakeholder engagement, and research. When beef or beef cattle are imported into Canada, an import levy is also collected. While the structure is not identical in every detail, the principle behind it is straightforward: beef marketed in Canada should help contribute to the programs that support beef demand in Canada. The national check-off paid by producers and the import levy paid on eligible imports are two parts of a broader investment approach. Together, they help ensure that both domestic beef production and imported beef products are connected to the market development work that strengthens beef’s position with Canadian consumers. For producers, the domestic cattle check-off is collected at the point of sale and includes both national and provincial po

I’ve noticed a lot of wild oat escapes in some of my fields this year; what can I do to prevent it from getting worse next year?

Despite our best efforts, sometimes even the best laid weed control plans go wrong! The first thing to remember is that not all weed escapes are created equal. In some cases, weeds can survive because of application timing issues, challenging weather conditions or late flushes that emerge after spraying. However, when weeds aren’t controlled by herbicide applications, herbicide resistance should also be on your radar. A recent survey in Manitoba found that in fields with uncontrolled wild oats, 100 per cent of populations were resistant to Group 1 products, 82 per cent were resistant to Group 2 products, and 82 per cent were resistant to both Group 1 and 2 herbicides. Those numbers show how important it is to take a closer look at wild oat weed escapes. Identifying why your herbicide failed to control wild oats is the first step toward finding a solution. Start by scouting the field to narrow down the cause. Consider factors such as application timing, weather conditions, late flush

Is fungicide actually effective on Sclerotinia head rot in sunflower?

This is one of the most difficult questions to answer because there are many things to consider. I also don’t want to be outright negative because we do still have options for sclerotinia management in sunflowers. However, management is the operative word. First of all, sclerotinia head rot infections have an interesting pathway. Spores use dead sunflower florets, plus pollen, as the base to infect a sunflower plant. The spores grow into the receptacle, infecting and decaying the entire head after a period of time. Sclerotinia wilt (basal stalk rot) and mid-stalk rot are also infected by the same sclerotinia species, but it will be via the mycelia that grow from the sclerotia bodies in the soil for basal stalk rot. Mid-stalk rot is also infected by ascospores, but this can be earlier in the season than head rot or at the same time. So, management of sclerotinia does not start at flowering. Crop rotation is the most obvious management tool that we are familiar with in sunflowers, but

Using Water More Efficiently in Beef Packing Plants

Packing plants use a time-tested approach to clean their facilities. The first step uses high-pressure hot water to remove fat and meat scraps from equipment, floors and walls. Next, surfaces are cleaned using detergent. Finally, sanitizers are used to further reduce bacterial numbers. Processing companies want to reduce water use as part of their environmental goals and to reduce energy bills. High-pressure water and steam can produce aerosols that capture bacteria and spread them throughout the plant. They can then settle on and cross-contaminate clean surfaces long after the cleaning has been completed, which complicates efforts to effectively clean facilities. Biofilms are another problem. Biofilms are colonies of bacteria surrounded by a protective layer that firmly attaches them to surfaces and shelters the bacteria from hot water, detergents and sanitizers. Biofilms are hard to remove and are commonly found in hard-to-reach places. These researchers investigated potential cro

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service