Gustgd

[bgmb]

Gust, I actually think the end point royalties arent all that bad of an idea but...... Right now a vast majority of the wheat genetics we are growing are derived or bred from government investment. So why would we now start paying royalties to private companies on these genetics. A better idea would be to but those royalties back into a some sort of a self funded farmer breeding program.

[gustgd]

Bucket I'll make it easy for you.

http://westerngrains.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Final-WGRF-ROR-STUDY2.pdf

For the record I hate economic impact studies yet I also learned quite a while ago if you haven't done the work don't argue with someone who has.

Bgmb the royalties are not self sustaining with brown bagging.

[Braveheart]

Help me ünderstand further. Patents on most things expire. When patents expire on plants, are they proposing deregulation as a way to eliminate someone using the technology without paying. Somehow that doesn't right, especially if the variety still meets customers specs, and the breeders investment plus has been recouped.

Also, mainstream agriculture aside, we can't discount the fact that there are small "agrarian movement" type farmers. These operations need to be able to count on seeds outside of the new proposed Seed Act to be viable. Wouldn't deregistered varieties work there?

[bucket]

Gust

Thanks for the link.

Here is the thing about complaining or arguing about someone efforts. Sometimes the time and effort they put into things are not asked for or required by anyone. A make work project still can be argued if it has no justification in the first place.

As a for instance. Although some people thought wheat commissions were a good idea, even you have been on board with a major consolidation into one body.

The efforts of all these should have been put into getting government to change the legislation to make it happen as opposed to having more fractured groups.

[gustgd]

Braveheart. As I understand currently there is 18 years for a company to recoup their investment.this legistlation moves that to 20. I don't know why that's necessary, but not a hill to due on.

Varieties are then surrendered to the crown, where they become royalty free.
Again as I understand most varieties are surrendered earlier because their is a cost to maintain registration and if no ones growing.....
I've heard test one of the only "modern" varieties to go the full 18 was Barrie. Thus was because it was being sold as seed under that variety name to Europe for the Warburtens program. ( someone please correct Me if I'm wrong)

So if I'm reading your question right.

My reply is anyone can currently AND IN THE FUTURE grow any variety currently being grown and grandfathered in. iIf they have a market the govt will not stand in the way of commerce.

If someone buys a new variety coming from parentage not derived from farmers dollars, they will be subject to whatever agreement they sign.

The dollars will flow back to the breeding company they deem, be that a public/private/or 3P.

Without a revenue capture model on innovation the whole system falls apart without massive taxpayer subsidies

[bgmb]

Gust I am suggesting going to the end point system but paying the royalties into a farmer owned breeding program instead of to companies who will play games like de registering perfectly good varieties.

[gustgd]

Deregistered (maybe wrong phrase) varieties in wheat go back to crown. Sometime varieties are pulled on account of quality or disease package. Watch for varieties Lillian, Harvest, or Unity on account of gluten streangth.
Every variety is being checked how it is holding up to fusarium.
Will low performers fail on account of farmers not buying low agronomic performers. Or buyers tightening buying specs?

[bucket]

But when the buyers of crops are also the seed sales guys and they also get to write the spec we are in a heap of trouble.

They might of sold you seed but if their market says they don't want it come fall where are you going to sell that new variety?

I think Lillian was develop for sawfly resistance. Why were the forward thinkers not including the gluten issue as part of their package?

De-register it, then what flush it out until sawfly becomes a problem again? Then a seed company buys it renames it and presto 70 buck seed?

[gustgd]

Bucket I think that Canadian farmers will always be able to sell whatever they want. But at what price?

I don't know if you work towards anything as far as quality or markets on anywhere other than agriville. You have been saying we should work towards a system where farmers are paid on a spec basis. Different specifications will be paid a different price. Likely IP programs where you will sign a contract to follow a recipe to deliver into a program. Think hogs or chickens delivering to a plant.

Alternatively you can grow a commodity, bulk handling,grow cheaper than your neighbours.
If your grain doesn't meet a spec keep shopping it around until you find market convergence.

FYI seed sellers and buyers are part of the registration process

[bucket]

Gust

Not arguing here. Just pointing out some what ifs.

Use the Syngenta corn **** up with China. The seed was sold to farmers, when China didn't accept it - who ultimately paid the price? Every farmer whether he grew it or not.

Same with the triffid flax issue? Ultimately farmers took the hit.

If the government regulated that so if something like that happened in the future and the entity responsible held to account it might be more palatable.

Somehow I doubt those safeguards will not be put in place.

[bucket]

Correction

I doubt those safeguards will be put in place.

[Guest]

triffid flax , shit we are still taking a hit every year and probably will for the rest of our lives . and people are growing $29/bu cert seed and still have to send in $250 triffid donation every year , what a $&$@&$ joke .