Quebec farmers slaughter calves in protest

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33693, 16 November 1974, Page 17

Quebec farmers slaughter calves in protest

(By

MELVIN SUFRIN

N.Z.P.A. special .correspondent)

TORONTO. November 15

Pictures of bloodsoaked carcases of calves and pigs hanging in public and being dumped into pits have focused attention on a wave of unrest that has gripped many Canadian farmers.

The macabre slaughter has been concentrated in the province of Quebec, where producers are protesting against a slump in wholesale beef prices. But their frustration is shared by farmers in other parts of the country. And the price of beef is! by no means the only complaint. Under attack is the

Canadian Egg Marketing, Agency which was forced to destroy millions of eggs bought as surplus and allowed to rot in improper storage.

Even among farmers not! involved with beef or eggs' there are problems. Almost all face a chronic shortage of farm labour. The only solution they see is to offer higher wages and better working conditions but that would mean higher food prices, to the chagrin of consumers already upset by the sharp rises of the last few years. Mass killings of calves and pigs in Quebec came as something of a surprise, because farmers are tra-! ditionally the most produent and conservative people in that province.

Displaying a radicalism which outstripped even the tough-talking leaders of their own Union des Producteurs

Agricoles, the farmers! gathered in angry groups to stage hangings and public slaughter, block highways with tractors, and spread manure in the paths of Sunday motorists. i Near one village they killed about 600 calves and threw them into a gigantic pit prepared in advance. The bloody scene was recorded by television cameras and displayed across the country on news programmes.

In addition to turning the stomachs of sensitive viewers — at least those with colour sets — the film raised an outcry among the public and brought demands from some ■ politicians for stiff laws to !ban public killing of animals. One member of Parliament i said that it was criminal to destroy potential food at a itime when millions were ; starving around the world. I What he probably did not 1 T

know was that many of the! animals were male dairy calves which, unlike females raised to replenish dairy herds, are either exported or destroyed. A year ago there was a fairly good market, mainly in Greece, Italy, and Israel, for these young males. But this has fallen sharply and it is reasonable to assume that if the farmers had not slaughtered the calves in public they would have done it in private. Nevertheless, farmers maintain that they have legitimate complaints. Their union says it costs 60 cents a pound to raise a calf but the present wholesale price is between ■l5 and 40 cents. Yet, they ■ say, retail prices are higher I than they were a year ago i before wholesale prices began I to drop. ' i Quebec farmers add that

they are losing ground ini their campaign to maintain! their income at national: levels. In 1971 their average net income was about $5OOO a year. This was well below that of the prairie provinces which produce most of Canada’s grain but in line with other parts of the country. Two years later the Quebec average was $8169 compared with more than $12,000 in neighbouring Ontario and more than $16,000 on the prairies. The Quebec Government tried to placate producers by announcing a 13 cent a pound subsidy for 2000 farmers who specialise in beef. But it will not help the 32,000 others, mostly dairy farmers, who have calves to sell.

From the consumer’s point of view the situation remains far from clear. He cannot

understand how wholesale prices can fall while retail prices rise. And he is seep-: tical when the chairman of the National Food Prices Re-1 view Board says that no-one; is making an unfair profit on! beef at any level. Mr Eugene Whelan, the Federal Minister of Agriculture, has promised a general inquiry into the beef industry “right from the time the calf is bom or even before that, until it reaches your plate.” But there are few who think it will do anything to bring prices down. The rotten-egg scandal is quite a different story. The National Marketing Agency was set up to regulate production in such a way as to avoid the traditional boom-iand-bust cycle that has kept iegg producers in a constant state, of anxiety.

The agency sets quotas and in times of overproduction buys large num-

bers of eggs to keep prices ■ up. The concept seems reasonable but it hasn’t iworked as well as it should. I For example, it was buying up large quantities of eggs in j other parts of Canada, while the province of New Brunswick was forced to import them from the United States to meet its needs.

Some large and efficient producers are annoyed because the quotas have forced them to curb production, leaving modem, expensive plants operating at far below capacity. A few of these have brought legal suits against the board and, 'f successful, their efforts could ! destroy the marketing idea.

But their reaction was nothing to the response from the ordinarv Canadian when he heard that because of carelessness the agency had ■to destroy 28 million eggs That had gone rotten in storage.