If farmers must pay more for seed, they want more say

[TOM4CWB]

[QUOTE=dmlfarmer;402228]

Point of issue;

... Farmer... many many farmers... buy PBR licensed seed every year... illegally. I dare to say... if cereal seed in SK is 18% Certified seed... the 'grown from' progeny of the Certified seed... legally exempted from PBR is less than 50%[50%+18%= 68%] leaving over 30% not paying levies owed today... without any changes to any systems....

You claim "...MANY MANY FARMERS are buying PBR licencsed seed every year...Illegally...." I have never bought or sold brown bagged seed nor do I know any neighbors that regularly do this. So just wondering how you know MANY MANY farmers are doing this. And where did you get the 50% figure from? What 3rd party study has verified these percentages you are throwing out.

Second, as a commercial grower I am currently not allowed to even name the variety when I take my farmed saved seed in for cleaning for my own use. However, if royalties are enacted, I will be forced to name the grown variety when cleaning, and if a commercial sale checkoff is enacted, then the variety grown will have to be named at the point of sale. Therefore if the seed industry still recognizes the variety after it has been grown commercially, it will be impossible to claim brown bag seed sales are illegal as the government and the seed trade both recognizes and charges for the purity of variety after commercial growth. Furthermore, it will be impossible to stop farmers from selling commercially grown seed as a named variety if the seed trade legislation gets passed. Far from solving the problems, you have made it MUCH MUCH worse!

DMLfarmer... I did not say you broke the PBR law... but some 30% of seed transactions sure appear to be illegal... otherwise this amount of Certified Seed used... won't cover how new varieties got integrated lnto commercial deliveries of new varieties so quickly.

[TOM4CWB]

No one really mentioned it, at the same time they are forcing farmers to increase the % of seed purchased from seed growers every year. I think the % of seed purchased as certified is around 15%?

Good for seed growers
Good for breeders
Etc

All creating a system of “un competitiveness “ when trying to promote competitiveness. What happens first?

What happens if I accidentally, seed grower, seed cleaner, mix varieties ( on purpose or not), how can that be policed?

Rareearth, end point royalties in Australia... have shown a decrease in Certified Seed... but the compliance funding for R and D funds need is gone... as funding does not depend on Certified Seed Sales... just that actual seed planted purity be proficient to meet the needs of the end users.

Trailing royalties have a huge compliance problem... just like in our present system today.

[wd9]

So Tom4CWB, if so many many farmers are doing illegal activity, why don't you do something about it and sue them? You have all the legislation and regulations to do so, but instead you just complain and want even more legislation.

[dmlfarmer]

[QUOTE=TOM4CWB;402234]

DMLfarmer... I did not say you broke the PBR law... but some 30% of seed transactions sure appear to be illegal... otherwise this amount of Certified Seed used... won't cover how new varieties got integrated lnto commercial deliveries of new varieties so quickly.

I never claimed you did said I broke the law, so quit the deflecting and answer the question I asked.

In your comment which I replied to, you claimed 50% of the seed appears to be illegal. I disputed that figure and asked for proof. Now you are saying 30% of seed transactions appear to be illegal. So which is it? 50% or 30%, or are you just spouting opinion and have no actual proof of your claims?

And you missed completely my second point. Seed growers cannot have it both ways. Today commercially grown wheat cannot be sold by variety. Commercial growers cannot even legally identify by variety what they are growing. However, if the seed trade gets to identify the commercial wheat I am growing by variety and charge a royalty or tax upon sale there is no way they can stop me from selling that variety by name for the purpose of seeding to another farmer as long as I pay the tax/royalty on it. If the seed trade considers the wheat I am growing to be pure enough to be taxed by variety, they will not be able to say it is not that variety if I choose to sell it to a third party by that name. This ill thought out royalty plan will not only cost commercial growers money, it will put many seed growers out of business as they will have to compete with every commercial grower selling the seed by variety name.

This is simply another CWB fiasco. Lots of promises, but a lack of planning and no foresight of potential problems.

[TOM4CWB]

[QUOTE=dmlfarmer;402267]

I never claimed you did said I broke the law, so quit the deflecting and answer the question I asked.

In your comment which I replied to, you claimed 50% of the seed appears to be illegal. I disputed that figure and asked for proof. Now you are saying 30% of seed transactions appear to be illegal. So which is it? 50% or 30%, or are you just spouting opinion and have no actual proof of your claims?

And you missed completely my second point. Seed growers cannot have it both ways. Today commercially grown wheat cannot be sold by variety. Commercial growers cannot even legally identify by variety what they are growing. However, if the seed trade gets to identify the commercial wheat I am growing by variety and charge a royalty or tax upon sale there is no way they can stop me from selling that variety by name for the purpose of seeding to another farmer as long as I pay the tax/royalty on it. If the seed trade considers the wheat I am growing to be pure enough to be taxed by variety, they will not be able to say it is not that variety if I choose to sell it to a third party by that name. This ill thought out royalty plan will not only cost commercial growers money, it will put many seed growers out of business as they will have to compete with every commercial grower selling the seed by variety name.

This is simply another CWB fiasco. Lots of promises, but a lack of planning and no foresight of potential problems.

1) If you read my original post... it said 18+50% and I said 30% not in compliance... the 50% I said IS in compliance.
2) you are required to illegally disclose what variety of wheat you grow... The CWB did... and the CGC does today... it is required to answer the sales question honestly.. of whether or not compliance is complied with... when the class or variety declarations are signed off at the sale point.
3) In the trailing royalty proposal.. this illegal non-pedigreed seed identification / thorny issue continues... as declaration of variety is needed each year... to pay the trailing royalty per the contract signed to receive the first Certified Seed.
4) The requirement to illegally declare the variety... when it is not Certified Seed... incentivizes further trade and production of non pedigreed seed... as the seed royalty collected will be necessary in function.. so it is less on non pedigreed seed/acres... which will again incentivize underground illegal production... and encourage improper declarations of varieties that are not certified seed. Hence... the reason plant breeders are not using the trailing royalty system today... they could choose to if they wanted... but do not. So no matter how we look at this... I agree with your thesis that trailing royalties are unworkable...

[dmlfarmer]

[QUOTE=TOM4CWB;402275]

1) If you read my original post... it said 18+50% and I said 30% not in compliance... the 50% I said IS in compliance.
2) you are required to illegally disclose what variety of wheat you grow... The CWB did... and the CGC does today... it is required to answer the sales question honestly.. of whether or not compliance is complied with... when the class or variety declarations are signed off at the sale point.
3) In the trailing royalty proposal.. this illegal non-pedigreed seed identification / thorny issue continues... as declaration of variety is needed each year... to pay the trailing royalty per the contract signed to receive the first Certified Seed.
4) The requirement to illegally declare the variety... when it is not Certified Seed... incentivizes further trade and production of non pedigreed seed... as the seed royalty collected will be necessary in function.. so it is less on non pedigreed seed/acres... which will again incentivize underground illegal production... and encourage improper declarations of varieties that are not certified seed. Hence... the reason plant breeders are not using the trailing royalty system today... they could choose to if they wanted... but do not. So no matter how we look at this... I agree with your thesis that trailing royalties are unworkable...

Okay, lets assume I misunderstood your first post. So you claim 30% of seed each year is not in compliance. Where are you getting his figure? Please provide your source.

2. You ARE NOT required by CGC to disclose the variety of wheat at point of sale, only the class of wheat. Here is the CGC rules https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm

3 You are prohibited by Canada's Seed Regulations to use a variety name for all commercially grown wheat plus most other crops). Variety names can only be used to describe pedigree production.
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/variety-registration/registration-procedures/questions-and-answers/eng/1360122407834/1360122517324 http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/variety-registration/registration-procedures/questions-and-answers/eng/1360122407834/1360122517324

Therefore, as I have stated, any attempt to define commercial seed by variety for purpose of royalties or taxation upon sale will open up the market to commercial farmers being able to sell commercial production by variety name. The seed industry cannot have it both ways!

[bucket]

[QUOTE=dmlfarmer;402276]

Okay, lets assume I misunderstood your first post. So you claim 30% of seed each year is not in compliance. Where are you getting his figure? Please provide your source.

2. You ARE NOT required by CGC to disclose the variety of wheat at point of sale, only the class of wheat. Here is the CGC rules https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm

3 You are prohibited by Canada's Seed Regulations to use a variety name for all commercially grown wheat plus most other crops). Variety names can only be used to describe pedigree production.
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/variety-registration/registration-procedures/questions-and-answers/eng/1360122407834/1360122517324 http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/variety-registration/registration-procedures/questions-and-answers/eng/1360122407834/1360122517324

Therefore, as I have stated, any attempt to define commercial seed by variety for purpose of royalties or taxation upon sale will open up the market to commercial farmers being able to sell commercial production by variety name. The seed industry cannot have it both ways!

The seed synergy group will quickly get the rules changed to suit their purpose.....wait for it....

[sawfly1]

Glad you guys are digging in on this issue .

It seems to cross all political
Lines. And most commercial growers are pretty wary of where we may be headed.

Like the guy said wheat yields have gone up the same percentage as
Canola . Without the astronomical
Price increases.
.
So we are fixing this why?

We watched the canola game play out the last 30 years.
So we have a pretty good idea
Where the seed industry wants to take us.
Canola seed did not start out at 14$/lbs.

The big seed co.s may play nice for a while in ceral and pulses.
A decent product at a decent
price.

At least until they run the public breeders out of business
And buy up anybody else left.

(CANOLA REPEAT)

Then all hell breaks loose.
3or4 co.s run it all.

Charge whatever they want.
Nice govt. Mandated collection scheme all set up in place.

Another thing . Important.
Related to what I said about the Free trade agreement the other
Day.
I am pretty sure.
(Somebody correct me if I am wrong)
That today
You could no bring back .
PUBLIC GOVT. Canola breeding
Without being sued for loss of future revenue by the seed co.s .
Under the FTA terms.

So that in the not to distant
Future.
With SEED co.s pricing reasonable . They have gained a 75%
Share of the market.
In cereals and pulses.


Then a Federal election and new conservative govt. Gets Elected.

Of course they say , the private sector is doing a fine job
Of variety development.

Why the hell are we paying these
GD public employees to do what the
Privates already do.

Axe the whole thing.
And they do .

Mission accomplished for the seed industry.

Time to jack up the prices.
Unstoppable now

The only real competition is dead.
Public breeding
Can not come back .
Without being sued under the FTA

Checkmate

[TOM4CWB]

[QUOTE=dmlfarmer;402276]

Okay, lets assume I misunderstood your first post. So you claim 30% of seed each year is not in compliance. Where are you getting his figure? Please provide your source.

2. You ARE NOT required by CGC to disclose the variety of wheat at point of sale, only the class of wheat. Here is the CGC rules https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm https://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm

3 You are prohibited by Canada's Seed Regulations to use a variety name for all commercially grown wheat plus most other crops). Variety names can only be used to describe pedigree production.
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/variety-registration/registration-procedures/questions-and-answers/eng/1360122407834/1360122517324 http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/variety-registration/registration-procedures/questions-and-answers/eng/1360122407834/1360122517324

Therefore, as I have stated, any attempt to define commercial seed by variety for purpose of royalties or taxation upon sale will open up the market to commercial farmers being able to sell commercial production by variety name. The seed industry cannot have it both ways!

DML Farmer,

My [back of match pac] logic on the Planted Seed sources is this:

18% Certified seed...
Then 3 years average grown from legally used by Commercial farmer on own farm[52%].

There by leaving perhaps 30% seed use then that is not in compliance with PBR laws left over.

Confirmation work;
I did talk to a major seed co leader today... and he would not quote the exact stats... because as WD9 says... the plant breeders and Seed Co's are somewhat afraid if we knew... but really want access to the information that every single commercial grain growers planted cereal varieties sown by acreage[each year].

Then it is the responsibility of commercial grain growers to justify where these varieties came from...
and "after the old varieties are 'deregistered'... cough cough splutter... I should say are reclassified... we will then get the funds we need to properly"...fund cereal varieties etc etc... by having grain growers buy the new varieties,

My spirit was/is grieved. I suppose this dear fellow thought I would be impressed... in a positive way... WRONG.

I told this fellow... with privacy laws... and as he called it the 'underground' seed trade already in place... I told him he was dreaming if he thought the trailing royalty model would significantly change the current CULTURAL situation of historic individual commercial farmer non-compliance, RE; R&D variety funding of Cereals.

WD9 again is right... we can fund a reasonable varietal development cereals program... through the primarily the public plant breeding system... if non-compliance to PBR laws is stopped... and the underground seed sales system were shut down.

Upov 78 makes it illegal to Sell any registered Varieties as common seed.
Upov 91 makes it illegal to Sell OR BUY any registered Varieties as common seed
PBR has been in effect for 25 years... so good luck with varieties over 25 years old...

With genetic testing... the new technology can tell exactly which varieties are in a blended sample... down to the single percent... and the CGC and CWB were doing this a decade ago.

I said the foolishness of doing the same thing over and over, ... yet expecting a different result... applied here.

The Seed Growers are generally not impressed with how this was being rolled out,,, and how Seed Grower farmers are taking the abuse from the seed trade rush to come up with a solution.

CGC protections of registered varieties were withdrawn... because climatic conditions and the failure of Variety screening to properly apply gluten strength standards... I was told today. He agreed this should be a grading quality issue... Not an excuse to downgrade varieties [to a lower CGC class] because of bad weather.

So the CWB leg of the 3 legged stool [CGC Act, Seeds Act, CWB Act] has left us with grain farmers at the mercy of multinational extraction of value from blending of CWRS ..., all wheat... because the CGC now listens to grain co's their customers[CWB farmer voice is gone]

Was told in so many words.. "Cereals Canada and cereal producer commissions did not have enough clout to force the CGC to back down".

Cheers!
It is a brave new world!!! Two steps forward... and one back!!!!

[Oliver88]

Rareearth, end point royalties in Australia... have shown a decrease in Certified Seed... but the compliance funding for R and D funds need is gone... as funding does not depend on Certified Seed Sales... just that actual seed planted purity be proficient to meet the needs of the end users.

Trailing royalties have a huge compliance problem... just like in our present system today.

This was never about “seed planted purity” rates though was it?

These royalties are only being promoted by seed companies and seed farms due to a possible increase in revenue. Just look at the solidarity of the seed industry pushing this seed tax. They are trying to tell us the only two options are a trailing royalty or an end point royalty and to trust the seed companies as they know best....LOL.