Saskatchewan Broiler Hatching Egg Producers Marketing Board

Transcription

1 Saskatchewan Broiler Hatching Egg Producers Marketing Board Annual Report

2 Table of Contents Who we are 2 Office Staff 2 Reports 3 Chair s Report 3 Chief Executive Officer 4 Saskatchewan Poultry Extension Service 5 Introduction 6 General 6 Broiler Hatching Egg Producers 8 Chicken Producers 9 Turkey Producers 10 Table Egg Producers 11 Budget report and Predictions 15 Financial Statements 16 Auditor s Report 17 Balance Sheet 18 Statement of Operations 19 Statement of Changes in Net Assets 20 Statement of Cash Flows 21 Notes to the Financial Statements Broiler Hatching Egg Budget 24 Who We Are From Left to Right Clinton Monchuk - Chief Executive Officer Colleen Kohlruss - Executive Assistant and Promotions Christina Nelson - Poultry Analyst Gale Kellington - Office Manager Missing from Picture Aaron Neufeld Auditor Janice Sopatyk Auditor 2

3 Reports Chair Henk van Steenbergen Cheers Gentlemen, looks like the end of a difficult chapter for the board and the beginning of a new era. Such were the words of Mr. Roy White, our government appointed administrator, upon informing us that the Government of Saskatchewan had approved and enacted the order in council for the return of power to the BHE Board. A new era for us as producers to work together with our stakeholders for the betterment of the Saskatchewan broiler hatching egg industry. To that end I am thankful for the good working relationship that we have experienced with our hatcheries in discussions as to what our allocation should be and the co-operation we have received in leveling out the flow of eggs as needed. Thankful that we are allowed to represent a group of producers who all operate CHEQ certified facilities in our quest to produce the best hatching eggs possible and that this same group of producers is willing to get together and wrestle with issues when needed. Also, for the work that our general manager, Clinton Monchuk, and his very capable staff in the office at Pacific Avenue, have done in support of our board. Two main issues come to mind that we have worked on as board: Firstly, finding ways to boost the total hatching egg production for the province and with the sought-after regulation change we have turned a corner and will be well on our way to achieving our production targets in the next year or two. Secondly, a stalemate in negotiations of a new Federal-Provincial Agreement has left Saskatchewan unable to obtain full membership status at CHEP, our national board. The directors at CHEP are actively pursuing ways to expedite the entry of Saskatchewan, as well as Alberta, as full members. With the support of the Farm Products Council of Canada an official signing ceremony in the next couple of months is the hoped for outcome. As stated before, a new era, but most likely not without its difficulties. If the last year and a half are any indications however, I feel confident that we will work, as an industry, through whatever difficulties we may encounter. Yours truly, Henk van Steenbergen. 3

4 Chief Executive Officer Clinton Monchuk This was a landmark year for the Saskatchewan Broiler Hatching Egg Producers Marketing Board (BHE), as it was the first in numerous where an elected board fully functioned. The four new board members, Hendrick Van Steenbergen (chair), Dave Janzen (vice-chair), Jeff Regier and James Glen, guided the industry through some change. There were a few changes to policy over the course of the year. Two new board orders were approved by the BHE Board and the Agri-Food Council, one revoking out-of-date board orders and the other updating base quota transfers. The board was also working on two other orders specific to leasing and the CHEP levy, however they will not be approved until The new leasing policy for 2012 would result in no overproduction penalty for producers who have over produced, if the province is not over produced their allocation. The board viewed this change as a beneficial policy to help Saskatchewan fully utilize our allocated production. At the 2011 fall producer meeting the board and producers agreed to an increase in levy rate. The current levy of $ per egg set of base quota in 2011 was not sufficient to adequately support a fully functioning board. Producers voted in favour of increasing the levy rate to $ per egg set of base quota in 2012 and $ per egg set of base quota in I look forward to serving this board in Yours truly, Clinton Monchuk 4

5 Saskatchewan Poultry Extension Service University of Saskatchewan Annual Report January December 2011 Prepared for: Chicken Farmers of Saskatchewan Saskatchewan Egg Producers Saskatchewan Turkey Producers Saskatchewan Broiler Hatching Egg Producers Lilydale Foods Inc., A Sofina Foods Company. Prairie Pride Natural Foods Ltd. Dr. S. Gomis, Dept. of Veterinary Pathology, U of S Dr. H.L. Classen, Dept. of Animal & Poultry Science, U of S Prepared by: Tennille Knezacek Bob Goodhope 5

6 I. INTRODUCTION The Saskatchewan Poultry Extension Service is funded by the four Saskatchewan Poultry Marketing Boards, Lilydale and Prairie Pride Natural Foods. There are two service personnel: a Poultry Scientist and a Veterinarian. The University of Saskatchewan provides an office for each and access to university resources. Policies are established by the Saskatchewan Poultry Council on recommendations by the Research and Extension Committee. The service is supervised and administered by Drs. S. Gomis and H.L. Classen of the University of Saskatchewan. Program Objectives: 1. Monitor industry performance. 2. Identify and solve industry problems. 3. Investigate individual production problems. 4. Communicate advances in poultry production. 5. Act as a liaison to individuals supplying feed, medication and equipment to the poultry industry. Personnel: Tennille Knezacek, Poultry Scientist, (306) Bob Goodhope, Poultry Veterinarian, (306) II. GENERAL 2011 Saskatchewan Poultry Industry Conference In 2011, the Sheraton Cavalier hosted the Saskatchewan Poultry Industry Conference on March 2 nd and 3 rd. The luncheon and technical presentations arranged by the Poultry Extension service included: Dr. Tom Scott, University of Saskatchewan, It Isn t Just Chicken Feed; Shelley Kirychuk and Natasha Just, University of Saskatchewan, What s in Poultry Barn Air?; Centaine Raginski, University of Saskatchewan, What Chickens Like to Eat Does It Impact Feather Pecking?; Tennille Knezacek, University of Saskatchewan, Toe Trimming Turkey Hens; Dr. Martin Zuidhof, University of Alberta, Building Better Broiler Breeder Bodies; Karen Schwean- Lardner, University of Saskatchewan, Let There Be Light And Dark!; and Aman Deep, University of Saskatchewan, Impact of Light Intensity on Broiler Production and Welfare. The 2010 Saskatchewan Egg Producer of the Year Award was presented at the conference banquet to Fritz Mandel from Eatonia Colony and Edward Kleinsasser from Smiley Hutterian Brethren as there was a tie for first ranking! Gery Schubert, playing the roles of Captain Stubby and Elvis Presley, was hired for the banquet entertainment. As attendees boarded the S.S. Poultry Love Boat, they were donned with tropical leis or feather boas. After practicing the life-boat evacuation drill, we were serenaded by two Elvises (Dr. Goodhope being Elvis #2) and astounded by the chicken-dancing talents of Mr. Clinton Monchuk and Mr. Mike Dungate! 6

7 Presentations and Newsletters Poultry extension is available to write technical articles for producer newsletters and mail-outs, as well as make presentations on topics of interest at producer meetings. The 2011 fall meeting for the Saskatchewan Egg Producers was held in Swift Current on November 3 rd. Presentations delivered by poultry extension were Salmonella Monitoring Update and Control, The Perplexing Cases of Shell-less Eggs and Egg Size in Saskatchewan. Articles prepared for the Chicken Farmers of Saskatchewan newsletter included: Infra-Red Camera for Field Applications (February 2011); When Should Lighting Programs Begin? (April 2011); OFAC Activist Advisory (August 2011); and Bird Capacity Calculation for ACP Record Sheet 1 (November 2011). Additionally, a Poultry Pointer was written for the Saskatchewan Poultry Producers titled, Disease Alert: Infectious Laryngotracheitis (ILT) diagnosed in Saskatchewan (February 2011). CanNAISS Program CanNAISS is the Canadian Notifiable Avian Influenza Surveillance System that has been developed by CFIA, government and poultry industry representatives to meet current Notifiable Avian Influenza (NAI) guidelines from the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and new trade regulations of the European Union. This surveillance program will also assist in preventing, detecting and eliminating the presence of H5 and H7 subtypes of NAI in Canada's commercial poultry flocks. CFIA covers all costs associated with sample collection, submission and analysis. During 2011, the Saskatchewan Poultry Extension Service was contracted by CFIA to collect blood samples from 16 turkey and 4 broiler breeder flocks. NAI virus was not detected in any of the tested flocks. Infra-Red Camera In conjunction with researchers at the University of Saskatchewan, Poultry Extension has purchased an infra-red camera for use in research and field applications. Infra-red thermography is a useful tool because it is non-contact, two-dimensional, and allows images of fast changing thermal patterns to be captured in real-time. Applications for poultry producers may include ventilation, equipment and insulation assessments. Producers interested in acquiring thermal images of their barns and/or equipment must schedule an appointment with Poultry Extension. Emergency Response Planning The Saskatchewan Poultry Industry Emergency Management Team (SPIEMT) producer manuals are available from the board offices. The manuals include information about reportable poultry disease symptoms and the procedures to follow if you suspect you have a reportable disease on your farm. SPIEMT is comprised of representatives from the Saskatchewan Egg Producers, Saskatchewan Broiler Hatching Egg Producers, Saskatchewan Turkey Producers, Chicken Farmers of Saskatchewan, egg graders and processors, hatcheries, poultry meat processors, 7

8 U of S poultry extension, feed industry, catching crews and Farm Animal Council of Saskatchewan (FACS), as well as government partners, including the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture. Acknowledgements Poultry Extension would like to thank the poultry producers and processors who make themselves, their facilities and their birds available for educational purposes. Students from the Western College of Veterinary Medicine and the College of Agriculture and Bioresources at the University of Saskatchewan appreciate the opportunity to learn first-hand about the Saskatchewan poultry industry. These student-industry interactions are also an excellent opportunity to promote the poultry industry in this province and to encourage student interest in poultry-related employment subsequent to graduation. Strict biosecurity protocols are followed for all on-farm visits. Additionally, a list of students in attendance is provided to keep the visitor log book at each farm site current. III. Broiler Hatching Egg Producers Health Overall flock health was good. Seven producers reported 15 disease incidents. Twenty percent of the cases were bacterial yolk sac infections in chicks. Bacterial lameness (arthritis/tendinitis) accounted for 20% of diagnostic submissions. There was one case of fowl cholera which was a historically common diagnosis years ago but has been controlled with vaccination and biosecurity. There were no cases of necrotic enteritis, which has been present in previous years. Lame breeders are not likely to breed or be bred and therefore do not contribute to quality hatching eggs. Reducing stress to the breeders will minimize lameness in the flock. A few stressors to consider carefully are moving pullets, adjusting birds to the layer barn, rooster aggression, nest box competition and feed management, which all become more critical as hens achieve peak egg production. The search for a commercial manufacturing company to produce vaccine developed by Dr. Gomis for inclusion body hepatitis (IBH) continues. IBH outbreaks have caused significant mortality losses in broiler chicken flocks for the past 9 years. An efficacious vaccine would prevent transmission of the virus from the egg to the broiler chick. Dr. Gomis is continuing his research raising breeders and doing various vaccine challenge strategies to determine the best types of IBH virus, dosage and application methods. All breeder flocks were blood sampled to monitor vaccination effectiveness for infectious bursal disease and avian encephalomyelitis to ensure protection of parents and progeny. The results indicate good vaccination practices in most flocks. All flocks were blood sampled twice to ensure freedom from Mycoplasma gallisepticum (MG) and Mycoplasma synoviae (MS). All flocks tested negative for MG and MS. Vaccination auditing, particularly for breast injections, is part of the poultry extension service that can be requested. A random sample of pullets is examined to ensure the person(s) administering the vaccine(s) is using the proper technique and applying the vaccine in the correct area. 8

9 IV. Chicken Producers Health Overall broiler chicken livability has continued to be good. Sixty producers reported 131 disease incidents. For the first time in seven years yolk sac infection (YSI) in chicks has regained the top spot from Inclusion body hepatitis (IBH) as the most frequent diagnosis with 38%. Bacterial E. coli infections other than YSI captured second place with 18% of submissions. IBH comprised 12% of cases. The total yearly outbreaks of IBH reported are shown in the chart to the right. Numbers of outbreaks dropped for the first time since Research into the epidemiology and preventive strategies of IBH in Saskatchewan has isolated the mortality causing strains and developed a vaccine for broiler parents. The research is supervised by Dr. Gomis at the University of Saskatchewan and partially funded by the Saskatchewan Chicken Industry Development Fund. The latest stage in the research program is chicken challenge trials optimizing both the killed and live IBH vaccines. The search for a commercial manufacturer to produce the vaccine continues. For the second year bacterial lameness (arthritis) was an important diagnosis at 8% of submissions. E. coli is the most common bacteria isolated. However, the isolation of Enterococcus species (cecorum and faecium) is emerging as an important cause of the lamenesses as it had not been cultured prior to 2010 and was seen in a number of cases involving both limb and vertebral joints. Very few cases of coccidiosis were submitted and no cases of necrotic enteritis were diagnosed. Infectious Bursal Disease Dr. Susantha Gomis identified Infectious Bursal Disease (IBD) viruses in 36% of Saskatchewan broiler farms. All of the IBD infected premises had variant IBD virus. Because Canadian IBD vaccines generally contain non-variant strains, control of IBD in these Saskatchewan broiler barns has been compromised. Significant production losses due to lower meat production per square meter of barn floor area, poorer feed conversion ratio and higher morality were recorded from farms infected with IBD virus. An effective IBD prevention and control program must include an effective broiler breeder parent vaccination program, proper clean-up and disinfection between flocks and control of traffic on broiler farms, and if necessary, an effective broiler vaccination program. Dr. Gomis has ongoing research to evaluate the commercially available vaccine s ability to confer protective immunity against variant IBD viruses previously isolated from Saskatchewan broiler barns. In the coming year Dr. Gomis will conduct challenge trials 9

10 on chickens experimentally infected with both variant and non-variant strains of IBD virus to determine the effectiveness of the IBD vaccines. Liver Condemnations of Broiler Chickens in Saskatchewan The 2010 annual report summarized initial research findings indicating the association of infectious bursal disease immunosuppression and the greater likelihood of condemned broiler carcasses at processing due to liver conditions. A further study to better understand the factors responsible for liver infections of processed broilers is in progress. Dr. Gomis is supervising. These research projects are supported in part by funding from the Saskatchewan Chicken Industry Development Fund. V. Turkey Producers Health Ten turkey producers reported 16 disease incidents. The most frequent diagnosis was E. coli bacterial infections (31% of submissions) other than yolk sac infections, and its prevalence has dropped dramatically from the relatively high levels (50-60%) seen in the last four years. E. coli infections are usually secondary to a primary stressor such as moving to the grower barn, chilling, overheating, or hemorrhagic enteritis (HE) immunosuppression. Identifying the primary stressor is the challenge to achieving control of infection in subsequent flocks. Poults failure to eat or eating litter resulting in gizzard and intestinal impaction continued to challenge management skills. Turkey poults have poor adaptive behaviour. Changes to their environment such as removal of feed trays and moving to another barn with different feed equipment requires extra attention to make it as easy as possible for the poults to adjust and find the feed. If they fail to find the feed they will substitute the litter for feed and if this behaviour continues the litter plugs the intestinal tract and poult mortality increases. There were no flock diagnoses of necrotic enteritis. Impact of Toe Trimming on Turkey Hens The University of Saskatchewan Poultry Research Centre investigated the effect of toe trimming on the productivity, marketability and welfare of commercial turkey hens. Five hundred seventy six Hybrid Converter female poults were divided into two treatments: trimmed (T) and not trimmed (NT) toes. Poults were placed into 18 pens such that there were 9 replications per treatment and 32 birds per pen. The poults were raised in brooder rings with heat lamps until 9 days of age and reared to 15 weeks at a stocking density of 34 kg/m 2. The dusk to dawn lighting program included 23 hours light at 20 lux from placement until 9 days of age. At 9 days, daylength was reduced to 18 hours for the remainder of the grow-out period and the lights were dimmed to 10 lux. At 19 days, pecking was observed in one pen so the light intensity was reduced to 5 lux. A standard temperature curve was followed with the barn temperature starting at 30 C (plus 10

11 the heat lamps for 12 days) and falling to 22 C by day 35. Commercial feed was provided ad libitum and included two diets in each of the starter, grower and finisher phases. Body weights were recorded at 0, 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 15 weeks of age. Feed efficiency was calculated at the same ages and all mortality was submitted for necropsy. Tissue collections from 1-14 days were performed to better understand the nature of trim damage and healing process. Turkey behavior was recorded at 3 and 5 days of age by direct observation, and at 7 and 13 weeks of age using infra-red sensitive cameras mounted on the ceiling in the middle of each pen. Gait scoring was performed on 5 hens per pen at 7 weeks of age. In addition, these birds were identified with wing-bands and selected at 15 weeks for carcass evaluation at processing. There were no significant differences in overall production characteristics, including body weight, feed conversion and mortality, for T and NT turkey hens. However, NT poults ate significantly more feed than their T counterparts during the first week. Histological examination of treated toes showed damaged and necrotic tissue on day one. By day 4, epithelial cells begin to repair the damaged epidermis such that the necrotic tissue begins sloughing around 8 days and complete healing of the treated toe was evident by 14 days. Direct observations of poult behavior at 3 days of age showed significant differences between T and NT poults. T poults rested more and stood and walked less than NT birds. This trend was still evident at 5 days, but by 7 and 13 weeks, there were no differences in hen behavior. This data suggests poults may experience short-term pain due to toe trimming. Gait score at 7 weeks of age was not affected by toe trimming, as all hens walked with ease. Scratch evaluation at the processing plant showed NT hens had significantly more carcasses with scratches (46%) compared to T birds (12%), though not all of the scratches observed resulted in carcass downgrading. The high percentage of scratched carcasses in NT birds is a concern as it reduces carcass quality and therefore marketability and profit. Based on this evidence, toe trimming commercial turkey hens is still a necessary procedure for the poultry industry. Results from commercial turkey farms participating in this project, with larger flock and pen sizes, will help determine if this conclusion is justified. VI. Table Egg Producers Health Layer and pullet flocks were healthy with 25 disease incidents reported. The most frequent cases were shell-less eggs and yolk peritonitis. Marek s disease was diagnosed for the fourth year in a row following three years without a case. There were two flocks diagnosed with avian leukosis-like tumours, surprisingly, since breeding stocks have been free of the avian leukosis virus for decades. Sudden onset of 30-50% shell-less eggs was reported seven times in six flocks. This unusual presentation has never been seen previously in Saskatchewan. Production of shell-less eggs stopped as suddenly as they appeared. Normal production resumed within 10 days of onset with no subsequent abnormal production. Extensive laboratory investigation has not identified the cause. Further investigation using suspect tissue is planned. 11

12 Production problems associated with infectious bronchitis (IB) continues to be reported and investigated. Each production facility needs to determine the best vaccination program, as the risks are different for single age versus multi-age premises, whether growing pullets or not. The effectiveness of the vaccination program can be monitored by blood testing a small sample of birds from the flock a few weeks following the IB vaccination(s). Contact the poultry veterinarian to help determine whether IB is the cause of egg production problems and review IB vaccination programs. NIR Technology Near Infrared (NIR) is a region of the light spectrum where most organic compounds have defined reflectance properties which are determined by the molecules and bonds that make up the compound. NIR technology allows the characteristics of a compound to be quantified based on the way it reflects light in the NIR spectrum. Feed parameters that can be analyzed with NIR equipment include: moisture, protein, fat, fibre, starch and ash; and prediction equations can be established to estimate amino acid content, such as lysine and methionine, from protein measurements. Unfortunately, minerals such as calcium, phosphorous and sodium are inorganic compounds so the accuracy and reliability of these measurements using NIR technology is questionable. The InfraXact NIR machine purchased by the Saskatchewan Egg Producers Growth Fund will help Saskatchewan layer producers improve the accuracy of milling rations and feeding laying hens by optimizing the use of feed ingredients and providing more consistent complete feeds. Since the NIR machine was purchased and housed in the U of S poultry lab, 46 Saskatchewan Egg Producers have submitted samples for NIR analysis. Table 1 indicates the number of samples that have been analysed each year. Table 1. Number of samples submitted for NIR analysis, by year Year # of samples Overall % TOTAL Overall, the majority of the samples submitted are layer diets (73.8%), followed by ingredients (15.4%), pullet rations (6.6%) and other samples (4.3%). The Other classification includes supplements and broiler diets submitted by SEP members. 12

13 Table 2. Sample Type submitted for NIR analysis Description # of samples Overall % Layer Pullet Ingredient Other TOTAL Table 3 shows how close the NIR value for protein was to the expected value for each sample submitted. About 28% of the samples submitted had protein values from the NIR analysis that were within 0.5% of the expected value. However, more than 21% of the samples had protein values at least 1.5% higher or lower than the expected level. Approximately 18% of the samples submitted did not have an expected protein level denoted on the sample submission form. Table 3. Difference between expected and NIR protein levels Variation # of samples Overall % Within 0.5% Within 1.0% Within 1.5% Over 1.5% Not indicated TOTAL All egg producers are encouraged to submit ingredient and feed samples on a regular basis. Salmonella Monitoring Program The Saskatchewan Egg Producer Board tested all flocks for Salmonella species/serovars by environmental sampling. The number of flocks testing positive during the 2011 period was 34% which was similar to In 2011, 13 strains of salmonella were reported, with S. Kentucky, Thompson and Mbandaka the most common serotypes. Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) was isolated from one production site late in 2010, which is included in 2011 data. Eleven percent of positive farms had more than one Salmonella serotype isolated (compared to 23% in 2010 and 21% in 2009) and the most frequent site of isolation was from the egg belt (45%). The SE flocks followed the direction of Board orders. All other Salmonella serotype affected flocks were followed up with a letter indicating best practices for control. 13

14 Salmonella screening results are generally available within one week of submission. Layer farms testing negative in all locations will receive a salmonella screening memo in the mail from poultry extension within a few weeks. However, if any of the locations tested on a farm are positive, an additional Poly D test is performed before the samples are sent to the Reference Laboratory for serotyping. If the Poly D test is negative, the likelihood of identifying Salmonella Enteritidis is negligible. Serotype results can take up to two months to complete. Due to concerns regarding delayed notification of positive salmonella screening results, Poultry Extension will be notifying farm managers when the preliminary positive results are received. Once the Reference Laboratory identifies the salmonella serotype, a memo containing this information will be sent by post. 14

15 VII Budget report BALANCE, AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2010 $93,559 INCOME, SPONSORING AGENCIES $ 225,017 EXPENSES Salaries and benefits $ 204,613 Equipments including a vehicle purchase $ 33,958 Travel $ 8,468 Consumables $ 5,484 Telephone/Fax $ 1,427 Vehicle rental and lease $ 3,479 TOTAL $ 257,430 $ 318,576 BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 2011 $ 61,147 BUDGET PREDICTIONS Salaries and benefits $ 216,000 $ 210,000 Vehicle maintenance / Travel $ 13,000 $ 13,000 Telephone $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Consumables $ 5,000 $ 5,000 TOTAL $236,000 $230,000 15

16 16

17 17

18 18

19 19

20 20

21 21

22 22

23 23

24 SASKATCHEWAN BROILER HATCHING EGG PRODUCERS Budget STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND SURPLUS 2012 Budget 2011 Budget 2011 Actual REVENUE Board Levies (Net of CHEP) $ 130,183 $ 96,880 $ 96,880 Licenses and Membership $ 150 $ 150 $ 150 Interest $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 834 Miscellaneous income $ - $ - $ 2,280 CHEP Levy $ - $ - $ 77,328 less paid to CHEP $ - $ - $ (74,909) TOTAL REVENUE $ 132,333 $ 99,030 $ 102,563 EXPENSES* Amortization $ 130 $ 130 $ - Legal $ 7,500 $ 500 $ 8,872 Audit $ 6,000 $ 4,500 $ 3,927 Bank Charges and Interest $ 800 $ 850 $ 1,002 Per Diems $ 22,000 $ 8,400 $ 14,593 Directors Travel & Meals $ 8,000 $ 6,000 $ 8,559 Poultry Extension Service (U of S) $ 12,100 $ 12,100 $ 12,068 Insurance $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ 1,478 Janitorial/Repairs/Security $ 600 $ 500 $ 598 Meetings $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 1,241 CHEQ Program $ 5,000 $ 3,000 $ 2,079 Printing/Postage/Courier/Stationery $ 250 $ 250 $ 100 Rent $ 10,500 $ 10,000 $ 13,128 Salaries and benefits $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ 45,000 Subscriptions and Memberships $ 150 $ 150 $ 120 Management Travel $ 2,000 $ - $ 1,585 Telephone $ 2,200 $ 2,200 $ 2,090 Utilities $ 800 $ 800 $ 581 Loss on Disposal of Capital Asset $ - $ - $ 324 Miscellaneous $ - $ - $ 142 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 129,030 $ 100,380 $ 117,486 EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENSES $ 3,303 $ (1,350) $ (14,923) 24

25 25