Have to agree with ado, lets take a look at the organic industry and if it is what is is. I say look at Hanmers organic facility in Nokomis they now farm well over 200 quarter sections and its just not enough they have to travel 100 miles to farm now, lets see if that came from selling conventional as organic. Testing testing and fine them if cause no one is looking. A local organic grower recently sold his farm at auction. All the land was certified organic and there was no organic growers present to bid or maybe they got outbid at 10 percent of land value which was well under opening bid. There is no value in organic small grains. Still need to be shown how.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Monsanto
Collapse
Logging in...
Welcome to Agriville! You need to login to post messages in the Agriville chat forums. Please login below.
X
-
So if the organic industry is based on peoples perception and the fact that the 10,000 bushels come off of just 10 acres of organic land then some questions need to be asked. I don't think I am out of line by questioning the organic industry. Ask parsley is Hanmers outfit legit? Or are you staying out of it?
Comment
-
i used to farm organically for 14 years, but i gave it up because i didnt have security of tenure to invest in fertlity crops, and the market collapsed after the 2008 crash.
Roundup has killed off the family farmer in the UK, as his husbandry skills have been replaced by min till guys hoovering up all the acres, who dont really understand the soil.
Comment
-
Hopper. I'm not familiar with the operation you are
questioning and I'm not sure if I totally understand
your posts but yes organic operations and
facilities do need to be and are questioned if
numbers don't add up. If this operation is cleaning
certified organic grain then it also has to be
certified as well. This means an inspection at least
once a year by an inspector who would check
their paper trail and plant to see if they were
complying to organic standards. Is there the
possibility of cheating in the system by a producer
or processor, IMHO yes, but what sector of ag or
business in general doesn't have those types. I
had a brother in law in commercial crime
department of RCMP and there are those types
everywhere. Also, being inspected does not
guarantee total compliance either but the
inspectors I have met ask lots of questions and do
as good of job as reasonably possible. The
organic industry doesn't live in a bubble so
consequently has to deal with the realalities of
chemical drift, cheaters in the system etc as best
as possible but at the same time trying to provide
an alternative to those farmers and consumers
who think there must be a better way to feed
ourselves.
Comment
-
There are a few things I like to address, hopper;
pettiness, and unfairness, first.
I find your accusatory comments, singling out the
Hamner family, as uncommonly discourteous,
blatantly unfair, and as gossipy as an old woman
who lacks teeth in both her mouth and
arguments.
I guest-lectured ag classes at the U of S in the
80's when Brad Hamner was a student. I only
know this b/c he sent me an email years later,
saying he had enjoyed my comments. That is the
fullness of my personal association with him. I
am not familiar with his farming practices.
Neither Brad, not his family deserve to be
derided publicly, by way if innuendo. No fatmer
does. Farming is much too difficlt to have other
farmers keen to grind you down. Competition is
good, but a continual viable supply of grain is
crucial field good export opportunities. Your grain
growing neighboring an essential part of your
bigger plan. You dont have to like him, but treat
him with respect
I really don't know if Brad, or the Hamner family
is/are an organic farmer, or whether their
operation is a combined wholeness, or each
family member maintains their own portion, nor
will I speculate, but I would suggest, hopper, if
you really want to know, or have concerns, first,
call Brad. That is what decency requires. I
understand, and am intimalely familiar with the
organic certification process and its' required
stringency, so I wIll not be doing so. Call him.
Parsley.
Comment
-
The other issue is about choice.
My choice is my choice. You may not like organic
farms. You may dislike eating the crops I grow.
You may have zero concern about pesticides. I
may choose to not buy apples sprayed with
insecticide. Choice spills into out personal lives,
as well. While you'd never buy the ugly blue
dress I wear, I wonder why you married the wife
you chose.
Organic farming, and organic crops are my
choice, and fill a market you absolutely cannot
service. Get over it.
Comment
-
Unfortunately ignorance is not a choice
and far too many people make these
decisions based on dogma and propaganda.
Those choices not only cause undo stress
to those of us that work our asses off
to feed the world but also millions of
people that would benefit from higher
producing crops or in the case of rice,
GE to produce more vitamin A saving
thousands of children from blindness.
This issue is quickly dancing on a whole
new ethical debate.
Comment
-
There are a few issues I see arising for farmers
that I will pit in Agriville's coffeetable this
morning, albeit an unwelcome contribution.
1. Wheat Belly (yes, I recognize my redundancy)
prompted media rapport with it's message;
hence, bakeries and manufactureres are sourcing
alternate grains, while premiun wheat sales will
continue to trend downwards. That is not good
financially, for farmers. You are spending money
on new wheat varieties, which profits breeders
and marketers, but does nothing for sales to
bakeries who won't buy your wheat. Your money
would be better spent in finding out WHY
consumers are avoiding wheat and wheat
products so the exercise is not repeated, and
replaced buy a newer model with a different
color. But still faulty. Consider the words:
allergens. Celiacs. Bowel syndrome
To not do so, means farmers will watch their
markets dwindle. parsley
Comment
-
Ado, what you call ignorance is what I call
rejection. and I also reject the
Blindkid/starvingAfrican plea. Poor people cannot
afford to buy the food you offer at a pricey-price.
Nor can Canada any longer afford to subsidize
what you grow.
And the rich people who can afford to buy what
you grow, are rejecting what you grow.
Facts are difficult to deal with. Rather like waking
up in the morning, sobering up, and discovering
she really is an ugly, ugly bitch. Parsley
Comment
-
All about choice folks.
If you chose to believe you are feeding a world lacking food. Your choice. More than enough to go around, especially if we don't waste it.
If you choose to think you are helping society in some other way. Your choice. However, give those people a choice as well and label your product.
So many rules in place for labeling "natural" or "organic" products, however each time a new chemical is used on food it is simply labeled "safe".
Label your grain or the products produced by your grain.
I actually like this whole chem farming thing for those of you who have no fear. More than enough food on the planet now and for the estimated 9 billion where every study says we will top out. So grow your chem crops. Once the labeling is done, people will choose the naturally grown products and you can create fuel for the tractors on the Organic land. Brilliant.
Forge on Bravely
Comment
-
if Monsanto wants to modify a crop so that you
are able to urinate out of your ear (hyperbole), so
be it: as long as Monsanto takes responsibility for
the any unintended consequences which accrue
from their invention.
If this article is true:
http://rt.com/usa/toxic-study-gmo-corn-900/
It appears that Monsanto can hatch any horror,
but owes human beings, and the world, no
acountability, no compensation, no
discontinuance, no morality, and no sense of
decency.
Monsanto has worked diligently to get exemption
from any responsibility. Pars.
Comment
- Reply to this Thread
- Return to Topic List
Comment