SASK Pulse Growers survey

[gustgd]

Trying something a little new and soliciting feedback on the varietal tender release program.

http://saskpulse.com/news-events/news/input-on-tender-release-program-renewals



Deadline to provide input is Friday, June 3, 2016.

We realize timing isn't the best in the middle of seeding but it only takes 5 minutes if checking boxes. If you provide written context.... Although then it's important to you and SPG and worth the time

If you provide comment here, I'll try and read and respond but they won't be counted in the survey.
Thanks for the input.
Gerrid Gust
SPG Director

[sumdumguy]

Was the survey sent out?

[gustgd]

There was an email sent to all the addresses they have on Friday.
It's also on the homepage if you go on the Saskpulse.com

Getting people's real email that they check regularly is an issue.
Esp this time of the year, although there are few good times to get ahold of people.

[westernvicki]

Gerrid, I note that there may be no really good times for farmers, there are better times than the middle of May.

Sumdumguy: Indeed the survey did go to emails on file, so every pulse grower may not have received.

While I am going to applaud the outreach, the process appears to be lacking.

The issue is this: market classes were awarded to companies, and these contracts are now up for renewal.


My support was always transparent as an SPG director. Growers levy supported the development of these varieties, access to these varieties and the ability to grow and market them should be by general release: giving all growers and all companies the ability to grow the market.

As background I note, the tenders were awarded for a period of time to give companies an exclusive advantage and the ability to grow the market, the contracts (as I understand from consulting a couple of past SPG directors on the board when the contracts were awarded)were never expected to be exclusive forever. And indeed one may argue in some of the cases that they are not niche at all but part of mainstream production.

The merit of the program is debated of course, but indeed the survey does provide an opportunity to weigh in.

I would encourage growers to be involved in this survey, and if you believe you do not have enough information to make an informed decision, let SPG know this as well.

Please take the time to do so.
Vicki Dutton
past SPG Director

[bucket]

I am not sure the SPG should be in the business of developing private label varieties for buyers without them paying the full cost or a royalty that allows the checkoff fund to recoup it's investment and then some.

The bullshit about R and D making us more more money is coming from those that benefit off checkoff money spent.... guys like Simpsons and AGT ...and those in the know that do their bidding.

Sell the variety at full development costs and a good 20 percent ROI. Or else leave it to the guys that actually paid the checkoff to develop it.

[westernvicki]

Please do the survey, and have your opinions measured.

As I note my support is for general release, always was.

[bucket]

I did it already. And didn't spend enough time writing comments. But this is a predetermined survey FFS.

Might do it again when I have more time. Perfect timing. What was wrong with January February March.?

Typical wishy washy questions that can have the results bent to wishes of those that don't know wtf they are doing until their master tells them.

[sumdumguy]

I remember the good old days of the ultra-famous Laird lentil release. Registered seed growers were given seed for multiplication, it became foundation, then registered, then certified and anyone could buy and sell it. That's called free market. This is total BS, we pay for research and development and just like bucket says, some one can tye it up. Should producers/ and government be funding these research projects if they aren't accessible to the general public who in fact paid for their development?

[westernvicki]

All great questions which SPG and funding agencies will need to take into consideration as we move into the UPOV 91 era, in regards to variety release in the future.

[Rareearth]

I agree with all the above comments.
- let those that want there own branded varieties pay full cost
- companies that had the initial "rights" have had the contract term completed general release them now
- how or why would a small niche crop need further protection and development? Do these companies receive funding or tax credits from other sources? Government?


-show me the money, very difficult to make comments when information is with held
- how many $ has each company returned in royalties?
- how many tons have they exported or processes in each year of the contract
- many of these" special markets" small size might hold the most lucrative opportunities in the future with "novel traits", functional properties, patented protected uses, etc.

The best strength and opportunities for the pulse growers will be with a diversified processing, marketing and exporting sector. Not a centralized, controlled one.

Do any of these exclusive variety holders market, distribute, promote other Saskatchewan pulse grower varieties ( my levy dollars) in other counties to compete against me?

The system is not broken, it was used as a way to generate extra revenue for pulse growers. At what dollar cost to growers, start up companies, foreign companies, etc

Green lentils, red lentils, were all new and special crops at one time. We don't need the exporters to manage growth, production and opportunities in the future.

A survey is good, nothing wrong with a public forum either