fiddle while Rome burns

[ajl]

What is needed in an increasingly cut throat export market that we are dependent on here in canuckistan is deregulation in which nobody is allowed to corner the market. A little brown bagging to keep costs down in the system is far preferable to a system of rights and privileges for a select group. However, that is not the canuckistanian way so instead we have factions competing over the spoils all the time while we concede market share to the competition which is the FSU, and South America who are not interested in UPOVing.

[jazz]

Jazz;

No, a royalty is NOT applied point of sale on every bushel delivered at a canadian terminal. This collection system would require major legislative changes as well as elevator companies have objected to the complexity of needing to identify every variety at the receiving of grain into the elevator.

Tom you are way more up on this than I am. I would like to know exactly where the unavoidable squeeze would happen. I don't buy certified seed and I can avoid any trailing royalties by selling in the US which is a 2 hr haul for me. So they would outlaw farm saved seed somehow like canolaÉ How could they monitor that? And wouldn't such a move be grandfathered, so like this year I could seed the entire place to durum and have enough seed on hand before the legislation to finish my farming career.

I guess they could lay some levy out on the chemical which we cant really avoid, sort of like Clearfield varieties did.

Where does it hit?

[blackpowder]

I applied for and was granted a County development permit before the re-build within as close to the previous shop foundation footprint as possible for our proper replacement farm shop foundation rebuild after the 'partial loss' fire damaged our pre-existing farm shop. Our yard level is at grade for 300+ feet... and the Queens gravel is on the County road... and my gravel on the approach with proper ditch slopes finishing drop offs to ditch levels for correct water drainage...

All good. All your business.
If I got the chance for a redo here, it would be well away from the road instead of on it like it is now.
40 years of redo lol. Had I known then what I know now.

[TOM4CWB]

Tom you are way more up on this than I am. I would like to know exactly where the unavoidable squeeze would happen. I don't buy certified seed and I can avoid any trailing royalties by selling in the US which is a 2 hr haul for me. So they would outlaw farm saved seed somehow like canolaÉ How could they monitor that? And wouldn't such a move be grandfathered, so like this year I could seed the entire place to durum and have enough seed on hand before the legislation to finish my farming career.

I guess they could lay some levy out on the chemical which we cant really avoid, sort of like Clearfield varieties did.

Where does it hit?

Jazz,

You can set up a closed loop supply chain system... and as long as the actual genetics of the seed you grow your crops from...

A] originate from purchased pedigreed seed stocks [with all royalties paid] that you can prove with records, is progeny of your future seed being used; comes from these verifiable seed genetic sources you have grown, actually is for yourself, for your own farm's grain production; alone;

B] Is seed from a US variety then grown in Canada... imported possibly as feed wheat [the way this was done previously]... the progeny which is to be used on your farm alone...and the crops produced from this US seed is in a contracted closed loop production system with all of the grain produced returned to the US... possibly you could be operating outside of the NSO seed utopia... while your taxes and previous research funding deductions remain still paying for future seed R&D... with no real benefit to your farm.

Cheers!

[foragefarmer]

Farming 101

Thanks for the Jan 22/2015 Agriville thread started by Sask3

SK3, Sawfly, Bucket, Mustardman, Tstep, and Farming 101 all predicted that with the passing of BillC-18 that this is exactly what's going to happen, and were 100% right. Hamloc gave a prefect example of what's to come.

Who was absent from that tread was none other than Tom4$$4Tom. Tom was obviously in favor of BillC-18 which was introduced by the Ritz the Con's and received Royal Assent Feb 25/2015. The Ostrich farmer was Tom's and the WCWGA puppet.

Now TOM4$$$4TOM comes on here trying to blame the Liberals for the mess created by Ritz and company only because it will now hurt Jackson Seeds bottom line.

Funny when so many Agriville posters were against the Seed Tax claiming it would hurt their bottom line, Tom4$$$4Tom defended it to the bitter end.

Seems to me you were the one playing the fiddle Tom.

[TOM4CWB]

Farming 101

Thanks for the Jan 22/2015 Agriville thread started by Sask3

SK3, Sawfly, Bucket, Mustardman, Tstep, and Farming 101 all predicted that with the passing of BillC-18 that this is exactly what's going to happen, and were 100% right. Hamloc gave a prefect example of what's to come.

Who was absent from that tread was none other than Tom4$$4Tom. Tom was obviously in favor of BillC-18 which was introduced by the Ritz the Con's and received Royal Assent Feb 25/2015. The Ostrich farmer was Tom's and the WCWGA puppet.

Now TOM4$$$4TOM comes on here trying to blame the Liberals for the mess created by Ritz and company only because it will now hurt Jackson Seeds bottom line.

Funny when so many Agriville posters were against the Seed Tax claiming it would hurt their bottom line, Tom4$$$4Tom defended it to the bitter end.

Seems to me you were the one playing the fiddle Tom.

Grassfarmer,

Have the Liberals reverse UPOV91. Totally fine with me. Very different than an Industry/Seed Trade NSO take over of the Canada Seeds Act through termination of the democratic rights of farmers through the CSGA being terminated July 2020. Farm saved seed has been a heritage of western Canadian Agriculture. we were promised that farm saved seed would remain... which UPOV 91 can facilitate and assure... if the Industry and Seed Trade would respect this basic freedom.

If western Canadian farmers do not stop the Industry/Seed Trade NSO termination of the CSGA...that will have been your surrender vote for the end of farm saved seed; without a whimper or shot being fired. Farm saved seed has been allowed until now.

Blame the man in the moon... or whom ever your fantasy dreams up... then look in the mirror... and decide what you stand for, the NSO industry utopia? or the CSGA we have today with farmer democracy. Your choice.

[TOM4CWB]

What is needed in an increasingly cut throat export market that we are dependent on here in canuckistan is deregulation in which nobody is allowed to corner the market. A little brown bagging to keep costs down in the system is far preferable to a system of rights and privileges for a select group. However, that is not the canuckistanian way so instead we have factions competing over the spoils all the time while we concede market share to the competition which is the FSU, and South America who are not interested in UPOVing.

Russia joined UPOV 91 in 1998, Ukraine joined UPOV 1991 in 2007.

https://www.upov.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/upov_pub_423.pdf

[bucket]

Grassfarmer,

Have the Liberals reverse UPOV91. Totally fine with me. Very different than an Industry/Seed Trade NSO take over of the Canada Seeds Act through termination of the democratic rights of farmers through the CSGA being terminated July 2020. Farm saved seed has been a heritage of western Canadian Agriculture. we were promised that farm saved seed would remain... which UPOV 91 can facilitate and assure... if the Industry and Seed Trade would respect this basic freedom.

If western Canadian farmers do not stop the Industry/Seed Trade NSO termination of the CSGA...that will have been your surrender vote for the end of farm saved seed; without a whimper or shot being fired. Farm saved seed has been allowed until now.

Blame the man in the moon... or whom ever your fantasy dreams up... then look in the mirror... and decide what you stand for, the NSO industry utopia? or the CSGA we have today with farmer democracy. Your choice.

Farmers said from the start this was a bad idea...some told politicians it was a bad idea...now the guys that supported it want the farmers to correct it...

Same with your Alberta Ag minister....he was in Ritz's office when BRMs were changed....now he is asking for the Liberals to fix the problem he helped create...

ZERO vision from people that always have strings attached to them...

[TOM4CWB]

SVUA's are only the tip of the iceberg! The Monopoly NSO 'Utopia' is where the Seed Trade Industry is extracting the democratic rights of farmers [The CSGA] out of the Canada Seeds Act

The implementation of the NSO 'utopia' is where the Seed Industry/Trade can extract a monopoly premium from western Farmers... after we paid once dearly to enhance our seed genetics... in many cases voluntarily, over the past century.



Prairie wheat and barley commissions concerned about impact of SVUAs


Saskatoon, SK; Calgary, AB; Carman, MB (February 26, 2020) – Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association (MWBGA), Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission (Sask Wheat), Saskatchewan Barley Development Commission (SaskBarley), Alberta Wheat Commission (AWC), and Alberta Barley have significant concerns about the Seed Variety Use Agreement (SVUA) pilot project and its future impact on western Canadian wheat and barley producers.

The SVUA pilot project was announced on February 25, 2020 by the seed industry at the Prairie Grain Development Committee (PGDC) meetings in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The pilot imposes the trailing royalty collection mechanism on farm-saved seed of selected crop varieties through a contract agreement.

The five wheat and barley commissions are not a party to, nor supportive of this pilot SVUA program. The pilot is separate from the federal government’s consultation process on a new seed royalty structure and signals the seed industry’s commitment to the SVUA model despite the on-going consultation. The consultation process, which also includes the End Point Royalty (EPR) model in addition to the trailing royalty model, was initiated by the federal government to inform the value chain and attempt to work toward the best model for all involved including farmers. Further, the SVUAs are being implemented via contract law and not a regulatory change, resulting in significant concerns from the commissions about the future of the consultation process.

“MWBGA has questions about the implications of the proposed SVUA pilot and its impact on the credibility of the ongoing consultation process being managed by AAFC and the CFIA,” said Fred Greig, MWBGA Chair. “We also continue to wait for the economic analysis to be released by AAFC as the next step in the consultation process.”

“Sask Wheat wants to ensure producers’ rights, such as the right to use farm-saved seed, are being protected in any pilot contracts and that producers clearly understand the impact of the contracts on their farms,” said Brett Halstead, Sask Wheat Chair. “We are concerned that the proposed trailing royalties could inhibit the adoption of midge tolerant varieties, should they be included as part of the pilot, which would have negative implications for the Midge Tolerant Wheat program.”

“This program has the potential to create frustration for farmers,” said Jason Skotheim, SaskBarley Chair. “There needs to be a clear demonstration of value to producers from this pilot program. Until that time, the pilot program should not expand to other crops such as barley, that already struggle with unique issues on variety uptake.”

“AWC believes that any trailing royalty system on varieties developed through the public breeding programs of AAFC and the western universities must take into account the fact that farmers have already made a substantial investment in the development of those varieties,” said Todd Hames, AWC Chair.

“It is critical that the government complete their consultations with grain producers and put a transparent and accountable process in place to demonstrate that the extra money producers are paying is advancing varietal development,” said Dave Bishop, Alberta Barley Chair.

The five commissions emphasize that it is necessary for AAFC to provide assurance that all royalties collected through the SVUA on AAFC publicly bred varieties will be returned to AAFC’s wheat variety breeding program in an open and transparent way to supplement the funding currently provided by producers and the federal government.

- 30 -


For more information or to arrange interviews, please contact:


Kate Menold
Communications Coordinator
Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association
204-807-1912
kate@mbwheatandbarley.ca

Dallas Carpenter
Communications Manager
Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission
306-801-2643
dallas.carpenter@saskwheat.ca

Jill McDonald
Executive Director
Saskatchewan Barley Development Commission
306-370-7237
jmcdonald@saskbarleycommission.com

Victoria Decker
Communications Manager
Alberta Wheat and Barley Commissions
403-219-7906
vdecker@albertawheatbarley.com"

And they are not aware of the July 2020 termination of CSGA and farmer democratic control being lost of the Administration of the Canada Seeds Act. Say NO to the NSO Seed Utopia administered by the Seed Industry.

[TOM4CWB]

[QUOTE=TOM4CWB;442114]SVUA's are only the tip of the iceberg!
"The implementation of the NSO 'utopia' is where the Seed Industry/Trade can extract a monopoly premium from western Farmers... after we paid once dearly to enhance our seed genetics... in many cases voluntarily, over the past century.



Prairie wheat and barley commissions concerned about impact of SVUAs


Saskatoon, SK; Calgary, AB; Carman, MB (February 26, 2020) – Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association (MWBGA), Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission (Sask Wheat), Saskatchewan Barley Development Commission (SaskBarley), Alberta Wheat Commission (AWC), and Alberta Barley have significant concerns about the Seed Variety Use Agreement (SVUA) pilot project and its future impact on western Canadian wheat and barley producers.

The SVUA pilot project was announced on February 25, 2020 by the seed industry at the Prairie Grain Development Committee (PGDC) meetings in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The pilot imposes the trailing royalty collection mechanism on farm-saved seed of selected crop varieties through a contract agreement.

The five wheat and barley commissions are not a party to, nor supportive of this pilot SVUA program. The pilot is separate from the federal government’s consultation process on a new seed royalty structure and signals the seed industry’s commitment to the SVUA model despite the on-going consultation. The consultation process, which also includes the End Point Royalty (EPR) model in addition to the trailing royalty model, was initiated by the federal government to inform the value chain and attempt to work toward the best model for all involved including farmers. Further, the SVUAs are being implemented via contract law and not a regulatory change, resulting in significant concerns from the commissions about the future of the consultation process.

“MWBGA has questions about the implications of the proposed SVUA pilot and its impact on the credibility of the ongoing consultation process being managed by AAFC and the CFIA,” said Fred Greig, MWBGA Chair. “We also continue to wait for the economic analysis to be released by AAFC as the next step in the consultation process.”

“Sask Wheat wants to ensure producers’ rights, such as the right to use farm-saved seed, are being protected in any pilot contracts and that producers clearly understand the impact of the contracts on their farms,” said Brett Halstead, Sask Wheat Chair. “We are concerned that the proposed trailing royalties could inhibit the adoption of midge tolerant varieties, should they be included as part of the pilot, which would have negative implications for the Midge Tolerant Wheat program.”

“This program has the potential to create frustration for farmers,” said Jason Skotheim, SaskBarley Chair. “There needs to be a clear demonstration of value to producers from this pilot program. Until that time, the pilot program should not expand to other crops such as barley, that already struggle with unique issues on variety uptake.”

“AWC believes that any trailing royalty system on varieties developed through the public breeding programs of AAFC and the western universities must take into account the fact that farmers have already made a substantial investment in the development of those varieties,” said Todd Hames, AWC Chair.

“It is critical that the government complete their consultations with grain producers and put a transparent and accountable process in place to demonstrate that the extra money producers are paying is advancing varietal development,” said Dave Bishop, Alberta Barley Chair.

The five commissions emphasize that it is necessary for AAFC to provide assurance that all royalties collected through the SVUA on AAFC publicly bred varieties will be returned to AAFC’s wheat variety breeding program in an open and transparent way to supplement the funding currently provided by producers and the federal government.

- 30 -


For more information or to arrange interviews, please contact:


Kate Menold
Communications Coordinator
Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association
204-807-1912
kate@mbwheatandbarley.ca

Dallas Carpenter
Communications Manager
Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission
306-801-2643
dallas.carpenter@saskwheat.ca

Jill McDonald
Executive Director
Saskatchewan Barley Development Commission
306-370-7237
jmcdonald@saskbarleycommission.com

Victoria Decker
Communications Manager
Alberta Wheat and Barley Commissions
403-219-7906
vdecker@albertawheatbarley.com"



Soooo... now this by Farms.com?

"The pilot program launched by the seed industry left wheat and barley commissions across the Prairies with questions

By Taryn Milton
Staff Writer
Farms.com
The Canadian Plant Technology Agency (CPTA) and the Canadian Seed Trade Association (CSTA) announced a Seed Variety Use Agreement (SVUA) pilot program and working group Feb. 25.

Plant breeders and their seed distributors will select varieties to which the SVUA will apply. When producers purchase one of these varieties and then keep some of that seed after harvest to use the next planting season, they will be invoiced a Seed Variety Use Fee (SVUF). This fee will be invoiced every time that farm-saved SVUA seed is grown. This arrangement is also known as a trailing royalty.

This pilot program will involve certain seed varieties in the 2020 planting season.

“The pilot program is good news for our industry, and we are supportive of the process. We look forward to testing and evaluating the system,” said Chris Churko, CEO of FP Genetics and chair of CPTA, in the release.

CSTA has also formed a working group with producer and industry representatives.

“It has been a twelve-year journey to get to this point on value creation, and I’m thrilled that we are taking the next steps to make the Seed Variety Use Agreement a reality,” Todd Hyra, western business manager at SeCan said in the release. “I’m excited about the opportunity the pilot program offers to provide evidence of value, transparency and choice for all.”

The program and working group come after consultations were done with producers and wheat and barley commissions. According to the commissions, however, the consultations weren’t finished.

In 2017, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency started in-person consultations around two models of value creation: trailing royalty and end point royalty, said Pam Derocquigny, general manager with the Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association (MWBGA).

“We were engaged in that process in terms of trying to understand what implications this could have for wheat and barley farmers in the province of Manitoba,” said Derocquigny. “There was significant feedback, and not all positive, in terms of the two proposed models that were being discussed.”

The end point royalty system would mean producers would pay a levy on the seed when they bought it. Then, growers would pay a royalty when they sold their grain. These royalties and levies would help fund the development of new seed varieties.

The Prairie wheat and barley commissions also requested an economic analysis be conducted so stakeholders could better understand the multiple financial aspects of the two proposed models. The organizations would also like more information on the current level of investment by various sectors and how much additional funding is needed.

The consultation process was put on hold in the fall of 2019due to the federal election and the commissions involved were under the impression that discussions would resume Derocquigny told Farms.com.

“Now this (pilot program) has been announced and we're just concerned it's adding confusion as to what's happening. What's happening with the current process and are we still evaluating the two models?”

The Prairie wheat and barley commissions distributed a release following the announcement stating their concerns. The commissions involved included the MWBGA, the Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission (Sask Wheat), the Saskatchewan Barley Development Commission, the Alberta Wheat Commission and Alberta Barley.

“Sask Wheat wants to ensure producers’ rights, such as the right to use farm-saved seed, are being protected in any pilot contracts and that producers clearly understand the impact of the contracts on their farms,” Brett Halstead, chair of Sask Wheat, said in the release.

“It is critical that the government complete their consultations with grain producers and put a transparent and accountable process in place to demonstrate that the extra money producers are paying is advancing varietal development,” Dave Bishop, chair of Alberta Barley, said in the release.

The commissions believe everyone wants the same things in the end, Derocquigny said.

“We want to collaborate within the industry and we want Canada to be competitive. We want producers to have great varieties that they grow on their farms and then those varieties in turn meet the end use of our customers,” she said. A lack of clarity and confusion surrounded the roll out of the pilot program and working group, she added."

'Confusion'... wouldn't be the descriptive word I would have chosen...

Perhaps, "BETRAYED", or "ANGERED", would be more accurate. Apparently this is our 'dirty little secret' that the Seed Trade and Seed Industry hope to burry...

Annoyed by the 'lack of honesty' the Seed Trade is portraying in this article... would be a possible further analysis...

We farmers paying this new tax have no assurances that this further 'Seed Tax' is going to fund better genetic and varietal advancements... particularly on new AAFC/University bred variety releases.

[sawfly1]

Tom , did you just say , have the liberals repeal or opt out of Upov91.
That deal that we just had to sign on to
. Or we would be left behind. As you said.
And I am not looking back for a quote .
But that is exactly what you , and the Conservative govt. And WCWG said.

All kinds of protections for seed co.s , extended patents, to 21 years
I think anyway , will have to read it again.
And I think lip service to planting our own seed.
Pretty sure there was nothing in there to give us the right to ever own the seed.
Little hard to replant your own seed , when you are only ever had a lease on it.

It is like John Deere software , you may have bought the tractor ,
But the software is not yours to do anything with.

Step by step , they just need a little more protection for their property.
To really invest and give us great product.

How about a yearly fee for their property. Even better.

How about we determine, you wiĺl never own any of our property. Ever.
We will let you use it , and even reseed it , but with a lease payment every year till you
Quit useing it.
That we shall set the rate on.
Now we are getting somewhere.

Just think of all the great seeds , you will get to use then.
( actually, we really don't have to that)
Since we own all your choices anyway.