Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Future requirements for grain handling through Pacific Coast ports 1967

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1967_A4_5 C3.pdf [ 7.83MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0102361.json
JSON-LD: 1.0102361+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0102361.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0102361+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0102361+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0102361+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0102361.ris

Full Text

FUTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR GRAIN HANDLING THROUGH PACIFIC COAST PORTS Alan Herbert Case B.Comm., Un i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1963 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Business Administration i n the Department of Commerce and Business Administration We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1967 In presenting this thesis in pa r t i a l fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that die Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. 1 further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed •without my written permission. Department The University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada ABSTRACT Grain i s the single most important export commodity shipped through four important Canadian ports on the P a c i f i c Coast. Recent rapi d growth i n these exports have strained present f a c i l i t i e s close to capacity. Therefore the necessity has a r i s e n to study the problem of future requirements f o r g r a i n handling f a c i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Furthermore the o v e r - a l l development of B r i t i s h Columbia ports has been widely discussed i n recent years and because grain i s such an important export, the problem of port development requires s p e c i f i c study of grain handling f a c i l i t i e s . I n v e s t i g a t i o n of future grain handling requirements r e l i e d on both l i b r a r y and f i e l d sources. F i e l d work, mainly i n the form of interviews with people i n port administration and grain handling and s e l l i n g were e s p e c i a l l y useful i n gaining f i r s t - h a n d knowledge of the actual problems of grain exporting. Facts and opinions gained from f i e l d work were also invaluable to i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a large mass of s t a t i s - t i c s that were av a i l a b l e from various l i b r a r y sources. The r e s u l t s of the research have l e d to several con- cl u s i o n s . The most important i s that the P a c i f i c Coast of Canada requires new grain handling f a c i l i t i e s i n the near future. In addition improvements i n handling are possible w i t h i n e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s and throughout the extensive system of grain gathering which begins on the farms, hundreds of miles i i i from the export point. In addition to the above findings there are several important secondary conclusions. F i r s t , the markets f o r grain are l i k e l y to continue growing i n the foreseeable future. Because the markets of greatest growth are near the P a c i f i c Ocean, Canada's West Coast ports are w e l l situated to serve them. Second, the United States P a c i f i c ports are also w e l l situated to provide d i r e c t competition with Canada. I f and when t h i s competition becomes more d i r e c t , Canada w i l l require the best f a c i l i t i e s to keep i t s customers. Third, Canadian ports have d e f i n i t e advantages to ship operators over the United States ports i n the form of lower charges for port use, but maintenance of e f f i c i e n c y i n Canadian ports i s e s s e n t i a l to maintaining t h i s advantage. F i n a l l y , the main Canadian P a c i f i c ports are p h y s i c a l l y suitable for the expansion of grain handling f a c i l i t i e s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I INTRODUCTION . 1 Background and Statement of Problem . . . . . 1 History of P a c i f i c Coast Grain Handling . . . 4 Purpose of the Study 6 Other Studies 6 Method of Analysis and Organization 9 I I PRESENT GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES . 12 Advantages of B r i t i s h Columbia Ports 12 Elevator Capacities 17 Shipping F a c i l i t i e s 22 R a i l F a c i l i t i e s 25 Comparative Elevator Operations - B.C. and Eastern Canada 29 I I I TRENDS IN GRAIN EXPORTS THROUGH BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS 36 Volume of Grain 36 Seasonability 39 Destination of Grain Exports 4 1 O r i g i n of Grain Exports 4 4 Vessel Loadings 46 IV FUTURE OF GRAIN MARKETS 51 World Grain Consumption 51 Japanese Grain Market 5^ Chinese Grain Market 57 United Kingdom Grain Market 59 European Grain Markets 59 V COSTS OF GRAIN HANDLING 63 Comparison of Port F a c i l i t i e s 69 Comparison of Port Charges 71 Comparative Elevator Costs 80 VI FUTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 88 New Elevators Now Planned' ' . 88 Future Elevator Requirements 91 V Page Location of Future Development - Vancouver -. 93 New Westminster and V i c t o r i a 94- Other Requirements 96 BIBLIOGRAPHY 99 APPENDICES . . 102 v i LIST OF TABLES Table Page I Canadian Grain Exports by Seaboard Sector, Selected Crop Years 7 I I Distances to Major Overseas Ports . 14 I I I Operating Capacities of B r i t i s h Columbia Terminal Elevators 19 IV Monthly Shipments of Grain by Ocean Shipping from B r i t i s h Columbia Semi-Public Terminal Elevators f o r Crop Years 1963-64 and 1964-65 . . 23 V D i s t r i b u t i o n of Boxcars to B r i t i s h Columbia Ports 1959-60 and 1964-65 . 27 VI Turnovers of Terminal Elevator Capacity i n B r i t i s h Columbia 1960-61 to 1964-65 31 VII Turnovers of Eastern and Lakehead Terminal Elevator Capacity 1960-61 to 1964-65 32 V I I I D i s t r i b u t i o n of Primary Shipments of Canadian Grain from the Semi-Public and Privat e Terminal Elevators, Fort William - Port Arthur, Crop Year 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 33 IX. H i s t o r i c a l Review of Canadian Wheat Exports 1 9 4 4 - 4 5 to 1964-65 37 X Canadian Wheat Exports by Months at P a c i f i c and St. Lawrence Ports, 1960-61 to 1964-65 4-0 XI R a i l Freight Rates on Grain for Export from Selected Points i n Alberta and Saskatchewan as at J u l y 3 1 , 1965 4-5 XII Grain Cargoes Loaded per Vessel i n March 1 9 5 5 - 1966 at B r i t i s h Columbia Ports 48 X I I I I n d i v i d u a l Cargoes Loaded at B r i t i s h Columbia Ports for Month of March - Selected Years . . . . 49 XIV Per Capita Human Consumption of Wheat Flour and Other Grains i n Selected Countries ( 1 9 0 9 - 1 0 - 1 9 5 6 - 5 7 ) . • • • • • . . . . . . . 52 XV World Population by Regions 1 9 2 0 - 1 9 7 0 55 v i i Table Page XVI Canada's Share of the Imports of Wheat into Selected Countries, 1 9 5 5 - 5 6 - 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 ( % ) . . . . 56 XVII Exports of Grain through United States P a c i f i c Ports 1 9 5 9 - 1 9 6 3 , 65 XVIII United States P a c i f i c Coast Grain Storage Capacity 1964 67 XIX. Exports of Grain through B r i t i s h Columbia Ports, 1960-1964 68 XX Total Primary Charges for Sample Vessel C a l l i n g at P a c i f i c Ports to Load Grain 73 XXI Schedule of Man-Hour Rates at United States P a c i f i c Ports 79 XXII Wheat: Percentage of Total Production, by Class, Selected Countries 1955-1962 82 XXIII Inshipments and Outshipments of Wheat: P a c i f i c Northwest 1959-63 Average and Crop Years 1964 and 1965 by Quarters 85 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGMENT Much of the r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d out f o r t h i s t h e s i s was almost e n t i r e l y dependent on the a s s i s t a n c e and c o - o p e r a t i o n of people d i r e c t l y connected w i t h the g r a i n and s h i p p i n g i n d u s t r i e s . For the m a t e r i a l r e l a t i n g to American p o r t s I am g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t i v e of the help of people i n P o r t l a n d and S e a t t l e . I am p a r t i c u l a r l y indebted to Mr. Fred S t o k e l d , Manager of the World Trade and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Department, P o r t l a n d Chamber of Commerce, who made p o s s i b l e much of my f i e l d work i n t h a t p o r t . The author i s indebted as w e l l to Canadian g r a i n company o f f i c i a l s who pr o v i d e d both guidance and data i n t a c k l i n g the re s e a r c h problem. The help of Dr. W i l l i a m Hughes and Dr. Trevor Heaver who advised i n the w r i t i n g of t h i s t h e s i s i s a l s o a p p r e c i a t e d . F i n a l l y , the author wishes to thank the F e d e r a l Depart- ment of Transport who pr o v i d e d the f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e t h a t made much of the f i e l d work p o s s i b l e . CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background and Statement of Problem F a c i l i t i e s f o r handling Canada's grain exports are an important part of the port i n s t a l l a t i o n s on the B r i t i s h Columbia coast. Grain was the single most important commodity exported through B r i t i s h Columbia Customs Ports i n 1964. The value of the shipments was 435.2 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s or 25% of the t o t a l value of exports. 1 In quantity, approximately 218.2 m i l l i o n bushels of grain were exported i n the 1964 calendar year. This represented 50% of the tonnage exported through B r i t i s h Columbia 2 ports. V i r t u a l l y a l l of t h i s grain i s exported through the four B r i t i s h Columbia ports where grain handling f a c i l i t i e s are i n s t a l l e d : namely Vancouver, V i c t o r i a , New Westminster and Prince Rupert. Only very minor amounts are exported "by r a i l to 3 United States destinations. Figures such as the above c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e the magnitude of grain exports i n o v e r a l l trade and indi c a t e that any comprehensive study of port i n s t a l l a t i o n s on 1Bureau of Economics and S t a t i s t i c s , Preliminary State- ment of External Trade Through B r i t i s h Columbia Customs Ports fo r the Calendar Year 1964 ( V i c t o r i a , 1964), p. S3- Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Shipping Report (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1965), p. 188. •5 ^Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada 1964-65 (Ottawa-, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1965), p. 3. . 2 the B r i t i s h Columbia coast must include some s p e c i f i c study of the grain handling f a c i l i t i e s . There i s l i t t l e unanimity i n d e f i n i n g the problems of grain handling i n B r i t i s h Columbia. For example a recent p e r i o d i c a l a r t i c l e quoted many varying opinions i n explanation of a recent grain handling tie-up i n V a n c o u v e r A s Mr. W. A. Sankey, Manager of the Vancouver Merchants Exchange and Honour- able Joe Greene, Mi n i s t e r of A g r i c u l t u r e f or Canada, a t t r i b u t e the problem to the r a i l r o a d s f o r not d e l i v e r i n g the boxcars that are needed to keep the elevators f u l l . On the other hand Mr. Ian S i n c l a i r , President of the Canadian P a c i f i c Railway, and Honourable M i t c h e l l Sharp, M i n i s t e r i n charge of the Canadian Wheat Board, have blamed poor port f a c i l i t i e s f o r gr a i n handling delays. F i n a l l y the manager of one of the la r g e s t g r a i n handling operations i n Vancouver, i n an interview with t h i s w r i t e r , not only f a u l t e d the railways but also blamed the Canadian Wheat Board f o r o v e r - s e l l i n g p a r t i c u l a r grades of wheat. Thus when ships come to load the grade may not be av a i l a b l e f o r some period of time. I t was also stated that at times the Wheat Board may under-sell c e r t a i n grades, leading to congestion i n the elevator because grain i s stored that does not move out of the elevator, thus reducing the e f f e c t i v e cap- a c i t y to handle grain. On the other hand o f f i c i a l s of the Canadian Wheat Board said that i n 1964 75 m i l l i o n d o l l a r s of grain sales were l o s t because of the i n a b i l i t y of B r i t i s h Laurencom Writers, "Grain Handling Sparks Controversy at Vancouver," Canadian M i l l i n g and Feed, XLVII (May 1966), 20-23. 3 Columbia ports to move more grain. ̂  To counter t h i s statement, grain handling agencies said that expanded capacity was not warranted to handle the temporary heavy shipments of 1963-64. 6 Charges and countercharges such as the above are not new. Ever since Canada started making s u b s t a n t i a l grain sales to China i n I960 there have been p e r i o d i c disputes and discus- sions over West Coast g r a i n handling f a c i l i t i e s . In 1961 a P a c i f i c Coast Grain Conference was arranged by the Canadian Wheat Board. A short report was made by an Immediate Problems Committee i n which many of the problems were stated and some recommendations for t h e i r s o l u t i o n were made. The possible problem areas l i s t e d at that time remain r e l a t i v e l y unchanged today. Some of the problems mentioned were: 1. Shortage of s u f f i c i e n t boxcars f o r unloading caused by: a. Lack of ample shipping orders i n the country. b. S l i d e s or washouts on the railway. c. Total r e s t r i c t i o n of country loadings by railways a f f e c t i n g terminal elevators. d. Shortage of boxcars due to abnormal increases i n demand generally. 2. Elevator congestion caused by: a. Lack of shipping generally - delayed a r r i v a l due to storms etc. b. Stocks of non-shippable grai n . c. Grain that requires drying or processing. d. Unloading o i l seeds when not required to avoid railway demurrage charges. 3. Shipping delays caused by: a. Bad weather - excessive r a i n fog etc. b. Periods of high t i d e s . c. Modern vessels - size and type of construction. d. Intermittent shortage of stevedore gangs f o r 1:00 P.M. or 6:00 P.M. s t a r t s . e. Ph y s i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s of sustained overtime work. J3. K. Edmonds, "Behind the Big West Coast Grain Back- up," F i n a n c i a l Post, March 14, 1966, p. 1 f f . Edmonds, p. 1. f. Excessive trimming or sacking slack holds while also loading bulk. g. Shortage of grades to meet requirements. h. D i f f i c u l t i e s i n maintaining grades on outward shipments as compared to those established at unload. i . Vessels not passed f o r loading or not completely ready f o r loading but occupying berths and pre- venting vessels from unloading that have passed and are ready. 0. Berthing generally, i n c l u d i n g s h i f t i n g from berth to berth. k. Delay i n grading some export cargoes u n t i l Winnipeg Inspector establishes grade. 1. Lack of s u f f i c i e n t d r a f t at some berths, m. S i l t i n g at New Westminster Elevator and at entrance to Fraser River. 7 n. Reluctance and/or r e f u s a l to work overtime. History of P a c i f i c Coast Grain Handling Grain handling on the B r i t i s h Columbia coast has a r e l - a t i v e l y short h i s t o r y when compared to the Lakehead or Eastern Ports. P a c i f i c Coast grain exports were hard won and repre- sented a v i c t o r y over the established eastern shipping and grain i n t e r e s t s . O r i g i n a l l y the opening of the Panama Canal was seen as leading the way to heavy grain exports from Vancouver. In a n t i c i p a t i o n of the canal route an elevator was opened i n Vancouver i n 1916. However, l i t t l e a c t i v i t y r e s u l t e d and the small amount of grain exported i n the next f i v e years went c h i e f l y to the Orient. Thus the established i n t e r e s t s i n the east were slow to see the opportunities inherent i n the P a c i f i c and Panama route to Europe. F i r s t they had reservations about shipping g r a i n through the t r o p i c s because of a fear of spoilage en route to Europe. Experimental shipments undertaken by the Dominion Research Laboratory i n 1917 proved t h i s to be ' P a c i f i c Coast Grain Conference, "Report of the Immed- i a t e Problems Committee" (Vancouver, 1961), mimeo., p. 3, 5 Q an unfounded fear. Probably of greater importance was that the eastern route was t r i e d and proven. Considerable money was invested i n Lakehead and Eastern port f a c i l i t i e s and con- t r o l of these f a c i l i t i e s was remote from B r i t i s h Columbia. Consequently there was considerable i n e r t i a i n developing a western route from those responsible f o r the export and handling of grain. One r e s u l t of i n e r t i a was the f a c t that r a i l f r e i g h t rates to the P a c i f i c Coast were unfavourable. Not u n t i l 1 9 2 5 were f r e i g h t rates to the P a c i f i c ports equal- ized with the Lakehead. P r i o r to the equalizing of r a i l rates on grain, exporting through Vancouver to Europe was only pos- s i b l e because of lower ocean rates to Europe as compared with the Lakehead or East Coast. These lower ocean rates began i n 1 9 2 1 and a f t e r t h i s European grain exports from Vancouver increased r a p i d l y . By 1 9 2 5 there were s i x elevators i n 9 Vancouver with a storage capacity of 6 . 5 m i l l i o n bushels. Grain shipments increased from about 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 bushels i n 1 9 2 0 - 2 1 to 5 3 m i l l i o n bushels i n 1 9 2 5 - 2 6 (Table I ) . By 1 9 3 2 - 3 3 shipments had reached a pre-war peak of 103 m i l l i o n bushels through a l l B r i t i s h Columbia ports. Elevator storage capacity i n Vancouver had also r i s e n i n the period to 18.7 m i l l i o n bushels by 1 9 3 3 . The present elevator f a c i l i t i e s at Prince Rupert ( 1 9 2 5 ) , New Westminster ( 1 9 2 9 ) » and V i c t o r i a ( 1 9 2 8 ) were also 8D. A. MacGibbon, The Canadian Grain Trade (Toronto; MacMillan Company, 1 9 3 2 ) , p. 268. % e e the unpublished graduating essay (Faculty of Com- merce, U.B.C., 1962) by G. R. Wheatley, "Grain.Handling Through the Port of Vancouver," p. 3 1 . 6 constructed during t h i s period of rapid growth although they did comparatively l i t t l e to improve the grain trade on the P a c i f i c Coast at that time. A l l of these developments during the decade of the twenties and early t h i r t i e s c l e a r l y estab- l i s h e d the P a c i f i c Coast as a major export point f o r Canadian grain. Exigencies of war reduced the trade to a t r i c k l e during the 1 9 4 0 ' s but since that time B r i t i s h Columbia grai n exports have shown steady increases, and at times have surpassed the volume shipped through St. Lawrence River Ports (Table I ) . Purpose of Study Continuing growth of grain exports through B r i t i s h Columbia ports, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the past f i v e years, has r a i s e d the problem of how much p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s possible i n t h i s grow- ing market with present elevator f a c i l i t i e s which are i n most cases more than 25 years o l d . Simply stated, the problem i s what should be done to ensure the e f f i c i e n t handling of a grow- ing volume of gr a i n through B r i t i s h Columbia ports. The purpose of t h i s thesis i s to consider and analyze the many facets of the problem that have to be considered and furthermore to i n d i - cate the course of a c t i o n t h i s analysis suggests. Among the most important facets of the problem examined i n t h i s thesis are the future of grain markets, the future of shipping as i t r e l a t e s to the grain trade and the future com- p e t i t i v e forces from the near-by ports i n the United States. Other Studies The ports of B r i t i s h Columbia are presently undergoing thorough examination and study i n preparation f o r b u i l d i n g f o r the f u t u r e. Vancouver p a r t i c u l a r l y , i s r e c e i v i n g close 7 TABLE I CANADIAN GRAIN EXPORTS BY SEABOARD SECTOR SELECTED CROP YEARS (Figures i n thousands of Bushels) Via Canadian St. Lawrence Via Via Via Ports and Canadian U.S.A. P a c i f i c Lakehead A t l a n t i c Via A t l a n t i c Crop Year Coast . d i r e c t Coast C h u r c h i l l Coast 1 9 2 0 - 2 1 1 9 2 5 - 2 6 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 1 9 3 2 - 3 3 1 9 3 5 - 3 6 1 9 4 0 - 4 1 1 9 4 4 - 4 5 1 9 4 5 - 4 6 1 9 5 0 - 5 1 1 9 5 5 - 56 1 9 5 6 - 57 1 9 5 7 - 58 1 9 5 8 - 59 1 9 5 9 - 6 0 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 1 9 6 1 - 6 2 1 9 6 2 - 63 1 9 6 3 - 64 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 4 7 5 5 3 , 4 0 4 7 5 , 8 6 6 1 0 2 , 6 0 5 5 9 , 9 7 9 4 , 1 0 6 8 , 6 4 4 6 6 , 9 5 1 6 8 , 4 8 1 1 1 3 , 5 8 3 1 3 8 , 9 6 7 1 6 9 , 5 5 5 1 5 4 , 1 0 7 1 3 6 , 7 5 5 1 5 9 , 8 1 3 1 8 0 , 9 0 7 1 6 0 , 2 9 2 2 2 0 , 7 4 5 1 8 6 , 1 4 1 5 2 , 0 6 0 9 3 , 8 6 7 6 3 , 4 9 5 8 8 , 8 6 9 7 1 , 7 7 8 6 3 , 2 3 7 1 0 6 , 9 4 9 1 2 1 , 6 8 1 9 4 , 9 5 8 1 4 7 , 8 1 6 1 1 7 , 3 9 2 1 2 3 , 5 0 8 1 2 0 , 0 6 7 1 1 0 , 4 3 2 1 3 9 , 6 5 9 1 4 4 , 1 0 1 1 4 2 , 3 5 7 3 0 6 , 1 0 2 1 7 8 , 1 4 2 9 , 8 1 6 1 5 , 9 4 9 1 1 , 1 0 8 9 , 2 3 5 1 3 , 7 0 5 5 0 , 7 4 1 5 2 , 4 0 9 3 0 , 6 9 5 1 6 , 7 5 8 4 5 , 2 1 0 2 7 , 8 1 8 3 0 , 9 3 0 3 1 , 1 1 0 2 5 , 0 9 9 3 3 , 9 7 0 2 1 , 8 0 8 1 9 , 8 4 3 5 4 , 4 7 5 3 4 , 2 9 5 2 , 7 3 6 2 , 4 0 7 6 , 7 6 7 1 2 , 8 1 8 1 6 , 2 5 0 1 8 , 4 5 1 1 8 , 7 2 3 2 1 , 8 3 8 2 0 , 2 0 3 1 9 , 2 4 4 2 1 , 7 6 1 2 1 , 6 8 0 2 2 , 0 6 0 6 4 , 0 8 1 1 7 5 , 0 1 7 9 8 , 6 9 9 5 5 , 5 1 6 7 5 , 4 2 9 5 7 , 7 4 0 8 3 , 0 9 5 7 2 , 8 2 5 4 , 6 2 4 227 676 1 3 6 3 6 6 Source: Board of Grain Commissioners f or Canada, Canadian Grain Exports f o r the Crop Year 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , p. 3 1 . 8 scru t i n y . Several studies are presently under way i n t h i s regard that w i l l , no doubt, provide a wealth of information on B r i t i s h Columbia's ports. P h y s i c a l problems of port construc- t i o n are being studied with the use of an elaborate hydrograph- i c a l model of the Vancouver Harbour a r e a . 1 0 There i s also a study presently being done by Joseph B. Ward and Associates which w i l l give a complete inventory of a l l port f a c i l i t i e s i n Vancouver. Economic and geographical studies are being under- taken by the B r i t i s h Columbia Research Council for the National Harbours Board and also by a graduate student i n the Department of Geography on a $10,000 research grant from the Department of Transport and the National Harbours Board. The l a t t e r study i s a thorough analysis of the o r i g i n s and destinations of goods i n f o r e i g n trade through Vancouver. In a d d i t i o n p r i v a t e organiz- ations, p a r t i c u l a r l y the Canadian P a c i f i c Railway and the Canadian National Railway, are studying Vancouver's port and have developed extensive plans f o r expansion. On a smaller scale the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool has studied c l o s e l y the P a c i f i c Coast as an o u t l e t f o r grain. And, f i n a l l y , various municipal governments and the p r o v i n c i a l government are v i t a l l y i n t e r e s t e d i n port development plans and have undertaken studies of t h e i r own. Within the extensive study of B r i t i s h Columbia ports now underway very l i t t l e i s being done to study the most impor- tant commodity presently exported from the province. This thesis i s intended to help f i l l t h i s gap with a comprehensive and "Ottawa R o l l s Out Giant Docks Plan," Vancouver Sun, February 18, 1966, p. 1. d e t a i l e d analysis of grain handling. Furthermore i t i s an analysis from a d i f f e r e n t viewpoint than that which may be done by pr i v a t e or even pu b l i c g r a i n handling i n t e r e s t s , f i r s t because i t has no p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n mind and second because i t includes analyses of competitive ports close to B r i t i s h Columbia. So f a r as can be determined the competitive factors of United States ports have not as yet been given study. Method of Analysis and Organization Most of the atten t i o n being directed to port develop- ment and study i n B r i t i s h Columbia i s understandably focused on Vancouver simply because i t i s the major port on the P a c i f i c Coast of Canada. However, other ports such as New Westminster and Prince Rupert have been a t t r a c t i n g some at t e n t i o n and devel opment d o l l a r s . New Westminster i s cu r r e n t l y having i t s ship channels improved1'1' and Prince Rupert i s being spoken of as the ou t l e t f o r northern B r i t i s h Columbia's exports. Vancouver, therefore, i s not the only port that i s l i k e l y to see new devel opments. For t h i s reason i t i s considered l o g i c a l to study a l l grain handling f a c i l i t i e s on the B r i t i s h Columbia coast. Any research i n t o future requirements f o r grain hand- l i n g f a c i l i t i e s i s a complex problem i n v o l v i n g the workings of the g r a i n trade, the i n t r i c a t e operation of ports, and the con- t i n u a l l y changing shipping industry. Such complexity p o s s i b l y explains why controversy a r i s e s among the various interested groups i n t r y i n g to pinpoint problem areas i n grain handling. Fraser River Harbour Commission, 1st Annual Report (1965), 3. . 10 In each of the chapters that fo l l o w the various aspects of t h i s complex problem are analyzed separately. Chapter I I i s p r i m a r i l y a d e s c r i p t i v e chapter that d e t a i l s the present g r a i n handling f a c i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h Colum- b i a . In addition some analysis of the operations of the grain elevators i s undertaken i n order to e s t a b l i s h t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n the Canadian g r a i n trade. F i n a l l y an e f f o r t i s made to analyze t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y i n handling grain. Problems of forecasting future markets for Canadian grain are an important part of planning f o r future g r a i n hand- l i n g f a c i l i t i e s . This aspect, however, appears to have received r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e a t t e n t i o n , being ignored i n favour of the more immediate problems of handling present orders. Longer term aspects of port development i n B r i t i s h Columbia requires such a n a l y s i s . For t h i s reason Chapters I I I and IV analyze the trends and outlook i n the grain markets served by B r i t i s h Columbia. By i m p l i c a t i o n , a study of grain handling f a c i l i t i e s and future needs i s a study of competitive advantages and d i s - advantages of c e r t a i n ports over others. Chapter V studies t h i s aspect i n considerable d e t a i l . As research data on P a c i f i c Coast ship movements becomes av a i l a b l e i t w i l l l i k e l y be shown conclusively that a l l ports on the P a c i f i c Coast, both American and Canadian, can be considered as a f u n c t i o n a l l y integrated system. Therefore i f Vancouver becomes an i n - e f f i c i e n t port and Portland or Seattle improve, Vancouver i s l i k e l y to lose trade. This does not mean our grain exports would be diverted to American ports but, even worse, g r a i n 1 1 sales could be l o s t altogether i f Vancouver and other Canadian West Coast ports become i n e f f i c i e n t , high cost centres. Con- versely, American grain exports may increase and, i n turn, t h e i r ports w i l l b e n e f i t. Because of these f a c t o r s i t was thought b e n e f i c i a l to study c l o s e l y American g r a i n handling methods, plans f o r expansion, and the costs involved with shipping through American ports on the P a c i f i c . By doing so the r e l a t i v e competitiveness of ports i n Canada and the United States can be determined. F i n a l l y , a f t e r study of the various facets of gr a i n handling i n e a r l i e r chapters of the t h e s i s , a synthesis i s attempted i n Chapter "VT i n order to make clea r e r what future act i o n w i l l be required with regard to grain handling f a c i l - i t i e s on the B r i t i s h Columbia coast. No pretention i s made to recommend s p e c i f i c f a c i l i t i e s , but i t i s possible at l e a s t to give some idea of the d i r e c t i o n future planning and expansion should take. 12 CHAPTER I I PRESENT GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES Any assessment of the future needs f o r gr a i n handling f a c i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia requires both a study of the future p o t e n t i a l g r a i n trade i n Canada and a complete analysis of present Canadian port f a c i l i t i e s f o r grain. In a d d i t i o n the possible d i v i s i o n of t r a f f i c between regions must be con- sidered. The second of these analyses w i l l be dealt with comprehensively i n t h i s chapter while the other two are the subject of Chapter 17. Smooth and e f f i c i e n t handling of grain through B r i t i s h Columbia ports has a dual r o l e . F i r s t the i n t e r e s t s of Canada as a major grain exporter are enhanced because i t allows Canada to s e l l more wheat overseas when the opportunities a r i s e . In some measure, i t i s safe to say, the prosperity of p r a i r i e a g r i c u l t u r e r e l i e s upon the q u a l i t y of grain handling proced- ures on the P a c i f i c Coast. Secondly the ports of B r i t i s h Columbia benefit because e f f i c i e n t inexpensive handling adds to the attractiveness of the ports f o r shipping. Due to t h i s f a c t i t appears quite clear that a study of grain handling cannot stand alone without reference to other port a c t i v i t i e s and f a c i l i t i e s . In f a c t the grain handling aspect i s very much a part of the larger integrated whole of the port. Advantages of B r i t i s h Columbia Ports Ports o f f e r i n g g r a i n as a cargo have several important advantages i n a t t r a c t i n g ships. F i r s t , g r a i n i s a clean cargo ! 5 that can be quickly stowed and discharged. 1 This, of course, speeds turn-around time which i s so important to p r o f i t a b l e ship operation. This f a c t o r may be even more important today because i t appears turn-around times are g e t t i n g longer as time passes. A recent book points out that days at sea, which are considered a ship's productive time, have dropped from 210 days per year i n 1929 to 130 days per year i n 1950 and p have continued downward since 1 9 5 0 ' Some of t h i s may be a t t r i b u t e d to l a r g e r and f a s t e r ships, but at l e a s t part of the fewer days at sea can be blamed on i n e f f i c i e n t ports that have f a i l e d to keep up with the trends i n shipping e f f i c i e n c y . Second, grain i s an excellent d i s t r e s s cargo to f i l l empty holds when other t r a f f i c i s not a v a i l a b l e . Ships w i l l quote very low rates on grain when t h i s occurs. In e f f e c t grain i s the type of t r a f f i c that w i l l move at rates very close to marginal cost. This appears to be a feature of the Vancouver- European trade^ and no doubt contributes to the r e l a t i v e l y low , average ocean f r e i g h t s from Vancouver as compared with Eastern Canadian p o r t s . ^ For example rates from Vancouver averaged only 24% higher to B r i t a i n than from Montreal i n 1964-65, yet the distance i s p r a c t i c a l l y three times as great (Table I I ) . •HR.'S. McElwee, Port Development (New York; McGraw H i l l , 1926), p. 236. 2 C o l . R. B.. Oram, Cargo Handling and the Modern Port (London; Pergamon Press, 1965), P« 4. ^See the unpublished graduating essay (Faculty of Com- merce, U.B.C., 1962) by G. R. Wheatley, "Grain Handling Through the Port of Vancouver," p. 31* ^Board of Grain Commissioners, Canadian Grain Exports for the Crop Year 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1965;, p. 21. 14 TABLE I I DISTANCES TO MAJOB OVERSEAS PORTS D i s t a n c e f r o m Port Arthur Vancouver Fort William Montreal ( n a u t i c a l miles) Western Europe Antwerp 9 , 0 0 5 4,354- 3,142 Copenhagen 9,210 4,453 3,241 Hamburg 9,137 4,408 3,196 Havre 8,683 4-, 156 2,944 Liverpool 8,614 3,967 2,755 London 8,833 4,306 3,094- Naples 9,383 5 , 3 7 2 4,160 Oslo 9,134- 4,377 3 , 1 6 5 Rotterdam 8,874- 4,351 3 , 1 3 9 A s i a (Far East) Hong Kong 5,704 12,780 11,568 Manila 6 , 0 1 9 12,656 11,444 Shanghai 5,160 12,94-8 11,736 Singapore 7,078 11,326 10,114 Yokohama 4,262 12,064 10,852 Vladivostok 4,312 12 , 1 2 3 10 ,911 Bombay 9,519 9,359 8,147 A f r i c a Capetown 10 , 505 8 , 3 3 0 7,118 Aden 11,802 7,699 6,487 South America Callao 4 , 7 8 3 5 , 7 3 2 4 , 5 2 0 Rio de Janeiro 8,360 6,569 5 , 3 5 7 Source: Canadian Ports and Seaway Directory 1 9 6 5 , (Gardenvale, Quebec; National Business Publications L t d . ) , pp. 48 - 4 9 . 15 F i n a l l y g r a i n has. a stowage f a c t o r of one. This means that one ton of wheat f i l l s f o r t y cubic f e e t : i t s free flowing nature allowing f o r no waste space.^ An important advantage of the P a c i f i c Coast l i e s i n i t s p o s i t i o n i n r e l a t i o n to the shipping patterns i n the world. Generally speaking ships from Europe unload t h e i r cargoes a l l along the P a c i f i c seaboard of North America, thus a r r i v i n g i n the v i c i n i t y of Vancouver or B r i t i s h Columbia ports looking f o r a return cargo. A b r i e f study done a few years ago i l l u s - t r a t e s t h i s point. The study was done to show how ships spread out around the world once they leave t h e i r home ports i n Europe. Of the 24-5 vessels that were charted, s i x reached Vancouver and a l l s i x l i s t e d Vancouver as t h e i r terminal port.^ In other words Vancouver was the l a s t port of c a l l before s t a r t i n g the return journey to Europe. On the other hand the same survey indic a t e d the vessels reaching Los Angeles and San Francisco had f u r t h e r ports of c a l l before s t a r t i n g the return journey to Europe. This would i n d i c a t e that, since grain i s a bottom cargo, Vancouver and B r i t i s h Columbia ports are very favourably located f o r the loading of such cargoes. The f i n a l and obvious advantage of B r i t i s h Columbia ports f o r grain shipping i s t h e i r proximity to the markets of the Orient. The advantage i n t h i s regard i s so great that there i s no question of Eastern Canadian ports being competi- t i v e . Greater shipping distances and higher handling charges %cElwee, op. c i t . , p. 2 3 7 . ^F. W. Morgan, Ports and Harbours (London; Hutchinson's U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , 1 9 5 2 ) , p. 1 0 7 . 16 involved i n double handling i n the East makes the P a c i f i c Coast the only economical export point f o r g r a i n to the Orient. I t should be remembered, of course, that B r i t i s h Columbia shares t h i s advantage with the United States ports immediately to the south. Distances from the markets f o r exports from B r i t i s h Columbia ports are very great and probably constitute the most serious disadvantage of the P a c i f i c ports i n world trade. This i s true p a r t i c u l a r l y of the major European markets which are f a r c loser to Eastern Canada than to Western Canada (Table I I ) . Therefore despite the many advantages l i s t e d previously there i s a great need f o r e f f i c i e n t port f a c i l i t i e s to overcome some of the costs of long distance. In e f f e c t the higher costs of long distance by ocean shipping have to be o f f s e t by lower land transport costs and lower t r a n s f e r costs from r a i l to ship. In Canada, the land transport costs f o r g r a i n are stable and reasonably low. The w e l l known Crows Nest Pass grain rates are set by statute, which means that only i n extraordinary circumstances w i l l g r a i n rates be changed. I t would appear, i n f a c t , that any r e v i s i o n of these r a t e s , e i t h e r up or down, i s out of the question. Under these circum- stances the advantages and disadvantages of West over East as an export point to Europe must be i n terms of port f a c i l i t i e s and ocean f r e i g h t r a t e s . S i m i l a r l y i n the Far East trade, part of Canada's a b i l i t y to s e l l to t h i s market w i l l r e s t on the port's a b i l i t y to handle grain, when compared with United States P a c i f i c ports. Therefore i t i s necessary to look at B r i t i s h Columbia's grain handling f a c i l i t i e s . Elevator Capacities There are four ports on the B r i t i s h Columbia coast that have grain elevator f a c i l i t i e s . Vancouver has by f a r the greatest proportion of the i n s t a l l a t i o n s , with s i x of the nine elevators on the coast. V i c t o r i a , Prince Rupert and New West- minster each have one. The s i x Vancouver elevators make up 88% of the t o t a l r e gistered storage capacity on the P a c i f i c Coast, or 21.8 m i l l i o n bushels out of 24 . 9 m i l l i o n bushels. I t was noted i n Chapter I that most of t h i s capacity was i n - s t a l l e d many years ago. In 1933 there was 18,716 ,500 bushels of storage capacity i n Vancouver. Since that time the addi- tions have been r e l a t i v e l y minor. The l a t e s t a d dition to capacity was made i n 1959 when one m i l l i o n bushels were added to the United Grain Growers i n s t a l l a t i o n . Nothing has been added at the other ports that export grain. This does not mean to say that improvements have not been made. Over the years new equipment has been developed and i n s t a l l e d and old equipment has been replaced. For example, cleaning and drying equipment has been improved considerably since the o r i g i n a l was i n s t a l l e d . As old machinery wears out or new demands are placed on the elevators the l a t e s t and most e f f i c i e n t equip- ment has been i n s t a l l e d . In spite of t h i s , the basic plant has changed l i t t l e over the years. Furthermore the pl a n t , c o n s i s t i n g of large concrete s i l o s , i s by nature l o n g - l a s t i n g and permanent. Even a f t e r 40 and 50 years of use the grain elevators s t i l l appear to be i n good condition. Most of the people interviewed f o r 18 t h i s study f e l t that the o r i g i n a l concept of the terminal elevator had been so w e l l developed that there was a c t u a l l y l i t t l e room f o r improvement. This appears to be borne out i n p r a c t i c e because the new Saskatchewan Wheat Pool Elevator, now being b u i l t i n Vancouver, follows the same basic design of the elevators b u i l t i n 1920. Even though i t i s easy to be complimentary about the basic elevator p l a n t , there are some operational problems that s t i l l a r i s e that have not been overcome. A study of the data r e l a t i n g to the various stages of the elevator operation r e - veals where these problems l i e . Generally speaking a gr a i n elevator can load grain to a ship f a r f a s t e r than any of the other operations such as drying, unloading boxcars or cleaning. Table I I I shows the various c a p a c i t i e s of the terminal eleva- tors i n B r i t i s h Columbia. In any eight-hour s h i f t a l l of these elevators can load 2,061,000 bushels to ships. In the same period of time only 965,000 bushels can be unloaded from r a i l cars (Table I I I ) . I t i s i n drying, however, that the r e a l bottlenecks a r i s e . A l l of the elevators i n B r i t i s h Columbia can clean 1,44-9,000 bushels of grain i n twenty-four hours and a mere 196,000 bushels can be d r i e d i n the period. The small drying capacity can be explained by the f a c t that drying i s only an i n t e r m i t t e n t operation. Damp grain i s a r e s u l t of poor harvest conditions on the p r a i r i e s such as co l d , wet, or snowy weather. Grain harvested under these con- d i t i o n s cannot meet Canadian Wheat Board standards for export without undergoing the drying process. As a rough average t h i s only occurs about once every three years. Consequently TABLE- I I I OPERATING CAPACITIES OP BRITISH COLUMBIA TERMINAL ELEVATORS (bushels i n thousands) Ci t y Company Amount Unloaded Method i n 8 hr. Rated Working of S h i f t Capacity Capacity Unloading Cars Cleaning Capacity 24 hrs. Drying Capacity 24 hrs. Shipping Depth Capacity at Length 1 hr. Shipp- Low of R a i l - ing Water Wharf road 8 hrs. (bushels) (bushels) (bushels) Berths ( f t . ) ( f t . ) Serving Vancouver Alberta Wheat Pool 7 , 3 0 0 6,400 Car Dumpers 125 233 325 40 40 320 2 32 - 3 5 N.A. C.P.R. Vancouver P a c i f i c Eleva- tors #1 & Annex and NHB 7 , 1 1 2 #1 6 , 0 0 0 Power Shovels (manual) 136 253 275 48 60 a 480 3 35 2 , 5 0 0 C.N.R. Vancouver P a c i f i c Eleva- tors #2 600 400 Power shovels 14 b 26 60 N i l 10 80 1 35 N.A. C.P.R. Vancouver Saskatchewan Wheat Pool 1 , 6 5 0 1,400 Power shovels 84 150 24 267 2 3 5 2,610 C.N.R. Vancouver United Grain Growers Ltd. 3,645 2 , 5 0 0 Car Dumper 60 112 300 24 27 213 2 28 -40 N.A. C.N.R. North Vancouver Burrard Ter- minals L t d . 1 , 5 0 0 1 , 0 0 0 Power shovels 28° 52 48 12 17 133 1 N • A. N.A. C.N.R. New West- minster P a c i f i c Elevators L t d . 750 500 Power Shovels 40 d 75 75 12 20 160 1 30 9 7 5 C.N.R. •Calculated on the basis of average P a c i f i c Coast unloading of wheat per boxcar of 1,862 bushels i n 1964-65' Source: Sanford Evans, Grain Trade Year Book (Winnipeg, 1966). *Based on wheat standard of 60 l b . per bushel. aCould only load at thi s rate i f a ship at each berth. Otherwise at each berth hourly loading capacity i s 20,000 bushels per hour. One ship cannot be loaded at 60,000 bushels per hour. *>None when vessel being loaded. CReduced 1/3 - 2/3 when loading v e s s e l . ^Reduced to 24 when loading v e s s e l . TABLE I I I (continued) Amount Shipping Depth Unloaded Cleaning Drying Capacity at Length Method i n 8 hr. Capacity Capacity 1 hr. Shipp- Low of R a i l - Rated Working of S h i f t 24 hrs. 24 hrs.. 8 hrs. ing Water Wharf road C i t y Company Capacity Capacity Unloading Cars ("bushels) (bushels) (bushels) Berths ( f t . ) ( f t . ) Serving (bushels)* V i c t o r i a V i c t o r i a 1,040 Elevator Ltd. 850 Power shovels 28 96 24 21 168 1 31' -48 800 C.N.R. Prince Rupert Canadian 1 , 2 5 0 Government Elevator 850 Power shovels 42 78 120 12 J£ 240 1 43-- 7 0 1013 C. N.R. B r i t i s h Columbia Totals 24,847 1 9 , 9 0 0 518 965 1,449 196 258 2,061 14 ""Calculated on the basis of average P a c i f i c Coast unloading of wheat per boxcar of 1,862 bushels i n 1964-65. Source: Sanford Evans, Grain Trade Year Book (Winnipeg, 1966). *Based on wheat standard of 60 l b . per bushel. Sources: 1. Grain Elevator Companies i n interviews and personal correspondence. 2. P a c i f i c Coast Grain Conference, Report of Immediate Problems Committee, 1961. Unpublished mimeo. 3. Sanford Evans, Grain Trade of Canada (Winnipeg, 1966). 4. Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Elevators i n Canada (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1965). 5. Canadian Ports and Seaway Directory, 1965 (Gardenvale, Quebec; National Business Publications L t d . ) , pp. 229-300. ro o 2 1 the elevator companies are reluctant to i n s t a l l more capacity when u t i l i z a t i o n i s so sporadic. I t should he r e a l i z e d however that g r a i n drying w i l l be a re c u r r i n g problem as long as the drying c a p a c i t i e s are not increased. From the information that could be gathered for t h i s t h e s i s i t would appear that g r a i n cleaning i s not a serious problem and r a r e l y causes bottlenecks. Loading of grain ships i s u s u a l l y an intermittent operation, sometimes being done at f u l l capacity while at other times several days may go by with- out any ships being loaded. This allows g r a i n to b u i l d up i n the storage bins i n the elevator. Then when a ship a r r i v e s to load i t can be f i l l e d as r a p i d l y as possible without any hold- up caused by cleaning or boxcar unloading c a p a b i l i t i e s . I t i s conceivable that i n the event of prolonged heavy shipments a problem would a r i s e because of a lack of s u f f i c i e n t g r a i n i n the elevator. This becomes a p a r t i c u l a r concern when the various grades of grain are considered and w i l l be dealt with more f u l l y i n a l a t e r chapter. A common question asked about B r i t i s h Columbia grain elevator f a c i l i t i e s concerns t h e i r true capacity. Table I I I indicates that over two m i l l i o n bushels of wheat could be loaded each day. This, however, i s only an estimate made up of t o t a l rated capacities of machinery. Obviously t h i s i s impossible to maintain. I f two m i l l i o n bushels could be loaded each day B r i t i s h Columbia would be capable of exporting f o r t y m i l l i o n bushels of grain each month, assuming 2 0 working days 22 a month. The record to date i s about 30 m i l l i o n bushels,? which i s considerably more than the 21 m i l l i o n bushel capacity estimated i n 1961. The conditions under which the very high fi g u r e of 30 m i l l i o n bushels of exports f o r one month was attained could not be considered i d e a l . F i r s t there was a constant queue of ships i n the harbour at Vancouver. Secondly a backlog of ships had b u i l t up because of a lack of g r a i n i n the previous month. Therefore the very high output f o r t h i s month can be considered as extraordinary and u n l i k e l y to be maintained f o r an extended period of time. A through-put around the 20 m i l l i o n bushel l e v e l i s attainable with e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s . In the 1963-64- crop year the P a c i f i c Coast regu- l a r l y handled close to or over 20 m i l l i o n bushels per month (Table IV); having handled t h i s quantity i n seven of twelve months. A conclusion that can be drawn from these f i g u r e s i s that the 21 m i l l i o n bushel estimate of capacity i s probably a good one over the long run. The present f a c i l i t i e s are cap- able of much higher outputs f o r short periods but these higher outputs are often at the expense of smooth low cost operation because overtime i s required i n the elevators and ships may be required to wait f o r loading. Neither of these conditions i s t o l e r a b l e f o r extended periods. Shipping F a c i l i t i e s Harbours and port f a c i l i t i e s f o r ships are an important aspect to be considered i n an o v e r - a l l analysis of g r a i n hand- l i n g . They are very much a part of the t o t a l operation of '"B.C. Grain Exports for the Month of March," Harbour and Shipping, XLIX ( A p r i l 1966), 270. TABLE IV MONTHLY SHIPMENTS OE GRAIN BY OCEAN SHIPPING FROM BRITISH COLUMBIA SEMI-PUBLIC TERMINAL ELEVATORS FOR CROP YEARS 1963-64,AND 1964-65 (thousands of bushels) August September October November December January February March A p r i l May June Ju l y Prince Rupert 1963-64 1964-65 V i c t o r i a 1963-64 1964-65 786 4 9 3 702 1,206 1 , 5 7 6 504 8 8 9 1 , 3 0 6 1 , 0 5 8 9 0 1 1 , 0 5 5 Total for year 1 0 , 4 7 5 639 922 9 9 5 444 969 935 1,128 786 1,166 1 , 1 5 0 991 10,124 246 531 495 1,358 867 302 684 533 343 620 1,013 647 338 660 866 858 987 1,172 817 534 783 670 498 982 7,938 8,865 Vancouver &. New Westminster 1963-64 1964-65 10,801 14,594 18,433 18,384 14,061 22,824 15,458 17,675 20,240 19,038 1 9 , 2 2 9 17,238 1 5 , 6 2 5 13,114 1 7 , 7 6 1 1 2 , 9 8 4 16 , 751 1 3 , 9 4 7 16 , 4 7 6 1 7 , 7 8 7 18 ,511 1 5 , 1 7 3 1 0 , 9 2 0 7 , 1 5 9 2 0 7 , 9 7 4 176,206 Total 1963-64 1964-65 11,047 15,875 19,793 1 9 , 7 7 0 15,610 25,413 15,846 19,430 22,533 20,913 20,913 18,791 16,793 15,393 19,058 13,961 18,339 14,594 18 , 0 7 1 19,773 20,469 16,872 12,740 9,132 226,386 1 9 5 , 1 9 5 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1963-64 and 1964-65 issues). r o VJ 24 t r a n s f e r r i n g grain from land to ocean transportation. On the B r i t i s h Columbia coast the four g r a i n handling ports have f i n e deep water harbours. Vancouver, f o r example, has only one l i m i t a t i o n to i t s excellent sheltered harbour, 8 that being the F i r s t Narrows entrance with a minimum water depth of 40 feet at low t i d e . However few of the loading wharves have t h i s water depth. As Table I I I shows, most of the shipping berths have about 35 feet of water at minimum low tid e which c l e a r l y l i m i t s the harbour more than the F i r s t Narrows entrance. Within the harbour there i s adequate space f o r maneuvering vessels and water depths are no problem w i t h i n the main harbour area between the F i r s t and Second Narrows. Unpredictable cur- rents are a problem around Ballantyne P i e r . This i s caused by a back eddy into Coal Harbour and ships have to use some care when moving about t h i s area.^ There i s also some problem i n berthing ships at the Alberta Wheat Pool, which, being close to the Second Narrows i s affected by the s w i f t t i d a l run through the narrows. Beyond these minor l i m i t a t i o n s there are no other major problems at the eleven g r a i n berths i n Vancouver. New Westminster i s probably the l e a s t desirable g r a i n port on the B r i t i s h Columbia Coast. F i r s t i t i s up the Fraser River about 20 miles from the Georgia S t r a i t . Navigation up the r i v e r requires a p i l o t and consequently an extra charge to the vessel. The second drawback of New Westminster i s that 8See the unpublished Masters Thesis (University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 5 2 ) by I. H. B. Cornwall, "A Geographical Study of the Port of Vancouver i n Relation to Its Coastal Hinterland," p. 1 1 . 9 ^Cornwall, p. 14. 2 5 the channel i s only 30 feet at low water, thus r e s t r i c t i n g the port to handling the conventional f r e i g h t e r s s a i l i n g today. Because the elevator i n New Westminster i s small, however, the l a r g e r deep-draft vessels w i l l not c a l l at the port f o r g r a i n . Therefore the channel i s adequate f o r present g r a i n f a c i l i t i e s . V i c t o r i a has a very small harbour f o r ocean shipping, with j u s t two wharves, one f o r general cargo and another f o r grain loading. The harbour i s an a r t i f i c i a l one, e n t i r e l y pro- tected by a large breakwater which i s constructed to a consider- able height to provide wind pr o t e c t i o n as w e l l as a wave protec- t i o n . One ship can be berthed f o r loading g r a i n at one time. Water depth i s quite good, varying from 32 to 48 feet along the 800 foot g r a i n loading p i e r . There i s very l i t t l e room w i t h i n the confines of the Ogden Point breakwater to expand shipping f a c i l i t i e s , e i t h e r f o r g r a i n or general cargo. Prince Rupert has one of the f i n e s t harbours on the P a c i f i c Coast from the standpoint of water depth and s h e l t e r . There i s a large harbour area that allows easy maneuvering. No r e s t r i c t i o n s are placed on vessels due to water depths. The shallowest part of the approach to the harbour i s 21 fathoms. The one loading berth at the Canadian Government Elevator has a minimum depth of 43 feet dropping o f f to 70 feet at the deepest point on the 1 , 0 1 3 foot p i e r . Under these conditions Prince Rupert i s capable of loading any s i z e grain vessel that i s now i n use. R a i l F a c i l i t i e s Railway f a c i l i t i e s are another important part of the gra i n handling operation through the ports of B r i t i s h Columbia. The ports receive grain from the i n t e r i o r of Canada on three railways: the Canadian P a c i f i c , the Canadian National and the P a c i f i c Great Eastern. Of the three the P a c i f i c Great Eastern i s i n s i g n i f i c a n t . In 1964-65 t h i s r a i l r o a d delivered only 213 cars of the 99,512 cars delivered to B r i t i s h Columbia Ports (Table V). The other two railways divide the t r a f f i c almost equally, with the Canadian P a c i f i c Railway generally d e l i v e r i n g a few more than the Canadian National Railway. In 1964-65 the Canadian P a c i f i c delivered 51% and the Canadian National delivered 49% of a l l cars. In the Port of Vancouver the Canadian P a c i f i c Railway d e l i v e r s the most boxcars, rang- ing from 53% to 64% between 1959-60 and 1964-65. Railway capacity to d e l i v e r g r a i n has been studied c l o s e l y by the Canadian National Railway, Canadian P a c i f i c Railway, and Canadian Wheat Board i n the past few years because of recent large export orders. On the p r a i r i e s there i s l i t t l e problem. Large track mileage e x i s t s for p i c k i n g up the g r a i n , although s c a r c i t y of boxcars occasionally a r i s e s . In periods of heavy movement the wide d i s p e r s a l of g r a i n cars, across the p r a i r i e s can lead to i n e f f i c i e n c i e s because turn- arounds cannot be affected as quickly as would be the case i f more c e n t r a l i z e d pickups were pos s i b l e . The c a p a c i t i e s of mainline track have also been taxed, although capa c i t i e s have been expanded with the use of c e n t r a l i z e d t r a f f i c c o n t r o l . This has helped speed up the greatly increased t r a f f i c i n t o B r i t i s h Columbia, not only of g r a i n , but of new export commod- i t i e s such as potash and sulphur. TABLE V DISTRIBUTION OP BOXCARS TO BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS 1959-60 AND 1964-65 T 0 t a 1 B o x . c a r s D e l i v e r e d t o • Vancouver - New Westminster V i c t o r i a Prince Rupert % of % of % of % of % of B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. C.P.R. , Total C.N.R. Total P . G. E • Total C.N.R. Total C.N.S. Total 1959- -60 42,386 59 23,234 32 173 ' — 1,914 3 4,455 6 1960- -61 48,014 54 32,586 37 241 - 3,753 4 4,541 5 1961- -62 51,822 52 40,375 40 215 - 3,076 3 4,699 5 1962- -63 43,966 49 39,376 44 217 - 3,432 4 2,360 3 1963- -64 59,346 51 47,012 40 245 - 4,237* 4 5 , 5 2 1 5 1964- -65 5 0 , 9 3 0 51 5 8 , 0 9 6 38 213 4,687 5 5,586 6 T o t a l B r i t i s h - C o l u m b i a % of % of % of % of B.C. B.C. B.C. B.C. C.P.R. Total C.N.R. Total P.G.E. Total Total Total 1959-60 42,386 59 29,603 41 173 1960-61 48,014 51,822 54 40,880 48 , 1 5 0 46 241 1961-62 52 48 215 1962-63 43,966 49 45,168 51 217 1963-64 59,346 51 56,768 49 245 1964-65 5 0 , 9 3 0 51 48,369 49 213 * Includes 2 C.P.R. cars. 72,162 100 8 9 , 1 3 5 100 1 0 0 , 1 8 7 100 8 9 , 3 5 1 100 116 ,359 100 9 9 , 5 1 2 100 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , pp. 40-41. 28 Switching f a c i l i t i e s i n each port are important to the smooth flow of grain. In Vancouver the waterfront elevators receive t h e i r g r a i n cars a f t e r they have been sorted i n the railway yards at Port Coquitlam (C.P.E.) and Port Mann (C.N.E.). Both of these marshalling yards are cu r r e n t l y being improved so they can handle more t r a f f i c . I t i s the sidings at the eleva- tors that tend to be a problem. There i s l i m i t e d trackage at many of the elevators, p a r t i c u l a r l y on the south shore of Burrard I n l e t . This means that frequent car spotting i s neces- sary. In one instance f o r example, four separate car spots are necessary each day to allow the elevator to unload at i t s economic capacity. On the North Shore the new Saskatchewan Wheat Pool elevator along with the Canadian National Eailways* large 2 7 m i l l i o n d o l l a r improvement program should provide adequate switching f a c i l i t i e s to t h i s a r e a . 1 1 In Prince Eupert there i s l i t t l e problem with railway trackage, since the elevator i s immediately adjacent to the marshalling yard of the C.N.E. S i m i l a r l y i n New Westminster no great problem with boxcar spotting i s f e l t because the size of the elevator does not demand heavy movement. V i c t o r i a cannot be considered i d e a l as f a r as r a i l f a c i l i t i e s are concerned because every boxcar unloaded on Vancouver Island has to be 1 0D. Yates, "Grain and the Port of Vancouver," Sympos- ium on the Port of Vancouver Proceedings, ed. Robert W. C o l l i e r (U.B.C., 1966), p. 9 0 . "^Information i n a l e t t e r to the author from Mr. E. P h i l l i p s , Besearch Director of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, June, 1966. 29 f e r r i e d a c r o s s b y b a r g e . I b i s i s a s l o w and c o s t l y p r o c e s s because i t i n v o l v e s e x t r a s h u n t i n g and s w i t c h i n g , b a r g e h a u l i n g and s l o w e r t u r n a r o u n d f o r b o x c a r s t h a n when t h e y a r e u n l o a d e d on t h e m a i n l a n d . The b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f r a i l f a c i l i t i e s above does n o t a t t e m p t t o s e t some f i g u r e o f c a p a c i t y on how much g r a i n t h e r a i l w a y s c a n d e l i v e r . T h i s w o u l d v a r y d e p e n d i n g on t h e vo lume o f o t h e r t r a f f i c t h e y have t o h a u l . The c a p a c i t y f o r s p o t t i n g c a r s a t any s i d i n g w i l l depend t o some e x t e n t on t h e number o f c a r s t h a t have t o be s p o t t e d a t o t h e r r a i l w a y s i d i n g s o r t h e amount o f s h u n t i n g and s o r t i n g n e c e s s a r y i n t h e y a r d s . I t i s known t h a t d u r i n g 1 9 6 3 - 6 4 t h e r a i l w a y s d e l i v e r e d up t o 500 12 b o x c a r s p e r day t o Vancouver a l o n e . T h i s i s c l o s e t o maximum c a p a c i t y f o r t h e e l e v a t o r s because w i t h o u t o v e r t i m e t h e u n l o a d - i n g c a p a c i t y i n Vancouve r i s 400 c a r s p e r d a y . . To u n l o a d a n o t h e r 100 c a r s p e r day r e q u i r e s d o u b l e s h i f t i n g o r o v e r t i m e . I t w o u l d appear t h e n , t h a t r a i l w a y f a c i l i t i e s a r e a d e q u a t e t o s e r v e p r e s e n t g r a i n h a n d l i n g f a c i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a b u t f u t u r e e x p a n s i o n s i n e l e v a t o r s w i l l l i k e l y r e q u i r e s i m i l a r e x p a n s i o n s o f r a i l c a p a c i t y . C o m p a r a t i v e E l e v a t o r O p e r a t i o n s - B . C . and E a s t e r n Canada A u s e f u l c o m p a r i s o n c a n be made b e t w e e n w e s t e r n and e a s t e r n e l e v a t o r o p e r a t i o n s b y c o m p a r i n g t h e r e l a t i v e y e a r l y t u r n o v e r s o f c a p a c i t y i n t h e w e s t and e a s t . I n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a t h e t o t a l r a t e d s t o r a g e c a p a c i t y o f 2 4 . 9 m i l l i o n b u s h e l s t u r n e d o v e r 9 . 1 4 t i m e s i n t h e 1 9 6 3 - 6 4 c r o p y e a r . T h i s i s t h e h i g h e s t t u r n o v e r i n t h e 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 t o 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 p e r i o d . I n ' Y a t e s , o p . c i t . , p . 8 8 . 3 0 the i n d i v i d u a l ports of Vancouver-New Westminster, Frince Rupert and V i c t o r i a the turnover was 9.28, 7.70, and 8.16 r e s - p e c t i v e l y . Table VI shows t h i s u t i l i z a t i o n f a c t o r f o r the past f i v e years. In 1963-64 the Lakehead elevators turned over capacity 4 .23 times while the eastern elevators turnover was 5.86, both of which are much lower than western terminal elevator turnover (Table VII). The performance of the western elevators i s even more s i g n i f i c a n t when the operations of west and east are compared. Lakehead elevators are p r i m a r i l y used f o r cleaning and grading g r a i n and forwarding to eastern elevators f o r export or domes- t i c use. Table VIII shows the d i s p o s i t i o n of g r a i n from the Lakehead f o r 1964-65 which can be considered a representative year. 98.3% of wheat and 79-4% of oats forwarded from the Lakehead i s tr a n s f e r r e d to eastern e l e v a t o r s . Somewhat smaller proportions of other grains are forwarded to eastern elevators but i n t o t a l eastern elevators are the d e s t i n a t i o n of 89% of Lakehead shipments. Another 4% i s forwarded to United States elevators or Canadian m i l l s or maltsters. Thus 93% of Lakehead shipments are t r a n s f e r r e d to other elevators. The great s i g - n i f i c a n c e of t h i s f a c t i s that v i r t u a l l y a l l of these shipments are made i n bulk loading lake vessels. The Lakehead operation, therefore, i s r e l a t i v e l y simple, c o n s i s t i n g of dumping boxcars, cleaning and grading, and loading one type of v e s s e l . S i m i l a r l y the eastern elevators have a simple operation. Their job con- s i s t s of unloading the lake vessels, elevating the g r a i n and loading deep sea v e s s e l s . No cleaning or grading i s involved. TABLE VI TURNOVERS OF TERMINAL ELEVATOR CAPACITY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 1960-61 TO 1964-65 (thousands of bushels) Total 1960-61 1961-62 - 1962-63 Capacity* Shipments** Turnover Shipments Turnover shipments Turnover Vancouver - New Westminster 2 2 , 5 5 7 152,210 6.75 W , 2 3 9 7-72 157,131 6 . 9 7 V i c t o r i a 1,040 7 , 0 9 2 6.82 5,042 4.85 6,276 6 . 0 3 Prince Rupert 1 , 2 5 0 9,889 7 .91 10,268 8.21 4 , 3 0 9 3.45 A l l B r i t i s h Columbia 24,847 1 6 9 , 1 9 1 6.81 189,549 7-63 1 6 7 , 7 1 6 6 . 7 5 1963 Shipments -64 Turnover 1964 Shipments -65 Turnover Vancouver - New Westminster 209,423 9.28 177,106 7.85 V i c t o r i a 8,006 7 . 7 0 8,995 8.65 Prince Rupert 10,206 8.16 10,173 8.14 A l l B r i t i s h Columbia 227,635 9.16 196,274 7 . 9 0 *Same f o r each year. **Includes r a i l shipments which are i n s i g n i f i c a n t . Sources: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , various issues. TABLE 711 TURNOVERS OF EASTERN AND LAKEHEAD TERMINAL ELE7ATOR CAPACITY 1960-61 TO 1964-65 (thousands of "bushels) 1 9 6 0 - 6 1 1 9 6 1 - 6 2 Capacity Shipments Turnover Capacity Shipments Turnover Lakehead - Fort William Port Arthur 93 , 152 320,433 3.44 97,582 251,753 2.57 Eastern Elevators 110,435 444 ,255* 4.02 110,955 441,580 3-98 Lakehead + Eastern Elevator Shipments minus Lakehead Shipments to Eastern Elevators 1 9 6 2 - 6 3 1 9 6 3 - 6 4 1 9 6 4 - 6 5 Ship- Turn- Ship- Turn- Ship- Turn Capacity ments over Capacity ments over Capacity ments over Lakehead - Fort William Port Arthur 101,741 2 9 0 , 1 0 7 2.85 106,421 449,916 4 . 2 3 106,421 385,658 3-62 Eastern Elevators 108,575 441,713 4 . 0 7 119,585 700,815 5-86 120,335 515,286 4.28 Lakehead + Eastern Elevator Shipments minus Lakehead Shipments to Eastern Elevators 210,316 480 ,290 2.28 226,006 740,548 3.28 226,756 *Includes United States grain handled i n Canadian elevators. Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada, 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) . TABLE VIII DISTRIBUTION OF PRIMARY SHIPMENTS OF CANADIAN GRAIN FROM THE SEMI-PUBLIC AND PRIVATE TERMINAL ELEVATORS, FORT WILLIAM - PORT ARTHUR, CROP YEAR 1964-65 (thousands of bushels) Wheat % Oats % Barley % Rye % Flaxseed % Transfers: By vessel to: Eastern Elevators 2 7 3 , 1 9 7 98.3 34,680 79.4 26,653 55-5 1,393 29.3 5,598 57.0 United States points - 277 .6 7,161 14.9 2,433 51.1 By r a i l to: Eastern Elevators 24 - 84 .2 4 181 1.8 Domestic Shipments By vessel to: Canadian points - eastern d i v i s i o n ( m i l l s & maltsters) 209 .1 60 .1 4,409 9.2 By r a i l to: Canadian points - eastern d i v i s i o n 241 .1 777 1.8 102 .2 33 -7 United States points - 150 .3 46 .1 - M i l l e d & processed l o c a l l y 3 - 39 -1. 4,656 9-7 2 Exported overseas 4,108 1.5 7,655 17.-5 4,968 10.4 898 18.9 4,049 41.2 Totals 277,782 100.0 45,699100.0 47,999 100.0 4,758 100.0 9,828 100.0 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada, 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , p. 2 4 . 34- In B r i t i s h Columbia, on the other hand, a l l of the operations c a r r i e d out i n the Lakehead and eastern elevators are combined at one point. In other words, boxcars are un- loaded, g r a i n i s cleaned, d r i e d and graded, stored f o r a time and f i n a l l y loaded to the great v a r i e t y of ocean shipping that a r r i v e s to load grain. A l l of t h i s i s c a r r i e d on i n a much smaller elevator p l a n t , as has already been pointed out. The varying c a p a c i t i e s to handle grai n at the various phases of the elevator operation c l e a r l y r a i s e s the p o s s i b i l i t y of bottlenecks. This p o s s i b i l i t y only increases i f there are not intervening cushions of storage to a l l e v i a t e temporary problems i n one or more operations. In the east these insurances against breakdown are very much greater than they are i n B r i t i s h Columbia. For example between cleaning, drying and grading at the Lakehead elevators, there are 106 m i l l i o n bushels of Lake- head storage plus the 122 m i l l i o n bushels of eastern elevator storage plus that loaded i n lake vessels on the way to eastern elevators. Therefore i f boxcars are held up f o r a period, loading of grain ships w i l l not be t i e d up for lack of grain. Conversely, i f a temporary shortage of ships occurs i n Montreal, unloading and cleaning w i l l l i k e l y carry on at the Lakehead because lake vessels w i l l continue to load. The east, therefore, with i t s huge i n s t a l l a t i o n s of elevator cap- a c i t y , can have breakdowns i n part of the operation, without serious consequence. Such cushions are not available at B r i t i s h Columbia terminals. Even a short delay i n boxcar d e l i v e r i e s due to s l i d e s or derailments, w i l l r e s u l t i n tieups of shipping because grain supplies are r a p i d l y depleted. A f a i r conclusion to make here i s that the B r i t i s h Columbia terminal elevator operation requires very c a r e f u l and t i g h t scheduling. There i s l i t t l e room f o r breakdowns at any phase without the whole grain handling operation being slowed, i f not stopped. 36 CHAPTER I I I TRENDS IN GRAIN EXPORTS THROUGH BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS A thorough analysis of a l l aspects of the volume of grain shipments i n B r i t i s h Columbia i s necessary i n order to provide a basis f o r p r o j e c t i n g future grain handling needs. Such an examination includes trends i n t o t a l volumes, i n o r i g i n and d e s t i n a t i o n of grain, i n s e a s o n a b i l i t y and i n volumes loaded to each ve s s e l . Volume of Grain The most s t r i k i n g aspect of B r i t i s h Columbia g r a i n shipments i s the upward trend i n t o t a l volume. Table IX shows t h i s trend quite c l e a r l y over the post-war period. The f i g - ures i n Table IX are for wheat only, but because wheat makes up 9 0 % or more of Canada's grain exports and 8 0 % or more of B r i t i s h Columbia grain exports the f i g u r e s would change l i t t l e f o r t o t a l g r a i n exports from a l l ports. The figures are not representative f o r each i n d i v i d u a l port, however. Appendices I , I I and I I I show exports of g r a i n from i n d i v i d u a l ports for the past ten years. From these tables the trends i n other grai n can be seen. Of greatest importance i n the trends i s the f a c t that both Prince Rupert and V i c t o r i a are now s p e c i a l i z i n g i n wheat shipments, whereas only a few years ago they s p e c i a l i z e d i n other grains. V i c t o r i a formerly shipped o i l seeds as w e l l as wheat, and Prince Rupert formerly handled only barley. Apparently most of t h i s t r a f f i c has now been switched to TABLE IX HISTORICAL REVIEW OF CANADIAN WHEAT EXPORTS 1944-45 TO 1964-65 (thousands of bushels) 1944-45 1949-50 1954-55 1959-60 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 Vancouver- New Westminster 7 , 2 3 9 61,339 78,176 92,246 118 ,720 145 ,520 129,748 153,439 136,269 %* 3.0 37.0 37.8 39.7 38.5 45.3 43.4 28.6 37.2 V i c t o r i a 288 — 1,410 2,822 5,467 4,427 6,222 7,937 8 , 7 0 5 % .1 • 7 1.? 1.8 1.4 2.1 1.5 2.4 Prince Rupert % 224 — 315 — - — 3,533 10,475 10,124 .1 .1 1.2 1.9 2.8 Total B.C. 7 , 7 5 0 61,339 79 ,901 95,068 124,187 149,947 139,503 171,851 155,098 % 3.2 37.0 38.6 40 . 0 40.3 46.7 46.7 3 2 . 0 42.4 Total Canada 238,427 165,969 206,829 232,629 308,433 321,264 298 ,925 535,700 366,740 % 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 *Per cent of t o t a l Canadian wheat exports. Source: Board of Grain Commissioners, Canadian Grain Exports for the Crop Years 1963-64 and 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , pp. 33-35 and 17. 38 Vancouver, which w i l l explain the lower proportion of wheat shipments from that port i n recent years. During the Second World War very l i t t l e g r a i n was exported from B r i t i s h Columbia because of d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered with shipping during the period of war. Since that time however there has been a con- t i n u i n g and vigourous growth i n the B r i t i s h Columbia g r a i n trade. In f a c t p r i o r to 1963-64- B r i t i s h Columbia ports were exporting 40% to 50% of Canada's t o t a l exports. There are two s i g n i f i c a n t features of Table IX that should be noted. The f i r s t i s that i n the 1963-64 crop year the B r i t i s h Columbia share of Canadian exports of wheat dropped sharply from 47% i n the previous year to 32% i n 1963-64. This occurred i n a record year f o r grain exports f o r Canada. Noting what was said i n Chapter I I about handling c a p a b i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia, the conclusion can be reached that the P a c i f i c ports are not equipped to handle an increased share of Canada's expanding grain sales. In other words, although B r i t i s h Columbia, along with the r e s t of Canada, did a record g r a i n export business i n 1963-64, P a c i f i c coast f a c i l i t i e s were not adequate to share p r o p o r t i o n a l l y i n shipping the heavy volumes of that year. The second feature to note from Table IX i s the recent growing s i g n i f i c a n c e of the small ports of V i c t o r i a and Prince Eupert. Indications are that a f t e r years of r e l a t i v e idleness these f a c i l i t i e s are now being u t i l i z e d at close to f u l l capacity. The f a c t that these two small elevators shipped 5% of Canada's wheat exports and turned over capacity between eight and nine times i n 1964-65 indicates t h i s quite c l e a r l y . 39 Seasonability A. feature of grain handling that a f f e c t s the t o t a l s i z e of the g r a i n handling i n s t a l l a t i o n i n Canada i s season- a b i l i t y . In eastern Canada the handling capacity on the Great Lakes and Eastern Ports i s l i m i t e d by the length of the navig- a t i o n season on the St. Lawrence River. Each year grai n ex- ports are halted from t h i s region f o r three or four months. On the P a c i f i c Coast t h i s does not occur because each port has an open shipping season f o r the entire year (Table X). I t might be expected that with the St. Lawrence ports closed three months of the year the P a c i f i c ports would experience a heavier export rate i n the winter months and a noticeable slackening during the summer months. This i s not the case as a study of Table X reveals. There i s not a d e f i n i t e regular seasonal pattern i n B r i t i s h Columbia wheat exports. J u l y and August tend to be the slowest months but the pattern i s not c l e a r because other slack months appear i n winter when the St. Lawrence Seaway i s closed. On the other hand busy months occur when the Seaway i s also very busy. For example i n the 1954-65 crop year the two slowest months were January and J u l y and the two busiest were October and A p r i l . B r i t i s h Columbia, therefore, has a non-seasonal pattern of grain exports. Fur- thermore, B r i t i s h Columbia ports have a more constant flow of exports than the ports on the St. Lawrence. Even during the shipping season, f l u c t u a t i o n s at the St. Laurence ports are greater. The s i t u a t i o n described above makes B r i t i s h Columbia an i d e a l l o c a t i o n f o r grain elevators from an operational TABLE X CANADIAN WHEAT EXPORTS BY MONTHS AT PACIFIC AND ST. LAWRENCE PORTS, 1960-61 TO 1964-65 (thousands of bushels) P a c i f i c Ports 1960-61 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 St.Lawrence River Ports 1960-61* 1961-62 1962-63 1963-64 1964-65 August September October November December January February March A p r i l May June J u l y 7,754 8,459 7,615 4,938 10,432 9,410 11,085 11,136 12,684 14,203 15,798 10,675 14,623 1 1 , 5 2 7 9 , 9 0 3 9,172 10,668 13,748 16,572 15,156 13,013 14,837 8,876 11,852 9 , 2 2 7 6 , 3 8 4 1 0 , 7 5 8 6 , 7 9 8 1 3 , 1 6 9 1 5 , 9 2 1 13,884 1 3 , 9 3 2 16,373 1 5 , 8 5 9 12,043 5 , 1 7 4 9,864 14,005 16,532 15,001 13,014 18,271 11,612 14,651 16,921 13,529 12,612 15,839 14,062 14,380 1 7 , 2 3 7 11,246 14,111 9,740 1 0 , 9 5 7 1 3 , 6 7 8 18,156 14,117 1 0 , 0 9 2 7 , 3 2 2 5,280 8,855 9,081 1 7 , 2 2 7 9,634 6,872 9,425 12,235 18,227 24,105 18,428 13,770 12,820 7,123 17,758 3 0 , 7 0 2 7,181 149 149 93 8,762 17,010 12,599 6,130 5,465 8,343 14,296 2 5 , 0 7 9 5,238 1 1 , 9 3 9 16,853 1 1 , 6 5 3 1 2 , 1 9 9 10,445 16,894 33,428 43,139 2 2 , 1 9 0 1,808 2 0 , 1 1 1 40,255 49,915 42,505 1 9 , 1 7 2 18,341 18,799 1 9 , 6 5 3 9 , 5 1 3 231 107 1 0 , 7 9 2 1 9 , 0 3 5 1 9 , 5 8 5 16,301 •Includes A t l a n t i c Seaboard Ports. Source: p i n i o n Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , r.rai „ Trade of Canada, 1960-61 to 1960-64 Issues (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) . o standpoint. I t means that with a year-round shipping season an elevator can be one-quarter to one-third smaller on the P a c i f i c Coast than an elevator on the St. Lawrence but s t i l l turn over the same amount of grain annually. In a d d i t i o n the greater r e g u l a r i t y of shipping on the P a c i f i c further reduces the s i z e of i n s t a l l a t i o n needed. Going back to Tables VI and VII i n Chapter I I , the data on the turnovers of elevator cap- a c i t y support t h i s conclusion. I t i s an important f a c t to keep i n mind when future expansions are considered. Destinations of Grain Exports Total export f i g u r e s have indicated that shipments are increasing from B r i t i s h Columbia ports, but they give no i n d i - c ation of why they are increasing. To get behind the trends i t i s necessary to analyze the i n d i v i d u a l destinations of g r a i n exports. Probably the most s t r i k i n g trend i n g r a i n ex- ports from B r i t i s h Columbia i s the decline i n the importance of the European market. Wheat exports from B r i t i s h Columbia ports to Western Europe have declined 50% from 1955 to 1964 (Appendix IV). This has been o f f s e t to some extent by growth of the Eastern European market (excluding Russia) but not enough to prevent an o v e r - a l l decline of European exports of 34%. Within the European market B r i t a i n remains the major country of d e s t i n a t i o n f o r B r i t i s h Columbia wheat exports although the decline to that country has been j u s t as r a p i d as to other European countries. Other major European importers that are showing d e c l i n i n g imports from B r i t i s h Columbia are Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Scandinavia and I t a l y . 42 In the Far Eastern market trends f o r B r i t i s h Columbia and Canada are showing extremely rapid growth, having quad- rupled i n the past decade to become the major de s t i n a t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia wheat. China i s Canada's newest customer i n the Far East and i s now the largest i n t h i s area. Japan, long a regular purchaser of Canadian wheat, has increased i t s im- ports 66% over 1955 "but since I960 has been a stable market of around 50 m i l l i o n bushels per year. Another regular customer fo r Canadian wheat, i s the P h i l l i p i n e s . Growth of t h i s market has been rapi d since 1958 and i n 1964 t o t a l e d about 8 m i l l i o n bushels. These three markets together, accounted f o r 98% of B r i t i s h Columbia's wheat trade with the Orient. The trends i n other grains show a mixed pattern. Barley, f o r example (Appendix V), i s de c l i n i n g to European destinations. B r i t a i n , the l a r g e s t customer, took 53% l e s s i n 1964 than i n 1955* As with wheat the major change i n des t i n - a t i o n has been from Europe to Asia. In 1964 Japan and China accounted f o r 68% of exports from B r i t i s h Columbia whereas i n 1955 Japan took a l l the barley f o r the Far East or 34% of exports through B r i t i s h Columbia. In that year the United King- dom accounted for the other 66%. Oats imports from B r i t i s h Columbia into Europe show no cle a r trend. This country" seems to do a sporadic trade with a l l countries (Appendix V I ) , except f o r the small amounts to South America. The Netherlands, for example, imported no oats i n 1961 but took 65% of exports from B r i t i s h Columbia i n 1964. Other European countries show s i m i l a r v i o l e n t f l u c t u a t i o n s . Since oats are used p r i m a r i l y f o r feeding l i v e s t o c k there i s 43 l i t t l e or no demand as yet i n the Far East because of the low standard of l i v i n g . Now i t i s necessary to analyze Canadian grain trade s t a t i s t i c s to see i f B r i t i s h Columbia's share of exports i n the various markets i s changing. F i r s t , i n the European mar- ket, B r i t i s h Columbia has l o s t some of i t s share. The drop i n Canadian exports to Europe has only been 20% (Appendix VII) compared to B r i t i s h Columbia's drop of 50% between 1954 and 1965. I t can be concluded from these two figures that a greater percentage of European exports are now moving through Eastern Canada. Unfortunately the figures i n Appendix I I I and VII are compiled on a calendar year and crop year basis r e s p e c t i v e l y , so the conclusions that can be drawn from the difference i n the two percentages are l i m i t e d to the very general one made here. In the Far Eastern market there i s no question of B r i t i s h Columbia's sharing with other Canadian ports. Thus any trends i n g r a i n exports to t h i s area w i l l a f f e c t only the ports of B r i t i s h Columbia. One f i n a l trend i n exports from B r i t i s h Columbia i s the increasing volume of wheat destined f o r the South American countries of Venezuela, Ecuador and Peru. While the volumes are not nearly as great as the Far Eastern market, i t could soon surpass Europe as a d e s t i n a t i o n f o r wheat i f present trends continue. This market has grown p r o p o r t i o n a l l y with the Far Eastern market from 2.6 m i l l i o n bushels i n 1955 to 11.8 m i l l i o n bushels i n 1964 or more than four f o l d . Venezuela i s the chief r e c i p i e n t of these exports and i s the f a s t e s t growing South American market f o r exports from B r i t i s h Columbia. South American countries receive mainly wheat, and small amounts of oats. Russia i s the only other major r e c i p i e n t of wheat from Canada. However exports from the P a c i f i c Coast f o r t h i s mar- ket have been l i m i t e d , amounting to only 9.5 m i l l i o n and 15.9 m i l l i o n bushels i n 1963 and 1964- re s p e c t i v e l y . This i s only about 16% of t o t a l volume shipped to Russia i n the 1963-64- crop year. 1 Just how much of the new three-year contract with Russia w i l l be shipped by P a c i f i c coast ports i s unknown but i t has been s a i d that some of i t d e f i n i t e l y w i l l be shipped p v i a B r i t i s h Columbia. Or i g i n of Grain Exports T r a d i t i o n a l l y the o r i g i n s of grain shipped from B r i t i s h Columbia are supposed to be west of the rate break or rate e q u a l i z a t i o n point with the Lakehead. Some of these points are B a t t l e f o r d , Kindersley, Kerrobert and Maple Creek, a l l i n western Saskatchewan (Table X I ) . I t should be noted that a l l the rates quoted for Vancouver are i d e n t i c a l to V i c t o r i a and Prince Rupert even though V i c t o r i a has an extra f e r r y haul and Prince Rupert i s about 200 miles further from the points l i s t e d i n Table XI. A l l o r i g i n points are between 4-0 and 100 miles from the Alberta border. This only leaves a small part of Saskatchewan as the economic grain hinterland of B r i t i s h Columbia. There are signs that perhaps t h i s "''Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1966;, p. 94-. 2John Best, "Canada S e l l s $800 M i l l i o n Meat, Flour to Russians," Vancouver Sun, June 20, 1966, p. 1. 4 5 TABLE XI RAIL FREIGHT RATES ON GRAIN FOR EXPORT FROM SELECTED POINTS IN ALBERTA AND SASKATCHEWAN AS AT JULY 31, 1965 Distance to Distance to Grain rate i n 0 Port Arthur Vancouver per 100 l b s . to Port O r i g i n Arthur Vancouver B a t t l e f o r d , Sask. 1,018 1,018 24 24 Biggar, Sask. 9 6 4 1 , 0 2 9 23 24 Elrose, Sask. 1 , 0 3 1 1 , 1 5 3 24 25 Kerrobert, Sask. 1,044 979 24 24 Kindersley, Sask. 1 , 0 3 2 1 , 0 7 9 24 24 Maple Creek, Sask. 1 , 0 1 7 881 23 23 Moose Jaw, Sask. 822 1 , 0 6 7 20 25 Outlook, Sask. 941 1,081 23 26 Brooks, A l t a . 1,147 751 25 22 Calgary, A l t a . 1,247 :642 26 20 Empress, A l t a . 1 , 0 5 0 . 839 24 23 Hanna, A l t a . 1,168 942 26 23 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada, 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , p. 111. 4-6 hinterland i s becoming l a r g e r . The main i n d i c a t i o n comes from the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. By b u i l d i n g a f i v e m i l l i o n bushel elevator i n Vancouver, they are implying that considerably more than a small part of western Saskatchewan w i l l be r e l i e d on to keep t h i s f a c i l i t y operating. The f a c t that the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool w i l l be draw- ing g r a i n from a higher f r e i g h t rate zone does not mean that they w i l l incur the cost of higher f r e i g h t . I f the grain i s required to serve markets serviced by the B r i t i s h Columbia ports the Canadian Wheat Board pays the rate d i f f e r e n t i a l . By doing t h i s the lowest t o t a l shipping cost can be maintained, although costs of r a i l haulage may be s l i g h t l y higher. Thus service to customers i s more important than s t r i c t adherence to f r e i g h t rate d i f f e r e n t i a l s and d i v i s i o n a l points. I t i s not unreasonable to conclude from t h i s that knowledge of the h i n t e r - land i s not c r u c i a l to decisions on shipping grain through P a c i f i c ports. Therefore from the standpoint of future planning, the hinterland or o r i g i n of grain i s not of great importance. Vessel Loadings The f i n a l trend i n grain shipping through B r i t i s h Columbia ports i s the volume loaded per v e s s e l . Information i n t h i s area w i l l serve to ind i c a t e the type of cargo being loaded and the demands i n d i v i d u a l ships are making on port f a c i l i t i e s . Table X shows that March i s c o n s i s t e n t l y a r e l - a t i v e l y heavy wheat shipping month. Therefore March can be considered a representative month f o r grain loading i n B r i t i s h Columbia ports and i s used i n t h i s chapter to i l l u s t r a t e shipping trends. Two things are obvious from Tables XII and X I I I . F i r s t , ships are loading more grain per vessel today than they did ten years ago. The average load has r i s e n from 247,000 bushels i n 1955 "to 540,000 bushels i n 1966. There are two reasons behind t h i s rapid increase. F i r s t , vessels using the port are obviously larger than they were ten years ago. This i s c l e a r l y shown i n Table XII by the figures on the la r g e s t cargoes loaded i n the various years. The trend i s unmistakably upward. Indeed, i n March of 1966 f i v e vessels loaded over one m i l l i o n bushels, three more between 800,000 and 1,000,000 bushels and altogether eighteen vessels loaded more than 600,000 bushels. 5 (Table X I I I ) In 1955 no ship loaded over 500,000 bushels. The second reason for heavier loadings per vessel probably l i e s i n the changing markets being served. I t has already been noted that exports to the Far East are r a p i d l y expanding while those to Europe are tending to decline. The greater grain trade with the Far East, p a r t i c u l a r l y with China, i s c a r r i e d almost e x c l u s i v e l y as f u l l cargoes i n vessels char- tered by the Chinese, whereas the European t r a f f i c has been c a r r i e d as both f u l l cargo and top-off cargo. Hence average h. load to Europe xvould be l e s s than to China. Table X I I I shows t h i s change. Only 9 of 64 ships or 14% loaded l e s s than 5 , ,B. C. Grain Exports for the Month of March," Harbour and Shipping, XLIX ( A p r i l 1966), 270. ^See the unpublished Graduating Essay (Faculty of Commerce, U.B.C., 1962) by G. R. Wheatley, "Grain Handling Through the Port of Vancouver," p. 31. TABLE XII GRAIN CARGOES LOADED PER VESSEL IN MARCH 1 9 5 5 - 1 9 6 6 AT BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS (thousands of bushels) 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 I960 1961 1962 1963 1964- 1965 1966 per vessel 24-7 233 289 256 286 315 280 331 378 396 354 540 Largest load 492 561 570 512 570 931 616 899 989 1288 803 1671 Source: "B. C. Grain Exports f o r the Month of March," Harbour and Shipping, A p r i l , various issues. TABLE XIII INDIVIDUAL CARGOES LOADED AT. BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS POR MONTH OP MARCH - SELECTED YEARS 1955 I960 1962 1965 Less than 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 bu. 13 18 23 9 100 - 2 0 0 bu. 3 8 6 8 200 - 300 bu. 2 5 6 9 300 - 400 bu. 17 5 8 2 400 - 500 bu. 5 10 13 9 500 - 600 bu. 0 9 12 9 600 + bu. 0 5 4 18 40 60 72 64 Source: "B. C. Grain Shipments f o r Month of March," Harbour and Shipping, A p r i l , Various issues. 100,000 bushels i n March of 1966 whereas i n 1955, 15 of 40 or about one-third of vessels loaded l e s s than 100,000 bushels. Thus the trend i s d e f i n i t e l y away from parcel or p a r t i a l car- goes. In summary, the important western forelands f o r grain from B r i t i s h Columbia have been increasing r a p i d l y . To serve the markets ships are getting l a r g e r and elevator f a c i l i t i e s are required to load larger and l a r g e r cargoes. Such c l e a r trends suggest that changes i n port f a c i l i t i e s may be neces- sary before very long. The next chapter looks at the future of the markets i n order to determine i f changes w i l l be warranted or needed i n the long run. 51 CHAPTER IV FUTURE OF GRAIN MARKETS World Grain Consumption Using some of the information from Chapter I I I and some furt h e r information from world grain trade data an attempt i s made i n t h i s chapter to give some idea of the future outlook i n markets served by B r i t i s h Columbia ports. F i r s t , some general observations about the consumption of grain should be made. A misconception that frequently appears when ?rheat mar- kets are analyzed i s that the r a p i d l y expanding population of the world w i l l automatically provide a large market f o r wheat exports. This i s not necessarily the case. Generally, changes i n income l e v e l s have been the most s i g n i f i c a n t factor a f f e c t - ing wheat consumption. 1 The cy c l e , stated generally, i s one of r i s i n g consumption per ca p i t a as incomes increase from very low l e v e l s . During t h i s stage people change t h e i r d i e t s from the cheaper breads made from rye or maize to bread made from wheat f l o u r . Furthermore as incomes continue to r i s e , con- s t a n t l y more expensive bread and wheat i s consumed. People w i l l use bread with higher wheat content or a higher grade of wheat that improves the q u a l i t y of the product. As incomes r i s e to even higher l e v e l s the per cap i t a consumption of wheat reverses as people substitute s t i l l more expensive foods f o r bread. Table XIV can be used to i l l u s t r a t e each stage of the Int e r n a t i o n a l Wheat Council, Review of the World Wheat S i t u a t i o n , A p r i l I960, p. 16. TABLE XIV PER CAPITA HUMAN CONSUMPTION OF WHEAT FLOUR AND OTHER GRAINS IN SELECTED COUNTRIES ( 1 9 0 9 - 1 0 - 1 9 5 6 - 5 7 ) Grain Equivalent - Kilograms per head per year 1 9 0 9 - 1 0 1 9 2 2 - 2 3 1927-28 1 9 3 2 - 3 3 1 9 5 4 - 5 5 to to to to to Country- Cereal 1913-14 1 9 2 6 - 2 7 1 9 3 1 - 3 2 1 9 3 6 - 3 7 1947-48 1 9 5 1 - 5 2 1 9 5 6 - 5 7 United States Wheat 135 114 109 99 91 8 5 79 Other grains i NA NA NA 27 25 20 18 United Kingdom Wheat 151 140 134 126 125 117 113 Other grain NA NA NA 6 12 15 15 Argentina Wheat 146 142 150 151 166 141 133 Other grain NA NA NA 13 10 13 7 Germany (W) Wheat 73 68 73 66 84 77 80 Other grain NA NA NA NA 58 45 42 Greece Wheat 78 119 131 141 126 148 154 Other grain NA NA NA 48 39 31 23 Turkey Wheat 117 112 128 127 122 148 177 Other grain NA NA- NA 80 71 61 37 Egypt Wheat 83 80 86 68 58 84 82 Other grain NA NA NA 144 150 115 133 India Wheat 22 22 22 22 NA. 21 24 Other grain NA NA NA 160 NA 1 2 1 147 Japan Wheat 26 25 28 17 21 32 33 Other grain NA. NA NA 169 125 142 141 B r a z i l Wheat 27 26 29 24 2 5 32 NA Other grain NA NA NA 71 80 8 6 NA Source: International Wheat Council, World Wheat S i t u a t i o n I960 (London; I960). 53 cycle outlined above. India i s an example of the i n i t i a l phase of the cycle. Over the years India's economic development has not been rapi d while population has increased r a p i d l y . As a r e s u l t the people have remained r e l a t i v e l y impoverished and wheat consump- t i o n has remained at a constant low l e v e l f o r nearly h a l f a century. Japan, on the other hand, i s an example of a country going through r a p i d economic development and, i n turn, r a p i d l y increasing consumption of wheat. Indeed, since the very low per c a p i t a consumption l e v e l of the 1930's Japan's consumption l e v e l had nearly doubled by 1957' No doubt per ca p i t a consump- t i o n has increased since that time. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that f o r Japan the l e v e l s of consumption of other grains ( p r i - m arily r i c e ) are showing a corresponding drop with the r i s e i n wheat consumption. The figures i n d i c a t e the s u b s t i t u t i o n f a c t o r i s very much i n operation i n Japan. The United States and the United Kingdom are examples of countries i n the upper income stage of the cycle. Both of these countries have shown a continual drop i n wheat consump- t i o n per c a p i t a over the 50 years shown i n Table XIV. The United States, the more prosperous country of the two, has declined 49% i n per capita consumption and B r i t a i n has declined about 25%. The difference i n decline r e f l e c t s the r e l a t i v e prosperity of the two countries. This leads to the conclusion that the f a l l i n g per capita consumption of wheat i n North America i s an i r r e v e r s i b l e trend as long as prosperity con- p tinues. On the other hand i n the l e s s developed countries Wheat Council, p. 62. 54 there i s huge scope for increasing consumption i f the poten- t i a l demand represented by the large numbers of people can be made e f f e c t i v e . Table XV gives an idea of the magnitude of the p o t e n t i a l i n the very near future. A growing proportion of world population i s l i v i n g i n Asia and by 1970 the propor- t i o n i s estimated at approximately 57%. This i s indeed a huge p o t e n t i a l market. But p o t e n t i a l must be emphasized because the r a p i d l y increasing numbers i n the Asian countries compli- cates t h e i r problems of r a i s i n g l i v i n g standards and thus a c t i v a t i n g the market f o r grain. I t could w e l l be that u n t i l t h i s swelling population i s c o n t r o l l e d and r e a l economic prog- ress i s made the market f o r Canada's grain w i l l be l i m i t e d . Such a conclusion has r e s t r i c t e d value however and a much better p i c t u r e of the future i s possible by considering each of the separate markets on an i n d i v i d u a l basis. Japanese Grain Market Canada's longest standing important Oriental market f o r grain has been Japan but since I960 Mainland China has surpassed Japan i n a l l but one year (Appendix IV). Canada's share of the Japanese market has been s l i p p i n g during t h i s period from 55% of the market to 41% i n 1964-65 and as low as 34% i n the year before (Table XVI). The reasons for the de- creasing share of t h i s important market are not c l e a r although the greater competitiveness of the United States may be the most important reason. This aspect i s more c l o s e l y analyzed i n Chapter V. ^Barbara Ward, The Rich Nations and the Poor Nations (New York; W. W. Norton.and Company, 1962). TABLE XV WORLD POPULATION BY'REGIONS 1920 - 1970 Region 1920 % 1930 % 1940 % 1950 °/° I960 % 1970 % Europe 328 18.1 355 1 7 . 6 380 16 .9 386 1 5 . 9 424 14.6 457 13.1 U.S.S.R. 158 8 . 7 176 8 . 7 192 8.6 200 8.2 214 7 . 3 249 7-1 North and Central America 147 8.1 169 8.4 187 8 . 3 212 8 . 7 262 9.0 311 8 . 9 South America 61 3.4 75 3 . 7 90 4.0 109 4 . 5 140 4.8 179 5 . 1 Asia 967 53.4 1073 5 3 - 3 1213 54.0 1310 54.0 1620 55.6 1980 56.8 A f r i c a 140 7 . 7 155 7 . 7 172 7 . 7 199 8.2 237 8.1 294 8.4 Oceania 9 . 5 10 . 5 11 • 5 13 • 5 16 .6 19 .6 Total 1810 100.0 2013 100.0 2245 100.0 2429 100.0 2913 1 0 0 . 0 3489 100.0 Source: International Wheat Council, Review of World ¥£heat S i t u a t i o n (London; i960), p. 1 7 . TABLE XVI CANADA'S SHARE OF THE IMPORTS OF WHEAT INTO SELECTED COUNTRIES, 1 9 5 5 - 5 6 - 1964-65 (%) Western Europe ( t o t a l ) Belgium - Lux. Netherlands Switzerland United Kingdom Germany (W) Eastern Europe ( t o t a l ) Poland Bulgaria Czechoslovakia A s i a (Far East) ( t o t a l ) China (Communist) Japan P h i l l i p i n e s South America ( t o t a l ) Venezuela Ecuador Peru U.S.S.R. 1 9 5 5 - 1 9 5 6 - 1957- 1956 1957 1958 % % % 1 9 5 8 - 1959- 1959 i 9 6 0 i 9 6 0 - 1961- 1961 1962 1962- 1965- 1964-1965 1964 1965 % 36 32 41 37 42 35 8 9 90 100 53 75 70 50 42 67 4 9 29 22 63 49 63 54 6 6 ' 58 52 50 52 52 55 50 31 32 33 34 34 40 44 93 16 3 5 14 28 63 99 17 34 15 5 _ _ — 0 0 - 19 92 0 - - 100 2 9 16 24 22 20 24 0 0 - 41 37 38 45 4 9 50 55 •- 71 69 16 4 5 6 6 7 6 40 13 41 48 31 27 84 22 36 100 70 100 8 27 25 17 23 13 100 100 100 98 - 100 % 30 65 11 54 49 35 9 9 93 o o 30 48 49 37 4 28 80 2 % 35 73 25 20 53 35 30 30 100 20 35 49 58 7 54 72 3 % 41 75 13 61 50 52 20 17 85 54 16 19 34 53 8 54 62 3 63 % 34 98 14 34 52 41 48 36 76 83 21 32 41 44 10 44 7 49 Source: S t a t i s t i c s (Rome; Food and Agriculture Organization of various issues). the United Nations, World Grain cr. 57 Japan can be classed as a growth market f o r grain for several reasons. F i r s t , i t i s a country that i s r a p i d l y becom- ing i n d u s t r i a l i z e d . In the process the l i v i n g standards i n Japan are r i s i n g quite r a p i d l y ; hence the growing demand f o r bread made from wheat rather than the t r a d i t i o n a l r i c e . The o v e r - a l l growth i n demand f o r wheat i s about 5% per year and the demand f o r imports i s growing f a s t e r because of a shrink- ing acreage devoted to growing wheat. Japan has a small f u l l y u t i l i z e d land area and as i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n progresses the demand f o r land for f a c t o r i e s and housing increases. The land most sui t a b l e f o r these purposes i s the dry wheat lands rather than the swampy r i c e lands. Consequently Japan i s experiencing 4 a 10% annual reduction i n wheat growing acreage. Japan i s not a major market f o r other grains, although i n the past two years sub s t a n t i a l purchases of barley have been made.^ Chinese Grain Market Mainland China, the other major Asian market f o r Canadian g r a i n i s a much more d i f f i c u l t market to p r e d i c t . Unlike Japan, there i s no assurance that China w i l l continue to demand imports of wheat over the long term. There i s con- siderable controversy on t h i s subject i n Canada. When the grain sales to China were f i r s t developing four years ago, there was considerable doubt about China as a consistent mar- ket and some even concluded that any outlook f o r long-term ^Information obtained i n an interview with Mr. N. Nakadai, Food Agency, M i n i s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e and Forestry of Japan, June, 1966. ^Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1966),- 97. sales was poor because of r a p i d l y improving Chinese a g r i c u l - t u r e . 6 On the other side of the argument there are those who see China as a d e f i n i t e long-term market. Mr. C. W. Gibbings, President of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, i s one who believes t h i s . He does not see China increasing p r o d u c t i v i t y very r a p i d l y and the gains that are made are overcome by population 7 growth. This i s a viewpoint based on personal observations of Communist China by people i n the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. The f a c t that they are b u i l d i n g a large terminal elevator indi c a t e s t h e i r views are not i d l e speculation but something they, as Canada's largest g r a i n company, are w i l l i n g to act upon. Further evidence to support t h e i r viewpoint came l a t e i n 1965 when a new agreement was signed with China to begin August 1, 1966. This was a three-year agreement with a mini- mum sale of 168 m i l l i o n bushels (56 m i l l i o n bushels per year), and a maximum of 280 m i l l i o n bushels (70 m i l l i o n per year). In a d d i t i o n the contract could be changed to a five-year agree- g ment with a minimum of 280 m i l l i o n bushels purchased. This means China i s under agreement to purchase Canadian wheat u n t i l 1970 and p o s s i b l y u n t i l 1972. By t h i s time China w i l l have been Canada's second or t h i r d l a rgest customer f o r ten years. With t h i s i n mind i t seems l i k e l y China w i l l continue 6 P e t e r C. Newman, "Backstage i n Ottawa," MacLean's, Ju l y 6, 1963, p. 2. ?C. W. Gibbings, "A B u l l i s h Future f o r Canadian Grain," Western Business and Industry, XXXVIII (November 1964), 18-19 f f . 8 L . T. E a r l , "A Record Crop and A l l Sold," Western Business and Industry, XXXIX (November 1965), 26a. 59 to be a major purchaser of Canadian wheat. United Kingdom Grain Market B r i t a i n i s Canada's chief market f o r wheat and i s one of the most r e l i a b l e and predictable markets. Canada's share of t h i s market has remained constant at about 50% over the past ten years (Table XVT). Therefore the declines i n the market i n B r i t a i n are due to consumption trends or r i s i n g B r i t i s h domestic production rather than Canada l o s i n g any share of the market. There i s l i t t l e to indicate that B r i t a i n w i l l not continue to be one of Canada's chief markets. The only possible change could occur i f B r i t a i n entered the European Economic Community. In that event i t i s probable that B r i t a i n would f i n d some of her wheat supply i n Europe. The reasoning behind t h i s has pertinence f o r the European as w e l l as the B r i t i s h market and l i e s i n France's apparent intended objec- t i v e of becoming a major exporter of wheat. This w i l l be done under a heav i l y subsidized system of government support. European Grain Markets In other parts of Europe under the European Economic Community Canadian wheat exports could also be affected i f France's intended p o l i c y i s successful. The main reason i s that Europe cannot be considered a growth market f o r g r a i n consumption and therefore increased French production would replace imports from outside the Common Market. The per capi t a consumption i n the United Kingdom has been f a l l i n g throughout the 20th century and as prosperity grows w i l l con- tinue to do so. The same applies to Germany where wheat con- sumption per c a p i t a has changed l i t t l e i n 60 years. I d e n t i c a l 60 analyses could be applied to most of Western Europe where economic growth i s making t h i s area one of the most prosperous i n the world. Eastern Europe and Russia are s i m i l a r to China, i n that p r e d i c t i n g t h e i r market future i s d i f f i c u l t because of lack of information. Past trends and present intentions are the only i n d i c a t o r s that are a v a i l a b l e . Poland i s Canada's most con- s i s t e n t customer i n Eastern Europe with purchases of grain i n each of the past ten years. Other major customers have been Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and East Germany but t h e i r demands have been sporadic. In keeping with these sporadic demands Canada's share of Eastern European imports have also f l u c - tuated (Table XVI). Por example Canada has supplied as l i t t l e as 5% and- much as 99% of Poland's imports i n the past ten years. When Russia made i t s large purchase of Canadian wheat and f l o u r i n 1963 i t was thought t h i s would be a single pur- chase to supplement a crop f a i l u r e . The next two years tended to support t h i s but the recent three year agreement to take 336 m i l l i o n bushels of Canadian wheat and f l o u r ^ p r a c t i c a l l y establishes Russia as a steady customer. The reasons f o r Russia and other Eastern European countries having to import wheat apparently l i e i n d i f f i c u l t i e s of organizing a g r i c u l t u r e under the c o l l e c t i v e system. Moreover there i s po s s i b l y the f a c t that a g r i c u l t u r e has taken a secondary p o s i t i o n to i n d u s t r i a l - i z a t i o n and hence resources have not been av a i l a b l e to keep ^John Best, "Canada S e l l s $800 M i l l i o n Wheat, Plour to Russians," VancouYer Sun, June 20, 1966,'p. 1. a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i v i t y i n l i n e with population and economic growth. I f t h i s i s so, and the w i l l i n g n e s s of Russia to buy ahead f o r three years c e r t a i n l y indicates that i t i s , then Canada can look to Eastern Europe and Russia for continued su b s t a n t i a l sales of grain. B r i t i s h Columbia ports are l i k e l y to f i n d l i m i t e d bene- f i t from large Russian sales. As noted i n the previous chapter only a small percentage of past sales have moved through B r i t i s h Columbia. Most of the grain i s moved i n Russian ves- s e l s . Hence they tend to favour the closer eastern and St. Lawrence ports. The shipments from B r i t i s h Columbia to Russia l o g i c a l l y go to the east coast of Russia and supply eastern S i b e r i a . There are strong economic arguments f o r t h i s from the Russian point of view since i t saves very long r a i l hauls from the wheat growing areas of Western Russia. Despite B r i t i s h Columbia's l i m i t e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the Russian trade there may be secondary or s p i l l o v e r benefits f o r the West Coast ports. This l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia's com- peti t i v e n e s s i n shipping to Western Europe. Large handlings of Russian wheat i n the east could mean a greater proportion of Western European grain being moved through B r i t i s h Columbia ports. The only other market area of importance to B r i t i s h Columbia i s Central and South America. Venezuela and Ecuador are the chief r e c i p i e n t s of Canadian wheat and minor amounts of other grains. These countries w i l l be increasing t h e i r wheat consumption as they progress from r e l a t i v e l y low l e v e l s of income, but volumes are not l i k e l y to be great. Population 62 and economic growth i n these countries i s not great enough f o r t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance to advance beyond the present l e v e l and are therefore of minor importance to B r i t i s h Columbia. Grain shipments from Canada and e s p e c i a l l y from B r i t i s h Columbia appear to be headed f o r long-term growth. Demands of ever increasing population, and economic growth assure the future demand for grain, p a r t i c u l a r l y wheat. The ports of B r i t i s h Columbia are w e l l located to serve the main growth markets i n Asia and possibly regain some of the share of the European market that has been l o s t . In b r i e f , the ports of B r i t i s h Columbia w i l l continue to experience growth i n g r a i n exports, providing the f a c i l i t i e s are a v a i l a b l e . 63 CHAPTER V COSTS OP GRAIN HANDLING A comparison of the Canadian and American West Coast grain ports i s an e s s e n t i a l part of a study of future grain handling needs i n B r i t i s h Columbia. There are two aspects to the comparison of ports i n the two countries. One i s the com- p e t i t i o n between ports provided by the r e l a t i v e adequacy of the f a c i l i t i e s . The other aspect i s the r e l a t i v e costs i n - volved i n using those f a c i l i t i e s . Each of these aspects, as they r e l a t e to g r a i n f a c i l i t i e s , w i l l a f f e c t the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a port as a stop for ocean vessels. The physical aspects of g r a i n handling have already been considered f o r B r i t i s h Columbia ports i n Chapter I I , but the analysis i s extended i n t h i s chapter to include a compar- iso n with United States ports of both physical capacities and costs. Another aspect that a f f e c t s the demand f o r grain f a c i l i t i e s i s the grain supply and market i t s e l f . Of prime i n t e r e s t here are features of grain marketing i n the United States P a c i f i c Northwest and how they compare to the B r i t i s h Columbia s i t u a t i o n . The Columbia River ports of Portland, Longview, Vancouver and Kalama are, by f a r , the busiest grain ports on the P a c i f i c Coast of the United States. These four ports account f o r about 80% of wheat and 87% of the barley and rye shipped through P a c i f i c ports i n the United States. Seattle and Tacoma account for v i r t u a l l y a l l the remainder with San Francisco and the San Joaquin River i n C a l i f o r n i a being i n s i g n i f i c a n t (Table XVII). In e f f e c t then, there are two areas of grain shipment on the American P a c i f i c Coast which, f o r purposes of t h i s a n a l y s i s , can be represented by two ports. One i s Portland, representing the Columbia River ports and the other i s Seattle representing Puget Sound ports. Portland i s studied because i t ships about twice as much grain as any other Columbia River port (Table XVII). Furthermore any costs that apply i n Portland w i l l , i n almost every case, also apply to the other g r a i n shipping ports of Vancouver, Longview and Kalama, Washington. Seattle i s chosen f o r study fo r two reasons. F i r s t i t i s presently the busiest Puget Sound port and second, Seattle promises to become much more important i n the very near future. 'The United States P a c i f i c Ports are well supplied with grai n handling f a c i l i t i e s with a t o t a l of 4-2.1 m i l l i o n bushels of storage capacity (Table XVIII). The C a l i f o r n i a elevators are l i t t l e used, however, and actual active capacity i s closer to 39.3 m i l l i o n bushels. Of the t o t a l a c t i v e Northwest eleva- tor capacity, 73% i s situated i n the Columbia ports and 27% i s i n the Puget Sound at Tacoma and S e a t t l e . In summary the United States P a c i f i c Coast has 14-.4- m i l l i o n bushels or 59% more g r a i n elevator capacity than B r i t i s h Columbia. At the same time, however, the United States ports on a l l of the P a c i f i c Coast have shipped l e s s wheat than B r i t i s h Columbia i n two of the past f i v e years and only very s l i g h t l y more i n two others (Table XIX). The American ports export considerably TABLE X V I I EXPORTS OP GRAIN THROUGH UNITED STATES PACIFIC PORTS 1 9 5 9 - 1 9 6 3 ( S h o r t Tons) I 9 6 0 1 9 6 1 1 9 6 2 P o r t Wheat B a r l e y & Rye Wheat B a r l e y & Rye Wheat B a r l e y & Rye San J o a q u i n R i v e r ( S t o c k t o n ) 118,043 78 ,284 174,781 30,692 5 9 , 2 3 5 253 ,064 Lone Beach 7,716 - 31 ,050 - 3,976 San F r a n c i s c o Harbour 10,689 2 , 7 5 0 65,060 15 ,604 3 1 , 3 3 0 13,565 O a k l a n d 2 7 , 3 7 0 4 , 7 8 4 41,216 2,800 12,651 3 , 7 5 8 L o n g ^ l w ^ l a s h . 615>25 311,845 662'.g? 280^64 457,243 2^908 A s t o r i a 5,787 - 7 9 ° " 5 ? 2 Q ^ 6 V a n c ^ e r r f e s h . 890^79 W.096 672,946 60 501 442',877 l ^ W P o r t l a n d , ' O r e g o n 1,694,539 337 ,014 1 ,553 ,431 240,168 1,308,749 421,448 S , W I S A . f £ £ l Mf7 gS:ig ^ ^:WQ i&HS T o t a l s 4 ,626 ,239 1 , 1 2 3 , 2 7 0 4 ,292 , 656 869,624 3 ,166,657 1,210,145 Vn TABLE XVII (continued) 1 9 6 3 1 9 5 9 Port Wheat Barley & Rye Wheat Barley & Rye San Joaquin River (Stockton) 61,404 10,735 577 131,538 160,708 Long Beach - 3,863 - San Francisco Harbour 25,541 5 6,759 7,984 Oakland 9,731 - 36,062 14 , 193 Los Angeles 2,106 925,579 — — — Longview, Wash. 224,298 365,357 3 2 3 , 2 9 1 A s t o r i a - - 3 2 , 0 7 9 -Kaloma, Wash. 242,872 - - — Vancouver, Wash. 546,575 66,764 520,577 189,802 Portland, Oregon 2,258,581 244 ,790 1 ,055,524 5 2 0 , 1 5 3 Tacoma, Wash. 404,616 547,214 10 ,950 215,736 54,622 S e a t t l e , Wash. 68,296 348,719 256,765 Totals 4,991,980 615,680 2,716,214 1,527,518 Source: Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part IV (Washington, D.C.; Superintendent of Documents;, various issues. cn cn 67 TABLE XVIII UNITED STATES PACIFIC COAST GRAIN STORAGE CAPACITY 1964 Port No. of Elevators Bushels of Capacity- No. of Berths C a l i f o r n i a Long Beach San Francisco Oregon Portland 1 1 830,000 ,000,000 1 2 , 3 5 3 , 0 0 0 1 1 Longview 1 7 , 8 5 0 , 0 0 0 2 Kaloma 1 3 , 3 2 6 , 0 0 0 1 Vancouver 1 5 , 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 2 Tacoma 1 4 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 1 Seattle 1 6 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 2 Total 42 , 1 0 9 , 0 0 0 Sources: 1) Harbour Directory of Portland, Oregon, Port of Portland Commission, p. -15« 2 ) Captain T. S. Campbell, ed., Ports. Dues, Charges and Accommodation, 1964 (London; G. P h i l l i p and Son, Ltd.V 1964}.' TABLE XIX EXPORTS OP GRAIN THROUGH BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS, 1960-1964 (short tons) I 9 6 0 1 9 6 1 1 9 6 2 Barley Barley Barley Port Wheat & Rye Oats Wheat & Rye Oats Wheat & Rye Oats Vancouver 2,673,264 450,021 56 , 9 9 0 5,732,240 447,011 5,858 3,744,597 239,417 1 7 , 5 5 9 New Westminster 72,248 - - 1 2 9 , 7 9 7 - 2 5 5 71,598 20 Prince Rupert - 121 ,152 - - 551,830 - - 126,179 V i c t o r i a 110,732 - - 192,286 - - 131,304 Total 2,856,244 571,173 36 , 9 9 0 4,054,323 798,841 6,113 3,947,299 365,616 1 7 , 5 5 9 Total U.S. P a c i f i c Ports 4,626,259 1 , 1 2 5 , 2 7 0 - 4 ,292,656 869,624 - 3,166,657 1,210,145 - - - - - - - - Barley Barley Port Wheat & Rye Oats Wheat & TRye Oats Vancouver 4,430,283 242,796 188,220 . 4,339,663 56,278 149,461 New Westminster 82 , 175 - 118 1 7 0 , 1 2 9 - 45 Prince Rupert 202 ,190 2,660 - 337,573 V i c t o r i a 172 ,991 - - 246 ,527 Total 4,887,659 245,456 188,338 5,095,892 56,278 149,506 Total U.S. P a c i f i c Ports 4,991,980 615,680 2,716,214 1 ,527,518 - Sources: 1) Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Waterhorne Commerce i n the United States, Part IV (Washington, D.C.; Superintendent of Documents), various issues. 2) Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Canadian Shipping Report (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , various.issues. cn Co more barley and rye than B r i t i s h . Columbia. As a r e s u l t they have tended to ship more grain i n t o t a l , although since I960 the margin has narrowed. Indeed i n the very busy year of 1964 B r i t i s h Columbia exported over one m i l l i o n short tons more than the P a c i f i c Northwest ports. Comparison of Port F a c i l i t i e s F a c i l i t i e s f o r loading vessels at the United States ports can be considered equal to or better than those i n Vancouver. While storage f a c i l i t i e s are not as great at Portland or Seattle as i n Vancouver they are adequate to pro- vide the same service as Vancouver f o r d i s t r e s s or top-off cargoes. For bulk loading the United States f a c i l i t i e s are superior to Vancouver at the present time. Both Seattle and Portland have elevators that can load up to 5 0 , 0 0 0 bushels per hour 1 while the best loading capacity i n Vancouver (and B r i t i s h Columbia) i s about 40,000 bushels per hour. Grain shipping from the United States ports i s con- siderably more decentralized than i t i s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. A comparison of the figures i n Tables XVII and XIX reveals that the small ports on the Columbia River ship considerably larger tonnages of grain than do the secondary ports of B r i t i s h Columbia. Whereas Vancouver r e g u l a r l y ships close to 90% of B r i t i s h Columbia grain exports, Portland, the major Columbia River port, ships only between 51% and 55% of "the grain shipped from that area. Larger c a p a c i t i e s i n the United "̂ F. S. Campbell, ed., Ports, Dues, Charges and Accomo- dation (London; G. P h i l i p and Son Ltd., 1964), pp. 642 and 646. 70 States small ports r e l a t i v e to Canada i s the reason f o r t h i s s i t u a t i o n and indicates that service i n small ports i s superior to Canada. The i m p l i c a t i o n for shipping i s that there i s a wider choice of ports i n which to load g r a i n cargoes i n the P a c i f i c Northwest. I l l west coast ports, Canadian or American, can accomo- date most ships now i n the grain trade. Minimum water depth i n each area i s generally 35 feet or more. In the Columbia l i v e r the channel i s presently 35 feet and being deepened to 4-0 f e e t . Depths alongside loading wharves are between 30 and p 35 feet at low water. S i m i l a r conditions e x i s t i n Seattle and the other Columbia River ports. One disadvantage of the Columbia ports which w i l l doubtless become more serious i n the future, i s t h e i r l o c a t i o n on a r i v e r . The water depths f l u c - tuate only s l i g h t l y due to l i m i t e d t i d a l a c t i o n or periods of high runoff. As a r e s u l t i t i s not possible to load a large ship and s a i l i t out at high t i d e , as i s done i n Vancouver or S e a t t l e . Grain handling at the United States terminal elevators has at l e a s t one important difference to Canada. I t was noted i n the d e s c r i p t i o n of Canadian handling c a p a c i t i e s that g r a i n cleaning can be a bottleneck operation. In the United States t h i s does not e x i s t because l i t t l e g rain i s cleaned before export. Grain i s only cleaned f o r s p e c i a l orders. Therefore g r a i n can be unloaded, weighed and put into storage s i l o s ready f o r a shipment i n one operation. This means that Campbel1, p. 642. 71 i f a shortage occurs, once supplies are delivered to the e l e - vator, no f u r t h e r shipping delays are experienced. Another bottleneck-producing service not performed i n the United States terminals i s grain drying. Consequently problems of shipping delays that may a r i s e i n B r i t i s h Columbia ports because of the drying operation w i l l not be encountered i n the United States. In addition the American grain grading requirements are not as demanding as i n Canada. There are fewer grades of grain i n the United States than i n Canada. Hence fewer separate storage areas are required with the r e s u l t that more storage bins can be f i l l e d to capacity. The important i m p l i c a t i o n of t h i s circumstance f o r shipping i s that a ship w i l l be less l i k e l y to be forced to move from one grain berth to another i n order to load a f u l l cargo. I t i s c l e a r then, that under these conditions the United States ports may be viewed more favourably by ship owners operating i n the grain trade. Comparison of Port Charges Problems of grain handling such as those l i s t e d above, are important cost considerations but they tend to be unpredict- able. Delays and bottlenecks i n e v i t a b l y occur i n p r a c t i c a l l y every port and unless they are chronic and repeatedly involve ships i n high costs they are not l i k e l y to se r i o u s l y damage a port's competitive p o s i t i o n . On the other hand known and pre- d i c t a b l e expenses i n each port w i l l , to some extent, determine a port's a b i l i t y to a t t r a c t t r a f f i c . In the grain trade tvio aspects of costs are notable. F i r s t there are port dues and charges which are l e v i e d against a vessel entering and leaving 72 a port. Secondly, there are g r a i n handling charges or charges for services performed i n the terminal elevator. This second group of charges do not a f f e c t vessel owners "because they are l e v i e d against the owner of the grain. However elevator ser- vice charges help determine the p r i c e at which grain w i l l be offered for s a l e , although t h i s e f f e c t i s very minor i n l i g h t of government subsidies to farmers and the rigours of the i n t e r - n ational markets. Nevertheless they are part of the t r a n s f e r cost of grain from land to ocean transportation and must be accounted f o r . Table XX and Appendix VIII l i s t the primary charges involved i n shipping and elevating grain i n the ports of the P a c i f i c Coast. Close study of Appendix VIII immediately r e - veals the great complexity of port charges. Each port has a d i f f e r e n t l i s t of charges. To give two examples, Vancouver, alone, has a cargo rate on grain loaded and Portland makes no charges f o r harbour dues while a l l others do. Therefore a s t r i c t comparison of costs i s a very d i f f i c u l t task. F i n a l l y i t should be pointed out that the l i s t of charges i s not ex- haustive. There are other charges such as port warden fees, brokerage, and customs inspection fees that have not been investigated here because they are r e l a t i v e l y minor expenses. Thus Table XX and Appendix VIII are r e s t r i c t e d to major impor- tant expenditures of terminal grain handling. The best method of attempting a comparison of costs i s to choose a vessel of a p a r t i c u l a r s i z e and apply the charges i t would incur i n each port. For purposes of t h i s example a dry cargo vessel c l a s s i f i e d as C3-5-A2 type by the United TABLE XX TOTAL PRIMARY CHARGES POR SAMPLE VESSEL CALLING AT PACIFIC PORTS TO LOAD GRAIN Charge. Vancouver New Westminster V i c t o r i a Prince Rupert Seattle Portland Pil o t a g e - one way #170.00(est.) $287.00(e st.) $87.00(est . ) $93.00 $158.63 $386.80 Sick Mariners dues 94.80 94.80 94.80 94.80 N i l N i l Light Money and Tonnage Tax Harbour Dues N i l 142.20 N i l 94.80 N i l 142.20 or 237.00 N i l 142.20 or 237.00 94.80 or 284.40 5.00 94.80 or 284.40 N i l Wharfage 3 5 5 . 5 0 711.00 1 , 7 7 7 . 5 0 1 , 7 7 7 . 5 0 2,488.50 2,488.50 Cargo Rate 3 5 5 - 5 0 N i l N i l N i l N i l N i l Dockage (per 24 hrs. f o r working vessel) 123.00 N i l 29 .52 2 9 . 5 2 65.64 65.64 Sample Vessel Specifications (C3--5-A2 type) Gross Tons 7900 Tons Net Tons 4740 "Tons Length 492 feet Beam 69 feet 6 inches Draft 28 feet 6 inches iheat loaded 11,850 Tons or approximately 395,000 bushels Source: Appendix I. 74 States Federal Maritime Commission i s s e l e c t e d . 5 The vessel has an o v e r - a l l length of 492 feet and a beam of 69 feet 6 i n - ches. The d r a f t of the v e s s e l , f u l l y loaded, i s 28 feet 6 i n - ches. I t s gross tonnage i s 7 , 9 0 0 tons. On the basis of a world average the net tonnage i s 60% of gross tonnage or 4. 4,740 tons. The tonnage figures are based on the t o t a l cubic capacity of the vessel d i v i d e d by 100 or, i n other words, 4,740 tons of 100 cubic f e e t . In Chapter I I i t was noted that one ton of wheat occupied only 40 square f e e t . Therefore the vessel i n the example w i l l be able to load 2-1/2 times net tonnage or 11,850 tons of wheat. In summary the s p e c i f i c a t i o n s of the vessel used f o r the example are: Gross Tons: - 7 , 9 0 0 Tons Net Tons: 4,740 Tons Length: 492 Feet Beam: 69 Feet 6 Inches Draft: 28 Feet 6 Inches Wheat Loaded: 11 , 8 5 0 Tons or approximately 3 9 5 , 0 0 0 bushels. In B r i t i s h Columbia the vessel w i l l incur i d e n t i c a l p ilotage rates to a l l ports. Any variance i n t o t a l pilotage w i l l be incurred because of greater distances. For example a vessel w i l l pay $82.00 more to come to Vancouver than to c a l l at V i c t o r i a because i t i s 82 miles between the two ports. ^Steward R. Bross, Ocean Shipping (Cambridge, Mass.; Cornell Maritime Press, 1 9 5 6 7 , P« 48. Campbell, p. v i i . -R.'S. McElwee, Port Development (New York; McGraw H i l l , 1926), p. 237- 75 A gross ton charge of $38.00 and d r a f t charge of $29.00 w i l l be i d e n t i c a l regardless of the port of c a l l . In a d d i t i o n to the regular B r i t i s h Columbia pilotage charge, a c a l l at New Westminster incurs a Fraser River P i l o t Charge, which f o r t h i s vessel would be $137.00. This i s nearly double the pilotage charge of taking a vessel into Vancouver. In the United States pilotage v a r i e s widely. Por a vessel c a l l i n g at Seattle there i s a s t r a i g h t mileage charge of $2.35 per mile f o r 67-1/2 miles f o r a t o t a l charge of $158.63. Por a c a l l at Portland the pilotage charge i s considerably higher than any other port on the P a c i f i c with a t o t a l cost of $386.80. In both Canada and the United States c e r t a i n federal l e v i e s are made against ships. In Canada t h i s charge i s c a l l e d Sick Mariners' Dues and i n the United States tonnage tax and l i g h t money. I t i s payable no more than three times per year at any Canadian p o r t , 6 and f i v e times per year i n any United States p o r t . 7 Hence a ship that c a l l s at three B r i t i s h Columbia ports on one voyage w i l l not incur t h i s cost again i f i t c a l l s at other Canadian ports during the year. The charge f o r the sample ship i n Canada w i l l be $94.80 per c a l l . In the United States i t w i l l be $94.80 or $284.40 with the l a t t e r f i g u r e applying to a f o r e i g n tramp vessel i n the grain trade. Harbour dues are charged with considerable variance on the P a c i f i c Coast. In Portland no harbour dues are assessed and range up to 50 per net r e g i s t e r e d ton i n the Public 6Campbell, p. 570. 7Campbell, p. 609. 76 Harbours of V i c t o r i a and Prince Rupert. Seattle's charge i s a nominal $5-00. As with Sick Mariners' Dues, harbour dues are only assessed a c e r t a i n number of times i n Canadian ports. Por Vancouver and New Westminster harbour dues are c o l l e c t e d a maxi- mum of f i v e times per year i n each port. Prince Rupert and V i c t o r i a are classed as Pu b l i c Harbours with the r e s u l t that o dues are only payable twice per year. As a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n i t i s safe to say that harbour dues are charged i n B r i t i s h Columbia but not i n American ports. Terminology used to describe charges f o r the use of wharf and dock f a c i l i t i e s tends to be confusing. The author found four d i f f e r e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s f o r these charges. P i r s t there i s wharfage, which i s generally a charge based on the tons loaded over the wharf. A l t e r n a t e l y t h i s may be c a l l e d top wharfage. To confuse matters even further the American grain elevators charge what they c a l l wharfage on g r a i n coming into the elevator. Their equivalent of Canadian wharfage charges i s the service and f a c i l i t i e s charge, which more adequately defines the charge for loading grain. A further confusion i s added i n Vancouver where a so-called cargo rate i s charged. This i s , i n f a c t , only a wharfage charge which, for some inex- p l i c a b l e reason, has been separated into a d i f f e r e n t t a r i f f . F i n a l l y there i s a dockage charge or, as i t i s sometimes c a l l e d , side wharfage. Besides American terminology being b e t t e r , t h e i r charges f o r loading vessels are more r a t i o n a l . As Appendix VIII Canadian Ports and Seaway Directory (Gardenvale, Que.; National Business P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1966), p. 34. 77 reveals, the service and f a c i l i t i e s charges i n Portland and Seattle recognize the varying e f f i c i e n c i e s of loading inherent i n d i f f e r e n t types of v e s s e l . Thus a s e l f trimming bulk loaded i s given a huge advantage over the t r i - d e c k type vessel that i s t y p i c a l of the sample vessel used i n t h i s chapter. Por ex- ample the 11,850 tons of wheat i n the example would cost $1,185.00 to load on the sample v e s s e l . This p r a c t i c e of lower rates f o r bulk c a r r i e r s i s a feature i n favour of the United States ports. Even though the charges are now higher than i n Vancouver or New Westminster they are lower than ei t h e r V i c t o r i a or Prince Rupert. On the other hand f o r the regular dry cargo vessel the wharfage i n the United States i s much higher than Canada as Table XX and Appendix VIII show. Dockage i s a charge made i n a port f o r occupation of wharf space. In most cases dockage i s charged on two scales; one f o r the working vessel and another f o r the i d l e v e s s e l . 9 The i d l e vessel i s always charged a higher rate"^ or a penalty f e e 1 ^ to discourage the use of wharf space by vessels engaged i n operations other than loading or unloading. Por example a grain ship that i s being cleaned or l i n e d i n preparation f o r loading would incur the penalty fee. Canadian and American ports use a d i f f e r e n t basis f o r assessing dockage. Canadian ports use a length of ship basis and American ports have charges on the gross registered tonnage. In addition the time period of a p p l i c a t i o n of charges also v a r i e s considerably. ^Port of S e a t t l e , Seattle Terminals T a r i f f No.lOO-A, March 18, 1966. lOjtfational Harbours Board, T a r i f f of Dockage Buoyage and Booming Ground Charges, Harbour of Vancouver, Feb.25, 1966. 78 B r i t i s h Columbia Public Harbours assess dockage on a twenty- four hour basis and Vancouver charges on an eight hour period. Seattle and Portland, on the other hand, charge on four hour periods, although t h i s w i l l soon change to eight hour periods. One f i n a l cost incurred by ships i s f o r stevedoring. This i s a complex a c t i v i t y and considerable d i f f i c u l t y i s ex- perienced i n developing comparative costs. Stevedoring i s often arranged by p r i v a t e contact and t o t a l costs w i l l vary depending on time taken to load a vessel. A f u l l study of the p r a c t i c e s and costs of ship loading, because of t h i s complexity, has been impossible. I t appears, however, that labour rates i n Canada and the United States are approximately equal. Table XXI gives the labour rates charged i n the American ports. The S3 .-38 per hour fi g u r e shown i n Table XXI i s the base rate f o r a longshoreman i n B r i t i s h Columbia. 1 1 A l l of the costs l i s t e d above are incurred by ships c a l l i n g at the ports and therefore influence the shipping con- cern i n deciding which ports are worthwhile serving. I t i s c l e a r from t h i s standpoint that B r i t i s h Columbia ports have a considerable advantage over the United States ports, assuming that turnaround times are s i m i l a r . I f , on the other hand, ships load f a s t e r and do not encounter delays i n the apparently higher cost ports i n the United States, then the $1,000.00 to $2,000.00 advantage i n B r i t i s h Columbia ports soon disappears. L i t t l e i s known about delays as t h i s i s w r i t t e n , although studies are presently under way to determine the frequency and Department of Labour, Wage Rates, S a l a r i e s and Hours of Work, October 1965 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1966), Table 76. 79 TABLE XXI SCHEDULE OF MAN-HOUR RATES AT UNITED STATES PACIFIC PORTS S.T. - s t r a i g h t t i m e . O.T. - o v e r t i m e S.T.P. - s t r a i g h t t ime p e n a l t y P.O.T. - p e n a l t y o v e r t i m e When Base S.T.P. S.T. S c a l e S.T. o r O.T. P.O.T. of Wage Rate R a t e R a t e i s i s i s i s $ 3 . 3 8 $6 . 0 9 $ 7 . 8 9 $ 1 0 . 5 8 3.48 6 . 2 5 8 . 1 0 10.82 3 . 5 3 6 .31 8.18 1 0 . 9 9 3 . 6 5 6 . 5 1 8.46 11 . 3 9 3.68 6 . 5 3 8.44 11 . 3 0 3 . 7 8 6.66 8 . 6 7 11.68 3 . 8 3 6 . 7 7 8.82 11 . 8 9 3 . 9 7 6.88 8.. 98 1 2 . 1 3 4 . 0 5 7.04 9 - 1 5 1 2 . 2 9 4 . 5 9 7.82 10.26 1 3 - 9 2 S o u r c e : S e a t t l e T e r m i n a l s T a r i f f No. 2-E. seriousness of such delays i n the Port of Vancouver. U n t i l t h i s research i s completed any f i r m conclusions are impossible However, as already noted, the differences i n terminal eleva- tor operations such as drying, cleaning and grading may tend to reduce the number of delays and hence favour the United States ports. Comparative Elevator Costs So f a r the costs of h a l f the t r a n s f e r operation of grai n from land to sea have been considered. The other costs involved are those of elevator handling. These are l e s s important f o r comparison purposes f o r two main reasons. P i r s t they do not a f f e c t shipping d i r e c t l y . Costs' of grain eleva- t i o n are paid by the shipper. In other words a l l costs on the land side of the operation are paid by the farmer or s e l l e r . Secondly the farmer's share of expenses of getting g r a i n to the ship may be o f f s e t by government action. Por example i n the United States the guaranteed p r i c e paid to cer- t a i n farmers i s adjusted to allow him to ship through Portland 12 or Seattle instead of the Great Lakes. With, adjustments such as t h i s the actual elevator charges become a secondary consideration. Despite these factors the l e v e l of charges has some importance f o r future development. The t o t a l per bushel charge i n a United States elevator f o r grain received from a r a i l car and delivered to a ship i s 3-3/40 per bushel (Appen- di x V I I I ) . The equivalent operation i n Canada returns 2-7/80, Information obtained i n an interview with Mr. R. Crabtree, Manager, P a c i f i c Northwest Grain and Grain Products Association, June 1966. 81 assuming no cleaning i n ei t h e r case. For cleaning the United States charges are also higher at 20 per bushel f o r a l l g r a i n cleaned whereas i n Canada the maximum charge i s 10 per bushel. For r e l a t i v e l y clean grain of l e s s than 2-1/2% dockage 1 5 there i s no charge at a l l . Under these circumstances, i n future, i t may be much more f i n a n c i a l l y a t t r a c t i v e to expand f a c i l i t i e s i n the United States ports than i t i s i n Canada. !This i s par- t i c u l a r l y so i f private i n t e r e s t s are expected to b u i l d or lease terminal elevators and operate them on a p r o f i t a b l e basis. Other aspects of P a c i f i c Northwest g r a i n exporting are more l i k e l y to a f f e c t the need f o r elevator f a c i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. T r a d i t i o n a l l y the American P a c i f i c Northwest and B r i t i s h Columbia g r a i n export businesses have been quite d i s t i n c t and d i f f e r e n t . In large measure t h i s s t i l l e x i s t s today although some important competitive trends are developing. Wheat grown i n the P a c i f i c Northwest area comes from eastern Washington and Oregon and northern Idaho. This i s p r i m a r i l y a white winter wheat growing area. Between 1958 and 1962 between 90% and 95% of wheat production was a white v a r i e t y (Table XXII). Nearly a l l of the remainder was made up of hard red spring and soft red spring v a r i e t i e s . Total pro- duction of white wheat ranged between 78 m i l l i o n and 104- m i l l i o n bushels between 1952 and 1963 1 4 and i s about 60% of t o t a l United States white wheat production. White wheat has been the c h i e f 1 5Dockage as used here r e f e r s to w i l d oats, weed seeds etc. that are removed from grai n i n the cleaning process. 14 'Western Wheat Associates, U.S.A. Inc. and U.S. Depart- ment of A g r i c u l t u r e , Wheat Supply D i s t r i b u t i o n and Value i n the P a c i f i c Northwest, 1962 (Portland, Oregon; November 1963), S t a t i s t i c a l B u l l e t i n No. 2, p. 40. 82 TABLE X X I I WHEAT.: PERCENTAGE OP TOTAL PRODUCTION, BY CLASS, SELECTED COUNTRIES 1 9 5 5 - 1 9 6 2 Common White °/n White C l u b °/n Hard Red W i n t e r °L O t h e r 1955 7° 2 9 . 0 /° 6 0 . 0 10.5 70 . 5 1956 4 9 . 6 4 2 . 1 7 . 4 . 9 1957 3 3 . 5 5 3 . 3 1 2 . 9 . 3 1958 25 . 4 6 4 . 2 1 0 . 2 . 2 1959 2 7 . 1 6.5-8 6 . 4 . 7 I 9 6 0 2 0 . 9 7 3 - 6 5 - 2 • 3 1961 2 8 . 2 6 6 . 6 4 . 9 . 2 1962 5 7 . 6 3 7 . 8 4 . 0 . 6 S o u r c e : Western Wheat A s s o c i a t e s , U.S.A.Inc. and U n i t e d S t a t e s Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e , Wheat S u p p l y D i s t r i b - u t i o n and V a l u e i n t h e P a c i f i c N o r t h w e s t , S t a t i s t i c a l B u l l e t i n #2, 1 9 6 3 , p. 42. 83 v a r i e t y exported from the P a c i f i c Northwest area although since 1950 hard red winter wheat has been exported from the area, most of t h i s originated i n Montana and some i n Utah and Southern 15 Idaho. ' A l l of these exports are a d i f f e r e n t v a r i e t y than Canadian exports. Canada's wheat i s l a r g e l y hard spring wheat used p r i m a r i l y f o r m i l l i n g and bread making. Canada's superior wheat f o r t h i s purpose has therefore experienced no serious com- p e t i t i o n from P a c i f i c Northwest v a r i e t i e s . Three recent develop- ments may change t h i s s i t u a t i o n . The f i r s t and most important event i s the lowering of r a i l f r e i g h t rates on export grain from the c e n t r a l p l a i n s to the P a c i f i c coast. The r a t e , at 700 per hundred pounds from North and South Dakota, i s f a r higher than Canada's Crows' Nest Pass r a t e s . However other factors such as Public Law 480, which provides f o r subsidized grain exports to poor nations could combine with lower rates to make i t economically f e a s i b l e to export through P a c i f i c Coast ports. The second event i s the establishment of f l o u r m i l l s i n the P h i l l i p i n e s . The Americans have d i r e c t l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n establis h i n g these new m i l l s . Consequently wheat i s blended and exported i n the United States rather than being m i l l e d into f l o u r and then exported. This too i s another demand f o r the hard spring wheat of the c e n t r a l p l a i n s . The t h i r d factor that could a f f e c t Canada's competitive p o s i t i o n i s the e f f o r t of the P a c i f i c Northwest grain growers to educate the Japanese i n the use of American wheat. This Western Wheat Associates, p. 54. 84 program has been going on since the mid-1950's with the d i r e c t aim of gaining a larger share of the Japanese cash market f o r w h e a t . U n l i k e exports under Pu b l i c Law 4-80, t h i s scheme i s d i r e c t l y competitive with Canada because i t i s i n the cash rather than subsidized market. The lower rates on wheat to be competitive with Canada are apparently having r e s u l t s . The 1959-63 average i n s h i p - 17 ments ' were 61,130,000 bushels and i n 1964-65 t h i s was up to 65,430,000 bushels. However since the new r a i l rates became e f f e c t i v e i n June of 1965, inshipments of wheat f o r the f i r s t three-quarters of 1965-66 crop year are 63% greater than the f i r s t three-quarters of 1964-65 (Table XXIII). S i m i l a r l y ex- ports of inshipments are up 52% over the same period. There i s no way to conclude from the s t a t i s t i c s whether Japan i s r e c e i v i n g greater shipments. However, people assoc- i a t e d with the American grain trade have said that t h e i r objec- t i v e s of gaining more of the Japanese market are meeting with 1 P success. As to exports of spring wheat i t i s also hard to estimate the volume since part of the inshipments are hard winter wheat, but the f a c t that such a large increase has occurred i n one year indicates a new source i s being tapped. 1 6Western Wheat Associates, p. 56. ^Inshipments i n the P a c i f i c Northwest grain s t a t i s t i c s means grain handled i n the P a c i f i c Northwest grain growing region of Washington, Oregon and Northern Idaho, but grown out- side the region. For example, wheat exported through Portland and grown i n Montana i s an inshipment. 1 Q Information obtained i n interviews and discussions with various grain i n t e r e s t s i n Portland, Oregon. 85 TABLE XXIII INSHIPMENTS AND OUTSHIPMENTS OP WHEAT: PACIFIC NORTHWEST 1 9 5 9 - 6 5 AVERAGE AND CROP YEARS 1964 AND 1965 BY QUARTERS A l l Wheat 1 9 5 9 - 6 5 Avg. J u l y - Sept. Oct. - Dec. Jan. - Mar. Apr. - June Crop Year 1964 Ju l y Oct. Jan. Apr. Crop Year Sept. Dec. Mar. June 1965 J u l y - Sept. Oct. - Dec. Jan. - Mar. Apr. - June Crop Year White Wheat 1965 Oct. - Dec. Jan. - Mar. Outshipments Inshipments ( r a i l & truck) (thousands of bushels) 18 , 7 3 9 14 , 5 7 6 14.420 1 5 , 5 9 5 61,150 2 5 , 0 1 5 12,567 15,765 16,285 6 5 , 4 5 0 55,647 22,858 21,567 N.A. 28 , 7 8 3 35,506 54 , 8 9 5 38,255 1 3 5 , 2 3 7 19,493 3 0 , 2 5 7 38,700 143 ,705 56,881 46,689 51,445 N.A. Outshipments % of Outshipments 5 1 , 2 7 9 2 9 , 7 7 6 68 58 Source: United States Department of Agr i c u l t u r e S t a t i s - t i c a l Reporting Service, P a c i f i c Northwest Wheat Summary Quarterly Report, May 2 , 19667 Mimeo. 86 I t i s clear that large quantities of inshipments are being ex- ported. Approximately 32% and 42% of outshipments were non- white wheat i n the October-December and January-March quarters of the current crop year. This represented '67% arid 100% of inshipments i n the two quarters r e s p e c t i v e l y , thus i n d i c a t i n g the chief inward movement i s f o r d i r e c t export which i s a change from the past when most inshipments were f o r m i l l i n g purposes. Approximately one-third of exports of wheat through B r i t i s h Columbia are bound f o r Japan and before the large Chinese wheat sales i t was as high as one-half. Therefore any serious inroads i n t o t h i s market by the United States suppliers could m a t e r i a l l y reduce Canada's exports to that country. Beyond the Japanese market however, Canada and the United States do not compete i n the P a c i f i c . The United States i s a supplier of large quantities of grain to under-developed countries such as India, Pakistan, South Korea and Pormosa. Such sales are made possible by United States P u b l i c Law 480 which allows for under-developed countries to pay f o r the grain i n t h e i r own currencies rather than d o l l a r s . In e f f e c t t h i s i s a subsidized surplus disposal program. Since Canada i s c h i e f l y a cash d o l - l a r s e l l e r , the countries supplied under the Public Law 480 program could not buy from Canada, even without the United States plan. On the other hand Canada i s e x p l o i t i n g markets i n which the United States cannot presently s e l l because of p o l i t i c a l considerations. China i s excluded from United States trade by deliberate choice of the American government and Russia i s e f f e c t i v e l y cut o f f from United States grain supplies by shipping regulations that make purchases i n the 87 United States too c o s t l y f o r the Russians. As a r e s u l t Canada has benefited immensely from large grain sales to these two countries. I t should be remembered however that t h i s present large market i s based upon p o l i t i c a l considerations which can and very p o s s i b l y w i l l change i n the future. When and i f such changes come the p o s i t i o n of Canadian grain and B r i t i s h Columbia ports i n r e l a t i o n to Russia and China could change d r a s t i c a l l y . Indeed, i t appears that China, p a r t i c u l a r l y , does not need Canada's high q u a l i t y wheat but merely buys wherever i t i s av a i l a b l e . The f a c t that only grades four and f i v e are pur- chased i n d i c a t e s high q u a l i t y i s not important. Furthermore, considering China's d i e t and standard of l i v i n g , s o f t wheat, i f i t were a v a i l a b l e , would l i k e l y be preferable.' To summarize b r i e f l y , t h i s chapter" has shown that the United States ports are capable of a high standard of g r a i n loading e f f i c i e n c y which, f o r ocean vessels, i s probably supe- r i o r to B r i t i s h Columbia. O f f s e t t i n g these service advantages are considerable cost disadvantages of United States ports com- pared to B r i t i s h Columbia ports. The above factors of service and cost w i l l only apply when grains i n the two countries compete i n the same market. At present t h i s applies almost e x c l u s i v e l y to the Japanese market. However future p o l i t i c a l and economic changes can and over the long run w i l l expand the sphere of competition between the United States and Canada. As t h i s occurs ports and grain handling f a c i l i t i e s w i l l take on much more importance for competitive purposes. 88 CHAPTER VI FUTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA The purpose of the f i n a l chapter of t h i s thesis i s to state the future needs f o r g r a i n handling on the P a c i f i c Coast' of Canada. I t i s , i n e f f e c t , the attainment of the o r i g i n a l objective of t h i s thesis stated i n Chapter I . I t represents the opinion of the author formed and drawn from the f a c t s and argument of the previous f i v e chapters. The chief conclusion of t h i s thesis i s that the B r i t i s h Columbia coast' w i l l need more grain handling f a c i l i t i e s i n the near future. The conditions i n the markets served by t h i s area, the changing pattern of cargoes, new ships, and compet- i t i v e forces from the United States a l l support t h i s conclu- sion. Before any conclusions as to new f a c i l i t i e s are reached however, current developments regarding g r a i n elevators should be mentioned. New Elevators Now Planned Reference has been made several times to a new Saskat- chewan Wheat Pool terminal elevator being constructed i n the Port of Vancouver. Because i t i s part of the future develop- ment i n B r i t i s h Columbia, analysis of i t s place i n gr a i n hand- l i n g has been l e f t to t h i s f i n a l chapter. This new elevator w i l l be a major addition to west coast grain handling f a c i l i t i e s . I t s capacity w i l l be 5.2 m i l l i o n Bushels (Appendix X), which 89 i s a 20% addition to B r i t i s h Columbia storage capacity and about a 25% add i t i o n to the storage capacity i n the Port of Vancouver. At present rates of annual turnover, i t should add between 4-0 m i l l i o n and 4-7 m i l l i o n bushels to the B r i t i s h Columbia export capacity. Other features of the new elevator i n d i c a t e annual handlings could e a s i l y be higher than t h i s . P i r s t , unloading capacity w i l l be high r e l a t i v e to the other large elevators i n Vancouver. With f i v e m i l l i o n bushels of storage capacity the elevator w i l l unload 128 boxcars i n an eight-hour s h i f t . A l b e r t a Wheat Pool, with over seven m i l l i o n bushels of storage capacity, unloads about the same number of cars. Secondly the shipping capacity i s the highest of any elevator. Two large shipping b e l t s w i l l be able to load 100,000 bushels per hour when two ships are berthed. This means that i n an eight-hour s h i f t 800,000 bushels could be loaded or 2-1/2 times the capacity of the Alberta Wheat Pool. Furthermore the shipping f a c i l i t i e s w i l l be able to load ships of 4-5,000 tons capacity. This makes the new elevator p a r t i c - u l a r l y important f o r loading large bulk c a r r i e r s . Besides an important addition to the Port of Vancouver i n terms of cap- a c i t y , t h i s new Saskatchewan Wheat Pool elevator i s an impor- tant a d d i t i o n to e f f i c i e n c y because i t w i l l be able to serve the newer large ships. This presumes, of course, that b o t t l e - neck problems of cleaning or drying do not a r i s e . With 32 grain cleaners of the l a t e s t and most e f f i c i e n t kind the former seems u n l i k e l y although drying w i l l continue to be a problem from time to time since only one dryer i s being i n s t a l l e d . 90 S a i l f a c i l i t i e s w i l l not be a problem i n the new i n s t a l l a t i o n f o r two reasons. F i r s t i t s l o c a t i o n on the North Shore of Burrard I n l e t means there i s adequate space f o r r a i l s i d i ngs. Secondly the project coincides with the improvements being made by the Canadian National Railway i n the same area. This indicates the new elevator w i l l be w e l l equipped with r a i l f a c i l i t i e s . Another elevator i n s t a l l a t i o n i n S e a t t l e , Washington, has important implications for B r i t i s h Columbia and should be noted. Like the new Vancouver i n s t a l l a t i o n i t i s j u s t getting under way. In terms of ca p a c i t i e s i t i s very s i m i l a r to the new Vancouver elevator. Storage capacity of the Seattle e l e - vator w i l l be f i v e m i l l i o n bushels and the loading rate to vessels w i l l be 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 bushels per hour. 1 The s t r i k i n g fea- ture of the new Seattle i n s t a l l a t i o n i s the f a c t that there w i l l be 65 feet of water alongside. Consequently any ship now i n the g r a i n trade w i l l be able to load to f u l l capacity. Furthermore the elevator should be able to serve p r a c t i c a l l y every ship f o r years to come, including the l a r g e s t ones of up to 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 tons now being b u i l t . This new elevator i n Seattle w i l l make that port very competitive with Canadian f a c i l i t i e s and improve the p o s i t i o n of Seattle as a grain exporting port. Although the Columbia River ports may suffer more from the competition of Seattle because of the p e c u l i a r i t i e s of grain marketing i n the United States, i t should be remembered that i f changes i n American marketing conditions occur, Seattle " 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 Bushel Grain F a c i l i t y Planned by Port," Port of Seattle Reporter, May 1966, p. 4-. 91 w i l l have the handling f a c i l i t i e s to compete e f f e c t i v e l y with B r i t i s h Columbia. I f B r i t i s h Columbia lacks e f f i c i e n t f a c i l - i t i e s the competition of Seattle could be harmful to Canada's grain trade. The conclusion to be drawn from t h i s analysis i s that new e f f i c i e n t f a c i l i t i e s are needed i n B r i t i s h Columbia not only to maintain a c e r t a i n volume of exports but, j u s t as importantly, to ensure present Canadian customers continue to buy Canadian grain. Future Elevator Requirements Present i n d i c a t i o n s are that B r i t i s h Columbia elevator capacity i s operating at or near i t s capacity with turnovers between eight and nine times i n the very busy year of 1963-64 (Table 71), and w i l l p o s s i b l y be s l i g h t l y higher than t h i s i n 1965-66. These turnovers i n busy years r e s u l t i n delay prob- lems f o r vessels and railways as has been stated e a r l i e r . The conclusion that B r i t i s h Columbia's f a c i l i t i e s are being u t i l i z e d at or near capacity i s further supported by a study made f o r the Portland Commission of P u b l i c Docks. I t stated that Portland's annual capacity to handle grain was about ten p times i t s storage capacity. I t i s concluded then, that B r i t i s h Columbia w i l l need more grain handling f a c i l i t i e s i n the near future. The exact amount of new elevator capacity that w i l l be needed i s impossible to predict i n t h i s thesis but two s p e c i f i c studies would be useful i n making t h i s p r e d i c t i o n . F i r s t , a thorough study of elevator operations to determine the 2 See the unpublished Ph.D. thesis (University of C a l i f o r n i a , 1966) by James M. Ashbaugh, "A Geography of the Columbia River Ports, U n i v e r s i t y Microfilms Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, p. 122. 92 most e f f i c i e n t turnover of capacity and the most e f f i c i e n t s i z e of elevator. This i s p o s s i b l y known by the elevator companies but does not appear to be available otherwise. Second, a de- t a i l e d market study should be undertaken to make av a i l a b l e some estimation of the actual volume that may be exported i n f i v e or ten years ! time. Location of new f a c i l i t i e s i s another problem to be resolved and involves the consideration of port e f f i c i e n c y . Vancouver w i l l soon have new f a c i l i t i e s capable of e f f i c i e n t handling of a l l types of vessel now i n the g r a i n trade. As pointed out i n e a r l i e r chapters, Vancouver i s a port contain- ing many of the advantages that a t t r a c t ocean shipping. Modern f a c i l i t i e s f o r grain handling add to that attractiveness. How- ever one new elevator w i l l not be s u f f i c i e n t to serve the increasing number of large bulk c a r r i e r s i n the g r a i n trade.^ Nor w i l l i t be s u f f i c i e n t to handle the constantly r i s i n g demand f o r export grain through B r i t i s h Columbia. I n e f f i c i e n c y w i l l increase as the old elevators become more obsolete i n the face of new ships and shipping techniques. There i s a need therefore to modernize present f a c i l i t i e s . This may not always be possible due to l i m i t a t i o n s of present elevator design or l i m i t a t i o n s of physical space. For example on the south shore of Burrard I n l e t i t would be d i f f i c u l t to greatly increase the r a i l f a c i l i t i e s at the elevators. Simi- l a r l y some of the present small elevators may be r e s t r i c t e d ^Col. E. B. Oram, Cargo Handling and the Modern Port (London: Pergamon Press, 1965), p. 119' 93 f o r space f o r b u i l d i n g new storage s i l o s . Conversely the l a r g e r elevators may have l a t i t u d e f o r expanding handling rates. For example the 7.3 m i l l i o n bushel Alb e r t a Wheat Fool elevator could p o s s i b l y i n s t a l l new loading g a l l e r i e s s i m i l a r to those of the new Saskatchewan Wheat Pool elevator. Location of Future Development - Vancouver Larger ships w i l l mean larg e r and deeper ship berths w i l l be necessary. Any expansion of loading c a p a c i t i e s at elevators would necessitate deepening and lengthening berths to serve the ships a t t r a c t e d by r a p i d loading f a c i l i t i e s . Currently the United Grain Growers berth i s being extended for t h i s reason. General harbour f a c i l i t i e s must also be adequate to accommodate large ships. Therefore i t w i l l be necessary to remove l i m i t s to shipping at the F i r s t Narrows entrance to Vancouver Harbour. Such a proposal f o r deepening the entrance to 50 f e e t has already been made by the l o c a l National Harbours Board o f f i c e but, as yet, no d e c i s i o n has been made as to when or i f the p r o j e c t w i l l be undertaken. Before large-scale port investments are undertaken however, further research into the vessels that w i l l be i n the grain trade would be h e l p f u l . I t i s suggested that harbours w i l l have to accommodate the l a r g e s t ships i f they hope to compete but t h i s i s not n e c e s s a r i l y true. The l a r g e s t tankers, f o r example, are i n many ways i l l - e q u i p p e d f o r the g r a i n trade and indeed may never be used f o r grain. Self-trimming bulk c a r r i e r s are more l i k e l y to dominate the trade, hence the requirements and future development of vessels a c t u a l l y using the port should be studied when port investments are contemplated. By doing t h i s , investments can he made r e l a t i v e to a c t u a l c o n d i t i o n s r a t h e r than some h y p o t h e t i c a l "maximum s h i p s i z e " c r i t e r i a t h a t may serve no purpose. Hew Westminster and V i c t o r i a New Westminster and V i c t o r i a , two p o r t s now h a n d l i n g g r a i n i n B r i t i s h Columbia, do not warrant expansion of f a c i l - i t i e s . New Westminster i s l i m i t e d by the E r a s e r R i v e r and there i s no apparent reason i n the f o r e s e e a b l e f u t u r e f o r the r i v e r to be deepened to handle l a r g e b u l k s h i p s , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h the deep harbour of Vancouver c l o s e by. The r a t i o n a l e f o r not developing V i c t o r i a i s t h a t s h i p p i n g through t h i s p o r t i n v o l v e s a barge h a u l from the mainland. While t h i s does not a f f e c t the f r e i g h t r a t e of s h i p p i n g g r a i n , i t does i n v o l v e g r e a t e r economic c o s t to the Canadian N a t i o n a l Railway. This can b e s t be avoided by r e s t r i c t i n g as much as p o s s i b l e s h i p - ments through t h i s p o r t . Another drawback i s tha t V i c t o r i a has a v e r y s m a l l harbour and expansion would t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e a c o s t l y e x t e n s i o n of the present a r t i f i c i a l harbour. P r i n c e Rupert i s the o n l y other harbour where expan- s i o n of g r a i n h a n d l i n g f a c i l i t i e s can be j u s t i f i e d a t the present time. The l a r g e n a t u r a l harbour means there are no r e s t r i c t i o n s of space or depth. Furthermore the l a r g e r a i l i n s t a l l a t i o n s i n P r i n c e Rupert would preclude the expansion of t h a t f a c i l i t y . F i n a l l y P r i n c e Rupert i s about 540 m i l e s 4 c l o s e r to the Far E a s t e r n market than south c o a s t p o r t s . See the unpublished Master's t h e s i s ( U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1951) hy A. D. C r e r a r , " P r i n c e Rupert,B.C. The Study of a P o r t and i t s H i n t e r l a n d , " p. 154. On the other hand there are several disadvantages of Prince Rupert as a grain export port. Further i n v e s t i g a t i o n into these could p o s s i b l y reveal that the disadvantages out- weigh the advantages of expansion i n Prince Rupert. Chief among the disadvantages i s Prince Rupert's distance from the other ports i n B r i t i s h Columbia. In general terms the south coast ports are to some extent complementary. Prince Rupert i s so far from t h i s area that ships r e g u l a r l y c a l l i n g i n the south coast area r a r e l y go near Prince Rupert. Furthermore i f ships do c a l l at Prince Rupert they f i n d few cargoes are a v a i l - able beyond grain and some lumber. Thus the port i s not diverse enough to be a t t r a c t i v e to shipping. This i s o f f s e t to some extent by the f a c t that g r a i n shipped from Prince Rupert goes as a f u l l cargo. Hence other cargoes are of no importance to these charter vessels. A f i n a l disadvantage of Prince Rupert i s i t s greater distance from the grain growing i n t e r i o r . This a d d i t i o n a l 200 mile haul at the same f r e i g h t rates applying to Vancouver i s , therefore, an a d d i t i o n a l cost to the railways. Despite the disadvantages, Prince Rupert i s a desirable l o c a - t i o n for the expansion of grain handling f a c i l i t i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. New f a c i l i t i e s i n Prince Rupert should be r e l a t i v e l y large to allow e f f i c i e n t loading of the la r g e s t ships. A f i v e m i l l i o n bushel elevator at t h i s port, with s i m i l a r unloading and loading c a p a c i t i e s as the new Saskatchewan Wheat Pool e l e - vator i n Vancouver would allow easy loading of the la r g e s t bulk c a r r i e r s that are being planned at the present time and 96 would give B r i t i s h Columbia f a c i l i t i e s equal to Seattle's new elevator. Other Requirements There are some other changes i n gr a i n handling that could expand handling c a p a c i t i e s without a d d i t i o n a l elevator i n s t a l l a t i o n s . The f i r s t i s concerned with grading and clean- ing. I t has been noted that Canada has a rigourous and w e l l known high standard of grading and cleaning grain. I t i s sug- gested that i n some instances the standard may be too high. This applies p a r t i c u l a r l y to China and other under-developed areas that need wheat but not necessarily of a consistent high grade. In these cases i t may be p r a c t i c a l to s e l l an uncleaned grade at a lower p r i c e than the regular Canadian Wheat Board grades. I t i s possible that p o t e n t i a l markets such as India would be more interested i n buying t h i s lower q u a l i t y g r a i n at a lower p r i c e . I t could also help e s t a b l i s h China as a longer term customer. China p a r t i c u l a r l y i s not interested i n high q u a l i t y grain because the bulk of her purchases at the present time are of the lowest grades. Obviously, i f such a scheme as s e l l i n g uncleaned wheat were worked out, the elevators could put g r a i n through more r a p i d l y i f cleaning and grading were eliminated or reduced. Another change that should be considered i s the use of s p e c i a l i z e d grain cars on the railways. This could improve both elevator and railway e f f i c i e n c y . These grain cars carry the equivalent of three large boxcars of grain, yet can be dumped i n the same time as one boxcar on a car dumper. In elevators without a car dumper the time saving would be even greater. New handling b e l t s and cleaning equipment would be necessary i n the smaller elevators but the added e f f i c i e n c y of the l a r g e r cars could make t h i s worthwhile. F i n a l l y , using these large grain cars would a l l e v i a t e the railway trackage problem by allowing a much greater volume of d e l i v e r i e s on the same trackage. In Vancouver t h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important. One f i n a l change that i s recommended deals not with f a c i l i t i e s but with p r i c i n g p r a c t i c e s . Ultimately t h i s would a f f e c t the u t i l i z a t i o n and demand f o r grain handling f a c i l - i t i e s . Wheat pr i c e quotations are c o n s i s t e n t l y higher at 5 Vancouver than at Lakehead or St. Lawrence ports. No amount of research reveals a v a l i d economic reason f o r the higher Vancouver p r i c e and one can only reach the conclusion t h i s s i t u a t i o n e x i s t s to keep wheat moving through Eastern Canada. In other words i t i s a p r a c t i c e to r e s t r i c t B r i t i s h Columbia's competitive p o s i t i o n . I f t h i s i s true, and i t appears that i t i s * then i t should be removed. I t s removal would favour B r i t i s h Columbia exports to Europe and would r e s u l t i n an even greater necessity f o r expanded grain handling f a c i l i t i e s on the P a c i f i c Coast of Canada. Each of the above suggestions for change i n the mar- keting procedures f o r g r a i n could be a subject f o r research. I d e a l l y a comprehensive study of the whole system of grain handling, from farm to f i n a l d e l i v e r y aboard ship, should be undertaken. The suggested changes i n t h i s chapter would be ^Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada 1964-65 (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r , 1966), p. 76. 9 8 topics f o r research w i t h i n a f u l l system study. Findings could then be r e l a t e d to the system and u l t i m a t e l y would lead to a set of recommendations for r a t i o n a l i z i n g the whole g r a i n handling procedure. Throughout t h i s thesis an attempt has been made to develop a p i c t u r e of g r a i n handling on the P a c i f i c Coast of Canada that shows the grain ports of B r i t i s h Columbia i n r e - l a t i o n to world markets, other Canadian export points and l o c a l competitive ports i n the United States. The conclusion of t h i s analysis i s that B r i t i s h Columbia has a p a r t i c u l a r l y advantageous p o s i t i o n i n a l l respects. Costs are low r e l a t i v e to the competition of American ports. The grain products offered are i n strong and growing demand on the world market and f i n a l l y , the ports, p a r t i c u l a r l y Vancouver and Prince Rupert, have excellent harbours that have good opportunities f o r expansion of grain handling f a c i l i t i e s . With the improve- ments i n grain handling now planned as w e l l as those recommended i n t h i s t h e s i s the ports of B r i t i s h Columbia w i l l not only main- t a i n but would advance t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n world trade. 99 BIBLIOGRAPHY Printed Sources Books Bross, Steward R. Ocean Shipping. Cambridge, Mass., Cornell Maritime Press, 1 9 5 6 ' Campbell, F. S. ed. Ports, Dues, Charges and Accommodation. London, G. P h i l i p and Son Ltd., 1 9 6 4 . Canadian Ports and Seaway Directory. Gardenvale, Quebec, National Business P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1966. McElwee, R. S. Port Development. New York, McGraw H i l l , 1 9 2 6 . MacGibbon, D. A. The Canadian Grain Trade. Toronto, MacMillan Company, 1 9 3 2 . Morgan, F. W. Ports and Harbours. London, Hutchinson's Un i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , 1 9 5 2 . Oram, Col. R. B. Cargo Handling and the Modern Port. London, Pergamon Press, 1 9 6 5 . Ward, Barbara. The Rich Nations and the Poor Nations. New York, W. W. Norton and Company, 1 9 6 2 . Yates, D. "Grain and the Port of Vancouver." Symposium on the Port of Vancouver Proceedinp;s. ed., Robert W. C o l l i e r (U.B.C. 1 9 6 6 ) , 8 7 - 9 0 . Government Publications Board of Grain Commissioners. Canadian Grain Exports f o r the Crop Year 1964 -65* Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1 9 6 5 - Bureau of Economics and S t a t i s t i c s . Preliminary Statement of External Trade Through B r i t i s h Columbia Customs Ports f o r the Calendar Year 1964. V i c t o r i a , 1964. Department of Labour. Wage Rates, S a l a r i e s , and Hours of Work, October 1 9 6 5 • Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1966. Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s . Grain Trade of Canada 1 9 6 4 - 6 ; ? . Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1 9 6 5 * Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s . Shipping Report. Ottawa, Queen's P r i n t e r , 1 9 6 5 . 100 Fraser River Harbour Commission. 1st Annual Report. 1965. National Harbours Board. T a r i f f of Dockage, Buoyage, and Booming Ground Charges, Harbour of Vancouver. Feb. 23, 1966. Port of S e a t t l e . Seattle Terminals T a r i f f No. 100-A. March 18, 1966T ; Western Wheat Associates and U.S. Department of A g r i c u l t u r e . Wheat Supply, D i s t r i b u t i o n and Value i n the P a c i f i c North- west, 1962. Portland, Oregon, November 1963 ( S t a t i s t i c a l B u l l e t i n No. 2). P e r i o d i c a l s and Newspapers Best, John. "Canada S e l l s $800 M i l l i o n Wheat, Flour to Russians." Vancouver Sun, June 20, 1966, p. 1. "B. C. Grain Exports f o r the Month of March." Harbour and Shipping, XLIX ( A p r i l 1966), 270. E a r l , L. T. "A Record Crop and A l l Sold." Western Business and Industry, XXXIX (November 1965), 26a. Edmonds, J . K. "Behind the Big West Grain Backup." F i n a n c i a l Post, March 14, 1966, p. 1 f f . "5,000,000 Bushel Grain F a c i l i t y Planned by Port." Port of Seattle Reporter, May 1966, p. 4. Gibbings, C. W. "A B u l l i s h Future f o r Canadian Grain." Western Business and Industry, XXXVIII (November 1964), 1 8 - 1 9 f f . In t e r n a t i o n a l Wheat Council. Review of World Wheat S i t u a t i o n , A p r i l I960, p. 16. Laurencom Writers. "Grain Handling Sparks Controversy at Vancouver." Canadian M i l l i n g and Peed, XLVII (May 1966), 20 - 2 3 . Newman, Peter C. "Backstage at Ottawa." Maclean's, July 6, 1 9 6 3 , P. 2. "Ottawa R o l l s Out Giant Docks Plan." Vancouver Sun, Feb. 18, 1966, p. 1. . . . . Manuscript Sources Theses and other Unpublished M a t e r i a l Ashbaugh, James M. "A Geography of the Columbia River Ports." Ph.D. Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1 9 6 6 , University M i c r o f i l m Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan. Cornwall, I. H. B. "A Geographical Study of the Port of Vancouver i n Relation to I t s Coastal Hinterland." Master's Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, , 1952. Crerar, A. D. "Prince Rupert, B.D. The Study of a Port and I t s Hinterland." Master's Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 5 1 . . . P a c i f i c Coast Grain Conferences. "Report of the Immediate Problems Committee," Vancouver, 1 9 6 1 . Wheatley, G. R. "Grain Handling Through the Port of Vancouver. Graduating Essay, Faculty of Commerce, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1962. Personal Enquiry Crabtree, R. Manager, P a c i f i c Northwest Grain and Grain Products Association. Interview with the author, June 1966. Crawford, P. B. Assistant General Manager, Port of S e a t t l e . L e t t e r to the author, June 2 9 , 1966. Gage, J. E. Manager, P a c i f i c Terminals Ltd. Interview with the author, June 1966. McRae, D. Manager f o r B r i t i s h Columbia, United Grain Growers Limited. Interview with the author, June 1966. MacDonald, K. G. Superintendent, Prince Rupert Elevator. L e t t e r to the author, May 31, 1966. Nalcadai, N. Food Agency, M i n i s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e and Forestry of Japan. Interview with the author, June 1966. P h i l l i p s , R. Research Director, Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. L e t t e r to the author, J u l y 1966. APPENDIX I PRIMARY NET SHIPMENTS OP CANADIAN GRAIN FROM SEMI-PUBLIC TERMINAL ELEVATORS, VANCOUVER, NEW-WESTMINSTER,- 1954-55 TO 1965-64 (thousands of bushels) Year Wheat Oats Barley Rye Flaxseed Rapeseed Other Total 1954-55 7 8 , 9 5 2 4,801 9,924 ' - 519 154 ' - 94,189 1955-56 96,242 1 , 9 1 5 10,155 360 703 4 3 0 - 109,840 1956-57 103,891 1,746 22,970 - 2,408 970 - 133,143 1957-58 128,210 3,164 19,971 1,359 5,224 4,285 - 163,045 1958-59 106 , 195 5 , 0 2 3 28,347 336 5,974 4,042 - 1 5 1 , 1 7 2 1959-60 92,866 3,421 2 3 , 2 5 5 327 6,296 2,859 579 129,603 1960-61 119,114 968 16,988 1,012 7 , 0 7 5 7,437 618 152,210 1961-62 145,746 1 , 5 0 5 13 ,071 1,137 6 , 0 9 9 6,266 415 1 7 4 , 2 3 9 1962-63 129,856 9,600 5,071 1,666 4,902 5,561 475 157,131 1963-64 154,010 13,588 28,163 1,600 6,282 5,088 692 209,423 1964-65 136,269 3,740 19,854 1,193 6,276 8,268 715 176,206 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , Various Issues. 103 APPENDIX I I PRIMARY NET SHIPMENTS OF CANADIAN GRAIN FROM THE SEMI-PUBLIC TERMINAL ELEVATOR AT VICTORIA CROP YEARS: 1 9 5 4 - 5 5 TO 1963-64 (thousands of bushels) Year Wheat Oats Barley Flaxseed Rapeseed Total 1954-55 1,411 26 1 - - 1,458 1955-56 2,476 28 : 1 - 412 2,918 1956-57 1,201 30 1 704 1,041 2,978 1957-58 2 , 1 7 4 29 3 702 905 3,810 1958-59 1,409 34 8 675 '390 2,516 1959-60 2,860 18 3 444 1 3,326 1960-61 5,482 59 7 248 1,296 7,092 1961-62 4,452 71 10 - 529 5,042 1962-63 6,228 43 5 - - 6,276 1963-64 7,954 46 7 - - 8 , 0 0 7 1964-65 8,723 44 10 - 178 8,955 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada (Ottawa; Queen's P r i n t e r ) , Various Issues. 104 APPENDIX I I I PRIMARY NET SHIPMENTS OP CANADIAN GRAIN PROM THE SEMI-PUBLIC TERMINAL ELEVATOR, PRINCE RUPERT CROP YEARS: 1954-55 TO 1963-64 (thousands of "bushels) Year Wheat Oats Barley Total 1954-55 154 - 5,083 5 , 2 3 7 1955-56 238 - 4,542 4,780 1956-57 - - 8,048 8,048 1957-58 - - 10,357 10,357 1958-59 - - 9,046 9,046 1959-60 - - 8,896 8,896 1960-61 - - 10,398 10,398 1961-62 - - 10,531 10 , 5 3 1 1962-63 3,553 - 111 3,664 1963-64 10,475 35 - - 10 ,510 1964-65 10,128 20 2 10,150 Source: Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s , Grain Trade of Canada (Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r ) , Various Issues. APPENDIX IV WHEAT EXPORTS THROUGH BRITISH'COLUMBIA PORTS BY COUNTRY OP DESTINATION (thousands of bushels) 1964 1963 1962 1961 I960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 Western Europe 15,568 21,924 16,455 20,837 30,767 33,983 46,356 7 0 , 0 7 0 45,466 51,956 United Kingdom 7,855 13,317 6,618 7,231 15,214 14,998 19 , 3 2 9 28,149 16,560 16 , 155 Belgium-Lux. 952 3,526 2 ,277 1,976 1 , 5 9 2 3 , 5 2 7 2,762 7,699 2,978 4,157 Germany(W) 1 ,439 1,949 5 , 0 5 0 7,196 3 , 9 7 8 7,811 12,066 16 , 3 0 5 1 5 , 8 7 7 1,188 Netherlands 5 , 0 5 2 2 , 9 6 0 1,805 2,815 5 , 7 3 2 1 , 8 7 6 5,266 9 , 9 1 0 4 , 7 5 8 1 , 0 9 2 Malta - - 244 807 1 , 3 0 8 - 747 1,151 1 , 5 0 1 1 , 7 2 7 Prance - 63 36 57 235 131 93 — 12 — I t a l y 270 109 139 80 940 709 467 1,126 75 — Norway - - 174 823 2 , 2 3 0 1 , 7 0 9 1,415 1,617 1 , 9 2 7 1,516 Switzerland - - 9 4 16 696 2 , 0 3 5 4 , 0 7 3 2 , 7 0 5 1,578 6 , 177 Denmark - - - - 19 43 138 224 75 A u s t r i a - - - 577 - 1,144 - 1,206 127 166 Eastern Europe 7,207 3,075 760 78 3,244 467 — 5,405 4,572 2,404 Bulgaria 3 , 3 7 6 - _ _ _ _ E. Germany - - _ _ _ _ - 572 Czechoslovakia 1,482 - _ _ _ _ - - _ Poland 2 ,549 5,075 760 78 5,244 467 - 5,405 4 , 2 0 0 2,404 Total Europe 2 2 , 7 7 5 24 ,999 1 7 , 1 9 5 2 0 , 9 1 5 5 4 , 0 1 1 5 4 , 4 5 0 46 , 5 5 6 7 5 , 4 7 5 5 0 , 0 5 8 5 4 , 5 6 0 North and Central America 1,610 916 1 , 5 0 5 852 144 185 352 2 0 0 199 847 Dominican Rep. 509 521 8 5 0 539 93 — - — — — E l Salvador 965 585 448 212 48 55 58 64 — _ Honduras 55 5 - 2 3 5 25 15 — — Nicaragua 205 - - — — _ _ Guatemala - - 27 80 - 70 167 107 155 5 United States - 9 - 19 - — 21 16 32 2 0 Panama 78 - - — — — — — _ APPENDIX IT (continued) 1964 1965 1962 ' 1961 I960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 Jamaica — — — — — — — — 1 1 Costa Rica - - - - - 55 85 - 33 224 Cuba - - - - - - - - - 599 South America 11,834 7,142 6,496 4 , 3 3 7 4,442 7,408 2 , 5 0 0 4,615 4,243 2,580 Ecuador 1,666 1 , 0 1 5 1,146 1 , 2 5 7 1 ,375 1,324 794 646 1 , 3 9 3 1,841 Peru 385 1,266 - 482 1 , 3 5 3 3,604 - 1,818 2,850 209 Venezuela 9,783 4,861 5,218 2,194 1,714 1,672 1 , 5 2 2 2,151 - - Colombia - — 132 404 - 808 184 — - 531 A s i a - Near East 1 , 5 2 2 5 1 , 5 9 2 977 3,600 956 1 ,711 568 1,180 Saudi Arabia — 335 5 — 29 — 233 405 150 86 Iraq - - - - 435 2,033 - 41 370 I s r e a l - 987 - 1 , 5 9 2 513 1 , 5 6 7 .723 1,308 377 - Palestine - - - - - - - — — 724 A s i a - Par East 120,780 1 0 9 , 3 3 5 110,494 102,672 52,74-6 42,630 5 1 , 2 5 0 3 4 , 3 0 9 35,409 51 ,593 Hong Kong 787 655 597 502 1 , 3 3 5 37 172 443 332 India 721 - - - 656 - 7 , 5 3 9 - - 355 Malaysia 723 182 - - - - - - - - Pakistan 355 — - - - - - - 1,008 -China(Mainland)58,043 54,058 58,470 45,518 - - 4,245 - - - Japan 51,998 47,536 44,827 5 5 , 0 1 9 49 ,557 41 , 3 7 1 39,048 34,137 33,958 30,906 P h i l l i p i n e s 7 , 7 7 6 6 , 2 0 3 5,890 1,877 1,153 1 , 2 5 2 381 - - - Taiwan 577 212 710 1 , 5 7 5 65 7 - - - - Burma • - - - 181 - — - - - -Korea - . 511 - - - - - - - - Total A sia 120,780 110,657 110,499 104,264 5 3 , 7 2 5 46,230 52,206 36,020 3 5 , 9 7 7 3 2 , 7 7 3 APPENDIX IV (continued) 1964 1963 1962 1961 I960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 A f r i c a 4,319 7,916 1,113 1 , 2 5 0 4,977 9,763 619 397 5,639 5,506 Nigeria 299 — 213 — — _ — — — — Northern Rhodesia 37 — 11 90 191 11 608 240 369 190 Rep.of South A f r i c a 3,983 7,916 683 205 4 , 7 0 5 9,696 - 71 5,100 5,184 Congo - - 9 18 - - - - - -Mozambique - - 197 - 81 - - - - -A l g e r i a - - - 937 - - - - - -Portugese E. A f r i c a — - - - - 56 11 86 170 132 Oceania 296 386 562 314 134 - 1,473 - - - U.S.Oceania 296 386 562 314 134 — — — — — A u s t r a l i a - - - - - - 1,473 - - - U.S.S.R. 15,861 9,453 - 7 ,511 - • 7,229 4,220 5,913 14,852 - 'Total * 177,475 161,469 137 ,170 141,040 98,608 105,265 109,857 118,467 110,948 *Totals may be s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t from o f f i c i a l p u b l i c a t i o n due to rounding. Source: Bureau of Economics and S t a t i s t i c s , Preliminary Statement of External Trade, ( V i c t o r i a , B.C.) Various Issues. o -o APPENDIX V BARLEY EXPORTS THROUGH BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS BY COUNTRY OF DESTINATION • (thousands-of-bushels) • . . . . . . Country- 1964 1963 1962 1961 I960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 United Kingdom 4,534 4,817 3,282 3,160 14,665 28,540 18,958 9,762 5,943 9,620 Germany 2,476 - - - 2,128 639 2 7,623 3,180 - I t a l y 947 - - 48 291 93 - - - - Spain 171 - - - - — - — - — Czechoslovakia 620 - - - - - - - - - China (Comm.) 16,647 1,083 9 , 3 0 9 30,340 - - - - - - Japan 3,828 115 1,694 - - - 4,860 6,824 12,604 9 , 7 5 3 4,989 Korea 1,318 - - - - - - - - Peru 93 92 92 161 92 - 92 - - - United States 5 - 87 407 27 - - 2 - - Netherlands - 170 70 33 986 890 - 522 189 - Costa Rica — - — - - - - - - 4 Belgium Lux. - - - - 158 483 47 72 243 - Denmark - - - - 397 - - - - - Switzerland - - - - 685 870 229 - 70 - Poland - - - - 4,681 483 2,287 - - - - Kuwait - - - - - - - - - Saudi Arabia — 42 - - 10 1 - - - - Union S.Africa — - - - 5 - - - - - Panama — — - - 1 - - - - - Hawaii — — - - - 127 20 - - - Venezuela - 1 - - - - - - - - U.S.fi.R. - - - - - - 5 , 7 9 9 - - - S y r i a - - - - - 662 - 29,456 9,217 12,840 34 , 150 24,605 39,544 30,462 30,586 19,378 14,615 Source: Bureau of Economics and S t a t i s t i c s , Preliminary Statement of External Trade ( V i c t o r i a , B.C.), Various Issues. APPENDIX VI OATS EXPORTS THROUGH BRITISH COLUMBIA PORTS BY COUNTRY OP DESTINATION - (thousands of bushels) Country- 1964 1963 1962 1961 I960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 United Kingdom 83 340 25 — 19 1,736 2,144 359 40 897 Belgium-Lux. 230 1,537 132 - 99 84 - 481 — 688 Prance 66 26 — — — — — — — — Germany 1,747 1,686 - 1,834 1,698 - - - — I t a l y 186 2,141 - - - - - - - — Netherlands 5,691 4,642 856 - 178 454 - - — 189 Switzerland 17 195 - - - - - - - 86 Rep. S.Africa 472 - - - - - - - - - Colombia 198 268 39 332 216 237 152 307 157 74 Panama 55 54 31 11 57 55 46 43 50 56 United States 28 5 18 26 290 492 404 457 758 249 Peru - 2 227 2 4 - — - - -Venezuela - 166 4 1 34 4 5 — 3 - Costa Rica — — 4 - - 2 - - - -Ecuador - - - - 3 5 - - - -Ireland - - - 120 - - - - — — Hawaii - - - " - - - - - 8 2 Dorn.Republic - — — — — — — — — Totals 8 , 7 7 2 11,064 1,340 492 2,733 4,768 2 , 7 5 2 1,655 1 , 0 0 9 2,241 Source: Bureau of Economics and S t a t i s t i c s , Preliminary Statement of External Trade ( V i c t o r i a , B.C.), Various Issues. APPENDIX VII IMPORTS OP WHEAT PROM CANADA INTO - SELECTED COUNTRIES (thousands of metric tons) Country '55-56 •56-57 '57-58 •58-59 '59-60 •60-61 '61-62 • 62-63 '63-64 • 64-65 Western Europe ( t o t a l ) 4-64-1.5 4859.8 4754.9 4498.9 4099.7 4587-1 4521.5 3836.5 4456.5 3689.6 Belgium-Lux. 4-07.0 429.1 3 9 0 . 5 2 9 4 . 7 294.5 330.1 314.4 260.7 423.6 418.1 Netherlands 24-3.9 339-6 5 4 4 . 9 406.2 221.1 157.4 1 1 4 . 5 126.6 96.5 95-3 Switzerland 188.4 284.1 251.9 177.1 222.0 178.3 233-0 80.1 201.7 122.0 United Kingdom 24-90.0 2231.5 2418.8 2458.5 2178.2 2078.3 2024.7 2087.5 2072.0 1981.3 Germany (W) 797.4- 1045.7 871.5 811.5 696.8 875.5 1222.8 739 .5 985.6 612 .5 I t a l y 162.3 90.5 42.1 50.5 59.3 405.1 106.9 127.1 112.2 18.0 Eastern Europe ( t o t a l ) 4 5 1 - 5 397.9 108.3 133.6 132.6 457.9 754.4 505.6 758.8 1927.3 Poland 398.7 190.9 108.3 133.6 132.6 63.4 426.2 586.0 323.5 485.6 Bulgaria - - - - - - - - 156.7 206.5 Czechoslovakia 42.7 207.0 - - - 350.4 - 119.6 178.8 714.2 Albania - — — - - 64.1 — - - -E. Germany - - - - - - 271.0 - - 275.9 Asia - Far East ( t o t a l ) 835.3 913.6 1715.0 1 5 8 2 . 5 1545.7 2499.7 3538.7 2925.6 2600.1 3690.0 China (Mainland) — — — ' — - 780.8 1967.7 1677-7 1004.8 1758.2 Japan 821.6 875.1 1050.6 1162.6 1224.6 1499.7 1301.6 1247.1 1306.0 1432.2 P h i l l i p i n e s — — 29.7 39.9 26.9 95.2 173.3 201.5 171.8 India — — 565.1 508.1 1 7 9 . 5 107.7 96.4 19.1 19.6 186.9 South America ( t o t a l ) 79.8 103.3 101.5 170.1 216.2 192.5 144.1 242.1 242.4 329.8 Venezuela 2.0 1.8 18.0 79.2 93.6 86.3 106.6 195.2 191.3 262.1 Ecuador 52.6 14.5 15.7 40.1 26 . 5 40.0 30.3 32.3 31.2 32.2 Peru 25.2 8 7 . 0 62.8 50.8 74.1 49.4 - 14.6 19.9 25.5 Colombia — — 5.0 - 22.0 13.7 7.2 - — 10.0 U.S.S.R. 290.0 110.0 564.9 181.7 — 204.4 - - 5195.1 868.1 A f r i c a 174.0 34.7 20.7 198.6 244.0 53.7 82.0 246.7 6 5 . 8 96.9 North & Central America 327.2 243.9 532.5 163.5 183-2 233.6 173.0 184.2 325.9 322.7 World Total 6847.7 6725.6 7514.4 7043.5 6585-7 8359.2 9072.7 8242.9 13598.4 10999.9 Source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, World Grain Trade S t a t i s t i c s (Rome), Various Issues. APPENDIX V I I I PRIMARY CHARGES FOR GRAIN HANDLING - AND SHIPPING AT PACIFIC COAST PORTS Charge Vancouver New Westminster V i c t o r i a Prince Rupert Seattle Portland Pilotage one way- only Sick Mariners 20 per n.r.t, Dues max. 60 per n.r.t, per yr. i n a l l Canada Tonnage Tax and Light Money Harbour Dues N i l Wharfage Cargo Rate 30 per n.r . t . - max.5 entries or 150 per n.r.t.per yr. 30 per short ton loaded 30 per short ton loaded 2 0 per n.r.t.- max.5 entries or 100 per n.r.t.per yr. 60 per short ton loaded N i l gross ton $ 1 . 0 0 per foot of draught $ 1 . 0 0 per' mile ton mile 1/2 0 per gross l/2 0"per gross 1/2 0 per 1/2 0 per gross $2.55 per $6.80 per ton 11.00 per foot of draught $1 . 0 0 per mile ton $1.00 per foot of draught $1.00 per mile In Fraser River 1.50 per nj?.t. $2.60 per foot of draught 20 per n.r . t . - max. 60 per n.r.t. per yr. i n a l l Canada N i l $1.00 per foot (67-1/2 of draught $ 1 . 0 0 per mile miles) foot of draught 4-0 per n.r.t. 20 per n.r.t - max. 60 per n.r.t, per yr. i n a l l Canada N i l 50 or 50 per n . r . t i - max.twice per yr.at any Public Harbour 150 per short ton loaded N i l 20 per n. r . t . - max. 60 per n.r.t. per y r . i n a l l Canada N i l N i l N i l 20 or 60 per n.r.t. max:. 5 times max. 5 times per y r . i n per y r * i n 20 or 60 per n.r.t. 50 or 50 a n.r.t.-max. twice per yr. at any Public Har. 150 per short ton loaded N i l a l l U..S.b $ 5 . 0 0 a l l U.S.13 N i l N i l N i l N i l N i l APPENDIX VIII (continued) Charges Dockage Vancouver 100 per f t . of length per 8 hrs. 50 per 8 hrs. i n non work p e r i o d 0 New Westminster N i l Wharfage Weighing & .0450/bu. Inspecting Elevation of Gr a i n e From r a i l c a r s 2-7/80 per bu.or 94.90 per short From barges N.A. From trucks N.A. Loading to ship N i l Service and F a c i l i t i e s Charge N i l Selftrimming bulk c a r r i e r Non-trimming bulk c a r r i e r .0450/bu. 2-7/80 per bu, or 94.90 per short ton N.A. N.A. N i l N i l V i c t o r i a 60 per f t . of length per 24 hrs. Prince Rupert 60 per f t . o f length per 24 hrs. ,0450/bu. .0450/bu. 2-7/80 per 2-7/80 per bu.or bu. or 9 4 . 9 0 per short ton N.A. N.A. N i l 9 4 . 9 0 per short ton N.A. N.A. N i l N i l N i l Seattle Varies with G.R.T.-eee Supplemen- tary Table XIIA 10 per bu. or 33-1/30 per short ton N-.A. Portland Varies with G.R.T.-see Supplemen- tary Table XIIA. 10 per bu. or 33-1/30 per short ton N.A. 1-3/40 per bu. 1-3/40 per or 57.80 per bu. or 57.80 short ton As above 2.50 per bu. or 82.50 per short ton 10 per bu.or 33-1/30 per short ton 100 per short ton 140 per short ton per short ton As above 2.50 per bu. or 82.50 per short ton 10 per bu.or 33-1/30 per short ton 100 per short ton 140 per short ton H ro APPENDIX VIII (continued) T"—*"*"" " " " Charges Vancouver New Westminster V i c t o r i a Prince Rupert Seattle Portland Tankers Two-deck vessels Three-deck " Un c l a s s i f i e d . " Cleaning- Wheat >2-l/2% dockage N i l 3-l/2%-5-l/2% 1/20 per bu. or 16.50/ST 10/bu.or 33-1/30/ST N i l .50/bu.or 16.50/ST #/bu. or 33-0/ST 5-1/2-10% Oats & Barley >1% dockage 1-5-1/2% 5-1/2-10% N i l 1/20 per bu. or 16.50/ST 10/bu.or 33-1/30/ST N i l .50/bu.or 16.50/ST 10/bu.or 330/ST N i l 1/20 per bu. or 16.50/ST 10/bu.or 53-1/30/ST N i l •50/bu.or 16.50/S1 10/bu.or 330/ST N i l 1/20 per bu. or 16.50/ST 10/bu.or 35-1 /30/ST N i l .5^/hu.or 16.50/ST 10/bu.or 330/ST • 150 per ST 150 per ST 210 per ST 170 per ST 20 per bu. or 660 per ST for a l l grain 150 per ST 150 per ST 210 per ST 170 per ST 20 per bu. or 660 per ST for a l l grain a50 per n. r . t . i f vessel from any point i n North America or B r i t i s h possession bordering on North A t l a n t i c or Carribean and 50 per n.r.t. from other o r i g i n . ^Charge i s 60 per n.r.t. i f vessel originates outside of North or Central America, West Indies or South America bordering on Carribean. cNon-work period defined as period from 12:01 A.M. to 8:00 A.M. ^Wharfage i s a charge f or the use of g r a i n - f a c i l i t i e s and i s charged against the owner of the grain. I t does not ref e r to term as i t i s applied to maritime operations i n Canada. This wharfage charge i s made against incoming grain whether or not i t i s loaded to a vessel. eCharges are i d e n t i c a l f o r a l l g rain at Portland and Se a t t l e . In B r i t i s h Columbia wheat, oats and barley are i d e n t i c a l but rye, flaxseed and rapeseed have a higher charge. APPENDIX VIII (continued) Sources: 1. Grain T a r i f f No, 19« Applying at Seattle and Portland ( C a r g i l l , Incorporated, A p r i l 1, 1966). 2 . Elevator t a r i f f s for Canada provided by United Grain Growers. 3 . Canadian Ports and Seaway Directory (Gardenvale, Que.; National Business P u b l i c a - t i o n s , 1966). 4. P. S. Campbell, ed., Ports. Dues, Charges and Accommodation (London; G. P h i l i p and Son Ltd., 1964). 5. National Harbours Board, T a r i f f of Wharf Charges, Harbour of Vancouver, Aug. 25, 1965• 6. National Harbours Board, T a r i f f of Harbour Dues, Harbour of Vancouver, Nov. 25, 1964. 7. National Harbours Board, T a r i f f of Dockage, Buoyage and Booming Ground Charges, Harbour of Vancouver, Feb. 2 3 , 1966. 8. National Harbours Board, T a r i f f of Cargo Rates, Harbour of Vancouver, Sept. 1, I960. 9 . Port of Seattle, personal correspondence. H 115 APPENDIX IX DOCKAGE RATES IN SEATTLE AND PORTLAND Vessels of Gross , Seattle _ Registered Tonnage A B A 251 - 500 i n c . $ 2 . 6 7 501 - 1 , 0 0 0 1 , 5 0 0 5 . 5 0 1 , 0 0 1 - 1 , 5 0 1 - 4.58 2 , 0 0 0 2 , 5 0 0 5 . 2 5 2 , 0 0 1 - 7 . 0 0 2 , 5 0 1 - 5 , 0 0 0 8 . 7 5 5 , 0 0 1 - 4 , 0 0 0 1 0 . 5 0 4 , 0 0 1 - 5 , 0 0 0 1 2 . 2 5 5 , 0 0 1 - 6 , 0 0 0 14 . 0 0 6 , 0 0 1 - 7 , 0 0 0 1 5 . 7 5 7 , 0 0 1 - 8 , 0 0 0 . 1 7 . 5 0 8 , 0 0 1 - 9 , 0 0 0 1 9 . 2 5 9 , 0 0 1 - 1 0 , 0 0 0 2 1 . 0 0 1 0 , 0 0 1 - 1 1 , 0 0 0 1 1 , 0 0 1 - 1 2 , 0 0 0 1 2 , 0 0 1 - 1 5 , 0 0 0 CO 1 5 , 0 0 1 - 14 , 0 0 0 1 5 , 0 0 0 U 14 , 0 0 1 - 1 5 , 0 0 1 - O CQ 16 , 0 0 0 O 16 , 0 0 1 - 1 7 , 0 0 1 - 18 , 0 0 1 - 1 7 , 0 0 0 4- & 18 , 0 0 0 1 9 , 0 0 0 rH O CD O p<o 1 9 , 0 0 1 - 2 0 , 0 0 0 rH UN 2 0 , 0 0 1 and over O- U . <D 'or t land B $1.65 $5 .50 $ 2 . 1 9 2 . 1 9 . 3 . 5 0 2 . 1 9 2 . 7 5 4.58 2 . 7 5 5 . 2 9 5 . 2 5 5 . 2 9 4.58 7 . 0 0 4.58 5.48 8 . 7 5 5.48 6.56 10 .50 6.56 7.66 12 . 2 5 7.66 8 . 7 5 14 . 0 0 8 . 7 5 9 . 8 5 1 5 . 7 5 9 . 8 5 1 0 . 9 4 1 7 . 5 0 10.94 12.04 1 9 . 2 5 12.04 15.15 21 . 0 0 2 2 . 7 5 24 .50 15.15 14.25 1 5 . 5 5 CO 26 . 2 5 16.45 PH 28 . 0 0 1 7 . 5 5 0 co 2 9 . 7 5 18.65 & Pi 0 5 1 . 5 0 19 .75 4" & 55 . 2 5 20.85 U O 5 5 - 0 0 21.95 CD O rH 56 .75 25 . 0 5 5 8 . 5 0 24 . 15 O rH fn $1. 75 per $1.10 per . CD rH ft • 4 hours 4 hours per 1 , 0 0 0 per 1 , 0 0 0 Tons Tons Column A i s the charge f or an i d l e v e s s e l. 2Column B i s the charge f o r a working v e s s e l . N.B.- A l l charges are f o r a four (4) hour period or f r a c t i o n thereof. Sources: 1. Port of S e a t t l e , Seattle Terminals T a r i f f No. 100-A, March 18, 1966. 2 . Commission of Public Docks of the C i t y of Portland, Oregon, Terminal T a r i f f No. 5-A, A p r i l 1 5 , 1966. APPENDIX X MAJOR STATISTICS OF SASKATCHEWAN WHEAT POOL TERMINAL AT NORTH VANCOUVER, B.C. Capacity Work house 5.70,000 bushels Storage Annex 1 2 ,300,000 " Storage Annex 2 2 ,500,000 " Total 5,170,000 " Handling Rates: 1. Two car dumpers handling a t o t a l of 128 boxcars per 8 hour s h i f t . 2. Two 54 inch b e l t s i n the shipping g a l l e r y with combined loading capacity of 100,000 bu./hr. Berths: Two ship berths adequate to load vessels up to 4-5,000 tons capacity. Cleaning: 52 c l e a n e r s . a SL Drying: 1 dryer. a C a p a c i t i e s not given. Source: Personal correspondence, June 1966.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 6 0
Japan 2 0
City Views Downloads
Mountain View 3 0
Tokyo 2 0
Sunnyvale 2 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items