Pool history
A letter from Glenn Tait of Meota printed in the March 14 issue of The
Western Producer caught my eye. He tells of how it used to be for
Saskatchewan Wheat Pool during Ted Turner’s presidency.
I agree with everything he says in his letter. I started as a SWP
delegate in 1966 and served for 23 years. During that time the Pool was
led by C. W. Gibbings, Ted Turner and Garf Stevenson.
Under all three presidents the Pool grew. They upgraded facilities,
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
bought into money-making businesses, paid dividends and made money.
The Pool was on a roll. At one time handlings were 68 percent of all
grains grown in the province. I believe 30 percent of cattle marketed
went through Pool facilities.
This past week I read where SWP handlings stood at 22 percent and
because Heartland was sold, no livestock handled at all.
CEO Mayo Schmidt can make all the excuses he wants about the debt but
he and the board of directors have to take full responsibility for
taking a well-run, largest grain co-op in the world and turning it into
a financial disaster.
The Pool once enjoyed tremendous loyalty and support from the
membership. Farmers would wait for Pool elevators to have room before
they would haul out their quotas.
Today many farmers, feeling betrayed by the company they helped to
build, haul anywhere but to the Pool.
History will record the tearing down of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool as
one of the worst events to happen in the history of the province.
– R. J. (Bud) Thomson,
Alsask, Sask.
CWB and organics
This refers to the Western Producer Feb. 14 article, “CWB’s organic
sales up”.
Donna Youngdahl, CWB organic marketing manager states: “In 1999-2000
the board sold 29,005 tonnes of organic wheat and barley, in 2000-2001
sales jumped to 57,766 tonnes.”
The CWB does not sell or market organic grain. Individual organic
growers realize their own market, via producer direct sale, set the
conditions of the sale and agree to the price. The CWB in the process
requires the producer to buy back his own grain and pay the cost
demanded by the board in order that an export permit can be issued.
CWB agents have similar circumstance. Anyone conducting a sale must
first of all own the article, find a buyer, set the condition of sale
and agree on a price.
The CWB does not fulfil these prerequisites and therefore is not
marketing or selling organic wheat or barley. CWB buy-backs for
required export permits exist only in the designated area.
The up straight with integrity character of the CWB is once again
called to question.
– Bill Rees,
Stockholm, Sask.
Market control
What will it take to convince farmers that we have to take control of
our markets? This is the fourth consecutive year that speculators have
squeezed grain prices near 25-year lows.
Buyers tell us we are getting the best possible price, supply and
demand, they call it, but record low grain stocks have blown this
theory apart.
Lean hogs crashed at 21 cents US in December 1998. Cattle could be
next. They can control our prices indefinitely, but only if we allow it.
Would you sell your truck and let the buyer set the price? Then why do
it with your commodities? Basis and open-ended contracts are our
biggest enemy because we are obligated to deliver with no price
guarantee.
Better to sell to a reputable agent or directly on world and preferably
futures markets. This way we control the price.
Better yet, if below the cost of production, buy cheap grain on the
futures and put land to other use.
Some farmers have a problem with this because they are uncertain as to
taking delivery and making payment for the grain.
The fact is, there is no grain. Commodity investors who profit by
consistently selling and re-buying huge volumes of “paper” grain, have
pencils and big bank accounts, but no grain.
If we call their bluff, their only hope would be to buy back the grain
from us, but considering that we might not give them any, what do you
think would happen to the price?…
We need a plan, and participation by a large number of farmers. We need
to ensure that the futures work for us in terms of delivery locations,
dates, price guarantees and discounts.
Normally this should be coordinated by government, except they have
their own priorities, including direct control of our grain sales which
insures we don’t even have a viable futures market.
– Louis K. Berg,
Sedalia, Alta.
Health insurance
The governments of Saskatchewan and Canada each appointed commissions
(namely Fyke and Romanow) charged with the responsibility of making
recommendations concerning the future of health care within our
province and nation.
There is a thrust by some sources to create doubt that government
treasuries will be able to afford funding to maintain the present
public health care system. Alberta has begun to introduce options that
would allow private, for profit, health clinics to establish within
their province. This is the first step in undermining our present
universal publicly funded health care delivery system.
During the term of government of Brian Mulroney, the huge
pharmaceutical drug companies lobbied and received a 20-year patent
protection on the development of new drugs.
As a result of having a monopoly, said companies can impose outrageous
prices on new drugs. Drug costs have risen 345 percent over the last
eight years. Cost of drugs within hospitals now is beyond the cost of
maintaining doctors. Prescription drug costs borne by individuals
amount to many more millions of dollars.
Recently I attended a seminar at which Professor Roger Williams from
the State of Wisconsin spoke on health insurance costs applicable to
farmers living in that state.
The premiums range from $400 to $900 per month. Deductibles on these
policies are the first $1,000 to $5,000.
As a result, over 25 percent of farm families are uninsured. Cost of
private health care delivery in the U.S. is 35 to 40 percent beyond
that of Canada’s publicly funded system.
If we as Canadians wish to retain our publicly funded health care
system, each of us must voice our support for it.
Individuals and consumer groups must begin to lobby our Members of
Parliament to convince the federal government to rescind the patent
drug legislation. This would allow other companies to manufacture
drugs, which in turn would lower the drug costs.
In this way we could greatly reduce the cost of health care and help
save our present health care system. Privatization of health care will
increase costs within the system.
– Fred Harrison,
Melville, Sask.
Killing gophers
How easy it is to make decisions for farmers when the farmers have
nothing to say about what is being done.
In the Feb. 28 Western Producer there was an article titled “Gophers
under fire”.
Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation thinks they can control gophers by
getting people to pay $20 to be part of a derby where some of the
applicants – how many we don’t know – will win back half of the entry
fee paid.
It seems to me it is a win-win situation for Dupont with a few hunters
winning some cash and nothing gained for the farmers. I don’t believe
guns can control the gopher problem we, the farmers, have now.
(The Society for the) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals wants this
shooting to be done humanely.
The question I ask: is it humane to shoot legs off these animals or
wound them so they can crawl to their holes and suffer until they die
sometime later? All this cruelty being done without getting control of
the farmers’ gopher problem.
In this same Western Producer newspaper article a statement was made:
“We don’t want to wipe the gophers out, we want to get them down to
controllable numbers.” I don’t believe this can be done with guns.
Another statement made in the article is: “Poisons are not humane.” The
poisons the farmers used to have would kill these animals in 10 to 20
minutes, which seems more humane than wounding the animals with a gun
or letting them suffer by using weak poisons.
Both of these control methods were decided by Cruelty to Animals and
Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation to be used by the farmers.
I have poisoned gophers for over 50 years and there certainly is no
problem in wiping out the gopher population….
The farmers don’t want to annihilate the gophers, we just want to
reduce their numbers in order to make a decent living.
I get tired of do-gooders making decisions for farmers.
The cost to use a weak poison is expensive, mainly because it does not
work, plus using manpower to place the weak solution in the fields.
Crop losses are never considered when making these determinations.
If the farmer is not allowed to control these predators of crops by
using proper poison, then the decision makers should come up with
compensation for damage loss and labour cost caused by the gophers.
– John D. Cubbon,
North Battleford, Sask.
Overcome myths
I read Mr. Lobdell’s letter to the editor, published March 14 in The
Western Producer, with surprise. In borrowing a genetically modified
organism analogy, he unfortunately appears to have become infected by
the GMO critics’ strategy – to favour myth mongering over getting the
facts right.
The record must be set straight on the Grain Growers of Canada’s
composition and origin, as fact must overcome myth.
The GGC is a national organization directed by elected farmers from
across the country. Our membership stretches from coast to coast, and
includes the following associations: Alberta Barley Commission, Alberta
Winter Wheat Producers Commission, Atlantic Grains Council, British
Columbia Grain Producers Association, Canadian Canola Growers
Association, Federation des Producteurs de Cultures Commerciales du
Quebec, Manitoba Corn Growers Association, Ontario Corn Producers’
Association, Ontario Soybean Growers, Ontario Wheat Producers’
Marketing Board, Western Barley Growers Association, and the Western
Canadian Wheat Growers Association.
The GGC is a precedent for the grains and oilseeds industry, marking
the first national association dedicated to representing the interests
of grain and oilseed producers.
The GGC was created out of a clear recognition that individual
commodity groups “going it alone” was not an effective approach to
policy development on farmers’ behalf. The associations that are now
GGC members decided to do something about it. They came together to
create a national vehicle to drive policy for farmers’ benefit – the
GGC.
The breadth and variety of perspectives brought to the GGC
policy-making table is a pillar of the association’s strength.
The GGC does support the re-appointment of Mr. Barry Senft as Chief
Commissioner of the Canadian Grain Commission. It is crucial to recall
that the grain commission is a national institution that impacts grain
farmers across the country.
Meanwhile, the commission is facing a number of challenges, ranging
from financial pressure to reconsidering its degree and nature of
regulatory presence in the context of a fast-changing industry.
The GGC is confident in Mr. Senft’s ability to meet these challenges.
Some might not agree, and favour politicizing the issue in the process.
That does not justify creating and spreading myths.
– Brian Kriz,
President,
Grain Growers of Canada,
Rimbey, Alta.
Long live rail
I was pleased to see your article on Australia getting back on track
with railroads. They are smart enough to realize that all the freight
traffic on their roadway systems is a costly mistake. Heavy freight,
grain, and indeed many other commodities, should be put on trains for
long haul endeavours. Not only will the damaging weight be removed from
roads, but the extra, deadly traffic will be gone too….
When Canada started getting rid of their rail lines, I, like many
others, knew it was a big mistake. Saskatchewan’s beat-up roads are a
prime example. Ours in Alberta aren’t handling it well either.
There are far too many heavy loads on them, many of which should be
transported on the rail system. Trucking should be limited to
short-haul, and shuttling goods between the rail system and their
initial and final destinations.
It’s ridiculous having big freight on our highways, from a financial
point of view, as well as one of safety. The unwarranted traffic has
made our roads a nightmare we all can do without.
We need to take notice of Australia’s efforts. We need to follow their
lead and get back to our own railway system before the right-of-ways
already stripped of tracks are gone for good.
Australia has realized that trains and trucks shouldn’t be in
competition with each other – they should complement each other for the
betterment of the whole country.
As for the idiots that are killed running into trains, removing the
train isn’t the solution, nor are more rules and regulations. As
Alberta’s Premier Klein once said, you can’t legislate against
stupidity. …
– Lori M. Feldberg,
Wetaskiwin, Alta.
