Disband producer groups

[rkaiser]

Hey cropduster, how goes the battle?
Don't know what the Canadian Cattle board is; haven't heard or read anything?
Horse may be right about ACC. Don't really see any other use right now.

If their hands are tied, as BWF explains then why even have public comments, or talk as if they can make a difference? If ABP is only out to look after the Cows and Fish program, then damn well say so, and lets start some kind of new organization. Big C has been directly or indirectly in front of a pile of politicians in the last few months with $hit for cash. Has ABPCCA been in front of them with anything but pom poms?

Support new packing initiatives my a$$. Even the ones that are being planned by high end ABP delegates are getting nowhere.

What the hell are they (ABPCCA) doing? Can anyone answer that very simple question?

Have any of the very few resolutions passed at the AGM been acted on?

We had a BSE meeting in Hanna the other night. Talk about Mark Purdey and a very interesting presentation by a Dentist who pushes the envelope with government and the medical profession concerning metal contamination and the effect of this stuff on the central nervous system (cows, humans, etc.).

While disscussing propeties and symtoms associated with various metals, the good Dr. got above most of our heads with a spew of accronyms.

I interupted with a few accronyms of my own.

While following the BSE crisis in North America, I have discovered a strange behavioral response to BSE and the USA from ABP and CCA. It seems that BSE has caused ABP and CCA to react in a strange way by bending over and kissing the ass of the USDA. Is this linked to something? Is this a side effect? It is happening on such a regular basis that it is close to becoming an epidemic. Science?????????????????????????????

[BFW]

In my earlier post in regards to ABP and marketing council I want to be clear that I'm not making excuses for the apparent lack of effectiveness that our organizations have displayed. I was merely pointing out my belief that the legislation and the structure under which the ABP operates pretty much precludes the outcomes of most situations. Remember, the Agricultural Products Marketing Act was drafted and enacted over 30 years ago. The industry and the issues were alot different then than they are now and certainly were not designed to allow the organizations to make long term, strategic decisions as are required in environments such as this. As I stated previously I don't think that the disbanding of our orgs is necessary but I think a total revamping and assessment of their roles in the future is in order and the sooner the better.

[JD4ME]

But what we really should be looking at then BFW would be a reopening and review of the APMA?
Is that something we should be looking to try and get some traction with?

[Horse]

Ivbenconed the only difference is the $ bombardier gets 2or300 mil and here it is handed out in smaller cheques and it is all taxpayer money yours and mine to the detrement of all players in same field.
Quote from Minister Thurber Its a little hard to justify that its compensation for damages when some lease holders are getting 2000 times more money than they put into it.
This is something that has just grown over the past 100 yr and there has to be a new look at it.
Thats a 1999 quote from the then minister but by changing Ministers all the time Ralph can keep the graft rolling .

[Horse]

horse, have you ever applied for a grazing lease ? You seem to have a one issue focus, and I don't know how you propose to change the current grazing lease program ? I always like to hear suggestions about a better way to do things. I know that the grazing lease review resulted in some changes, Tom Thurber chaired that review after he was dumped from cabinet, he was not a Minister at the time.

[cakadu]

The point made about the Agricultural Products Marketing Council (or Marketing Council as it is known as) and revisiting/changing policies is a valid one. In many cases, I think policies regarding what we are doing in production must be looked at because the circumstances are so very different than when they were first drafted or even amended over the years.

We have been asked to make all these changes to our production/marketing etc., yet the policies governing all of it haven't changed much, if at all, to reflect current realities. Granted, you can't rewrite policy every time change occurs, but it seems to me that you can ensure that it is at least resembling reality to some degree.

[bombay_43]

Emerald, the problem that Horse has with grazing leases, is a very valid one. He does not understand how land, which is owned by the crown, has compensation paid out to the leaseholders. Valid concern.

However, Horse and I have had this go around on several other occassions, and I have yet to see a fair proposal put forth by Horse, to resolve the issue.

Horse has not applied for a grazing lease, because to my knowledge, grazing leases in Alberta, have been trading, at approximately half the cost of deeded land.(AFSC will lend farmers money to purchase a lease, based on that figure) This money is paid to the former leaseholders, just to get your name on the lease. Lawyers are retained, in the same way regular deeded land changes hands. Title searches are done, etc. before the leaseholder now has the grazing lease rights. Every year, a minimal grazing fee is paid to the crown. As well, the leaseholder pays the municipal taxes on it. Liability for injuries, falls to the lease holders, just like private lands. Fencing is the sole responsiblity of the lease holder, and any further improvements, such as clearing, reseeding, dugouts, etc., must be approved by the crown. The amount of Animals allowed to graze on the lease is also set by the crown.

Now the part that frys Horses ...! Any oil and gas revenues, are split 3 ways, with 1/3 of the compensation, going to the lease holder. The remaining 2/3 goes to the crown.

How is the government suppose to compensate these lease holders, who have already paid a good dollar just to get their names on these leases? If you just paid forty or fifty thousand dollars to purchase a lease, is it fair to have to turn it back to the government with no compensation?

I've said it before, Horse, if the grass is so much greener on the other side, JUMP right in there! Leases come up for sale all the time. Government allowed the sale of these leases to other lease holders, in the first place. How can it be fairly corrected now? Give us all the benefit of your infinite wisdom!

Have a good one!

PS. Didn't qualify for CAIS in 2003 or 2004, I'll bet it's because Horse has been subsidizing my grazing!! Thanks Horse!

[bombay_43]

I am well aware of the requirements to obtain grazing leases etc. I also know that compensation paid by oil companies is less on a crown lease than on private land.
During my time on council we made recommendations to the Thurber committee, one being that once a leaseholder no longer had cattle the lease would revert to the crown, and could not be willed or sold to someone else, but that was not included in the final recommendations.
I know many people whose leases are worth far more than their deeded land. A neighbour of mine owns 3500 acres and has six sections of grazing leases covered in oil leases. He leased the land and has spent a kings ransom on improvements. He and his wife are giving their land to their kids within the next two years, and feel they will live very comfortably on their oil revenue which is around $75,000 a year.
I tried valiantly to get him to adopt me because I could use some of his nice well cared for land but he seemed to think that I was far too old to be his kid !!!

[ivbinconned]

Horse: once again... the difference is this. A QUEBEC business interest gets ALBERTA CASH, versus ALBETA business interests recieving a good deal FROM ALBERTANS!! GET IT!

One other aspect not yet mentioned and that is this (atleast in saskatchewan).

During the past 7 years of drought in which grass lease holderes could not utilize their leases anywhere near as much as they where charged for, they still got no sympathy from the Lands Branch and had to PAY for grass that did not exsist, or lose the lease.Got to keep the government employees fed!!

Had we been renting grass from private land holders there would have been no charge.

[Horse]

Well you have it I do have 1 concern and thats to make a $ in the beef business and I do hate to have to compete with govmt coffers that I help to fill . If it is only just and right that current lease holdes are intitled to oil revenue them are they not way over charged if there are no resources on some land.
What did you rent it for grass or oil? Two side by side 1/4s and one gets 1000$ oil and the other gets none but both are same cost how can you afford to have the one without oil?

Soultions the leases are 10 yr contracts They should be bidd on at end of term with posibly curent holder last right of biding term and no new leases issued at curent practice as for pouring a kings ransome into if the king is giving you the ransom I dont think it is all that much to expect.
In the last 15 yr or more there has been at least 5 govmt studies and with some private impot and all have said there has to be corections made and so far other than getting things mired down into agri there has been no change
Private AUM has gone from 10$ to 25 but crown land hadsnt moved