By Leslie Cholowsky, Editor
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) announced late January that up to 12 per cent of its workforce, 655 positions, will be cut, and seven agricultural research facilities will be closed over the next 12 months.
The National Farmers Union objected to the closures and cuts immediately, saying, “By closing the doors on agricultural research centres and research farms, and ejecting people who represent upwards of 10,000 years worth of experience from the public service, Canada will be foreclosing on the discovery, problem-solving, and knowledge-base that would have been created by these institutions, leaving us more vulnerable with fewer options.”
NFU Vice President Phil Mount says, “We need more investment, not less, in our public research institutions and personnel. The planned cuts would remove about $154 million from AAFC’s annual budget, but this is a false economy. Cutting our capacity to address known and emerging agriculture problems will be far more costly.
“For just one example, agricultural economist Dr. Richard Gray has shown that there is a $35 return to farmers and the public for every dollar invested in public plant breeding.”
Food Canada said some of the research facilities have been running since 1887, and “have been responsible for significant agricultural discoveries in crop production, sustainability, and food safety. They also support the Canadian fresh meat processing sector.”
“These cuts will sabotage important gains we’ve made in agricultural research and set research on Canadian food products back by decades,” said Milton Dyck, national president of the Agriculture Union. “We have been warning the federal government for months about cutting an already-decimated department. There is simply no more room to cut.”
NFU adds, “The research institutions on the chopping block are key components of Canada’s original nation-building infrastructure.
“By closing them, we will also lose their lands (including plots with scientific data going back a century), buildings (from historic sites to brand new purpose-built facilities), and equipment ranging from specially adapted farm machinery to sophisticated laboratory instruments.”
The National Farmers Union is calling for not only a reversal of these cuts, but re-investment in public agricultural research.
Killam area farmer Roger Chevraux says, “The closure is quite concerning to Agriculture in general! Not only are we losing facilities but we’re losing vital staff with extensive knowledge. That knowledge is extremely hard to replace.
“The government has been cutting Ag research for years and we knew from the fall budget that the Liberals were planning on cutting more.
“I met with both the Ag Minister and Deputy minister before and after the budget reminding them how important Ag research is.
“It’s vital for Canada to invest in it in order for Canadian Agriculture to remain competitive.”
Chevraux says he has noticed that investment into Canada’s agricultural needs have been disappointing. “One other concern I brought up was that in the past several years the government has invested more into their political priorities rather than areas which are identified as actual needs at the farm gate.
“One example is funding that has a climate outcome had a priority over other research projects that are a direct benefit. I’m not sure if they are going to make adjustments to their priorities but closure of these stations and laying off of important researchers doesn’t give me that impression.”
Chevraux was back in Ottawa at the end of February, and planned on addressing the closures and layoffs again then.
Daysland Farmer Ken Eshpeter addressed the issue recently while speaking to MLA Jackie Lovely. He calls the planned closures and layoffs, “A very serious situation.”
Eshpeter says, “Elimination of these facilities would be disastrous for production agriculture in Canada and for consumers who depend upon the many crops that we grow.”
He says that he’s bringing three perspectives to the issue. That of growing up as a young adult on a farm, from the view of his time as an Extension agent for the Alberta Provincial Government, and as an active farmer for the past 47 years, trying to make innovative changes to seeding and prairie-crop-growing strategies.”
Eshpeter said that it was Senator Herb Sparrow in the 1970s who spread the idea that prairie crop production strategies needed to change. “His contention was that soil erosion, caused mainly by excessive cultivation followed by wind events, needed to change.”
Eshpeter said that research stations across western Canada applied themselves to solve the issue, and by 1990 significant progress had been made, “But it was through cooperation between concerned farmers and researchers. The advancement of ‘no till’ was a miracle for prairie agriculture,” Eshpeter says, and is an example of many of the contributions research has made to modern farming.
Eshpeter says research contributions for cattle management and the beef grading system, after the introduction of exotic breeds, have made a major impact as well.
He adds, “The Lacombe Research Station has also been home to a number of accomplished plant breeders. Over the years, numerous new varieties of lodging-resistant wheats were introduced onto the prairies. The station also did significant work in the area of barley breeding.
“Had it not been for these accomplishments, we farmers would still be growing lower-yielding varieties susceptible to lodging.”
Eshpeter says, “Growing conditions and environmental issues are constantly changing.
Agriculture needs current and capable researchers, able to react to changing conditions.
“Farmers need the help of qualified researchers to help us find affordable, alternative ways of controlling unwanted plant species.
“The arguments could be made that we need agricultural research more now than ever before. Let us not squander the incredible research resources that we currently have. We must convince the powers that be that the closing of time-tested government facilities is a bad move.
“We farmers are not interested in handing over the process of research to private organizations who see a goal and opportunity to gain total control of products and revenues.
Research needs to stay arms-length from big profits. Food production should be about providing dietary necessities to everyone at affordable prices.”
Viking-area farmer Ed Lefsrud has also been paying close attention to the issue since the closures were first announced. “Plant growers are furious,” he says. He says the long-term nature of crop research means it could be years before the true impact of the closures and layoffs are felt. Meanwhile, he says, “new diseases and resistant weeds are emerging all the time, like bacterial leaf blight and kochia.”
He’s been a seed grower for decades, and has seen the positive impacts of new disease-resistant varieties on the industry.
That’s made possible through long-term public research, he says, where it takes an average of eight to 12 years to create a crop that is uniform in maturity, height, quality, taste, and disease resistance. “We’re trying to prevent something like the Irish potato famine, where planting one variety of potatoes year after year eventually failed due to disease.”
Lefsrud says he has been following the issue closely. He watched at the end of February when Western Crop Innovations researcher Lori Oatway made a presentation on Feb. 26 to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agricultureand Agri-Food. She has 35 years of experience, both as a seed grower and a research scientist.
She talked about industry concerns over diminishment of research capability due to the closure of public facilities. She said that as a member of the agricultural research community, she was, “Deeply concerned by the announcement. For our community, this is not an abstract policy change; it is a deeply personal and profoundly consequential one.”
Oatway said that eliminating key research facilities such as Lacombe, which she described as an “active and relevant research institution with long-term and relevant projects in progress,” weakens Canada’s national research network.
She said the planned closures “will be disruptive and have far-reaching implications to Canadian farmers and the resilience of our agriculture industry.”
The Committee heard that day about emerging new diseases and pests that threaten crops across the country from other experts.
The committee was reminded often that Prime Minister Mark Carney said at Davos, “A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options,” with presenters citing the decision to cut public research capabilities as working against that statement.
READ THE REST IN THE MARCH 11 EDITION OF THE COMMUNITY PRESS – Read it on our Patreon right now
or Subscribe on Local Ink for just $5 for the year for a limited time!
Canada needs to be very cautious not to go down the road of the UK where agriculture and producers are viewed as a burden of the county and the nation alike. This is our food supply. We need more supports, not less.