“It seems that with every trade deal our industry is undermined to a greater extent, regardless of the platitudes of support expressed by our government of the day,” said Bill Uruski, chairman of Manitoba Turkey Producers. “It’s time for the federal government to produce the details of its commitment.”

Speaking to producers during the organization’s annual general meeting in Winnipeg earlier this month, Uruski said the revived Trans-Pacific Partnership, now known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership, has the potential to critically undermine turkey production in Canada.

Eleven countries continued negotiating the multi-lateral trade deal after the U.S. pulled out last year, agreeing to a revised trade agreement in principle this January. The agreement is scheduled to officially be signed in early March 2018.

According to Turkey Farmers of Canada (TFC), this deal will increase import access to the Canadian turkey market by 71 per cent, representing $270 million in lost farm cash receipts over the next 19 years — a farm output loss of at least 4.5 per cent.

“We believe this deal will harm the turkey sector,” said TFC chairman Mark Davies. “There was no need to maintain the market access levels of the original TPP, which were made in response to demands by the U.S., which is no longer part of the agreement.”

Davies is also concerned that this revived trade deal has not been accompanied by the promised market loss compensation that came with the original Trans-Pacific Partnership, announced by the previous federal government some years ago.

The current Liberal government dedicated only one sentence in its recent federal budget to the issue, Davies said. It indicated that the federal government will investigate the negative impacts of greater market access, but doesn’t mention compensation.

“So that’s about as much commitment as we’ve heard and we’re quite disappointed in that, but again we continue to persist on that issue,” he said. “Every time we have a negotiation, we seem to get used as political capital and that is something we’ve raised with the ministers we’ve met with and shown our concern.”

Concerns over the future of supply management in Canada have only been compounded by the ongoing renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the news that Canada has just embarked on a fresh round of trade talks in South America.

“NAFTA, the WTO and the CPTTP have all intensified pressures on supply management to a degree I’ve never seen in my two decades here. It will be essential to devote all available resources to ensuring the role, the benefits and the facts are understood by our key stakeholders,” Davies said. “We all have to keep up the pressure this year to make sure that the government is fully aware that any market access concessions will hurt both our sector and consumers.”

While Canadian trade negotiators have made it clear that the wholesale dismantling of supply management requested by American negotiators is a “non-starter” when it comes to NAFTA, that supply-managed commodities are continually seen as bargaining chips is troubling, said Davies.

Uruski agreed.

“The federal government speaks about the need for Canada to have a domestic food security policy — there is no better food security policy than having your milk, eggs and poultry produced on family farms right here,” he said. “Is there a national commitment to a domestic food security policy, or is it just lip service?”

That said, both Davies and Uruski add that they realize other commodities will see benefits as a result of these trade deals and note they are not opposed to them in principle.

“What we want is a firm commitment from the federal government,” Davies said. “The original TPP agreement came with commitments to mitigation and remedies for border irritants… we look forward to working with the government to follow through on these commitments and work on solutions tailored to our sector.”

The post Turkey producers still waiting on promised federal compensation appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

While the stock of surplus birds was lower this January than last, several factors continue to hamper the flow of turkey through processors and into the market.

Bill Uruski, chairman of the Manitoba Turkey Producers, told the organization’s members that the results could mean increased levies during the organization’s annual general meeting in Winnipeg last week.

“Given our current storage stocks of turkey in Canada, our national directors have had to cut production. We as a provincial board are having a difficult time in reconciling our lower revenues with our current levies, as they relate to our ongoing commitments of serving you, our producers,” Uruski said. “We are continuing to examine options to operate with less, but there may come a time where we will have to bite the bullet and increase our levies to remain financially solvent to meet our legislated responsibilities.”

He went on to say that an increase isn’t on the table at this juncture, but that it could be in the future. Ideally, Uruski would like to see changes made to the national allocation system that would reduce storage stocks and hold processors accountable when they request more turkey than they utilize.

Ten years ago, Turkey Farmers of Canada (TFC) brought in a duel allocation system that differentiated between whole birds and birds destined for further processing. Uruski said concerns that processors may underutilize their allocations were raised at the time, but that the decision was made to rely on an honour system rather than an enforcement system at that time.

“Having processors dictate the supply required the opportunity to overshoot it without any consequences, we are now tasked with finding a way to make this further processing component of the allocation system actually function with responsibilities and repercussions on processors who have not fulfilled their obligations after receiving the allocation,” he said. “Not having those measures in place has led to the current buildup of storage stocks and price pressure on all segments of our industry.”

TFC chairman Mark Davies said that a review of the current allocation system began about a year ago and changes will be made in the near future. He added that most allocation policies have a lifespan of six or seven years, so with a decade under its belt the current system has seen many market changes take place that need to be addressed.

“Right now, everything is on the table,” said Davies, adding the board is looking at how to best build on the elements of the system that are working well. Ideally the new allocation system will strengthen the current honour-based system and add teeth to the agreement, he said.

“I think this is something we have always sort of dabbled with around the edges, to put some parameters around the requests that (processors) make when they are looking for new product, so basically, if you are requesting a certain amount of product, that you be responsible for it and that it doesn’t affect the market moving forward,” said Davies.

As of January 1, Canadian turkey stocks were at 21.1 million kilograms, down from 24.8 million kilograms the year before. An improvement, but not one large enough to prevent a reduction in quota allocations, Davies said, something that required some tough decisions and a lot of co-operation from provincial organizations.

“Our quota allocations for 2018 set last November are a good example of this — of all of us setting aside partisan desire and doing what must be done. As difficult as it is, we face the facts that market conditions were difficult. The disappearance of whole birds at Thanksgiving was disappointing and as a result of that the stocks remain high,” he said. “No one liked the idea of reducing quota, but we recognized that was the action that had to be taken.”

TFC set the preliminary 2018-19 whole bird allocation at 63 million kilograms, which was down three million kilograms from the previous 2017-18 allocation. However, further processing allocations remain unchanged at 83.9 million kilograms.

The post New turkey market mechanisms needed appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Speaking to producers at CropConnect in Winnipeg last week, market analyst Randy Strychar said that changing consumption patterns at home and abroad are presenting new opportunities for Prairie oat growers, particularly those in Manitoba where growing conditions are conducive to high levels of beta glucan.

“The biggest problem we’re having right now getting oats into the Chinese market is that the protocol is not in place for us to put oats in there,” said Strychar. “We can put seed oats in there, but we can’t put oats for human consumption in.”

Concerted efforts over the last 24 months have put Canadian oats on the Chinese trade agenda.

“(Growers) did send a delegation over there this summer and it is now on the agenda, (but) at what pace the Chinese move on that I don’t know,” he said, adding that Australia is currently the largest exporter of PRC-bound oats.

But with Chinese oat imports predicted to grow by as much as 35 per cent over the next five years, the owner of the Vancouver-based oatinformation.com said Canada can still take advantage of the growing market if access is secured.

“The middle class is emerging as a huge buyer of… western-based products, specifically breakfast cereals and snack bars,” Strychar said. “The diets are changing for the younger generation — the traditional Chinese breakfast is being replaced as the economy changes.”

However, changes in North American breakfast preferences are also impacting demand. As consumers seek healthy breakfast foods with less sugar content, oats are becoming a favoured ingredient, he said.

“Breakfast cereals and snack bars have a fairly high concentration of oats and those two industries are showing solid growth,” he said. “There are a lot of positives for the oat industry moving forward and most of it has to do with the breakfast cereals and the snack bars.”

Doyle Penner of the Manitoba Oat Growers Association agrees that there is room for growth in the industry.

“I absolutely do believe there is room to grow in the Red River Valley, we are a prime growing area, we are good with our beta glucan counts and there is a great opportunity,” he said. “And we’re close to the border, so as far as our movement south, we’re in a prime position for it… the opportunity for growth is definitely there.”

According to Statistics Canada, total Canadian oat acres rose 13.6 per cent from 2016 to 3.2 million acres in 2017. In Saskatchewan, farmers planted 1.7 million acres, an increase of more than 20 per cent, while Alberta’s acreage decreased about 4.2 per cent to 690,000 acres in 2017.

Manitoba saw one of its biggest oat crops in 2017. Manitoba Agricultural Services Corporation estimated there were 461,804 insured oat acres in the province, an increase of 32 per cent from the previous year.

Gone are the days when oats were seen as an also-ran crop.

“It’s pretty prominent now,” said Penner. “With the way we have to look at our inputs and everything… it’s a calculated thing that we’re going into when we plan our acres and ultimately, we’re basing it on the price that we’re going to be selling it for and we’re all trying to make a living at it.”

However, Strychar noted it’s not increasing acres driving oat production in Manitoba — it’s yield.

“They are not just throwing it in the ground, people historically viewed oats as one of those six major crops that they didn’t pay a lot of attention to, that’s not the case,” he said. “More and more farmers are paying more money to get a better crop.”

But just because demand is rising, it doesn’t mean that prices are rising with the same gusto.

“It could be 24 months where we struggle with averaging $3 (cash price), maybe $2.75, $3.25 in Manitoba,” he said. “If you’re looking for $3.50 in Manitoba, I don’t think you’re going to see it… we’re going to have a struggle for about 24 months.”

The post Oat prices to stay put over next 24 months appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Speaking to producers at CropConnect in Winnipeg last week, noted conservative thinker David Frum gave his thoughts on the fate of the trade deal, which most consider to be essential to agriculture.

A senior editor at The Atlantic, Frum said that what is “ominous and alarming for people who have to do business with the United States is that while a lot of the basic architecture is staying the same, the meaning and content of that architecture is changing.”

While generations of past presidents have pushed for freer trade and more open markets, Frum said President Trump is a consistent protectionist who came to office with little understanding of how the NAFTA actually functioned.

“He understood that it involved Mexico somehow, but he didn’t realize that the N.A. stood for North America and that Canada was also a part of it, and what he also didn’t realize of course, is how integral to the architecture of the economy the continent NAFTA has become,” said Frum, who once worked as a speech writer for President George W. Bush. “What Trump has bumped into since being elected is that his NAFTA views are not shared within the American political system or by his party.”

Former prime minister Brian Mulroney appeared before the U.S. congress last month to defend the trade deal, which was negotiated by his government and signed in 1992. It came into effect two years later in 1994. He told Manitoba producers that “success in this renegotiation is not preordained” and described the current situation in U.S. politics as a “different kettle of fish” than when he sat down to begin work on NAFTA a quarter-century ago.

“We will need to be extremely vigilant in safeguarding access to our most vital market and in resisting unilateral demands,” he said. “When fear and anger fuel public debate, history teaches us that protectionist impulses can easily become a convenient handmaid. History also demonstrates, in Europe, North America and throughout Asia, that the best antidote to protectionism is more liberalized trade, not less.”

Ideally, all sides of a trade negotiation leave the table feeling they have given a little to gain a lot, but both Frum and Mulroney said the current White House attitude towards trade is that there must be a winner and loser in each deal — a mindset that is hampering negotiations.

Trump has insisted that NAFTA has been a bad deal for the United States, but Mulroney noted that the U.S. enjoyed a US$7.7-billion trade surplus with Canada in 2017. Frum added that more Americans depend on NAFTA for employment in the three U.S. states key to electing Trump than represented by his margin of victory.

Watching warily

For Manitoba farmers and commodity groups, the situation is an unsettling one, but not entirely unfamiliar.

“Certainly farmers are keeping an eye on the talks,” said Mark McDonald, who farms near Virden. “But I think as farmers you’re a bit immune to day-to-day fluctuations and events. We’ve all been through trade negotiations and NAFTA talks before, if we have any grey hairs, and it’s just part of the things we have to deal with as farmers every day.”

With 90 per cent of Manitoba’s oat crop heading south of the border, the Prairie Oat Growers Association said its members definitely have the trilateral trade deal on their minds.

“NAFTA is key,” said executive director Shawna Mathieson, adding that with the trade deal once again on the table, discussions among producers this year have a different tenor.

“In the past it’s always been, maybe I shouldn’t say a given, but basically a given that the U.S. has always been our biggest export market… and that’s always been the expectation, but we are looking at other markets.”

Francois Labelle, executive director of the Manitoba Pulse and Soybean Growers, said that ongoing negotiations have caused a genuine concern among some of the organization’s members.

“Remembering when NAFTA first came in, probably the biggest thing it did for the Canadian pulse industry at that time was allow beans to go to Mexico at a reduced, and eventually zero, duty,” he said. “The dynamic of that market has changed now, with beans coming from China and other locations… but it still is a factor.”

Strange times

While many producers have lived through past trade talks, the wild card aspects of current U.S. politics is a stressor not seen before.

“It would be nice to get this one over with, but I’ve got a funny feeling that this will be a long, slow, protracted process,” he said.

But there are some positive points to be made about the negotiation process.

Frum noted that while political chaos and scandal south of the border is alarming in many ways, it also makes it unlikely that the Trump administration will be able to effectively implement the platform it was elected on.

“There is a kind of chaos and that is reassuring, in that chaos isn’t very productive. So when Donald Trump says, ‘I’m going to make things happen in the world of trade,’ he has trouble making things happen because he doesn’t have the instruments and tools of power,” Frum said, adding that Canada’s biggest advantage in renegotiating NAFTA is the deep relationship it has with America, its politicians and its industry.

The current Liberal government’s strategy of currying favour and buying more time, is a prudent one, said Frum.

Mulroney agreed. He noted that while the introduction of NAFTA so many years ago was a politically fraught battle fought in ridings across the country, the current renegotiation is a non-partisan issue, adding that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau invited him to work with his government as soon as renegotiation was on the table.

“It’s not a role that I sought, but I was asked by the prime minister if I would do it and of course,” he said. “I’ve learned there is no Conservative way to negotiate a free trade agreement and there is no Liberal way, there is only a Canadian way.”

The post Non-partisan approach needed to trade appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Speaking at Keystone Agricultural Producers annual general meeting in Winnipeg last week, Manitoba’s Minister of Agriculture Ralph Eichler, said the pork industry will be the biggest winner under the new deal, which was rechristened as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership during talks in Japan earlier this year.

• Read more: TPP seen critical for beef sales growth in Japan
• Read more: Chicken, dairy farmers rip TPP concessions

Beef and honey will also see substantial benefits, according to the minister.

“It’s an opportunity… to get in on the ground floor if you will. We’ve done a number of trade deals over the past number of years, but certainly this will open the door for more opportunities,” said Eichler, noting that Japan in particular is a significant importer of Canadian beef, as well as pork. Vietnam is also a big importer of pork products.

When U.S. President Donald Trump pulled out of the original Trans-Pacific Partnership last January, many believed the deal was dead. However, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam and Canada ultimately forged on ahead.

“I’m not overly concerned that the United States is not in on it,” Eichler said. “I see it as an opportunity for Canada to really focus on getting more deals done before they finally do decide to come in, if they do decide to come in.”

Dermot Hayes, an American economist and consultant to the U.S. National Pork Producers Council said it’s likely that the U.S. will likely remain out in the cold even after the “craziness” in Washington subsides.

“I think the U.S. will recognize, eventually, that not participating in these agreements is against its long-run, vested interests, but that’s not the case right now, right now we’re measuring benefits of trade based on a simple number called the visible trade deficit and eventually we need to realize that Canada will have preferential access, the European Union will have preferential access,” said Hayes. “I don’t think the other countries will let us back in, all 11 countries would have to vote yes and if you’re in Canadian agriculture and you have that preferential access to Japan, do you want the Americans in that market? I don’t think it happens.”

Continuing economic growth in China will present other trade opportunities for the U.S., but Hayes believes the U.S. has missed substantial opportunity by not participating in the reimagined Trans-Pacific Partnership.

“At some point the U.S. has to come to its senses,” he said — a process he expects to take “three more years” to complete.

The post U.S. won’t recapture TPP opportunity in coming years appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Last summer, the province’s Progressive Conservative government announced it would close 23 emergency medical service (or EMS) stations. Now, producers are calling on the government to provide more information about how emergency services will be provided once those stations are shuttered.

“That’s a great concern for farmers and rural communities,” said Simon Ellis, who represents District 7. He put forward a resolution on the issue at Keystone Agricultural Producers’ annual general meeting in Winnipeg last week.

“Response times are critical to people who have been injured and we don’t want to see farmers losing their lives or their infrastructure, if it’s in the case of a fire,” he said. “We want to make sure they know how to get to us and that they can get to us in a timely fashion.”

Stations slated for closure include those in Bissett, Reynolds, Riverton, Lundar, Pinawa, Manitou, Swan Lake, Elie, Cartwright, Treherne, Ethelbert, Reston, Rossburn, Balder, Birtle, Oak Lake, McCreary, Hartney, Hamiota, Grandview, Elkhorn, Wawanesa and Boissevain. The province has also announced that new EMS stations will be built in Alonsa, Eriksdale, Manigotagan, Miniota and Cowan. Existing stations in Glenboro and Virden will be upgraded to regional hubs.

• Read more: Municipalities not convinced on rural EMS changes

A total of 29 new paramedic positions will also be created under the new model, although some will be filled by moving existing staff from on-call and call-back shifts to full-time positions, a move the provincial government says will save money.

“It’s quite concerning,” said Dan Mazier, KAP president. The Justice-area farmer said it’s hard to fathom how greater distances between EMS stations could result in shorter wait times for those facing an emergency.

He also questions the process used to determine which stations would be closed, noting there was little, if any, consultation with rural municipalities or other rural organizations about the issue prior to the government’s announcement last summer.

Recommendations to close the 23 stations came from the EMS Review Task Force, which was created by the previous provincial government in 2013. The task force included representatives from the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, Red River College, the paramedics’ union, an air ambulance service provider, a rural EMS manager and provincial bureaucrats. However, organizations representing rural municipalities and rural health authorities were not part of the task force.

“It’s a lot more top-down than I thought it was going to be and that’s always concerning when you start to see governments doing that, especially in our health-care system,” Mazier said.

Staff not facilities

Manitoba’s Minister of Agriculture Ralph Eichler, spoke to producers at the meeting and noted the government has been in discussions with STARS Air Ambulance regarding the changes to rural service, but directed further questions to Health Minister Kelvin Goertzen.

For his part, the health minister emphasized that the new model is not about brick-and-mortar ambulance garages.

“It’s about investing in more full-time paramedics working in rural Manitoba so that we are able to match resources with call volumes and provide Manitobans with a reliable and responsive service when they need it,” Goertzen said. “While we understand that change is difficult, particularly in rural communities, we are certain that Manitobans will experience either the same or better levels of service from highly trained and professional paramedics who will be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.”

But EMS station closures were not the only health-care concern brought forward at the Keystone meeting. Even under the existing EMS model, many producers say response times are hampered by a patchwork system used to direct ambulances and fire apparatus.

A second resolution moved by Ellis proposed that Keystone Agricultural Producers “lobby the Manitoba government to investigate the challenges associated with identifying rural locations and access routes,” and “develop a solution that will standardize and simplify the ability of emergency responders to identify these locations and the best routes for accessing them.”

Several producers spoke to the issue.

“I hope that everybody can support this,” said Don Dewar, who represents District 11, recalling the recent death of a neighbour who had suffered a heart attack.

“The ambulance got lost and he died,” said Dewar. “Now whether he would have survived or not is another question, but the ambulance took three-quarters of an hour to find him six miles from Dauphin.”

• Read more: New STARS app calls for help 24-7

He said that 911 calls in his area are routed through Brandon and that call takers there are unfamiliar with the area being serviced.

“I’m quicker phoning the local fire department and telling it where I am,” he said. “We really need to get this sorted out in this province.”

Unreliable

How properties are identified varies from municipality to municipality and producers at the meeting expressed uncertainty as to whether they should give emergency dispatchers the number assigned to the property, a GPS location or landmark-based directions.

Keith Castonguay, director of the Manitoba Farm Safety Program, said he has spoken to the Office of the Fire Commissioner and representatives from the RCMP about the issues around effectively locating emergency callers. He said that better training and standardization are key to improving response times.

“It became very clear it is a fractured system and there are multiple layers involved with it,” he said.

Les Ferris of District 2 added that a big part of the problem with giving out the so-called 911 number issued to a property is that signage can be inconsistent and difficult to spot. “Part of the problem is the standardization of the road markers, some municipalities jumped before there was a standard and those numbers are the blue ones that a lot of people see; of course the green ones are standard and a lot easier to identify and read,” he said.

Mazier noted that poor cellular service also continues to hamper emergency services and communication in rural areas of the province.

“We all understand that things gotta change, that things are going to be modernized, we see that and do that in agriculture quite a bit and certainly in health services. But there’s got to be better tools to stop people from slipping through the cracks,” he said.

Both resolutions were passed.

The post Who you gonna call? appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

At the event Myron Krahn told producers that “we’re here because we want farmers’ feedback, we want ideas from farmers… we’re looking for as much feedback as we can get, positive or negative, it doesn’t matter.”

• Read more: Commodity groups release merger report

The president of the Manitoba Corn Growers Association went on to tell producers that it’s taken the better part of two years to establish a blueprint for the proposed merger, but emphasized nothing was set in stone and that producer concerns will be addressed.

“The next step — once we get all the feedback — is to go back to the committees and see where things maybe need to be changed or strengthened,” said Dennis Thiessen, vice-president of the MCGA. “If farmer support is there, then we keep moving forward, if farmers are strongly opposed to doing it, then we keep going the way we are, we’re not tied to this at this point, but this is what we’re exploring and we are looking for farmer feedback.”

Province-wide

To that end, meetings are being held across the province and farmers are being asked to fill out and return a questionnaire on the issue.

Rob Hannam of Synthesis Agri-Food Network is facilitating the process on behalf of the Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers, Manitoba Flax Growers, the National Sunflower Association of Canada, Manitoba Corn Growers and Manitoba Pulse & Soybean Growers.

“Those associations handle nine of the field crops here in Manitoba — and in the spring your farmer boards signed a memorandum of understanding to investigate collaborating. I came in at that point to support those boards, because when you’ve got five different groups it’s easier to have an outsider, a facilitator, to manage that,” explained Hannam.

The proposed merger would result in one board with 15 directors. Initially, each existing board would elect three of its own members to join the new 15-member amalgamated board of directors, but elections would take place over the next three years to replace the initial directors with ones elected by the entire membership.

“The board of directors… will represent all crops,” Hannam said. “We had multiple options, but what it really came down to is the farmers who are part of this organization grow multiple crops.”

He stressed that the board will still be farmer driven with a focus on research and agronomy.

“I think overall it’s best for farmers in Manitoba to work together and I think we can gain some efficiencies by working together,” said Thiessen. “I’m on the corn board and we already share an executive director together with wheat and barley, as well as research person. That has enabled us to have, I think, better-quality people in those positions and we get better value and are more hands on.”

Some sharing

The five commodity groups already share an office in Carman, as well as equipment used in field trials.

“It’s not as complicated as some people might envision, but it’s a reasonably good-size project to amalgamate all these groups and it will take a lot of effort to make happen,” he said.

But amalgamation is not without risks.

“It’s a big ask, we’ve got to recognize that. Five groups, nine-plus crops coming together as one organization, you know? It’s a big concept, if it’s going to happen, you’ve got to get it right,” said Dean Harder, a director with Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers. “And if it’s not going to happen, then you’ve got to figure out what collaboration can look like and learn from this process too.”

Producers in St. Jean raised concerns about the possibility smaller-acre crops would be left by the wayside in a larger organization as higher-acre commodities dominated checkoff levies.

“Research investment for each crop will not be set at the checkoff level for that specific crop, it will likely be close to it, but it’s not going to be exactly the collected dollar on sunflowers, it may be a little more than the dollar, it may be a little bit less,” Hannam said.

Krahn added the idea is to have some flexibility in the new organization’s research model.

“Let’s use flax for an example,” he said. “We get this much money from flax and then… we’re forced to spend money on research that maybe isn’t that pertinent — if our guideline is to spend dollar for dollar when the timing maybe isn’t quite right for that crop.”

Some unconvinced

Others in the audience expressed skepticism that the process would result in a more efficient organization.

“It sounds to me a little bit like a bureaucracy being built here, that’s my first comment,” said Bill Walton. “My second comment is I think you really need to think about your timeline… there is legislation in the province that has to be followed and it may not be quite as simple as you envision.”

Hannam acknowledged that there was a regulatory process involved and noted a presentation had already been made to the Manitoba Farm Products Marketing Council, which would have to approve the merger.

He said the five existing groups have already discussed possible pitfalls and worked to minimize risk if the merger goes ahead.

“The first risk that came up is farmer-director work load, how will the directors of this new organization handle all of the crops?” he said. “The second risk I want to mention is levy refund, it’s a refundable levy, so if people disagree with the principle they can request a refund.”

However, he doesn’t think either would be insurmountable, noting that the merger won’t go ahead unless members approve of the amalgamation. Members of each organization will vote on an amalgamation proposal resolution at their respective annual general meetings in February 2019.

“To me, improved research and agronomy is the No. 1 benefit,” Hannam said.

“I do feel this group would have a stronger voice; when you’re together you have over 8,000 members.”

The post Farmers mull commodity group merger’s risks and benefits appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Researchers with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada sure hope so, but just to be sure, they’re going to put it to the test.

An artificial stomach has been installed at the Richardson Centre for Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals at the University of Manitoba.

“It’s a system that’s based on the physiology of a human or animal gastrological tract. We put a food product or diet into the system and it simulates what happens in the stomach,” said James House, head of human nutritional sciences at the university. “We’ll be able to look at the factors that absorb and digest foods, including functional foods, and how they are absorbed and digested.”

The gutsy piece of equipment is comprised of tubes and pumps, standing a little taller than your average human. Enzymes are pumped in at appropriate junctures to mimic the digestion process.

“Basically, you would be loading the food samples from here,” said Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada researcher, Sijo Joseph, pointing to a section near the top of the device. “The pH is controlled and also the temperature will be controlled at 37°, as in the human body… all the enzyme recreations, saliva secretions and different types of enzymes and bio-acids will be secreted from the back of the system.”

Versatile

But the system isn’t limited to human digestion; it can also be used to study animal digestion. The effects of specific factors — like age and whether the stomach is full or fasting — can also be researched using the model stomach.

“Based on the computer profile you give, the digestion happens,” Joseph said, adding that the instrument also emulates the movements that accompany the digestive process. Samples can be taken at different stages throughout the digestive process.

The equipment, which cost about $600,000, will primarily be used by the Richardson Centre for Functional Foods and Nutraceuticals, the Canadian Centre for Agri-Food Research in Health and the University of Manitoba. The research tool was funded, in part, by the Growing Innovation program.

“The results that come from these groups are consistently very positive and encouraging,” said Daryl Domitruk, of Manitoba Agriculture. “I’m positive that this equipment will enable them to achieve more great results.”

Research draw

The model stomach could also draw researchers from around the world to the University of Manitoba, he said.

“This opens the doors for people who, we believe, are very capable of doing very critical and world-class research,” Domitruk said. “This equipment will be able to show how the foods we produce in Manitoba can have a positive effect on health and could potentially save in health-care expenses.”

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada researcher Nancy Ames is one of those creating procedures for the model stomach that will change the way new crop varieties are tested for health benefits.

“What we’re doing with it, is really trying to investigate a number of different agri-food products that we’re working on that are made out of cereal grains or made out of pulses,” said Ames. “We’re trying to look at potential differences in glycemic response. We’re looking at differences in protein quality in some of these agri-food products.”

The artificial stomach at the University of Manitoba is one of only two such devices in Canada.

– With files from Ed White.

The post Model stomach arrives at U of M appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“One of the big components in there is the fungi, the fungi and its hyphae,” said Fuhrer, a conservationist with the United States Department of Agriculture. “What breaks up a hyphae? Well, if we pull something made up out of steel through the soil or the compost, it breaks up the hyphae and the fungi numbers get real low.”

While some might be tempted to champion bacteria as the lead decomposer of crop residue, Fuhrer told dairy farmers gathered at a recent conference in Winnipeg that without the mighty fungi, bacteria would never make it to the buffet.

“The principle decomposer in the world is saprophytic fungi… if we didn’t have saprophytic fungi your cornstalks would last year, after year, after year, on the soil surface and the only way you could probably get rid of them is if they blew off the field or you baled them off,” he said. “The bacteria cannot decompose that cornstalk until the fungi bring it down to a simpler chain, then bacteria can step in, take over and make it happen quicker.”

Despite its prominent role in soil health, the long hyphae of fungi are also delicate and particularly susceptible to soil disturbance.

“One of my jobs as a young man in the ’60s was to sit on a tractor with a cultivator and work the summerfallow… and if your dad happened to have a little German heritage in him, all the neighbours worked it four or five times and it pretty much meant you were going to work it six times,” said Fuhrer, whose father’s farm straddled the border of North and South Dakota.

“So when it was all done, was there any fungi left in there? Probably not.”

Initially, he said, yields were strong because tillage allowed for the mineralization of nutrients.

“We were harvesting off the nutrients with crops every other year. That went along pretty good for 30 years and then, all of a sudden, you’ve built a brick, because all organic matter is pretty much gone,” he said. “When we till we make more food available and we get this burst in CO2 because the soil food web goes on a feeding frenzy… the protozoa and the nematodes, the big guys that couldn’t get at all of the bacteria because it was locked up into little pore spaces, now they can because you’ve tilled it and opened it up.”

Ultimately, the frenzy is unsustainable and after releasing a burst of CO2 into the atmosphere, the soil is left dead and deprived of organic material. But that’s not the only change that soil experiences with tillage, said the soil specialist.

Tillage also leaves fields open to water erosion, which transports topsoil, nutrients and water to off-site locations, said Fuhrer, who advocates for the use of cover crops. Wind erosion, standing water and crusting can also be side-effects of tillage.

“Minimizing soil disturbance is a good start to rebuilding soil aggregates, pore spaces, soil glue, and soil organic matter,” he said. “This is an essential step for long-term soil productivity.”

Fuhrer said that typical soil is composed of about 45 per cent minerals — like sand, silt and clay — five per cent organic matter, 25 per cent water and 25 per cent air.

“The water and air portions exist in the pore spaces between the soil aggregates,” he said. “Over time, tillage implements reduce and remove the pore spaces from our soils, restricting infiltration and destroying the biological glues which hold our soils together.”

But short-term interests often outweigh concerns for the long-term health of our soil, he added.

“Short-term economics at the expense of the resource is one of the things that I’ve never been able to compete with, because I’m not taking that carbon out, I’m putting carbon back,” he said.

The post Fungi and tillage don’t mix well appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Jay Fuhrer certainly hopes so. The soil health specialist believes cropland and large ruminants are a natural fit. He advocates turning animals out of the barn and onto the land whenever possible.

“Soils, plants and animals evolved together,” he told producers gathered in Winnipeg for the annual Dairy Farmers of Manitoba conference. “And we must recognize the systems we use today are not the systems that built your soils.”

But natural soil-building systems can be mimicked by producers, benefiting the environment, farmers’ bottom lines and livestock, he said.

A conservationist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fuhrer said that fall and winter grazing converts high-carbon annual crop residue into low-carbon organic material, while managing crop rotation residue and balancing the carbon-to-nitrogen ratio.

Short periods of spring or summer grazing, followed by long periods of recovery, expose plants to additional sunlight and CO2, allowing for more vigorous growth.

“This is when we start to mimic that natural cycle,” Fuhrer said.

He added that the key component to making it all work is cover crops.

“I used to think they were important, but now I know they are essential,” said Fuhrer.

He suggests using a full-season cover crop in the summer months, then allowing for a full plant recovery before animals begin a second grazing session in the fall. Planting a second cover crop after harvest is also advisable, although very few producers make use of the technique.

“Simplified rotations have resulted in fewer fall seeding windows for cover crops,” Fuhrer said, noting that winter is also a challenge for producers looking at cover crops, but not an insurmountable one.

One option is using a biennial cover crop or “planting green.”

“The way that would work is putting in cereal rye that fall — in a field that is going to go to soybean — then we plant directly into the standing rye or plant green,” he told producers. “So consequently, you’re looking at bringing in a fibrous plant and a fibrous plant is what built soil aggregates.”

Without aggregates, soil acts like a brick surface, unable to absorb water or move salts deeper into the earth, he said.

“If you have aggregates then you get water into the soil,” said Fuhrer. “That takes a fibrous plant.”

Cover crops also help reduce the amount of nutrients exported off the land and manage water quality.

“When we have water evaporating, instead of transpiring, we have a problem,” said the soil specialist. “Evaporation is going to leave the salt on the surface and you don’t want that.”

In-field grazing also minimizes the amount of time spent moving animal waste and feed, but bales can still be used to effectively recycle nutrients and carbon if they are fed in situ.

“It’s not evil to make it bale, it depends where you feed that bale,” he said. “If you feed that bale in a feedlot, most of that is going to be lost. Now you’ve got carbon that’s not coming back.”

Livestock are one of the five pillars of soil health, along with building soil armour (both residue and living plants), minimizing soil disturbance and continual live plant or root development, Fuhrer said. An integrated system of cover crops and grazing livestock will suppress weed growth as well.

“So this is how we turn things around,” he said. “You look at the root causes when you have problems.”

The post Cover crops ‘essential’ to in-field grazing appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.