The case is part of broader scrutiny in the U.S. over so-called right-to-repair practices, with regulators and plaintiffs arguing that some manufacturers limit competition by controlling access to repair tools and software.

What does the settlement cover?

The settlement fund covers eligible plaintiffs who paid Deere’s authorized dealers for repairs to large agricultural equipment from January 2018, according to a document filed on Monday in the federal court in Chicago, Illinois.

In the settlement, Deere also agreed to make available to farmers for 10 years “the digital tools required for the maintenance, diagnosis, and repair” of large agricultural equipment, including tractors, combines, and sugarcane harvesters, the filing showed.

The proposed accord requires a judge’s approval.

“This settlement addresses the issues raised in the 2022 complaint and brings this case to an end with no finding of wrongdoing,” Deere said in a separate statement.

Deere faces FTC suit

Deere also faces a separate lawsuit brought by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. A U.S. judge ruled in 2025 that Deere must face that lawsuit, which accused the company of forcing farmers to use its authorized dealer network and driving up their costs for parts and repairs.

Deere is blocking farmers from acquiring the “tools and information necessary to repair their equipment in a timely and cost-effective manner,” the FTC had said in a court filing in April. Deere has denied the wrongdoing.

— Reporting by Carlos Méndez, Mrinmay Dey in Mexico City and Mike Scarcella in Washington

The post Deere settles U.S. right-to-repair lawsuit with $99 million fund, repair commitments appeared first on Country Guide.

Planting decisions

“A decent amount of Canadian canola oil goes into the U.S. for biofuels, so this is the crop that could be impacted if there is a U.S. trade issue,” says Darren Bond, a crops farm management specialist for Manitoba Agriculture.

Most producers’ acres are locked in due to rotation requirements and, depending on the producer, only 10 to 20 per cent of their land could be considered swing acres, he says.

More important than U.S. trade when switching acres between crops is high fertilizer costs, which were high even before the Middle East conflict, Bond adds.

Leigh Anderson, a senior economist at Farm Credit Canada (FCC), says that farmers are talking with their agronomists and crop input suppliers to plan these decisions.

“These plans could include changing what crops they plant, adjusting fertilizer use or revising yield targets that make economic sense in the current environment,” he says.

Fertilizer

Bond says how producers manage fertilizer this year will be key to their profitability. Effectively using the 4Rs (right source, right rate, right time, right place) will ensure getting the most out of fertilizer.

“There is a difference between being cost effective and cheap,” Bond says. “Cost effective is where every decision is analyzed and only outputs that provide an adequate return receive investment. Cheap is just cutting expenses because something seems too expensive.”

Taking steps to achieve maximum yields, while cutting expenses that provide little to no return, will be the keys to success in tight margin years, says Bond.

Expanding operations

Bond adds that whether producers pursue or hold off on expanding acreage will largely depend on their management and equipment capacity.

“If there is capacity that is currently not being used to its fullest potential, then expanding acres makes sense,” he says.

High costs and tighter margins tend to result in less land sold.

“Landowners may choose to rent out acres for a few years and wait until better margins return before putting land on the market,” Bond explains. “Producers may choose to rent land over purchasing it because the cash outlay is much smaller, and land rental contracts are for much shorter durations than a mortgage from a land purchase, leading to much less risk with land rental situations.”

Anderson adds that purchasing land in 2026 will come with careful consideration of price and timing.

“Some operations will prefer to wait and see where land values will settle while others may move more quickly should adjacent land become available, or simply because it fits their strategic business plans,” he says.

Producers should be aware of the external environments that can affect their businesses when it comes to deciding whether to buy or rent more land, but that shouldn’t be at the top of the list.

“Their focus should be on things they actually control, like marketing grain, managing equipment costs and understanding their costs of production,” Anderson says.

Livestock operations

External factors will affect livestock operations as well, but more so by weather than economic news, Anderson says.

“Cattle producers are awaiting spring weather to see pasture and hay conditions which will impact their ability to expand,” he says. “Meanwhile, the hog sector has faced a challenging winter for disease pressures, which has pressured supply.”

Anderson notes that Canada’s livestock herd expanded according to the January 1 inventory estimates released by Statistics Canada. StatsCan reported the Canadian cattle herd rose on January 1, 2026, in the first year-over-year increase since 2018. During the same period, StatsCan data shows that Canadian hog inventories fell due to higher international exports and slaughter in both Eastern and Western Canada.

Bond notes that beef margins are currently decent, but there remains a two-fold challenge when it comes to expansion, especially in the cow-calf industry.

“One is that it is very expensive to expand one’s cow herd, whether it be through retention (lost revenue) or purchase,” he says. “Secondly is that cow-calf production is very labour intensive, with many looking at the time and dedication that is required for an expansion, and simply deciding it’s not worth it.”

Equipment replacement

Producers will also take a hard and long look before purchasing equipment so that they don’t overextend themselves, according to Bond.

Used equipment might be more attractive in a year like this. It comes down to a cost-benefit analysis between the two situations, Bond says.

“Used equipment comes with a lower price tag, which is the biggest attraction,” he points out. “However, new equipment comes with warranty, a longer lifespan and dealer support.”

Weighing these options, while considering risk tolerance levels, will be the largest element in how farmers choose to equip themselves. Some will decide to hold on to their iron for an extended period.

“That fear of overextending oneself will keep iron on the farm longer until the margins improve,” Bond says.

Thanks to falling commodity prices, higher operating costs and lower profits, Anderson says that farmers are cautiously approaching their equipment replacement decisions, placing greater emphasis on their price per acre equipment costs.

“Farmers are looking for cost-saving measures, including delaying purchases and planning to further reduce equipment costs,” Anderson says, adding that FCC expects overall used equipment sales to outperform new ones.

Click here to read part one in this series.

The post Economic indicators your farm should keep an eye on appeared first on Country Guide.

“I want John Deere and Case and all of – they’re great companies, Caterpillar… I want these companies to give it to you in the form of lower tractor and equipment costs,” Trump told hundreds of farmers and ranchers gathered under drizzle at an event on the South Lawn of the White House.

Deere & Co shares dropped two per cent after the statement. Case IH manufacturer CNH Industrial fell one per cent while Caterpillar Inc was down nearly 1.2 per cent in late-session trading.

The three companies could not immediately be reached for comment.

Trump seeks support from struggling farmers

Trump called for lower prices in an aside during a speech that otherwise focused on shoring up support among the Republican president’s loyal constituency of rural voters, who have backed Trump in all three of the last presidential races.

For the fourth straight year, U.S. crop producers are facing tight margins, high production costs and low commodity prices – and are struggling financially – despite near-record government payments.

The Trump administration is distributing $12 billion (C$16.7 billion) in aid to U.S. farmers — a move that farm trade groups and agricultural economists have said is helpful in the short-term but will not fully compensate farmers for financial losses that have topped $30 billion in recent years.

On Friday, Trump said he would seek even more such aid for farmers from Congress. More than 50 farm-interest groups, such as the American Farm Bureau Federation, are urging Congress to approve additional aid in a military funding package.

Trump pledges new loan guarantees

The event happened as the administration finalized new biofuel blending mandates for U.S. oil refiners, requiring them to mix more of the fuels made from corn and other agricultural products into the nation’s gasoline and diesel than initially proposed, in an apparent win for farmers.

Trump also said the U.S. Small Business Administration would open up new loan guarantees for farmers and food suppliers.

Farmers are entering the critical spring planting season under a cloud of uncertainty as the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran disrupts global trade, causing fertilizer and diesel costs to spike.

The long-term U.S. trade relationship with China also remains unclear amid the ongoing trade war launched by Trump’s administration with the country, the world’s top soy importer.

Rural voters constitute a fifth of the U.S. electorate, and they favored Trump by a two-to-one margin over Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.

— Additional reporting by Bhargav Acharya

The post Trump tells farmers that tractor companies should lower prices appeared first on Country Guide.

RB Global Inc. announced last Wednesday (March 4) it will buy Nebraska-based BigIron for an undisclosed sum, expecting to close the deal in the second half of this year.

BigIron, whose roots in the auction business date back to 1984, is now billed as “a scaled, agriculture-focused online marketplace connecting buyers and sellers of agricultural equipment, land, livestock, and other farm and ranch assets.”

According to RB Global, BigIron processed about $885 million in gross transaction value in the 12 months ending last Sept. 30, including about $520 million worth of farm assets and vehicles and about $365 million in farmland and real estate transactions (all figures US$).

“BigIron brings a talented team with deep ag sector knowledge and an established sales footprint that will continue operating as a stand-alone brand while being complemented by the Ritchie Bros. industrial footprint,” RB Global CEO Jim Kessler said in a release. “This will create opportunities to serve even more customers through a combination of onsite, offsite, and digital channels and solutions.”

BigIron co-founder Ron Stock noted BigIron will remain a stand-alone operation within RB Global, with he and co-founder Mark Stock “involved in the business as usual.”

“Through this combination, we gain a larger platform and additional resources, which is expected to help us deliver even greater choice and liquidity to all the sellers we serve,” Mark Stock said in the same release.

RB Global dates back to the founding of Ritchie Bros. in Kelowna in 1958, from which it expanded its services into the U.S. and overseas and bought several Canadian and U.S. auction firms, becoming publicly traded in 1998. Its corporate headquarters has since moved to the Chicago area.

In its last fiscal year ending Dec. 31, RB Global booked $412.8 million in net income on total revenue of $4.28 billion, handling a gross transaction value of $15.9 billion.

The post Ritchie Bros. parent to buy online auction firm BigIron appeared first on Country Guide.

To date, only pesticides registered for use with drones — often called remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) — can legally be applied by drones. Almost none are registered for drone application.

WHY IT MATTERS: The proposed regulations would make many existing pesticides available for application by drone. To date, almost no products have been made available for legal application by drone — though anecdotal evidence suggests drone application is happening on the down low.

Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) proposes to allow currently registered products, where the label permits aerial application — that is, by fixed wing or rotary aircraft — to be applied by drone.

Applicators would need to comply with all the label directions for aerial application, including spray volume, application rate, droplet size, treatment interval and spray buffer zones.

When used according to aerial application instructions, the PMRA said, drone application is not expected to impact the value of the pesticide being applied.

Based on data from global studies, spray drift with drone application is similar to ground application. Spray buffer zones established for conventionally-piloted rotary wing aircraft will be adequate. The PMRA also said pesticide residues on food crops are not higher than with conventional applications.

The PMRA said there isn’t enough data for a full risk assessment on safety risks of operators exposure to pesticides; however, it says available evidence suggests it’s “unlikely to be higher than with conventional equipment” — particularly because tasks such as mixing, loading and application must be done by different people, just as with other aerial spraying.

Consultations opened on Feb. 23 and close March 25.

Drone pilots would still require the relevant licenses from Transport Canada.

PMRA passes five-year mark on regulation studies

The PMRA began studying drone regulations in 2019. In September, members of the federal standing committee on agriculture asked the PMRA’s senior director general Frédéric Bissonette what was taking so long.

Bissonette cited scientific issues — for example, that a drone did not behave the same as an airplane — and pledged to have “something in place for next year.”

“Canada seems to be kind of falling behind other jurisdictions in terms of allowing this type of use,” CropLife Canada CEO Pierre Petelle told Glacier FarmMedia in late 2025.

“With these products being used in many other western-type jurisdictions … there should be ways of coming to conclusions much quicker than we have,” he added.

Crop protection companies, meanwhile, have been conducting studies to collect drone-specific data for their products.

Anecdotal evidence suggested farmers were using already drones to apply pesticides on the down low.

The post Consultations open on expanded regulations for drone pesticide application appeared first on Country Guide.

Its shares climbed 8.1 per cent in morning trading.

The world’s largest farm-equipment maker previously scaled back factory production to counter weak demand for new machinery as lower crop prices and higher input costs push farmers to postpone big-ticket purchases.

The company is also working closely with dealers across its network to reduce inventory.

Construction, small agriculture demand recovering

It expects net income for 2026 to range between $4.5 billion and $5 billion (C$6.16 billion and C$6.85 billion) compared with its prior forecast of $4 billion to $4.75 billion. Analysts on average expect Deere to post full-year net income of $4.45 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG.

“We’re encouraged by the ongoing recovery in demand within both the construction and small agriculture segments,” CEO John May said.

“These positive developments reinforce our belief that 2026 represents the bottom of the current cycle.”

Deere now expects 2026 net sales in two segments — Small Agriculture & Turf and Construction & Forestry — to rise about 15 per cent each compared with its earlier forecast for a roughly 10 per cent increase.

Oppenheimer analyst Kristen Owen said the company ended the quarter with relatively lean inventories, building historically less stock in the fourth and first quarters and leaving room for a potential upside as inventory normalizes through the year.

Deere posted net income of $656 million (C$898.7 million), or $2.42 per share, for the quarter, down from $869 million, or $3.19 per share, a year ago, but above analysts’ estimate of $2.05 apiece.

It’s first-quarter revenue rose 13 per cent to $9.61 billion (C$13.16 billion).

Tariffs drag, farm income remains weak

U.S. President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs have weighed on Deere’s operating profits. The Moline, Illinois-based firm has struggled with higher, tariff-driven production costs as it relies significantly on imported raw materials to manufacture its green and yellow tractors.

U.S. farmers are heading into another season of weak crop prices and elevated costs, forcing tough decisions about how, or if, to continue operating as ample grain supplies pressure markets.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture earlier this month forecast net farm income — a broad measure of profitability in the agricultural economy — to fall 0.7 per cent to $153.4 billion (C$210.14 billion) in 2026 from a year ago.

Deere expects a pre-tax tariff hit of around $1.2 billion in fiscal 2026.

The post Deere lifts full-year profit forecast as construction, sales rebound; shares soar appeared first on Country Guide.

Shares of the company were down more than four per cent in premarket trading.

The Basildon, U.K.-based company said it expects retail demand in 2026 to fall about five per cent from 2025 levels and plans to keep production subdued as it works with dealers to bring down excess inventory across its network.

Farm equipment makers have scaled back factory output amid persistently weak demand for new machinery, as softer crop prices and rising costs prompt farmers to delay large purchases. That slowdown has left dealers carrying elevated stock, resulting in a more cautious approach to restocking.

CNH expects full-year adjusted profit to be between $0.35 and $0.45 per share (C$0.48 to C$0.61) , below analysts’ estimates of $0.54 per share, according to data compiled by LSEG.

Farmers in the U.S. are facing another season of low prices, high costs and difficult decisions about how, or whether, to keep operating, as abundant grain supplies weigh on markets.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture earlier this month forecast net farm income, a broad measure of profitability in the agricultural economy, to fall 0.7 per cent to $153.4 billion (C$209.5 billion) in 2026 from a year ago.

“Agricultural equipment industry demand is expected to resume growth in 2027,” CNH said.

The company, which makes Case IH and New Holland tractors, reported fourth-quarter revenue of $5.16 billion (C$7.05 billion), beating analysts’ estimates of $4.61 billion.

On an adjusted basis, it reported a profit of 19 cents per share for the quarter ended December 31, compared with estimates of 10 cents per share.

— Reporting by Abhinav Parmar in Bengaluru

The post CNH Industrial flags weak 2026 profit on sluggish farm machinery demand appeared first on Country Guide.

According to the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute (CAPI), “Digital agricultural tools available to producers today have been proven to boost productivity and competitiveness and reduce environmental impacts with the potential to unlock a further $750 million to $1.5 billion in annual net revenue over the next decade.”

The rate of adoption can depend on any number of factors, for instance, the age of the farm owner, available labour, type of technology, type of operation and infrastructure. It could also depend on the cost to implement, potential return on investment, compatibility with existing technology on the farm and how available are the knowledge and skills needed to utilize the technology and the data it produces.

What’s driving digital technology adoption on farms?

Invariably, the reasons farmers adopt any technology is to improve productivity and efficiency, increase profits and help solve major pain points such as labour shortages. Staying competitive and reducing costs are major drivers.

“Farmers today are competing not just inside their province, or Canada, but internationally,” says Maryna Ivus, manager, economics research at the Information and Communications Technology Council (ICTC). “So, competitiveness is an important driver of technology adoption.”

Farmers across the board are struggling to find labour and existing technologies that have helped to address this issue for many producers. The digital era, with advancements in areas such as autonomous farming, remote sensing and sophisticated AI-driven systems to integrate and manage multiple functions and operations, could solve it once and for all.

“Whether it’s true automation technology or just more updated equipment that makes things run a little bit smoother, farmers are investing in what’s needed to allow the farm to operate,” says Phyllis MacCallum, senior program manager, research and knowledge mobilization, Canadian Agricultural Human Resource Council (CAHRC). “It can allow a production facility to continue on if they are short-staffed. And herd health is important whether you are in milk or beef production, so these technologies can allow farmers to monitor and ensure that the herd is staying healthy while they manage everything else.”

Setting the stage for autonomous agriculture

AI, machine learning and autonomous technology are at the forefront of technological trends in agriculture and many other industries. In agri-food, AI is being used for diverse applications from managing greenhouse operations to evaluating embryo viability in cattle.

“Automation and AI allow for 24/7 operations, which means constant quality control as well as safety control when it comes to worker performance, as well as reducing costs through things like precise use of fertilizers, water and other inputs,” says Ivus.

“AI-driven planning tools for co-ordinating field equipment are starting to gain traction, especially in Western Canada where large grain and oilseed farms rely on multiple machines working together,” says Godard, CEO and co-founder of Verge Ag, a company that creates AI-driven software designed to help farmers plan, simulate and streamline how their equipment operates in the field. The aim is to make existing equipment more efficient, ease the workload on operators by optimizing routes, and reduce costs by minimizing overlap and reducing fuel consumption.

“Since most farm equipment already comes equipped with GPS and autosteer, these optimized routes leverage existing capabilities, bringing us closer to a future of fully autonomous farming,” says Godard.

The tech can work for any type or size of farm, although larger farms tend to see the most immediate impact because even small efficiency improvements can lead to significant cost savings. However, benefits such as reduced overlap, lower fuel consumption and improved timing apply across the board.

Digital twin technology

Digital twin technology, while well established in the gaming industry, is a relatively new concept for agriculture. On its website, IBM describes a digital twin as “a virtual representation of a physical object or system that uses real-time data to accurately reflect its real-world counterpart’s behaviour, performance and conditions.”

“If you are looking to invest, to innovate and create better efficiencies on the farm, this technology has the ability to do that,” MacCallum says.

Whether you are bringing innovation in, or you are remodelling, you can use digital twinning technology to simulate what it would look like once everything is put in place, and assess whether that would create efficiencies and, overall, more profitability. It allows you to physically see how things will look in a 3D form before you execute.

Phyllis MacCallum
Canadian Agricultural Human Resource Council (CAHRC)

“For most of the people taking this program, digital twinning is a new technology, and they are learning about its capabilities. There is so much capability for the technology, no matter the farm or the application. There is always a way to incorporate this. The technology can be as simplistic or as complex as someone wants it to be.”

But digital twins are not just for planning; they also form the basis of a fully functional system connected to sensors, robots, cameras and other technology that can allow for continued remote monitoring and managing of operations. It could also be used to create virtual reality models for things such as health and safety training.

CAHRC is working with various partners and Palette Skills to offer a free 12-week training program called Seeding Digital Skills that introduces farmers and employees in agriculture and the food and beverage processing industries to digital twin technology. The program, valued at $12,000, is currently being funded by Upskills Canada.

“There is so much opportunity to co-ordinate with other applications like sensors, so it is monitoring the field and growth,” MacCallum says. “Or for sustainability questions in terms of crop production, to determine where the most efficient use of the land is, (for example) if you have marginal land, whether that needs to be left because it’s not returning an ROI or be put into a different level of production.”

Using AI to manage risk

A real-world example of digital twinning is offered by Agi3. The platform brings crop planning and risk management tools into one AI workflow. Farmers can create a field-level digital twin that connects with land, climate, management and market data to generate a risk profile and individualized insurance options.

“Farmers gain fair, individualized coverage and pricing that reflect their actual fields and practices, not provincial averages, so strong management is recognized rather than averaged away,” says David Hodge, chief strategy officer for Agi3 Group.

“With risk and coverage properly aligned, farms can invest in productivity-enhancing practices with greater confidence, instead of ‘farming to the average’ and leaving margin on the table.

“Claims are faster and more defensible because losses are verified with time-stamped, geo-referenced evidence, which improves program integrity and reduces friction. Agi3’s platform also provides a clean digital twin of the operation, simplifying planning and interactions with lenders, insurers and other partners. Overall, these elements deliver better protection, stronger economics and clearer, data-driven decisions for farmers.”

What is holding some farmers back from adopting digital technology?

CAPI’s report The Future is Digital: Digital Agriculture and Canadian Agriculture Policy, notes that adoption rates of digital technologies among Canadian farmers remain low due to factors such as poor rural connectivity, costs and uncertainty about the return on investment (ROI) and concerns over stewardship of the data that these technologies generate.

“If farmers are financing a technology, that is a risk, and that technology often requires additional finance for things like energy or additional infrastructure, for example broadband access. Securing an autonomous tractor doesn’t mean that you can utilize it tomorrow. There are additional expenses that sometimes are not clear. So, financial concerns are definitely number one for most farmers.”

Maryna Ivus
Information and Communications Technology Council (ICTC)

It’s often difficult to calculate the ROI of digital technology because it can take several years before benefits, such as productivity or profitability, start to show. Furthermore, some of the benefits can be intangible, such as improved safety.

“It has to be able to pencil out, whether that is over a number of years or over per head of cattle,” says MacCallum. “For producers who may only have a few more years in the industry, or those just entering the industry, they have to ensure that the investment that they’re making is worth the time and the commitment, and that in trying to find the efficiency, it doesn’t slow them down in profitability and production by investing too big or too fast. There is a lot to consider.”

Another big hurdle to adoption for many farm owners or managers is having the skills and knowledge to actually use these technologies and understand the data that they generate.

“It’s not about just acquiring the technology, it’s having someone who can use it and understand and analyze the data properly to make sure that it’s not underutilized,” says Ivus. “Someone who has the background in technology and agriculture is hard to find.”

Compatibility with other technologies already being used on the farm and ensuring that they can both connect and communicate with each other, can be another challenge. It may require some specialized skills to overcome but may also require farmers to think differently about how they approach getting the work done on their operations.

“The main hurdles are more about behaviour than technology,” says Godard. “Most farms already have the necessary hardware, for example, GPS, autosteer and precision guidance, but aren’t yet using planning software to co-ordinate machine operations across their fields. This requires a shift in how farmers approach their work, with more emphasis on planning digitally before heading into the field.”

There’s gold in the data

Digital technologies continuously create a monumental amount of data. Every operation in the field or cycle of production generates information that has tremendous value to help improve operations, offer solutions to create more efficiencies, identify and address problems, and create more profitability on the farm, but it’s not much use unless it has been properly analyzed and made useful. AI is going to play a big part in unlocking the ‘gold’ in that data.

“As producers innovate at a pace that’s comfortable for them, how do we ensure that they can harness the data that they are collecting?” MacCallum asks. “How do we ensure that data is available to them and that they can use it to better their production system? A producer who is busy running his operation doesn’t have time to sit down and look through thousands of data points, so how do we set up AI to analyze and generate reports or summaries that show the trends through this data collection so producers can better use that information?”

Who owns the data?

Farmers are understandably concerned about who actually owns the data that is being generated by all the technologies on their farms, where that data ends up and what is being done with it.

“It comes down to an issue of trust,” says Dr. Emily Duncan, department of sociology and social studies, University of Regina. She carried out a large-scale survey of 1,000 farmers across Canada around the adoption of digital technology, which was summarized in the report I grow food, IT people do cybersecurity: Addressing cybersecurity risks in Canada’s agri-food sector.

“Farmers had a lot of concerns around where the data goes once it leaves their farm, because end user license agreements, or the terms and conditions of using these platforms are not very clear about what that company can do with the data,” she says. “That does hold farmers back because the decisions that you make on your farm, how you get to that level of productivity, or what you use, is information that you might not want shared widely with third parties.”

Although farmers acknowledge that there is value to data sharing, Duncan learned that they are more comfortable sharing certain types of data than others.

“Farmers were more comfortable sharing environmental information like weather data that they might collect from an on-farm weather station, or soil data that they might collect from soil testing or soil mapping,” Duncan says. “When it came to data about decisions around use of inputs and productivity levels, these were types of data that farmers were much less comfortable sharing.”

It also matters to farmers how their data is shared. Farmers were most uncomfortable sharing raw data that comes off the sensors or implements on their farms. Once that data is uploaded to their service provider’s platform and is combined and averaged (called summarized data), they were a little more comfortable sharing it. The data they were most comfortable sharing was fully aggregated data that is pulled from many different farms in the region and remains anonymous.

Finally, Duncan asked who farmers are most comfortable sharing data with.

“Farmers were generally more comfortable sharing with industry groups, other farmers and researchers, and rated tech service providers as the actors they were least comfortable sharing data with,” Duncan says. “These are the people who have access to the data and are the people that farmers have little trust in.”

Dr. Emily Duncan
Department of sociology and social studies University of Regina

That could be because farmers are also skeptical about who is benefiting most from the data that they are subscribing to and paying for.

“Farmers aren’t really seeing any of the returns from the data that they are generating that these companies are making profits off,” Duncan says.

Despite all the misgivings that farmers may have about digital technologies, Duncan believes the industry is heading in the right direction.

“Farmers are interested in technology and are keen to improve their productivity and sustainability through new tools,” she says. “The challenge with new tools is sometimes they create a whole new set of problems, like issues around cybersecurity or trust and data sharing governance, but I think the industry is moving in the right direction in terms of trying to develop sector-specific solutions that empower farmers, and that is the most important thing.”

The post Are farmers ready for the digital ag revolution? appeared first on Country Guide.

The goal is to establish new reliable and trustworthy trading networks that can, at least in part, create a path back to stable global trade.

As an example, Europe is just about to ratify a trade deal with the Mercosur bloc, which includes several South American countries, including Brazil. Brazil is also a member of the expanding BRICS trading block.

Today’s announcement that Canada has reset its trading alliance with China is just one more trade agreement with clear intent is to bypass an increasingly erratic U.S. administration.

Speaking at a press conference following an announcement of the new agreement, Prime Minister Mark Carney said, “the way our relationship has progressed in recent months with China, it is more predictable (than with the U.S.) and you see results coming from that.”

The relationship with China, Canada’s second largest trading partner, deteriorated under the previous Liberal government, but it is now set to become an even more important partner.

The major trade irritant had been Canada’s decision to follow the U.S.’s lead and place a 100 per cent tariff on electric vehicles. In return, China targeted Canola exports.

Criticism from the auto sector

The new agreement sees China reduce canola tariffs to an effect 15 per cent in exchange for allowing up to 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles into the Canadian market at a 6.1 per cent tariff rate.

The agreement is being widely criticized by Ontario’s auto manufacturing sector.

“This is a self-inflicted wound to an already injured Canadian auto industry,” said Unifor national president Lana Payne in a press release.

“Providing a foothold to cheap Chinese EVs, backed by massive state subsidies, overproduction and designed to expand market share through exports, puts Canadian auto jobs at risk while rewarding, labour violations and unfair trade practices.”

However, not everyone completely agrees.

Speaking to the Western Producer ahead of the announcement, Barry Prentice, director of the Transport Institute at the University of Winnipeg, predicted that a quota system on EV imports would be the likely outcome of any trade negotiation.

“I would certainly approve of that for a couple of reasons,” Prentice said. “One is we don’t have the North American manufacturing volume that would displace (regular ICE vehicle production). We need to get enough electric vehicles on the road to support the charging system (network).”

The only electric vehicle production in Canada was at a GM plant, which produced the company’s Brightdrop commercial van. It ceased production last year due to low sales numbers.

However, many Canadian auto parts manufacturers produce components for a variety of vehicle models built in both Canada and the U.S.

Ontario premier Doug Ford spoke out against the deal, saying “this lopsided deal risks closing the door on Canadian automakers to the American market, our largest export destination, which would hurt our economy and lead to job losses.”

That is a threat the U.S. president has already made several times against Canadian auto production, well before today’s announcement. So, arguably, that risk isn’t new.

The growing Canadian consumer boycott of American products is also now moving toward targeting U.S.-built vehicles.

Awaiting American response

Ontario auto sector hasn’t exactly been overlooked by governments in the past. It has received more than a little government support up until now.

In 2009, the federal and Ontario governments ponied up $13.7 billion in funding to allow GM and Chrysler to keep the lights on at plants in Ontario.

However, the question remains: what, if any, response will ultimately come from the U.S.

The U.S. National Security Strategy document published in November made clear its intent to economically and militarily dominate all countries in the Western Hemisphere.

It specifically mentioned influencing trading partners’ engagement with China, saying “the United States must work with our treaty allies and partners … to help safeguard our prime position in the world economy.”

However, the administration doesn’t seem to understand the “work with” aspect of engaging with traditional trading partners.

“Trump was in Detroit (at a Ford assembly plant) saying we don’t need anything from Canada,” Prentice said. “Yeah, but you want to sell cars made in the U.S. to Canada. He doesn’t seem to understand trade is a two-way relationship.”

The post Electric vehicles remain wild card in China trade deal appeared first on Country Guide.

But is AI everywhere except on your farm? Are you missing out on the new revolution?

Here’s the good news: You’re already using AI and other people are using it in ways that benefit your farm. So, taking the first step is not as scary as you might think.

But first, what exactly is AI?

Defining AI

There’s no single definition for artificial intelligence. AI is used in all kinds of ways to describe many different things. Generally, AI is a process where computers do something normally done by humans. This could be something complicated, like a computer model that forecasts climate change, or something simple like a heater that turns on when the temperature drops.

Some people default to thinking of “chatbots,” such as ChatGPT, when they think of AI. Chatbots are software programs that can answer questions based on information they’ve “read,” and sometimes generate new information.

There’s more to AI than chatbots, but chatbots are a key piece of the puzzle.

For this article, ChatGPT was asked to define AI for a farm audience, using an account personalized to use a “critical and sarcastic” tone. This is ChatGPT’s response:

Imagine a smart hired hand that never sleeps, doesn’t complain about the weather, and works from data instead of gut feeling. It can read soil maps, predict yields, plan spray timing, monitor livestock health, or even drive machinery — though it still can’t fix a seized bearing or find that one missing wrench in the shop. In short: AI uses information to make smarter, faster choices. The farmer’s brain is still the boss; AI just crunches the numbers faster than anyone with a coffee thermos ever could.

You’re already using AI

Dr. Felippe Karp, instructor and researcher at the Werklund School of Agriculture Technology at Olds College of Agriculture & Technology in Alberta, opens his presentations about AI by telling farmers that it’s not the future, “It’s the present.”

Do you use an app to check the weather? “Guess what?” Karp said. “There’s AI behind that.”

Machinery automation is also AI. “Auto-steering is one of the most adopted precision agriculture systems,” Karp said.

Auto-steer equipment is driven by an algorithm that uses data from satellites and field locations. The algorithm directs the machinery so it can steer without human intervention.

Automation in newer combines also uses AI. It’s changed combines to the point that, Karp said:

“Someone with no experience running the equipment can jump in there and run it.”

Given the shortage of ag employees Karp added, “This is quite amazing.”

Knowing we already use AI makes it easier to take the next step. “We need to demystify AI,” Karp said. “It runs in a hidden way where we don’t directly interact with it, but it makes our lives easier.”

Smartphone apps that identify weeds, insects and disease are also AI at work. “This can empower people that might not have the expertise to go in the field and do some scouting for you,” he said.

However, powerful AI doesn’t replace real farmers and experts. For example, Karp suggests, imagine your phone app misidentifies a bug. You still need a farmer or agronomist with field experience to detect errors.

“This critical thinking portion is key,” he said.

Karp and other instructors at Olds College are training students to think critically about results from AI and help students see where they can add value in a world of rapidly changing technology.

Researchers are using AI for you

Dr. Rozita Dara is the director of Artificial Intelligence for Food (AI4Food), a technology hub at the University of Guelph that promotes responsible development and use of AI in Canada’s ag and food sector. Dara agreed that Canadian farmers already use AI in many ways, most of which are rather simple to explain.

For example, many AI tools have been developed for greenhouses. “Because it’s a relatively controlled environment, it’s easier to develop AI solutions,” Dara said. AI-enabled equipment helps greenhouse managers decide when to spray and how much to irrigate.

In poultry barns, cameras connected to AI systems can monitor animals for stress. Human experts “teach” the systems what kinds of movements and behaviours to “watch” for before the system is operable.

“When we build AI solutions it’s always with humans in the loop,” Dara said.

More complicated cases

“Generative algorithms” don’t just analyze data; they also build on it to create new information. These algorithms are complicated, so the results can be less predictable than, say, a steering wheel that makes a turn if a rock knocks the tractor off its straight course.

Because they’re more complex, generative AI systems have been known to go off the rails and provide very incorrect results. This has been referred to as “AI hallucination.”

Because this can happen, we’ll always need people to verify complicated results. Dara encourages farmers to “trust the technology but also validate.”

Dara’s current project is an example of a complicated algorithm guided by humans. Dara and her team are combining several data sources to detect avian flu outbreaks in its early stages, with the goal of getting information to decision makers.

Their data includes everything from satellite images to social media posts. AI looks for patterns in reams of data, identifying correlations that humans might miss.

“Our goal is to extract risk factors from these data sets.”

Dr. Rozita Dara, director
Artificial Intelligence for Food (AI4Food)

Dara’s team can detect potential avian influenza outbreaks two or sometimes three weeks before it’s been officially confirmed. The extra time helps decision makers monitor and act before an outbreak becomes severe.

Meanwhile, scores of other ag researchers are using AI in their labs to analyze genetics for faster plant breeding, correlate satellite data with in-field information for optimal cropping information and speed up every area of ag research you can imagine.

It comes down to good data

Much of the work is less than glamorous.

“AI is 90 per cent data,” Dara said. “People don’t understand the effort we put into data cleaning. It’s 90 per cent of the work.”

Karp has also spent more than his share of time processing data for AI. “We have to guarantee that good data is coming in,” he said, referencing the “garbage in, garbage out” maxim of computer models.

For example, crop yield maps show variations throughout the field. “We know that this is based on sensors,” he said. “Sensors can get things wrong.” Yield maps are only useful after any sensor errors are found and corrected.

There is a lot of data to clean. But AI becomes more powerful when it has access to multiple data sets, what Karp calls “data fusion.”

For example, adding yield data to rainfall data, along with soil test and EC (electrical conductivity) data makes a database that would drown an Excel spreadsheet.

“Imagine how powerful this information could be if we were to build models based on this data.”

Dr. Felippe Karp
Werklund School of Agriculture Technology, Olds College of Agriculture & Technology

He believes data fusion will let AI empower ag decision makers at a new level, bringing on a “digital revolution in agriculture.”

It’s all coming together, but a lot of the work is still at the “data collection” point.

Eventually, data-empowered AI will identify patterns and forecast results, giving farmers better insights into questions such as: Do your strawberries need pest control? Is it a good time to price your feed barley?

“But who makes the final decision?” Karp said. “The farmers.”

Here’s how to start now

You can start your AI journey at home, right now, with Farm Credit Canada’s (FCC) chatbot designed just for Canadian farmers.

Nicole Hayes, director of FCC’s Innovation Hub, said FCC found “producers were feeling the gap in availability of advisory services across Canada.” A chatbot that could answer agronomy and farm management questions could fill that gap and also be a safe space for farmers to learn to integrate AI into their businesses. The first version of FCC’s chatbot called Root was released in July 2024.

“Root is a great starting point,” Hayes said.

“It’s free, it’s available to everybody. It’s a great tool for people to start becoming more comfortable asking questions and getting responses, engaging in that dialogue.”

Nicole Hayes, director
Farm Credit Canada Innovation Hub

Unlike other chatbots, with Root, Hayes said, “We can ensure that the dialogue that we’re engaging in is focused on agriculture.” FCC only allows Root to base its chats on reliable information. “We’ve done some of that fact checking and validation behind the scenes,” Hayes added.

Root can “chat” with farmers based on Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada information and databases, FCC information and other sources FCC deems trustworthy. “We’ve got quite a substantial database that exists underneath the surface,” she said.

For now, users might find Root’s answers to be a bit limited, but that will change. “We’re at the early stages of development. It’s something we’re continuing to build and expand on. We are continuing to expand the knowledge sources that we’re using and who we’re partnering with in the industry.”

Even more options

In October 2025, Wharton Business School listed the top chatbots used by business leaders to analyze data, summarize reports, make presentations and generate ideas. ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot were the most common off-the-shelf chatbots. Some businesses build their own custom AI models, with access to confidential internal data.

Create your own free account at ChatGPT.com and ask it about your farm (or anything, really). It finds information faster than a Google Search, does math quicker than your calculator, and writes business letters more formally than your seventh-grade English teacher.

When asked “What’s the best fertilizer rate for canola?” ChatGPT led with: “There’s no magic number that fits every field — if there were, agronomists would be out of work and the rest of us could just read the bag.”

It also provided some general NPKS guidelines and a recommendation of 80 to 150 pounds of nitrogen per acre.

A free account on Microsoft’s Copilot (which comes bundled with most Microsoft Office software) said the best rate “depends on your yield goals, soil nutrient levels and environmental conditions.” Copilot suggested 125 to 150 pounds of N per acre and also listed reference links, with one to the Canola Council of Canada.

Root wouldn’t go out on a limb with a suggested rate, which was sensible given that it didn’t know how much N is already in the soil. However, Root listed factors to consider, mentioned 4R fertilizer practices and referenced an Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada article titled “Managing nitrogen use efficiently.”

Using Root feels a bit like asking your sensible uncle. You’re not likely to get the wrong answer, and you might need to use its suggestions (links) to find the answer on your own. Other chatbots respond more like your wild cousin.

Did ChatGPT or Copilot give better responses? That depends on your field and your own expertise.

Ask harder questions

Don’t be afraid to ask more difficult questions. Chatbots are great at brainstorming and they may come up with answers you weren’t expecting, but do take a critical look at the answers.

When asked for suggestions for new crops in southeast Saskatchewan, Root provided great links and resources. When pushed, it suggested quinoa.

ChatGPT suggested a long list of crops that included soybeans and sunflowers but not quinoa. When asked, “What about quinoa?” ChatGPT “answered”:

“Ah, quinoa — the hipster of grains. Everybody loved it until they realized it was actually hard to grow here. Then they went back to complaining about canola.”

ChatGPT was willing to forecast revenues and expenses for a new crop — making the kind of assumptions Root would never make. It wasn’t always 100 per cent correct, but it wasn’t ludicrously wrong. Responses like this are either extremely helpful, or very dangerous. As Dr. Dara would say, “verify.”

You know more about your farm than a chatbot, but interaction can still help you come up with new ideas.

What’s next?

“In the coming months or years,” Dara said, “there will be many more AI assistant tools that are more reliable. They will definitely become much smarter.”

Whether or not you use it, Dara said “this technology is here. It’s not going to go away.” AI will be embedded in many of the tools we use, on or off the farm.

“Just as we can’t say ‘no’ to mathematics, we can’t say ‘no’ to AI,” Dara said.

“Eventually AI will be everywhere, and agriculture and food cannot fall behind.”

The post Artificial intelligence reaps what you sow appeared first on Country Guide.