Dear CWB, Take me to Jail!

[cityguy]

I wonder what sort of carryout Canadian farmers would "choose" if we had a free market here. CWB forces the choice on you year in/year out and this year the Canadian wheat carry out (excluding the durum - different thread) will be in the 4 to 5 million tonne range versus production of about 21 million, or about 20-25%. In the US they carry over about 50% of production and next year it could be an even higher percentage. If Canadian farmers had an open market in wheat would they also carry over about half of their production this year and next?

[parsley]

Take your PICK stubble and AV'ers:


#ONE STUBBLEJUMPER "the real issue is that some ( farmers for just me) would stab their neighbor in the back rather than cooperate and get better prices"


#TWO PARSLEY

"the real issue is that some (farmers for just me) would not jail their neighbor through forced cooperatation for the mere purpose of getting better prices"


Let farmers choose. Or would you also prevent choosing, stubble? Pars

[parsley]

hlg,

"If the CWB is so bad grow non board crops or get elected to it. Change it from within."

You expressed more than you realize. You showed us who you are.

Few free market advocates believe in decrying to marketing board advocates, "Don't grow canola" It's just plain wrong.

But you are. Shame on you.

Farmers should be able to choose to grow whatever the hell they want. Your farm changes every day. And you know your farm best. The people who farm your land change. Your up and coming sons should be able to pick any crop he selects on a whim, or in a drought dream, or learns about from a Cargill ag rep, .......and grow it. That is what farming life should be.

What kind of a step-in-line farm world do you vision? Do you have any idea of what kind of agricultural life we enjoy, where we are able to choose what we grow and how much we grow, and how fragile that system is?

As for meaningful change...only the government can make legislative changes. Suggestive tinkering only ends up in the Government's backroom office, anyhow, with some twenty year old student drone deciding which pile to file it in, with the only decision made that because you sent your tinker on pink paper, the department will now incorporate pink paper filers and train them. That's what a government instructed institution such as the CWB does to stupid-assed FARMER-marks. We've had over sixty years of it.

Q Have you learned anything?
A Yes. Most of you grow mainly canola or lentils or peas or flax. Pars

[wmoebis]

What would the carry over be in the US. if there was NO loan rate? What would the price be?

The Gov't of Canada has made it clear that they will not play by the same rules as the US or EU. If the US took away the loan rate would the producers there conitue to sell at what ever companies were offering or would they carry over higher stocks waiting for higher price. We also have that option if we don't like inital signals at sign up time we don't have to sign up. We can fallow De Putters advise and drop it in the feed market and empty our bins. If we don't like the bids offered for lentils we don't have to sign contracts but there is always some who will sign and keep price low. If nobody would sign contracts for less than 45cents the marketers would have to go find it but they know we are price takers and tell us what we will get. Not only board grains.

Canada can not or will not change the rules. It is time for the Gov't of Canada to get some balls and step up to the plate and give us a level playing field with the rest of the world. WITH OR WITHOUT THE CWB. In all commodities. Is .24 cents for lentils good enough when not long ago they were .47cents?

Highered and appointed officials, at all levels, have thier noses so far up the elected, that appointed them, that they have to go to the drycleaners to get thier ears out of thier back pockets. The drycleaners are in Ottawa and while they are there they all dance around doing the naked bunny hop scrambling to get to the front of the line without making waves and getting sent back down the line. Once they at the front they find out it wasn't sooo bad being at the back of the line.

[hlg]

Pars I enjoy our freedom to grow whatever I choose. If there was a yes or no vote tomorrow and the CWB won then what? Our present system has made some very wealthy farmers. People complaining about the price of wheat and $300,000 tractors in the same post hardly makes sense. As stated above maybe it`s time for farmers to actually run CWB.

[cottonpicken]

Not sure what part that i wrote was not true.

And not sure about why SWP and me are in the
same sentence.

You need an example of what sucsessful farmer
cooperation can acheive?

Pull your truck up to the weyburn inland terminal.

I dislike,more than anybody,people marketing my
grain.I can/have/will lay a lickin on
anyone/anywhere /anytime on the markets
battlefield.

But for the guys that cant/wont/dont do this a,
pooling system is a damn good idea in my opinion.

Just like the other cant/wont/dont jobs that come
up on a farm-a farmer calls for help when he cant
accomplish a certain task.

And NO farmer can accomplish every task that
comes his way on a modern farm.

So can anyone guess cotton's word of the day?

ME ME MEES,ELMOS KNOWS WORD..

Yes Elmo

THE WORD IS VOLUNTARY ....HEHEHEHEH

[parsley]

"has made some"

Yes, well.

I think that about sums it up when it comes to wheat and barley.

Some.

The CWB machine rewards its' loyalists and economically crucifies its' opponents.

Include both companies and farmers in that supposition.

Selective largesse.

***One buyback for one applicant and another buyback for another applicant? ***Special contracts for supportive Manitoba Warburturds?
***Family holidays for the Combined Alumni?
yada yada yada on and on.

You can probably better descriptively explore each one of them from personal experience, and validly criticize me for making observative deductions from a view far far far afield.

Using the word "some" indicates you have, as a BSDA (Board Supporter in the Designated Area), conceded what NBSDA (Non-Board Supporter in the Designated Area) have known all along:

CWB dictum: "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, and we'll eat each other's lice."

Good thing there is equal opportunity for the rest of us with all off-board grains. NBSDA, Pars

[parsley]

You asked:

"can any anti board supporters fathom the worries of old school pro-boaders?"

The answer is "sure".

The old old old old pro-boarders formed a co-op, (good idea ) played in the futures market they knew nothing about(brave but stupid), lost their ass(not surprising), went crying to government to get bail out money( now here's where they shoulda been slapped with their horses' reins for being horses' asses)and after they got the cash, asked for a monopoly, and eventually got it. (whining incompetents who wanted to be guaranteed a living)

Voluntary is good. Voluntary co-op is good. No problem from me.

The remnants from the old pioneers is fear of failing, fear of marketing, and fear of standing on their own two feet...hence monopoly dependency), a fire of fear, fear, fear, all of which to this day, is continuously fueled by the CWB's propoganda machine. Pars

[cottonpicken]

And back to reality.

Show me this vast army of 65 year old small
farmers voting for the cwb consistently.

When i drive around all i see is monster big family
farms,with push pins of 30 to 50 dictating direction
and votes.

What the f can you accomplish in this war if you
cant see the trees because of the forest.

[parsley]

"small"? Where did I write "small"?

I did not, cott.

Don't take my word for it. Take this:

http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/rural_population.html


"2001, the average age of the farm operators in Saskatchewan was 50.9 years, which was 1.5 years greater than in 1996; and the average age of farm operators is greater than that of other Canadians in the self-employed and general labour forces. As shown in Figure RP-3, the percentage of farm operators in the age group under 35 years of age decreased by 7.7% from 1991 to 2001, while the percentages in the two older age groups increased during that ten-year period. The relative increase or stability in the older age group is possibly the result of the operators continuing to farm beyond the normally accepted retirement age of 65, because few younger operators are willing or able to purchase farm operations."


Yes, well.

The CFA can add to this discussion:

http://www.cfa-fca.ca/pages/index.php?main_id=74

"The number of farms has declined significantly in Canada over the last two decades. At the same time though, the amount of land farmed has stayed relatively stable.

The 1996 census reported that there were 276,548 farms in Canada. For the first time, the total number of census farms in 1996 included 138 commercial poultry hatcheries and 1,593 farms that produce only Christmas trees. Despite these additions, the number of farms has decreased by 18.3% since 1976.

In contrast to a decrease in the number of farms in Canada, the amount of cultivated land has remained relatively stable over the last 20 years. The result is that Canadian farms are, on average, 22% larger today than 20 years ago. In 1996, the average farm size was about 608 acres (422 hectares) 5 compared to 499 acres in 1976. It is also important to realize that in Canada, farm size varies from province to province. Newfoundland reported average farm acreage at 146 acres in 1996 while Saskatchewan reported an average farm size of 1,152 acres"

So, cott, the farmers are generally a bit longer in the tooth. The land base is pretty much the same. But the family farm has gotten a quarter larger.

Can we agree?

Now this is a little more cash-interesting:

"At 3% before tax, farmers' return on their investment, as measured by the equity ratio, is two to three times lower than that of other sectors of the agri-food industry.

Debt levels remained steady between 1990 and 1993 due to a combination of extremely low inflation and a period of recession. Nevertheless, the debt level of Canadian farmers reached $27.2 billion in 1996, an increase of approximately 14.7% over 1990.

The number of registered farm bankruptcies rose slightly to 275 in 1996. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Québec registered 81% of the bankruptcies in 1996.

In general though, farmers' input costs have outpaced farm gate prices. From 1986 to 1996, farm input prices rose 25.2% while farm product prices only increased by 16.7%."


Yes, well. It seems to me, the problem isn't the land. It's input, age and pricing.

In my neighborhood's world.

Farmers' NET profit seems to be the problem, what with input costs. No profit! Which causes bankruptcies. And causes Little Cotty VI to escape to the city. And causes Dad to long for more Wheat Board policy to GUARANTEE the next generations' success.

"Another day older and deeper in debt", sings little Johnny Cash.

So I say...if a farmer will cut inputs/costs (which also reduces production), get a better price, (which also means firing a 70 yeear old senile marketing agency), form strong local marketing partnerships with like-minded/like product farmers, it's a beginning. Then the farm may look a little more inviting to Cott VI's wife to be.

Too simplistic for you? Yes well, three trees... price, inputs, and an ages old approach....yup, they're all hard to see through. Pars