EDITORIAL: QFA EDITORIAL

Why bother?

Chris Judd

QFA Vice-president

As any producer can tell you, there’s a whole lot of organizations running agriculture today: mutuals, co-ops, syndicates, our provincial milk and beef federations, associations like QFA, UPA, the list goes on. All of them take dedication, effort, and money to maintain. Similarly, there’s no shortage of people who can rightly argue that private industries can sell us insurance, feed, fuel and fertilizer, and buy our beef, milk, pork and grain, at equally competitive prices as our mutuals and co-ops. If private industry can do all that without the trouble of maintaining these organizations, we have to ask ourselves, “Why should we bother?”

To put the question another way, let’s look an example that hits close to home: why did our beef federation buy out Colbex-Levinoff? A still better question to ask might be “why did Canada’s largest beef wholesaler buy out Colbex-Levinoff’s largest customer just before the beef federation took over the abattoir?” Why is one privately owned company allowed to control a large majority of our beef processing and distribution in Canada while our co-ops are not allowed to do the same in the milk industry?

Why does Canada still have its own Canadian Wheat Board when private grain traders will pay slightly more for grain than the board does? Maybe that $20 billion U.S. farm bill had more to do with the U.S. grain price being lower than ours than our wheat board did! British milk producers were sold a similar story that they could be paid more for their milk outside the board. They chose to sell to private buyers, and the board promptly lost all its power. Now the farm gate milk price in England has been cut in half and the rural distress and farm suicide rate has reached unseen levels. Let’s hope that the western grain producers do some hard thinking before they vote!

Why do we use Valacta or some other private lab to test our feed and prepare feed recommendations when many feed companies would do the same “as a service”? Quite often they have equally good labs and nutritionists on staff. Maybe we want someone to advise us with only ONE profit in mind—our farm’s! That’s the main reason we belong to soil clubs, too! (Hopefully, keeping the environment guy off our back is secondary.)

Our affiliation to the UPA, and various other production groups must be evident by now. The complexity of negotiating, lobbying, and fighting for a fair living has become more than most farmers have the time or the know-how for going head-to-head against the toughest in the world. As the people responsible for Canada’s food supply, we shouldn’t have to do this, but that’s the way things work.

At the Quebec Farmers’ Association, we also must justify our raison d'être. We pay a check-off on most everything we sell in order to fund our production associations. We pay a compulsory due to the UPA for our main lobbying body. Your QFA who tries to keep English farmers up-to-speed on the Quebec agriculture scene (along with other pertinent information that may not trickle down your way), encourage our youth who choose this enviable profession, and give our English-speaking farmers another door to work through, to be heard from and sound off at. The QFA tries to keep their finger on the pulse of agriculture, not just in Quebec, but all over the world. Remember, we operate on VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIPS and what grants we can beg for. We try our best to earn your support! If the QFA is not up to your expectations, please tell us. If we have earned your support, please check to see if you are a paid up member!

Canada puts more money into biofuels

Andrew McClelland

Advocate Staff Reporter

The Harper government is getting more and more excited over Canada’s possible role on the world stage as a leading producer of biofuels, and has launched a new initiative to encourage Canadian development of renewable sources of energy.

Last month, the Canadian Ministry of Agriculture and Agri-Food unveiled the ecoAgriculture Biofuels Capital initiative (ecoABC), a new fund designed to support Canadian farmers investing in biofuel facilities.

"The ecoAgriculture Biofuels Capital Initiative is a significant boost for farmer participation in biofuels production,” said Agriculture Minister Chuck Strahl. “This is the first program to give farmers capital assistance to construct or expand biofuels facilities. With this initiative, we expect a potential increase in renewable fuel capacity of 1.5 billion litres."

The ecoABC program is a $200-million fund that hopes to offset producer costs of switching to biofuel production. The four-year program will give up to $25 million per project in “repayable contributions” to help farmers construct new buildings for the production of biofuels or to expand an existing operation.

All biofuels, such as corn ethanol, cellulosic stock ethanol and biodiesel are eligible under the fund. Participants must apply to ecoABC for funding, which is available to co-operatives, corporations, partnerships and individuals. Agriculture Canada says that the project will also give farmers the chance to diversify their economic base through investment and ownerships in a rapidly growing sector of their industry.

Strahl made the announcement from the proposed site of the Western Biodiesel Incorporated plant in High River, Alberta, 65 km south of Calgary. When finished, the multi-feedstock plant will convert rendered animal fats and plant oil—such as canola—into biodiesel.

Kory Teneycke, executive director of the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association (CRFA), applauded the announcement of ecoABC. Teneycke stated that his organization is excited about participating in a project that “will help farmers invest directly in biofuels facilities, not just supplying them with grain.”

Yet while the CRFA celebrates what it is calling “a renaissance in agriculture around the world” sparked by an almost frenzied interest in ethanol and biodiesel, many are taking a critical stance on biofuels. And surprisingly, it’s not big oil companies that are raising objections, but environmentalists.

“Wheat is good to make bread, good to make breakfast cereal, but it’s not a good thing to fuel your car,” says Tom Adams. As executive director of Energy Probe, a Canadian environmental and consumer research team, Adams is a surprisingly harsh critic of ethanol fuel made from both wheat and corn. Like many who are suspicious of ethanol, he doesn’t believe that the amount of processing needed to create the fuel offsets the energy that goes into it.

“The amount of natural gas going into some ethanol plants is only slightly lower than the amount of ethanol they produce,” says Adams. And while biofuel champions point out that two-thirds of any ethanol plant’s output is protein that goes back into the animal foodchain, Adams maintains that any type of ethanol production is not economically viable.

“This industry wouldn’t last ten seconds if subsidies were cut,” says Adams. “With the current cost of oil up at $65 a barrel, ethanol should be able to pay its own way now, but it is still relying on government subsidies and mandates.”

Other environmentalists and global poverty watchdogs are concerned that the sudden surge in biofuel production will leave the world’s poor without their chief source of food—corn.

Ken Sigurdson, a grain and oilseed producer from Manitoba, first became sceptical of biofuels when conducting a research project on the subject for the National Farmers’ Union. He believes that the increase in demand for corn needed for fuel production will replace the worldwide acreage of corn used for food production. That could have a devastating affect on poorer countries ability to feed themselves.

“Since NAFTA, American corn has moved into Mexico to replace corn growth by self-sufficient peasant farmers,” Said Sigurdson in an interview with the Advocate. “The same thing has happened in Brazil with sugarcane ethanol production.”

While others insist that the price of yellow corn raised for fuel purposes should have no affect on that of white corn intended for consumption, statistics show that the U.S. is now devoting twice as much land to ethanol corn as it is to corn intended for food. That’s a trend that Sigurdson finds disturbing.

“In our world, when it comes to whether or not an SUV gets fueled, or an empty stomach gets fed, the SUV will get filled up and the empty stomach will stay unfilled.”

Former QFA president starts politics in good company

Barry Wilson

Special to the Advocate

Cindy Duncan McMillan, a former president of the Quebec Farmers’ Association, stood before West Quebec Liberals on a Sunday afternoon in mid-April touting her political experience as she tried to become their candidate for the next federal election.

But it was not, unlike her opponent Richard Mahoney, an Ottawa lawyer who had been a senior advisor to former prime minister Paul Martin and twice a Liberal candidate in Ottawa, experience in federal party politics.

Instead, it was farm movement politics in the QFA and the Union des producteurs agricoles.

Farm politics were “a great training ground” for political organizing and issue focusing, she told the meeting in Farrellton, close to her Gatineau Valley cattle farm.

Delegates bought it, giving her 60 per cent of their votes and making her the long-shot Liberal Pontiac candidate against Conservative cabinet minister Lawrence Cannon who won the traditionally Liberal riding in 2006 and has become the key Conservative operative in Quebec. He is the grandson of Quebec Liberal icon Chubby Power, a former Quebec Liberal cabinet minister.

But her point about farm politics as a training ground has much historical validity.

Over the years, the farm movement has been the launching pad for many successful political careers from legendary Liberal agriculture ministers William Motherwell and Jimmy Gardiner to Eugene Whelan and Conservative John Wise. In Quebec, there has been a regular exchange between the UPA and prominent positions in governments of various political persuasions.

It’s logical. Farm politics involve organizing, sharp debates, compromise and discipline.

All these skills, learned properly, are vital in the world of party politics.

Add to that the fact that agriculture traditionally has been described as 15 percent protein and 85 percent politics and it gives you a farm leadership cadre both skilled and politicized.

That may explain the over-representation of farmers in federal politics.

In the current Parliament, MPs who describe themselves as farmers represent close to seven percent of the Commons seats, more than three times the representation of farmers in the Canadian population.

Since Confederation in 1867, farming has been the second-most represented profession in the House of Commons. There have been 591 farmer MPs in the past 140 years, second only to lawyers.

Part of the reason clearly is that rural Canada is over-represented in the House of Commons, home to many ridings with much smaller voter lists than massive urban ridings.

But part of the reason also is that farm politics hones skills and whets the appetite.

In the current House of Commons, Alberta Conservative Ted Menzies was an executive in several Prairie farm organizations and government whip Jay Hill was president of the British Columbia Grain Growers Association before moving to Ottawa.

The Conservative government of Stephen Harper has one of the largest farmer MP contingents in decades and as a result has had an active farm policy, controversial as it sometimes is.

On the Liberal side, Duncan McMillan is in good company.

Canadian Federation of Agriculture president Bob Friesen ran for a Liberal nomination, MP Wayne Easter is a former National Farmers Union president and both NFU and former provincial farm organization presidents have run for the party.

The farm movement is indeed a good training ground for attempting a political career. And farming offers some neat analogies for politics.

In her acceptance speech, Duncan McMillan said the only previous standing ovation she had received was going to the stable in the morning, turning on the lights and seeing the animals get up.

It's hard to imagine an Ottawa insider Liberal lawyer telling that story.

Barry Wilson grew up on a West Quebec farm and has spent more than a quarter century covering agricultural, rural and trade issues on Parliament Hill as National Correspondent for The Western Producer newspaper.

A new provincial minister of agriculture

Andrew McClelland

Advocate Staff Reporter

Premier Jean Charest announced his new cabinet on April 18, appointing Frontenac MNA Laurent Lessard as the new Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for the province. Lessard, who served as mayor of Thetford-Mines from 1993 to 2003, replaces former agriculture minister Yvon Vallières.

While this will be Lessard’s first term under the official title of agriculture minister, it won’t be the first time he has had to negotiate with farmers and the Union des producteurs agricoles (UPA). Lessard served as interim Minister of Agriculture in 2005 when then-minister Vallières was recovering from illness. Following the March 26, 2007 election, Vallières requested a lighter workload and asked to be relieved of his duties as Minister of Agriculture.

“The QFA welcomes Mr. Lessard, the new provincial Minister of Agriculture,” said QFA President Gib Drury. “Mr. Lessard is no stranger to the Quebec agricultural community and has already demonstrated his competency for this portfolio when he temporarily replaced Mr. Yvon Vallières during his unfortunate illness while in office as the previous Minister. We wish Mr. Lessard the best of luck in his new job and look forward to working collaboratively with him for the advancement of Quebec’s agriculture.”

Other producers’ groups have voiced their hopes of working with the newly appointed minister. The UPA has said that they have confidence in Lessard’s abilities from working him with him previously.

A notary in private practice by training, Lessard has no professional agricultural experience. Following the 2003 provincial election, he was named Minister of Labour for his first term in the National Assembly.

The Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ), Quebec’s upstart party, also announced its shadow cabinet last month. The province’s new official opposition has assigned Albert De Martin the task of acting as agriculture critic. De Martin beat out favoured Liberal candidate André Chenail in the riding of Huntingdon to win his seat.

“He should be good at the job,” said Douglas Brooks, QFA board member in Franklin when asked his opinion of the rookie MNA. “He has lots of experience as an agricultural producer and has been actively involve in many agricultural organizations over many years.”

The Charest cabinet is the first-ever in Quebec history to have an equal number of male and female ministers. Twenty-nine year-old Yolande James is the sole Anglophone chosen by Charest for a ministerial position. James holds the proud distinction of becoming the first black person to hold a cabinet position. She will serve as Immigration Minister and act as MNA for the Nelligan riding on Montreal’s West Island.

When should you start grazing and ‘training’ your grass?

Hubert McClelland, agronome

Pasture specialist

Special to the Advocate

This question arises every spring whenever graziers get together. And the answer is dependent on many factors in a farm’s grazing program. Some graziers argue that you should not put livestock out until the grass has three or four leaves, and that for every day the herd goes to pasture too soon in the spring, we will lose two days grazing in the fall. Other expert graziers get their cattle out early and go through a rotation very quickly. They offer some hay on pasture, or let the cattle into the paddock in early spring for a few hours before moving them to another parcel or returning to a feed yard to have access to hay. They know that waiting until every pasture parcel has three or four leaves will mean they will have more hay than they can make come mid June.

The reality is that how soon you start the rotation depends on many factors: your stocking rate for the year, the fertility of your parcels, the carryover of stockpile from the previous fall—and, in some years, how empty is the hay storage.

If all pastures on the farm were overstocked and overgrazed the previous fall, you’ll need to delay entry in the spring to wait for regrowth. However, it is also a good idea to also begin early to ‘train’ the grass so that some of the parcels are at different stages of growth. The objective here is to aim for ‘a graziers wedge.’ Of course, a wedge begins at its narrow point and gets thicker in depth from one end to the other. We want our grazing parcels to be collectively like a wedge, some not very deep in grass, the most recently grazed, and getting progressively deeper in grass, then the parcels having the longest rest period since the last grazing.

Another reason to get cattle grazing early is to train the grass to tiller. Early grazing when the grass is just beginning to grow causes the grasses to tiller more, or to send up more shoots instead of sending up one big stem. This practice of ‘training’ the grass to tiller is used in the British Isles. On a visit to Scotland some time ago, the graziers I visited put their sheep to pasture early in the season when the adult cows would punch up the sward with their heavy weight. Their sheep grazed the new growth early in the season when the soil was soft and humid and forced more tillering. When the sheep had finished the first round of grazing, the cows would enter the paddocks. Researchers were measuring the number of tillers per square metre and had measured up to 33,000 growing points of grass in square metre. Unbelievable! Think of a square formed by a metre stick of 100 centimetres by 100 centimetres, that is 10,000 squares of 1 centimetre by 1 centimetre. In every square they would find three grass growing points—much thicker than anything we would have on our fields. In North America, we aim for 75,000 corn plants per hectare, or 7.5 corn plants per square metre, but they were measuring up to 33,000 grass-growing points in the same area. That’s about 4,400 times the number of growing points as in a hectare of corn. Those research parcels looked like golf greens. We like to measure the corn yield by its height, but they were looking for grass density near the ground to get yield and quality in pasture with successive grazings all year long.

So the question of when to start grazing is more complicated than you might imagine. It depends on your goals: if you put cattle out early, you need to have a grazing plan and have your stocking rate balanced to your acreage. This will allow for adequate rest between grazings to optimize your yield per hectare in grass and animal production. And most importantly, it will maintain your grasses’ productivity.

Commission on the Future of Agriculture hears from producers in Estrie

Claudia Villemaire

QFA Eastern Townships Reporter

The Commission sur l’avenir de l’agriculture et de l’agroalimentaire québécois (CAAAQ) has been bombarded with presentations from organizations and individuals from just about every corner of the province since its first hearing in February.

As a result scheduled hearings were re-set, adding—as in the case of the Sherbrooke sessions held in early May—to a three-day event rather than four hours spread over two days.

It seems the future of agriculture and agri-food production is a major topic of concern to the province's producers, faced with rising costs and decreasing returns. The major source of worry expressed in almost every area is the farmer's lack of control over production and marketing. Just about every type of brief thinkable has been presented, from tiny, market-garden enterprises, to groups concerned with marketing organic meats, vegetables or fruit. Most felt they were coming up against rules and regulations that seemed designed only for the large farming operations such as feed lots, pork producers and huge dairy herds.

Concerns about environmental and climatic effects such operations generate were brought to CAAAQ’s attention in almost every brief. Several pointed out the advantages of taking control of their productions and marketing, and making special efforts to persuade consumers that locally produced products are not only better tasting and healthier. They also argued that organic items offer savings in fuel (shorter transport to markets), and are kinder to the environment (organic food is grown without chemicals of any kind). Presenters backed up their statements with proof that organic production could be feasible to support a family operation.

Briefs like the one presented by Francis Landry and Marypascal Beauregard—based on their experience in running their full-cycle dairy-goat operation—cited the difficulties small, specialized productions face when confronting agriculture loan agencies. In their view, loan agencies are only interested in funding expanding operations such as giant feedlots or huge pork producing set-ups, which, by the way, are still a bone of contention among rural folk.

“How can we motivate or interest new producers when they can clearly see little or no chance to make a decent living with the weight of a huge debt hanging over their heads probably running into a second or third generation,” Ms Beauregard explained.

“We are convinced there is a future for agriculture in Quebec, but major changes are needed. Producers must take control of their production—taking into account every aspect of their production—even if it means going against existing syndicates or government policies.”

The Union des producteurs agricoles (UPA) is urging government powers such as ministries of agriculture and environment to take another look at what's happening to family farm operations.

“In Estrie, we have 2,800 producers, grouped geographically into 11 zones. We have nine specific production groups,” explained Estrie UPA President Nol Landry. Regional agriculture is largely dairy and beef production, but there’s a quite a number of different and specialized productions as well. “We have over 5,000 hectares growing Christmas trees, several fish hatcheries as well as cheese makers, vintners and field-fruit growers. We have nearly 162,000 hectares in cultivation,” he described.

In his brief, Landry urged all government ministries to contribute and collaborate with related organizations in preparing a new agriculture strategy for the province.

“We congratulate the government for admitting, through this commission, agriculture is in need of some major changes in all areas—credit regulations and criteria, environmental requirements and investments that bring no return to the producer, studies and changes to import taxes, financial and technical assistance that will support and introduction and exposure to different types of food production as early as primary grades. We would encourage the ministry and the government to take a long and educated look at the imbalance between profit and loss on the family farm and formulate a strategy that would encourage and support every aspect of this family enterprise, large or small, conventional or specialized.”

Generally, presentations to the CAAAQ hinged on the desire to persuade consumers to be less dependent on imported produce and realize the advantages of Canadian-grown food, in spite of slightly higher prices. In short, the resounding message was to support local, provincial and Canadian production whenever possible.

Editorial

Taking milk quota by the horns

Laurent Pellerin

UPA President

The subject of milk quota was at the top of the list of discussions at the recent annual meeting of the Fédération des producteurs de lait du Québec. And delegates literally took the bull by the horns.

A ceiling price of $28,000/kg was set, along with a formula that will bring it down to $25,000 within two and a half years. In addition, there will be a holdback of 30 per cent on all quota sales outside the centralized system (SCVQ). The objective is two-fold: to lower the price of quota and to counteract speculation. Basically, it means going back to the original system’s ‘ raison d’etre,’ which is for producers to share in production volumes but not to ‘pad’ the value of shares.

This result is concrete evidence that dairy producers are ready to act against the negative impact that high quota prices are having on young farmers and the development of their farms. Their counterparts in three other production sectors under supply management (consumption eggs, hatching eggs and poultry) have also included this question as one of the main themes at their annual meetings. This convergence of ideas is proof of responsible decision-making by the producers involved. It also prompts us to examine essential questions regarding both collective action and the model of agriculture we wish to promote—a model where the autonomy and sustainability of our farms are among our first concerns, from both the financial and the decisional points of view.

A change of course was definitely necessary. The value of our business capital assets has literally skyrocketed over the past few years. As a consequence, this situation has contributed greatly to debt load. In other words, the present price of quota has created a differential between a farm’s market value and its economic value, prompting producers to dismantle their farms when selling and putting enormous and unnecessary pressure on those wishing to transfer their businesses to the next generation, thus penalising young farmers.

Although this state of affairs has been going on for some time, everyone knew that it could not go on forever. It is for this reason that dairy producers decided to act now on the one asset where they have control: milk quota. Let’s not forget that the basic objective of supply management is to respond adequately to domestic market demand, while at the same time ensuring a fair income for producers. In this regard, the purpose of quota is not as an asset for individuals but rather for the collective group—more or less a privilege. The approach currently being adopted during these annual meetings is based on this fundamental principle. It signifies the desire of producers to re-appropriate their collective marketing tool—the milk quota. A desire to counteract speculation, to bring more transparency to sales transactions and to establish conditions that favour farm establishment and transfer, whether it be through succession or by opening the ranks to new arrivals into the profession, as pioneered in the consumption egg production sector.

Although supply management has shown itself to be an efficient tool in obtaining a fair income from the marketplace, it should also permit us collectively, to develop our farm businesses according to the model of our choice. In this regard, current discussions on the subject reflect the maturity of those involved to stick to the real facts. It also underlines the responsibility of their leaders in supporting and directing this thought process and their ability to find solutions together—in short, a perfect example for others to follow when looking for management tools in their own productions. And all of this brings to light another fundamental quality of supply management: its capacity to evolve with the times, as it has done many times. In that way, it continues to remain current, but also ready for the future.

New feathers

The Fédération des producteurs de volailles du Québec will get a name change, becoming the Éleveurs de Volailles du Québec. For their president, Martin Dufresne, “this new name reflects exactly what we are, chicken and turkey producers of the highest quality. It puts the emphasis on the individual and family-based producers who are tuned in to the needs of consumers and the welfare of the birds.” Along with the change of name will come a new visual logo: a stylized wing as a common symbol, with red for Poulet du Québec, orange for Dindon du Québec and beige for Éleveurs de volailles du Québec.

A herd update is important for cow-calf producers!

Sylvie Boutin

Information officer

Agri-Tracabilité Québec

In early April, Quebec cow-calf producers received a letter informing them that, as of January 2008, the Financière agricole du Québec (FADQ) intends to use the Agri-Tracabilité Québec (ATQ) permanent identification database to determine the number of insurable cows and bred heifers for its income stabilization insurance (ASRA) program for beef calves.

The letter also encouraged producers to immediately update their traceability file in order to be ready to make their insurable animal declaration, which must be submitted to the FADQ in January 2008. Producers will soon be receiving a second mailing with all necessary documents to complete their ATQ herd updates. This will include a complete inventory of the animals on their premises, as declared to ATQ, as well as a list of the ear tags that are still in their possession but for which no animals have been declared.

Roughly 60 electronic tag readers will be made available to cow-calf producers who would like to use them to complete their inventory. For further information on this important project, or about borrowing an electronic tag reader, please contact the ATQ at 1-866-270-4319.

Yellow ear tags for slaughter steers

Are you a slaughter steer producer buying calves in other provinces where cattle are identified with only the Canadian electronic identification device (EID)? In order to comply with Quebec’s double identifier regulation, you can order a visual ear tag (dangle tag) from ATQ showing the same number as on the Canadian EID, or you can use a blank white tag on which the Canadian ID number can be marked by hand.

Furthermore, since the fall of 2005, slaughter steer producers insured in FADQ’s income stabilization insurance program (ASRA) also have a third option: ordering special yellow dangle tags. As shown in the adjoining photo, these visual ear tags are stamped with the ATQ logo, followed by a series of seven numbers, a bar code, and finally a second series of five numbers in sequence at the bottom of the tag . When you fill out the traceability report, it is important to carefully mark the number of the Canadian EID on the form that is enclosed in your ear tag package.

Blank w hite t ags…just what you have been asking for!

Since January, ear tags for the beef sector are packaged in sets of 30, which means that extra blank tags are no longer included. In order to respond to requests from beef producers, the ATQ is now offering packages of 50 blank white dangle tags at a cost of $45.50 (plus tax). Think about getting some with your next order!

Agri-tourism: is it for you?

Jean-Jacques Simard

Agronome, M.Sc.

MAPAQ land-use planning adviser

Outaouais sector

Farm producers are increasingly on the lookout for ways of diversifying their activities in order to prop up or increase their income. Some opt for a new production. Others prefer to get involved in agri-tourism.

The farm’s the place!

The Groupe de concertation sur l’agrotourisme has suggested the following definition of agri-tourism: agriculture-related tourism activity that takes place on a farm. Agri-tourism brings farm producers and vacationers together by giving tourists the opportunity to discover the agricultural community, farming and farm products through their host, who provides information and a window on farm life.

The most common forms of agri-tourism are farm visits and demonstrations, food services featuring products fresh from the farm and regional agri-food products, farm stays, and the promotion and sale of farm products. However, roadside stall or pick-your-own-produce operations do not qualify as agri-tourism because they have no informational purpose per se and are not specifically designed to acquaint visitors with farm life.

Agri-tourism in the Outaouais

The Outaouais has close to 20 farms offering agri-tourism related activities, with the MRC de Papineau boasting the most businesses of this kind, generating three jobs each on average. Most establishments are seasonal, with income from farm visits and demonstrations, the sale of farm products, or food services such as sugarhouse meals and country-style dining. For a third of these operations, agri-tourism activities account for over 75 per cent of farm income. On a larger scale, agri-tourism revenues represent roughly two per cent of the region’s farm receipts, which top $75 million.

The keys to agri-tourism success

Do you have some interesting ideas for an agri-tourism venture? Before leaving the drawing board, you need to have completed several important steps. Here are a few questions you should try to answer before drafting your business plan:

• Do I have the personal qualities for dealing with tourists?

• Is my farm located in an attractive setting?

• Can my farm be easily reached by the clientele I hope to attract?

• Does my municipality authorize projects of this kind in my sector (municipal zoning, permit or certificate, etc.)?

• Do I need authorization from the Commission de protection du territoire agricole du Québec or the Centre québécois d’inspection des aliments et de la santé animale?

Clearly, this is just a sample of the questions you need to ask! For help in creating your project or getting it off the ground, feel free to contact a MAPAQ adviser (Outaouais region: agronomist Christine Dion at 819-986-8544, extension 227).

Sources:

Groupe de concertation sur l’agrotourisme.

Le pense-bête de l’agrotourisme, by the Conseil agrotouristique des Cantons-de-l’Est, 2004.

L’agrotourisme en Outaouais, final survey report, Université Laval, 2004.

Agrotourisme : diagnostic sectoriel. Plan de développement et de commercialisation, report submitted to the Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation du Québec and the Ministère du Tourisme du Québec, Zins Beauchesne et associés, 2006.

Web site: www.mapaq.gouv.qc.ca (use agrotourisme as the search word).

Aim for flavour and you’re sure to please!

Jude Saumur, agricultural technology

MAPAQ, Outaouais sector

CSA de Shawville

Last fall, the Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation, in collaboration with the Collectif régional en formation agricole de l’Outaouais, offered the region’s maple syrup producers top-of-the-line training in Luskville.

The theme was organoleptic properties. Are you wondering what “organoleptic” means? It refers to the attributes of a product that can be perceived through three human senses, namely, touch, taste and smell. The product assessment carried out by professionals is called “sensory analysis.”

The inspection division of Cintech agroalimentaire, an innovation and technology transfer centre, was in charge of training, with Annie l’Heureux and Nil Lambert at the helm.

The first subject was types of contamination, followed by sensory analysis. The three types of contamination identified were biological, chemical and physical.

Biological contamination: Bacteria, yeasts, moulds and viruses are biological contaminants. The growth factors are water, food, oxygen, pH, time and, lastly, temperature. Sources of biological contamination include garbage bags and unwashed dishrags or hands.

Chemical contamination: Chemical contaminants can enter maple syrup from cleaning products, gas, lead, oil, perfume, etc.

Physical contamination: Physical contamination in maple products can be caused by anything from tools, paint, rust and debris to plumbing repairs, fluorescent tubes, broken light bulbs, etc.

To avoid contamination that could change the flavour of maple syrup in the making, here are a few rules to follow: practice good body and oral hygiene; wear clean clothing; and refrain from smoking, eating, drinking or chewing gum. If you are sick, stay away (applies to employers and employees alike), and when plumbing or other repairs are being done, cover the equipment and material in the areas where sap is boiled or processed.

Next, participants were required to test their sense of smell and taste. To do this, they were given 15 samples of maple syrup that could contain defects. They were then asked to classify substandard syrup according to the six following categories:

1. Natural or processing-related defect: A woody, burnt, scorched, or sappy taste or smell. In these cases, the syrup smells like pencil lead.

2. Microbiological: Traces of mould or fermentation. The syrup smells musty.

3. Chemical: Traces of residue, often the result of poor washing or disinfecting. The odour resembles that of medicine, soap or detergent.

4. Unidentified or general: Objectionable flavour or smell of unidentified origin.

5. Buddy: Tastes of buds and smells like dirty socks.

6. Ropy: Syrup of this texture is isolated and sent to MAPAQ for further testing.

Nil Lambert, who has over 40 years’ experience in sensory analysis, has this advice to offer: if you have any doubts about the quality of your syrup, keep it away from consumers! Before doing an organoleptic examination of your syrup, let your sample cool to room temperature. Some minor natural defects can be corrected by re-working the syrup. However, syrup with more obvious flavour defects must be used solely for the industrial market. In the case of serious defects (chemical contaminants or a ropy product, for example), all the syrup must be collected and destroyed.

Cintech agroalimentaire, through its inspection division, manages the large-container maple syrup inspection and grading program which applies to Québec’s maple syrup producers, processors and distributors. The organization also acts as an exclusive agent, in compliance with the regulations of the Fédération des producteurs acéricoles du Québec.