Food policy advocates in Ottawa are calling on Ontario’s regulatory bodies to amend their quota system to reflect consumer demand for local production.

The Chicken Farmers of Ontario (CFO) and other Ontario chicken industry stakeholders are re-assessing and increasing the province’s chicken production quotas. At the centre of this process is the question of how they will distribute new and surplus figures.

The Ottawa Food Policy Council (OFPC) has called on Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs (AFRA) Minister Jeff Leal to use this opportunity to amend the quota system to prioritize consumer demand for locally-produced chickens. OFPC has cited a 2014 consumer survey commissioned by the CFO which suggested that 80 per cent of Ontarians prefer “local” chicken (according to the provincial government, “local” chicken comes from within the province). They said that “the supply management system [needs to be] amended to reflect these priorities, and not to support family dynasties of chicken farmers at the expense of new entrants and a diversity of management practices.”

Chicken production in Canada relies on a quota system to match production with consumer demand so that farmers are guaranteed business. Quota amounts are distributed from the federal regulator (Chicken Farmers of Canada, or CFC) to Ontario’s chicken marketing organization, the CFO, to distribute and regulate. The CFC recently decided to increase national production quotas and therefore will be expanding the number allocated to Ontario producers.

The current quota system requires farmers to produce a minimum of 30,000 birds in order to purchase a quota and 90,000 birds in order to scale up to commodity production.

Regulations permit farmers to sell up to 300 birds from their farm but this size of operation does not allow farmers to keep chickens as a profitable component of a diversified farm operation. OFPC wants the CFO to drop minimum flock size in order to purchase quotas, a practice that has already been implemented in four other provinces.

They also want the CFO to allow non-quota producers to sell a greater number of birds, access marketing services, sell birds for specialty markets (including halal, kosher and organic), and sell beyond the farm gate. Non-quota production became legal in 2007 with the small flock program, however, Ontario’s cap remains the lowest in the country.

The CFO has already ruled against raising the non-quota sales cap in 2013. Some believe it was because the CFO anticipated that this would negatively impact existing operations. But the OFPC disagrees, saying that “increasing the allowance for non-quota sales will pose no danger to the commodity chicken market, since the costs of small-scale, specialty chicken are higher and are reflected in prices.”

There are a number of other barriers to small-scale farming. “Family dynasties” arise when large-scale producers are able to hand down quotas from generation to generation and sell surplus quotas (as opposed to returning them to the marketing board to distribute where the public interest determines they are needed). According to CFO President Rob Dougans, “the vast majority of Ontario chicken farms remain family owned, passed down through generations.”

Thunder Bay currently has only one major chicken producer and has to import the rest of their chickens from over 1,000 kilometres away because it is difficult (especially in northern Ontario) for new farmers to reach flock sizes and access the regulated abattoirs necessary to purchase quota. Thunder Bay Food Strategy has been consulting with the CFO to make entrance into the supply management system easier for northern farmers.

Time will tell what the CFO’s consultation process will reveal, but it is now up to the Government of Ontario – specifically Leal – to guide the future of the province’s chicken industry. We may see local chicken operations popping up on small and local farms very soon if the CFO follows the recommendations of local food advocates like OFPC, Thunder Bay Food Strategy, and the Practical Farmers of Ontario.

This article first appeared in the Leveller Vol.7, No.5 (Feb/March 2015).

Read the original article at The Leveller