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: 159

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

Food for Thought: From arts to agriculture, James Snyder saw big picture

Many of you may have read that James Snyder passed away suddenly in New Zealand, his second home. You may have no idea who he was, other than his love and involvement with local arts and culture. He truly enjoyed working with so many people who made Chatham-Kent a better place to live. I knew James for his love for the land and for his impact in the agriculture sector, not just here in Chatham-Kent, but across Ontario and Canada and in many parts of the world. In past columns, I’ve discussed people who have helped guide me, not only as a person, but also in my agriculture career. James Snyder was one of them. James was very proud of his British heritage. During my last visit, he took me through his downtown Chatham apartment, showing me every square foot — each of which had something of value to James. I met James when I started working for the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. I was working with Ron Anderson, our agriculture specialist, with whom James worked closely trying to expand

Agricultural Educator and Industry Leader Dr Tom Funk Remembered for Lasting Influence

Dr Tom Funk, a respected agricultural educator and leader at the University of Guelph, is remembered for his dedication to teaching, mentorship, and community service.

John Deere Becomes Official Tractor of Major League Baseball Ahead of America’s 250th Anniversary

John Deere and Major League Baseball have launched a new partnership.

What Distributed Energy Resources Mean for Canadian Producers

From solar panels to battery storage, distributed energy resources are giving Canadian farms new ways to control energy costs and build long term resilience.

FuelPositive Corporation Announces Filing of Annual and Interim Financial Statements and Upcoming Revocation of Management Cease Trade Order

FuelPositive Corporation (TSXV: NHHH) (OTCQB: NHHHF), the Company, announces that it has filed its audited annual financial statements, management's discussion and analysis, and related certifications for the year ended September 30, 2025, as well as its interim financial statements and management's discussion and analysis for the three months ended December 31, 2025. These filings were completed in accordance with the requirements of applicable Canadian securities laws and have been filed on SEDAR+. As previously disclosed, the Company was subject to a management cease trade order (the "MCTO") issued by the Ontario Securities Commission on January 29, 2026, in connection with the delay in filing its annual financial statements. With the completion of these filings, the Company has satisfied all continuous disclosure obligations relating to the default. The MCTO will be revoked by the Commission on April 2, 2026. The Company confirms that it is now current with its financial report

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service