May 14, 1920

CORRESPONDENCE TABLED.


Correspondence between the Department of Justice and the Civil Service Commission with reference to the promotion of the secretary.-Rt. Hon. A. L. Sifton.


MAPLE PRODUCTS ADULTERATION.

SENATE AMENDMENTS NOT CONCURRED IN.


Hon. NEWTON W. ROWELL (Minister of Health) moved: That the House do not concur in the amendments made to Bill 28, an Act Respecting Maple Products, for the following reasons:- 1. Striking out clause 3 of the Bill removes the penalty for the violation of the provisions of subsection 1 of section 2 of the Bill. 2. The amendment of section 4, which purports to provide a penalty for the violation of subsection 1 of section 2 of the Bill, is not effective to accomplish the purpose. He said: The Senate has amended the Bill by striking out section 3 which makes specific provision for a penalty for the violation of subsection 1 of section 2, and they have amended section 4 of the Bill with the intention apparently of making its provisions applicable to violations of the pro- [The Chairman.] visions of subsection (1) of section 2, but they are not applicable. The penal provisions provided in section 4 are those contained in section 16 of the Food and Drugs Act. That section provides penalties for three classes of offences: (1) adulteration injurious to health, (2) adulteration not deemed injurious to health and mis-brand-ing, and (3) wilful adulteration. As violations of the provisions of subsection (1) of section 2 do not fall within any of those classes, section 16 of the Food and Drugs Act cannot be made to apply, and if it was desired to institute a prosecution for violation of those provisions one would not know which of the offences to charge or what the penalty would be. It is quite clear that the Senate made the amendments under a misapprehension, and I therefore move non-concurrence. Motion agreed to.


UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Hon. Mr. ROWELL:

I now beg to move:

That a message be sent by this House to the Senate to acquaint their Honours with the nonconcurrence in the amendments made to Bill 28, an Act respecting Maple Products.

Topic:   MAPLE PRODUCTS ADULTERATION.
Subtopic:   SENATE AMENDMENTS NOT CONCURRED IN.
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


SUPPLY.

DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.


House again in committee of Supply.- Mr. Boivin in the Chair. Department of Agriculture-Experimental Farms-Maintenance of Central Farm and maintaining of additional branch stations, $1,200,000.


UNI L

William Stevens Fielding

Unionist (Liberal)

Mr. FIELDING:

According to the custom the Speaker automatically leaves the Chair on Friday, but as the Estimates of the Agricultural Department have not yet been considered, my hon. friend (Mr. Tol-mie) could not, strictly speaking, proceed to-day. However, we quite understand his good object, and I have no objection to his proceeding on the understanding that at a later stage abundant opportunity shall be afforded for the discussion of these items. Therefore I am very glad to concur so that the Minister of .Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) may at once have an opportunity of making a statement.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Simon Fraser Tolmie (Minister of Agriculture)

Unionist

Hon. S. F. TOLMIE (Minister of Agriculture) :

Mr. Chairman, before taking up

the Estimates of the Department of Agriculture, I deem it advisable to outline briefly our agricultural development, the improvements that may be made in the in-

dustry, the prospects for the future, and the great importance of the development in meeting our financial obligations.

In making a brief survey of the situation, I find that we have invested in agriculture $7,379,299,000; the land under field crop in 1919 was 53,049,640 acres; the value of agricultural products in the same year amounted to $1,975,841,000.

In 1918 the mineral wealth amounted to $396,917,732; timber, $182,254,740; fisheries, $60,221,863. The total manufactures in 1917, which was an exceedingly heavy year, amounted to $2,786,649,727.

In looking over the figures in respect to wheat production, I find that while there has been a marked increase in acreage in the average year there has been a decrease in the yield per acre. In 1911 the average yield per acre was 20.80 bushels; in 1912, 20.38; in 1913, 21.04; in 1914, 15.67; in 1916, 17.10; iln 1917, 15.75; dm 1918, 11.00; in- 1919. 10.25. In 1915, which was an exceptional year and in which the conditions were just about ideal, the average yield per acre was 26.05 bushels. We should not fail to give attention to the gradual reduction of yield in the average year, because this is exactly what has occurred in wheat growing countries which have followed the single crop system.

One of the greatest responsibilities of the Dominion Department of Agriculture as well as of similar departments in all the provinces .is bo conserve the fertility of our virgin soils to the very best of our ability. If we can do this we will ensure the prosperity of this great country. The best method to follow to bring about this result is that of carrying on mixed farming with livestock as a basis. As a splendid example of w'hat can be done along these lines, let me point to Great Britain, a country very small in area compared with Canada, in whidh they have created and maintained in a state of perfection more breeds of horses, cattle, sheep and swine than all the Test of the world combined. While breeders from many other parts of the world have gone to Great Britain and made importations of some of their best stock, and on their return have actually taken a Scotchman along so as to ensure good care of them, after a few years they have found it necessary to return to the Old Land and secure new blood to maintain tihie Standard of perfection. .

There is grealt need in this country for a vigorous and continuous campaign of agricultural education, education along the lines of better methods of farming.

better livestock, better seeds and better marketing. I would like to potin|t out, Mr. Chairman, the possible results that may be achieved through the employing of better methods of agriculture, without turning over a single fresh acre of land. All hon. members who have had experience in farming will agree that an increase of three biuishele per acre of ,wheat is not an extraordinary expectation as the result of better methods. We may assume, therefore, that this is a reasonable figure. In 1919 we had 672,793 acres in fall wheat, giving an average yield of 23.75 bushels per acre, valued at $31,521,000. If we had an increase of three bushels per acre as the result of better methods, the value of that increase in cash would have been $3,976,206. In the same year we had 18,453,175 acres in spring wheat, with an average yield of 9.50 bushels per acre valued at $333,336,000. An increase of three bushels per acre would have given us an increased return of not less than $104,075,907. In the same connection it is fair to assume that -we might secure from better cultural methods six additional bushels per acre of oats, four of barley and fifty of potatoes. In 1919 we had 14,952,114 acres in oats with an average yield of 26.25 bushels per acre, valued at $317,097,000. An increase of six bushels per acre would have given us an extra yield worth $71,770,147. In barley we had 2,645,509 acres with a yield of 21.25 bushels per acre, valued at $77,462,700. An increase of four bushels only per acre would have increased the cash value of that crop by $14,497,389. In potatoes we had 818,767 acres with a yield of 153.5 bushels per acre, worth $118,894,200. An increased yield of 50 bushels per acre would have given us an increased cash value of $38,891,433. This makes an estimated annual increase from grain and potatoes alone, as a result of improved methods of agriculture, of $233,211,082 per year.

Now, remember that this is an estimate made on the basis of not turning over, one fresh acre of land. Some hon. gentlemen may think that these estimates are unreasonable. But let me point out what- the results have been of experiments on our Government farms. It has been shown that as a result of using good seed, that is, of changing from an unsuitable variety to a variety that will suit the location, an increase of not less than from fifty to eighty per cent has been secured. For instance, a variety that is too long in maturing in a certain district where it is liable to frost may be entirely destroyed. Other varieties, again, may mature too quickly in certain

districts without filling out and without giving a proper yield. The use of pedigree seed instead of seed of a nondescript variety has given an increase on our Government farms of ten per cent and upwards. The use of clean seed, free from weeds and foreign grain, has given an increase of ten per cent and upwards. Disease-free seed, particularly potatoes, has given most excellent results, in some cases producing an increase of from fifty to one hundred per cent. Rotation of crops-that is, the arrangement of the crops in rotation over periods of three, four or five years so as to retain the fertility of the soil-has given an increase of seven per cent and upwards. Thorough cultivation has given an increase of five per cent and upwards, and, in some dry areas, there was the difference between a fair crop and no crop at all. By the use of commercial and ordinary farm fertilizers, very largely increased production can be secured. These figures, as I have pointed out, are not guess work; they are the result of experiments carried on by the experimental farms from the Atlantic to the Pacific. This indicates, not only the value of the experimental farms, but the results that may be obtained by better farming methods.

I have been pointing out to the committee simply what may be done by a better method of cultivation. There is still another very large field that is practically untouched, and that is in the immense areas of virgin soil in Canada:. This can be reached by encouraging agricultural immigration of the right class to take up these lands, and if this be done, satisfactory and immediate results wall be obtained. We should not, however, make any of the mistakes we have made in the past in allowing every one to immigrate to this country and giving him the privilege of Canadian citizenship. We should be a little more discriminating and select a better class, bringing in the kind of men who are willing to work and settle on our farms and keeping out the soap-box orator and the man who would rather talk than work.

Agriculture has not escaned entirely from the unrest experienced in other lines of industry. We find our farmers going into certain lines of production for a year or two and then getting out of them in a hurry and leaving the market short. An excellent illustration of that is the hog industry, which requires stabilization to a certain extent. We find that hogs are being brought all the way from the city of Winnipeg to the Pacific coast merely to meet the

local requirements, and in addition to that hundreds of carcasses are being imported from the American side. This should not be, and it is largely due to the high price of grain and to the lack of faith on the part of the farmer in present market conditions.

We find that the farming industry has been very slow to go into sheep rearing. In Australia, there are no less than 80,000,000 sheep; in the United States, 40,000,000; in Great Britain, 27,000,000, and in Canada, only 3,500,000. If you ask a farmer why he does not go into these industries, he will tell you that it does not pay; but by actual experiments at our experimental farms, it is clearly shown that in almost every year these two lines, hog raising and sheep raising, have shown a satisfactory profit. This again indicates the need of more education along the line of better fanning and better livestock.

Let us look for a moment at what can be done by the use of better animals and by better feeding and finishing of our livestock. Canada has to-day 3,543,600 dairy cows which have an estimated average production of less than 4,000 pounds of milk per year. Any dairyman farmer, who . has any ambition, should aim to have his cows average a production of at least 7,000 pounds a year, and some of 'the herds of this country average over 14,000 pounds per cow. Supposing that we were able to obtain this increase, and we valued the increase at only 82 per hundred pounds, that would mean an increase in the yield of 860 per cow, which would bring us a total increase annually of no less than 8212,616,000.

The total number of beef cattle marketed through our inspected abattoirs-and these are not by any means all the beef cattle killed in the country-amounted in 1919 to 1,026,141 head. Many of these were of poor quality and in very poor condition. I visited an abattoir in Toronto, went over the killing floors, where they were putting through some 700 head that day, and some of our western representatives will be surprised to learn that these cattle were passing through with a weight of from 250 to 350 pounds per carcass. Had the animals been in condition and properly grown, they would have weighed at least twice that, and *would Wave sold Ifor a much higher price. It is safe to say that, by better feeding and by keeping our cattle better, we could secure an increase of weight of 300 pounds per head which would mean an increase of $36 in cash per head, or an annual increase of $36,941,076.

The hogs slaughtered at our inspected establishments, that is the packing houses where they kill hogs for export and for interprovincial trade and where we maintain a staff of inspectors, number 2,373,810 head wilth an average woighlt of 189 ipoiuands in 1919. They should have averaged, had they been in proper condition and fully grown, 220 pounds per head. Of this number, 158,254 were what are known as light hogs or " lights." These should have weighed 80 pounds or more, or an increase of 12,666,320 ,pounds; with an increase of thirty pounds on the balance of the hogs, an increase of 66,466,680 pounds could have been secured, or a total gain, had all these hogs been up to standard, of 79,127,000 pounds which, at 17 cents per pound, would have amounted to $13,451,590. ( . I i 1

Let us consider for a moment the innocent little Canadian hen, of which we 'have 41,000,000 flying on and off the nest iln . Canada. The average yield ' otf the Canadian hen is only from 5i to 6 dozen eggs a year. By better breeding and selection, very much better results can be obtained, because some of the hens in high-class flocks are yielding from twenty to twenty-five dozen eggs a year. An increase of only one dozen eggs a year by better selection and breeding would result in an increase in our poultry wealth of $12,300,000 at 30 cents a dozen, to say nothing of the results that can be obtained in bettering the quality of our fowl which are disposed of for the table.

The results I have referred to will give us an increase in our field crops of $233,211,082, an increase in our livestock of $275,308,666 as a result of improved methods, making a total of $508,519,748, or more than one-quarter of our total national debt per year, and this, without turning over a single fresh acre. I would ask if it is not reasonable that we should make every effort to attain this end?

These are just a few striking illustrations of the possibilities of a better system of agriculture, and the figures that I have given show, without any doubt, the necessity of more agricultural education. We are disseminating this education to-day through the medium of our experimental farms, agricultural colleges, agricultural exhibitions, agricultural press, comity agents, the Livestock Branch, the Seed Branch, the Fruit Branch, the Entomological Branch, Dairy Branch, and the Health of Animals Branch. While we are accomplishing a great deal of good work, our work would be vastly increased if more money were available for the purpose.

To show the results of agricultural education in the livestock business and the benefits to be obtained from campaigns of education, let me point out that when we in Canada first began to become Interested in the big market for our hogs in Great Britain, our hogs were on the whole of a more or less nondescript variety. We had the American thick-fat hog, the scrub hog, and a few of the bacon type. We soon learned that the Danes and the Irish were supplying the British market with what is known as the bacon-type hog. An attempt was immediately made in this country to induce our farmers to rear that type so as to meet the requirements of that market, and to show you the excellent results obtained, I might say that during the past year in our inspected abattoirs no less than 85 per cent of the hogs that passed through these establishments were of the bacon type. That shows the results of agricultural propaganda of the right kind. I am quite confident that if this had been left to individual effort, not nearly as good results would have been obtained.

Let me give another example to show what can be accomplished by improved methods of caring for livestock. On a one hundred acre farm on Vancouver Island are two brothers, neither of whom has ever had any training in an agricultural college. They are shrewd business men, anxious to improve their opportunities and willing to work. They maintain on this farm 3,000 head of high class poultry. They carefully trap nest their Ihens, and have registered some of the best of them with the result that to-day for their best hatching eggs they are securing no less than $7 per dozen. On the same farm a Jersey herd was established about ten years ago, and to-day that herd averages more than 550 pounds of butter fat per cow, while the average scrub or nondescript cow is satisfied with 125 pounds. This is another example of what can be done by improving one's methods and a willingness to work. Let me give another example. Last year in British Columbia a single cow yielded within twelve months 32,000 pounds of milk, which is just eighty pounds less than the world's irecord, and which is eight times as much as the yield of the average Canadian cow. This one cow required only one-eighth of the room in the stable that was required for eight average cows, needed only one-eighth the care, and consumed a little more than one-eight of the feed required by eight scrub cows. The farmer that kept eight average cows to yield as much milk

was at a loss at the prevailing price of feed and found that at the end of the year he had been farming in a circle andi had not got anywhere. After balancing his receipts and expenditures he found that he had got nothing from his year's work but the fresh air and the exercise, whereas the man with the 32,000 pound cow was able to sell that milk for $1,280 and he sold the cow with a heifer calf for $15,000 to be shipped all the way to Pennsylvania. The heifer calf brought $1,000. The value of knowing how to do things was worth in this particular case at least $14,000.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
L LIB

William Henry White

Laurier Liberal

Mr. W. H. WHITE:

Ii these methods were followed by the average farmer does the minister think there is a market for very many $15,000 cows?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Simon Fraser Tolmie (Minister of Agriculture)

Unionist

Mr. TOLMIE:

ganda. They have instituted household science work, giving instruction in the domestic arts, in home nursing, sanitation, improvement in social conditions, and they are exercising a very wide-spread influence which cannot but make for the enlightenment and advancement of all those who live on the farm. These women, have worked very generously during the war, and the organization referred to being nonsectarian and non-partisan they have been capable of rendering highly valuable service to the country.

There is something else that will improve agriculture and business generally, and that is a better understanding between the city man and the farmer. When the city man gets his quart of milk in the morning and has to pay 15 cents for it., he is rather inclined to designate the farmer a profiteer; but he probably does not know the history of that 'quart of milk. He does not realize that the cow from which it was obtained cost possibly twice as much as she would in 1914; he does not know that all the fodder used for that cow is just about double in price what it was four or five years ago; he does not realize the fact that labour is scarce and that the farmer has to stay at home and milk his cows twice a day 365 days of the year, including holidays, birthdays and all. On the other hand, the farmer should realize that 80 per cent of the goods he turns off his farm are either manufactured or consumed in Canada, so that the home market is easily his biggest' market; and that every time a new sawmill is put up, or a new logging camp, a new mining camp, a new factory, or any other new industry established, all this increases his big home market.

I am not personally in favour of any policy which proposes to tear down one industry in order ito build up another; I feel that there is room for all of our industries in this great country. What we need is more national thought and more business co-operation between city man and country, man. I may remark that very excellent results have been obtained in the United States in .certain sections where bankers and business men have established amicable social relations with the farmers in .their surrounding agricultural districts In many cases the city men have backed the farmers, enabled them to increase their capital, to establish their dairy industry on a sounder and better basis, to go in more extensively for hog raising, etc., with the result that while the agricultural in-

TMr. Totmie.]

dustry in these districts formerly just dragged along, many have now become prosperous and the business men find an excellent market right at their door.

The war and its inevitable after effects, not to mention the debts that have been incurred, have brought us face to face with the great necessity of production, and we must realize the importance of the man who produces, whether agriculturally or industrially, as compared with the man who heretofore has thrived on the efforts oi others. In out present situation we cannot hope to free ourselves from the incubus of our debts without great national effort. This is the time for energetic action; this is the time for thrift and sound common-sense. Our markets are receiving careful attention. We realize that the surest w>ay to stabilize our agricultural industry is to furnish the farmer with an absolutely reliable market, or one as nearly approximating that standard as possible, so that he can be always sure of getting reasonable prices for his produce when he is ready to sell it. The home market is receiving close attention, and any one who is unable to-day to obtain an article in his own town should endeavour to get it in the neighbouring town rather than send to a foreign country for it.

What we need is more home buying. We have to the south of us a very good market for our agricultural produce, particularly for our livestock and many other articles which the farmers produce. It is very convenient and within easy reach, but I think we would be rather short-sighted if we did not give some attention to the development of the great market overseas, and especially the market of Great Britain. I believe in building up a bond of sympathy between the old Mother Country and this one, one of her most important Dominions. In addition to the bond of sympathy between us, we can find in the Old Land a business that is a very profitable and satisfactory one to this country. On the continent of Europe there is also a most excellent market.

Eealizing the opportunities on the continent of Europe, the Department of Agriculture secured, immediately after the winter fairs were held, two first-class Canadian steers, which were exhibited in France, Belgium and Switzerland, with most excellent results. One firm alone has shipped to the continent of Euirpoe no less than 20,000 head of cattle, and many others are shiping very largely whenever shipping space is obtainable. We have had some very favour-

able comments from the Euro4 p.m. pean papers regarding these cattle, in the first place alluding particularly to the quality and condition of the animals, and in the second place to the enterprise of the country which adopted that practical method of displaying her goods. Another strong feature in connection with our cattle is the reputation they have made on account of their good health. We have no foot and mouth disease in this country. One of our greatest competitors on the continent of Europe is the Argentine Republic and some other South American countries, where foot and mouth disease prevails most of the time. Looking to the West, there is also a market springing up on the Pacific ocean.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Hugh Boulton Morphy

Unionist

Mr. MORPHY:

In regard to these cattle from Canada which you have shipped to Great Britain, is there any restriction upon their entry as there was formerly?

M. TOLMIE: Those cattle that I spoke oi were shipped to the continent of Europe. I will touch upon the British embargo a little later.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Hugh Boulton Morphy

Unionist

Mr. MORPHY:

Are they admitted free to the continent of Europe?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Simon Fraser Tolmie (Minister of Agriculture)

Unionist

Mr. TOLMIE:

Yes.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Hugh Boulton Morphy

Unionist

Mr. MORPHY:

But not into England?

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
UNION

Simon Fraser Tolmie (Minister of Agriculture)

Unionist

Mr. TOLMIE:

what are known as "accredited herds'' in an effort on our part to eliminate tuberculosis from our pure-bred herds. We hope that by creating little nuclei of pure-bred herds we will soon start on the road towards getting rid of tuberculosis in this country, a disease which is causing serious losses in all the countries of the world. We also deal with hog cholera and comparing our work with that of the United States we find that we have made very much better progress in dealing with that disease. According to the latest figures hog cholera in this country .amounted to only one-half of one per cent. Dourine is another disease that has caused great I0S6 among horses in Alberta and this disease has been practically wiped out as a result of our efforts. The success of this work is largely due to Dr. Watson who was in the employ of the department and who was able to isolate the organism which was responsible for the disease and to develop a serum which was very useful in reducing and controlling it. In Alberta we have also what is known as mange; and this area lias been under quarantine for some time on account of the cattle having mange, which is a skin disease'. We expect to be able to get rid of this disease during the coming summer. We have an organization and equipment for dealing with the matter and hon. gentlemen will appreciate the magnitude of the undertaking when I mention that we will require baths to give a lime and sulphur bath to over 200,000 head of cattle.

W7e have also raised the standard of veterinary teaching in this country. Tnat is very important because we have over a billion dollars invested in the livestock industry. Within the last few years there have been serious outbreaks of foot and mouth disease on the American side and had we been at all careless we would have had this disease in Canada and we would have lost many millions of dollars. Thanks however, to the vigilance of our Health of Animals Branch, the disease was kept out.

Animals are subject to other diseases which, while not included in our Contagious Diseases Act, cause serious losses. For instance, our losses per year on poultry alone amount to over $7,000,000. Contagious abortion and sterility in cattle, and internal .parasites .require very careful mvestiga/tkwi, so that in that way we secure information of great value to the farmer.

Now, while the importance of pure-bred sires and the better breeding of livestock cannot be overestimated, the production of pure seed is just as important. We have in connection with the Department of Agricul-

IJIr. Tolmie.]

ture a Seed Branch, whose business it is to encourage the use of new and improved varieties of seed, and to disseminate propaganda on the value of using improved seed. We have a system of stimulating the' interest of farmers in this work by distributing to them good varieties to be grown under certain conditions, and many farmers become seed-growing specialists. In this way a great deal of valuable seed is turned out every year. Then we have a system under which seed grown under certain restrictions is eligible for registration, and last year we produced * 100,000 bushels of registered seed. We also encourage the use of improved seed through field crop competitions, seed fairs, and provincial seed exhibitions, by which means several million bushels of high quality seed is produced annually, and this registered seed is doled out to the seed men throughout the country, so that our work affects the whole Dominion.

What are the actual results obtained? There has been a great increase in the production of timothy seed in Alberta. A few years ago only a small quantity was grown, but last year no less than 20,000 bushels were produced. Our Canadian market can consume 300,000 bushels of this seed annually, and the export market would take 2,000,000 bushels if we had it to sell. In 1918 the clover seed of the country was valued at no less than $10,000,000. Clover seed has been produced of excellent quality, particularly on the clay lands of Northern Ontario. Before the war practically all our field and vegetable seed was imported from Germany and other European countries, but owing to the excellent work performed by our Seed Branch we are now able not only to supply our domestic demand but to export in considerable quantities.

Much has been done too in creating seed potato centres .for the production of disease-free seed. This has made a tremendous difference in some sections. The lower St. Uawrence valley has established an excellent reputation for producing high-class potato seed, and northern grown Canadian seed of all kinds is gaining a very good reputation throughout the continent.

During the war the Seed Branch took up emergency seed distribution to meet the prevailing war conditions, and they established a Seed Purchasing Commission, which did very effective work in maintaining a supply of seed during the whole war period in spite of very heavy handicaps. This Commission had a turn-over of $12,000,000, every cent of which has Been returned tto the Receiver

General, and in addition they were able to pay all operating expenses.

I may point- out for the benefit of hon. members from the West that it is not the intention of the department to withdraw the Seed Purchasing Commission from the western provinces- until normal conditions are reached in that section.

The Fruit Branch has also been rendering . very excellent service by enforcing the Inspection and Sale Act, inspecting and grading fruit and the filling of packages, and by giving practical demonstrations in orchard cultivation, pruning, spraying, grading and so forth. They also carry on inspection at the point of shipment. In this way they protect our trade by ensuring that the fruit is sent to market in first-class condition, and where found satisfactory, certificates are given on carload lots, which assist the sale of the fruit at destination.

Crop reports are issued by telegraph during the growing season, and when the sales are proceeding in Great Britain we receive market reports which are sent all over the country so as to place the grower on a perfectly sound footing in marketing his produce. Attention is also given to railway and express tariffs and the handling of fruit in transit.

It is a matter of more than passing interest in this connection that Great Britain is proving to be our one big market of importance. Another matter of interest is that box fruit is becoming much more popular. In addition to our export business with Great Britain, we also ship to the United States, Australia and New Zealand in their off seasons when they have no fruit to sell.

Our Experimental Farm system is rendering a very valuable service to the country, but unfortunately it is not perhaps as well appreciated as it might be. Our stations are situated in all the provinces, and particular care is taken an carrying on experiments in regard to adaptability of the soil for production, climatic conditions, and so forth in new sections. All this information is made immediately available for the farmers in those districts. For instance, a settler going in can immediately secure full information on the best means of growing crops in that section by applying to the Experimental Farm. It is estimated that this service is worth $60,000,000 a year to the country. Frequently we hear people complaining that our Experimental Farms do not pay. This is rather an unreasonable attitude when we take into. consideration the very small plots of ground that are used for carrying

on experimental work, in some cases not more than one-fortieth of an acre, which it is necessary to cultivate by hand-the most expensive kind of work. In the event of something of value being discovered, it is not given to the public right away, but further experiments are conducted in control plots, and the experiments may run over four or five years to make sure of the correctness of the results obtained before tha information is passed on to the farmers. After all, the real harvest and profit from an experimental plot is not the small amount of grain, roots or seed that may be obtained from it, it is the information that is filed away in the office for the use of our farmers.

The Entomological Branch is also rendering good service, but it is very little known. The work has to do with the destruction of parasites injurious to crops. Hon. members will perhaps be surprised to learn that our losses from injurious parasites amount to $125,000,000 a year. In some parts of the West, in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and also in Alberta, we are now threatened with a grass-hopper plague. We are combatting these grass-hoppers by treating them with a mixture consisting of arsenic, bran and molasses. To give an idea of the extent of our operations in co-operation with the Provincial Governments, I may say that the work will require 100,000 pounds of arsenic, 2,000 tons of bran and 50,000 gallons of molasses for the purpose. When we take into consideration the fact that from 2 to 4 grains of arsenic are sufficient to kill a human being, I think we may reasonably expect that 50 tons of arsenic will take the hop out of a considerable number of those grass-hoppers. It has been suggested that we try poisonous gases for this purpose. There are many difficulties in the way, but we are carrying on a quiet investigation and if there is any promise of success we may go further with the matter. The brown-tail moth is another parasite that has caused a lot of trouble to our orchards in the East, but luckily that pest is now almost under control. In British Columbia we have what is known as pear thrips, which have done some damage to orchards out there. As an illustration of what has been done by the Entomological Branch, I may .say that in one particular orchard that I know of the yield in one year was only 700 boxes of pears. That year work was commenced by the Entomological Branch and in the next year the harvest amounted to 7,000 boxes.

The Entomological Branch has been 'brought to .a high is'tate of efficiency by tihe

late Dr. C. Gordon Hewitt, a gentleman of high scientific attainment and of very large calibre. We were unfortunate enough to lose him through death some weeks ago. He possessed great executive ability, and his loss will be a serious one to agriculture and to science, not only in Canada, but all over the world; for he was becoming widely known on account of his scientific attainments. I wish to pay this tribute to Dr. Hewitt's ability and tp the very great work that he performed in this country.

Another new line of industry that is doing well and making good progress is the tobacco industry. The crop last year amounted to over 20,000,000 pounds, worth about 18,000,000. But this industry is only in its early stages; there is a great deal to be done in securing co-operation so as to facilitate the putting up of curing plants and the improvement of marketing facilities. The Department of Agriculture has been interesting itself in this industry. We have a man overseas who is looking into the possibilities of the British market and trying to make arrangements for the selling of Canadian tobacco. When he returns we expect that he will bring with him a great deal of valuable information which will help us to attain this end.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I have taken up a great deal of the time of the committee, but I thought it advisable to outline rather briefly the possibilities of agriculture in this country. I have also directed attention to the important part that agriculture can play in meeting our present financial situation. The prospects for development, I think you will agree, are practically unlimited. In briefly summarizing the situation, I may say that it will be the object of the department to facilitate and encourage production and better methods of farming by the medium of education, demonstration and illustration; to encourage a system of mixed farming with live stock as a basis; to increase and encourage better feeding, finishing and marketing of live stock; to develop our export trade in agricultural products; to expand our marketing policy in every posible way and to have our goods, when they are placed on the market, of such quality and in such condition as to enable us to meet successfully any competition that may offer; to improve and extend our facilities for handling perishable products; to conserve carefully the health of our live stock and to maintain the high reputation we now possess in this connection.; to assist in the development fMr. Tolmie.]

of special lines of production which have not yet become thoroughly established; to encourage co-operation and co-operative selling; to improve transportation facilities for handling our products; to investigate the possibilities of securing cheaper money for our farmers so as to enable them to increase their production; to use our best efforts to rigidly apply such legislation as is on the statute book for the protection of the farmer.

I feel that a policy of this kind is an absolutely safe one and can bring about nothing but the best results. Of course, our efforts in this connection will be limited to the amount of expenditure that we shall be able to make. After travelling all over Canada I find myself to be more than ever a thorough believer in this country. I am more strongly than ever impressed with the extent of our wonderful resources. There should really -be no pessimism at this time on the part of our Canadian people, if they will only consider the tremendous wealth of this country and its possibilities. While it is necessary to apply taxation to meet our immediate requirements, it should -be but. a temporary burden and but a side line to a big progressive movement for more business and the development of our wonderful opportunities in agricultural and natural resources. All that is required is an intelligent handling of the situation, and I feel that with the spirit of the Canadian people behind it no safer plan of action can be adopted and nothing is surer of success than the policy which I have indicated.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink
L LIB

William Henry White

Laurier Liberal

Mr. WHITE (Victoria):

Without presuming to be the agricultural critic on this side, I may say that although I agree with nearly everything the minister has said, particularly with his remarks respecting the improvement of stock by breeding and feeding, it is possible that some of the minister's figures may be misleading. If I understood him aright, he said, speaking of the loss that Canadian producers had sustained in the matter of hogs, that the weight of these animals might have been increased with advantage to the producer. Well, it is possible that if the weight had been increased there would have been a greater loss to the producer. Not every one may know that there are certain limitations as to size and weight. Hogs in our country weighing from 175 to 225 pounds are worth four, five, sometimes six cents a pound more than those which go above that weight. So that the statements given out by the min-

ister might mislead some who have not much practical knowledge or who are beginners, and who might sustain a loss rather than make a profit if this suggestion of the minister was adopted. A few years ago a young mam who had invested a considerable amount of money in live stock in my part of the country was trying to. follow the directions issued by the Central Experimental Farm. He was feeding the hogs on rations as laid down by that branch of the Department, but he was feeding them under different circumstances. In the Experimental Farm the hogs had the benefit of steam coils to keep them warm, but this young man was feeding them in a stable in which the temperature was not very well regulated; consequently he lost his stock by following that advice.

The minister gave us examples of what can be done by breeding. He told us of a certain cow that was sold for $15,000 and about large production of milk being obtained under certain circumstances. Well, very often these large productions of milk cost more than the milk itself is really worth. A few years ago I saw at the Winter Fair in Ottawa a cow that was making a record by producing 100 or 108 pounds of milk a day. But the fact of the matter was that they were giving her that milk to drink, after adding some other foods to it, and it was costing more to get that increased production than the production was worth. I simply point to these facts in case people might be carried away by the minister's statement that everybody should go into the raising of expensive stock and that if they did they would find a ready market for it.

We know that high prices are paid for the winners in ali classes of animals. For instance, a few years ago in Chicago a rancher from my province bought a purebred Hereford bull for $27,000. It took a judge two days to decide which was the better of the two, this bull and another one, and the one that was placed next to this one in the prize list, sold for $3,010. This is simply a case of the top price being given for the one which became famous owing to the fact that he was a prize winner. Some time ago a Boston terrier sold for $15,000. The animal was, of course, not worth that; he was not, for utility purposes, worth more than any cur running about the streets; but he was a prize winner at the show, and somebody wanted him and was willing to pay this price.

As regards the record cow of which the minister spoke, if he had given us figures

to show how many cows were used for dairy purposes, and what was the average production and its value, per cow, the people of the country would know what there was in dairying. As regards prizes and encouragement given by the Government to carloads of steers and other things, in many cases the expense is greater than the value of the prize.

The minister has stated that we do not feed our animals enough, but I think the average farmer throughout the country feeds in the most profitable way. When hay is worth $60 a ton, as it was this year in the western country, and a man was induced to put three or four tons of hay into an animal during the six months of feeding there was this winter, he would not find that profitable advice when he discovered that he had put $250 worth of feed into a steer that would not sell for $120. Circumstances alter cases, and the average farmer may be trusted to know pretty nearly what pays him and what does not. Although we are all in favour of improving stock and the breeding of cattle, and we have every confidence that the minister, as an old showman and a man who has handled a great deal of stock, will give the stock breeders all the encouragement they can possibly expect from the present Minister of Agriculture, I was just pointing out these facts, because I am afraid he looks at the stock business more with the eye of a showman than as a practical man who is making a living out of the business. I have always used pure-bred sires in all classes of animals, and I have always had a herd of pure-bred cattle; but the man who makes the money makes it, not out of his purebred herd, but out of his grade herd, and the bigger the grade herd, the more money he makes. In the western country, every stock man who looks after his business well makes money out of his grade herd, but I do not know of any who have made money by going into the high-class, pure-bred stock. The reason for that is that there is room for only one or two at the top of this kind of breeding, and if many went into the business, the result would be disastrous.

While I appreciate what the minister has said, I do not take his figures altogether seriously when he * says that we should continue feeding our hogs and cattle when it is not profitable to do so. If the average man carried his hogs over until they obtained a weight of four or five or six hundred pounds, he would find he was losing money. After a hog gets over the

select weight of, say 175 to 225 pounds, the extra expense of making it heavier would mean only less profit to the producer. Perhaps those who were turning their cattle off at lighter weights, found that paid them better than to carry them over until they reached a heavier weight. Many ranchers in Alberta made a great mistake last year in not selling because prices were a little lower than usual. They could have got eight or nine cents a pound for their stock, but they would not sell as they had been accustomed to higher prices. Now they find that they have added to the cost of their steers possibly $120 to $150; in many cases they have not as many as they had before, and they find that steers have cost them more to carry over than they are really worth. Therefore, there is no fixed rule. That is the only difference I have with the minister who says that we should carry these animals over until they reach a certain weight. Sometimes that would be a very expensive experiment. The average stock breeder knows when he should sell and when he should not, and my experience is that they never lose very much money through not knowing what to do when the proper time comes. Sometimes, on paper, statements are made apparently showing an enormous waste; but if people knew the circumstances of the matter, they would find that the average stockman, no matter what kind of stock he is handling, is getting out of that stock practically all the money there is in it.

Mr. TOLM3IE,: I appreciate what the hon. member, who is recognized as one of our prominent stockmen in Alberta, has said, but I should like to correct one or two of the statements he has made. In the first place, I did not advocate the production of the thick-fat, heavy hog to a weight of six or seven hundred pounds. I said that these hogs should average 220 pounds, which is the ideal bacon hog. As regards the high producing cows, perhaps I am wrong, but I have had experience in this line; I have maintained a dairy herd, and the best paying cow I ever had was one that gave 112 pounds in a day or 25,560 pounds m 115 months.

Topic:   SUPPLY.
Subtopic:   DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE-REVIEW BY THE MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN CANADA.
Permalink

May 14, 1920