Sask Wheat encourages farmers to participate in the Canada Grain Act consultations

Feb 18, 2021

Saskatoon – The Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission (Sask Wheat) encourages grain farmers to participate in the consultations on the Canada Grain Act review. Farmers have until April 30, 2021 to submit their feedback.

“Farmers need to make their voices heard during this consultation as many of the potential recommendations for the Canada Grain Act will have a direct impact on their farming operations,” said Brett Halstead, Sask Wheat Chair. “Sask Wheat is actively participating in this review, as well, but there will be a greater opportunity to influence the changes in the Act if as many farmers as possible contribute their opinions and experiences during the review.”

Many topics that fall under this review’s scope are important to farmers, including variety classification, producer payment protection, Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) oversight on objective measurements, access to binding determination, and improved data collection and reporting.

Canada’s quality assurance system and the Canadian brand are highly regarded by international customers and help to support the competitive position of farmers. As part of protecting the Canadian brand, Sask Wheat is in favour of mandatory outward inspection remaining as a function performed by the CGC. Sask Wheat notes that additional improvements to the current system should be pursued during the CGA/CGC review that strengthens the functions that support Canada’s quality assurance system and the Canadian brand.

In response to the resolution recently passed at Sask Wheat’s AGM calling for the establishment of an Export Sales Reporting Program, Sask Wheat will work with other commissions to advocate for the CGC to expand its export sales reporting to assist farmers in making marketing decisions and improve overall market transparency.

In preparation for the CGA/CGC consultation and review, Sask Wheat contracted a report to review potential changes to the Canada Grain Act and their implications for Saskatchewan grain producers’ activities and economics. This report is now available on Sask Wheat’s website: CLICK HERE.

Among the recommendations, Sask Wheat believes that it is vital that the CGC’s mandate as set out in the Canada Grain Act continues to work “in the interests of the grain producers.” Furthermore, the governance structure of the CGC needs to ensure that farmers’ interests are protected from the parties that are meant to be regulated by the Canada Grain Act.

Sask Wheat encourages all producers to get involved in the Canada Grain Act consultations and continue to watch our website, e-news, and Twitter for updates on Sask Wheat’s involvement in the consultation.

To participate in the consultations, CLICK HERE.

Source : saskwheat

Video: The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety!

Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it.

The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere—and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026–27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson—one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group—a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult—and particularly costly—to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not simply how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines—far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s.

But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses.

That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”