The canola crop may be in bloom, but if the flower petals look small or pale instead of that nice vibrant yellow, the crop may be suffering from sulphur  deficiency, says a soil fertility specialist.

 The Calgary Stampede may hand out more than a million dollars in prize money to cowboys, but it also handed one of its most persistent critics a significant propaganda gift following the death of six horses at the 2010 event.

 While one group in California is calling for a boycott of Alberta in memory of 1,600 dead ducks, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) has been harping for years that the world’s largest outdoor rodeo has been profiting from animal cruelty, since Guy Weadick first saddled a trick pony to launch the Stampede in 1912. Well the Stampede handed them more fuel for this fire this year after six horses died (or had to be put down) following rodeo and chuckwagon racing events in July.

 There weren’t any of the truly man-made mishaps like chuckwagons colliding on the oval race track. These animals either broke legs, backs, or keeled over from heart attacks from running and jumping and then had to be euthanized.

 It was unfortunate. Unfortunate for the animals. Unfortunate for the owners who I believe really do care about their livestock. And unfortunate that it handed critics fresh and timely ammunition.

 I’m not necessarily a big rodeo fan, although I have gone to several over the years. I like watching the highlights on TV, but in real life and in real time some of these events can drag on and my attention span is short. Maybe if I could afford the $500 per-person in-field seats where I could get a better look, I’d be more of a keener.

 Although I am not a rabid rodeo fan, it’s not because I consider it animal cruelty. I think the calf roping, which now seems to be called tie-down roping, and steer wrestling, probably put stress on livestock that would rather be somewhere else, doing something else. But I suspect most survive none the worse for wear.

 Other events – bronc riding, bull riding and chuckwagon racing, for example – do rely on animals as a source of human entertainment, but I don’t know if it is any worse than polo or thoroughbred horse racing, pigeon racing, pig racing, or teaching a dog to do tricks.

I think a horse that breaks a leg while running a race, or its back while bucking in a corral  – both relatively rare considering the number of horses involved in rodeo events, isn’t a lot different than a race car driver who gets banged up in a high speed crash or a football player who ends up with a compound fracture during a tackle.

 Of course you can always say the big difference is that people have the choice of whether they want to participate in high risk events. Which is true. But, I’m guessing if you turned 500 head of healthy horses lose to run and graze on 100,000 acres of open prairie, with no humans in sight, that after a year, natural causes or natural accidents are going to take their toll as well.

I think it was a mistake that Stampede officials cancelled a night of chuckwagon races saying the track was too muddy. It was a sign of weakness, dressed up as a safety measure. My guess is they just didn’t want to run the risk of another mishap and another dead horse they would have to explain to the media.

In any event, I think it gives do-gooder organizations like PETA that chink in the armor they will pry on over the next few years in an ongoing bid to shut the rodeo down.

One of these days the Calgary Stampede could revert back to true country fair status, where it becomes the home of the largest vegetable judging competition in the world. Of course then, the Stampede officials of the day will have to deal with all the vegan critics distressed over the total disregard and lack of care which allowed carrots to shrivel and, and dare I say it, apples to get bruised. When will the world be happy?

-30-

Even while waiting for fields to dry out, farmers are reluctant to complain about too much moisture. Particularly producers in southern Alberta and Saskatchewan say too much moisture isn’t great, but there have been many years when they face the hardship of too little moisture.

At an indoor “crop walk” in Lethbridge this week about 100 producers shared some thoughts on managing crop land that has received anywhere from eight to 12 inches of precipitation so far this spring. It was supposed to be a field crop walk, organized by Alberta Agriculture and the Southern Applied Research Association to look at research plots demonstrating a number of crop production treatments. But, Ross McKenzie, agronomy research scientist with Alberta Ag in Letbridge said the plots were just too wet. He had been out with pumps to get standing water off the fields, which are near Ag Canada’s Lethbridge Research Centre, and it looked like the plants would make it, but having an on-site look would have been a gum-boot only affair.

There was a lot of discussion about crops and moisture and here are a few of the highlights.

·   The southern prairies are considered dry, but 2010 was the fourth year in the last 16 to be considered as ‘wet’ years. They included 1995, 2002, 2005 and now 2010. Lethbridge had about eight inches of moisture in four major weather events this spring, further south at Cardston it was closer to 13 inches, and east towards Bow Island it was about 11 inches.

·   Along with the moisture, average temperatures have been cool, which has delayed the crops anywhere from two to four weeks. Just for interest, at 20 C degree temperatures it takes barley about five days to germinate, at 10 C it takes about 14 days and at five C it takes 25 or more days to germinate.

·   If plants have been under standing water for five days or more, they are probably finished.

·   While yellowing crops under too much moisture is fairly normal, the yellowing could be caused by a combination of factors – cool temperatures, lack of oxygen, and with saturated soils crops don’t have the same nutrient uptake which leads to a lack of nitrogen.

·   If, as moisture recedes, crops don’t look like they are bouncing back from the yellowing, top dressing with nitrogen fertilizer may be an option. Good products are 28-0-0 (urea) and 28-0-0 (UAN liquid) or even 21-0-0-24 (ammonium sulphate). Granular products are good, but the downside in a year like this, is that you still need moisture after application to carry the nitrogen into the soil, or you risk loosing 25 to 30 percent to volatilization.

·   McKenzie says if producers do plan to top dress, aim to apply 30 pounds of actual nitrogen per acre, and “don’t mess around with a 10 pound rate”.

·   A soil test and/or tissue test may not be accurate or timely enough in a year like this to give producers a clear message on whether top dressing is necessary. It comes down to a producer call – look at the crop, if it is a good stand, with good potential, and the potential pencils out with market prices, invest in the top dress application.

·   Unless you are keen on chemfallow, if you have some unseeded fields this late in the season, it might be best to get something seeded and growing to use moisture and control weeds. A cereal can be seeded, if you can make use of green feed in the fall, or perhaps consider a legume such as sweet clover, as green manure. Sweet clover is cheaper than peas and fixes nitrogen in the soil, making it worthwhile, even under a zero-till cropping system. Alfalfa is also a good option on soils prone to salinity.

·   You can also manage those unseeded acres so you can get a winter cereal such as winter wheat seeded in good time in early September.

-30-

Due to the fact that southern Alberta has water up to its proverbial boot tops, the AgTech Centre seeding demo near Lethbridge, AB scheduled for this Wednesday has been postponed until June 30.

With 10 to 15 inches of rain over the past 10 days and more rain forecast for this week, organizers had little choice but to reschedule the event, which was intended to show producers how six leading seeding systems worked.

Hopefully conditions will be dry enough for the event to be held next Wednesday June 30. Anyone planning to attend should watch this blog site or contact Mike Bevans at the AgTech Centre at 403 329 1212 – ext 225 for details as the day approaches.

-30-

What’s the best seeding system you can use? The answer to that may always remain a personal preference. But you can get an excellent idea of how six of the leading air seeders and drills compare at a southern Alberta field day coming up Wednesday, June 23.

Alberta’s Ag Tech Centre is staging a seeding technology demonstration June 23 at the AgTech Centre’s research farm south of Lethbridge on Highway 508.

The six leading systems supplied by SeedMaster, John Deere, Morris, New Holland, Seed Hawk and Bourgault have already been at the research farm, each seeding their respective areas of a 200 acre demonstration site. The six systems will be back on the farm June 23 to provide a live demonstration to producers attending the field day.

“The demonstration isn’t intended to say one system is better than another, but to give producers a first hand look at home different seeders and drills work under similar field conditions,” says Mike Bevans, an AgTech Centre technologist who is coordinating the field day.

“The first 200 acres will have been seeded to crops such as peas, wheat and canola for about one month before the June 23 field day. The first seeding wasn’t done under the best conditions because of the wet spring. But producers can see how the crops are performing and also see how the various systems work.”

At the demonstration day producers can make their own assessment of how different systems handle fertilizer and seed placement, soil disturbance, and residue management. There will also be presentations on variable rate technologies, inter-row seeding, and RTK coverage.

The AgTech Centre research farm is south of Lethbridge, east off of Highway 5 on Highway 508. Or if you are coming in on Highway 4, go west on Highway 508. There will be signs.

Coffee and lunch will be provided at the field day. And in the event of inclement weather the field day will be rescheduled to June 28.  For more information contact Mike Bevans at the AgTech Centre at 403-329-1212, or email michael.bevans@gov.ab.ca.

-30- 

I think it is important that North American cattlemen keep those livestock numbers up to avoid the risk of another Ice Age.

I’m still on the fence when it comes to issue of Global Warming – is it happening? Why is it happening? And so on…  But a recent article I read says it was the demise of the wooly mammoth, due to human predators, that led to a major deep freeze nearly 13,000 years ago.

How researchers figure this stuff out, I don’t know – and really who can argue with them since there are no eye witnesses left. But, researchers say it was the herds of belching and farting mammoths, releasing methane gas, trapped in the atmosphere, that kept the climate warm.

When two-legged predators reached the Americas about 13,000 years ago, the mammoth began to disappear and as far as I know became extinct – although I haven’t traveled much around the Prince Albert area of Saskatchewan, so there could be some up there.

The demise of the mammoth triggered what was known as the Younger Dryas cold event. That lasted about 1,300 years, until the Canadian Angus Association began its marketing program.

A couple things come to mind. First, how many of these six tonne beasts were roaming over North America, and second, how hungry were these people? If there were enough mammoths to affect global climate, even with only a 50 per cent carcass yield, that would represent one hell of a pile of burgers at the caveman campout.

The researchers figure as mammoth numbers declined, mammoth methane production dropped from 10 trillion grams per year, to just a few embarrassing releases around the pre-historic watering hole. That cleared the atmosphere and triggered a deep chill.

So if we are going to learn from history, let’s keep those livestock numbers up. Current statistics show there are about 1.5 billion head of cattle in the world, including about 100 million head in the U.S. and 14 million head in Canada.

Sure, there may not be a lot of money to be made in keeping the critters around these days, but I think we have to look at the bigger good for society.  If we don’t keep those cattle numbers up, we’d better be prepared to break out the blankets.

If we really want to get these ‘sickos’ who slaughter horses for meat-sale profit off the street, the only real, long lasting solution is an outright ban on  breeding and ownership of any class of horse in North America by anyone– unless you are a card-carrying member of the Amish community.

The value of or need for the original, four-footed equus-type horsepower has been steadily declining since the first internal-combustion engine was developed more than 120 years ago. We no longer need horses.

If the figures from animal welfare groups are correct (and it would be hard to believe they would be exaggerated) Canadian horse slaughter plants process about 100,000 head per year. And that is not a one-time deal. That is year after year. So to me, year after year we have 100,000 head of unwanted horses being produced somewhere, that end up on the kill floor of horse plants.

And I’ve haven’t run into one commercial ranching operation over the past 25 years in the ag reporting business that raises herds of horses just for slaughter. (I wonder if that has anything to do with the economics?) So again I am assuming the majority of these slaughter horses are coming by ones and fours from the beaten to the nubs, two-acre paddocks of hobby farmers and acreage owners who “really love horses, but no body rides them anymore,” or “we bought a new motor home and want to do more traveling, so we don’t have time for them” or “geez, they are expensive to keep”.

When you look at the whole meat industry, I find it interesting to note that beef animals, pigs and poultry all go to packing or processing plants. Horses, however, go to “slaughter” houses. Horses are slaughtered. Apparently they skip the packing and processing stage and are just slaughtered. 

According to animal welfare/rights groups who are usually able to present crystal clear, well-documented video footage, many of these animals are tortured before being slaughtered. I am sure that is a common practice in the beef processing sector too. I watched a high quality video the other day of someone trying to pickup a crippled beef animal at a packing plant with a front end loader. And if at first you don't succeed, try, try again.  I’ve heard that most “packing plants” have a secret room where employees can go at lunch time for the always popular forklift flipping of downer cattle competition. It is usually in the same area as the cockfighting pits. It is important to keep workers entertained and happy.

If you’ve guessed my comments are somewhat sarcastic, you’re correct. As long as so called ‘horse lovers’ are producing boat loads of unwanted horses there is a need and a value for horse processing plants. Even well-cared for working horses come to the end of their day at some point, or circumstances change for well-meaning horse owners, and the animals have to go.

The point is what do you do with these animals, otherwise? If they are not processed, do you let them run wild on the Canadian prairie?  Since people are farming there, maybe we should just have drop locations at National Parks. There is a lot of vacant land there no body uses. Let them live out the rest of their natural lives running free in Banff, or Grasslands or Riding Mountain national parks.

Horse processing plants need to be – and I believe are – properly managed, and properly inspected to ensure that animals are humanely cared for and handled right up to the final moment they are bolted. No system is perfect, so we need to always work to improve.

Rather than trying to close these plants, animal welfare/rights groups should be putting their resources into promoting horse spaying and castration programs, and educating hobby farmers about the misconception that every acre can support five easy-keepers.

If critics can reduce the flow of these unwanted horses to a trickle, these horse slaughter people may not disappear, but at least then they will stop murdering horses and get back to the core business, which is supplying kittens to lucrative Communist fur coat market.

-30-

Just kicking back in the office today, catching up on some reading and on the top of the pile is a new book called “Raising Goats for Dummies”.

I knew there was a series of these trademark bright yellow and black jacketed books on a wide range of topics, but I thought it was 15 or 20 titles about trying to figure out your computer, or specialty software, or genealogy or something. But if you go to the “Dummies” website (www.dummies.com)

there are hundreds of titles (about 1700 actually) on just about every imaginable business, entertainment, or lifestyle topic you can think of.

I saw ones called Arthritis for Dummies, Bath and Sink Refinishing for Dummies, Adoption for Dummies, Beagles for Dummies, even Pope John Paul II for Dummies. I guess for the slower learners there was one called “Sex for Dummies”, and right after that in the list – probably for those who were too enthusiastic about learning the previous topic, was “Divorce for Dummies”.  So if you have no skill in just about any area I highly recommend you go to the Dummies website to see if there is a title there for the topic. (I didn’t see one on Raising Beef for Dummies – not sure what the hold up is there – maybe Pork Production for Dummies is ahead of them on the press).

Back to the goat book. The publisher for Cheryl K. Smith sent me this copy to review. Cheryl started with two Nigerian Dwarves (I assume they mean goats) in 1998 and has never looked back. She is a lawyer by training, and she has actually written several books on goat rearing and husbandry and the Raising Goats for Dummies is her latest. She lives and farms near Low Pass in the coast range of Oregon.

I see she also has a published paper on “What about legalized assisted suicide? : An article from: Issues in Law & Medicine”, maybe that is just in case the goat business doesn’t go so well. (But in all fairness and seriousness, I believe that is just a paper on the legal and ethical issues of the topic and really isn’t making the case pro or con and is certainly unrelated to raising goats).

I am not in the goat business and probably never will be (even though it is all my wife ever talks about is someday getting a herd of goats – as soon as the chinchillas are gone), but I would say if you ever wanted to get a couple goats or a whole herd, it is a very good book to begin with.

It is 325 pages long, easy to read, has some great illustrations and covers the A to Z topics, whether you want a couple goats for the yard, are looking to raise goats for a 4-H project, or want to get into the goat meat, milk and/or fibre business.

The various chapters describes different breeds, housing requirements on the farm, feed requirements, animal care, animal health, breeding, and kidding. And there are also sections about the business of selling meat and milking goats, as well as collecting and marketing fibre.

There is a short chapter on the 10 Misconceptions about Goats, which is interesting.  It isn’t true that they eat everything, they don’t stink (except for the bucks at breeding season), they are smart, and the meat and milk taste good – are a few of the highlights.  There is even a 14 page appendix with goat milk and meat recipes.

Raising Goats for Dummies by Cheryl K. Smith is available from many bookstores that carry the “Dummies” series. It is $24 Canadian. And you can also order it on-line through Chapters/Indigo Books.

Keep me posted on how you make out in the goat business.

-30-

 I work out of my basement office, so it is easy for me to loose track of things. But as we observe Earth Day this week I was just trying to update myself on who is producing biofuels in Western Canada.

Husky has a four-year-old ethanol plant at Lloydminster, Sask. and an upgraded facility at Minnedosa MB, and Poundmaker at Lannigan, Sask. has been operating for many years. There is a fairly new 25 million litre ethanol plant owned by NorAmera BioEnergy Corp. at Weyburn, Sask.  But is there anyone else?

Three or four years ago, at farm meetings, if you weren’t ready to invest in your local, neighborhood biofuel project you were disrespecting motherhood and missing out on a great industry-saving opportunity. When all these ethanol and biodiesel facilities began operating there was a real risk of a shortage of canola margarine, and even wheat to make the bread to spread it on.

I recall at one conference there was a brawl in the alley between a group of biofuel project organizers and a committee planning a producer-run meat packing plant. They were squabbling over available land for their developments. All seems pretty quiet today.

I was just reading this morning a company called BioStreet Canada is working on plans to build a biodiesel plant at Vegreville, AB. They are a bit behind with their plans. It was supposed to be open in 2008 and now they are looking at 2012, but it doesn’t sound like they’ve poured any footings yet.

I’m not trying to be cynical, but I was just curious if there was a flourishing biofuel industry out there and I was missing it.

-30-

Yes, that is just what Agriculture Canada needs is more budget cuts. I was just reading recently where the federal government plans to cut the Ag Canada budget by nearly half – 45 percent – or $1.5 billion over the next three years.

First of all it amazes me that the regular Ag Canada budget is or was $3.5 billion….I think that use to be Canada’s national budget a few years ago. Where have I been? But the new figure will be just under $2 billion by 2013.

I am all in favor of a government saving money, but too often these budget cuts affect the wrong programs. Instead of working on the spare tire around the waist, it becomes a hatchet job on fingers, toes and even arms and legs.

Whether it be a provincial government or the federal department of agriculture, the escalating-trend over the past 10 years has been to get away from the nuts and bolts research and development – the good old R & D – the down-in-the-dirt stuff that can really benefit farmers. The preference is to put more emphasis on supposedly higher profile support programs, which someone hopes will at least impress a senior bureaucrat, gag the opposition, and/or impress voters.

I have seen a number of good researchers who know how plants grow or which end a cow craps from, who get shuffled off into some bureaucratic administration position for a great new save-the-industry program, that makes the director or the minister look good. And those who aren’t pulled out of active service, spend half or more of their time filling out paper work to apply to 125 different funding sources, or trying to schmooze some corporate partner to kick in a few bucks, because there is no core funding for this long term research in the annual budget. 

The other thing I see on visits to research centres is a lot of grey hair. What’s going to happen to fundamental agricultural research when these old farts decide to hang up their white smocks? Are there enough bright young minds coming into the business to carry on this work, who are prepared to bitch and barter for every dime to keep a field research program going?

Yes, I hear people argue that times have changed. Farmers spend too much time worrying about production and they should spend more time on business management and marketing and the global economy. And those are increasingly more important elements of the agriculture industry too.

But damn it all, as we get down to razor thin margins it is also increasingly important that producers have the tools and the knowledge to optimize yields or have the most efficient rate of gain possible. And so much of that depends on independent, unbiased, critical crop and livestock production research.

I know the image of some plant breeder sitting on an overturned five-gallon pail in a variety plot on a 30-degree day, or a livestock researcher up to their armpit with a gloved arm down the back end of a cow may not capture the public imagination like the ribbon cutting of a new art gallery, but if politicians and senior trained-seal bureaucrats keep whacking away at fundamental research and development programs, federal and provincial research centres will become little more than museums themselves.

Save a dollar if you can, but if there was that much fat in the system, why not turn some of that $1.5 billion “cut” back into funding-starved R & D projects. Some how I doubt stripping that $1.5 billion out of agriculture is going to reduce taxes and increase my take home pay any time soon.

-30-