If you are going to raise livestock, there will be deadstock. Most livestock producers in Ontario are able to bury, compost or recycle their mortalities. Some animal species (sheep, goats, etc) have been excluded from the recycling option. Other regions of the province have already lost the recycling option. The Nutrient Management Act will dictate how livestock producers dispose of mortalities on-farm, while economics and global markets will determine the availability of the recycling option.

Safe on-farm burial must consider the depth of soil, depth to ground water and stocking rates. Minimum distances to buildings, property lines, wells and watercourses must be considered as well. Despite farmers following best management practices, consumers will judge on-farm burial as high risk due to their perceptions of ground water protection.

Safe on-farm composting includes similar soil depth and minimum distance issues as burial. However, as composting is an art and a science and not simply an "out of sight out of mind" solution, scrutiny will be greater. Composting requires a greater degree of management to ensure a proper carbon nitrogen mix is achieved, thereby ensuring proper decomposition. A proper structure is required to ensure leachate is contained and scavengers are kept out. Despite the fact that proper composting will destroy the majority of pathogens associated with livestock mortalities, consumers have been educated to exclude meat from their backyard composting units and may also perceive this as a high-risk option.

The third disposal option available to many farmers is recycling. Historically small entrepreneurs have collected on-farm mortalities, and salvaged the hides, meat, guts and bones. This sector operated as a profitable free-market recycling model for years, as returns from salvaged products exceeded the costs of operation. However since 1998 the survival of these businesses has been threatened by depressed global markets.

In the fall of 1998, recyclers in eastern Ontario approached OMAFRA after hide and rendering markets fell. Recyclers servicing low-density cattle areas were most affected by the market downturn. Collectors were advised by OMAFRA and livestock organization representatives to implement user-fees in order to offset lost market revenues. Recyclers began to implement user-fees throughout 1999, at the same time restricting services, removing trucks from the road, laying off employees, and reducing operating costs.

The introduction of user-fees resulted in a significant drop in the number of cattle and hogs recycled, further compromising the viability of recyclers. In the fall of 2000, the Ontario Cattlemenís Association, Dairy Farmers of Ontario and Ontario Pork submitted an application to Healthy Futures (HFOA) to assist the recycling sector. At the time of application submission, hides had regained some strength. However, by the time the HFOA Livestock Mortality Recycling Project Livestock was announced in May 2001, the meat market had collapsed. With only one major pet food canner remaining, both the demand for meat and price had slipped by nearly 50%. The collapse of the meat market left some recyclers with no meat sales at all, skinning 65% off the businessís gross revenue.

The bad news continued for this sector as the hide market began to slip again in July. By July of 2001, only a few collectors with longer contracts were getting paid for their rendering (guts and bones). During the fall of 2001, rendering companies have been negotiating market-based contracts with recyclers that will most likely result in user-fees by the spring of 2002. Rendering is moving from a small source of revenue for recyclers to an expense. Once again, free-market forces will squeeze the primary producer as the expense is passed from recyclers to livestock farmers.

In a capitalist society, we are programmed to believe that free markets will solve economic problems. Has user-fees worked? Not even close to previous market revenues! Will HFOA rescue the recycling option? It may have, prior to the collapse of the meat and rendering market. The HFOA program leverages user-fees paid by farmers to build a trust fund. Recyclers must first purchase specific eligible items in order to access the funds accumulating in the trust fund. It will be difficult for many recyclers to draw upon their HFOA trust fund entitlements, while their cashflow bleeds red ink.

At a recent meeting of the recyclers in Eastern Ontario, it felt like a funeral. These business owners are depleted of the capital, energy and ideas to endure much longer. In an era of increased consumer scrutiny and unknown Nutrient Management Act regulations, livestock producers can ill afford to lose this livestock mortality disposal option.