Glacier FarmMedia – Farmers came away from the recent federal, provincial and territorial ministers meeting in Saskatoon with a few items stroked off their wish list.
Farm organizations welcomed a $500-million or 25 per cent increase in cost-shared funding over five years, half of which will help farmers fight climate change and reduce emissions.
The ministers also came through with long-awaited improvements to AgriStability, with compensation levels to be increased to 80 per cent.
Read Also
More precious than gold
When commercial fertilizers no longer meet the needs of the world’s farmers, the value of manure will grow, says Alberta Farmer columnist Brenda Schoepp.
Yet much of the industry’s attention remains focused on the federal ambition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fertilizer use by 30 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030, and the convoluted narrative swirling around that goal.
It can’t be overemphasized that there is a huge difference between reducing emissions from fertilizer use and reducing fertilizer use, yet many of the harshest critics of the plan conveniently fail to make that distinction. They’ve been having a heyday with this on social media and sowing seeds of doubt throughout the farming community.
“It’s official. Trudeau’s meeting with provincial agriculture ministers wrapped up yesterday. He is moving forward with a 30 per cent fertilizer reduction. Farms will fail, land will be purchased by billionaires/the government, and people will starve. Farmers are rising up today,” rages one social media post.
The disinformation campaign is working. Almost every conversation with farmers on the subject is couched in anxiety that the government will place unreasonable restrictions on their ability to operate.
The federal government clearly needs a better communications plan. However, the objectives of the federal policy are laid out quite clearly in a discussion paper released in May.
For the record, it states: “The fertilizer emission target is ambitious, but achievable. It is intended to build upon the sector’s work to date, and increase adoption of region- and farm-specific approaches that will reverse the trend of rising emissions arising from fertilizer use while maintaining the sector’s competitiveness and Canada’s reputation as a top producer and exporter of quality crops.
“To a large extent, the required technologies and practices already exist. It is now a question of how to increase their use, identify and address any challenges or shortcomings, and ensure that farmers have the knowledge and support required to do so.”
The document states further: “The Government of Canada has been clear that the objective of the national target for fertilizers is to reduce emissions, and that the primary method to achieve this is not to establish a mandatory reduction in fertilizer use that isn’t linked to improved efficiency and maintaining or improving yields. Rather, the goal is to maximize efficiency, optimize fertilizer use, encourage innovation, and to work collaboratively with the agriculture sector, partners and stakeholders in identifying opportunities that will allow us to successfully reach this target.”
It repeats: “Given the essential role of nitrogen fertilizer in Canadian agriculture, actions to achieve emissions reductions will focus on improving nitrogen management and optimizing fertilizer use, and not on a mandatory reduction in the use of fertilizers.”
Of course, there are questions about how that goal will be achieved, measured and recognized. That’s to be expected and why these consultations are so necessary.
The discussion paper points to increasing use of enhanced-efficiency fertilizers, minimizing fall application and/or broadcasting of fertilizers, increased use of pulses in crop rotations and annual soil testing — all of which are consistent with the 4R nutrient strategy embraced by Fertilizer Canada.
These are all measures that are known to improve yields, not reduce them.
A 2019 Fertilizer Canada study found a direct correlation between farmers who regularly conducted soil tests and higher yields. However, surveys have also found that only about one-third of farmers soil test regularly.
Governments have indicated they are willing to put money on the table to help farmers achieve these targets, which speaks to a carrot rather than stick approach to driving change in the sector.
Farmers and their organizations need to hold governments accountable for what they’ve stated and promised. They need to push for better data, more research and accurate measures.
But at the end of the day, farmers could be the biggest beneficiaries of this emissions reduction strategy.
The naysayers could be right on one point, though.
It’s entirely possible that fertilizer use will fall as these measures gain more widespread adoption. But it will be because farmers don’t need to use as much, rather than mandatory reductions imposed by regulation.
– This article was originally published at the Manitoba Co-operator.
