Front page
To the Editor:
Few people in this country have the courage to be as passionate about the future of Canada as does Rose Bohush (Open Forum July 31).
It seems that the swallowing up of once-proud companies such as UGG barely cause a ripple, so common has it become.
It’s quite ironic that in the very WP issue in which she berates the staff for not putting what she (and others) consider front-page news on the front page that we go from “grain will move next winter” to people betting on cows moving their bowels.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
Now, there’s front-page stuff!
Classy, eh? Comic relief, maybe? Right up there on the culture list. Good grief.
– C. Pike,
Waseca, Sask.
Bailey’s roads
To the Editor:
Response to July 17 letter in Western Producer: Please tell me if I’m wrong.
Is not Roy Bailey, the current Member of Parliament for Souris-Moose Mountain the same Roy Bailey that was a MLA for Elrose in the 1982 Grant Devine’s government?
The government that told us we didn’t need a tax on gas, that the highways and roads would just look after themselves.
Surely Mr. Bailey, as a previous member of Devine’s government, should accept his share of responsibility for the condition of the roads.
Now he wants us to believe he has all the answers to finance our road improvements. Like any typical Tory he chose to ignore the interest on the debt of highway maintenance during those terrible Devine years.
One comfort Reformers can take from Mr. Bailey’s report is that their leader doesn’t have the complete corner on hypocrisy.
– Harry-Jae Elder,
Fillmore, Sask.
Sales strength
To the Editor:
With reference to the letter headed CWB sheep. I would rather be a sheep than a goat.
On the subject of freedom. Ask some of the poor souls in the Middle East, Bosnia, North Africa or South America what freedom means to them.
Then maybe you will appreciate the freedom you have here in Canada. But freedom brings its own responsibilities. It doesn’t mean you can always do whatever you want. Remember collectivity and unity bring strength. Think of how much stronger laminated our plywood is than one thick plank.
Dual marketing would only weaken our selling strength.
– David Caldwell,
Kenton, Man.
Millers benefit?
To the Editor:
Your July 10 editorial angered me.While you may be correct that we as producers may not benefit from a dual system, the West sure would.
Because millers would not have to pay the fictious buyback price that includes the freight rate. They could pay $4 directly to the producer and not pay the $2 to the CWB.
You realize that if I wish to sell my own grain directly I must pay the total price f.o.b. Vancouver so I cannot afford to mill grain on the prairies because it costs double freight in order to then ship the finished product.
I feel the CWB should handle export grain only and grain sold internally should be free of the wheat board.
There is no need for us as farmers to support a marketing agency that encourages all our raw products to be exported as well as our children’s jobs. Also, the transportation system and the unions would not be able to hold us farmers up for ransom.
– Cecilia Olver,
Windthorst, Sask.
CWB prices
To the Editor:
We need more Wheat Board propaganda!
This appeal is to Bob Roehle, our CWB spokesman. Bob, please tell us farmers how the Gretzkys of the grain trade stick-handled around $8 a bushel wheat sales in the spring of 1996, and are now selling our wheat at $3 is a good thing. Please assure us dumb farmers that not selling our wheat and carrying it over to 1997 was in our best interest.
Please tell us again how keeping us farmers from knowing how much and for what price you sell our grain for is really in our best interest.
Tell us again how $1 a bushel below world price is still a premium price. Please tell us again because some of us are starting to doubt you and Ralph.
– Dan Hertz,
Oyen, Alta.
Water problems
To the Editor:
We have a small ranch and lease a 100-acre hay field to sustain us and our cows and horses. Last year, although the weather was great for making hay, we lost at least one third of our hay crop and subsequent income due to flooding which began in mid-July and lasted several weeks.
It was peak production time as we watched our bumper crop of organic hay over mature, being unable to do anything about it because of the water. …
Some days we returned to the fields to find swaths and bales from the previous day floating.
It was quite a mess to clean up. We got no second cut at all.
What caused this? The Duncan Dam!
Old-timers in the area swore they had never seen so much water flooding the Cooper Creek and Meadow Creek vicinity.
This year is even worse. Due to our excessively wet weather, we hadn’t begun to cut until now; however, we’re finding few dry patches and the water is knee deep and higher in spots.
The standing hay looks exceptional but now it houses ducks. The mosquito population is soaring. Our swather, a large 16-foot self-propelled version, even got stuck in the water. Why is this happening?
I am sure that the snow pack is not the only answer. Who exactly is responsible for managing the water levels?
Everyone passes the buck!
Do we just kiss our alfalfa goodbye for a second year in a row? Standing in water kills it.
Our fields are being destroyed and so is our livelihood. We have only a short haying season. With the weather on our side and the ground water against us, we have an impossible battle.
Not one field is dry.
What can be done to change this abysmal scenario? Why can the Duncan Dam not be managed the way it used to be? Even Cooper Creek Cedar is under water again.
I suppose the livelihoods of small fry like us mean nothing to B.C. Hydro and the U.S. …
Last year we had seagulls in our hay fields, this year it’s ducks. This is no joke.
I understand that the maximum dam flow is around 300 cubic meters per second and that presently the dam is releasing even more. Runoff happens every year. There seems to be no consideration for those immediately downstream.
The high levels of Kootenay Lake affect everyone near the water systems. …
This kind of flooding is man-made and quite avoidable with proper planning.
– Gabriela Grabowsky,
Kaslo, B.C.
