And it said in a report it has issued that it’s willing to go beyond subsidies and accept regulation to achieve the goal.
In more than 50 years as a farm reporter, I have never seen a general farm organization advocate for government regulation of its members.
The NFU-O (Ontario branch) noted that this year’s algae bloom in Lake Erie “is whopping 620 square miles.”
For farmers who take pride in being land and water stewards, the persistence of these agriculturally-caused algal blooms is distressing, the NFU said in a news release.
“We want to be part of the solution, not the problem,” said Don Ciparis, a conventional grain grower in Elgin County.
“We wish to initiate honest and difficult conversations about what we can do as farmers to advance an environmentally-responsible agriculture sector in this province.”
The NFU-O said it “is keen to sit down with the provincial and federal governments, and other agricultural organizations, to develop robust policy to support the critical role of farmers in maintaining healthy soils and waters.”
Instead of taking commercial fertilizer suppliers’ advice at face value, farmers want the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness (OMAFA) to reintroduce comprehensive extension services that provide unbiased nutrient guidance and free annual soil testing for all farm operations, it said.
The NFU-O is also calling for a Canadian Farm Resiliency Agency to coordinate a rapid, science-guided, and least cost transition to financially secure, emission-minimizing farms and food systems.
“Farmers shouldn’t have to choose between a fair income and w
ater health. With survey respondents reporting that crop farmers spend, on average, one-fifth of their input costs on fertilizer, we are overdue for a public education campaign that provides farming strategies that maximize profit, not yield and help farmers arrive at least-cost crop production,” it said.
The existing public and private grants, subsidies, and cost-share programs that support best agricultural conservation practices need to be expanded. Financial supports to lessen nutrient use and/or support nutrient retention should be easy to apply for, equitably administered, and long enough in duration to measure the efficacy of any intervention, it said.
Almost half of the farmers it surveyed are also interested in exploring solutions that go beyond the voluntary carrot.
“Participation rates in voluntary programs remain stubbornly low, and the agricultural operations that decline to reduce nutrient use, follow best management practices, or undertake naturalization projects are giving the entire agricultural sector a bad rap, " it said.
“Many farmers try to do everything just right while the neighbour down the road just doesn’t seem to care. This can be very frustrating,” said one farmer survey respondent.
It also suggested tax breaks and subsidies could be conditional on the adoption and maintenance of on-farm agricultural conservation practices.
“This could include incentivizing farmers who participate in the federal AgriInvest program who have enacted proven ecological improvements.
Or, at the provincial/municipal level, we would like to pursue a discounted conservation property tax rate that is tied to specific agricultural conservation practices.”
The NFU-O also recommended following the lead of British Columbia farmers who worked with the province to develop specific synthetic fertilizer regulations.
Any synthetic fertilizer guidelines could work in tandem with the manure regulations within Ontario’s Nutrient Management Act, it said.
These regulations could include regular soil testing and OMAFA supportive interventions whenever these tests reveal elevated nutrient levels.
“We will also need to ensure that any new regulations, along with the ones already covered in the Act to regulate greenhouses and manure storage and application, have adequate compliance, monitoring, and enforcement both to be effective and to gain the public’s trust,” it said.
