Letters to the editor

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Published: July 26, 2007

Our butter

Why is the butter available in the Canadian stores so different than the butter we bought 40 years ago or more? The “new” butter remains hard at room temperature, making it difficult to bake with and it is tasteless.

Not so with the butter I bought in Montana. It is Tillamook Brand, made in Tillamook, Oregon. It tastes wonderful, just like it did years ago, is soft at room temperature, making it a pleasure to bake with.

It is in quarter-pound blocks (half cup measure) wrapped in waxed paper, not foil, and the best part only $2.19 per lb. I don’t mind paying $4 per lb. in Canada if it was a good product, which it isn’t. If the U.S. can make good butter, why can’t Canadian dairies?

Read Also

A variety of Canadian currency bills, ranging from $5 to $50, lay flat on a table with several short stacks of loonies on top of them.

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?

We use about 10 lb. every six weeks. I brought back 10 lb. from Montana. Maybe next year I’ll buy much more.

– Elaine Sloan,

Morinville, Alta.

Please explain

The Canadian Wheat Board says farmers could be on the hook for millions of dollars in damage claims if the government goes ahead with an Aug. 1, 2007, implementation of an open market for barley.

Why? Because the CWB had contracted our barley to the maltsters at a cheap price and now the maltsters are worried that they won’t be able to get the barley at the price agreed upon.

I believe that CWB contracts should be honoured but we no longer need the CWB as an expensive middleman.

The malt barley producer will be able to contract directly with the maltster and get paid upon delivery.

What a concept.

And all this will be accomplished without the hassle and confusion of a pooled price or an interim or an adjustment or a final (payment) 18 months later.

I would also request that the government extend the open market implementation to wheat as well.

I have compared what a wheat producer in Billings, Montana, receives for his hard red northern 13.5 percent wheat and what I receive for my CWRS (Canadian western red spring) 13.5 percent wheat.

This is comparing apples to apples, adjusted for the exchange rate, and it reflects exactly what an Acme, Alta., wheat producer receives for his wheat and what a wheat producer in Billings receives.

The wheat producer in Billings receives on average 90 cents more than a wheat producer in Acme. Please check out the United States Department of Agriculture website for clarification.

The CWB has cost my farm $54,000 on last year’s wheat production alone. I cannot afford this and I ask the “Friends of the CWB” to explain this. Where is the premium that we are supposed to get from the power of the single desk?Ê

– Glenn Sawyer,

Acme, Alta.

Whose interests?

Paul Orsak asks whose interest is served by a judicial review of the federal government’s regulatory change on barley (Opinion, July 19.) The answer is clear: farmers.

The federal government has created huge uncertainty in the barley industry by rushing ahead with an implementation date that nobody expected, ignoring concerns from a wide range of stakeholders, including the Malting Industry Association of Canada.

The government even ignored the advice of its own task force, which suggested ending the single desk in 2008. Mr. Orsak sat on the federal task force and helped prepare its final report. He advised the federal government not to rush, but to wait until 2008. Why does he want to rush now?

In fact, an Aug. 1, 2007, implementation was never mentioned until the release of the plebiscite results on March 28. This is despite the fact the federal government had talked about voluntary participation in the CWB for more than a year.

Did the federal government do a market impact analysis to uncover and deal with the ramifications of such a change being implemented in such a time frame? If such an analysis was done, it certainly hasn’t been shared with prairie farmers.

In an attempt to implement the changes as fast as possible and sidestep the House of Commons, the government turned to regulation instead of legislation to create an open market. This is despite the fact that Mr. Orsak’s task force recommended proceeding by legislation.

The CWB’s farmer-controlled board of directors tried to work with the federal government to resolve the uncertainty around the marketing changes. We were turned down on each occasion. …

The CWB board is going to court to remove this confusion and bring clarity to barley marketing. This was not a decision we made easily and it was one we made because we had no other choice. But be clear that the majority of the board is farmers, the majority is elected by farmers, and we are acting in the interests of farmers. …

Barley acreage is up substantially this year. More farmers have barley in the ground and more are directly affected. This is largely due to extremely wet spring seeding conditions in central and northern Alberta and Saskatchewan. Many producers simply could not access their fields early enough to plant alternative crops. The recent rise in barley prices has nothing to do with the elimination of the single desk. …

Our court challenge will determine if it is legal for the federal government to change the way barley is marketed through regulation. Our application clearly outlines how the need for legislative change was included in the 1998 amendments to the Canadian Wheat Board Act. …

We want western Canadian farmers, not politicians or bureaucrats, to control the CWB.

Make no mistake, Mr. Orsak: the CWB will run a barley pool in the upcoming crop year, no matter what the federal dourt decides.

I invite Mr. Orsak to tell us more about his organization, Grain Vision. He spins it as an “agricultural coalition”, but Grain Vision is far more connected to big business than to the farm field. At last count, most of its members are either large multinationals or businesses peripherally related to the agriculture industry and/or food processors.

Unlike the majority of GrainVision signatories, … the CWB’s aim is to ensure profits from the marketing of grain go directly to the farmers who’ve produced the grain. Independent studies have verified that the CWB adds $59 million a year in value to barley. The CWB … gets the best price and returns all revenue, minus operating expenses, to farmers.

– Allen Oberg

CWB Board of Directors

Forestburg, Alta.

Roping decision

I would like to respond to the roping events in B.C. being eliminated. I am also a registered Black Angus ranch operation, and have several horses. I think it was very unfairly evaluated…

They (the animals) are not repetitiously roped, they are changed regularly. They get fed the best of feed and given open pastures to graze. The number of cattle that get injured is very low….

Team roping cattle are also

gently halter broken, so roping them is not much different then walking your dog.

Furthermore, roping is not just an industry for entertainment; it takes great talent to do what those cowboys do. Not everyone is talented in this event.

Families and individuals make a living from this industry.

Some examples are the pro ropers, rope providers, livestock producers, saddle providers, trailer providers, truck providers, horse trainers, etc.

If roping events are eliminated permanently, think of all the families and individual businesses that make a living with this industry that would be affected….

The people who made this decision were watching an incident that happens (rarely)….

When I watch roping, I see a bunch of cattle running down the arena bucking and kicking, their adrenalin rushing, taunting that cowboy and saying to themselves “just try to catch me.”

I am not a roper, and a lot of times I wish I had the talent these professionals show, because if I could rope the calf I was treating out in the pasture, it would be a lot easier on them and me instead of chasing them with the quad.

I just like to end my opinion in saying I think they should’ve taken more time and discussion on this decision. It deserved it, just like all the roping cattle, horses and ropers deserve a better explanation why there is no more need for their contribution to the rodeo.

– Melanie Warkentin,

Primate, Sask.

explore

Stories from our other publications