The couple, who farm more than 4,000 acres near Hartney, southwest of Brandon, have been experimenting with split nitrogen applications — spreading their fertilizer across two or more passes during the season rather than front-loading everything at seeding.

For their corn acres in particular, the approach has helped them stay flexible when weather throws a curveball. Splitting nitrogen lets them spread out risk, workload and logistics through the season, Nathan Beernaert said.

“We’ve run off our residual early and been able to top up to where we needed to be later in the season. It’s saved our butt a couple times.”

WHY IT MATTERS: As well as being touted for reducing financial risk without hitting yields, split nitrogen application is among the practices caught up in the quest for fertilizer efficiency, assuming farmers can work it into their workflow.

The Beernaerts apply UAN 28-0-0 liquid nitrogen in season via drop nozzles, targeting the base of corn plants before tassel emergence. They’ve tried putting down 100, 50 and even zero per cent of their nitrogen needs at planting, followed with a mid-season top-off.

The results haven’t always been what they expected. One of their strongest corn crops came in a year when they applied no nitrogen at planting and put it all on later in a June–July pass, Nathan said.

“It went against a lot of the other experience we had doing that, and against some of the norms associated with nitrogen availability or crop uptake in corn.”

Research backs in-field experience

Splitting fertilizer applications is one of the identified best management practices rooted in 4R nutrient management philosophy, noted Xiaopeng Gao, professor of soil fertility at the University of Manitoba.

Holding back on some of the fertilizer at seeding can better match crop needs for nitrate requirements.

“Especially where the crops are small, they don’t need a lot of nitrogen at the beginning,” Gao said, adding that nitrogen applied later in the season matches the peak growth stages of the crop.

Why and how nitrogen gets lost

Across the Prairies, nitrogen use efficiency is often only about 50 to 60 per cent for the current year of application, meaning a large share of fertilizer isn’t taken up by the crop in the year it’s applied, Gao said.

Better timing can push that number higher, though there’s still a lack of data on exactly how much.

“If you can do a better job in terms of the 4Rs, especially if you can time the fertilizer supply better with the crop needs, that can improve the efficiency, maybe up to 70 per cent,” Gao said.

Nitrogen loss hits both at the farmer’s wallet and environmentally, and it happens through several pathways depending on soil type and location.

In Manitoba’s Red River Valley, with its heavy clay soils, nitrogen loss mainly happens through denitrification and the unfortunate transformation to nitrous oxide — the greenhouse gas at the heart of Western Canada’s fertilizer emissions debate and the government’s push to curb them. The risk is particularly high while ground is waterlogged during the spring melt.

On sandy soils, such as the potato lands around Carberry, the bigger risk is leaching. Shallow-rooted crops like potatoes, with their high nitrogen and water demands, are especially vulnerable to having the nitrogen they need leach away on coarse-textured ground with low water-holding capacity.

A third major loss pathway is ammonia volatilization — nitrogen escaping to the atmosphere when urea is broadcast on the soil surface rather than banded below ground.

“But if you can improve your placement by banding the soil, either side-banding or mid-row banding, that can effectively reduce the loss,” Gao said.

Other tools to reduce nitrogen loss

The Beernaerts are also considering nitrogen inhibitor products, which Gao said can make a real difference under the right conditions.

Enhanced efficiency fertilizers fall into two main categories: polymer-coated products like ESN, which slow down nitrogen release over time, and inhibitor-based products that include urease inhibitors and nitrification inhibitors.

The benefit of inhibitors is most pronounced when conditions are already driving significant nitrogen loss — a warm, wet early growing season, or in low-lying areas of a field prone to ponding and denitrification.

“Under that condition, if you use some inhibitor products, that will reduce the loss,” Gao said.

Under normal conditions though, if the nitrogen loss is already minimal, farmers shouldn’t expect a benefit by using those products, he added.

“It depends on the soil condition, the landscape and also the environment conditions,” Gao said.

Thinking beyond the next season

For the Beernaerts, nitrogen management is not just about the economics of a single season. With nitrogen making up roughly a quarter of their input costs, and prices that can spike suddenly based on global events, efficiency matters.

It’s also about setting up the farm for the long term.

“We want to set ourselves up for the future succession of the operation,” Chelsi Beernaert said. “We want to know that it’s in a good position to be left when we’re not around.”

The post Split nitrogen applications help Prairie grain farm manage risk and efficiency appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Producers got a close look at several of those approaches during a Jan. 12 winter grazing tour at the Bos family farm. Jordan Bos demonstrated how cover crops, straw and silage pile grazing fit into the operation’s winter feeding plan.

Rather than relying heavily on chopped silage, the operation is grazing a mix of feed sources through the winter. These include pea straw, barley straw and hay at roughly 20 pounds of dry matter per head per day.

“Three times a week we come out with a rack of straw and just roll it out for them so they all have access,” Bos said.

WHY IT MATTERS: Experts say that using cover crops, straw and silage grazing can help cattle producers manage winter feed costs, as long as rations are carefully balanced to meet herd nutritional needs.

Cover crops on the Bos farm cost about $35 an acre to establish, with funding support for a water site provided by a local watershed district.

“It’s nice if you can get some funding and cut the cost,” Bos said.

The farm typically fertilizes its corn but not its cover crop.

The tour included a demonstration of the farm’s feed truck and TMR mixer, which they call “Mad Max.” The truck reduces labour during the winter.

“The idea is to use that truck as much as we can for a good part of the winter,” Bos said.

Silage pile grazing in practice

Silage pile grazing was another stop on the tour. Cattle are grazing the pile with minimal waste, Bos said.

“I don’t think they’re wasting much. They’re eating it right down to the dirt,” he said. “It seems to be working good.”

The silage pile is about 70-feet wide, with both sides exposed, providing roughly 140 feet of space for about 300 head. Electric wire is adjusted daily to control access and manage utilization.

“You get pretty good utilization like this,” Bos said. “It’s cheaper than hauling it out.”

The winter feeding system appears to be meeting cattle needs, Bos said.

“The animals seem pretty content and full.”

Importance of feed testing and balanced rations

While alternative feed sources like pea and barley straw can help manage costs when available, provincial livestock and forage extension specialist Kristen Bouchard-Teasdale said that it’s important to ensure proper feed testing and balanced rations.

“Winter feed supplies are our biggest expense in these cattle productions,” she said. “How people feed and what proportions they’re able to mix into their ration is going to be dictated by the quality of the feed ingredients that they have on hand.”

Producers incorporating straw into winter rations need to ensure cattle receive sufficient protein and energy, particularly during extreme cold periods like the one that has been gripping most of Manitoba for the past few weeks.

“Cows can’t eat enough of those fibrous feeds, like the pea straw and the barley straw, to be able to meet those energy requirements in particular,” she said.

That’s why feed testing is so critical for developing effective winter feeding strategies, she added.

“Get your feed tested, know how much you have of something and exactly what’s in it, and then you have that information. It makes it much easier to be able to change your strategy if need be,” Bouchard-Teasdale said.

The post Winter grazing tour highlights cost-saving mix of cover crops and silage appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Intranasal vaccines are catching on with some Alberta ranchers, said Dr. Tawnya Copland, a large-animal vet with Prairie Rose Veterinary Services in Innisfree.

“A lot of people are using [them],”Copland said.

WHY IT MATTERS: Tailoring calf vaccination timing to your herd’s specific needs is key to healthier calves, experts say.

But she’s quick to point out these products aren’t right for every outfit, and instead are usually brought in when specific health troubles crop up.

“This isn’t a cookie cutter recipe for everybody … it depends on what your problems are, (and) how big your herd is.”

Operations dealing with respiratory disease in young calves are the main users of intranasal vaccines, while outfits without those troubles might skip vaccinating at birth altogether, Copland added.

Producers also need to read the fine print, since some vaccines have minimum age requirements before you can use them.

The maternal immunity question

Timing gets trickier when you factor in the immunity calves pick up from their mothers through colostrum.

How long those maternal antibodies keep calves protected is “a million-dollar question” that nobody can pin down for sure, Copland said. Even though people throw around rough estimates, immunity levels swing all over the map.

“You can guess eight weeks, but you can’t really say, because it all depends on the quality of the colostrum and the amount that the calf got,” she said.

Research shows why timing is tricky

Research backed by Alberta Beef Producers sheds some light on why getting vaccine timing right in young calves is so tough.

A 2010 study out of the University of Guelph, led by researcher Patricia Shewen, found that newborn calves depend heavily on antibodies soaked up from colostrum in those first few weeks, but those same antibodies can interfere with how well early vaccines take.

Calves come into the world with immune systems that aren’t fully operational yet. It takes several weeks before they can properly respond to standard vaccines. Between when maternal antibody protection drops off and when the calf’s own immune system gets up to speed, there’s a window where calves face higher disease risk.

Standard preweaning programs target core diseases

Most cow-calf operations aim to get at least basic protection in place before weaning hits. Vaccination programs typically start during other ranch work, including branding time, when cows get their pre-breeding shots, or around bull turnout, to cut down on extra handling.

The backbone of most preweaning programs covers clostridial diseases (blackleg and related bacteria) plus the main respiratory viruses that cause shipping fever and pneumonia, according to the Merck Veterinary Manual.

On the virus side, that usually means protecting against bovine respiratory syncytial virus, both types of bovine viral diarrhea, infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, and parainfluenza type-3. Some outfits also add bacterial pneumonia coverage for bugs like Mannheimia haemolytica and Pasteurella multocida, depending on what problems they’re seeing.

Feedlot protocols differ from cow-calf operations

In feedlot settings, where calves are packed tighter and often mixed together, the usual game plan includes early respiratory vaccines, then clostridial (blackleg) vaccines at four to six weeks, with boosters at weaning, according to feedlot vaccination guidance published by the Alberta Veterinary Centre.

Calves in feedlots are usually split into groups based on whether their vaccination history is known or not, with killed vaccines often the safer bet when previous exposure is anybody’s guess.

Handling matters as much as what you buy

Vaccines only work if they’re stored and handled right, and that’s where plenty of programs fall apart, said the Merck Veterinary Manual.

Most vaccines need to stay refrigerated but not frozen, and they need to hold that temperature from the time you buy them until they go in the animal.

Common mistakes include hauling vaccines without a cooler, leaving them out during a long working day, or storing them in a fridge that doesn’t keep a steady temperature. If you’re keeping vaccines for any length of time, it’s worth checking your fridge actually holds the right temperature.

The manual also warns against reusing vaccine bottles once you’ve stuck a needle in them. Once that seal’s broken, bacteria can grow inside, and you risk making calves sick instead of protecting them. Use what you need that day and pitch the rest.

For vaccines that come as powder needing mixed with liquid, the manual recommends only mixing what you’ll use within an hour or so. Don’t mix up the whole day’s supply first thing in the morning. Be sure to give the bottle a gentle swirl before drawing up each dose to keep everything mixed evenly.

When it comes to whether you need to give a booster shot, that depends on what type of vaccine you’re using. Modified live virus vaccines usually build good immunity with one dose, while killed vaccines typically need that second shot a few weeks later to really take hold. Check the label or ask your vet which kind you’ve got.

Vaccines work best when cattle are in good shape to start with, the vaccine says. This includes proper nutrition, low stress, and good health.

Working with a local vet is non-negotiable

Both Copland and Dr. Troy Gowan, a veterinarian at the Minnedosa Veterinary Clinic in Manitoba, hammered home that vaccine calls should be made with a local vet who knows your operation.

“The best thing to do is work with your local veterinarian,” Gowan said.

Copland agreed, warning producers off chasing generalized advice instead of getting herd-specific direction.

“The number one thing is get a relationships with a local vet and use them,” she said. “And stay away from Facebook know-it-alls.”

The post Calf vaccination timing: why one size doesn’t fit all appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“The research WGRF is investing in is intended to provide farmers with new tools to improve profitability on the farm,” said WGRF board chair Laura Reiter in a Jan. 13 news release.

These projects aim to create crop varieties that can better withstand challenges in the field, focusing on improving resistance to diseases and insects, and developing useful new traits for farmers.

All of these projects align with the organization’s research priorities, said WGRF executive director Wayne Thompson.

“The funding will work toward the priorities of WGRF to support research that will lead to new crop varieties and management practices,” Thompson said in the release.

Funding is a joint effort between WGRF; Saskatchewan’s Agriculture Development Fund, which includes federal funding through the Sustainable CAP agreement; and producer groups.

The WGRF website will share the full list of funded projects once all the research contracts are finished.

The post Western Grains Research Foundation commits $2.71M to new crop research projects appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Canada’s national standard for companies to voluntary label genetically modified foods is currently open for public review. Part of that involves comment on how gene editing should be defined within the standard and where they do, or do not, fit in the rules.

The federal consultation is accepting comments until Jan. 23.

WHY IT MATTERS: Canada has already ruled that gene-edited plants don’t need to meet the stricter threshold that genetically modified plants do to be approved for cultivation (as long as there’s no foreign DNA involved), and that gene-edited crops are safe for livestock feed. Now, the topic is entering the food labelling arena.

The standard in question is formally titled CAN/CGSB-32.315 Voluntary Labelling and Advertising of Foods That Are and Are Not Products of Genetic Engineering. It provides guidance on how food companies may decide to mark packaging as to whether products are or are not, products of genetic engineering. This standard is maintained by the Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB).

Canada does not require genetically engineered or gene-edited foods to be labelled differently from other foods, according to the federal government’s website. Claims are voluntary, although they must be truthful and not misleading under the Food and Drugs Act and related regulations.

According to the Standards Council of Canada, the purpose of the voluntary labelling standard is to provide a framework for truthful labelling, not to create mandatory requirements.

Edited versus modified

Industry groups such as the Canadian Health Food Association (CHFA) have noted that the federal government’s current proposal would draw a line between gene editing and genetic modification —similar to Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s take on the subject in recent years. Seed and feed guidance in recent years have put gene-edited plants on largely the same regulatory ground as conventionally bred crops, unless foreign genetic material is being incorporated, in which case they’re back to needing a pre-market safety assessment and authorization before they hit the farmer’s field.

Those decisions have drawn ire from the organic sector, worried about contamination with their crops, and praise from much of the rest of the seed sector as a gateway to faster innovation and variety development.

The CHFA, meanwhile, says the new label proposal could allow foods made with gene-editing techniques to be marketed as not genetically engineered, despite gene editing being a form of genetic modification in scientific terms.

In a CHFA report released in October, the association argued that a majority of Canadians surveyed by the study believed gene editing is a form of genetic engineering and that labelling should disclose its use.

The post GMO food labelling review opens questions on gene editing appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

That’s what experts said at a recent Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute (CAPI) webinar. Panellists said the country’s agricultural innovation system needs major improvements if it hopes to keep pace with other leading food-producing nations.

Panellists disagreed on whether the situation already counts as a crisis, but all agreed that change is needed soon.

“When I think of innovation, it’s really part of a continuum,” said Darcy Pawlik, executive director of the Wheat Growers Association — one of the camp that does typify the innovations gap as a crisis.

“It starts with research … the universities are doing a great job. I think we’ve got a lot of successes that need to be celebrated.”

The problem, Pawlik added, is those successes often don’t carry through to commercialization or getting new technologies and ideas out into the field.

“I think that’s a good example of where we’re really faltering,” he said.

Furthermore, Pawlik argued, Canada has not done a good job building new agriculture-focused companies or supporting startups.

Among other arguments, industry has long suggested that Canada’s regulatory environment has not set a stage that encourages innovation, and there needs to be considerable streamlining to pave a smoother path for those advances.

A growing innovation gap

Canada’s performance in research and development (R&D) continues to decline internationally, listeners heard. The country dropped from 14th to 17th in the Global Innovation Index rankings this past year, said Omer Kaya, CEO of Global Advantage Consulting Group.

“We have a $26 billion a year gap when it comes to R&D expenditures in Canada, across all sectors of the economy,” Kaya said.

He said that Canada spends about $55 billion a year on research and development, equal to about 1.8 per cent of its gross domestic product. Of that, $33 billion comes from industry, $18.5 billion from universities and colleges, $2.7 billion from the federal government and around $500 million from provincial governments.

Most of the gap between Canada and other developed economies comes from lower business investment, Kaya noted. He added that Canada struggles to turn research into practical results, and that there needs to be better collaboration between researchers, developers and end users.

Agriculture’s quiet crisis

Within that wider challenge, agriculture has its own issues. Public investment in agricultural research has been declining for the past 40 years (21 per cent since the 1980s), and private-sector investment now represents only about one quarter of the total, the listeners heard.

Elisabeta Lika, a research associate with CAPI, described it as a gradual problem rather than a sudden collapse.

“I see this more as a quiet kind of crisis, one that is creeping through this underinvestment … (There’s) fragmentation, there’s missed opportunities,” Lika said.

She further argued that Canadian agriculture’s research infrastructure is getting long in the tooth.

“I see this more as a quiet kind of crisis, one that is creeping through this underinvestment …”

–Elisabeta Lika, Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute

Long-standing research institutions and commodity groups may feel the system is still functioning, she noted, but others in newer value chains say it is broken.

“I think that we can all agree that the system can and should deliver better to the sector,” Lika said.

Funding pressures hit universities

Angela Bedard, dean of the College of Agriculture and Bioresources at the University of Saskatchewan, said she tries to take a more balanced view.

“I tend not to be too much of an alarmist. I try to be a bit more of a pragmatic person,” Bedard said.

“Could we do better? Of course, absolutely, there’s lots of spaces where we are fragmented, but not completely shattered.”

Universities face tighter budgets as provincial funding declines and federal caps limit the number of international students, she said. Even in Saskatchewan, where space remains available, the policy changes have discouraged applications.

Aging research facilities are a particular challenge for agricultural research, which requires access to land, laboratories, and animal care facilities, she added. Maintaining and upgrading these facilities is costly, and even more so when trying to plan for the future rather than simply keeping pace with current practices.

Need for co-ordination and action

Canada also lacks clear data on how research and development funds are divided between basic, applied and experimental research and that makes it difficult to design effective policy, Kaya said.

Investment needs to extend beyond research itself to include modern equipment, intellectual property development and collaboration that allows people to work as a connected network rather than in isolation, he added.

“We work all as an individual, and we tend to work within an organization,” Kaya said.

“The sector is still exploring how to work effectively in networks and networks of networks.”

The three panellists agreed that fragmentation and lack of co-ordination are holding back progress.

Canada has national strategies for critical minerals, artificial intelligence and quantum computing, but not for agriculture, Kaya pointed out. Other countries, including Australia and the Netherlands, have established national plans for agricultural innovation.

Farm Credit Canada, meanwhile, estimates the Canadian economy could gain $30 billion over the next decade simply by matching the productivity growth of the previous decade, Kaya noted.

A call for leadership

Tyler McCann, CAPI’s managing director and moderator of the discussion, also noted that Canada does not yet have a national agricultural innovation plan.

Bedard suggested a “confederated” model that would share accountability among regions while maintaining national co-ordination. She said a fully federal approach could be viewed as too Ontario-focused and might create regional tensions, while a shared model would allow strong ideas developed in one region to be tested and applied in others.

Pawlik returned to Canada after working abroad and found multiple consultations taking place across government and industry, but all focused on maintaining the status quo.

“I think what we’ve seen to date is that we always defer, and it’s just these little tweaks that don’t really move the needle,” he said.

He argued that Canada must set clear goals and hold itself accountable in a competitive global environment.

Lika agreed that government leadership is essential, especially when it comes to stable funding and regulatory frameworks. She compared it to how provinces eased trade barriers during COVID-19, which helped some businesses but did not fundamentally change the system. The lesson, she said, is that co-ordination should allow the best ideas to rise naturally rather than trying to pick winners in advance.

Canada cannot afford to spend years developing strategies that are never put into action, Kaya believes.

Canada needs a bold agricultural innovation plan that brings together governments, universities, businesses, Indigenous communities and value chains across the country, he added.

The post Canada’s agricultural innovation in crisis? appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“We have an incredible agriculture and food sector in Canada,” said Amanda Richardson, executive director of the Centre for Agri-Food Benchmarking, when speaking about the 2025 National Index on Agri-Food Performance.

WHY IT MATTERS: The National Index on Agri-Food Performance shows how fragmented and outdated Canada’s farm sustainability data still is, and why measuring real progress remains tricky.

The index is part of a growing effort to give Canada one shared, trustworthy set of numbers on how the ag and food system is doing.

For years, farmers and companies have been implementing sustainable practices throughout the industry, but that hasn’t stopped them from being scrutinized.

“It’s a challenge to demonstrate progress and to measure sustainability overall,” Richardson said at a webinar hosted by the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute on Dec. 11.

That’s where the index comes in. It puts everyone’s data, from government, industry and researchers, into one framework. The resulting report is a “framework of indicators and metrics” that is built by a coalition of over 165 partners, she added.

Lots of good work, but hard to show it

The new index shows Canada holding steady or improving in areas like water quality, soil metrics, and greenhouse gas emissions. But some of the numbers used to prove that are old. Some are inconsistent. Others don’t exist at all.

The reports’ wildlife habitat capacity indicator, for instance, is stuck using data from 2015. By next year, it’ll only have advanced to using 2020 numbers.

“As we’re looking at making real time decisions and recommendations moving forward, that’s the challenge,” Richardson said.

Another issue is that every group in the sector measures things differently.

“We can collect data all day long,” she said. “But it’s collected in a way that’s fragmented.”

That makes it hard to compare, and even harder to explain to consumers, customers, or trading partners who want clear proof of sustainable practices.

Making sense of what’s out there

The first step isn’t making new data, it’s figuring out what already exists, said Michelle Edwards, director of Agri-Food Data Strategy at the University of Guelph.

“Right now we don’t know what we don’t know.”

And while there might be interesting data sets being collected in different regions in Canada, analysts don’t know they exist because people don’t seem to be sharing data.

Without documentation, including what was measured, how, and who did it, who did it, Edwards said even decent data becomes “questionable.”

Complicating things, it seems like everyone keeps trying to build their own systems instead of co-ordinating, Edwards believes.

“Everybody’s trying to reinvent the wheel,” she said. “Can we stop? Let’s sit down in the room together.”

Policy makers want data, but it has to line up

Jessica Norup, director of climate policy and partnerships at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, said the government needs better information just as much as farmers do.

“There are often misunderstandings about there always being trade offs between profitability and environmental action,” Norup said. “And I think the key to basically dispelling that myth is through data and evidence.”

But she said Canada’s fractured approach gets in the way. The federal emissions inventory, for example, can’t show most on-farm practice changes, because it’s built for a different purpose.

“Because it’s fractured, because we’re not talking to each other … no one knows whether you’re using the same methodologies and approaches,” Norup said.

The challenge is finding a way to bring everyone together and make sure they’re all on the same page.

Industry wants good metrics

The index is also working through tough questions around pesticides and plant breeding. In both areas, numbers can easily be misused or taken out of context.

It’s not just about putting data out there, said Brittany Lacasse of CropLife Canada.

“The important part is that we’re being thoughtful, and we have really good data to tell this really important story.”

Lacasse said the Index’s collaborative approach matters. Groups that rarely talk to each other are now sharing the same table.

Labour a part of sustainability

Labour shortages continue to weigh on food processors across the country, and Kevin Elder, a project manager of Food Processing Skills Canada, said data matters there as well.

“I think the labour force is critical to the discussion on sustainability. They’re the people that are going to carry out the work,” Elder said.

But just like environmental data, labour numbers get thin once you zoom in on specific regions or sectors.

“We just don’t have the numbers,” he added.

Younger workers increasingly want to be part of companies that take sustainability seriously, he said, something better data could help highlight.

What success looks like

For Richardson, the end goal is simple: Canada should be able to show real, measurable progress, not just talk about it.

In 10 years, she hopes the sector can look back and see clear improvements, and have the numbers to back them up. Until then, she says the priority is getting the data right.

Fiscal pressure can be a catalyst for clarity, Richardson added.

“It challenges us to be strategic about what matters most, to invest in the right data at the right time for the right purpose. And that’s what we’re trying to do with the National Index.”

The post Measuring sustainable ag in Canada appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Krawiec’s “grazing in the sweet spot” philosophy is a method that allowed him to scale from 40 cow-calf pairs on 373 acres in 2000 to grazing 5,000 yearlings on 5,500 acres by 2007 with minimal hired help.

“It was just myself and the summer students,” Krawiec said at the Manitoba Forage and Grassland Association’s (MFGA) 2025 Regenerative Agriculture Conference in Brandon on Nov. 12-13.

WHY IT MATTERS: Grazing at the right moment in the plant’s growth cycle can dramatically increase forage production, animal performance, and profitability, an Alberta rancher says.

Krawiec’s “sweet spot” is a specific point in grass growth, just before plants enter the reproductive phase, when around 15 to 20 per cent of plants are in reproductive phase and the rest remain in late vegetative state.

“The other thing about grazing in the sweet spot that is really critical is that I only take 20 to 40 per cent (of forages) during the growing season,” he said.

Success with the system requires training livestock to move as a co-ordinated group, Krawiec stressed.

Feeding soil biology year-round

Krawiec’s approach feeds soil biology multiple times per year, rather than just once.

When plants enter reproductive phase, they redirect energy from root exudates, which feed soil microbes, into seed production, he told conference attendees. Root exudates are fluids emitted through the roots of the plant. They contain a complex cocktail of sugars, amino acids, organic acids and metabolites. They promote microbial activity, facilitate nutrient cycling in the soil, and foster overall soil health.

“The thing about letting plants go into reproductive phase is that that’s where they release the least amount of exudates,” Krawiec said. “Instead of releasing exudates into the soil, those exudates go into producing seed.”

Gaining livestock performance

The impact on his farm has been substantial.

Krawiec reported increasing daily gains on heifers from 1.5 pounds per day to 2.5 pounds per day after implementing his system. Cow-calf producers using his methods commonly see 60-80 pounds higher weaning weights, while sheep producers can achieve lambs weighing 100-15 pounds in four-and-a-half months, Krawiec said. Conception rates in the first breeding cycle consistently exceed 80 per cent, and have gone as high as 83 per cent.

Last November, Krawiec backgrounded calves on stockpiled pasture at a cost of 12 cents per day. A forage test from that period showed 24 per cent protein and 65 per cent total digestible nutrients (TDN). That paddock yielded 317 stock days per acre.

Krawiec described a “tipping point” at approximately 175 stock days per acre where the system becomes self-sustaining, requiring no inputs except management. This typically takes two to three years, he said.

Grazing system math

Krawiec’s approach centres on respecting both graze period and resting periods. He found livestock behaviour helped indicate when a paddock has been grazed too long.

“The first day they walked back to water, I gave them a strip (of forage). Second day, they had to walk back to water. Day three, same thing, they had to walk back a lot of the water. Day four, same thing … but as we’re coming back to graze, they stopped in the first strip, and that’s when I realized that was my grace period,” he said.

Krawiec thus put ideal graze period at his latitude (similar to Athabasca, Alta.) at three days. With that three-day graze period and a minimum of 13 paddocks, the math works out to 36 days of rest. Rest periods increase at more northern latitudes due to fewer daylight hours, Krawiec added.

He pointed to his grazing chart as an essential planning tool.

The chart allows Krawiec to adjust rotation based on growing conditions. In June 2021, when temperatures hit 38.5 C for weeks, he extended his second rotation to 55 rest days after his strip system suggested that grass growth had slowed. He later sped up his third rotation to 42 days, and was able to keep high-quality forage through November, plus stockpiling enough grass to calve 1,000 cows the following spring.

“The results were amazing, but what I did was not amazing. I just used my grazing (method), and I just adjusted to conditions,” he said.

The post Grazing ‘sweet spot’ boosts pasture performance appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Indigenous communities in North America were cultivating crops such as potatoes and corn long before anyone from Europe had heard of the crops. Materials from the Manitoba Museum cite evidence of agriculture in the eastern United States dating back 3,800 years.

More locally, bison scapula bones found in Gainsborough Creek in 2018 showed convincing evidence of pre-European contact farming in the Melita region. And agriculture was an undisputedly big part of the Métis way of life in the Great Lakes region. Farms surrounded fur trade posts by the 16th century, and some cereals were being farmed in the 1830s.

When it comes to reconciliation, agriculture presents a unique challenge. How can the treaty rights of Indigenous peoples be honoured in a way that gives them a proper seat at the table when it comes to farming in Canada?

It’s something that groups like the Southern Chiefs’ Organization (SCO) in Manitoba, headed by Grand Chief Jerry Daniels, and the Manitoba Métis Federation, with its agriculture minister, David Beaudin, have been working on for years. I recently had the chance to speak with both about why they feel agriculture is so important, and what still needs to be done.

Daniels and Beaudin share views on several pivotal issues, including engaging youth and the continued importance of food security. Both expressed that, while regular conversations do take place with the Manitoba government, there’s still a ways to go when it comes to proper recognition and reconciliation.

Currently, there are several programs funded by the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership (S-CAP) that would partner with Indigenous communities, such as the Indigenous Agriculture & Food Systems Program and the Indigenous Agricultural Relationship Development Program. Eligible activities include revitalizing traditional food systems; training, skill and resource development; climate change adaptation; increasing Indigenous participation in agriculture; engagement between industry, academia and Indigenous Peoples and the development and delivery of engagement activities.

I was unable to find a list of specific projects that have benefited, although Manitoba Agriculture Minister Ron Kostyshyn highlighted Fox Lake Cree Nation’s Food for All program and collaboration with Brokenhead Ojibway First Nation, Sandy Bay Ojibway First Nation and the SCO on bison-related projects.

Meanwhile, both the MMF and the SCO have made strides towards agricultural autonomy through their own programming, including garden box programs, community gardens, climate action plans, bison herds and lobbying for more access to Crown lands.

It seems like both Indigenous organizations and the Manitoba government are eager for relationship building and programming designed to reclaim agricultural traditions tied to local Indigenous history and culture. There are stories like these emerging across Canada.

I think education is another important aspect—not just having Indigenous leaders with ties to the land remind their people, especially the youth, of their rich agricultural traditions, but for Manitobans who descended from settlers to learn that history and those tradition as well. If anything, it will only lead to more common ground between Indigenous communities and non-Indigenous farmers, both of whom are tied to the land in real, rich, and meaningful ways.

Hopefully soon, this country’s fertile soil might produce the right growing conditions not just for healthy crops, but for more healthy relationships built on respect, understanding and a motivation to keep moving forward together.

The post National Day for Truth and Reconciliation: Acknowledging the past, seeking a better future appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Developed by Invasives Canada, Animal Health Canada and the Invasive Wild Pig Leadership Group, the website, Wild Pigs Canada, was announced on Aug. 20.

“Animal Health Canada is proud to be a collaborator on the new Wild Pigs Canada website that shares information to support the prevention, management and removal of invasive wild pigs from the Canadian website,” said Dr. Leigh Rosengren, industry co-chair on Animal Health Canada’s board of directors in an Aug. 20 news release.

The website represents a team effort across sectors, said Rebecca Lord, executive director of Invasives Canada.

“Wild Pigs Canada is the result of the strong and meaningful co-ordination across sectors and regions, developed through our partnership with Animal Health Canada and the Invasive Wild Pig Leadership Group, and informed by our ongoing work with international partners in the U.S. and Mexico,” Lord said in the release.

Farmers, hunters, hikers and the general public are encouraged to use the website for keeping up to date with information about wild pigs in Canada and to know what to do if one is sighted.

Wild pigs can be destructive to natural habitats and crops and may be a vector for disease.

“Remember, people on the land and out in nature are our first line of defense against invasive species like wild pigs,” said Matt DeMille, executive director of the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters in the release.

To learn more or report a sighting, visit WildPigs.ca.

The post New wild pig website launches in Canada appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.