proposed Alberta Wheat council Left meets Right

[gustgd]

Not sure what to think of all this.
that's why I posted here. to get input. Some of you have opinions I value.

Agree that there are probably too many meals and mileage types out there. but the alternative is that some crops might get sacraficed to king wheat.
Barley folks are already up in arms over thoughts that HRSW gets all the money.
Layers of admin and staff are always a worry, but also thinking issues in cereals some are similar but some are complete outliers.

The further you go "professionalizing" directors and having them spend more time in the board room the less time they are in the field.

I would lean to different working groups under a cereals commission, but strong proponent of term limits.

I think that research/market development/ policy....... are too important to be left to volunteers and donations.
Open to suggestions.

Last guy to advocate non-refundable but think there should be someway to reduce free riders.

[charliep]

Will note there are lots of other elements to R&D other plant breeding. Reduced tillage. Seed placement. Timing of operations.

Within plant planting, there are also other things than yield. Consumer traits. Disease resistance. You can add on.

What would the malt barley opportunity be in Canada if the only variety available was Harrington (sp?)?

Are diseases like fusarium, rust, UG99, an issue? From a plant breeding perspective, is there a need to stay ahead of them/seek resistance at some level?

From a competitiveness standpoint, are advances in wheat yields keeping up with other crops (i.e. canola)? Is Canada keeping up with wheat yield improvement in other major exporting regions? Does Canada need to be investing more money on developing higher yielding mid quality wheats?

If the answer is yes to some of the above, then where does the money come from to do this?

Will note Alberta farmers will have their say on the wheat commission. From an outsider, I suspect the 70 cents/tonne investment leveraged to $7 to $10/tonne in final research pays far better than the inflated land values/rent talked or the payments for new paint/fancy equipment. What you put in the seed drill has to pay for this. Are cereals carrying their weight financially?

[charliep]

Realize the discussion is about the structure of the organization and accountability. Also nothing wrong with moving to a completely private sector driven model where things like plant breeding are privately financed and paid for using things like end use levies/royalities. Done in Australia and Europe. malleefarmer attempted to get a thread going on this topic but nobody responded. I would pay attention to this. This may be where western Canada is going.

[URL="https://www.agriville.com/cgi-bin/forums/viewThread.cgi?1317618579"]Australia[/URL]

[charliep]

rockpile

I notice your question on productivity and profitability.

Won't like my answer but western Canada is only a small part of the world pricing equation. A 1 or 2 million (even more) shift in Canadian production will not really impact internatinal prices all that much. Wheat is a commodity. To improve profitability, you have to grow more, reduce costs or do improve price per unit by differentiating our wheat/capturing more value.

The education from the current crop year is Russia, Ukraine, Kazakstan are the drivers of commodity wheat prices when they have crop. High quality in a year of high wheat production in western Canada means we compete with the previously mentioned new exporters by selling Cadilac wheat to a Malibu wheat market in a world that will buy Lada's for the right price.

If you look at yield improvement in western Canada, we are lagging most if not all the other wheat producing regions of the world. Western Canada is loosing its competitiveness. Not about feeding the world as parsley will chew me out for but rather making money in a new world.

[rockpile]

Hi Charlie, actually I think your response is right
dead on. Lots of folks here crow about the cash
prices across the border in ND and Montana, but
that is the worlds premium market where 80% of
production is used domestically. But for our
customers, 60% can't afford the cost of protein and
nutrition at those prices. So another question.
Relative to our competitors, like Russia, etc. are our
input costs way overboard and therefore restricting
production and innovation? Are we subsidizing agro
business so our competitors can access those
products more cheaply? I don't know, just
wondering.

[charliep]

Don't know the answer to your question. From my experience 5 years ago
in the Ukraine, the issue was access to herbicides/other ag chemicals.
The stuff that was being bought was older formulations manufactured in
the Ukraine or more modern stuff from Europe.

Would be an interesting question to look at cost/acre for chemicals or
chemical cost/unit of production. Again, don't know the answer.

I think where the new exporters have an advantage is on the fixed cost
side. Lower land and labor costs. If I look at Canada, there are not
massive differences in variable costs per acre among farmers. Where the
big differences between operations lie is in fixed costs and debt. If your
fixed costs and debt are high, then a farm needs to be at the top end of
productivity with no room for weather glitches.

Way off the topic of a wheat commission but perhaps the point is whether
it is money well spent by farmers and from there, are systems in place to
ensure value for farmer investors. An expense like all other expenses.

[Hopperbin]

We are facing 90 dollars per acre fert.
30 chem.
40 to 50 machinery
50 other
I don't understand not having a mandatory 2 bucks minimum to develope new crop strains, markets etc. Just because farmers can claim back check off money does not insure accountability as farmers that claim back will do year after year anyway. no one should be allowed to claim this moneys back.

[parsley]

Charlie charlie charlie, you kinda sound enthused

I smell subtlety Don't even try to instill research
as the normal everyday farming expenses
farmers should come to accept as routine
accounting. ...... Set In our psyche so to speak.

Nor follow up with a spiel on how farmers should
be legally responsible for their own research and
get dumped with the bills

I'm feeling ornery. LOL. Pars

[wd9]

We all know the real work gets done by the staff hired for the organizations. By having less board members more staff could be utilized. If wheat is king, then which one? cwrs? cps? white? red? winter red? winter white? If there are so many wheats alone adding barley and oats shouldn't be that difficult. Goood leadership and policy make the commission guide the staff to accomplish goals whether 2 crops or 10. having 50 worker bee wanna be directors makes little sense today. Almost as archaic in concept as the cwb.

Pars, graffiti with punctuation.

[parsley]

Good thing, then, I haven't had my blog up and
running since 2009. Someone would be washing
it. Pars

[parsley]

Hopper, I don't think all farmers should have an
environmental fee slapped on them if they don't
have some rotational forage... As EU is pushing.
Nor should APAS be deducting a checkoff Nor
should there be a U Of S farm accident
newsletter Checkoff deduction on our tax notice

If you want a checkoff... Don't assume I should
be obligated to finance your hairbrained/genius
ideas.
Don't eye uP my purse cowboy. Jeez you'd think
you'd recognize the principle you are overlooking.

You drinkin rum? Pars

[malleefarmer]

Why should farmers who pay r and d levies do
so knowing full well all farmers will benefit from
new technologies,varietys,disease resistance etc
etc ,so those who don't pay get a free lunch.

It really wasn't a issue here and if they decide
grdc need more money they just increase the
levy and it's basically never questioned.

Private companies do a heap of r and here as
well mostly along side grdc for extra credabilty

Funny slot of you guys are pro collective
marketing but not collective r & d

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

I agree with Hopper.

I agree with WD9.

Alberta Pulse Growers works with numerous crops... with the same administration same staff very well.

As does Grain Growers of Canada.

Co-operation happens on our farms every second of every day. The same farm... grows many different crops. Easily the same 'Council' would deal with multiple cereal crops.

As to us robbing yoour purse... I am sure you will find appropriate way to slap anyones hand that comes too close!

Grin <(>:{)

Your points are always provocative... and there for appreciated!!!

It is great to have all sides of the debate.

[parsley]

Oil industry pays royalties to mineral rights
holders, which includes, for example, farmers
and govt holders, but they do not collect research
checkoffs from the gov or farmer. The oil cos pay
for their own research. And pay the clean up

And of course, universities do their regular
research. Right now, universities don't get
enough cash because most gov funding goes to
biotech companies to match the farmer funding.

Ah, charlie, there's the rub.

The companies want every last red cent (and
why not if farmers are stupid enough) that both
gov'ts and farmers don't have!! Borrow more?
Borrowing money for endless funding is not the
farmers goal is it.

[parsley]

I was mugged in Regina, Tom. He had his
designs on my purse; however, he was the one
who ended up running for the door, and yes, I
know when someone is eying up my purse. You
should keep your eye on yours. It's so heavy, you
forget, and think it's your heavy laptop.

Calculate your number of ag orgs... The number
of sucking directors, and their expenses, what
the number of govt staff being paid, and the
contracting costs. The latter wil groil your insides
Divide it by the number of farmers. And sit on the
toilet before you press "divide". Pars