Steve Sickle, Tom Cunningham and Amadou Thiam discussed several year-round watering systems and calculations required to design a suitable system during a Profitable Pasture webinar hosted by Christine O’Reilly.

WHY IT MATTERS: The closer cattle are to water, the less weight they lose from walking, resulting in higher pasture capacity and increased grazing between watering times.

O’Reilly, an Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness forage and grazing specialist, said a beef stocker needs 67 litres of water daily and will travel up to 250 metres, while a beef cow requires 112 litres and will travel twice that distance. Sheep travel 3,500 metres for 13 litres daily and up to 5,600 metres without affecting production, while dairy cows won’t travel more than 150 metres for the required 130 litres. O’Reilly noted 250 metres is the key distance affecting a pasture’s capacity.

“If any class of cattle had to walk further than that to get to a water source, we saw the carrying capacity of the pasture drop,” she explained. “The location of our water sources is important, but also making sure the water sources can meet the needs of the herd or flock.”

Sickle agreed, saying it’s not obvious how much time cows spend walking to water, but once it’s closer, they aren’t walking off pounds, lessening pasture impact, and not collecting around trough or water supply.

“When they go for a drink now, just one will drink, and the rest are still grazing,” he said.

Distance, herd and tank size affect consumption and pumping requirements and inform pipe diameter to ensure a sufficient flow rate, usually 100 psi to fill the water tank and maintain sufficient storage.

Calculations

Amadou Thiam, an OMAFA senior engineer, built an Excel tool to help farmers calculate and size their watering systems, whether using a pressurized system with a power or solar-powered pump or a low-energy-cost gravity system, to bring water where it’s needed.

For example, if the distance is less than 244 metres, size the tank to provide one-tenth of the need; if it’s farther, make it one-third. Additionally, the duration of stay, four hours or eight hours, is needed to calculate the flow rate; one cow drinks approximately 20 litres per minute. Pencil in elevation loss, required pounds per square inch of pressure and select the appropriate pipe size, avoiding overpressure, to ensure all animals, particularly calves, to access water.

“Rule of thumb is a foot per cow to drink at the same time,” explained Thiam. “Depending on how big that water tank is, you know how many can drink at the same time. Is it only one side or two sides?”

Supply and demands

Sickle, an innovative farmer known for his mobile cow shade, rotationally grazes 25 cows for approximately 10 months a year in Brant County’s north end.

A water line is buried below the fenceline of his permanent pasture, feeding four pastures per spigot, and a steel sleigh-mounted 100-gallon water trough supplies storage pasture-to-pasture.

Sickle uses an old milk tank and pumps water from the pond for cows grazing cover crops and corn stalks. Adding a good cover crop, especially if it includes turnips or corn with snow, reduces water intake.

“I’ve got a motion-sensor, water ball (submersible pump) in the middle of three fields,” he said. The water table is about eight feet below ground due to the culvert from the swamp. “It doesn’t freeze; it drains out the bottom of the trough when the cows walk away.”

Tom Cunningham’s medium-sized rotational and conventional grazing cow-calf operation is smack-dab between Wiarton and Lionshead in the Bruce Peninsula. Early on, he fenced off his natural water sources, creating river crossings in areas with flat escarpment rock to minimize erosion, before adding solar systems and frost-free nose pumps to supply upward of 180 cows per pump.

The system is fed by a 20-foot-deep dug well, with the cows travelling upward of 304 metres to either drink at the crossing or at the nose pump.

“The higher your static water level is, the easier it is to pump,” explained Cunningham, adding even at -30 C, it’s relatively maintenance-free, with water at ground-temperature.

The biggest challenge is training the cows, but once accomplished, they train each other, explained Cunningham, who plugs the drain during training to keep water at the top, and pulls it out during the winter to drain below the frostline.

He estimates his vertical Kellin system costs about $1,400 for the steel hood, pump and other items, adding that if he redid it, he would add multiple pumps to one well to accommodate more cows.

No system is without challenges. Cunningham mentioned nose pumps are not user-friendly for calves under 500 pounds or sheep. Sickle faced solar power issues this winter due to overcast days, noting that in winter, coyotes bite and puncture the hose when the pasture centreline is drained.

Cunningham said the initial cost of remote watering systems may seem high, and while there is some solar system maintenance, the return on investment is quick. He wishes he’d made the investment sooner

“There’s a stigma about the word ‘solar systems,’ and being over-complicated, hard to maintain and expensive to fix, but the technology’s come a long way,” Cunningham stated. “Solar panels are a lot more reliable and cheaper than they used to be, and those bilge pumps that I use are cheap and fairly simple.”

He pointed to a fenced-off pond surrounded by lush green grass and some trees, where he placed two 160-watt solar panels, two 12-volt deep-cycle batteries and a Princess Auto bilge pump floating out in the water to supply 60 pairs. Previously, erosion and desert-like conditions around the pond made it muddy and lifeless; now the water is clear, full of life and thick grass is growing.

“The pond is flourishing,” Cunningham shared. “If anyone’s afraid to fence (cows) out of an area, just do it because the benefits outweigh the cost and the time. It’s just a single strand of wire and a bunch of junk to build it.”

The post Clean water, strong pastures: Producers rethink livestock watering appeared first on Farmtario.

On March 22, the federal government announced it would develop such a strategy, calling it “an opportunity to discuss how we can address freshwater-related threats and opportunities,” protect freshwater ecosystems, and secure water for communities and the economy, according to a news release.

The Canada Water Agency, which was repurposed in 2024 as a stand-alone freshwater management agency separate from Environment and Climate Change Canada, will spearhead the strategy’s development.

While the announcement was scant on details of what such a strategy might look like, it said the agency will work with provinces and territories, First Nations, Inuit and Métis partners, “stakeholders across sectors” and the public.

Farmers should be among those consulted, the CFA said in a statement to Glacier FarmMedia.

“Water security is absolutely critical for the future of Canadian farmers. Farmers in different regions of Canada have been devastated by water issues over the past few years, such as the floods in B.C., or the ongoing long-term drought in the Prairie provinces,” a federation spokesperson said.

“A lack of water has severe negative impacts on any type of farm, no matter what they grow or raise.”

Prioritizing food security, agriculture

The strategy should protect farmers and mitigate the effects of water-related events. It should also secure predictable access to water so farmers can maintain food production — for example, through effective water management policies and investment in water infrastructure, CFA said.

“Farmers need to make it clear that food security and agriculture production should be prioritized if there was any issues with access to water.”

“Farmers are also on the front-line of climate change, dealing with the on-ground realities of water-related events,” CFA added. “They have experience and knowledge that will be critical in developing this strategy.”

While the announcement made no specific mention of the agriculture industry, the sector will have an opportunity to share its views during the public engagement process, “recognizing that freshwater is fundamental to our economy, powering industries, agriculture, and the growth of communities,” a federal spokesperson told Glacier FarmMedia.

The federal government has not yet set timelines for consultations, but said those will be announced “in the coming months.”

The post Get farmers in on federal water security strategy planning, CFA says appeared first on Farmtario.

Though two more than the originally proposed seven consolidated regional authorities, many questions remain on how the move will impact programming and governance.

WHY IT MATTERS: Farmers are the largest landowners in the areas influenced by conservation authorities.

Ontario currently has 36 CAs based on watershed boundaries, which operate as separate entities. With consolidation plans being made public in October 2025, farm and conservation groups lobbied for some 19 authorities in the new system — again based on provincial watersheds.

Ontario’s environment minister Todd McCarthy made the announcement on March 10, providing further detail on how the government intends to operate the amalgamated regions, and the additional costs incurred during the transition. McCarthy said consolidated regional CAs “would reduce administrative duplication, redirect resources to front-line conservation and modernize permitting to help the province deliver on its plan to protect Ontario by cutting red tape.”

Lower-tier community participation restricted

Under the government’s new structure, the nine consolidated authorities will operate under the Ontario Provincial Conservation Agency — created as an oversight body in 2025. Additionally, the provincial agency will administer $20 million, plus an additional $3 million annually, to facilitate the amalgamation process.

Each existing CA will provide representatives for transitional committees.

The new system will also feature watershed councils within each of the consolidated regions. These councils will, as the press release describes, “help identify local priorities for watershed-based conservation programs and services.”

“Regional conservation authorities would remain municipally governed, with regional municipalities, counties and cities appointing members to conservation authorities. Lower-tier municipalities in counties, such as towns and townships, will no longer be participating municipalities of a conservation authority under this approach.”

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a source within Ontario’s conservation sector said the government’s latest moves are not surprising — they had been anticipated for some time — but appear to be adding complexity rather than reducing bureaucracy.

Streamlining application processes and development requirements across regions could have been accomplished without consolidation, they said, and the establishment of another higher governance seems unnecessary if local structures remain more or less the same. Not allowing towns, townships and other similar communities to participate in governance is also a concern. Speaking more generally, they said the now-released details indicate many recommendations provided during the now-passed consultation period were ignored.

“The whole process will come at the expense of taxpayers,” said the source, adding it’s not entirely clear who will hold responsibility for source water protection — a central purpose of CAs — under the new system, given the Clean Water Act currently says local board of directors hold that responsibility.

“Nine is better than seven, but it’s not 36. Our comments are not reflected in what they’ve done.”

A statement from Hamilton Conservation Authority — an authority mentioned by minister McCarthy in his address as an example where overlapping jurisdictions cause development headaches — said the amalgamation plan is similarly not what conservation staff and board members advocated for.

“We support modernization, but dismantling a high-performing authority that is already meeting provincial objectives does not advance that goal,” Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) chair Michael Palleschi said March 19 in a separate release, noting CVC’s current average processing time for development permit applications.

“Transitioning to a new regional bureaucracy would almost certainly slow approvals while staff, systems and governance structures are reorganized.”

‘Serious concerns’

The Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario (CFFO) published a response on March 11, indicating the organization’s disappointment the advice provided by farm organizations had little effect.

“CFFO is disappointed that the government did not take the advice of the farm organizations in Ontario to align authorities with the 19 watersheds in the province. We believe this would have been a much more logical plan.

“Making these changes so we can get shovels into the ground faster for building homes and more infrastructure, doesn’t justify such a change. CFFO believes a less disruptive and more productive approach would have been more beneficial allowing each watershed to address their own regulations.”

The National Farmers Union – Ontario (NFU-O) published a strongly worded response two days later, saying the organization is “dismayed” at the government’s plan.

“This reduction is driven by a government mandate to support the building of new homes and infrastructure, and follows years of continued attempts to limit the reach of CAs. This, coupled with recent laws and policy changes like the More Homes Build Faster Act (2022), and Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act (2025), illuminate a short-sighted approach that does not compensate for long-term environmental compromises and ultimately fails to implement best practice methodologies as defined by experts.”

While the revised proposal now requires regional CAs to establish watershed councils with Indigenous representatives and stakeholders from agriculture, the development industry and other local sectors, there will still be a 75 per cent reduction in the number of authorities, and NFU-O said “serious concerns around transparency, supports for farmers, and the integration of localized knowledge in decision making remain.”

Speaking March 12, Ontario Federation of Agriculture president Drew Spoelstra reiterated OFA’s support for streamlining regulatory processes, but disappointment with the province’s overall plan.

“We had put forward a proposal to see a watershed-based model with 18 or 19 authorities instead of nine,” Spoelstra said. “Now we’re turning our attention to making sure farmers’ voices are heard. We’re virtually the biggest landholder, farmers are, across the province.… Farmers own a lot of that landscape conservation authorities are working on and regulating.”

“The other piece is around stewardship programs. We don’t want to see that effort lost either. I think there’s a lot of good things we can take from the former system, the current system, and migrate that into the new system.”

Legislation to enact the government’s CA consolidation plan will be tabled once the legislature is back in session.

The post Province moves ahead with conservation authority amalgamation appeared first on Farmtario.

A new study from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem sheds light on a promising direction: a machine-learning method that predicts plant water use each day, using high-resolution data that captures how healthy plants naturally behave.

The research brings together seven years of continuous monitoring from tomato, wheat and barley plants grown in semi-commercial greenhouses. Using a high-precision load-cell lysimeter system — technology that records subtle changes in plant weight — the team generated highly accurate measurements of daily transpiration, the evaporation of water through leaves that reflects the plant’s water use.

By feeding these measurements into models such as Random Forest and XGBoost, the study showed that machine learning can reliably predict daily transpiration from environmental conditions and plant characteristics. While the models currently rely on lysimeter-based weight data — technology that growers do not typically use in the field — they highlight an important conceptual step toward plant-driven prediction tools.

Two factors stood out as especially important: plant biomass and daily temperature. “These variables consistently shaped how much water plants consumed,” said Shani Friedman, one of the study authors.

“Understanding how a healthy, well-irrigated plant is expected to behave on a given day also allows us to detect when something is off.”

Because the model predicts what a healthy plant should be doing, unexpected changes in transpiration may serve as early warning signs of stress, whether caused by drought, salinity, disease, root damage, or other environmental pressures.

“If a plant behaves differently than the model predicts, that deviation can be an indicator of abnormal or unhealthy plant behavior,” Friedman added.

Study co-author Nir Averbuch, whose work focuses on precision irrigation, emphasized the long-term potential.

“Today, many irrigation decisions still rely on indirect estimates,” he said.

“Although this model is not yet field-ready, the findings show how future systems could incorporate physiological predictions to support more accurate irrigation scheduling.”

The study comes at a time of rising interest in data-driven agriculture, especially as growers face increasing pressure from drought, heat waves and fluctuating weather patterns.

While the approach is not yet a practical farm-deployable solution, it offers a glimpse into how machine learning, environmental sensing, and plant physiology may eventually combine into tools that support both irrigation management and stress diagnostics.

Importantly, the model performed well when tested on plants grown in a different research greenhouse at Tel Aviv University, suggesting the approach could adapt across climates and production setups.

The post Can AI read a plant’s mind? Research predicts thirst before stress sets in appeared first on Farmtario.

That’s been the experience of three Ontario beef producers, who shared their insight with participants of a recent webinar hosted by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness.

Why it matters: Benefits of over-winter bale grazing include improved pasture quality, calf performance, and reduced manure management costs as input prices rise.

The panel discussion included Don Badour from Eastern Ontario and Micha Gerber and Alex Kraus from Northern Ontario. It was moderated by OMAFA forage and grazing specialist Christine O’Reilly.

All three producers overwinter bale feed livestock, but each began doing it for different reasons, adapting the system to meet their needs.

Gerber runs a mixed 50-head of Angus-Herford cattle, cash crop, and laying hen operation in Fort Frances, integrating bale grazing on 10- to 15-acre pastures for efficiency, to increase gains, and to reduce manure handling and labour.

“It worked well to integrate into our corn grazing,” he said. “And it’s a really nice way to target poor areas of our field, like a very basic variable rate fertilizer application.”

He loads a few bales early in the season, then spends two hours each weekend dropping bales and pulling twine once the lowlands freeze.

In 2021, Kraus purchased a quarter of bushland north of Englehart in the Temiskaming area, cleared some of it, and introduced Angus-Herford beef cattle and sheep the following year, expanding grazing each year.

“That was kind of a big thing, keeping cows out on the ground that we’ve just cleared, and hopefully get some rejuvenation out of that,” Kraus explained. “We started with just a couple of days’ moves, and now we’re going to weeks at a time.”

Kraus bale grazes from December to April, preloading fields from the hay wagon to reduce tractor use and rejuvenate the land, targeting weedy areas with bales for short-term management in summer.

Kraus advised those planning to incorporate overwinter bale grazing to assess bale quality and weight for placement, and to add a straw bale as a buffer and a shortfall alert.

In his seven-day rotation, the bales are thin on Day 5, with cattle eating the residue on Day 6, and by Day 7, they’re ready to move. If they’re picking at the straw bale, he knows to drop an extra bale or move early to avoid issues. Badour agreed, adding that straw bales come in handy during storms for the cattle to hunker down on.

Badour, who raises 50 to 60 Angus-Herford cows, cash crops, and does custom work in Lanark County, began overwinter bale grazing to reduce spring mud problems and prevent damage caused by rowdy bulls.

Badour’s overwintering hybrid system uses bale feeders across two 16-acre pastures, feeding two groups of 20 pairs each, maximizing fertilization and secondary seeding.

“We breed in the wintertime … and since we calve in the fall, our calves are sold the first week of May,” he explained. “It was hard to keep them clean for sale time, so we tried something different, mainly for those two reasons. The benefit to the pasture was kind of an afterthought.”

This year, he invested in the Gallagher eShepherd collar system to simplify fencing, aiming to line up bales and use virtual fencing to rotate them.

Badour considers the upfront cost of $350 per collar and the $2.75 monthly cell fee for virtual fencing worthwhile due to the time-saving benefits, expanded grazing options, and the ability to fence off wet or problematic areas without physically resetting fencing.

The first year provided Badour with an “aha moment” when the bale-grazing calves came in heavier and cleaner than those in the confined system.

“We definitely found a difference in performance and the cows were in a little better condition as well,” he explained, adding that spreading one-third of the manure and bedding saved was a bonus.

Kraus and Badour’s cattle calve in nearby pastures, while Gerber’s calve in barns to avoid predation.

“We might lose one (calf) every four or five years, that’s about it, but it is a concern,” said Badour, given his region’s coyote population. “Feeding cows today, there was a coyote sitting out in the middle of the herd with three-week-old calves, but knock on wood, like I said, we haven’t had any problems.”

Whether left whole or rolled out, seed banks from strategically placed bales cover an entire pasture over time, reducing the need for mechanical overseeding outside of pasture establishment, the panel said.

“We do have a close pasture that we just continually unroll on it, and there’s not the residue that the bale grazing has,” said Kraus. “So, it’s not a worry on the residue side of things, and it’s producing very well right now.”

Each producer uses existing bush as shelter against the weather, choosing pastures to counter wind, rain, and temperature, with cattle naturally clearing the bush.

Badour’s cattle have access to a heated water bowl system near the barn, while Kraus depends on natural water sources and ponds up to a quarter mile away. Gerber uses a frost-free water bowl fed from a dugout but is considering upgrading to a motion-sensor unit to prevent potential freezing.

“There’s a float switch inside the (current) trough that activates the pump. Once the pump shuts off, the line drains out again,” explained Gerber. “There’s no water in any line anywhere. But I do run into (icing) issues (at) minus-25 (degrees Celsius) or lower.”

The post Over-winter bale grazing can boost cattle gains and pasture health appeared first on Farmtario.

The 4,000-acre watershed slopes gently before it drops into Lake Huron about five kilometres away.

Why it matters: Large-scale drainage projects can be challenging to co-ordinate, but are better if more people are involved.

The Ontario Soil Network’s 2025 Huron County tour visited the watershed and learned some of the lessons from the project from Harrison Burgsma, who farms in the area.

The watershed was sliced by rills and gullies from years of water heading to the lake, taking with it valuable topsoil and nutrients from farms. Water from the area enters the lake through one outlet.

Ben Van Dieten, the agriculture stewardship supervisor with Maitland Conservation, told the farmers on the soil network tour that the conservation authority identified the watershed as an area to concentrate resources.

“There’s a lot of water moving. It’s pretty flat, but there’s a lot of water moving across here,” said Van Dieten. “Even if you were to no-till it, it would still be pumping out gullies and rills. There’s that much water moving.”

There’s also low tree cover in the watershed.

The project started more than a decade ago and since then, 30 erosion control berms have been installed and farmers have adopted new tillage and planting practices.

Despite the berms and drains and attempts to control water, the quality of the water hasn’t improved at the outlet to the lake.

A three-inch rain in late winter or early spring can frustrate all of that planning.

“You’ll start to have an upward trend in water quality and then boom, you have one bad event that does the majority of the nutrient losses for the whole year,” says Van Dieten.

More of the water in the watershed has been moved underground in tiles and drains, instead of sitting on the land and sinking in over time. That meant less erosion and more productive land for farming, but concentrated water flow meant more erosion of the channel at the lake. The lands around the channel were likely supersaturated with phosphorus from the previous 50 years, says Van Dieten, and when the land eroded, it increased phosphorus readings.

Various programs have contributed funds to the watershed project, including the Great Lakes Agricultural Stewardship Initiative (GLASI) and On-Farm Applied Research and Monitoring (ONFARM).

Farmers could qualify for up to 80 per cent of the cost of projects such as putting in buffer strips, modifying equipment for precision nutrient placement, windbreaks and in-field erosion control structures.

Cover crop planting has also been supported.

Farmers such as Burgsma have seen a change in the productivity of their land.

Burgsma made several changes to how he farmed on the land that was farmed by his father and grandfather. He modified a planter for no-till and installed berms and grassed waterways to help control water flow. He says the no-till helps him manage the amount of labour he needs on the farm.

“I do all the planting,” he says.

In August, during the Ontario Soil Network’s tour, he stood at the base of a berm that slows water coming from the east.

The berm directs the water to one place where a catch basin was created with a French drain with about 20 feet of tile coiled next to it to slow the speed of the water entering the catch basin. An eight-inch tile leaves the catch basin and runs off to a nearby woodlot. At that point, if the water is too high, it can escape over the berm and down a grassed waterway.

With 30 berms in the watershed, the water moves more slowly and is better controlled, but it took a co-operative effort.

Burgsma pointed to the east where the direction from which water flows onto his farms and then to the west towards the lake.

“I’m glad folks out there did it. I’ll do it for them down that way.”

The post Lessons from a watershed-level water management project appeared first on Farmtario.

The increase from the provincial and federal governments’ Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership is part of a five-year investment strategy ending in 2028.

Why it matters: The investment provides farmers with financial support and tools to build long-term resiliency in the land and farm operations.

RALP’s Marginal Lands Initiative (MLI), delivered by Conservation Ontario, will receive an additional $9.6 million on top of the existing $12 million in funding over four years.

The second intake for MLI opens on Sept. 22, 2025, for projects that enhance natural features, such as wetlands or pollinator habitats, reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions, sequester carbon, and increase ecosystem goods and services.

Eligible projects could encompass:

Strip-planting perennial cover to create grassed waterways or manage in-field salinity.

Converting marginal or high-risk annual cropland to permanent grassland or perennial biomass crops, including establishing native or tame forages.

Wetland restoration, construction of new wetlands, or creating/widening buffers in agricultural fields adjacent to surface water sources, to protect existing riparian areas

Establishing shelterbelts for farmyards, livestock facilities, fields or intercropping with trees, including planting trees or shrubs on marginal or high-risk cropland.

“Together, we’re helping farmers across the province take on environmental projects that support their farms and protect their land – both important for Ontario’s future and economy,” said Dave Barton, Conservation Ontario chair and Uxbridge mayor, in a statement.

Angela Copeland, Conservation Ontario’s general manager, stated in an email that the funding increase will be allocated based on the program’s requests and the merits of each intake submission until the program concludes in 2028.

The Ontario Agricultural Sustainability Initiative, delivered by the Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association, was recently granted an additional $5 million in funding to help producers with costs for planting grasslands and trees, reducing tillage, and constructing water retention features until 2028. The Initiative’s RALP intake remains open.

The post Canada and Ontario invest $14.6M to boost farmland resiliency and sustainability appeared first on Farmtario.

Eligible Holland Marsh producers can submit applications for phosphorus reduction projects that decrease runoff into the Lake Simcoe Watershed until October 5, 2025. Each project could receive up to $375,000 for enhancements.

Why it matters: The Farm WISE fund promotes the adoption of new technologies to enhance water use efficiency and treat water used for washing produce, thereby reducing phosphorus runoff into the watershed.

“With this investment, farmers will be able to upgrade and improve the tools they have to further their productivity and sustainably feed Ontario,” said Tim Horlings, Holland Marsh Growers’ Association chair, in a release. “At the end of the day, farmers are the stewards of the land, and the Ontario Government is helping them with another piece of the puzzle to achieve their goals.”

Todd McMarthy, minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) said in the release this new fund is “just one of the ways our government is empowering communities to protect the air, land and water in Ontario for generations to come.”

McCarthy said the Holland Marsh produces more carrots, celery, onions, lettuce, and greens than any other single region in Canada.

Since 2018, the Ontario government has invested $37 million to restore and protect Lake Simcoe, resulting in a 50 per cent reduction in phosphorus from sewage treatment, reduced algae growth and the stabilization of yellow perch and warm-water fish populations. However, there are now fewer smallmouth bass, but they are larger in size.

The post Ontario invests $3 million protecting the Lake Simcoe Watershed appeared first on Farmtario.

Why it matters: Acquisition of the property will help provide education and outreach on best management practices.

In partnership with Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority, the Ontario Farmland Trust has announced plans to develop a demonstration farm on a 37-acre Tiverton-area property donated to the Trust. The property borders the Little Sauble River, which flows into Inverhuron Provincial Park and Lake Huron, providing what the Trust describes as a unique opportunity to pilot innovative best management practices to enhance soil quality, waterway health, and the overall ecological sustainability of the Great Lakes Basin.

The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness provided $514,000 for the project from its 2025–2027 Canada-Ontario Agreement and Lake Simcoe Program. Huronview Demonstration Farm, as well as the Huron County Soil and Crop Improvement Association, are also partnering to get the project up and running.

A July 11 press release from the Ontario Farmland Trust says the next two years will see the integration of environmental monitoring, farmer engagement, and applied research. Martin Straathof, the organization’s executive director said in the release the project is “about creating a model for how farmland conservation and stewardship can actively contribute to water quality improvements and soil health across the sector to achieve the long-term viability of Ontario’s agricultural landscape.”

Speaking to Farmtario on July 21, Straathof adds a number of things aligned to provide an opportunity to establish the project, including the property’s ideal location on the Little Sauble River and an estate agreement, which included clauses stipulating the property was leveraged to “continue providing community benefit.”

This coincides with what Straathof says is a clear desire for more extension services.

“There was lots of discussion at this past year’s Farmland Trust forum of the need for extension work … A big component of this project we propose would assist with that. We would be able to fill that kind of need through the property and this grant program,” he says.

The $514,000 investment has been provided to get the demonstration farm established. What best management practices will be demonstrated are to be determined through consultation with partnering organizations, as well as the wider agricultural and conservation community, though Straathof says they will avoid replicating work already occurring at Huronview.

The Trust will be hiring someone in September to head the consultation period.

Regardless of what the demonstration farm features, the wider project includes a comprehensive education and outreach strategy, with plans for field days, peer-to-peer learning events, and new educational materials to reduce adoption barriers for whatever best management practices are of focus.

“We don’t want this to be a one-and-done scenario,” Straathof says. “Most of the costs are upfront to get it established.”

Straathof sees an additional opportunity — the development of a model which could be applied to other properties donated to the Trust. This could be particularly valuable as the organization has seen a “substantial increase” in inquiries from landowners in recent months.

“We had not had a land donation for 20 years. Then we had one donation, and now we’re up to 12. To me that is a substantial increase,” Straathof says.

The post New demonstration farm coming to Bruce County appeared first on Farmtario.

Or in the case of Walkerton, a community.

In May 2000, as a rookie photojournalist I obsessively followed images from big-city colleagues documenting the devastating effects of contaminated drinking water in Walkerton.

The images reflected a community overwhelmed by tragedy, funerals and uncertainty, while print and broadcast journalists summarized the investigation and its potential sources.

I vividly recall media reports tracing the E. coli source to David Biesenthal’s farm, but I missed his eventual, quiet exoneration, which was merely a footnote in the coverage of the inquiry that followed.

As happens with news cycles, my attention waned during the government’s multi-level pass-the-buck accusations. By the time the Walkerton Inquiry Report was released and the Koebels’ trial occurred, my focus had shifted to my community coverage.

In the report, Justice Dennis O’Connor stated on page 105 “The primary, if not the only, source of the contamination was manure that had been spread on a farm near Well 5, although I cannot exclude other possible sources.”

Further down he noted, “at the outset that Dr. David Biesenthal, the farm’s owner, engaged in accepted farm practices and cannot be faulted for the outbreak.”

Many media publications used “should” instead of “cannot,” creating a sliver of doubt.

Only when I began covering the 25th anniversary of Walkerton for Farmtario did my bias of misinformation become apparent, and I realized I’m not alone.

The bias affecting the Biesenthals a quarter of a century later is subtle, often rooted in beliefs stemming from early reports and a lack of clarification or exoneration in the media.

While in Walkerton to speak with the Biesenthals and take photos around town, locals stopped to ask me what I was photographing. This provided an opportunity to strike up conversations and during one of these encounters a dairy farmer during the water crisis revealed how deeply entrenched Biesenthal’s perceived responsibility runs.

She and her husband shared how their children fell ill from drinking water at the babysitter’s house in town and mentioned in passing, with no malicious intent, that the manure spread by Biesenthal was at fault.

Technically, the E. coli source was manure; however, Justice O’Connor ruled that the outbreak could have been prevented if Well 5 had provided continuous chlorine residual and had turbidity monitors to sound the alarm and shut off the pump. Additionally, the report stated that positive E. coli tests from a spring discharge near Well 5 on June 6, 2000, indicated contamination of the large bedrock area underlying the well.

The advice from Mike McMorris, then manager of the Ontario Cattlemen’s Association, to use third-party expert verification to enhance transparency in agricultural practices and provide the public with bite-sized information was crucial. And it extends beyond just crisis mitigation.

It’s a tool that every journalist should use, especially if we want to inform the public about the importance and fragility of agriculture, protect agricultural land, and build confidence and trust in Canada’s agriculture sector.

But there’s another one we must hone.

In conversations with David and Carolyn Biesenthal it is evident from the occasional, shockingly sharp comments and accusations still aimed at them that some residents remain steadfast in attributing guilt.

It’s a powerful reminder of our responsibility to provide accurate information in our coverage and to dedicate equal passion and commitment to clarifying misinformation.

How different might Biesenthal’s experience over the last 25 years have been if journalists, quick to aim their hair-trigger poisoned pens at him, had worked just as diligently to exonerate him with facts?

The post The Weight of water and words appeared first on Farmtario.