A new way?

[cowman]

I think we all agree that the federal government isn't going to do much to solve the farm crisis...no money and no brains.
So what can we do? I believe the problem is we just produce too much food. We are just too darn efficient and the better we become the worse our net income gets.
So anything we can do to become more inefficient would in reality benefit us.
I think organics could be the answer!
I mean think about it...take grain as an example. No more spraying so we mostly grow big weed patches. No more fertilizer or GMOs so we grow a lot less. And lets go back to the old varieties that had no disease resistance and poor yields. Why I bet without really trying all that hard we could get yields down to less than a quarter! Then lets see what the brewerys will pay to make their beer!
In cattle hogs etc. we could ban all anti-biotics so a whole lot of them would die, no hormones or feed additives so they would grow slower...in fact go to grass beef and pasture pigs!! That would really cut production. Or even better go with buffalo and wild boars so we could really be inefficient! Why I bet we could eliminate all exports within a year!
And when we have the supply and demand more in harmony the price would go up big time. No more exports/no more imports! Of course we would have to convince the consumer that any other type of food was poison, or else the government would screw us by letting in cheap imports! I think that can be done...I mean look at Europe!! They seem to have the attitude of don't confuse us with facts! One other disadvantage would be the elimination of all the people who live off the farmer. Not much need for "experts" when we are all back farming like Grandpa!!!
So do your part. Get out and support growing less and getting paid more!!! Almost as good a deal as an Alberta school teacher!!!

[countryguy]

Cowman,I hope you don't have your joking cap on today because that was in all honesty one of the best things I have read in a long time.We have to get rid of this "more is better" mentality in this country.All of this technology these days is giving us is more work for less money.The only ones benefitting are the ones selling the technology.

Think of all the benefits of less production.The few elevators we have left would be able to serve us better.The roads would take less of a pounding from less b trains beating them to death everyday.The list goes on and on.

I think we as farmers in Canada should forget about the export business and concentrate on producing food only for our country.We can't compete with other counties on the export side of things so why bother trying?I feel all production in Canada should be processed and used in Canada and anything excess could be exported in a processed form.

I am almost positive that there would be many health benefits to be gained which in turn could dramatically help our over burdened health care system.It is no secret that pesticides are harmfull and grass finished meats are beneficial.

All of this is possible,all it would take is a little cooperation throughout all of the sectors of Canadian agriculture.

[jensco]

That would sure anger the big food corporations wouldn't it - McDonalds and KFC - who demand such fast turnaround. They would have to import almost all their supplies to meet their demand. Their consumers would not be real happy either if they couldn't buy their Big Mac that day. Unfortunately, the consumers wouldn't really learn anything about it.

Now how do you get everyone to co-operate and reduce supply? Hasn't this question popped up before!?

[cowman]

I don't know if we have to do anything real drastic. If the grain guys aren't completely crying wolf they should be to the point pretty soon where they can't buy any inputs!
The drought gave us an example of what can happen when production is cut...prices went way up. My buddy is selling barley to a feedlot, picked up at the bin...$3.54/bu.
Even with cheap corn feeder cattle are heading south big time. I wouldn't doubt the big packers in Alberta will have trouble getting enough cattle by summer. We very well could be eating American beef this summer. The western cow herd has to be down 25% with more to come if it stays dry. What do you think feeder cattle will then be worth? And remember this drought area extends all the way to Texas! In Kansas they are selling off the cow herd because there is no water!
So all we need to do is convince the consumer, that herbicides pesticides hormones and anything else that enhances production,are very bad for him.
If this could work you would see a whole new culture. Can't you just see the feature article in the Country Guide..."How Do These Farmers Consistently Grow Crops Yielding Less Than 5 Bushels To The Acre"!! The cutting edge of the new agriculture!!

[Deb]

I'm with you country guy, cowman is so funny. Cowman, you can get equal yields with organic farming, it is just something that has to be learned. And efficiencies in production through technologies has increased yield which, naturally, lowers the price.

[Deb]

Lets get one thing straight if there were ten bushels of wheat left in the world the price would be the same as it is right now. Wheat is conventionally organically politically worthless material that feeds the masses. 50% of the masses is over weight on the worthless dam stuff. Wheat is the staple of all diets and politically it will remain cheap for the masses.

So belly up and stop whinning how cheap it is.

Your wealthy wheat farmer The Kernel

P.S. When the price is small the volume must be big.

[cowman]

Maybe I'm completely wrong here but I don't believe you can get the yields with organic production you can with conventional.
I hear people talking about summerfallow and green manure crops to get production up. Also you would have to use a lot of tillage. Now idle land or crops grown to be plowed under doesn't really add much to the yield! On a total year to year basis how can this compete with fertilizer and spray?
Now if someone will pay me twice as much for half my normal production, and they don't mind lots of wild oats, stinkweed etc. in their bread then I'm all for it.
And if they will pay me $1500 for that 2 yr. old grass steer(or maybe bull as we wouldn't want to interfere with his natural hormones now would we?)then fine and dandy.

[Deb]

Wait a minute Kernel, what did you say? "Wheat is conventionally organically politically worthless material that feeds the masses. 50% of the masses is overweight on the worthless dam stuff. Wheat is the staple of all diets..."

A food that feeds the masses is not worthless. Wheat needs less water than other things too - this is a good thing to remember when living in a semi-arid region as the globe warms.

People aren't getting fat on wheat. They are getting fat on the fat beef patties they put on the beef and the fries, and the Cokes they drink with that fat beef and fries(read Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser).

And on this planet I think, and I'm not positive about this, rice feeds more people than wheat does.

The reason wheat prices are low is because farmers produce wheat as a raw product. Wheat, like trees, fossil fuel, minerals and fish, are sold to the middle men - and the processors, then the advertisers and the retailers make the money (so do the corporations that provide the seed, pesticides and fertilizers). Farmers, loggers, workers in factories - they are serfs to the corporations which must keep the shareholders happy. The people who actually do the physical work make a fraction of the people controlling them in the board rooms. This is because the workers are not organized, just like the peasant serfs in the Middle Ages weren't organized. They would revolt now and then and burn down the odd nobleman's castle, and today some workers who do unionize go out on strike, but basically things don't change because workers are so busy trying to get ahead that they forget what co-operation is all about.

Corporations like the fact that workers compete with each other for jobs. The higher the unemployment, the happier they are and the higher their stock goes cuz they save money on desperate people looking for any kind of job (so people don't look down on them in the homeless shelters and kick them when they're down - like Ralph Klein likes to do).

[cowman]

I actually agree with you about wheat being the preferred crop for the prairies! Unfortunately because of our useless marketing system and government, farmers are forced to try to grow a lot of crops that are "risky" in terms of the environment. But consider what would happen if through "organic farming" we could get that production down to where we barely had enough to feed Canada!! What could we soak the public for a loaf of bread? $5? $10? And never mind the stinkweed! Or how about the same thing with malt barley? How much for a bottle of beer? $5? $10? I guess that would sure get a lot of drunks straightened out, right? Sort of the same logic that the government uses in justifying the outrageous cigarrette prices? And just think we would have no more drunks and no more fat people...I mean who could afford to eat anything?
And then old Ralph couldn't get in trouble for telling the bums to get a job...because all the bums would be out slaving away to buy their $10 loaf of daily bread.

[Deb]

No, the bums would be out supporting the malting barley growers!

[Deb]

That previous comment was tongue-in-cheek by the way!

Why don't you think organic farming practises can work? Anything works if it is done properly. There are lots of successful organic farmers in Canada. There are thousands of successful organic farmers around the world. They feed their families and their local communities. They don't need a lot of extra cash provided the International Monetary Fund and other global money-lenders stay away and they can ignore the commercial advertisers that tell them they need to buy more useless stuff to be happy.

[cowman]

Deb:You missed my point...the idea was ,hopefully, that organics wouldn't work! Then we would have a shortage and the prices would go up! Not only that but we wouldn't have to work as hard. I mean no fertilizer, no spraying why worry about tillage(and just think of all the oil and gas we'd save!).
I do understand you are a crusader and thats okay, the world needs people like you. And I sincerely believe that!
And as an aside I'm not against the bums and drunks in the homeless shelters. I always figure "There but for the grace of God..." I do believe they need a hand up/not a hand out. And sometimes a little "tough love" ala Ralph is a good thing! I mean consider this Deb...if Ralph is a drunk and he can be premier like what is their excuse!!!

[wilagro]

Tough love? You want tough love, check out the new budget that this 'progressive' gov't brought in. Chop the senior benefits, chop the childrens' services, increase health premiums...and on and on ad nauseum. This gov't couldn't run a hotdog stand. When will the people of Alberta get it through their heads? This gov't has to go.

[cowman]

Well lets not forget $408 million for health(read that higher wages for doctors and nurses). $208 million more for education(read that teachers salaries). An increase in school taxes of $45 million.
In total $616 million added expense for health and education, $750 million in new taxes, and a decrease in roads and infrastructure of $600 million!
It may not be pretty but you can be proud that now we have the highest paid parasites of any province! Oh except for our homeless drunks and bums...they never got one more red cent!
Do you think this government will ever figure out you can't increase spending by 22% a year? Because that's what it went up in 2001!

[Deb]

Thank you Wilagro for you honesty. Yes, the emperor not only has no clothes on, he also does not have a real economic plan other than let the foreign corporations take our resources for next to nothing.

We'll work harder to vote him and his cronnies out next time. Ken Nicol is an economist and a farmer and is very intelligent. I think the Tories won by default. Can someone advise me - I don't think Klein won the popular vote, I think the Tories won because of the way they set up the constituancy borders, so they'd get more votes. Is this correct?