Is anyone else frustrated that ag money is going into every thing but

[lonewolf]

This internet thing has opened my eyes just a wee little bit. Being a young farmer other than my loans being underwritten by FCC through CIBC all this money for agriculture has eluded my grasp. I mean what is wrong with the government investing in one of the few viable industries that actually produce something. In my area there has been some money available for certain projects on a 60 40 split, How does this help a young guy. Get him to mortgage around 800 000 (average to farm says stats can and nearly more than the 9-5 guy will make in their 25 year career) and then convince him that it is good to recieve 40 %.I just do not see it Borrow more money to pay interest on. So back to my thread. What is wrong with paying a farmer to do something. society is placing more and more demands on us and want it for nothing. Yes I am refering to the clean environment but also to the latest tech release here. What possible producable good can come from a laser that senses cattle emissions. Do you see the problem RESEARCHERS making big dollars and tying their name to agriculture are sucking the life out of us. IS information more valuable than the crops we produce. Yeah, you are probably right, picked too many stones in the last week and I should finish up and drink my beer. Until later then

[Muttley]

Probably more money in stones if you can sell them to the urban market as a yard decoration than there is in farming.

My wife started a small greenhouse here on the farm this year, we will sell thousands of dollars of plants to locals to put in their yard, then after a frost we will sell them more to replace. I work at a equipment dealer selling machinery and what ever. One of our biggest markets is land levelers to non farming enterprises such as acreage owners.

What I am getting at is the people with money to spend are many times not farmers. Find a product to sell that hits a market with money whether it's a petting zoo or grandma's home made duck soup!!

The government will never cater to farmers and give us many breaks we need to survive, so find something you got that somebody with bucks wants(they probably won't need it just want it, that's where the money is at)

[cakadu]

Muttley - you are 100% correct in what you are saying - find out what the customer wants and then give them what they want, every time. Quality and consistency mean a great deal in today's marketplace as if they aren't satisfied with your products, they'll move on.

It is misleading when the public at large hear about how much money agriculture is getting, but what they don't realize is what ends up making it to the producers pocket.

Take the Ag Policy Framework for example, we hear all the time about how it is $5.2 billion dollars, but that's over 5 years and things can change over time. We also know that $3.2 billion of that is earmarked for the "safety net" portion of the program, so that leaves $2 billion (give or take) for the rest of the APF over 5 years. Now, if you take out what it will take to administer the program along with all the other things, then what is left for each producer?

Makes it hard to embrace some of the things that are coming our way i.e. environmental farm plans, nutrient plans etc. etc., when there is no compensation nor incentives coming our way to take on some of this stuff.

I also heard 2 interesting things the other day:

1. You cannot finance your way out of a difficult situation
2. You cannot produce your way out of an already over-supplied market.

When you think about them, they make sense. Doesn't help to solve the problem of getting more money to the producer. How do you think we can achieve something like that? What would you like to see?

[ianben]

Every farmer should be given 100 lines

You cannot produce your way out of an already over-supplied market.
You cannot produce your way out of an already over-supplied market.
You cannot produce your way out of an already over-supplied market.
You cannot produce your way out of an already over-supplied market.
You cannot produce your way out of an already over-supplied market.

Will we ever learn?

[lonewolf]

yeah Cakadu that is exactly what I am talking about. Too many hands in between and very little to the producer

[carebear300]

I sort of agree a bit with what everyone has said. I have just one thing that I want all of you to remember is that because of the subsidies world wide the price is actually being depressed. In fact if the truth was only known the Europeans and the Americans are both quilty of dumping process onto the world market at below the cost of production. That is the main trouble. We can compete with the best of them but only if we play on a level playing field. Our government has not done their part to make the playing field level. For instance they are putting our interest rates up gradually which has caused the canadian dollar to appreciate in comparison to the american dollar and decreases the price which receive. Just one example and excessive taxes and regulations are another way that we are disadvantaged. As more money getting to the actual producer there has to be a maximum allowed per producer. It won't be entirely fair no matter what we do but the time has come for something to be done.

[ValueChainFX]

The producer has always been the ones to pay for many of the programs at the end of the day. So how do we put some of that coin back into our pockets...

Well find out what the government wants and supply that to them!

Even though you may not think that statement holds water, believe it or not there are still some folks in the government that would love to see you put those coins in your jeans. It isn't easy to do but producers can bridge the gap if you study the programs and work with the ones that will help you. Don't run out and buy your new tractor yet though cause that ain't going to happen. It takes time, money, coordination and stick-to-itness.

As for the government singing about how much they are putting into agriculture ... well ... they are going to sing what they are going to sing, maybe with some luck we can get them to sing our song?

[cakadu]

Carebear, the global subsidies are what is hurting us but it isn't the subsidy itself, it is the fact that because of the subsidy more is being produced. If the subsidies weren't there, then producers wouldn't be as inclined to produce because they wouldn't make enough (or any) money. We can't blame it all on the subsidies though, technology has also helped to get us to the point that we are at now. Because we have the machinery and chemicals available to us, we are able to continuously crop - which I suppose in a lot of respects isn't a bad thing.

The downside to it is that there hasn't been a corresponding increase in the demand for the product.

I wonder if another factor might be that as developing countries are able to produce more of what they need in order to feed themselves, they are less reliant on government aid, buying grains from other sources etc.

We also tend to see the same thing happening in many of the commodities - a push to produce more, but there aren't the markets for the products to go into. Take beef for example, we are being told that the government's plan is for us to produce 20% more beef than we are already producing. What we need to be asking is where are the markets for this additional production? From where I sit - and in my own opinion - producers will not gain from the increase in production, but processors will i.e. more beef means lower prices and having access to a cheap source of what is needed for them to get their job done.

Lessons should be learned from other sectors of the industry. Take hogs for example - a recent study in Alberta showed that the hog industry lost something like $78 million last year, which means that with each pig sold, they lost money. How long can this be sustained?

Once again, producing more when we can't sell what we are currently producing - at a profit - isn't going to help us to make more money.

How do we more effectively use the dollars that are being given to agriculture?

[gkelley]

Never let gov't or bank money alter your business plan.They willput you on a detour that will cost you in all aspects of your business.

Glenn Kelley

[Smithy]

That sounds like excellent advice.
One of my pet peeves is the amount of our money the government spends on 'studying' our problems and then more money on 'making recommendations' and 'implementing plans' and then more money on 'incentives' so we will follow the 'recommendations' and then about the time we have made some progress in whatever direction they want us to go they spend some more of our money on another 'study' that results in a 'policy change.'
Have you ever noticed that most of the grant money available for agriculture is for studying something and very little actually goes for doing anything? I am all for research but lots of the grants awarded are for some damn silly reasons and don't really qualify as research in any practical sense.

[ValueChainFX]

Another challenge we see with most of the spending is that in most cases it does not really help the producer. An ag ... grant ... funding ... gov money usually helps the processor, marketer, retail or consumer. The fees producers pay as check offs etc. go???? they are going to support marketers, retails etc. may be a little off base here, but I don't think so. Time these thing got a little more balance ... like on the producer side of things.

[lonewolf]

See this is what I am talking about. But the real problem is how do we accommplish this.

[ValueChainFX]

Lonewolf ... the only way a producer is going to accomplish what the processors, marketers and retails have accomplished is to act like them. These businesses are able to pull a group together, pin point the issues and making choices that will make them more money!!! I have discussed this point with many people throuigh out the supply chain and the standard answer is simple, "Producers are very hard to coordinate, get together and have them agree on any one issue, until we can easily communicate with them we will continue to focus on where we get the best results". WHO DO YOU SUPPOSE SAID THAT?

It doesn't matter we all know that statement is true. More and more however, producers are taking charge and pulling themselves together. We are working with tools that are designed to put more money in our jeans. The key is to be the processor ... be the marketer ... and be the retails. The answer I have heard to that most times is ....

I don't want to be a processor, marketer or retail ... Well you already are so what is that statement all about. Besides that the big marketing companies don't have one person that does it all, nor to the processors or retails, they have managers, coordinators etc. Well so do you, but to make all these people work for you, you have to get together, agree at least on some basics and speak with a producer voice. It is happening, producers are starting to do it, there are always going to be the negative Nigels, but hey there choice if they want to stay on the sidelines and watch. For those taking part, I believe they are the ones making history not watching it happen!

[cdunbar]

The above comments are all well and good. But it still comes right down to the grower. We have to change the way we do the business of farming. Complaining about the government not doing something, or the consumer not paying, or the media not getting the message out...are all examples of passing the buck. We, as growers, have to make the changes. Consuers will only pay more when the HAVE to pay more. Producers of many commodities have the freedom to produce whatever they want...but there is a big price to pay for this freedom. If growers could work together as a group they can get what they need out of the marketplace without blaming anyone. The buck stops at the farm gate. If farmers change the way they are doing business, positives can happen...that's the only way change will happen.