|
IBC2000-7 Plenary Sessions
The Bison Advantage I Dr. Robert Hudson
Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry &
Home Economics
University of Alberta
Edmonton, AB Canada T6G 2P5
| The following
article was originally presented at the International Bison
Conference in Edmonton, Alberta in August 2000. The
conference covered a wide array of bison topics including
production, marketing, genetics, history and much more.
This article has been reprinted with the permission of the
IBC2000 Chairman. |
Abstract
This
session aims to discover, articulate and capture the bison
advantage. Three
speakers illuminate the notion: an academic (Hudson) and the
executive directors (Conacher and Albrecht) of the two national
bison associations. In
this introductory presentation, I argue that the main element of the
bison advantage is image and this should remain central in
production and marketing programs.
Introduction
Sounds
great and sells well but precisely what is the ‘bison advantage’
and how do we capture it? We agree there is one but some of our most
profound philosophical and operational disagreements arise from this
very issue! Like an
unruly herd of bison, we seem to be going in the same general
direction, but the herd may split at any moment and there is
inevitable head butting along the way.
In
this session, we don’t pretend to reveal the final answer (that
would assume there was one). Rather we wish to provide new fuel for
thought and a learning map for the theme that pervades the
conference. Also, we
don’t pretend to represent the full diversity of views, rather the
opinions of people situated at three vantage points. The conference
reflects the broader diversity with topics ranging from the role of
bison as outstanding commercial opportunities, fascinating subjects
of scientific study, key ecosystem components, tools for ecosystem
reconstruction, and vital links to our cultural roots.
Transect
through time
Northern
peoples of both Old and New worlds share a common heritage as bison
hunters. However, in North America this history is only 15 decades old
or less compared with perhaps 15 millennia in most of Eurasia
(although European bison survive to the present day, a specialized
hunting culture was not sustained after the close of the last ice
age). Aboriginal North Americans therefore are an important bridge
to the past and source of traditional knowledge.
They must continue to play a central role in the evolution of
our industry.
From
subsistence hunting to feedlot production, many attempts have been
made throughout human history to capture the bison advantage –
some more successful than others.
Subsistence hunting, the most successful and sustainable strategy,
persisted about 50,000 years and reached its zenith of
specialization in western North America.
It declined with climate change in Eurasia and finally in
North America following a clash of subsistence and market economies.
Market hunting in the 1800s represents the logic of the market at
its most perverse. The
creation of a market for the versatile bison under an unstable
property regime, lead to the profound decimation of bison herds.
Markets for meat for the fur brigades and forts, growing
settlements, and robes and hides reduced 50 million animals to
almost a handful. Who
would have believed that the supply would have been exhaustible and
in so few years?
Husbandry became an option once wild herds had been depleted.
It began with a handful of speculators/conservationists
like Buffalo Jones, Charles Goodnight, Mossom Boyd, and Samuel
Walking Coyote. Attempts to ‘improve the breed’ lead to
cross-breeding as early as the late 18th Century. Thomas
Pennant (1784/5) notes that:
Attempts have been
made to tame and domesticate wild buffalo, by catching the calves
and bringing them up with the common kind, in hopes of improving the
breed.
Success
was achieved in the Red River Settlement about 1820, and hybrid
animals were promptly shipped to Britain to encourage investment.
Cross breeding attracted scientific attention when the Dominion
Department of Agriculture (1916-64) started their 50 year project,
which attempted to blend the beef producing qualities of cattle with
the hardiness of bison. But classic problems with interspecies hybrids limited the
potential.
The
modern red meat industry emerged in the 1990s with increasing
standardization of production, creative value added-diversification
of product, and sophisticated market promotions. The relentless
pursuit of quality implies grain finishing, suppression of
seasonality and, most seriously, a growing gap between what we say
and what we do. We
have learned well from the established mainline meat
industries…perhaps too well.
Except
to predict that the future of bison will be different, it is hard to
judge whether we have finally captured the bison advantage … or
given it away. Recognize that subsistence hunters, market hunters,
robe traders, and cross-breeders all were sure they had captured the
bison advantage. The
establishment of a sound modern meat business may seem to be the
crowning glory of the bison industry but the story will not end
here. Our success in capturing the bison advantage depends on how
the future unfolds.
Fig.
1. Product quality has several dimensions that collectively
determine consumer preference.
The problem and danger is that the pursuit of one (e.g.
sensory characteristics) may undermine others (e.g. image and
health). All quality
factors can be influenced by the animal (age, gender), how it is
fed, how it is transported and slaughtered, and how the carcass is
handled.
Preparing
for the new millennium
In
each attempt to capture the bison advantage in the past, failure
ultimately came because the world changed.
Subsistence economies were swept up by cash economies, market
hunting had to give way to settlement, hybridization was stopped
dead by premium prices for pure bison meat products. Therefore, more
important than projecting market trends into the future is trying to
understand how the world will change. We don’t have to look far.
The
United Nations Environment Program’s Global Environment Outlook
2000 tells us that within 50 years, human populations will increase
from present-day 6 billion to at least 10 billion. Humans already
have made a significant impact on global carbon budgets and climate
and threaten disruption of the world’s nitrogen budget (excessive
use of nitrogen fertilizers has caused eutrophication of estuaries
and contamination of surface and ground water). An even greater
crisis is the world’s hyrdologic cycle.
We expect severe global water shortages within a few years.
Despite concerted efforts, the assimilative capacity of the
earth’s ecological life support systems is strained and radical
immediate action is needed.
There
is no need to speculate on how the global community will respond. It
is mapped in Agenda 21, the outcome of UNCED (Environment Summit).
Of particular importance is Chapter 14 – Promoting Sustainable
Agriculture and Rural Development.
We
should expect:
- Trade
deregulation balanced by “Community-supported agriculture”
initiatives
- Perverse
subsidies will be reduced and costs will be imposed for negative
externalities.
- Stiffer
environmental regulations and product and operating standards
will be will be imposed
- Sacred
issues of property rights will be questioned.
Many
people were surprised with the suddenness and profoundness of
changes brought by the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change.
We can expect a similar response to concerns about the
nitrogen cycle. Two key agricultural inputs, fuel and nitrogen
fertilizer have already become much more expensive. Environmental
regulations and incentive structures further constrain conventional
agriculture. Environmental management systems such ISO 14000 and
various stewardship certification programs (e.g. Forest Stewardship
Council) will play an increasing role in agriculture. Because of the
wholesome idea of the family farm and private ownership of land,
agriculture has been sheltered by subsidies and regulations.
This is about to change as the public comes to appreciate
agriculture as a global business.
All
of this will greatly change the competitive position of different
countries and industries. It
will be bad news for many mainline agricultural activities but good
news for bison – if we play it right. The emerging order will
confer a competitive advantage on enterprises and industries that:
- Provide
wholesome safe food
- Are
environmentally sustainable
- Are
welfare sensitive
- Provide
environmental amenities/services or recreational experiences
Real
advantage
The
competitive edge in this new economy is the real bison advantage.
But to capture it, bison must be distanced from beef and aligned
with other natural foods. The marketing theme should be
‘nature’s harvest’ and it should exploit regional variation
and distinctiveness. Like
seafood, fruits and vegetables, nature’s foods can be seasonal, a
fact which should be part of the story-telling that goes with
seasonal advertising. Seasonal bursts of advertising will be less
expensive and probably more effective.
There
must be a consistency between market and production strategies. As
prices settle (as they must) and input costs rise (as they will),
the great competitive advantage for bison will shift back to
extensive rangeland systems, an option achieved with more difficulty
by beef. Because of the modest growth rates of bison, advanced
slaughter ages and long finishing periods make production relatively
expensive. The great
danger is that current trends will lead to production systems that
are only viable under unsustainable premium prices for bison
products.
Livestock
diversification
Bison
should be understood as part of a wider wave of interest in
livestock diversification rather than an extension of the cattle
business. Besides tapping new market opportunities, livestock
diversification spreads risks and makes better use of resources on
the farm.
The
logic of livestock diversification is to use multiple species to use
multiple resources to serve multiple niche markets. The
extensification of production that results offers several
environmental benefits such as preserving habitat and watersheds.
The
focus of research must now turn to producing animals profitably
under new price structures for inputs and products. Seasonal
production on pasture may largely replace year-round finishing in
feedlots. Studies of multi-species grazing systems may be added to
studies of nutrition and product quality.
Conclusions
We
should look for the bison advantage in the competitive edge it will
afford during the next doubling of human populations. New price
structures, tougher environmental controls and emerging consumer
behaviour will favour production practices that are wholesome,
welfare sensitive and environmentally sound. Bison offer a powerful
natural advantage but to capture it we may have to rethink our
marketing and production strategies.
The
future for the bison industry is bright but almost certainly
different than we currently imagine.
The current market is sustained because bison is similar to
beef. The future market will be sustained because bison is different
than beef and the key difference will be image.
We
are in the ‘adventure foods’ business. Live the legend! |
pdf)
