CGC at it again

[pulse72]

After speaking to SGS, I feel they are just towing the line.
They are a strong enough voice and an establihed enough company to make a stand.
I know they grade according to CGC standards, but CGC says the standards haven't changed.
They should stick to their guns and keep calling #2 reds #2 reds.

[JDGreen]

i understand sumdum very well what you are saying. However does not change the fact they are having this little peeing match as a result of color variation. It has nothing to do with damage, frost, wrinkles, loose coats, ascochyta, mold, mildew, etc. Just color. If i do the little cooking test they are all equal, hence my concern.. I believe we are too loose on damage in a #2 and this is where the problem has started.

[dave4441]

JD-If there was a problem with damage levels in a #2 that would be the issue. It is not damage levels that are of concern, strictly color. Color on a laird #2 is probaly too loose, not sure if that is what you are refering to.

[JDGreen]

dave we are in agreement on the color problem. What i mean by too loose on damage in a #2 is: Many samples have seeds that are wrinkled, loose coats,fragile,copper coated and will not be saved in the cleaning,splitting or futball process. The cgc has this part correct, however terminals and processors alike do not count all or any of this as damage as a rule. Sharp processors know this and steer away from these samples, however with so many of them around this year what is the solution?? These exact problems are what is causing the cgc to paint all reds with the same color brush. They are saying all bleached reds react the same way and this is the furthest from the truth. It is sample specific end of story. Therefore do we need to count these fragile seeds as damaged?? Or do processors need to add a damage surcharge and discount accordingly to the customer?? What I do know is that a discount of 8-10 cents a pound is ridiculous if only a 10%-15% reduction in splitting efficiency occurs. JMO

[dave4441]

Ok, sorry, you are on the money on this comment. Problem is the grades do not really take into account functionality of end use. I agree with that, but much study has to be done on this before it can be introduced as a grading standard. There is some real low damage reds, that will be powder during splitting, but generally a wrinkled lentil is low color which drops it right into a low quality product anyway, but i do get your comment now.

[dave4441]

I think if stuff is ready to fall apart )fragile/loose graders will count that as PSB and include in damage portion (total damage, not other damage). The bronze or copper needs to be determined if that is stain or damage or just color. In a green, it falls into stain and is removed prior to color. CGC has downgraded based on this "bronzing" during color determination this year.

[sumdumguy]

The integrity of Canada Grades is at stake in this battle. We want the world to be able to count on our grading syatem to reflect the quality of our grain. This industry was built and prospered as a result of our grading system, good farmers, good processors and good marketers.

I suspect that this year it is especially difficult to establish grades in the fall with rain every day during harvest. The problem is that there was so much product presold upon grades. The product hit the rail before grades were established and this is the result. What do you see as the solution JD Green when the product is on-route?