Friday Crop Report on a Thursday!

[sumdumguy]

KAp, in favour of carbon tax? You gotta be kidding-should be tarred and feathered and sent to the unemployment line, maybe they could get a job as bird shepherd.

[LWeber]

For a long time KAP was ok with the idea of a carbon tax. They've changed their tune a bit but not that much. Different song sheet but same song book.

President Dan Mazier is still hoping for his appointment to the "ex KAP executives dumping ground" that being the Canadian Grain Commission.

So Macaulay's not wrong, totally useless, but not totally wrong.

https://sencanada.ca/en/Content/Sen/Committee/421/AGFO/54044-e


Dan Mazier, President, Keystone Agricultural Producers of Manitoba: Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee, for giving me the opportunity to provide feedback on the carbon tax for industrial fossil fuels. The Keystone Agricultural Producers is Manitoba’s general farm policy organization, representing over 7,000 farm families. I am also a grains and oilseeds farmer from northeast of Brandon, Manitoba. We’re a community called Justice. Let me start by stressing that agriculture is a very high-input industry. To put this in perspective, the total cost of inputs during seeding season in Manitoba, which is happening right now, is approximately $2.6 billion. That includes seed, fertilizer and equipment fuel. These inputs are not only expensive but are often carbon-intensive to produce. Input costs have gone up dramatically over the past two decades, in part because of the mergers of agricultural input companies. Also, the lack of competition has meant these companies have charged what farms can bear to pay rather than the price at which companies can afford to sell. These mergers are still going on. We’ve just seen two major ones, and there is another large one in the works. This will reduce competition even further. Farmers, especially young farmers, are already concerned about the high cost to farm in Manitoba. Now, they are extremely worried that a carbon tax on fossil fuels will drive the cost up considerably. The carbon tax for companies involved in shipping and fertilizer production, among others, will be passed on to farmers. For example, one truck company implemented a 1 per cent carbon tax surcharge at the start of 2017 in Alberta, where there is already a price on carbon. It will increase to 1.5 per cent in 2018 as the Alberta carbon tax increases. Here is another example: Railways currently charge a carbon tax surcharge of 4 cents per mile on all shipments to, from, or within British Columbia. There are similar amounts in other provinces that already have a carbon price. I stress that grain and livestock prices given to farmers are set globally, based on world market demand. Manitoba prices cannot be altered to pass on additional production costs and taxes to customers. Farmers are well aware of climate change and the need to mitigate it. We have seen weather extremes from climate change cause havoc to our production and marketing systems, and research tells us that we’re going to get wetter springs — although you wouldn’t believe it this spring — and falls, and drier summers. The irony is that as we adapt to climate change, we often invest in more carbon-intensive tools like grain dryers or irrigation systems. However, there is a solution: investment in new technology and research that will reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. Precision agriculture is an example of this technology. It uses field data to adjust the fertilizer applied to fields of varying characteristics, and can greatly reduce the amount of applied fertilizer. We need these revenues from the carbon price invested into technology. Manitoba farmers, and in particular young farmers, want transparency in the carbon pricing system so we can see where the revenues are going. Keystone Agricultural Producers recommends the Senate insist the Government of Canada implement a program that monitors and reports on the macroeconomic impacts of the carbon tax on consumers and industries, including an assessment of costs passed on. In particular, for the agriculture sector, we want to know if it drives down the farmers’ profits.
We also ask the Senate demand a measurement of greenhouse gas reductions associated with the carbon price. Current estimates in Manitoba put reductions at just over 1 million tonnes cumulatively from 2018 to 2022. Many stakeholders are unsure about whether these reductions will be realized without supplemental programming to provide incentives for reduction practices. In closing, I reiterate the price farmers receive cannot be increased. If farmers become unprofitable, the Canadian economy and the environment will be harmed. I’d like to thank you for your time and attention, and I look forward to taking your questions.

[Braveheart]

This is KAP's modified position after a near revolt amongst members. They (KAP) were helped along after the MB gov't acquiesced on a harder original line against the carbon TAX. KAP can now position themselves as "helping" design the carbon strategy.

Many MB farmers are still left wondering about the answers to the questions Mazier posed. Would have been best to follow SK's example of opposition to the tax period.

[sumdumguy]

“Farmers are well aware of climate change and the need to mitigate it” , give me a break! Farmers I know are well-aware of the BS. There’s a lot more that I’d like to rant but I am stopping here - for today because I want to be happy with the rain for a day.

[Oliver88]

From what I read there, Mazier doesn’t seem to be a good representative for farmers or have their best interests at heart.

Although it’s up to MB farmers to get someone else elected as president of KAP.

[SASKFARMER3]

Dump him and then move on.

MAybe rain today if Drews forecast is right a whole lot of rain and slow rain.









Well after walking fields yesterday after we finished seeding I would call the early seeded an 8 out of 10 as things got a good catch on cereals.

peas are a 9 and need to be sprayed next week lets hope the cold stays away.

Barley is 9 all healthy and nice rows.

Canola is a 7 as some dry areas or seeded deeper aren't quite out of the ground but so far so good. Nice healthy plants funny on a dry year we planted 120 new trees at the farm to rebuild what the flood years killed. All but 5 didn't make it so far. My son watered the first few days and since then (3 weeks ago) nothing was watered and yet they live and root. Maybe because they weren't from the Indian head tree farm. I purchased these from an online new tree farm and they weren't priced bad at all. But the funny thing is in the wet years we tried to grow trees and most died. Go figure.

Also, a friend is doing experiments with the new JD weather stations, yes the golden goose 12000 plus station. The interesting addition is the moisture probes that are attached and after the data from last two weeks has been collected he feels with timely rains we have enough in the ground to grow a crop if the tap turns off in our area. But the rains now are building up soil moisture and as long as our roots are going down before the heat and not on the surface it might work.

All hope is not lost yet.

Later off to open the lake.

[SASKFARMER3]

Ah, that was one heck of a normal weather system. Little more than we wanted but we will take it. Some flooding in reclaimed seeded areas that were flooded years ago.

The farm rain gauge is on the fritz as it is to close to the house.

The Weather station was up and running yesterday for a while and lost WiFi so not sure of total but at 4 it was an inch.

So 2.25 so far since April.

Again you only need a bit of snow and 4 timely showers of rain to grow a good crop.

Neighbour has soil moisture probes hooked to his weather station and it says we have adequate soil moisture below ground but timely rains are needed. That was before this system.

[grassfarmer]

https://sencanada.ca/en/Content/Sen/Committee/421/AGFO/54044-e


Dan Mazier, President, Keystone Agricultural Producers of Manitoba: Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee, for giving me the opportunity to provide feedback on the carbon tax for industrial fossil fuels. The Keystone Agricultural Producers is Manitoba’s general farm policy organization, representing over 7,000 farm families. I am also a grains and oilseeds farmer from northeast of Brandon, Manitoba. We’re a community called Justice. Let me start by stressing that agriculture is a very high-input industry. To put this in perspective, the total cost of inputs during seeding season in Manitoba, which is happening right now, is approximately $2.6 billion. That includes seed, fertilizer and equipment fuel. These inputs are not only expensive but are often carbon-intensive to produce. Input costs have gone up dramatically over the past two decades, in part because of the mergers of agricultural input companies. Also, the lack of competition has meant these companies have charged what farms can bear to pay rather than the price at which companies can afford to sell. These mergers are still going on. We’ve just seen two major ones, and there is another large one in the works. This will reduce competition even further. Farmers, especially young farmers, are already concerned about the high cost to farm in Manitoba. Now, they are extremely worried that a carbon tax on fossil fuels will drive the cost up considerably. The carbon tax for companies involved in shipping and fertilizer production, among others, will be passed on to farmers. For example, one truck company implemented a 1 per cent carbon tax surcharge at the start of 2017 in Alberta, where there is already a price on carbon. It will increase to 1.5 per cent in 2018 as the Alberta carbon tax increases. Here is another example: Railways currently charge a carbon tax surcharge of 4 cents per mile on all shipments to, from, or within British Columbia. There are similar amounts in other provinces that already have a carbon price. I stress that grain and livestock prices given to farmers are set globally, based on world market demand. Manitoba prices cannot be altered to pass on additional production costs and taxes to customers. Farmers are well aware of climate change and the need to mitigate it. We have seen weather extremes from climate change cause havoc to our production and marketing systems, and research tells us that we’re going to get wetter springs — although you wouldn’t believe it this spring — and falls, and drier summers. The irony is that as we adapt to climate change, we often invest in more carbon-intensive tools like grain dryers or irrigation systems. However, there is a solution: investment in new technology and research that will reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. Precision agriculture is an example of this technology. It uses field data to adjust the fertilizer applied to fields of varying characteristics, and can greatly reduce the amount of applied fertilizer. We need these revenues from the carbon price invested into technology. Manitoba farmers, and in particular young farmers, want transparency in the carbon pricing system so we can see where the revenues are going. Keystone Agricultural Producers recommends the Senate insist the Government of Canada implement a program that monitors and reports on the macroeconomic impacts of the carbon tax on consumers and industries, including an assessment of costs passed on. In particular, for the agriculture sector, we want to know if it drives down the farmers’ profits.
We also ask the Senate demand a measurement of greenhouse gas reductions associated with the carbon price. Current estimates in Manitoba put reductions at just over 1 million tonnes cumulatively from 2018 to 2022. Many stakeholders are unsure about whether these reductions will be realized without supplemental programming to provide incentives for reduction practices. In closing, I reiterate the price farmers receive cannot be increased. If farmers become unprofitable, the Canadian economy and the environment will be harmed. I’d like to thank you for your time and attention, and I look forward to taking your questions.

I'm not a KAP member or supported particularly but in my opinion that was an intelligent presentation of facts to a Government committee. If he'd gone and presented a stupid climate change denier rant he would have been laughed out of the room and how would that have helped producers voice be represented?

[SASKFARMER3]

If he would have attended and said Western farmers are creating a huge Carbon Sink that we want stupid Quebec and Ontario to send us their useless Carbon tax money.

Guess what the Whole I love Climate change etc would die right their.

We needed leaders with Balls to talk real science and then follow the money back here.

Guess what that wouldn't happen because the East only can survive if they feed off us.

[oneoff]

What a difference a day can make in rainfall totals.

A variable six tenths or so up to yesterday and then an easy 3.5 inches and as much water in the fields as ever seen. Still coming down. A 175 mile trip to Regina yesterday found some standing water in almost all fields and the return trip required windshield wipers on high. Lots of continuous rain and sheets of water washing across the high ways (particularly in Bienfeit-Frobisher areas.

Spraying will be on a big hold.


The 15 to 25% acre losses going to be factored into the bin busting expected crop by the grain trade?

Still... any amount of rain is overall better than severe drought ...with all its complications.

[SASKFARMER3]

what is lost in the flooded area is made up of higher. But what did Lampman get some pictures I have seen look awful.

Creeks will run for first time in some areas. STill spitting in Regina.

Heading to the farm to take tires of a special JD A Wide front and then sheet metal etc to get down to bare bones. Then paint and put tires and decals back on.

This one we got from 1 mile of the USA border south of Regina.

Fixed up motor last year and other issues.

Won't be ready for Farm Progress maybe next year.

[fjlip]

Still... any amount of rain is overall better than severe drought ...with all its complications.

NOT any, the right amount, this better STOP or the year will not be a huge crop, or easy to harvest. Stinks like 2010 here...
This area crops DIED from way the hell too much rain. Weeds took over due to no competition and harvest was HELL.

[Horse]

4mm here since snow gone in April, sure could use a drink.

[STRNGR]

Here in SWMb, most done seeding,we finished Monday, May 28 We were setting up to sow low spots to water tolerant grass Tue, but rained out,4/10,Wed 2 2/10,Fri 2 2/10,Sat 2/10 so far. What we feared has happened again, won't stop. Rebuilding subsoil moisture . Will start spraying next week, will be a few ruts again. Pastures are coming along, hauled out last of cattle on Monday. Hay fields were slow,dry & frost May12, but have come along now, still will be a small 1st cut,grasses heading out & alfalfa flowering at 10".
Looks like another "Normal" year !!

[beaverdam]

9 1/2 inches in 4 days is destroying crops and significantly damaging land. After finally drying out for two years and planting normal acreage,( after 7 yrs of excessive rain), back to this, severe flooding. Crops will be huge before we can get back out there to spray. Just sickening.
Southeast Sask