WGRF

[bluefargo]

gustgd

This is an important discussion which affects all growers.
- Has the board looked at the Australian model?
- Has there been any discussion of replacing the current royalty system with a pit levy based on variety similar to the way I understand the Australians do?

[northfarmer]

In Alberta pulse and canola deductions are refundabale, which I believe leads to more accountability. Cannot speak for other provinces on this matter.

[northfarmer]

end use royalties are an option as well, like they use in Australia, that warrant further investigation....I agree we need to be open minded about the structure in the future, lets build the best system

[gustgd]

To start off all thoughts here are mine and not positions of the Wheat Growers or WGRF. I post here to inform those farmers who pay the bills at WGRF and to get some feedback on positions we have taken.

Lots of good feedback thanks.

Yes we have looked at the Australian model, but it is a Cadillac model for farmers there is a % checkoff from all grain sales and and end point royalty
system where farmers declare varieties and funding flows back to breeding programs that are commercially successful. This model does leverage some money from Govt and industry but as I understand it Aussie. farmers "contribute 10:1 more than Canadian farmers.
Malleefarmer do I have this right?

As far as unelected board that is technically correct. But all seats are held by organizations and board members appointed from those same organizations. I feel that it's not my seat at the table it's the WG'ers and if they don't like the way I represent the organization I get yanked.
Along that same line of thought I don't claim to represent all farmers I try and speak for commercial farmers.
When talking to industry I tell them we are the ones you are advertising to. If you see a farmer in a magazine or hear a farmer on the radio I'll bet you it's a WG'er member. I won't be right all the time but I will be more often than not.
Any ideas on how to improve things or how to fund this *CCC* would be greatly appreciated.
Agree now is a great time to look at improving Western Canadian Ag. The Acts will be open. It`s all a matter of time and continuing research. it would be a great shame if good programs did not get funded because someone never thought about consequences.

[parsley]

Surely someone has the time to comment on PQ/Ont gov't legislated checkoffs.

Those who sit on checkoff boards, will surely be able to share with us, how the Rest of Canada enjoys their farmer paid for research funding and legislated checkoffs and compulsory legislated checkoffs.

Don't be shy. Parsley

[charliep]

Will leave the discussion continue.

An interesting graph I have used a lot is one from an Informa Economics conference about a year ago. Shows world production and consumption of grain over the past 50 years and a projection of what needs to happen to meet demand over the next 15 years.

In 1961, the world produced and consumed about 700 million tonnes of grain. Today the world produces and consumes about 2.1 billion tonnes of grain. Technology that allowed production to keep up with consumption were the the introduction of hybrid seed/increased fertilizer use in the 1960's, improved weed control via increased herbicide use in the 1970's, seeding technology in the 1990's, biotech in the 2000's. By 2026, simple trend analysis suggests the world will be consuming 2.8 billion bushels of cereals. Very simple I know and lots of other things come into play but highlights the challenge.

It is also interesting to look at trends in yield growth by region and approach to funding research and plant breeding. Europe (private sector funded), Australia (GRDC plus seed levys), North America (mainly public breeding/research) and Former Soviet (mixed bag but mainly importing other regions technology/experince).

On with your discussion about what the future looks like in western Canada.

[charliep]

I should note that my comments on North America approach to R&D/plant breeding are wheat, oats and barley. Corn is a private sector funded model.

[parsley]

Governments advocate farmer funding so they can download their funding committments.

Listen carefully for the voices of government popping up, like bubbles in a soup pot, imbedding the idea into farmers that the starving masses worldwide, have to be fed. Just not by them.


Governments would do better to tell their starving masses, lolling about in moderate year round climates, to pick up a rake and a hoe. It's called work.

Hint: Food can't be grown virtually. Pars

[charliep]

[URL="http://www.gfo.ca/Media/News_Announcements/Home.aspx"]grain farmer of ontario[/URL]

[charliep]

Parsley

Reading way too much into my comments.

Simple question. Is research and developement including plant breeding an important part of any countries agricultural policy? Not looking for explanation. Just yes or no.

Once you answer that question, then it becomes who sets priorities, does, who pays, who regulates, etc. Will note the canola industry has answered many of these questions.