Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Farm Org. Funding.

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: 138

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dale Ketcheson on December 1, 2009 at 1:15pm
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.
Permalink Reply by Wayne Black on December 2, 2009 at 2:33pm
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.
Permalink Reply by Joann on December 16, 2009 at 4:45pm
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.
Permalink Reply by Avia Eek on December 17, 2009 at 5:16am
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.
Permalink Reply by Ken McCormack on January 31, 2010 at 3:47pm
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

Midwest Farmers Continue Moving Corn and Soybean Planting Dates Earlier

Across the U.S. Midwest, corn and soybean producers are steadily shifting planting dates earlier.

Ontario Pig Producer Disease Advisory -- PED and PDCoV Risks Rising This Winter

Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea (PED) and Porcine Deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) remain serious threats to Ontario swine operations, particularly during the winter months.

New rules boost water storage and conservation

New and expanded Water Act exemptions will increase water availability, improve conservation, support agricultural production and help protect communities from future emergencies. Currently, many dugouts are sized too small to capture available water because of a 2,500 cubic metre exemption limit. Effective immediately, farmers and ranchers can fill their dugouts up to 7,500 cubic metres – triple the previous limit – provided the water is used for agricultural purposes. This change helps protect them from future droughts and supports strong agricultural operations. “Albertans asked for practical improvements to make more water available, and we’re delivering. These changes make it easier for farmers, businesses and communities to access and store water. It’s good for communities, the environment and the economy.” Grant Hunter, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas “Reliable access to water is essential for Alberta’s farmers and ranchers, especially as they manage drought ris

Calf Health Management — What Does the Science Say?

Sometimes two research studies will ask a similar question and get different results. That doesn’t mean that one is right and the other is wrong, or that it’s a coin toss, or that research is pointless – it just means that details and context are important. If we want to know whether a particular management practice helps prevent scours in beef calves, large-scale studies that measure signs of scours, treatment and recovery rates in beef calves are more helpful than studies that compare rectal temperatures or white blood cell numbers in a few dairy calves. This is where “systematic reviews” are helpful. A systematic review clearly defines what kind of existing studies will help answer a specific question. Then it finds all the published studies that meet those criteria, reviews them, and identifies what they all agree on. Systematic reviews are extremely helpful when trying to make recommendations to real-life producers. Claire Windeyer and a team of veterinary researchers from the U

Ag Minister Launches National Consultations to Shape the Next Agricultural Policy Framework

Agriculture Minister Heath MacDonald has kicked off consultations to shape Canada’s Next Policy Framework, which will guide federal–provincial–territorial support for the agriculture and agri food sector from 2028 to 2033.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service