Will the CWB Ever Stop Pillaging Organics?

[chuckChuck]

Francisco, so it is okay to have the elites of Wall street,Bay street,CBOT, and Minneapolis and Kansas City make decisions that affect our future but it is not okay for farmer elected directors at the CWB to make decisions on our behalf? Beween the above choices which group do you think most closely represents farmers Francisco?

[chuckChuck]

Chaff and Parsley: The issue of the CWB and organic comes down to the issue of whether you support family farms, orderly marketing, pooling and the single desk. If you don’t support those policies then you will find fault with the CWB’s handling of organic grains. You either believe in pooling and sharing the highs and the lows of the market or you don’t. All the organic markets are in the premium conventional markets. There hasn’t been an organic sale of organic wheat to China, Brazil, or Indonesia. The primary organic markets are the EU,Canada, US and Japan. Essentially Parsley is asking for organic farmers to be allowed to cherry pick the best conventional market prices without going through the Board’s pool account.
Further, the majority of the critics of the CWB don’t support orderly marketing and are generally pursuing their own self interest by saying they should decide how and when they market their wheat and it doesn’t matter what happens to the other guy. Everyone for themselves, dog eat dog or however you want to put it. The end result is that farms will continue to grow bigger and small family farms will become a thing of the past. As I said before, there is no economic reason why we need 50,000 farmers when a handfull of large farm corporations can do the job. If you support a market economy where there are no restrictions like the CWB then we should also get rid of the majority of the family farms, communities and the subsidies that keep them going.

[Fransisco]

Chuck that is a false choice.

The people you mention do not make decisions on my behalf. And they treat my decisions with respect.

The CWB directors do not treat me, my property, or my decisions with respect or even acknowledge that they are mine in the first place. The fact that they are elected by my neighbors makes absolutely no difference in any of this.

But since you yourself are such a big fan of deciding things by elections you must be really upset by the board of directors refusal to except the outcome of the barley plebiscite. And their refusal to heed the wishes of the majority.

[Fransisco]

And it is spelt 'between' not 'beween'.

[Fransisco]

See also[URL=" http://agriville.com/cgi-bin/forums/viewThread.cgi?1176312172"] this.[/URL]

[gregpet]

Fransisco, I hate to do this but you should have written accept not except.


Chuck you wrote:

“The end result is that farms will continue to grow bigger and small family farms will become a thing of the past.”

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe farms have been growing larger under the CWB. Just economics coming into play with the theory of economies of scale becoming reality under the CWB and the dismal return for most crops grown.

[gerald.d]

Chuck: You make some rather general statements there about if a guy does not want the present marketing structure ie. single desk selling, "orderly marketing" (I don't believe it's all that orderly as it is) then he does not support family farms. My family has been on this farm for over 100 years and I have a 25 year old son who is farming with me . .if you don't think I value a family farm you have learning to do.
I spent most of the day in Saskatoon at the CWB organic producer consultation meeting. I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised to find that they had not stacked the invitees with die-hard CWB supporters.There were more of us there who wanted change than not. The CWB people ( Donna Youngdahl and Gord Kurbis) and the moderator Brian White (former CWB grain marketer) put forward for our consideration and discussion 4 options .
1.
Get the CWB fully involved in marketing organic wheat and barley with full participation in the pool and PDS buybacks.
This was NOT a popular option!! They spent much time extoling the virtues of this sort of idea but eventually had to accept the fact that the majority simply wanted nothing to do with such a scheme.
2.
Pool the PDS spread payments from organic PDS contracts seperately from the conventional pool and thereby at least return the net back to organic producers.
This option was also met with much resistance.They were told time and time again that the whole PDS system as it relates to organics is just rediculous.Several of us had copies of actual PDS contracts showing large amounts of money owing to the CWB for what is perceived as no value. They were hard pressed to try and justify the amounts.Only Stewart Wells said that he thought these amounts were an acceptable part of selling organic grain. He did not reach for his cheque book when I asked him to pay the nearly $50,000.00 that I will owe the CWB by Jan.08 when this years pools have closed. I guess he felt that I had received good value so I should just pay it and be happy to support the rest of the farmers who all share in th pool. Mighty big of him to be so generous with my money!
3.
Flat rate PDS.
This option would see us pay a flat fee per tonne to the CWB for "intrinsic value" that is supposed to exist because the CWB has spent years developing markets and promoting Canadian wheat and barley in foreign countries.This is alleged to be reflected in the prices that we get for our organic grains.
There was some debate about how much the fee might be and who would get to decide how much.It was suggested that perhaps the amount would vary from country to country depending upon how much the CWB thinks they have influenced the pricing of grain in that country,and you guessed it, the CWB gets to decide how much.
This option was also received with some scepticism but not dwelled upon because by that time we were all(well most of us) anxious to hear about option #4 and it was getting close to lunch time and we had not yet heard about an option Not to use the CWB.
4.
Exemption,Free export license.
This was popular with many of us but the CWB people did their best to point out why this was not appealing-
a. organic producers would be getting a free ride on the backs of the conventional producers who fund the variety research and trade dispute actions and lobby efforts to keep GMO wheat out of the market. This last one brought a -- disagreement-- from Arnold Taylor who quickly riminder CWB staff about how much conventional growers have benefited from the actions and financial expenditures from the organic community.
b.
A precident would be established for the CWB allowing "special interest" groups out of the CWB.
We told them that no more so than is already granted to producers in ontario and quebec.
And they had more reasons but my writing could not keep up and I can't remember them, but many of us felt that they were not insurmountable given a will to do so. But therein lies the rub.
This whole process was only to get producer input and then be assembled and be presented to the CWB board of directors for consideration. Only time will tell what is done with it.

[Fransisco]

I was wondering how long it was going to take for someone to catch one of my spelling or grammatical mistakes. I do make them from time to time. Thanks gregpet, criticism <b>ACCEPTED.</b>

[gregpet]

Fransisco, I wish the CWB was as receptive to crticism and willing to work with the majority to improve the situation.

[Fransisco]

As do I. There is absolutely nothing wrong with constructive critism.

[parsley]

chuckchuck,

IF as you say:

"You either believe in pooling and sharing the highs and the lows of the market or you don’t"

Then why did the CWB directors abandon pooling and marketing the millions of bushels of grain that passes through the Export Manufactuered Feed Agreement and let the feed mills buy directly from the farmer?

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

ChuckChuck,

Why does the CWB give no cost export licenses on Pedigreed Seed wheat and barley being exported!

These "special" western Canadian "designated area" wheat and barley varieties we are told are the base determining quality key to Canadian differentiation from other grain qualities from other countries...

If this were true, the buyback should be double normal CWB commecial wheat and barley that belongs to the "single desk".
This is much like giving the patent on a product away for nothing and allowing others to reproduce without paying for the patent... why would the CWB do this when it breaks the "single desk" principal and makes it a farce?

Face it, the CWB is here to protect their agents... to keep commercial growers in Canada bound to them...

The reason the "buyback" can't be done direct with the CWB for commercial wheat and barley... like it is done for cheap ($1.50/t?) for organics plus special financing clearly proves this point.

We have been had in a big way ChuckChuck... deception upon deception layer upon layer.

[parsley]

Tom4CWB,

What's ggod for the goose is good for the gander.

An old tried and true axiom.....you should be teaching them to the CWB

Parsley

[chuckChuck]

Gerald D. There is a good case for making the buyback more predictable. But at the same time organic farmers need to think long term. For the most part the organic market has developed in a situation where demand has grown faster than supply. When the supply exceeds demand then what will prices look like? I doubt that organic premiums will look nearly as good. With major retailers like Walmart carrying organic, the pressure is on to reduce premiums. China is being very aggressive in some products as well. We also know that many farmers sell well below the going price in any marketing year which helps push prices down for everybody. The concept of a free market is all well and good when there is a lot of buyers and sellers in a transparent market, but as we have seen in the conventional market the number of buyers is being reduced to the point where there is less competition. In this situation individual farmers have little ability to be more than price takers. Groups of farmers have more marketing clout since they can bargain collectively on behalf of members like the Farmer Direct Coop does. The advantage the CWB has is if you want Canadian Wheat then you have no where else to go. It is a monopoly seller on behalf of farmers. Everyone is well aware of the power of monopolies when it comes to purchasing any product. When Roundup first came out it was $20 a litre. Monsanto had patent protection which effectively gave it a monopoly for nearly 20 years. What happened when the patent (monopoly)expired and there was competition? Prices came down. I doubt that it took 20 years for Monsanto to pay for the research investment. From the perspective of Monsanto which was better, the monopoly on Roundup or the open market with many sellers and lots of generic competition? From the perspective of a farmer selling a product which would be better a monopoly selling position or lots of competitive sellers?

[gregpet]

Chuck, unfortunately Canadian wheat or barley is not completely irreplaceable for millers, unlike roundup was when it was the only burnoff chemical option. May be a slight difference in pricing opportunity there. Why, Chuck, would the CWB sell to the Algerians at savings of 'tens of dollars per ton' if they have the only product out there available? My guess is that the competition is very and the CWB sold our grain at a discount to keep the customer. Is this what the CWB means when it states the without the monopoly designated area producers will 'bid the price down'? I know what my cost of production is and try not to sell below that cost. Does the CWB know what my cost of production is and what price I require to make a profit. I don't know, they have never asked they just sell at whatever price they can receive, not at what price they dictate to receive. They only dictate to me the price that I receive.