It is the P.E.I. MP’s second time in the role, having previously held it between 2015 and 2019.

MacAulay took over the role from Marie-Claude Bibeau, who will move to the post of Minister of National Revenue.

Manitoba’s Keystone Agricultural Producers (KAP) was quick to commend the appointment, releasing a press release shortly after the news broke Tuesday.

“On behalf of all Manitoba farmers, I want to welcome Minister MacAulay back to his role as Minister of Agriculture & Agri-Food,” said KAP President Jill Verwey via the statement.

She also thanked Bibeau for her work in the role and said that MacAulay’s previous experience would be an asset in the future.

There is support for the move within MacAulay’s home province as well; Donald Killorn, Executive Director of the Prince Edward Island Federation of Agriculture (PEIFA) said he welcomed the news.

“Farmers on Prince Edward Island are very pleased to see Minister MacAulay return to the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada portfolio,” said Killorn. “We had a good relationship with Minister Bibeau, but Minister MacAulay is someone who we know well and many, many farmers have a personal relationship with.”

“He was a Prince Edward Island farmer himself before he became a minister of Parliament,” Killorn continued. “We were thrilled to see when Prime Minister Trudeau decided to place Minister MacAulay back in that role.”

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture (CFA) also welcomed MacAulay in their own statement, saying it looked forward to collaborating, “to propel the vital interests of Canadian agriculture forward, unleashing Canadian agriculture’s full potential as an economic driver and source of climate solutions.”

In a follow-up interview, CFA President Keith Currie said he was encouraged to see someone with experience dealing in agriculture taking over the role.

“It’s nice to have somebody that’s familiar with the industry and familiar with the players,” Currie said. “There won’t hopefully be a long period of getting up to speed.”

Currie also mentioned that MacAulay’s personal experience with farming could be an asset.

“Coming from an island like Prince Edward Island where predominantly agriculture is everything, he certainly is kept up to speed with, you know, a lot of the issues, so we’re looking forward to reacquainting ourselves with Mr. MacAulay and working together with him moving forward.”

“I was vice president of CFA when he was appointed as minister,” Currie said. “And so, we did work closely with him.”

He also acknowledged Bibeau’s work in the role, thanking her for four years as ag minister. “I know she worked very hard,” he said.

Lauren Kennedy, Director of Public Affairs for the Chicken Farmers of Canada (CFC) said MacAulay has always been a relevant figure in Canadian agriculture, no matter what role he currently held.

“We’ve worked closely with Lawrence MacAulay back when he was minister previously. Even since then, to be honest, he’s always been a friend of agriculture,” she said.

“Even when he was outside of the portfolio, we kept in touch with him and kept him apprised of our issues.”

The Canadian Organic Growers (COG) welcomed MacAulay back to the role and said they looked forward to working with him.

“COG looks forward to engaging and collaborating with Minister MacAulay on the interests and needs of Canadian organic and regenerative producers, and the essential role they play in advancing Canada’s climate goals,” read a July 27 press release.

In the dairy industry, the news was met kindly as well.

“Minister MacAulay is well versed on the realities of dairy production, and we look forward to collaborating with him further,” said David Wiens, President of Dairy Farmers of Canada in an email.

National Farmers Union (NFU) President Jen Pfenning said the NFU sent MacAulay a letter of congratulation after hearing the news.

“He has experience in the role, so I suspect he’ll be up to speed quite quickly, and that’s a good thing,” said Pfenning. “I personally am looking forward to meeting with him as soon as he can make some time in his schedule.”

The NFU wasted no time calling the newly appointed minister to action; they issued a joint letter with the Wheat Growers Association (WGA) asking him to halt the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC) decision to impose export grade standards on wheat delivered to country elevators within the hour of his appointment.

Pfenning said this was not at all related to his change in position, but a statement the NFU was already planning on issuing.

— Jonah Grignon reports for Glacier FarmMedia from Ottawa.

The post Ag leaders welcome MacAulay’s appointment as AAFC Minister    appeared first on Country Guide.

Among several other changes, a planned new package of federal regulatory amendments will put a gradual end to a “pause” imposed in August 2021 on such proposed MRL increases, which are overseen by Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA).

Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault announced the planned amendments Tuesday, in what are billed as Canada’s “next steps toward a sustainable approach to pesticides management, while giving farmers the tools they need to keep providing reliable access to safe and nutritious food.”

The term “MRL” refers to the highest legally allowed amount of pesticide residue that may remain on or in food when a pesticide is used according to label directions. Different MRLs are set for different combinations of chemicals and foods, depending on how a pesticide is applied for a given crop.

Ottawa’s 2021 pause had been imposed in response to public concerns specifically regarding a boost to MRLs for glyphosate herbicide, as was proposed in May that year for certain imported commodities.

That proposal, Bibeau said Wednesday in an interview, was meant to have brought Canada’s glyphosate MRLs in line with revisions laid out by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the body which oversees standards for foods traded internationally.

But for some, she said, the concept of MRLs is “really counter-intuitive, so it’s hard to explain to the public. When you say, ‘You know, we might be increasing that,’ the first reaction is that ‘Oh my God, we will increase pesticides on our cereal,’ which is not the case, which is not how it works, but intuitively, it was not well received.”

Bibeau said the government felt at the time that a pause, to better understand the existing process, was necessary, because PMRA was “functioning under a law that is quite old.”

Health Canada said Tuesday it’s “still reviewing the significant feedback from the public” in response to the proposed increase to MRLs for glyphosate, with the last comments received in April 2022.

Bibeau said the re-evaluation process for glyphosate MRLs won’t resume before 2024, while the pause on evaluations for other, “less complex” MRL proposals will be lifted more quickly.

For glyphosate, key studies on the matter are currently underway in the European Union and elsewhere, Bibeau said, and Canada wants to have access to that information before making its decision.

READ MORE: Canadian grain is safe: Chorney

Otherwise, Health Canada said Tuesday, “lifting the pause is important to allow people in Canada to maintain a reliable access to affordable and nutritious food, provide predictability for farmers to access the required tools to fight against new pests, and facilitate trade, which is central to support food security.”

Health Canada emphasized Tuesday that an MRL will only be increased if the department’s scientists determine it’s safe to do so.

Transparency

Ottawa’s proposed new regulatory amendments stem in part from consultations conducted last year during a “targeted review” of the federal Pest Control Products Act (PCPA).

Health Canada said Tuesday it found that “opening up the PCPA wasn’t necessary, as policy and regulatory initiatives are sufficient to achieve the goals” of the department’s agenda for the PMRA.

To that end, Health Canada on Tuesday filed a notice of intent for proposed amendments to the federal Pest Control Products Regulations, opening up a 60-day public comment period.

The amendments, as proposed, would aim to “increase transparency” for MRL applications for imported food products, and to “facilitate access” by the public to confidential test data (CTD) used in such decision-making, such as for research and re-analysis.

Up until the COVID-19 pandemic, Health Canada said, anyone wanting access to CTD would have to travel in person to Ottawa and apply for access to PMRA’s physical “reading room,” in which a person could review CTD under supervision and could only take notes, subject to PMRA also taking photocopies of those notes.

The government has to acknowledge that the public has an increased interest in these sorts of decisions, Bibeau said Wednesday, adding such methods of disclosure were “not really transparent.” Since the pandemic, access to inspect CTD has been granted remotely, using an encrypted USB key.

The amendments proposed Tuesday would further provide access to CTD “in a manner that would allow an individual to conduct their own data analysis” but while “maintaining the appropriate levels of protection against unfair commercial use of the data” as required by international treaties.

New regulations proposed in Health Canada’s notice of intent would also grant a federal health minister the “explicit authority to require submission of available information on cumulative environmental effects” of a pesticide, and require the minister to consider cumulative effects on the environment during risk assessments. They would also authorize the minister to require any available information on species-at-risk to be submitted during pesticide risk assessments.

Bibeau on Tuesday noted the federal government in 2021 put up $50 million for pest management research, both by PMRA and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, with support from Environment Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.

That funding would go toward “independent” data-gathering on pesticide safety by PMRA, as well as research into alternative pest control products by AAFC, she said.

Cosmetic curb

The moves Ottawa announced Tuesday also stem in part from international commitments reached in Montreal last year during the Conference of Parties (COP15) on biological diversity, as per the participating countries’ adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

Specifically, Bibeau said Wednesday, Target 7 of the GBF calls for reducing the overall risk from pesticides to biodiversity by at least half by 2030 — and by that, she emphasized, “I want to insist, the risk, not the use” of pesticides.

Target 7 calls for reducing risk by 50 per cent means such as “integrated pest management, based on science, taking into account food security and livelihoods.”

To that end, Ottawa on Tuesday also announced what Bibeau described as a more “concrete” federal move — namely, a new ban on “cosmetic” or otherwise nonessential use of pesticides on federal lands, such as national parks and around federal buildings, except where needed to protect lands against a harmful infestation.

All that said, Bibeau emphasized Wednesday, “there is absolutely no change” directly affecting pesticide use by farmers in any of the new regulatory proposals announced Tuesday.

“Pesticides are part of the toolbox agricultural producers use to protect their crops from pests and contribute to their productivity,” she said in the government’s release Tuesday. “The measures announced by our government today help to ensure responsible access, framed by reliable data, to these essential inputs, while protecting health and the environment.”

It’s given, she said Wednesday, that when it comes to pesticide use, farmers are trained professionals who are concerned for the environment, incorporate integrated pest management practices and limit their crop chem use to what’s agronomically necessary.

Canada, Bibeau said, has always advocated for trade rules based on science and will lead by example.

“If we are asking other countries, our trading partners, to do trade based on science, we will keep making decisions based on science, but we have to provide more transparency to the public, and cut the risk where it’s not essential, like for cosmetic use.”

‘Conflicting messages’

But the organization representing Canada’s crop protection companies says the government’s proposals miss the mark.

CropLife Canada, in a separate statement, hailed Bibeau’s “strong statements in support of the importance of pesticides in food production and the need for these important tools to help bolster food security in Canada and around the world.”

However, CropLife said, the government plans to “only slowly begin to increase MRLs again where required, despite acknowledging that MRLs do not pose a safety concern and that they are critical to international trade and food security.”

The government’s new plan to ban cosmetic use of pesticides on federal lands also “runs in direct contradiction to its own risk-based approach to pesticide regulation,” CropLife said, noting PMRA “thoroughly assesses all pesticides” for safety.

“For Health Canada to deem pesticides safe and then turn around and ban them for so-called cosmetic purposes on their own lands sends conflicting messages to Canadians.”

Canada Grains Council president Erin Gowriluk, in a separate release, also hailed Bibeau’s recognition of the importance of pesticides to food production and security and of “the connection between crop protection and environmental sustainability.”

However, she said, by persisting with the “pause” on certain MRL approvals, “there is an increasing risk of Canada’s trading partners perceiving it as an intrusion of ideology into policymaking, contradicting our message to other countries.”

That, combined with the ban on cosmetic pesticide use on federal lands, has “the potential to undermine the government’s explicit recognition that pesticide uses in Canada undergo rigorous testing and assessment to ensure they are safe and pose no unacceptable risks to human health or the environment,” the council said. –– Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Feds lift ‘pause’ on increases in crop chemical MRLs appeared first on Country Guide.

Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau on Wednesday announced updated guidance from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency that sets gene-edited seeds on the same regulatory level as conventionally-bred seed varieties.

Taken with last year’s related updates by the federal health department to Canada’s Novel Food Regulations, CFIA’s new opinion opens the door for gene-edited seeds’ unregulated use in Canadian fields.

Grower groups whose members have waited years for gene-edited seed to come to Canada lined up Wednesday to hail CFIA’s decision as a potential watershed moment for the domestic ag industry.

But advocates for Canadian organic growers, whose buyers consider gene-edited to also be genetically modified, say the decision will leave the organic sector dependent on seed and biotech firms’ willingness to disclose their handiwork.

Risks not ‘unique or identifiable’

In its updated directive, CFIA said it’s the “scientific opinion of (the agency) that gene-editing technologies do not present any unique or specifically identifiable environmental or human health safety concerns as compared to other technologies of plant development.”

With that in mind, CFIA said it “does not foresee an outcome of conventional breeding where an authorization for environmental release would be required, other than in the case of herbicide-tolerant plants.”

In other words, a company wanting to release a plant with novel traits (PNT) will still need to apply for, and receive, CFIA authorization before that plant is released into the environment — that is, if the PNT still has any DNA from foreign organisms, and/or a new commercially-viable herbicide tolerance trait.

That would also apply to any gene-edited PNT in which any foreign DNA used to encode “gene-editing machinery” — such as in the CRISPR process — remains in the final product and hasn’t been removed through rounds of breeding and selection.

In cases where a plant isn’t a PNT, CFIA said, a plant’s proponents are “expected to fully participate in mechanisms that provide transparency about non-novel products” — such as the Health Canada Transparency Initiative and the Canadian Variety Transparency Database.

It also “remains the proponent’s responsibility to notify the CFIA if the plant could have significant negative environmental impacts and be considered a PNT.”

CFIA said its decision follows consultations with plant breeding, industry and regulatory experts and stakeholders, as well as a public consultation that ran from May through September 2021.

In its release Wednesday, the federal ag department noted the U.S., Japan, Australia, Argentina and Brazil have already “clarified the pathway” for gene-edited products, while New Zealand, the U.K. and the European Union (EU) “are in the process of doing so.”

‘Trusted and safe’

Canada’s competitiveness in world ag markets — and its crops’ resilience against environmental and climate stresses — were common themes among the groups hailing CFIA’s decision Wednesday.

“The CFIA’s updated guidance helps Canada stay competitive on the global stage,” Krista Thomas, vice-president of seed innovation for the Canada Grains Council, said in a separate release.

“Many of our trading partners have already adopted similar science-based policies, and farmers outside of Canada have been growing gene edited crops since 2015. When we let the science be the core of regulatory decision making, we know that the end result can be trusted and is safe.”

Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said in the government’s release that CFIA’s new guidance “will ultimately help Canadian farmers access new plant varieties that are more resilient to pests and extreme weather events and support our food security and sustainability objectives.”

Greg Sears of the Alberta Wheat Commission said seeds gene-edited for efficient use of resources give farmers “another opportunity to manage inputs more effectively, while sustaining ecosystems and reducing greenhouse gas” — an important development after another year in which Alberta growers “seeded the most expensive crop in recent history.”

Canola Council of Canada president Jim Everson said the guidance will also “encourage new and additional research and development investment in Canada.”

Soy Canada, in a separate statement, noted the country’s soy industry has “excelled at meeting diverse customer needs” including organic, non-genetically modified, genetically modified and identity-preserved soybeans — and meeting any such specific needs “remains an important priority for the industry.”

“Our customers know that we excel at providing a diverse range of products,” Soy Canada’s executive director Brian Innes said in a release. “We’re committed to continue providing customers what they want once we commercialize soybeans created using gene editing.”

‘Shocking’

Other groups, however, don’t expect the new guidance will assure buyers looking for non-GMO or organic crops from Canadian growers.

In a joint release Wednesday, several such groups said CFIA’s guidance means gene-edited crops that have no foreign DNA — and any foods produced from those crops — “will not go through any government approval process at Health Canada or the CFIA, but can be released onto the market by companies without any safety data submitted to the government.”

Given that organic standards allow only for conventionally-bred crops and not for gene-edited or genetically modified plants, the result will be “unknown (genetically modified) foods and seeds on the market that have not been subject to any independent safety assessment,” they said.

Lucy Sharratt, co-ordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, called CFIA’s guidance “a shocking abdication of responsibility by our regulators” that “asks Canadian farmers and consumers to trust unseen corporate science.”

Allowing gene-edited seed to enter Canadian agriculture unchallenged could “ultimately destroy the systems that farmers and many food companies have set up to deliver non-GM choices to consumers,” National Farmers Union president Jenn Pfenning said in the same release.

“This decision needs to be reversed, or over time, it will eliminate our ability to offer reliable non-GM food choices, including organic food.”

Garry Johnson, president of SaskOrganics, said “not ensuring full disclosure of all GM seeds through a mandatory public registry, will make it challenging for organic farmers to meet the requirements of the Canadian Organic Standards.”

‘Informed decisions’

In her release Wednesday, Bibeau said that “in light of discussions with the government-industry committee, we will protect the integrity of organic certification.”

Her announcement Wednesday included plans for creation of a “government-industry steering committee on plant breeding innovations transparency, to facilitate ongoing discussions as gene-edited products are introduced in the marketplace.”

Bibeau also said an expansion of the Seeds Canada Canadian Variety Transparency Database will provide transparency around individual seed varieties — and new federal oversight of that database “will ensure (its) completeness and robustness.”

Bibeau also committed Ottawa to “again provide funding to support the review of Canada’s organic standards.” Those standards, updated every five years, are next due for renewal in 2025.

CFA’s Currie, in the government’s release, said those commitments “will help ensure farmers can continue to make informed decisions on what they produce.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Gene-edited crops clear CFIA’s regulatory bar appeared first on Country Guide.

The “What We Heard” Report, released Wednesday, is the result of consultations between AAFC and the agricultural sector to gather feedback on how best to support farmers and producers to achieve a 30 per cent reduction in fertilizer-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agriculture by 2030 — a stated federal goal since 2020.

Over 2,000 submissions were received through the online consultation, technical workshops, and town hall meetings between March and October 2022. Farmers, producers, industry associations, provinces and territories, scientists and environmental organizations provided their input.

A large number of respondents questioned whether a fertilizer emissions reduction target was needed, a sentiment that was often coupled with concerns that a mandatory target might later be imposed. A significant number of respondents said they preferred an intensity-based reduction in emissions rather than an absolute reduction in emissions. They were also concerned about how these targets might impact production.

Farmers were also concerned that climate change policies might not take into consideration the economics of emission reductions and how that could affect their bottom line.

Another concern was that applying blanket policies doesn’t properly reflect the regional diversity of the agriculture sector in Canada. Respondents indicated more localized data and increased extension services would help them adopt nitrogen management practices.

However, while there were many concerns with the program, there was also significant buy-in. Many respondents recognized the need to act on climate change and were on board with reducing emissions. But they also wanted recognition for the role that Canadian farmers already play in promoting sustainability and reducing emissions, something in which many respondents felt pride.

“Fertilizers are an essential input for farmers,” Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau said in the report. “We need to ensure that our efforts to reduce emissions do not undermine their competitiveness or their vital work, especially at a time when food insecurity has reached unprecedented levels worldwide and the fertilizer supply chain is increasingly strained.”

Bibeau’s message also reinforced the voluntary nature of the targets.

“I would like to be clear; there is no mandatory reduction in fertilizer use on Canadian farms. Instead, we want to support measures that producers can take voluntarily to reduce their emissions over the long term without curtailing growth in crop yields,” she said.

The desire to see better communication and engagement between the government and the agricultural sector also emerged through the consultation process. To address this, a Fertilizer Working Group is being formed under the Sustainable Agriculture Strategy Advisory Committee.

The objectives of the committee will be to strengthen the ongoing dialogue between industry and government, examine mechanisms that need further support and improve the measurement and tracking of fertilizer emissions reductions in the sector.

“There is clearly a diversity of perspectives on many key issues, and we are pleased to see the report identify the importance of further producer engagement in advancing this voluntary approach,” said Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. “We are pleased to see the report factor in producer profitability.”

Fertilizer Canada CEO Karen Proud said she was pleased to see the support of 4R nutrient stewardship. “We look forward to continuing to work with the government and producers to improve measurement and accelerate the adoption of 4R best management practices, which reduce emissions and increase productivity,” she said.

— Don Norman reports for the Manitoba Co-operator from Winnipeg.

The post Federal report shows farmer concerns remain regarding emissions targets appeared first on Country Guide.

Bibeau told delegates attending the 10th annual conference she’s never felt like she’s had to fight for spot at the political table because of work done by women who have gone before her.

She said in a follow-up interview she’s amazed and inspired by the shift in agriculture that’s taken place in the four years since she took on the agriculture portfolio.

“I’m very impressed by the next generation because they have so many opportunities (within) agriculture… With all the research and science and innovation that is being done in agriculture, they are all well-educated, they have degrees and I (look forward) to see how they see the future of agriculture,” Bibeau said.

She advised women not to wait to be asked to participate. They need to trust themselves to take on whatever challenges presented to them on the farm or within the field of agriculture.

She acknowledged it can be daunting going into meetings with only men at the table. However, she said, with more women stepping up, “there’s… no limit to the possibilities” women in agriculture can achieve.

Julia Flinton, a B.C. cattle producer and manager of the food systems program for the Indigenous Sport, Physical Activity and Recreation Council (ISPARC) in that province, spoke earlier in the day about how combining one’s passion and family life can turn into a career.

Flinton said she’s heard the saying “faking it until you make it” too many times from women — and asked “Well, what are we faking?” which prompted another round of applause.

— Jessika Guse writes for Glacier FarmMedia from Calgary.

The post AWC 2023: Federal ag minister inspired by farm women’s progress appeared first on Country Guide.

A clutch of farmer and ag industry groups on July 15 put forward a new request to Ottawa for compensation to farmers “negatively impacted” by a 35 per cent tariff imposed following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Nearly all imports of goods from Russia and Belarus became subject to a general tariff of 35 per cent on March 2, when Ottawa withdrew both countries’ entitlement to the most-favoured-nation (MFN) treatment under Canada’s Customs Tariff.

That move, the ag industry groups said July 15, was made “without any prior consultation with the agriculture sector” and eastern Canadian farmers were “disproportionately impacted.”

The ag organizations included Grain Farmers of Ontario, the Atlantic Grains Council, Quebec Grain Farmers, Ontario Bean Growers, Ontario Canola Growers and the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, as well as Fertilizer Canada, the Ontario Agri Business Association, ag co-operative Sollio Agriculture and input retailer and fertilizer distributor Sylvite Agri-Services.

Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada, they said, rely “heavily” on fertilizer imports including about 660,000 to 680,000 tonnes of Russian nitrogen fertilizer per year, or about 85 to 90 per cent of the total nitrogen fertilizer used in the region.

Nitrogen fertilizers such as ammonia and urea are produced domestically, in Canada’s West, but for years it’s been more cost-effective for growers in the East to access imports from overseas.

The ag groups said July 15 their industry “strongly supports the people of Ukraine and condemns the Russian invasion” as well as sanctions imposed by Canada and its allies, but “action by the Canadian government should not jeopardize Canada’s capacity to produce food today or in the future.”

Canada’s application of the General Tariff made it the only G7 country with tariffs on Russian fertilizer, the groups said.

“Farmers bore the costs of tariffs which has put Canadian farmers at a disadvantage to farmers in other countries who did not have tariffs on fertilizers,” Christian Overbeek, chairman of Quebec Grain Farmers, said in the groups’ joint release. “We need compensation for farmers and concrete solutions for the 2023 planting season in place this summer.”

“An additional tariff paid by farmers on a global product such as fertilizer just penalizes the farmer,” Roy Culberson, chairman of the Atlantic Grains Council, said in the same release. “We look forward to working on a resolution with government.”

Asked during a media scrum Tuesday in Winnipeg about the groups’ requests, federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau said that while the government has heard the request, it would be supporting Canadian farmers “in other ways.”

For example, she cited the government’s move last month to temporarily raise the interest-free portion of cash advances available under the Advance Payments Program to $250,000, up from the usual $100,000, for 2022 and 2023.

As for direct compensation, though, “we have been looking at it and we’ve made the decision to support farmers in a different way.”

Ottawa will be working with the industry and the various ag associations, she said, “to see how we can find alternative options to access fertilizer for the next season.”

Ontario Bean Growers, in a separate release Wednesday, called on the federal government to “return the fertilizer tariffs entirely, or at least for those purchases made prior to the war” — and also to invest in domestic fertilizer production in the longer term.

“We are also asking for the federal government to examine major trading partners, such as the U.S., to assess the disparity on costs caused by the Canadian regulations,” group chairman Dave Woods said in that release. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Direct compensation for fertilizer tariffs not on table appeared first on Country Guide.

Following meetings this week in Saskatoon, federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau and her provincial and territorial counterparts on Friday mapped out the bones of their next five-year ag funding framework, to be called the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership.

“As the provincial-territorial co-chair, we are pleased with the increased funding all parties have committed to today,” the ministerial co-chair, Saskatchewan Ag Minister Dave Marit, said in a release. “I believe we have found the proper balance between economic and environmental objectives to ensure our industry remains globally competitive.”

Where the current five-year Canadian Agricultural Partnership — agreed upon in 2017 for the 2018-2023 period under Bibeau’s predecessor Lawrence MacAulay — committed the feds and provinces to $2 billion in funding for cost-shared programs, the new partnership deal will raise that figure to $2.5 billion, up 25 per cent.

RALP

Part of the thicker cost-shared envelope — $250 million — will go to fund a new Resilient Agricultural Landscape Program (RALP), which is meant to support ecological goods and services provided by the agriculture sector.

The ministers “agreed in principle” on that program, with details to come later, though they said it will be administered by the provinces and territories, based on “nationally consistent principles (and) tailored to regional needs and conditions.”

Existing programs that “respect the guidelines” for RALP, such as Prince Edward Island’s Alternate Land Use Services (ALUS) program, Quebec’s Programme de Rétribution des pratiques agroenvironnementales, and Manitoba’s Growing Outcomes in Watersheds (GROW), will be “able to benefit from the new federal funding,” the federal government said in its release Friday.

AgriStability

The new partnership also commits the feds and provinces to boost the compensation rate for the AgriStability ag income stabilization program to 80 per cent, up from the current 70, which is expected to provide another $72 million per year for enrolled farmers.

Under AgriStability, a payment is triggered when a participating farmer’s production margin for a given program year falls more than 30 per cent below their reference margin. Under the current framework, AgriStability covers 70 per cent of the farmer’s decline beyond that 30 per cent mark.

That said, the ministers added Friday they’ve agreed to “continue to work, and consult with industry, on a new AgriStability model that will be faster, simpler and more predictable.”

The governments taking part in the ag policy framework said they’ve “identified key changes” to improve AgriStability and plan to “further analyze and implement this new model while ensuring a smooth transition.”

As for other business risk management (BRM) programs operating under the partnership, the ministers committed to a one-year review on “how to integrate climate risk and readiness” in those programs.

Under that review, the provinces would identify “potential incentives” and then launch a pilot for producers who adopt environmental practices that also reduce their production risks.

The ministers also agreed that in order to receive a government contribution to their AgriInvest accounts, farmers who have allowable net sales (ANS) of at least $1 million will need to have an agri-environmental risk assessment (for example, an Environmental Farm Plan) in place by 2025.

The ministers noted the BRM programs will still “continue to focus on production risk.”

‘Results strategy’

The ministers also said they agreed on “the need for a more robust results strategy” for the 2023-28 partnership, which will involve “improved data sharing, results reporting, and a commitment to contribute to common, measurable outcomes” over that time.

Those outcomes include reduction in the sector’s greenhouse gas emissions by between three million and five million tonnes; $250 billion in ag sector revenues and $95 billion in sector export revenues by 2028; and a measurable increase in funded recipients who are Indigenous Peoples, women and youth over that time.

The ministers noted Quebec is “already implementing policies and strategies to provide targets, indicators and accountability processes that meet the priorities and objectives set out in this agreement” and will not be subject to the framework target’s commitments but rather will “contribute to collective results” through its own targets and accountability mechanisms.

Fertilizer emissions

Curbing the ag sector’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fertilizer was a sore spot among participating ministers. In their joint release, they said they “discussed the importance of ensuring that efforts to reduce emissions from fertilizer or other agricultural sources do not impede Canada’s ability to contribute to domestic and global food security, now or into the future.”

The discussions, they said, also “mentioned” ongoing consultations undertaken by the feds to develop “voluntary approaches” to achieve Canada’s target of reducing absolute GHG emissions associated with fertilizers by 30 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030.

That 30 per cent target was first laid out in the federal climate plan in late 2020. The ministers said Friday it was “reiterated” at their meeting that the 30 per cent target “applies to emissions and not fertilizer use.”

However, Marit, in a separate release, said his government is “really concerned with this arbitrary goal,” adding the Trudeau government “has apparently moved on from their attack on the oil and gas industry and set their sights on Saskatchewan farmers.”

Marit and his Alberta counterpart Nate Horner, in a joint statement Friday, said the provinces had “pushed the federal government to discuss this important topic, but were disappointed to learn that the target is already set.”

The commitment to future consultations, Marit and Horner said, is “only to determine how to meet the target that Prime Minister Trudeau and Minister Bibeau have already unilaterally imposed on this industry, not to consult on what is achievable or attainable.”

“The federal government needs to be true partners, rather than simply imposing targets that make it harder,” Ontario’s Agriculture Minister Lisa Thompson said in a separate statement, adding the provinces were “disappointed by the lack of flexibility and consultation regarding the federal target.”

Reaction

The Canadian Cattle Association, in a separate release late Friday, said with the new framework’s increased funding envelope, the beef cattle sector “is now better equipped to deliver on some of the ambitious environmental and productivity goals as set by the national beef strategy partners.”

“Today’s announcement is a recognition that the (ag ministers) heard our concerns,” CCA president Reg Schellenberg said in the release.

The CCA hailed the RALP program announcement as “a welcome investment for beef producers who perform these services as a byproduct of raising beef” and noted the increase to the AgriStability compensation rate has “long been advocated for by the beef sector.”

Bill Campbell, president of Keystone Agricultural Producers, said the group “remain(s) concerned with the increase in GHG reduction targets… This will need clear and transparent data sources and measures, but we have yet to see which data and life cycle analysis will be used to determine these targets.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Ag ministers lock in next policy funding framework appeared first on Country Guide.

Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, speaking Thursday in Calgary, announced $54 million from the $185 million, 10-year ACS program launched last spring has been allocated to nine new Living Lab sites in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador.

Included in this round of allocations is the first Indigenous-led Living Lab: the Bridge to Land Water Sky project, to be operated west of Prince Albert, Sask. by the Mistawasis Nêhiyawak and Muskeg Lake Cree Nation.

Each of the nine labs, the feds said, will focus on “identifying innovative technologies and on-farm management practices that can be adopted by farmers nationwide to tackle climate change.”

More specifically, the new projects explored at each Living Lab are to focus on carbon sequestration and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions via development and testing of beneficial management practices (BMPs), which “could then be widely adopted across the region and country.”

The announced projects — and their exact final non-repayable funding — are still subject to negotiation of contribution agreements with the lead recipients, the government said, also noting more living labs are still to be announced “in the coming year.”

The Living Labs initiative has been around since 2018 and, at that time, had a broader field of interest across a “wide range” of environmental issues. That initiative saw labs set up at sites in Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba and Prince Edward Island.

The ACS-backed Living Labs, however, are meant to focus specifically on reducing GHGs and sequestering carbon — although solutions they develop are also expected to “help protect biodiversity on farms, improve water and soil quality, and, through the efficient management of resources, strengthen farmers’ bottom lines.”

‘Whole farm’

The biggest chunk of funding announced Thursday goes to an $8.5 million project spearheaded by Alberta Beef Producers, to “explore the use of beef, forage and cropping systems to improve soil carbon sequestration and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

That project is meant to lead to the development of BMPs in crop rotations and cropping systems, land use changes, grazing management, livestock feeding, nutrient management, and “increasing carbon on the whole farm.”

Another $7.7 million goes to the Alberta Conservation Association (ACA) and Food Water Wellness Foundation, collaborating on a Living Lab to “improve soil health, reduce costs of production and sequester carbon in the soil using regenerative agriculture.”

BMPs to be examined in the ACA/Food Water Wellness project include cover cropping, intercropping, relay cropping, adaptive multi-paddock grazing, use of perennials and animals in cropping systems, and feeding strategies to cut methane emissions. The projects are also expected to “amplify and support traditional ecological knowledge and efforts of First Nations.”

Bibeau and the Alberta groups’ representatives, speaking in Calgary Thursday, noted these projects will be helpful in gathering hard data on how much carbon can be sequestered through these BMPs — with an aim of having those practices recognized to thus allow cattle producers to become eligible producers of carbon credits.

The other funding allocations announced Thursday include:

• $8 million for the South of the Divide Conservation Action Program in southern Saskatchewan, focused on four key areas — avoiding land use conversion, adaptive grazing management, restoring and enhancing perennial plant communities, and livestock grazing of “diverse annual cover crops;”
• $6 million for the Peace Region Forage Seed Association, looking at “farms as a whole, including land management, economics and the social aspects of applying new BMPs” in the Peace region of northern Alberta and B.C.;
• $6 million for the B.C. Investment Agriculture Foundation (IAF) and B.C. Agriculture Council, whose lab will also explore BMPs relating to crop rotations and cropping systems, land use changes, grazing management, livestock feeding, nutrient management and increasing carbon on the whole farm;
• $4.8 million for the Indigenous-led Bridge to Land Water Sky project in Saskatchewan, focusing on BMPs including crop diversification and cover, 4R nitrogen stewardship, pesticide management, and landscape diversification, “while committing to the protection of Indigenous values, treaties, communities, lands and resources;”
• $4.5 million for the Agricultural Alliance of New Brunswick, exploring BMPs including systems for advanced cropping, enhanced forage management, “high-performance” pasture management and efficient nitrogen management, along with landscape use;
• $4.5 million for the Nova Scotia Federation of Agriculture, focused on “four BMPs important to this region” including cover cropping in annual and perennial systems, establishing riparian zones and shelterbelts, and land swapping; and
• $3.8 million for the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Agriculture, exploring BMPs including diversifying forage and vegetable rotations using cover cropping, optimizing fertilizer rates, and adding composts and biochar to sandy soils.

Applicants seeking ACS funding for their Living Labs were required form a network of partnerships within a province, such as with producer organizations and other agricultural not-for-profits, along with Indigenous organizations and environmental groups.

The goal, the government said, is to set up at least one such collaboration hub in each province. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Feds boost Living Labs’ reach to all provinces appeared first on Country Guide.

Bibeau on Tuesday announced Quebec dairy farmer Jennifer Hayes as the CDC’s new chair for a four-year term starting Dec. 23, 2021.

Hayes, who had served as commissioner on the CDC’s three-person board since January 2017, is the first female chairperson in the commission’s 56-year history, Bibeau noted.

Active in Quebec’s Union des producteurs agricoles (UPA), Hayes comes to the role with “extensive governance experience,” Bibeau said.

Bibeau added she’s “confident that (Hayes) will continue to be an asset to the commission and help the industry remain competitive, productive and innovative.”

Hayes co-owns PineCrest Farms, a dairy and beef operation on Quebec’s Gaspe Peninsula at Shigawake, about 150 km east of Campbellton, N.B.

As CDC chairperson, she replaces Bob Ingratta, a former British Columbia Milk Marketing Board CEO whose two-year term on the national commission expired Dec. 16.

Hayes’ appointment follows recommendations made in a special report from the federal auditor general’s office in March 2021. It called on the CDC board to keep in touch with the ag minister’s office on a “timely basis” to make sure the three-member commission keeps a full complement at the board table.

With Ingratta out and Hayes now promoted, the commission’s only other current board member is its CEO, former Agropur president Serge Riendeau — who Bibeau re-appointed last April for an additional one-year term ending in May 2022.

The auditor general’s report found no board meetings had to be cancelled or any decisions left unresolved, but having one empty chair at a three-member board table nevertheless “poses a significant risk that the board would be unable to make decisions and operate effectively,” the report said.

That poses a risk particularly for the CDC. Its requirement for members to have “significant dairy industry experience,” with one member also serving as CEO, makes it somewhat more likely that a “real, potential or perceived” conflict of interest may pop up, requiring at least one member to abstain from voting on certain decisions.

At the time of the report’s release in March, the CDC said it agreed with the recommendation and was “already in communication” with Bibeau’s office — and with the section of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada responsible for such appointments — “especially as the term of one of the board members is almost over.”

All that said, the auditor general’s report also noted maintaining a full slate of members is a job “outside the corporation’s control” because those appointments are made by the federal Governor in Council — that is, by Canada’s governor general on the advice of the federal cabinet.

Last April, when announcing Riendeau’s extension as CEO, Bibeau said the federal government had launched appointment processes for a new full-time CEO and new part-time chairperson for the CDC. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post New chair named for Canadian Dairy Commission appeared first on Country Guide.

Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau on Thursday announced an $8 million, three-year funding envelope for the first of two streams of what’s now called the AgriCommunication Initiative, to run through to the end of March 2024.

That first stream opened to applications effective Thursday and an applicant guide is available online.

The first stream is to bring “non-repayable” funding to projects meant to help Canadians better understand how their food is produced and “projects that promote consumer awareness of the strengths of Canada’s agriculture sector.”

Funded projects under the first stream “will also help enhance Canadians’ trust in sustainability, animal care, and efforts to reduce food waste,” the government said.

Projects done by agricultural fairs and exhibitions, which conduct “broad agriculture awareness activities in helping strengthen public trust about the origin of the food they eat and how it is produced,” are among the expected beneficiaries under the first AgriCommunication stream.

Not-for-profit associations and Indigenous groups are also eligible, the government said. Individuals, academic institutions, commodity organizations and for-profit organizations aren’t eligible.

“Regional or local” organizations may be considered for funding “if they can demonstrate the ability to deliver a project that is sector-wide and national in scope,” the government said, noting “support from national organizations may be required where relevant.”

Regional projects may also be considered, if a national organization doesn’t exist, the government said.

The program’s first stream will also back “communications and awareness activities” starting in spring 2022, “to highlight the sector’s efforts to adopt sustainable and environmentally friendly practices and technologies.”

Funded projects can generally expect cost-shared support, with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada covering 70 per cent to the recipient’s 30 per cent. A “more favourable” 85:15 cost-share arrangement may be applied on projects from “underrepresented groups within the agricultural sector.”

Government funding — including local, municipal and/or provincial funding as well as program funding — shouldn’t typically exceed 85 per cent of a funded project’s costs.

The government said Thursday it will take applications for the program on an “ongoing basis” from now until Sept. 30, 2023, or until otherwise announced, or until funding has been “fully committed.”

That said, the government added, applicants “who can complete activities before March 31, 2022 should contact the program immediately to discuss their application.”

Full details aren’t yet available on the AgriCommunication Initiative’s second stream, which will focus on “increasing the sector’s understanding of consumer preferences and expectations.”

More information on what can be funded in the second stream is expected to be made known “in the coming months.”

“Consumers have a growing interest in learning more about where homegrown agricultural products come from and how they’re made,” Bibeau said Thursday in the government’s release.

“This initiative will develop more connections between the agriculture and agri-food industry and Canadians, which will increase appreciation and pride in our farmers and food businesses.”

Reciprocal awareness between Canada’s consumers and ag sector was a major plank in the “Guelph Statement,” which Canada’s federal and provincial ag ministers drafted at their meeting last month as a guidance document for the 2023-to-2028 ag policy funding framework.

Under the Guelph Statement’s “resiliency and public trust” category of priorities and focus areas, the ministers called for “fostering awareness of sector commitment to the sustainable production of safe, high-quality food and building public trust while increasing sector awareness of the expectations of consumers.”

Noting the funding component for ag fairs, the Canadian Association of Fairs and Exhibitions said Thursday it’s “proud that we are seeing the benefits of our government relations efforts.”

The association, in the lead-up to September’s federal election, had pointed to a “lack of recognition for fair and exhibition organizations in the federal government” — that is, outside of the COVID-19 pandemic.

CAFE at the time urged federal candidates to promise “clear access to a federal department in order to create and access ongoing funding programs.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post AgriCommunication plan to seek farmer-consumer dialogue appeared first on Country Guide.