Rearranging the Titanic's Deck Chairs

Why has Chicken Farmers of Ontario ("CFO"), the Association of Chicken Processors ("AOCP"), and Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission ("OFPMC") formed TeamOntario and the Chicken Industry Advisory Committee?

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

Rearranging the Titanic's deckchairs has become a common expression or idiom defined as:

"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 Comments

Small 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:

1. 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.
   
   
2. 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 for Ontario.
   
   
3. 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.
   
   
4. 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.).
   
   
5. 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 epidemics.
   
   
6. 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 resistances.
   
   
7. 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.
   
   
8. 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.
   
   
9. 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.
   
   
10. 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.
    
    
11. Feed Conversion Ratio ("FCR") is the major determining factor for farm gate pricing of a meat food product.
    
    
12. 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).
    
    
13. 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.
    
    
14. 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.
    
    
15. 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.
    
    
16. Of the OECD nations, Canada has just 1.4% market share of the chicken export market.
    
    
17. 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).
    
    
18. 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.
    
    
19. The above facts support a dramatic re-alignment and rationalization of Ontario's chicken market, sooner rather than later.
    
    
20. 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.

Distractions or Consultations by CFO?

Am I too cynical, jaded, and suspicious?

Chicken Farmers of Ontario ("CFO") and their Chicken Industry Advisory Committee, prodded by Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commission are holding consultation meetings from chicken farmers and all other interested parties, seeking input, feedback, and advice on how to best position the chicken industry for growth in a controlled market (ie. Supply Management).

Team Ontario (a disguise worn by CFO, see http://www.ontariochicken.ca/chickenindustryconsultations) says:

The Ontario chicken industry is well positioned to grow over the next few years as a result of both market fundamentals as well as the resolution of a national differential growth solution which will bring additional production to Ontario. This growth in the Ontario chicken industry will not only stimulate broad economic benefits for the province, it will positively contribute to the Government of Ontario’s stated objective of creating an additional 120,000 new jobs in the food and agricultural sector by 2020.
Growth in both established and emerging chicken markets presents a real opportunity for the industry to review existing mechanisms of allocating growth, assess the current system and provide the basis for exploring new ways to administer growth to both producers and processors.
The Consultation Process: 
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.

Some Northern Ontario chicken farmers noted that there were no consultations meetings in Northern Ontario.  It would seem that CFO feels there is no need to consult everybody, as Northern Ontario only represents more than 50% of Ontario's land mass, and 10% of its population.  Apparently, we still don't qualify as part of Ontario.  Northern Ontario has been disenfranchised for decades.

Max Burt and 7 other chicken farmers weren't satisfied with that approach, so they loaded up their vehicles and headed South to the meeting in Guelph.  In that Guelph meeting, there were 3 chicken farmers from the Guelph area, and 8 from Northern Ontario.  Max and his gang of Northern chicken farmers made it very plain about their dissatisfaction with the ignoring of half the Province.

CBC News notes that on Jan. 27, 2015, twenty farmers and food organizations in Northern Ontario sent a letter to OFPMC and CFO, requesting meetings in Northern Ontario.

Shortly after that, a 17th consultation meeting was scheduled for Northern Ontario.

On Feb. 7th, Nourishing Ontario's website posted about the last minute addition of the Northern Ontario meetings on Feb. 10th, grace of Sustain Ontario's Flocking Option Campaign.

A tip of the hat to Max and his merry band of Northern Ontario chicken farmers for protecting our interests.

The live meeting was held in Gore Bay with 5 participants with Brian Boyle (an ex-OMAFRA facilitator) and Murray Opsteen (a CFO Board Member), and Brad Stephenson (Technical Support).  In addition, there were Internet-based satellite conferences tied in from Bruce Mines (6 more people), Dryden (10), Geraldton (6), Rainey River (10), Temiskaming (?), Thunder Bay (10), and Verner-Sudbury (9), for a grand total of more than 55 participants.

Since University of Guelph is the heart of all things agriculture in Ontario (University of Guelph, OMAFRA's offices, research stations, etc.) you'd think they could collect more than 3 participants.  Yet in Northern Ontario, we collected more than 55 participants, 37 times more than the Guelph meeting.

It seems everybody was impressed (or should I say shocked) at the interest shown by Northern Ontario.

Was this just another propaganda facade to placate the masses, with the input guaranteed to be ignored?  Did they really want to hear what non-quota farmers (ie. small flock chicken farmers and others) thought?

Only time will tell.  While the comments were recorded, they may be doomed to gathering dust in some filing cabinet for the next century.  There is some slim possibility that they may be forwarded to the true decision makers, and used to shape Ontario's new policies.  At this point, it's hard to know for sure.  We will patiently wait and watch.

The consumption of chicken in Ontario is growing significantly, more than 4% in just the last year.  How is it best to respond to that market growth and the fair allocation of supply and demand amongst all the players?

Just because there are more that 10 times the number of small flock farmers in Ontario (as compared to the quota-bearing chicken factory operators), doesn't mean that Small Flockers will get their fair share.

Today, Small Flockers can only grow 300 birds per year, just enough to supply the annual chicken consumption for 9 people.  Due to the bureaucracy and red tape, and the uneconomic constraints imposed on Small Flockers, most Small Flockers grow 57 birds per year or less; just enough to feed their immediate family.

Some of the points made by Northern Ontario participants:

• Supply Management is ineffective.
• Major changes in the quota system and small flocker exemptions are needed; or removal of the quota system altogether.
• We need safe, locally produced, affordable chicken that responds to the local needs and customers
• Chicken factories are the source of the majority of disease outbreaks and resistant bacteria due to dysfunctional farming practices
• First Nations need an opportunity to participate
• Affordable chicken is a major issue, and getting worse every day
• Abattoirs that are reasonably proximate to chicken farmers are needed.  Portable abattoirs are one possible solution.

At the meeting, a handout listed 6 Objectives for allocating growth was circulated:

1. Evolve the allocation systems of both farmers and processors to improve the flexibility and responsiveness in capitalizing on growth opportunities in the chicken marketplace.
    
2. Create value by serving the needs of growing and emerging markets.
3. Encourage innovation, new business-building ideas.
4. Serve the needs of existing markets, taking into consideration their size, importance, and historical investment.
5. Develop a system that is predictable and stable that aligns the interests of key stakeholders in the chicken industry
6. Encourage quality, efficiency, and value creation.

I note that CFO tries to focus attention on dividing the spoils of future growth of Ontario's chicken market.  Is this the equivalent of distracting people to focus on the selection of new upholstery fabrics for the deck chairs on the Titanic, rather than watching out for iceburgs?  What is the root issue that CFO wants to avoid?

We await the tallying and reporting on the input received from the grass roots participants.

Quota-based Chicken Farmer Speaks Out

We have been honored to have a quota-based chicken farmer post a comment to this rag torn Blog here.

I assume that not everybody would find that comment, so I have re-posted it here, as well as my response to it.

I have been patiently waiting 8 months for dialogue on these important issues.  It has finally started.  I encourage more of the same.  With dialogue, there is hope to make things better.

This comment was in response to Sean McGivern stating that he doesn't recognize CFO's authority, and he would be raising more than the 300 bird limit that CFO has unilaterally imposed on Small Flockers.

Here is Mr. Rod McLean's response to that Blog posting:

To Sean McGivern:

It's obvious you weren't around in the pre marketing board days. You don't know what it's like to sell chickens at a loss or what it's like to grow chickens for nine weeks and have a processor tell you he can't take your chickens at the previously agreed price. We have been growing chickens since nineteen fifty two and know what it's like to lose twenty five hundred dollars on a crop and not be able to pay your bills. If it wasn't for the wisdom of former Ontario Agric Minister Bill Stewart and people like Eugene Whalen and many others we wouldn't have marketing boards and it wouldn't be worthwhile for you to grow any chickens because you would be selling at a loss. You appear to be the tools of big business such as Tyson foods and KFC and retailers. If you succeed in destroying our marketing boards you will impoverish your fellow farmers, Canadian agriculture, and open the border to foreign food dependency. To extend your logic why don't you ask your farmer neighbour to share with you at no cost some of his land. It's only fair that he should not control that land and prevent you from using a small portion just because he paid for it. Also why don't you ask the guys in GM in Oshawa to share some of their union controlled higher wages with you. You should also have part of teachers union controlled salaries. It's not fair that you should be excluded. In reality all you'll be doing is hurting your fellow farmers. Be like the rest of us and earn it instead of taking from those that have spent their lives earning it. We also grow chickens under strict sanitation and disease control measures which requires constant monitoring, cleaning and auditing. This requires considerable record keeping and reporting. Thank you. Rod McLean

Here is my response to Mr. Rod McLean's comments:

Thank-you very much for fully expressing your ideas. Sean McGivern, to whom you address your comments, is equally welcome to post his comments here too.

I hope it is OK for me to post my comments as well.

I assume from your post that you are an active quota-bearing chicken farmer, part of the chicken Supply Management ("SM") system. I am glad to have you here so we can have some fruitful discussions between the two sides of the same coin.

I assume and accept that you and your family are hard working farmers, and that you have a great amount of your time and money invested in your chicken farm. It's only natural that you want to minimize the risks to your life and livelihood, and you see Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada ("SFPFC") as a growing threat.

I encourage you to read SFPFC's Mission, Vision, and Principles here: http://canadiansmallflockers.blogspot.ca/p/blog-page_14.html I believe you will find many things there that both SFPFC and quota-bearing farmers like yourself can share and agree upon. I would be interested in hearing your side of anything there that you find objectionable. Perhaps there is something you can suggest to add, or change the wording on.

I don't think anybody wants to go back to the 1950's, nor the boom-bust cycles similar to what the pork industry is currently suffering through. I assume that Supply Management was the best available solution at the time it was created. However, like the glow-in-the-dark fish in the waters off the crippled Fukishima nuclear power plant in Japan, in the last 50 years Supply Management has mutated into some awful Godzilla-like creature that eats people alive.

There are viable win-win-win alternatives. Nobody credible wants the win-lose of no marketing board and dismantling the lives of all quota-bearing chicken farmers, nor do they want the continuation of the Chicken Mafia tyranny of today.

I for one, am willing to work with anybody who is willing to listen to all sides of the issue, listen to all stakeholders, and help craft a solution that works for everybody.

I started this quest by asking for explanations and request to improve the Canadian chicken system. I received 100% rejection and/or stonewalling (ie. refusing to answer my civil questions) from the Ontario government, Federal Government, Chicken Farmers of Ontario, and Chicken Farmers of Canada.

After more than 6 attempts on my part with nothing but denial and stonewalling in response, I had to decide on one of two available options:

A) Drop it, and accept what the "powers that be" 1% minority had decided for themselves and everybody else in Canada (the other 99% of citizens); or

B) Choose to object, and fight for what I believed was in the best interest of all; the greater good.

As you now know, I chose "B".

SInce then, I have expressed growing concern about how this situation is becoming more and more polarized. The "Chicken Mafia" still refuses to talk. They have the lid screwed on tight to their chicken pot. There is a lot of heat on that pot, not just from SFPFC, but from everywhere all across Canada. Witness local food movements, animal rights movements against battery cages, organic pasture raised chickens, right to food movements, poverty groups, social justice groups, church groups, sub-therapeutic drug usage protesters, and many more. SFPFC has been adding lots of heat too. I assume that heat is what brought you here today.

With the burner on high, and the lid screwed down tight, the pressure inside the pot is rising exponentially fast. The pot is only so strong. Soon, if nothing changes, the lid will blow off, and there will be much damage, and many people will be hurt.

Does that mean that all of the above dissidents need to back off, turn off the burner, and let the Chicken Mafia continue in their total control of the chicken system and their unfair treatment of Small Flockers and the public in general?

I don't think so. I have been at this quest for 8 months now. I for one, am not going to quit until I die, or significant improvements are made to the chicken supply management system. I probably have another 20 years left of my life. If that is what it takes, so be it. Eventually, I believe there will be either the total destruction of the SM system, or significant changes for the better. It won't be me who ends up making the decision as to which option occurs. Perhaps nobody will make a decision, and things will just spiral out of control into total chaos. Good luck to us all if that is allowed to occur by default.

However, you, and other quota-bearing chicken farmers can decide that, or significantly influence that decision.

Do you support CFO and CFC to continue to deny, stonewall, and oppress? If yes, I believe that maximizes the risk for you, me, all other quota-bearing chicken farmers, Small Flockers, and the public in general.

Do you choose to make your voice heard here, and to CFO and CFC? Do you encourage all other stakeholder that discussions need to occur, and changes to the system need to be contemplated so it is better and sustainable for all?

This evolving situation will not continue in its current state much longer. Before the pot blows itself up into deadly shrapnel, I encourage you to decide what is in your best interest, talk to other quota-bearing chicken farmers, talk to Small Flockers, and let's get this problem resolved.

Glenn Black
President
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada 

Can Supply Management be Saved?

As Chris Hedges says, you can take a step toward supporting truth and justice, or you can take a step towards privilege and power.  Doing one of these automatically undoes the other.  Choose your path.

This is similar to the polarization of "You're either with us, or against us."
 
I received an email providing me feedback on my proposed replacement for Canada's Supply Management System .  The email was from a Supply Management insider ("SMI"), a well informed, influential insider to Supply Management, a close advisor to those with their hands on SM's levers of power.  So as to protect this person from outing and subsequent ridicule, I will not name them, thereby encouraging others like them to come forward with their comments & suggestions.

SMI suggested to me that SM could be improved, needs to be improved, but radical change of SM need not occur.  SMI feels that abandoning SM for anarchy, or nihilism, or some ill-defined alternative need not occur.  SMI likes very much the 4 Principles I proposed for any solution to the current SM system.  SMI seems to feel that it is a virtue that Canada's SM system is able to charge 300% for its SM commodities.

SMI feels that as current trade talks continue, we will probably be forced to open our borders some more to foreign goods (ie. the SM commodities of dairy, eggs, chicken, and turkeys), and our high domestic prices may have to drop somewhat, but SMI sees this as no reason to throw the SM baby out with the bathwater.  SMI feels it is highly unlikely that Canada will be forced to fully open its markets to foreign goods and totally dismantle our SM system.  The nuance I sense is that SMI feels that the winds of change against SM are mainly from outside of Canada, and most people within Canada are oblivious or apathetic towards SM and what it does for us (does to us).  It's almost as if SMI feels that SM is similar to maple syrup and hockey, that SM is one of the important factors of what makes us Canadian.

SMI seems to feel my proposal will upset the leaders of SM, cause them to feel threatened, and therefore cause them to fight against it, rather than support it.  SMI said, "...the SM boards themselves need to be convinced that ... their situation is untenable."

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

Quote by Upton Sinclair (1878 - 1968), prolific American writer, including The Jungle (1906), which exposed scandalous conditions in the U.S. meat packing industry, causing a public uproar that contributed in part to the passage a few months later of the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act.  Time magazine called him "a man with every gift except humor and silence."

SMI also said, "Internally I think they see big problems in how the mechanics of the system is operating, but do not see a need to wind the system down. Any proposal for big changes in supply management will need the SM groups' buy-in; they are stuck in marginal changes when they should be making big changes, but I don't see why they would support a process for wind down."

I agree with SMI, that the SM leaders can barely bring themselves to contemplate incremental, marginal changes.

I believe SM leaders have to expend huge efforts hiding the truth from themselves and all others.  Cognitive dissonance is when a person must finally admit a previously denied and avoided truth, for to continue denying it further would be a full admission to themselves of their insanity (ie. no longer in touch with reality).  SM leaders, in my opinion are a long, long way from cognitive dissonance

SMI suggests that I focus my efforts on helping SM to:   a) become a little more liberal;   b) lower their domestic commodity prices just a little (or slow the rate of cost increases ??);  and c) obtain growth in the industry.

My response to SMI was as follows:

Thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate it.

As a management consultant for the last 23 years, I always told my clients, "As bad  as it looks today, 95% of what you were doing is good stuff.  It's that last 5% is what is driving you crazy and causing all of your issues.  We need to focus our efforts there."

When I got started on SM in Jan. 2012, that is what I assumed would apply here as well.

Since then, I'm beginning to see just how bad it is.

Witness the egg marketing board fiasco here:   https://hoosierincanada.wordpress.com/2013/05/15/looking-for-cracks-at-efo-finally/
and here:  http://agri007.blogspot.ca/2012/12/heres-scoop_7234.html

For the chicken side, I calculate that they are raping the Canadian public every year as follows:

• $11 million/yr planned Pullet Supply Management premium (coming soon to a province near you)
• $143 million/yr Chicken feed premium pricing
• $945 million/yr Bogus FCR in farm gate chicken pricing
• $10.8 Billion/yr Premium price of Cdn. chicken over US price
• Total $11.9 Billion per year taken out of Canadian's pocketbook every year.

I hear similar issues on the dairy side.  Witness the pizza pack fiasco on cheese.

Turkey is pretty quiet.  Can we assume all is OK over there?

Pullets can't wait to join SM5, at a starting cost of $11 million per year, and rising.  See http://canadiansmallflockers.blogspot.ca/2013/05/pullet-parasite-11-millionyr-screwing.html

Those who are channeling and directing this SM system, and simultaneously benefiting from it, will they voluntarily stop?  I seriously doubt it.

They now have 2+ generations fully steeped into their traditions and myopic view of the world, similar to how most psychopaths see their victims; they just don't see a problem with what they are doing.   They think they're doing "god's work", and we should all be thankful for their tireless effort on our behalf.

Unfortunately, we don't have Diogenes to help us find the one honest man in the SM system.

I'm sure all of these SM bureaucracies, [ reference to SMI's organization], you, and many others have good people who are trying to do a good job for the "system" they work for.  While they work for the system, they didn't create it, they just accept it as somebody else's decision that they are carrying out the best they can.  In other words, careerism.  It's good for their career to bolster the current SM system as much as they can, because the alternative is frightening.

Those in control of SM will not stop on their own.  We, the Canadian public, can either accept our fate, to continue to be subjected to their whim to do with us as they please, or they have to be stopped against their will.  Like any psychopath worth their salt, they will do everything in their power to retain dominance and control over their historic powers, privileges, freedoms, and their victims.

All that above sounds like a manifesto.  I never thought I'd get that black & white about something.  Unfortunately, I see no other choice with these people.

If all the above is true, or just 1% true, I don't see a graceful evolution, or a few minor fixes around the edges.  SM may have worked & was needed at some time in the past, but is rotten to the core today, and the cancer needs to be removed.

Comments?

If I'm missing something, if there is some glimmer of hope in this pile of smoking ruins called SM, please point it out to me.

Glenn Black
Small Flock Poultry Farmers of Canada