Driving across the Prairies, one sees a proliferation of large concrete grain elevators and one can’t help but wonder where the volume of grain is coming from to fill them.
Bin capacity is one thing but these behemoths are equipped to load grain in hopper cars even faster than the product can be delivered. The one limiting factor is that you can’t fill cars that aren’t there.
The stretch of Saskatchewan Wheat Pool into neighboring provinces and the offsetting move of Agricore into Saskatchewan, along with construction of facilities by regional farmer groups, has added new competitive dimensions.
Read Also
Crop insurance’s ability to help producers has its limitations
Farmers enrolled in crop insurance can do just as well financially when they have a horrible crop or no crop at all, compared to when they have a below average crop
Saving a few cents at the elevator as a result of volume discounts on rail charges hasn’t created the heaven on earth promised by the railways at the transportation hearings back in the 1970s and 1980s.
A farmer told me recently he had received his returns on $5,000 worth of grain from which $1,400 had been deducted for rail charges.
Somewhere I hear the derisive cawing of a crow.
And rail charges are only part of the picture.
Today massive semi-trailer trucks move grain from farm to inland terminal.
Operation of these road transports is a cost as are handling and elevation charges at the elevator level.
There is an urban feeling that farmers complain a lot about these things and suggestions are made that when an urban business doesn’t pay, it quietly folds up.
When a machinery manufacturer sends out his product, who pays for the transportation? The buyer.
When a grower in California sells us lettuce, who pays for the transportation? The buyer.
When we buy a pair of expensive walking shoes, the buyer pays all costs, including transportation.
Why shouldn’t the farmer complain?
