checkoffs opt out question?

[parsley]

Pretty much all refunded money is a premeditated action that is meant to send YOU a message.

Better learn to read the message, "I'm ticked off", ask why, and and do things differently.

[dave4441]

Parsley-what i was trying to explain re oil industry is that they do invest dollars into research, as most industries do. THe issue is that an individual producer in agriculture has to act with other producers for research to be feasible. We must act as a corporation does and invest for long term. I use the example over and over. Pulse growers invested dollars into red lentil breeding program as US variety did not work. 2010 we have 2 million acres going in the ground. Big, big returns. Your plan would involve each of us getting their own breeder. Or, i know, we could get a seed company breed the crop and then we could pay royalities and plant breeder rights. Of course that is bad too. Can't win.

[wmoebis]

The problem I see with oil comparison is the oil company buys right to drill. They supply oil to thier refinery, they supply oil to thier pumps, they set price for thier crude, they set thier price for fuel. All the while they read thier meters telling us how much they produce and how much they want for thier product. They are producers and retail setters.

Grain producers are price takers. We have no control over retail price and get no benifit from retail increases. Where most of the rerearch benifits.

I am not against producers helping in research but it should be split by all those who benifit.

[dave4441]

Use any type of business, that is all i am getting at, all industries invest in production efficiencies or practices that make them more competitive. Oil industry was apparently a bad choice on my part.

My belief is that creating or increasing demand always trumps everthing else in increasing dollars in my pocket. Weather it is nutrition work (why does someone use a a partiular grain in their product vs another country's product), how effeciently we get product to port (grain is worthless sitting in Western Canada), and utilization of the product(how does someone use our products the most efficently). These may seem like issues of importance to the miller or baker/producer, but it really impacts demand. Demand is king. Trade barriers are another area that is key to overcome as they can kill the price for out product in a heartbeat. It would be great if we could offload these costs to end user with a tax so to speak, but the market is the market and nothing else is really in our control. We can leave these things to grain companies, but most will just choose a lowest cost product that has the highest margin into a particular market. We have to help strenghten the demand pull of our products.

[checking]

What is the success rate coming out of WGRF?

I suspect it is very low, like all research, but even being very low WGRF has come up with at least one winner that would have forever satisfied me with continuing to financially support it. Having contributed into the gem that was developed, and I refer to navigator durum, what did WGRF do with it?

What did I get out of it? According to the gd gust, those who didn't contribute got a free rider, or a free lunch. Do you navigator growers, especially the free riders agree?

Has WGRF ever publicly stated that if it develops a second gem that it won't do the same thing again. I'm tired of paying for dogs that won't hunt, while paying for, and being denied the rare gem that gets sold away.

Do you still wonder why some of us are questioning the dead wood in WGRF?

[wd9]

Wow parsely, hope you are getting paid for all the time you spend hamering this stuff out. Maybe donate some time to a worthwhile cause like compiling research projects into searchable database structure that Ag Canada has spent millions on for canola production research that big surprise would not have been done had ACPC not come to the table with a few ten thousands from canola growers in Alberta. Two thumbs up that spent their ONE DOLLAR a tonne getting much done. Shame on those that "needed" the money but still take the free ride on the backs of those that invest their industries future.

[gustgd]

Actually I was talking to a Wheat Grower member at a Syngenta function this winter.
He brought up the same point about Navigator. This is a guy who I have allot of time for and who has put some time into thinking about things. So when he told me he pulled money out of WGRF in the past over Navigator, I looked into it.

So here it is as I understand it.

Navigator came out of the Sask Wheat Pool breeding program. Was NOT a WGRF program, that`s why SWP has exclusive distribution rights.

http://www.westerngrains.com/index.asp?id=121010103&gfx=&ts=0

If you have a different story, let me know. But that`s what I`ve got.

As for sucesses
Strongfield durum, probably 85% of durum seeded in this area.
AC Lilian and sawfly resistance
The midge tolerance
AC Andrew is what 99% of soft white spring and the new CDC Ptarmigan also has WGRF money in it
CDC Copeland ....................

I could cut and past for quite a while longer but
You get the idea

[checking]

gustgd:

http://www.meristem.com/wheat/ws02.07.html

[parsley]

What is your defense of the premise that:

a)avidly promotes stealth or public shaming methods, so that farmer checkoffs become mandatory.

***Intimidation
***Humiliation
***Alienation.

These three tactics, used by the well instructed, have proven effective on the farm community in the past, haven't they?

Did you notice how gusty first tried to humiliate all farmers into compliance, then he got flak from checking so he switched to humiliation, and when checking didn't give a "rat's ass", the focus settled on alienation? ("I won't talk to you anymore, Lulu")

b)check-offs must be downloaded on farmers because most of the other funding is drying up. Well, farmers are perfect sitting, gullible ducks, waiting to be plunked.

Because some ag organizations' paid memberships represent but a few farmers, should you look to them to represent your interests?

c) We gotta hurry with more checkoff money cause we're having a science-race!

Yes, well.

In order to enable biotech companies to apply for and recieve pretty much all Canaddian governments' ag funding, public perception has to 'managed'.

The handing over of massive amounts of public tax dollars to private entities is so blatantly illegitimate, it can only be legitimized in the eyes of voters IF so-called "willing and lobbying" farmers endorse the process.

It's not about "falling behind Australian researchers" folks. The sheer volume of biotech science to be done is daunting. But then it always has been. That's what good science is...understanding how stupid we are.

It's about a few smart folks taking a big bite of tax dollars, lobbying to implement regulatory measures upon the farm community to guarantee money continues to flow, expand internationally, and do it in the name of science.

The problem you have,wd9 is that I am NOT paid for commenting about what I view as happening in agriculture. They are only my humble opinions.

Organics raged at me because the Rod Flaman look alikes registered themselves as organic farmers, and loved the Wheat Board and brought in CWB marketing with their stealthy CWB caregiver. I commented moving from farmer owned and farmer controlled to a government monopoly was not good for real organic farmers who originally established organics through embracing the free market. I have not changed my opinion.

Environmentalists are angry with my position on global warming which I have expressed as a scam. Global warming and carbon credits will suck money fropm farmers and NOT help the environment. I have not changed my opinion.

And then there are farmers who are angry because I have expressed the view that biotech has placed "their own" key people in university positions; placed "their own" key people in government positions; placed "their own" key people in ag organizations. To meet their own ends.

Well paid people.


I have expressed that a few will end up owning plant patents, (minus responsibilities that go with ownership); and a few will own the necessary chemicals that twin with those patents. I have observed that genetic changes which will eventually genetically pollute all varietes and all farms, (and even organic farmers will be contaminated, ending organics, and ironically, even organics will end up paying royalty fees).

And the worst I have done, is I have presented you with the idea that unintended consequences may deliver food to your table that is no longer accepted by your body, and that farmers bear too much risk of those unintended consequneces. Will Canadians eventually not buy food from Canadian farmers?.

I don't blame you for disliking those kind of ideas being presented on Agriville. My heart did not want to write them, but my head did. Or maybe it was that my head did not want to write them but my heart did. There's always two or more ways of looking at things. But, I will take responsibility for my observations.

So far, you have said nothing that has changed my mind. So, refute the ideas. That's all they are.

Every farmer should discuss and mull ideas that effect farming, and especially if you are among those well-paid to influence.

I'm not. Pars

[parsley]

That should read:

" then he got flak from checking so he switched to intimidation"

Je regret.