• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Costs of Production

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Costs of Production

    The following article appeared as a CBC Editorial by Laura Rance on the CFBMC website:

    That’s the situation that more and more farmers are facing. It’s most acute in Prairie grain farming, but the same scenario can be found in farm accounts across the country and in just about every commodity: Income is flat and being drained of its vitality by inflation while short-term debt is being converted to long-term liabilities.

    Even with government transfers, low interest rates, and a low dollar that boosts returns on export commodities, farming is no longer a paying proposition for more and more families. But aside from giving up, what do you do?

    The first step, says University of Guelph economist George
    Brinkman, is to stop deluding ourselves with myths. One example, he says, is the belief that all we need is a level playing field – that North American producers are the most competitive in the world. We’re certainly productive but we have environmental constraints such as shorter growing seasons. And we spend an awful lot to produce what we grow.

    Brinkman cites the emergence of South American countries as world leaders in grains and oilseed production. He also points out that if
    South Americans can produce cheap grain and oilseeds, they will soon be producing cheap livestock too.

    Brinkman says farmers here must improve their understanding of costs of production and their ability to capture premiums through
    differentiated marketing.

    Henry Nelson of the Manitoba Farm Debt Mediation Board says he used to get laughed out of the room when he suggested grain farmers move into livestock. Now he sees farmers putting land they once considered “too good” for forage into pasture land because it generates higher returns and lowers costs.

    The risk, he fears, is that the new converts, in their enthusiasm, will do the same thing to livestock production that they did to grain
    farming – erode their profitability by spending too much chasing economies of scale.

    But Nelson is hopeful too. He sees a new focus on keeping capital costs down and the bottom line healthy. Whether that will be the saviour of farmers is still unknown. What is clear is that another trip to the bank or the government to buy more time for the same old approach is a doomed strategy.

    For CBC commentary, I’m Laura Rance, a farm journalist in Sanford, Manitoba.

    _________

    Several concerns are raised here: How do we deal with the South American markets, especially in terms of beef? What is being done to watch what is happening there. I'm not sure we can sit back and say that they have things llike FMD, so they can't export. Brazil for one is working very hard to get their status cleaned up. They have something like 160 million cattle. What happens when these are ready to go?

    How do we break the cycle of wanting more subsidies, safety nets, government help?

    How do we better utilize our inputs so that we can get more from the land?

    One thing that confounds me is that we keep trying to be the lowest cost producer, which doesn't work and we shouldn't be aspiring to. Ianben has brought up several times in various threads that we need to know the value of what we are producing.

    Where do we start?

    #2
    Very simple...don't let it in or if it comes in tax it so it is just as pricey as our beef. Not so hard to do...look at the North American car industry. Why,as a country would we want a bunch of cheap imports? Good for the consumer but taken to the extreme the consumer has to make a living too. If we import everything where does the consumer get the money to consume? We have a wealthy country and economy, what is the advantage for the average guy in Canada by allowing cheap imports of any commodity or product in? in the short term it might look good...in the long term it spells disaster.You and I have nothing to really gain by cheap imports but you can bet some big parasite down in Toronto does!

    Comment


      #3
      I started trying to find if the so called low cost producers where happy producing at these prices.
      A drop in canola price here was blamed on Canada.
      So I thought I would check it out with this amazing internet.
      Eventually after much disscussion I find Canadians hurt at the same prices I hurt at. Brazilians are expanding and cutting down rainforest because prices are so low. US demand improved farm bill to survive. NZ and Oz think they are making a profit but their currency has been devalued so perhaps not.
      No government program however well intensioned seems to work. We are all urged to diversify and add value. Organic must be the next dotcom. Huge growth from zero looks good but cannot be sustained.
      We are all urged to have tracability and food safety without anyone wanting to pay for the extra cost.
      Of course we farmers are destroying the enviroment single handed and rural communities everywhere are dying.
      If we could just stop competing on price and charge a realistic price for all our produce we could solve alot of the problems disscused in these threads.
      I have no worries about the sky and dont want to get off just yet but we do need to actually do something to help ourselves.
      WE are the problem and only we can provide a solution.
      Think we would still have to pay taxes though, the problems of making a profit!!!

      Comment


        #4
        Ian: This is where we need a super strong farmer type organization. One that has the general support of all farmers and the political muscle to back up its demands. Now I will use Canada as my example because I don't know much about Europe. But it could equally apply there.
        We take the example of wheat. Our "farmer organization" determines how much wheat Canada needs this year(forget exports as they are basically just a scam to keep the CWB in business). Say it is X number of bushels. Everyone who wants to grow wheat is allotted a quota for that year. Then a fair price is determined and the millers, pasta plants etc. are told this is what it costs. It is very simple they pay this price or they quit. No imports allowed in to drive down the price. If they quit then there is no flour and up goes the price. New millers come in to pick up the slack. Now due to weather the crop might come up short...up goes the price. Or the crop may be a bumper crop...the government has the option of buying the crop for food aid or storage. If they won't take it the farm organization stores it and the quota goes down the next year so that the surplus is used up. The price remains the same plus storage costs and interest. In other words the organization completely controls the supply of the commodity. This would work with all farm products.
        Of course this whole thing would not go over very well with the government or their masters, the food corporations! Just like the unions, in the mines and factories, didn't go over very well in the 19th century. This is when farmers would need to be very determined and not be afraid to go head to head with the "authorities"! Not an easy thing to do. It never is easy to throw off the yoke of slavery!!!

        Comment


          #5
          "The risk, he fears, is that the new converts, in their enthusiasm, will do the same thing to livestock production that they did to grain
          farming – erode their profitability by spending too much chasing economies of scale."
          I can't help but wonder if the 'experts' would make these comments if they had actually tried farming. It seems to me that for years we listened to 'economy of scale' as being the saviour of the grain industry. More land, bigger tractors, level slews, take out trees, all in the name of efficiency.

          We have already seen in the cattle industry that because all of our input costs and overhead have skyrocked we need to double or even triple the number of head in order to cover costs. Is this part of the cattleman's decision making process or is it a reaction to circumstances that are beyond our control. I would rather make a decent living with 50 cows than 500 hundred myself.



          "But Nelson is hopeful too. He sees a new focus on keeping capital costs down and the bottom line healthy. Whether that will be the saviour of farmers is still unknown. What is clear is that another trip to the bank or the government to buy more time for the same old approach is a doomed strategy."

          I would like to ask just how one keeps capital costs down, or production costs for that matter?
          I look around me at a few of my neighbors who are successful farmers according to this model. They calve cows in March in the bush with no bedding, they have no buildings or ones they have are falling down. They feed minimally. Calves or cows are not tagged, minimal livestock equipment. One feeds with a team, no tractor or other equipment. Vet trips do not happen. I actually admire these neighbors resourcefulness and they will be in the cattle business longer than I will. However, how many of us want to farm like this? Is this the wave of the future?

          Comment


            #6
            Pandiana,this is the wave of the future for me.This whole farming thing (grain) has really gotten to me in the last few years.Because I like animals I see this as an excellent option for me,a much simpler life.My goals in life now are just to have a house paid for and exist.All the fancy things in life do not mean anything to me anymore,been there done that.I'd bet my last dollar that the people you described are very happy people.

            Comment


              #7
              Pandiana: You are right on the experts because most of them think they are a service to farmers as advisers, but really have no working experience in producing food or making a living from doing so. I think they are the biggest problem in promoting farmers to compete against each other in the marketplace, and this is one reason that some of farmers feel they don’t need to be united.

              Comment


                #8
                Pandiana: The returns to a cow/calf operation do not allow a lot "extras". It has to be sort of a bare bones operation. I think a good part of it is making the decisions on where to spend that dollar. Feeding tough is almost essential to make a buck.In a commercial operation if you are running around with the molasses and supplements it is a lost cause. They same goes for elaborate facilities(now I have what some would consider elaborate facilities, but the oil revenue paid for that years ago and not the cows!). You have to grind those old cows mighty fine to make a buck.
                The future for the commercial cow/calf industry is one of being even cheaper! It is a future I personally don't want to be part of. If I have to starve cows or let them sleep out in the snow at -40 then no thanks...I quit. We all draw the line somewhere and for me the day when I can't afford to keep them the way I feel I should is the day to quit.

                Comment

                • Reply to this Thread
                • Return to Topic List
                Working...