Traceability

[parsley]

<p></p><p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong>[URL=" http://parsleysnotebook.blogspot.com/2009/10/should-food-traceability-costs-be-paid.html"](Is OnTrace your cup of tea?)[/URL]</strong></p>

[charliep]

You mention segregation and traceability be a cost of business for
farmers? You make the point that the customer is always right in other
threads. If this is what your customer wants full traceability systems, why
wouldn't provide them this service as a business practice- particularly if
they are paying you well at price premiums over the commodity stream.

If organics had a full traceability system, why can't you move any product
you want into Europe - farm gate to processor. Then you would have no
issue with conventional crops and GMO.

[checking]

I'm trying to think of the last time I saw a European processor with the interest of his EU customer in mind come to an area farm with his sensitive testing equipment in tow, confirm this grain is pure, bring out their pressure washed containers, and arrange to have it hauled to port. No, the onus is on us to cottle to their terms of, I'll reserve the right to reject this when it arrives at my Greenpeace inspected bake shop.

They pay so well for these services in the price we receive for our raw grains, and so consistently. Lovely system that has been developed.

[parsley]

How do we read the Ontario system?

Stores propose they will have an audit code built in when they scan the product at their tills. Tracing the food product to its' source. Not just for organic, charliep. But for all food. Food producers pay to participate

Say, Uncle Wheatgerm, a flour company in Manitoba sells flour bags to an Ontario store. Does each batch ground incorporate the coded producer's ID# into Wheatgerms' lot#? Is that how it will be done? Who does the producer pay to obtain his coded ID?

Will Wheatgerm also pay the store? Or will the producer pay Wheatgerm? User fee? Will the fees establish and maintian a "Contamination/recall fund"?

You can see where this is going, right?(Or a wine company in Calgary supplies an Ontario store with wine made from g****s grown by four BC g**** growers.)

Questions I have:
1. How is the price of the code the producer will need, be determined and by whom? Will it fluctuate? Annual, or onetime? or every time scanned?

2. If there is a recall, who pays? For example, in the case of mustard and flax, in the EU, there is a recall, who pays? Theycost money. The grocer will say, "There is contamination." Who would/should pay for recalling mustard jars? It can take years in court to determine fault.Good thing to plan to avoid.

As an example, the EU tested contamination. Does it go back to the producer to pay, because the seed he purchased, or because of pollination, or because of crossing, EVEN IF HE WAS UNAWARE, is contaminated and he is responsible for the contamination?

The devil is in the details. And who pays will be in the details.


**** And I'm not sure farmers have anyone working in their best interests, dotting the i's and crossing the t's.******

This is not a criticism. This is a reality I believe farmers will have to work with.

Farmers picked up the loss of deer poop, if I recall, and the CGC swept it under the table with absolutely no apology, just smoothing so they looked good. But Farmers picked up the tab in demurrage, bad PR etc. Why should farmers have had to pay? After all, farmers had already paid for cleaning at port.

Farmers will be systematically downloaded on, unless we plan, participate, and watch carefully.

[parsley]

charliep,

Farmed conventionally for 22 years. A farmer is a farmer.

The conventional people will do what they want to do. But my observation is that a system WILL be planned.

Few traders enjoy boatloads of unloaded grain

And dreading more.

My point is hopefully farmers will take interest AND action and be part of the process to come

Or pay for it in spades.

If they don't, they don't. Pars

[charliep]

Traceability doesn't necessarily deal with who pays. It is simply a mechanism for recording various attributes, quality characturistics, food safety issues, tolerances around things like GE levels, etc. at various points in the supply chain. If there is a problem in the supply chain, traceability works to quickly get to the root cause.

Responsibility/other issues including financial liability will be dealt with in the contracts along the supply chain. These issues are already in commercial contracts today whether there is traceability or not.

Perhaps one of the benefits of traceability systems is that there is very clear communication about buyer requirements - particularly if they fall outside normal government grading requirements or import regulations. Then everyone can do risk assessment and determine whether the financial benefit out weighs the costs/risk.

[parsley]

actually charliep, we've adhered to traceability for many many years.

The point I was making though, about traceability, was "Who pays?"

There are things that come up that are really quite head scratching.

If there is a recall, as is so common these days, it is essential to have response, and a lead person, and so on, as the trace is done.

But it is not always cut and dried.If it was, flax would be moving and so would mustard, wouldn't it?

Who pays always comes up. Even with an agreement.

"Did Farmer Peter have a nasty cat digging in some pile here?"

http://www.canada.com/stops more canola meal with salmonella/2075205/story.html
Contamination you don't even know about is costly. And more farmers are value adding and selling direct than ten years ago. Pars

[haveapulse]

"Who pays?" no Pars "Who benefits?" is the new persepctive.

IP; traceability officially has a raison d'etre born. It will be a necessity of marketing into the EU which in turn will be the ability to sell so someone can pay for the commodity in their bin.

We can and will provide IP products with guaranteed purity with confidence to buyers, the reality is we will have to.

The question is no longer who pays because it will be our benefit to do this.

[parsley]

I agree, haveapulse.

I was looking down the road.

I went into Regina several times last week, and bought some fruit I cannot buy locally, in two major grocery chain stores.

Now, since I am intending on making plum perogies for a birthday party for a friend, I hunted in the stores for BC plums. I love them. I hunted awhile ago for them, too. BC peaches are also becoming hard to come by.

The distribution system seems to truck us Washington and California goods.

Will IP access, down the road, be priced so Canadian farmers will be able to afford access markets?

Who decides?

Presently, Shelf space = an arm and a leg. In every store.

Will IP = a shoulder and a hip?

Or will shelf space costs be miraculously transformed into IP costs?

[parsley]

<p></p>
<p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong>[URL="http://www.gs1.org/sites/default/files/docs/traceability/GS1_tracebility_what_you_need_to_know.pdf"](Traceability Primer)[/URL]</strong></p>

[parsley]

<p></p>
<p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong>[URL="http://www.gs1.org/sites/default/files/docs/barcodes/databar/RSS_Perishable_Cost_Benefit_Study_Aug2001.pdf"](Gs1/ Loblaws)[/URL]</strong></p>

[parsley]