Why is it no one buys based on falling number?

**wmoebis** · Jan 20, 2015, 09:34

Visually assessing sprouted and severe sprouted is a rapid indication of what the falling number will be.
The problem I see is the lack of training of staff to properly identify Sptd and Sev Sptd.

Falling number test takes too long, sample has to be ground, slurry made, then test done between each test the equipment has to be thoroughly cleaned.

**tweety** · Jan 20, 2015, 09:39

Bleached number 2 wheat always makes better bread then a pretty number one.

There is a lot of years CWB manipulation within WGS and those habits and traditions exporters use to take advantage of cdn farmers will be there for a looooong time.

**CptnObvious** · Jan 20, 2015, 10:06

I am curious...'CWB manipulation,' on behalf of whom? Those who claim it existed say that it was to the detriment of farmers but 'que bono?'

**bucket** · Jan 20, 2015, 12:32

Because they don't have to. It's that simple.

**farmaholic** · Jan 20, 2015, 13:14

In a year with alot of rain damaged wheat at harvest it would be a good idea to have your bin samples tested for falling numbers. If the Inland Terminal graders get stupid you will be armed with knowing what you have, the first step in selling your crop. I had ours done and they tested high. We had a bit of rain at harvest but not a lot.

In my opinion a visual assessment will never be as accurate or "unbiased" as the falling number test.. once again subjective versus objective.

**ErgotErnie** · Jan 20, 2015, 14:57

Just had this question answered this morning at the combine to customer course at Cigi, basically the Canadian grain commission says we have to many customers looking for wheat that will give there products a specific colour along with the right protein and gluten. The falling number can be high but will give the customers a wheat that will not make the noodles the right colour

**furrowtickler** · Jan 20, 2015, 17:38

Fair enough then ergot - why the *** are we not paid on this special attribute? Our 'good' wheat receives less than undesirable wheat for a perceived quality advantage.
IMO - producing better food is an absolute farce when farmers are not paid to grow it .

**hobbyfrmr** · Jan 20, 2015, 19:49

You have to consider that almost no farmers sell on falling number because they do not lab test their own inventory.
The 70 year old game of visual grading/ dockage game of bullshit poker continues.
People get what they deserve. If you can't back up your inventory with laboratory specs protein/falling number, why do you expect more money?
If your grains are low or out of spec, leave the papers at home. If they are high, or within spec, present the information. Put it on Farmlead or Johstons where buyers are looking for certain milling qualities.
av ers constantly ruminate this subject. Do something about it.
Don't get mad at me.....get mad at YOU!!

**farmaholic** · Jan 20, 2015, 19:57

You are so right hobby as to how to manage the information you paid for.

Something that drives me absolutley crazy (why drive when it's only a short walk for me ;-) is how we run after this grain at harvest and do everything humanly possible to get it off in good shape trying to preserve it's quality only to have it picked apart with tweezers and magniying glasses harder than the old chickens in the hen house would, why?

I can't help but remember the terminals telling us not to worry about grade, price only, yeah right... is that what the tell the end users they sell to?

Why is it no one buys based on falling number?