This article has all three.
I would love to have to store oats all year round like do with wheat and barley. I'd love to export offshore instead of to the Upper Midwest, where I do have a transport advantage. Some people will say anything. Canadian oats rarely competes with oats from Australia, but if it fits with your argument why not include it, right?
I hope that anyone out there who hasn't yet voted in the plebiscite reads the article I linked to. Farmers know the smell of b.s.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Wow these guys have been snorting way to much barley dust.
Oats acres in Manitoba have tripled. On our farm we never grew it while under board rule, this year we are seriously considering going to 50% of our acres in Oats.
It pencils out way better than HRS wheat.
First off, I think that the article you link to does make some pretty illogical leaps to reach its conclusion based on the arguements presented.
But mixed in with the propoganda are some very valid arguements.
It is a fact that for a number of years following the removal of oats from the CWB prices were very low. I don't suggest that this drop was entirely (or even largely) due to removal of the single desk, other market forces were present.
It is also a fact that the increase in oat acreage that has occurred post CWB in Canada does directly coincide with a large reduction in US oat acreage over the same period.
It is also a fact that this decrease in US oat production is strongly correlated with a decrease in US gov't support for oats relative to other crops.
It is also a fact that the price bubble that occurred in the late 90's early 2000's is consistent with the time period of low EU oat support levels.
I would really like either side in this debate to give me an argue based on reality not simply; open market good; single desk bad (or vice versa).
The single desk has many positives , but also drawbacks, the same can be said about the open market.
The reality is that costs are a lot higher when it comes to board grains. Check the federal monitor.
The reality is that the prices available for board grains are consistently higher when you look at them on a farm gate basis.
The reality is that if you live in the designated area and you sell your own wheat, malt barley, or feed barley for export you will go to jail.
If you want better prices, lower costs and don't want to put your neighbor in jail for having a different opinion on how to market a crop, things need to change
You will only goto jail if you steal your truck back from customs, after it has been impounded, because you went across the border without an export permit and then refuse to pay the fine.
That's B.S. and you know it.
Where does the export permit come from? How much does it cost to get it? And how much of a tariff(buyback) do you have to pay on your own grain before you get it?
It comes from the CWB, the tariff rate is horrendous and if you refuse to pay it on the grounds that it is your own grain you do not get the permit which leads you down the road to jail when you cross the border.
If the price tag on the export permit and tariff were zero you would have a point, but it isn't and you don't.
Stop telling just part of the story and pretending the other part doesn't exist.
The threat of jail is what makes the CWB system work, and they use it with an iron fist.
Well the farmers that were jailed stole their vehicles back from a customs impound lot. This is what got them into the most trouble. They used this to exaggerate the situation, afterwards boasting, “Look what happens when you sell outside the board—They throw you in jail.”
The tariff rate has nothing to do with the CWB. It is set by U.S. Customs.
You would still have to pay a tariff with or without the board.
The CWB will not issue export permits to people that are trying to sell lower than the CWB can sell for into a particular market.
Those high priced markets such as the one in Montana wouldn't be there very long if all of a sudden a bunch of farmers start delivering grain into them. Prices go up when supplies are low. If supplies are high prices go down.
The CWB manages the supply so they don't flood a market with grain and lower the price. If the CWB didn't do this they would crash that market.
The tariff I am talking about is the buyback and it is set by the CWB not the US.
"The CWB will not issue export permits to people that are trying to sell lower than the CWB can sell for into a particular market."
What the price is should be irrelevant, its the farmers grain, he should be able to sell it to whoever he wants for whatever he wants.
Thankyou for making my point. If a farmer doesn't pay the board a cut he doesn't get the license, if he sells his grain without the license he goes to jail.
And if you are under the impression that the CWB is a supply management scheme you are dreaming in technicolour.
Post a Comment