Irrigation Headlines....

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Irrigation Headlines....

Aug 9, 2020 | 10:56 1 Seeing how these things are an economic benefit.....how does that work????When the government is funding them...

Province provides Lethbridge Northern Irrigation District with over $1 million for upkeep

Adding to the many different irrigation projects to be started shortly, the Canadian and Albertan governments gifted nearly $40 million for three new irrigation-based projects are on the way for Taber and one for the Raymond area.

$2.5 million for the installation of travelling screens to capture and remove aquatic weeds from the M1 Canal;

When it comes to irrigation, there’s huge economic potential. I know there’s been lots of studies that have indicated that every dollar you invest in irrigation will produce about three dollars in economic return


The last one may be true but if the government has to keep injecting cash it seems like it is not able to any economic benefit like they speak of....in my simple mind when people say economic benefit it means keeping their hands out of the taxpayer's pockets.
Last edited by bucket; Aug 9, 2020 at 11:04.
Reply With Quote
Aug 9, 2020 | 11:49 2 And why does no one ever do the math on the benefits of dryland farming? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 11, 2020 | 08:33 3 $4 billion for irrigation from the Sask Party gov to help, what?, 500 farmers? Fair?

    Wheat varietal research has an ROI of 20:1, barley has one of 8:1. Would that money not be better spent on research facilities to help ALL farmers? Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 08:50 4
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    $4 billion for irrigation from the Sask Party gov to help, what?, 500 farmers? Fair?

    Wheat varietal research has an ROI of 20:1, barley has one of 8:1. Would that money not be better spent on research facilities to help ALL farmers?

    Can someone explain the ROI on research that continues to have to be government supported....typically with that type of return it should be self sustaining...

    Wheat prices are the same as in the 70s and the only thing that has gone up 20 to 1 is the cost of farming....not the returns.

    When does the research ROI come to farmers? Because even though I am growing newer varieties it doesn't seem there is higher net returns for my farm.

    And I will repeat......there is no return to taxpayers on an irrigation project they are proposing....none ...the existing 3 are still on the government tit. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 11, 2020 | 08:58 5 The ROI numbers are from work done by Dr. Richard Gray. I don't see it either but his work is well supported and accepted by agricultural academia.

    Also: I have heard of a UofS agricultural thesis( 1970s?) that proves no major irrigation project has ever paid for itself. Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 09:07 6
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    The ROI numbers are from work done by Dr. Richard Gray. I don't see it either but his work is well supported and accepted by agricultural academia.

    Also: I have heard of a UofS agricultural thesis( 1970s?) that proves no major irrigation project has ever paid for itself.
    I don't know but one agricultural academia that has skin in the game....that actually still farms...

    The rest are taking care of their own interests which include an indexed pension plan...
    Last edited by bucket; Aug 11, 2020 at 09:10.
    Reply With Quote
  • 2 Likes


  • Aug 11, 2020 | 09:12 7 Remember Richard Gray on CWB file? Who in this world bites the hand that feeds them? Public scrutiny of his work would test the pudding.
    Last edited by sumdumguy; Aug 11, 2020 at 09:15.
    Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 11, 2020 | 10:02 8 Public scrutiny of advanced economics? Dunning and Kruger would have something to say about that.

    You are correct about biting the hand....he who pays the piper and all that...but that makes the pros either do the work or not touch it at all, not do it incorrectly. There are some that have been bought/drunk the Kool-Aid as in the Fraser Institute, but those in public institutions must stand to peer review and Richard Gray has. He farms too. Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 10:04 9 That said, what are the opinions of the Sask irrig. announcement? Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 10:41 10
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    Public scrutiny of advanced economics? Dunning and Kruger would have something to say about that.

    You are correct about biting the hand....he who pays the piper and all that...but that makes the pros either do the work or not touch it at all, not do it incorrectly. There are some that have been bought/drunk the Kool-Aid as in the Fraser Institute, but those in public institutions must stand to peer review and Richard Gray has. He farms too.

    This is the way they divide farmers for decades....hire academia to say opposite views. And then say there is no consensus amongst farmers...

    Academia gets paid.....farmers get phucked.... Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 11, 2020 | 11:19 11 Yup, that's why Quebec farmers laugh at us. They have one voice, the union, because everyone must join. Politicians know what farmers think and can work with them. Out west we have a different group( many with their own 'experts') for every side in every issue and politicians just pick the one that's convenient. Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 11:24 12
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    Yup, that's why Quebec farmers laugh at us. They have one voice, the union, because everyone must join. Politicians know what farmers think and can work with them. Out west we have a different group( many with their own 'experts') for every side in every issue and politicians just pick the one that's convenient.
    They can have their union
    Leave me out , I will take the alternative Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 15:58 13 I would be OK with irrigation if it wasn't so lopsided with the funding...

    Private guys have spent their own money developing irrigation and see zero help from the government...


    How is that?

    And if the wannabe guys would put their own money in ....that would be a little more palatable....


    Still ....there will not be any industries associated with irrigation here without corporate welfare.... Reply With Quote
    Aug 11, 2020 | 16:17 14
    Quote Originally Posted by CptnObvious View Post
    Yup, that's why Quebec farmers laugh at us. They have one voice, the union, because everyone must join. Politicians know what farmers think and can work with them. Out west we have a different group( many with their own 'experts') for every side in every issue and politicians just pick the one that's convenient.
    https://www.upa.qc.ca/en/frequently-asked-questions/

    Farmers are under no legal obligation join the UPA. Membership has always been voluntary. Also, the claim that there is a “farm union monopoly” in Quebec is false. Rather, the Farm Producers Act stipulates that only one union organization is accredited to represent Quebec farmers and collect mandatory dues.

    To obtain this status, an association must demonstrate to the Régie des marchés agricoles et alimentaires du Québec (RMAAQ) that it is representative of all producers and that it fulfils the duties incumbent upon it. Beginning in 1972, and every year thereafter, only the UPA has been able to demonstrate this. Another organization could become the certified association if it demonstrated this representativeness.

    It is worth noting that the UPA is legally required to represent all Quebec farmers—members and non-members—regardless of the size of their business, their type of production, or their region. A number of producers’ groups (12 regional federations and 26 production types) are affiliated with the UPA, and over 90% of Quebec farmers are members.

    __________________________________________________ _______________________

    More bull shit from the left wing whacks.... Reply With Quote

  • Aug 11, 2020 | 17:36 15 All I know is the current clusterphuck of current farm groups in western Canada ain't doing any good for farmers...

    And the WP is highlighting those retiring from their incompetence that have led us here ... Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Aug 13, 2020 | 09:09 16 I agree with that statement, bucket, some are bang on but nobody listens and others are charging headlong in the wrong direction. Which organizations would you have do what differently? Reply With Quote
    Aug 13, 2020 | 18:25 17 I am not sure more bushels of anything will solve the problems ....

    It's a race to the bottom ....


    Quality has to be be redefined....

    Grain contracts need new standards when you look at farmers investment in storage....

    Why are the grain cos not building storage faster than farmers if there is money in it? Reply With Quote
  • 2 Likes


  • Aug 22, 2020 | 04:44 18 In Alberta where the capitalist farmer reigns.......

    The full list of districts receiving funding, some of which were previously announced:

    Aetna Irrigation District (Cardston area): $35,163
    Bow River Irrigation District (Vauxhall area): $1,585,642
    Eastern Irrigation District (Brooks area): $2,418,872
    Leavitt Irrigation District (Cardston area): $40,112
    Lethbridge Northern Irrigation District: $1,098,698
    Magrath Irrigation District: $116,413
    Mountain View Irrigation District $37,391
    Raymond Irrigation District: $271,432
    St. Mary River Irrigation District: $2,651,848
    Taber Irrigation District: $547,532
    United Irrigation District (Cardston area): $262,043
    Western Irrigation District (Strathmore area): $934,854



    Sure looks like irrigation is an economic driver....ooops.... i mean government tit sucker


    How about the government throw in 75 percent of the costs for dryland farmers???? Reply With Quote

  • Aug 22, 2020 | 07:21 19 Heard on the radio sort of one sentence about MOUNTAIN WATER will be going into buffalo pound. Is this about farming or does somebody want to sell their cottage for a hefty increase? Lol Reply With Quote
    Aug 22, 2020 | 08:13 20
    Quote Originally Posted by bucket View Post
    And why does no one ever do the math on the benefits of dryland farming?
    They come on agriville. And they see there is no benefit to dry land farming. (Wink) Reply With Quote
    Aug 22, 2020 | 08:21 21 There is concern that the Qu’Appelle chain will be deprived of water, not to mention Indigenous and environmental concerns. It might not be as easy as Lyle Stewart thinks to pull this one off. Reply With Quote
    Aug 22, 2020 | 08:37 22
    Quote Originally Posted by sumdumguy View Post
    There is concern that the Qu’Appelle chain will be deprived of water, not to mention Indigenous and environmental concerns. It might not be as easy as Lyle Stewart thinks to pull this one off.
    Ya 4 billion will be light for a cost all the lawyer fees to sort this out will be double this amount a Reply With Quote
    Aug 22, 2020 | 09:51 23
    Quote Originally Posted by sumdumguy View Post
    There is concern that the Qu’Appelle chain will be deprived of water, not to mention Indigenous and environmental concerns. It might not be as easy as Lyle Stewart thinks to pull this one off.
    I’m guessing they could acquire water from the Quill Lakes to bring their level up. Reply With Quote
  • 2 Likes


  • fjlip's Avatar Aug 22, 2020 | 10:00 24
    Quote Originally Posted by Oliver88 View Post
    I’m guessing they could acquire water from the Quill Lakes to bring their level up.
    That is TOO easy, cheaper and simple...Gov can't do that! Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like