“Selling genetically engineered seeds to home gardeners is reckless and could jeopardize our ability to provide customers with organic and other non-GE choices,” said Mel Sylvestre, an organic farmer from Gibsons, B.C., in a statement from the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN).

CBAN has been vocally critical against GMOs and gene editing in foods.

This August, U.S.-based Norfolk Healthy Produce received Health Canada’s approval to bring The Purple Tomato to Canada. The tomato has had traits from snapdragons added to its genetic makeup. This causes its deep purple colour and increases the amount of an antioxidant called anthocyanin.

Contamination fears

CBAN coordinator Lucy Sharrat said that as of Dec. 2, seeds for the purple tomato were listed in Norfolk’s online seed store but were marked as sold out. On Dec. 18, the seeds appeared to no longer be listed.

The fear is that if genetically modified produce is widely grown across Canada, this will raise the risk of contaminating other varieties. This is a problem for organic farmers, who cannot grow genetically-modified crops under the Canadian Organic Standards.

Organic groups have also said cross-contamination concerns could lessen the standards’ credibility and hamper export opportunities.

CBAN is calling for mandatory labelling of genetically-engineered seeds as is the Canadian Organic Trade Association.

“With no GE garden seeds previously on the market in Canada, gardeners may not expect these seeds to be GE and would not have clear indications that identify them as GE at the point of purchase,” said the association’s executive director Tia Loftsgard in a statement.

On its website, Norfolk Healthy Produce frequently calls its plants “bioengineered,” which is in keeping with U.S. labelling conventions according to a ‘frequently asked questions’ page. Its seeds are currently only for sale on its website, it said.

Seed sovereignty

CBAN said the introduction of genetically-engineered seeds could also threaten the ability of growers to save seeds and cultivate heritage varieties.

“Our customers want to buy the seeds we’ve nurtured on our farm, not patented seeds from corporate laboratories,” said Kim Delaney, founder of Hawthorn Farm Organic Seeds in Mount Forest, Ontario.

“We should reinforce our local seed systems and reject genetically engineered seeds from U.S. and multinational biotechnology companies. Canadian seed sovereignty should be a priority for all levels of government.”

“We don’t need or want genetic engineering in our gardens,” Delaney added. “We already have many good varieties of purple tomatoes.”

A group of 163 farmers signed a statement in opposition to the sale of genetically-engineered or gene-edited seeds to Canadian gardeners and small growers.

The post Selling GMO tomato seeds to Canadian gardeners ‘reckless’ say advocates appeared first on Country Guide.

“Other countries have recognized the opportunity that the organic sector has, both in terms of meeting some of their economic goals, some of their environmental and social goals, and they have invested significantly in the organic sector,” said My-Lien Bosch, government relations and regulatory affairs manager with the Canadian Organic Trade Alliance (COTA).

“In order for Canada to compete, we need to do that.”

Bosch spoke as part of an online panel discussion on the upcoming federal election, hosted by the Canadian Organic Alliance on March 27.

Election priorities

The Canadian Organic Alliance has identified two categories of election priorities, said Bosch: quick wins and catalytic investments.

Quick wins include an organic data strategy and a streamlined organic standards review process. It also included positive feedback from policymakers.

“We know that data is going to be able to unlock a lot of things that we can have to make decisions in our businesses, on our farms, and be able to help us plan for the future,” Bosch said.

In other countries, organic standards reviews are government funded, Bosch added, whereas in Canada organic groups have to advocate for government help every few years.

Catalytic investments, defined as “longer-term investments, balancing production and market growth, to grow the Canadian economy,” included an organic market development fund, which Bosch said has worked well in other countries to create a more stable market.

Ongoing research and support are also long-term needs.

Bosch added that other countries invest far more in their organic sectors than Canada does. She said for every dollar Canada invests, the U.S. invests eight dollars, and the EU invests 200 dollars.

“So absolutely this needs to step up,” she said.

Effects of tariffs on organic

Panelists also discussed the need for competitiveness and the potential to expand into other markets as tariffs threaten to disrupt Canadian trade with the U.S.

Canada trades $1.797 billion in organic goods to the U.S., said COTA executive director Tia Loftsgard. As of March 27, goods under CUSMA rule of origin regulations were excluded from tariffs.

The trade situation continues to evolve, however, and Canada and the U.S. are each other’s largest organic trading partners. The two countries have had a sixteen-year agreement organic equivalency agreement that has facilitated seamless trade, COTA’s website says.

“We certainly have been indicating that if we lose these markets, farmers will leave organic,” Loftsgard said, adding that it takes three years to transition farm production back once organic certification is lost.

Loftsgard said COTA is in regular communication with federal officials and has been told that they’ll continue to get updates despite the upcoming election.

The post Trade, competitiveness, investment among organic sector’s election priorities appeared first on Country Guide.

“We always need something to aim for, and whether the goal is attainable or not, giving ourselves a direction to point at helps keep everyone focused and aligned,” says Bergman.

Bergman and Wassenaar own and operate Haybury Farms Inc. and Claybank Organics where they grow conventional and organic crops in Jarvis, Ont., and in the Algoma district of northern Ontario. The two entrepreneurs also operate Winfield Contracting, a commercial snow removal business that serves Haldimand County, and a construction business, County Line Construction.

Managing diverse businesses across varying seasons, geographic locations and growing climates means Bergman and Wassenaar depend on their staff of 19 full-time employees, open communication and strategic planning to achieve success.

“Our business relies on a handful of people to manage everything, so we need them (and ourselves) to show up at their best both physically and mentally,” explains Bergman. Bergman says individual goals can be health- or family-related while business goals are divided into the relevant enterprises, but they are all intertwined.

Business partners since 2015, Bergman and Wassenaar have grown their farm operation to 4,500 acres between the two Ontario locations. The expansion to northern Ontario in 2021 came from their goal to invest in land that made the most financial sense. After significant research and an unsuccessful attempt to partner with a larger group to expand north, the two invested in 1,500 acres in the Algoma district where they felt their dollars would stretch the most. “It was a giant leap of faith, but we believe northern Ontario is where the land market is heading,” says Wassenaar.

Managing more land in two distinctly different farm locations requires more equipment. To maximize horsepower, the partners float their tractors back and forth between locations, driving more than six hours each way, and keep tillage, planting and harvest equipment at each farm.

Bergman says he’s blessed to have such a good business partner in Wassenaar, noting that neither of them would be able to own and manage their businesses independently. Both believe that surrounding themselves with good people is key to their success. They rely most on their accountant for guidance, and seek professional and informal advice from agronomists, industry specialists and peer networks. “Farming has changed so much, that we’ve found the most value in talking to people of similar age, experience and situations,” says Bergman.

Success for the long term

Bergman explains that all their businesses are dependent on the weather, so they break their business planning and goals into seasonal three-month periods. Monthly meetings between Bergman, Wassenaar and their management team keep everyone on track and feed the agendas for weekly staff meetings.

Wassenaar says that their goals have changed as the scope of their business has grown. And as they’ve grown their ability to take on more risk has expanded too. This year, the team set out to achieve their biggest goals yet: to increase the profitability of their northern Ontario acres so the farm can be a self-sustaining operation and complete a three-year shop building project. Wassenaar says that the shop build fits into their long-term expansion strategy because its new size will accommodate future business growth. “Long-term planning is constantly on our minds and part of our annual written goals,” he explains.

For Bergman and Wassenaar, planning long term means looking five to 10 years ahead. Within the next decade they would like to expand their equipment lineup to match their land base, accumulate more acres and transition into more management less hands-on roles. They both have young families, and like many farmers, struggle with balancing their workload and time with family. Bergman says it’s hard to learn to let go of the day-to-day so one of his goals is to enhance middle management roles within their companies to take some pressure off him and Wassenaar.

The challenge is how to measure success when so many of their production and financial goals are tied to variables they can’t control, such as weather, input costs and commodity markets. But Wassenaar believes if their business and personal lives are better off than the year before, they are making progress. And if they don’t achieve their goals, they try again.

“Sometimes I like it when we don’t meet our goals because it gives us a reason to look at things critically and fuels our motivation,” says Bergman. “Success looks different for everyone, and for us, our goals are focused on growth, efficiencies and progressive management.”

Legacy underlies decisions

Father and son team David and Brett Francis are expanding their mixed farming operation of seed potatoes, field crops and beef to enhance the farm’s sustainability for the next generation. They trust their instincts and make one decision at a time.

Decisions made on Francis Farms in Lady Fane, P.E.I., are rooted in generational knowledge passed down through the family since it was founded in 1844. And decisions must result in a farm profitable enough to support the family, nimble enough to adjust to market conditions and provide a balance between work and lifestyle.

“If the decision feels good and you’re truthful with yourself about the situation, then it’s likely the right choice to make,” says David. He says that it’s also important to weigh external factors into every decision, but that with so many uncontrollable dynamics in agriculture, it’s best not to get too caught up in negative “what ifs.”

David admits the family never follows a formal goal-setting process. They take the same, practical approach that has served the family for generations: they look internally to assess their strengths, assets, equipment and what they enjoy doing.

Since Brett returned to the farm after graduating from Dalhousie University in 2008, the family has set and achieved several goals, each designed to reduce the farm’s exposure to risk.

Francis Farms has grown seed potatoes for generations and has developed a reputation for high-quality products. Their cost of production is higher, given the specialized equipment, stringent regulations and inspections, and the labour required to sort and ship seed potatoes each spring.

“We’re proud to provide seed for potatoes grown across the province,” says David. “It’s a unique opportunity, and our goal is to continue to serve this niche market.”

Traditionally, the family sold the potatoes on the open market, but five years ago they decided to mitigate their risk by contracting their potato production. Today, 80 per cent of production is contracted to processing growers in P.E.I. Not only did they reduce their marketing risk, but they were able to refocus their resources on expanding their land base and crop and livestock marketing.

Like many farms, the Francis family relies on rented land. They work hard to maintain great relationships with their landlords and recognize the importance of a reliable land base for the sustainability of their farm. “The sustainability, profitability and the ability for the next generation to take over the farm factors into every decision we make,” says David.

The family is also diversifying to further improve sustainability and risk management goals. They’ve added a feedlot to finish their cattle, and they’ve purchased feeder cattle to expand the herd. Three factors influenced this decision: the proximity to Atlantic Beef Products, a federal beef processing facility just eight miles down the road; the ability to utilize their own feed sources and market their crops through the finished beef rather than selling their barley and straw through previous channels; and a new year-round employment opportunity to maintain a reliable labour source. Since they already know how to manage beef cattle and had most of the equipment to expand, the decision made sense.

Future vision

Despite an informal approach to planning, decisions are not made lightly on Francis Farms. David and Brett work closely with their spouses, Vicki, a retired social worker, and Keshia, a school social worker. Both are involved in the farm management and contribute to its success. The family also relies on trusted advisors, especially their tax specialist and accountant who visit the farm regularly, and they acknowledge the hard work of their full-time and seasonal employees. And while not always planned, the impromptu business meetings in the shop or around the kitchen table are where open and honest communications help shape the strategic direction of the farm’s future.

David and Brett’s vision is to maintain the legacy of a productive, efficient, profitable and enjoyable place to live and work. “Farming is a responsibility, and I want to create an environment that supports and feeds our family and community, while leaving what we’ve built for the next generation,” says David.

Strategic intents

Stacey Meunier is certain there’s no way she and her husband Chad would be where they are today if they weren’t intentional about following their farm values. “Our values and vision statement guide our day-to-day decisions and our overall goals,” explains Stacey.

Chad and Stacey own Meunier Livestock Ltd. in Barrhead, Alta., where they raise 4,500 cows, manage a finishing feedlot and crop forages to feed their cattle. Ranching with the help of 16 full-time staff and raising four children keeps the couple busy, especially since the farm has grown substantially since they took ownership of the family operation in 2016.

They set their vision for the farm on day one and “Everything we do must align with our vision: thriving plants, animals and people,” Meunier says.

Meunier refers to their goals as intents and says they have typically identified four to five overarching intents in each of their strategic plans. “Our approach to setting our goals, or intents, creates a framework that enables us to make detailed plans that inform our decisions,” she explains.

Each set of intents — they’re on their third iteration — is incorporated into the farm’s business plan. Measurements are established for each goal, but as Meunier points out, because agriculture is constantly changing, they are prepared to adjust or change their intents to meet each new situation. Some measurements are tied to numbers, like their 2021 goal to increase crop yields, while others, such as learning to farm by their values, are harder to quantify.

Their approach helps them define short- and long-term goals, though Meunier points out that on a farm, a short-term goal can take a few years, while a long-term goal could be 10 or even 100 years when factoring in farm sustainability and succession.

Looking back, Meunier says their initial set of intents was very task oriented, and their most important goal was developing a comprehensive succession plan. Their second round of intents was focused on increasing revenue and decreasing operational costs. At the time, they also challenged themselves to farm by their own values and align everything they did with their five core values: honesty and integrity, strong work ethic and efficiency, being intentional, community and continued learning.

“Intentionally farming by our values was one of the most challenging, yet impactful goals that we set for ourselves,” reflects Meunier. “If we hadn’t written the goal and acted deliberately, we may not have achieved it.”

Their third, and most recent set of intents proved to be the most difficult. In December 2023, Stacey and Chad found themselves at a crossroads about the direction for their business. They had recently expanded and were facing a tough cattle market, so they reached out to a trusted advisor for help. “By consulting a third-party advisor, we were able to gain input, decide on and clarify what will serve our farm,” she says.

Their latest set of intents is quite broad compared to previous versions, but this shift reflects the complexity of their business and changes made in recent years. For example, two of their intents are to develop and expand key relationships and improve management and operational infrastructure. Intents might be general, but Meunier says they’ve identified key action items and assigned timelines that will help them achieve their goals.

Shared goals

“It’s easy to set goals, but if you don’t see them every day, or position them in front of you, I question the ability to get them done in a timely manner,” says Meunier. That’s why their current list of strategic intents is posted on the office wall. She says this keeps them focused on their end goals and provides a visual for staff to see what everyone is working towards.

The farm’s vision statement is also posted on their office wall and company vehicles so everyone in the community can see what they stand for.

Stacey and Chad use bi-weekly staff meetings to share how each intent fits into the overall picture of the farm’s success and update staff on tasks associated with each intent. “It’s important that everyone understands how our goals impact everyone individually and as a whole,” says Meunier. The couple also make a point of sharing accomplishments at monthly staff lunch-and-learns so everyone can celebrate their contributions.

“If we don’t achieve our intent after two years, we analyze the situation. Sometimes we shelve the idea and come back when the time is right,” says Meunier.

Meunier’s advice to farmers: make time to get away from the farm to plan. “Space and distance help with clarity and finding a new perspective,” she says. She also recommends openly communicating goals with family and staff, so everyone buys into the idea and overall direction.

“Setting strategic intents is the key to our success,” she says.

The post How these Canadian farms thrive appeared first on Country Guide.

“(Prices) are in a holding pattern until we know what’s going to happen with the U.S. situation,” commented Harro Wehrmann of Wehrmann Grain and Seed Ltd.

The threat of tariffs emerged after Donald Trump won the United States Presidential Election. In late November, Trump stated he would impose a 25 per cent levy on all goods the U.S. imports from Canada and Mexico on his first day as president come Jan. 20.

Wehrmann added Trump’s threat has already put the brakes to a lot of organic grain exports to the U.S. as the market waits until the issue is resolved one way or the other.

Meanwhile, Scott Shiels of Grain Millers Canada suggested the tariffs might be somewhat overblown.

“If we do see tariffs once Trump gets in, they won’t be as high as been talked about and some people believe there won’t be any tariffs on ag products,” he said.

However, it’s not only the ‘Trump effect’ that has prices for a number of organic crops standing pat.

“The demand ain’t there,” commented Jason Breault of RW Organics in referring to organic wheat as many buyers are covered likely through to March-April.

He said recent and future interest rate cuts by the Bank of Canada could help the industry. On Dec. 11, Canada’s central bank reduced its key lending rate by 25 basis points. Also, Breault said a weaker Canadian dollar would be helpful to organic grains exported to the U.S.

Breault added he hopes prices for wheat don’t fall much further as that could lead to farmers leaving the organic industry.

Jason Charles of Charles Commodity Consulting said he’s seen almost no current bids for organic grains, expect for yellow peas.

“Buyers are mostly bought through to March. I expect things to be slow for the next 90 days,” he commented.

Charles noted that over the course of 2024, he estimated organic grain prices dropped 25 per cent, although production was average  and demand reasonable.

Richard Reimer of Grasslands Brokerage and Consulting suggested prices for organic wheat could ease back by spring. However, he said lentil prices are higher because of demand outstripping the supply.

“The Northern U.S. and Western Canada experienced really low yields this year and we can see higher prices carry into 2025 for old crop and higher than average new crop contracts until more producers choose to put acres into the ground,” Reimer said.

As for organic feed prices, he said those will likely soften in 2025 because of the availability of corn and hard red spring wheat.

The post Most organic commodity prices remain firm heading into the holidays appeared first on Country Guide.

As they got into it, Ryan often talked up the benefits of organics on social media and in the local coffee shop. He’d quiz conventional farmers why they weren’t going organic too, not because he’s a dyed-in-the-wool believer but because organic was proving to him that it could be good for the land, good for the crops, and good for business.

Then, a decade into it, the Hoffords had two years of exceptional years’ yields. That should have been great news, but it wasn’t. Their yields never got close to that high again. Instead, they slumped, and they just wouldn’t bounce back.

Soil tests pinpointed the problem. As an organic farmer, Ryan says, “you can grow as much nitrogen as you want. But we hit a wall with phosphorus.”

So Ryan, the organic guy at Swan River five hours northwest of Winnipeg, had to become Ryan, the guy who used to be organic. It was the only choice for getting their soil the phosphorus fertilizer it was crying for, even though abandoning organic would prove full of technical challenges.

It was also a big swallow. Ryan found himself online and in town asking for fertilizer and crop protection advice from the same farmers he’d been having debates with about why they should switch.

“I had to eat a lot of crow,” he says.

But in a Canadian agriculture facing the prospect of unpredictable climatic changes and even more unpredictable geopolitical black swans, it was also a lesson in how to survive when everything you built your farm business on suddenly falls apart.

It’s tough to back down from a position once you’ve taken a vocal stance, Ryan agrees. But that isn’t his only learning. It takes smart money management, too, and total commitment plus a lot of skill because so few people have done what you’re about to attempt.

In the beginning

So let’s go back to 2008, the year Ryan and Amy got serious about farming. They had four quarter sections of land but no machinery to use on it and trouble getting financing too. To put it plainly, they weren’t sure what they were doing. But now they were determined.

Ryan had worked on his family’s farm while he was growing up, like most farm kids, and he’d imagined himself one day moving back to the farm. But the Hofford family farm was small, and a few years after he finished high school, Ryan headed west to find work in Calgary.

With none of his three kids left on the farm, Ryan’s father took a job offer from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, even though the job was in Winnipeg, a five-hour drive from the farm. The family auctioned off their farm equipment, but hung onto the farmland, seeding it down to alfalfa and renting it out.

Ryan did well in Alberta. He liked his job and reconnected with his now-wife Amy, who had also grown up in Swan River, but as a town girl, not on a farm. They were happy in Alberta and planning a life out west. “We were quite content out there,” Ryan says.

Then the Hofford family changed. Not long after he left the farm, Ryan’s father was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and passed away within three months.

After their father’s death, it was still important to Ryan and his sisters to keep the farmland in the family. The siblings and their mother chose the easiest solution: to keep on renting it out. But their alfalfa stands were thinning.

“We knew we had to do something with this land,” Ryan says. Once again, they chose a relatively simple solution. They decided to break the land up, reseed it to hay, and keep leasing it out. Ryan made a trip back to the farm to do the work.

But while he was out in the field, Ryan’s thoughts started to snowball. “Is this the best thing for the land?” he kept asking himself. He could see there were more profitable options.

The bootstrap

So that’s how, in 2008, Ryan and Amy decided to take control of the land themselves and convert most of it to crops. Ryan was 26; Amy was 21. Their move home wasn’t a complete surprise to Ryan’s family and friends. “I knew I was going to end up back here at some point,” Ryan says.

This decision was partly economic, but also emotional. “When your dad passes away, life changes very fast for you.” A connection to the family farm fed into Ryan’s decision, and so did Ryan’s father’s request to have his ashes spread on the Hofford land.

Amy’s move back to Swan River was more surprising. “I thought farming and small-town life was in the past,” she says. “It was very surprising how quickly I ended up back in a small town.”

Starting a farm with no equipment and limited cash was a challenge. “We were new to agriculture, and we didn’t have any credit,” Ryan says. They had very little collateral and nobody to co-sign a loan. Bankers and input suppliers were not impressed. “We couldn’t even get credit for fuel in the first year.” Ryan still finds it hard to believe they got past this rough start.

With low personal spending and two full-time jobs in town, they were able to more than cover their living expenses. But they still needed to keep their farm input costs to a minimum. They found a solution with low input costs and potentially high revenues.

“Organic farming fit really well,” Ryan says. Not needing to buy synthetic fertilizer and crop protection products, they could keep their cash needs low. “Any money we had available to use, we had to buy equipment.”

Organic farming was a relatively low-cost way to get on their feet, and they also saw it as a lower-risk enterprise. With less money on the line, they had less to lose, and they found this comforting. “We didn’t know how good we’d be at farming,” Ryan says. In 2023, Ryan can make this comment as a joke and laugh a little. But for a young couple in their 20s starting a new life and a new farm, this was a painful truth that kept them awake at night.

The tough slog

Research, learning and hard work were the not-so-secret keys to the Hoffords’ success in organic agriculture.

On weekdays, Amy worked for an accounting firm in Swan River. “I started as a receptionist and worked my way up,” she says. On the job, Amy learned basic bookkeeping and business analysis skills, including how to understand balance sheets, follow tax rules and submit GST forms. It was helpful that she loved spreadsheets. Her new skills were invaluable on the farm. “That was definitely great knowledge,” Ryan says.

Ryan learned organic farming through research and experimentation. “We were always doing clover plow-downs, trying to build nutrients up,” Ryan says. Amy agrees: “We were having good results, sticking to our rotation plans, and trying to do everything right.”

Soon they had a positive cash flow, but they were still careful about how they spent their money. As Ryan says, “We saved every penny.” Amy bought a small-scale flour mill and sold organic flour in town for extra income. “We learned how to do as much as possible with as little as possible,” Ryan says. They were slowly but surely growing the farm they wanted.

Within a decade, things were going well. “We upgraded our equipment and infrastructure fairly fast in the first years,” Ryan says. They also bought some cattle to make the most of the land that was best preserved as pasture. Amy was able to leave her job at the accounting firm to stay home with their children, born in 2012 (Aubree), and 2016 (Ronan).

Things were going so well for them the Hoffords wondered why every farmer wasn’t farming organically. Ryan took that question to social media and sometimes to the coffee shop. He spent time online explaining the benefits of organic farming to conventional farmers, and got involved in social media debates about it.

When the Hoffords grew high-yielding crops and sold them for organic price premiums in 2017 and 2018, their business model was confirmed.

The turning point

Their above-average crops in 2017 and 2018 took a lot of nutrients out of their fields. They could use organic methods to replace the nitrogen, but they struggled to find an organic-approved method to return phosphorus to the soil. They tried growing alfalfa varieties with long taproots, to bring up phosphorus from deep below the surface. “That works,” Ryan said. “But when you’re getting 60-bushel wheat crops, it can’t keep up.” They didn’t have access to enough manure to solve the problem. They couldn’t see another feasible solution for their location and soil conditions.

Of course, phosphorus isn’t a limiting factor for all organic farmers; many find workable organic solutions. But the Hoffords could not find an organic solution for their specific problem.

“As the years went on, our soil was getting worse,” Amy says. Their situation wasn’t viable for the long run and their shortage of phosphorus kept lowering their yields. “It was starting to compound quite fast,” Ryan says.

The long-term future was becoming more important to the Hoffords as their children were getting older and loving farm life. Ryan and Amy were already thinking about how they might pass the farm on to Aubree and Ronan. But with yield-limiting phosphorus levels, Amy says, “we would’ve just been handing them a problem. We needed to do something different.”

The pivot

For the Hoffords, “different” was a switch to conventional farming. In 2020, they pulled two quarters of land out of their organic rotation and seeded them to canola, using phosphorus fertilizer.

In 2021, they took all of their farmland out of the organic certification program and used conventional inputs across the farm. Because they had managed their cash carefully during their years of organic farming, they were able to self-finance the change. “The first two years, we paid cash for all of our inputs,” Ryan says.

They changed their agronomy, they changed their cash-flow plans, and of course, they changed their mindsets. They had built an identity as organic farmers. Now they had to rip off that label and humbly ask for advice about chemicals and fertilizer.

When the Hoffords told their friends and neighbours about the change, most of them were too polite to say, “I told you so,” and when Ryan posted about his new status on social media, many of the same farmers he’d debated with now offered helpful advice.

Ryan was relieved to be able to redesign these relationships, moving from offering advice about organics to asking for advice about conventional farming.

Many farmers learn directly from their fathers, but Ryan doesn’t have this option. He sees other farmers his age butting heads with their fathers and struggling with succession planning and strained relationships. “It’s hard to relate to that,” he says. “I’d want nothing more than my dad’s advice sometimes.”

While they’d been able to find lots of resources for farmers switching from conventional to organic agriculture, there were few to help farmers transition the other way.

Local farmers provided good agronomy advice. “They’re farming the same land as I am,” Ryan says. “I’ve been watching them across the fence for years.” Farmers in other locations that he found through social media also provided helpful advice on marketing, chemicals, equipment and repairs. “Whether they’re always right, I don’t know,” Ryan says. He’d learned to ignore advice coming from extreme ends of the spectrum but finds useful information in the middle, and he also found a valuable sounding board. “Sometimes my ideas are maybe a bit off the wall,” Ryan says. When his ideas are unrealistic, he says, “that’s been where those guys kind of shine.”

The Hoffords used the advice they found and learned as they went along. Some lessons were more profitable than others. “We made a lot of mistakes that cost us a lot of money,” Ryan says.

As they’ve done since they first moved back to the farm, the Hoffords continue to manage their farm business as a team. “It’s Amy and I, usually with two kids in tow,” Ryan says. Ryan looks after the farm machinery purchasing and maintenance and does most of the fieldwork. “I love equipment,” Ryan says. He also loves a chance to solve problems with research and experimentation.

While Ryan runs the day-to-day farm operations, Amy cooks, manages the house, and operates the fertilizer tender and the combine when needed. She’s in charge of the bookkeeping and most of the marketing, paying special attention to their cash flow. “She’s forecasting 12 months out at any time,” Ryan says.

The Hoffords still reinvest all they can back into the farm and watch their spending. “We don’t live high on the hog,” Ryan says. He still has a full-time job in town and they don’t spend money on many luxuries, he adds.
“I drive a 2006 RAV4.”

The next move

While they were switching to conventional farming, The Hoffords were offered a chance to expand their farm. “Having a nest egg saved up really helped with that,” Ryan says, and they plan to expand more, or will if they get an opportunity given the strong competition for land in their area.

Other changes may come too. They still have 35 head of cattle but they regularly evaluate whether crops might be a more profitable use of their land. “We’re growing canola on three sides of the pasture,” Ryan says. “Whether the cows will be around in another five years or even two is doubtful.”

Their goal isn’t changing, though. “We hope to be able to provide the farm to these kids as a sustainable operation that can support itself and them both, if they choose,” Amy says. But Aubree and Ronan are still young. It’s impossible to know what farming will look like when they’re ready to take it on.

“Will what’s sustainable today still be sustainable in 30 years?” Ryan asks. Now, though, they know they can adapt.

A system for big pivots

The key to making those big decisions on your farm is to use a system and make decisions intentionally, says Josée Lemoine, CEO and strategy lead for Backswath Management, a farm and agribusiness management consulting company.

First, Lemoine says, consider your vision for the business. “What is the ultimate goal that you have?” Lemoine asks. Based on your vision and goals, you can develop clear criteria to use in your decision-making process.

You’ll have different criteria for every decision, depending on your vision for your farm, and on the type of decision you’re making. A major decision about the structure of the farm will probably include financial criteria, risk management criteria, and some qualitative points. A financial criterion might be: “We want to increase our working capital ratio to 1.5 in five years.” A qualitative criterion could be: “We want to be able to pass our farmland on to our children by 2040.”

Once you have a set of criteria in place, you can use these points to analyze your options. “When you’re looking at alternatives,” Lemoine says, “consider ‘which one gets me there, within what I have established?’” If one of the alternatives would help you pass on your farmland to your children, but would increase your debt-to-equity ratio, it doesn’t meet your criteria, and you’ll have to choose something else.

Evaluating your alternatives against your fixed criteria brings some mathematical rigour to your decision. You can exclude the alternative(s) that don’t meet the criteria. Or, if more than one does, you can weigh your criteria and select the alternative that has the most impact on the most important criteria. But if none of the alternatives can meet all of your criteria, you may decide that none of the alternatives are suitable. Or, you may have to rethink your criteria.

Sometimes, buyer’s remorse strikes after a big decision. This is less likely to happen if you keep your criteria in mind, and you believe in the process you followed, Lemoine says. “You have to trust the process.”

Once you’ve made a decision, she advises, own it. “Take pride in the process you used to make that change,” Lemoine says.

With a sturdy process behind the decision, it should be easy for you to explain your choice to friends, family and most importantly, yourself. You should be able to say “We evaluated alternatives. We developed strong criteria, and this is the decision that is best for us.”

“They were very intentional in what they’ve done,” she says. “You can also make intentional decisions that will keep you lucky.”

– This article was originally published in the December 2023 issue of Country Guide.

The post Summer Series: Manitoba couple reinvents their farm appeared first on Country Guide.

“With increasing demand for local organic products from folks here in Canada and around the world, I have no doubt this investment will have a positive impact right across the value chain,” federal agriculture minister Lawrence MacAulay said in a Thursday news release.

MacAulay pledged up to nearly $$1,175,841 for the Canadian Organic Trade Association (COTA) over three years via the AgriMarketing program and up to $985,985 over three years to the Prairie Organic Development Fund via the AgriCompetativeness program.

This renews federal funding COTA has received since 2012, executive director Tia Loftsgard said in an email.

“This support has been instrumental in advancing our mission at the Canada Organic Trade Association, enabling us to expand our reach, enhance our marketing strategies, and ultimately strengthen the organic sector in Canada,” she said in the federal news release.

Loftsgard said COTA had requested $5 million over three years but received the same amount as their 2021 grant.

The funding mostly flows to member organizations, she added. The rest goes to funding events, webinars and trade shows, producing organic sector data reports, funding organic advocacy work, and other projects.

The Prairie Organic Development Fund (PODF) is “an investment platform established to develop organic agriculture and marketing in the Canadian Prairies,” its website says.

The federal funding will “advance the organic sector in Canada by building evidence for organics through data aggregation and benchmarking, growing organic supply and leadership through education, tools, and skill-building, and strengthening public trust in Canadian organics,” the news release said.

The post Feds fund organic development groups appeared first on Country Guide.

“The [Sustainable Agriculture Strategy] is and can be a big opportunity, and organic and regenerative have a lot to offer,” said Katie Fettes, COG’s director of policy and research, in an online presentation yesterday.

The federal strategy, announced in late 2022, is touted as positioning Canada to be a world leader in sustainability.

COG is a member of the strategy’s advisory committee, along with multiple producer groups, conservation groups, and the Manitoba Metis Federation, which Fettes said has coordinated Indigenous community engagement.

Following public consultation, the federal government published a ‘What We Heard’ report late last year.

Fettes said the strategy is forming around six principles: supporting productivity (i.e. economics and profitability), forward thinking, respecting regionality, integration and collaboration, inclusivity (e.g. recognition of Indigenous groups’ interests, the diversity of farmers across operational scales, demographics, etc.), and basis in evidence.

COG and its partners in the organic sector have been making the case that organic producers can fulfill some of the goals of the strategy, Fettes said.

For instance, while ecological practices aren’t exclusive to organic farming, organic farms often “can’t do without them,” she said.

The sector’s third-party verified system also has built-in incentives to help maintain those ecological practices.

“We don’t just want to see uptake of practices. We also want to see them maintained and built upon,” Fettes said.

Other key messages have included the need for the strategy to include multiple pathways for a diverse Canadian agricultural sector; that systems-based approaches like organic are complementary to the strategy; and that the demand for organic food is outpacing the Canadian supply.

Ahead of the next meeting to discuss the strategy, COG is asking for producer feedback via a survey on their website. The deadline for that survey is June 7.

The post Organic growers push for recognition in federal agriculture strategy appeared first on Country Guide.

The three-year project is funded by SaskOrganics, the Prairie Organics Development Fund, and will be conducted by organics researcher Martin Entz at the University of Manitoba.

“We want to help farmers understand how soil health interventions that they may be interested in and are employing on their organic farms actually affect the soil health and the productivity of their systems,” Entz said.

To be eligible, farms must either be certified organic or transitioning to organic and must be implementing some sort of soil best management practice on their farm—e.g. a new cover crop. While the study is spearheaded by Prairie groups, farmers across Canada can apply, Entz said.

Farmers will be guided to send in soil and biomass samples from the area on which the management practice is applied, and from untouched soil. Samples will be lab tested, either at the University of Manitoba or other participating labs, Entz said. The farmers will then be sent reports of the results.

There is no charge for participation.

While the goal is to provide benchmarks for individual farms, Entz added, the tests will add data to their pool of knowledge and may reveal patterns.

Interested farmers should contact SaskOrganics at admin@saskorganic.com.

The post Organic farmers invited to soil health benchmarking study appeared first on Country Guide.

“The petitioners are calling upon the Government of Canada to give Canadians better and more affordable access to the foods they want by establishing bold policies and programs that would encourage growth in the domestic supply of organic,” said B.C. MP Alistair MacGregor, who tabled the petition.

The Canadian Organic Trade Association (COTA), with the support of other organic groups, launched the online petition at the beginning of April and amassed nearly 1,600 signatures according to a May 7 news release from that organization.

The petition called for the federal government to bolster the organic sector through policies and program, and to “meaningfully recognize and incentivize” sustainable and resilient food systems, like organic.

“Agricultural practices and policies must adapt as consumer demand moves towards organic and sustainable options. Investing in organic not only helps mitigate our climate-related risks but also delivers on changing consumer preferences,” said COTA executive director Tia Loftsgard in the release.

Once a petition is tabled, the government must respond within 45 days.

While petitions rarely bring immediate policy change, Loftsgard said they can keep the topic front-of-mind in the House of Commons.

“This petition provides us another forum to talk about the needs of the organic sector with consumers and government and in the broader context of the Organic Action Plan,” Loftsgard said in an April email.

“It also allows supporters of organic to add their voice to our advocacy efforts and to showcase to their Members of Parliament the broad support for Organic across the nation.”

The organic sector is developing a national organic plan and “is united in its request for a policy mechanism to support implementation of the plan,” the news release said.

The post Organic sector tables petition in Parliament appeared first on Country Guide.

“A shift is needed in how we invest in our agri-food sector to protect Canada’s domestic food supply, and ensure sufficient, appropriate, and accessible food for all,” the Canadian Organic Trade Association (COTA) said in an email to members on Monday.

COTA launched an online petition on April 2 sponsored by NDP MP Alistair MacGregor.

The petition says that Canadian consumers are driving strong demand for organic food, and asks the federal government to establish policies and programs to “encourage growth in the domestic supply of organic to meet the market opportunity,” and to “meaningfully recognize and incentivize sustainable resilient food systems, such as organic, across all departments that relate to Canadian food policy.”

The petition needs at least 500 signatures to be presented to the House of Commons. On Wednesday morning, petition e-4909 had 596 signatures.

In September, national organic groups launched a national organic action plan, which included a push for greater support through federal policy and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s work.

At the time, COTA executive director Tia Loftsgard said that while the federal government provides some funding for organic research and developing export strategies, overall support is “nominal.”

“We get lost in the fold,” she told the Manitoba Co-operator.

This petition supports some of the objectives behind the national organic plan, Loftsgard said in an email yesterday.
While petitions rarely result in immediate policy change, Loftsgard said they can be an effective tool to keep a topic front-of-mind in the House of Commons.

“This petition provides us another forum to talk about the needs of the organic sector with consumers and government and in the broader context of the Organic Action Plan,” Loftsgard said. “It also allows supporters of organic to add their voice to our advocacy efforts and to showcase to their Members of Parliament the broad support for organic across the nation.”

People can sign the petition until May 2.

The post Organic group send petition to federal government appeared first on Country Guide.