Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

The Term “Organic” Losing its Luster

I’ve watched the organic farming movement with interest over the past 10 years or so. It’s not because I have any philosophical motivation to become an organic producer – I’m interested because smaller scale crop operations have to look for every opportunity to derive more revenue and margin from every acre.

I have great respect for those producers who make the commitment to an organic production system and make it work. It requires a significant step-up in management and there is a steep learning curve to farming without herbicides and chemical fertilizers.

Having said this, I’ve not made the jump for a number of reasons. Time and labor constraints being one – I’m not sure that I could be as efficient as I am now, and hiring more labor is not an attractive option for me. Secondly, I’ve been somewhat skeptical about the future of organic premiums and here’s why. Organic farming is not unlike any other innovative production system, whether it be no-till, strip-till or some other alternative to traditional methods. The common path is that smaller scale, innovative producers latch on to an idea, work to perfect it and learn all the hard lessons as they cut the path. Early adopters watch from the sidelines, and when there is a reasonable expectation for success, they jump in and improve on the process and take it to a larger scale. Ultimately, large scale conventional producers look at the economics and realize that their economies of scale enable them to derive larger benefits from the innovation and they go for it.

This pattern holds for organic food production, or at least it was headed in that direction. The strange thing about organic farming is that it brings with it a lot of philosophical and emotional baggage. Many people have difficulty looking at it as simply another production/business model. For some, a move to organic is all about a deep seated mistrust of major agri-business corporations. For others, it’s about a perceived benefit to the environment. It can be even be a lifestyle choice. For me, it would be all about profitability.

I’ll admit I’m less interested in organic production than I was a couple of years ago. The fickle consumer is showing less enthusiasm for more expensive organic food as the recession hits many food buyers in the pocketbook. Also, the marketers have been quick to grab the word “organic” so it’s difficult for consumers to know what the word really means anymore. Recently I heard of an individual selling “organic” firewood at a local folk festival – sheesh. And a recent study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine found no real nutritional advantage to organic food compared to conventional.

But the real deterrent for me is the simple fact that as large scale producers enter the organic realm, per unit premiums for organic production will also come down. There are organizations that say a 12,000 head organic dairy farm is not what the organic movement is all about, but if Wal-Mart is going to sell organic milk, it’s going to come from large production units. Supply and demand rules, whether it’s organic or not and there is no way to regulate this sector to keep the big guys out.

For now, I’m on the sidelines. Nothing against the organic business model, but it’s not for me at this point.

What about you? Have you moved to an organic program? Have you considered a shift to organic? Will this niche market continue to grow or suffer some speed bumps?

Click here to join the discussion.

Peter Gredig
Farms.com Media
Peter.Gredig@Farms.com

Follow me on Twitter – I’m Agwag!

This commentary is for informational purposes only. The opinions and comments expressed herein represent the opinions of the author--they do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Farms.com. This commentary is not intended to provide individual advice to anyone. Farms.com will not be liable for any errors or omissions in the information, or for any damages or losses in any way related to this commentary.

Views: 27

Reply to This

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Welcoming Visitors: Show Off Your Herd Safely

Welcoming visitors onto your beef operation for tours, sales or informal stock viewings is a great way to connect and tell your story, but it also opens the door to a serious risk: disease. Every visit—whether from neighbours, tourists or family—carries the potential to introduce or spread disease to or from your operation. Good biosecurity practices help manage these risks while also reducing the probability of disease at the herd, national and even international levels. It’s important to understand why biosecurity matters during tours, as well as what actions should be in place before, during and after tours to minimize risk. Why Biosecurity Matters During Tours Biosecurity planning and precautions should be implemented during tours to limit the potential spread of disease to your livestock. This not only helps protect against significant reportable and trade-limiting diseases such as Foot and Mouth Disease, but also helps reduce the spread of endemic diseases, such as bovine viral

Health Canada opens consultations on drone pesticide applications

Health Canada is looking at allowing drone applications of pesticides

CWRC review of Canadian wheat breeding innovation system confirms significant gaps and risks

The Canadian Wheat Research Coalition (CWRC) has completed its review of the Canadian wheat breeding innovation system. The review, which was conducted by Synthesis Agri-Food Network, featured comprehensive analysis of related reports and studies, as well as interviews with 29 key stakeholders. This process confirmed three crucial facts about the current wheat breeding landscape in Western Canada: 1. The Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) wheat breeding program is an integral part of western Canadian wheat variety development. 2. The current wheat breeding system is at risk from recent and historic budget cuts, especially at the variety development and pre-market evaluation stages. 3. Wheat breeding is a long-term process and decisions made today will impact agriculture decades into the future. “It’s clear that the status quo is not a viable path forward,” says CWRC chair Jocelyn Velestuk, CWRC chair and a farmer near Broadview, SK. “Our system has been incredibly productive

Protein Industries Canada partners with nine companies to boost domestic food production and strengthen Canada’s food supply chain

Today, Protein Industries Canada announced the second cohort of companies participating in its Strengthening the Canadian Supply Chain Program: nine companies that span the value chain, focused on bringing their supply chains home to Canada and advancing the country’s value-added opportunity. This initiative builds on Protein Industries Canada’s efforts to increase domestic food and ingredient processing as a key market for Canadian crops. By working with companies to Make It Here, Protein Industries Canada is driving increased food production and value-added agriculture in Canada—critical factors for strengthening Canada’s supply chain and economy. “The Government of Canada is committed to shifting Canada’s economy from reliance to resilience—building strength at home and reinforcing the supply chains that secure our prosperity,” said the Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Industry and Minister responsible for Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions. “Through Protein Indust

Rollins, Vaden, and Forst Announce Disposal of Dilapidated USDA Facilities

Today, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins and Deputy Secretary Stephen A. Vaden, joined by General Services Administrator Edward C. Forst, announced the imminent disposal of the South Building and Braddock Place, returning resources to the American taxpayer, effectuating the vision of President Donald J. Trump, and reducing the real estate footprint of the U.S. Government in the National Capital Region. “This is a long overdue move to protect American taxpayer dollars from being wasted on expensive real estate inside the Washington, D.C. area when our government should be closer to the farmers and ranchers we serve,” said Secretary Brooke Rollins. “More than 85 percent of the South Building is unoccupied and there is a $1.6 billion backlog in deferred maintenance. It is simply unacceptable to put these costs on the taxpayer. We are being strong stewards of taxpayer dollars while also ensuring top notch customer service and fulfilling our promises to American farmers.” “P

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service