Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau on Thursday announced an $8 million, three-year funding envelope for the first of two streams of what’s now called the AgriCommunication Initiative, to run through to the end of March 2024.

That first stream opened to applications effective Thursday and an applicant guide is available online.

The first stream is to bring “non-repayable” funding to projects meant to help Canadians better understand how their food is produced and “projects that promote consumer awareness of the strengths of Canada’s agriculture sector.”

Funded projects under the first stream “will also help enhance Canadians’ trust in sustainability, animal care, and efforts to reduce food waste,” the government said.

Projects done by agricultural fairs and exhibitions, which conduct “broad agriculture awareness activities in helping strengthen public trust about the origin of the food they eat and how it is produced,” are among the expected beneficiaries under the first AgriCommunication stream.

Not-for-profit associations and Indigenous groups are also eligible, the government said. Individuals, academic institutions, commodity organizations and for-profit organizations aren’t eligible.

“Regional or local” organizations may be considered for funding “if they can demonstrate the ability to deliver a project that is sector-wide and national in scope,” the government said, noting “support from national organizations may be required where relevant.”

Regional projects may also be considered, if a national organization doesn’t exist, the government said.

The program’s first stream will also back “communications and awareness activities” starting in spring 2022, “to highlight the sector’s efforts to adopt sustainable and environmentally friendly practices and technologies.”

Funded projects can generally expect cost-shared support, with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada covering 70 per cent to the recipient’s 30 per cent. A “more favourable” 85:15 cost-share arrangement may be applied on projects from “underrepresented groups within the agricultural sector.”

Government funding — including local, municipal and/or provincial funding as well as program funding — shouldn’t typically exceed 85 per cent of a funded project’s costs.

The government said Thursday it will take applications for the program on an “ongoing basis” from now until Sept. 30, 2023, or until otherwise announced, or until funding has been “fully committed.”

That said, the government added, applicants “who can complete activities before March 31, 2022 should contact the program immediately to discuss their application.”

Full details aren’t yet available on the AgriCommunication Initiative’s second stream, which will focus on “increasing the sector’s understanding of consumer preferences and expectations.”

More information on what can be funded in the second stream is expected to be made known “in the coming months.”

“Consumers have a growing interest in learning more about where homegrown agricultural products come from and how they’re made,” Bibeau said Thursday in the government’s release.

“This initiative will develop more connections between the agriculture and agri-food industry and Canadians, which will increase appreciation and pride in our farmers and food businesses.”

Reciprocal awareness between Canada’s consumers and ag sector was a major plank in the “Guelph Statement,” which Canada’s federal and provincial ag ministers drafted at their meeting last month as a guidance document for the 2023-to-2028 ag policy funding framework.

Under the Guelph Statement’s “resiliency and public trust” category of priorities and focus areas, the ministers called for “fostering awareness of sector commitment to the sustainable production of safe, high-quality food and building public trust while increasing sector awareness of the expectations of consumers.”

Noting the funding component for ag fairs, the Canadian Association of Fairs and Exhibitions said Thursday it’s “proud that we are seeing the benefits of our government relations efforts.”

The association, in the lead-up to September’s federal election, had pointed to a “lack of recognition for fair and exhibition organizations in the federal government” — that is, outside of the COVID-19 pandemic.

CAFE at the time urged federal candidates to promise “clear access to a federal department in order to create and access ongoing funding programs.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post AgriCommunication plan to seek farmer-consumer dialogue appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

As annoying as it is, those comments underscore an increasingly important theme in Canadian agriculture: communication. It used to be enough to grow and market your crops, but that has changed dramatically over the last several years.

The impact of this is being felt in a real way — perhaps more now than in recent years.

People prefer to buy organic food, even if they can’t define what exactly the word means. Shoppers search the shelves for the container claiming to be “non-GMO” knowing little more than what the letters stand for. Actors take to the stage at awards shows denouncing an entire industry with little indication they have set foot on a dairy farm. High-ranking politicians warn of “extremists” holding protests generally denouncing an entire industry. Protestors halt railways to draw attention to a cause with little, if any, recognition of what’s in the stopped cars along the track.

Consumers make some of those decisions because they have looked into the issues. Mostly, though, they do it because it feels like the right thing to do. For all of their clout in political circles, farm organizations have struggled to combat this.

Ironically, the failure can at least in part be attributed to the agriculture industry’s inability to abandon the facts.

Farmers and the organizations representing them make decisions based on evidence, logic and science. Consumers are making decisions on feelings and emotions.

Our state of public discourse in this modern era seems to be entirely online, conducted in explosions of a few sentences at a time. People bang away on keyboards driven by the emotions in their hearts rather than the information in their heads. Discourse is fragmented, and we’re all awash in information with, for the average person, little ability to distinguish what’s news, what’s marketing, and what’s downright wrong.

Informed public debate was once sacred, the goal of political discourse and the foundation of good decision-making. No longer. Politics has devolved into elected officials speaking in platitudes, talking a lot but saying little while trying to make people feel good about their actions.

The result of this post-truth world is having the displeasure of living in an age where we have never before had the means to be this connected to one another, but are left with an ever-growing divide between us. Friends and enemies, left and right, consumer and corporation.

Feelings, not facts.

It’s all kind of sad, but at least within agriculture there is a growing recognition of this.

And there are some great ideas on how to combat it, including one from Andrew Campbell.

He spoke at Farm Credit Canada’s Ag Day celebration in Ottawa recently, sharing with the crowd of 500 people why it is important for farmers to share their side of the story.

“To the consumer, our side of the story doesn’t exist unless we tell it,” he said, suggesting to the audience everyone in the industry should make an effort to explain to anyone who will listen why they are in agriculture.

“Just go out and be real, and be honest and be transparent. Because what I found, and I know a lot of other farmers have found in the past, is that, you know, just having that kind of emotional transparency into what we do and why we do it actually goes a long way.”

It’s a good point, grounded in optimism.

The agriculture industry should be commended for sticking to the facts. But farmers need to learn how to leverage those facts and tap into emotions. Until that happens, complaints about bad communication will persist.

— D.C. Fraser writes for Glacier FarmMedia from Ottawa.

The post Fraser: In ag marketing, emotions need to start trumping facts appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Ag Days in Brandon? Never heard of it, or any of the other big farm shows in the country.

I couldn’t tell wheat from canola, or identify most other crops, either.

Manitoba Co-operator? Western Producer? Ontario Farmer? Although I was an avid newspaper reader — a news junkie, really — they weren’t on my radar at all.

As for the weather, all I cared about was whether rain might spoil a picnic or softball game.

In other words, I was a classic example of the rural-urban divide in Canada. But that all changed in 2011 when I joined Canadian Foodgrains Bank to direct its communication, fundraising and public engagement work.

Suddenly, this city boy was in a new world of crops, prices, drainage, weather, machinery, seeds, science and technology — and did I mention drainage? I had no idea how big a deal direction of the flow of water is.

The first thing I did to get up to speed was to start reading farm newspapers — like this one.

The second thing was to go out and meet the farmers who support the Foodgrains Bank. My strategy was to listen, not talk — something that served me well over many cups of coffee, breakfasts, lunches and farm and field visits.

It helped, but I still won’t pretend to really understand the agricultural sector. Far from it! But during my time at the Foodgrains Bank I developed a deep appreciation for the hard and amazing work of farmers, and of everyone else who works to support the growing and harvesting of crops.

I also developed tremendous gratitude for the generosity and community spirit of the many farmers across Canada who support the Foodgrains Bank.

Year after year, thousands of them come together to organize and operate the 250 or so community growing projects from P.E.I. to B.C., donating their time, money and machinery to raise funds to help those who don’t have enough to eat.

I also came to appreciate the generous support of agricultural businesses, big and small. Each year hundreds of them support the growing projects through donations of inputs, services and even gifts of land.

I also was grateful for many other farmers and others who donated individually, whether the donations were big or small.

Overall, I was deeply moved by the care farmers show for their land. It is the source of life, and their livelihoods. Soil will never again be “dirt” to me.

And that rural-urban divide? It might not exist for me anymore, but it’s still a big issue. The agricultural sector still needs to find ways to have conversations with consumers about things like GMOs, use of chemicals, and climate change.

The silos are so tall and thick; what can be done to break them down? It will take creativity, imagination and a bit of risk to build bridges between the two.

Looking back at my time at the Foodgrains Bank, I will forever be grateful for the many people I met in the agricultural sector, and for what they taught me about hard work, generosity, faith, and community — and also for patiently answering questions from this city boy.

And I will never view weather the same way again, either.

John Longhurst is now a freelance consultant in the areas of communications and marketing, as well as a special communications adviser for the Foodgrains Bank.

The post Opinion: Note from an urbanite appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Here we were, isolated from town and neighbours. Our only chance of talking to them was to hitch up a horse and drive a few miles. Now all was changed. Our neighbours were distant no longer. They could be talked to at any time. It was not necessary for the young men to carefully shave and dress up then drive a number of miles only to find that their best girl was not at home. The doctor could be called at a moment’s notice. No wonder we all felt progressive.

All went lovely. The whole neighbourhood was one huge family. Then like a thunder cloud came the scandal, causing many to look askance at one another. It developed into a typical feud, only there was no bloodshed. No one was disfigured for life, but some hearts were made sore, which is sometimes worse than a wound.

It came about in this way: Jim McHenry, a homesteader, was located out north of our little settlement some five miles. A likable sort of chap was Jim, good natured, quiet and very bashful in the presence of ladies. A confirmed bachelor by all appearances. He was a slave to work.

People predicted a great future for Jim; wealth and all the comforts that go with it. Many a mother with a far-seeing vision tried to get him in her clutches in order that one of her daughters might be amply provided for. He was invited to tea on Sunday evenings and stuffed full of every conceivable article of food they thought he might like. Through it all Jim remained normal. He was pronounced absolutely hopeless. “But then one never can tell,” said Mrs. Jones to her neighbour one afternoon. “Life is made up of hope, you know.”

The fall the phone arrived Jim was very anxious to have it installed. When questioned as to his reasons he blushed and stepped from one foot to the other finally stating that lately he had been thinking that a fellow should be in better communication with his neighbours. One never can tell, he said, what might happen and no one would know anything about it. There are many cases just like that where, had a phone been in some lonely fellow’s shack, his life might have been saved. No answer coming over the wire after repeated trials for a day or two would naturally cause people to suspect that something was wrong.

One bright, sunny December day Mrs. Strong called up Mrs. Jones for the express purpose of finding out the methods of making angel cake. Of course, after the recipe had been given and duly commented upon, district news was next in order. “Did you hear that Jim McHenry was engaged to haul out the school wood supply?” Mrs. Jones said, “I suppose Mary Thompson is getting along pretty well teaching for a home girl.”

“It must be awfully hard,” Mrs. Strong replied, “for a girl to teach the children in her own district.” Here an awful noise came over the phone. “Mercy! What’s that,” she exclaimed as the noise continued, finally dying down in a guttural sound like that of a dying cat. “I don’t know. Oh, well, I must get at that cake. Goodbye.”

On the same line, standing at the phone, an interested listener had held her phone tightly gripped in her hand. Owing to the baby crawling around it was a difficult thing to catch all the news without the infant making the fact known. As Mrs. Jones had finished the part about Jim being engaged the youngster gave a loud yell causing the mother to hastily place the receiver on its hook. After he had been quieted and her ear again pressed against the instrument Mary Thompson’s name came over the wire. Then young master Roy, having fallen on his face, gave out a yell and the mother had to rush to his assistance. She had heard enough anyway. News like this was not an everyday occurrence.

During the afternoon she called up her bosom friend, Mrs. Doyle, and told her as a great secret, the news that Jim McHenry was engaged to Mary. “Of course,” she added, “I don’t wish it to go any further, you know.” Mrs. Doyle thoroughly understood and it would be as safe with her as though locked up in the bank vault. However, when down at the store she met her dear friend, Mrs. Brown, and during the talk gave her as a strict secret the news that Jim and Mary were to be married. Mary was going to quit the school the end of the term, she understood, and Jim was busy getting things in shape for a trip.

Before long everyone in the community knew all about the affair, all except the two most concerned. As the news travelled the story became longer and more detailed until it had now assumed tremendous proportions. Jim was going to build a regular mansion of a home, was going to Palm Beach on a wedding trip. Mary had a most beautiful outfit all ready for the event. The Rev. Wilber Thomas who had baptized Mary was coming all the way from B.C., mind you, just to make the couple man and wife.

Meanwhile, Jim worked away drawing wood to the little school and Mary daily tramped two miles from her home every morning. As Jim was usually unloaded about 4 p.m., and his homeward way led past Mary’s place she rode home on the sleigh. They became quite good friends. She apparently had reached underneath the surface of this bashful man’s character and found him a true man, and a good talker when he forgot self, and it was a sight to see his eyes light up with enthusiasm when talking on some subject of interest to him. Of course, all this was noted.

There came a day when Mary on her way to town stopped at a neighbour’s for a short visit. During the talk that followed, marriage came up. “I suppose we will soon hear of you getting married, Mary.”

“Not for a while yet, I am afraid,” Mary replied, with a smile.

“Oh, don’t try to put me off that way,” her hostess said. “I know all about it. You two tried to keep it quiet and give this neighbourhood the surprise of its life, but I know,” she nodded wisely.

“What in the world are you talking about?” Mary said.

“Why you and Jim McHenry.”

Mary leaned back and gasped. Then the humour of it striking her forcibly she gave way to paroxysms of laughter. After she could control herself she asked just what was going around. So it all came out, whole volumes of it.

After making her purchases in town Mary started homeward. Bells ringing behind made her plunge off the road. A cutter drew up and stopped. Jim’s voice it was who asked if she would have a ride. After being tucked in and the cutter moving swiftly down the road Mary looked at him and laughed so heartily that he was amazed. When she could control herself she told the tale. Jim at first blushed a rosy red and then turned pale. This was awful. Good heavens! The whole neighbourhood talking about him.

They passed Jones and the wife on the way to town. Jim pretended that the horses were too fractious to look their way. He felt their eyes glued upon him. It made him chilly and he shook. The tale had ended. So engrossed had he been that he had not noticed Mary stop talking. He looked around. Mary was sitting there quite composed as though a neighbourhood talk was an everyday occurrence. It helped him regain possession of his own faculties. She turned toward him.

“Well, what are you going to do about it?” she demanded.

“Do about it?” he echoed, nearly jumping out of the cutter. “Do about it? Good sakes alive! Don’t you know what this means? Everyone talking about us.” – Here he waved his arm – “Everyone believes it. We will never be able to make people think otherwise.”

“Yes, but Jim, after going to all that trouble about building a new house and everything, and look at my new clothes all ready, according to reports.” She looked at him and laughed. He looked into her eyes, and, forgetting all about himself, also laughed. “Well,” he said, “Mary, I’m game if you are.”

“My,” said Mary irrelevantly, “what a blessing the phone is after all.”

The trouble began when the news was really confirmed. One remembers telling her friends in strict confidence, of course, all about it. Link by link it traced back to its origin. Everyone blamed her friend for telling her secret, and the settlement suffered a severe frost for a time.

But now all is over. Blessings on the rural phone!”

A version of this article first appeared in the Nor’West Farmer on December 5, 1919.

The post Our rural phone appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Connecting with a public audience is a skill that seems to be at a premium in today’s conversations surrounding agriculture.

Haspel is an oyster farmer in Cape Cod, as well as a journalist for the Washington Post. She opened by reminding the audience that before engaging in a potentially polarizing conversation it is important to remember that many people allow their passions to overcome their ability to reason with others.

So, when farmers are talking to the public about agriculture it is important to understand that people persuade people. Most people are more inclined to open their mind to someone that they trust, and that’s why the emotional side of a conversation is so important.

The way a conversation is approached and the ability to connect with people is often just as important as communicating information. Simple things like driving a big truck and hunting allowed Haspel to connect with other farmers when she was working as a journalist. Shared pastimes or values can be good connecting points between the public and farmers.

It’s easy to take high ground on a discussion topic that one is well versed in, but as Haspel explained, this can easily sound like a condescending tone and fast-track the conversation to nowhere. Instead, be that person they can trust.

Sometimes it may not be possible to change someone’s mind right away, but it is possible for them to be shown that there might be more to farming than they had previously thought. If there are going to be better conversations around agriculture, the public needs to have a better understanding of farming values.

Farmers also need to do their best to remove themselves from their own biases. Understanding other people’s experiences and learning from them is important for engaging in a productive conversation. By listening to other points of view and taking the right approach, farmers can create an open discussion that encourages new ideas and fosters a positive relationship between agriculture and the public.

Haspel encourages farmers to go out and invite a local classroom to the farm for a field trip or share some interesting and fun videos on social media. Most people get their information from a computer screen and many urban residents have never been able to visit a farm or stand beside a dairy cow. It’s easy for people to be swept up in the sensationalized reports that they see on social media. If we can change our emotional responses, we can have better conversations.

Josh Kraemer is a communications intern for the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario.

The post Opinion: Have better conversations around agriculture appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

But while farmers are using their devices for everything from surfing the Internet, to purchasing fertilizer and checking weather forecasts, producers, farm organizations and commodity groups are overlooking the basics of communication when it comes to getting their stories into urban publications.

“Nobody uses the telephone anymore, right? Nobody calls anybody,” said Owen Roberts, an agricultural journalist and head of research communications at the University of Guelph. “I know it’s a little bit scary, calling up a reporter and saying hey, I’ve got a story for you, but I know as a reporter… or as a communications professional at Guelph, when someone calls me and says, I’ve got a story for you, I listen.”

Ed Cassavoy agrees.

The director of reader engagement and content commercialization at the Toronto Star joined Roberts to speak about reaching urban audiences during a seminar at the University of Manitoba last week. He said he gets about 1,000 emails a day, while an assignment editor would receive even more.

“Killing off emails is easy,” said Cassavoy. “A lot of it is junk.”

However, phone calls are harder to ignore and even if an editor or reporter is too busy to speak to you at that moment — or even blows you off altogether — a brief connection is made and the door is opened a crack.

“If you work that person over time, in an honest way, trying to explain it, that will bear much more fruit than shooting out emails and PR releases,” Cassavoy said, adding he’s still surprised some organizations simply fire off emails and hope for the best.

“You really have to concentrate on reaching the right people and I’m always shocked that in this world with all this information at your fingertips there’s a lack of awareness and research done to find the right people to contact in the media,” he said. “You’re not trying to spread this to every possible person in the world, you focus on the key markets, the key journalists, the key publications and key editors and have a connection with them, which takes some work.”

Roberts notes that one benefit of having a relationship with a journalist or editor is that issues can be dealt with proactively, rather than reactively. It also gives agriculture another avenue from which to lobby elected officials and government.

“We know government is sensitive to media,” Roberts said.

Social media and other electronic platforms are also important, but still don’t reach as large an audience as a paper of record would, he said. Meaning that getting agricultural issues into mainstream publications remains important.

“Print continues to be a really vital way to get news out and to have something on the record that people can refer to,” he said.

A strong social media presence can help provide background or a repository of images that can be used to illustrate and buttress an article — or even alert a journalist to a possible issue, story or source — but social media is still unlikely to reach as many people as a newspaper.

“One story in the Star and Metro News is 1.8 million readers,” said Roberts, noting the combined readership of the Toronto Star and its affiliated daily publications.

Cassavoy added that number didn’t include online readership or social media views.

But to get to that point, communicators, farmers and researchers still need to be able to pitch a story or issue in a way that connects with an urban audience.

“Tell me the point of the story in one sentence,” Cassavoy said. “What’s the headline?”

Food continues to be the driving issue for urban readers, especially factors affecting prices, he added, noting stories rooted in technology also grab reader attention.

“Most of our readers are not going to read about agriculture, right, and we already know that, you guys already know that, so how do you get at them? You have to entice them, it’s got to be about something they care about,” he said.

Roberts said getting people to take notice of a story on agriculture boils down to answering two questions, “so what and who cares?” Having a story that is entertaining is also important, as is realizing that agriculture may not be the whole story, it may be one part of a larger story.

How to show success in media penetration can be challenging for academic institutions that are increasingly interested in the metrics of success, said Yvonne Lawley, a researcher with the University of Manitoba’s department of agriculture interested in reaching a larger audience who attended the seminar.

“In the broader media, it’s much harder for me to demonstrate whether I’ve done a good job or not,” she said.

Roberts agreed that it was easier to track academic citations, but said there are ways to gauge success in mainstream media, including tracking social media followers and interactions, as well as the number of incoming queries an expert or researcher receives.

Apiarist and philosophy professor, Phil Veldhuis, wondered what impact the current diversity of opinions in the agricultural community could have on getting media coverage of farming issues, noting “not everyone in agriculture is going to tell the same story.”

And that’s OK, according to Roberts, who said a diversity of opinions and perspectives will help cultivate a wider interest in agriculture issues.

“I’m OK with there not being one voice for agriculture, I’m OK with there being a bunch of different voices, because I think that reflects diversity that exists,” he said.

The post Diversity of opinions OK appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“I think we’ve become way too politically correct in this country and we need to call a spade a spade… because it would really help us to understand people a lot better,” said Tina Varughese, who specializes in cross-cultural communications and spoke at the annual Manitoba Swine Seminar in Winnipeg last week.

“When we know better, we do better,” she said, noting that businesses often reject potential employees based on misinterpretations of cultural customs. For example, someone interviewing an indigenous person might be put off if they don’t maintain eye contact. The reality is that people from some cultures, including some indigenous cultures, avert their gaze out of respect for the person they are speaking to, Varughese said.

“So if you misread these signals, you might be ruling out the best person for the job before they even have a chance,” she said.

As the pork industry continues to ease labour shortages with foreign workers and new arrivals, learning how to navigate cultural differences is absolutely crucial, said Varughese, who was born to parents of East Indian origin in Saskatchewan. Even common Canadian hand signals — like the thumbs-up sign — can have hugely different and offensive meanings to people from other cultural backgrounds.

“And you do not want to be the person who just accidentally flipped the new employees the bird,” Varughese said.

But nowhere is good communication more important than when it comes to safety, especially when working around livestock and machinery.

“I think when you are working with people who don’t have English as a first language, it’s really key to use pictorials, pictures, and all techniques of communication,” she said. “That means audio, visual, and kinaesthetic. Audio, you’re going to speak the message, visual, you will use pictures, PowerPoint, graphs, whatever it takes, video and kinaesthetic means you’re going to use examples of anecdotes, or stories to get that message across.”

It’s also important to understand if your employees are direct or indirect communicators.

While Canadians tend to be very direct in their communication, Varughese said Filipinos are usually indirect communicators.

“So they don’t tend to say they don’t understand something,” she said — a situation that could lead to real danger in a hog barn. She suggested using open-ended questions to avoid confusion.

An open-ended question gives an employee the opportunity to expand on what they understood and what they didn’t, without overtly saying no to anything, Varughese said.

At one time learning about cultural differences and other people’s customs was considered a nicety, something that a business person or employer might take an interest in if they were inclined to, she said.

“For business today, it’s a necessity,” Varughese said.

The post Pictures help avoid confusion in the barn appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The FCC AgriSpirit Fund is about making life better for people in rural communities. It awards between $5,000 and $25,000 for capital community improvement projects such as emergency services equipment, playgrounds, recreation centres and care homes in communities with populations fewer than 100,000.

“The FCC AgriSpirit Fund is just one way FCC contributes to rural communities across the country,” says Kellie Garrett, FCC senior vice-president, strategy, knowledge and reputation. “Since 2004, we’ve supported over 370 capital projects, totalling $3.5 million through the FCC AgriSpirit Fund.”

In 2009, FCC received 1,374 applications for AgriSpirit funding and gave $1 million to 115 community groups across Canada.

“People work very hard to raise funds to improve equipment and facilities in their communities,” says Garrett. “At FCC, we care about the communities where our customers and employees live and work. The FCC AgriSpirit Fund allows us to support community groups in rural Canada and contribute to the success of their projects.”

To receive funding, the selected groups must meet certain criteria prior to the implementation of their projects, which must be completed before December 2012. FCC will announce the selected projects in December 2010.

The post Apply For FCC AgriSpirit Fund appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Dr. Donna M. Beegle, the president of Communication Across Barriers, believes good communication involves active listening. Beegle says, “Active listening is a way of listening and responding to another person that improves mutual understanding. Often when people talk to each other, they don’t listen attentively. They are often distracted, half listening, half thinking about something else.”

It may take some practice to give full attention to another. Listening to understand, not only what the other person is saying but being sensitive to the clues of what the other is feeling, is also part of effective communication. When you are actively listening, you understand what the other person is saying and what they mean. You are not thinking about what you want to say, how you feel or worse yet, ignoring the person.

Good communication skills become especially important when income is not as it was, when there is financial uncertainty, or when other factors cause situations to change.

Families living with changing financial circumstances or uncertainty will be wise to include all family members in new decisions. Set priorities and talk about how income will be spent, considering the immediate goals of each person and the family. A time of economic challenge can become an opportunity to clarify family values. Meeting the need for food, clothing and shelter puts purchasing other items in perspective. Knowing that it will likely not always be as difficult as now may provide a more hopeful outlook.

Humour is also a great tool in family communication. Even during difficult times, take opportunities for play and enjoyment in each other’s company. Laughter has a health and wellbeing effect. Laughter, besides relieving stress, brings people together. Using more humour and play in your communication can improve the quality of your relationships with family and with others.

Everyone has heard of the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” The golden rule of communication would suggest that you listen to others as well as you wish to be listened to yourself. With your family possessing good communication skills, including active listening, you will be helped through difficult economic times and other situations throughout your lives.

– Jo Musich is a family relations educator with University

of Minnesota Extension.

The post Are You An “Active Listener?” appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

In a decision announced Feb. 11, the CTA said CN did the best it could in meeting the company’s need for cars in restricted plant facilities in North Battleford.

The pulse crop shipper accused CN of erratic and unreliable delivery of hopper cars that it said constituted “a breach of CN’s level-of-service obligations to WGT.” The poor performance and inadequate communication from the railway about empty car deliveries “makes it difficult for it to plan processing time, to plan incoming grower shipments and to confirm forward sales or purchase contracts.”

WGT’s siding has a maximum capacity of four hoppers to serve two plants. There’s a complicated mix of products and a wide variety of loading times. During the 2007-08 crop year, the company shipped four cars per week but that figure climbed to 16 in the next crop year.

The company is expanding its processing capacity at the plant and considered upgrading its siding until it became frustrated with the rail service.CN

said the shipments from WGT go to trans-loading facilities on the West Coast where the crops are loaded in con-t ainers. They “don’t require the staging or accumulation of product for direct loading into a bulk vessel.”

In its conclusion, the CTA said the company received 86 per cent of the cars it ordered during 2008-09. It also said “that almost one-third of the cars received were not released within the week of placement and that the average dwell time for hopper cars on WGT’s property “exceeded the allowable free time for loading by over 200 per cent during most of the (time it examined)… In this case, WGT has significantly increased its demand for rail cars and there has not been a decrease in CN’s service. In fact, CN offers yard service that provides considerable flexibility.”

WGT generally could not load and release the cars delivered to it, the CTA added.

The post Grain Company Complaint Against CN Dismissed appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.