Loading...
The Rural Voice, 2003-04, Page 36How size matters to our communities While the majority of speakers at Size Matters focussed on the farm itself, Elbert van Donkersgoed. strategic policy advisor with the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario. looked at the effect of fewer, larger farms on the rural community in general. Size is not neutral, he said. "Bigger farms are about as neutral as farm pickups sharing the 401 with 18 - wheelers." One of the ways bigger farms are changing rural life is the need for family participation in farming. he said. Much of the physical labour is gone as a result of specialization while technology has speeded up the pace of farm life and makes it a more danger- ous place. Management has become more important than physical labour and management is an adult activity. Farm lifestyles are under pressure, van Donkersgoed said, with spouse and children often being Tess involved in the farm business. "Unless families intentionally seek out activities beyond the farm, farm life risks being more isolated than in the past." Farm neighbours are less relevant as farmers, with a full line of equipment of their own, don't need to turn to their neighbours for help. The common values that once brought farmers together are broken down by specialization as pork farmers and dairy farmers attend different meetings, use different suppliers and tour separate open house events. Declining farm numbers and more rented land means a farmer has fewer neighbours, period. The land next door may be farmed by someone living kilometers away. "Communications may be reduced to a neighbourly wave if spring planting happens to coincide or harvests overlap." Loyalty to local communities is fading. "Farmers are no different from city folks in their desire for choice, up- to-date technology, convenience and service." Big farms buy in volume and emphasize quality, price and service that the local community may not be able to provide. "The big farm's search for volume discounts has extended its supply region to hundreds of kilometers." Ontario's villages and small towns are still important to big farms for non -economic relationships such as worship. friendships, sports and recreation, and for small purchases like light bulbs and screwdrivers, but the business of farming, done big, has gone cosmopolitan, he argued. The "hurry factor" and the focus on the financial bottom line risk squeezing the time necessary for doing proper stewardship of the land. With bigger farms if something goes wrong or management is not up to snuff. there is more risk to the environment. Given the risk, governments regulate more as best management practices can't remain voluntary options. When a farm business expands on one site. its ecological footprint becomes, not just bigger. but more complex. "Growth in size creates a complexity that leads to new environmental stewardship challenges and greater risk of unintended consequences." Through a series of workshops across the province, the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario has developed a new vision of agriculture that doesn't see the future in low-cost, commodity production. "Farmers need not scramble to be the low-cost producers for export markets. There are openings for farmers to reinvent themselves as producers of nutrients and health. Consumers may insist on cheap food but they are willing to pay for health." Part of the rural advantage is diversity, van Donkersgoed argued. "There is no one rural — no one countryside. When rural communities build on their unique characteristics — open spaces, cultural landscapes, historical buildings, managed ecosystems, good-looking farmsteads, recreational developments and great spaces to call home — they are building on their strengths. "Municipalities have to be able to develop their unique characteristics. In the past, if you saw one rural community you had seen them all. Ontario's rural economy Zags because of that sameness. Rural vitality depends on communities consciously distinguishing themselves from the many others." In arguing for the ability of communities to play on their own uniqueness, van Donkersgoed promoted the controversial idea that the Nutrient Management Act is deeply flawed and municipalities should be allowed to impose caps on the size of livestock operations. "Ontario's rural landscape varies hugely. Ontario is too diverse for a one -size -fits -all approach. The basic rules need to be customized to suit the local landscape. In other words, municipalities need a defined role in projects like nutrient management." The NMA will allow risks for the environment from livestock enterprises to increase, he argued. "Ever -larger enterprises will bring greater risks. No doubt those greater risks can he balanced by new, more sophisticated regulatory systems and red tape. "There is a simpler, less intrusive way of taking precautionary action to protect our environment: cap the size of farms on any one site, keep livestock dispersed and tied to a land - base. Then, a heavy-duty regulatory system will be unnecessary." Provincial regulations should set general policies, including minimums and maximums. Municipalities should be required to consult on the need to modify provincial standards and demonstrate that there are local needs that make modification important, he said. Municipalities should be able to set a maximum size of 400 to 600 livestock units per site and a maximum density of 1.0 to 2.0 livestock units per acre, depending on the environmental and cultural needs of their communities. They should be able to require up to one half of the land -base needed for nutrient management be owned by the farmer. Ontario needs a different model than the American approach of ever - bigger barns, he argued because minimum distance standards are already preventing some operations from expanding. "We need alternative technologies and management systems. Ontario's best future is with technology and management systems that make the moderate scale of many of our farms more productive. A cap on size will help farms and out farm infrastructure focus on keeping our moderate-size enterprises profitable."0 32 THE RURAL VOICE