Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Over the last year and a half in Perth County we have had the surplus farm house issue visited twice. Most recently about a month ago county council decide to turn the motion down for the second time. The issue we divide people easier than picking your favorite hockey team. I don't believe there is a right or wrong answer but my problem is if it has been defeated twice why in after only a month of being defeated is it back on the table. This almost feels like a federal election. Democercy has to be considered some where along the line perhaps we have to have the best 3 out of 5. In tough economic times does our elected people have nothing better to do. It is like the dog that has chased a cat up the tree and won't move until it comes down(alot of wasted energy and resources for no reason). Anyway just wanting to hear other thoughts on the severance of surplus farm houses. Yes or No

Views: 4631

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Severing a house has more complications than just setbacks etc.
You will get a change in population, you will get ratepayers that are urban oriented in a rural setting who will influence the direction from your rural municapality and county.
For the last twenty years I have toured your county by-weekly and all I can see a huge difference, a book can be written about that.
.
Also people need to keep in mind that setbacks will almost certainly increase fairly steadily in time, and will affect more than just livestock buildings. There will certainly be restrictive setbacks on fertilizer, pesticides, maybe even tillage at some point in the future. They are very unlikely to stay the same or decrease.

rein minnema said:
Severing a house has more complications than just setbacks etc.
You will get a change in population, you will get ratepayers that are urban oriented in a rural setting who will influence the direction from your rural municapality and county.
For the last twenty years I have toured your county by-weekly and all I can see a huge difference, a book can be written about that.
.
Thanks for that Dale,
I like to put a little more emphasis on ONE thing only I brought forward in my first reply.
Allowing severances is like farming in a URBAN setting.
What created the GREEN BELT around the Greater Toronto Area??
Answer,
The cloud of the urban ratepayer.


Dale Ketcheson said:
Also people need to keep in mind that setbacks will almost certainly increase fairly steadily in time, and will affect more than just livestock buildings. There will certainly be restrictive setbacks on fertilizer, pesticides, maybe even tillage at some point in the future. They are very unlikely to stay the same or decrease.
rein minnema said:
Severing a house has more complications than just setbacks etc.
You will get a change in population, you will get ratepayers that are urban oriented in a rural setting who will influence the direction from your rural municapality and county.
For the last twenty years I have toured your county by-weekly and all I can see a huge difference, a book can be written about that.
.
Surplus farm dwellings today are coming from the purchase of a farm property with a house on it.
A lifetime lease should be given if the seller has the need to retire on the property.
The change in zoning from agriculture to whatever is where we loose our agriculture freedom.

Joann said:
I have read the discussion about severing surplus dwellings and noticed this discussion is protective of long-term farming practices.

What I also noticed is the lack of information concerning farmers' true rights.

Farm lots were created and distributed by agents of the Crown. The very first Act of Upper Canada entrenches property rights, things such as drainage. Farmers' property rights are protected by 4 very important words. Free and Common Socage. In my opinion, there are no more powerful words than that phrase when it comes to farmers' rights in Ontario and yet so few really knows what that phrase entails.

Land grands were awarded under Free and Common Socage with each and every land grant Sealed by the Crown. The land grants (all?) were docketed by the Auditor general (speaking Upper Canada here, before confederation). These covenants are still valid. Excise is a condition of the land grants. Excise is a source of Crown income. The Crown kept the final rights to land and we as farmers only truly have 'tenure' to the land.


The land grants are in effect contracts awarded by the Crown directly to each and every farmer with rights, duties and obligations that are consistent with full and complete enjoyment of properties as defined by ancient servitudes. Individual rights awarded directly to farmers before collective rights of municipalities were even formed. The land grants are the farmers' sovereign production licenses.

If you reach back far enough you will find that farmers always had the right to "develop lots". As the farms were passed down through ancient rights of "tenure", most retiring farmers had little to no pension income. Therefore farmers were entitled to sever a lot for retirement purposes. The right to sever a lot and SELL to raise capital for retirement. It was the original pension plan for farmers and for many, it was the only pension plan.

Severing surplus houses on farms today is a societal problem and yet farmers are being pressured, again, to solve a societal problem by foregoing their rights without compensation.

The discussion about surplus dwellings must include farmers' rights in the broader forum for an adequate and just solution.

Severing lots by farmers is part and parcel of agricultural justice. It would appear that farmers willingly erode/forego their rights without compensation through a total lack of understanding their true rights.
Thank you Rein - you are correct about changing the zoning and losing agricultural freedom. I was thinking about that lease option. It would give the retiree more cash for their retirement to invest as they see fit and less worry about property taxes.
Also - on the retiree thing - it has been proven that a farmer who severes a "retirement" property from their farm use that residence for an average of five (5) years. Locally we have seen it used less than 5 years. House or trailer removed in 6 years.
Yeah - that is a huge gain for society...???

rein minnema said:
Surplus farm dwellings today are coming from the purchase of a farm property with a house on it.
A lifetime lease should be given if the seller has the need to retire on the property. The change in zoning from agriculture to whatever is where we loose our agriculture freedom.
for those who need to retire on the property after the sale the only option should be given is a live time lease.
Since when is creating residential areas in Agriculturally Zoned lands considered agricultural use? You stated it yourself "Farmers have the ancient right to have a dwelling on farm property so to have shelter on the property he possesses. When an additional dwelling is acquired it is deemed "surplus" and does not conform to agricultural use therefore the farmer has the right to dispose of items that are not agricultural to maintain the spirit of the Crown contract."
So when you have a house on a farm - it is for the farm use. When you have a severed house - it is no longer farm use and therefore creating a non-agricultural zone in a farming area and therefore in effect eliminating a farm use product. Yes a dwelling on a farm property - I agree. So when a new farmer buys the severed farmland - he has no house! he can not build a house on that remaining property. So you would suggest that the new owner of the bare land has a right to build a house, has the right to severe it once "it" becomes surplus.. and carry on until it is now "urban development".
You are suggesting it is okay to continue to severe off lots as the owner retires, or wants to remain on the farm. It is a "societial issue" that you suggest. So where do you draw the line? When do you stop the severances once you start them. Because you are stating that as an owner of farmland, I have a right to build a house and I have a right to severe it off once it becomes surplus - whether a house has been severed off yet or not. When are you going to stop it before it becomes urban development? It has already happened in a Township locally where a farmer - yes a true farmer - went around and bought farmland with a house on it. He then sold off the house as a severed lot, turned around and sold the bare land. ASAP he went and did it again. Around 4 - 6 farms he did this with before the township stopped him with a bylaw stating no surplus farmhouses to be severed.
Farmers have the right to use the land for agriculture - as you stated "for food production". Severing the farmland for lot creation is land development - not "food production".

Joann said:
True. But the land grants are about and for agriculture.
What that means is farmers working in conjunction with Mother Nature for food production by valid contract conditions.
Farmers have the ancient right to have a dwelling on farm property so to have shelter on the property he possesses. When an additional dwelling is acquired it is deemed "surplus" and does not conform to agricultural use therefore the farmer has the right to dispose of items that are not agricultural to maintain the spirit of the Crown contract.

Lot creation and the effects on land use planning is a societal issue. Farmers should not be the only members of society to bare the burden of such issues by being denied an element that is contrary to the original contract.

If society does not want surplus lot creation then society should compensate for the loss of farmers right to create and dispose of non-agricultural items on farmland.

A contract is a contract. It is time Mr. McGuinty respected the Crown contracts farmers possess.
Times and society are changing, there are a lot more issues we need to focus on.

Wayne Black said:
Thank you Rein - you are correct about changing the zoning and losing agricultural freedom. I was thinking about that lease option. It would give the retiree more cash for their retirement to invest as they see fit and less worry about property taxes.
Also - on the retiree thing - it has been proven that a farmer who severes a "retirement" property from their farm use that residence for an average of five (5) years. Locally we have seen it used less than 5 years. House or trailer removed in 6 years.
Yeah - that is a huge gain for society...???

rein minnema said:
Surplus farm dwellings today are coming from the purchase of a farm property with a house on it.
A lifetime lease should be given if the seller has the need to retire on the property. The change in zoning from agriculture to whatever is where we loose our agriculture freedom.
The other day I recieved notice that 2 municipality's within our county are planning on fighting our county bylaw of no surplus farm houses in the county by taking it to the OMB. it doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with severing of a farm house. I believe that dividing up a county is far more complicated. If you start with surplus farm houses and move on to other things, you eventually end up with a broken official plan that puts township against township. In this day of larger farms and fewer rural people you need to keep consitency amongst the county. We have moved to bigger municipalitys and that will continue to happen perhaps on day everything will be run at the county level. I believe that the county should remain as one to make it fair for everyone.
That common sence may lead to the right direction as it did in the past
I have several farm houses that I rent out and can see the merits of both sides of this argument. I do not think I want to sell mine . I would like to rent them out to some one that would take care of them. I am not interested in making a lot of money from them I would just like to breakeven, and have my building maintained.As renters come and go the the building seems to decline. I can not believe there are not people out there that would fulfill this goal, but they seem to be few and far between in my experience. It would be nice to be able to be to participate in some program for the distressed or under privileged that would help ensure payment and find the right tenants.

Not so happy landlord

i have lived in  logan township for  22 years in  a rented house

no one gives a crap about us   We could grow  enough food to feed  one hundred families   at half  what they would pay at the grocey store but they are to rich to give a dam and stop

 

THEY hate us because we speak the truth about money and  self righteous pricks that have it

WE  WORK HARD     we  have lived in the same place for 22 years

we want to farm  a hundred acers  BUT OUR  bank load went to gm   chrysler and the banks

WHEN INTEREST  rates in canada  go to   15 percent again and they will   I cant wait till all these MILLIONAIRE  debt farmers  WHO GOT everything handed to them     either from mommy and daddy or the banks   lose it all

then you can  be like us and told to get a  job at  WALLMART  selling  canadian flags  MADE IF  FRICKING CHINA

 

I VOTE  allow the people that have lived in the country to have five acers and GROW FOOD

then tell the rich idiots in the neighbourhood  TO BUY LOCAL instead of mexico

 

Reply to Discussion

RSS

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

SHIC-Funded MSHMP Assesses Evolutionary Dynamics of PEDV in US Throughout Last Decade

In April 2013, porcine epidemic diarrhea virus emerged in US pigs for the first time and since then has been an endemic pathogen causing significant production impacts to the swine industry. Team members including Drs. Joao Paulo Herrera da Silva, Nakarin Pamornchainavakul, and Kimberly VanderWaal partnerted with the SHIC-funded Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Project ream members Drs. Mariana Kikuti, Xiaomei Yue and Cesar Corzo of the University of Minnesota, to assess the long-term evolutionary dynamics of PEDV in US pigs a decade after its initial introduction to help guide practitioner strategies for future PEDV control. PEDV causes acute enteric disease in nursing and post-weaning pigs with severe clinical signs in neonatal piglets, leading to significant economic losses. After the introduction of PEDV to the US in 2013, it spread rapidly and quickly emerged across 31 states. Two strains, indel and the more virulent non-indel, have been identified in the US to date. However, th

Jump In With Both Feet: Q&A with Ohio Pork Council’s President

An open book – that’s how Ohio Pork Council president Nathan Schroeder defines himself. The leader of one of the most active state pork organizations in the country, he believes strongly in the power of communication. “They are getting a leader who likes to communicate,” says Schroeder, a 46-year-old pig farmer from Leipsic, Ohio. “I like to share what we are doing because I’m very proud of what we are doing. I think communication is important. Being able to share what you are doing in an open and honest fashion is key.” He also says he’s willing to take some risks and is not scared to jump into something new with both feet – whether it works out or not. Schroeder says there are several initiatives in Ohio that have him feeling optimistic about the future. “We started a young leadership program in Ohio. I’m very proud of that one,” he says. “I attended the national Pork Leadership Institute a few years back, and thought is a really good program. It opened my eyes to a lot of things

Pork Promotions and Opportunities: What’s Making Headlines?

NOVUS and DPP Team Up to Recognize Excellence in Swine Education Nominations are open globally for a new award recognizing swine educators. The NOVUS Distinguished Academic Training & Innovation Award will be presented in partnership with the 16th International Symposium on Digestive Physiology of Pigs (DPP) held May 20-23, 2025. Along with recognition, the award winner will receive $7,500, the company said in a release. The award is open to educators around the world at higher education institutions who have made significant contributions to the academic and professional growth of undergraduate and/or graduate students in the fields of digestive physiology of pigs, and related fields such as swine nutrition, nutritional biochemistry, and nutrient metabolism. Award sponsors NOVUS and DPP aim to highlight the importance of swine academic leadership and innovation, ensuring the continued growth and advancement of the field. Marisol Castillo, executive manager of Global Swine Solutions

Jarrod and Shari Bakker: Pigs Fuel Dreams and Marriage

For Jarrod and Shari Bakker, the pork industry has always been and will always be part of their love story. They met at the Iowa State Fair (ISU) after their senior year of high school while participating in the Premier Exhibitor Contest. Although it doesn’t matter who won, Shari beat Jarrod if you want to keep track. After that, they both headed off to Iowa State University for their freshman year. “We re-met during fall of 2002 in a mutual friends’ dorm room and became good friends,” Shari says. “Jarrod had started working at the ISU teaching farm and after a couple of months, helped me get a job at the farm. We were just good friends for a couple of years, traveled to hog shows and started dating our junior year of college.” They were lockstep as they competed on the livestock judging team, graduated from Iowa State University and began their adult life. Shari took a job as the Team Purebred Jr Coordinator. “Jarrod proposed at the state fairgrounds during World Pork Expo the summ

Swine Scholars Auction raises record amount

The 2025 Iowa Pork Congress saw a record-breaking fundraising effort for student scholarships in the pork industry. This year’s Dollars for Swine Scholars Auction raised an impressive $62,511, surpassing the previous record of $61,525 set in 2023. Held in January at the Iowa Events Center in Des Moines, the auction was a highlight of the Iowa Pork Congress festivities. Proceeds from the event will support scholarships for incoming freshmen, returning students, graduate fellowships and interns pursuing careers in the pork industry. “We are incredibly grateful to the generous individuals and organizations that contributed to this year’s auction,” said Aaron Juergens, president of the Iowa Pork Producers Association. “This event is about investing in the future of the pork industry by supporting the next generation. It was a fantastic night, and we couldn’t be happier with the results.” One of the most sought-after items was a CINCH World’s Toughest Rodeo package, donated by the Iowa E

© 2025   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service