Shifting Gears: Blog 3.0

I believe it's time to shift gears on the Blog for Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada ("SFPFC"), moving toward Blog 3.0

Readers of SFPFC's Blog are now from 161
countries, including Antarctica.

This Blog was started  on Feb.28, 2013 (coming up on 3 years old), has posted 444 entries, and attracted a total of 187,723 visits from people in 161 countries around the world. (USA, Canada, Russia, France, Ukraine, Germany, China, and UK leading the way in visitors).

We shifted gears in May 2015 to a non-daily posting, as Blog 2.0

Today, we shift gears to Blog 3.0, where our primary focus will now be to help non-quota poultry farmers, cheerleading their successes, and providing helpful hints to do sustainable, worthy poultry farming that can produce safe, nutritious, affordable, locally produced poultry for our local communities.  This will include non-CAFO poultry farming, small flock, Artisanal Chicken, Family Food exemption, and all similar non-quota poultry farming.

Up until now, our primary focus has been on investigating and describing the plight of non-quota chicken farmers in Ontario Canada, as a proxy and worst case scenario for all Small Flockers across Canada.

Small Flockers in Ontario have historically been the most abused, mistreated, and persecuted of all Small Flockers across Canada.  Our theory was that if we cannot make our case for relief and respect for Small Flockers in Ontario, we would not be able to do any good for anybody else across Canada.

Since starting our crusade 3 years ago, Ontario's Chicken Mafia, as embodied and lead by the Chicken Farmers of Ontario, has introduced "Artisanal Chicken", where a Small Flocker can raise up to 3,000 birds per year; 10 times more than the previous draconian rules by CFO against both Small Flockers and Canadians.

For those who shout "Too little, too late", I agree.

However, these changes forced upon the Chicken Mafia by public opinion and their government masters are a good start.

As the Canadian and world economies continues to tailspin down, out of control, the unfairness and unacceptable cost of Supply Management ("SM") will become more and more apparent to the public.  Soon the public will start shouting for urgent changes for more affordable food that isn't contaminated or depleted of nutrition.  Those additional changes to SM will suddenly start to appear.  We need to be patient.

The Chicken Mafia will think that each concession granted will be sufficient to satisfy the complaints against them and their wicked, dysfunctional system.  The Chicken Mafia think that throwing one last bone to the wolves at the Chicken Mafia's door, they will escape the bite of the ravenous wolves.  The Chicken Mafia think they can then resume their raping, pillaging, and abuse of Canadians and Small Flockers.

However, each changed forced upon the Chicken Mafia will be too little, too late.  It will quench the thirst for change only momentarily.  The grudgingly created concession will help show that change for the better is possible, and show the chronic unfairness that has been imposed for decades by the Chicken Mafia.  Each change will fuel and spread the need for more change.

That doesn't mean that the Chicken Mafia can escape by refusing all change, sending forth their lobbyists with more money and propaganda to quell the growing disturbance.  The Chicken Mafia can no longer delay, deny, destroy, defend, distract, deride, and deflect.  Refusing to change for the better will quickly end their tinpot monopoly.

For those who are interested, the evidence of the Chicken Mafia's dirty deeds is collected together and fully explained here.  For those interested, the Internet will spread the message.  For those who wish to stay dumb and blind, nothing written here will change anything for them.

Also, there is little to be gained from re-hashing the same crimes and misdemeanors of the Chicken Mafia over and over again.  It's now time to move on.  However, if the Chicken Mafia commit another unique and grisly offense against Small Flockers or the Canadian public, you will likely hear about it here first.

Now  we will build our own Small Flocker community.  We will share and support each other.  We will build the policies and best practices of Small Flockers, so that this becomes the nexus of sharing and celebrating everything Small Flocker.

I therefore call upon all our readers around the world for what they have done to improve their flocks and better serve their local communities.  You are all requested and invited to share your stories, pictures, and other successes here.

The dysfunctional CAFO chicken factories and their quota monopolies, lies, cheating, and incest are hereby abandoned, out of the spotlight, and can wallow in their own filth as long as they want, slowly rotting, rusting and inbreeding to their heart's content.  We are done with them.  Good-bye.

Chicken Consumer Due Diligence

If the Chicken Mafia are surviving and prospering by spewing their propaganda far and wide, what can a consumer do to overcome the lies, half truths, and misleading omissions by the CAFO chicken factory owners and their henchmen?

Consumers must fight back with due diligence.



The above clip from the TV show Portlandia satirizes what well informed restaurant staff must go through to make a sale to overly conscientious guests who must know the provenance of the chicken on the menu.

It's funny because it went to an extreme.  It's sad, because that is what consumers are being forced to do more and more so as to overcome the Big Food propaganda machine.

Abuse of BC Homeless Persons via Chicken Manure

Weaponized Chicken Manure:   Farmers who raise chickens under a Supply Management ("SM") license appear to have supplied biohazardous chicken manure to at least 3 municipalities in BC to use as a weapon against the homeless.  Did the SM system adequately regulate and supervise the SM farmer(s) that aided &/or abetted this despicable and disgraceful act?

Figure 1:  A large farm tractor hauling a load of chicken
manure. In Abbotsford's case, the chicken manure was
manually shoveled out of a municipal dump truck on top
of the homeless and their meager possesions.
(Photo: Abbotsford Today )

Chicken manure was used by municipal employees (in Surrey BC in Aug. 2009, again in Abbotsford BC in June 2013), and Port Coquitlam shortly after Abbotsford) to contaminate municipal lands, residential tents, and personal property used by homeless persons for encampments.  The manure was also used as a weapon to force homeless people to vacate the manure treated area of municipal property.

The story "This Stinks" was originally reported by James Breckenridge on an online newspaper Abbotsford Today on April 6, 2013.  I first learned of this incident on Oct. 21, 2015 via CBC Radio As It Happens   coverage of the BC Supreme Court ruling (Chief Justice Hinkson,
Abbotsford (City) v. Shantz, Case: 2015 BCSC 1909, Dockets S156820 and S159480), against the Abbotsford BC municipality, calling the city's actions "disgraceful".

CBC News also reported that BC's Supreme Court upheld the complaints by homeless persons that their Charter rights had been violated by chicken manure, bear spray, confiscation &/or destruction of the meager possessions of the homeless, and other disgusting and callous behaviours by municipal employees and/or police.

Figure 2:  Residents at the homeless protest camp in Jubilee
Park in 2014 refused to leave, despite threats of an injunction
from the City of Abbotsford, BC. (Photo: CBC)

CBC Radio states that local police may have facilitated, acquiesced, or originated the idea of using chicken manure as a weapon against the homeless.  The Abbotsford Chief of Police was quoted at a public meeting in the Winter of 2012-2013 saying: "My policy is displace and disperse … we only respond to complaints from citizens…we don’t seek the homeless out…”; in other words, run the homeless out of town.  It is unknown if these were bona fide substantiated complaints, or maybe automatic (or self-generated) complaints.

While no By-law was passed by the Municipal Councils to authorize these misguided actions, that doesn't guarantee that one or more Councillor, Mayor, Municipal Clerk, or other senior municipal manager didn't know of this planned action in advance, tacitly approved it, or acquiesced to the plan.

Subsequent to the initial report on the chicken manure incident, the scandal spread much further (see here, here, and here).  Eventually, Abbotsford Today reported in June 2013 that the city's manager of bylaw enforcement, the general manager of finance, and general manager of economic development all left the city's employment rather abruptly, shortly after the chicken manure attack upon the homeless.

There is now a video short that you can watch privately for $3.00 or you can screen it for your local community group.  There is also a Facebook group on this issue.

Abbotsford BC:  A City of Contrasts

As of June 2015, Abbotsford Today reports:

Homelessness: This issue won’t go away. The City of Abbotsford has spent $1 million of your money fighting the homeless in court, and they continue to lose nearly every battle. It is estimated that they will spend at least another $1 million only to lose the entire war. There has been no progress whatsoever on this issue. The only real beneficiary has been the City of Abbotsford’s law firm. So where do we go from here? Watch for this column coming soon.

What terrible fate or fear has fallen upon the people of Abbotsford, Surrey, and possibly many others that those who "have-a-little" feel a need to persecute the "have-nots"?

Is this a misguided attempt by the "have-a-little" people to clear the proverbial airport runway of poverty so that the "have-a-little" gain some free space to crash land into poverty as they are shot out of the sky by the 0.1%'ers?

Contrast the weaponized chicken manure with the report by Statistics Canada that as of 2011, Abbotsford had the most generous per capita charitable donations of any Canadian city for 9 straight years.

No doubt, Abbotsford BC is a city of contrasts.

I have previously posted about the precipitous drop in the savings rate of Canadians from 30% in 1980, reaching virtually zero in 2013 (see Blog posting "Why do we need cheaper food?").  In BC, the savings rate is currently -7%, meaning that the average household must use their credit card, bank line of credit, or re-mortgaging of their house so as to afford 7% of their monthly household expenses.  No wonder Food Banks in BC reported a 24.7% increase in Food Bank usage between 2008 and 2014, which is a doubling & re-doubling of Food Bank usage every 18.6 years.  In Abbotsford, there are 7 Food Banks to serve about 134,000 people.

In 2012, Globe & Mail reported:

"The Fraser Valley city of 137,000 went from recording 11 murders — most gang-related — in 2009 to none in 2011 after four deaths in 2010, Constable Ian MacDonald said.

Based on the Statistics Canada figures for communities with a population of more than 100,000, Abbotsford was on top [worst city for murders] on a per-capita basis in 2009."

In 2005, the Abbotsford–Mission metropolitan area had the highest property crime rate and the second highest violent crime rate for cities with a population of 100,000 to 500,000 in Canada.

With the Southern city limits of Abbotsford being the Canada-US border, Abbotsford is prime real estate for cross-border traffic with the USA.  BC Business magazine estimated that the BC marijuana industry "contributed" $7.5-billion GDP in 2008 with a labor force of over 250,000 workers.  BC's marijuana industry is #2 in the BC economy (Construction is #1, Forestry is #3).  With Canadian housing teetering on the brink of a crash, the housing wealth effect will likely soon evaporate.  The construction industry in BC (and across Canada) will soon likely shrivel like a man on a New Years Day Polar Bear plunge into an iced over lake.  That may soon leave marijuana as the #1 industry in BC.

Abbotsford, and many other similar communities may soon become even more stressed.

What comes after weaponized chicken manure?

Weaponized Chicken Manure

We believe that all chicken farmers, both quota and non-quota, must ensure that weaponized chicken manure (and all similar incidents) must be prohibited and prevented from re-occurring ever again.
 
Scientists have studied the negative impact on people from manure, and they can be severe.  The impact isn't limited to upper middle class suburbs that are encroaching upon farmland.  The study found: 

• Bacteria, fungi, moulds, and bioactive substances like endotoxins and glucans were present in the dust (particulate matter) from manure;
• "Odour annoyance is a strong negative predictor of QoL [Quality of Life] among nearby residents. Sixty-one percent of the respondents complained about unpleasant odours and 91% of these accused livestock as source of these odours."

Did this manure also contain dead bird mortalities or poultry processing waste, which could be even a greater biohazard risk?

It was reported that the chicken manure was extremely odorous when it was spread on the land, as well as next to, on top of, and inside tents used by the homeless to sleep in.

Chicken manure is only highly odorous when it is fresh, prior to it being composted.  Prior to composting, chicken manure contains, or should be assumed to contain, active pathogens (bacteria, viruses, and other biohazardous materials) that can readily contaminate articles or persons.  Chickens are known to carry or transmit 60 major diseases, some of which humans can be afflicted by.  Just one of those diseases is HPAI (Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza, or "Bird Flu").  Thousands of people have died from contracting Bird Flu during the last decade, which was in BC's Fraser Valley as recently as Spring 2015.

If the chicken manure had a mild or minimal odor, it was likely properly composted prior to the mis-use of the manure by the municipalities.  If composted, the manure would have been denatured (ie. pathogens that had previously existed had been mostly or totally killed) via the high temperatures that naturally occur during proper composting techniques.

With very stinky chicken manure used by the municipality, I therefore conclude that a significant biohazardous risk was created when the chicken manure was used as a weapon against the homeless.

Crime, Terrorism, or Just a Bad Idea?

Figure 3:   Farmer David Cannon spreads manure upon the
walls and sidewalk outside a UK bank in 2000, after a
10 year dispute.  The farmer was fined and sentenced to
60 days in jail (suspended provided he stays out of trouble).
Should the bad acting BC municipalities  and the enabling
chicken farmer(s) face similar sanctions?

In the UK, a farmer assaulted urban bank branches using farm manure in Year 2000.  He was fined and sentenced to 60 days in jail (suspended sentence). Should the bad acting BC municipalities and the enabling chicken farmer(s) face similar sanctions?

Is there sufficient grounds for the RCMP to investigate this as a criminal act or indictable offense, and possibly lay charges?

For an example of the potential hazards and to minimize the risks from manures, look at the regulation for importing manure into Canada that could be infectious or biohazardous, we have the Federal  Health of Animals Regulations, C.R.C., c. 296

41.1.  A person may import into Canada an animal by-product, manure or a thing containing an animal by product or manure, other than one described in section 45, 46, 47, 47.1, 49, 50, 51, 51.2 or 53, if:
. . .
 (c) the by-product, manure or thing has been collected, treated, prepared, processed, stored and handled in a manner that would prevent the introduction into Canada of any reportable disease, any disease referred to in Schedule VII and any serious epizootic disease to which the species from which the by-product, manure or thing was derived is susceptible and that can be transmitted by the by¬product, manure or thing, and the person produces a certificate signed by an official of the government of the country of origin that

(i) attests that the by-product, manure or thing has been collected, treated, prepared, processed, stored and handled in that manner, and

(ii) shows the details of how it was collected, treat-ed, prepared, processed, stored and handled. 

BC's Environmental Management Act has an Agricultural Waste Control Regulation that controls the proper use of manures, but this regulation likely doesn't prohibit the crazy actions of these out of control municipalities.

It appears the chicken manure used meets the definition of a noxious substance.  There appears to be reasonable & probable grounds to believe the spreading of the chicken manure was an intentional act meant to aggrieve or annoy one or more of the homeless persons who were living in that area.  Section 245 of Canada's Criminal Code states:

Administering noxious thing
245. Every one who administers or causes to be administered to any person or causes any person to take poison or any other destructive or noxious thing is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years, if he intends thereby to endanger the life of or to cause bodily harm to that person; or

(b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, if he intends thereby to aggrieve or annoy that person.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 229.

The chicken manures used in BC seem to meet the definition of a active biological agent.  The Canadian Federal law Biological  and  Toxin  Weapons  Convention Implementation Act (Part 23) states on page 96:

6.(1) No person shall develop, produce, retain, stockpile, otherwise acquire or possess, use or transfer(a) any microbial or other biological agent, or any toxin, for any purpose other than prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes; or

(b) any weapon, equipment or means of delivery designed to use such an agent or toxin for hostile purposes or in armed conflict.

Something tells me the chicken manure wasn't used for "peaceful purposes" against the homeless.  Section 14.(1) says that if someone contravenes Section 6, they are guilty of an indictable offense and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or to both.

Criminal Mischief is defined by Section 430:

Mischief
430. (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

(a) destroys or damages property;

(b) renders property dangerous, useless, inoperative or ineffective;

(c) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property; or

(d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.

Sections (a) and (b) seem to fit the prima facie evidence.  Case law has found that mischief can be done even to property such as refuse or garbage, so damaging or destroying the meager possessions of the homeless can still justify a charge of mischief.

I also looked at whether this could be considered an act or terrorism.  It doesn't appear the use of chicken manure against homeless people sufficiently meets the definition of terrorism under Section 431.2.(2) of the Criminal Code (see page 508).  However, if it was a Muslim-Canadian who had spread the chicken manure for the intentional harassment of the homeless, the previous PC government would likely have taken a different interpretation than what I have concluded here. 

BC's Chicken Mafia Aiding & Abetting Weaponizing of Chicken Manure ?

It is unlikely that the municipal employees normally have ready access to significant quantities of fresh, non-composted chicken manure.  Therefore the city employees had to obtain that fresh chicken manure from one or more chicken farmers, likely within or proximate to these misguided municipalities.

Therefore, I conclude that one or more Canadian chicken farmers likely enabled these civil rights violations by these wayward municipalities.

I have no way of knowing if the culpable chicken farmer(s) were small flockers or quota-based CAFO farmer(s).  However, assuming that the municipality needed large quantities of manure, it is unlikely that it came from a small flock poultry farmer.  I therefore assume the guilty farmer(s) was/were quota-based chicken farmer(s) who conspired and enabled these despicable actions by municipal employees.

I hope that rules, policies, regulations, or laws of  BC Chicken Marketing Board,  BC Chicken Growers’ Association, BC Farm Industry Review Board, B.C. Ministry of Agriculture, and B.C. Ministry of Health
are sufficient to ensure that manure (and all similar farm products) are never again mis-used as weapons against people, homeless or not.

Under BC Poultry Biosecurity Guide, BC's quota-based poultry farms:

• Must have a documented manure management strategy (Section 4.4);
   
• Recognize that manure can be a high-risk source of disease transmission (Section 4.4);
   
• Must have a manure management strategy that, at a minimum, document how the manure was utilized and/or who transported it from the farm (Section 4.4); and
   
• Should not spread raw (ie. not composted) manure on fields (Section 4.4); and
• Require a mandatory written log book, and must log the name of company or individual transporting manure off the farm and, where known, the receiver (Section 4.7.1).

I doubt that anybody's Manure Management Strategy will neither document nor authorize the selling or gifting of chicken manure to a municipality or other third party for use as a weapon against homeless people.  If it isn't documented and yet was done by a BC quota-based chicken farm, then that is a non-compliance that can be investigated, the farmer(s) that facilitated this attack on the homeless can be identified, and those farmer(s) can be suitably sanctioned by the Chicken Mafia authorities in BC.

Has that Chicken Mafia investigation of weaponized chicken manure been done? If not, why not?

Could the chicken manure (recklessly spread on municipal lands as a weapon used against the homeless) be explained as an "accidental" spill?  Under the BC Spill Reporting Regulation, manure spills greater than 200 kg or 200 litres must be reported immediately to the Provincial Emergency Program.  Did this occur?

A 6 year study of manure issues by BC's Ministry of Environment has finally resulted in a Sept. 2015 announcement that changes are required to tighten controls on manure.  Perhaps this issue needs to be added too.

When I reviewed Small Flocker's policies and Principles, I was not comfortable that our Small Flocker principles were adequate to prevent this issue on our side of the farm fence.  Therefore, today I added the following to our Principles as the new #10:

10.  All farmers shall plan and reasonably ensure that all raw materials, on- and off-farm processes, products, by-products, wastes, and emissions are done in a lawful, moral, reasonable, sustainable, and socially acceptable manner for the entire life cycle of the materials and/or processes involved.

Does the BC Chicken Mafia have a similar policy?  Shouldn't Chicken Farmers of Canada take actions so we have a Canada-wide, consistent policy on the mis-use and abuse of people by chicken manure or other chicken offal?

Do any of these regulatory bodies need a policy?  If yes, they are welcome to use Small Flocker's new policy (see #10 above), if they wish, but I doubt they see the need.  I also doubt any of them will take action to do their job.  In that case, should the BC Farm Industry Review Board, B.C. Ministry of Agriculture, or the B.C. Ministry of Health force the Chicken Mafia to protect the homeless or the public in general from this type of assault in the future?

If not, we can eventually expect the same type of bad behaviour (by or enabled by a CAFO chicken farmer) some time in the future.

Chicken Mafia Answers to Serious Questions?

I have sent this Blog posting to the above BC authorities, and put some questions to them about this issue.

Any bets on whether I receive a reasonable & timely response?

Overthrowing Canada's Supply Management

Overthrowing of Canada's Supply Management System

We are not there yet.  All of us must be patient, and wait.  Unfortunately, the abuse of the Chicken Mafia will continue until it can no longer continue.

The Chicken Mafia's abuse will get worse and worse.

The Chicken Mafia tyranny will go from bad to absurd.

Only after this process can go no further, when we are all under the absolute Despotism of the Chicken Mafia, when we can no longer continue, only then will the people awake and throw off their oppressor.

"... all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Thomas Jefferson, In Congress, July 4, 1776, Preamble, U.S. Declaration of Independence

We are not there yet.

We must wait for, and survive, much more abuse from our Chicken Oppressors before that day of relief arrives.

Our Chicken Mafia oppressors will not permit small incremental improvements to occur that relieve the suffering of the people.  This absolute prohibition maximizes the continuous flow of gains and benefits for the Chicken Mafia in the hear and now.

The Chicken Mafia will push, and push, and push again so as to capture as much as they can get as quickly as possible.

The Chicken Mafia has successfully achieved a special interest coup d'étate and installed an inverted totalitarian state that oppresses all of us.

The Chicken Mafia has won, and we have lost.

Our only hope at this point is the awakening of the people.  The people must eventually stand on their own two feet, to protest, to do civil disobedience, and put fear into the hearts and minds of all leaders, both government and the Chicken Mafia.


Until them, the Chicken Mafia will continue pushing Canadians into a corner until there is a backlash.  This greed and kleptocracy imposed by the Chicken Mafia, and permitted by the government, will ensure we all descend into our shared destiny of a Chicken Apocalypse.

As sure as the sun comes up in the East, and the grass grows, and the waters flow, that day of Chicken Apocalypse will eventually come.

"Power concedes nothing without demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."

Thomas Paine (1737 - 1809), English political activist, philosopher, and political theorist who emigrated to N. American colonies in 1774, and was instrumental in leading the US to its Declaration of Independence

The spark that will eventually ignite the fuse on the Chicken Apocalypse bomb is unknown and unknowable.  The spark will come from a trifling event, but it will eventually come only when the time is right.

“In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.”

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

Until the time is right for overthrowing the Supply Management System, we must prepare.  We must get ready to claim our freedom from the Chicken Mafia.

Now, for today and all tomorrows, we must busy ourselves.  We must prepare ourselves for what comes next, while we await the arrival of that spark that will ignite the fuse of freedom.

Is "Humane Certified" Really Humane?

Foster Farms is the most
recent accused for chicken
abuse by the Chicken Mafia

The public is getting more and more enraged by clear violations of humane treatment and reasonable animal welfare for farm animals, including chickens. This time it was Foster Farms, a member of the US Chicken Mafia.  The Chicken Mafia can and should be preventing these incidents from occurring, then promptly responding to these incidents when their prevention efforts were insufficient.  Instead, the Chicken Mafia, whether in the US or Canada, prefer to delay, deny, distract, defend, destroy, deride, and deflect; rather than make the necessary changes to their dysfunctional systems.

Mercy for Animals enlisted Bob Barker, the former "Price Is Right" host, TV personality, and animal rights advocate for more than 30 years, to host and narrate this shocking video.



If the above video is reliable evidence, something in this commercial chicken system is broken, and needs to be fixed.

The above video is alleged to have been shot in California USA, at Foster Farms poultry slaughterhouse in Fresno, and their three poultry farms in Fresno County.  Once the undercover video was published, Foster Farms suspended 5 employees, and are doing re-training for the other employees in the areas investigated. The allegations received an immediate knee jerk reaction by the management of Foster Farms, blaming their employees.  Foster Farms response to the video is here.

Foster Farms says that every employee has animal welfare training every year.  If that's true, how do we explain the actions shown in the video?  Does management give mere lip service in this training (ie. rolling their eyes, cracking jokes, turning it into a farce)?  On the other hand, is every employee required to do a comprehensive comprehension test at the end of the training, to prove that they were paying attention, and fully understood?  Using dummy chickens, can each employee demonstrate what they understand to be acceptable animal treatment at their work station, and what is unacceptable (and might lead to them being fired)?

In spite of Foster Farms putting 100% of the blame onto the employees in their press release, does the management of Foster Farms have any blood on their hands?

I have posted previously that all management, whether on chicken farms or aerospace manufacturing, have the following duties owed to each and every one of their employees:

Duties that Managers Owe to All Employees

1. Ensure each employee knows exactly what is expected from them;
2. Provide each employee with all the necessary resources to readily achieve what is expected (eg. money, training, equipment, data, feedback, recognition, dignity, respect, supervision, tools, etc.).
3. Ensure each employee can (and does) measure and understand the difference between what is expected and what actually occurred.
4. Ensure that all employees take prompt corrective action to close the gap(s) between what is expected & what actually occurred.
5. Ensure that risks and non-conformances are promptly identified, and actions are taken to prevent their occurrence (or re-occurrence).

To run an organization without these 5 managerial duties, is to abdicate management's responsibilities.  For example, if the driver of a vehicle suddenly decided to close their eyes and let go of the steering wheel of their moving vehicle while driving on a busy street, should society hold that driver responsible for the subsequent carnage?  Without these 5 duties, the management has similarly let go of the corporate steering wheel and closed their eyes, and subjected all those nearby to the gruesome consequences.

Did the management of Foster Farms do any of those 5 steps?  If they didn't do all 5 steps in a comprehensive and effective manner, then the blame for the animal abuse sits on the shoulders of both Foster's management and the employees who actually did the abuse.

One news report on this scandal raised the issue of the poor working conditions suffered by the employees working at Foster Farms.  If the employees feel abused in their jobs at the hands of Foster management, some employees may lash out at the animals they are forced to process at break neck speeds.  As a hands-on employee on the chicken processing line, how do you keep your empathy and sanity in spite of the thousands of animals you send to their death every day, and avoid becoming desensitized to the animals' welfare?

In the video, Bob Barker (and/or Mercy of Animals) also blame the American Humane Association ("AHA") for enabling this abuse by falsely certifying Foster Farms and their chicken processes as "humane".

The Chicken Mafia is rich.  Foster Farms is one of the biggest chicken producers in the US, with 10,000-employees, operations in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Arkansas and Alabama, a comprehensive line of products that's sold globally, with over 100 producers on more than 7,000 farms. Foster Farms says they employ two full-time avian veterinarians and a poultry nutritionist.  Where were these professionals when these abuses were ongoing? Did these professionals know about, suspect, or turned a blind eye to this abuse? I believe any corporation that big should have known better, and taken better care to prevent these issues from occurring.

The American Humane Association ("AHA") has an ongoing need for $12.8 million per year in funding their charity.  Can the Chicken Mafia purchase and use the good name of AHA Certified Humane as a smoke screen?  AHA says:

"Since 1877 the historic American Humane Association has been at the forefront of every major advance in protecting children, pets and farm animals from abuse and neglect."

AHA doesn't own nor operate any animal welfare shelters.  AHA has drafted a document of best practices and minimal accepted standards to which about 300 animal shelters have voluntarily endorsed, follow, and pay AHA to audit their compliance.  AHA also has the exclusive contract to ensure that animals are well treated in all Hollywood movies and similar artistic productions.

There are others who also certify animal welfare excellence.  For example, Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), this label has the most stringent guidelines. It is only issued to meat that comes from independent family farms.

Humane Farm Animal Care has Certified Humane, which USA Today called the "Gold Standard" for animal welfare.

According to Charity Navigation, AHA has recently suffered a 16.3% drop in funding to its charitable programs for animal welfare.

PetSmart Charities (a recent spin off of the US for-profit pet store chain that has a similar purpose to AHA) has a 22.9% better charity effectiveness score that AHA, and a $51 Million per year budget; almost 4 times bigger than AHA.  Obviously, older isn't necessarily better.

Does this loss of market share and exclusivity explain why AHA supported Foster Farms and the Chicken Mafia in their time of need, so as to obtain some quick cash for the AHA?

To become AHA certified for animal welfare, AHA requires an application, payment of a fee to AHA, an on-site audit by a certified ISO auditor who also has animal species-specific expertise, a review and approval of the audit results, employee training, and annual re-certification.  Sounds pretty good to me.  But is it effective, or a smoke screen?

The AHA standard for broiler chickens is 136 pages in length.  I haven't read the entire document, but I skimmed through it, as well as fully read and analyzed a few key sections.  There are a few typos, a few unclear sentences here and there, but for the most part, it seems to be a good standard to help ensure animal welfare.

Red Rover says that AHA's certification system is not as thorough as the other two major animal welfare certification bodies.  Is that why Foster Farms chose AHA's system?  Perhaps Foster Farms couldn't be bothered, or couldn't achieve compliance to the higher standards?

Whatever the answer, it seems to me that if a farm or chicken processing plant was fully compliant to the spirit and letter of AHA's standard, most people would find it acceptable.  The Mercy for Animals video shown above is clearly in violation of all three standards for animal welfare.

Therefore we are left to question the AHA auditors that were sent to Foster Farms, the auditing process, and compliance by Foster Farms' employees to the defined animal welfare standard.

During AHA's audits, do the auditors seek objective evidence that Foster Farms' management has consistently and effectively implemented all 5 steps listed above?

Paper documents, by themselves, don't keep animals safe and well cared for.  Many ISO-based quality management systems are bureaucratic, bloated, and ineffective; in spite of gold stars on their audit reports.  I know, as I spent 27 years as a certified ISO auditor.

Management must be engaged, and vigilant to ensure they build a culture that believes, supports, and practices the applicable standards every hour of every day.  Does Foster meet that criteria?  If they did, they would have been aware (or suspected) the potential for abuse portrayed in the video, and stopped it from occurring (or re-occurring) long before the Mercy for Animals undercover operative arrived with their video camera.

It takes time, skill, and significant effort to do a comprehensive audit, looking for evidence of what occurs when the auditor is there, as well as what happens between audits.  Are the auditors given sufficient time?  Are auditors encouraged and supported to dig deep and have the confidence to report fully and honestly, in spite of cajoling and attempts at manipulation of audit results by the employees and management?

Are verification and validation audits done by outside auditors (separate from both the company being audited, and AHA as well)?  This could be used to see if AHA auditors are doing full and comprehensive audits with consistent and repeatable results.

Hopefully, in time, we we learn the full details, and will be reassured how both Foster and the AHA certification process will both be improved.

Could we expect the same or similar results if Mercy for Animals did more undercover work in a factory farm and/or processing plant inside Canada?  Unfortunately, based on my research on the Chicken Mafia in Canada, I'm sad to say it's likely as bad or worse in Canada as what Foster Farms got caught doing in the USA.

What are the opinions of CFC, CFO, and all the other provincial Chicken Boards about the incidents described in the video?  It is a long standing legal precedent that silence should be interpreted as acceptance.  Who will ask each and every one of these Canadian Chicken Boards, as well as the provincial and Federal supervising commissions what they have done (or will start doing) so that similar animal abuse in Canada's system will be prevented, and/or detected and remedial actions taken to prevent re-occurrence?

Today, I sent a link to this posting for both Foster Farms and the AHA, requesting their comments.  If I receive anything (which I doubt), I will post it so the world can clearly know their positions on the issues raised in this Blog posting.

Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada ("SFPFC")  has clearly defined its expectations for animal welfare.  See Clauses 2 and 3 of SFPFC's Principles.  Why hasn't the Chicken Mafia been able to do similarly?

Unfortunately, the Chicken Mafia gives all chicken farmers and chicken processors a bad name, even Small Flockers.

Chicken Mafia Powers

The Chicken Mafia has all the illicit power, all the improper rights, and the devious support of all levels of government.  The Chicken Mafia uses those powers to oppress Small Flock Farmers, and hurt all Canadian consumers.  For some strange reason, there is a conspiracy of silence throughout Canada on these illicit powers and their improper use.

“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” 

Frederick Douglass (1818 - 1895), African-American social reformer, abolitionist orator, writer, and statesman, from his speech “West India Emancipation” at Canandaigua, New York, on August 3, 1857; the twenty-third anniversary of the event.

We will never solve this injustice by patiently awaiting the self-realization of the Chicken Mafia as to the error of their ways.  For example, small flock poultry farmers in Ontario are restricted to growing just 300 chickens per year for meat; enough to feed chicken to 7 people for a year.

A tip of the hat to Murray Stenton, a graphic designer/cartoonist  from Halifax Nova Scotia.  Well done cartoon.  Thanks! 

Chicken Choices for Maple Lodge Farms

The Chicken Mafia has a few choices:  A) continue to deny, delay, stonewall, and resist; or    B) Admit it has serious problems in its defined processes, and poor compliance to those defined processes; then fix all those problems; or   C) Allow others (ie. Small Flockers) who don't have those dysfunctions to serve consumers who want humane chicken.

Here is the undercover video allegedly shot at Maple Lodge Farms' Ontario slaughter plant, then reported by Mercy For Animals.



For more, including a MFA petition see http://www.maplelodgeharms.ca/

CTV's W5 provides some excellent video and followup investigations.

From January to June 2011, Maple Lodge accrued 26 Administrative Monetary Penalties ("AMPs") and paid $120,600 in fines, according to CFIA data. Between April and June, the company chalked up another  22 violations, the most AMPs in Canada.  Rather than continue with even more AMPs, CFIA laid charges against Maple Lodge Foods.

On Sept. 27, 2013, Maple Lodge Farms was convicted on 20 separate charges for failing to provide adequate animal welfare under Health of Animals Act.  They received a suspended sentence for 3 years (expires Sept. 27, 2016) on 18 of the charges they were convicted of.  On the two charges they were sentenced on, they were fined $80,000 cash and must spend $1 Million over the three year probation period to improve their bird transportation and processing plant system.  See Appendix "A" of the Mar. 27, 2014 Court Order  Since then, there have been 20 incidents of high chicken DOA (Dead On Arrival) during the 2014 period of  probation, indicating Maple Lodge Farms still hasn't solved their issues.

In their defense, Maple Lodge Farms says:

"We also participate in third-party audits of our facilities. On our most recent audit, conducted in August 2014 by Silliker, a global leader in food safety and quality solutions, Maple Lodge Farms achieved a 99.1 per cent score on transportation and 100 per cent on the holding and handling portions of the audit."

I note a difference between food safety and animal welfare.  Perhaps that is one source of the problem, Maple Lodge Farms can't comprehend the difference.  Silliker may have expertise in HACCP, but seem to have less experience in animal welfare.  If Maple Lodge scored 99.1% and 100% on their audits, perhaps they need a new auditor, and I shudder to think of those processors who barely pass the audits. 
Maple Lodge Farms is the largest chicken processor in Canada, exports chicken to 30 foreign countries, and is a prior winner of "50 Best Managed Companies in Canada" award.  Obviously, they knew better than this.  They had the sophistication and resources to do better than this.

How do we explain their alleged cruelty to dozens, if not thousands, of chickens?

On Maple Lodge Farm's Facebook page a posting at Mar. 29, 2015 8:29 AM by a Maple Lodge spokesperson blames the undercover videographer for continued abuse of the chickens because the videographer did not use the anonymous phone tip line to report known or suspected animal abuse by other employees.

Obviously, any of the hundreds of employees at Maple Lodge Farms could have picked up the phone, but none did.  Does this indicate that the abuse is a chronic accepted fact at Maple Lodge?  How else do we explain this?  It appears that this company, or at least this slaughter plant, is a toxic work environment needing a big shakeup.

What about the thousands of good, hard working employees at Maple Lodge Farms who were not involved in the abuse, and are just as appalled as the rest of Canada?  How do these previously proud employees explain to their family, friends, and neighbours about the Mark of Cain that Maple Lodge has tattooed upon them through no fault of these employees?

So what does the President of Maple Lodge Farms have to say about all this?  Here he is, fresh off YouTube, re-invented by their crisis media consultant with their soothing tones and politically correct phrases.  Give it a good, hard listen.




The word cloud from his speech looks pretty good.  Obviously professionally written.  You bought yourself the best speech money can buy.

Word Cloud from Speech by Michael Burrows, President of Maple Lodge Farms
about animal abuse inside their slaughter plant in Brampton ON

 Maple Lodge Farms has also issued a press release.

I have done a detailed analysis and recommendations, and a commentary from the vantage point of small flock chicken farmers, thinking about the steaming pile of chicken manure Mr. Burrows has thrown his company into.  My analysis of his amateurish attempt at a reassuring, yet shallow and unbelievable speech was done sentence by sentence.  It also provides a full, corrected transcript of his speech, as You Tube's version is a little garbled.  I hope it helps Maple Lodge quickly get onto the proper path, and mend their evil ways.

Note at the end where the Ontario Don of the Chicken Mafia clinches for his closeup, and says:

"If you feel we are falling short of these expectations, I invite you to let me know via the "Contact Us" page of our website."

Michael Burrows CEO of Maple Lodge Farms

Well Mr. Burrows, I think both you and Maple Leaf Farms fall very short of the mark.

Hear me loud and clear, you have fallen short of my expectations.

Mercy for Animals Canada, at the end of their shocking documentary on Maple Lodge Farms’ dysfunctional chicken operations (Timestamp 3:10), said:

“Remember, you can withdraw your support from this cruel industry by leaving chickens off your dinner plate".

Mercy for Animals Canada

You, Mr. Burrows and your company Maple Lodge Farms have damaged the reputation of the entire chicken industry, both within Canada and internationally.  Perhaps you have damaged Canada itself, and its citizens.  A weak economy, and we ge even more damage and weakness.  Thanks a lot!

As one of the small flock chicken farmer in Ontario Canada, you have damaged me and my chicken farm.

In Luke 23:34, Jesus, while on the cross, said:

 “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”

Incompetency and lack of awareness won Jesus’ recommendation for forgiveness.  It appears that you are incompetent, and lack awareness of both animal welfare and the managing of people.  Perhaps you should be forgiven for your failings and sins too.

Mr. Burrows and Maple Lodge Farms may be suffering from the Dunning–Kruger Effect, which is a cognitive bias wherein unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate.

"If you’re incompetent, you can’t know you’re incompetent. […] the skills you need to produce a right answer are exactly the skills you need to recognize what a right answer is."

David Dunning

Having a name for your disease is half the battle.  Now all we need is a cure.  How about the cure of disciplinary firing for Mr. Burrows?

Someday, I hope to forgive you, Mr. Burrows.  However, I will never forget what you have done to those unfortunate chicken, to me, to all the other chicken farmers, and to Canada.

Oscar Wilde said,

“Every Saint has a past, and every Sinner has a future.”

Perhaps you hope that Oscar Wilde's maxim applies to you, Mr. Burrows; your sordid past, and your potentially illustrious future as a Chicken Mafia millionaire.

*  *  *

I'm done with them and their Chicken Mafia brotherhood.  Now it's your turn, my faithful Blog Dog Readers.

Do you have some comments you'd like to make to Maple Lodge Farms, and their President Michael Burrows?  If yes, here are the links.  Let them know how you truly feel.

Email Maple Lodge Farms

"Contact Us" page of  Maple Lodge Farms website page

Using Chicken to Rape the Ontario Consumer

Has CFO crossed the line into unacceptable behaviour again?  OFPMC is supposed to supervise the actions of CFO and others.  Has OFPMC encouraged CFO's bad behaviour, or turned a blind eye towards it?

In a previous post (see Chicken Pricing: From Bad to Worse), I pointed out the consequences of the latest "improvement" in regulations issued by Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission ("OFPMC").

Today, I sent CFO and OFPMC an email asking for the missing information, and for them to explain their actions.

It escapes me how anybody could call the new system for setting the live farm gate chicken prices in Ontario to be an "improvement" over the previous system.  Today, we have more complexity, less transparency, and more opportunity for arbitrary action.

Agri007 picked up my original Blog posting, and added some interesting detail on the added complexity and bureaucratic bafflegab.

As to the arbitrariness, note in Section 18.(2) of ON Regulation 402 (as amended by O. Reg 6/15),  which says:

"CP means the live chick price for sexed mixed chicks established by the Ontario Broiler Hatching Egg and Chick Commission for each quota period, expressed in dollars per kilogram of live chicken, and adjusted as necessary by the negotiating agency each quota period" [emphasis added by me]

Under Section 17 of this Regulation, CFO and their "friend" AOCP (Association Ontario Chicken Processors, the multi-millionaire Big Food owners of the major chicken slaughtering plants and distribution systems) both sit on the "negotiating agency". 

The same arbitrary latitude is given to the Chicken Mafia (ie. CFO, AOCP, and all their henchmen) for the "FP" (Feed Price) factor that is the prime factor that controls live farm gate pricing of chicken.

Exactly how and why should the Chicken Mafia "adjust" the CP and FP?

What limits exist for adjusting?  Is +/- 1% or +/- 300% adjustment OK, or somewhere in between?


Does the Chicken Mafia have to tell anybody when they have been privately fiddling with the numbers?

Does the public (or other interested parties such as Small Flockers or Affordable Food Advocates) get an alert when the Chicken Mafia has been playing fast and loose with the farm gate prices?

Are there improper reasons for the Chicken Mafia to adjust these price fixing factors?

It is obvious to me that it's the public, the end consumer and purchaser of the chicken, who ultimately pays the bills for anything that the "negotiating agency" decides.

Am I the only one on this planet who understands the sad yet shocking truth?  CFO and AOCP are not adversaries, they are in cahoots with each other.  There can be no "fair bargain" when both CFO and AOCP work together to screw the Ontario consumer.  Both CFO and AOCP realize that if they mutually co-operate with each other, their profits will be maximized; all paid for by the Ontario consumer.  When CFO and AOCP co-operate with each other, the price of chicken in Ontario rises faster and the choice available to consumers diminishes.

The analogy that applies to ON Regulation 402 and its "negotiating agency" is as follows:

The Mafia Don has instructed two of his henchmen to negotiate the agreed split of the loot that they will rob from every house and business in town.  After very tough negotiations, the robbers decided amongst themselves to split the loot 60-40, a fair split the robbers decide, as it recognizes the greater skill and years of experience by the lead robber.  Shaking hands on their deal, the two robbers then set out to burglarize every building in town and split the proceeds 60-40 as they have privately agreed.  The Mafia Don is happy because his cut of the loot is maximized.  The robbers are both happy because they each have help with all the heavy lifting they must do as they rob everybody in town, and one can be the lookout for the other, ensuring the authorities never interfere.  Unfortunately, the innocent townspeople are preyed upon to the maximum, because the thieves have organized themselves and rob in an efficient manner with no in-fighting.

Why doesn't OFPMC understand that they have guaranteed maximum damage and oppression to the Ontario consumers of chicken by their crazy regulation?

Will somebody stop OFPMC, CFO, and AOCP from their dysfunctional system and the systemic abuse of the Ontario public?

At the top of this Blog page, SFPFC says, "...Small Flockers are on the side of justice & truth, and against privilege & power."

SFPFC can't do it alone.  Will somebody help stop this organized raping of the Ontario public? 

Squeezing the Pimple

There is an over ripe pimple on the rear end of Ontario:  The Chicken Mafia.  Small Flockers now have something to push against so as to squeeze that pimple and relieve the pain and infection.

 Archemedes (287 BC - 212 BC), the great Greek philosopher and scientist said,

"Give me a place to stand, and with a lever, I will move the whole world.”

That has been a problem so far for Small Flockers. The more we push for change, the more the Chicken Mafia deflect or move out of the way.  What Small Flockers need is something to push against, so as to put the Chicken Mafia between a rock and a hard place.

Perhaps Jamie Oliver is that something (or someone) that Small Flockers can push against with the Chicken Mafia caught in between.

Jamie is a chef from Essex England, now world famous for his work in getting safe, nutritious food for children in English schools.  For the past 7 years, he has been trying to do the same for US school children.

Farm to fork, or farmer to chef.  These are two excellent bookends in which to frame the Chicken Mafia, so they can't escape.

In Feb. 2010, Jamie was invited to be a speaker at TED.  Jamie continued his crusade against obesity in children from bad food nutrition.  He showed how the US is spending $150 Billion per year in excess health care costs due to poor nutrition.

Jamie wants good food for families.  Small Flockers want good food for families.  Chicken Mafia say they do, but do exactly the opposite.  One of his latest projects was in Huntington West Virginia USA.  When he left that town after finishing his project, Huntington Kitchens continued on as a community kitchen to help people learn how to eat properly.

Watch the video, then get on your splash shield to protect yourself.  When we start squeezing that Chicken Mafia pimple, you never know when it will pop.  When it does, it will be pretty messy at first, but we'll get it put right soon enough.

LICO-Chicken = "Let them eat Cake"

"Let them eat cake" has been attributed to callous aristocracy who were insensitive to peasants spending more than 50% of their income on bread, helping launch the French Revolution and the rapid increase in the use of guillotines.  Is Chicken Farmers of Ontario and the rest of the SM Chicken Mafia saying the same today?

Low Income Cut-off ("LICO") is one of the measurements used by the government to define who is living in poverty.  You are living in poverty if your total annual income, expressed as $/yr, is less than LICO (whether that income is from gambling, lottery winnings, wages, government welfare, bank interest, clipping your bond coupons, or fixed retirement pension income).

With the inflation or deflation of retail prices (eg. housing, energy, food, etc.), LICO goes up or down accordingly.

Chicken prices have had almost a continuous rise in prices for over 20 years (see Blog Posting Chicken Price Parity: will it ever come?, going up an average of 3.54%/yr for more than 17 years.  If the income of the poor has not been rising as fast as the price of chicken, then the poor are feeling the squeeze of unaffordable food.  So we pose the important question:

Is chicken getting more affordable, or less affordable for the average Canadian, and someone who is subsisting at LICO?

Scrooge McDuck counting and playing with his gold coins
(also known to to done by members of the Chicken Mafia)

To find out, all we have to do is divide LICO by the average retail price of chicken.  This provides us with the number of kg. of chicken that a LICO-earning person can purchase per year.  If the kg/yr of LICO-chicken is decreasing over time, then chicken is becoming less and less affordable for someone living at the LICO threshold.

CFO, and the rest of the Chicken Mafia seem only interested in maximizing their personal profits.  It seems they are busy counting their gold coins, like Scrooge McDuck.  They don't know about nor understand LICO, and don't want to know.

I believe that since they received their government created quota for free, and have been delegated government powers to enforce their quota, they should be acting as a proper steward, working for the greater good of all Ontario citizens.

Unfortunately, it appears that CFO, their members, and the rest of the Chicken Mafia have a callous disregard for everybody except themselves.  Witness the data on LICO-chicken:

Figure 1:  The number of kg. per year of retail chicken that can be purchased by someone earning
at the Lower Income Cut-Off ("LICO") Poverty Line.  LICO-chicken has been dropping at 1.3%
per year, down a total of 16% during the last 14 years.  This means chicken is becoming less
and less affordable by the poor.

The data in Figure 1 is derived from Statistics Canada CANSIM Table 326-0012 and ON Ministry of Labour report on Minimum Wage
and Statistics Canada LICO data with Census Agglomeration for an individual living in a community of 30,000 to 99,999 people, before tax income.  The amount of chicken that can be purchased at retail stores in Ontario by someone earning at the LICO Poverty Line has dropped 16.3% in the last 14 years (1997 - 2011).

By way of chickens having the lowest FCR of all farmed animals (Feed Conversion Level, see The Chicken Mafia Exposed ), chicken should be the cheapest available meat.

If you cannot afford chicken, your poverty has forced you to become a vegetarian.

LICO is affected by many complex factors.  CFO and the Chicken Mafia contribute to, but do not control nor overly influence LICO.  However, CFO and the Chicken Mafia have direct control and supreme influence on the price of chicken, from the farm gate, all the way through to the retail meat counter.

Not only do CFO and the Chicken Mafia have the ability to control chicken prices, I believe they have the duty to control chicken prices on an on-going basis in the best interest of the citizens.  I believe CFO has that duty of responsibility for LICO-chicken as long as SM is allowed to continue in its present form.  If CFO continues to ignore LICO-chicken, doomsday for Ontario's chicken SM system may be far sooner than they would have dreamed possible.

Is CFO aware of this trend they created?  Does CFO care?

Did I just hear somebody within Chicken SM shout:

"Can't afford chicken?  Let them eat cake!"

Now that I have exposed CFO's negligence and callous disregard for the poor, will CFO study the matter, and assemble a plan to reverse the trend of LICO-chicken?

Will Ontario's Minister of Agriculture Kathleen Wynne order Ontario Farm Product Marketing Commission ("OFPMC") to consider LICO-chicken every time CFO tosses in another request to increase the farm gate price of chicken?

Under Ontario's Farm Products Marketing Act, CFO has been delegated sweeping, broad powers over everything within Ontario that is directly and indirectly associated with chicken.  For the most part, CFO continues to ignore and abdicate its authority over the chicken marketing and processing system beyond the delivery of chicken to the abattoirs.

Will CFO continue to ignore the impact of allowing the billionaire mega food corporations to extract the maximum profits that they please, making chicken less and less affordable for the poor and everybody else?

If CFO is unwilling or unable to act on LICO-chicken, will OFPMC order CFO to exercise the full scope of its delegated powers, so as to rein in the processors and distributors of chicken in Ontario?  

If CFO put their minds and efforts towards LICO-chicken, they should be able to achieve an improvement of 10%/yr in the kg/yr of chicken that a person living in poverty can afford.

While we are at it, why aren't all basic necessities of life judged in a similar manner by governments, as the yardstick we can all use to determine if our politicians and bureaucrats are earning their keep?

If life is more and more affordable for the poor, likely it is more affordable for everybody.

Does SM create higher prices?

In a recent posting on Better Farming, another person repeats the often made claims that Supply Management ("SM") doesn't create higher prices for the commodities that they control.  He provides the case of Australia and New Zealand as proof positive.

I assume he is referring to the removal of SM from their dairy industry in New Zealand.

For those interested, the Globe & Mail provides a good, short history on SM in New Zealand, why New Zealand developed the way it did, and then chose to abandoned SM, starting around the 1980.

I agree that doing away with, or modifying SM in Canada will not necessarily lower the price of previously SM commodities in Canada.  The world is complex, many factors interact to create the outcome.  Not all economists agree why there are "sticky prices" (also called nominal rigidity, market inertia, or market friction).

In 1998, Alan Blinder and others surveyed 100 corporations on how and why they made changes to their prices, so as to compare real-world actions against the 12 prominent theories economists have used to describe price stickiness.  Blinder wrote the book on price stickiness, called "Asking About Prices:   A New Approach to Understanding Price Stickiness", 400 pages, ISBN 978-0-87154-121-5, $34.95,

Alan Blinder is Gordon S. Rentschler Memorial Professor of Economics at Princeton University, where he has taught since 1971. He also founded and directs Princeton’s Center for Economic Policy Studies. He has served as vice chairman of the Board of Governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve System and as a member of the US President’s Council of Economic Advisers.  To me, it sounds like he might know what he is talking about.

Why don't companies change prices more frequently than they do?  The #1 reason provided was:

"It would antagonize or cause difficulties for our customers" which was 20.9% of all responses received (41 responses out of 196 total responses, from 151 firms.

Here is the survey answers received (click on graphs & tables for larger version):

Why don't you change your prices more often?, survey results from Blinder et al, for
151 US firms in various industries, 1998.

The top 6 reasons provided represent 81% of all answers received (ie. Pareto's "Vital Few").

Reasons for not changing prices more frequently.  Source:   Blinder et al.

Organizations tend to care about how customer's feel when they realize that angry or disrespected customers tend to get even by voting with their feet and/or wallets, leaving you for your competitors.  With a monopoly, that can't easily happen, so monopolists tend to be less concerned about what customers think or do.  This would mean that the top two reasons don't apply to monopolists, so they are ready to change prices much more easily, in both frequency and magnitude.

Blinder also provides data on the 4 major driving forces on those who change prices, and how long before a price change occurs after that exogenous event (ie. outside forces cause a change, then firm decides to change their prices in response):

How long after an exogenous trigger event does the firm change their prices?
Time lag in months.  As expected, it can be as fast as the same day for a firm
suffering cost increases (Mean - 3 Std. Deviations or zero, whichever is greater),
to as long as 15 months for a firm experiencing a decrease in their costs before
they pass those savings on to their customers (Mean + 3 Std. Deviations).
Source: Table 4.3, Blinder et al.

The firms were asked why they tend to avoid raising prices before their competitors do.  An overwhelming majority said,

"If we raised our prices first, we would lose too much business to low price competitors."

Obviously, not a concern when you're running a monopoly with 99.96% market share.  Guess why Canada's SM Mafia love raising prices on a consistent basis, like clock work?

Canada's Chicken Mafia are obviously not troubled by "Sticky Prices",
they make absolutely sure to raise prices almost continuously, rain or shine,
for the last 17 years and counting, 3.54%/yr price increase on average.
Graph from SFPFC's Blog posting on Feb. 28, 2013
Chicken Price Parity Will It Ever Come?

Flexible pricing is the opposite of sticky prices.  The most flexible pricing occurs when every trading opportunity is priced on a 1-off basis, without regard to any previous trades made.


Sticky prices serve a useful purpose in the marketplace.  In one simple model used to investigate sticky prices,

As I understand it, to get price reductions, there has to be:

1. a free market,
2. effective price discovery,
3. no or minimal collusion by the major players
4. a competitive marketplace, and
5. adequate slope on the price-volume supply curve
6. low or insignificant barriers or thresholds to the entry of new players
7. natural consequences (ie. bankruptcy, consumer shunning, etc.) for poor suppliers.

Without all of these and more factors, prices tend not to change for the better.
One of the biggest drivers of price changes are competitors.  If a competitor raises or lowers prices, other suppliers tend to follow the lead, or at least, it prompts them to reconsider their current strategy, and decide if they want to join, stand pat, or go in the opposite direction.  Witness the wave of retail gas price changes that often occur once one gas station bites the bullet, and changes their price.

The second biggest factor is the slope of a supplier's price-volume curve.  This means that there must be a significant difference to the total profits of the supplier if they are to go to the work and hassle of optimizing their price vs. volume factors (usually means low overhead cost suppliers are more motivated to change first in a competitive market).

There also must be low thresholds for new people to enter the marketplace.  Without this, the veterans often get sloppy and complacent over time, become less and less efficient over time, and don't take care of their customer's best interests.

When suppliers are saved from the natural consequences of poor service (ie. government grants, favors to "friends", regulatory entrapment and changing the rules in favor of status quo, etc.), the pain in the marketplace is allowed to continue a little longer, and to a greater degree.

Economists have found that price changes can occur second by second (ie. Chicago Board of Trade commodities), to as long as a 4 year cycle, but the median is around 1 year between price changes.  For more info, see Sticky Price Manifesto and Nominal Rigidity

To reach equilibrium, it usually takes between 3 to 7 time constants to get over 90% of the resulting price adjustment effect to have occurred.

We must therefore hold off in jumping to conclusions about price effects until 3 to 7 years have passed.

For example, someone who understands how the world works won't check the status every day on an acorn that they planted by digging it up to check for root development, then giving up in just seven days because nothing seems to have occurred as assumed.

It takes longer, you must have patience.

When SM is removed, either by government changing the laws, or by consumers bypassing the laws and SM's monopoly, we need to ensure that the new system meets the 7 requirements listed above, and we will soon enjoy the more affordable commodities Canadians deserve, and will enjoy more and more.