The world is changing, and we all know that.
One of the biggest changes is going to be in the area of food production.
A growing population will demand more food. It is something farmers have been banking on for years. That food will increase in value in the face of population growth and that farming will become profitable on a continuing basis.
That is the positive side of the scenario for farming.
There is a negative side too though.
There will be growing pressure long term to have grain production going to feed people, and not animals.
We might love our beef steaks in the summer time, but it takes a lot of grain in a feedlot situation to produce that steak.
We love bacon. There is a growing realizing bacon makes virtually everything better. But again there are literally bushels of wheat and barley, or corn going into finishing a hog.
It's the same thing for a feed of fried chicken, or a Christmas turkey.
By contrast the land growing the grain for livestock could be producing lentils as a high protein source for humans.
The livestock sector is going to have to look to alternatives, partly to offset the perception of consuming valuable grain resources better targeted to human consumption, and to lower their production costs in the face of higher grain prices.
There are of course some obvious alternatives.
There are thousands of acres of marginal land simply not suited to grain production which will still grow hay and pasture land to allow grass finishing of beef.
And there are protein sources, such as the meal left once oil is extracted from canola seed which can go into livestock feeds because at present they have limited human consumption usage - although I will surmise that too will change as technology finds way to make the meal consumable.
All that said livestock producers need to look for new protein sources to remain viable long term.
Flash forward to a recent story out of Europe that might seem a touch sci-fi creepy, but actually makes quite logical sense once you get past the 'ewww' factor.
TheReutersstory out of Paris, which appeared online at www.producer.com detailed that a French start-up company Ynsect "has identified a cheap, nourishing and locally sourced alternative to soybeans as a source of protein in animal feed."
Jean-Gabriel Levon, co-founder of Ynsect, said seeking out new protein sources are economically a wise business decision for his company as new sources are essential in a market where costs are set to climb.
"The company, which has around 10 rivals globally, is raising funds to build the first European insect meal production unit by 2014-15. One well-heated part of the plant would breed insects and the other would crush them into powder," stated the story.
"It aims to focus on using flies and beetles", and Levon says a great advantage is that they can eat just about anything, such as human food leftovers.
"Once crushed, co-products such as shells can be used in the pharmaceutical sector, for cosmetics and wastewater treatments."
I personally can recall missionaries stopping at the Yorkton This Week office once, and during the interview offering up barbecue flavoured grasshoppers, something they said in many countries is a low cost, readily available, protein source for people.
Taste wise they tasted like the flavouring, with a definite crunch. I wouldn't say they'd replace potato chips anytime soon here, but they are protein rich.
Given that many bugs would be easily raised feeding off what we already deem as waste, converting that waste via the bugs to protein for livestock is actually a rather forward thinking idea.
It could not only lower feed costs, where the protein source is the lion's share of feed costs, but it could also be a way of biologically dealing with growing mounds of some waste materials. That sounds like a win-win situation that could meet a definite future need for society and agriculture.
