36 / 52
Spring
2018
Grains
West
36
grain that is artificially, unevenly wetted
in this manner.”
A second, and possibly more serious,
outcome of this inability to accurately
read the moisture content would be
the deliberate concealing of the true
characteristics of the grain. To that end,
there is a section in the CGA that speaks
to this exact possibility.
Section 105 of the CGA states:
No person shall …
c) offer for sale or storage or submit for
official inspection grain that has been
so treated, mixed or dealt with as to
conceal its true characteristic; or
d) except under the regulations or an
order of the Commission, deliver to or
receive from an elevator any grain,
grain product or screenings that is
infested or contaminated, or that may
reasonably be regarded as being
infested or contaminated.
“Additionally, food safety concerns
enter the conversation when the source
of the water that might be used is
looked at critically,” Bunkowsky added.
“Is the water coming from a dugout? Is it
contaminated with E. coli? Or algae? Or
other pathogenic bacteria? Or animal
waste? Is it coming from a storage tank
that might have been used in spraying
operations?” All these possibilities
could potentially contaminate the grain.
Further to this point, such
contaminants present risk to the greater
supply chain. Grain wetting in this
deliberate fashion—for example, by
running water into grain in an auger as
it loads into a truck for delivery—is very
different to how grain becomes wet
naturally during a rain event. In that case,
it’s a slow, even distribution process
that takes place over time. The moisture
content can be accurately discovered
with a moisture meter, but such is not
the case when grain is wetted artificially.
Though being effectively penalized
for extra-dry or very-dry grain seems
unfair, grain wetting is certainly not a
solution. And it bears repeating that
the practice contravenes the CGA.
However, it would seem that growers
and grain handlers may need to sit
down and discuss the fairness of the
diminished return farmers receive when
delivering dry grain into the system.
Though farmers are effectively penalized for marketing an overly dry product, the delivery of grain that has been “contaminated” by wetting is an explicit contravention of the
Canada Grain Act.