Community Economic Development - Documents

GAINING GROUND

Upper Skeena Sustainable Agriculture Plan

July 2002

Prepared for:  Upper Skeena Development Centre

Funding assistance:  Canadian Agricultural Rural Communities Initiative

Lead consultant:

Ryan & Company

Dave Ryan

Box 561, Hazelton, BC V0J 1Y0
ryangro@uniserve.com

(250) 842-4144

Associate consultants:

Storytellers' Foundation

Box 37, Hazelton, BC V0J 1Y0
oldtown@uniserve.com

Doug Donaldson, Anne Docherty, Melanie Sondergaard, Karen Erickson

(250) 842-6500

MacDonald Consulting

Gail MacDonald

RR#1 Comp 43 Site M, Hazelton, BC V0J 1Y0

gmacdon@bulkley.net

(250) 842-2102

Ryan & Company would gratefully like to acknowledge the work of the team that was involved in researching and putting this project together. They brought distinct and valuable skills and experience to the team and collectively share in the credit for the work.

Executive Summary

Agriculture has always been an important activity for settlers and First Nations in the Upper Skeena where deriving sustenance from local soils and waters is central to the existence and identity of the people living here.

Although agriculture is not as prominent an economic sector as it once was in the Upper Skeena, recently there is a new desire from residents to reevaluate the potential for agricultural activities to move once again from sustenance-based to income-generating endeavors.

The work in Gaining Ground was based on extensive public consultation that included a community steering committee, kitchen table discussions, consumer surveys, interviews with local experts, workshops, career fairs and a symposium on sustainable agriculture. There was also much research done through literature searches, Internet searches and attending conferences to network with agricultural professionals. The work in the plan,

and the idea for placing emphasis on agricultural endeavors, came from the residents of the Upper Skeena as described in two community economic planning documents, Action 2000 (1998) and Beyond 2000 (1999).

Those community economic development (CED) documents clearly laid out the values and vision that people in the Upper Skeena hold dear: kinship, a love of the land, learning by doing, working on the land, a rural lifestyle, youth as future decision-makers and creating the circumstances so our children can continue the way of life we have created locally. It is in the context of these values and vision that work under the sustainable

agriculture plan took place.

The approximately 6,500 people living in the Upper Skeena have some unique population attributes that are relevant when discussing CED plans such as sustainable agriculture: the population is younger than the Canadian and B.C. average, with 70% of residents under the age of 30; the population numbers do not demonstrate the wild swings typical of resource-based communities dependent on “boom or bust” economies -- people tend to stay here through good times and bad. Unemployment in the Upper Skeena is characterized as “extreme” by Human Resources Development Canada with overall rates in the 60% range and some reserves experiencing rates of more than 90%.

Agriculture has had a storied past in the Upper Skeena with the Kispiox Valley Farmer’s Institute being one of the fi rst established in the province (1929) and a lively export market to urban areas such as Prince Rupert taking place. The fertile soil remains but the export and local markets have diminished. Only three farms in the area are full-time,       financially self-supporting, commercial operations for their owners. There still remains, however, many who derive a portion of their income from their land through agriculture and many who use what they produce to barter for other goods or services. It is the collective local knowledge that is being kept alive by these operations that will form the basis for a renewed sustainable agriculture sector in the Upper Skeena.

World, Canadian and BC agriculture issues and trends point towards strategies and markets that suit our local situation. Many of these issues and trends revolve around food security and a concern about food safety that have created momentum in the area of community-supported agriculture, the establishment of marketing cooperatives, and the organic agriculture sector. Work conducted on a local consumer questionnaire also points

to the fact that there is a local market, as well as an export market, for the types of farm products that can be successfully, sustainably grown and raised on the lands of the Upper Skeena.

Based upon the values of those living in the Upper Skeena, the direct input of residents into this plan, research on the climate and soil conditions we have locally and an analysis of agricultural issues and trends from the global to the local scene, the following recommendations are made:

General Recommendations:

The Upper Skeena Development Centre is the body to initially drive the implementation of the plan.

Specific recommendations

1. Hold three “Surplus Saturdays” in late summer and/or early fall.

2. Undertake a feasibility study on the creation of a marketing cooperative.

3. Create a Community-Supported Agriculture system.

4. Recognize that the continued interest of youth in agriculture in the Upper Skeena is essential to the continuation of our rural lifestyle by:

• supporting leadership development of local members of the agriculture community in order to sustain a viable 4-H program

• exploring the possibility of a locally developed agriculture curriculum within Hazelton Secondary School

• mentoring a youth team to organize and advocate for local youth to be involved in the implementation of agricultural opportunities

5. Apply information technology tools to the local agriculture sector for marketing and educational purposes by:

• distributing and promoting the Sustainable Agriculture Plan on CD-ROM so that educational institutions, community organizations and individuals can use it as a resource tool

• creating direct marketing ties with farmers and consumers, a “matchmaker” concept. Accessible through the Internet, this creates more sustainable communities as inputs are all local. Example: match hog farmer with grain grower or potato grower with manure supplier.

• Use the www.upperskeena.ca Web site to host the matchmaking strategy

• create a central location to house the agriculture information resources gathered during this process and the material that was available through the provincial agriculture office in Smithers that is no longer accessible to the public. The USDC could be host to the resource center.

6. Producers and consumers in the Upper Skeena develop a set of local food regulations.

7. Develop initial value-added facilities around agricultural products.

It is clear from the work done under Gaining Ground that there are current producers and potential producers who want to do more in the local agriculture scene, there are consumers in the Upper Skeena who would buy local farm products, there is a market segment outside of the Upper Skeena who buy the type of products that can be grown and raised here, and there is a considerable segment of our large youth population who are interested in agriculture. All of these findings bode well for a revitalized role for sustainable agriculture in our local economy. A key next step to the revitalization will be successfully implementing the recommendations in this report that came from the people living in the Upper Skeena. It is up to us.

A.  Introduction and Background

Agriculture has always been an important activity for newcomers and First Nations living in the Upper Skeena.  Whether defined in a conventional Western sense of growing crops and animal husbandry, or in a traditional First Nation perspective of management of the natural landscape, deriving sustenance from local soils and waters is central to the existence and identity of the people living here.

Although agriculture is not as prominent an economic sector as it once was in the Upper Skeena, recently there is a new thrust from residents to reevaluate the potential for agricultural activities to move once again from sustenance-based to income-generating endeavors.  The major force behind this rekindled interest in agriculture is a desire for economic diversification.  Because of a dependence on a single economic sector – forestry -- community members are attempting to survive an economic crisis of a magnitude witnessed only once or twice in the past century.  The most recent downturn in the local forest industry began in 1996 with the collapse of the prime industrial player in the northwest, Repap Enterprises.  The downturn in industrial forestry, magnified by global market factors, is longer and deeper than anything in recent history.  The realignment the sector is currently undergoing means industrial forestry activity in the Upper Skeena will never be the same as it was.

Facing this reality, many residents of the Upper Skeena are looking at starting or expanding their activities in other economic sectors, such as agriculture.  The actual drive for this sustainable agriculture plan developed from local input into two community planning processes. 

In 1998, Action 2000, A Journey into the Human and Economic Potential of the Upper Skeena was completed.  During Action 2000 interviews with community members, leaders and organizations focused on forestry issues but it soon became apparent that people wanted to discuss the whole economic picture in the Upper Skeena and not simply one sector.  The document produced a number of observations and listed seven recommendations, all of which have been followed up during the last four years.  A snapshot of the observations about people of the Upper Skeena that form part of the foundation for this work include:

• people enjoy being outside…people want to work on the land
• this is a resource rich community
• these rich resources include the human resource.  Opportunities and potential for people in this community are very rich, particularly with people’s knowledge of, and connection to, the land
• in spite of continued economic stability, we have a stable land population base.  People get by in hard time
• people survive by working outside of, and around, the dominant industrial model.  They continue to use the infrastructure that was here long before the industrial model arrived.  In many cases this alternate economy has just been pushed to the side.

The emphasis on land, the natural resources and the deep knowledge local people have in connection to the land are all obviously relevant to agriculture.  Expansion on the last observation in Action 2000, however, makes the link to economic activity:

A strong social safety net and economic foundation is provided by extended family, House groups, clans and feasts.  Many people survive financially through seasonal work outside of the mainstream economy through such activities as mushroom picking, the commercial inland fishery, trapping, and bartering and trading.  There is a dependence on sustenance activities like hunting, berry picking, canning and smoking fish, and growing gardens.

The work from Action 2000 was expanded out from forestry to an assessment of values, vision and socioeconomic priorities for all economic sectors in the Upper Skeena in a document called Beyond 2000, Creating Our Future, Setting socioeconomic priorities in our communities, completed in 1999.  Like Action 2000, Beyond 2000 was a year-long process involving community economic development research and the interviewing of hundreds of local individuals.  Beyond 2000 detailed the values and vision statements described by people in the Upper Skeena, synthesized what was heard into socioeconomic goals, listed a number of socioeconomic topics accumulated during workshops and public consultations, and created a workshop template for communities to use in developing action-oriented frameworks and work plans for economic development.  The clear message from the Beyond 2000 process is that residents wanted more local control over decisions affecting economic activities in the Upper Skeena and that energy in the near future should be spent on three specific sectors:  value-added forestry, tourism and agriculture.

Since 1999 time and energy has been spent in all three of these sectors at a local level resulting in community conferences, workshops, creation of community organizations and the establishment of a number of new businesses.  The work that has been done in the agriculture sector during the past three years, and that was conducted under this sustainable agriculture plan, grew from the values, vision and socioeconomic priorities articulated by community residents during the Beyond 2000 process. 

The value section of the Beyond 2000 document is worth reviewing while keeping the application of these values in an agricultural setting in mind:

Youth are our future decision- makers

·        we recognize and are concerned about the lack of opportunities for our youth     

·        young people want more involvement in decisions that affect their lives

·        people want their children to have an education that allows them to stay here, work and continue in a lifestyle that is connected to the landbase

Experiential learning is how we best acquire knowledge and skills.

·        we recognize that most learning takes place in doing things

·        we believe that local knowledge is absolutely necessary to be passed on to continue our way of life

·        we find successes in education programs that involve learning within the community and community life

Stewardship and working with the natural resources is central to our identity.

·        we take pride in being able to continue the traditions of working with the natural resources

·        because of this long tradition, there is a strong hope that the land can continue to provide

·        there is recognition and respect for local knowledge about the landbase

We live here because of kinship and a connection to the landbase.

·        we live here because of a connection through family and to the land around us

·        the vast majority of our population have a history of family connection here

·        the Upper Skeena is our home

We strive for self-reliance, self-sufficiency, autonomy and independence.

·        we stay here and find ways to survive even during times of economic crisis, especially using alternative economies such as trading services, food preservation and barter

·        there is a strong desire to bring decision-making closer to home

·        within the Upper Skeena, people are fiercely proud of their community’s identity

We enjoy a rural lifestyle.

·        most people live here not as members of a mainstream economy

·        many people work a variety of jobs so that they can stay here

·        a lot of the work we do is not for cash – we barter and trade services

·        our economy is not tied up in “career” based jobs

Beyond 2000 created 12 vision statements to sum up the common themes of where the people of the Upper Skeena said they want to be as family, community and resource-based workers.  All the vision statements are worth reviewing as they have application to the agriculture sector:

We want jobs on the land that will be there for our children and grandchildren.

We want healthy support systems for our children and youth.

We want a diversified economy that makes better use of the land around us.

We want a diversified economy that provides both social and economic benefits to our citizens.

We want easier access to resources.

We want to form socioeconomic relationships between each other while being capable of maintaining our diversity.

We want increased local management and control of natural resources.

We want increased local management and control over decisions that affect our lives.

We want socioeconomic development that recognizes the responsibility and connection to kin.

We want to take greater responsibility, and exert greater authority, over socioeconomic development.

We want sustainable practices in all forms of development.

We want the economic opportunities in order to sustain our chosen lifestyle.

The clearly articulated observations, vision and value direction coming from the people in the Upper Skeena as described in Action 2000 and Beyond 2000 around land, learning, lifestyle, local control and sustainability, combined with the socioeconomic priority given to agriculture, created momentum for the development of a sustainable agriculture plan in the Upper Skeena.  Adding to this momentum since 1999 have been a number of initiatives in local agriculture including a marketing conference held in Gitsegukla on non-timber forest products, a public consultation process involving a review of ALR land in the Kispiox Valley , the establishment of an industrial hemp operation and the creation of Gitsegukla Valley Farms, a Band-sponsored organic food company.

As a result of this momentum, local consultants wrote an application in the spring of 2001 on behalf of the Upper Skeena Development Centre to the Canadian Agricultural Rural Communities Initiative (CARCI) Partnership Projects for funding for an Upper Skeena Sustainable Agriculture Plan.  The application to this federally-funded program was successful and in October, 2001 work began on the plan.

There is a huge diversity of activities that could be addressed in a plan around sustainable agriculture.  All areas of sustenance in the Upper Skeena are worthy of attention and create to conditions that allow residents to keep living in this area.  Time and cost restrictions however, lead to the focus of this plan on agriculture activities being defined within the parameters of cultivation of crops and animal husbandry rather than the potential management of natural processes such as found with pine mushroom harvesting or picking wild berries.  These activities are well worth a plan of their own and may be more clearly addressed under such processes as interim measure agreements under treaty negotiations overseen by the Gitxsan Treaty Office.  From a sustainable viewpoint, this plan focuses upon activities that take an ecofarming approach where reducing inputs, maintaining soil and ecosystem health and diversity, and emphasizing long-term productivity over short-term gain are promoted.  By taking this approach the plan remains true to the values and vision of the people of the Upper Skeena.

B.  The Process

The process that lead to the recommendations in this report was comprehensive.  It involved a number of different public consultation strategies including “kitchen table” sessions, a survey, targeted interviews and forming a project steering committee.  As well, local events were organized such a sustainable agriculture symposium and a career fair.  In addition, comprehensive research was undertaken in a variety of forms.  The process is, in many ways, as important as the recommendations generated in that the various activities outlined in this section have assisted in re-energizing the community about agriculture and have resulted in additional agriculture-related outcomes detailed later in this report.

Sustainable agriculture symposium

In April 2001, a sustainable agriculture symposium was held in Hazelton to help raise the profile of sustainable agriculture in the Upper Skeena. Specifically, the forum was designed to:

·        Kick-start the Sustainable Agriculture Plan

·        Bring people together to share interests and ideas around sustainable agriculture in the Upper Skeena/Bulkley Valley

·        Examine the differences between industrial agriculture and sustainable agriculture and its impact on small farms and rural communities, and

·        Explore the potential of sustainable agriculture as an ecologically sound and socially responsibly approach to community economic development

Forty-seven people that included farmers, horticulturists, landowners and those interested in sustainable economics and food safety and security attended the forum. The forum was opened by Nikate’en, a Gitxsan Hereditary Chief whose traditional territory contains the community of Hazelton. John Ikerd, a professor of agricultural economics, University of Missouri College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources was the keynote speaker who gave a presentation on sustainable agriculture titled ‘New Hope for the Future of Farming’. (summary of the symposium)

Steering committee

It was felt that a community committee should be formed in the early stages of the planning process to advice the planners and to give feedback as the process progressed. It was important to have members with diverse occupations in order to achieve a broad range of perspectives in the area of sustainable agricultural development. Four meetings were held within the planning timetable. Guest speakers were invited to speak on their area of expertise and participate in discussions with the members on topics concerning agriculture and community economic development.  The steering committee consisted of:

Lou Parent                   logger, farmer                                                   Two Mile

Kim Larson                  ranch owner, lab tech                                        Kispiox Valley

Renee Chandler            sheep farmer                                                     Skeena Crossing

Anne Howard               economic development officer                           Gitsegukla

Wilma Patterson           band manager                                                   Glen Vowel

Kathy Clay                   teacher, landowner                                           Kispiox Valley

Dale Hobenshield         logger, farmer                                                   New Hazelton

Julie Maitland               forest tech                                                        Hazelton

Guests who spoke at the steering committee meetings were Dave Reindeau, BC Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (BCMAFF), Smithers; Jammi Kumar, Aboriginal Extension Agrologist, BCMAFF, Prince George; Paul Kidney, Fairhaven Farms, Cedarvale.

Kitchen table

“Kitchen table” discussions were a way to informally gather community members together in their own environment to openly discuss the topic of sustainable agriculture, agriculture, and economic opportunities around these topics. The idea was to locate a residence or community gathering place, put on the coffee, bake some cookies and invite all to participate in discussion. These ‘Kitchen Table’ discussions were held in geographic locations within the study area to get equal representation of all community members. Locations were; Kispiox Valley, Kitwanga Valley, Hazeltons’ and Two Mile. All discussions were recorded by taking notes and formulated into the plan.  More than 20 people participated in the kitchen table sessions.  (summary of sessions)

Consumer survey

Part of the research into a model for a sustainable agricultural sector in our area was to determine what the local consumers of agricultural products want and are willing to buy.

A consumer questionnaire was developed and three hundred copies of the questionnaire were distributed throughout the Upper Skeena communities. One hundred and thirteen completed questionnaires were gathered. The information from those questionnaires provides strong indicators of the shopping trends of the local populace.

Knowing the preferences and shopping patterns of the customers is one of the key elements of successful marketing plans. The indicators extracted from this survey will prove useful to individual producers trying to sell products locally and to organizations involved in economic planning. (summary of survey results)

Interviews

A number of professionals in agriculture and agriculture-related fields were interviewed in a formal manner to gather further information of relevance to the plan.  A set format of questions was asked to “local experts” and the discussions branched off from there.  Those who were interviewed in a formal manner for this project were:  Dave Reindeau, Resource Stewardship Agrologist, BCMAFF, Paul Kidney, Agrologist, Fairhaven Farms, Joe Whitney, Roger Leclerc, Paula Peinszski, 16-37 Community Futures, Anne Howard, Gitxsan Wet’suwet’en Economic Development Corporation and Jamie Kumar, First Nations Agrologist, BCMAFF. (summary of interviews)     

Research

Data collection came from many sources and using a variety of techniques: 

·        Informal interviews in-person and by telephone with existing farmers and landowners, local government officials, Kitimat-Stikine regional district staff, provincial and federal government agencies and university academic

·        Literature searches of agriculture journals, magazines and Hazelton and District Public Library archives

·        Internet searches

·        Review of books on agriculture topics

·        Attending workshops and conferences (click here for appendix):

Winter Harvest: Commercial Greenhouse Production of Fresh Vegetables in Cold Weather Climates, Agriculture Canada and Northwest Community College, Smithers, B.C.

Greenhouse Growing, B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and First Nations Agricultural Lending Association, Hazelton, B.C

The Dynamics of Change in Western Rural Communities, Western Agri-Food Institute & Agriculture Canada, Edmonton, Alberta.:

Caribou Farm Direct Marketing Seminar, Agriculture Canada, Western Diversification, Community Futures and the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture, Quesnel, B.C.

Youth and Public Education

The involvement of youth in the early stages of the planning process was critical to the success of the plan. Several initiatives were  incorporated from a youth perspective, all facilitated by Storytellers’ Foundation.

• Youth Cooperative Kitchen

Over a three-month period, 12 teenagers from the Experiential Education Program tested the idea of a youth cooperative kitchen where young people learned skills around cooking, nutrition, meal planning and food security.

• The re-establishment of 4-H

In discussion with community members about promoting agriculture and a rural lifestyle an interest in 4-H was expressed. 4-H has been introduced several times in the Upper Skeena and has always petered out. Usually the leader becomes busy in other activities and there is not someone else to carry on the programming or leaders have moved away.  We have re-established the Upper Skeena 4-H. Several parents have stepped forward and are developing 4-H leadership and facilitation skills through the support of Storytellers' staff.

• Youth Workshops

In-class

Several educational workshops took place as part of the planning process. In the early stages of the plan, staff delivered classroom workshops to elementary children, high school students and post-secondary students. Selected schools included South Hazelton Elementary, First Nations High, and Hazelton Secondary School. These workshops facilitated children and young adults to discuss the foods they eat and where these food products come from. The discussion also extended to what foods are available locally and how can people support local farmers and market gardeners. The results of these discussions are recorded through collage work, which has been sewn together in a quilt format. This quilt along with photographs and testimonials of youth who work in agriculture have been displayed at career fairs and public areas throughout the community.

Check Your Head, Community Workshops

Workshops on Food Security, Genetically Modified Food and Globalization were held on Tuesday, April 16th. These workshops were led by Check Your Head, a youth political action group funded through the BC Teachers Federation. The morning session was held in the Learning Shop, an informal education storefront in downtown Hazelton, and was attended by approximately 25 young people from Hazelton Secondary School and the Computerized Learning Centre at the First Nations High. The afternoon session was held in the Hazelton Secondary School and over 30 youth attended. Katimavik hosted the evening session; 15 young adults attended this session.

• Career Fairs

Two career fairs were targeted as a way to introduce agriculture to local youth. The first fair was in November, 2001, at Gitanmaax Hall as part of the Gitxsan Wet’suwet’en Economic Development Corporation trade fair. This annual trade fair attracts hundreds of local and regional community members. As part of a larger booth, the Sustainable Agriculture Project information and display was available to the general public.

Included in this display was a quilt made by local children and teenagers. This quilt highlighted the elements of food security they believed already exist in our region. Another part of the display was a poster promoting local youth who already work in agriculture. Photographs of youth workers with a short narrative about their work and their thoughts on agriculture were described on the poster.

A second career fair was held in May, 2002, at Hazelton Secondary School. This display highlighted local economic opportunity in agriculture and informed youth and teachers about the agriculture plan being developed. The display was interactive and challenged youth to add their thoughts and comments in our youth agriculture journal. Local food such as berries, eggs, and milk were used to provide youth with milk shakes as an example of food security. The career fair display also promoted formal and informal education options around agriculture.

• Public Display

An agriculture wall display and interactive timeline has been developed around this project. The display was posted in public spaces within the community. The wall display informed community members about agricultural development taking place locally as well as invited them to add their knowledge to the historical timeline. The information gathered from this display was available in an agriculture discussion journal that informed people of the plan.

C.  The Upper Skeena:  A snapshot

The people and the communities

There are approximately 6,500 of us living and working in the Upper Skeena. The majority of our population is Gitxsan with most of the remainder of Western European descent.

People live in two municipalities, Hazelton and New Hazelton, a number of reserves: Anspayaxw, Glen Vowell, Gitanmaax, Hagwilget, Gitsegukla, and Gitwangak, and several settlements: Kispiox Valley, Two Mile, Suskwa Valley, South Hazelton, Kitwanga Valley and Cedarvale.  All of these communities are situated on the traditional territories of the Gitxsan which cover 30,000 square kilometers in the Upper Skeena and Nass watersheds.

These diverse and distinct communities create a sense of belonging and separateness and give us a sense of identity and pride. They also create conflict, confusion, and sometimes, fear and mistrust. People of the Upper Skeena are fiercely proud of where they live. For many citizens there is a strong sense of value to place and home and a quick criticism for other communities.

In our lives family connections are very important. This influences how we relate to each other. Family connections create a path and strengthen entrance into the community. New people moving here find it difficult to create those connections if they do not have family ties.

There is a high awareness of connection to the land among residents of the Upper Skeena. We are a land-based people. It is a chosen or inherited lifestyle. For those born and raised here

, the landscape of wilderness, clean air, clean water, and natural resources has shaped lives and worldviews.

The economy

Within the most recent social and economic history of the Upper Skeena, industrialization, colonialization and corporatism have left people living with dysfunction and poverty stemming from a loss of power.

The communities within the Upper Skeena are dealing with high unemployment, a radically cyclical global resource industry, far removed decision making and, most lately, provincial government cuts that threaten the existence of our way of life.

The Mayor of Hazelton most recently explained that the reality of the forest industry is something locals have had to deal with for the past three decades, but never has the community had to contend with such an unkind and unhearing provincial government.

The communities are left stuck in a cycle where power and control is not believed to exist locally. Many locals accept the current crisis as "just the way it is", a few take control by making significant life changes, many remain unemployed because of a lack of personal power.

The Gitxsan are still attempting to assert local control. It is an ongoing battle with both federal and provincial governments.  Local citizens have mixed responses to the Gitxsan's quest: some feel threatened that even less economic opportunity will be open to them if they are not Gitxsan themselves, others believe it is one answer to creating local sustainable industries that better fit with our way of live and our socioeconomic values and visions.

Voices are quiet in responding to our economic reality. With unemployment reaching levels greater than 90%, local people feel overwhelmed and frozen by our desperate situation.

However, there are community groups working together to attempt change. Local government and local associations have been coming together to develop new industry that is reflective of a land base people. Value-added timber and botanical production, wood lots, organic agriculture, food systems, cultural tourism and commercial inland fishery are some of the economic potential being explored in the Upper Skeena. Much of the industry being explored has sustained many citizens long before the industrial model arrived. We are trying to establish infrastructure to bring this economy back to the forefront so that it can sustain a large part of the population.

Our challenge is to find ways to support each other as we go through this transition from corporate ownership of industry to local economic control.

The local economy is heavily dependent on forestry (45%). The public sector supports 26% of the population; construction, 8%; tourism, 8%; agriculture, 4%; fishing/trapping, 1%; and other, 8%. Tourism and recreation industries arising from the beautiful scenery, wildlife populations and varied outdoor activities are important economic growth factors.

Even those who are employed and working struggle economically and face sporadic, seasonal employment. The average annual income in the Upper Skeena is $17,079 compared to the provincial average income of $26,295. In spite of continued economic instability, people in the Upper Skeena have learned to get by. People survive by working outside of, and around the dominant economic model. They continue to use the infrastructure that was here long before the industrial economy arrived and will continue to do so.

Social trends

There are two distinct demographic statistics that stand out for the Upper Skeena: compared to the B.C. average, there is a higher percentage of young people and the work force has a lower level of formal education. This does not sit well for a community dealing with an unemployment rate of more than 90% and school dropout rates averaging up to 57% over the past three years.

Of the 6,500 people living in the Upper Skeena, 60% are below 28 years of age. Of this population only 48% attend school full-time and over 65% have no, or less than six months, work experience.

Teenage pregnancies are twice the B.C. average, which means we are entering our fifth generation of children growing up witnessing family and communities struggle socially and economically because of a loss of power. This manifests itself into school dropouts, a dependency on social assistance for economic support, and marginalization from community.

When we look at national and provincial statistics for community well being, the Upper Skeena is among the worst in the country. Yet, in spite of the terrible circumstances within our society, we have strong social networks that provide care and support for members from birth to old age.

Most of this social network comes from the Wilp which is the basic social, economic and political unit of the Gitxsan. Each Wilp is comprised of 20 to 200 closely related members and has a distinct geographic land base and fishing site on traditional territory.   Relationships within and between Wilps contribute hugely to the social fabric of the Upper Skeena.

A social trend unique to the Upper Skeena is the long-term relationships between the non-First Nation population. We do not have a transient population. Most non-Gitxsan community members belong to pioneer families. Settlers coming to the local valleys have created ranch families still living and working on farmland. Marriages between these families have created extended relations who also provide social care and support for one another.

Because of this social make-up people in the Upper Skeena struggle in tough economic times, and because of this social make-up people in the Upper Skeena know their history, their values and have specific goals and visions for their future.

D.  Agriculture Past – a brief history of agriculture in the Upper Skeena

Although the Gitxsan were practicing plant and animal management techniques for thousands of years on the natural landscape, Western agricultural practices were not introduced into the Upper Skeena until European settlers arrived in the late nineteenth century.  The recentness of the Western agricultural history is apparent in that there are people still alive who were actively involved in farming with horses and mules and people who remember clearing land and setting fence posts by hand.

Families provided for themselves by farming and gathering the food that they needed. Europeans adopted the practices of the Gitxsan, in gathering the natural resources of fish, berries, wild game and natural forages and herbs. Gitxsan people adopted the cultivation of specific crops in the European manner.  Between the knowledge of the two cultures the Upper Skeena provided bountiful harvests of what we now label healthy “organic food”.

Local ranchers and farmers found themselves in need of support to deal with farming in Northern BC. The Kispiox Valley Farmers’ Institute was founded and incorporated on September 23, 1929.  KVFI is one of the oldest Farmers’ Institutes in British Columbia.  It is noteworthy that the objectives of the original “Society” are as relevant to farming today as they were then:

a. To improve conditions of rural life, so that settlement may be permanent and prosperous;

b. To promote the theory and practice of agriculture by lectures, essays, the circulation of information and other educational methods, and to stimulate interest by exhibitions, prizes, and other means;

c. To arrange on behalf of its members for the purchase, distribution, or sale of commodities, supplies, or products, and generally to act on their behalf in all matters incidentals to agricultural pursuits; and,

d. To promote social intercourse, mutual helpfulness, and the diffusion of knowledge, and to make new settlers welcome.

A sampling of documents including minutes, correspondence, annual reports, projects and plans to give the reader a clear view of  what an active, dynamic organization the KVFI was. KVFI was an important catalyst in supporting and maintaining agriculture for over 70 years in the Valley. KVIF was the voice for local farmers on many issues over the years. The issues are the same ones that today’s farmers are struggling with:

·        Prices of seeds, fertilizers, and the cost of freight

·        Arranging financing for the purchase of seeds and fertilizers (KVFI purchased supplies and extended credit to farmers until harvest)

·        Introduction of new crops, seed potatoes, forages, cabbages

·        Weed control, education on managing/ spraying noxious weeds

·        Transportation, poor roads conditions, lack of signage

·        Environmental concerns, proposed coal mine, watershed management, river bank protection

·        Advocacy with government for weed control, changes to gun control legislation that recognized farmers rights to protect their livestock

·        Working off the farm to make the money needed to fully develop farming operations into principle means of livelihood

·        Status of “farmer” for tax purposes

·        Sponsor of major improvements to the Kispiox Community Ground facilities

·        Supporting education, providing bursaries and raising awareness of farming as a career with youth

·        Resolutions on land claims

·        Education seminars, conferences on a wide variety of agricultural subjects and farm management issues

·        Co-odinating of the Kispiox Valley Emergency River Surveillance Plan

·        Acted as a social club for celebrations of all kinds and a communication tool between the Valley and the outside world, (hydro and telephones did not come to the Valley until the late 1970”s)

E.  Agriculture Now:  The state of agriculture in the Upper Skeena

(click here to view video clips of agriculture in the Upper Skeena)

Although agriculture played a significant role in the past 100 years in the economy, and lifestyle of residents, in the Upper Skeena, its prominence is not nearly what it was.  The fertile soils of valley lands produced crops and livestock that not only feed locals but supported an active export market to cities like Prince Rupert.  The fertile soil still remains but the export and local markets have diminished.  Only three farms in the area are full-time, financially self-supporting, commercial operations for their owners:  Fairhaven Farms, Hazelton Potatoes and Farleigh’s Organic Farm.  There still remains, however, many who derive a portion of their income from their land through agriculture and many who use what they produce to barter for other goods or services.  It is the collective local knowledge that is being kept alive by these operations that will form the basis for a renewed sustainable agriculture sector in the Upper Skeena.

Because of the small size of the population in the Upper Skeena, the few commercial farming operations and the hard-to-track barters and traders, statistics are difficult to come by for our specific region.  Yet it is still important to get an idea of the size of the agriculture sector in the Upper Skeena.  The closest we can get for an official statistical picture is Statistics Canada’s numbers on the Regional District of Kitimat-Stikine.  The Upper Skeena, or Electoral District “B,” of the Regional District of Kitimat-Stikine contains the largest portion of arable lands within the Regional District. District “B” encompasses the Hazelton's rural areas, Kispiox Valley/ Moricetown to Cedarvale.

For purposes of census Statistics Canada defines a farm as an agricultural operation that produces at least one of the following products intended for sale:

Crops – field crops, tree fruits or nuts, berries or grapes, vegetables, seeds, livestock such as cattle, pigs, sheep, horses, exotic animals, poultry such as hens chickens, turkeys, exotic birds, animal products such as milk or cream, eggs, wool, fur, meat or other agricultural products (greenhouse or nursery products) Christmas trees, mushrooms, sod, honey and maple syrup products.

Statistics on the “Upper Skeena” area are very limited. Official statistics must be extracted from the Regional profile provided by Statistics Canada, Agricultural Profile of British Columbia, Cat. #95-181-XPB, 1997.

Profile of Agriculture in Regional District Kitimat-Stikine –2002

(extracted from Statistics Canada, Agricultural Profile of British Columbia, Cat. #95-181-XPB, 1997, Statistics Canada- 2001, BC Ministry of Agriculture Foods & Fisheries)

Population  = 40,876 

Population increase 1971 – 2002 = 8,499

Jurisdictional Area = 9,892,100 hectares

Agricultural Land Reserve = 66,488 (less than 1%)

Decrease in ALR since 1974 = 2,318 hectares

Total area farmed = 12, 763 hectares (1996) 80% of all farmland in the District is owned rather than leased compared to 62% being owned province-wide

Number of farms reporting = 184 ( 1996)

Average farm size 69.4 hectares (1996)

Farmland use (1996)                            Hectares

Crops                                       2,681

Summer fallow              x

Pasture (managed)                    2,345

Pasture (unmanaged)                4,188

Other                                       x_____

Total                                        12,763    

Crops

Field Crops                                          2,004

Tree fruits                                                   4

Berries and grapes                                      8

Vegetables                                               20

Other   (confidential, not reported)          645

Total                                                    2,681

Area Irrigated = 221 hectares

Greenhouse Production (1996) 13 farms, 14,684 square metres

Christmas trees = 52 hectares

Livestock                                             Farms               Livestock

Hens & chickens                      66                    41,016

Turkeys                                    11                          140

Other Poultry                            29                           311

Cattle & calves                         78                        2,326

Milk cows                                13                             57

Beef cows                                64                           970

Pigs                                          29                           238

Sheep & lambs             17                           388

Horses & ponies                       62                           336

Goats                                       17                           388

Rabbits                         19                           269

Llamas & alpacas                       1                             x

Colonies of honey bees   9                          244

Total Farm Capital (1996) = $51,031,077

Total Gross Farm Receipts (1996) = $2,968,687

Total Cash Wages Paid (1996)= $330,508

Upper Skeena agricultural directory

The idea for this directory grew out of the Agricultural Symposium held in Hazelton as part of the planning process in the spring of 2001.  At this symposium, sustainable agriculture was defined as being socially responsible, economically viable and ecologically sound.

More than 47 people attended the symposium and offered suggestions for supporting sustainable agriculture and the food directory was one of those suggestions.

In order to take some action around sustainable agriculture, a group of volunteers produced the Upper Skeena Sustainable Agriculture Directory. The directory lists the names and contact information on 19 producers who sell products and services ranging from fruits and vegetables, meat products, pasture and hay crops, locally processed food and agriculturally related services. It was an effort to make closer connections between producers and consumers and to support the local economy, which is at the heart of sustainable agriculture.

The directory also assists in providing a look into the local agriculture scene.  Click here to view the directory.

F.  The Potential

The potential for an increased role for the agriculture sector in the Upper Skeena needs to be put in the context of trends in agriculture worldwide, in Canada and in BC.  This report goes into a fair amount of detail on global and Canadian agricultural developments.  Sometimes the issues faced by agriculture in the big picture seemingly have little to do with our local scene.  But it is these producer and consumer trends that can help point the way to increased agricultural opportunities in the Upper Skeena. 

World Agricultural Issues and Trends

Production trends

Agricultural growth

Over most of history, including the 20^th century, agricultural output has been increased by bringing more land into production through conversion of forests and natural wetlands.  The limits of geographic expansion were reached many years ago in densely populated parts of India, China, Java, Egypt and Western Europe.

The total area of land used for agriculture rose from 4.55 billion hectares 1996 to 4.93 billion in 1999.  There has been noticeable intensification of agriculture land use around major cities, for high-value perishables such as dairy and vegetables.

World cereal consumption has more than doubled in the last 30 years.  Meat consumption has tripled since 1961.  Cattle numbers rose 40% between 1961 and 1997, pigs by 130% and chickens by 246%.  The world today is home to 13.5 billion chickens.  Global demand for cereals by the year 2010 will rise by 40%, meat by 58% and roots and tubers by 37%.  Demand for fruit, vegetables and seasonings will also rise.

Economic Importance

The food, fiber and animal feed that the world’s agroecosystems produce is worth approximately $1.3 trillion per year.  Agriculture is most important to the economies of low-income countries, accounting for 31% of their GDP, and more than 50% of GDP in many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa.  In middle-income countries, agriculture accounts for 12% of the GDP.  But in the high-income countries of Western Europe and North America, where other economic sectors dominate, the contribution of agriculture to GDP is just 1-3%, even though the value of agricultural output in these countries represents 79% of the total market value of world agricultural products.

Beyond the economic value of food produced, agroecosystems also provide employment for millions. In 1996, of the 3.1 billion people living in rural areas, 2.5 billion-44% of the world's population-were estimated to be living in households dependent on agriculture. The labor force directly engaged in agriculture is an estimated 1.3 billion people-about 46% of the total labor force. In North America, only 2.4% of the labor force is directly engaged in agriculture.

Production Issues

Consumption in agriculture is rising in every major world region, although at different rates.  Resource consumption in the world is rising rapidly driven by population growth.  Threats to the world’s food production capacity are compounded by three disturbing trends:

• 1.5 billion additional people will be on the planet by 2002, 30% of those in child-rearing years
• the natural fertility of agriculture soils is generally declining
• it is increasingly difficult to find productive new land to expand the agriculture base

Natural fertility

The International Food Policy Research Institute carried out the most comprehensive mapping to date of global agriculture and concluded 40% of the world’s agricultural land is seriously degraded. 

Surveys of broad resource use trends over the past 30-40 years in the agriculture sector demonstrate that fundamental changes are taking place in biological processes.  The global nitrogen cycle has been significantly disrupted by an increase in fertilizer use, animal manures and human activity.

In the past half century, the application of inorganic fertilizers worldwide has increased nine fold.  Fertilizers and animal manures have increased and concentrated the amount of nitrogen entering soils, freshwater and marine ecosystems.  More fertilizers will be needed to produce additional cereal crops and fodder crops for animals.  Looking ahead just 10 years, if current practices persist global fertilizer consumption will increase by at least 55% by 2010.  The incidence and severity of nitrate contamination of drinking water, ground level ozone formation, crop damage, forest dieback, and damage to coastal fisheries from algal bloom, can all be expected to increase dramatically.

One of the most common of inorganic fertilizers (nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium).  Too little can lead to soil “nutrient mining”  -- the amount of nutrients extracted by harvested crops is greater than the amount of nutrients applied – too much can lead to nutrient leaching – washing away excess nutrients contaminating ground and surface water.

Causes for concern

The scale of agricultural expansion and intensification has raised concern about the state of agroecosystems. First, there are growing concerns about their productive capacity-can agroecosystems withstand the stresses imposed by intensification?  These stresses include soil erosion, soil nutrient depletion, salinization and waterlogging of soils and reduction of genetic diversity among crops. Secondly, the amount of land remaining that is both well suited for crop production, especially for annual grain crops, and not already being farmed is limited. A further limitation is the growing competition from other forms of landuse such as, industrial and residential development.

Despite global growth, agricultural area has actually decreased in many industrialized countries.  Both the USA and Western Europe have progressively been taking land out of agriculture for the last 30 years.

The current global consumption of fertilizers totals 137 million tons/year representing a dramatic increase in consumption during the last 50 years.  Commercial application of fertilizer to cropland in North America equals 100 kg/hectare.

81% of agricultural land has significant soil constraints.  These marginal lands represent a significant share of global agriculture and support roughly 1/3 of the world's population.

Erosion of arable farmland is a global problem.  The world's present population consumes about 40% of the world's total plant growth.  By 2025, a population of 10 billion will consume 80% of the world's total plant growth.

Humans have degraded about 38% of the world cropland.  It takes about 1000 years to produce 2.5 centimeters of topsoil necessary to grow food.  Topsoil is disappearing 300 times faster that it can be replaced.  Topsoil disappears at a rate of 28 million acres, worldwide, a year.

The bottom line for food production

At a global level, there is little reason to believe that crop production cannot continue to grow significantly over the next several decades.  That said, the underlying condition of many of the world's agroecosystems is not good.  Soil degradation data suggests that erosion and nutrient depletion are undermining the long-term capacity of agricultural systems on well over half of the world's agriculture land.  And competition for water will further magnify the issue of resource constraints to food production.  Although nutrient inputs, new crop varieties and new technologies may well offset these declining conditions for the foreseeable future, the challenge meeting human needs seems destined to grow even more difficult.

Organic farming trends

Organic farming has expanded in the industrialized West in recent years, as ‘food scares’ and increasing concerns about the genetic manipulation of food lead consumers to seek out more trustworthy food sources. In North America, demand for organically grown foods has grown by over 20 percent per year over the last several years.  The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates the sale of organic food and beverages reached $13.5 in 1997 in seven European markets and sales of organic foods worldwide is estimated at $20 billion.  In looking at these markets plus the United States and Japan, the FAO concluded that “at least in the short to medium term that an insufficient supply of organic products will be the main problem rather than lack of demand.” (click here for the FAO report) 

Much of the demand is driven by concerns regarding the healthiness of the food we eat.    The Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta found that each year in the US 76 million people suffer from foodborne disease, 325,000 of them are hospitalized and 5,000 die.    

Many consumers believe that food produced by certified organic farmers does much to alleviate the worries about harmful microbes contaminating produce and meats, leads to fewer diseasing causing bacterial strains becoming resistant to antibiotics and has other beneficial side effects such as conserving soil fertility. 

Organic farming – a background

Organic farming is an agricultural production system that promotes and enhances biological diversity.  It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony.

One of the guiding principles of most organic farmers is that healthy crops demand healthy soil, and so an emphasis is placed upon maintaining soil fertility and good soil structure.

Crops are usually rotated (i.e. planted in different spots from one growing season to another) to avoid any one crop from overburdening the soil with its particular nutritional demands.

Intercropping – growing multiple crops amongst each other in the same space – ensures the efficient use of the plot, helps suppress weeds, and allows sympathetic species to benefit each other by their proximity. Pests find it more difficult to spread through mixed crops, especially if some of the plants repel the pests of other plants, or play host to their predators.

A diversified organic farm contains so much biodiversity that it is possible to do without artificial fertilizers or pesticides.

Agricultural biodiversity

There is a growing realization that biodiversity is a fundamental basis of agricultural production and food security, as well as a valuable ingredient of ecological stability. Agricultural biodiversity, or “agrobiodiversity”, has been called the cornerstone of stability – a basis of livelihoods and of sustainable development. The term encompasses not only diversity among plant and animal genetic resources, soil organisms, insects and other flora and fauna in managed ecosystems, but also diversity among elements of natural habitats that pertain to food production.

Agrobiodiversity makes it possible for farmers to recycle nutrients, reduce pest and disease problems, control weeds, maintain good soil and water conditions, and handle climatic stress, while producing agricultural products necessary for health and human survival. It therefore has multiple economic, ecological, and social benefits.

The issue of Genetically Modified Organism ( GMO )

A decade ago there was virtually no genetically modified food available for consumers.  Now it is a challenge to find something to eat that doesn't contain GE ingredients.  70% of the food sold in North American supermarkets has been altered.

The term genetically modified refers to the alteration of genetic material.  Specifically, it means the genes of one organism have been cut out and then pasted into another organism.

GM plants are often created to resist disease and eliminate the need for pesticides.  Desired characteristics, such as a hardier texture, higher nutritional value or faster growth, are chosen to produce a kind of super food.  There is concern among scientists and the general public about the benefits and safety of GM food.  One study showed that US farmers growing GM soybean crops used 11.4% more herbicides compared with conventional soybeans.  Other concerns include the effect of pesticide resistant plants on beneficial insects and the results consuming GE foods may have on our immune and digestive systems.

Labelling GE food in European and Asian countries is mandatory.  There are no mandatory labeling requirements in Canada or the US and Health Canada has taken the position that GM foods are just as safe as conventional foods.  Many Canadians want to make up their own minds about consuming GM foods – a 1999 Environics poll found 80% of Canadians want GM foods to be labeled.

Regardless of the results of the debate on GM foods, the concerns regarding their benefit and safety has created a niche market for traditionally produced crops and animals that farmers can exploit.  Consumers in Europe, for instance, have pressured their governments into passing legislation requiring that imported foods indicate whether  they contain GMOs.  And in Britain, Nestle U.K. and Unilever U.K. have dropped GM ingredients from their products.

The trend of community supported agriculture  ( CSA )

The principal behind community supported agriculture is that people who want to eat locally grown, sustainably produced food can ensure its availability by financially supporting local organic and low input farms.

CSA customers pay in advance for a share of the farm’s seasonal fresh produce or livestock. This financial support of local farms benefits the farmer by providing up-front cash for seeds and supplies. It also lets the farmer know how many customers to plant for. And consumers assume some risk involved in planting and harvesting, as each season varies. Through CSA’s customers benefit by having a weekly supply of freshly picked vegetables, as well as grains, berries, etc. Instead of paying several layers of middlemen to route produce around the country so that it is a week or two old by the time you buy it, CSA members get a weekly basket of produce picked the day before it is delivered (or even the same day), and what you pay goes directly to the farmer who grew it.

Through CSA’s customers and farmers work together to ensure a supply of fresh organic produce. Together they replenish the earth and renew the tradition of nutritious, flavorful goods grown in local farms and delivered in your neighborhood.

The critical problem facing small scale, sustainable agriculture today is how to produce food in sufficient quantity to feed modern populations without adopting an industrial system of production and distribution. One distribution channel consistent with the values of sustainable agriculture is the farmer’s market.

The Farmer’s Market is very popular with a subset of consumers, but it is not a distribution channel that can easily meet the needs of most people. Typically, markets are held only one day a week, are open only part of the year, and are very sensitive to weather. They are not ideal for farmers either, for they often impose a great transportation burden, while putting small-scale farmers in direct price competition with conventional agriculture.

Community supported agriculture has the potential of providing food all year long with a freshness and integrity that the conventional system cannot.

Community supported agriculture makes organic farming socially responsible as well as ecologically responsible. It connects food buyers to the land instead of retailers. It makes each organic producer economically stronger while providing jobs at the local level. It gives local communities a more secure and controlled food supply, while preserving product diversity and a high degree of consumer choice.

The issue of corporate agriculture

For many consumers and producers, the global trend of farms become larger, those farms being owned or controlled by a small number of companies and a few corporations controlling agriculture-related components such as seed stock, fertilizer production and retail distribution outlets is an issue.  The concerns are summarized as the difference between a global food system vs. locally adapted food system

The global system is characterized by large-scale, highly mechanized, monoculture and chemical-intensive methods, with production oriented towards distant, and increasingly global, markets. The abundant use of external inputs, large machinery and long-distance transport make this system capital and energy intensive.

Locally adapted food systems are typically oriented towards local and regional consumption, with ‘food miles’ – the distance between producers and consumers – being relatively short, sometimes with direct links between the two.

Professor John Ikerd from the University of Missouri sums up the concerns with corporate control of farming in his paper The Small Farm Revolution:

The epitome of the economics of greed is the publicly-held industrial corporation. The publicly-held corporation has no heart, it has no soul, and it is motivated solely by profit and growth. Corporations pollute and waste natural resources and they degrade and use up people – and they will corrupt any political process that attempts to keep them from doing either. Anything that has no value in the market place is worthless to the corporation. The people who work for corporations have no choice but to feed the unending corporate hunger for every greater profits and ever faster growth.

Corporate industrialization will do for agriculture as it has done for other sectors of the economy. It will pollute the natural environment – the water, the soil, and the air. Farmer and farm workers, like factory workers, will suffer ill health, low pay, and eventual abandonment – as agri-industries find other people in other places who will work even harder, in more dangerous environments, for even less pay. The safety and healthfulness of the food supply will continue to deteriorate as a consequence of the inevitable race to the bottom, to see which corporation can produce the most stuff cheapest, so they can drive the competition out of business and raise prices to whatever level they choose.

Canada and US

Trends in Canadian production

The small and medium-sized farm is rapidly disappearing in Canada.  Between 1990-1996 small farms (less than $50,000 in annual revenues) declined by 11% and medium-sized by 17.5%.  During the same period large and very large farms increased by 15 and 109% (over $500,000 in annual revenues) respectively.

This rapid shift in the size of farms is part of a revolution taking place in farming in Canada and the US.  A revolution characterized as the “farm crisis”.

Farmer and researcher Darrin Qualman, in his publication The Farm Crisis and Corporate Power for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives,  describes the state of Canadian farming:

Net farm income has returned to Depression-era levels. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) projects 1999 realized net income for Saskatchewan farmers at $96 million.  This works out to just $1,783 per farm, a level not seen since 1938. Worse still, AAFC projects negative realized net farm incomes for 2001, 2002, and 2003, with losses worse than those during the depression (see crisis is not confined to that province. In nearly identical fashion, realized net farm income has fallen to 1930s levels for grain and hog producers in Alberta, Ontario, and across Canada.

Martin O’Malley and Linda Ward from CBC News Online recently did an analysis called “Battling foreign farm subsidies”.  They found that:

Statistics Canada reported that between 1996 and 2001, the number of farms in Canada slipped to 246,923 . The 11 per cent drop is the fastest between censuses since 1971. But, seven out of every 10 farms counted in the 1996 census still existed in 2001, those that remained in business generally got bigger, and some new farmers did get into the business. Approximately 50,000 new farms entered the agriculture sector since the 1996 census.

It seems that it is mostly the smaller farms that are dropping out of the industry, although these farms still comprise two-thirds of all farms in Canada. Almost half of farms with less than $25,000 in total revenue counted in the last census had left farming by 2001.

Here's how bad the farm situation was in the late 1990s:

*          Manitoba farm income fell from $428 million in 1997 to $132 million in 1998;

*          Saskatchewan farm income fell from $680 million in 1997 to $189 million in 1998;

*          The price of pork in Canada dropped to $60 a head in the fall of 1998, down from $189 in the summer of 1997;

*          80 per cent of Canadian farms are supported by off-farm income.

On the farm subsidy front, farmers in Europe received subsidies of about $6 a bushel, U.S. farmers got $2.50 a bushel, Canadian farmers received subsidies of only 40 cents a bushel.

O’Malley and Ward project that in response to this crisis, the federal government will announce farm aid of $5.2 billion over the next five years and, if the province kicks in their expected contribution, it could push the package to more than $8 billion – the largest government-sponsored farm package in the history of Canada.

The issue of corporatism in agriculture in Canada

The concerns regarding corporate control of the agriculture sector were discussed in the previous section.  How these concerns display themselves on the Canadian scene is well-described by Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives researcher Murray Dobbin in The Farm Crisis and Corporate Power:

In Canada, the food industry is controlled by a ever-diminishing number of large corporations.  For example:

• Three fertilizer companies control 71% of Canada’s nitrogen fertilizer production capacity.
• Nine companies make and market almost all of the insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides used in Canada.
• Four companies (DuPont/Pioneer, Monsanto, Novartis, and Dow) control 69% of the North American seed corn market and 47% of the soybean seed market.

Firms wielding immense market power squeeze farmers from both sides. We will begin by looking at examples in the “downstream” side of the food chain. The market power of the retailers, processors, railways, and grain companies that dominate the downstream side of the agri-food chain allow them to take large and increasing portions of the consumer’s grocery store dollar and, hence, large profits. See Figure 4.

Processors and retailers can reach into the food system revenue stream and extract very high returns. As their power increases, less money makes it back to the farm level.  In 1975, 13% of the retail value of bread went to farmers; today, a mere 4% does. The farmers’ decreasing share is a direct result of processors’ and retailers’ increasing market power. The farm income crisis is caused by these firms using their market power to take an ever larger share of the grocery store dollar and, thus, to choke off the flow of money to farmers.

Farmers are also squeezed from the other side of the food chain by powerful input suppliers. When an abnormally large amount of money does make it back to the farm level, the large size and small number (i.e., the market power) of the machinery, fertilizer, and chemical companies that dominate the input side of the agri-food chain allows them to quickly snatch those increased returns out of farmers’ pockets.

It’s brutally simple. One of the more recent examples was when farm prices actually recovered briefly in 1995-1996. Much of the increased revenue was taken by the companies providing inputs to farmers. Fertilizer companies simply increased their prices by 75% even though there were no increases in the cost of their inputs, such as natural gas.  Corporations in the other input sectors similarly increased prices because they had the power to do so. It had nothing to do with “free enterprise,” “the market” or “supply and demand.” It had to do with bald corporate power. Monopolies and near monopolies set prices at wherever level they choose because they can get away with it.

Organic food trends in Canada

Organic farming is becoming more popular in Canada with 2,230 farms producing at least one certified organic agricultural product.  That works out to 1% of all Canadian farms. 

Canadian sales for organic food were estimated at $1 billion in 2001, representing an annual growth rate of a whopping 20%.

From a consumer point of view, 71% of Canadians (22 million people) have purchased organic food at least once, 40% (12 million) buy it fairly often and 8% are regular or heavy consumers of organic food.

In the regular consumer category, the majority (60%) are women and 30% come from BC.

Federal government direction

In 2001 the federal government published a policy document called Agriculture in Harmony With Nature, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Sustainable Development Strategy, 2001-2004.

The four strategic directions, or themes, highlighted in that document outline a series of objectives  representing the federal government’s sustainable development priorities for the coming years. The efforts are targeted at:

• improving the environmental sustainability of natural resources
• promoting a prosperous and viable sector where growth is achieved in an environmentally sustainable manner
• contributing to sustainable communities.

It is interesting to note that Upper Skeena Sustainable Agriculture Plan shares like objectives with the federal government’s agriculture policies.  The directions in this plan have arisen from the values and vision of the people of the Upper Skeena regarding agriculture.  This is described in the local potential section.  These local directions take more concrete form in the recommendations section of the plan.

British Columbia

BC farming trends

British Columbia, like the rest of Canada, saw a decrease in farm numbers between 1996-2001.  In 2001 there were 20,290 BC farms and 246,923 farms overall in Canada.  This was an 11% decrease in the total number of Canadian farms and continues a 60-year slide.  BC suffered the lowest decline in Canada.  Although total farm numbers decreased by 7.1% the resulting total number of farms in the province was still 1.8% greater than 40 years ago.

While overall numbers of farms are dropping, the average farm is getting bigger.  Seven of every 10 Canadian farms that “counted themselves in” in 1996 still existed in 2001.  Those that remained generally expanded production, with higher average crop area or livestock numbers per farm.

avg. BC farm size 2001:            315 acres, an increase of 10.1% from 1996 (17.1% since 1981)

total BC farm area 2001:          6,392,909 acres (up 2.3% since 1996)

Farms of all sizes are leaving, although those with gross receipts less than $100,000 are departing faster.  Almost half the 1996 farms with less than $25,000 in receipts had left by 2001.  Despite this, two-thirds of all farms still have receipts under $100,000.

For those farmers who remain, adjustment and adaptability are key to success.  Overall, they are producing more with less.

Despite increased production, farmers are being squeezed as the margin between operating expenses and gross farm receipts narrows.  Farm size and type seem to be two factors that distinguish those most successful in keeping a favourable financial balance.  Beef farms had the narrowest operating margin at 94 cents in expenses for every dollar in revenue while dairy farms had the widest at 75 cents to every dollar.  Operations between $100,000 and $250,000 in receipts tended to have the best ratio of expenses-to-sales of all classes, at 81 cents to the dollar in sales.  Farms with $25,000 or less in receipts were clearly “hobby” farms, with $1.68 in expenses for each dollar in sales.

total gross farm receipts 2001:  $2.3 billion

total operating expenses 2001:  $2.1 billion

In general expenses rose slightly faster than revenues.  Over the five-year period (1996-2001) prices farmers received for their products increased 7.8% but prices they paid for expenses such as fertilizer and fuel increased 9.8%.

Only 9% of BC farms had gross receipts of $250,000 or more, yet they accounted for over 78% of the province’s total farm receipts.

Greenhouses and grapes are two Canadian success stories.  A full 18 square kilometers in Canada is now under some sort of cover.  This is more than double the area in 1991.  1,292 BC farms reported greenhouses with greenhouse are growing to nearly 50 million square feet from over 31 million square feet in 1996.

While still a small commodity, Canadian grape area increased 41% since 1996, the largest relative increase in area of the top five fruits grown in Canada.  BC grape area more than doubled.

Certified organic farms were identified for the first time in the 2001 Census, with 319 reported in BC.  This represents 14% of Canada’s organic farms, meaning BC has a higher than average percent of organic farmers.

The Lower Mainland-Southwest region remains the most important agricultural area in BC.  Although it includes only 4% of the total agricultural land, it is home to over 62% of gross farm sales.

Although BC has the highest number of operations (3,988) reporting tree fruits, berries and nuts in Canada, it ranks only third in area (48,330 acres) behind Ontario and Quebec.  Over half of Canada’s raspberry area is in BC.  A total of 693 farms reported growing raspberries on 5,500 acres. 

Some quick facts:

• Agriculture is BC’s second largest primary industry contributing approximately $2.2 billion to the provincial Gross Demand Product, as well as 61,000 direct and 250,000 indirect jobs.

• It is the only primary industry that has created jobs at the same pace as the population growth over the last 20 years. One in twelve people in BC are employed in bringing food from the ”farm to the fork”, or the “field to the fridge”.

• The top ten commodities grown in BC and ranked by five year average sales (000) are:

Product                                                Ave, Sales 1993 -1997

Dairy products                                      287,127

Cattle                                                   180,418

Hens and chickens                                160,523

Floriculture                                           142,327

Eggs                                                     80,420

Nursery                                                70,255

Apples                                                 55,451

Hogs                                                    46,424

Calves                                                  45,134

Mushrooms                                          34,488

BC organic farming trends

In 2000, there were more than 300 organic farms in BC producing fruit and vegetables.   A Statistic Canada Agriculture Division survey from May of that year supplies the following information: 

Fruit                      Vegetable

Estimated Number of Farms*

B.C.                                                     175                        135

Quebec                                                55                          75

Ontario                                                85                          140

Canada                                                365                        415

Estimated Area (acres)*

B.C.                                                     1,350                     1,340

Quebec                                                515                        600

Ontario                                                995                        2,025

Canada                                                4,300                     4,200

                                                            Organic (acres)      Total (acres)

B.C. Vegetable Area - selected crops**

Broccoli                                               124                        1,440

Carrots                                                75                          785

Leeks                                                   8                            40

Lettuce                                                 46                          760

Shallots                                                33                          90

Spinach                                                27                          135

Radish                                                  19                          120

Squash & Zucchinis                              43                          345

Tomatoes                                             19                          185

B.C. Fruit Area - selected crops**

Apples                                                 719                        15,750

Peaches                                               66                          1,195

Pears                                                   60                          825

Raspberries                                          100                        4,985

Strawberries                                         53                          1,600

* Organic farms producing both fruits and vegetables are included in each column. The numbers have been rounded to the nearest five farms or acres.

** Crop selection based on an organic component of five per cent or more of total cultivated area.

Source: Statistics Canada, Agriculture Division, May 2000 Spring Fruit and Vegetable Survey

Local

A word on marketing

The basic potential exists to market agriculture products in the Upper Skeena to ourselves and to those outside our area.  A view of agricultural marketing and what is a niche market that is applicable to the state of the sector in the Upper Skeena is provided by Professor John Ikerd from the University of Missouri:

(excerpted from The Role of Marketing in Sustainable Agriculture and The Small Farm Revolution, click here for entire article)

Marketing, in agriculture, includes all the various activities involved in the transformation of commodities sold by farmers into food and fiber products purchased by consumers...

A niche is analogous to a corner, nook, crack, or cranny. A niche represents something that is seen as being different, uncommon, or exceptional. A niche is small only because it is defined in comparison to something larger... a niche market may be defined as a market that is different from the predominant market for the same basic commodity or generic class of products…

The industrialization of agriculture quite likely has created a multitude of niches in markets that are largely undiscovered. Food consumers have been bribed and persuaded into buying mass produced foods through lower prices, advertising, and other forms of promotion. Mass manufacturing and distribution systems employed in food marketing have limited consumer choices to those items that can compete for scarce space in shelves of modern supermarkets. For example, consumers have no choice other than U.S.D.A. choice grade beef, or a single similar quality store brand, in most supermarket meat cases. Fruits and vegetables, while abundant in variety, are generally available from only one or two supplier and one or two qualities of each item offered for sale. Canned and frozen foods may offer several labels, but with very similar products inside the can or box. The variety of different items offered by supermarkets is enormous, but efficiency dictates that substantive choices within generic food groups remain very limited. The emergence of fast food restaurants, likewise, has transformed table-ready beef, chicken and potatoes into a dozen or so manufactured, industrial commodities that can be mass produced for mass consumption. People who are satisfied with products that fit industrial systems of mass production realize a bargain. They get what they want at a lower price. Those who are not satisfied, but just go along, represent potentially profitable niche markets…

The key to successful niche marketing is to find a market that is: (a) sufficiently different from its mass market context to allow a significant premium in price (or a significantly lower cost), (b) large enough to be served profitably, but (c) too small to accommodate methods of mass production and distribution…

...If consumers cannot be bribed, persuaded, or coerced to conform to the requirements of mass production, they are ignored by industrial suppliers. These ignored consumers represent potentially profitable niche markets.

Sustainable farms must also be of a size consistent with their markets. Conventional wisdom is that most markets are mass markets, and thus, farms must be large – or if not must market collectively. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Markets are made up of individual consumers, and as consumers – as people – we are all different. We don’t all want the same things. In fact, each of us actually prefers something just a little bit different, and thus, values the same things a bit differently.

The local market

Statistics on food imported into the Upper Skeena market place are not available. 

Statistics Canada currently provides B.C. with a break down of six commodity groups:

Grains

Other agriculture products (this includes fresh produce but does not break out volumes)

            Fresh fish, seafood and other trapped products

Processed meat, fish and dairy

Processed fruit, vegetables

Alcoholic beverages and soft drinks

The provincial picture of total imports for all six commodities for 1999 is $3.5 billion, of which nearly $1.5 million was for fruit, vegetables and other food including grain.

BCMAF&F, Dawson Creek, reports there have been no statistical reports on food imported into northern BC since the late 80’s and those reports are no longer available.

Local retail stores in the Upper Skeena do not have, or do not wish to share, records on food commodity volumes imported and sold.

Without firm data one has to rely on observation of and anecdotal evidence from the local market place.  What is clear is that local consumers purchase a wide variety of farm produce. The overwhelming majority of agricultural products are not only imported from other parts of the province and other parts of Canada, but a great deal is imported from other countries. 

A few local products are carried in some of the local stores. Fairhaven Farms carrots, cabbages and bread are popular with local consumers.  Fairhaven produces between 200– 350 tons of carrots each year and sells to a market area from Smithers to Prince Rupert. Carrots are labour intensive (hand graded and packed) but the profit margin is higher than crops such as potatoes.

Hazelton Valley Farms’ potatoes can be found in local retails stores. Acreage and yields vary from 70 acres in 2000 to 35 acres in 2001. The average yield is 8-10 tons per acre, with yields varying from 280–700 tons per year.

Both Fairhaven Farms and Hazelton Valley Farms sell their products to the large chain stores like Safeway but those markets are becoming more difficult to access. Of course, if local consumers are vocal in their demand for locally grown produce there is a much better chance of the chain stores continuing to stock the products.

Casual conversations with the vendors who travel with fruit and vegetables from the Okanagan to the Upper Skeena supports the consumer survey that local people are willing to buy fresh produce from sources other than a retail grocery store. Several vendors said that sales in Upper Skeena made the stop here worthwhile (more than that they were not willing to say). It seems safe to conclude that bringing the product to the customer is one way people like to shop.

The land

(click here to view map)

Soil capability for agriculture classifies soils from Class 1 to Class 7. Soils in classes 1, 2, 3 and 4 are considered capable of sustained use for cultivated field crops, those in classes 5 and 6 only for perennial forage crops and those in class 7 for neither.

Some of the important factors on which the classifications are based are:

·        Soils will be well managed and cropped, under a mainly mechanical system

·        Land requiring improvement, including clearing classed according to improvements having been made, if improvements can be made by the farmer

·        The following are not considered, distances to market, kinds of roads, location, size of farms, type of ownership, cultural patterns, skills or resources of individual operators and hazard of crops by storm

·        Classification does not include capability of soil for trees, tree fruits. Small fruits, ornamental plants, recreation or wildlife.

The Canada Land Inventory Map for the Upper Skeena identifies the area as “Hazelton Map Sheet Area, 93M/SW and provides this general description:

Geography

The area comprises 1367 square miles around Hazelton in west-central BC. The area lies in the Nass Basin and the Skeena, Hazelton and Babine mountains physiographic regions. The Hazelton Mountains can be further subdivided into the Kispiox and Bulkley ranges. Elevations ranges from less than 600 feet above sea level near Andimaul to more than 8,200 feet on Brian Boru Peak in the Bulkley Ranges.

Climate

The climate as recorded at the only long-term weather station at New Hazelton is a mean annual temperature of 4 degrees C and the mean winter and summer temperatures are 7 degrees C and 14 degrees C respectively.

The growing season is 175 – 185 days and the frost-free period is 70 – 90 days. The annual precipitation is about 19 inches, of which 9 inches falls from May to September. Winter snow ranges from 44 inches to 120 inches, the latter falling in the Nass Range.

Locations in the main valleys between 1000 and 2500 feet above sea level have a Class 2 climate characterized by 75-90 frost-free days. Cool temperatures and frost pooling are the main limitations. Climatically adapted crops are wheat, coarse grains, forage crops, cool season vegetables and small fruits.

The lowest terraces and floodplains of the Skeena and Kispiox rivers between Skeena Crossing and the northern boundary of the area, and on to the Bulkley River from Bulkley Canyon to Moricetown have a Class 3 climate characterized by 75-90 frost free days. Frost pooling is the main limitation. Most of the Bulkley Valley from Moricetown to the Suskwa River has a Class 3 climate, the main limitation, being the cool air temperatures. Suitable crops range from hardy varieties of cool season vegetables, such as cabbage, to coarse grains and forages.

The narrow, deeply incised creek valleys have a Class 4 climate, characterized by less than 60 frost-free days. Here very hardy varieties of vegetables and forages can be grown on the most arable soils. A Class 5 climate characterized by less than 50 frost-free days has been assigned to the rest of the area, up to an elevation of about 3400 feet. This elevation is considered the upper limit of  arable agriculture.

Soils

Soils and agricultural capability – is limited to only one third of the area. Arable soils are found in the Skeena and Bulkley river valleys. Total arable land is 25,000 hectares.

Rapidly drained sands and gravels form recent floodplains of these valleys, and smaller expanses of finer-textured, silt-capped gravel border the rivers

Large tracts of glacial sandy outwash, deposited over the glacial till occur near Hazelton. The soils are classified 2 and 3 for silt loam to loam-textured deposits on gently sloping topography and Classes 5 and 6 for coarse textured deposits on rolling topography.

Floodplain soils with Greysolic development and subject to periodic inundations have been rated 4 Class 4 and 5. Small stream tributary to the Skeena, Bulkley and Kispiox rivers generally have narrow coarse-textured flood plains and narrow dissected valley train terraces have been rated Class 4M and 5M.

The south facing slope of the Bulkley River valley have been rated Class 3 to 5, depending on soil, structure, rock outcrops and topography.

British Columbia, Ministry of Agriculture Foods and Fisheries and the Land Reserve Commission advises the majority of the land with soil classified as Class 3, 4 and 5 have been designated as Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR)

ARL lies mainly along the river flats and long the Highway Sixteen transportation corridor. The largest parcels of ALR are found in the broader valleys of the Skeena, Kispiox and Bulkley Rivers.

Because of the topography of the region, microenvironments and climates can be found. Some microenvironments such as the land surrounding Glen Vowell (Sik-E-Dakh) provide the best soil classifications and growing conditions in the Upper Skeena.  There are a number of such areas in the region, with varying conditions and levels of potential for productive farms.

BCAMFF reports of the 25,000 arable hectares in the Upper Skeena, only 109 are being used for growing vegetables and that there is a great deal of room for expansion growth in the production of suitable crops.

Public consultation summaries

Symposium

The “What’s Eating Agriculture” Agriculture Symposium held in Hazelton as part of this process assisted in gathering important input into the plan.

During a plenary sessions on the practice of sustainable agriculture,  keynote speaker John Ikerd, a professor of agricultural economics, University of Missouri College of Agriculture, delivered a presentation titled New Hope for the Future of Farming. In this presentation he described the differences between industrial agriculture and sustainable agriculture. Industrial agriculture relies on specialization, standardization, mechanization that requires farmers to increase their capital outputs and access to land. Sustainable agriculture, where the focus is on diversification, individualization and decentralized decision making, requires farmers to match unique farming operations to their potential markets and the natural resources of their farm. He went on to talk about the linkages between sustainable development and community development.

Following Ikerd’s presentation, Dave Ryan gave a brief overview of the Upper Skeena sustainable agriculture plan. With assistance from Ikerd, Ryan lead a discussion on identifying ideas for action that could be taken based on the information covered during the symposium. The ideas that were identified were:

·        Increasing community self-sufficiency through community gardens, community kitchens, backyard gardens, seed swaps, perennial sales and community root cellars.

·        Developing relationships between producers and consumers through Good Food Boxes, Food Circles, and Farmers Markets.

·        Community education through symposiums, open house/gardens, local courses and garden tours.

Kitchen Table Summary

These common themes came out of the community kitchen table discussions:

·        Agreement that the success of sustainable agriculture will depend on the participation of both producers and consumers. That both producers and consumers will require an education on the community benefits of supporting a local food system.

·        Agreement that our local economy is so poor that developing sustainable agriculture and a local food system makes so much sense.

·        Agreement that cooperative models be explored joining producers and consumers in a non-competitive way.

·        Agreement that the key to success will mean that a convenient location be established as consumers are used to one-stop-shopping.

·        Agreement that sustainable or biological farming methods be encouraged in the production and processing of all local foods. There is a concern regarding food safety of all imported foods now coming into our community.

·        Agreement that staying small and community minded will be a key to our success.

·        Agreement that food regulations reflect our community desires in the production, processing and delivery of foods to community members.

(click here for complete minutes of Kitchen Table sessions)

Local Experts Information

The list of people interviewed under this heading can be found in the process section.  They are either farmers, agricultural professionals or with organizations that have agriculture development  in their mandate.

A number of common themes arose during the interviews .  These themes can be summarized under the following topics:

To build a local agricultural economy there are three specific areas that farmers need to focus on:

1.      Producing raw food products (animal and plant origin) that are fresh, wholesome high quality products

2.      Adding value to raw products to increase variety of products and profit margins

3.      Marketing farm products to ensure maximum profit to farmer, direct sales, retail outlets, farmers markets, delivery of produce to consumers, electronic market place, joint ventures with distributors for niche markets

Farmers and marketers may not always be the same people or have the same goals

Farmers and marketers need to work cooperatively to be successful

Action is needed now on education for farmers and consumers

Farmers and marketers need a support network that is based on sound business principles

The type(s) of support network needs to be determined:

Growers Association

Co-operatives

Farmers’ Institute

Agricultural planning for Upper Skeena should be based on joint ventures between First Nations and Non First Nations that are sustainable and viable for everyone

(click here for full report of interviews)

Survey Results

The indicators in this document are based on the responses of 113 consumers of food products in Upper Skeena.  The results of the survey are summarized below.

• Consumers responded from every community in Upper Skeena

• Consumer responded from ages 17 to over 65, with 79% between the ages of 19 to 55

• 35% of the consumers were male and 65% were female

• 82% of consumers shop for 1- 4 people

• 58% of consumers spend between $50 - $150 on food per week, 28% of consumers spend between $100 - $125 on food per week

• Consumers living east of Gitsegukla buying patterns for food commodities are:

Milk/dairy                     72% purchased in Hazelton

Fresh fruit                     66% purchased in Hazelton

Fresh vegetables           65% purchased in Hazelton

Meat                            50% purchased in Hazelton

Poultry                         46% purchased in Hazelton

Baked goods                43% purchased in Hazelton

• Consumers living east of Gitsegukla shop in Smithers as their secondary choice of location and occasionally in Terrace

• A small percentage (less than 5%) of all consumers shop in Smithers on a regular basis)

• Terrace is the prime shopping location for people living in Gitsegukla and communities west of that location. There was no indication that these consumers shop in Hazelton.

• There are two distinct market areas in Upper Skeena and no indication of cross over shopping by consumers

• Locally produced products purchased by consumers living east of Gitsegukla included:

Vegetables in season                             Farleigh’s Market (23%)

Potatoes                                               Glen Vowell (4%)

Bread                                                   Fairhaven /Local stores (4%)

Strawberries                                         Local growers (4%)

Beef/Pork/lamb                                    Kispiox Valley (3%)

Eggs                                                     Local producers (2%)

• The term ORGANIC FOOD to local consumers means:

No pesticides, chemicals, fertilizers or insecticides (60%)

Naturally grown (15%)

Home grown, in the dirt. Like you grow yourself (13%)

Not genetically altered (7%)

No growth hormones or antibiotics given to animals  (5%)

No residue chemicals in the soil (4 %)

13% did not know or did not answer

• 90% of consumers said they would buy locally produced food if it were stocked at a convenient shopping location

• Consumers said buying local food would depend on:

Price                22%

Quality             7%

Location           3%

• Consumers would rather shop for locally produced food at:

Farmers market                        68%

Local retail store                       57%

Producers home                       26%

Delivered to door                     3%

• Food products consumers would most like to see produced locally are:

Vegetables                                                       34%

Fruit – berries, apples cherries                          27%

Meat – beef, pork                                            14%

Other local products                             See survey

Conclusions that can be drawn from these survey results, comments received on the survey forms and informal discussions that took place during the distribution and collection of the surveys include:

Local consumers will buy locally grown and raised produce if:

·                                If the price is right

·                                Produce is of good quality

·                                Produce is “healthy”

·                                Produce is made available and producers are dependable

Action is needed now on education for farmers and consumers

A number of small community projects are under way already, communicating what’s going on would build interest

Marketing methods should include a variety of options:

·        Hire a Direct Marketing Coordinator (funded by producers from sales revenue and local communities economic development resources)

·        Roadside tables sales

·        Incentives to local retail stores to carry local produce

·        Retail outlets, with value added products

·        A van or bus to bring produce to local communities and farmers markets

·        WEB site for local producers to list products available and local shoppers to list products wanted

The full survey results can be found in Agri-Market Indicators, 2002.

Co-operative models

Early on in the planning process the topic of cooperatives arose during public consultation and during discussions with a variety of agencies involved with agriculture.  Research was then conducted on a variety of cooperatives connected to agriculture.  A summary of this research is outlined in the following tables (click here for further links).

As the planning process progressed with further research and more extensive public consultation it became apparent that the primary local interest at this time is in the marketing style of agricultural cooperative.

In assessing different types of successful agricultural marketing cooperatives  that exist in small rural communities similar to the Upper Skeena, the authors found an example that has many of the characteristics desired by locals consulted during this planning process. 

An example of a successful marketing cooperative

(adapted from Farm Speak, click here for more info on The Growing Circle)

The Growing Circle Food Cooperative was formed on Salt Spring Island in 1999.  It now has more than 400 members and is the first of its kind in BC in that it combines three member-groups: producers, consumers and workers. Members are served by a retail food store located in Ganges village, and non-members may also shop there.

The Growing Circle Food Cooperative's primary vision is "to beneficially link Salt Spring consumers with Salt Spring growers and producers, through a predominantly organic food and natural goods store, and to provide local growers and producers with broader access to the market."

Producer-members are able to sell their fresh produce and value-added products through the retail store at prices which support the growth of their businesses. The Co-op also is seeking broader markets for local products. Consumer-members can buy high quality, organic food at affordable prices through the Co-op. Essentially, they want security about where their food comes from and how it is grown. Worker-members, who operate the store and facilitate the goals of the Cooperative, require fair wages and benefits, and job security.

The Growing Circle doesn’t just sell locally produced food or certified organic food.  In fact, when they first began, 90% of the produce wasn’t grown locally.  By the end of 2001, however, local produce accounted for 24% of the store’s produce sales with about 60 local farmers contributing goods.

The Growing Circle does have policy guiding how they buy from producers:

• first from local certified organic producer members
• second, from local non-certified members.

If the products are not available from these first two sources:

• third from certified organic bioregional producer members
• fourth from non-certified organic bioregional producer members
• fifth from local non-members

Finally, if it is necessary to buy outside the bioregion in order to meet demand

• sixth, certified organic produce in order to assure quality and safe food.

To encourage local production, the Cooperative pays producer members at least as much as it pays wholesale companies for mainly imported produce from California.

As highlighted in this report’s findings, education is a major theme for the Growing Circle Cooperative.  They seek to educate local consumers and other potential markets to buy local produce they promote eating foods in accordance with seasonal availability. Part of the education is to encourage paying higher prices in the short term, in order to provide local small-scale farmers enough income to be in business and to expand their production so that prices can be lower in the long term.

Establishing a cooperative

There a wealth of resources on how to set up cooperatives and even a specific report on conducting a feasibility study for an agricultural marketing cooperative (click here).   The first and most important step is deciding what the central activity of the marketing cooperative will be.  This involves identifying interested people, assessing potential membership and researching potential farm product supply, amongst other important information gathering activities.  

One method to “test the waters” on the concept of a marketing cooperative, to gather information towards a feasibility study, to test the format for a Farmer’s Market (click here), to increase awareness around local agriculture and to distribute the findings of this plan in an innovative way, is to implement the idea of Garden Surplus Saturdays.

Garden Surplus Saturdays

Focus of Activity

To operate three Garden Surplus Saturdays in August (or late August-early September)   where producers, local gardeners, crafters and community people can sell their products.

Goals

·        To test the feasibility of developing a local market that sells local produce

·        To educate people about food security

·        To create a forum for producers to network

·        To share and market the Sustainable Agriculture Plan

Youth

The feedback from youth on agriculture during this project has pointed to the fact that youth enjoy and will support activities on the land related to agriculture and the creation of food and other products from what is grown and raised. 

A number of projects took place during this planning process that assisted in gathering public input from youth.  The various activities can be defined as youth gleaning projects where local youth groups were being organized to glean, preserve extra produce and share the food through distribution.

The gleaning projects included:

4-H

An agriculture-related outcome to the work undertaken in this plan was the reestablishment of the 4-H program in Hazelton. The Learning Shop – a storefront informal education centre – supported this revitalization as part of the overall youth agriculture education plan. 

4-H is an internationally renowned citizenship program for children and youth. It gives members the opportunity to take on a project in an area of interest for the year and to gain knowledge, leadership and citizenship skills, and personal development in the process.

 The Skeena 4-H club is run by parent volunteers who wanted to see a 4-H club active in the area. 18 members (ages 6-11) were involved in local and district activities since January, 2002. This year every member in the club chose to take on an Outdoor Living Project (the project options range from livestock raising projects, to garden growing, to arts and crafts).

The objectives  of the local program fell under three headings:

·        education and understanding

·        sustaining a rural lifestyle

·        ensuring quality around agriculture work and life

Other 4-H clubs have come and gone in the area. As the current Skeena 4-H club is very new, it’s still not clear whether the interest and support of members and volunteers will continue next year.

The present club leaders and parent volunteers have had as their goals for this year to:

1.      Encourage all members to complete the year and achieve in their project areas of interest; and to

2.      Expose members to as many aspects of the 4-H program as possible (other projects, district/inter-club events, community resource people etc.).

With these goals in mind, club leaders are hoping that members will complete the year with a good understanding of the 4-H program (including which projects are possible to do), a sense of achievement, and an interest in participating again.

As the year was so successful, there is definite potential for the Skeena 4-H club to continue and to expand. It is hoped that members will also want to branch out and try their hand at different projects. There has been some interest expressed by members in growing gardens and raising small livestock such as rabbits, chickens, sheep and goats.

Over the year The Learning Shop facilitators met with parents on a regular basis to help them prepare, plan and deliver programming to the 18 local children. The Learning Shop administered the program but is working with 4-H parents to transfer this responsibility so that within one year it is local parents who are administering and operating the 4-H program.

Youth Cooperative Kitchen & Youth Garden Plot

Over three months, 12 teenagers from Storytellers’ Foundation Experiential Education Program tested the idea of a youth cooperative kitchen where young people learned skills around cooking, nutrition, low budget meal planning and food security. This project expanded to young people contributing to the cooking of meals for the local soup kitchen as well as exploring the idea of young people planting, maintaining and harvesting a garden.

The ideas for this three-month pilot were included in a proposal to expand the cooperative kitchen and introduce a junior garden plot. This proposal was submitted to the Northwest Regional Health Authority (NHA).  Storyteller's secured funding from the NHA to further test and expand the practice of a cooperative kitchen in the Upper Skeena and to create educational materials to promote food security and healthy eating and active living.

The Cooperative Kitchen and Youth Garden began in the summer of 2002.

In addition to the gleaning projects youth participated in information technology work related to agriculture.

Information Technology

Storytellers’ Foundation is using the Internet to research informal educational opportunities for young adults. This information will be published as well as presented at a youth humanities coffee shop. The coffee shop will highlight the travel experiences of local youth and promote agricultural projects abroad such as Farm Work, New Zealand; Wooffing, Australia; and Fruit Labourer Projects in Britain and Western Europe.

From this coffee shop Storytellers’ will create a informal learning database and attach links of agricultural travel opportunities to our website - upperskeena.ca

G.  Conclusion and Recommendations

Based on a community-directed desire to explore opportunities in sustainable agriculture as defined in the community economic development documents Action 2000 and Beyond 2000, this report conducted research and public consultation into the expansion of the agricultural sector in the Upper Skeena.

It is clear from the work done under this plan that there are current producers and potential producers who want to do more in the local agriculture scene, there are consumers in the Upper Skeena who would buy local farm products, there is a market segment outside of the Upper Skeena who buy the type of products that can be grown and raised here, and there is a considerable segment of our large youth population who are interested in agriculture.

All of these findings bode well for a revitalized role for sustainable agriculture in our local economy. A key next step to the revitalization will be successfully implementing the recommendations in this report that came from the people living in the Upper Skeena. 

The crucial focus is to find from within the Upper Skeena the individuals, groups and organizations who are willing to take on and drive the implementation of the recommendations. 

This is seen as the critical piece of the puzzle to keep the energy going on sustainable agriculture in the Upper Skeena and therefore forms the basis of the first recommendation.

General recommendation

The Upper Skeena Development Centre is the body to initially drive the implementation of the plan.

This fits with the USDC mandate to incubate sectors of the local economy in a sustainable way and to support community economic development initiatives.

It is suggested the USDC fulfill the recommendation by:

·        taking the lead role in bringing interested farmers, marketers, community development specialists together to implement recommendations in this plan

·        acting as a sponsor to assist in obtaining funding from federal and provincial sources to support implementation of the recommendations

·        investigate funding sources for individuals, groups and organizations wishing to implement any of the specific recommendations.  Funding sources include:

Federal (click here for June 28, 2002 announcements)

Industry Canada – high speed Internet for rural or remote areas

Agriculture Canada – cooperative development fund

Canadian Rural Partnership initiative

Community Capacity Building initiative

                        Office of Learning Technologies

                        Canadian Workers Co-op Federation

                        Provincial/regional

                        16-37 Community Futures

                        Northwest Community College

Specific recommendations

1.  Hold three “Surplus Saturdays” in late August and early September.

As outlined in the local potential section, this activity will provide an opportunity to distribute the sustainable agriculture plan, gauge the interest by consumers in a local producers retail outlet, and provide the basis for the initiation of a feasibility study into a marketing cooperative.

The Surplus Saturdays are a short-term, feasible-to-implement, activity that will assist in keeping the energy developed during this plan alive in order to drive momentum for the implementation of the additional recommendations.  Keeping in mind that this recommendation is immediately implementable, an action task list was developed:

Action items:

Communications and Publicity Tasks

• Create Garden Surplus Saturday Posters and Brochures outlining the concept, the dates and location of the market and how people can sell their produce at the market

• Contact producers in Sustainable Agriculture Directory to update information in the directory, and inform them about the Garden Surplus Saturdays

• Contact local gardeners and food producers to inform them about the Garden Surplus Saturdays

• Put up posters and distribute brochures throughout the community

• Contact local food retailers and restaurants and inform them about the Garden Surplus Saturdays

• Have contests on the biggest zucchini, the best uses for zucchini, flower arrangements etc.

Educational Tasks

• Create flyers and brochures outlining the key elements of the Sustainable Agriculture Plan

• Create flyers and brochures outlining the key issues related to local food security and producers co-operatives

• Set up the Agriculture Display each Saturday

• Create poster highlighting where people can buy local food ( i.e. Sustainable Agriculture Directory, local retailers selling local food)

• Create a recipe sharing/food processing information board where people can swap recipes, share information on canning and jarring garden produce and share gardening hints

• Encourage producers to provide cards and information about their products and how they can be contacted during the week

Organization Tasks

·                                Determine parameters for selling produce and products. Clearly acceptable i.e. fresh fruits, vegetables, flowers, plants, honey, Possibilities (Baked breads, pies, cookies, orders for sides of beef, pork, lamb, poultry), Questionable because of health regulations (home canned foods, eggs, fresh meat, canned fish)

·                                Try to get the commitment of a half-dozen sellers to come to the market. Use this as an opportunity to talk about the benefits and possibilities of setting up a local retail market. Start with the most enthusiastic producers and retailers contacted through the Sustainable Agriculture Plan

·                                Meet with young people involved in the Community Garden and determine the linkages between the two projects (perhaps they can assist with the publicity and promotion of the project as they visit local producers as part of their project)

·                                Check out the possibilities and benefits of inviting the fruit sellers to join the market (may bring in people but may also take away sales from local sellers).

·                                Identify a location for the market (drive by traffic, good parking, open space for stall, access to public telephone, access to restrooms, relatively level site)

·                                Each week showcase a special agriculture-related attraction to bring people into the market  i.e. Helen Roisum (spinners and weavers), April Koning (rock painting, arbours), musicians, etc

·                                Set up a anonymous system for reporting sales by each seller

·                                Set up a system for reporting and tracking sellers and number of consumers at each market

The Surplus Saturdays should be held at location where the concepts of a retail outlet and of Farmer’s Market can be tested along with providing a suitable facility for distribution of this plan.  A location with a building available for three Saturdays of rental, which also has a large parking area, would be ideal.  One possible location for the Surplus Saturday trial is the grounds and building of the former Hazelnut Corner Store

2.  Undertake a feasibility study on the creation of a marketing cooperative.

The structure of a feasibility study is available (click here) as outlined in the previous section.  The study will determine if producers have the desire to carry through with a marketing cooperative, select the model the cooperative will adopt, and investigate three specific marketing strategies that could be part of the cooperative , or may be taken on by private individuals.  These are:

Retail storefront at a primary location with maximum visibility and access like the Hazelnut Corner Store or Gitanmaax Food & Fuel. The retail storefront would operate year-round supplying consumers local products as well as supplementing with imports such as fruits and grains. This storefront would work well in the multi-functional cooperative model as described is found with The Growing Circle.

Mobile delivery: This could be a unit that belongs to the cooperative or operated as a private business. The vehicle would have easy access (for example a converted school bus) that customers could enter and exit. In addition to fresh produce, the vehicle could have a frozen section for berries, etc. This vehicle would travel to communities weekly and set up at central locations. It would operate from May to December.

3.  Create a Community Supported Agriculture system.

This could be a role fulfilled by the marketing cooperative or could be a stand-alone function taken on by an individual, a group of producers or an organization.  One possibility is that the USDC hires, with support from the producers, a Direct Marketing Coordinator to drive the CSA and other marketing concepts such as the retail outlet and mobile produce delivery outlet.

4.  Recognize that the continued interest of youth in agriculture in the Upper Skeena (see local potential) is essential to the continuation of our rural lifestyle by:

·        supporting leadership development of local members of the agriculture community in order to sustain a viable 4-H program

·        exploring the possibility of a locally developed agriculture curriculum within Hazelton Secondary School

·        mentoring a youth team to organize and advocate for local youth to be involved in the implementation of agricultural opportunities

5.  Apply information technology tools to the local agriculture sector for marketing and educational purposes by:

• distributing and promoting the Sustainable Agriculture Plan on CD-ROM so that educational institutions, community organizations and individuals can use it as a resource tool
• creating direct marketing ties with farmers and consumers, a “matchmaker” concept. Accessible through the Internet, this creates more sustainable communities as inputs are all local. Example:  match hog farmer with grain grower or potato grower with manure supplier.
• Use the www.upperskeena.ca  Web site to host the matchmaking strategy
• create a central location to house the agriculture information resources gathered during this process and the material that was available through the provincial agriculture office in Smithers that is no longer accessible to the public.  The USDC could be host to the resource center.

6.  Producers and consumers in the Upper Skeena develop a set of local food regulations.

Create a set of locally developed regulations to control and police own food safety through a producer-consumer joint committee. 

There is the need to explore the development of local food regulations to meet the standards and values of our community. A recent study by the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention points out that outbreaks of food-borne disease are more likely today because of the trend toward fewer, bigger food production facilities and longer distances of distribution.

Current food safety regulations are geared to large-scale producers and marketers. In the Upper Skeena, there is no Federal meat inspection agency which makes it difficult or impossible to set up a local butcher shop for locally produced meat. Community-based minimum standards for local production and retailing would be influenced by local conditions and community values. Community peer pressure would ensure compliance with the agreed upon standards much more effectively than the current standards which rely on expensive enforcement mechanisms. Local regulations would allow more flexibility, encourage more accountability and would dramatically reduce the cost of both monitoring and compliance.

7.  Develop initial value-added facilities around agricultural products.

The two initial facilities that would improve marketing opportunities for local producers are:

• a cold storage facility to house cold crops for winter delivery.  A market has already been demonstrated for locally grown produce in the winter months.
• a food processing facility where value-added items from local products are made such as jams, soups and or fish

Once again this initiative could be part of a local marketing cooperative or a local organization or individual could take it on.

APPENDICES

1. Kitchen Table Discussions

Kitwanga/Cedarvale

Present: Vern Bedwell, Paul Kidney, Ron & Dusty Scott, Gary Walton, Gina Jarsma, Gail MacDonald

Ron Scott has 180 acres at Whiskey Creek, Cedarvale, named Skeena Farm Ventures. He has owned the farm since 1995. Ron & Dusty mixed farmed in Ontario prior to moving to Cedarvale. They bought the farm in hopes that their children would be interested in farming it.

Gina Jarsma is the daughter of Joe Jarsma who recently bought the Boychuck potato farm. Joe currently raises sheep, hay, barley and oats. Gina is interested in growing potatoes.

Vern and Paul are from Fairhaven Farms. Their main crops are carrots and cabbage. They also have raspberries, strawberries and blueberries. They market the carrots from Prince Rupert to Smithers at Safeway and Overwaitea. They are conventional farmers using chemicals where needed.

• There is no farmer’s market in Kitwanga
• There is a need to educate locals on buying local produce
• One-stop shopping is the key for consumers these days
• The timing is perfect now for educating the public on supporting local food consumption considering our depressed economy
• People need to know the buying that they have. Let local stores know your preferences
• Let us focus on health issues as well as economies
• All agreed that co-ops and CSA should be investigated
• One day the big stores will cut us off our food supply
• We will have to comply with all food regulations
• Let us focus on vegetable crops they do so well here

Kispiox Valley

Present: Glyn Wookey, Kathy & Todd Stockner, Kathy Clay, Martha Muigg, Dave MacDonald, Gail MacDonald, Ginny Larson, Graham Larson, Allan Larson, Clint Larson, Alice Smith, Bob Smith

Glyn Wookey has been farming in the Kispiox Valley since 1950. He is now growing vegetables for self consumption and gives some away to locals.

Cathy Clay is self-efficient in meat (chicken,turkey), vegetables and some berries. Cathy raises 30 to 50 chickens and sells or trades eggs. Thinking about expanding to greenhouse and beef production.

Cathy and Todd raise chickens, eggs, turkeys. They have 25 apple trees and some herbs. In the future they would like to raise sheep.

Martha has a family vegetable garden, chickens, eggs, pigs for meat. She would like to have one dairy cow for cheese and butter.

Ginny used to grow field tomatoes and carrots. She likes to buy local produce for her café operation when available.

Allan raises about 20 cattle for local and for shipping. Al used to grow tomatoes and carrots before becoming a lodge owner.

Graham is raising 10 head of beef and sells to Vanderhoof and Alberta, with no local sales.

Clint is a certified butcher and would like to do it full time in the Valley.

Alice and Bob used to raise beef and sell eggs. They would like to pursue greenhouse growing.

• Need two incomes to survive as a farmer
• It is important that we stay small and community minded
• Greenhouses make a lot of sense, how about Carnaby mill site as a heat source for greenhouses
• We need a temperature controlled facility for storing vegetables for seasonal supply
• People may be willing to lease or rent their land to those who don’t have access
• Farmers need a storefront, a one-stop central location like using the empty  Hazelnut store
• Silage equipment is costly but it is needed here

Bill Jenkins, Seeley Lake Ranch

Bill has been farming for twenty years and is currently raising cattle. His registered Angus bull and 22 breed cows will produce 22 calves in the spring. He will sell his calves in the fall when they weigh in at 600 to 700 pounds at the Vanderhoof Auction. Beef is at a good price right now at approximately $500.00 per calf, net. The biggest constraint over the past five years has been the wet and cool summers. He has noticed the weather changing over the past 15 years, but the last five have been the most dramatic. If he had 50 cows and another 100 acres of hay land plus silage equipment he would be self-efficient. Bill will not invest in any equipment and is planning on retiring.

2.  Local Experts Interviews

Highlights of discussion with Dave Riendeau, Resource Stewardship Agrologist, with BCAMF&F.

Question: In your opinion what arable land has the best potential for sustainable agriculture in our area?

Ø      Class 3 and Class 4 have the best potential for cold season vegetables

Ø      There is good potential for horticulture

Ø      We can grow everything here, it’s getting it to market that’s our big problem

Ø      Class 4 and Class 5 for forage for livestock

Question: In your opinion what are the most viable crops and why?

Ø      A 25 to 40 acre mixed operation would be a good way to start, especially for a family run business to supplement family income

Ø        An example of a good mix would be cold season vegetables, strawberries, blueberries, sheep and pigs

Ø      Don’t get too many things started, then your list of tasks is too long and too time consuming to be cost effective

Ø      Stay away from dairy, there are too many health issues and it is too expensive for a small operator

Ø      Poultry, eggs, especially organic and free range, a good local market for these products, again beware, educate yourself about health issues

Ø      Beef and pork producers have no access to government inspection facilities. The nearest CFIA inspector is in Williams Lake. This limits producers to shipping beef or local gate sales.

Ø      There may be enough volume to warrant a CFIA Inspection Facility in Houston (Hamblyn’s) and that would widen the market to local retail facilities for local beef production

Question: Identify good examples of current farming operations that match uniqueness of farmlands to the operation

Ø      Several dairy farmers in Smithers/Houston make their principle livelihood from their operations

Ø      Farleigh’s market garden in the Kispiox

Ø      Fairhaven Farms in Cedarvale, faming, nursery, bakery combined

Question:  Identify ideas for potential operations that could match existing farmlands to a unique operation.

Ø      A potential new market for weed free hay has opened up. Guide outfitters wish to avoid weeds in their guiding territories and are looking for weed free, compact hay.  Growing this type of hay means spraying to control weeds. Because of weather conditions and concerns around spraying this crop may be better suited for more eastern regions.

Ø      Being on the transportation corridor to Prince Rupert is not doing the local area much good. For instance, if you had an off shore market for beef, pork or lamb, Agriculture Canada regulations and inspection requirements, plus licensing fees ($3000) per year just for the license, makes this market viable only to large producers and this area is not suited to large operations.

Ø      Tourist marketing, value added is the key

Ø      Small roadside sales, prepared products, salads, jams, berries, grow wheat for decorations, sells flowers, birch tree syrup

Ø      Consider farm tours, hands on farm experience, again beware, educate yourselves, there are health and liability issues

Ø      Find ethnic groups for live meat production sales

Ø      Good markets locally for cabbages and turnips

Ø      This is a natural area for contained fish farming, although this is an expensive set up, facilities, feeding, environmental issues to be addressed, talk to Toboggan Creek Hatchery.  They have been one of the most successful operations

Ø      Explore farming mushrooms, domestic and wild

Ø      Grow cold season vegetables, potatoes, carrots, turnips, chard, lettuce peas

Question:  What is your opinion on steps needed to establish viable, sustainable farming operations in the Upper Skeena?

Ø      Grow what you can and market locally

Ø      Most farmers aren’t interested in marketing, they just want to grow things

Ø      Find people interested and knowledgeable to do the marketing

Ø      Small is good if you want to supplement your family income

Ø      The amount of work you have to do compared to the profit often isn’t worth it on a small operation

Ø      If you want to make your entire living from farming you have to go big

Ø      Ranches will get bigger and fewer in the next ten years

Ø      Link up with the Skeena Valley Vegetable Growing Association (Tom Leach) they have been working on organic, sustainable agriculture for a few years.

Ø      Attend as many seminars, training sessions as you can, build the network you need to market

Ø      Use every marketing devise you can, Web sites, cooperatives, retail outlets, local restaurants

Ø      A local produce truck or van that takes the products out to the communities sounds good, do your research

Ø      There is funding available for awareness, education and infrastructure

Ø      This office is available to offer consulation, support and expertise to any groups working on strengthening agriculture in our area.

Highlights of discussion with Paul Kidney, Agrologist, local farmer with Fairhaven Farms

Question: In your opinion what are the most viable crops for our area and why?

Ø      You can grow any crop you want to in this area if you are willing to put in the effort, time or a greenhouse.

Ø      It is impossible to name specific crops to specific soils. You can generalize by saying things like, carrots do well in sandy, loamy soil, but, if you are willing, you can build up clay with organic material and grow great carrots

Ø      Another example, berries don’t like wet feet, but blueberries do

Ø      What you need to do is know your soil, consider the most likely crops and what you will have to do to your soil to grow that crop and then figure out if it is viable from there

Ø      Greenhouses may be a good solution to address our short growing season, but, again, there is much to know about greenhouses before you start building one and planting things

Ø      This area is no different than any other, every region of the whole world has some kind of problems to overcome when it comes to farming

Ø      Never plant just one variety of any crop, some years the conditions are better for one variety than another and that way you increase your odds of success

Ø      The nature of farming is, if you are not an optimist better not get involved, there is almost never a perfect year and you had better know that up front

Ø      Our problems here are more about marketing the produce than growing or raising it

Ø      Farmers want to grow things, most of us are not interested in the marketing part, and yes, we know it’s very important but it is not what we want to do.

Ø      There is always a challenge and you must have a passion for growing things, I thrive on it, I dream about summer all winter, can’t wait for spring to get out there and start farming

Question: Identify some ideas for potential operations that could match existing farmlands to a unique operation

Ø      Greenhouse operation that provides early supplies of salad vegetables and gets bedding plants started

Ø      Asparagas, the male varieties (males produce more stems). I tried a trial crop and it did very well. They require a lot of weeding, so I would grow from seed and cultivate, if I were going to plant several acres or more. If you are going to grow from roots, buy certified roots, clean of club foot disease

Ø      Cabbages are doing very well for Fairhaven, Copperside and Safeway have reported that customers really like them,

Ø      Carrots have been the only cash crops that will provide a living but cabbages could be on par with them

Ø      You-pick strawberries do well, people come to the farm to pick and you have any opportunity to sell them other products while they are there

Ø      Blueberries should be another good cash crop, plant them before August. High bush Northland berries are the best in my opinion, but Blue Ray, Blue Cross are good too. Some producers are having good luck with Half highs, bush berries, tastier berries

Ø      There is a good market for honey but there is a problem here. February and March are cool and damp and mould builds up in the hives and the bees get weak and don’t produce. If the bees were kept in a dehumidified climate, not heated, just dry that would help overcome that problem

Question: What is your opinion on the steps needed to establish a viable, sustainable farming operation in Upper Skeena?

Ø      Learn all you can about what you want to grow before you start your operation

Ø      Expect the first three to five years to be a real struggle

Ø      It takes three to five years to establish your market as well, and having to do both things at the same time can be overwhelming

Ø      A support network (other farmers, experts, resource information) would make life a lot easier and chances of success much better

Ø      Get people who have good marketing skills to help you if you can

Ø      Get your products to market any way you can, or get the market to come to your door

Ø      Add other products to your produce, like Fairhaven’s bakery, or other processed food

Ø      A produce van that would bring the vegetables to the customers is a great idea

Ø      I was seriously thinking of doing the same thing myself. Thought I would use a bus, with a front and rear door, for traffic flow, bins on each side of the isle, extra produce stored under the bins, a generator, then you could have frozen products too. Add other seasonal products if customers want them, fruit, nuts, grain, herbs. If the van belonged to a farmer it could probably sell direct at framer’s markets in Terrace or Smithers.

Ø      Box sales are another good marketing method, maybe in combination with the van or bus, as a drop off point gets to be a problem after a while.

Ø      One thing about marketing, is you have to be dependable and supply what you say you are going to, or, you won’t be in business long

Highlights of discussion with 16-37 Community Futures, Joe Whitney, Roger Leclerc, Paula Peinszski

Question: What is your opinion on steps needed to establish viable, sustainable farming operations in the Upper Skeena?

Ø      Farmers aren’t interested in marketing they are happy growing things

Ø      Two focuses support, one for the farmers and one for the marketers (may not be the same people)

Ø      Use every marketing method you can, farmer’s markets are great, local retail stores will carry good produce if it’s presented well and if it is reliable

Ø      People want quality products, they will pay more for fresh, organic, healthy foods

Ø      Find niche markets, don’t try to compete with the big boys

Ø      Do your research, get a good cost analysis, have a business plan, get help if you don’t know how

Ø      This area would be perfect for contained fish farms for trout. BC restaurants are importing trout from Chile because BC cannot supply the product

Ø      Another marketable product this area is suited for would be a local micro-brewery, there is an excellent water supply and you are on the transportation corridor for the Yeallowhead

Ø      How about soapberry ice cream, someone should be working on that product

Ø      Forestry related communities may be looking at new programs after the end of June communities with good community development plans that include sustainable partnerships will have a chance to access funds from Western Economic Diversification and Department of Indian and Northern Affairs.

Ø      16-37 looks forward to working with the Upper Skeena Development Centre project for sustainable agriculture and is willing to consider support for next steps once the plan has been completed

Highlights of discussion with Gitxsan Economic Development Corp. Anne Howard and BCMAF&F, Jamie Kumar, First Nations Agrologist

Question: How can USDC and GEDC work together to support the development of sustainable agriculture for all of the people of Upper Skeena

Ø      GEDC has been working with BCMAF&F Agrologist, Jamie Kumar on a number of local projects

Ø      Since both organizations are taking an active role in the development of a viable agricultural industry there could be mutual interests and benefits to First Nations and non-First Nation communities working on joint ventures

Ø      We should come together to explore ways we can work together and access as many combination of resources as possible to make our plans become reality

Ø      BCMAF&F is working with Gitxsan people in a three fold approach to agriculture:

1.      Backyard gardens

2.      Community gardens, collaborative efforts producing retail products

3.      Commercial productions such as the Gitsegukla hemp project

Ø        Sustainable agriculture would diversify and strengthen the economy for the Gitxsan communities

Ø      The Gitsegukla hemp project has a regional flair, other BC First Nations have started, or are going to go into, hemp production. The hemp would be shipped to Gitsegukla for processing and marketing. The Shelley Band in Prince George has planted hemp crops this year, as well, Bella Coola, Alkaline Lake and Anaham Band will begin next year.

Ø      Joint ventures are under way with private companies and First Nations. Examples are Halfway River (70 K north of Ft. St. John) and the Pure Seed Company from Vancouver are producing and selling organic seed potatoes. Another is, Gitsegukla and Wilkerson Potatoes are partnering with Discovery Food in Vancouver to grow and retail potatoes. Canoe Creek Band, south of Williams Lake, is entering into a joint venture with Mushroom Tec, a Vancouver company, to produce a commercial mushroom business

Ø      The private companies provide technical advice, training and marketing

resources, the First Nations supply the land and product

Ø      The idea of joint venture in agriculture between First Nations and off-reserve agriculture commerce should be encouraged and strengthened wherever possible – the door is opened

Ø      A long-term goal is to establish a First Nations Agriculture Training facility which would include full scale farming operations. BCMAF&F is looking at the possibility of purchasing Fairhaven Farms for that purpose

Ø      The Province has announced a 30-million dollar Economic Measure Fund for First Nations and joint ventures fit very neatly into that picture.

BCMAF&F was not aware of the mandate of the Upper Skeena Development Centre and will make contact with the manager to discuss future collaborations

3. Conferences attended

Winter Harvest: Commercial Greenhouse Production of Fresh Vegetables in Cold Weather Climates, Agriculture Canada and Northwest Community College, Smithers, B.C.

This seminar focused on the growing of fresh vegetables from October to April in greenhouses without supplementary heat.  “Winter Harvest” can produce high quality, organically grown crops for fresh sale during the traditional non-farming months by using locally available resources and inexpensive climate modifications. It achieves the aim by combining the biological potential of cold hearty vegetables with the minimal protection of simple greenhouse technologies.

Greenhouse Growing, B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and First Nations Agricultural Lending Association, Hazelton, B.C

Sponsored by the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and First Nations Agricultural Lending Association. This workshop was targeted to the Gitxsan First Nation and focused on the basics of greenhouse vegetable growing.

The Dynamics of Change in Western Rural Communities, Western Agri-Food Institute & Agriculture Canada, Edmonton, Alberta.:

Hosted by Western Agri-Food Institute & Agriculture Canada, this seminar focused on a comprehensive survey identified by census subdivision, two groups, farmers and non-farmers in Western Canada.  The research focused on the dynamics of demographic, economic, social and political change in Western rural communities. The objective was to describe the similarities and differences in attitudes between farmers and non-farmers, living on the Prairies and in British Columbia, concerning

·        The socio-demographic changes affecting communities

·        Their economic situation and development possibilities

·        The specific situation of farm enterprise in the community

·        Their social integration and participation

·        The different political issues

Cariboo Farm Direct Marketing Seminar, Agriculture Canada, Western Diversification, Community Futures and the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture,  Quesnel, B.C.

This seminar was geared towards the value-added farm operation. Farms near larger population centers are more than just the “farm” but some have turned to entertainment to attract consumers through the gates. This forum presented examples of existing farm operations and the value-added products they are selling. For example some farms are selling, pies and baked goods, gift baskets, juices and holding special events like Christmas sales and farm tours.

4. Sustainable agriculture symposium

In April 2001, a sustainable agriculture symposium was held in Hazelton to help raise the profile of Sustainable Agriculture in the Upper Skeena. Specifically, the forum was designed to:

·        Kick-start the Sustainable Agriculture Plan

·        Bring people together to share interests and ideas around sustainable agriculture in the Upper Skeena/Bulkley Valley

·        Examine the differences between industrial agriculture and sustainable agriculture and its impact on small farms and rural communities, and

·        Explore the potential of sustainable agriculture as an ecologically sound and socially responsibly approach to community economic development

Forty-seven people that included farmers, horticulturists, landowners and those interested in sustainable economics and food safety and security attended the forum. The forum was opened by Nikate’en, a Gitxsan Hereditary Chief whose traditional territory contains the community of Hazelton. She spoke about Gitxsan people relationship to the land and the ways they harvested the natural wealth and resources of the land and the need for people to continue to find ways to share knowledge so people can continue to sustain their selves from the land.

John Ikerd, a professor of agricultural economics, University of Missouri College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources was the keynote speaker who gave a presentation on sustainable agriculture titled ‘New Hope for the Future of Farming’. In his presentation he described the differences between industrial agriculture and sustainable agriculture. Industrial agriculture relies on specialization, standardization, mechanization that requires farmers to increase their capital outputs and access to land. Sustainable agriculture where the focus is on diversification, individualization and decentralized decision making requires farmers to match unique farming operations to the uniqueness of the farm, their potential markets and the natural resources on the farm.

5. World Organic Market -- FAO

With retail sales of organic food and beverages reaching an estimated $13.5 billion in the seven markets covered by this survey (Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Sweden, the United Kingdom) and in Austria, Italy, the United States of America and Japan in 1997, trade in organic foodstuff has become an important global agribusiness. Preliminary estimates for 1998 indicate retail sales in these markets of $13 billion to $13.5 billion. The organic trade is of particular interest in a development context because of the spectacular growth that has taken place in recent years, with growth rates of between 5% and 40% expected over the medium term, depending on the market in question. It should be noted that the continuous growth in the organic sector is all the more remarkable since overall food sales is experiencing either slow growth or stagnation. There are good reasons to conclude that the market for organic food and beverages is growing rapidly in most countries in Western Europe, North America, Japan and Australia. Expansion is also taking place in a few developing countries though at a slower pace. The currently small share of organic products in the food and beverage trade in all these markets indicates a large long-term potential. Expectations of growth are underpinned not only by strong and increasing consumer awareness of health and environmental issues, but also by the more goal-oriented and aggressive marketing and promotion being undertaken by the major retail groups. Product development and innovations in packaging by food processors and manufacturers, as well as supportive government policy in many countries, will also push up world demand. It seems clear - at least in the short to medium term that an insufficient supply of organic products will be the main problem rather than lack of demand. Though domestic production is growing rapidly in many markets, demand appears to be expanding even faster. This opens up opportunities for exporters in developing countries, not only for those already in the business but also for others who would like to start production. A review of the world supply situation shows that more than 130 countries produce certified organic food and beverages in commercial quantities, including at least 65 developing countries of which about 15 are least developed (LDCs). Production also exists in most transition economies. It should be noted that interest in promoting organic agriculture in developing as well as developed countries is rising. Although the overall picture looks highly positive, a number of potential risk factors should be borne in mind when evaluating future developments in the organic food business. For example, occasional oversupply of a given product may not only have immediate but also more long-term negative effects. Furthermore, other forms of environmentally friendly and sustainable agriculture are likely to result in increased competition in the future. Reduced price premiums for organic produce and insufficient profitability among farmers and other operators are also factors to reckon with. Unfavourable press (e.g. fraud) and scare stories, whether justified or not, cannot be excluded either. Developing countries produce a wide range of organic products and many are doing relatively well. However, most of them suffer from a number of constraints, such as the lack of technical know-how (e.g. on production methods), lack of storage and processing facilities, poor logistics, inadequate market information (for example on which products to grow, which markets and distribution channels to choose, the competition, market access) and insufficient financing. Certification is a major problem that they share with producers in developed countries. Importers, food manufacturers, retail organizations and consumers need a guarantee of organic origin. In other words, the organic trade faces a number of challenges in the future. On balance, however, there is no doubt that the world markets for organic food and beverages will continue to offer developing countries profitable export opportunities. All of the major markets under review offer good prospects for suppliers of organic products that are not produced domestically: examples are coffee, tea, cocoa, spices, tropical fruits and vegetables and citrus fruits. However, there are also very good prospects for several products that are produced in the main markets themselves. Such opportunities exist not only for off-season produce (such as fruits and vegetables), but also for many other products like in-season fruits (e.g. apple and pears) and vegetables, cane sugar, grains, cereals, pulses and seeds, for the simple reason that the rapidly growing demand in most markets cannot be met by local supplies, at least in the short and medium term. To succeed in building up an export trade in organic products, exporters will find that careful selection of target markets and distribution channels is of the utmost importance. A strong and reliable relationship with an importer/distributor in the target markets is an absolute must in establishing a profitable business. Finally, supportive government policies as well as assistance from the international community are other necessary elements

6. The trend of community supported agriculture  ( CSA )

The principal behind community supported agriculture is that people who want to eat locally grown, sustainably produced food can ensure its availability by financially supporting local organic and low input farms.

CSA customers pay in advance for a share of the farm’s seasonal fresh produce or livestock. This financial support of local farms benefits the farmer by providing up-front cash for seeds and supplies. It also lets the farmer know how many customers to plant for. And consumers assume some risk involved in planting and harvesting, as each season varies. Through CSA’s customers benefit by having a weekly supply of freshly picked vegetables, as well as grains, berries, etc. Instead of paying several layers of middlemen to route produce around the country so that it is a week or two old by the time you buy it, CSA members get a weekly basket of produce picked the day before it is delivered (or even the same day), and what you pay goes directly to the farmer who grew it.

Through CSA’s customers and farmers work together to ensure a supply of fresh organic produce. Together they replenish the earth and renew the tradition of nutritious, flavorful goods grown in local farms and delivered in your neighborhood.

The critical problem facing small scale, sustainable agriculture today is how to produce food in sufficient quantity to feed modern populations without adopting an industrial system of production and distribution. One distribution channel consistent with the values of sustainable agriculture is the farmer’s market.

The Farmer’s Market is very popular with a subset of consumers, but it is not a distribution channel that can easily meet the needs of most people. Typically, markets are held only one day a week, are open only part of the year, and are very sensitive to weather. They are not ideal for farmers either, for they often impose a great transportation burden, while putting small scale farmers in direct price competition with conventional agriculture.

Community supported agriculture has the potential of providing food all year long with a freshness and integrity that the conventional system cannot.

The definition of “eating local” depends on one’s culture and technology.

From the perspective of social responsibility, “localness” is less important than physical connection to the farm. Farm-direct products and farm brand identity come together to create in the mind of the consumer a connection to the land, reinforced through physical contact with the farm. At the farm, people see whole plants, roots and all. Food from a CSA can be tracked back to a specific piece of land, giving the consumer confidence in its quality, freshness, and organic integrity. The natural food retailer, on the other hand, can only connect the consumer to yet another commercial transaction.

A CSA is not a single farm but the place in a web of complementary farms where consumers connect to the land. To achieve the stability and volume it needs to maintain sustainability, each CSA farm needs to be connected to a cooperative web consisting of other organic producers. For example, farm A produces carrots, farm B potatoes, farm C produces grain and so on. Inter-farm transactions are critical to the success of a CSA because it address the consumer’s choice, quality, and variety.

In the 21st century, food security and food integrity issues will move to the center of the political arena, as people become more aware of climatic changes induced by global warming, the ecological costs of conventional agriculture, and the implications of such new and controversial technologies as genetic engineering.

Community supported agriculture makes organic farming socially responsible as well as ecologically responsible. It connects food buyers to the land instead of retailers. It makes each organic producer economically stronger while providing jobs at the local level. It gives local communities a more secure and controlled food supply, while preserving product diversity and a high degree of consumer choice.

Community Supported Agriculture

In the community supported farm structure, every member of the relationship benefits: the shareholders, the farmers, the farms(earth) and the greater community:

The Shareholders

Receive fresh, contamination-free vegetables, grains, berries and herbs delivered on the day of harvest;

Pay close to supermarket prices for fresh, certified organic produce;

Know where and how their food is grown, who grows it and have the opportunity to partake in its growth;

Are provided with a structure through which they can support a viable local agriculture, preserve local farmland, and contribute to a healthy local economy;

Have the opportunity to gain knowledge of growing food and stewardship of the Earth; become more aware of their relationship to the land, farm life, and processes that make our lives possible

The Farmers

Are given the opportunity to make a viable income by growing food in a responsible and harmonious way, directly supported by the consumer with no middleman;

Have the pleasure of knowing who their product is going to and consequently feel more care, responsibility, and reward in their work;

Are relieved of marketing labor and can focus more on growing food;

The Farms

Are preserved from development; are preserved from harmful farming practices;

Are nurtured into fertile, bountiful land.

The Greater Community

Is strengthened by the bringing together of people who share healthy concerns about our future;

Gets an economic boost when food dollars remain within the community rather than supporting out-of-area corporations;

Benefits by the preservation and maintenance of an important agricultural component that is being consumed by industry - by preserving this diversity the community becomes a more whole and satisfying place to live.

7. Marketing in general from John Ikerd

The Role of Marketing in Sustainable Agriculture

Marketing, in agriculture, includes all the various activities involved in the transformation of commodities sold by farmers into food and fiber products purchased by consumers. The most obvious aspect of this transformation is a change in physical appearance or form. Form changing activities for agricultural commodities range from washing and grading apples to processing wheat into Wheaties. Another important marketing function is transportation. Agricultural commodities must somehow get from the farms where they are grown to the retail outlets where they are bought, in some cases moving across a country or half-way around the world. Time is another important aspect of marketing. Many agricultural commodities must be harvested at a specific time, but can be stored for later use and in some cases be consumed year-round. Finally, in a specialized economy, most consumers are not producers. Marketing involves the transfer of ownership or possession from those individuals who produce, ultimately, to those individuals who consume the food or utilize the fiber.

A niche is analogous to a corner, nook, crack, or cranny. A niche represents something that is seen as being different, uncommon, or exceptional. A niche is small only because it is defined in comparison to something larger. A crack in a sidewalk, a niche in one thing, may be far bigger than a grain of sand, the whole of something else. The essence of a niche is its uniqueness relative to its physical surroundings or conceptual context. Thus, a niche market may be defined as a market that is different from the predominant market for the same basic commodity or generic class of products.

Market niches may be identified in terms of form, time, place, or individuality. For example, the market for blue corn may be considered a niche market. The market for local-fresh produce in season may be a niche market. Or Saint Louis, Mo might be a niche market for certain ethnic foods. However, market niches are associated, most fundamentally, with specific individuals or groups of consumers. The people who prefer blue corn chips make up a niche in the corn chip market only because most people prefer chips from white or yellow corn. The people willingly pay more for local-fresh produce in season represents a niche in the fresh produce market, not the particular time of year. And the ethnic communities of people in Saint Louis, not their geographic location, make up niches in the mass consumer market of the Saint Louis region. Niche marketing is about identifying and serving individuals or identifiable groups who have unique tastes and preferences for products that are different from those of the larger populations of which they are part. Niches are often "described" using differences in form, place, or time of delivery. But, market niches are "defined" by differences in tastes and preferences among people.

Industrialization creates market niches. This assertion is based on the premise that people differ in their tastes and preferences. If this is true, we still have different underlying tastes and preferences, even though we have been bribed and persuaded to buy the same basic things to accommodate the needs of an industrial economy. We have been bribed by the lower prices and persuaded by advertising and promotion. By accepting pretty much the same things as other people, not only because we can be "in style," but we can be "in style" at a lower price. Enough people were willing to accept a black Model T Ford to allow ordinary people to ride in style. But, that did not mean that everyone "preferred" a black Model T. Those who were not totally satisfied represented market niches for other car makers. Some niches grew into mass markets, but others did not. For many people, managing a riding stable may still be more rewarding, personally and financially, than managing an automobile dealership.

The industrialization of agriculture quite likely has created a multitude of niches in markets that are largely undiscovered. Food consumers have been bribed and persuaded into buying mass produced foods through lower prices, advertising, and other forms of promotion. Mass manufacturing and distribution systems employed in food marketing have limited consumer choices to those items that can compete for scarce space in shelves of modern supermarkets. For example, consumers have no choice other than U.S.D.A. choice grade beef, or a single similar quality store brand, in most supermarket meat cases. Fruits and vegetables, while abundant in variety, are generally available from only one or two supplier and one or two qualities of each item offered for sale. Canned and frozen foods may offer several labels, but with very similar products inside the can or box. The variety of different items offered by supermarkets is enormous, but efficiency dictates that substantive choices within generic food groups remain very limited. The emergence of fast food restaurants, likewise, has transformed table-ready beef, chicken and potatoes into a dozen or so manufactured, industrial commodities that can be mass produced for mass consumption. People who are satisfied with products that fit industrial systems of mass production realize a bargain. They get what they want at a lower price. Those who are not satisfied, but just go along, represent potentially profitable niche markets.

The key to successful niche marketing is to find a market that is: (a) sufficiently different from its mass market context to allow a significant premium in price (or a significantly lower cost), (b) large enough to be served profitably, but (c) too small to accommodate methods of mass production and distribution. Industrial suppliers attempt to fill market niches by providing as wide a variety of products and services as they can economically provide. However, much of their differentiation is in packaging, convenience, and other largely superficial differences in the same basic products. The primary advantage of being big arises from the ability to specialize, mechanize, routinize, and realize the economies of scale of "mass" production methods. Whenever industrial suppliers attempt to target niche markets, their production methods must become more like those of small suppliers, and consequently they become more vulnerable to small-firm competition. The smaller the market niche, the greater the competitive advantage for a similarly small supplier.

The basic market assumption of the industrial paradigm is "the consumer is always right." The industrial economy is "consumer driven" in that successful producers must fulfill the needs and wants of consumers. In reality, consumers are considered to be right only if their choices accommodate the needs of the industrial economy. If consumers cannot be bribed, persuaded, or coerced to conform to the requirements of mass production, they are ignored by industrial suppliers. These ignored consumers represent potentially profitable niche markets.

The small farm revolution

Sustainable farms must also be of a size consistent with their markets. Conventional wisdom is that most markets are mass markets, and thus, farms must be large – or if not must market collectively. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Markets are made up of individual consumers, and as consumers – as people – we are all different. We don’t all want the same things. In fact, each of us actually prefers something just a little bit different, and thus, values the same things a bit differently.

Mass markets are created by lumping together a lot of people who are willing to accept the same basic thing – even though they might not prefer them. If mass markets can be created, the food system can be industrialized, and dollar and cent food costs will be lower. The lower price is a bribe to consumers to accept something other than what they actually would prefer. Typically, they must be coerced as well as bribed to accept what the industrial system has to offer. That’s why Americans spend more for advertising and packaging of food than they pay the farmer to produce it. It costs more to convince people to buy industrial food products than it does to produce them.

Eighty cents of each dollar spent for food goes for processing, transportation, packaging, advertising and other marketing services. One key to economic sustainability of small farms is to capture a larger share of the consumers’ food dollar by performing some, and bypassing others, of these marketing services. Farmers currently get only about ten cents of each food dollar as a return for what they contribute to production, the other ten cents goes for purchased inputs. By tailoring production to consumer niche markets, and selling more directly to consumers, small farmers have an opportunity to make more profits without becoming big farmers.

The conventional wisdom is that niche-marketing opportunities are limited and can support only a handful of farmers. Once again, the conventional wisdom is wrong. Since all people want something slightly different, the ultimate in niche marketing would be to give every individual precisely what they want. All consumer markets are made up of individuals – totally, not just in part. Thus, all markets in total are made up of niche markets. The question is not how many niches exist, but instead how many different niches does it make sense to serve? The relevant answer, at least at present, is that more than enough market niches exist to support as many small farmers as might choose to direct-market to consumers. A lack of niche markets need not place a lower limit on the size of farms. Farms can be as many and as small as needed to accommodate the ecological niches of nature.

8.  Comments from Surveys

Thank you for answering our questions. If you have any thoughts on a plan to develop and strengthen agriculture in Upper Skeena we welcome your comments.

Cooperative venture with strong market research.

Do not depend solely on local markets, unless an independent store front is opened.

Grow watermelon.

A community garden would be cool.

Have regular markets Saturday somewhere convenient.

I will buy any fresh fruits & veggies if they are easily available.

Have fruit stands along the highway on the way to Vancouver, so tasty, memorable stops—don’t forget the cherry cider.

I think this is a great idea everyone would benefit with our economy going down.

If there’s anything I can do call me!

Barter, trade or sell produce on a bulletin board.

Selling in stores would be the logical place to start, but we totally sold out to California/Mexico companies and big US Agri businesses.

A market garden in Hazelton is a good idea.

I would like to see more local traditional herbs available.

Financing for new agriculture projects, meeting to discuss new ideas.

I’d like to request a few more days of sunshine a year here. I think it would greatly enhance the growing season.

Use sawdust and slabs to heat a large greenhouse, possibly at a sawmill to save freight costs.

Farleigh’s market is great in the summer.

Sounds like a fantastic idea, I hope it gets rolling.

House groups using traditional territories to have our gardens on.

Co-operative marketing and transportation.

Thank you and good luck.

It would be nice to see someone willing to start selling organic food as long as the price doesn’t rocket out of control. When I grew up we all used to grow organic food right in our gardens before people moved in.

Get a butcher shop for Hazelton. We need a meat inspector in our area. Contact land owners- help with business plans.

This would be a great opportunity for our youth and displaced workers.

Involvement of all communities regarding work. Employing members of all Bands. This way knowledge goes back into the communities. Many of us plant gardens but don’t have the volume to accommodate preparing for the winter months. I plant some vegies and berries but buy the rest at Farleigh’s.

9.  Legend of the Soils

Information source Department of Environment Canada. There is no land designated as Class 1 or Class 2 soils in the Upper Skeena.

Class 3:  Soils in this class have moderately to severe limitations that restrict the range of crops or require special conservation practices.

The limitations affect one or more of the following practices: timing and ease of tilling: planting and harvesting; choice of crops; and methods of conservation. Under good management they are fair to moderately high in productivity for a fair range of crops.

Class 4:  Soils in this class have severe limitations that restrict the range of crops, or require special conservation practices, or, both.

The limitations seriously affect one or more of the following practices: timing and ease of tillage; planting and harvesting; choice of crops; and methods of conservation. The soils are low to fair in productivity for a fair range of crops but may have high productivity for a specially adapted crop.

Class 5:  Soils in this class have very severe limitations that restrict their capability to produce perennial forage crops, and improvement practices are feasible.

The limitations are so severe that the soils are not capable of use for sustained production of annual field crops. The soils are capable of producing native and tame species of perennial forage plants, and may be improved by use of farm machinery. Improvements practices may include clearing of bush, cultivation, seeding, fertilizing, or water control.

Class 6:  Soils in this class are capable only of producing perennial forage crops, and improvement practices are not feasible.

The soils provide some sustained grazing for farm animals, but limitations are so severe that improvement by use of farm machinery is impractical. The terrain may be unsuitable for the use of farm machinery, or the soils may not respond to improvement, or the grazing season may be very short.

Class 7:  Soils in this class have no capability for arable culture or permanent pasture.

This class also includes rock land, other non-soil areas, and bodies of water too small to show on maps.

10.  Upper Skeena Agricultural Directory

Agriculture once played a much larger role in the community economy, when more food was produced and sold locally. Neighbours produced food for neighbours, money circulated locally and on the whole we were much more self-sufficient. Over the years, people have become increasingly dependent on people from far away to feed them. 

As consumers we spend on the average a little over a dime out of each dollar for food and the farmer only gets a penny of that dime. The rest goes to pay for commercial inputs and

marketing services  packaging, advertising and transportation. We are doing less to support the local economy and local farmers and spending more to support large-scale agri-businesses outside the area and in many cases outside the country. The farther we get from the food source the more difficult it becomes to know where the food is produced, how it is produced and who produces it.

This directory is an attempt to narrow this gap by connecting producers of food with consumers, grocery stores, restaurants and processors. It provides information about agricultural products that can be purchased locally, agriculturally related services and locally processed food. It is a straightforward and simple way for producers to market their products and services and f

for consumers to be more informed about the food they eat.

If we are going to improve the health of our community economy, we need to look for ways to take back control of our communities and our economy  to become more sustainable and self-sufficient. The intent of this directory is to support sustainable agriculture that contributes to the health of the people and the land in the Upper Skeena. Sustainable agriculture focuses on farmersí profit in the short run while preserving rural communities and natural resources in the long run.

Fruit and Vegetables

Fairhaven Farms

Hodkin Road off Old Cedarvale Rd. Kitwanga B.C.

Box  190  Kitwanga B.C. V0J  2A0   Phone (250) 849-5673 or (250) 849-5395

They sell carrots, cabbage and specialty potatoes. Purchase directly from farm or can be purchased from some local grocery stores.  On site they have U-Pick raspberries, strawberries and some blueberries and apples. Vegetables and fruits are grown using conventional methods of farming but are moving to organic methods, especially with the fruits. Open Sunday to Thursday 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Friday 8:00 to Noon .

Farleighís Market Garden

Kispiox Valley Rd. Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Box 343 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0  Phone (250) 842-6673

E-mail refce@bulkley.net

They specialize in home-grown freshly picked vegetables. More than 20 different vegetables are available. No pesticides or herbicides are used in production. Purchase directly from the farm or at the Farmers Market in Terrace. Phone ahead to order large quantities. Open 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. July to end of October. Sunday to Friday. Closed Saturday.

Glen Vowell Band

Box 157, Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0 Phone (250) 842-5241

1-877ñ 653-8833

They sell a variety of organically grown potatoes ó russets, reds, blues, Yukon Gold, Norlands. Phone ahead to make arrangements for sales.

The Garden of Weedin (Lucien and Pearl Senecal)

# 3 North Boundary Road

Box 814 , New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2J0

Phone (250) 842-2310

They sell greenhouse cucumbers, tomatoes and green peppers.

They also have U-Pick strawberries but will take orders to pick berries for customers with priority service going to elders. Customers must provide containers. No pesticides or herbicides are used. Organic-based fertilizers such as seaweed, soft rock phosphate, fish fertilizer and composed animal manure are used. Open  Sunday to Friday from mid June to mid August.

Hazelton Valley Farm

Carnaby Rd. South Hazelton B.C.

R.R.#1 Box 5 Boundary Road,

 South Hazelton B.C. V0J  2R0 Phone (250) 842-2464

They sell organic potatoes and cabbage. Produce can be purchased directly from the farm or can be purchased in selected local grocery stores. Produce grown using organic farming methods. Open Monday to Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Closed Sunday.

Saralyn Nursery

Swan Rd, Kispiox Valley B.C.

Box 846 New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2J0 Phone (250) 842-5405

They sell greenhouse tomatoes and cucumbers. Organic fertilizers.No pesticides or herbicides are used. Open everyday from 9: 00

a.m. to 9: 00  p.m. from April 15 to September 15.

Nurseries, Arbors and Gardening  Supplies

April Showers Garden Supplies (April Koning)

Silver Standard Road, Two Mile

R.R. #1 Site F Comp 19. Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-5480 E-mail koningklan@uniserve. com

They sell  trees, shrubs, roses and vines. They also make and sell arbors trellises and planters. They try to use organic-based fertilizers but occasionally use chemical pesticides and fertilizers.

Open Wednesday to Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Closed Monday and Tuesday.

Saralyn Nursery

Swan Rd, Kispiox Valley B.C.

Box 846 New Hazelton B.C.  V0J 2J0 Phone (250) 842-5405

They sell nursery stock for vegetables and herbs, flowers and hanging baskets. All vegetable stock is produced using organic methods while the flowers have been treated with conventional fertilizer. Open everyday from 9: 00 a.m. to  9: 00  p.m. from April 15 to September 15.

Beef, Pork, Goats and Lamb

B.J. Ranch (Bruce and June Nash)

33 klm Kispiox Valley Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 22, Hazelton B.C.

Phone (250) 842-5598

They sell beef by half and quarter sides. Free range with no hormones or antibiotics. They also sell calves and yearlings for breeding stock. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Mountainview Ranch (Lloyd Kerr)

4 1/4 klm Salmon River Road, Hazelton B.C.

R.R. #1 Site P Comp 2 Hazelton B.C V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-5872

They sell  South African Boer Goats to butcher and for breeding stock. Free range pasture. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

P/ E Ranch (Carole and Graham Larson)

6klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site L Comp 25 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6708

They sell beef by side and quarter. No hormones or antibiotics used in production. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Poplar Park Farm (Dave and Kathy Larson)

3klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 23 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6406 E-mail ppf@bulkley.net

They sell beef, pork and lamb by the side. No  hormones or antibiotics or chemical inputs used in production. They are in the process of becoming certified organic. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Rocking Chair Ranch (Dave and Gail MacDonald)

17 Mile Road, Kispiox Valley

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 43, Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-2102   E-mail gmacdon@bulkley..net

They sell ranch raised pork. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Julia Sundell

1.5 klm Salmon River Road

R.R. #1 Site P Comp 3 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-4088   E-mail jyukon@uniserve.com

They sell goats to butcher. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Horses

Rocking Chair Ranch (Dave and Gail MacDonald)

17 Mile Road, Kispiox Valley

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 43, Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-2102   E-mail gmacdon@bulkley..net

They sell AQHA western pleasure horses.

Poultry and Eggs

Poplar Park Farm (Dave and Kathy Larson)

3klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 23 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6406 E-mail ppf@bulkley.net

They sell farm fresh eggs. Call ahead to arrange sales.

Rocking Chair Ranch (Dave and Gail MacDonald)

17 Mile Road, Kispiox Valley

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 43, Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-2102    E-mail gmacdon@bulkley..net

They sell free range chickens and turkeys.

Julia Sundell

1.5klm Salmon River Road

R.R. #1 Site P Comp 3 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-4088     E-mail jyukon@uniserve.com

They sell free range eggs, turkey, meat chickens and stewing chickens. No medications or antibiotics used in production.

Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Pasture, Hay and Silage

The Combs

Swan Lake Road, Kispiox Valley

Site L Comp 23 Hazelton B.C.

Phone (250) 842-5957

They sell square bales for cattle and horses. No fertilizers used in production. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Dale Hobenshield

Box 547, New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2J0 Phone (250) 842-6728

They sell round bales for cows and horses. Conventional fertilizers used. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Fairhaven Farms

Hodkin Road off Old Cedarvale Rd. Kitwanga B.C.

Box  190  Kitwanga B.C. V0J  2A0   Phone (250) 849-5673

www.fairhavenfarm.ca      e-mail info@fairhavenfarm.ca

They sell square bales of grass and grass/alfalfa mix for cattle and horses. Some fertilizer used in the past on some fields but are going to organic production. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Lazy T Ranch (Mary Houlden)

Box 649  New Hazelton B.C. V0J  2J0

13 klm Kitwanga Back Road     Phone (250) 842-2482

They sell  square bales for cattle and horses. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Lou Parent

6 Mile Road, Two Mile

Box 517 New Hazelton B.C.    Phone (250) 842-6334

They sell round bales for cattle and horses. Some fertilizer used but moving towards organic-based methods with no use of chemicals and fertilizers. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Poplar Park Farm (Dave and Kathy Larson)

3klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 23 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6406 E-mail ppf@bulkley.net

They sell silage for feed. No fertilizers or chemical inputs used in production. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

P/E Ranch (Carole and Graham Larson)

6klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site L Comp 25 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6708

They sell square hay bales. No fertilizers used in production. Call ahead to make arrangements for sales.

Hemp

Gitsegukla Hemp and Sustainable Agriculture

Hwy 16 Gitsegukla B.C.

Box 36 Cascade Ave South Hazelton B.C. V0J 2R0

Phone (250) 849-5490   E-mail gitsegukla.hemp@kermode.net

They sell organic hemp seeds, oil and fibre. Call ahead to make arrangement for sales.

Honey

Poplar Park Farm (Dave and Kathy Larson)

3klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 23 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6406 E-mail ppf@bulkley.net

They sell wild flower honey by the jar.  

Special Services

Bruce Haskins

Wrinch Memorial Hospital, Hazelton B.C.

Bag 999 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6107

Provide gardening space for people to plant vegetables and herbs. Rows are about 15 feet long and the soil is ready for planting. Services include drip line and power tilling. Bruce also teaches an apple tree course that covers all aspects of growing your own apple tree and producing quality apples. He will also arrange for the purchase of root stock for apple trees. Call ahead to make arrangements.

Poplar Park Farm (Dave and Kathy Larson)

3klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 23 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6406 E-mail ppf@bulkley.net

They provide custom tilling and excavating services.

Imported Foods, Locally Processed

Garden of Weedin (Lucien and Pearl Senecal)

3 North Boundary Road

Box 814 , New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2R0

Phone (250) 842-2310

They sell custom baked hamburger and hotdog buns made with cold pressed olive oil, fresh farm eggs and ground organic whole wheat flour. Please make orders in advance as each order is fresh baked and not frozen.

Fairhaven Farms

Hodkin Road off Old Cedarvale Rd. Kitwanga B.C.

Box  190  Kitwanga B.C. V0J  2A0   Phone (250) 849-5673

They sell bread, buns, rolls and pizza crust made from organically sprouted grains and or flour. They also sell fresh grains, ground flours and cerealsógranola flakes and hot cereal that is sold in local stores and/or at the bakery. Bakery hours Sunday and Wednesday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Closed Saturday.

Local Producers

April Showers (April Koning)

Silver Standard Road, Two Mile

R.R. #1 Site F Comp 19. Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-5480 E-mail koningklan@uniserve. com

Bruce Haskins

Wrinch Memorial Hospital, Hazelton B.C.

Bag 999 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6107

B.J. Ranch (Bruce and June Nash)

33klm Kispiox Valley Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 22, Hazelton B.C.  V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-5598

The Combs

Swan Lake Road, Kispiox Valley

Site L Comp 23 Hazelton B.C.

Phone (250) 842-5957

Dale Hobenshield

4klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

Box 547, New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2J 0

Phone (250) 842-6728

Fairhaven Farms

Hodkin Road off Old Cedarvale Rd. Kitwanga B.C.

Box  190  Kitwanga B.C. V0J 2A0   Phone (250) 849-5673

www.fairhavenfarm.ca     E-mail  info@fairhaven.farm

Farleighís Market Garden

Kispiox Valley Rd. Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Box 343 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0  Phone (250) 842-6673

E-mail refce@bulkley.net

Garden of Weedin (Lucien and Pearl Senecal)

# 3 North Boundary Road

Box 814 , New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2J0   Phone (250) 842-2310

Gitsegukla Hemp and Sustainable Agriculture

Hwy 16 Gitsegukla B.C.

Box 36 Cascade Ave

South Hazelton B.C. V0J 2R0

Phone (250) 849-5490

E-mail gitsegukla.hemp@kermode.net

Glen Vowell Band

Box 157, Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0  Phone (250) 842-5241

1-877ñ 653-8833

Hazelton Valley Farm (Richard Wilkerson)

Carnaby Rd. South Hazelton B.C.

R.R.#1 Box 5  Boundary Road,

South Hazetlon B.C. V0J 2R0

Phone (250) 842-2464

Lazy T Ranch (Mary Houlden)

Box 649  New Hazelton B.C. V0J  2J0

13 klm Kitwanga Back Road

Phone (250) 842-2482

Lou Parent

6 Mile Road, Two Mile

Box 517 New Hazelton B.C. V0J 2R0

Phone (250) 842-6334

Mountainview Ranch (Lloyd Kerr)

4 1/4 klm Salmon River Road, Hazelton B.C.

R.R. #1 Site P Comp 2 Hazelton B.C V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-5872

P/E Ranch (Carole and Graham Larson)

6klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site L Comp 25 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6708

Poplar Park Farm (Dave and Kathy Larson)

3klm Poplar Park Road, Kispiox Valley B.C.

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 23 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-6406 E-mail ppf@bulkley.net

Rocking Chair Ranch (Dave and Gail MacDonald)

17 Mile Road, Kispiox Valley

R.R. #1 Site M Comp 43, Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-2102

E-mail gmacdon@bulkley..net

Saralyn Nursery

Swan Rd, Kispiox Valley B.C.

Box 846 New Hazelton B.C.  V0J 2J0

Phone (250) 842-5405

Julia Sundell

1.5 klm Salmon River Road

R.R. #1 Site P Comp 3 Hazelton B.C. V0J 1Y0

Phone (250) 842-4088

E-mail jyukon@uniserve.com

11.  FOOD SECURITY

With the increased movement of people and goods around the globe, food security, access to adequate and sustainable food supplies, and food safety have become topics of widespread international interest.

Food security exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.

Food security and safety are tightly linked. On one hand, transgenic technology may hold the greatest potential to increase food production, reduce the use of harmful chemical pesticides, and provide nutritional foods. On the other hand, some argue that the technology, rather than being a hope, represents a new threat to both the environment and health.

12.  Sources & References

Acres USA, A Voice for Eco-Agriculture, Published Monthly by Acres USA,

Action 2000, A journey into the human and economic potential of the Upper Skeena, February, 1998.  A-D Communications, Hazelton, BC.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Agriculture in Harmony With Nature, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Sustainable Development Strategy 2001-2004, ISBN # 0-662-29910-8

BC Ministry of Agriculture Food and Fisheries

BC Organic Grower, Summer 2002. BC Organic Grower, Special Issue, July 2002. BC Organic Grower is a quarterly publication of the Certified Organic Association of BC.

Beyond 2000, Creating Our Future, Setting socioeconomic priorities in our communities, March, 1999.  A-D Communications, Hazelton, BC.

Bringing the Food Economy Home, The Social, Ecological & Economic Benefits of Local Food, ISEC, Helena Norberg-Hodge

Business & Sustainable Development , The Earthscan Reader, 2001,Richard Starkey and Richard Welford, ISBN # 1-85383-639-7

Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, The Farm Crisis & Corporate Power, Darin Qualman, April 2001

Canadian Geographic, Jan/Feb 2002, Special Edition, FOOD

Country Life, The Agricultural News Source in British Columbia since 1915, Surrey, BC

Cultivating Diversity, Agrobiodiversity and Food Security, Lori Ann Thrupp, World Resource Institute, ISBN # 1-56973-255-8

Eco-Economy, Building an Economy for the Earth, Lester R. Brown ISBN# 0-393-32193-2

Eco-Farm, An Acres USA Primer, Charles Walters & C.J. Fenzau,1996, ISBN # 0-911311-50-5

Family Friendly Farming, Joel Salatin, 2002, ISBN # 0-9638109-3-6

Farmageddon, Food and the Culture of Biotecnology, Brewster Kneen, 1999, ISBN # 0-86571-394-4

Prime Ministers’ Caucus Task Force on Future Opportunities in Farming, Interm Report, April 2002

Statistics Canada

The Biological Farmer, A Complete Guide to the Sustainable & Profitable Biological System of Farming, 2000, ISBN # 0-911311-62-9

The Food Revolution, How Your Diet Can Help Save Your Life and the World, John Robbins, 2001, ISBN # 1-57324-702-2

The Multiple Functions and Benefits of Small Farm Agriculture, In the Context of Global Trade Negotiations, Peter M. Rosset, Ph.D 1999

The New Organic Gardner, A Masters’ Manual of Tools and Tecniques for the Home and Market Gardener, Eliot Coleman, 2001, ISBN # 0-930031-75-x

Western Producer, A Weekly Newspaper Serving Western Canadian Farmers Since 1923, Published at Saskatoon, Sask.

Whole Earth, Spring 2002, A Food Revolution in Berlkey, Michael K. Stone

World Resource Institute, United Nations Development Program, United Nations

Environment Program, World Bank Isbn# 1-56973-443-7

World Resources 2000 – 2001, people & Ecosystems, The Fraying Web of Life

13.  STEPS to a SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

·        Conserve and Create Healthy Soil

·        Add organic matter to soil with green manure cover crops, compost, manures, crop residues and organic fertilizers

·        Conserve tillage

·        Plant windbreaks

·        Rotate cash crops

·          Conserve Water and Protect its Quality

·        Stop soil erosion in field in pasture

·        Reduce use of chemicals

·        Establish conservation buffer zones

·        Grow crops adapted to rainfall received

·        Use efficient irrigation methods

3.  Select Plants and Animals Adapted to the Environment

·        Grow crops and crop varieties well suited to Upper Skeena climate

·        Match crops to the soil

·        Experiment with older, open pollinated varieties that do well without chemicals

·        Raise hardy breeds of livestock adapted to climate

·        Raise livestock that gain well on grass and native forages

4.  Encourage Biodiversity

·        Diversify crops and livestock raised

·        Leave habitat   ( field margins, unmowed strips, pond and stream   borders, etc.) for wildlife

·        Maintain the health of streams and ponds

·        Provide wildlife corridors

·        Rotate row crops

5.  Conserve Energy Resources

·        Reduce number of tillage operations

·        Cut use of chemicals and fertilizers

·        Develop production methods that reduce horsepower needs

·        Recycle used oil

·        Use solar power

·        Use renewable, farm-produced fuels; ethanol, methanol, fuel oils from oil seeds, methane from manures and crop wastes

6.  Increase Profitability and Reduce Risk

·        Diversify crops and livestock

·        Maximize the use of on-farm resources

·        Work with, not against, natural cycles

·        Keep machinery, equipment and building costs down

·        Add value to crops and livestock

·        Try direct marketing ( subscription farming, csa, farmers’ markets )

13.  Wilp or Gitxsan House group

A House group, orWilp, is the basic sociopolitical economic unit in the Gitxsan traditional governance system containing anywhere from 20-200 closely related individuals based on matrilineal ascendancy. Each Wilp has a distinct landbase and fishing locations within the 30,000 square kilometres of traditional territory in northwest BC. There are more than 50 Wilps, each with its own hereditary chief.