From floods to heat, Saskatchewan farmers navigating season of weather whiplash

For Saskatchewan farmers, this growing season has been anything but predictable.

Some producers are dealing with waterlogged fields while others are working through high temperatures, and producers say they’re feeling the squeeze long after their crops leave the farm.

Read more:

• VIDEO: Tornadoes, severe storms cause damage across northern Sask.
• ‘Yellowing and drowned out crops’ follow heavy rainfall in Saskatchewan: Crop report
• Saskatchewan farmers getting less of the food dollar, APAS study reveals

Bill Prybylski, president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, joined guest host Tamara Cherry on The Evan Bray Show on Monday to discuss the impacts of the weather and the pressure farmers are under as a result.

Listen to the full interview, or read the transcript below:

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

TAMARA CHERRY: There’s been lots of up and ups and downs in the weather. Has this been helping or hurting our farmers?

BILL PRYBYLSKI: There’s certainly areas of the province that have welcomed the extra rain, especially those areas that have been dry for several years in a row. They’re finally getting the rain that they’ve needed, and crops are looking quite nice in those areas. Other areas, not so much, particularly the east central and northeast regions, where it’s been extremely wet and there’s been significant crop damage because of the excess moisture and the extra heat. It certainly isn’t helping relieve any of that stress on the on the crops.

What is the sweet spot that you guys are looking for this time of year?

PRYBYLSKI: We just need moderate temperatures and sunshine. The crops have sufficient moisture to get the development going, and excess heat is not good. It puts extra stress on the crops. If we could go two weeks to let things dry out, and then have a quarter inch of rain in a couple weeks just to help the crops fill, that would be ideal.

The latest APAS report shows farmers are getting a smaller share of the food dollar while grocery prices remain high. What does that mean?

PRYBYLSKI: It means that somewhere in the value chain between the farm gate and the grocery shelves, there’s more costs being added on to the price of groceries, and consumers are paying more in the grocery store. That extra value is not being translated back into into the farmers’ pockets at the farm gate.

If farmers are not benefiting from higher grocery prices, who is?

PRYBYLSKI: It depends on the product and how much processing goes on. If there’s minimal processing, it’s pretty easy to see where the extra costs accumulate after it leaves the farm gate. But when we get into things like bread, there’s several steps that the process goes through to get from wheat leaving the farm gate to bread on the shelves. And the more processing there is, the less value returned to the farm, so there’s lots of steps along that supply chain that accumulate value, and there seems to be less transparency. The more processing there is and the more times that product is handled, there’s obviously more costs accumulated, but less transparency as to where those costs are coming from.

Who should we be calling upon for increased transparency in that supply chain?

PRYBYLSKI: Ideally, it could be the players themselves that could show where the farm gate prices are coming from. If they would take the initiative, that would be ideal. There may be room for government to not necessarily regulate, but to make it more practical for the industry and the supply chain to be more more transparent.

Are the existing safety nets enough for what producers are dealing with this year?

PRYBYLSKI: The programs are designed for average conditions. But when there’s complete disasters like this, the programs are inadequate to recover for producers, and in some cases very slow to react. In the case of AgriStability, it’s my understanding that some of the claims are still two years in arrears to get their program payments. They’re well intended and the theory is good, but when we have significant disasters like this, there needs to be more more support for those producers that are affected.