Alberta Pulse Growers (APG) has confirmed 30.3 per cent of eligible producers’ 2025 check-off payment is eligible for the Scientific Research & Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax credit for their investment in APG-funded research and development projects.

WHY IT MATTERS: Agricultural producers need to know all the tax credits available to make their operation as profitable as possible.

How much can producers claim?

Producers are eligible to claim up to a maximum of 15 per cent for non-incorporated farm operations and up to a maximum of 35 per cent for incorporated operations of the determined 30.3 per cent.

Producers who have paid check-off this past year and have not asked for refunds are eligible claimants for this year’s credits.

How to apply for the SR&ED credit

For more detailed information about the Scientific Research & Experimental Development Tax Credit, APG advises producers to contact an accountant or the Canada Revenue Agency.

For a history of Scientific Research & Experimental Development visit the Alberta Pulse Growers website. Information about APG research investments in 2024-25 is also available on the website.

The federal Scientific Research & Experimental Development tax program is administered by the Canada Revenue Agency and encourages businesses to invest in and perform research and development in Canada.

The Scientific Research & Experimental Development Tax Credit application forms for individual producers and Canadian controlled private corporations can be downloaded directly from the CRA website.

About Alberta Pulse Growers

The Alberta Pulse Growers Commission represents 5,400 growers of field pea, dry bean, lentil, chickpea, faba bean, lupin and soybean in Alberta.

With five zones and a farmer-elected board of 12 directors, APG works to promote the benefits of pulses, both in sustainable crop rotations and as a key part of a healthy diet. Through strategic initiatives, the commission aims to enhance the sustainability, profitability and visibility of pulse production across Alberta.

The post Alberta pulse growers can claim tax credits on check-off dollars appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Called a “red tape” cutting measure in a July 31 provincial government news release, the Alberta Agricultural Products Marketing Council — the supervisory public agency for Alberta’s 19 agriculture MBCs — is deleting 28.5 per cent of regulations pertaining to these MBCs.

This includes 20 foundational rules that overlapped with existing requirements.

“Alberta’s agriculture producers deserve to focus on what they do best, feeding our province and the world,” wrote Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation RJ Sigurdson in the release.

“By cutting unnecessary red tape, we’re giving them more time to grow their businesses and less time buried in paperwork.”

The move builds on changes made to Alberta’s Marketing of Agricultural Products Act (MAPA) in 2020 and enacted in 2022. These granted MBCs the right to develop their own bylaws.

Marketing groups give thumbs-up

Jake Kotowich, general manager of the Agricultural Products Marketing Council, explained the streamlining in an email.

“Before the amendments, MBCs’ regulation-making authorities were laid out in separate ‘authorization regulations’ — one for each MBC,” he wrote.

“Because of MAPA amendments in 2023, those authorities are prescribed directly in the MBCs’ plan regulations, which meant the authorization regulations were no longer relevant or needed.

“To clarify, repealing the 20 authorization regulations did not give MBCs new powers they didn’t already have. Instead, they change how those powers are granted,” continued Kotowich, adding the deletion of these 20 regulationss makes the regulatory process timelier and more efficient.

“The structure is more flexible, supporting decision-making while maintaining (provincial government) oversight. This is all part of a broader effort since 2020 to reduce regulatory burden and modernize the framework for agricultural governance in Alberta.”

Even though there are only 19 MBCs in the province, 20 authorization regulations were cut. The 20th belonged to Alberta Barley, which merged with Alberta Wheat to form Alberta Grains in 2023.

While admitting he still needed to work through the changes, Andre Harpe, chair of Alberta Canola Producers Commission, recognized the streamlining as a positive move set to help MBCs become more efficient.

The immediate benefit to Alberta’s canola producers, said Harpe, is that the changes allow the grower group more time to focus on member concerns.

“It’s going to give Alberta Canola more time on some of the needs that farmers are looking for right now.”

Shane Strydhorst, chair of the Alberta Pulse Growers Commission, praised the amendments.

“The streamlining of regulatory processes allows Alberta Pulse Growers Commission to work more efficiently on behalf of Alberta farmers toward our vision of pulses on every farm, on every plate,” he wrote in the Province’s news release.

Brad Dubeau, general manager of Alberta Beef Producers (ABP), said the changes “reflect a modern, responsive approach to agricultural governance.”

It also builds on what ABP has already been doing.

“In addition to aligning with the amendments made to MAPA in 2020, ABP took the opportunity to make administrative adjustments that enhance transparency and efficiency,” wrote Dubeau in an email.

“We’re proud to align with MAPA’s amendments and strengthen our administrative framework.”

Marketing council still involved

Janelle Hancock, a senior manager with the provincial marketing council, says this streamlining should not be misinterpreted as the government stepping away from oversight of these ag MBCs.

“There’s still oversight from the Alberta Agricultural Products Marketing Council. That hasn’t been changed,” said Hancock.

“That oversight is still there to supervise activities … While they (the MBCs’) are bylaws, they still have to be approved by council as an oversight body. That structure is pretty common across Canada with other supervisory agencies.

“The only thing that shifted with these most recent changes is we got rid of 20 regulations that weren’t any longer necessary because we fixed the clauses that required those regulations.

“So there’s still lots oversight for the marketing council. The (agriculture) minister still has to approve plan regulations. The minister is still in charge of the marketing council as a public agency, and then there’s still marketing and commission regulations that these organizations have in addition to their bylaws.”

The post Province streamlines rules for ag marketing boards, commissions appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Agriculture Financial Services Corporation (AFSC) has updated its normals — that is, the yield expectations in a given risk area which help determine insurance coverage — to reflect provincial faba bean production reported from 2000 to 2024.

As a result, producers insuring faba beans, which are sold for livestock feed as well as human consumption, for less than five years will see an increase in their coverage.

The change was made in response to concerns expressed by the Alberta Pulse Growers (APG) industry group over faba bean normals being too low for the higher yields the sub-sector has achieved in recent years.

This resulted in lower amounts of coverage than production warranted, says Shane Strydhorst, a central Alberta crop producer and chair of APG.

The federal insurer analyzed faba bean production data from the past two decades and found APG’s assessment correct.

“We did the analysis and the data to see what we needed to do and we increased the startup normals for the risk areas where faba beans are grown,” said Nancy Smith, AFSC product coordinator.

Alberta Pulse hopes this adjustment will take some of the financial risk out of growing the beans while, at the same time, offering an incentive for producers to try planting them on their own farms.

Strydhorst calls the move “fantastic.”

“Just by having this increase in dollar coverage per acre, it does remove an obstacle by reducing the risk that the farmer is taking on.”

Under the changes, coverage steadily shifts from being 100 per cent based on area normals in the first year to 100 per cent based on the producer’s historical production in the fifth.

“It’s divided by 20 per cent so you start out at 100 per cent of the area normal,” says Smith.

“And then, as we take your information (through) your harvested production report, we’re going to put in 20 per cent of yours and use 80 per cent of the normal (in the second year). And then we’ll put in 40 per cent of yours and 60 per cent of the area normal.

“And it’ll start to change to be just about what you do, not what the area can do.”

Faba beans in Alberta have been steadily growing in acreage over the past few years. AFSC expects around 50,000 insured acres of the beans by the crop reporting deadline of June 20, says Smith. It’s a small jump from 47,000 acres in 2024, but a leap from the previous year’s 37,000.

Looking at acreage from a more historical perspective, Strydhorst says faba bean numbers tend to jump around depending on whether the year is dry or wet. Faba beans grow best in high rainfall areas or under irrigation, he says, limiting the pulse’s best growing areas to a handful of regions in Alberta.

“They’re grown in quite a few different areas of the province. There’s a little bit in southern Alberta on irrigation. There’s quite a bit in what I would consider central Alberta focused around Edmonton.

“There’s some (faba bean) farmers around Sylvan Lake, Lacombe. They’re really successfully growing them around Camrose, New Norway, Fort Saskatchewan, and of course where I’m located, which is the Barrhead-Westlock area.”

He says any region that consistently receives at least 10 inches of rain per year is a candidate for faba bean production.

“(For) areas of the province where there’s generally less rainfall or less consistent rainfall, then they could be a risky crop to grow.”

However, they tend to grow very well in areas with the appropriate conditions.

“I know farmers in each of these areas that have harvested 70 to 80 bushels (per acre) of faba bean crops. A farmer that I know from Fort Saskatchewan even topped 100 last year.”

Strydhorst’s own luck has improved over the decade-plus he’s been planting the beans.

“The last couple years I think maybe we’ve just gotten dialed in a little bit better with fine-tuning our production. And we’ve seen fair consistency in those 60, 70, 80 bushel crops the last number of years, which is kind of exciting.”

Due to their long growing season that usually starts in late April or early May, Strydhorst’s faba beans are the first crop planted and the last one harvested.

“They’re very tolerant of cool soil and cool weather in the spring, so there’s not really a risk with planting early. Basically, as early as we can get in the field when it’s not too muddy, we’re trying to get our faba beans in.

“Some years we do experience frost damage, but that hasn’t really impacted feed market opportunities for faba beans. So there’s always been a market for them.”

Smith praised the strong relationship AFSC and Alberta Pulse Growers, adding faba bean normals will be reviewed on an annual basis from this point forward.

“They’re the people who are representative of producers. We listen to the individual client for sure (but) sometimes the voice comes through a little bit stronger through these industry groups.”

Strydhorst shared a similar sentiment.

“For as long as I’ve been on the board — and long before that — Alberta Pulse and AFSC have had a really good long-term working relationship.

“We have our meeting every summer, usually in July or August, where several staff and several of the directors from Alberta Pulse meet with AFSC staff at their office in Lacombe and we talk about pulse crop insurance coverage and improvements that can be made on behalf of farmers.”

The post New crop insurance policy enables easier startup for faba beans appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The positions are not necessarily as time-consuming as farmers may think because there are many people to help and in many cases work-life balance is prioritized.

“It has to be family, farm and then commission work. Those should be your priorities at all times,” said Jason Lenz, interim vice-chair of Alberta Grains (formerly Alberta Wheat and Barley).

And there’s a lot in it for them. Farmers engaged in the industry get a lot of return for their service, he said.

“I think most producers that get involved will tell you they get way more out of it than what they put into it as far as time, knowledge and the ability to be on the leading edge of issues that farmers are faced with.”

That knowledge component has been a big incentive for Shane Strydhorst, chair of the Alberta Pulse Growers executive committee and a director for Pulse Canada.

“Access to information is one of the things I’ve appreciated the most. I learn a great deal about issues that affect me as a farmer, both directly and indirectly: things like processing, transportation, trade and the importance of market acceptance and market access.”

Directors with the Alberta Canola Producers Commission get a “front row seat at the table” for new government policy and an opportunity to have a say in those discussions, said Karla Bergstrom, executive director.

“There’s some intrinsic value to seeing the good work that’s happening and being able to get those wins,” she said.  

“There’s a lot of times where the government doesn’t understand agriculture. Sometimes the biggest thing we do is just mitigate some of the bad policy that impacts farms.”

While a new director or delegate is faced with a steep learning curve, Bergstrom said the commission tries to accommodate individual circumstances so people aren’t overwhelmed.

“There’s some who are the primary operators on their farms and so they might get involved in initiatives where there may be not as much travel and maybe there’s more virtual meetings.”

Limited time and feelings of inadequacy play a role in producers’ reluctance to volunteer.

Said Strydhorst, “everybody’s trying to balance their farm, their family and volunteering. Some people are helping with their aging parents and a lot of us are raising children and helping their aging parents.” 

Some producers consider their knowledge of industry issues to be insufficient. Strydhorst tells them they don’t have to be instant experts.

“I think you just need to have a willingness to learn and be involved,” he said.

“From my own experience, I joined APG as an advisor in 2017 and I was quite intimidated. But I’ve learned a tremendous amount since then because of my involvement and it’s been a really enjoyable experience so far.” 

Fred Lozeman, finance chair and a six-year delegate for Alberta Beef Producers, believes a societal pivot on volunteerism is partly to blame for fewer volunteers in general. The pandemic aggravated a trend that started about a decade earlier.

“I’ve sat for several two-year terms and only had to be elected once. Otherwise, I was just in by acclamation. So not enough producers are stepping up and getting involved. But I get it — it’s a significant ask,” he said.

“It used to be that so much stuff was handled locally and so many of us in in a community would have to get involved in a lot of little local committees and boards and service clubs and things like that in order to just make our communities better.

“Now it’s become more centralized and governments seem to handle a lot of that stuff.”

How do current board members manage the family, farm and commission balance?

For Lenz, it means keeping an eye on the calendar and counting on family and employee support.

“I’ve become way better at scheduling and paying attention to what’s coming up in the days or weeks ahead in order to get the work that needs to be done on the farm done.

“That allows me to spend a couple days away at a board meeting or a trip to Winnipeg to attend the Cereals Canada meeting, for example,” he said.

Strydhorst gets creative when managing his farm while engaged in commission duties.

“There’s a lot of times where I’ve got the autosteer engaged in the combine or the tractor and I’m responding to emails or texts or taking phone calls.”

However, that level of multitasking is rare.

“We’re obviously really busy at seeding and harvest, so there’s not too much at those times of the year.”

The amount of workload can vary. At Alberta Grains, delegates are expected to attend four board meetings per year.

“That’s kind of the bare minimum,” said Lenz. “Once you get elected as a director, you are expected to be on some of our committees — primarily committees that interest you. Some people like research, some people like policy.

“So there’s always those research or committee calls that are usually done virtually so there can be four or six of them per year.” 

Alberta Canola’s expectations of board members are similar.

“We have four board meetings a year and each are about a day and a half. So with your travel and the board meetings, that’s the minimum requirement,” said Bergstrom.

Farmers don’t have to stand for nomination to get involved, she said. They can start by attending some of Alberta Canola’s events, such as grower engagement meetings, which take place in communities throughout Alberta in November and December. (Visit albertacanola.com for more details.)

However, engagement can be as simple as picking up the phone or writing an email.

“If growers have suggestions for any kind of policy or research challenge they’re facing, we’d love to hear from them. It’s really a grassroots organization,” said Bergstrom.

As an aside, Lozeman would like to see more diversity on ABP’s elected boards and among farm commissions in general.

“Those of us who have more time for our commissions are typically in the more established farms that are running well,” he said. “It’s tough for people who are just trying to get their business going to carve out time.”

However, perspectives from that cohort and others are needed.

“Maybe it’s a first generation farmer. Maybe it’s someone who’s a service provider to industry. They’re seeing a lot of things and those are important perspectives.”

Lozeman doesn’t suggest that commissions change their rules on who qualifies to run for boards. Most farm commissions limit board memberships to primary producers and levy payers. However, he said they could consider ways to give ancillary industry players a platform of some kind.

“They’re intimately involved in the industry somehow so we need to find ways of hearing those voices as well.”

More information on these groups’ short-term nomination and voting plans is available on their respective websites.

The post Don’t fear involvement in ag groups, say commission reps appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“I strongly encourage any interested pulse farmers to join the APG team,” said chair Shane Strydhorst.

“I started out as an advisor like most APG directors, and it has been a very rewarding experience. Becoming an advisor is a great way to get involved with the organization. It’s a good introduction to APG, working on committees and making improvements for Alberta pulse farmers.”

A team of advisors leads extension activities specific to each of APG’s five zones.

The post Alberta Pulse Growers seeks advisors appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The award is given to “a person or organization that has worked to help nurture and shape the pulse industry and has helped contribute to the success of the industry,” Alberta Pulse Growers said in a release.

That can include production, marketing, research, extension, processing, management, and promotion of pulses. This is the ninth year for the award. Recent winners have included a researcher, district agriculturist, an extension person and a grower.

The nomination form can be found at albertapulse.com. The entry deadline is Dec. 6.

The post Nominations sought for pulse innovation award appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“I started out as an adviser like most APG directors,” said chair Robert Semeniuk. “Becoming an adviser is a great way to get involved with APG.”

Adviser spots are open in all five zones and any producer who has sold pulses and paid service charges in the last two years is eligible. There are about 6,500-plus growers in the province.

The deadline for submitting a nomination is Nov. 1 and each candidate must be endorsed by another pulse producer from their zone.

The nomination form is available at albertapulse.com.

The post Alberta Pulse Growers seeking grower representatives appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The fourth-generation Lacombe-area producer, who retired from farming in 2016, was the inaugural vice-president of Alberta Pulse Growers Commission in 1989, becoming the group’s president a year later. He began growing peas in 1984 (to feed his brother’s hogs) and became well known as an early adopter of new practices and technologies as well as for sharing his experiences with other pulse growers.

Today there are more than 6,500 growers of field peas, lentils, dry beans, chickpeas, fababeans and soybeans in Alberta. Peas are by far the most popular (with acreage ranging from 1.5 million to 1.9 million acres) with lentils a solid second (generally between 400,000 to 500,000 acres).

The post Alberta pulse pioneer honoured appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

With the conference cancelled this year, Alberta Wheat, Alberta Canola and Alberta Pulse Growers are all holding their AGMs online. Alberta Canola’s meeting is Jan. 26 (from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m), Alberta Wheat’s is Jan. 27 (10 a.m. to 11:15 a.m.), and Alberta Pulse’s AGM is later that day (3 p.m. to 4 p.m.).

During annual general meetings, the past year’s activities are reviewed, audited financial statements are presented, and there is voting on resolutions (and in some cases, elections) for registered farmer members.

For agendas and more info, see the websites of the three crop commissions.

The post Trio of AGMs being held online appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Well, it depends on who you ask.

Some say using words like ‘burger’ or ‘sausage’ to describe vegetarian fare is misleading.

“To me, it’s obvious we’re producing the best meat product, because everybody else wants to call theirs ‘meat,’” said Nanton rancher and feedlot owner Bob Lowe, who is president of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.

“If they want to do it and people want to eat it, that’s completely fine with me — but let’s not have those people think that they’re actually eating meat.”

But for others, it’s much ado about nothing.

“Who is pushing for it? I don’t hear consumers pushing it,” said Sylvan Lake farmer Allison Ammeter, who is chair of the Plant Protein Alliance of Alberta and a director with Alberta Pulse Growers and Protein Industries Canada.

“I don’t hear anybody going to the grocery store and saying, ‘I can’t read your labels.’ I don’t see letters written to the editor saying, ‘I bought a product and I got it home and it wasn’t what I thought it was.’”

St. Brides-area producer Don Shepert agrees.

“If you buy it and use it, you know right away it’s something different,” said Shepert, who grows pulses but also raises cattle. “From that standpoint, I don’t find it confusing.”

But the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association has a different view.

“In the food and drug regulations as they’re written right now, meat has a defined legal term. It’s defined legally as deriving from an animal carcass,” said Lauren Martin, government and food industry relations manager for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.

“Using the language ‘simulated meat’ is contrary to that legal definition in the regulations.”

And the debate is coming to a head in Canada right now.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is conducting on online consultation on proposed changes to the guidelines for faux meat products, including labelling, advertising, and composition of these products. (A link to the consultation, which ends Dec. 3, can be found at www.inspection.gc.ca.)

But even in consulting about the issue, the CFIA refers to these products as “simulated meat,” which in and of itself could be confusing for consumers.

“These guidelines are not for the lawyer drafting them or the person enforcing them. They’re supposed to be for consumers to make an informed decision at the grocery store,” Martin said.

“If you’re a hurried consumer making purchasing decisions for your family, and you’re in and out of a grocery store in 15 minutes, maybe you miss the word ‘simulated.’”

Are consumers confused?

That’s what has happened in the States, according to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the American counterpart to the CCA.

In an online survey of 1,800 consumers in February, almost two-thirds thought that plant-based products like Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods, and Lightlife contain real beef or an animal byproduct, the organization said.

And it’s because of labelling and advertising, the cattle group said.

Beyond Meat, for instance, uses the image of a cow in its logo, despite being entirely derived from plants (though its packaging prominently displays the words “plant based”).

“Under these (proposed CFIA) guidelines, even just the image of an animal is allowed on a product that doesn’t contain anything derived from that animal,” said Martin.

“In the marketing world, individuals can use whatever type of language they want. As we have seen, some of these alternative protein products have used more disparaging terms to talk about the beef industry than others.

“That’s the risk. If the government of Canada allows for competing terms to be used, it’s possible for the advertising space — which is a much bigger arena — to play with more disparaging comments.”

Labelling is a debate that’s also been raging in Europe for a while but in October, the European Union rejected a proposal to ban the word ‘burger’ for plant-based patties (even though three years ago it did ban using ‘milk’ or ‘butter’ to describe non-dairy products).

But with more and more plant-based meat alternatives finding their way to the meat case alongside the real deal (the market has been growing by eight per cent annually since 2010), there needs to be clarity to the regulations, say some in the beef sector.

“When we look at the definition of meat — the edible part of a carcass — and then start calling things ‘plant-based meat,’ it brings in confusion. Is it a carcass-derived meat, or is this a lab- or plant-derived meat?” said Kelly Smith-Fraser, a Pine Lake rancher and chair of Alberta Beef Producers.

“I prefer the term ‘plant-based protein,’ because at least that clearly defines what a consumer is purchasing.”

But others say consumers can figure it out on their own — just as they did when veggie burgers and soy milk arrived at their grocery stores.

“We’ve been well trained to read ingredient lists, and now they’re saying this might be misleading to consumers? You’re not giving any credit to consumers there,” said Ammeter. “It is a non-issue, in my opinion.”

Regulatory alignment

Consumers — especially young ones — have become increasingly familiar with plant-based proteins as they look for a “sustainable alternative,” said Shepert, who is also chair of Alberta Pulse Growers.

And that’s a good thing for Canadian agriculture, he said.

“From my perspective, pulses are great, but so is beef,” he said. “We shouldn’t be quibbling and quarrelling about these things. We should be working together to feed the world and to make sure that our products are all top notch, safe, and sustainable.”

For Ammeter, the labelling debate isn’t “a problem looking for a solution,” but rather, “an attempt to create a problem where there isn’t a problem.”

The beef industry doesn’t see it that way.

“It’s not about protecting the term ‘meat’ for only meat users,” said Martin. “We think that’s probably the clearest thing for the Canadian government to do, but it’s not about meat versus other products. We’re not here to make a competitive statement. It’s about precedents.”

That clarity is also important in the global marketplace, Smith-Fraser added.

“We need to make sure that, between Canada and the United States, our regulatory requirements are aligned — our terminologies, our definitions, and our labelling requirements,” she said.

“That way, it’s consistent for the consumers, and it will lessen any confusion.”

But regulations come with costs, said Ammeter.

“Everybody needs to be aware that, as you go down the road of turning this into an issue, you might be adding inefficiencies, extra costs, and regulation demands that require all kinds of extra hoops,” she said.

“Most of us know that all of that costs money and hurts us all in the long run. Let’s not wander into something that ends up costing the industries a bunch of money and really doesn’t gain us anything.”

For Shepert, it’s “frustrating” that people on both sides of the issue are having these debates instead of working together to grow both industries.

“I’m a pulse grower, and I have beef, and I really wish we could all just work together,” he said.

“There are a lot of people who are very protective of their beef, and that’s fine, but why be protective of it? We’ve got a great product that’s still widely accepted and widely used. It’s not like it’s going to stop our beef production any time soon.”

But as a rancher, Lowe is proud of what he produces — and he wants consumers to understand what sets his beef apart from the plant-based alternatives.

“I believe consumers should have a choice of anything they want, but we don’t want the advertising to be misleading,” said Lowe.

“It’s not built on truth. It’s not built on science. So it’s up to us to make sure people know the truth, and the truth is, eat what you want, but know what you’re eating.”

The post Some cattle producers have a beef with fake-meat labelling appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.