Environmental Farm Plan

[cowman]

Have you done this yet? The boy went through it and quite frankly it is sort of a joke! Unfortunately we are all going to have to eventually bite the bullet and do the same? Voluntarry now...compulsary in the future?
Just more government drivel designed to give somebody a sweet heart job, in my opinion!
This country is fast on the way to regulating just about all commerce out of existance! The constant make work schemes never seem to end...and that probably is neccesary because our young people coming out of school are pretty well incapable of making it any other way!
If no one will hire you because you are incompetent then we'll pass some more stupid laws/regulations so they have to! The Canadian way?

[pmckenna]

cowman, my big issue with the Environmental Farm Plan is that some of the criteria are different than the provincial legislation AOPA, which makes no sense at all, if the plan is to acheive anything it should be consistent with regulations that are in place. The Environmental Farm Plan is a Company and seems to be building a huge beaurocracy . My understanding is that many banks are now requiring their customers to complete the plan. There is money available through the plan to assist in implementing various improvements to farming operations and some folks are hoping to cash in on that, but they have to have their project approved and spend matching funds. I haven't heard of anyone around this community that has had a project approved yet.

[cakadu]

The Canada Alberta Farm Stewardship Plan pays 30% or 50% of the project, depending on what it is you are doing. Producer labor can be included as in-kind contributions and if you use equipment, it can also be used in the calculations. The maximum allowed to any one farming operation is $30,000 and it can be allocated for various projects - it doesn't have to be utilized all at once.

Some of the improvements etc. will have to have a CEAA done which can take some time to get approved depending on what governments are involved.

It will NOT pay for anything that is ongoing or retroactive, so if you want to apply for funding, the project must be approved before the dollars will flow.

Bear in mind that there are some changes coming to the binder itself - much of the material in the binder was done before some of this legislation came into effect. Throughout the sessions over the year, binder and worksheet evaluations are gathered and there is a committee that works on those evaluations. Producers are encouraged to give feedback throughout the entire process.

It gets you to take a second look at what potential environmental risks there can be on the farm. Some of the changes are relatively easy and don't cost much to do, yet they can make all the difference.

What I would really hope to see in the future is that producers and/or landowners get paid for the environmental goods and services that they provide and the Ag Policy Framework II is moving in that direction. When these things start getting paid for, then we will know that government and society is serious about protecting what we have.

How you balance that with the damage and footprint being left by all the oil and gas exploitation, I'm not sure, but all we can do is look after what we have control over.

[dalek]

How is the peer review and approval being done in the west? I'm one of the 3 farmers on our county peer review committee, once we approve somebody's EFP it's almost a no-brainer that a project will be approved if it seems to have a reasonable likelihood of correcting a problem the farmer identified in their EFP.
Let's face it, the regulations are going to come whether we have EFPs or not. We'd better all have an honest look around our operations and use the money while we can, otherwise it will be all stick and no carrot. We've had our original EFP since it started here 10ish years ago, back then the only problem anybody had was that the $1500 available then didn't go nearly far enough. $30,000 does much better now that we in Ontario have had years to work out the bugs for the rest of the country.

[dalek]

the problem I have with the environmental farm plan is the criteria is more stringent than the provincial legislation in AB., which does not make any sense. I was involved in developing some of the criteria for the practice review committee and I think the members have a staggered term, so that there are always experienced members when new appointees come on stream.

[cakadu]

Dalek, the review committees are made up of 3 people here as well and the committee members are producers. Ontario was definitely in the lead when it came to getting them done and prior to the CAFSP being announced there was no payment made for having a peer-reviewed EFP.

I don't know where we are at right now in terms of having reviewed EFP's - in June it was something like 750 and I know that there have been some applications for CAFSP money, but how many have been approved is a number I don't have at ready. With CAFSP having a quarterly application deadline, that could help things as well.

Emrald, unfortunately I can't comment on how the workbook actually came about because I wasn't part of that. All I do know is that there are parts of it that are being looked at and like many things, it is a work in progress and a living document, just like the My Farm Plan itself.

Dalek is right, it does open ones eyes to what is happening on their farm. It is important to remember that it is a snapshot of what is happening on the farm with respect to environmental risk assessment. It isn't a comparison between you and the neighbor or the fellow way up north and it definitely isn't a report card. We've all got things, had things or potentially had things that we've had to make changes to. An EFP is the first step in understanding where you are at. You can't change what you don't know about, so becoming informed is what is most important.

[cowman]

I will admit we made a couple of small changes(seal two wells and fence springs), but basically we were so "green" we didn't have any problems.
The fuel tank thing is still a problem as you are supposed to have a catch pan around the fuel tank stand? But apparently the day is coming when the gravity based fuel stand will have to go? I find this sort of funny...that there is a big problem if you spill some fuel? You should visit some of the lease sites I've been on! You would not believe the things that get dumped on the ground and buried in the lease!
I have never heard of anyone getting any money from the program? I do know one guy who applied to fence out a creek, but he figures he'll be old and gray before he sees any money...in the meantime his cows continue to slop about in the creek! He's ready to get her fenced but won't get any money if he just goes ahead and does it!
We did fence our cows out of the springs but I told my son to hell with waiting on the government! I figure if it is the right thing to do then lets get it done and they can keep their pittance! Besides I don't like having to kiss their butts and have them interfering in my business!

[cowman]

Linda, cowman, I think that the people who really need to examine and change their environmental practices on their operation are likely never going to become involved in the EFP unless it becomes mandatory. The people I know that are completing their plan are farmers that have always tried to ensure that their operation is run in an environmentally sustainable manner.

[grassfarmer]

I think that's fair comment Emrald1 - but the poorer operators will be forced to do it eventually. This is very much following the pattern in Europe as well but the point Cowman highlights is a valid one - agriculture proving it's green and at the same time oil activity going ahead right, left and centre. It's like the Government is only paying lip service to conservation.
I'm going to do the Farm plan this Fall - there is potentially money for doing what I'm doing already and I'm all for that. How this can be reconciled with a Government intent on encouraging the move to Corporate factory and chemical agriculture is hard to see.

[cakadu]

There are many instances we can look at in terms of others not doing their part with respect to protecting/sustaining/restoring or reclaiming the environment. I don't like it any better than the next person and one of my biggest pet peeves is that only 4% of oil leases are reclaimed properly. It is only well after the fact that we discover some of the things that cowman speaks of and by then any restorative effort is often too little too late.

I believe that eventually everyone must pay the piper and the abusers will eventually get their due. We can only concern ourselves with what we have control over and that is the land that we own - or at least as much control as we actually have over it.

I often find it ironic that fingers are pointed at producers in terms of not protecting the environment, yet you see urban/rurban type folks fertilizing and using "weed and feed" with no concern whatsoever for where the runoff goes yet we as producers can't use chemicals to lessen weeds and pests in crops etc. The problem with the urban/rurban folks is that they believe that the water that goes down the storm sewers etc. is treated before it goes back into the river system, which is definitely not the case.

Emrald, you're quite right in saying that there are those folks who see it as the right thing to do and they do it, primarily because they live their, eat the food that is produced there in many cases and drink the water. We also know that by protecting it, it will be there for future generations.

For every finger that points outward, there are 3 pointing back inward. Education and awareness is important for all of us.

[cakadu]

interestingly enough a co-worker just bought 10 litres of roundup to control weeds on his 120'x60' lot in St. Albert !!!!
I don't go through one quarter of that amount contolling grass and weeds around my two acre lawn !!!

[cakadu]

What is even more interesting is that same co-worker of yours emrald has to take absolutely NO training in terms of safety when applying it, application rates etc.

In many instances, if a little will do the job, then a whole lot more will do it even better.

[dalek]

Cowman I'm surprised you're still allowed to have a gravity fed diesel tank, they've been out here for several years. Technically we're supposed to have either a double-walled tank or the tank inside a cement vat capable of holding the contents of the tank, plus steel bollards. The fuel companies aren't supposed to deliver fuel if the tank isn't stickered to meet the standards but most still do for now.

[dalek]

dalek, I am sure that reg will be in place here in the not too distant future but at this point the gravity fed tanks are still okay. The Environmetal Farm Plan criteria is as cowman said to have it contained with a berm but that is not a regulation.

[dalek]

Forgot to mention, I have a neighbour who dumped a 5 gallon can of diesel that got contaminated with water on the grass 300' from his well - within a week the well was ruined. If diesel gets into your water source, it takes very little to do a lot of damage.