Media

[parsley]

From Morris Dorrosh's Agriweek:


Let George do it


If the Board can’t get competitive
prices, should it get out of the way?


According to another report that
appeared last week, the trouble with the Canadian Wheat Board is that it
is too involved in details, such as
selling grain and getting it shipped
to salt water.

The report, by Richard Pedde and Rolf Mirus, issued by the University of Alberta’s Western Centre for Economic Research, suggests that these core functions could be farmed out to private contractors.

Pedde farms at Indian Head, Sask.
and also teaches at the University of
Alberta.

He is at least a lukewarm supporter of the single-desk system and in 2007 authored an inconclusive comparison of prices received for wheat at comparable locations in Alberta and Montana.

This new report argues that day-today
operations of the Board can be
improved while retaining its monopoly.

‘Modest’ changes could increase
transparency and efficiency and get better prices for producers.

Logistics, marketing and trading of
grain would be outsourced, allowing
the Board, especially its directors,
to concentrate on long term strategy.

Auctions would be held to select the
highest qualified bidder.

The resulting system, Pedde says, could use publicly-visible benchmarks
such as U.S. wheat futures prices for ‘transparency’.

Credit and performance risks would be shifted to specialists while guaranteeing producer payments and proper service to Board customers.

The Board already outsources management of its foreign exchange and interest rate risk.

The scenarios are admittedly hypothetical and its premise is that
results commonly improve when
business functions are outsourced.

The report firstly insults the people
within the Board currently responsible
for marketing and logistics, and
secondly assumes that more highlyqualified contractors would come
forward with sufficient motivation to
not just obtain better prices from
Wheat Board customers but sufficiently
better to generate a profit for
themselves.

It would also remove from the Board the very things that, in its inflated self-opinion, make it
the world-class marketing powerhouse.

The Board would become basically a regulator and enforcer, tasks at which it does excel.

It is also hard to imagine that such a scheme would be acceptable to farmers who either support or oppose the marketing monopoly.

It would not change the compulsory, repressive aspects of the Board system, with is the main thing in the present controversy.

What some qualified economic researcher should really look into is
the
(a) possible impact of the
Board’s trading in Minneapolis
wheat futures of the last six months,
and
(b) the matter of the origin of
soaring U.S. malting barley and durum
wheat exports offshore at a time
when that country is one of the biggest
importers of Board grains.


Parsley

[agstar77]

Read the article in the NY times in a previous thread, and then tell me if you can trust U.S. futures.

[parsley]

I readthis article from:

http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStories/ContentPosting.aspx?feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V2&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2 f20080328%2forganic_products_AM_080328



Organic farmers not meeting demand, study finds
28/03/2008 10:30:01 AM





Canadians' demand for organically-grown fruits and vegetables is increasing rapidly, but farmers aren't yet meeting the need, according to a new study released by Statistics Canada.


CTV.ca News Staff


The new study, 'Organic: From niche to mainstream,' is based on data from the 2006 agriculture census and a 2006 study by the Organic Agriculture Centre of Canada.

It was released Friday morning by StatsCan.

The study shows more farmers are jumping on board the organic bandwagon, but the majority of the certified organic products grown in this country are field crops such as wheat and barley, and hay, and most are destined for export.

"Canada has a competitive advantage for growing grains and oilseeds because of the climate and large expanses of cropland suited to mechanization," says the study.

"So it makes sense that organic field crops and hay would be the most common certified organic product. Many of the field crops grown organically are sold internationally -- not processed, sold or eaten in Canada."

The study found the following:

2,462 farming operations reported growing certified organic field crops and hay, nearly half of them in Saskatchewan;
Less than 1,000 farms grew certified organic fruits and vegetables or greenhouse products;
More than 6,000 farms produced certified organic animals or animal products.

But the study showed that progress is being made and production levels of organic products are on the rise:

A total of 3,555 Canadian farms reported growing certified organic products in 2006. That marks a major increase of close to 60 per cent from 2001, when only 2,230 farms made the claim.

Over half of the farms that accounted for the increase are in Quebec or Saskatchewan, the report states.
Saskatchewan had the highest number of certified organic farms, with 1,181.
11,937 farms reported producing products that were organic, but not certified.

Laura Telford, of Canadian Organic Growers, told CTV's Canada AM she wasn't surprised by the numbers or types of products grown on most certified organic farms in Canada.

"We've known for a long time organic doesn't really meet the expectations of Canadians," she said. "Most Canadians think of organics as being cute little vegetable operations in Ontario or Quebec. But that's far from the reality."

[agstar77]

Just goes to show how uninformed and paranoid Baby Boomers are. They should be more concerned with the SUV fumes they are breathing and all the plastic packaging even the organic foods come in. We won't even talk about the bottled water illusion. All power to the Organic people for taking advantage of them. These are the same people who idle there cars outside of the schools ,so they can run heaters or air conditioning. They demand biofuels that cost more to produce and cause more pollution.

[parsley]

...and then there's eating food that is religiously prepared.......


the consumer is always right.

I haven't read the article yet, agstar, but I will.

[agstar77]

Do you have special filters on the exhaust from your machinery. How do you keep the Harmful gases from getting on your organic crops or do you burn biofuels? Or maybe you use horses or donkeys to pull your equipment. I realize the customer is always right but not necessarily bright.

[parsley]

Nothing quite that sophisticated, agstar.

You obviously service a different set of consumers than I, ones I prefer to leave for you to continue to service.

Rather the consumers I deal with want traceability, (prefer to buy locally), want pesticide and chemically-free food, (practically produced,.. not growing in a glass rotunda),and want to support Canadian farmers.

Organics threw in third party verification as a measure of neutrality.

Interestingly, many elements of the organic system have been adopted by other players,a regognition which is not unnoticed.

For example, audit trails are used by the processing industry, and surely even you would agree that ever-increasing recalls demand identifying risks by that audit system put in place, so that their production lines do not entirely shut down.

Your tirade against Baby Boomers is duly noted, and with luck, they will not buy raw material from you, thus saving you the irritation.

You might want to lobby Flaman and Korneychuk to create a pooling account for similar minded Board supporters, such as yourself.

Anti-Boomer Pooling Account

Not selling to those Boomers will satisfy your resentment, and your markets will continue to include third world countries, I'm sure.

Much the same as some banks which advocate investing in mutual funds which are socially acceptable to the investor.

Glad we are not courting the same market. Goes to show why the CWB cannot not serve all, and serves as a reminder why the Board and its' supporters do not have any place in organic marketing.

Parsley

[agstar77]

I didn't say it wasn't astute business, just ironic, that on the one hand they want pure food and on the other they pollute the enviroment!

[parsley]

I presume you do ride a horse to town, and wash clothes in the river, which is where you get your stones to throw.


Good for you.
(pat pat on the back)

[Jay-mo]

Since when is the consumer always right? For a majority of products from food to cars to clothes. Consumers are advertized to and told what they should want.
What I mostly see in todays market place is not sellers asking consumers what can I sell you but telling consumers this is what you want and need.
Like I said on another thread I see alot of tactics by the organic crowd to convince people they should eat organic because if its not they are basically eating cancer.

[parsley]

Jay-mo,

I have to say that organics began because there was a demand. I have not created demand. I have satisfied demand.

I have noticed that in some industries/sectors/circles, advertising is approached as "educating" the consumer, but organics never began that way.

Frankly, my take on it is that the consumer has resented that tactic at times.

Organics has always asked the consumer what they wanted, and supplied it.

For one thing, we know who the buyer is.

And the second thing is we get direct feedback.

The consumer is always right because it is his money and he can walk any old time. If he wants a red yo-yo, he gets it or he walks.

It is what it is.

Parsley

[parsley]

Yup. They been reading the exporting sheets.

Just like those giant jellyfish slide about the ocean, bottom-feeding, multiplying, multiplying, and slurping up everything of value, growing fatter and fatter, here comes the Wheat Board vacuming organic buyers, organic profits and organic integrity.

Expelling slime.


QUOTE from CWB Gunsite
Newsroom
2008
CWB offers spring contracts for organic grain

March 28, 2008

Winnipeg – The CWB’s farmer-controlled board of directors has approved enhancements to the organic marketing program for the 2008-09 crop year.

On a limited basis, the CWB will offer organic growers spring contracts as a continuation of its pilot organic marketing program. The program includes a cash price upon delivery and, under the new basis-pooling contract, the potential for an additional payment at the end of the crop year. The CWB will continue to offer spot contracts in 2008-09.

“The CWB’s organic program continues to grow and evolve. New cash-buying enhancements, such as basis-pooling contracts, will help us meet the needs of organic producers marketing through the CWB,” said CWB President and CEO Greg Arason.

Starting in mid-April, the CWB will offer organic producers a spring contract for the 2008-09 crop year. Contract availability is limited and will be determined by market opportunities.

Under the new basis-pooling contract, producers will receive a negotiated cash price upon delivery, just as they do now. However, producers will also be eligible for a potential payment at the end of the crop year. The potential payment will be derived from any spreads between the upfront cash prices paid to organic producers and actual CWB returns.

Organic grain is marketed separately from conventional grain, and is distinct in a number of ways. Organic grain must adhere to strict certification requirements and federal regulations.

Although demand for organic grain is growing, organic production constitutes less than one per cent of the overall wheat and barley production in Western Canada. Organic grain sells at a premium to conventional grain, and does not compete directly with conventional grain sales.

Controlled by western Canadian farmers, the CWB is the largest wheat and barley marketer in the world. One of Canada’s biggest exporters, the Winnipeg-based organization sells grain to more than 70 countries and returns all sales revenue, less marketing costs, to Prairie farmers.
UNQUOTE

Gawd, slime is disgusting stuff.

[bucket]

And FLAMAN and WELLS keep laughing all the way to the bank.

Cash upon delivery. It probably means they are getting a substantial amount of money for cash flowing their farms.

I wonder why the cwb can't do it for conventional farms considering they pay $6 for my grain now and are asking (and according to Vader/Flaman on other threads the cwb is making substantial sales at these high levels ) close to $18. Why is there not better cashflow options for conventional grains?

I don't see them taking a fee like the epo or fpc on organic grain.

Discrimination. I think so.

[parsley]

Discreet Contract Peeping


Every time an organic farmer goes through a buyback,do you suppose the Wheat Board looks at the name of the buyer listed by the farmer?


Nah.


Do you suppose the CWB Marketing jellyfish slither through those buyers' names that organic farmers have established and add it to the CWB list "to call"?


Nah.

Do you suppose the CWB Organic Marketing specialists who despise organics at the best of times, phones those buyers to ask about the weather?

Nah.

Do you suppose those new specialists have now self-appointed themselves as the "Canadian Organic Marketing Specialists"? with Departments to consolidate transactions, statistics, and attend all the trade shows, compliments of the Conventional pooling accounts?

Nah.

Do you suppose Conventional farmers' pools have been paying for organic Marketing specialists all along?

Nah.


Thought naught.

I get these really funny notions first thing in the morning.


Carry on.


Parsley

[parsley]

Calgary Herald
29 March, 2008



Wheat board elects pro-monopoly chair; Hill faces ongoing struggle with Tory government




The farmer-run Canadian Wheat Board has elected Larry Hill as its new chairman after Ken Ritter, who had led the marketing agency since 1999, stepped down this week.

"I know that it's not going to be an easy job, but it's an important thing that the CWB function in the best interest of producers," Hill said in an interview on Friday.

The wheat board, which had $4.95 billion in revenue last year, has been locked in a struggle with the federal government, which wants to end its monopoly on sales of Prairie wheat and barley to millers, maltsters and export markets.

Hill, a farmer from Swift Current, Sask., is a strong monopoly supporter and has been on the wheat board's board of directors since 1999.

Ritter, who farms at Kindersley, Sask., became the first chairman when the governance of the 72-year-old wheat board was overhauled to give farmers more control over the agency, one of the world's largest grain marketers.

Farmers elect 10 directors to the board. The government appoints five, including the CEO. A narrow majority of elected, pro-monopoly directors now controls the board.

Ritter's term as a director is set to expire this year. He said he stepped down so a new chairman could begin at the same time as the agency's new chief executive, Ian White, who takes the helm on Monday.

"It's a new beginning, a very fundamental change for the organization, and this is as good a time as any to make that exchange" at the board of directors, Ritter told Reuters.

Before he joined the board, Ritter had advocated for a "dual market," where the wheat board would compete for farmers' grain with other buyers. But he changed his mind after joining the board, and became a staunch monopoly supporter, leading the fight against the Conservative government's push to change the agency's mandate.

Ritter said he is optimistic about the wheat board's future if farmers are allowed to continue to control it.

"If it's left in the hands of farmers, I think the board has a bright future. If it's left in the hands of government, who knows -- they have to answer that question," he said.

UNQUOTE


All these years on the Wheat Board. and Ritter still doesn't know that the CWB is an Act of Parliament, and farmers are subject to an act of Parliament.

The poor man.

Farmers running farmers.

No wonder farmers are in such a bloody mess.

Parsley