Triffid Bites a Hunk out of Pocketbooks

[parsley]

And I should add, in organics, on your application for renewal, there is a complaint log, which you must list ALL complaints made to you, against you.
They are followed up. So if you sold seed and had a writtien complaint it didn't germinate, you have to list that complaint. And you may not get re-certified, depending upon the weight and number of complaints.

Did conventionalPedigreed/breeder seed growers have complaints against them?

What were the Triffid repercussions for them? How many of them are doing business as usual? Has process changed? Has surveillance changed? Have requirements changed? Has punishment changed?

What was that you were saying about wagging dogs, charliep? Pars

[parsley]

"contaminated"

No charliep.

I again, am getting at unintended consequencecs. Because you see, slap-stick modification of plants, by any method, will always result in things you never dreamed would happen.

We are not at all smart. This very conversation by you and I serves to support that very observation.

I am prepared to take some chances. But not by hit and miss fly by nighters who will ride out of town on the closest lawyer's shoulders within a five year money grabbing patent-span, leaving farmers to clean up, shut up and pay.

Policy planners must take the onerous financial responsibility being placed on ordinary farmers for unintended consequences and set it elsewhere.

if policy makers cannot see there is a problem in waiting, is it because that is what policy makers are told, by governments, not to see?

Or because that is what policy makers are told, by corporate patent holders, not to see?

Or because that is what policy makers are told by seed growers, not to see?

Or simply because policy makers think it is in Ag industry's best interest to expect farmers to pay until profit ceases to exist?

Or 'other'? Pars

[charliep]

There is also a risk to doing nothing.

Will note that fusarium graminearium has made its way into Alberta. Cruising to the consumer side of the world and food safety, there is likely to be the same vigilance on mycotoxins in food as there is with unlicenced GE events. The question back at you is what is the cereal grains supply chains responsibility to manage this risk (a natural one)? If plant breeding/R. and D. is one of the strategies, how should these efforts be funded?

[parsley]

And then there is the matter of "monitors" that you pose:

How has seed inspection been working?

Even Canadian canola breeder seed shipped to Europe was contaminated, but not even noticed contaminate in Canada, but rather found contamnated in Europe?

Are Universities not capable or is testing innacurate/lax?

If Universities cannot anticipate unintended consequences and test for them, in this case, canola that had cross-pollinated, (cross-p always happens in my flower garden and is obvious,) how can some oddball anomaly be imagined?

....or have Universities become dumbed down, complacent, lazy, or worse... turn a blind eye because their sole goal is bank farmers' dollars matched by government dollars to run their departments?

Or might one even think those in charge of the department want a piece of the patent pie, which is "Bake it and serve it and run to the bank."

How has field inspection been working?

Monitoring has resulted in gone-wild canola growing all over fields. At least that's what I saw crop touring this summer. Am I wrong? What do farmers see? Who owns them? How do you observe that monitoring working then, I ask? Do you advocate copying this standard? Pars

[parsley]

Oh my gosh charliep, Kids are are famous for, " Hurry, hurry. Everybody is doing it and we're not"

Forgive me for posting redundantly:

BUT you need the refresher

"You are more than eager to talk about the importance of risk and the benefits of it. But I would like to talk about and establish responsibility for LOSSES if the risk goes sour"

I am not going to argue we shouldn't have any risk. For heaven's sake, I'm a farmer and I eat the results of risk.

I know that risk COSTS.

Modification proponents are busy planning how to set up a wheat/barley/cerals council.

It will definitely save a few seed growers' asses for a few years and send them to Maui a few times, if it's patterned after the Flax Council, won't it?

When I look at the Flax Council, and what they have done...what have they done for the farmer?

**Ruined the export market.
**Built dependency on Government (Just nabbed taxdollar project money to pay for testing costs)
**Debased testing credibility
**Devalued Canda's reputation as a flax supplier
** Picked Winners and Losers by Catering to ONE exporter named Viterra
**Displaces and Dilutes the Voice and Power of Producers with the Voice of Government and Industry
** Ignored Accountability Demands
** Downloaded Costs on Producers
**Hushed Up and Hoarded Information
**Encouraged non-compliance by not Punishing Non-Compliance
** Allowed Local Grain Testing to Become a registered Snickering Sport.
** Eroded Confidence in Reg. Seed Growers
** Flaunted accountability and Trsnsparency
** Downloaded costs on unsuspecting innocent.
** Paid themselves the unearned.
in ny very humble OPINION.
Pars

[oneoff]

**Ruined the export market.
**Built dependency on Government (Just nabbed taxdollar project money to pay for testing costs)
**Debased testing credibility
**Devalued Canda's reputation as a flax supplier
** Picked Winners and Losers by Catering to ONE exporter named Viterra
**Displaces and Dilutes the Voice and Power of Producers with the Voice of Government and Industry
** Ignored Accountability Demands
** Downloaded Costs on Producers
**Hushed Up and Hoarded Information
**Encouraged non-compliance by not Punishing Non-Compliance
** Allowed Local Grain Testing to Become a registered Snickering Sport.
** Eroded Confidence in Reg. Seed Growers
** Flaunted accountability and Trsnsparency
** Downloaded costs on unsuspecting innocent.
** Paid themselves the unearned.
in ny very humble OPINION


Pretty good list eh charliep

Add to that ** A genie let out of abottle and can never ever be put back

** Everyone found out that no one can be sloppy with flax production even though it supposed never ever cross pollinates; but it is now obvious that the seed supply can be contanimated forever by any simple mixup of two varieties that can never be completely seperated again.
** Next to no one has yet caught on that the problems with Triffid flax contanimation will surely happen with every other crop we play with using the new genetic manipulation techniques.

[parsley]

Just so you know, fellow farmers:

You are paying clean up the Triffid mess.

For what, may I ask?
They've ruined the present overseas market.
This is from the Flax Council's page:

Number of cargoes represented
October 2010
#1 flax 1 cargo
#2 flax 2 cargoes

Crop year to date
#1 flax 2cargoes
#2 flax 5 cargoes

Previous year totals
#1 flax 16cargoes
#2 flax 66cargoes

Tonnes represented
October 2010
#1 flax 848 tonnes
#2 flax 20146 tonnes

Crop year to date
#1 flax 1614 tonnes
#2 flax 59910 tonnes

Previous year totals
#1 flax 101228 tonnes
#2 flax 395844 tonnes

So that is what has been flushed by the Flax Council

So what flax future do you have to look forward to?

Parsley

[oneoff]

What part of "no" doesn't Flax Council etc. not understand?

[oneoff]

And have we eradicated; ridden; and removed Triffid from the flax production. I know that is not the case; but when will the industry admit that fact?

[parsley]

You have to ask what has gone on in the past:

Here it is: Your Flax Council of Canada has a big fat hungry baby named FC2015:

FC2015 is a national, not-for-profit, wholly owned subsidiary of the Flax Council of Canada, based in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Here's her pedigree:

http://www.flaxcouncil.ca/english/index.jsp?p=about&mp=fc2015

FC2015 owns her own Board of Directors.

Where does FC2015 get her money?

Well, Funding for FC2015 comes from the Agricultural Policy Framework, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada's Science and Innovation Program, Flax Council of Canada, Saskatchewan Flax Development Commission as well as the provincial governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

And that's why charliep will be VERY familair with FC2015

FC2015 will scoop up every dollar they can steal, force, find, blackmail or con because the head of FC2015
is a front man for the biotech industry by the name of John Oliver
President, Maple Leaf Bio-Concepts
1424 Oxford Street in Oshawa.

He's 'pimped' (excuse the term, but it worked so, er, well)for every biotech firm you can think of, but don't believe me, check it out, or type his name in google:

http://www.fass.org/quebec02/opsesssp.asp

You see what they really need is ACRES. They will impose every means to make you a captive grower. They will try to make you a captive seller, They really need a captive SUPPLY, contrary to whatever the hell they promise. ("Lie on the bed darling, I won't do a thing.")

After all, the Government's NAFGEN Green Economy effort doesn't want to fall flat on its' ass and become a vote loser, does it now? It's going to be considered as one of Canada's "green" tokens.

And when you consider that Flax Canada 2015 Inc.'s Network Lead Mr. Les Rankin, is working with:
•5 Universities
•16 Industries
•15 Government departments / agencies / public sector supporters / others, well, none of them want it to fizzle.

But they need flax and flax acres. What are they going to try and do with your flax and what are their concerns?

They list them:

"Challenges and barriers to be directly addressed by NAFGEN include breeding, straw management, lack of agronomic information for the production of natural fibres, under-developed bioresource engineering, current issues in the reliability of fibre crops (availability of natural fibre feedstocks), issues in the grading of fibres, the need for novel conversion technologies, the need for the integration of suites of conversion technologies in natural fibre-based biorefinery models, the need for the development of new products (materials, chemicals, energy/fuels), the need to identify, engage, and cultivate corporate partners to both commercialize Canadian natural fibre-based bioproducts and to gain acceptance in the receptor markets for these products, and the need for whole system design and analysis based on principles of sustainability."

So, you can see, the government and FC2015 central planners are building an industry to attract corporate interests, a bit like China would do, and the government handed over $9.6 million in 2009 to kickstart it. Again, check it out yourself:

http://www.agr.gc.ca/cb/index_e.php?s1=n&s2=2009&page=n90318

What I don't like, is the heading. If you think this is done to help farmers, you are as stupid as posts in a deep slough.

If I threw $10M at a project, I would make sure flax was put under the Wheat Board aka in the future as Cereal, Grains and Oilseeds Board, to guarantee a cheap captive supply.

That's YOU, btw,..cheap supply.

Kelley Fitzpatrick, M.Sc, one of biotech's grunts who has moved from project to project to promote 'innovation and novel traits, and research' and all those words that fly off policy tongues so smoothly to lubricate what is really done in the back rooms, is one of FC2015's experienced, under-the-radar organizers. IMHO.

Richardson suits must have shuffled a good dance and are standing in line to be a FC2015 "corporate interest" dancing partner, as they now fill a Board seat.

Meantime, producer checkoffs will increase, YOU CAN COUNT ON IT. FC2015 Per diems and salaries will INCREASE. And a few token farm bloats will sell you down the river, imho.

I had decided to leave my thoughts buried and not reply to wd in last weeks's thread, as he knows full well what the issues are, but Prairie farmers are paying full bore, for cleaning up the Triffid biotech mess, only to be soon overcome with a fresh dose of biotech flaxseed.

Throw out modified flax to bring in more modified flax.

Yes, well.

I don't like central planning, as you well know, but I do have a keen admiration for the fine men and women farming, who are expected to pay for all the mistakes, all the building, all the administration, and maintenance, and finally pay for annointing a few entities who will be selected to succeed.

Those companies who scheme and court tax and producer dollars haven't earned anything. They stand in line with their hands out, and quite often, they are so godamn arrogant they don't even know they are beggars.

And the governments aren't regulators any more. They pick winners and losers because they think you and I are too stupid and they also work in their own re-election self-interests. And I don't approve.

Most of you will, in fact, deem me quite mad. But you are more than welcome to add or subtract from the links, and the interpretation, and change my mind.

In the meanitime, at the least, give me kudos for a dandy rant.

Parsley

[parsley]

Well, I'll be darned, darn.

Neal Oberg, Chair of the Audit Committee of the big fat flax baby, FC2015, just happens to also be the B of D of AVAC:

"AVAC continues to break ground in Alberta and making a significant contribution to Alberta’s emerging value-add industry, and the fledgling venture capital sector"

Read more: http://www.avacltd.com/about/board-members

Isn't that really quite the "well gee whiz" Pars

[BTOfarmall]

Here's a taught...

Crush all da flax here in Comedia. I tink dey call it Value Added. Den certify da oil Triffid free and sells it abroad....

Someting to Ponder......

[parsley]

BTO, Oil does not disguise triffid contamination, even ground, which leads to my never-ending point, "Who should pay for triffid expenses,(testing, fines, product recall,broken contracts etc, and lost profit? (markets lost, containers not shippped, etc"

Isn't it your best interest to know who picks up the tab for losses? Pars

[oneoff]

This thread will now go deathly quiet. Charlie will run out of questions to confuse the basic issues. The average farmer will be continue to see flax as a minor , marginal crop and be content with the major win of getting 50% of the testing costs back as a subsidy. Serious flax oil crushing will continue in China and around the world; but probably never be done where it should have been in the first place. And it will be another 6 months before another similar thread appears on Agriville as the industry and Flax Council continue to manipulate our business of flax production.

[oneoff]

Naw. There's no reason for flax to be put under the CWB. Its already under the Flax Council; and they have the ear of the Gov't and their hands in the pockets of both the Gov't and the producers. They have the industry players onside (and unfortunantely the tacit approval of the producers which was obtained by default) so their position is quite secure. They are their own CWB.