Ford on Friday announced a major cabinet shuffle, dropping Hardeman, the long-time MPP for Oxford, from the cabinet table and naming Lisa Thompson as minister for agriculture, food and rural affairs.

Thompson, who until Friday was Ford’s minister of government and consumer services, has been MPP for the western Ontario riding of Huron-Bruce since 2011. She previously served as minister of education (2018-19) and in opposition critic portfolios such as international trade (2017-18) and environment (2014-17).

Thompson lives on a family farm near Teeswater, about 100 km northwest of Kitchener, where she and her husband raise purebred Boer goats. She served as general manager for the Ontario Dairy Goat Co-operative before entering provincial politics.

Thompson’s resume also includes a degree in economics and study in the Advanced Agricultural Leadership Program at the University of Guelph, plus certification from the George Morris Centre executive development program at U of G’s Ontario Agricultural College. She also previously chaired the Ontario 4-H Foundation and served as vice-chair for Ontario Agri-Food Education Inc.

Thompson “understands the need of rural communities and farmers, and we know she will look for new ways of supporting and helping grow farm businesses and rural economies,” Grain Farmers of Ontario chair Brendan Byrne said in a separate release Friday.

“With COVID disruptions, trade disputes, volatile markets and high levels of business risk for farmers, Ontario agriculture needs a strong voice and advocate who understands farmers and farming businesses,” GFO CEO Crosby Devitt said in the same release.

The Ontario Federation of Agriculture on Friday also hailed Thompson’s appointment. As government and consumer services minister, she was a “key partner” in addressing concerns with the provincial Not-for-Profit Corporations Act and its “potential negative impacts on (OFA’s) democratic structure,” the organization said.

Thompson “has a valuable understanding of farm and rural issues and has a direct connection to those communities,” OFA president Peggy Brekveld said in a separate release.

Ford’s shuffled cabinet includes himself and 23 ministers plus five associate ministers.

“As we continue our work to rebuild and support Ontario’s health system, our renewed team is well positioned to deliver on the priorities that matter to Ontarians, including getting more people back to work, making life more affordable, supporting businesses and job creators and building transit infrastructure,” he said Friday.

Hardeman, the MPP for Oxford since 1995, served stints as then-premier Mike Harris’ agriculture minister (1999-2001), the Tories’ opposition agriculture critic (2003-05, 2008-14), and Ford’s ag minister from mid-2018 up until Friday.

Before entering provincial politics, Hardeman owned and operated Hardeman Feed at Salford, Ont., east of London, from 1966 to 1995 and chaired the Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA) in 1993 and 1994.

“We engaged regularly with Minister Hardeman over the past few years and wholeheartedly appreciate his passion for agriculture and his desire to see our dynamic industry grow, innovate and move forward,” OFA’s Brekveld said Friday.

Other appointments in Friday’s shuffle of interest to farmers include Northumberland-Peterborough South MPP Dave Piccini as environment and conservation minister and Kenora-Rainy River MPP Greg Rickford as natural resources minister.

Rickford’s portfolio now involves a “merged role” also including northern development, mines and forestry, and he remains minister for Indigenous affairs. “This new northern- and economic-focused ministry will enhance development potential and sustainability in the north,” the government said Friday.

Energy, meanwhile, will become a separate ministry handled by Todd Smith, MPP for Bay of Quinte. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Ontario names new ag minister in shuffle appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The new agreement has been updated to manage digital data and is aimed to provide a base from which to leverage more research funding from other levels of government and the private sector, said Malcolm Campbell, Guelph’s vice-president of research.

Why does it matter? Maintaining public sector primary agriculture research is challenging around the world. The OMAFRA/University of Guelph partnership solidifies long-term funding for research at Guelph long-term, which means more local research and the ability to attract higher-quality scientists.

“Scientific research is critical to developing innovations that benefit people, animals and the environment, from safer food to improved health to healthier ecosystems,” said Dr. Franco Vaccarino, University of Guelph’s president.

“Agri-food innovation also attracts investment and highly skilled talent, helping create jobs and strong communities. The OMAFRA/U of G partnership has helped position Ontario and Guelph as the epicentre of agricultural research and innovation in Canada.”

The new deal was announced Tuesday by university officials and Jeff Leal, Ontario’s minister of agriculture, at an event at the university’s agriculture laboratories.

“Ontario will be called on to meet the challenge of feeding the world. That’s why our partnerships are so important,” said Leal. “They will help Ontario to grow our capacity to grow safe, high-quality food.”

Leal also mentioned the need to continue to educate people to work in a growing agriculture sector. A recent University of Guelph study notes four jobs in agriculture for each graduate.

He tied the OMAFRA funding to equipping the next generation of researchers, innovators and policy making in agriculture.

OMAFRA and the University of Guelph have had a research partnership for decades. The previous partnership supported work such as:

• Dr. Bonnie Mallard and her high immune response selection now available for dairy cattle through Semex;
• a natural formula, hexanal, to prolong the shelf life of fresh produce;
• smartphone apps that help to identify pests in crops; and
• Gryphon’s LAAIR (Leading to the Accelerated Adoption of Innovative Research), in which researchers pitch their ideas to a panel of industry experts and business managers. Winners receive funding to develop their research ideas.

The new agreement, running 250 pages, provides clearer explanations than in the past and will help provide better digital information flow, Campbell said.

— John Greig is a field editor for Glacier FarmMedia based at Ailsa Craig, Ont. Follow him at @jgreig on Twitter.

The post Ontario, U of Guelph renew ag research partnership appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

During the 2016 growing season an agronomist in the Verner area of northern Ontario examined a canola field and found the distinctive clubbed roots, said Meghan Moran, canola and edible bean specialist with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) at Stratford.

The agronomist sent a sample for testing and, after confirmation of the disease, contacted the ministry.

“Treat it with respect and really focus on reducing spread to other fields,” said Moran.

The disease can have a significant yield impact, although the first diagnosed field in Verner was harvested normally.

Clubroot has been found in Ontario in cole crops, such as cabbage, turnip or broccoli, but this is the first time it has been diagnosed in canola. The oilseed is grown in northern Ontario and in a fairly narrow strip of growing area in the northern part of southern Ontario, south and east of Georgian Bay across to the area around Ottawa. Vegetable crops are not grown on a large scale in the same area.

Clubroot has been found in canola in Western Canada, especially central Alberta, since the early 2000s. It has more recently been found in canola in Manitoba, but is not yet widespread. It has also been sporadically found since 2011 in surveys in Saskatchewan.

After the first case was confirmed, OMAFRA undertook a survey of soils in canola-growing areas. The survey looked at 95 samples, including 68 from northern Ontario (Verner and New Liskeard areas) and 27 from southern Ontario (Renfrew, Bruce, Grey, Dufferin and Wellington counties). It found eight positive fields in the northern group of samples and three in the southern group. All samples came from canola fields.

The next step, currently underway, is to determine pathotypes for all of the positive samples to identify the strains of clubroot in Ontario.

This is valuable information, as the pathotype will determine if the Ontario disease is the same as western Canadian strains; if clubroot-resistant varieties will have an effect in Ontario; and even if the same strains are present in different growing areas in Ontario.

Moran doesn’t believe much will be gained trying to figure out how the disease got to Ontario canola fields. It’s better to dedicate energy to preventing its spread to other fields and areas, she said.

There are several management practices associated with monitoring for clubroot and limited its spread. They include:

• Scout fields with the understanding that the disease is now confirmed in Ontario.
• Understand that the disease often shows up first at the entrance to fields where it has been deposited by contaminated equipment. Take soil samples first from that area of the field.
• Sanitize equipment, especially when it has been in contaminated fields, by cleaning off all soil and using bleach.
• Leave contaminated fields to harvest last.
• Longer crop rotation has a significant limiting effect on the disease, if the crops between canola years are not hosts for the spores.
• Above ground symptoms include yellowing, wilting and stunting. These symptoms mimic nutrient deficiencies and other diseases. Pull up plants to check the roots for clubbing or galling.
• Premature ripening is also a symptom.

“It is manageable, but only if you take it seriously,” Moran said.

For more information visit the Canola Council of Canada’s clubroot website.

— John Greig is a field editor for Glacier FarmMedia based at Ailsa Craig, Ont. Follow him at @jgreig on Twitter.

The post Clubroot arrives in Ontario canola appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Greg Meredith will become deputy minister on Jan. 9. A deputy minister is a ministry’s chief civil servant, managing its implementation of government policy.

Meredith replaces Dr. Deb Stark, who recently retired as deputy minister, capping a 30-year career in public service that included time as the province’s chief veterinarian. She has been a fixture in Ontario agriculture and is known to have known the sector well.

Meredith has worked for more than 30 years as a federal public servant, including most recently with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), where he is now assistant deputy minister for strategic policy.

He has also worked as an assistant deputy minister at AAFC, in farm financial programs and communications and consultations. Meredith has master’s degrees in business administration and international affairs.

Debra Sikora, the assistant deputy minister for OMAFRA’s food safety and environment division since 2013, has served as acting deputy agriculture minister since Dec. 1.

— John Greig is a field editor for Glacier FarmMedia based at Ailsa Craig, Ont.

The post Ontario names new top ag bureaucrat appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The report recommends better soil carbon level monitoring and 10-year programs to financially encourage farmers to adopt soil-healthy production practices. It also suggests linking crop insurance to soil carbon levels as healthier soils have lower risk of crop failure.

This summer’s inconsistent rainfall in Ontario plainly showed the value of better soil health with average or strong yields on healthy soils with water-holding capacity and lower yields on poorer soils.

Environmental commissioner Dianne Saxe said in an interview that the issue of soil health is “very important. The opportunities in agriculture are important and exciting and can have so many ecological benefits.”

Saxe’s mandate is to provide guidance to provincial policy makers.

The report pointed to modern agriculture practices as significant contributors to soil degradation in Ontario, including the use of fertilizers, pesticides and tillage, instead of focusing on farming systems that emphasize the maintenance of healthy soil through crop rotation, cover crops and organic-based soil amendments such as manure and compost.

The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) has neglected to focus on soil health, Saxe said.

“OMAFRA admitted they had let the issue slide and lost expertise and did not have a plan to deal with the catastrophic loss of 30 per cent of organic matter in a generation.”

OMAFRA is currently in the process of developing a soil health strategy for the province and is looking for comments on the first draft until Nov. 27.

The environmental commissioner’s report acknowledged the current rapid movement in Ontario toward more use of cover crops and minimal tillage, but it suggested such practices need to be adopted even more widely.

Saxe acknowledged farmers are making changes to their practices that are building healthier soils. “It’s exciting, isn’t it? If farmers make all of this unnecessary because of the things they do, all the better.”

She noted the rate of decline of soil matter has slowed in Ontario recently, due to some of those production practices.

The report profiles farmers in the U.S. and in Ontario who are creating changes in soil health and sequestering increasing amounts of carbon in the soil. Those farmers include the Belan family near Inwood, Ont. and the Rogers farm at Lambton Shores.

Both have shown increased soil carbon by maintaining growing roots year-round, through cover crops and other practices such as strip tillage.

Saxe pointed to the French-led 4/1000 initiative, a global program that is based on the belief that by increasing soil carbon by four per cent per year, the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can be halted, and global climate change slowed. Governments and organizations around the world have signed on and she encourages Ontario to do the same.

Farmers shouldn’t have to bear the burden of stopping climate change, which is why Saxe has included a recommendation of 10-year funding for farmers moving to healthier soil practices.

Not much in the report will be new to farmers; many are using some of the methods identified as best practices in the report. They include:

• Conservation tillage
• Crop rotation
• Cover crops
• 4Rs of fertilizer application (right source, right rate, right time and right place)
• Composting and compost utilization
• Livestock integration with farms (producing manure for crops and including use of pasture and forage crops in rotations)
• An ecological approach to grazing management

A unique recommendation of the report encourages the government to tie crop insurance premium and risk assessment to soil health. Saxe said healthier soils reduce risk of crop failure and those with healthier soils should have advantages when it comes to crop insurance.

Saxe encourages farmers to read the report and form their own opinions. Farmers were consulted on the report and reviewed the drafts.

“I hope you notice that I didn’t tell farmers what to do. I am certainly not trying to tell farmers how to grow their crops. That would be foolish of me. It is my job to comment on government policy and this is an area that needs a tuneup.”

Saxe’s report is the latest in a number of initiatives in the province around soil health, including the Great Lakes Agricultural Stewardship Initiative (GLASI); OMAFRA’s renewed interest in soil health; a $2 million soil health monitoring project at the University of Guelph; and a significant focus by the Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association on soil health research projects.

— John Greig is a field editor for Glacier FarmMedia based at Ailsa Craig, Ont. Follow him at @jgreig on Twitter.

The post OMAFRA seen needing a soil health ‘tuneup’ appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

It provides profiles of the 10 northern regions that offer everything from soil types to production statistics for the region, the major communities and numerous machinery, agri-business contacts as well as municipal offices, schools and farm organizations.

The post Northern Ontario website up and running appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The observation that beef barn design has not changed much is somewhat true. There are new fabric barns, and new flooring discussions, but the basic principles remain the same.

A better question to start with might be, “If I am starting a beef operation, what facilities do I need to look after my animals?” Sorting out the type of farm you want, and the production system you will employ, will determine what you need for facilities.

Beef Farmers of Ontario conducted an extensive study last year as it looked at what a startup beef operation would require for land, machinery and facilities. Long discussions with farmers, advisory staff, and economists considered a wide range of options.

With a beef cow-calf operation, three critical care points are easily identifiable: calving, health treatments and weaning. In Ontario, our weather determines how elaborate our calving facility needs to be. Traditional calving during the winter months requires some type of barn to protect the newborn calves from the elements, and typically include a heat source of some kind. The BFO model looks at working with nature and the seasons, with calving on grass during the summer months. This eliminates the need for a heat source, and a specific calving barn.

Treating animals for health reasons requires an excellent handling system. Under the Beef Code of Practice it is critical to handle cattle safely and humanely. The BFO model builds in a facility for handling livestock in a safe manner.

At weaning time, calves experience stress as they are separated from their mothers. This stress can be reduced using the Fence line and Two-Step weaning methods as outlined in previous Virtual Beef articles on the OMAFRA website.

The BFO model found that the optimum number of cows was around 250, and would need about 2,500 acres of land. What did the BFO model indicate as an absolute requirement for facilities to look after these animals?

The first building is a simple open-fronted pole shed, 30×100 feet or in that size range, that would serve primarily as storage for high-quality hay. Wastage from dry hay stored outside without cover can be extensive. Storing some high-quality dry hay under cover would retain quality, plus allow for hay that could be accessed in the middle of winter if it is stormy. The secondary purpose of this facility would be for sick pens and a weaning area as the hay is fed out.

The second building would be a covered handling facility, approximately 30×30 feet. This would house the crowd tub, working chute and squeeze for restraining livestock for treatment purposes.

Where do the cows spend the winter if there is no barn for them? The BFO model uses windbreaks and bedded pack dry lots for housing the cows. Cows need shelter from wind, more than from rain or snow. By using tree lines and groves for cover, cows can get out of the wind. If they are out of the wind, cold can be managed by the animal’s internal metabolism.

Using existing trees or planting trees for windbreaks is the cheapest option for keeping cows sheltered from the elements. By bale grazing and feeding out on pasture, manure can be spread as the cows eat, supplying soil with nutrients and organic matter. In the absence of trees, portable windbreaks could be used.

For more traditional dry lots, both Western Canada and northwest Quebec ranches use wooden windbreaks to block their wintering sites from the wind.

Things to consider in locating a dry lot include:

• Raised area for bedded pack;
• Sufficient slope to direct run-off to proper location;
• Windbreak for shelter;
• Feeding area (preferably with paved surface);
• Adjacent alleyways (for sorting livestock into different areas, feed and manure-handling equipment, etc.);
• Sufficient distance from surface water, wells, neighbours, etc.

Proper site preparation so water from the roofs of adjacent buildings and overland flow of field run-off does not enter livestock yard area.

Machine sheds were identified as important under the BFO model to keep equipment out of the elements… the cattle actually keep better outside than the tractor does.

The facilities discussed in this article suit extensive beef production using summer calving and employ minimalist facilities.

Barry Potter is an agriculture development adviser with OMAFRA.

The post Facilities for Ontario beef cattle appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

BFO’s northern cow herd expansion project presents an opportunity for beef farmers unlike any since the settlement years with the prospect of opening up provincial Crown land in the “great Clay Belt” of northern Ontario for beef production.

The Clay Belt in the Cochrane District isn’t uncharted territory, surrounded by communities such as Timmins (700 km north of Toronto), up to Cochrane, Kapuskasing and Hearst along the northern route of the Trans-Canada Highway. But it could be the last frontier for affordable land and ample access to water for beef production, encompassing 16 million acres of parkland-like terrain with some open land already used for agriculture, bush, swamp and forest.

To put the opportunity into perspective, 13 million acres in all of Ontario are currently used for agriculture.

The proposed beef herd expansion would require about five per cent of the 16 million acres released little by little as beef farmers buy in. The project aims to develop a premium northern beef system capable of expanding the provincial cow herd by 100,000 head with the addition of 30 economically viable (requires 2,500 acres) farms per year over the next 20 years.

• More ‘News Roundup’: NCFA three-pronged strategy sees cattle feeders looking forward

A feasibility study done for the BFO shows beef expansion of this magnitude is doable and economically viable for families in the long term with affordable access to Crown land. The expansion would generate more than $3 billion in economic activity for northern communities while bolstering the supply of cattle to retain processing capacity and sustain the beef industry in Ontario.

Premier Kathleen Wynne gave the concept a nod of approval in her mandate to the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) last fall. Now, with an agreement on the broad vision in place, work begins on implementation.

“This isn’t going to happen overnight and we won’t have details for a while,” Gordanier says.

“The key is release of the Crown land. Say, for example a family purchases 500 acres of land bordered by Crown land, there would be an opportunity to expand by buying or leasing the Crown land. We are trying to get a pilot project and are very open to ideas and open to what should be in the stipulations.”

Gordanier likens the government’s release of land for agriculture to creating an “agricultural preserve for the future of food production” considering seven million acres of land used for agricultural production in 1965 now sit under housing and industrial developments.

It’s not unusual for land in southern Ontario to sell for $10,000 per acre and upwards of $20,000 per acre in some districts. “Young farmers can’t afford to pay those prices and the current size of beef operations won’t support two or three families to bring the next generation in.

“Someone has to move on,” Gordanier says.

BFO is also looking at the feasibility of expanding beef production in Ontario with alternative strategies for feeding Holstein calves. Directors have twice visited the U.K. to gather information on a Holstein feeder value chain and assess its potential for Ontario.

BFO’s Farm-to-City business model for producers who want to sell directly to consumers will roll out as a pilot project this spring with Toronto as the target market and VG Meats as the first participant. When complete, the model and website for online ordering and payment, will be suitable for direct sales of other agricultural commodities, and to consumers in other urban centres.

These initiatives stem from strategic planning sessions in 2012 when directors tackled the challenge of reversing the decline in the provincial herd, which has fallen from 410,000 to 289,300 head over the past decade.

Several resolutions at the BFO meeting dealt with helping producers maintain the current level of production and participate in expansion efforts.

Delegates had one concern with the expansion plan in that they asked BFO to ensure producers in the rest of Ontario be offered the same programs and incentives as those in the north.

There is full support for BFO’s efforts to raise the loan limits and funding for the provincial feeder cattle loan guarantee and beef breeder co-operatives.

Currently there are 18 feeder co-ops operating in Ontario serving the credit needs of more than 900 farmers plus eight breeder co-ops with nearly 300 members, 60 more than last year.

BFO is arguing for a guaranteed loan limit of $500,000 per member from the $250,000 set back in 2006. Back then the average value of feeder cattle financed through the program was $800. Last year it was $1,600, effectively cutting the number of cattle a producer could finance in half.

To make the change the province would have to raise the guaranteed loan limit to $250 million from $130 million today.

The risks are higher for all concerned but, as the BFO often reminds the province, no co-op has ever drawn on the guarantee in the 24-year history of the feeder program or the 13 years of the breeder program.

BFO delegates would like to see both programs brought under one roof so that co-ops could achieve greater economies of scale by offering both options, while trimming administrative costs. They also recommend implementing a third-party review of an individual’s ability to pay when applying for new loans.

The annual report and resolutions from the annual meeting are available at ontariobeef.com.

The post Ontario looks north for more cows appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

But what about forages?

The answer can be less than straightforward, depending on whom you ask. Today’s challenges to produce quality and quantity are different than 15 years ago. Some are based on demographics, or the availability of land and dairy quota. In the past three years, there also has been considerable speculation on the potential for export opportunities through the construction of an alfalfa compaction facility somewhere in Eastern Canada.

Despite the potential for marketing forages to New York State or the Middle East, reality always comes back to the fundamentals. Forage growers tend to adhere to the notion of “the more you know, the better you grow.”

Joel Bagg, forage adviser with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA), says growing forages for compaction or export requires strict quality standards. Stepping into a relatively new crop often requires new equipment purchases or the adoption of a new production regimen, not to mention a level of familiarity that takes several years of experience.

Planting considerations

Still, there is room for a quick refresher on the basics of forage production. For instance, is spring or fall better for establishing a good hay crop?

Aric Bos and Martina Pfister, agronomists for DuPont Pioneer, say spring is becoming the easier choice for establishment. It depends on the individual producer’s situation, and there are some who simply default to the fall because there’s a wider window. But spring planting can offer several advantages.

“Moisture is the biggest challenge,” says Bos, who is based in Exeter, Ont. “This past year (2014) there was no problem: I saw a lot of good, established forage crops planted mid- to late-August after wheat, but there was plenty of moisture throughout the year. The long-term trend would say that moisture is a lot more dependable in the spring, so that would be my first choice. Get it in between the end of March and most of April is a good window — even until mid-May, depending on where you live.”

But that may not be convenient from a logistics standpoint, as it conflicts with the other seeding and spraying operations. On the other hand, late summer to early fall provides a wider window following wheat harvest, with the midsummer dry spell usually done by the time a forage crop should be planted.

But finding the balance between sufficient moisture late in the season and a narrowing window before first frost may be expecting too much. By the same token, heavy driving rains in May, June or October can make things difficult for early stage forage stands.

That’s also why Pfister also prefers spring, and the earlier the better.

“Alfalfa only needs 3 C to germinate, so it can go in earlier in the spring,” says Pfister, who is based near Baltimore, Ont., just north of Cobourg. “But what we need in the summer is about six weeks of growth before the first frost, so if the alfalfa can’t get established enough — whether it’s due to dry weather or planted too late — the risk of winterkill is higher.”

Other influences

Pfister notes a pair of trends taking place in forage production. One is more young farmers are entering the family operation, so it’s important in helping them understand why their fathers or grandfathers grew forages as feed for their cows. And Bos notes some recent management challenges such as herbicide resistance provide an opportunity to put forage into the rotation.

“Just by geography, there might be some weed resistance problems, like some of the counties of southwestern Ontario where there’s dairy but also pressure with glyphosate resistance. A lot of those guys would be growing Roundup Ready corn and soys in the other parts of the rotation, and that can make things more complicated in terms of keeping glyphosate resistance at bay.”

Bos says that even in times of higher commodity prices, the renewed interest in forages has been positive. Farmers generally have a good grasp of their cost of production, he notes, and many are “pencilling out” the numbers for forages, even if they’re not involved in livestock.

In the 1990s, Ridgetown College provided a comprehensive study that found that wheat in the rotation provides a yield boost to subsequent corn and soybean crops. Bos says forages can do the same thing.

“From what I’ve seen, OMAFRA and the industry and also the University (of Guelph) have done a good job of showing the benefits of alfalfa in the rotation,” says Bos, citing the potential for a seven to 10 per cent benefit to the corn crop that follows alfalfa.

“Even though growers are making margins in their cash crop ventures, they’ve started looking at forages with more interest. And there’s a pretty well-established hay market that’s always been there, and that always has a need for good-quality forage. Hay making — at least dry hay — has always been something of an art form.”

Pfister adds that  farmers do realize the importance of good-quality forages. “When you have high commodity prices it means that any supplementary feed coming in will be more expensive, too. So the better quality forage is, the cheaper the feed bill may be at the end of the month.”

This article appears in the 2015 Forage & Grassland Guide

The post Getting back to the basics: The fundamentals of good forages appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Agricorp announced Tuesday that farmers can expect to see direct deposit enrolment information in their packages during the spring program renewal period, and can apply for direct deposit starting in March.

Customers who sign up for direct deposit by April 1 will see program payments deposited directly into bank accounts starting in May, Agricorp said.

The agency, in a statement, described the option as “an important step in Agricorp’s commitment to enhance service offerings to customers.”

Timely payment was one of the issues identified by farmers leading up to a 2008 review of Agricorp by the provincial auditor general’s office.

The audit, focused mainly on delivery of the pre-AgriStability CAIS program, found the agency had “difficulty adapting to rapid changes” due in part to the rising number of farm support programs.

The provincial ag ministry, in requesting the review, had noted “a number of concerns from the agriculture community over delays in processing applications and payments.” — AGCanada.com Network

The post Ontario’s Agricorp to offer direct deposit appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.