The Waterloo, Ont.-based company has also recently raised $7.3 million to continue expanding its unique system.

WHY IT MATTERS: Nitrogen costs are a significant part of farm budgets, so a way to reduce those costs while increasing yields is enticing for farmers.

Upside Robotics turns traditional crop fertilization on its head by microdosing liquid nutrients using a small robot that runs between corn rows and refills and charges on its own at a docking station in the field.

The company has spent two years building the system from scratch, with the assistance of farmer co-operators such as Don Bender, a dairy farmer near Tavistock.

His trial in 2025 started on 80 acres of corn, but some acres were dropped when an oat cover crop complicated nitrogen management. Bender is working with the company again in 2026.

He sees great potential in the technology to meet the goals of 4R nutrient management: the right source, the right rate, the right time and the right place.

“There’s the potential to reduce excess fertilizer in some areas of the field and boost others,” Bender said at the London Farm Show.

“You run your strip-till, and you’re putting 250 pounds of product out. It’s 250 pounds (of nitrogen) too much here, 250 pounds not enough there. To me, it doesn’t make sense,” he said.

The robot applies nitrogen, as it is the corn nutrient with the biggest impact on farm finances. Bender is also excited about the potential of dosing more than nitrogen, applying other fertilizers and micronutrients as the crop shows it needs them, and applying them in other ways, such as on the leaves.

Tanya Franklin, Upside Robotics’ vice-president of agronomy and strategic partnerships, said she can see that in a cold, wet spring, when phosphorus and zinc are tied up in the soil, a foliar application could make sense to deliver those nutrients to the plant and encourage root growth.

“We foliar feed when the time is right, and then we can pound nutrients into the root to take that even further. Think of the potential, 250 bushels is going to turn into 350,” Bender said.

“That’s the part that a lot of the farmers are pushing us on,” said Jana Tian, co-founder and CEO of Upside Robotics. “It’s not all about nitrogen savings. It’s about finding what the other yield-limiting factors are and how we push for that.”

WATCH: Scott Garvey chatted with Jana Tian at Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show in 2024.

Creating more functions for the robots will require experimentation and validation, as well as an increase in the data load, which is already extraordinary.

Upside Robotics uses algorithms to fine-tune nutrient applications based on baseline and real-time data. The robots are now fitted with crop-sensing equipment.

“One robot last year collected 10 terabytes of data, which is insane,” Tian said. “Now we’re analyzing, processing and building models on it, but that’s like hundreds of algorithms we are validating. So it’s going to take some time.”

Reducing equipment

The system also reduces equipment and logistics on the farm, Bender said. The sprayer doesn’t have to stop during fungicide application to add a late-season nitrogen pass. A side-dress pass is eliminated when the corn is young.

He also hopes to limit applications such as fungicides by keeping the corn healthier.

Bender recounted a story that illustrated the Upside Robotics team’s work ethic.

It was 11 p.m. when one of the robots stopped working in his field. Tian showed up and carried a battery and cables to the robot, which needed charging. It had been raining, and the field was wet. They worked until 1 a.m. on the machine.

One of the robots had to go in for repairs.

“I found out she couldn’t get the robot going because the motor had fried, so she pushed the robot out of the field, a quarter- to half-mile, put it in her van and took it home to fix it.”

The post Upside Robotics looks to next steps in crop fertility microdosing appeared first on Farmtario.

A field with adequate fertility doesn’t necessarily equate to adequate plant nutrition, said Jack Legg, SGS Crop Science manager and agronomist, at Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement’s Microsmart Deep Dive presentation in Kingston.

Soil tests assess the potential availability of nutrients under optimal conditions. In contrast, tissue tests indicate actual uptake under variable field conditions.

“Non-limiting in the soil is where you want to be, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the crop is utilizing it efficiently,” Legg explained. “Tissue samples tend to be reactionary. People see a deficiency; they want to confirm it. They send in the tissue.”

“We don’t really want to see deficiencies,” said Legg. “We want to test before things go deficient.”

According to him, tissue tests are a proactive nutrient management tool that identifies “hidden hunger” before it escalates into a critical issue.

Chris Roelands, president of Honeyland Ag Services, explained that soil sampling should follow the same schedule, ideally in the fall when soil moisture is sufficient, to provide comparable results on nutrient availability year over year.

“Soil testing is still the base of where everything starts, right?” he said, adding it’s the soil reserve baseline to inform needed inputs.

In general, soil testing in the fall provides ideal moisture levels for probing ease and nutrient accuracy.

Soil scientist Rigas Karamanos noted that research from the Saskatchewan Soil Testing and Enviro-Test Laboratories indicates that weather and soil moisture influence soil pH during the growing season. He explained that as the pH changes, which can be significant with soil moisture, the availability of nutrients also shifts. For example, potassium tends to bind to clay under drier conditions.

However, Roelands cautioned that three aspects — genetics, environment and management (G.E.M.) — can affect how plants convert soil nutrients.

“Soil moisture, temperature, or whether it’s something related to management, can be what changes what we see in our plant tissue test versus what we’re seeing in our soil test,” Roelands said.

For example, manganese availability and uptake are more efficient in compacted, saturated and anaerobic conditions, but those are terrible for other nutrient uptake.

The soil and tissue tests of V10 corn at approximately six feet tall show that, on average, potassium levels in the soil and tissue concentration rose in unison. However, a closer look at individual field sites revealed that soil sites with a less-than-desirable 60 ppm K level had plants with decent levels. Where plants tested poorly for potassium, the soil levels were decent.

This is where G.E.M. comes into play to provide answers on why that’s happening, said Roelands.

Legg said tissue testing throughout the growing season provides unique insights into the plant’s current needs at the juvenile, mid-season and flowering or silking stages to inform how to mitigate immediate issues and plan for the following season.

“The basic rule of thumb is to test as much, as frequently and as intensively as you’re willing to pay for obviously and willing to manage,” Legg suggested. “Starting with one or two tissues in a crop a year is a good starting point. Weekly is very interesting, but it’s a heck of a lot of data and a lot of work.”

There are a few easy rules to follow to ensure the best bang for your buck with tissue samples. The first is leaf quantity. Corn leaves are probably the easiest, but Legg suggested a third to half-full paper lunch bag for other crops.

“When we dry that down, that only leaves us with a few grams of dried material,” he explained. “One little soybean trifoliate is not enough to test.”

Due to nutrient mobility, the ideal sample is the most recent fully developed leaf, usually a few down from the top, wrapped in paper instead of plastic to avoid slimy samples.

“Identifying the growth stage (is important),” he added. “The critical values are usually tied to a physiological age, usually when the plant is under stress like flowering or silking. Make sure you label them appropriately.”

If selecting tissue samples for a v3 corn plant (which is rare), pull the entire plant cut at grade without roots, said Legg. Select the most recently collared leaf at the vegetative stage and the ear leaf at tasselling. Wheat follows a similar vein, with soybean, requiring the most recently mature trifoliate throughout the season.

He encouraged producers to provide a clean sample, cutting it as low as possible without soil contamination, which provides biased results.

“Folks think micronutrients are less important,” he shared. “They’re essential nutrients required for that whole plant life cycle, but in much smaller quantities.”

He said we’ve managed without fertilizing micronutrients for decades, but it’s becoming a soil management focal point, said Legg.

Ontario soils generally contain sufficient copper, iron, and molybdenum supplies but require micronutrients like zinc, manganese or boron, which has a narrow range between adequate and toxic. Legg said that integrating these in a proactive nutrient management program can optimize crop yield.

He suggested farmers try check and zero strip trials with varying rates to test the payback on their farms, noting a pound of zinc and manganese costs approximately four dollars, while a pound of boron is slightly more expensive at $7.25.

He explained that fertilizers can increase manganese levels over time, but application is crucial. Applying a foliar treatment to symptomatic soybeans, for example, is a quick fix, but fertilizing the leaves does not enhance soil fertility.

“The bottom line is, in general, if your (zinc and manganese) index value is greater than 15 ppm, you have enough nutrients,” said Legg. “(Boron levels of) 0.5 ppm is considered low, and 1.0 ppm is considered high.”

The post Taking the mystery out of soil and tissue tests appeared first on Farmtario.

The Weston Family Foundation — the philanthropic arm of the Weston business empire — has slated $10 million for those eight projects through the organization’s soil health initiative, it was announced Feb. 13.

The initiative is tagged under the foundation’s “environmental stewardship” stream — a category mandated towards biodiversity improvement, research and sustainable agriculture. Other projects in the stream have funded ecological renewal around the Great Lakes and promoted grasslands.

The new soil health initiative was launched in spring 2022. Successful projects would help spread practices like cover cropping, 4R nutrient management or diverse crop rotations to increase soil organic matter, according to the foundation’s website.

In total, 38 organizations made a bid for the funding, said Eliza Mitchell, chair of the foundation’s conservation committee. Of those, 16 were invited to make a full proposal, with the final lineup decided by a review panel.

“Several [reviewers] were active farmers, but they all had experience in soil health management, some were involved in conservation…and they were all in fair agreement of the outstanding eight,” Mitchell said.

Those standouts “had a really clear focus and a really clear way forward,” she said. “The projects that showed a defined and clear approach on how they would successfully help shift producers towards greater adoption were given more weight.”

The list of chosen projects includes digital soil mapping tools for better nitrogen management, a farmer-led peer network, a reverse auction model to incentivize small grain and cover crop acres, research into cover crop best practices, benchmarking soil in Ontario’s Greenbelt, soil health outreach, a registry to help underpin markets for ecosystem service credits and Indigenous-led education for managing First Nations farmland.

The project list spreads funds widely nationwide, although Mitchell said that was more happy accident than part of the selection criteria. First project assessments were largely blind in terms of location, she noted.

The final list also spans both industry and academic perspectives, she said, pointing to the split of producer groups and universities singled out for funding. Half of the awardees are post-secondary institutions.

“There’s a lot of complexity in soil health and in rebuilding healthy, fertile soil, so there’s lots of ways of going at it. But we wanted to find projects that would help promote beneficial management practices, not just to the individuals involved, but hopefully communicate it out into the wider farming community,” Mitchell said.

— Alexis Stockford reports for the Manitoba Co-operator from Brandon.

The post Multi-million-dollar fund greenlights soil health projects appeared first on Farmtario.

Corteva Agriscience said Wednesday it had signed a “definitive agreement” to buy Houston-based Stoller in an all-cash acquisition worth US$1.2 billion (C$1.61 billion), which it expects to close in the first half of the new year.

Stoller, whose Canadian operations are based out of Regina, makes and sells crop protection and nutrition products such as X-Cyte, a plant growth hormone meant to help protect plants against heat blast; Fortified Stimulate, another plant growth regulator combining X-Cyte’s active ingredient with three other hormones; and plant nutrient combinations billed as “growth-enhancing co-factors” under brands such as Bio-Forge, Action, X-Tra Power and Sugar Mover.

Stoller, Corteva noted Wednesday, has operations and sales in over 60 countries and its revenues for full-year 2022 are forecasted to come in above US$400 million.

“Biologicals provide farmers with sustainably-advantaged tools that complement crop protection technologies, and collectively, can work to address global challenges around food security and climate change,” Corteva CEO Chuck Magro said in that company’s release.

Corteva said it forecasts the biologicals market to grow by “high-single digits” each year through 2035, which by then would put that segment’s share of the overall crop protection market at around 25 per cent.

Corteva said it’s developed a “world-class” biologicals business in the past three years through not only acquisitions and licensing and distribution deals, but also through “external and internal innovation” and R+D collaborations.

Corteva in September also announced a deal to buy Spanish microbiologicals firm Symborg for an undisclosed amount. Those two companies had already collaborated on the recent launches of two biostimulant products, Utrisha N and BlueN.

Stoller, Magro said Wednesday, “represents a leader in the biologicals industry given its commercial presence and market expansion potential, while also delivering attractive growth and operating margins.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Corteva to buy biological plant stimulant firm Stoller appeared first on Farmtario.

Now, facing a global shortage of commercial fertilizers made worse by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, more U.S. growers are knocking on his door. Sandquist says they’re clamouring to get their hands on something Old MacDonald would swear by: old-fashioned animal manure.

“I wish we had more to sell,” said Sandquist, founder of Natural Fertilizer Services Inc., a nutrient management firm based in Iowa. “But there’s not enough to meet the demand.”

Some livestock and dairy farmers, including those who previously paid to have their animals’ waste removed, have found a fertile side business selling it to grain growers. Equipment firms that make honeywagons are also benefiting.

Not only are more U.S. farmers hunting manure supplies for this spring planting season, some cattle feeders that sell waste are sold out through the end of the year, according to industry consultant Allen Kampschnieder.

“Manure is absolutely a hot commodity,” said Kampschnieder, who works for Nebraska-based Nutrient Advisors. “We’ve got waiting lists.”

Sky-high prices for industrial fertilizer are projected to reduce American farmers’ corn and wheat plantings this spring, according to U.S. government data. That further threatens global food supplies as domestic wheat inventories are the lowest in 14 years, and the Russia-Ukraine war is disrupting grain shipments from those key suppliers.

While manure can replace some of the nutrient shortfall, it’s no panacea, agriculture specialists say. There’s not enough supply to swap out all the commercial fertilizer used in the U.S. Transporting it is expensive. And prices for animal waste, too, are rising on strong demand.

It’s also highly regulated by state and federal authorities, in part due to concerns about impacts on water systems.

Manure can cause serious problems if it contaminates nearby streams, lakes and groundwater, said Chris Jones, a research engineer and water quality expert at the University of Iowa.

Livestock farmers say it’s a heavy lift to meet all the government rules and track how manure is applied.

Race for waste

Regardless of the drawbacks, demand is booming.

In Wisconsin, three dairy farmers told Reuters they turned down requests to buy their manure sent via text and Twitter messages.

North Carolina-based Phinite, which makes manure-drying systems, says it’s fielding solicitations from growers as far away as Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa and Indiana.

Smithfield Foods, the world’s largest pork producer, has noticed the shift at the U.S. hog farms that supply its slaughterhouses.

“We’re definitely seeing farmers move toward manure with the increase in fertilizer prices,” said Jim Monroe, a spokesperson for the company, which is owned by Hong Kong-listed WH Group.

Industrial fertilizers such as nitrogen require a lot of energy to produce. Prices started to surge last year amid rising demand and lower supply as record natural gas and coal prices triggered output cuts by fertilizer manufacturers. Extreme weather and COVID-19 outbreaks also roiled global supply chains.

War in Ukraine has made the situation worse by reducing fertilizer exports from Russia and its ally Belarus due to Western sanctions and shipping snags. That threatens to shrink harvests around the world at a time of record food inflation. Combined, Russia and Belarus accounted for more than 40 per cent of global exports of potash last year, one of three critical nutrients used to boost crop yields, according to Dutch lender Rabobank.

As of March, commercial fertilizer prices reached a record high, with nitrogen fertilizer jumping four-fold since 2020 and phosphate and potash up three-fold, said London-based consultancy CRU Group.

One person left bereft is Dale Cramer, who grows corn, soybeans and wheat on about 6,000 acres at Cambridge, Nebraska. Searching for alternatives, he has sniffed around feedlots for manure since last August with no luck.

“A lot of people have put their names in for the same thing,” Cramer said.

Honeywagon scramble

With demand for manure surging, prices have followed, delivering an unexpected windfall to livestock producers and cattle feedlots.

Prices for good-quality solid manure in Nebraska alone have reached $11 to $14 per ton, up from a typical price of $5 to $8 per ton, consultant Kampschnieder said (all figures US$). A dry winter helped drive up prices by leaving manure with less water in it, making it more concentrated, and thus more valuable, he said.

Iowa farmer Pat Reisinger is relieved he has dung from the pigs and dairy cows he raises to fertilize the corn, soybeans and hay he grows to feed those animals. He sold a little manure to one neighbor and is getting phone calls from others in need.

“If I sold any more, I’d have to turn around and buy commercial fertilizer, which makes no sense,” Reisinger said.

The boom has also has lifted machinery companies that make spreading equipment for solid manure as well as so-called honeywagons: wheeled tanks hitched to trucks and tractors for transporting and applying liquefied waste.

In Ontario, Husky Farm Equipment is sold out of honeywagons. The company built its first contraption back in 1960 as a way to make collecting and spreading manure more efficient, according to company president Walter Grose. Today Grose sells directly to farmers and machinery dealerships, and he can’t keep up.

“We have people looking for equipment right away and we’re sold out for six months,” said Grose who sells honeywagons in several sizes. Bigger tanks come with a $70,000 average price tag.

CNH, the American-Italian farm and construction equipment giant, said it has seen strong demand for its New Holland brand box spreaders — essentially, a steel box that attaches to a tractor to haul and spread solid manure.

Kansas equipment dealership KanEquip Inc. is sold out of New Holland spreaders, even though prices have jumped 10 per cent from the normal list price of $30,000, said regional manager Bryndon Meinhardt. He said the dealership has ordered 10 more to meet demand.

No poop for you

Even in states where large livestock herds generate massive quantities of manure, there’s not enough to replace commercial fertilizer completely. Iowa, the top U.S. producer of pork and corn, already applies all of its manure on land covering about 25 per cent of its corn acres each year, said Dan Andersen, an associate professor at Iowa State University who specializes in manure management.

On average, Iowa uses about 14 billion gallons of manure annually, said Andersen, known as @DrManure on Twitter. He expects Iowa growers may suck out an extra billion gallons this year from storage in tanks on farms to substitute pricey commercial fertilizer.

Part of the current supply problem is rooted in the evolution of the U.S. farm economy. As America’s livestock sector has consolidated, there are geographical hubs where animals are raised for eggs, milk or meat, and where the most manure is produced. As a result, some places have too little, while others have too much and have wrestled with ways to dispose of it.

Last October, Pennsylvania dairyman Brett Reinford thought he might be tight on manure storage space over the winter. So he made an offer to local farmers: You come and haul it away, you can have it for free. He got no takers.

Fast forward six months and Reinford is now sitting on liquid gold. “We’re keeping it all and I wish we had more,” he said.

Manure could become even more precious later this year, as U.S. livestock herds and poultry flocks shrink.

The number of hogs in the United States has dropped to its lowest level in about five years, as producers grapple with swine diseases and rising costs for feed and other inputs. Bird flu, meanwhile, has wiped out more than 22 million chickens and turkeys on commercial U.S. farms since February.

But even hard-hit poultry farmers could have something to use: Their dead birds can be composted and applied as fertilizer, according to the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship.

— Reporting for Reuters by P.J. Huffstutter and Tom Polansek in Chicago and Bianca Flowers in Chicago and New York. Additional reporting by Leah Douglas in Washington, D.C.

The post No poop for you: Manure supplies run short as fertilizer prices soar appeared first on Farmtario.

The other is its availability, said Todd Lewis, president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS).

“We forecast prices to remain at elevated levels for the first quarter. Urea prices have dropped over recent weeks, with a big pull back in the U.S. this week. But with supply still relatively tight, ammonia prices still at record highs, a large volume of European capacity remains idle (and) China out of the market until June…(w)e don’t see a sustained fall in prices for a while yet,” Lawson wrote in an email to MarketsFarm.

“We will most likely see some declines start in the second quarter, and even more so over the second half. This is when we expect energy prices to decline from the current extraordinary levels, more supply and demand rebalancing, and a general softening in commodity markets,” he said.

Lewis emphasized there needs to be real transparency from fertilizer industry.

“As producers make their seeding plans, it’s going to be important to know the fertilizer they’re going to require is going to be on time. It would be a shame to see delays because of a fertilizer shortage,” he said.

Lawson listed several factors to explain the sharp spikes in fertilizer prices over the last number of months. Those included record-high natural gas prices throughout much of Europe that curtailed or slowed nitrogen production.

Massive hikes in bulk freight rates, the current North American cold snap and the aftereffects of Hurricane Ida, as well as economic sanctions on Belarus, a country that produces 20 per cent of the world’s potash, were also factors. He further cited China halting phosphate and urea exports, export quotas by Russia and Egypt, and production issues due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Meanwhile, Lewis said “fertilizer pricing in Western Canada has always been a mystery,” since nitrogen is already produced in the country.

At this point, Lawson doesn’t foresee farmers en masse altering their plans for what to plant in the spring.

“There is still an incentive for farmers to plant nutrient-intensive crops like corn and wheat, despite the higher input prices. So we believe some of the concerns around fertilizer demand destruction are overblown,” he said.

“Yes, prices are higher, and farmers will be incorporating more risk. But the data we have seen so far suggest little pullback in demand for developed markets like Canada.”

But to Lewis, there are very likely some producers making such considerations.

“On an individual basis, I think farmers are having that conversation, especially when you look at some of the pricing,” he said, noting the net returns for canola and durum are about the same in southern Saskatchewan.

Other than durum, he suggested there could be a move towards lentils and other pulses.

— Glen Hallick reports for MarketsFarm from Winnipeg.

The post Fertilizer prices to remain high for now appeared first on Farmtario.

However, such reductions require growers to understand what nutrients are already present in soil, what portion is likely to be available for crops in the growing season and the significance of overapplication.

Support for cost-share programs and collaborative environmental policies could also help speed adoption of more efficient fertilizer-related technologies.

Why it matters: Fertilizer is expensive and a significant source of greenhouse gases. Reducing fertilizer use without incurring yield losses is possible with the right tools and a nutrient management program.

Claudia Wagner-Riddle, a professor in the university’s School of Environmental Sciences, believes 4R management (right source, right time, right rate and right placement) comprises a good overarching framework, though the concept is light on details when it comes to quantifying potential emission reductions.

She and colleagues from government and other academic institutions have been trying to measure the environmental impact of 4R fertilizer management practices.

Wagner-Riddle says truly significant reductions lean heavily on achieving each factor simultaneously. Getting the right fertilizer on the right place is all well and good, but if the timing is poor, fertility is lost as emissions anyway.

“The kind of elephant in the room is, eventually, we do need to work on the right rate. That’s the toughest nut to crack,” she says.

“It’s a lot about weather, but it also has that risk for insurance… You don’t want to be standing in the middle season saying, ‘oh I should have applied more.’

“In this area there is some [beneficial] application technology, but the other big part is that forecast of what the season is going to be like, what supply from the soil will be available and what the plants need… We can do that based on historical data, but what farmers are looking for is in this season.”

The solution is to monitor what the soil is providing alongside crop needs. It is critical to understand how nutrients are lost (via water and as ammonia for nitrogen) and what conditions are conducive to that loss.

Combined with on-farm experimentation, Wagner-Riddle says growers can determine whether the expense of repeatedly erring on the side of caution by applying extra fertilizer is offset by the occasional yield boost.

“Losses subtract from what you apply and makes the whole thing less efficient. … It goes back to behaviour and information,” she says, adding farmer-led research groups in the United States have been able to demonstrate emissions reductions by better balancing nitrogen inputs with what’s derived at season’s end.

In terms of the models developed through her own research, data suggest emissions reductions nearing 50 per cent could be achieved without negative yield impact.

Alfons Weersink, one of Wagner-Riddle’s research colleagues and professor of agricultural economics at Guelph, says both carrot and stick incentives — in addition to continued education efforts — will be important to meet emission reduction targets.

The nature of the proverbial carrots and sticks is up for debate.

“A tax on fertilizer has been used in some countries and American states, but it’s not necessarily that effective because there are not a lot of substitutes,” says Weersink.

A self-supporting system, where taxes on fertilizer are used to support further incentives and outreach programs, might have more impact.

Cost-share programs or subsidies for precision fertility equipment could also promote 4R management, though such an approach does not inherently mean less fertilizer will be used since application rates often shift from uniform coverage to more concentrated application in specific areas.

“Really you just try to educate people on the effects of fertilizer. Higher prices will make people more cognizant of what they’re applying,” says Weersink.

“When erosion was a big issue in the 1970s and 1980s, new technology and strategies helped reduce the environ- mental impact, but was also profitable for farmers to use it… It’s harder to see fertilizer loss to air and water.”

Slow-release inhibitors designed to allow greater crop nutrient absorption are an example of a technology that could help achieve emission reduction goals.

Clyde Graham, executive vice-president of Fertilizer Canada, believes the combination of new technologies and increased 4R management adoption is a practical and effective path forward. Other strategies such as subsurface banding and a greater focus on micronutrient deficiencies could go further.

In an ideal world, Graham says policies aimed at reducing fertilizer-based emissions would be based on incentives, including the ability for growers and the private sector to access offset programs.

“Where the growers are being encouraged rather than forced, that we think will have the best uptake,” he says.

“We would like to see a healthy debate around this issue, but I think the best way to achieve better climate outcomes is for farmers, companies, environmental organizations and governments to work together.”

The post Reduced fertilizer emissions possible through incentives appeared first on Farmtario.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), India’s top crimefighting agency, said late Wednesday it was investigating U.S. Awasthi, managing director of Indian Farmers Fertilizer Co-operative (IFFCO), and Pravinder Singh Gahlaut, the managing director of Indian Potash Ltd. (IPL).

IFFCO is co-operating with the CBI, a company spokesman said. IPL did not respond to Reuters request for comment. Awasthi and Gahlaut did not respond to Reuters requests seeking comment.

The CBI said searches were being carried out at the offices and residences of the two men in a dozen locations across India.

IFFCO, the country’s biggest fertilizer producer, and IPL, a leading importer, typically have import contracts for nutrients, such as with global potash miners, on behalf of Indian buyers.

In the CBI’s statement, it alleged that Awasthi, Gahlaut, members of their families and several others received kickbacks of tens of millions of dollars.

The CBI statement alleged that between the periods of 2007 and 2014, the accused cheated and defrauded IFFCO, IPL, their shareholders and the government by “fraudulently importing fertilizers and other materials for fertilizer production at inflated prices.”

India is one of the world’s top consumers of fertilizers and relies on imports of urea, potash and phosphate to fulfil significant amounts of local demand. The country also spends billions of dollars annually to subsidize fertilizer imports for farmers.

The prices of big purchases of fertilizers such as potash from Russia, Belarus and Canada are often considered as global benchmarks that can affect the spot price of these commodities.

“These officials of IFFCO and IPL have been importing fertilizers and raw materials… at highly inflated rates,” the CBI said in its statement.

IFFCO counts many state co-operative societies and some state marketing bodies as its shareholders. It in turn owns IPL, along with several public sector entities that are also shareholders.

— Reporting for Reuters by Rajendra Jadhav; additional reporting by Polina Devitt.

The post India’s federal police probe bosses of two fertilizer companies appeared first on Farmtario.

Though the winter nutrient ban has been lifted, the province cautioned producers to “assess current weather conditions and periodically check weather forecasts” if they’re applying anytime between now and April 11.

“Nutrients should not be applied in instances where the weather outlook is unfavourable,” the province said — for example, “a forecast of snow or an appreciable amount of rainfall that would result in runoff.”

All other manure management regulations are still in effect, the province added, such as the ban on applications on “sensitive lands along waterways” and on lands classified as Nutrient Management Zone N4.

Typically, the province’s ban on winter application of nitrogen and phosphorus, including manure, is in place between and including Nov. 10 of one year and April 10 the following year — with variances where conditions allow.

The regulation was put in place in 2008 as application of nutrients onto frozen or snow-covered soils “results in an increased risk of nutrient runoff” into Manitoba waterways, which in turn increases algal blooms in Lake Winnipeg and elsewhere. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Manitoba soil temperatures allow for spring fertilizer appeared first on Farmtario.

And while whole milk would get a pass from such a plan, Canada’s dairy farmer organization fears many other dairy products would wind up wearing such warnings, thus “alarming” consumers.

Federal Health Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor on Friday announced Health Canada will run public consultations from Saturday through to April 26 on rules requiring a new nutrition symbol on foods.

The proposal, part of Health Canada’s Healthy Eating Strategy, wouldn’t replace the Nutrition Facts table now seen on the sides and backs of packages, but is meant to offer “a clear visual cue that a food is high in nutrients of public health concern, such as sodium, sugars, or saturated fat.”

The consultation documents available online include four different options for a front-of-pack symbol.

“The consultations launched today are geared towards helping Canadians make healthier food choices,” Petitpas Taylor said in a release. “Identifying foods that are high in sodium, sugars or saturated fat is not always easy, and this front-of-package symbol will make it clearer while shopping for groceries.”

Health Canada, in its release, cited research showing Canadians consume “too much” of these nutrients, with eight of 10 Canadians consuming too much sodium and “almost one in two” Canadians eating too much saturated fat.

Dairy Farmers of Canada, in a separate release Friday, said it would take part in the consultations, noting Health Canada “recognizes the scientific evidence demonstrating the nutritional value of milk as a key contributor to the health of Canadians” by exempting whole milk from the label proposal.

“However, as currently proposed, many other dairy products, rich in essential nutrients, will be stigmatized by a warning label that may confuse consumers as to which products are healthy and which are not,” DFC said.

DFC, in its release, didn’t specify which dairy foods might be affected by the proposed label rule.

Given that Health Canada’s goal is to help consumers make informed choices, “the best way to do this is to drive them to the Nutrition Facts Table,” DFC president Pierre Lampron said in the same release. “What assurances can Health Canada give that this type of warning labelling will not simply deter consumers from the products themselves?”

The proposed approach, he said, “runs the risk of alarming consumers, and ultimately preventing them from learning more about the nutritional benefits of a food. This is completely contrary to the stated intent of Health Canada. How will they address this issue for Canadians?”

DFC emphasized it “shares the overall goal of promoting healthy eating for all Canadians, so long as it is supported by evidence-based policy.”

Health Canada said Friday it also wants public input on “other regulatory requirements related to nutrition,” including:

• updating conditions for some label claims;
• changing labelling requirements for foods containing “certain high-intensity sweeteners;”
• increasing levels of vitamin D in milk and margarine.

Health advocacy groups on Friday hailed Health Canada’s proposals. Corinne Voyer, director of Coalition quebecoise sur la problematique du poid, said in the government’s release that “educating the public on healthy eating is no longer sufficient and must be supported by policies and regulatory action.”

Dr. Laurent Marcoux, president of the Canadian Medical Association, said in a separate release that adding front-of-pack labels “represents a step towards enabling all Canadians to make the healthy choice, the easy choice.”

Nathalie Savoie, CEO for Dietitians of Canada, added that a label requirement “will also encourage product innovation, providing more food products that are lower in sodium, sugars and saturated fat.” — AGCanada.com Network

The post Dairy sector wary of proposed food label policy appeared first on Farmtario.