Spring
2016
grainswest.com
13
ples are graded at accredited grain grading
labs. Often, growers will get both Canadian
and U.S. grades on the same sample. With
information in hand, growers can now
shop their grain around to end users, to
grain companies or to brokers in order to
extract the most value.
Buyers who are buying on specification
are generally looking to have some addi-
tional assurances around falling number,
vomitoxin levels, protein and moisture.
“Buyers do buy on spec, but it still has to
be relatively easily and quickly measure-
able,” said Doug Hilderman, director of
western grain for Broadgrain Commodi-
ties Inc. Other contracts, like identity-pre-
served contracts, might have even more
stringent requirements for quality, but,
generally, the price the farmer receives
reflects this higher standard.
However, not all grain can or will
be bought on specification. “It doesn’t
take much imagination to understand
just how di cult it would be to load a
60,000-tonne vessel at port if it all had to
be purchased on specification,” Driedger
said. “Quite simply, a big chunk of the
grain has to move that way just to get the
crop sold in time for next harvest.”
Buyers of Canadian grain are most
interested in purchasing grain that meets
the specific demands of their custom-
ers. Those demands might be met with
grades, but, more often than not, more
detail is needed—buying on specification
is common. Some buyers (or end users)
are a lot more particular than others, it
depends on what they are manufacturing.
Growers who understand this and can
reliably provide information about their
own production, and then deliver what
they promise, are the ones who receive
premiums in the market.
Grades di er north and south of the bor-
der. Mildew is a good example of a factor
in play for the 2015 crop. Canada grades
mildew tougher than in the United States.
“This year, mildew is the primary reason
for downgrading in Western Canada,”
said Elaine Sopiwnyk, director of grain
quality at Cigi. “It’s an aesthetic factor that
doesn’t a ect food safety or functionality,
but it can negatively impact flour colour.”
Flour colour has an impact on end-product
quality and consumer acceptability. Grain
with mildew will not work for consumers
who want white pan bread with a bright
crumb colour or Asian noodles with high
levels of brightness. Additionally, it can
cause increased speckiness in pasta made
from semolina milled from Canada West-
ern Amber Durum. In the United States,
mildew is not considered a downgrading
factor in the same way, so a Canadian
grower might find better value for his
grain south of the border.
This year, more of the wheat crop grad-
ed a No. 1 or No. 2 than the year prior.
“Durum is a good example,” Sopiwnyk
said. “In 2014, only 13 per cent of the crop
graded a No. 1 or No. 2. This year, 50 to
60 per cent was in the top two grades.”
This in turn will reflect in the spreads
between grades. “It’s important to under-
stand that the grade tolerances for the top
two grades for, say, CWRS are kept very
tight to maintain the functional quality
of the grain. The grade tolerances for the
various degrading factors don’t change
year over year unless research supports
such a change. When you get to a No. 3,
that’s when the tolerances open up and
there is the potential for greater impact on
functionality.”
This year, the crop is performing very
well. “The data is showing little in the way
of di erences in the performance of No. 1
to No. 3 CWRS,” Sopiwnyk said. “Howev-
er, this data doesn’t tell the whole story.
We are seeing impacts in the flour and
the rheological properties of the dough.
For instance, we are seeing a decrease in
gluten strength in No. 3s, compared to
No. 1 and No. 2, which has caused some
challenges in baking.” Additionally, Sopi-
wnyk said that No. 3 CWRS showed lower
specific volume in the pilot baking process
and poorer colour in Asian noodles—al-
though the poor noodle colour was a
reflection of mildew, not gluten strength.
It’s not strictly a quality scenario that
will determine price, however. Supply
and demand plays a large part in that
determination. “Right now, we are seeing
the CWRS spread from a No. 1 to a No.
2 at roughly five to 10 cents, compared
to closer to 20 cents in recent years,”
Driedger said. “The spread from a No.
2 to a No. 3 is wider, ranging from 25 to
50 cents, compared to 60-plus cents in
recent years. That spread will improve
when the elevator is specifically trying
to source a No. 3 CWRS.” For this year,
the narrower spreads could be reflective
of the closer performance of the top
two grades. These spreads, and prices in
general, vary depending on catchment,
company, general demand and demand
on any particular day.
RobynMakowski, analytical services technician, weighs samples for falling number testing at Cigi.
Photo: Canadian InternationalGrains Institute
