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: 131

▶ 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

Ag in the House: Dec. 1 – 5

A Liberal minister reminded the House the carbon tax doesn’t apply to farmer

Ontario Animal Health Network (OAHN) Swine Network Quarterly Industry Report

Starting in 2015, Senecavirus A (SVA) has caused intermittent complications with respect to the export of Canadian cull animals to the United States. This disease resembles reportable swine vesicular diseases. This is a national issue and since June 2025 has impacted Ontario cull sow movements. In July 2025, the APHIS and the USDA removed the export eligibility status for a cull sow assembly in Ontario due to SVA lesions being seen in cull sows sent to a USDA processing facility. These lesions initiated foreign animal disease investigations at this US processing plant. The suspect animal(s) were initially quarantined for individual inspection and further testing. Since the initial site, another 2 Ontario cull sow assembly sites have also had their export eligibility status revoked by APHIS and the USDA for similar reasons. The affected assembly sites accept cull sows from Quebec, the Maritimes and Ontario. Each affected assembly site must action the USDA requirements including emptyin

New restrictions placed on hunting, farming 'incredibly destructive' wild boars in Alberta

Wild boars have been declared "a pest in all circumstances" by the Alberta government effective Dec. 1, meaning new restrictions have been placed on keeping them in captivity and hunting them in the wild. It is now illegal to keep, buy, sell, obtain or transport wild boars in Alberta without a permit. That also means no new wild boar farms will be permitted in the province. The hunting and trapping of wild boars in Alberta is banned as well, with the exception of land owners or occupants killing the animals on their own land. Any person who kills a wild boar is now required to report the date, location and number of boars killed to the province as soon as possible. Hannah McKenzie, the province's wild boar specialist, says the changes were made due to the dangers posed by existing wild boar populations and the risks associated with more escaping from captivity. "In addition to damaging agriculture and the environment, wild boar pose a serious risk for the introduction and spread of

CUSMA Review Raises Concerns Over Potential U.S. Tariffs on Canadian Pork

As the first formal review of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) approaches in July, pork producers across North America are bracing for potential impacts—especially the possibility of new U.S. tariffs on Canadian agriculture. Florian Possberg, Partner at Polar Pork Farms, says the U.S. political landscape is shaping expectations. He notes that U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly pushed for a baseline 15% tariff on foreign goods in recent global trade discussions. If that approach carries into the CUSMA renegotiation, it could disrupt one of the pork sector’s most critical trade corridors. Free Trade Has Been Essential for Pork Movement Possberg emphasizes that under CUSMA, both live hogs and processed pork products have flowed freely across borders without tariffs. This freedom is especially important given the highly integrated nature of North America’s pork supply chain. The best-case scenario, he adds, is that tariff-free access continues unchanged. The wor

FCC report highlights productivity as key to Canada’s agricultural future

Canadian farmers could see significant income gains and new opportunities if agricultural productivity growth returns to historic highs. The Farm Credit Canada (FCC) report titled Reigniting agricultural productivity in Canada, estimates that boosting productivity growth to two per cent annually could unlock $30 billion in additional farm income, generate $31 billion in GDP, and create nearly 23,000 jobs across the country. Canada has long been a standout among global food producers. Over the past half-century, the agriculture industry has achieved significant productivity growth through better farm management, improved input efficiency and technological innovation. The report warns, however, that productivity growth has slowed in recent years, threatening the industry’s competitiveness and Canada’s ability to meet growing national and global food demand. “Canada’s agricultural productivity growth has consistently outpaced other G7 countries for more than three decades, showing the s

© 2025   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service