|
|
Mar 19, 2023 | 20:39
1
I thought this was dead on arrival last time they tried. Now there is a version 2.0.
Why?????
Why do people keep trying?
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 08:47
2
Sounds like some busy bodies in our ag industry are looking for a new project added to their resume.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 09:00
3
 Originally Posted by Oliver88
Sounds like some busy bodies in our ag industry are looking for a new project added to their resume.
Won't be much of an resume add on when you look at this whole clusterphuck.
I thought most of the farm groups had $hitcanned the idea?
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 11:04
4
They have lots of farmers support through many farmer funded organizations.
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 12:13
5
At first glance 10 pages make more sense than the tome written last time.
This one just mentions stuff we're already doing. A totally different document. Worded differently as well. Probably won't even join the focus group this time. Still alarmed and pissed that our so called commissions allowed the last one.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 13:49
6
I thought it prudent to post the 30% drop in nitrous oxide from fertilizer use in Canadian Agriculture the Liberal NDP environment police seek to apply to Agricultural production in Canada.
We went to a seminar on Friday… and went through the Liberals /NDP 30% reduction in nitrous oxide fertilizer emissions….by 2030
Even if they had an inkling of a clue of what is actually happening on Canadian grain farms….(Which they have no accurate ground proofing data to prove any of their projections) The target compliance 30% reduction (in nitrous oxide) would reduce global greenhouse gasses by .007% …. Way less than a rounding error…in greenhouse emissions.
It is doubtful that 100% compliance…. With the Liberal 2030 30% reduction plan… would constructively produce anything but chaos for Canadian Agriculture.
Here are the charts that Dr Dan Hennessy (former Farmers Edge Agronomist) presented….
Western Canadian Pulses were Not included in the Acerage model calculations in the historical 2020 fertilizer a huge flaw in this reduction projection…
No NH3 N application data or efficiency use ground proofing…. Crystal Green P2O5… high efficiency power rich type applications…
Here are the presentation tables, I took pictures of. 
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 13:51
7
Next set:
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 13:53
8
Next set:
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 13:56
9
Next set:
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 13:59
10
Next set:
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 14:02
11
Next Set:
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 14:15
12
Next set:
Hope this gives a glimpse of what the Feds are trying to do…. This undermines crop insurance…. Basic common sense economics… it is based on a model that is Not based on real life Canadian Agricultural production…
PM Trudeau and the NDP Liberals have been hypnotized by fast talking perverse climate change WEF/UN politics…. And are attempting to correct a rounding error in global greenhouse gas emissions…. With unrealistic unscientific laws that undermines Canadians and Global food security.
We have a duty to civilization to expose this corruption and chaotic mess.
Blessings and Prayers
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 14:33
13
those slimmy ****ers.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 16:01
14
Very well said Tom
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 18:00
16
the NFU is our spokesman for farmers. just let that sink in. Chuckys are in charge we are fu ked
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2023 | 18:13
17
Originally Posted by SASKFARMER
the NFU is our spokesman for farmers. just let that sink in. Chuckys are in charge we are fu ked
Not sure NFU are the spokesman I would think the F##k Trudeau flags and bumper stickers have a bigger impact and influence than them.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2023 | 22:12
18
So interestingly enough a few years ago a crop wizard who i was lucky enough to do a farm trial with did a very intensive study north of St.Albert on intensive management of wheat. Long story short she had figured out a simple way to see what each cultivar was removing from the soil... soil sample/fertilizer rate/ discoveryield+protein/ then soil sample afterwards to figure out what the removal rate of each cultivar was. Some hard red varieties were as low as 40 ish % with some closer to 80.
Should a bunch of money be put into such research continuing forward so we can ( and should / would want to) grow varieties that utilized the most amount of Nitrogen each and every year?
Why is this not part of the emission reduction plan?
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2023 | 05:15
19
Because that makes sense and for liberals they don’t understand that.
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2023 | 05:25
20
Originally Posted by goalieguy847
So interestingly enough a few years ago a crop wizard who i was lucky enough to do a farm trial with did a very intensive study north of St.Albert on intensive management of wheat. Long story short she had figured out a simple way to see what each cultivar was removing from the soil... soil sample/fertilizer rate/ discoveryield+protein/ then soil sample afterwards to figure out what the removal rate of each cultivar was. Some hard red varieties were as low as 40 ish % with some closer to 80.
Should a bunch of money be put into such research continuing forward so we can ( and should / would want to) grow varieties that utilized the most amount of Nitrogen each and every year?
Why is this not part of the emission reduction plan?
My understanding is that the typical variety trials hold the nutrients constant, therefore if new variety x does 5 % better than old variety y, that indicates that it is being more efficient and using the available nutrients.
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2023 | 09:00
21
Originally Posted by goalieguy847
So interestingly enough a few years ago a crop wizard who i was lucky enough to do a farm trial with did a very intensive study north of St.Albert on intensive management of wheat. Long story short she had figured out a simple way to see what each cultivar was removing from the soil... soil sample/fertilizer rate/ discoveryield+protein/ then soil sample afterwards to figure out what the removal rate of each cultivar was. Some hard red varieties were as low as 40 ish % with some closer to 80.
Should a bunch of money be put into such research continuing forward so we can ( and should / would want to) grow varieties that utilized the most amount of Nitrogen each and every year?
Why is this not part of the emission reduction plan?
Who decides on where R&D $ are spent? Do farmers through their commissions not have that say?
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2023 | 11:52
22
Looks like the Dutch farmers had the right response to the conditions imposed on them. Booted the climate government to the curb in the recent election.
|
|
|
Apr 7, 2023 | 10:18
23
I see there is an article in Western Producer about this. Why didn't they take this behind the barn and shoot it?
The underhanded way they are rolling out the second try . Two zoom meetings easily missed due to calving.
Anything with DU involved in any measure says it is garbage.
|
|
|
Apr 8, 2023 | 09:40
24
Originally Posted by bucket
I see there is an article in Western Producer about this. Why didn't they take this behind the barn and shoot it?
The underhanded way they are rolling out the second try . Two zoom meetings easily missed due to calving.
Anything with DU involved in any measure says it is garbage.
On the first Roundtable of Wordsalad the point was definitely made that Ducks Unlimited should have zero input.
Why did they not listen?
What connection does Ducks Unlimited have with the organizers?
|
|
|
Apr 8, 2023 | 11:55
25
Because DU is not a conservation group, it is a land accumulator.
Then they access government funding using their bullshit environmental scams.
The guys behind this roundtable should disclose all their relationships to various groups as to why they are promoting this.
|
|
