ABP report came in the mail!

[ASRG]

Yesterday I got "Grass routes" in the mail from the ABP.
Inside was a piece by Rich Smith (an executive director) titled "Land Owner Rights and Wrongs". It out lined the ABP effort to protect landowner rights. The tone of the piece was the Alberta government had done a lot to rectify the problems of Bill 36 the Land Stewardship Act through bill 10 the Land Stewardship Amendment Act? I'm not sure how the ABP comes to this conclusion, in light of the government action in the lower Athabasca region where they cancelled unilaterally several oilsands leases? If Bill 10 was passed to ensure leases wouldn't be cancelled....why would they think ranchers are in anyway protected? If the government can cancel contracts on oil leases...why would they treat ranchers any different?
ABP seems to be bending over backwards to accomodate this government? Bill 24 the Carbon Capture and Storage Statutes Amendment Act DID confiscate real property, without compensation or due process of law! That is a fact that cannot be disputed!
Bill 24 showed this governments true colors....and it is not as a loving and caring government who has your best interests at heart? They want your property....pure and simple!
The Western Stockgrowers understand very clearly the implications of the "LAND GRAB BILLS"...why is the ABP so willfully blind?

[farmers_son]

Bear in mind that ABP is landowners and cattle producers from all over Alberta and they are not willfully blind. WSGA is landowners and cattle producers too. Actually everyone is working to the same goal although using different methods. It could be that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Maybe vinegar works best, don't know. ABP has effected some important changes but like the piece says ABP is not completely satisfied and really no one is.

Again as the piece says, we are in the middle of a leadership election (my phone has been ringing wanting me to support the various candidates) and this is an election issue. Some people are not waiting to see who the next leader of the PCs will be and are throwing their support to the Wildrose.

I do not have to take second place to anyone when it comes to protecting our property rights but my take is we are going to lose this one. There are too many stars lined up against us plus as I said in another thread we do not have political influence any more due to realignment of ridings.

There will be political rhetoric stating support for proterty rights but as soon as whoever takes over the reins of this province gets into power the farmer should not be surprised when that support vanishes.

[littledoggie]

I wondered why we didn't hear much of an uproar from the oil companies that lost those leases. Then I heard that they were royally compensated - compensated as well for infrastructure that wasn't even built yet. Don't know how reliable the source was.

[ASRG]

And you may be right on politicians saying one thing and doing another once they are elected, farmers son?
In this case ,I hope not.
I have sat across the table from Danielle Smith and have heard her say:" The first thing we will do in office will be to repeal 19,36,50, and 24. The second thing we will do is bring in a Property Protection act".
Now that may be a bunch of BS or it might be the truth....but at least she is the only one saying it?(I know Allison Redford has said she'll scrap 50).
The other PC leadership candidates aren't saying much except Morton who is in favor of them all except maybe 50....which might need some "clariying"....sort of like bill 10 "clarified" bill 36!
How can the very people who wrote these bills and voted them in possibly be the solution to getting rid of them?
These laws go way beyond whether some farmer loses some of his property? The common theme of all the "land Grab bills" is the taking away of "the rule of law"...and that is a road no Canadian should ever want to go down? It is in fact the road back to being a serf.

[per]

Sticking to principals will eventually win the day. (if you live long enough) That is the reason why the Stock Growers' are still here. 115 years of holding the Government of the day accountable. Honey, vinegar, flies, whatever it takes to protect the principal.

The sum of the parts of these Acts show the true colors of this administration. Each of these Acts have serious implications and need fixing but all of them together add up to a troubling philosophy. Can a new leader change the tone? Time will tell.

[grassfarmer]

Speaking of ABP a city friend attended the Capital X parade in Edmonton and was commenting how lame the parade in general was compared to those of previous years - singled out as being particularly lame was the ABP entry which she said was just a truck with a BBQ in the back proclaiming.
I told her I was glad I don't fund this organisation any longer.

[farmers_son]

I agree about sticking to principles. I am not so sure about these bills showing the provinces true colors or if we are seeing a very troubling indication of where the world is going. China is a world economic superpower. China is looking to invest everywhere in the world and will and has invested billions in Alberta and throughout Canada. China Investment Corp has $300 billion to spend and is spending some of that money right here at home. And Chinese investment is one way to counter U.S. claims that the Oilsands is dirty oil.

John Baird, Canada’s new foreign minister, chose to make China his first visit and China Investment Fund is opening its first foreign office in Toronto. And on the topic of beef, we will see more Canadian beef flow into China as Canada Sino relations improve (read that as China has more investment in this country).

See:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1029373--sino-canadian-relations-strategic-partnership-ii

China is investing in Canada. That does not come without a cost. China is a nation that cares little about human rights and has no use for property rights. I expect property rights will be eroded (not completely gone but eroded) in every nation that China invests heavily in, part of the necessary investment climate. When I said the stars were aligned against us I was thinking of China.

And it should not be overlooked when Danielle Smith talks about property rights she is thinking of the energy sector which views its leases as “property”. I can tell you no oil or gas company gives a damn for a farmers property rights. As for rural farmers, really we have not had any real property rights since they were taken away decades ago. The amount of compensation we presently receive for our property rights is token at best.

I say it again, until you can make property rights a hot button issue for the cities no one is going to care about property rights in the country.

As for ABP maybe if Grassfarmer and the big feedlots who share his views left their $2 bucks in ABP they could afford a better float in the parade.

[per]

We all have viewed the layers of Statutory consents as what makes property valuable. The missed opportunity in Bill 36 was not enhancing security of tenure resulting in actually highlighting their vulnerabilities. The fact that ranching policy groups are taking up the cause should in no way preclude all others who depend on Statutory Consents to also take up the cause. Certainly the oil and gas leaseholders are concerned but are reluctant to tackle this publicly. There are countless urban businesses who for some reason don't think this is their issue. The problem like you point out f-s is getting them engaged. In the mean time we will keep plugging away at it. Those that want to help are welcome. The bandwagon will keep going down the road.

[Happytrails]

Very good comments all. The question of for why the ABP leaders continue to toe the PC line after refundable checkoff, etc. I posed to an observer a while back. He said it was because ABP is counting on funding from ALMA to make up the shortfall from refunds. So the circle stays unbroken. BTW rumor has it that Wildrose will cancel ALMA's statutory consents. Can't be too soon IMHO. HT

[ASRG]

I'm sure there are good people involved with the ABP and I'm sure they think they are doing meaningful work....however....
I don't ever remember them asking me if I wanted to be represented by them? It sort of like a union I guess....you have to pay the dues whether you want to or not, or whether the union represents your interests or not?
Personally I don't want to be represented (or pay for) an ABP union that sanctions and supports the theft of my property?

[farmers_son]

To keep on the thread topic the Grass Routes article begins by pointing out this has been a winter and spring of discontent. And is sure has. The truth of the matter is there are few if any left who want the Stelmach government representing us. It was not that long ago, 2008, that the Stelmach government won its historic and overwhelming election victory. Look what has happened since then. Stelmach abruptly resigned in part over backlash regarding Bill 36 and others. And we are in the middle of an leadership campaign at the same time as there is a campaign to see which is the next party to govern Alberta.

ABP may very well end up taking heat for trying to improve the worst parts of the Land Stewardship Act. You wade into that sewer you may not come out smelling like a rose.

The reality is those Bills are not going to survive the leadership campaign even if ABP did get some of the worst parts improved. Yes the Keith Wilson dog and pony show continues traveling to every small community that has a hall but those events are just about selling Wildrose tickets.

I am amazed to see the disconnect between rural and urban Alberta. Rural Alberta is just not getting it. If you want to push rural Alberta’s buttons just mention property rights. In my opinion we really do not have any property rights to lose, they were all taken years ago, but property rights will still get the farmers to come to a meeting. The urban voter will say their priority is health care and education but when you consider the recent federal election I would say the urban voter voted for jobs. The Harper government was never viewed as a stout defender of health care. In my view only, since I am suggesting the rural vote does not count for anything after years of riding redistribution favouring the cities, then the urban issue which is jobs is the only one that counts. An angry rural Alberta is out with the pitch forks over property rights but that train left the station long ago and the farmers are left standing at an empty rail siding.

The Wildrose has Keith Wilson stirring up rural discontent but does the Wildrose have anything similar going on in the cities?

I really do not know how the urban voter views the Wildrose. If an election were called today the Conservatives would not get many rural votes but I am not sure the urban voter is going to go Wildrose either. After the federal election no one should underestimate a center/left party’s ability to come up through the middle and change the political scene in Alberta.

And then see what you have left for property rights. Give the urban voter a choice between mega projects/mega investments from China or elsewhere that mean more and better paying jobs versus farmers property rights and guess which they will choose.

[ASRG]

I don't think many urbanites are all that happy with the Tory government either.....granted for different reasons. Stelmach is just one man of many who were sitting at the table?
It is kind of sad that the population in the cities can't see beyond their wallet but I think the "economics" of the land grab bills might get them interested? When large industries start talking about leaving the province because power rates will be too high to operate once the power export lines are built, it might get their attention?
Also when they realize the high continual costs of carbon capture (about $3 Billion/year)might make them pause?
Anyway that will be up to the Wildrose to sell that idea....it is their election to lose.
It might surprize you that there is something coming down the pipes that might derail a lot of the property theft? It is the "Crown Letter Patent Grants" and the Crown patents are being used in courts in Ontario today to stop a lot of landowner abuse. I just got off a conference call with the Ontario Landowner association and got the lowdown on this stratedgy. Our group hopes to bring out the president and the expert on the Crown Patents this fall for a public information meeting on how to challenge the various governments on land issues.

[rkaiser]

If ABP spent half as much time trying to help producers with the business of cattle rather than political postioning to keep money flowing into their coffers, there would not be as many disgruntled producers.

[per]

So back to Grass Routes...

"Alberta Beef Producers (ABP) was established in 1969 for the purpose of initiating, supporting and conducting projects and programs to stimulate, increase or improve the production and marketing of beef cattle and beef cattle products."

[wd40]

So have they met their goals.