Agri007 correctly noticed that Ontario Independent Poultry Processors ("OIPP") is missing from this group. I also wonder why, especially after CFO says on their website:
"CFO, Association of Chicken Processors and Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission are jointly committed to working with and encouraging participation by the broadest possible range of relevant stakeholders who have an interest in or who may be affected by decisions resulting from the consultation exercise."At least CFO held a meeting for input from OIPP on Jan. 26th in Burlington ON. Is it because OIPP wasn't sufficiently malleable to CFO's iron will and nefarious strategy? Was there a significant danger of OIPP exposing CFO's plans to manipulate, distract, and control the issues via propaganda in CFO's favor?
What best describes CFO's actions:
- Re-arranging the Titanic's deckchairs?
- Propaganda issued by Compliance Professionals
- Red Herring to manipulate and distract
"to do something pointless or insignificant that will soon be overtaken by events, or that contributes nothing to the solution of a current problem."CFO has been spending bundles of money lately on media consultants. The next step up from media consultants are "Compliance Professionals". A compliance professional is defined as:
"an expert that utilizes and perfects means of gaining media influence. Though the means of gaining influence are common, their aims vary from political, economic, to personal. Thus the label of compliance professional applies to diverse groups of people, including propagandists, marketers, pollsters, salespeople and political advocates."A red herring is defined as:
"something that misleads or distracts from the relevant or important issue "Noam Chomsky has written about the Top 10 Media Manipulation Strategies. Do any of those apply to CFO and their actions in this case?
Regardless of CFO's intentions, Small Flockers have assumed the best, that CFO has honorable intentions. Therefore, SFPFC has responded with fair comments to improve the Supply Management system in Ontario and Canada.
After attending one of CFO's meetings in Northern Ontario, the following summary was sent to Bryan Boyle, CFO's "Compliance Professional", aka "Meeting Facilitator". All of the comments made here are based upon SFPFC's research, fully described in SFPFC's Blog postings made here over the last 2 years. Our comments on CFO and their Chicken Supply Management System are as follows:
SFPFC's CommentsSmall Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada has the following additional input as followup to our comments made during the Gore Bay ON session on Feb. 10, 2015 that our representative attended:
- Products manufactured by both manufacturing and agriculture
have similar GDP size and impact, contributory margins, value
added, and spin-off effects for the Ontario economy; some of
the best available from all sectors of the economy.
- Unfortunately, Canadian manufacturing has been on decline
for more than two decades, has been significantly wounded, and
will need years or decades of convalescence to recover its
former strength and capacity. That leaves agriculture at the
best available economic driver for the Ontario economy in the
short and medium term. What is good for agriculture is good
- Throughout North America, we have excessive carbohydrates in
our diet, causing or contributing to numerous, simultaneous
epidemics, such as obesity, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis,
Metabolic Disease, fatty non-alcoholic liver disease, high
blood pressure, high blood lipids, cancer, Alzheimer's
Disease, etc. It is estimated that 75% of all disease are
caused or contributed to by poor nutrition and/or poor diets.
- The health care budget consumes 42% of Ontario's budget. By
2045, diabetes alone is projected to consume the entire health
care budget (ie. no money left to fix broken bone, birth
babies, car accidents, etc.).
- Animals that are raised whole-life as pastured animals have
meat and eggs with ideal ratios of Omega-3 and Omega-6 fats,
while CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) based
meats have significantly worse ratios. Based on the latest
research, animal protein and fats of pastured animals is now
seen by leading nutritionists and health researchers as a
significant part of the solution to some or most of the above
- Large automated chicken processing lines generally produce
retail chickens which 30% to 80% are significantly
contaminated with deadly food-borne pathogens (salmonella,
listeria, campylobacter, Heidelburg, E.coli, etc.). Of those
pathogens, half are Super-bugs, with 1 or more drug
- OMAFRA experts have previously stated that CAFO-based
chicken operations must have and use antibiotics for disease
prevention. Most or all small flock chicken growers do not
use, and have no need for prophylactic antibiotics, thereby
avoiding or minimizing the creation of Super-bugs.
- On-farm, small scale chicken slaughter has been found to
consistently produce chickens with 1/10 the level of
contamination of the automated slaughter factories.
- Ontario's 1,400 commercial chicken producers under Supply
Management are almost exclusively focused in CAFO-based
technologies and systems, and exclusively use automated
slaughter factories. This is a deadly combination, putting
consumers at significant risk.
- Ontario's 15,000 small flock chicken producer are primarily
focused on free range and/or pastured poultry, and can use
manual slaughter systems, with significant advantage for
product quality for consumers.
- Feed Conversion Ratio ("FCR") is the major determining
factor for farm gate pricing of a meat food product.
- Chicken, with a FCR as low as 1.38 (New Zealand commercial
chicken farmers), or 1.72 in Canada, has one of the lowest
FCR's for any animal protein or fat production. Some farmed
fish claim an FCR as low as 1.2 but this accounts only for the
fish farm, not the entire supply chain life cycle (ie. there
are significant input losses to the preparation of fish feed
pellets, and when these are accounted for, the overall FCR is
usually calculated as greater than 1.75 for farmed fish).
- Therefore food produced from pastured chickens are an
important solution for the health of the Ontario public, and
the affordability of nutritious dietary fat and protein.
- By continuing to invest in CAFO-based chicken, Ontario and
quota-based farmers risk significant mal-investment, delay the
conversion to more healthy and affordable chicken production
techniques, and face a write-down or write-off at significant
financial loss of this obsolete technologies and systems.
- By allocating more and more quota, whether by direct
ownership or leasing, to CAFO-based operations will expose
Ontario to long term risks and costs that will not be easily
undone, and delay the launching of subsequent better solutions
without compensating those who were allowed or enticed to
invest in these antiquated systems.
- Of the OECD nations, Canada has just 1.4% market share of
the chicken export market.
- Canada is unable to export chicken in any appreciable degree
due to the potential for accusation of unfair or illegal trade
practices (ie. government subsidies or dumping).
- CAFO-based operations likely have significant advantages for
large export contracts at the lowest available prices,
requiring CFIA-inspected processing. Small flockers and
regionally distributed chicken producers, if allowed more than
300 birds per year can produce as farm gate producers with
prices close to those of CAFO-based retail pricing, and are
likely better suited to locally produced chicken with minimal
transportation of feeds and finished products through use of
OMAFRA-inspected local abattoirs.
- The above facts support a dramatic re-alignment and
rationalization of Ontario's chicken market, sooner rather
- For TeamOntario to focus on the narrow issue of distributing the annual incremental increases in Ontario's chicken allocation is to ignore these facts and to chronically subject Ontario citizens to the adverse consequences.