Picton - Wednesday March 26, 2003

By Linda Roberts
Chairperson of CREEK (County Regional Environmental Evaluation Ko-alition)

Thank you once again.

Before I start, I would like to ask Mr. Williams a couple of questions, if I may.

I know, Mr. Williams, that as a leader of OFA you do your best to represent your members.

May I ask how many members there are in the PEC OFA? How many of those would be what we would call "traditional family farmers"; i.e. live on their farm and raise the food for their livestock?

And how many corporations who own and run intensive livestock operations do you represent?

How many live outside of the county?

Really, Mr. Williams, we are not that far apart in our concerns, you and I, and I hope to demonstrate that later in this presentation.

But first I would like to respond to some of the comments made in your presentation.

You accuse us of using half-truths, exaggerations and incorrect statements. I assure you that any material presented was thoroughly researched and the information acquired from accredited sources.

However, let us look at the couple of points that you felt you could demonstrate were incorrect. Our research cited cholera as a constituent of hog manure. But, if we put that aside for the moment, you do not refute that hog waste contains parasites, bacteria, and viruses including salmonella, campylobactu, ecoli, cryptosporidium, giardia, streptococcus and chlamydia, all of which were listed in our presentation. We can strike cholera from the list and still have reasons for concern.

In terms of salt, which you correctly point out is spread in great abundance on our roads, we, of course, have concerns about that practice also, but CREEK's mandate is to deal with factory farms, not the department of roads.

Perhaps at some time in the future you and I can sit down and you can point out to me the exaggerations and inaccurate information through the rest of our presentation.

We acknowledge that agriculture is a very important industry in Prince Edward County and it is the roots of our heritage. We also recognize the contribution made by Midtown Meats; Mr. Williams, Midtown Meats is a meat packer and distributor, not an intensive livestock operation. It does employ over 200 people;

But

In general, hog factories displace three times as many jobs as they create. In contrast, smaller farms generate a higher number of permanent jobs and account for a greater increase in local sales per capita income, and a greater reduction in unemployment rate than hog factories.

The cost per unit for agricultural production is no better in larger commercial operations than in family farms. The optimum efficiency for raising hogs is reached on a farrow-to-finish operation with just 150 sows. (Grace Factory Farm Project)

I will not take much time to debate the issue as to whether the regulations in Bill 81 should be the same across the province. Most groups who are concerned about the land and the communities in which they live understand that each area has unique needs based on the topography and geology of the area. Many groups have made that point in response to the Bill 81 regulations.

In view of the fact that it was the Kincardine council who wrote the resolution referred to, I would hope that Mr. Williams does not believe that the councillors had not done their homework. There are indeed concerns that the regulations as they now stand do not go far enough in protecting our ground water supplies. Once again, at another time perhaps, Mr. Williams, we can get together and I can point out to you the areas of the regulations that demonstrate this.

In terms of the Brockton resolution, I believe that we can go to the nutrient management regulations themselves to determine the size of an intensive livestock operation. But, as explained at the council meeting, size is less important than the manner in which the livestock are raised, and the storage and spreading of vast amounts of liquid manure.

Now I would like to demonstrate to you how, really, we are on the same side in this issue. We are concerned that the growth of ILO's is detrimental to traditional family farmers, those farmers who make up the bulk of your membership.

Over the decades, family farmers have built up a vast treasure of public confidence and good will. Many people in the cities either grew up on farms or have parents or other close relatives who either are or were family farmers. The "farm family" conjured up images of people who are hard working, moral, honest, solid, dependable, trustworthy, caring, and responsible. These images have been a valuable source of wealth for farmers - although not widely recognized as such.

Farmers have been awarded special privileges, exemptions, and variances under a whole host of public policies -- from taxation to environmental regulations -- because they were trusted to behave in the public interest. Support of "family farms" has been an important part of the rhetoric of every farm bill. Farmers have also enjoyed a special status "as people," apart from any monetary benefits. They have been respected and trusted. However, bad publicity surrounding large-scale, corporate hog production is using up the farmer's stock of public confidence and good will at an alarming rate. Negative stories have appeared on every major television network over the past few years. Family farms will be paying for this loss of public trust for decades, if not forever.

An important thing to mention is "the growing separation between rural agricultural residents and rural residential residents, a distinction that ILO owners make and try to exploit. One thing that must be made clear is that being against ILO's is not being against agricultural residents, because ILO's should be viewed not as "farms" but as "factories" for that is what they are and how they run. Simply because ILO's are a part of the agricultural sector does not mean that they are a farm, or even support farmers.

The fact that the number of farmers in Ontario is declining but the number of animals/crops has stayed the same or increased, shows that this current trend is helping to kill farming, in favour of large scale vertically integrated factories. Canada has become a major exporter of hogs on earth. We have 70% more pigs than a decade ago, but although the $750 million we made from hogs in 1976 was split up between 63,000 farms, today the $2.8 billion we get goes to only 950. Just as one example among many, Nebraska has banned ILO's for almost 20 years and now has far fewer hogs - but vastly more farmers making a living raising pork.

This industry is not "a normal outgrowth of traditional farming" says Bill Weida, an economist at Colorado College, who wants to challenge the assumption that it benefits communities. We must "demand proof that hog raising actually increases economic prosperity in any way at all." The mega-hog industry's purpose is to "get people off the land so they can use this resource for market production. People are just complaining nuisances to ILO's," said Weida. They don't need your labour, just your land. So they're thrilled when an area is depopulated because of their activities."

Professor Emeritus Bill Andrews of the University of Toronto has explained that liquid manure washes into the water table more quickly than solid manure, long term application of liquid manure degrades the soil quality and destroys the land. The land becomes a victim to clod formation, nutrient overloading, and reduced crop yields due to salinization. What will that do to our prime agricultural land?

Committee members, Mr. McComb, Mr. Williams, I have brought with me another recently passed interim control bylaw passed by the Tweed council on March 4. On behalf of the members of CREEK, on behalf of all of the residents of PEC, farming and non-farming, I urge you to follow the lead of so many other councils who recognize the many dangers associated with ILO's - dangers to the environment, to the economy, and to the farming community.

Please pass an interim control bylaw.

Excerpts from

A report to the Minister of Agriculture as part of consultations on the Agriculture Policy Framework

Presented by the National Farmers' Union
January 23, 2003

Federal and provincial governments are tacitly (and overtly) encouraging the structural adjustment of the Canadian food system with the aim of moving to larger, "more efficient" farms. Thus, the problem (fewer farms) has been transformed into the solution.

The real problem - an imbalance in profit distribution within the agri-food chain that mirrors the large, destructive, and growing imbalance in market power within that chain.

Farms are not being destroyed because we have failed to become efficient or because we are not running fast enough; farms are being destroyed because it is impossible for family farms to outrun multi-billion-dollar transnational giants.

Lured by increased profits agribusiness corporations will try to take over additional agricultural sectors - as they have done with hogs in Canada and hogs and poultry in the U.S. - expelling family farmers.

For farmers around the world, their highest profits markets tend to be their home markets. Production for local markets reduces transportation costs and the number of intermediaries. World markets, on the other hand, are often dumping grounds.

Local and organic production and the reduction of food transportation distances can improve environmental sustainability.

Governments must control the market power and profiteering of transnational agribusiness that is the cause of the farm income crisis.

All Canadians must work to create more sustainable, less energy-intensive, more environmentally-friendly, more equitable, and more health-giving food production and distribution systems.

When local families own our businesses, those families receive the profits and spend them locally. Those families buy supplies and materials locally, from other local families.

The last sector in the Canadian economy where the means of production are largely owned by local families is the farm sector. The transnational takeover of family farms is one of the last battles in a long war over who will own the economy - local families or distant investors. As the last hold-out against transnational takeover and control, the farm sector is besieged - surrounded, and starved for life-sustaining revenues and profits.

The family farm does not stand in isolation. Its fate is inextricably tied to the fate of our children's jobs and our social programs. Canadians and their governments must resist the destruction and takeover of the family farm.