doing a rough survey...

[fjlip]

August is the only month for Wheat and Canola, you missed it, wait a year...

[Grahamp]

Been applying for mine for a few years. Would seriously consider donating my check off refunds to challenge the mandatory pulse growers.

[bucket]

Sadly a resolution has been passed to make the pulse checkoff refundable but the board shot it down....

I think it should be voluntary....where they have to ask for the money before taking it.....

Phucking guys don't want to listen or do performance reviews back to the farm gate or make pulse Canada accountable.....

Start begging for your money instead.....

[Quadtrack]

It is good you are planning to become more directly engaged by bringing forward and speaking to a resolution at the annual meeting. There needs to be more engagement of farmers with their organizations.

I disagree with your point of view that checkoffs should be voluntary. Although unpopular on this forum, I believe we would be better off with all the checkoff being mandatory and non-refundable but having considerable consolidation in groups-perhaps only one like Australia has.

I will present my reasoning for what it’s worth-I did spend some years as a director but no longer and now just try to keep up with my own farm work.
Regarding value, I don’t understand how anyone who grows pulse crops cannot recognize the value of having varieties that have been developed for our own region. Are Spectrum or Inca or Meadow not superior to Century or Trapper or even Carnival? Of course they are and their development has been paid for by farmer levy nearly 100%. Same w lentils-sure Laird Eston got us started along with Dr Al foresight, but much improvement has happened since, again paid by levy. Not all new varieties are ‘winners’ we all know that, but generally, over time, we have access to better than we did before. And this would not have happened without growers footing the bill because large seed companies don’t invest in tiny crops like a few million acres of pulses. Variety development aside, a good number of products that can be used to protect minor crops are available because of research funded by growers. Market development work as well, even though I know you don’t believe it, has opened opportunity that has been a huge benefit (peas, noodles, China for example)
Leave pulses alone for a minute-check back 25 years to the work SK canola did to develop the market in the US. A lot of effort, over many years, and today, a lot of canola oil and meal is used in the US. Check off funds paid for that. Would it have happened otherwise? Don’t think so. Sure, once it gets rolling, others like various companies/processors get in and run with it. But that is not how it started-check the facts.

On the aspect of refundability, what is happening more and more is larger farms are told by their accountant-hey, look at this x thousands you paid in levy, we can get that back. Larger the farm, bigger the sum. So a lot of the refunds are bigger checks. It’s really the opposite of ‘socialism ‘ as someone mentioned. Small or medium size pay in and don’t bother with refund, but large do-yet all benefit. I personally don’t take a refund and never have. Does it make the organization accountable? I think elections are the place for that.

I do think there is rationale to decrease the number of groups/decrease admin costs/decrease the number of directors etc. There is less of us farmers all the time, everyone is busy, and good directors are increasingly hard to attract. Despite the noise, being a director takes a lot of time and effort (detracted from one’s own operation) and is largely thankless. This same argument could apply to RMs in SK-each has a administrator for what, 100 taxpayers and falling, no one wants to be a councillor, amalgamation would save $$.

I think it is far better to get involved with one of our Ag organizations, stand for election, learn what is going on and attempt to influence the path it takes that will provide farmers with the best return and opportunity. As opposed to saying it’s all crap and should be shut down. There have been and are benefits/value. Could it be better? Yes, for sure. Is it up to an Ag organization to represent every issue all the time? No, there has to be focus or else nothing gets accomplished. Will you please everyone? Not a chance. I would argue that there are certain things that can only be done as a collective-direct farmer investment in variety development is one such. It takes millions and there is no guarantee a winning variety will emerge every year.

So clearly this is a different view from some. If I make it to the AGM, I look forward to the resolution discussion and I will speak against it.

[burnt]

It is good you are planning to become more directly engaged by bringing forward and speaking to a resolution at the annual meeting. There needs to be more engagement of farmers with their organizations...

Such an optimistic view is rather rare - and for good reason.

That reason being that involvement with a farm organization with any intention of influencing the preconceived outcome is usually an exercise in futility.

It has been repeatedly demonstrated that most major farm orgs have "matured" to the point where they exist solely for their own ego and self-preservation - membership views be damned. especially if they might upset the status quo. Wouldn't want to jeopardize that accreditation process now, would we!

Attendees at a recent farm org meeting heard the former President of the organization voice his concern that the org was losing its "grassroots" input and becoming a top-down dominated structure.

This, coming from a fairly recent past president, to the pleasant surprise of several there who voiced their support for his words.

Yet even after that, when faced with discussing some material that didn't fit the preferred narrative, it was dismissed by some executive as "reactionary".

Pollyanna or realist?

Once a significant percentage of contributors ask for their checkoff to be refunded, the self-serving bums will be forced to choose between losing their positions or serving their actual mandate - representing the farmer.

#you'refired

[bucket]

It is good you are planning to become more directly engaged by bringing forward and speaking to a resolution at the annual meeting. There needs to be more engagement of farmers with their organizations.

I disagree with your point of view that checkoffs should be voluntary. Although unpopular on this forum, I believe we would be better off with all the checkoff being mandatory and non-refundable but having considerable consolidation in groups-perhaps only one like Australia has.

I will present my reasoning for what it’s worth-I did spend some years as a director but no longer and now just try to keep up with my own farm work.
Regarding value, I don’t understand how anyone who grows pulse crops cannot recognize the value of having varieties that have been developed for our own region. Are Spectrum or Inca or Meadow not superior to Century or Trapper or even Carnival? Of course they are and their development has been paid for by farmer levy nearly 100%. Same w lentils-sure Laird Eston got us started along with Dr Al foresight, but much improvement has happened since, again paid by levy. Not all new varieties are ‘winners’ we all know that, but generally, over time, we have access to better than we did before. And this would not have happened without growers footing the bill because large seed companies don’t invest in tiny crops like a few million acres of pulses. Variety development aside, a good number of products that can be used to protect minor crops are available because of research funded by growers. Market development work as well, even though I know you don’t believe it, has opened opportunity that has been a huge benefit (peas, noodles, China for example)
Leave pulses alone for a minute-check back 25 years to the work SK canola did to develop the market in the US. A lot of effort, over many years, and today, a lot of canola oil and meal is used in the US. Check off funds paid for that. Would it have happened otherwise? Don’t think so. Sure, once it gets rolling, others like various companies/processors get in and run with it. But that is not how it started-check the facts.

On the aspect of refundability, what is happening more and more is larger farms are told by their accountant-hey, look at this x thousands you paid in levy, we can get that back. Larger the farm, bigger the sum. So a lot of the refunds are bigger checks. It’s really the opposite of ‘socialism ‘ as someone mentioned. Small or medium size pay in and don’t bother with refund, but large do-yet all benefit. I personally don’t take a refund and never have. Does it make the organization accountable? I think elections are the place for that.

I do think there is rationale to decrease the number of groups/decrease admin costs/decrease the number of directors etc. There is less of us farmers all the time, everyone is busy, and good directors are increasingly hard to attract. Despite the noise, being a director takes a lot of time and effort (detracted from one’s own operation) and is largely thankless. This same argument could apply to RMs in SK-each has a administrator for what, 100 taxpayers and falling, no one wants to be a councillor, amalgamation would save $$.

I think it is far better to get involved with one of our Ag organizations, stand for election, learn what is going on and attempt to influence the path it takes that will provide farmers with the best return and opportunity. As opposed to saying it’s all crap and should be shut down. There have been and are benefits/value. Could it be better? Yes, for sure. Is it up to an Ag organization to represent every issue all the time? No, there has to be focus or else nothing gets accomplished. Will you please everyone? Not a chance. I would argue that there are certain things that can only be done as a collective-direct farmer investment in variety development is one such. It takes millions and there is no guarantee a winning variety will emerge every year.

So clearly this is a different view from some. If I make it to the AGM, I look forward to the resolution discussion and I will speak against it.

Always the answer from the people that phuck it up.....good to see someone getting involved....


BTW the resolution passed years ago to make the saskpulse checkoff refundable....the board chose not to....

Now it should be voluntary where saskpulse has to ask for money....

So you openly admit you were responsible for the mess agriculture finds itself in...wasting millions of checkoff money on research for King Red Lentils that helped your farm and the fat boy that didn't even pay the research and development costs and made sure it would never be a public domain variety....producer checkoff dollars were lost on that ....a few board members made out OK on someone else's dime...that is socialism...

As far as varieties go ...what about centennial peas that were a disaster for guys that had to buy new seed the next year?

Why do need the saskpulse board sitting on the pulse canada board if both mandates are the same?????

Why is no one held accountable at Pulse Canada????Phucking saskpulse can't even answer the question as to what Pulse Canada are doing with 1.8 million of saskpulse money or the millions from the taxpayer?????

I can't get involved because I have no filter....I am pissed at the waste and have been for years..Wrote a letter to the Saskpulse board over a year ago about asking for government help and a lobbying effort...

Saskpulse wrote back thats not in their mandate....

Look at their website today and they are asking for more from government for agriculture...oh oh some of the directors hit a snag that needs taking care of....little late in the middle of an election campaign....


I can go on but its obvious you are part of the problem that you don't see the problem at the farm gate and correlate it other industries that are on the required government tit to protect their respective industry ...and they are not begging...

You have done a shit job representing primary producers if you were involved ...don't pat yourself on the back to much....someone else will have to clean up your mess.

[bucket]

Want to know what Pulse canada is doing for primary producers...

I encourage anyone reading this to phone and try to find out....from either Saskpulse or Pulse Canada....

I was informed there isn't easy or quick answers to the request because no one is actually asking for performance from sask pulse or pulse canada....

The answer is they are doing nothing.