Farmers push for unbiased, complete testing of crop inputs.
There is a advantageous line between defending farmers and getting out of the way in which to allow them to assist themselves.
This is aptly illustrated in a 10-year-old resolution by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to cease testing the efficacy of some agricultural inputs.
In 2013, the company mentioned it might now not conduct complete testing and reporting on fertilizer and fertilizer dietary supplements. Instead, it might focus solely on their security.
The resolution didn’t produce the Wild West situation that some might need feared, nevertheless it did put the onus on farmers when deciding whether or not a selected product would work for them.
They typically had solely the phrase of the businesses promoting these merchandise, with the inherent dangers that include that.
Now, the National Farmers Union is looking on the federal authorities to roll again the clock and once more take duty for testing the efficacy of crop inputs, particularly non-fertilizer dietary supplements.
“The absence of comprehensive testing and verifiable data leaves claims largely unverified,” the NFU wrote in a recent assertion.
“This lack of oversight reiterates the necessity for robust, data-driven evaluation to bring order to this unregulated terrain.”
The group proposes that the federal authorities do the heavy lifting. It has requested agricultural minister Laurence MacAulay to reinstate complete testing and reporting and urges different farm organizations to get on board.
Farmers do want the flexibility to make knowledgeable selections about new merchandise, however asking the federal government so as to add one other layer of regulation isn’t the reply. Neither is relying solely on the businesses that promote these merchandise to offer dependable info.
What to do?
The reply is to help extra unbiased testing. And that reply most likely lies with farmers themselves.
Commodity teams that gather producer checkoffs are already in place to do this type of work. A community of good farms throughout the Prairies is also concerned.
And then there are individual farmers with the know-how and wherewithal to conduct on-farm analysis, both on their very own or in collaboration with different analysis organizations.
The work they produce might not be as much as the peer-reviewed requirements anticipated of extra formal analysis however utilizing them to check the efficacy of crop enter merchandise is price consideration.
All of this could take money, and that’s the place authorities may play a job.
Society is taking an ever-increasing curiosity in local weather change mitigation and greenhouse fuel emission discount. More educated farmers making better-informed selections will play a major position in assembly these targets.
Why shouldn’t taxpayers foot the invoice for serving to this come to go?
And why not ask enter producers to put aside a proportion of their income from the sale of those merchandise to fund unbiased testing?
The NFU has raised an vital challenge however addressing it through the regulatory route isn’t the reply.
Instead, we should discover methods to fund the kind of unbiased analysis that may assist farmers make good selections for themselves and for all society.
Karen Briere, Bruce Dyck, Barb Glen, Michael Robin, Robin Booker and Laura Rance collaborate within the writing of Western Producer editorials.
Bookmark SASKTODAY.ca, Saskatchewan’s home web page, at this hyperlink.
