“FedNor’s investment is a game-changer,” stated Dr. Jeffrey Wichel, dean, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, in a release. “It empowers Lakehead to build the foundation needed to train the next generation of veterinarians from Northern Ontario to serve the communities that need them most.”

Why it matters: The Collaborative Doctor of Veterinary Medicine program is the first of its kind, designed for Northern and rural agricultural economies

Minister Patty Hajdu, Minister of Jobs and Families, and Minister Responsible for FedNor, said CDVMP is indicative of how local partners marry new ideas with lasting partnerships to bolster Northern Ontario.

“A resilient Northern Ontario is one that keeps building for the future and investing in talent that will benefit generations to come,” said Hajdu, in a release.

Lakehead has allocated the funding for specialized laboratory and research equipment necessary to establish the Collaborative Doctor of Veterinary Medicine. The program, launched in collaboration with the University of Guelph, is designed to close long-standing gaps in veterinary care, strengthen the health and well-being of underserved regions across the north and support the growth of the agri-food sector.

“We are proud to partner with the University of Guelph on this initiative,” said Dr. Gillian Siddall, Lakehead University president and vice-chancellor. “Together, we are building a program that will train the next generation of veterinarians where they are most needed.”

The post Lakehead University’s Northern veterinary program gets federal boost appeared first on Farmtario.

A total of $75 million over five years will be available under the AgriMarketing program’s market diversification streams, federal Agriculture Minister Heath MacDonald announced in a news release on Feb. 10. The aim is to support Canadian agriculture and agri-food, including fish and seafood, to diversify markets in the face of current instability.

The programs will support all sectors but will focus on those most affected by trade barriers, such as canola, pulses, pork and seafood, the news release said.

The funds are divided between a stream for national industry organizations and one for small and medium-sized enterprises. This is separate from a $130 million AgriMarketing program announced under the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership.

The $75 million was previously announced on Sept. 5 and was included in the 2025 budget.

Applications open on Feb. 13.

The post New federal funding to open for agriculture, agri-food market diversification appeared first on Farmtario.

Matt McIntosh, an Essex County, Ont. farmer and conservation enthusiast, recently published a Nuffield Canada report, Conservation in Farm Country: What Makes a Good Farm Environmental Scheme?, which explores the challenging relationship between farmers and conservation efforts.

The report is a culmination of two-and-a-half years of travel, research, conversations and observations in which he explored how governments, local organizations and individual farmers are tackling conservation and restoration efforts. McIntosh travelled across several countries (Estonia, Latvia, Denmark, Ireland, Brazil, the United States, Canada and a few countries in the United Kingdom) and met with like-minded individuals to determine best practices to approach agriculture and environmental conservation.

“Farmers are the same, no matter where you are in the world,” says McIntosh. “We all have similar characteristics and want the best for our farms and surrounding environment, and we all want to leave a legacy for the next generation.”

Finding common ground

In his report, McIntosh identifies what works — and what doesn’t — in the design and delivery of agri-environmental initiatives, offering valuable lessons for Canadian policymakers, farm organizations, conservation authorities and farmers themselves.

McIntosh’s takeaway from his experience, and one of his report conclusions, is that on-farm environmental and economic gains do not need to be separate, that farmers can benefit from both — with the right programs in place.

“Nature is messy and what farmers want is straight lines,” says McIntosh. “But as production efficiency improves, we have a little more wiggle room to look at our practices. It doesn’t have to be one or the other, production and profit or environmental conservation; we can have both.”

McIntosh notes another common theme and barrier to conservation efforts here at home and across the globe: the cultural divide between farmers and conservationists. He explains that “as farmers, we’ve been incentivized to do more, to produce more. And sometimes that production-focused mindset trumps environmental or conservation practices.” Culturally, this mentality will require time to change and refocus, and McIntosh believes effective environmental programs that incentivize farmers to make positive changes are needed to make the change.

Cultural barriers to environmental conservation and restoration projects can easily crop up between neighbours, or even farm family generations, especially when one person wants to do something different. McIntosh explains that simply the act of changing a practice or implementing new ideas can be perceived by neighbouring farmers as criticism directed at them for their own farming methods, making it hard to change.

Other barriers to conservation efforts can be attributed to inadequate program funding and overly complex requirements, and the absence of on-the-ground extension support that often provides valuable resources and support to farmers implementing practices and programs.

Lessons from the field

McIntosh shares his observations in a series of case studies within the report. They illustrate a mix of success stories and cautionary tales across an array of on-farm environmental improvement efforts. He notes that the conservation and ecological programs that thrived had similar characteristics: a clear strategic vision, fair compensation for farmers’ ecological services, practical and timely support through extension, and flexible, farmer-driven delivery.

On the other hand, overly rigid or bureaucratic programs often failed to meet their goals, resulting in low participation and undermining the sense of shared purpose that McIntosh says is essential to long-term success.

“I looked for examples where people were winning, or encountering challenges from their programs,” he explains. “Those who were winning were realizing economic and ecological benefits. Those who weren’t had some clear red flags within their programs that restricted success.

Building programs that work

McIntosh believes conservation and ecological restoration success isn’t one-size-fits-all, especially since every farm and regional environment is so diverse.

“The successful outcome of any endeavour depends on the farmer, the program and whatever else you want to use to measure,” he says, citing an example from the United Kingdom where one of the determining factors of farmer compensation was the number and thickness of trees planted.

McIntosh questions the effectiveness of quantifying measurement standards and the unnecessary micromanagement of the program, and notes that other factors, such as increased biodiversity, could have been just as effective in determining the progress of the program.

No matter the standards used to define success, McIntosh offers several recommendations in his report for improving the design of conservation and restoration programs. They include: Establishing a strategic vision that integrates economic, environmental and social resilience before setting targets or metrics.

Compensating fairly for both risk and ecological services and delivering payments in a timely manner.

Investing in extension services and ensuring advisors are well-equipped to support farmers.

Empowering grassroots knowledge by engaging farmers early and often.

Balancing structure with flexibility, allowing room for innovation and regional adaptation.

McIntosh also recommends a shift in thinking when designing programs. He suggests approaching program development and implementation by asking whether a given conservation or restoration initiative truly empowers farmers to make positive change. “If the answer isn’t a clear ‘yes,’ the program may be missing the mark.”

Other practical recommendations include transferring program design and implementation to local levels when possible, striving for simplicity and ensuring initiatives are built for longevity rather than short-term results.

“You don’t need government-scale resources or complicated programming to make real change,” says McIntosh. He uses the example of re-establishment of Burren winterage, an ancient cattle production system in Ireland’s County Clare, which was one of the inspirations behind his Nuffield journey.

McIntosh explains that farmers in the Burren employ a system called “winterage” where cattle graze the region’s uplands from autumn through spring, helping to manage the landscape and regenerate grasslands. Despite the ecological benefits of this practice, the region’s winterage method came under threat from government conservation policy and general economic pressure in the 1990s. The result was the loss of a local grassland ecosystem.

So, farmers and environmental researchers developed a plan to reintroduce the proven winterage system. This regional initiative reintroduced winter grazing to maintain biodiversity and saw the development of a grassroots-led program, BurrenLIFE, established with the national government in 2010.

“Local farm and community efforts, guided by solid planning and farmer buy-in, can strengthen the environment, economy and social fabric of rural regions for the long haul,” says McIntosh.

Farming for the future

Exploring how rural landscapes are being effectively conserved and restored has helped McIntosh gain a deep understanding of what those efforts really involve. His experience also gave him a new perspective on efforts being made here in Canada, from on-farm projects through to how policies and programs are developed.

“Most Canadian farmers are already implementing beneficial conservation practices, but we can take those efforts further by opening conversations about the business and economic benefits of these practices,” he says. “We should also be thinking generationally, not just about what needs to be done now, but how we can leave the land for future use and enjoyment.”

Of course, it will also take the right policy supports, grounded in trust, fairness and flexibility, for farmers to continue as partners in conserving and restoring Canada’s natural landscapes.

A statement in McIntosh’s report reminds farmers that “agriculture may not be Nature’s best friend. It does not, however, have to be its greatest nemesis.” While there are plenty of barriers to the environmental conservation and restoration of ecologically and culturally significant spaces in agricultural landscapes, the solution depends on empowering the people who know the land best to shape its future.

Read Matt’s full Nuffield report Conservation in Farm Country: What Makes a Good Farm Environmental Scheme?

The post Conservation on the farm: Empowering farmers to lead environmental change appeared first on Farmtario.

The Next Policy Framework, which will succeed the current Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership, will cover the 2028-33 period as the main government mechanism for supporting Canadian agriculture.

On Tuesday, Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Heath MacDonald hosted a roundtable in Ottawa with agriculture groups from across Canada.

MacDonald said he will continue to host more negotiations with regional associations and producers. He added the government welcomes submissions to framework via an online consultation and social media.

MacDonald acknowledged the consultations must address the increasing geopolitical challenges producers are facing, but also “position the sector for exciting opportunities ahead.” He pointed to the government’s recent trade agreement with China.

The Next Policy Framework is “a vitally important piece to the success of the industry going forward, and ultimately to the success of the economy of Canada as well,” said Canadian Federation of Agriculture President Keith Currie.

“The important part of developing of any kind of framework is that consultation piece,” Currie said. “It started today, but the great thing is, it’s going to continue in the months ahead, right across the country, so that all of our stakeholders have that opportunity for input.”

The post Agriculture Minister hosts agriculture leaders, launches policy framework talks appeared first on Farmtario.

Farm Credit Canada’s new Sustainable Finance Framework (SFF) is built around that reality. Announced in September 2025, it includes a $1.9 billion commitment to sustainable finance by 2030 to strengthen Canadian agriculture’s resilience, efficiency, and productivity, and to advance long-term food security.

It is among the largest structured sustainable finance commitments in Canadian agriculture, offering clear criteria for what defines sustainable finance within the sector.

“We’re here to support the industry, not ask people to do more,” said Marie-Claude Bourgie, FCC’s vice-president of sustainability.

From financing advisory or consulting support to investing in energy-efficient equipment, Bourgie said the FCC is backing on-farm investments that improve productivity and resilience, open access to stronger markets, and help farms strengthen their position across the food value chain for the long term.

“We’re taking a whole value chain approach to this initiative by incorporating environmental and social aspects across the framework,” she explained. “Whether it’s enhancing the biodiversity on the farm or reducing product packaging, we’re investing in business across the agri-food value chain.”

Supporting investments

The science-based SFF offers FCC clients financing for projects aligning with the FCC’s sustainability focus, including 60 eligible activities or best management practices that are proven and vetted by industry and validated by third-party scientific experts every two years.

For example, the adoption of cover crop practices, intercropping or relay cropping, enhanced crop rotation or integrating livestock systems such as rotational grazing could be eligible under soil health.

Implementation of silvopasture, alley cropping, or planting, and maintenance or non-conversion of riparian zones or shelterbelts falls under the wetland and tree category. Water conservation practices, such as efficient irrigation management or tile drainage water recycling for drought protection, fall under sustainable water management, quality, and availability.

Other categories include livestock management, biodiversity, crop input management, resilience and adaptation, waste management, food security, Indigenous empowerment and support of underserved groups.

“We understand that a one-size-fits-all sustainability model wouldn’t work, and that’s where the framework’s practice-based approach matters,” said Bourgie, explaining that focusing on outcomes and management practices rather than rigid criteria allows farmers to apply and measure sustainability concepts in ways that fit their operation, their commodity, and their region.

Recognizing farmers

For Ontario farmers, FCC’s Sustainable Finance Framework isn’t about changing priorities; it’s about recognizing them.

Those already focused on good management and practical stewardship, signalling alignment with recognized sustainability standards and solid farm business planning, could be further encouraged by new financing opportunities.

“This framework isn’t prescriptive – it builds on what farmers are already doing,” Bourgie said. “We’re recognizing, supporting and investing in the sustainability and future of the industry.”

The post Sustainable Finance Framework to recognize existing farm practices to unlock capital appeared first on Farmtario.

“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 Farmtario.

The scholarship awards were presented during the OFA’s Annual General Meeting in Toronto Nov. 25.

Drew Spoelstra, livestock farmer and president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, said in a release “Access to veterinary care is essential for livestock health, food safety, and farm productivity and we are proud to play a role in supporting students who will help meet these critical needs in the future.”

In addition to the OFA, Dairy Farmers of Ontario, Beef Farmers of Ontario, Veal Farmers of Ontario, Ontario Sheep Farmers and livestock genetics company EastGen have all provided financial support for the scholarship program.

“We are grateful to Ontario’s farming community for their leadership in supporting veterinary education. These scholarships not only recognize the talent and dedication of our students but also reinforce the vital connection between veterinary care and the health of Ontario’s livestock sector,” said Dr. Jeffrey Wichtel, Dean, Ontario Veterinary College, in a release.

The Dairy Farmers of Ontario sponsored the following recipients:

Alison Eyre, Athens Ont. (United Counties of Leeds and Grenville)

Alison Eyre grew up on a dairy farm in Eastern Ontario near Athens and, after completing her animal science degree at Guelph, is now in her first year at OVC.

Lily Copp, Erin Ont. (Wellington County)

Lily Copp graduated from Guelph this spring with a degree in Animal Biology and is now in her first year at OVC. She works at Kitcholm Farms in Moffat and plans to work in dairy herd health after graduation.

The Beef Farmers of Ontario sponsored the following recipient:

Hope Grootenboer, Murillo, Ont. (Thunder Bay District)

Hope Grootenboer grew up on a family dairy farm near Thunder Bay and, after graduating from Lakehead University, she is now in her first year at OVC as part of the new northern cohort. Her goal is to become a mixed animal veterinarian in the Thunder Bay area following graduation.

Sponsored by the Veal Farmers of Ontario:

Erica Robertson, Kent Bridge, Ont. (Chatham-Kent)

Erica Robertson is the sixth generation on her family farm near Ridgetown and gained early experience with cattle and poultry on her grandfather’s feedlot and pullet farm. Now in her final year of the veterinary medicine program at OVC, she is looking forward to a career focused on large animal medicine.

Ontario Sheep Farmers and EastGen co-sponsored recipient:

Samantha Dixon, New Hamburg, Ont. (Waterloo Region)

Samantha Dixon is a second-year vet student at OVC, following completion of a master’s degree in animal breeding and genetics that focused on parasitic resistance in sheep. She is looking forward to using her sheep industry experience and passion for dairy calf health and herd management in her veterinary career.

2025 OFA Veterinary Technician Scholarship Recipients:

Mavis Carberry, Guelph/Eramosa, Ont. (Wellington County)

Mavis Carberry is in her second year of the veterinary technology program at Ridgetown. An active 4-H participant, she has interests in sheep, beekeeping, and rabbit husbandry.

Alexa Elford, Kimberley ON (Grey County)

Alexa Elford was raised on a beef farm in Kimberley and after several years of full-time work as a veterinary assistant, has just started in the vet tech program. She has long-time involvement with 4-H, has her own sheep flock and is building a Simmental herd with her fiancé.

Claire Koch, Baden, Ont. (Waterloo Region)

Claire Koch was raised on a dairy farm near Baden. She is an active school and community volunteer, and as this year’s Wellesley Fall Fair Ambassador, is looking forward to visiting schools and talking to kids about agriculture.

Sidney Sicard, Markdale, Ont. (Grey County)

Sidney Sicard is a competitive plower, community volunteer and 4-H participant. A former local Queen of the Furrow and 4-H Ontario ambassador, Sidney hopes to focus on improving genetics and herd efficiency as a vet tech.

The post Ontario farmers support scholarships for veterinary students appeared first on Farmtario.

At the time, the latest federal funding program for Canada’s entire agriculture sector was $3.5 billion over the forthcoming five years — less than half of the battery plant subsidy, if extrapolated an additional five years.

Not long afterwards, the federal government updated its subsidy estimates by adding a few billion dollars for Volkswagon.

The return on this investment looks a bit shaky. Indeed, we’re heading into some tough times as a country, much of which spurred by war criminals in the Kremlin, the malevolent talking leader in the White House, and other malign actors.

Much digital ink has been spilled about our own complacency, too, particularly when it comes to defence spending, infrastructure, and such like.

There’s also been a lot of talk about righting that complacency. And yet, agriculture — a critical industry repeatedly identified as having major growth potential — still seems like a black sheep.

The 2017 “Barton” report from the federal Advisory Council on Economic Growth, analyses from the University of Guelph and University of the Fraser Valley, Bioenterprise Canada, the Canadian Agri-Food Policy institute and others, all point to the agriculture sectors potential to accomplish much of the growth and development we’re going to need — more than ever, given we seem to have been forced back to an international environment characterized by the imperialism and mercantilism of bygone centuries.

We see a lot of photos where politicians such as Doug Ford, Danielle Smith and Mark Carney are wearing hard hats and gazing eagerly at rolls of aluminum, car parts, and all manner of industrial material.

But photos in agricultural settings, or pertaining to food and agribusiness, are fewer and far between.

Agriculture generates seven per cent of this country’s gross domestic product. For comparison, the automotive sector contributes 0.7 per cent. Agriculture also exists across the country, whereas other industries are more regionally concentrated.

The immensity of career opportunities in agri-food could address unemployment, even remedy anxiety among younger generations facing a tumultuous and uncertain job market and seemingly insurmountable cost of living. Upgrades to rail and port infrastructure used to export Canadian commodities also shore up national security, while reassuring our customers of Canada’s trade reliability.

Investments in a sector as diverse and diffuse as agriculture could help insulate the wider economy from singular shocks (more eggs in more baskets, if you will).

Making serious investments in agriculture could achieve all these things, and more. But it never seems top of mind for those at the top.

What do we have to do — indeed, what can we do — as an industry to help policy makers and more of the general public see the value of agriculture and agribusiness? What are we doing wrong? Right now, it’s as though they look at our farms but don’t actually see them.

The post Shouting into the void appeared first on Farmtario.

Why it matters: Farmers benefit when research is conducted to help solve problems or improve efficiencies on-farm.

Does industry need drive research, or does research identify gaps and then offer industry solutions?

When done well, it turns out, it’s a bit of each said presenters at the Livestock Research and Innovation Corporation’s annual Getting Research into Practice (GRIP)’s “Benchtop to Barnyard” roundtable in Elora, Sept. 30.

Dr. Tina Widowski, from the University of Guelph department of Animal Biosciences and Egg Farmers of Canada poultry welfare research chair, pointed to livestock codes of practice or the development of a non-penetrating captive bolt for humane euthanasia in poultry as prime examples of successful industry partnerships and practical research.

“When it comes to animal welfare, it can’t be opinion-based. It has to be fact-based. It has to be objective,” Widowski explained.

The codes of practice provide guidance on the care and handling of livestock. The codes’ development includes a variety of stakeholders, including farmers, veterinarians, government, animal advocacy groups and occasionally retailers.

These partnerships also provide a conduit for researchers to have their work published in relevant publications or guides, helping advance the industry.

For example, Widowski has performed research the examine the impact on productivity and welfare measures when introducing laying hens to enriched colonies with a higher space allowance, curtains, and a scratch mat. This research filled a knowledge gap that existed to inform the recently updated Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Pullets and Laying Hens.

Widowski advised all levels of researchers and students to spend time in the barn, take that farmer phone call, build relationships, and develop a comprehensive understanding of farm operations so that research can be translated into achievable solutions.

Dr. Alexandra Harlander, veterinarian and animal welfare scientist with the U of G, partnered with farmers as well as provincial and national poultry boards to collect data for a benchmarking study to develop a feather cover scoring system for Canadian laying hens in free-run and enriched housing systems.

Feather pecking is an abnormal behaviour leading to naked birds and potential cannibalism, resulting in increased feed, heating, and mortality costs, explained Widowski.

The system has been adopted and adapted for use by the Egg Farmers of Canada and translated into several languages.

“This was a beautiful collaboration with industry,” Widowski said, adding on-farm applicable research helps secure funding, especially through commodity groups. “And you can find research that has direct application to informing guidelines and practices because we (animal welfare sector) have a natural conduit for doing that.”

Problem-solving approach

Dr. Jennifer Ellis, an associate professor of Animal Systems Modelling at the U of G and a former Trouw Nutrition poultry research scientist, said that starting research from a problem-oriented perspective, rather than trying to force a solution, is more effective.

Ellis, who develops and refines mechanistic models and machine learning algorithms to understand and improve the relationship between animal physiology, digestion, and farm production, was inspired to create a pellet quality app after a failed poultry nutrition trial.

She believed that using machine learning to leverage untapped feed mill data, an algorithm could predict pellet quality and improve manufacturing methods in commercial feed mills.

Approaching her existing contacts at Trouw with the proposal led to an introduction to Molesworth Farm Supply’s manager of nutrition and production research, Dr. Meeka Capozzalo, as well as connections with Masterfeeds and Walinga.

“I don’t think this project would have been adopted or embraced by the industry as quickly if it weren’t based on relationships and the trust that existed between us,” said Ellis. “In addition, we’ve somehow succeeded in getting competitor companies to work together, because they see the value in this bigger-picture approach to solving this problem.”

Molesworth hadn’t produced pellets but wanted to address potential issues and wondered if increasing their throughput by 10 per cent could also be explored.

“I was extremely happy and relieved that they were willing to add to the research question in a significant way,” said Capozzalo, adding that, from an industry perspective, space to evolve research is critical. “Because, sometimes you think you’re solving a problem, but really your actual problem is something else.”

There were deep conversations about intellectual property and how much information Molesworth was willing to share with the university, industry partners, and who the end users or beneficiaries would be — whether that was decision-makers, policy and regulatory bodies, practitioners, or others — and how they would champion the project.

“It’s really important to identify those early on, address the concerns,” she said, adding it’s critical to engage the end-user and secure buy-in early.

“Also make sure that you’re really selling the value of what this project can do and how it will benefit them.”

The definition of a “problem” is shaped by each stakeholder’s perspectives and may not align.

Solutions to farm-level problems could be driven by the sustainability, affordability, adoptability, or adaptability of the solution, resulting in improved operations. Meanwhile, industry, policymakers, regulators, or other stakeholders are often interested in the bigger picture or in-depth data analysis, said Capozzalo.

When designing research, scientists need to recognize who is executing it, understand their personalities or care factor, and, if they’re producers, listen when they share their issues.

“I think a lot of producers don’t really realize they’re already researchers, (and) are hungry for knowledge and hungry to try new things,” Capozzalo explained.

“A lot of people still think research needs to be hard for it to be good, but I don’t think that’s necessarily true.”

The post Research meets reality: Farmers and scientists find solutions together appeared first on Farmtario.

The winning raffle ticket was drawn on Sept. 28 at the Ilderton Fair.

Why it matters: The Stanley Knapp Resource Development Fund supports 4-H project resource development, allowing Ontario’s youth an opportunity to expand their knowledge and access up-to-date information.

The canoe was built by Ron McRae, a longtime 4-H supporter, alumnus, and grandson of Stanley Knapp, who started the first Boys’ and Girls’ Club in Waterloo in 1915, which was renamed 4-H Canada in 1952.

“I wanted to honour my parents, Murray and Dorothy, for the years they devoted to agriculture and 4-H here in Middlesex,” McRae explained. “This can be my way of putting the 4-H motto, ‘Learn to Do by Doing,’ into action, one strip of cedar at a time.”

The canoe, won by Danny Jefferies, will serve as a reminder of the community he’s long supported.

“I’ve been involved with the fair for years,” said Jefferies. “To win something that means so much to Ron and to the history of 4-H makes it even more special.”

The post Ontario 4-H canoe raffle raises funds and awareness appeared first on Farmtario.