The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is seeking a home for waste from the province’s nuclear generating stations, and a 1,700-acre area in South Bruce is one of the proposed sites. It includes 250-acres for the waste site itself, surrounded by a 1450-acre buffer zone.

Why it matters: The nuclear sector has the challenge of finding suitable long-term below-ground storage for Canada’s low-to-intermediate nuclear waste.

Those in favour see the once-in-a-lifetime proposal as a rural industry lifeline that can provide financial stability and community investment. Opponents say the decision process lacks transparency and some farmers wonder how the repository could affect their livelihoods.

“There’s 25 per cent strongly opposed, 25 per cent strongly in favour, and 50 per cent asking for more information so they can make an informed decision,” said Mark Goetz, mayor for the Municipality of South Bruce.

• Letters: South Bruce residents should be concerned about deep repository nuclear waste project
• Letters: Would decisions be different if they were the ones expected to make sacrifices?

He said the repository would create 700 direct jobs, 1,100 indirect jobs, approximately $1 billion in economic spin-offs, a one-time payment of $418 million for securing the project, and a $70 million road use agreement.

“This is the biggest economic development we’ve ever seen and likely ever will see. I think it deserves a fair shake to make sure we’ve got everything dotted and Ts crossed.”

Opponents, who include the Protect Our Waterways—No Nuclear Waste group and local farmers, are concerned about wording in the host agreement and have accused some factions of lying about the process. They also question NWMO’s refusal to answer questions in a public setting.

Michelle Stein and Sharon MacDonald have farms that bookend the site acquired by the NWMO and are among the opponents.

“When I asked about nuclear stigma (at the Community Liaison Committee meeting), the answer I got back was, ‘we don’t think that will be much of an issue; it is something we could study in the future’,” said Stein. “Yet when you read the report, there’s a whole section on nuclear stigma, but they didn’t want to answer that in the public setting.”

Stein raises dairy sheep and beef. Her butcher told her he won’t process her lambs if the proposed repository goes through, and her sheep milk processor wouldn’t commit to maintaining a business relationship.

Goetz said Teeswater is 40 kilometres from North America’s largest nuclear plant, which stores five per cent of the nation’s nuclear waste above ground 300 yards from Lake Huron. He said there’s no issue marketing products from 1,300 beef cattle that graze on Bruce Power’s doorstep.

Fifth-generation farmer Darren Ireland, who oversees Gay Lea Foods Teeswater facility, sold and optioned portions of his land for that repository.

He said that years ago, Gay Lea tested milk for contaminants within the radius of the Bruce Nuclear, Pickering and Darlington Plants. Every water well, livestock, poultry, vegetable and cash crop product was also tested, he added.

A third-party conducts the tests now, and he can’t recall any failed safety tests.

Ireland said he is puzzled that Kinectrics, a large facility that opened in 2021 to provide laundry services for Bruce Power’s radioactive PPE equipment, failed to raise an eyebrow. Yet the repository proposal has divided the community.

“I’m not here to criticize (Kinectrics) because I’m sure they’ve got to follow procedure and make sure it all meets requirements,” he said. “We don’t care about that, but we’re worried about something that hasn’t even come here yet.”

Ireland also questioned how South Bruce can build roads, retain services and attract new investment without new industry.

Given the amount of land gobbled up annually by sprawl in Toronto, Bolton or Mississauga, and by gravel pits, Ireland said it’s worth considering a project that involves 250 acres converted into jobs and the balance of the 1,450 acres remaining productive.

As a fifth-generation farmer, Goetz said he understands the struggle to envision how a project of this size could positively reshape the community while still supporting the agriculture sector.

South Bruce is home to 21.4 per cent of Bruce County’s agriculture sector and half its dairy, dairy product and beverage manufacturing. The 25 per cent agricultural tax base is no longer enough to bolster the municipality’s finances, Goetz said.

He added that the municipality informs residents at every step and has posted the recently signed hosting agreement. He encourages everyone to read and submit questions to the South Bruce repository team.

Stein and MacDonald said clauses in the host agreement hint at land expropriation loopholes for expansion and bind municipal support during the regulatory process. In contrast, the NWMO is tied only to “good faith efforts” to incorporate or address municipal comments when making major applications to government regulators.

“The municipality cannot publicly disagree with this project; they cannot do anything to hinder or delay the project,” Stein said. “Which raises the question, if this is supposed to be such a great deal, why do they have to gag people?”

Goetz said the federal government can expropriate land with or without agreements in place, so he’d rather build relationships at the table to get the best possible municipal deal, protect agriculture and avoid future conflicts.

The NWMO has assured him that the 1,700 acres are more than sufficient for Canada’s nuclear waste volumes over its 100-plus-year life span, Goetz added.

Stein said NWMO’s property loss and business loss protection plans to cover lost income and property value related to the repository are insulting because they fail to recognize the impact on growth potential or relocation limitations.

“You can’t just milk sheep anywhere,” she said. “To find a processor, we would have to go south, where land is obviously more expensive, and I don’t want to go north.”

Another concern is placement of the 63-acre, 15-metre-high excavated rock management area and potential radon exposure. Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas released from soil and rock. Its half-life is 3.82 days, but prolonged exposure is known to cause cancer.

Stein and MacDonald, who farm at either end of the site, have each been told the rock pile would be in the other’s “backyard.”

A 2024 NWMO study showed no significant hazard during construction, operation and 100 metres from a release point, with approximately 100 times lower concentration of radon than Ontario’s average.

Ireland initially questioned the safety aspect of the project, whether the area contained suitable rock formations to house the underground facility and whether it would impact the water table. He agreed to a 12-inch pipe borehole on his optioned land to expand South Bruce’s knowledge of available untapped natural resources.

“I am allowing the study because I want to learn and get educated to make sure we make a sound and safe decision,” Ireland said. “I’m still learning about it. I can’t answer yes or no to the future yet because I need to learn more.”

Under the Municipal Elections Act, the electronic referendum vote scheduled Oct. 28 requires a 50 per cent turnout of eligible voters to be valid.

“If the referendum fails, it falls back onto the shoulders of the six councillors and the mayor to make the decision and decide the fate of the municipality,” Said Goetz. “It’s too easy to point the finger down the road at seven people versus (when) everybody has the equal opportunity here to cast a vote and have an equal say.”

If South Bruce and the Saugeen Ojibway Nation communities vote yes to the project, and members of the second proposed site in the Wabigoon Lake Ojibwa Nation-Ignace community also vote yes, the NWMO will make the final site decision.

The post Battle lines clear in nuclear waste storage plan appeared first on Farmtario.

That’s according to a recent online article by Farm Credit Canada (FCC) that delved into the dollars and cents of the renting-or-buying decision.

Generally, the cost to rent farmland is lower than financing a purchase, making renting a worthwhile option to explore, FCC said. It can support cash flow and minimize financial risk to the overall farm operation.

The best way to analyze this decision is what’s known as the rent-to-price ratio, which is the cash rental rate per acre divided by the value of that acre of land. The result is a ratio that is measured as a percentage.

For example, land worth $5,000 an acre, with a rental rate of $100 an acre, would have a rent-to-price ration of 2.0 per cent.

The largest increase in farmland values in 2023 were in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Quebec. With rental rates rising at a similar pace overall in those provinces the ratio remained stable. Alberta had a rent-to-price ratio of 2.4 per cent in 2023, down from 2.6 per cent in 2023. Saskatchewan was at 3.1 per cent both years. Manitoba was at 2.4 per cent both years.

The national rent-to-price ratio in 2023 was 2.52 per cent, a slight decrease from 2022. The lowest rent-to-price ratio provincially was Ontario, at 1.25 per cent in 2023, compared to 1.4 per cent in 2022. The highest was Prince Edward Island at 4.35 per cent in 2023, unchanged from 2022.

In 2022, Ontario saw the highest increase in farmland values with an average 19.4 per cent increase, with a more modest increase of 10.7 per cent in 2023. With the RP ratio decreasing this year, this indicates that cash rental rates agreements have not evolved at the same pace as farmland values.

Similar results were observed in Atlantic provinces with the rate of increase in rental agreements being lower than the rate of farmland value appreciation in both New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. These provinces experienced higher than average increases in farmland values in 2022.

Cash rental agreements are often negotiated for longer periods, which encourages better land stewardship and more predictability for both parties. There is also considerable fluctuation in each province’s cash rental rates and farmland values. The high-end RP ratio is usually seen on farmland with the lowest value per acre in the province.

Specialty crops, like potatoes, are generally negotiated at higher prices than other crops.

Renting farmland can complement land purchases and is often part of long-term strategic growth plans, FCC says, but a lot goes into that decision.

Rent or buy?

Renting may be part of the business strategic plan when an operation is looking to expand their land base and grow their operation. Buying land can tie up available capital and reduce cash flow, leaving fewer financing options for machinery, input needs or future expansion opportunities.

While there are obvious advantages of land ownership, cash flow remains a key consideration for producers, as this is tied to the ability to service debt and maintaining agility for capitalizing on opportunities, FCC says. The difference in per acre profitability is generated by subtracting the cost of renting land from a newly purchased land cost, assuming a 25 per cent down payment and 25-year amortization length.

Since 2021, the three Prairie provinces have seen an increased cash flow benefit from renting land compared to purchasing. In 2023 in Alberta, rented ground returned $160 per acre more than newly-purchased land. The same story holds true for Manitoba as the per acre difference in profitability due to renting has doubled since 2020.

Saskatchewan has also seen the advantage grow for renting over owned land as well, but with smaller results.
Ontario and Quebec producers have also seen higher cash flow advantages when moving to rental agreements compared to newly purchased land. Ontario’s rent advantage was 2.5 times higher in 2023 compared to 2020, while Quebec is 2.1 times higher.

While the cash flow advantage of renting over financing is significant, producers need to understand their cost of production before entering into a new land rental agreement to ensure it meets the needs of their operation.

The post Renting land better than buying for cash flow: FCC appeared first on Farmtario.

Farm groups and lawmakers are concerned that land buys by investors and foreign countries are driving up farmland prices and threatening national security.

Booker’s Farmland for Farmers Act, introduced on Thursday, would ban most corporations, pension funds and investment funds from buying or leasing farmland.

“We must protect farmland from becoming an investment strategy for huge corporations,” Booker said in a statement.

Institutional investors – including Nuveen Natural Capital, a subsidiary of TIAA, and UBS Farmland Investors – own $15.9 billion of farmland, according to the National Council of Real Estate Investment Fiduciaries’ Farmland Index.

Several U.S. senators, including Iowa Republican Joni Ernst and Montana Democrat Jon Tester, have introduced bills in recent months to limit foreign ownership of farmland, citing concerns that adversaries might buy U.S. land to gain influence.

The Senate on Tuesday passed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would boost federal review of foreign farmland purchases and limit some by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.

China holds less than 1% of U.S. foreign-owned farmland, according to the Department of Agriculture (USDA). Canada holds 31%.

Jordan Treakle, national program coordinator for the National Family Farm Coalition, said corporate ownership is the more pressing concern for rural communities because of its impact on land prices.

“Most farmers cannot outbid a multinational corporation,” he said.

The average price of an acre of farmland was $3,800 in 2022, a record high and up 75% from 2008, according to USDA data.

Booker hopes to pin his bill to this year’s farm bill, an omnibus package passed every five years that funds farm and nutrition programs, said a staffer.

–Reporting for Reuters by Leah Douglas in Washington.

The post U.S. Lawmakers seek to limit corporate, foreign ownership of farmland appeared first on Farmtario.

Kazakhstan is a major producer of grains, oilseeds and meat in the former Soviet region sandwiched between China and Russia and five years ago, its authorities decided to attract foreign investment into agriculture by opening up the farmland market.

But, unusually for the tightly controlled nation of 19 million people, the plan was met with street protests where demonstrators expressed concerns that giant neighbour China would eventually snap up all the fields and pastures.

The government then shelved the plan until this year. On Thursday, Tokayev said the foreign ownership ban would remain in place.

“The land (ownership) issue has always been very important to our people. It is a cornerstone and a sacred symbol of our statehood,” Tokayev said at a meeting with an advisory council.

“I order that the sale and leasing of agricultural land to foreigners and foreign legal entities be forbidden. This also includes legal entities with foreign shareholders.”

China is Kazakhstan’s key trade partner, creditor and investor, but its growing clout has prompted a rise in anti-Beijing sentiment among locals, which has also been fuelled by reports of a crackdown on ethnic Kazakhs in China’s Xinjiang province as part of a “de-radicalization” campaign.

— Reporting for Reuters by Olzhas Auyezov.

The post Kazakhstan’s president orders ban on foreign ownership of farmland appeared first on Farmtario.

The province on Thursday announced amendments to the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) Act — having received royal assent last spring — now come into force.

The ALR, which today includes 46,159 square km of B.C. land preserved for agricultural use, was set up in 1973 to stem the loss of “thousands of hectares” annually to development.

The new rules are expected to tighten the process by which any farmland can be permanently removed from the ALR, by allowing only local governments, First Nations and “other prescribed bodies” to make applications directly to the ALC to have land excluded.

The change “empower(s) local governments to ensure ALC decisions align with the land-use plans in their own communities,” the province said in a release.

Under the amended act, private landowners can still put in requests to have land removed from the ALR — but only if their local government agrees and makes the application to the ALC.

However, the province said Thursday, local governments indicated during recent public consultations that “they need sufficient transition time to implement these changes.”

Thus, that specific rule will go into effect Sept. 30, the province said.

Other amendments now in effect give the ALC the “flexibility” to create decision-making panels which can “better consider local and regional circumstances for land” within the ALR.

With that capability in hand, the province said, the ALC can cut the wait times for landowners seeking decisions — and can “make better use of the commissioners, drawing on their expertise in a related technical field or land-use issue.”

The new amendments are also expected to bring “more rigour” to the reconsideration process, by “clarifying the circumstances under which reconsiderations will proceed.”

They also add new criteria prioritizing “the protection of the size, integrity and continuity of the land base” that the ALC must consider in decision-making.

‘Land use pressure’

The amendments follow review and consultations by a ministerial committee starting in 2018, with the stated goals of preserving the ALR’s “productive capacity,” encouraging farming in the ALR for “uses related to agriculture and food production,” and strengthening the governance of both the ALR and ALC.

“During the past 45 years, the ALR boundary has been refined through early boundary reviews, local government land use planning exercises and over 48,000 individual applications,” the advisory committee said in a discussion document at the time.

The ALR boundary, the committee said, “is often viewed as temporary and adjustable” and. the idea that the ALR is available for urban uses “perpetuates land use pressure on farmland.”

That sort of speculation, the committee said, “results in a focus on applications made by individual landowners to modify the ALR and detracts from proactive work” such as regional-level land use planning, analyzing permitted uses and preserving and encouraging the ALR’s farm use. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Tighter regulations take effect for B.C. farmland reserve appeared first on Farmtario.

At Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show in Woodstock, Ont., Alex Barrie, engineer in training with the Ontario Environmental Management Branch, demonstrated his group’s efforts to study the impact equipment can have on the soil.

They have been conducting tests in many areas with different soil types to try and come up with data farmers can use when setting tire pressures for fieldwork.

Barrie said all the data should provide a better understanding of “what goes into causing compaction from vehicles.” His display at the show was meant to highlight the fact that even big tires can cause damage if inflation pressures are set too high.

“Right here we’re simulating a big single tire with high pressure and low pressure,” he said, while standing beside a high-horsepower tractor used to drive over an in-ground sensor during a demonstration.

“That’s a big single tire, but if you run a high pressure in it you’re still causing compaction.”

Barrie’s group wants farmers to be aware that minimizing compaction goes beyond just choosing the largest tire.

“On average we use 15 p.s.i. for most soils as the threshold for causing compaction,” he said. “But some soils if they’re dry might be a little stronger, and some soils, if they’re wet, might be a little weaker. So 15 is the number for average soil, and that came from some European research. If we run enough of these events we’ll have a good database on a variety of tire sizes and pressures in a variety of soil conditions.

“The biggest take-home message we’ve been finding when we do these events is not, ‘Should I go out and by 900 metric tires or something twice as wide,’ it’s just, ‘weigh your equipment and understand what tire pressure could be used to safely carry the load.’ A lot of the time tires are over-inflated, or at least have the potential to come down. 19 p.s.i. down to 17 p.s.i. isn’t just two p.s.i.; it’s five or 10 per cent. So that’s pretty substantial.”

But even after weighing a machine, Barrie said producers need to understand the effect of the work they’re doing in the field on each machine.

“If you weigh a machine in the yard and you go out and use it in the field, the weight changes,” he said. “In the case of big tillage equipment that takes a lot of draught force, you’re going to load up the back tires heavier than you would when it’s sitting in the yard. So you might need a little more pressure than is recommended for a static load.”

Auto-inflation systems can provide benefits, Barrie noted. But producers who don’t want — or can’t afford — the investment in a system like that can still take some steps to minimize the problem.

“It’s (an auto-inflation system) one option,” he said. “Causing compaction is really a management decision. The order of things you should look at is what’s your tire pressure, how heavy is the equipment, could I wait one more day. A lot of the time with some cropping systems being calendar driven rather than condition driven, a little extra moisture is probably going to drive compaction deep into the soil and give you those deeper problems that are hard to fix. It causes a whole host of problems. There are things you can do that don’t cost much money.”

The team’s research is finding soil compaction can extend down deep in some soils.

“In a sandy-loam soil we were seeing pressures high enough to cause compaction at 20 inches, that real deep compaction,” he said.

The group plans to continue its research until it has a large enough database to publish some inflation pressure guidelines and conclusions.

“We’re right in our infancy,” he said. “This is the first year we’ve had the (testing) equipment to ourselves.”

The post Looking for machinery compaction data appeared first on Farmtario.

Fewer than 400 white farmers are still operating in the southern African nation, after former president Robert Mugabe’s government evicted more than 4,000 under an often-violent land reform program.

Those who remained were issued with five-year renewable leases by the state compared to 99-year leases for black farmers, leaving their land vulnerable to expropriation by the government.

The agriculture ministry circular to staff, seen by Reuters, says white farmers should now be issued the same 99-year leases as black farmers.

“Please be informed that the minister of Lands, Agriculture and Resettlement has directed that all remaining white farmers be issued 99-year leases instead of the five-year leases as per the previous arrangement,” said the circular, dated Jan. 19.

Land ownership is one of Zimbabwe’s most sensitive issues. Colonialists seized some of the best agricultural land and much of it remained in the hands of white farmers after independence in 1980, while many blacks were landless.

Twenty years later, Mugabe authorized the violent invasions of many white-owned farms, justifying them on the grounds that they were redressing imbalances from the colonial era.

Mugabe, 93, resigned in November after the army and his ZANU-PF party turned against him.

Earlier this month a government document showed that Zimbabwe is considering establishing a special tribunal to determine the value of compensation and how to pay it to white farmers who have lost their land since 2000.

Many white farmers challenged their evictions legally but lost. Under Zimbabwe’s constitution all agricultural land belongs to the government.

— Reporting for Reuters by MacDonald Dzirutwe.

The post Zimbabwe to give white farmers 99-year leases appeared first on Farmtario.

The bill was backed by 236 lawmakers, narrowly over the 226 required to pass.

Currently Ukraine’s more than 99 million acres of farmland cannot be bought or sold. The land is instead divided into smaller plots that are leased, resulting in relatively low productivity and limited private and foreign investment.

The International Monetary Fund says the moratorium hampers the development of the agricultural sector and named land reform as a key condition for future funding under its US$17.5 billion loan program.

But the issue is politically sensitive in Ukraine — once the breadbasket of the Soviet Union — and some politicians say lifting the moratorium could lead to a land-grab by powerful businessmen or foreign conglomerates.

“Today 60 per cent of Ukrainian live below the poverty line. Who will buy this land? Only oligarchs,” Svoboda party MP Yuriy Levchenko said before the vote.

— Reporting for Reuters by Pavel Polityuk and Natalia Zinets; writing by Alessandra Prentice.

The post Ukraine’s parliament extends ban on farmland sales appeared first on Farmtario.

From March 1, foreign purchases of agricultural land over A$15 million (C$14.51 million) will be subject to regulatory approval from the country’s Foreign Investment Review Board, Prime Minister Tony Abbott said.

Previously, Australia had only required regulatory approval on foreign purchases of agricultural land of more than A$240 million (C$232 million).

“This is not saying that we don’t want foreign investment,” he told reporters.

“We do want foreign investment but it’s got to be the right investment, the right investment that serves our purposes. It needs to be transparent.”

The tighter rules will also prevent multiple purchases below the threshold, with regulatory approval being required as soon as total transactions by one purchaser pass $15 million.

Australia’s Bureau of Statistics said last June 90 per cent of agricultural land is fully owned by Australians, although Abbott promised greater scrutiny after the rural sector expressed scepticism about those findings.

Abbott said the Australian Taxation Office will conduct a review in June of all land ownership to provide a more detailed “stocktake,” with a registry of foreign ownership to come at an unspecified date.

Foreign ownership of Australian land has been a controversial issue. By announcing the tighter rules, the embattled Abbott will win favour from some. He is looking to tighten his grip on power after narrowly surviving an internal party challenge to his leadership on Monday.

— Colin Packham reports for Reuters from Sydney, Australia.

The post Australia tightens rules over foreign buying of farmland appeared first on Farmtario.