Western Canadian Grain Farmer results on Seed Royalty Options Released!

[TOM4CWB]

"Producer Survey on Seed Royalties

-Recent proposals on seed royalties have generated a great deal of interest and discussion among Canadian farmers. In late 2018, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency launched consultations on the future of crop breeding in Canada. A series of public meetings were held across the country where federal officials sought feedback on new models to collect royalties on saved seed. These included a “trailing contract royalty” where producers would sign a contract stipulating a royalty is paid when farm-saved seed is used, and an “end point royalty” in which a royalty is paid when delivering harvested grain from farm- saved seed. The consultations were put on hold in the spring of 2019, but are expected to resume later this year.

The Alberta Federation of Agriculture (AFA), the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS), and the Keystone Agricultural Producers of Manitoba (KAP) have been working together to ensure the viewpoints of producers are heard in these discussions. In July, the three farm organizations launched the “Producer Survey on Seed Royalties”. The purpose of the survey was to:

• Gauge awareness of the consultations and the two models that have been presented.

• Measure satisfaction with how varieties are currently developed and funded.

• Gather opinions on the two options presented and determine if there is support for investigating other
options.

• Seek input on the principles that should guide changes to how plant breeding is funded.

Survey Results and Analysis
The survey was open from July 15 to October 15, 2019 and received 1,136 responses. 53% of respondents were from Saskatchewan, 25% Alberta, 19% Manitoba, and 3% other provinces.

Result #1: There was broad awareness of the consultations and the two specific options that have been presented.
80% of respondents said they were aware of the consultations on seed royalties/value creation. When asked to rate their familiarity with the proposed models, only 13% reported being unfamiliar with the end point royalty proposal, while only 17% were unfamiliar with the Trailing contract royalty option.

Result #2:
Respondents reported an overall level of satisfaction with how new crop varieties are developed and funded in Canada.

The survey listed eight crop types and noted that these crops have different models for funding and commercializing new varieties. Respondents were asked to rate how satisfied they were that these models would meet their future needs (economic and agronomic).

Are you aware of the two seed royalty models under consideration?
Yes-79%
No-12%
Uncertain-9%

Level of Satisfaction with Current Crop Variety Development and Funding Systems;
Wheat/Durum-75%
Barley-71%
Oats-70%
Pulses-70%
Forages-63%
Specialty Crops (e.g. flax,...-61%
Corn-60%
ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿ ¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼C anola-57%


Result #3:
A large majority of respondents disagreed [65%] that the Trailing contract royalty and [66% disagreed] end point royalty models should be pursued further. There was strong support [51%] for the need to investigate additional options.

The survey used descriptions from government consultation material to briefly describe the trailing contract royalty and end point royalty proposals. Respondents were then asked if these models were worth further consideration or whether additional options were required. Respondents could also answer “more information needed”.

-[65%-DISAGREED]-[18%-AGREED]-End Point Royalties are worth further consideration;
-[66%-DISAGREED]-[25%-AGREED]-Contract Trailing Royalties are worth further consideration;
-52%-Additional Options are Required - [25% WANTED]-More info

Responses to both proposals were consistent. For each proposal, between 65% and 66% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that the models were worth further consideration. The majority wanted to express an opinion about the two models, with less than 25% selecting “more info needed” or “neither agree nor disagree”. Of those expressing an opinion, 79% disagreed or strongly disagreed they should be pursued further.
51% of respondents agreed that additional options were required, while 25% requested more information to fully answer the question. Of those expressing an opinion, 69% agreed or strongly agreed there was a need to examine additional options outside the two proposals.

Result #4:
Responses were more varied when asked about the future direction of plant breeding in Canada. Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with various statements about the future of crop breeding in Canada.
-Long-term funding for public / university breeding programs ranked highest, followed by the need for producer oversight into how much funding is collected and how research funds are used. The percentages below include only those expressing an opinion about each statement.

1. Increased investment in crop development is required provided it ensures long-term stable funding for public and university breeding programs (68% Agree; 32% Disagree)

2. Increased investment in crop development is required provided producers have oversight into how much is collected and what the funds are used for. (64% Agree; 36% Disagree)

3. Increased investment in crop development is required to ensure Canadian producers have access to improved varieties in order to remain competitive in international markets. (52% Agree; 48% Disagree)

4. Increased investment in crop development is required provided it encourages competition and higher levels of private sector investment in plant breeding (47% Agree; 53% Disagree)

Result #5:
Respondents expressed a strong interest and desire for further producer engagement in the seed royalty consultations. The survey results reflected strong opinions about seed royalties and a general awareness that the changes under consideration will affect farmers and the agricultural industry for decades.
A large number of respondents asked to be kept informed as the consultation process moves forward.

To access the complete list of data tables used to compile this report, please visit:
www.seedroyaltysurvey.com"


[TOM4CWB]

"Producer Survey on Seed Royalties

-Recent proposals on seed royalties have generated a great deal of interest and discussion among Canadian farmers. In late 2018, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency launched consultations on the future of crop breeding in Canada. A series of public meetings were held across the country where federal officials sought feedback on new models to collect royalties on saved seed. These included a “trailing contract royalty” where producers would sign a contract stipulating a royalty is paid when farm-saved seed is used, and an “end point royalty” in which a royalty is paid when delivering harvested grain from farm- saved seed. The consultations were put on hold in the spring of 2019, but are expected to resume later this year.

The Alberta Federation of Agriculture (AFA), the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS), and the Keystone Agricultural Producers of Manitoba (KAP) have been working together to ensure the viewpoints of producers are heard in these discussions. In July, the three farm organizations launched the “Producer Survey on Seed Royalties”. The purpose of the survey was to:

• Gauge awareness of the consultations and the two models that have been presented.

• Measure satisfaction with how varieties are currently developed and funded.

• Gather opinions on the two options presented and determine if there is support for investigating other
options.

• Seek input on the principles that should guide changes to how plant breeding is funded.

Survey Results and Analysis
The survey was open from July 15 to October 15, 2019 and received 1,136 responses. 53% of respondents were from Saskatchewan, 25% Alberta, 19% Manitoba, and 3% other provinces.

Result #1: There was broad awareness of the consultations and the two specific options that have been presented.
80% of respondents said they were aware of the consultations on seed royalties/value creation. When asked to rate their familiarity with the proposed models, only 13% reported being unfamiliar with the end point royalty proposal, while only 17% were unfamiliar with the Trailing contract royalty option.

Result #2:
Respondents reported an overall level of satisfaction with how new crop varieties are developed and funded in Canada.

The survey listed eight crop types and noted that these crops have different models for funding and commercializing new varieties. Respondents were asked to rate how satisfied they were that these models would meet their future needs (economic and agronomic).

Are you aware of the two seed royalty models under consideration?
Yes-79%
No-12%
Uncertain-9%

Level of Satisfaction with Current Crop Variety Development and Funding Systems;
Wheat/Durum-75%
Barley-71%
Oats-70%
Pulses-70%
Forages-63%
Specialty Crops (e.g. flax,...-61%
Corn-60%
ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿ ¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼ï¿¼C anola-57%


Result #3:
A large majority of respondents disagreed [65%] that the Trailing contract royalty and [66% disagreed] end point royalty models should be pursued further. There was strong support [51%] for the need to investigate additional options.

The survey used descriptions from government consultation material to briefly describe the trailing contract royalty and end point royalty proposals. Respondents were then asked if these models were worth further consideration or whether additional options were required. Respondents could also answer “more information needed”.

-[65%-DISAGREED]-[18%-AGREED]-End Point Royalties are worth further consideration;
-[66%-DISAGREED]-[25%-AGREED]-Contract Trailing Royalties are worth further consideration;
-52%-Additional Options are Required - [25% WANTED]-More info

Responses to both proposals were consistent. For each proposal, between 65% and 66% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that the models were worth further consideration. The majority wanted to express an opinion about the two models, with less than 25% selecting “more info needed” or “neither agree nor disagree”. Of those expressing an opinion, 79% disagreed or strongly disagreed they should be pursued further.
51% of respondents agreed that additional options were required, while 25% requested more information to fully answer the question. Of those expressing an opinion, 69% agreed or strongly agreed there was a need to examine additional options outside the two proposals.

Result #4:
Responses were more varied when asked about the future direction of plant breeding in Canada. Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with various statements about the future of crop breeding in Canada.
-Long-term funding for public / university breeding programs ranked highest, followed by the need for producer oversight into how much funding is collected and how research funds are used. The percentages below include only those expressing an opinion about each statement.

1. Increased investment in crop development is required provided it ensures long-term stable funding for public and university breeding programs (68% Agree; 32% Disagree)

2. Increased investment in crop development is required provided producers have oversight into how much is collected and what the funds are used for. (64% Agree; 36% Disagree)

3. Increased investment in crop development is required to ensure Canadian producers have access to improved varieties in order to remain competitive in international markets. (52% Agree; 48% Disagree)

4. Increased investment in crop development is required provided it encourages competition and higher levels of private sector investment in plant breeding (47% Agree; 53% Disagree)

Result #5:
Respondents expressed a strong interest and desire for further producer engagement in the seed royalty consultations. The survey results reflected strong opinions about seed royalties and a general awareness that the changes under consideration will affect farmers and the agricultural industry for decades.
A large number of respondents asked to be kept informed as the consultation process moves forward.

To access the complete list of data tables used to compile this report, please visit:
www.seedroyaltysurvey.com"


>
Alberta researchers have found a way to produce canola plants that can withstand late-season frost
By Diego Flammini
Staff Writer
Farms.com

"Alberta scientists may have discovered how to protect canola crops from Old Man Winter.

Dr. Marcus Samuel, an associate integrative cell biology professor at the University of Calgary, leads the research team tthat did this work. They produced a gene-based technology that can create plants capable of withstanding late-season frosts and still produce high-quality seed.

“We’ve been able to create canola lines that can degreen properly,” Samuel said in a statement.

The team reduced the amount of chlorophyll in genetically modified canola by up to 60 per cent after the plants spent six hours at -4 C (24.8 F).

Late-season frosts can prevent the chlorophyll in the canola from breaking down, resulting in green seeds.

Grade No. 1 canola can contain up to 2 per cent, or about 20 seeds per 1,000 of “distinctly green seed,” the Canadian Canola Growers Association says. Grade No. 2 canola can have up to 6 per cent and No. 3 canola can have up to 20 per cent of “distinctly green seed.”

Producers could earn less if their canola has higher amounts of green seeds, so reducing the volume of these seeds is important.

“If our research was integrated into canola-breeding programs, it would serve like crop insurance for the farmers, who ultimately take the financial burden for frost-damaged canola,” Logan Skori, a farmer and member of Samuel’s research team, said in a release.

This recent discovery builds on research the team conducted in 2013, which laid out the degreening process in Arabidopsis, small flowering plants related to canola, mustard and other crops.

Farms.com has reached out to the research team and agronomists for comment on the discovery and how frost can affect canola yields."

[Guest]

I cant wait to pay another tax
We really need more higher yielding crops to fix this shortage of commodities
FFS , do these clowns actually think they can pull this off , right here , right now
Surely to god , they cant be that simple

[Guest]

Most of the wheat here is feed from getting a very few rains on it while still standing
One fella i know secured an older variety and grew it
Elevator agent amazed that it has no sprouting
Yea they sure have our best interests in mind

[SASKFARMER]

**** YOU to anyone who thinks another tax is what we need in this country.

FEED wheat pays **** all.

[sk_wheatking]

Hahaha, these guys pushing for this seed tax, lol! You own the seed you put into your own ground. They have been on the multi level marketing scams over the internet too long!!! Now they want "residual income"

LOL!

[bucket]

First question in Saskatoon was whereis the infrastructure to handle the nonsense of growing more..

Right now even if I had the newest varieties and paid a seed tax...I couldn't deliver wheat without a falling number test...its not a CGC grading factor but it has to be done to protect the grainco....


Where is the infrastructure to handle more production???? Elevators are the ones that should build the bins not farmers although its going to be interesting to see how they extract good grain from farmers that have the ability to say ...what if it didn't matter...

The graincos are not set up to handle some 8MMT of feed wheat and to make farmers pay a seed tax on feed wheat is insulting....

Further back to the falling number tests....I am dropping off the same batch of samples at two different graincos that are sending samples away to be tested ...it backlogs the system because the graincos have overloaded the testing companies...no co-ordination between graincos to at the very least help each other....

There needs to be more coordination on that aspect...


The bureaucrats that came out to present this nonsense looked at it with blinders on with the interests of industry in mind and the dummies at the WCWGA supporting it because their masters told them to....


Farmers got their back up and have said phuck off...

And some have explained to the bureaucrats that someone has to be held responsible when a variety turns out to be a dud...

Who paid the costs for Triffid flax ????

You can't forget this shit nor look forward and say the infrastructure costs to grow more,,,, without a better return,,,,, comes to who?????

No one has thought forward...

It is still a stupid idea on any front....without taking a look at the whole industry process from farm to port ...its incompetence and its highlights the strength farmers have shown and it highlights the strength of the industry within government that farmers don't have....yet...

[furrowtickler]

All these new wheat varieties, some $15-16 / bus
And guess what , ask around , falling numbers suck when the first shower goes by ...
Columbus could weather for a month and still be good

[mcfarms]

Last time I checked I cant walk into McDonalds and ask for a "end point royalty" on my steers.

[Oliver88]

Increase taxes on all seed company employees !

I think their idea of as to subsidize the seed companies operating expenses so they can send an army of 70 employees to discuss seed genetics at every farm show.....instead of only 30.

This is all about seed industry welfare.

[Rareearth]

How, what, is the mandate of the Canadian Seed Trade Association?

Interesting the head office is in Ottawa.

“CSTA is a national trade association that brings together more than 130 members engaged in all aspects of seed research, production, and marketing and trade, both domestically and internationally.”

So they use grower funds to develop interesting varieties and traits then sell containers of our seed to other countries with a lower cost of production to compete against western Canadian growers, not so nice

The system is broken, what are Western Canadian grower competitive advantages?


What We Do

CSTA represents its members with stakeholders at the government and industry level. In addition, CSTA fosters the development of international markets, and works with industry and affiliated organizations in Canada and abroad to address issues in the seed industry.

CSTA member companies are building markets in many areas and the association helps these members by removing trade barriers and handling systemic market access questions. Our successes to date have included:

Reduction in phytosanitary and trade barriers
Trade arbitration services
Passage of the PBR Act that put Canada in compliance with UPOV 1991
Increased trade in licensed genetics, now worth millions of dollars
Improved trade of soybean varieties and identity-preserved soy shipments founded on seed genetics
Improving the domestic regulatory environment to facilitate trade and access to improved genetics
For an in-depth look at the Association’s work in 2018, please refer to our 2018 Year in Review. Additional information on the seed industry, CSTA’s core values and strategic goals can also be found here.

This is similar to the supply management sectors, dairy, birds etc. But the original need for those was due to perishable concerns. There are no perishability concerns with seeds.

We don’t even have a international standard for grain grading, ( it’s made in Canada and not relevant any more) falling numbers is part of that. Can’t be done, expensive, takes too long - bull shit - Viterra was forced to and does in their elevator systems in Australia now. Today growers are at a competitive disadvantage with the terminal exporters as they suppress information.

Need another coffee

[Guest]

are you sure you are not blinded by her other attributes?

[furrowtickler]

Anyone wonder why the big panic for grading falling numbers now ?
Most of these new high yielding bearded varieties can not handle weather . But Tom want his cut .. as do others as we sell these varieties to the elevator for $4 feed , he wants $14 for the same wheat .. follow the money

[hobbyfrmr]

Anyone wonder why the big panic for grading falling numbers now ?
Most of these new high yielding bearded varieties can not handle weather . But Tom want his cut .. as do others as we sell these varieties to the elevator for $4 feed , he wants $14 for the same wheat .. follow the money

Agreed. Always, follow the money.

[farmaholic]

Why the fūck don't I have the right to say no? The system is being developed to force everyone into one of the two options, why wasn't there a "fùck you" option?

What isn't working the way the present system of breeding and research is being done?

I started receiving the check off refund cheques I applied for, feels good.
With each cheque is a letter stating the good work done with the check off dollars.
When I am assured this phallus won't be rammed down my throat or up my ass, I will consider leaving my check off dollars with the commodity groups to invest in research, until then....I want MY money back!

To the SeedCos, breeders and researchers: tighten your fùcken belts, spend less on useless people that return no value and trim the sickening advertising budgets.

And quit rebranding old technology and genetics. Everything "new" is always bigger and better, yea right! Are there many meaningful strides in most new varieties? .....didn't think so!