Through a partnership with Grain Farmers of Ontario, Cereals Canada said in a Thursday release its technical team will analyze the quality of four Eastern wheat classes including Canada Eastern Soft Red Winter (CESRW) for the 2025 crop year. Representative samples are provided through Grain Farmers of Ontario’s annual Ontario wheat harvest survey.

Cereals Canada has been analyzing western wheat quality for over 50 years. The Winnipeg-based organization said in the release the expanded program builds on its “established reputation as the globally recognized independent expert in Canadian grain quality, processing quality, and milling technology.”

“Cereals Canada is the trusted source for quality information on Western Canadian wheat, and our technical experts understand the data needed to support our domestic and global markets,” said Dean Dias, chief executive officer at Cereals Canada. “Our partnership with Grain Farmers of Ontario brings that same level of expertise to Eastern Canadian wheat. This united, comprehensive approach will help to strengthen Canada’s global position as a premier wheat supplier.”

To conduct the annual Harvest Assessment, Cereals Canada works with exporters to obtain representative samples from four wheat classes grown in Western Canada: Canada Western Red Spring (CWRS), Canada Western Amber Durum (CWAD), Canada Prairie Spring Red (CPSR), Canada Western Red Winter (CWRW).

Composite samples of CWRS, CWAD, CPSR, and CESRW from the 2025 wheat harvest will be evaluated for milling performance, flour/semolina quality, and end-product functionality for the New Wheat Crop Report. Depending on the class of wheat, bread, pasta, noodles, and/or cookies are produced in the technical labs at Cereals Canada and thoroughly assessed by the team to evaluate quality.

“Partnering with Cereals Canada on comprehensive milling and baking quality analysis of our wheat harvest helps reinforce the strong reputation of Eastern Canadian wheat in both domestic and international markets,” said Crosby Devitt, chief executive officer at Grain Farmers of Ontario, adding the collaboration also creates new opportunities to strengthen international engagement for Ontario wheat growers.

Cereals Canada said data generated from Harvest Assessment activities will be used to create the 2025 New Wheat Crop Report, which will be released to members, global and domestic customers, and stakeholders on November 18, 2025. The report, which will be available on cerealscanada.ca on its launch day, provides detailed information on milling performance, functionality, and end-use applications of this year’s Canadian wheat quality.

Composite sample assessments of Canada Eastern Hard Red Winter (CEHRW), Canada Eastern Red Spring (CERS), Canada Eastern Soft White Winter (CESWW), and Canada Western Red Winter (CWRW) will also be available for customers upon request, Cereals Canada said. Grain Farmers of Ontario said it also continues to work with SGS Canada on real-time wheat grain grading analysis, with results posted on gfo.ca throughout harvest.

Cereal Canada’s harvest assessment activities in Western Canada are funded in part by the Government of Canada under the Canadian Agricultural Partnership’s AgriScience Program. Grain Farmers of Ontario provided funding for the assessment of Eastern wheat classes.

The post Eastern wheat to be included in Cereals Canada’s harvest assessment appeared first on Country Guide.

The capital campaign for the project announced on June 5 that Warburtons, a family-owned company based in Greater Manchester, contributed $650,000 to the project.

WHY IT MATTERS: Once complete, the Global Agriculture Technology Exchange will replace Cereals Canada’s leased space in the Canadian Grain Commission building in Winnipeg.

Warburtons has a longstanding partnership with Cereals Canada and has sourced significant volumes of Canadian wheat from Western Canada, according to a press release from capital campaign chair JoAnne Buth.

“Cereals Canada and Warburtons share a deep commitment to quality and innovation,” she said.

She added that Cereals Canada is “thrilled to make this announcement alongside Warburtons, and we are grateful for their support.”

Warburtons has utilized the current Cereals Canada facility in Winnipeg for many years. The pilot bakery, mill and analytical lab at the facility has been used to test and analyze western Canadian wheat before it is exported to the United Kingdom for production.

Warburtons partnered with Cereals Canada in 2016 for a multi-year pulse research project with a goal to produce healthier baked goods.

“Warburtons has proudly partnered with Canadian farmers and the agriculture industry for over 30 years to source the highest quality wheat through our Identity Preserved Program,” said Adam Dyck, Canadian program manager for Warburtons.

“For the past 15 years, Cereals Canada has played a vital role in supporting our commitment to quality and innovation,” he said, adding that their contribution “reflects the value we place on Canadian agriculture and our strong belief in innovation, collaboration and long-term relationships.”

“This facility will help ensure that Cereals Canada remains a global leader, and we’re honoured to support that vision,” he said.

The fundraising project for the exchange, which will be located in downtown Winnipeg, has raised just over $32 million towards its goal of $100 million.

The stated vision for the Cereals Canada project is to provide the tools necessary to allow Cereals Canada to maintain the globally recognized expertise of Canada’s wheat industry and maintain Canada’s global role as a supplier of high-quality wheat.

The post Cereals Canada hub receives international support appeared first on Country Guide.

However, the organization’s chief executive officer, Dean Dias, defended the Global Agricultural Technology Exchange, proposed for downtown Winnipeg.

He said if Canada wants to continue to be a top exporter and preferred choice of its customers, it has to be able to prove quality and consistency.

Dias said the roller mill in the current facility hasn’t been upgraded since 2000, for example.

Several producers at the SaskWheat annual meeting Jan. 14 questioned the need for a new building.

Edenwold, Sask., farmer Alanna Koch said she was concerned about the amount of money SaskWheat has committed to the project and why new real estate was required when there are so many empty buildings in downtown areas.

Dias said a lease is not feasible.

“No developer is willing to break down walls to put a three-storey mill in there,” he said.

The facility requires a certain type of concrete to carry the load, as well as electrical systems that can deal with flammable products, Dias said.

Jeff Mathieson, who farms in central Saskatchewan, asked why other Cereals Canada members haven’t committed funds. Only several crop commissions from the Prairie provinces have done so.

SaskWheat chair Jake Leguee said the commission pledged $6.2 million as a signal to others that farmers are committed to the project. If it doesn’t go ahead, the commission won’t spend the money.

The post Crop production show 2025: Producers at SaskWheat question proposed building appeared first on Country Guide.

The funding was announced Oct. 15 by Winnipeg South MP Terry Duguid, on behalf of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Minister Lawrence MacAulay, at the industry group’s pasta lab in Winnipeg.

“Our government is building on our long legacy of support for Cereals Canada,” said Duguid.

The funding falls under two programs within the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership (S-CAP).

The larger of the two accounts for $6,660,817 over three years and comes via the AgriMarketing Program. That program aims to increase market access, improve customer support and expand exports through initiatives like technical exchanges, market research and knowledge sharing among stakeholders.

Duguid said that funding will help further open international markets to Canadian agricultural products. He pointed to the opening of a trade office in Manila in the Philippines earlier this year.

“The funding will help exporters leverage new digital tools, navigate market access barriers and meet the needs of our customers around the world,” he said.

The remaining $674,249 is funded through the AAFC AgriScience Program—Projects Component. That funding is focused on research into how environmental conditions impact cereal crop quality during the growing season.

One program set to benefit from those funds is a four-year research initiative looking at how environmental conditions affect oat quality.

“Our oat research aims to enhance our understanding of Canadian oat quality and how it performs as an ingredient,” said Dean Dias, chief executive officer of Cereals Canada. “This information will strengthen Canada’s position in the global market, potentially increasing the value and demand for Canadian oats as a premium food ingredient and supporting our value chain.”

Dias welcomed the support from the federal government.

“This funding enables us to amplify our resources, maintain and grow markets and foster industry relationships and advocacy, helping to ensure the long-term competitiveness and sustainability of Canada’s cereals industry,” he said.

The post Federal funds announced for Cereals Canada appeared first on Country Guide.

“The board of directors strongly supports Cereals Canada, including the vision for GATE,” chair Brett Halstead said in a June 27 news release.

The new building planned for downtown Winnipeg in the heart of the grain industry is projected to cost $100 million and would house Cereals Canada and other grain industry bodies. However, it first needs to line up the money, for which it is launching a capital campaign.

“The campaign will target contributions from industry groups, agribusinesses and individuals, as well as support from the three levels of government,” said the release.

There has been internal strife within the Cereals Canada membership in recent months, particularly after the GATE project was revealed to members a few weeks ago. A number of grain and seed/chemical companies have considered quitting the organization, with some feeling financial pressure to cut expenses and some unhappy with Cereals Canada’s treatment of members.

Few deny that Cereals Canada badly needs new digs for its sophisticated processing and milling equipment, which was never a good fit for a downtown office building, where it is currently located.

Some, however, don’t think downtown makes sense as a location, with the critical mass of agriculture research and commercial operations already occurring in the University of Manitoba’s research park.

Others wonder why existing empty structures, of which there are many in Winnipeg, aren’t the favoured solution.

The issue has been around for decades, with the accommodation shortcomings of what was formerly called the Canadian International Grains Institute widely recognized.

Cereals Canada says it has to be out of its present building by 2027, so the time to get moving on a replacement is now.

The post Cereals Canada moves forward with building plans appeared first on Country Guide.

The official launch of the funding campaign to establish the Global Agriculture Technology Exchange (GATE) has been postponed, with Cereals’ Canada’s June 27 board meeting expected to clarify which members are staying and which might leave.

One medium-sized grain company has definitively decided to leave the organization, a large one has triggered a two-year option to depart if it chooses and other grain companies may have also triggered two-year potential-departure options, sources say.

Both North West Terminal and Cargill told the Western Producer that financial considerations are behind their decisions to reconsider their participation in Cereals Canada.

Cargill “continuously evaluates” its memberships in industry organizations and since it is required to give two years notice if it might leave, it supplied that on June 1.

“No final decision has yet been made that Cargill will withdraw from the organization,” says a statement from Cargill.

“We will continue to be committed participants in Cereals Canada over the next two years and are eager to engage in strategic planning and membership review discussions as we assess our membership in the future.”

Major multinational seed and crop protection companies are also mulling departures and planned to discuss the situation around this week’s annual Cereals Canada board meeting.

Farmer-based organizations appear to be mostly on-side with Cereals Canada’s plans in their broad outline, if not with every detail.

The GATE is designed to “contain state-of-the art analytical milling, baking, noodle- and pasta-making, malting and brewing, oat processing and educational training facilities to support and train global customers about the quality, functionality, safety and sustainability of Canadian grains,” according to promotional material for the proposed centre.

Cereals Canada is the successor organization to the Canadian International Grains Institute, which operates today’s version of the GATE’s proposed functions. Current facilities, in an office tower not designed for industrial and scientific uses, has long been recognized as inadequate, constricting and unfit for future uses. The Canadian Grain Commission, which also resides in the same office tower, does not have the room it needs to conduct all of its function and has moved some to other facilities.

Cereals Canada said it needs to begin making plans now.

“Cereals Canada’s current building lease is expiring on March 31, 2027, with no option to renew,” said a statement from the organization.

“With this date fast approaching, a new home is needed to continue to build on the vital work to advance the Canadian grains value chain. Creating a new state-of-the-art facility will allow Cereals Canada to continue to offer best-in-class technical expertise to support Canadian farmers, as well as domestic and global customers.”

The plan involves constructing a new building, probably between the Richardson building at Portage and Main and the new Richardson Innovation Centre in the heart of downtown Winnipeg, on what is today a surface parking lot beside the Fairmont hotel. Most Winnipeg-based grain companies are within a few blocks of the proposed location, as are Cereals Canada and Agriculture Canada.

The GATE plan is a surprise for some grain industry players since it follows only a few years after a consultant’s report into the need for better facilities. That report found building a new structure from scratch was the least attractive option of those considered.

It also confounds those who believe other locations in Winnipeg or elsewhere on the Prairies should be considered. The University of Manitoba campus houses a critical mass of agriculture research and development departments and private companies and is seen by some as a more natural home.

The Wheat Growers Association has attacked the plans for the GATE, highlighting the large amounts of vacant office space in post-pandemic Winnipeg that could be used to house improved facilities without the costs involved in a major capital project.

The desire to build an integrated crop industry centre goes back decades in Winnipeg, with many seeing the city’s plethora of agriculture organizations, agencies and companies providing a critical mass of expertise that could benefit from closer physical co-operation. Both federal Liberal and Conservative governments have been supportive of the idea.

However, the cost of building a new centre has seen the hopes punted from one federal government to the next since the early 2000s and now is not primarily seen as a government-driven project, especially with farmers and industry controlling Cereals Canada today.

Grain companies are not on very good terms with each other right now, sources say. The western Canadian drought years hammered profit margins following extensive re-investment in their grain-handling systems. For some, the idea of a major new industry project today is poorly timed.

The post Membership crisis rocks Cereals Canada appeared first on Country Guide.

As Britain prepares to end its transition out of the European Union on Dec. 31, it has negotiated multiple rollover bilateral deals to maintain trade, with many simply replacing the terms the bloc had already agreed.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson joined Canada’s Justin Trudeau and their respective trade ministers on an online call to mark the deal, which paves the way for a tailor-made agreement covering more areas such as digital trade, small businesses, the environment and women’s economic empowerment.

“Today’s agreement underpins 20 billion pounds worth of trade and locks in certainty for thousands of jobs,” Liz Truss, the U.K.’s international trade secretary, said in a statement.

Her Canadian counterpart Mary Ng said the transitional agreement “largely replicates” the EU deal on tariff reductions and provisions for labour and environment. “We do want an ambitious, high level comprehensive trade agreement with the U.K.,” Ng said, signalling Canada wanted similar terms to the EU deal.

Canada’s Parliament must approve legislation that would enable the deal to come into effect.

Britain is Canada’s fifth largest trading partner after the United States, China, Mexico and Japan.

Johnson is trying to shape a new “global Britain” that can strike out alone and negotiate better trade agreements than the EU as part of what he says is the benefits of its historic decision to leave the world’s biggest trading bloc.

In less than two years it has agreed trade deals with 53 countries, accounting for 164 billion pounds (C$284.62 billion) of British bilateral trade. Johnson’s critics point out that many are largely the same as the EU deals.

The U.K.-Canada Trade Continuity Agreement will be subject to final legal checks before it is formally signed. “This is a good moment,” Trudeau said.

Export-oriented ag groups in Canada said the deal provides clarity and ensures continued market access for some agrifood exporters.

For those sectors, the deal provides “temporary certainty and stability,” Canadian Agri-Food Trade Alliance president Dan Darling said in a release Saturday.

“However, for other agrifood exporters, a transitional arrangement simply reinforces a situation that remains unacceptable under CETA (the Canada-E.U. free trade pact) due to the persistence of trade obstacles that continue to hinder Canadian exports.”

CAFTA called on the parties to “return to the negotiating table as soon as possible in order to reach a comprehensive and more ambitious pact that removes tariffs and non-tariff barriers, provides liberal rules of origin and creates a level playing (field).”

Cereals Canada CEO Dean Dias, in a separate release Saturday, said the continuity agreement “is a positive outcome for Canadian wheat farmers and exporters, especially those operating in a highly integrated supply chain with important U.K. millers and food processors.”

— Reporting for Reuters by Kate Holton and Amran Abocar. Includes files from Glacier FarmMedia Network staff.

The post Britain, Canada agree on post-Brexit rollover trade deal appeared first on Country Guide.

The ‘new’ Cereals Canada was created June 1 when it and the Canadian International Grains Institute (Cigi) amalgamated after two years of discussions and the approval of their respective boards April 13.

Hames, who farms northwest of Lloydminster near Marwayne, also chairs the Alberta Wheat Commission and served as chair of Alberta Canola.

Hames, has a degree in computer engineering from the University of Alberta and worked as a software engineer before returning to the family farm in 1991, according to Cereals Canada.

Hames, “a dedicated zero tillage farmer,” has grown canola, wheat, peas and barley under conservation tillage for 25 years.

“I believe in working together in partnerships to achieve larger goals,” Hames states on his Twitter account.

Why it matters: Cereals Canada has an important and challenging mandate: representing Canada’s cereal sector from farmer to exporter, based on consensus, with a goal of all making all participants better off.

The new Cereals Canada board has 16 directors, who elected Jennifer Marchand of Cargill as vice-chair, Robert Misko as treasurer and Jean-Marc Ruest as secretary.

Misko farms at Roblin, Man., and is a director with the Manitoba Wheat and Barley Growers Association (MWBGA); Ruest, Cereal’s Canada’s former chair, is Richardson’s senior vice-president of corporate affairs and general counsel.

The executive committee will also serve as the search committee to find a CEO, Hames noted in a release Tuesday. That job is currently held by Cam Dahl.

A human resources consultant has been hired to lead the search, Dahl said in an interview Tuesday.

“The board needs to do its due diligence at looking at all the available candidates and that’s in the best interests of the organization,” he said. “And I absolutely believe that.”

The board also selected a governance committee consisting of Jake Leguee, Henry Van Ankum, Jeff Bertholet and Jeff Cockwill.

Leguee is a Saskatchewan farmer and vice-chair of the Saskatchewan Wheat Development Commission; Van Ankum farms in Ontario and is a director of the Grain Farmers of Ontario.

Bertholet and Cockwill are with BASF and Viterra, respectively.

Cereal Canada’s new board and CEO will consider where to locate, Ruest said in an interview April 14.

Cereals Canada, with six employees, is located in the old Grain Exchange Building in downtown Winnipeg; Cigi has just under 30 staff located a few blocks away. in the Canadian Grain Commission building.

While Cigi — created in 1972 to teach Canadian grain customers, including millers and bakers, how to get the most value from Canadian grain — is now part of Cereals Canada, its role and name will continue, outgoing Cigi chair Trent Rude said in an interview April 14.

“One of the main things we wanted to do is maintain the brand of Cigi,” Rude said. “In the milling industry globally it has a very, very strong brand and is very well respected when it comes to nations around the world that are buying Canadian wheat and milling Canadian wheat. That was one of the main, important things.”

Meanwhile, the amalgamation between Cereals Canada and Cigi is proceeding smoothly, Dahl said.

“According to the bylaws we needed 21 days notice for an annual meeting so in fact (Monday) was the very first day that we could provide that much notice after June 1,” he said. “So as quickly as we can, the members and directors have come together to take those next steps to secure the future of the new organization.”

— Allan Dawson reports for the Manitoba Co-operator from Miami, Man.

Cereals Canada: The board

The post ‘New’ Cereals Canada names board, chair appeared first on Country Guide.

The two Winnipeg-based not-for-profit organizations announced Tuesday their memberships have approved “the amalgamation of both organizations under a unified governance and management structure.”

Terms of the merger call for the consolidated body to operate under the name Cereals Canada, though Cigi would maintain its brand as “a division within the overarching organization.”

The merged body’s governance structure, as approved, “also ensures that all members can shape and influence future priorities and initiatives,” the two groups said Tuesday.

The two organizations started in 2018 to explore the possibility of a merger, and agreed last June to pursue it with a target of March 31 this year for its effective date.

Cigi, a.k.a. the Canadian International Grains Institute, has operated since 1972 and provides “pre-market and in-market technical support” on matters of Canadian grain milling, quality and end-uses for domestic and international buyers.

Cereals Canada is a national organization set up in 2013 to help bring “sustainable profitability” to Canada’s cereals value chain, and to provide industry co-ordination following the deregulation and privatization of the Canadian Wheat Board, helping to focus Canadian cereals research and market outreach.

Both organizations already promote Canadian wheat sales and share many of the same members, including the three Prairie wheat commissions and some of the same grain companies.

Their leadership said last summer that a merger would save money — in part by co-locating the two organizations in one space — as well as improve communications and help focus their work maintaining and developing markets for Canadian grain.

“Cereals Canada and Cigi have already established a close working relationship supporting the promotion of Canadian wheat and this merger will strengthen the benefits of this relationship” Jean-Marc Ruest, senior vice-president of corporate affairs at Richardson International and chair of the Cereals Canada board, said in a release.

“The merger represents an opportunity to align our efforts on behalf of the Canadian cereals value chain and ultimately strengthen the focus and impact of our activities,” Cigi chair Trent Rude, Viterra’s director of merchandising for North America, said in the same release. “While unlocking new synergies, we will also be maintaining the key components and expertise that each organization brings to the table.”

The next “major” step for the merged group will be to appoint a CEO, he said, while “our senior leadership team and staff will also continue to play a key role in guiding strategic planning with a view towards leveraging the opportunities of a fully integrated organization.”

The Alberta Wheat Commission, in a separate release Tuesday, hailed the merger as setting up “a platform for a unified value chain approach to enhancing the competitiveness of Canadian cereal crops.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Cigi, Cereals Canada vote to close merger deal appeared first on Country Guide.

To be clear, these are proposals at this stage. Nothing has been implemented by the CGC nor is there a timeline for the commission to enact such changes. Instead, the commission has asked for public input and is in the process of evaluating what it’s heard. (For the original proposal, its specifications and goals, check the grainscanada.gc.ca website.)

There is an incorrect perception that this is a western Canadian issue, based on the notion that visual characteristics and the proposed changes will mainly affect the export market for Canadian grains. Added to that is the reality that the CGC is not involved in purchasing grain for domestic use, which is the common destination for eastern cereals. Yet depending on if or how these changes are implemented, they could encompass both eastern and western cereal production under the banner of traceability or sustainability.

Part of what makes these proposed changes such a challenge is the number of organizations, business and interests that would be affected. The ultimate impact would be on the quality of finished products, but there are three specific concerns for farmers and for many in the trade. They include the accuracy of tests, the time taken for testing, and, of course, who pays. Several stakeholders have characterized the concept as “just another excuse” for downgrading grains and decreasing payments to farmers.

Country Guide approached a number of organizations, including the Cereals Canada, Canadian Grain Commission, Western Canadian Wheat Growers and Western Grain Elevators Association. Three individuals representing the groups responded.

The CGC opted against participating.

Cam Dahl

Cereals Canada

The accuracy of tests, the time it takes to carry out a test, the infrastructure required and the cost involved are foremost questions for Cam Dahl. As president of Cereals Canada, he believes shippers and farmers share the goal of objective grading versus a reliance on visual factors. However, this goal can only be achieved if the new procedures are accurate and cost-effective and can be carried out in country facilities.

“The more you can move to objective measures, the more accurate the grading system,” says Dahl. “I think everybody would like to see that as much as possible, but the trade-off on the other side comes in three key questions, one of which is accuracy — because these kinds of tests have a margin of error surrounding them.

The second is time, where if it’s a laboratory test, it could take significant amounts of time. And the third is the cost. That cost can be subdivided under equipment, allotting space inside of facilities and the value of time taken: if producers could have the test done while they wait to unload, it’d be better and more time-efficient than waiting for results from the lab.

“It can be done on-site, but again, you’re making sure the grain is ground properly, and it’s that accuracy of the process,” says Dahl, noting the same concerns exist for testing DON. “DON is the issue — not the fusarium itself but the toxin. Yet some of the strip tests and the accuracy of those tests are sometimes in question.”

There is also some discrepancy in the claims by the CGC, specifically that falling number can be linked to sprouting and that DON can be linked to fusarium. There is a relation between the factors but it’s not a straight line. Falling number measures the alpha-amylase activity that reflects sprouting but it’s not a visual “tell.” The same applies to lab results indicating DON concentrations and the physical manifestation of kernel visual distinguishability (KVD).

“There’s a direct link to the functionality on the other side — what kind of bread will come out of that, where flour made from sprouted grain has very different functional qualities compared to flour made from grain that has not begun to sprout,” says Dahl.

On the DON side of the equation he adds that there is a relationship between the different species of the fungus and the toxin it produces. In the past, there was only one major species of fusarium in wheat, but recently, more species have been identified, with different species producing different levels of DON. Although there’s a relationship between fusarium and DON levels, the increase in forms of the fungus makes a visual determination much harder than 10 or 15 years ago.

One aspect that Dahl highlights is that this is more of an issue for both Eastern and Western Canada. He points to the DON situation in Ontario corn in late 2018 and a fusarium head blight infection which ruined the P.E.I. wheat crop in 2010. In spite of the proposal to add falling number and DON seemingly affecting only exports, Dahl has asked for clarification from the CGC.

“Some of my questions to the Grain Commission are, “how does this apply to Eastern Canada?” he says. “How does it apply to corn? Have those kinds of questions been considered when this was being put together?”

Jim Wickett

Western Canadian Wheat Growers

Working with proposed changes to grading factors can translate into a lot of speculation, and that’s troubling for Jim Wickett, chair of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers (WCWG). His primary concerns focus on including falling number and DON levels because they’re parameters that growers don’t deal with, and determining who will pay for the implementation and operation for such testing.

“There’s a lot of suspicion that this will be one more reason to downgrade, instead of trying to achieve the value that it’s really worth,” says Wickett, who also farms near Rosetown, Sask. “I don’t know where they’re headed with this — the entire grading process really needs to be examined.”

That’s a contention based on the current version of the Canada Grain Act and its visual grading parameters, which predate the invention of the automobile, according to Wickett. Compared to the technology that’s already in use on most farms, the grading methods need to be upgraded to the 20th century, if not the 21st.

As farm costs rise and commodity prices remain relatively low (even as corn, soybean and wheat prices begin to climb in 2019), it’s unreasonable for consumers to insist that associated costs for traceability and sustainability be borne by the farmer, he says.

There can be no sustainability (and the same should be true for traceability) without profitability for the farmer.

“That’s an issue that a lot of farmers have, where a regulator sets its own rates and benefits from the regulations that it puts out to make things mandatory to suit their own budget,” says Wickett. “In the U.S., once they have enough operating money saved up, they stop charging. But we’re still charging and we’re still accumulating a surplus, but we have bureaucrats and other groups looking at $130 million and asking, ‘How can we spend that?’ And that’s not right: we should simply cut the fees and move on.”

Another point Wickett makes refers to the difference between Western Canada, where there isn’t the relationship between farmers and the mills, and Eastern Canada. This, he adds, is definitely an export-related issue which makes it more of a challenge for western Canadian growers. Yet the piece-meal approach of just adding more parameters to an outdated process will not make Canadian grains more competitive.

What’s more frustrating for Wickett and others is that the Grain Commission had technology which made a so-called “driveway test” economically feasible. It was eight to 10 years ago that the commission tested the Read-Rite machine and although it was shelved, the blueprint for it exists, with the potential for augmenting the system with sensors now available.

Instead, the CGC is proposing to add two factors to the grading system without justifying costs or the process of conducting the tests. There’s also no guarantee that any two tests conducted with the same methods or equipment will yield the same results.

“In my time on the Western Standards Committee six or seven years ago, they were testing those Read-Rite machines and we talked about DON and falling numbers,” recalls Wickett. “One of the scientists for the commission kept mentioning that if two different people are testing the same sample of wheat, they can get a different number. If there’s a different source of water than the elevator down the road, you can get a different number. There are all kinds of variables.”

Wade Sobkowich

Western Grain Elevator Association

The concept behind adding falling number and DON levels is a noble goal, improving and ensuring grain quality, says Wade Sobkowich of the Western Grain Elevator Association (WGEA), but it’s not a practical approach. Any failing in that chase can be costly to those who can least afford it.

There is an “order of operations,” Sobkowich adds, that needs to be respected when considering the introduction of new factors.

“This includes the determination that the technology exists to produce repeatable, accurate, timely and cost-effective test results upon delivery to an elevator,” says Sobkowich. “To date, we are not aware of technology that would meet an acceptable threshold in each of these categories.”

The WGEA response to the CGC proposal is a seven-page write-up including several clarifications on statements made by the commission in its outline, as well as the association’s position opposing changes without due consideration.

Sobkowich emphasizes that added costs to the system to support DON and falling number factors would likely be borne by growers. He also cites the impact of something like the basis and the effects of tying-in falling number and DON tests, with “Company A” involved in grain exporting and investing in an on-site laboratory, while “Company B” sends the sample to a lab for testing. The on-site sampling would provide results at the time of delivery with added costs; the off-site testing would result in lower added costs but a better price to the farmer than the other company.

“Since it’s a competitive environment, Company A will only be able to pass as much of their costs to the farmer as the producers will bear before they make the decision that the risk of deferred settlement is acceptable for a potentially greater return,” says Sobkowich. At that point, they’ll choose to do business with Company B. “Company A still needs the grain, so they’ll have to narrow their basis and absorb a portion of these costs to attract the grain.”

Also part of the WGEA’s opposition is the fact that wheat buyers from outside Canada already purchase wheat based on the specifications they require.

If they already need certain minimum falling numbers and DON levels, those would be specified in the sales contract. As a result, Sobkowich says making falling number and DON part of the grade will have no impact on sales contracts, nor will it help increase wheat exports from Canada — and it would be invisible to the customer.

“Most customers want to know the class of wheat, like is it CWRS, the grade — number one or two — plus a number of other quality specifications such as protein, falling number and DON,” says Sobkowich. “The move is to try to reflect how customers already buy back to the farm level. However, we cannot accurately, reliably and cost-effectively measure falling number and DON in a timely way.”

The post Guess who’s paying for new grain grading? appeared first on Country Guide.