Livestock Producers vs Commercial Grain Growers

[TOM4CWB]

Fransisco,

We need to figure out how many livestock producers are in the CWB 'designated area'. Each one of these farms can grow wheat and barley.

We also need to know how many commercial grain growers there are in the CWB 'designated area'.

I will be surprised if the livestock producers do not out number the commercial grain growers 2 to 1.

Is anyone really surprised CWB election turn out the way they do?

I think it is a testament to the hard work and honesty of the farmers in the districts that DO vote in Choice Directors!

It is no surprise to me at all... that these folks come from 'Red Neck' Alberta... where principal and honest hard work has been their trade marks for generations!!!

Be that as it may... the other 8 districts know what prize they deserve!!!

[jamesb]

As a farmer renting land from many landlords who have a vote in the CWB election my vote is drowned out to these non farming landowners. Until the methods are changed to allow only those who are actively farming to decide CWB issues, I feel change is going to come slow.
Tom I believe you are speaking of the large numbers of farmers, disenfranchised by the CWB and its system , gave up holding a permit book years ago and have not voted in CWB elections for years yet despise how the CWB operates. Getting them involved is a challege because they have essentially said to hell with it.

[Braveheart]

Tom, if you are insinuating that livestock producers vote for the monopoly to help keep grain prices and thus feed prices low, you're dreaming. The livestock producers that I know, both cattle and hog, want the board scrapped. Like me, they no longer want a voluntary wheat board . . . THEY JUST WANT IT GONE! Low grain prices have in the past encouraged farmers to get into or expand livestock production and oversupply those sectors. Furthermore, most cattle producers are using alternative feed sources. Cow calf producers like our ranch practice extended grazing. We bale graze (some on purchased hay), swath graze, feed a lot of straw. Cattle in feedlots are more dependent on silage and more distillers grain is being fed, at least here in Manitoba. We are becoming non reliant on grain as cattle fodder. Also, having been in the hog business for 18 years, I remember the best years for profitability were often when grain prices were higher. So there. Don't blame us.

When it comes to the CWB, you'll discover that it's really pardigms that guide peoples' decisions. Nothing else. No sense. No brilliant research by John Depape. No relentless lobby by the Wheat Growers. Just paradigms.

[TOM4CWB]

Braveheart;

I assume you mean:

"Groupthink is a type of thought within a deeply cohesive in-group whose members try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas."

I could accept this to some extent... though it is logical that folks maintain a benefit that enhances their livelihood (speaking of livestock producers).

The sad part is, that any arbitrage condition which lowers bias towards transparent prices... breaks/hurts the livestock producer on average... ESPECIALLY if they fail to prepare for the inevitable event.

Then the other norm reasserts control, (the CWB pool ends arbitrage) and back we go into the black hole of distorted prices.

However... the overall effect of CWB price pooling can NOT be mitigated.

THE CWB does NOT allow transparent price OR delivery opportunity... which leaves domestic buyers in the drivers seat on price setting the vast majority of the time. Those same folks (by far the majority of which)... vote in CWB elections.

END.

[Braveheart]

Tom, I hope I never catch "Groupthink" it sounds terminal. Back in the '70's I know I had a touch of "Gropethink", but it is a much different condition.

What I mean is simply this. Making the assumption that if a farm raises livestock they are more likely to vote for a pro-cwb candidate in the election is very misguided. Example: Fransisco. Hog producer as well as grain producer. Very motivated to a voluntary CWB. Example: Braveheart. Cattle producer and grain producer. Strongly desires no CWB in any shape or form. Another example: Bruce. Farms in my area. Large grain producer. No cattle. Farm is located 0.25 miles from the US. Wife ran as pro-CWB candidate. He supports CWB monopoly. Would like all grains under it. Example: Stewart Wells. Nuff said.

What is common is not the production type but the underlying principles that lead to decisions. These might be polically or socially motivated. They might be driven by a lack of education or a strong sense of "do what Daddy said to do". Some people are driven by commerce and a desire to just carry it out without gov't or anyone else's interference.

By the way, I agree that the effect of the CWB does distort prices. However, to lump all livestock producers onto the blame train is loco, mi amigo.

[DogPatch]

Livestock producers have helped eat up a lot of off-grade grains. Lets not blame them on the way the CWB vote went.

[riders2010]

It obviously would be the case that either more cattlemen or less cattlemen percentage wise favor cwb at any point in time, but it is quite a stretch to say hey that's the reason our side lost, how would anyone know the percentage? Personally in our area for one thing way less cattlemen than before so that should have meant less support for cwb by the above rational it hasn't.

More importantly creating reasons to push the cattlemen against the grainfarmer and vs versa, is not the solution for us farmers it may be for the politicians in their minds divide and conquer and it is working for them but not for us farmers.

There needs to be a reality check based upon facts, I don't believe the cwb does the job it is supposed to, but getting rid of it will not change the problems that most farmers face in that when you have weather problems there are no effective programs in place, when prices go to shit world wide for any farm commodity and they have relative to inputs there is no effective solutions. The answer according to some is simply f you go get another occupation go big or get out! To me that is not a solution that is heading to a much bigger problem not just for farmers but consumers. And maybe in some weird way the stand made by the cwbers, their cause is correct, but their method which is supporting that particular entity is what is wrong.

[wmoebis]

Feed grains are already non board. It wouldn't suprize me if very few even voted.

It is only the mixed farmers that would have a vote and they mostly grow thier own feed that would never hit the market place anyway. Any grain they do pick up is a feed grade. Our non board feed market is a big market but that is mostly to the big feedlots who wouldn't have a vote.

Unless Tom, you are suggesting that only 100% board grain growers should have a vote. That would include seed growers who sell outside the board,et al.

[TOM4CWB]

wmoebis,

Scads of permit books are around because of goofy CWB policies like Malt cars especially... now the 45t policy on Series signups.

Many Folks with 3 permit books haul half the wheat crop before the end of October. These same folks have cows as well. The effect is obvious as grassfarmer so well demonstrates.



And you wonder why they vote for the CWb... they think they are getting ahead of 'big' commercial grain growers... which they are by the way...

Having a vote on how my neighbour cheats on harvest deliveries... is just plain insane.

Which is why this whole CWB election process is a scam. Folks who truly do NOT count on the CWB for the VAST majority of farm income... use the CWB as an interesting 'risk management tool to diversify risk. Too bad CWB pool management is such a horrible risk management tool.

[TOM4CWB]

wmoebis;

I suppose we should go out and take out 9 permit books and play the game.

On principal alone this whole system is a joke.

[wmoebis]

I don't think it is only mixed farmers that have more than 1 permit book.

Do you have a min/max nuumber of animals you could own to be on your 'Do not vote' list? If I have one beef for my own use would I make your list?

If a son/daughter has 1/4 of land and works for a input supplier, trying to get ahead so he can buy a farm some day, does he make the list? They would want farmers to be profitable, Still they might want prices to be low so they can maybe, buy land against the big guys that want to eat up the little guys '1/4 at a time'.

Who knows how they might vote? Better put them on the 'Do not vote' list too.

I'm not sticking up for the way the voters list or the permit book system works. I am on your side here, These are some of the areas that need looked at for sure.
I just don't think we should be attacking our markets as a way of getting our points across.

[TOM4CWB]

wmoebis;

The whole point of this thread was to point out... the CWB elections are not at all logical or as first impression would indicate.

Hence:

We need to vote with our trucks... and at the very least the stupid POOL plan needs to be voluntary. Taking $22/t straight off my FPC flat price is criminal... on top of the basis theft the CWB is hawking for the pool accounts and Contingency Fund.

If anyone thinks the CWB is a 'transparent' marketing system... that allows arbitrage with international prices:

I have some 'ocean front property' in Alberta I can sell them!!!

The CWB is so far from being a commercial marketing system... they (at the CWB) have no clue to even know how to start!

[oneoff]

And until everyone in the primary production farming business (or at least a sizable majority) can think "big" enough to include the complexities of positions of farmers who think they are opposed; let alone the ones who basically would or should be supportive............we won't ever get off square one.
This thread is a classic; and demonstrates how easy it is to offend; and how insufficient a tolerance that ordinary humans have for others opinions; needs; wants; greed; possessions etc.etc.
Time to work on the basics; if that is ever possible.