STANDING COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
Mr. Neil LeBlanc
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will start the meeting. It is 9:05 a.m. We have one member from our caucus who will not be attending, George Archibald, because he is Chairman of the Human Resources Committee which is taking place at the same time. He may join us later if his meeting finishes early. We just had a communication from Charlie Parker that John Deveau will not be able to make it today.
Our witnesses today are from the Nova Scotia Federation of Agriculture; Mr. Laurence Nason and Mr. Anthony Van Oostrum. Our usual process is to make some opening comments, maybe there are some points that you would like to make, and then we would open up to questions from the committee. If you could proceed in that manner, I would be more than pleased to hear your submission.
MR. LAURENCE NASON: We have provided everyone with a written copy of our comments. Maybe I can dispense with the pleasantries in the first section and the description of the Federation of Agriculture in the second section, unless you want us to specifically review what the federation is and what it is about, and move on to Page 3 where we talk about the importance of agriculture in Nova Scotia.
Farming in Nova Scotia underpins a large, diversified and important service and industrial sector as the agri-food industry is a cornerstone of Nova Scotia's economy now and in the future. Only a cursory examination of the contributions made by agriculture in the agri-food industry to the economic prosperity of Nova Scotia indicates that any past and future investments made to assure a framework of growth and prosperity for the industry are sound investments, investments that can be justified even in a climate of restraint.
In terms of employment, farm businesses in Nova Scotia employ 7,800 individuals directly, that is on farms. Another 4,000 individuals are employed in directly related agricultural enterprises with an additional 750 jobs in the agricultural service sector. It is estimated that the agri-food industry indirectly provides employment for an additional 42,600 Nova Scotians.
In terms of capital investment, in 1995, farmers in Nova Scotia had a cumulative capital investment of $1.4 billion. For the past eight years, farmers have continually invested an average of $50 million per year in capital assets and capital improvements on farms. This substantial capital investment enables the sustainable and competitive production of food and fibre for domestic and foreign markets and creates jobs for other Nova Scotians.
The farmgate value. During the 12 year period from 1986 to 1997, agricultural producers have increased the value of farmgate receipts by 36 per cent, from $274 million in 1986 to $374 million 1997.
Nova Scotian farmers' operating costs are approximately $328 million. That figure comes from 1995 and those dollars are used to purchase goods and services from other Nova Scotians providing stable and sustainable rural communities in the province. The competitiveness of the agriculture industry in Nova Scotia and indeed its ability to continue to contribute substantially to economic and social progress in the province are inextricably linked to a strong commitment both from within the industry itself and from government. The increased investment by farm businesses and the increased productivity achieved by the industry in the past decade demonstrates undeniable commitment on the part of farmers in Nova Scotia.
The future of agriculture. Well, governments appear to have recognized the value of the agricultural sector for future social and economic prosperity and government planners have set laudable goals for the industry, but the optimism on paper is not evident in the policy choices governments are making with respect to the development of a strong competitive future for the industry. During the past three years, the agriculture community has seen a massive retrenchment of public investment in its future and is being enveloped by an insensitive regulatory blanket that threatens to smother the initiative to exist.
Direct public investment in agriculture. In 1992, the direct cash investments by government in Nova Scotia's agricultural industry was $14.2 million per year. By 1996 that investment was $5.9 million, a decline of 58 per cent. Program payments as a percentage of farm income in Nova Scotia, at 1.9 per cent, are the second lowest in Canada. In 1997 program payments to Nova Scotian farm businesses were 49 per cent lower than the Canadian average. This has a significant impact on the competitiveness of the agri-food sector here in Nova Scotia in both domestic and international markets.
Farm income. The continuing increase in farmgate receipts in Nova Scotia tends to mask a deep-rooted and fundamental problem. The basic profitability of farming is eroding. Between 1986 and 1997, farm net income has declined 6.3 per cent. This decline in income has been accompanied by a 42.1 per cent increase in farm operating costs. This represents a serious challenge for both farmers and policy makers.
It is a critical time for the agriculture industry in Nova Scotia, a time when the entire industry is being forced to adjust to national and trans-national market pressures, a significant reduction in public investment in the development and transfer of new production technology, and a neo-environmental ethic that will demand costly infrastructure change. If the industry is to survive and maintain its position as a net contributor to the social and economic fabric of Nova Scotia, it is essential that the public commitment mirror the commitment of the industry itself and that public policy reflect the progressive needs of the challenges faced by the industry.
We have a series of reports which I will leave with the committee that provide detail on the issues that immediately face the industry. What we wanted to do today is take the time to focus on one issue that we think transcends all the other issues and that is the right to farm.
Agriculture plays a major role in our society. It is a major supplier of food and fibre. It is a source of livelihood to a large sector of the community and is an important sector of our economy. However, society is putting ever-increasing pressure, and at time unreasonable constraints, on the way in which farmers carry out their business. In order to protect the agriculture sector, it is vital that the farmers' right to farm be protected. The practice of agriculture is highly dependent on the use of soil, water and air to transform raw resources into food, feed and fibre. Today these elements are being defined as public resources and the farmer is being increasingly held solely accountable for their use. From the farmers' perspective, that is not new. Farmers in Nova Scotia have always held themselves accountable for the Earth's major life support system. Their livelihood depends on the sustainability of those systems.
The increasing public constraints that are being placed on the use of privately owned land in Nova Scotia is becoming a major concern to farmers. The continued development of rural non-farm housing adjacent to farmland, growing numbers of Nova Scotians who are choosing rural areas and hamlets as a place to live and the competing uses being defined for farmland by the rest of society are the pressures behind those concerns. Farmland is increasingly being viewed as a recreational resource, as a tourism resource and as a tool for the preservation of the natural environment. There are, in addition, a number of other major non-land issues that impact the farmers' ability to farm.
Nova Scotia presently has a right to farm legislation in the form of the Agricultural Operations Protection Act. However, this legislation provides only a narrow protection for farm practices and that protection is being significantly eroded by the implementation of other
legislation, most notably the Environment Act. The current legislation does not reflect the changing settlement patterns and the changing community values that are shaping the post-modern world community in Nova Scotia.
There are three principal reasons why the current legislation and regulatory regimes that impact the rights of farmers to use their land need to be reviewed and replaced with a comprehensive right to farm Act. First, right to farm legislation is necessary to address complaints that arise as a result of normal farm practices because the common law doctrine of nuisance does not take into account the uniqueness of agricultural operations or the inevitability of some odour, dust and noise being created. Right to farm legislation ensures that agricultural issues will be given priority when complaints about farm practices are being resolved.
While the farm community in Nova Scotia fully realizes that the right to farm is not a right to pollute, it is not reasonable to expect a farm to operate without creating some odour, dust, or noise, as part of its normal operations. Right to farm legislation is required to protect farmers who are farming responsibly from nuisance complaints.
Second, public policy and initiatives in groundwater conservation, wetland preservation, and the promotion of biodiversity and endangered species protection, all have the potential to impact on agricultural operations. The agricultural land that produces so much wealth for our economy is the same land under which coveted groundwater flows, the same land that supports the habitat for a diverse biota, including endangered species, and the same that surrounds valuable wetland preserves. Unless comprehensive Right to Farm legislation is in place, other sectors of society will claim those benefits and leave agricultural landowners with the majority of the costs.
The third issue increasingly impacting the right to farm are the powers that have been passed to municipal authorities with respect to land use. Municipal councils, whose decision-making processes are often weighted in favour of urban values and driven by an ethic of service provision at the lowest possible cost, have the power to severely limit agricultural operations. Local authorities in Nova Scotia have the power to adopt bylaws and policy that can severely limit farming practices over a very large area. This will be done under the pretension of protecting land and water resources for the greater community and it will be done in many instances at a cost to agricultural landowners.
All Nova Scotians have a vested interest in promoting the growth and the expansion of a competitive and sustainable agricultural sector. That sector will become stagnant unless farmers have the right, protected by force of law, to carry out all normal farming practices. Farmers must have the right to farm in accordance with normal farm practices, and where the interests of the greater community predominate, farm landowners must be fully compensated for loss of use. The Government of Nova Scotia in close consultation with the farm community needs to review all existing legislation and regulation that impacts on the right to
farm and develop a comprehensive legislative package that will protect agricultural land and the right of farmers to farm their land.
Any new legislation must balance the needs and the rights of all members of society and should ensure that if farmers are expected to have restraints placed on normal farming practices for the good of the greater community, the community will compensate the farmer for the fair market value of the restraint.
In conclusion, we are entering a period when the outlook for the agricultural sector in Nova Scotia can only be described as uncertain. Producers are being called upon to adapt to a staggering array of innovation in their operations. The industry is continually buffeted by external forces over which they have little control and it is continually being pressed to take responsibility for problems that extend well beyond the farmgate.
While the immediate outlook for the industry is uncertain in the rapidly changing world in which we live today, opportunity abounds for the agricultural sector here in Nova Scotia. However, each opportunity seems to be coupled with some level of constraint that threatens to neutralize any advantage. While sound public policy with respect to the protection and the right to use agricultural land will not eliminate all of those constraints, it can help ease their impact and provide a solid basis for farm businesses to make decisions and investments that will be required in the future. The future of the agricultural industry in Nova Scotia will be forged by the choices and actions taken today by all stakeholders involved. The anvil upon which the future will be forged is one of cooperation and accommodation and most of all understanding. The federation very much appreciates the opportunity to meet and discuss the future of the agricultural industry with this committee. With the drastic changes that are taking place in our industry, it is critical that an open dialogue continue to take place between political decision-makers and agricultural leaders.
If there is a single message that we would like to leave in the minds of the members of the committee today it is this; the farm community in Nova Scotia realizes that governments cannot create a rainbow nor can they create the proverbial pot of gold at its end. It can, however, create conditions that make rainbows possible by taking charge of the issues that will ensure farmers in Nova Scotia have the right to farm in the future.
As I mentioned, there are certainly a number of other issues, important issues in the industry, and I will leave a series of reports with the committee. We are prepared to discuss those issues briefly. There are a number of environmental issues, a number of issues that deal with the Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture farm finance and farm development programs, taxation issues, occupational health and safety, employment issues, feed grain transportation and a number of issues that involve the Department of Natural Resources, for example hunting on agricultural land, endangered species protection and wildlife control.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We are going to be opening up some questions. My intention is to give each of the Parties a predetermined amount of time to use, starting off with the NDP Party, then on to the Progressive Conservative Party, then the Liberal Party, and then at the last end of it, depending on how much time there is, we either divide the time up again, or we will have an open forum, depending on how many questions the members have. My intent is to give 20 minutes to the NDP; you can use it all, but if not, then we will continue. So I would open up the questioning.
MR. CHARLES PARKER: Maybe I'll go first, I have a few questions; I know John as Agriculture Critic has some questions too. One of the future weeks, we are hoping to have the Nova Scotia Cattlemen's Association in to speak with us and to get their point of view. But certainly the cattle industry, the beef industry in particular, has been in a lot of trouble in Nova Scotia the last number of years, and especially last year with the drought. It really hurt. I guess I want to ask you, Laurence, what initiatives or what programs or what do you think is really needed to help this industry in this province at this time?
MR. NASON: Anthony is a beef producer, so he is probably more qualified to answer that question than I am.
MR. ANTHONY VAN OOSTRUM: Thank you. I am a beef producer, and I am also an apple producer in the Annapolis Valley. I am not the biggest one, but probably one of the larger ones, and I talk a lot with the cattlemen. We have quite a few meetings with the cattlemen and are aware of the federation's position. We did have a task force on beef, but you all know, and I think the minister is trying to implement that number one recommendation, that sustainable performance program, that somebody who is in the beef industry and is serious about it, that he continues to produce his beef.
I know it is not an easy one; the market out West is low, so we can't expect to have a big price here. But certainly I think there is a bright future for the beef industry, because Nova Scotia only produces about 20 per cent of the beef we consume here, and we have a tremendous resource in pasture land in that we can grow grass better than anybody in the rest of Canada. We should do well, I think. One thing comes to my mind, the big retailers, they say sometimes, well Nova Scotia, we can buy the federally inspected beef, because Hub Meat Packers have federal inspection and not Armstrong in Kingston. And I know there are people working on it and trying to get Armstrong on the federal inspection, they only have the provincial now. Those changes in the future to beef, they want to do it through the three Maritime Provinces, not only to Nova Scotia.
I do not know what else to say about the beef industry. There is a future, we bring in about 70 per cent, I think it is something around $30 million worth of beef that we bring into this province, and I think this is ridiculous. We should do that ourselves, we have the resources here, we have the land, everything is here for beef, but we have never been able to do it.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: What about the connection to raising beef and grain production with the feed-freight assistance going? Do we grow enough grain, or we used to grow grain here, so we don't . . .
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: We still grow grain, we still grow corn, in some parts of the province. But I think we have to go back to our grass, that is our cheapest method. We can graze them.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Can you finish them?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: We pretty well can finish them with alfalfa. We might have to buy a little grain, but we don't have to put 80 per cent grain in cattle to finish, we can do it with 20 per cent.
MR. NASON: We have a strong comparative advantage here within the cattle business because of our ability to grow grass. One thing, about 10 or 12 years ago, the Government of Nova Scotia made a decision that there was going to be a hog industry in Nova Scotia, and today there is a hog industry in Nova Scotia and they produce the best hogs in North America. It is well-organized. I think basically the first thing that has to happen is government has to make a decision that there is going to be a beef industry in Nova Scotia. While there is no empirical evidence to demonstrate the impact the beef industry has on rural Nova Scotia, we think that that impact is considerable. If the beef industry founders, as it has in the past year and it keeps on going that way, there will be a real severe impact of the sustainability of rural communities in Nova Scotia.
MR. PARKER: I just want one final comment there on the beef industry. You mentioned that the big chain stores are buying 70 per cent of the beef coming into this province from Western Canada, or whatever. It almost seems some way you have to prove to them that you can supply a good quality product at a competitive price and on a long-term basis. If you could tie into them then it seems like you would have it made.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: There was a study funded by Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and P.E.I. What came out of the study that the beef from those three provinces is just as good as the rest of the beef. That study is finished now and the report is available.
MR. PARKER: So, why aren't they buying from you? Is it supply, you can't get a regular supply or what?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: It is the supply. For instance, the big chains when they buy apples, they say, if you can't supply us with a tractor trailer load of apples, we are just not going to buy two cases from you, and it is the same with beef. If you can supply us with 100 per cent, they don't want to buy just 10 cartons.
MR. PARKER: So, they want quantity and they want it on a regular basis?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: Yes, on a regular basis. They want the whole shot.
MR. NASON: Market organization is the problem.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Like I say, those chain stores, the whole process of marketing, I would think, has changed. It has evolved the same as everything else has. So, we have been raising beef in this province for a long time. Why hasn't the beef industry evolved along with the way the market demands for the carcass? In other words, it seems to me we have been at it long enough to have the animals, but do we not have the infrastructure or the continuity among the producers that everybody is heading towards the same carcass? It seems to me that the volume would be an easy thing to take care of if you look at the land base that we have, but it is obvious that we do not have that. So, it seems to me that if you could produce the animal as good and at a good price, that would have taken care of the industry long ago, but it has not. So, there has to be something else involved that has really prevented the industry from taking advantage of an obvious foothold that you say is there.
MR. NASON: The beef industry is one of the most complex industries that there is. One of the major markets for beef in Nova Scotia is the institutional market. There is a strange thing that happens there because there is a provincial inspection standard for me but, yet, somehow these provincial institutions do not recognize that standard and they insist on a federally inspected product. There is no federally inspected plant in Nova Scotia that kills beef currently. The major supplier in this area would bring beef from Hub and probably from Ontario and Quebec suppliers to supply institutional markets. So, it is market organization and that is a problem that is beyond individual producers and beyond producers as a group. It is an issue that the public sector needs to get involved in.
As I have said, I think the basic thing that has to happen is the same thing that happened in the pork industry, that government has to decide that there is going to be a viable beef industry here, and then start to develop programs to ensure that that industry develops in the way it should.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm going to interrupt because Hansard is recording and it is easier, when you start your question, if you could let me recognize you, just so that later on the transcript will be easier. I know you get involved and I do it myself. So when you want to speak, just let me say, I recognize the honourable member for Hants East, and from there we will continue, so continue with your question. I just wanted to clarify that for the members of the committee.
[9:30 a.m.]
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I wasn't sure of the process here. I guess I have a question regarding what had happened with the hog industry, and are there things that can be applied to the beef industry? Is it a completely different organizational marketing scheme, or are there things that can be applied to the beef industry that were applied to the hog industry?
MR. NASON: Well, before you mentioned the fact that there needs to be a constant supply of product. That is one of the things that has happened in the pork industry, they are able to supply, through central marketing, a central desk marketing system, they are able to supply Armstrong's and Larsen's and Tony's Meats with x number of hogs a week. They know where they are coming from, and so on. That is one lesson that might be applied in the beef; it is a little more difficult to apply, but the model is there.
MR. PARKER: I want to turn over now to the dairy industry for a minute, and from Pictou County I notice that there are certainly far less dairy farmers than there were when I was growing up, and each year there seems to be less and less. The industry has evolved to the point where the farms are getting larger and larger, and they are almost becoming corporate farms. So, it is making it very difficult for the new farmers, or a farmer's son even, whatever, to try to break into the industry. It is costing $1 million or more to buy a dairy farm, perhaps that individual is better off spending his money on the stock market or somewhere else. As an investment, it is quite a deterrent to get into it. Do you see any means or methods whereby that process can be stopped maybe, so that we are not getting into four or five corporate dairy farms in all of Nova Scotia, but to try to keep it as a family farm?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: We are really concerned at the federation. The minister appointed a committee that will be working on that for young beginning farmers because, right now, we are only having about 20 to 30 farms starting in Nova Scotia each year, and to make it a healthy industry, we should have 100 every year. We are really in trouble. You can see it in your area, I can see it down in my area. If we don't have the new ones started, we are going to be in big trouble five years from now. We should get a hold on this. Anyway, I think he gave us until December 1st to come back with a report - and in some parts of the world they are working on this - for different incentives to get new and beginning farmers - we don't just say young farmers, but new and beginning farmers - started.
MR. NASON: I think we have identified that as one of the most important areas that we need to deal with. With respect to dairy farms, I think there has been 25 or 26 dairy farms sell out this year. I guess I can allude back to our right to farm issue, and John MacDonell will certainly be familiar with what is happening in East Hants right now. The Municipality of East Hants is about to make a decision to designate a large area as a protected water supply. There would be at least two of the largest dairy operations in Nova Scotia sitting on top of that aquifer. I know that both the Farm Credit Corporation and the Nova Scotia Farm Loan
Board, and probably the banks, are starting to get worried about their investment there. One of those particular farms is in the process of expanding. They have been questioned by their lender, are you going to be able to continue to farm in that area in the future?
I think that is one of the things that tips the decision. In a lot of cases the reason that farmers are saying I might as well get my equity out and be gone now, is because this land may be designated for some particular purpose in the future, for a watershed, as a protected area for endangered species, and then my equity is not the same as it is now. So I am going to get out now. I think that certainly is one of the things that tips the decisions.
Farmers in Nova Scotia have to know a little bit more about the future and about how they are going to be able to use their land in the future before they are willing to make the kind of investment that is required and that will be one of the things we will address in the report that we are putting together now on new and beginning farmers. We used to call them young farmers and every time we did some guy about 50 years old would stand up and say, well, I just got into the business last year. But that is one of the things we will address in that report. Certainly in other jurisdictions there are programs that enable young people, or new farmers to begin, and we need to get on with putting some of those types of programs in place here.
One of the things that can be done is there are currently programs and help that is available to new businesses and sometimes we do not realize it is available to agriculture and sometimes the programs may need a few adjustments to accommodate agricultural businesses. We think there is an opportunity there as well.
MR. PARKER: Mr. Chairman, I will defer any further questions I have maybe to John here. There are a few because I know our time is moving along.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: I guess there are a number of things, sheep producers I wanted to hit on, but they are going to come in and I will try to address that then.
MR. NASON: Be careful of the sheep producers because if you took the IQs of farmers across the province, sheep producers end up with the top IQs.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: I am in that area. I think one of the problems is the rest of society and their perception of the agricultural industry and I think one of the biggest problems the agricultural industry has is that they do their job too well. People are not really hungry enough and because of that fact we tend to take it for granted. We are talking about the production of food, and in society it would seem to me that the people who produce the food, who could heal your sick, and who could teach your people, would be about the three top jobs, and food production I would rate right up there.
We like driving through the country and the white fences and the fields and the cattle and, you know, you died and went to heaven, but it is not a natural process. It is a lot easier to make arguments for natural environments - forests, endangered species, et cetera - but farming is in a way, you have to really go about destroying some of that in order to take land for farming. So in that sense we are growing other species that naturally would never be there and people look at that and they can be fairly critical of that, but it does come down to the production of food for people.
The surplus in California would supply Canada. Well, you can either make a decision as to whether or not you want to bring all your food in or you want to supply food for your people and I think one of the major jobs of any country, or province, should be to see that their people are fed. So I think if we take that approach to agriculture, I think we should have a food policy that we produce a certain level of food in this province to meet the demands that are in this province. I think that would be a start.
I will just sum up. I am assuming, Laurence, that the Federation would certainly be willing to offer some expertise on how they would like that right to farm legislation posed? I know that the protection Act you talked about, I read that, and there is not a lot in it that would make you feel secure.
MR. NASON: One of the things that happened when the Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Marketing did a reorganization two years ago, they created a resource stewardship unit. That group is currently looking at all of the legislation, the municipal by-laws and so on, but it is not a priority and it is certainly not an area where there have been any resources. It is like all the other areas of the department. They have some really good, keen staff but they do not have any resources to work with.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. DeWolfe.
MR. JAMES DEWOLFE: I guess one thing that came to mind when I was campaigning for this job, having been born and raised on a fairly good-sized dairy farm myself, travelling around the country you see so much land that is going back to forest, just growing up in shrubs and so on. Do you see that ever coming back into agriculture land? It is very sad when you think back. I could picture my grandfather up there with a horse trying to clear land with a crowbar and a horse and a shovel. Now this land is going back. We could be raising a lot of crops and shipping a lot out of this province if we really set our minds to it. What is the problem? Why isn't this happening? Why are we letting that land grow back up again?
MR. NASON: Basically, one of the reasons is that agriculture has become efficient. Some interesting work has been done by the Hudson Institute in the U.S.A. and I cannot quote the figures exactly, but they claim that agriculture has become efficient and they say that agriculture is the only sector that can actually create new wildlife habitat and create new
wetlands, and so on, because it has become efficient and it does not need as much land. They have produced a series of figures that talk about how much additional land would be needed to feed North Americans if we were not efficient. So, the fact that land is laying idle is probably just a result of agriculture becoming much more efficient than it was in the past. You just can't afford to farm as much land. You have to farm a smaller lot more intensively.
MR. DEWOLFE: One of your concerns in your document here in the right to farm, is the pressure that is put on farmers by people moving out of the cities into the country and using valuable agricultural land for subdivisions and so on.
MR. NASON: That is because the most valuable agricultural land is also the most coveted land for development; settlement patterns tend to move into areas that are the best for agriculture. One of the best ways to rejuvenate that land that you are talking about is with the cattle and the sheep industry, with ruminants who can turn fibres into protein.
MR. DEWOLFE: Get the beef going, and so on, in those areas. There are so many environmental groups and special interest groups now with concerns of pesticide use, and that sort of thing, putting a lot of pressure on governments and farmers. Without the use of pesticides, obviously, it would be harder for farmers to raise the money they need because their crops would not be protected and so on. What is your feeling on this?
MS. VAN OOSTRUM: I could say a few things about this. I think the perception of people is that farmers use a lot of pesticides and insecticides, and it is not true. I remember we used to use a lot of spray material, I have to think, about 28 years ago. Now we don't use it because we watch the bugs. We hang up traps and there is some glue in there and we catch them and count them and say, well, if there is only, let's say, five in, we spray. If there is no more then we don't spray. We did not do that 25 years ago, 20 years ago. We are watching it, we have expertise. We have people who do that job for us, but the general public think the farmers are spraying all the time, but we don't. In my orchard farm, I use a lot less.
To come back on the production, we used to produce, let's say, 350 bushels an acre of apples. Now, we produce 1,000 bushels an acre. We have come a long way, but we are still getting the same prices we got 25 years ago, but the only reason is, as Laurence said, we do a lot better job. I think if we go to insecticides, pesticides, fungicides, we are doing a tremendous job. But the only problem is, we don't tell the people that we are doing it, and we should go around. We should go down to the winter fair and take all those different things with us and say, listen, we are not spraying if we don't really have to.
MR. NASON: The apple industry in Nova Scotia pioneered integrated pest management. The apple industry in Nova Scotia uses less pesticide than their counterparts in any other place in North America. I guess, you can't say that there is no risk involved with the use of pesticides, because there is risk involved with everything. But if you look at how farmers in Nova Scotia use pesticides, I think you will soon come to the conclusion that the
risks have been looked at very carefully. We have farmers who use pesticides in Nova Scotia, they must have a licence to purchase them and must have a licence to use them. That is done by the Department of the Environment. That wasn't forced on the agricultural industry, the agricultural industry asked the government to develop that program, because it is in our best interest to do that.
There is a bill before the House now that is of great concern to the agricultural industry, Bill No. 1, which provides the Municipality of Halifax with by-law making powers to control the use of pesticides in the municipality. Well, the municipality now takes in a large and productive agricultural area up through the Musquodoboit Valley. That legislation could totally restrict agriculture in Halifax County. I think part of the reason that agriculture wasn't excluded is maybe because we haven't done a good enough job of telling people how we use pesticides and why we use them.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: There was no intention . . .
MR. NASON: No, we realize that.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: That will be changed.
MR. DEWOLFE: Recently, and you probably know the case, I heard on CBC Radio, just from travelling in the car, a young man and his wife, and he happened to have $450,000 - God knows where he got it, but he had it - and he wanted to buy a farm and it wasn't enough. As strange as it may seem, he had the God-given gift to go into farming and no doubt knew the business; he could buy the property, but he wouldn't have any operating capital. Is that a normal situation that would be facing a young person today in Nova Scotia?
MR. NASON: I think that is probably fairly normal. The average age of farmers in Nova Scotia is about 53 to 54 years of age. In another 10 years, there is going to be a lot of farms and something is going to have to happen. They are either going to be turned over to family members - I had a neighbour who when I asked him what he was going to do with his farm, he said, well, I haven't got a kid I dislike enough to give it to - or they are going to be put on the market. If they are put on the market, more than likely, they are going to sold for non-agricultural use, and there is going to be more farm land that is good farm land that is going to be paved over with cement and asphalt.
MR. DEWOLFE: I just wanted to go back to the sheep issue that was brought up. I was just curious about sheep farming in Nova Scotia, what stage is that at now? Is it a viable industry?
MR. NASON: I am not qualified to comment on the sheep industry. Sheep producers appear to be doing fairly well. As I have said, they think in circles that are above me, so I don't even like to go and talk to them.
MR. DEWOLFE: As a cattle farmer, we didn't even mention sheep in the kitchen.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I know prices for lambs right now are sky high, and they are doing very well. But the coyotes pretty well ruined it a few years ago, and I think they are coming back a little bit. I don't know enough about it to comment on it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: In regard to land and your comment that there is some real prime farm land in this province, you are concerned, from your previous comments, that if the family does not continue it or if someone is unable to buy it, then it is going to go for development. When you talk about the right to farm, does that encompass something in the sense of trying to have certain land designated as farm land? That is perhaps a dirty word because if you have a farm and you are looking to sell it, and it says it has to be used for agricultural purposes, that diminishes its value because you have no options, it has to go for farming. If you could sell it for development, it might be worth three or four times what the value of the asset is.
This begs the question, especially when you look in certain areas of this province and you know that it is beautiful farm land, do we have a long-term vision for this province as to what we want to have or do we just sit here and wait until it is all gone and then say, gee, it would be nice to take it back and when you take it back, you are right in the middle of a residential centre, with homes on both sides, and then you start spreading the manure on the field, then you wonder why you have a problem. So I ask the question as to what is your vision in regard to this?
MR. NASON: First of all, our position with respect to the protection of farm land itself is that, yes, it needs to be protected and, obviously, if you look at the Kings County example, the community has decided that it is worth protecting. However, we do not think that the farmer should pay the price of protecting it and that is basically what is happening here and what has happened in other jurisdictions. If it is worth protecting, if the Province of Nova Scotia decides that, yes, we need to protect this valuable resource, then something needs to be done to ensure that it is not protected on the backs of the people who own it now.
Quebec probably has one of the best models. They have a new Act that protects agriculture, that integrates the protection of farm land with the right to farm and accepted farming practices and so on. So that is probably the answer, an Act like that. I certainly think agricultural land needs to be protected. However, if you are going to ask the farmers to protect it, then I do not agree with it.
I know a guy in Ontario who years ago was worth millions of dollars when he went to bed one night and a planning committee decided to zone his farm for agriculture. He got up the next morning and he was not worth nearly as much money because a group of people sitting around the table had the power to designate that for agriculture. Nobody compensated him for that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I agree and the real dilemma that we have in my estimation is that most of the prime farm land that we have is within perhaps an hour of metro - I am speaking as a rural member - and I always note that the civil servants always try to move positions to about an hour's reach outside of Halifax, and maybe I am being presumptuous here, but I always find that they are trying to set up centres in Kentville, Bridgewater and Truro, and in their latter years in the Civil Service they can move out there and enjoy the rural life and still be close to all the cultural attractions of the city. In other words, most people would feel the same way, that you are looking at land that has the advantages of an urban centre and also has the advantages of a rural setting.
I look at it as to whether or not we, as a province, should not be making a long-term statement as to what we value in Nova Scotia and if we intend to have farm land available for the next 100 or 200 years, do we make a conscious decision to sometimes buy the land, make provisions of a yearly investment into land acquisition, and then in turn perhaps lease it at a nominal rate, whatever, for farmers who wish to do it, and long-term contracts and so forth? I am asking the question because if we wait, it will be too late and then we will say we should have done something and I think that discussion has not taken place. I agree with you that it is not for the farmers to make the sacrifice. I have been in business myself and often, someone says, well, you had a fish plant and it's nice but it is now community-owned because the community wants it and you cannot sell it. I would be somehow angered. I know that I would. That is a mild way of saying it.
So, I look at ourselves as a province that we really have not put forth that position. Your position you are putting forward on the right to farm, is that a vision? I am not trying to put words in your mouth because you are bringing up all the points, but up to now you really haven't articulated whether or not that is a vision that encompasses some of the things that I am saying.
MR. NASON: Well, I think that is a vision that the agricultural community is developing. It has just become a serious issue because of various things that have happened in the past few years. We certainly welcome a government's vision of the agricultural industry and some steps to protect agricultural land. There are lots of models around. They do it in most other jurisdictions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: George, our caucus has four minutes left, if you want to make any comments and then it will be going to the Liberals for 20 minutes after. You can't clear your throat in four minutes, but you can try if you want to.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: You are talking about the right to farm, right now. Anthony is probably quite familiar with the hog fellows who want to build a farm up on the West Halls Harbour Road. Did you talk about that?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: No, we didn't talk about that.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I have had people calling me from Halls Harbour and say, look, we are becoming a retirement community and the community of artists and artisans. We are a tourist destination. We don't want smelly pigs. You know the pigs are what, two miles away?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: Yes.
MR. ARCHIBALD: You know it's 600 sows and it is just for growing little pigs and off they go for finishing somewhere else . . .
MRS. COSMAN: Finishing school.
MR. ARCHIBALD: . . . and it's needed. Yes, finishing school. (Laughter) That is exactly what it is. They are finished. We can look at it from 100 kilometres away in amusement, but it had committee meetings. What is going to happen?
MR. NASON: I do not know if you are familiar with the document that has just been produced by Pork Nova Scotia. Over the past one and one-half years, they developed a document that makes a commitment on their part, to build hog facilities in the future with certain setbacks from any residential or other uses.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Well, this is right in the middle of the woods.
MR. NASON: Yes, but the fact is that to do that they have to have the cooperation of local governments, and local governments will not agree with that. One of the problems with that facility is you can build a hog facility in the middle of the woods, but then the municipality will issue a building permit or development permit right up to the door of it then you have problems. It does not matter who was there first when you get into the problems.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I know you want to put me on the spot, George. (Laughter)
MR. ARCHIBALD: No, I want your help because I'm on the spot.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I think there should be, as Laurence said, quite a zone around it, you know, that they say, well, there is no houses, you should pick your spot. In New Brunswick, there are four or five miles around, there was nothing around. You wouldn't like to see a piggery starting right across the road from you.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I have two.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: Yes, they must be downwind from you.
MR. ARCHIBALD: No, they are northwest.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I think, they need something, as you said, we have to get something in place soon in Kings County to protect our agriculture land and on the other side, you heard on the radio advertising, it is such a beautiful place to retire in Kings County. We are trying to get the people who retire, but we can't find any money for VON and we want farmers there and not there. I think we have to make up our minds and I think it is really important that we make up our minds like you said about agricultural land. Is it important to us and we better make some rules and regulations because otherwise they are going to be gone. Even in Kings County there are a lot of people coming from the city and if I put a 40 acre or 60 acre lot for sale, it is no problem to sell it.
[10:00 a.m.]
MR. NASON: To get back to the chairman's point, when it comes to agricultural land use I think that is an issue that the province needs to grapple with and they have shoved it off on local governments. So there are different situations right across the province.
I can sell my field and my field is just as good for agriculture as Anthony's field. I can break it up and sell it for $10,000 a lot. Anthony cannot do that where he is because he is not allowed. The local council has said, no, you are not allowed to do that, we are going to protect that but yet they have not compensated him for the fact that he cannot get the highest market value out of his land. I think it is an issue that the province has to deal with and as you have indicated, they need to develop some kind of a vision and make a statement with respect to the protection of agricultural land.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It is time for the Progressive Conservatives to finish and move onto the Liberals. Any questions from the Liberal Caucus? The Minister of Community Services.
HON. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Chairman, I don't have a farming background, I hate to admit that, having heard our other colleagues talk about their farm life. I have to say though I did milk a few cows as a girl. There used to be a farm next to our home when I was growing up in New Brunswick and it was always an interesting experience to see what happened on the farm. We used to help bring the cows in, actually, and those were the days before the electric milkers so there was always a very labour-intensive milking session twice a day.
I am thinking about the drought last year and the incredible problems it caused and the likelihood that we are into another drought again this year. I just would like to get some comments around the Drought Relief Program and how useful it has been or has not been. I would just like to get your viewpoints on it.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I think the Drought Relief Program, I don't hear a lot of bad comments about it. There are a lot of people who use the money, I think. There are still applications coming in now and I think there is a little problem that some people did not know, they thought they needed to have a new loan and in some cases that was not necessary to get the interest relief.
The way I understand it, it is used well. In some parts of the province they did not have a problem with the drought, they didn't apply for it. To get on this year's, I think it is serious just in some parts. Around Truro there is no problem at all. In the area that I live, I think George, there is going to be a real problem if we don't get rain soon because it is serious and it started earlier than last year.
MR. ARCHIBALD: The brooks are dry.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: The brooks are dry, the ponds are empty now and I have a pond that always flows over up until July but it is going down every day probably six or seven inches that you can count days and say, we are going to have a serious problem. It is only going to be in parts of the province. I think half of the province gets plenty of water, Cape Breton, around Truro, plenty of water; anything beyond Hantsport is terribly dry.
MRS. COSMAN: So the drought program as it was put in place last year has, from your view, worked?
MR. NASON: It is working from the last information I saw. If you did a graph of the take-up of the program and overlaid it on a graph where there were weather problems, they match up exactly, you know Kings County, Queens, Lunenburg. When you get over into Cumberland County it goes down, so I think it is working.
MRS. COSMAN: The switch last year from the food inspection from Environment to Agriculture, has that been an effective thing that was done?
MR. NASON: The optics of it look good in Agriculture's budget, it looks like there was a big increase in the budget. I guess it has been effective, that seems to be the place.
MRS. COSMAN: It is a logical thing to do, isn't it?
MR. NASON: Yes.
MRS. COSMAN: Apart from what you see as optics because it looks like the budget has got some more money in it. I mean the funding had to obviously transfer over.
MR. NASON: No, that is the place for it. I will leave a series of reports that we have done on the department and I think that is one of the points we make, that it was a good move to consolidate all those services under the Department of Agriculture.
MRS. COSMAN: Just to pick up on my colleague's comments around the use of pesticides on farms, I think, Anthony, you are right, there is a perception out there that there is a huge amount of pesticide use and I think if you ask the average person that question, they would probably reflect that perception. I just was curious if there has ever been any tracking on cancer incidence in the farm community, whether it is just the average norm for incidence across the province, or if there is any difference? Does anyone do any research?
MR. NASON: There is no evidence that pesticides cause cancer, no direct evidence. In fact, farmers, who are the biggest users of pesticides, probably have a lower rate of cancer than other segments of the population and that comes from work that was done at the Hudson Institute. Do you remember the guy's name, Anthony? He came up and spoke at our conference.
MRS. COSMAN: Yes, that probably kicks in from lifestyle factors and the variables that would play into that in terms of the fresh air, the food, the work ethic, and all the rest of the things that keep your immune system functioning. So there is no research being done at the present time on that question here, that you know of?
MR. NASON: I do not know of any research. In fact, like I say, the research I have looked at indicates that there is no direct evidence linking pesticide use with cancer.
MRS. COSMAN: Well, I think that might be disputed but Bill No. 1 that has been introduced in the House is of concern to you because of the impact on the farmland in the Halifax Regional Municipality area?
MR. NASON: It is not only a concern to us because of the impact in this municipality, but that legislation will not be too long getting over into the Municipal Act. So every municipality in the province will have by-law-making powers to put pretty severe restrictions on the agricultural industry.
MRS. COSMAN: So there was not any effort to communicate with the farm community that that clause was going to be in that bill that was introduced suggesting that control?
MR. NASON: No.
MRS. COSMAN: You folks were not consulted with . . .
MR. NASON: No.
MRS. COSMAN: That is it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Fraser.
MR. HYLAND FRASER: Mr. Chairman, I am not normally on this committee but I am glad I am here because I did farm for a number of years. You had mentioned earlier on that there was only one federally approved beef inspection. I thought Tony's Meats were . . .
MR NASON: He is provincial inspection.
MR. FRASER: They do not have federal, because they do export?
MR. NASON: They do not have federal inspection as far as I know.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I thought they did, up in Antigonish.
MR. NASON: Perhaps they do.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I think they do.
MR. FRASER: I know they export outside of Canada. So they must.
MR. NASON: We were talking about the beef industry. He does not kill a whole lot of beef.
MR. FRASER: No, I understand that, but I just wanted to clarify that. I thought that they still had a federal inspection there. I am going to focus in on the dairy industry a little bit and the concern I have, I guess, with the price of a milk quota. I understand it is up to about $18,000 per kilogram right now and the discussion before was, why young farmers or new people cannot get into the industry and I guess it has been the way for a number of years. The price of a quota on a dairy farm is the full value of the farm and there is no incentive to tie a quota to a farm. So if somebody cannot raise the money to buy the farm, the farmer can sell the quota and get his full value for his farm and let the rest of it fall down, who cares.
I guess my concern is that when government looks at how we provide incentives for new people to get into the industry, we are really promoting the high cost of milk quota and I know with the P6, or whatever it is called, the interprovincial agreement that the Dairy Commission has now in the province, the free market system is allowed to float. That is a concern of mine and I am just wondering, do you have any opinion on it, on how we can address that in order to bring people into the industry without breaking everybody?
MR. NASON: Other than the provision of programs that will allow new and beginning farmers to borrow money easily and access, particularly, operating capital, no, I do not have any answers to that, but like I said, strategically I think it is one of the biggest problems we have.
MR. FRASER: I am wondering, with the P6 agreement, are we losing net quota from the province?
MR. NASON: I cannot answer that with any degree of authority. I do not think so, I think that 1 percent is allowed to move out, and I am not sure whether we are up to that limit or not. I can certainly find out, if you would like to know.
MR. FRASER: When you attach onto other provinces, bigger than ours, I guess I have always been concerned as well, when the Canadian Dairy Commission set the quotas for the provinces, Quebec got the lion's share at that time, because it was the politically expedient thing to do, and we had come out of a bad year, a drought back in the early 1970's when those quotas were set, or the year they were based on. I think it is one the reasons that we import butter and other products into this province, when we could probably do them here ourselves. So we never gave ourselves an opportunity through the years to expand, because of the limitations we had on quotas and stuff like that, where other provinces were allowed to produce our products and ship them back into us, and there was nothing we could do about it. Is that changing now at all, or is that a done deal?
MR. NASON: That's another question I can't answer. Sorry.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Perhaps this committee should meet with the Nova Scotia dairy farmers. (Interruptions)
MR. NASON: The milk producers can answer all those questions. They have a very sophisticated organization. They know exactly what is going on in the dairy industry here, in Canada, and in the world.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We could have them, or we could have George answer the questions for them. (Interruptions) Hyland, do you have any further questions.
MR. FRASER: Well, since I didn't get any answers there, I'll move away from the dairy industry for a few minutes. The ability to grow grain, I know this from years ago, there was an impetus, I guess, to try to get more people to grow grain, and with the change in the freight-rate subsidy, it seemed to make a lot more sense then because, we had been more competitive in grain purchases with the western provinces. I am wondering where that is now? I understand that grain production is dropping back off, because we are just not a good area to grow grain. Is that the reason?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I can probably speak more for the Valley area. I think for the Valley area we grow a lot of produce, and there is just a lot more money to be made in growing carrots and onions, than in growing grain. If we get dry weather like this year, you are not going to get great grain, it is just too expensive. That is probably one of the things. The world prince of grain is way down, and if grain goes back to $250 a ton, probably people will start growing grain again. But right now, there are not too many farmers interested in growing grain.
MR. FRASER: If there was a type of subsidy program or anything like that ever initiated by the province, would it make any difference, or is it just that the climate is not here to bother doing it?
MR. NASON: There has been about $40 million, I think, spent over the years on trying to encourage the production of grain in Atlantic Canada, not just Nova Scotia. Obviously, there is something wrong. I think that, our goal is to find a way to cut about $10 off the cost of freight, because we are at the end of the line, and there are some restrictions that are placed on getting grain in here, for various reasons that aren't particularly good for the monogastric section of the industry, poultry and the hog industry. So we have to find a way to cheapen the transportation of grain in here.
MR. FRASER: I know some dairy farmers in my area, and I guess, quite a number around the province mix their own feed now, buy the whole products. The products coming in and out of the United States, with the way the dollar is, is that costing them a lot more now?
MR. NASON: Yes.
MR. FRASER: They are buying American.
MR. NASON: I don't think there is a lot of American grain coming in now.
MR. FRASER: I though some of the corn and soymeal . . .
MR. NASON: We just got a load of Argentinean, a boat load at Halifax and there is talk of barley coming from western Europe as well so that probably has to do with the American dollar.
MR. FRASER: Just another question on the turkey industry. I have one turkey producer in Antigonish. What is going on with that? What is its future in this province? Are they going to be able to have a plant to kill turkeys or is that a done deal, gone for good?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I cannot address that. As a federation, we usually stay away from those. We would like to help wherever possible like the other day we touched on the Middleton Grain Centre and we will certainly help. If any commodity group needs any help we certainly address it. All I can say about turkeys, I was at the meeting with the federal minister in Moncton two weeks ago and Hub Meat Packers asked the minister if they could not get a quota for bringing in frozen turkeys from the United States and then they could slice them up down in Moncton. There are always two sides to a problem. I cannot answer your question on the processors, I know there are empty barns down in Lunenburg County too.
MR. FRASER: I know some of the hogs were being exported from the province, they were getting more money in Quebec. Has that been addressed? Has it changed or is it still in place?
MR. NASON: I do not know of any Nova Scotian hogs that went, I think that was Prince Edward Island hogs that were going to Quebec.
MR. FRASER: So, no Nova Scotian hogs were going?
MR. NASON: No. We can't supply the market for fresh pork here. There is fresh pork coming in.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: You mentioned earlier about the concern with family farms and farms themselves once the farmers have to retire, that land is being lost. I am just curious if non-residents of Nova Scotia are coming in to purchase that land, if that has become a problem for unused farmland, that it is non-residents of Canada coming in and buying that land? The other question would be, are they using it for a farm or is it being developed for real estate?
MR. NASON: Non-resident land ownership I think may be a problem in Lunenburg County, parts of Cumberland County and I think parts of Kings County. Other than that I am not aware that it is a major problem. I guess it may be a bigger problem in the case of the forestry industry because people can buy large tracts of forest land here at what seems to be a very reasonable price, compared with forest land in European countries and even the United States. They do not manage that land the same way as landowners here manage their forestry properties.
MR. SAMSON: My other question is that Richmond County traditionally has not been a very big participant in this industry. The few that we do have that participate feel pretty frustrated that their voices are not heard or that their industry is not really growing in Richmond County. I do not really know what the reason is for that. We have lots of land there that has not been tapped for farming purposes and I guess maybe you would have a better
understanding of why is it not growing in Richmond County and what can we do for counties like Richmond, where the industry is very small, to foster growth in the industry?
MR. NASON: Make it reasonable for beginning farmers to start agriculture. The rest of Cape Breton has a pretty vibrant agricultural industry. The biggest farm in Nova Scotia is in Cape Breton, outside of Sydney.
MR. ARCHIBALD: The biggest vegetable farm.
MR. NASON: No, they are the biggest farm in Nova Scotia, Eyking. I am pretty sure. Chris told me that himself. Anyway, there is a vibrant industry and I know what you are saying, in Richmond County, outside of a few beef producers, there does not seem to be a large agricultural sector.
MR. SAMSON: I think in our gross domestic product coming out of that industry is a mink farm that we have down there that represents over 30 per cent of the value of what is going out there. So they feel pretty frustrated that it is not growing and no one seems to be interested in getting into it, I guess, and it is unfortunate, as you say, the other parts of Cape Breton are doing quite well with the farming industry. So I was just curious if there was any reason why Richmond itself was not growing?
MR. NASON: None that I know of except the fact that the capital is not available to people to get into the industry.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The time has expired that we had there. We are going to be going back to the NDP and our intention is to go for 10 minutes for every caucus and then if time remains, we will open up for questions.
MR. PARKER: I have got a few short snappers I wanted to ask you. New crops in Nova Scotia, one of them is cranberries that is being encouraged but another one I have been doing some reading on lately is hemp and it looks like it has tremendous potential or is a good match for Nova Scotia. Is the federation encouraging farmers to grow this particular crop or where is it at from your point of view?
MR. NASON: I guess we are following what is happening with the development of it. Other than that, no, we have not been encouraging people to get into it.
MR. PARKER: It looks like a good cash crop that farmers could grow and it can be used on a lot of vacant land so-called, to bring it into production.
MR. NASON: A low maintenance crop.
MR. PARKER: It is a weed really I guess.
MR. NASON: Low pesticide use, cross pollinates with the good stuff and makes it not quite as good, but authorities are anxious to get it growing.
MR. PARKER: It looks like a crop that has got a lot of potential. Secondly, I had the opportunity on the weekend to attend a purebred cattlemen's field day. There is some debate over what is the number one beef breed in Canada? It depends who you talk to . . .
MR. NASON: Aberdeen Angus.
MR. PARKER: . . . but I am going to ask you, which breed is the number one beef breed in this country?
MR. NASON: Aberdeen Angus.
MR. PARKER: That is what I was told. So perhaps they were correct then.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I do not know who told him that.
MR. PARKER: Yes, they were saying that is the number one breed right at this time in Canada.
MR. NASON: It is the number one breed in the world.
MR. PARKER: Is it?
MR. NASON: Yes, U.S., South Africa . . .
MR. PARKER: You just verified their information then.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Listen, he has to qualify that. What kind of cattle do you keep?
MR. NASON: Aberdeen Angus.
MR. PARKER: I guess the third thing, do you see any future in Nova Scotia for the dairy goat industry that has gone through ups and downs and right now is down, I believe, but is there potential for this industry in Nova Scotia?
MR. NASON: There appears to be. I mean there is a pretty significant investment in the dairy goat industry taking place in the Musquodoboit Valley right now and, you know, we have talked to a couple of people who last week were quite concerned about the lack of facilities to process goat milk. So there appears to be a market for it.
MR. PARKER: Yes, there is.
MR. NASON: It is just a case of organization.
MR. PARKER: They just do not have a dairy at this time, I guess is the problem?
MR. NASON: Yes. There is one being developed in the Musquodoboit area.
MR. PARKER: The final thing I will mention, we talked earlier here about the pesticide issue and HRM. I guess we agree that the rural areas of the municipality should not be affected and I think it is just a matter of determining where the boundary should be drawn, if it is the old city boundaries or what, but I certainly feel that we do not want to get it into areas outside the urban areas in Halifax County. In fact, we talked about that yesterday in our caucus and we are certainly supportive of it being in the urban area but not outside of that. John, you probably have some questions you want to ask.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Yes. I know a little bit about the history of the goat dairy because my brother set that dairy up. He bought the name from Maxine Joyce or used that name, Forever April. It has had a fairly rocky history, at least up until he was involved, or he wasn't involved. It did not make anybody wealthy which is probably part of the reason why the dairy processing is shut down.
As far as the land use, I am wondering and this probably gets back to something that the chairman had mentioned, but is this something where the government really is going to have to buy that land and lease it; young farmers coming in have a possibility of leasing that land from the government, or the possibility of lease-to-buy or depending on whatever the operation may be. I have the same concern about what happens to that land, the fact that it goes out of production, but also, along the lines of the cost of quota as far as the dairy sector is concerned. When quota goes up for sale, I think the government really should buy part of that, and take it out of production, and have it set aside for young farmers. You know, give it to them. Because that's how it started out. There was no price on quota, it was allotted to you, and I think, if nothing else, you are going to have to draw a line in the sand and put a cap on that, and do it in relation - if a guy bought quota today at a certain price, somehow he has to be guaranteed that he is not going to lose his investment.
The government is going to have to make some move in order to ensure that the people who have put money out on quota don't lose their investment. But for the future, there has to be some accessibility to quota, if you are going to get young farmers into the business. Even with the P6, I am not sure if quota's market is the same in Prince Edward Island, or has the same price associated with it. So if there are different types of structures that still seem to work, but don't have the excessive value placed on them. Certainly, I think it is something, that and land use both could be impediments to bringing farmers in or keeping them farming. And when you mentioned about 20 new farms when there should be 100, I was wondering,
is that in relation to those who have left? In other words, did 60 leave the industry, but only 20 come in, so we really only lost 40?
MR. NASON: We don't know how many are leaving. We know we lost about a third of our beef herd as a result of the drought last year. So you can assume that there are a whole lot of beef farms, the land is still there and they may still have an interest, but they are not actively farming.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: And the other, the last, the sheep farmer is going to finish. The last thing I am wondering about is if it seems clear that we can grow grass so well for a beef industry, then why can't we grow grain. Doesn't grain grow as a grass, basically it is a cereal, but how much different are the conditions that make for good grain, other than you can grow grass when it is pretty darn wet, but you can't get grain off when it is pretty darn wet? So, I know I can buy grain in Prince Edward Island darn reasonably, and only on the basis that the guy who is growing it uses it as a second crop, when he is not growing potatoes on that land. So, 300 acres of grain, you can buy grain fairly reasonably, because he is a potato man anyway, and that is where he makes his money. I am curious as to what other factors seem to impede grain production here.
MR. NASON: Soil type and moisture. For example, one of the largest blocks of class 2 land in Nova Scotia, is down through East Hants, and down through Kennetcook and that area, and it is pretty tough to grow grain on that. You can't get on it early, your can't get on it late in the fall.
MR. DEWOLFE: Just a comment, I guess, from you, if I could. I too am concerned about this, you know you suggested 100 farms should be starting up. Where would you like to see us go with this? What can we do to help you? You are the experts, you have some definite ideas. Why don't you tell us what you would like to see happen.
MR. NASON: We plan on doing that in December, when we finish our report. But basically, there has to be a program developed. There was a program in place in Nova Scotia that provided an interest subsidy. There has to be a program developed to encourage new people to get into the industry. Part of that program is obviously going to be things like interest subsidies, but there are other areas that are involved, tax concessions, and so on. Unless we get this right to farm thing straightened out, why would anybody even want to get into the industry.
MR. DEWOLFE: But the fact is there are some people who want to get into it, it is in their blood, and they want to do it, there's a great satisfaction, and you know yourself, the farmers that you talk to.
MR. NASON: I am just trying to put away enough money to get into it again.
[10:30 a.m.]
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: We have people, young fellows, there are four or five, around where I live, who would like to start farming. I know one, he was going to milk 20 cows and his Farm Loan Board loan was going to be $300,000 and now at 18,000 kgs., he is going to need $360,000. Everything is there, but he just cannot afford it. I do not know who could do something. Maybe the dairy industry itself should make up their mind and it is not up to the federation, I think, to tell the dairy industry what to do.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Archibald, do you have any questions or comments?
MR. ARCHIBALD: I think it is great when the federation comes in because, as you outlined so clearly in your briefing - and it is such a good brief, where did I see it? It is just tremendous the farm gate value, the employment - 42,600 Nova Scotians depend on agriculture. That is pretty darn good and to have the president and executive director here in one day is marvellous.
You mentioned a few minutes ago you had some meetings with the Middleton Grain Centre. I know the minister is meeting again trying to help out, but I am concerned about Annapolis County and I guess there is really nothing much you can do or I can do because there is good land in Annapolis County but the agricultural value keeps going down year after year and pretty soon there will not be anybody left except the spruce trees. We do need a new entrance program desperately in this province so that new people, whether they are taking early retirement at 50 or 55 and want to start farming - I am not sure, but I do know we have to get new people in.
Some people may say 50 or 55 is too old to start farming. If you think back to the late 1940s and early 1950s and the very early 1960s when we had people coming here from Holland, a lot of the people were 45 and 50 years old, bringing their families out to this place and some of the people arrived and they did not even have running water in the farms they managed to pick up, but there was a program to help them get started. If there had not been the program to help them get started, we would not have an agriculture industry in the province today because if you look at the Federation of Agriculture, the Hog Board, the dairy farmers, you do not go very far before you find out that it is people from Holland, whose parents perhaps were from Holland, who are running the organizations. Every single one of them had a new entrants program so we have to have a new entrants program or this industry is going to fold, I think.
I am very concerned about the future of agriculture in Nova Scotia because there never was a whole lot of money in farming, but there was satisfaction and all those other things. We do have to concentrate on getting new people into the business. It is not happening now. Hopefully your paper will be adopted by government because we have a whole county of pretty high quality land. Then, too, you have to identify the agricultural
enterprise that people should get into. It is very difficult to grow potatoes in Nova Scotia. There are a lot of things we do not grow very well here, but there are, hopefully, still some opportunities.
MRS. COSMAN: If I may lead off, one of our colleagues across the way mentioned that you should perhaps give us some suggestions of what you would like to see government do. You mentioned you are producing a paper in the fall that will address that. I am wondering, in your brief that you gave us this morning, you talked about the insensitive regulatory blanket and policies not only at the provincial level but at the municipal level.
MR. NASON: And federal level.
MRS. COSMAN: Will you be addressing that insensitive regulatory blanket in your presentation in the fall?
MR. NASON: Well, I guess it is indirectly related to the ability of individuals to get into the business but no, I do not think so. We are perfectly willing to address that if somebody will listen. We have been trying to address occupational health and safety issues for the past two or three years. I have not even looked at the new general safety regulations. One of Mr. Archibald's constituents, who is the expert on farm safety, sent us a list of 10 or 15 areas in that particular document that are insensitive to the uniqueness of agricultural. It is things like, well, for a while, Anthony was not allowed to pick his apples unless he had a crane and harness on every apple picker. It is things like that that slip in and it is basically because people do not understand the industry. There are parts of the Environment Act that are the same.
MR. ARCHIBALD: They were told, but they wrote it anyway.
MR. NASON: They were told at the committee level. So the other part of the regulatory blanket that we talk about is the cost recovery regimes that are being put in place particularly by the federal government. What does it cost you to send a load of apples to New Brunswick now, $700 for a licence to do it?
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: Yes, $500 or $700. It used to be $5.00.
MRS. COSMAN: But from the viewpoint of trying to make this all-encompassing in terms of presenting the view that these regulations, this department, that department - is there a collection of these policies that you could focus on in one document that would say, this is what is in place in the policy regime, this is its impact and this is our suggestion for overhauling it, revamping it, whatever needs to be done?
MR. NASON: Yes, in conjunction with the Prince Edward Island federation and the New Brunswick federation, we are in the process of doing a study on cost recovery which the preliminary report - and I can get a copy of it for you if you wish - identifies all of these restraints that have been placed on the industry and cost them out.
MRS. COSMAN: That is not just occupational health and safety issues, it is across the board?
MR. NASON: No, this is cost recovery, it is not occupational health and safety; we can do that as well.
MRS. COSMAN: Well, I guess what I am picking up on here is that there are a number of areas that are an aggravation and a concern to the federation that go across the board. I am wondering if anyone has done the research on it to present a brief that covers that kind of an analysis of all the policies that are an aggravation?
MR. NASON: We have outlined the occupational health and safety issues. We have identified a number of areas in the environmental area. Cost recovery, from the standpoint of the provincial government, has not been an issue for the farmers up until now. The cost recovery initiatives have been fairly reasonable here, the federal ones have not. If the committee would like that information we can certainly forward it.
MRS. COSMAN: I am not necessarily suggesting it for the committee though it is helpful for us to see it, but in terms of your plan of action for the next couple of years as you go down the road, it is mentioned in your document that there is an insensitive regulatory blanket. I am just suggesting to you that if there is a capacity to bring forward a position paper on the federation's part that analyzes that regulatory blanket the number of perspectives, then it is probably a worthwhile exercise. Those are my questions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions from the Liberal Party? Hyland Fraser.
MR. FRASER: To go back to the issue my colleague to the left of me mentioned when he first came in, the land use by-laws and when they are being developed by towns and rural municipalities, I know in the County of Antigonish when we did the fringe area around the town - and there are a number of farms in that catchment area - there wasn't any problem marking those down as agricultural land. The problem that we had was other land that somebody said used to be farmed that had kind of grown up, shrubbery and stuff like that, that probably if somebody turned the sod over and made use of it, it is probably excellent land. That land was kind of left off to the side there. If a young farmer wanted to come in and said, gee, I would like to start a vegetable operation here, probably the surrounding houses that were allowed to develop over the past 5 or 10 years would say, no, we don't want him
there, even though that is not really a threatening industry. It could be a hog farm, as well, I suppose.
I am concerned, I guess, a little bit about how that should be addressed. Everybody does it their own way. It is under the planning department of Municipal Affairs. There is a lot of leverage there where municipal units are allowed to do what they want. You try to change it and you are up against a public hearing and people can come in and stack a meeting and turn you down.
MR. NASON: I guess our position would be that we think decisions with respect to agriculture land should be made by the Legislature, not by local councils, so there is some continuity across the province.
MR. FRASER: Another item is where rivers or streams flow through farms. Even on the farm I had, the cows used to walk across the brook and onto the other side to have a drink and whatever. Now you have to airlift them to get them to the other side, with a bag under them to make sure they don't lose anything on the way across. (Laughter)
MR. NASON: That is one of the issues that Anthony mentioned earlier, that we don't do a good enough job telling people what we do. That is one of the things that farmers are conscious of. A lot of farmers are fencing watercourses, not because they are forced to, but because they have decided that the riparian habitat is something they want as part of their agro-ecosystem that they farm now. It is ridiculous and there are still a lot of farmers who think it is ridiculous. I think you will find that a lot of farmers are responding to that without pressure from government and fencing watercourses.
MR. FRASER: That is it, Mr. Chairman. I appreciated the opportunity.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have 18 minutes left. I am not going to follow any Party lines so if anybody has any questions, I will open up the floor.
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: Mr. Chairman, this is not really a question, it is really a statement regarding Bill No. 1. I am not sure of the history of that bill. I know that it was put forth by the HRM and put in as a Private Member's Bill by one of our caucus members. So when you raised your concerns to me on that, I was a little surprised because there was no consultation with the caucus on that bill. My fear is that, depending on the way governments work, there is no assurance that you will be around for any great length of time. You may not have the capability of some of the members here who have etched their mark in the building over there.
I assume that this bill will keep coming back, one way or another. I think somebody told me that it was the third time they tried to get it into the House. I would really like to see it go through but with that change associated with the agricultural community, because my
fear is that if it doesn't know and does later, it may not get the attention that it deserves as far as that change is concerned and it could have a serious affect on the agricultural community in the HRM and, as you noted, possibly other municipalities in the future. I would kind of like to make it a done deal and make sure it gets done right, as soon as possible, so that the agricultural community is not going to be too worried about the effect of it. Just on the idea that it will keep coming back, I am sure, it probably should be dealt with and done right as soon as possible. That is really the only other comment I would like to make.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: I think sometimes from the federation's point of view, things seem to slip by and they shouldn't. I am always concerned about that. We got to the endangered species Act on time and if we hadn't jumped on it, I think it would have slipped by. I protect any bird. I have pieces of land on my farm and people say, why don't you break them up and make it one field? I say, I like to see those pheasants, I like to see a few deer around. It doesn't hurt anybody to just leave that little corner of the woods there. I know not everyone thinks like that.
The same with the Occupational Health and Safety Act. At that time, you know, if I picked an apple tree, it should have had a resting platform every 10 feet. You know, this means putting a platform up every tree that you picked and it was just not feasible and I am just wondering how things get in there and nobody picks them up. It is not for me. We are really concerned about this. The same now with this Halifax one. It is really a concern, but nobody seems to pick it up.
MR. NASON: Well, when you look at a bill to amend the Halifax Regional Municipality, you do not tend to think that there is a whole lot of impact on agriculture. That one sure has an impact.
MR. CHAIRMAN: If I could maybe interject at this point, when we talk about this bill, when we are speaking about agriculture, but what about forestry?
MR. NASON: They are concerned as well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Of course, they are.
MR. NASON: But our concern is agriculture.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I know and your focus is on the agricultural side of it. Then there is another application. It goes on into the forestry and then it comes to the point of the HRM can have a bill that is passed in the Legislature, and maybe subsequent to that there will be Kentville, and after that it will be Yarmouth, and it goes on and on. Those are sometimes the difficulties that you have in regard to bills which will have implications down the road, in trying to deal with one specific location rather than dealing with things provincially. I think those are the difficulties that you have, because one thing I have learned in my political career
is that there is cause and effect for everything that you do. Maybe you do not recognize them at the time that you do them, but down the road you realize perhaps that you erred in judgment and had not considered all the implications or consequences.
I think that is a little bit of what is going on with this bill. It seems simple but it is not simple because it will have implications for other areas.
MR. SAMSON: Just one question I guess for my own clarification to make sure there is no confusion here. Was the federation ever consulted by the NDP caucus on Bill No. 1?
MR. NASON: No. To my knowledge we have never been consulted by the Opposition.
MR. SAMSON: Basically, this is the first time you heard of this bill, is it?
MR. NASON: Well, you would never believe how I heard of it. I got a phone call from Brooke Taylor. That is how I heard of it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions from the members of the committee? Mr. DeWolfe.
MR. DEWOLFE: I just have a concern not related to this. I would like to have a name added to our list.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That is subsequent to the conversation.
If not, I would like to thank our guests for taking the time out of their busy schedules to come and appear before the committee. It is always a pleasure to have the Federation of Agriculture come and give us some of their views on issues. We would be very much appreciative if you can ensure that when your position paper comes forward, that maybe if you give a copy to the Resources Committee and not only just to the Department of Agriculture or the minister responsible. I think the members have shown an interest in perhaps receiving a copy of that position paper when it is done.
MR. NASON: On beginning farmers?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, or the right to farm. You are saying that in the fall you are going to have a position paper?
MR. NASON: On beginning farmers.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, if you could perhaps send a copy of it to the Resources Committee, we would be very much appreciative if that is agreeable to yourselves and then we could distribute it to the members.
MR. NASON: The report is a joint effort between the president of the federation and the Minister of Agriculture.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I do not argue that. What happens a lot of times, we may get it a little later on. So that it might be more timely, if you have no problems with that.
MR NASON: Yes, we will make sure that you get a copy.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for your time.
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: On behalf of the federation, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to come here. This is my second time here. It was not quite new but there are different faces around the table, except George, he will be here for a long time yet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: He is part of the furniture. (Laughter)
MR. VAN OOSTRUM: Anyway, thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: If we do have a few minutes left, there is a submission in writing this time from the NDP Caucus in regard to witnesses. I would like to thank Charlie and John for doing that, correcting that oversight from the previous meeting. I think everyone has received a copy.
MRS. COSMAN: Do you have the submissions from last week of the other two caucuses to see if there are any similarities?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have them here, Francene, in regards to what was presented by the other two. We do have two of the witnesses that we have agreed to call before the committee, one of which is the Agricultural Association of Nova Scotia and also the Cattlemen's Association of Nova Scotia. Darlene has just stepped out for a second and I believe that she told me the Agricultural Association could make it here on July 7th. Is that a Tuesday? Does someone have a schedule here?
MR. ARCHIBALD: Are we going to be meeting all summer, or will we take the summer off?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I leave myself to be at the whim of the committee. Some of us also have other committees that we sit on, which will be meeting. It wasn't my intention to meet every week, I will tell you that right now because I am going to be meeting virtually
every week with Public Accounts also, plus the member for Kings North has a suggestion and perhaps you could put it on the table.
MR. ARCHIBALD: We really have to meet with the Cattlemen's Association. We have half the number of livestock today that we had at this time last year. They had a drought last year that really drove them nuts. The price of beef was lower than it was in 1970, in real dollars. They are most anxious, I know, to meet with us. I would like to meet with them but I would like to not meet the rest of the summer, if it is all right with you.
MRS. COSMAN: I think that is a great suggestion.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I have got the committee that was going to be meeting a lot, Human Resources.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You are going to be busy, are you George?
MR. ARCHIBALD: Yes, filling in, and it is hard with all the committee members on vacation and so on and government staff and certainly even the staff at Hansard are on vacation, so it makes it difficult. So I would suggest that we meet with the cattlemen and then we call it a day until later on in the fall.
MR. CHAIRMAN: There are two other witnesses. We are trying to set up a meeting with the Cattlemen's Association and she is having some difficulty getting in contact with them. You are saying that they wanted to meet and suggest that perhaps . . .
MR. ARCHIBALD: Sooner than later, if they want to meet now. If they would just as soon meet in September, I would be more than willing to wait until September to meet with them.
MRS. COSMAN: And then perhaps we can have a look at our agenda, with these suggestions and the rest of our list, to see what we could line up in the fall.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I agree.
MR. CHAIRMAN: If that is the wish, we will have a vetting of the caucuses in this regard. If that was an intention, if we wanted to not hold meetings in July and August - I want to make sure what is being suggested here because if the two months that we would not like to have meetings and to start in September, if that is what is being suggested, then I think we should be very clear about what we want to do because I intend to have hearings from different witnesses and so forth but I do appreciate that for most of the members since February it has been non-stop for all of us and for our families. We have other committees that are also going to be meeting during the summer so it is a situation that is there.
John, you have a comment you would like to make?
MR. JOHN MACDONELL: I really have no big problem with what Mr. Archibald is saying. I am just wondering, if this House ever rises, maybe we would just take a week, if there are two or three people, if you are here, meet three, four, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, if they can be fitted in and then go until fall. If there are two or three major ones that we would like to see right away, rather than coming in much in July or August and then meet again in the fall since we are here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, the problem you get is you don't know how long we are going to be sitting from now on. When you get into July most of the time the House is adjourned. I don't know what is going to happen. This is a different situation that we find ourselves in. The start of the sitting has started much later than probably in the history of the province. There are two other groups that we have asked to come forward. We have asked them, so in that sense I think we have to meet with them. We asked the Cattlemen's Association and we also asked the Aquaculture Society to come before the committee.
If it is the wish of the committee that we meet with those two groups and set up the meetings as soon as possible and to set up something commencing in September, unless something comes up that is very pressing that would be of an emergency nature then that would be what I'm hearing. You have a comment, Mr. Parker?
MR. PARKER: I was going to say I do not have any problem taking the summer off to do other things. We all have busy things to do. If there is one group from our list that we submitted that I would like to see us invite, in September is fine, is the one we added at the end there, the Nova Scotia Silvicultural Contractors Association.
Our forest industry is in a crisis situation and these folks are hurting. I think it is important that we hear from them. That would be my first choice, when the first opportunity comes. If that is September, that is fine.
MR. DEWOLFE: I mentioned before that I was going to propose a name because we essentially overlooked the mineral industry which is an important sector in this province. I have that name now to submit. It is Dr. Howard Donahoe.
MR. CHAIRMAN: To our list of witnesses there has been a request to add an additional name onto our caucus' submissions. We might as well take this down and get it done right at the same time.
Dr. Howard Donahoe.
MRS. COSMAN: Maybe in the fall we could come back and look at these agenda items from all three.
MR. DEWOLFE: He will represent the mineral industry in Nova Scotia.
MR. CHAIRMAN: If I am clear, with the two witnesses that we have asked, we will meet with them. Is that correct? Then when we start in the fall a suggestion has been put forward for the Silviculture Contractors Association? (Interruptions)
That might be a very good idea. You could have a site visit with a meeting.
If you leave it to the discretion of the chairman, would that be agreeable to the members?
MR. ARCHIBALD: Has anybody seen a fish farm? (Interruption) You have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I will keep the members informed.
We are adjourned.
[The committee adjourned at 10:58 a.m.]
