Environmental farm plans

[bobofthenorth]

Am I the only one paying attention to this topic? It has the power to cost a ton of money, blacken the image of agriculture and bury everyone of us in paper. A bunch of suits are meeting regularly to decide just how thick the bundle of paper that you will have to fill out will be. No one seems to be questioning whether there is any need for the paper - just where the blanks will go on the form and how many there will be.

Environmental farm plans won't make any citizen one iota safer and the very concept of them is an admission that farming is dangerous to the environment.

[carebear300]

Exactly my sentiments a complete and collossal waste of our time and the taxpayers money, but it makes more work for the unproductive people of this world that are important, bureaucrats. Can you imagine the amount of 60,000 dollar a year political hacks then can be hired administering this program and terrorizing farmers for the next thirty years? Another example of highly educated and highly paid individuals taking care of their own. They would all starve to death if they actually had to do anything productive. If this attitude is not allowed on this site so be it.

[bobofthenorth]

I don't think the bureaucrats are the only problem with Env Farm Plans, although they no doubt will love the extra paper to shove around. Who I see driving this thing just as eagerly is the "hangers on" - the CCAs and PAg/consultants who see EFPs as an ongoing income stream for themselves. And my industry, the crop input sector, is just as guilty. Too many of my peers think that they will make their fortune by hiring the aforementioned CCAs and PAgs to write these stupid plans and then charging farmers big bucks for them.

[danm]

Have either one of you heard Dave Biesanthal(spelling?) speak? He was the the farmer that got nailed in Walkerton. The only thing that saved him was the fact that he did show due dillegence & did a environmental farm plan on his own. Don't think for a minute that telling everyone they are wrong is going to get rid of this. In fact the more you fight it, the more people have to accuse you of. Sorry but this is the reality of having 2% of the population. I think it will be our job to show the 98% what we are doing right. Education is the way to go on this not denial.

[bobofthenorth]

Piling up paper to hide behind in the event of a lawsuit isn't going to help anyone. Due diligence doesn't come in some pile of forms filled out by an out of work bureaucrat or unemployable PAg/CCA. The reason the farmer in Walkerton wasn't found guilty was because he wasn't guilty. The fact that he used an environmental farm plan to demonstrate his non-guilt was incidental. The fact that his situation is being used to foist this perversion on western farmers speaks more about shallow thinking and apathy than it does about science.

[cakadu]

I am ambivalent about farm plans - on the one hand I can see some benefit to them, on the other, I have questions and concerns just as many of you do. The push for the farm plans in Alberta came from industry and the feeling that if we as producers do something about it on our own, then we would avoid the situation that you are talking about bob, which is to have it legislated against us and then we would have no say.

From what I understand - having been to one of the workshops - this is not a report card, nor is it a means to see how you measure up to everyone else, it is to give you a snapshot of where your farm is at in terms of environmentally sound practices. Now, I have to say that I agree with dan to a large extent in that producers are less than 3% of the population so it doesn't really seem right that we do our part, while the other 97% doesn't seem to have much in the way of accountability at this point in time. I wonder about washing cars in driveways where the runoff gets right into the water system, or the amount of fertilizers and herbicides that get used on city lawns.

The plan looks at where you store things like fertilizers, manure, oil and petroleum products in relation to the siting of water sources and what your likelihood of contaminating these are.

It isn't a bureaucrat or a P.Ag or anyone else that fills out the farm plan - you as the owner or lessee of the land fill it out and no one else sees it except for you, unless you are willing to let your plan be peer reviewed. Don't worry, I have some concerns about the confidentiality of the whole system, but again, I'd rather be doing it from a voluntary perspective than having it legislated.

At this point in time, there isn't much incentive for doing a farm plan from a monetary standpoint and there seems to be a great deal of reliance on the money that should be available through the Ag Policy Framework - the APF. The incentives should not be a one shot deal, however. As stewards of the land, we need to be getting regular incentives - whether they be monetary or what- I'm not sure what that should look like - but I do think that if society is demanding safe food, then they should be prepared to pay the producer for it.

I have some issues over the producer having to pay for soil testing, manure testing, water testing etc., but in order to get the biggest benefit from our land, we should be doing that anyway. I get very concerned when we as producers have to keep paying and paying without getting any return on it.

As an example, if there was a $2.00 charge from every steer paid directly back to the producer, I wouldn't have a hard time at all paying that - if I knew that it was going right to the producer.

We all have the right to safe, affordable food, but there is getting to be more and more put onto the producer that he has to pay for without accompanying compensation of some sort.

I do not have any connection to the farm plan at all, other than to have taken the course. The sad reality is that in time, you will need one to sell your land, get a loan or any number of things that you take for granted now. Is this right - I don't know, as I say I'm ambivalent about it. I think it will take some time to work out all of the bugs on this.

For now, I guess you can just call me a fence sitter.

Bob and others, what would you need to see in order to become more accepting of the idea of a farm plan?

[dalek]

Even though TheLyle and AAFC seem to want to take credit for EFPs, this has been an Ontario plan for over 10 years through the provincial gov't and now the feds are finally catching on.
It's actually a pretty good plan as long as they stick with the same confidentiality policy as Ontario has had. It's similar to the same kind of environmental plan we have to fill out to get a loan for most banks, less work than most.
In Ontario the plan has always come with $1500 cash that the producer can do what they want with as long as you say you're filling out a need identified in your plan, the feds are looking at expanding that to $3000 per farm.
As far as I'm concerned, EFP's are about the only good idea AAFC is working on right now for farm policy.

[rodbradshaw]

EFP's are a good idea to work on as we are an industry that will be held to zero tolerance for polluting unlike every other industry and muncipality that have licenses to pollute.

As Cakadu said it is to be a device that is to be used by each individual on their own operation and it will help when you are applying for financing as banks will soon be paying more than lip service to the environmental questions on their revue forms.

[mcauley]

Check out Prince Edward Island and farm plans. They have been doing them for years on a voluntary basis and non-profit environmental groups there such as southeast environmental Association have been giving financial aid to those wanting to up grade, fence off streams, put in trees, remote watering systems etc. Also govt putting money into above ground storage of fuel tanks and protective walls for spills. sometimes it amounts to 100% coverage with farmer putting in his time and a tractor.