Truflex

[Klause]

Don't blame the companies for your bad decisions or farming practice. It all rests on your shoulders and is your responsibility to be either good or bad stewards of the land you very temporarily are in care of.

But hey, if you want to spray 2 passes at 360 gm in canola, someday - and i kinda doubt it will even be approved next year, it will be available someday for YOU to decide to purchase and use.

The TruFlex doesn't look any different then the RT73 gene canola beside it. You can just use more roundup on it.

Theoretically. We were at the Monsanto tour a few years ago. The plots they sprayed with high rates/late looked like crap compared to the regular ones in Saskatoon.

There's also the true reason - the patent for the original gene and the shenanigans around it have run out... Time to get rid of it and bring a new one out before people go bin-running seed.

[wd9]

Theoretically. We were at the Monsanto tour a few years ago. The plots they sprayed with high rates/late looked like crap compared to the regular ones in Saskatoon.

There's also the true reason - the patent for the original gene and the shenanigans around it have run out... Time to get rid of it and bring a new one out before people go bin-running seed.

So what. I believe that is called staying in business. It's their right to come up with new products, and you will buy them. Bitching about it is pretty pathetic. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

My plots look great. As do all the others i've seen.

https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536623286743040 https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536623286743040

https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536294340116480 https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536294340116480

[Klause]

So what. I believe that is called staying in business. It's their right to come up with new products, and you will buy them. Bitching about it is pretty pathetic. If you don't want it, don't buy it.

My plots look great. As do all the others i've seen.

https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536623286743040 https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536623286743040

https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536294340116480 https://twitter.com/efarmerdot/status/1012536294340116480

Because as soon as the new ones are registered they will delist /deregister the old varieties removing producers' choice.


New technology is good. However this is a dirty trick to circumvent the spirit and purpose of the patent system

[wd9]

Because as soon as the new ones are registered they will delist /deregister the old varieties removing producers' choice.


New technology is good. However this is a dirty trick to circumvent the spirit and purpose of the patent system

Its their variety, they can deregister it

In 2022 you can make your own hybrid variety, register your variety, get approval in all 7 countries, spend a couple hundred million doing so, get it thru WCCRRC, CFIA, Food feed and health approval, meet min spec for codex alimentarius defintion and give it to farmers royalty free - who will still buy the latest and best yielding from Bayer.

[shtferbrains]

This is some of the new tech we get to use first keeping us on the leading edge.

Does our position as a "favored" market due to our intellectual property agreements give us an advantage or disadvantage?

This is an example of what we compete with;

BUENOS AIRES – Argentine farmers have agreed to pay perpetual royalties when they replant genetically modified seeds made by companies like Monsanto Co., a deal that could allow farmers access to the newest biotechnology.

Farmers’ group Argentine Rural Society and the Argentine Seed Producers’ Association representing companies confirmed the agreement. The farmers’ new willingness to pay corporations royalties indefinitely is a stark reversal in Argentina, the world’s top soy meal and number three soy and corn exporter.

Argentina’s 1973 seed law allows farmers to use seeds generated from their harvests freely in later plantings, unlike their counterparts in the United States.

Their position spurred a bitter, years-long dispute with agribusiness companies and Monsanto in 2016 decided not to launch its new varieties of soybean seeds in Argentina.

Farmers and a group representing seed companies sent the agreement to the government in December, but the details were previously unreported.

“There is recognition that these (royalties) must be paid, and that we producers have to pay for this service,” Daniel Pelegrina, president of the Argentine Rural Society, said in an interview.

“This will give certainty to companies, which are going to release new technologies and be able to collect payment, and for producers, who need technology to increase our productivity.”
The position spurred a bitter, years-long dispute with agribusiness companies and Monsanto in 2016 decided not to launch its new varieties of soy seeds in Argentina.

The deal could pave the way for a new seed law and the arrival of better seed technology at a time South America is increasingly challenging the United States’ dominance over global foodstuffs trade.

It comes more than a year after an effort by President Mauricio Macri to replace the seed law that failed in Congress due to disagreements over how long farmers should continue paying royalties.

“This agreement is the result of a year of dialogue between producers and developers, which has not happened before,” said Alfredo Paseyro, head of the Argentine Seed Producers’ Association, which represents Monsanto and dozens of other companies.

Macri’s administration has said a new law is needed, but it has not clarified whether it plans to send Congress a new bill this year. An Agriculture Ministry spokeswoman declined to provide details on the plans beyond saying they “are advancing.”

The deal indicates that the royalty rates will be set for three years after the original purchase of a seed, after which point the value of the payment could be adjusted, Pelegrina and Paseyro said.

[Klause]

This is some of the new tech we get to use first keeping us on the leading edge.

Does our position as a "favored" market due to our intellectual property agreements give us an advantage or disadvantage?

This is an example of what we compete with;

BUENOS AIRES – Argentine farmers have agreed to pay perpetual royalties when they replant genetically modified seeds made by companies like Monsanto Co., a deal that could allow farmers access to the newest biotechnology.

Farmers’ group Argentine Rural Society and the Argentine Seed Producers’ Association representing companies confirmed the agreement. The farmers’ new willingness to pay corporations royalties indefinitely is a stark reversal in Argentina, the world’s top soy meal and number three soy and corn exporter.

Argentina’s 1973 seed law allows farmers to use seeds generated from their harvests freely in later plantings, unlike their counterparts in the United States.

Their position spurred a bitter, years-long dispute with agribusiness companies and Monsanto in 2016 decided not to launch its new varieties of soybean seeds in Argentina.

Farmers and a group representing seed companies sent the agreement to the government in December, but the details were previously unreported.

“There is recognition that these (royalties) must be paid, and that we producers have to pay for this service,” Daniel Pelegrina, president of the Argentine Rural Society, said in an interview.

“This will give certainty to companies, which are going to release new technologies and be able to collect payment, and for producers, who need technology to increase our productivity.”
The position spurred a bitter, years-long dispute with agribusiness companies and Monsanto in 2016 decided not to launch its new varieties of soy seeds in Argentina.

The deal could pave the way for a new seed law and the arrival of better seed technology at a time South America is increasingly challenging the United States’ dominance over global foodstuffs trade.

It comes more than a year after an effort by President Mauricio Macri to replace the seed law that failed in Congress due to disagreements over how long farmers should continue paying royalties.

“This agreement is the result of a year of dialogue between producers and developers, which has not happened before,” said Alfredo Paseyro, head of the Argentine Seed Producers’ Association, which represents Monsanto and dozens of other companies.

Macri’s administration has said a new law is needed, but it has not clarified whether it plans to send Congress a new bill this year. An Agriculture Ministry spokeswoman declined to provide details on the plans beyond saying they “are advancing.”

The deal indicates that the royalty rates will be set for three years after the original purchase of a seed, after which point the value of the payment could be adjusted, Pelegrina and Paseyro said.

Old story. Argentina's new seed law allows for royalties for three years - not for having to buy new seed every year and after that the seed becomes public domain.


In Canada, our system used to work like that... Except now we have gone to delisting varieties as soon as their patent/IP time runs out. The point is not using old seed varieties, the point is with no alternatives, Bayersanto can charge whatever they would like and you're hostage to them and have to pay. They know this, thus they can extract maximum value from the producer.


Actually, Monsanto owns one gene. Canola itself was bred by Canadian public researchers - and is public property. So actually, you're paying all that money for canola seed to a private company, after you and every other taxpayer paid for the public development of it already.

As far as genetics go, some of the most advanced bean genetics are actually produced by a company called Don Mario, which is from Argentina originally.

Remember, Argentina is the third largest producer (54ish million tonnes) of soybeans in the world and the largest exporter of soy oil and meal.

Also, in 2012 Monsanto was expelled from the Argentine market by the government for fraud and bribery of officials trying to get new genetic events approved.

Bayer, Dupont, Syngenta, Dow all operate down there... Monsanto tried to play bully and got their ass handed to them.



Also, I'm not sure why Reuters quotes that article as "exclusive" as this has been widely broadcast and discussed on pretty much every Argentine and Latam news agency for the better part of a year.

The reuters article also fails to mention that Argentina has four major farm unions, and three of them fought against the royalty scheme, which is why it ended the way it did (with the houses modifying the original bill).

In Argentina, any citizen can bring forth a law, or modification of a law - it is then presented in legal format (following a constitutional and legal study) to the lower house by a committee - the house is then obliged to debate that bill or amendment within 12 months of it being presented.

[Klause]

Its their variety, they can deregister it

In 2022 you can make your own hybrid variety, register your variety, get approval in all 7 countries, spend a couple hundred million doing so, get it thru WCCRRC, CFIA, Food feed and health approval, meet min spec for codex alimentarius defintion and give it to farmers royalty free - who will still buy the latest and best yielding from Bayer.

Hmmm.


Except a bunch of the genetics are borrowed... (Ag Canada and DL seeds for instance).

I'm not sure, are you familiar with Dr. Kevin Falk? He had no problem bringing seven canola varieties to market including a few hybrid polish varieties before retiring last year.

Now if the WCCRRC would actually work to approve varieties that improve agronomic performance for the farmer, instead of just performance for the "industry", that'd be great.... Though that's a whole 'nother story.


Also, nobody says that they can't profit from or charge royalties. On the contrary.

What I'm saying is we should never have allowed them to be able to delist/deregister perfectly good varieties because they feel like it.

And they are no longer their varieties - see that's how patents work. In exchange for guaranteeing the owner/inventor of a new idea exclusivity for a certain amount of time, that owner/inventor then places that same idea in the public domain for perpetuity It's give or take, and it's the legal and ideal foundation of the patent system - it's also why all drawings for patents and materials to replicate the original idea are in the public domain.

Unfortunately, we've managed to completely screw things up, and now have become "the best place to extract profit from primary ag in the world"...

When you are teetering on breakeven costs within 5% of the long term average of a crop, there's a serious problem


It's like the other post about Argentina. What good is having "new technology" when their farmers make $400 USD/HA/yr profit and we make $50...

[hobbyfrmr]

Farmers need to grow canola for profit. Tight rotation pressure means you need to spray herbicide at least 2x , fungicide at least once.
Stacked trait genetics LL + RR is a perfect recipe for disaster. Then the same chemical manufacturer will sell you the new chemical solution to the disaster.
You cant sell supplies if you dont have a demand.
You guys should be looking into better sprayer equipment. Its the most important machine on the farm.

[SASKFARMER3]

This is just fascinating.

We are now going to create more superweeds and less yield all in the name of a clean more pissed on the field.

How come my RR fields side by side with my Liberty always yield less. Last year had a section Canola Left was RR and Right was Liberty.

I don't give a rats ass if you can spray twice to get clean fields. You're creating a super weed.

Now besides yield and two liberty passes and no burn off on either plus two half-litre original rates no RR canola. The yield difference was around 6.3 bushels an acre. Liberty Won.

This year the RR side needed a spring burn off for wheat and the Liberty side had none.

This bullshit notion it will clean up fields is a crock. Every time we rented new land and if it was dirty we seeded Liberty because you knew you would have a better crop. than RR.

Going a heavy rate in spring just burns the plants off.

Ah, farming were just changing a name and farmers fall for it every time. Hook Line and Sinker.

[wd9]

There is no such thing as a superweed.

Sounds like you found your ideal product. Good thing you have a choice to buy what fits your farm.

[wd9]

For those convinced the sky is falling, it's going from spraying roundup on canola like for the last 20 years to spraying roundup on canola where the canola is actually resistant.

That kind of incredible leap forward and innovation rarely comes along in your farming career, so dig deep, swallow, try not to gag, and try to accept this huge revolutionary change. Yes this is sarcasm, I have to put that too.

Mowed the plot today, it all looks the same - because it is all basically the same. Liberty, stacked, TruFlex, RR1, no diff.

[Partners]

If there is any super weeds it's because we have been tickling them at .33 for yrs.
This yr we did one pass at .5 and what a difference.fried the shit big time..
So if needed double the rate will kill not just piss the weeds off.

[Crestliner]

For those convinced the sky is falling, it's going from spraying roundup on canola like for the last 20 years to spraying roundup on canola where the canola is actually resistant.

That kind of incredible leap forward and innovation rarely comes along in your farming career, so dig deep, swallow, try not to gag, and try to accept this huge revolutionary change. Yes this is sarcasm, I have to put that too.

Mowed the plot today, it all looks the same - because it is all basically the same. Liberty, stacked, TruFlex, RR1, no diff.

I agree with WD9....I have been renting land to Monsanto for years for these trials and watching this TRUFLEX come to market.The Chinese stopped it 3 years ago and now it is back on track for release next year. Being able to use higher rates will definetly help keep weeds down.

Stick to a good rotation, mix your chemical groupings up including fungicide yearly and it will all be good crops. We need every tool we can get our hands on, it is up to us to determine how when and how much to use.

I totally agree with Klause on the good bugs in our soil that we kill with fungicide. We do the best to limit its use, but when we do use it sparingly...results are fantastic. I agree that we need to take an active role in understanding our soils, in every field and maximizing nature to full economic benefit. Paint by number farming is expensive and can yield negative results.

We are the farmer...we need to get to it every aspect of our operations....not simply be the guy that signs all the cheques to the so called experts that dont farm.

I have been at it for 30 years and I still learn something new every year about crop production.
I am always reminded by the article of the newer young farmer that said “ I did eveything right and spent all this money and I didn’t get a crop.”....welcome to the Real World.

[furrowtickler]

Dumping even more gly onto the ground .... not a good plan at all for the producer.
They will be happy to supply a new super duper fungicide to help control the crop disease that will manifest itself later in other crops for $25-$30/ac
. But hey , giver 👍👍

[wd9]

Then don't use it. Use something else that doesn't piss you off so much.