Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Today's Ontario Farmer had an interesting letter which proposed calculating the funding for farm organizations on a per acre basis. The intent, I suppose, would be to spread the cost according to potential benefit.

The acreage could easily be calculated from the existing Agricorp files.

Views: 110

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Maybe... if all acres were created equal and all farms were dependent on acreage. They aren't. Should an acre under glass in a greenhouse be counted the same as $800 rough pasture? Should 20,000 broilers on a 5 acre lot be counted the same as a 5 acre pick your own?

Haven't seen it yet, probably won't until the weekend so I'm just guessing on the content of the letter.
You are correct Dale - close enough anyway.
Another question would be - what about the farmers who do not own or crop any land at all? The ones who rent barns to feed cattle or milk livestock? There are so many different types of arrangements for a farm operation today it would not make sense to set the fee based solely on acreage or livestock units because of "assumed benefit".
The arguement a few years ago was: If Large Farmer pays $320 per year and little farmer pays $80 per year - does that mean the Large Farmer gets 4 votes for every vote the little farmer gets? The General Farm Organizations are suppose to represent their members. The membership includes all landowners and farmers who have a Gross Revenue from Farming operations in excess of $7,000 per year ("gross" not "net"). Each member is entitled to one vote.
the bigger question is.... do we need the present farm organizations? or are they completely stale-dated in today's environment?

if the present farm organizations were disbanded, will farmers be served better or worse?

if one looks around, i believe one will see that there are some very big farm operations that are more effective and efficient as individual lobbyist. ... farm operations are getting bigger and fewer.

is there a new farm lobby-organization on the horizon that will effectively meet the needs of the next generation of farm operations?

Wayne Black said:
You are correct Dale - close enough anyway.
Another question would be - what about the farmers who do not own or crop any land at all? The ones who rent barns to feed cattle or milk livestock? There are so many different types of arrangements for a farm operation today it would not make sense to set the fee based solely on acreage or livestock units because of "assumed benefit".
The arguement a few years ago was: If Large Farmer pays $320 per year and little farmer pays $80 per year - does that mean the Large Farmer gets 4 votes for every vote the little farmer gets? The General Farm Organizations are suppose to represent their members. The membership includes all landowners and farmers who have a Gross Revenue from Farming operations in excess of $7,000 per year ("gross" not "net"). Each member is entitled to one vote.
I have more of a statement to make, since I haven't read the paper yet--will get to that later. Generally, though as far as farm organizations are concerned, a good question would be how does the Farmer benefit from them. I know the Holland Marsh Farmers are, and continue to fight the peaker plant being built in the Holland Marsh, but I don't know that any OFA representative has stepped in and added their voice to this issue which will affect all the people in Ontario. Not to mention the precedent this is setting for prime agricultural land versus the need for energy. Our own local organization, the Holland Marsh Growers' Association is fighting this, but it seems we're on our own! The only benefit I see, right now, with OFA is cheaper taxes.
This idea has a lot of merit, particularly for the new Grain Farmers of Ontario. Since most of their members grow corn, wheat and soybeans in rotation on approximately the same acreage it would be a stable funding for them independent of yields and specific crops.

The only real breakdown is for those who grow crops for 'own use'. They would end up paying on acres they plan to feed to livestock. It can be said they still benefit from improvements in the crops, but it would be a harder sell.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

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

Agriculture in a changing climate

At the heart of the agriculture industry are coffee shops where farmers gather to chat. I believe the unwritten rule is to start every meeting with a discussion about the weather. There is a reason for that. While there are many factors, the weather plays a large part in the success of the agriculture industry, and Canada’s agriculture industry is susceptible to climate change. The earth is warming, and many experts agree that we will continue to see more extreme weather events and warmer temperatures. The Aquanomics model by GHD, a global engineering and architecture service firm, projects a loss of $108 billion to the Canadian GDP from 2022 to 2050 caused by droughts, floods, and storms. Flooding could cost the economy $30 billion by 2050. The model predicts that manufacturing and distribution will be the hardest hit at $50 billion in total output losses, with agriculture 5th on the list at $3 billion in output losses by 2050. Regardless of the economic impact, the agriculture indust

Rabobank Research Examines Trade War Implications for Soybeans

US soybean acres and farmgate prices could suffer in the event of another trade war with China, according to new research from Rabobank. A renewed trade war would potentially lower US farmgate prices by US$1.50 to $2/bu and reduce American soybean planted area by up to 5 million acres, the research shows. With current US farmgate soybean prices already weak, now hovering around $10/bu or below, the worst-case scenario could drag values down to near their mid-2019 low of about $8 during the first trade war. Meanwhile, a loss of 5 million acres from the 87.1 million planted to soybeans in 2024 would represent a fall of about 6%. If accurate, that would be a much more modest fall than in 2019, when planted area tumbled more than 13 million acres or 14.6% from the previous year to 76.1 million. US President-elect Donald Trump has promised to ratchet up tariffs on imports from China after he takes office on Jan. 20, suggesting amounts ranging anywhere from 10% to 100%. Rabobank said

Saskatchewan sees average year as province back to recovering from droughts

Saskatchewan continued on the path to recovery as another year saw conditions remain closer to normal following the droughts earlier this decade. The ag sector is hoping to see more progress on that with a good snowpack over winter helping to balance that moisture deficit. Daryl Harrison, Saskatchewan's Minister of Agriculture, talks about the province's economic fortunes over 2024. "I think more moisture-wise, some of our dryer pockets have seen some more moisture and our drought area certainly shrunk. There's certainly dry areas remaining out there and with our snowpack that we've received so far this winter, I think it's very optimistic that we're seeing the drought years behind us. We still need some spring rains to help enhance both the grass and hayland, but also prepare for spring seeding." Harrison himself farms in the southeast corner and says he saw a great year in that area. "Crop wise it was a great year, I thought cops across the board were generally average to above.

A look back at ag under the Trudeau Liberals

The Liberals usually viewed ag through different portfolios

Brock University becomes Canada’s Food & Agri-Tech Engine partner

Brock University is the newest Knowledge and Development partner to join Bioenterprise through Canada’s Food & Agri-Tech Engine. The addition of Brock will expand the capacity of the Engine’s growing national network of advisors, resources and mentors to support innovation, collaboration and technology for agri-food start-up businesses and entrepreneurs. 

© 2025   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service