Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

This past summer has been an interesting one along the lakeshore. Living and farming in the Ashfield Twp area is particularly interesting each summer due to the influx of tourists that bring their stress and frustrations to the lakeshore for some quality recharge time. Smooth washing waves, romantic sunsets, green fields of crops, quiet countryside and tourist events.
In order to keep them coming some people suggest we need to improve our environmental standards when it comes to water quality on the nearshore area of Lake Huron. For years this has baffled the scientists as to why Lake Huron has an interesting uniqueness about it. Obviously everyone else has answers for a solution to the problem but some will not admit they are a part of the problem. You can imagine who is pointing their finger at you know who. We are each an issue at the end of the day and we each need to do our part.
Recently a letter writer to the local paper publisher (Signal Star Publishing Ltd.) wrote an interesting letter stating "we farmers would have appreciated advice". I find this mind boggling due to various reasons. A few of the reasons were listed in a letter I wrote to the editor of Better Farming Magazine titled "Clarifying the facts about E. coli in Lake Huron". Since then the letter was printed in the Focus Magazine which has a distribution area of Huron County (20,450 copies delivered) - rural and urban areas.
Within the letter I stated "Each month the Huron County Federation of Agriculture lists the dates for the local Environmental Farm Plan sessions. Most annual agriculture meetings in Huron County features someone talking about local initiatives and funding that is available for environmental stewardship programming. Each of the two local conservation authorities has staff that can assist farmers with projects that will be effective in reducing erosion and improving the environmental "footprint" of the property (and quite possibly improve productivity). The local OMAFRA office in Clinton also has staff to direct farmers on where to go or who to speak with if they want to do a project. Funding can be up to 100 per cent of the cost of the project depending on where the farmer is located in Huron County. For a few years now Huron County has a Huron Clean Water Project that provides project funding."
In the letter I sent to Focus Magazine I also referred to an article that a Signal Star reporter printed on July 8 about the funding initiatives for farmers and how we can improve our impact on water quality. So the articles are out there each year.
This past week I spoke with Lois Sinclair, Ontario Soil & Crop, who delivers the Environmental Farm Plan (EFP) to Huron County farmers. She stated that since 2005 she has numbered 700 books - the number of farmers who have actually completed the EFP sessions and filled out action plans - not necessarily the number that have participated in the class but not completed the book.
Huron County lead the way under the previous program with over $5.5 million in grants from the EFP and over 1400 projects completed. This does not include the hundreds of thousands of dollars granted from the County each year through the Huron Clean Water Project.
The EFP program has since changed going on an annual basis. Lois stated that the applications for funding under Year 1 of the four years opened on June 22, 2009. She then received a message on August 12, 2009 stating that funding was all used up.
Farmers all across this County are trying and attempting to mitigate their impact on the environment. So it really puzzles me when I read "we farmers would have appreciated advice". A Ministry of Natural Resources staff person told me they are surveying a region of the Lower Maitland watershed and they are finding similar results - a high percentage of the property owners do not know that there are programs and funding available for them - rural and non-rural.
How do we get the messages out that there is funding and assistance available, "we farmers" are spending millions of dollars to try and do our part, and finishing off the message with "we are not finished yet."?
Oh, by the way - the way I look at the numbers, Environmental Farm Plan funding has been cut by over 40%. Does that sound like environment is a concern to the government?

Views: 66

Comment

You need to be a member of Ontario Agriculture to add comments!

Join Ontario Agriculture

Comment by Jacqui Laporte on March 15, 2010 at 6:41am
Lois and I would love any ideas on how to get this message out to more producers, however, perhaps it is a sign of accomplishment, when we still hold EFP workshops and 50% of the participants have never heard of it before. I would prefer to think that they are getting our message now in some way, rather than focussing on why they havent before this time.

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

2025-2026 Year in Review Showcases Impacts of Beef Producer Investments

What have your investments in the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off accomplished for the industry lately? The Beef Cattle Research Council’s 2025–2026 Year in Review highlights how producer investments and input are advancing research, addressing industry priorities and delivering practical value back to Canada’s beef producers. “The BCRC continues to enhance coordination across the broader beef system, bringing researchers and industry groups together so we can make the best use of limited resources and move solutions and benefits to producers more quickly,” said BCRC Executive Director Tracy Herbert. “The BCRC’s collaborative approach is essential as we address complex challenges and position the Canadian beef industry for long-term success.”   The 2025-2026 BCRC Year in Review provides a broad funding overview by program area and source. In the past fiscal year, the BCRC received on average $0.66 (unaudited) of every $2.50 of the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off collected by provincial

Pre-harvest products and how to use them

Canola growers have three primary reasons for a pre-harvest spray application: Weed control ???????Desiccation Manage uneven crop ??????????????Use scenarios for pre-harvest spray Weed control Pre-harvest can be a good time to manage weeds, especially when straight combining. The act of swathing and curing can also provide weed control. Effective control is challenging on big weeds: apply product at the recommended rate with high water volumes to penetrate the crop canopy and achieve thorough coverage. Note: Set reasonable expectations on preventing seed set. Charles Geddes, weed management scientist with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in Lethbridge, Alberta, says: “There is no easy way to tell if weeds will have mature seed, but in my experience, it happens earlier than one might think. I suggest that the latest a weed should be left is until it is flowering. Once it starts to flower, then some of the seed can mature on the plant after it is terminated. From a weed management p

Pre-harvest glyphosate staging tips help produce market-ready crops

As harvest approaches, Keep it Clean is reminding Canadian canola, cereal and pulse growers to follow proper staging practices for pre-harvest glyphosate application to help protect crop marketability and preserve access to domestic and export markets. Applying pre-harvest glyphosate for weed control too early can result in unacceptable product residues in harvested grain. Keep it Clean’s Pre-Harvest Glyphosate Staging Guide provides visual examples to help growers identify when grain moisture content in canola, cereals and pulses is less than 30 per cent – the only stage at which pre-harvest glyphosate may be applied. Where allowed, glyphosate is registered for pre-harvest weed control and is not to be used as a desiccant. Pre-harvest glyphosate may only be applied when grain moisture content is less than 30 per cent in the least mature part of the field, including any areas of regrowth that may produce seed. “Glyphosate is an important tool in the grower’s toolbox for crop manage

Safeguarding Cereals Against Allergens

Maintaining a reputation for clean, safe grain is essential for both domestic and international markets. Shipments contaminated with allergenic grains can lead to costly rejections, recalls and long-term damage to market confidence. Unintentional mingling of allergenic grains with cereals is a concern for export markets and must be actively managed.  Certain crop types can be allergen sources in our export markets. When these crops are unintentionally mixed with cereals, they can pose serious food safety and market access risks.   Common allergen sources in grain exports include:  Mustard   Soy   Buckwheat   Buckwheat is considered highly allergenic, and even very small amounts mixed into wheat, barley or oats can cause severe reactions in some markets. Because of these risks, many export markets apply strict limits for allergenic material in cereal shipments.  How allergens can contaminate grain  Allergen contamination most often occurs through shared equipment and handling system

Canada Launches First Private Forest Owner Survey in Over 20 Years, Farmers Invited to Participate

Canadian farmers who own woodlots or private forests are being asked to participate in the first national survey of private forest owners in more than 20 years.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service