All research projects must: Contain a ‘Final Mile’ plan: A clear research extension plan to show how research outcomes will reach Alberta’s producers on-farm, either directly or through ancillary service providers (e.g. veterinarians). Clearly demonstrate how results of the project will benefit producers and/or value-chain partners.

In a media release the group said the launch “marks an ambitious path forward in Alberta.”

More information is available on RDAR’s website at rdar.ca. 

The post RDAR launches second funding round appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“When you do something yourself on your own farm, you can be pretty certain it will work in your conditions,” said Lewis Baarda, research program manager at Farming Smarter.

“It’s great to know that in theory something works, but until we actually get it on the farm, we can’t know really how well it works. On-farm research is where we do that last piece of adapting technologies to a farm. It’s that critical step between uptake and adoption to really prove the concept in a real-world setting.”

His organization launched its Field Tested program in 2018 and it’s been well received by farmers, he said.

“We can’t manage a crop in the field as precisely as we can in a small-plot trial — there’s variability in soil and moisture and nutrients,” said Baarda. “There’s all of these things in the real world that do affect how some of these technologies scale up to a field scale.”

Farmers are curious and eager to adopt new technology, but they need to know “if it makes sense for them,” he said.

“There’s a spirit of innovation and curiosity in agriculture and doing it yourself on your own farm is quite appealing because you know that those aggregate results may not apply specifically to your situation.”

Baarda predicts more producers will start doing on-farm research.

“If you can find something that will save you $10 an acre on this quarter and extrapolate that over the size of a large farm over a number of years, you can see it pays off,” he said. “So I absolutely think we’re going to see more and more of this and that some farms are just going to integrate it as part of the way they do things.”

Growing interest

“We’ve seen increased adoption and grown the number of trials we’re doing because of that, and now heading into 2022, we’re continuing to grow as the program continues to gain more attention from producers across the province,” said Jeremy Boychyn, agronomy research extension specialist with Alberta Wheat and Barley.

This year’s trials are examining the impact of higher seeding rates, using nitrogen-fixing bacteria and plant growth regulators, wider row spacing, and split in-crop nitrogen application. (Descriptions and locations of this year’s Plot2Farm trials can be found online.)

It can be challenging to create an on-farm trial that will generate information farmers can be confident in.

“There’s been a lot of scenarios where producers would maybe do one strip with a management practice that’s slightly different,” said Boychyn. “But those don’t always give us information that’s realistic — and probably less often than we like.”

Underestimating the work involved is another common issue, Baarda added.

“It takes a lot of effort and a lot of energy to implement an on-farm trial,” he said. “It can be easy to assume that you’ll just toss it into the middle of your workflow. But it is quite challenging, and to do a good job of it, there’s a lot of pieces that need to fall into place.”

And making sure it doesn’t slip down the priority list is critical, too.

“All the important things that happen for an on-farm trial happen at the same time as all the important things on a farm,” he said. “We’ve got production bottlenecks for seeding, for spraying, for harvest, and that’s exactly when we’re trying to take some extra time and resources to study these things. That’s a big part of the challenge — to still make it a priority when things are busy.”

Replicate and randomize

As much as possible, producers should incorporate trials into their existing workflow in an area that’s representative of the entire farm.

“Set aside a quarter section or even a piece of a quarter-section for a trial, but have it be a decent piece of land — not just what’s on the back 40 that you’re not really sure what to do with,” he said.

“Choose something that will be reflective of what’s happening on the rest of the farm so that when you get those results, you have the scientific validity to say that you can expect that same outcome again because it’s on a good piece of land that’s representative of what’s happening on the rest of the farm.”

Planning is also critical to ensuring trials are replicated and randomized — two absolutes that can’t be skirted.

“If you’re going to put in all that work, it’s critical to make sure that the outcomes you get are something you can trust and that you know the results are valid,” said Baarda. “That’s where some of the principles like replication and randomization come in.”

Boychyn agrees.

“We really want to implement replicated, randomized trials. That is where we’re going to get the most amount of value for the amount of time you spend on it,” he said. “Take the time to develop a plan, to work with your agronomist, to make sure it’s being implemented properly at seeding, and to collect whatever data you’ve determined you need to collect.

“You’d hate to go through that entire process to not collect the data in a way that’s going to give you useful information back.”

Some of the data may also take several years to collect, so be patient, he added.

“Making sure it’s designed and set up in a way that the information is going to be valuable is a long-term process, but it’s worth it in the end if it’s done properly.”

The post They don’t wear lab coats but more farmers doing on-farm research appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“A lot of the groups are kind of squeezed to the point where, if we don’t get something secured right now, there are going to be some major changes or even some closing,” said Ken Coles, executive director of Farming Smarter in Lethbridge.

His association is one of a dozen farmer-led applied research organizations that have informally banded together to lobby the province for adequate and stable funding.

And the main pitch from the regional ag associations, as they now call themselves, is that they do critical work in helping producers adopt new practices and techniques that bolster farms and the provincial ag economy.

“It’s important to do local research,” said Liisa Jeffrey, executive director with Peace Country Beef and Forage Association in Fairview.

“The Peace is a large region and is fairly lacking in other research resources. There is no college or university tackling agriculture research in the region, and (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s) Beaverlodge research station has severely reduced its activities in the last few years.”

Funding has long been an issue for the associations, which vary greatly in size and the scope of work they do. But the situation has become more acute under the current government, the groups say. That’s partly because the province has dramatically reduced its own extension services but also because it handed off association funding when it created Results Driven Agriculture Research (RDAR). That arms-length agency is primarily focused on backing individual research projects, not groups.

“We’re coming to the end of a two-year funding cycle that ended up going through RDAR,” said Coles. “We’ve been fighting to get our funding more stable and sufficient for our groups. We were still given this $2 million grant that was the same amount of money here that we’ve gotten for about 19 years now.”

That funding ends next March and “after that, our capacity funding is up in the air,” said Laura Gibney, manager of Foothills Forage and Grazing Association in High River.

But like Jeffrey and other association leaders, she said producers are looking for information on practices they can put to work on their operations — and that need has increased because there are no longer provincial extension officials to whom they can turn.

“One thing that we’ve seen in the last five years is that Alberta Agriculture has got out of having extension specialists,” said Gibney. “They have left a bit of a hole and a gap. We do our best to provide unbiased information, explore new technology and innovations in the industry and be a conduit between researchers and farmers.”

Making their case

“He was quite supportive of our efforts,” said Coles. “He talked to RDAR and his own department and asked if we could work towards a solution.

“There’s a little opportunity right now to put in a good word about what we do and get something a little more consistent back. There’s more pressure put on our organizations to up their game.”

The total ask from the 12 groups is $8 million annually in base funding, although Coles said the organizations would thrive if that was increased to $12 million.

But “the jury is out” on whether their appeal will ultimately be successful, said Dianne Westerlund, general manager of the Chinook Applied Research Association in Oyen.

“The proposal is very strong,” she said. “We’re very hopeful that we’ll end up with base funding. The reason for that being so important is the base gives us that stability and security to develop partnerships, to put proposals together and access other funding. Without that base, we would really struggle.”

“We’re really hoping for a five-year agreement that will help cover capacity or core base funds,” added Gibney. “Project funds are awesome and wonderful. But in order to go after project funds, you do need to have that base core of operations.”

However, several officials said they are worried because things have been moving slowly and they fear the issue could be set aside as the United Conservative Party leadership gets into full swing and then moves into election mode.

‘A tremendous struggle’

“It’s been a tremendous struggle,” said Becky Doherty, manager of West Central Forage Association. “Our organization in particular, we’ve had a lot of struggles trying to attract and retain talented staff.”

The organization, which has a staff of three, would have to close its doors if its base funding isn’t renewed, she said.

But given that the amount of provincial funding hasn’t increased for 20 years, the operation is threadbare, added Doherty, pointing to its plot seeder, which dates back to the 1990s, as an example of their long-standing budget woes.

“There’s not a lot of opportunities to access funding for capital items,” she said. “That in particular is going to be one of our biggest struggles. How do we offer high quality research when we can’t update our capital or attract and maintain really talented people?”

New equipment and more funding could make a big difference, she said, adding the group is trying to keep up with the demand for information from producers, but doesn’t have the capacity.

This year the association had to discontinue an innovative and popular program that brought in and distributed Canada thistle stem-gall flies and stem-mining weevils to producers battling infestations of the noxious and hard-to-control weed. The organization’s tiny staff didn’t have time to administer the program, said Doherty, adding her top funding priorities are to give her staff a raise and to add an agronomist.

The Peace Country Beef and Forage Association is somewhat larger (seven staff and one intern) but operates a leased 340-acre farm, where it can do long-term projects. The farm is also used for some projects by graduate students from the University of Alberta. The group also provides extension services, such as assisting producers with ration balancing, feed and soil testing and completing an environmental farm plan.

But almost all its funds come from public sources, said Jeffrey.

“Because we are almost entirely livestock and forage focused, it’s very hard for us to access private industry funds or funds from (crop) commissions,” she said. “The funds just aren’t there.”

Focusing on local conditions

“We’re providing that adaptive component,” she said, adding the group takes research done in other locations and tests it to see if it will work under local conditions.

“Producers have the opportunity to see (research and application) at the local level,” she said. “That will be impacted if we aren’t successful in securing some base funding.”

With a staff of 10, Farming Smarter is one of the largest groups but its public funding is only a small percentage of its budget. However, it’s a critical part and the government should want to fund the work of regional ag associations, said Coles.

“We’re not looking for handouts,” he said. “We’re looking for partnership and mutual investment towards collective goals in spurring and supporting agricultural innovation.”

The other associations that have banded together are: Grey Wooded Forage Association, Battle River Research Group, Lakeland Agricultural Research Association, Gateway Research Organization, Sarda Ag Research, North Peace Applied Research Association and Mackenzie Applied Research Association.

“It’s been really positive that we’re in discussions and that we’re working on this. We’ve all talked about having an advocacy message or a network going forward,” said Gibney.

But because the organizations are so different, a “cookie cutter” approach will not work, said Westerlund.

“From our discussions with RDAR and Alberta Ag folks, they do recognize it,” she said. “It will be difficult to put a formula together that works for us all, but we’re very hopeful that does come out in further discussions here over the next few weeks.”

But decisions need to be made, said Coles.

“We’re kind of reaching the point of critical change and I think the minister recognizes that,” Coles said.

The post Squeezed and struggling: Research groups desperate for funding appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The academic system “from coast to coast is very intact,” Dr. Baljit Singh said.

“We will continue to develop new technologies. We will continue to provide new knowledge to the producers. Our education is continuing, albeit on the online platform, not in person.”

Still, Singh acknowledges the enormous challenge wrought by the pandemic. People with more experience than him have been telling him that they’ve never had to “rejig the whole system in such a short period of time,” he said.

“It has just been unprecedented.”

Why it matters: Ag research often has a seasonal or time-sensitive component and COVID-19 is hitting at a critical time for many projects. Some projects have been underway for months or years, representing a large investment of money and time. As well, the animals involved will still need care. Universities are figuring out which activities will have to be delayed, which will carry on, and how they can carry on while minimizing risk to faculty, staff and graduate students.

On the research front, universities across the country have been evaluating which research components would create a major loss to the program if cancelled, Singh said.

For example, research on COVID-19 is critical. So are the prion biology research groups in Calgary and Edmonton, which were established after BSE shuttered international borders. Calving season is underway, and so faculty members will continue collecting data for those research projects. And long-term experiments that began months ago, and require sampling from animals at specific times, would also represent a major loss if shut down.

The University of Calgary’s faculty of veterinary medicine (UCVM) has also sought input from stakeholders on research. Most of their work is in disease modelling, feedlot health services, clinical and applied research. Much of that research focuses on infectious diseases, and experimental models are typically done on-site at the university’s Spy Hill campus.

Administrators have also considered the health of staff and students at W.A. Ranches, a working ranch donated to the university for teaching and research. Singh notes that it’s hard to know who might be carrying the virus, and so they need to have “a great deal of caution.”

“So I think it’s very challenging. But I believe some of our research will keep on going,” he says.

So far, UCVM has greenlit the following projects:

• A Margaret Gunn Endowment for Animal Research-funded project set for the calving season, involving Drs. Ed Pajor, Jennifer Pearson, and Claire Windeyer.
• A Beef Cattle Research Council-funded project to develop a calf health risk assessment tool, involving Drs. Ed Pajor, and Claire Windeyer, along with a researcher at Saskatoon’s Western College of Veterinary Medicine (WCVM).
• A project looking at colostrum intervention strategies in newborns and the effect of colostrum storage methods on colostrum quality. The project involves Drs. Michel Levy, Ed Pajor, Claire Windeyer and Robin Yates, along with a researcher at WCVM.
• A trial looking at optimizing calf health around weaning, and antimicrobial use in feedlots, funded by Alberta Agriculture and Food and MIF. Drs. Karin Orsel, Ed Pajor and Frank van der Meer are involved, along with researchers from University of Lethbridge, WCVM and Olds College.
• Projects at the university’s new Simpson Centre for Agricultural and Food Innovation and Public Education that focus on policy and data analysis. The university also seeks a director for the centre.

However, UCVM is also suspending some projects. For example, new experiments that can be delayed will be suspended until it’s safe to resume. So far, the delayed research includes:

• A project on the use of bacteriophage-derived lysins in combatting multi-drug resistant pathogens that cause bovine respiratory disease (Dr. Dongyan Nui).
• An experimental infection model to study pain and diagnostics in Developmental Duplication (DD)-affected beef cattle (Dr. Ed Pajor).
• A project describing beef bull behaviour using remote access technology as potential indicators of bull siring capacity (Dr. Ed Pajor).
• Dr. James Wasmuth’s lab project looking at new drugs for cattle parasites. Researchers had recently started testing new compounds. Wasmuth has also suspended his work sequencing cattle parasite genomes. However, he’s still able to continue some of his work to find more drug targets.

How will COVID-19 affect ag research in the long run? Researchers don’t yet know what type of health, animal care and research protocols they’ll have to implement, or for how long, Singh said. If the pandemic passes in the next two or three months, it will mean researchers have lost some time, but everyone will be able to get back to a normal life within the next four to five months.

But if the pandemic lingers longer, requiring prolonged social distancing, they will have to put their heads together, Singh said, to decide “what type of research of research is most critical, that can go forward under the new guidelines, circumstances, public health advisories. And what is it that we need to deliver to the producers?”

Renewed focus on food

COVID-19 has brought a renewed focus on food, Singh said, with shoppers emptying grocery store shelves, and reports of price-gouging making headlines.

We need to consider that as the pandemic has pressured the just-in-time food supply system, people have behaved as though they won’t have food in a week or two, he added.

We need to assure Canadians that during a pandemic or natural calamity, people will be able to set food on their tables every day without “disruptions, price-gouging and exploitation,” says Singh.

All levels of government need to prioritize the food production system and supply chain, and stakeholders such as producers groups need to work together to place that priority in front of political leaders, he says.

A supply of healthy food “is a fundamental priority,” Singh said. “Families, at home, they cannot go out. And their ability to make a livelihood goes down.

“I do not worry that much about three, four, five month loss of time in a research project. We can recover that…What worries me now is that this is the first time we’ve had a national pandemic story and our food supplies are under stress. We need to really do a better job at this collectively.”

For those Canadians who have questions about how the ag sector produces food, now is the time to explain how it’s done, he added. It’s time to say, “we want you to be partners with us. Not questioning and attacking the food production system in this country, but to work together to create a better food production future for everybody.”

— Lisa Guenther is the editor of Canadian Cattlemen.

The post Universities can adapt to COVID-19, UCVM dean says appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Alberta Wheat is giving $2.6 million, part of a $25-million effort called the Canadian National Wheat Cluster.

The initiative by Ottawa and several ag groups is funding 22 variety development, pathology, agronomy and pre-breeding projects.

Among the recipients are three federal researchers working in Alberta: Robert Graf (CWRW cultivars), Harpinder Randhawa (CPSR cultivars and also CWSWS cultivars), and Kelly Turkington (management options to lessen the impact of fusarium).

Meanwhile Alberta Barley is giving $900,000 as part of the $10.2-million National Barley Research Cluster.

Turkington has a trio of projects receiving funding along with research by Breanne Tidemann of AAFC Lacombe and Ruud Zijlstra of the U of Alberta.

The post Research clusters fund host of projects appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Research proposals participating in larger national or international efforts are strongly encouraged.

For example, understanding stress response of crops at the genomic level offers a better understanding of adaptation strategies, while biomarker-informed breeding programs provide the strategy for delivering the appropriate traits to the right regions in support of a healthy ecosystem.

The post Genomics research funding on offer appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

One of the most innovative is the Mackenzie Applied Research Association (MARA).

Until last year, the association conducted research in Alberta’s northwest corner with a small staff and limited budget. But when the federal government began looking to unload its research station at Fort Vermilion, area farmers saw an opportunity they couldn’t pass up. That led to Mackenzie County purchasing the facility last November.

“In the last few years, our funding structure changed a little bit because we are now in control of the research station,” said Jacob Marfro, MARA’s manager and research co-ordinator.

“What the farmers did was, instead of using the whole 400 or 500 acres of land for research, they volunteered their time and equipment, and we seeded a portion of it and sold the crops for profit.”

Last year, the organization raised almost $100,000 by selling crops grown in their research projects, and while the final tally for this year isn’t in yet, the organization has made close to $88,000 so far.

Raising their own funds gives the producers and researchers involved with the association a greater degree of certainty about their research investments. While MARA’s most stable form of funding right now is from the provincial government, changing government priorities makes long-term planning a challenge.

“We want to have our own funding base so that we can continue to do the research that we do,” said Marfro.

Most government grants also ask for matching industry dollars, he said, and with the new funding structure, finding those matching dollars isn’t a challenge.

“Last year, some associations could not match the amount that was needed to run their projects, but we had an excess, because our farmers’ donation alone was almost $100,000,” said Marfro.

“Because we also had the equipment and the county’s contribution for the land, we had almost $500,000.”

Diversifying Mara’s funding base beyond government and industry contributions allows the organization to be “as independent as (it) can.”

“Last week, for example, we were told we have to do this work and we have to do that work. We are not comfortable with that,” said Marfro.

“We want to minimize the government influence as much as we can.”

Their new funding structure also creates greater investment among the producers who participate in the organization’s research.

“These people are really serious about the research that they do,” said Marfro. “They pay for all the chemicals. They pay for all the seed. They use all the equipment.

“Producers are volunteering their time and making almost $100,000 for us each year.”

It also means the farmers are helping to “shape the process,” he said.

“If we get everything from the government or from private guys from outside the county, they may not like what the projects look like,” said Marfro.

“But if they take part in the whole process of, ‘we are funding you and we want you to do this,’ they help it take shape, and it works better than everything coming from the outside.”

And that’s particularly important in the far north, where “agriculture is very different from almost everywhere in the country.”

“We are unique,” said Marfro. “Our soils, our rain, and our weather are unique, so we need research to come up with plans or varieties that are more adapted to the local conditions.

“To be able to actually make meaningful decisions… you can’t use information from Manitoba.”

The post Peace farmers funding research by doing what they do best — farming appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

40 per cent of AWC producer checkoff dollars going into research projects,” said commission chair Kent Erickson. In total, the Agriculture Funding Consortium — a group of 14 funding organizations — is investing $9 million in research.

The post Funding for research projects appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.