Denial, denial, denial

[oneoff]

Way too many farmers strive for maximum yields and 100% seeded acres. It should be obvious that overproduction is a guaranteed recipe for bleak farming incomes.
Similarly far too many people continue to expect European movement on their zero tolerance policy of minute amounts of GM contamination. What part of no don't Canadian farmers understand.
As for the federal government announcement that the Western wet weather problems "aren't as bad as it looks"; what reasonable hope should any person have that anything meaningful is coming.

Probably the NFU analysis summarizes the past 25 years as succintly as possible. In those 25 years Canadian farmers produced 750 billion dollars worth of food. The only money farmers made came from government charity; welfare and government programs. Given this stark statement; what optimism was there that this year would have been any different?; or next year? or the next 25 years?

It seems obvious that change can only come from the power and dicipline of the remaining farmers. But when so many are hamstrung; and desperate with their current crisis; how many are working on a collective plan for more than the immediate future? What is even more draining is that there are too many (both in the desparate and financially secure categories) who would knowingly sabotage changes that might improve every farmers' lot.

[countryguy]

"It should be obvious that overproduction is a guaranteed recipe for bleak farming incomes" B-I-N-G-O,that IS the problem. But how do you get that through the thick skulls of all the "look at me,and I am smarter than you and I am the king because I farm such and such many acres,etc" type farmers out there??

[newguy]

Americans think of farm support as part of thier nation security. Energy and food..

[oneoff]

OK I'll go further.
The contracts you must sign before you deliver any grain to the major companies are an offront to any farm sovereignty that was left.
Further; to rely on any government; or grain purchaser to dictate what your operation can and can't do; is to relinquish what should be your power. Those outside entities may well keep farms slightly afloat for their totally different objectives; and on the other hand they have demonstrated that 9 cent pork prices; worthless cows and grain prices well below breakeven have all happened in very recent memory. Many farmers have lost their pride and are just like the prostitute arguing over the price and who should pay.
Think about the seed business; and the other inputs that stay the same as your paycheck shrinks; along with the additional rules; regulations and liabilities that are being offloaded onto farm operations. It doesn't have to be that way.... or maybe the will to fight back has been lost for some time.

[furrowtickler]

And some Canadians think that they must absolutely at any cost farm more acres every year as the solution to making a profit - morons!!! Never had an issue with chem dift damage before but tonight I went for a quick drive and yep, 60 ac of peas torched by the now biggest farmers in the area - why - b/c they had to spray regardless of wind b/c they were behind and have sooo many acres to cover. Well I am going to call it on them tomrow hopefully they are cooperative otherwise I am going to make a very big ***in point. It is sad to see the lack of respect for the guy next door with some of these assholes.

[oneoff]

Farm support isn't the answer and shouldn't even be debated. Anything in this world should be done on its own merits. If it isn't viable without someone else's outside money; then it isn't viable; nor sustainable on its own. No one has any control over subsidies; so why would you want to tie yourself to programs out of your control. Wouldn't it be refreshing to earn a decent return that worthwhile plans deserve. A part of that plan should obviously be to not destroy profitability with senseless and counterproductive over production.

[parsley]

Lotta words making a lotta sense, oneoff.

[oneoff]

Attn: shaney; charliep etc. etc.

This topic is sufficiently important to have the industry take a look at it. Or could it be that industry doesn't want it to ever get any "traction" and so benign neglect; and ignoring the little tempest is the solution to handling what the industry doesn't want to hear.

[charliep]

Perhaps you would have to define what over production is -
particularly in a year production will be way down relating to a
weather based natural disaster. I would argue Canada in general
and western Canada is particular does over not produce based
on the evidence of stable to declining production in cereal grains
in absolute terms (acreage and tonnage). Western Canada has
had small improvement in average yields but not to the same
extent as Europe or the US. Our market share of world
production and trade is declining so again don't know how you
can argue we are overproducing.

Now if you asked the question, is western Canada loosing
competitiveness in growing cereal crops, the answer may be
somewhat different. The answer would also be different if the
question were how quick is western Canada in responding to
market demands both in terms of quality and quantity. Canola
could be called a success story - western Canada is growing
bigger quantities for a larger and quality specific market at a
profitable price.

My two bits when I can't sleep.

[charliep]

Read through the postings again and still curious what your
agricultural utopia would look like.

Went to an interesting presentation on Wednesday that compared
the financial performance of top farmers from a return on
investment performance measure to average and bottom third
farmers. Lots of surprising results in that the cost side wasn't
much different. What was different was use of capital assets and
things relating to management performance.

I will share the document when finalized.

[northfarmer]

excellent points charlie.....limiting production through collective action is not the answer....as you seem to sugggest oneoff...manageable scale of operation is key to lowering fixed cost per unit of production, finding the balance is hard in the farming businss because of the many uncontrolled variables.....the key to sustainable profitability, or loss minimization is to achieve lowest cost per unit of production....i for one am grateful of the risk mgmt programs we have at our disposal.....are they perfect no, but to not use them you do so at your own peril...unless your balance sheet is strong enough to self insure.......I cannot afford to do so, but i know those who do....

but to those who think we are overproducing, quit producing....over producing is the only way I can make any money at this game

[wmoebis]

I don't believe that it is production quantity or even price that the problem. I think that it is the cost of producing that is the problem. If the world doesn't want to pay more it shouldn't be on our shoulders to pay as much to produce it.

We have come a full circle from the 20's and 30"s when the unrest among farmers brought on the big changes to the grain industry. Only dif is that today we don't have a political party of any colour that will stand up and make changes that are needed. They have boxed us in with all thier political BS on trade agreements and enviro rules etc. Changes to safety nets and ins programs that all cost way too much to run and are nightmares to admin but don't work. They have allowed suppliers to run all over us. They screw up and it costs us. How many billions have we spend on sc****d programs that didn't work? Ever get refunded for the money you spent on accounting fees or travel on one of these wonder fix all programs?

Today the input corps and rail companies are raping farmers. Most of the companies are making big profits and reaping all the benifits from our better farming practices and increase production. The grain companies and end users are reaping all the benifits from the low prices as they can set the retail price to compensate for small flucuations in inputs and force the price of grain/cattle/hogs down to producers when it gets too high and thier profits drop.

I could live with $4 WHT or peas if it only cost $1 to grow it and market it. Tell me how it costs more to put my grain in a rail car and drag it to Vancouver than it does to grow it? In this new high efficient system with all its rationalization, specialization and diversification after the amalgomation.

What other trade would even want to be a supplier to a industry that was losing money. We buy retail and sell wholesale it has gone on longer than it ever should have.

If someone went onto the TV show "The Sharks Tank" and asked for invester to go into farming with them, they would laugh you off the show and tell you to get a paying job. Become one of these twits running around selling chem or marketing your grain and telling you how to farm and have no investment but are getting big pay checks. Maybe even be the last episode.

The way the system is set up today it doesn't matter what we get or how much we grow, nothing will change because either the suppliers or the gov't will take the profits. If we were getting $10 for our WHT someone would have thier hand in our pocket and we would be no better off.

I would almost rather have a Bible thumper or Amway salesmen show up at my door than a grain buyer or a chem rep. At least you can tell the Bible thumper and Amway sales that you are not interested. The chem rep and grain buyer you need have to deal with and they know it.

[agstar77]

Can you call canola a success story ? Ever increasing costs , Tua , hybrid seed , expensive fungicides and greater risk. Who benefits most from these things?

[charliep]

My measure of success is the ability to grow the market. Profitability in
the whole supply chain is the driver of this growth. Research and
development, creativity and innovation are also drivers. The ability to
identify market opportunities and respond.

Don't like canola and the business model - don't grow it.

[agstar77]

That will be a reality next year.