News

Manitoba farmers struggling with wet conditions this year will have a few more days to plant soybeans while still receiving full crop insurance coverage through the Manitoba Agricultural Services Corporation (MASC).

A permanent extension to the AgriInsurance seeding deadlines for soybeans was announced by Manitoba Agriculture and MASC on May 20.

The deadline for full coverage of soybeans in area 1 of the province is now June 8 instead of June 6. The deadline for full coverage in areas 2 and 3, meanwhile, has been pushed back to June 4 from May 30. Growers will be eligible for crop insurance at 20 percent lower coverage if planting happens within five days of those deadlines. The deadline in area 4 remains on May 30. (View MASC’s soybean area map here.)

“These changes were made in consultation with the Manitoba Pulse and Soybean Growers Association after a review of available data and agronomic considerations such as growing season length and the use of varieties that are more adapted to Manitoba conditions since the seeding deadlines were last considered,” says a news release from the province.

The changes are not expected to change the risk to the AgriInsurance program, so the province says there will be no change to premiums.

Despite major delays due to excess moisture this spring, the province says MASC is not considering deadline extensions for other crops at this time. The final deadline for many crops is June 20.

The May 17 crop report from Manitoba Agriculture estimated provincial seeding progress at four per cent complete, compared with a five-year average of 50 per cent.

Health Canada has issued a long-awaited clarification on how it will regulate different forms of plant breeding, including newer gene-editing methods.

Genetically modified crops are deemed “novel” under Canada’s regulatory framework, requiring an expensive multi-year safety review before being approved for sale, but there was uncertainty about whether gene-edited crops would also be treated as novel, since gene editing doesn’t typically involve the introduction of genes from other organisms.

After holding public consultations in the spring of 2021, Health Canada published new policy on May 18, 2022 that says gene-edited crops that meet certain conditions can be treated like conventional-bred crops, and not require a pre-market safety assessment.

“It’s great news in the sense that there was a lot of ambiguity and plant breeders never knew what was going to trigger a full safety review,” says Pierre Petelle, president and CEO of CropLife Canada. “Sometimes innovations were put on a shelf because they didn’t want to risk triggering a review and all the data requirements, and this is a great development.”

Given the lower cost and increased precision of gene editing relative to older genetic modification methods, the regulatory certainty should lead to new investment in plant breeding in Canada, he says.

“Whether it’s small, public or private breeders, or large companies, now we’ve got predictability, we can really push Canada as a place to invest and to bring those technologies for Canadian farmers,” says Petelle. “What it means for farmers is potentially many, many more choices coming down the road, and innovative products, niche products for a variety of different crops.”

While investment in genetically modified traits was historically confined to corn, soybeans, and canola, Petelle says gene editing has potential to unlock value across all crops — from cereals, oilseeds, and pulses to fruits and vegetables.

There are still some cases where gene-edited crops would have to undergo a pre-market safety review — for example, if the process results in the presence of foreign DNA in the final product or in an elevated level of an allergen or toxin relevant to human health.

Health Canada has also announced the launch of a voluntary transparency initiative that it says “provides plant breeders the opportunity to inform Canadians about what gene edited plant products will enter the Canadian marketplace,” with the goal of enhancing public trust in gene-edited products and the regulatory system.

The National Farmers Union, meanwhile, is criticizing the new policy alongside several activist organizations that have traditionally opposed genetically modified crops. The groups say they are “alarmed that the federal government will now allow product developers to assess the safety of many new gene-edited foods with no role for Health Canada regulators.”

Canada is standing by its proposed solution regarding dairy tariff-rate quotas under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), as U.S. dairy groups continue to pressure the White House to escalate the matter. Earlier this week, U.S. trade representative Katherine Tai said Canada’s changes didn’t go far enough, and the proposed solution was a disappointment.

Jim Wiesemeyer, with Pro Farmer, based out of Washington, D.C., weighed in on the situation and provides insight on what the next moves could be, what he’s hoping will be avoided, and what some of the potential motives could be surrounding the yet-to-be-heard decision from the U.S..

“First of all, I don’t think this says much for the what we thought was going to be an accelerated dispute resolution process on the new North American trade agreement,” says Wiesemeyer. “The USTR in Washington is consulting with what they call the stakeholders, Congress, on the next steps. They don’t say what the next step is. And (USDA secretary, Tom) Vilsack doesn’t say, retaliation, but at least a couple of dairy groups want the U.S. to retaliate.”

Wiesemeyer adds that he strongly hopes the response wont be in the way of retaliation, however it is, he doesn’t believe that it will come through the food sector. He speculates that the U.S. would avoid the food price environment and hit Canada with a blow in another industry.

Political strategy could also come into play and may determine the standpoints of some as we move closer to the midterm election this fall.

“Well, I won’t say they aren’t a factor. One key state is Wisconsin, that’s a battleground state for the Senate. So I just think the White House, they’re chalking up some losses left and right. So there’s your pressure, they need a win here and so the dairy issue could be wrapped up in the that.” says Wiesemeyer.

Additionally, we have to look at what is happening on a global level with trade. Indonesia has cut off palm oil exports, followed by India, which has essentially cut off wheat exports. Although Wiesemeyer says there are surely people in Congress who are in favour of doing the same and provides insights on the reality of that process as it relates to dairy and also fuel.

“There’s people in Congress that think it’s a good idea. When you have gasoline prices in every state over $4 and probably on their way to $5, the pressure grows on price controls. I hope that doesn’t happen,” says Wiesemeyer. “The House passed a bill on price controls for gas gouging, but I don’t think the votes are there in the Senate. Bottom line, I don’t think the United States will do that. I’ll guarantee you, when you have price controls, it makes matters worse, you put a price control on any commodity and you’ll have a shortage of it.”

He also discloses his take on the wheat cut-off by India. Wiesemeyer says that he believes the decision was made in order to get a true assessment of their new crop potential, after which, he predicts we will see a resurgence of wheat exports from India.

At the end of the day, Canada is holding strong on their position stating they have gone through the proper consultation process and as stated earlier, this is their final offer, to which the U.S. continues to hold their position, proclaiming they are right and just and that Canada has proposed an inadequate offer ever since this issue started.

It’s been a wild week in the wheat markets, with lots of trading action and news stories driving the markets.

Chaos, says Jon Driedger of Leftfield Commodities Research, is one way to describe it — starting off with last week’s United States Department of Agriculture report.

“That was a friendly report for wheat. We go into the weekend, and you get the announcement from India that they’re going to stop exports, maybe they’re going to export some…the whole thing has been a little convoluted,” he explains.

When you look at the temperatures India has had, followed by a shrinking crop, on one hand, this news doesn’t really come as surprising. On the other hand, says Drieger, “it seems like maybe there was some headline chasing and money flow.” (Story continues below interview)

One of the things we need to remember, he highlights, is that in the grand scheme of things, the India wheat market is quite small.

“It’s a pretty small market from a financial market perspective, relative to corn and beans. It doesn’t take that much money to maybe cause exaggerated swings. And so you sort of have this element of maybe chasing that headline. And then of course, we’ve got financial markets — crude oil, everything else breaking. But it’s just tremendous volatility…it really is a market that, boy, we’re extremely elevated levels,” he explains.

In all directions, it’s the fragility of the market that has many observing closely. There’s no question how tight this global market is, says Driedger, and when you look at all the production threats, it could get worse over the next weeks or few months.

Jim Wiesemeyer of Pro Farmer also recently joined RealAg Radio to discuss India and the wheat markets. As Weisemeyer explains, India closed off exports so they could get a true assessment of their new crop potential.

“Once they get a better read on that, I fully expect the Indian government to announce that they’re resurrecting wheat exports. Now to what degree — it’s murky. But I would look for that in the not too distant future.”