WCWG Stance on Seed Royalties

Crop Production & Forage

Tools

WCWG Stance on Seed Royalties

Dec 18, 2018 | 14:32 1 Just got this in the email today, a letter from the President of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers - Levi Wood. I will quote a section, you take it for what it's worth, but he's basically calling farmers who aren't in support of the new models buffoons, and trying to rally farmer support.

"Back to cereal breeding for a moment. I heard with disappointment, comments from some short-sighted farmers at "Seed Value Creation" consultations;

"We don’t need higher yielding wheat as the world has an oversupply."

How selfish that must sound to those that go hungry every night.

"This is about giving monopoly control and attacking public research."

Wheat Growers see this as pure nonsense! If someone thinks the decline in wheat acres isn’t related to the scientific technological advances in competitive crops, they have their heads in the sand. How frustrating it is to me and my Wheat Growers colleagues who volunteer our time working for policy to encourage investment in our sector. We must let our policy makers and political leaders know that is NOT the sentiment of farmers who are here for the long term and have another generation entering the business."


Might be time do actually talk to some producers Levi … His phone number is (306) 535-2997 Reply With Quote
Dec 18, 2018 | 16:07 2 Agree with what he heard. There is no advantage in growing high yielding wheat (that costs a never ending fortune to grow).

Sorry to disappoint you! Reply With Quote
Dec 19, 2018 | 09:03 3 It was a farmers meeting in Saskatoon....the lobbyists like WCWGA and the CSGA and the companies like LIMAGRAIN have had their say with the government....


Its pretty shitty for a average farmer like myself to take the time to go and have the audience stacked cheering on the SEED TAX.... Reply With Quote
Feb 21, 2019 | 20:31 4 What the Levis' negotiation position for farmers in exchange for 60 million of new seed tax: what is he asking for? Reply With Quote