• Print
  • Send to a friend
  • Comment (27)

Farmers: Don’t fence me in

The much photographed Cape Tryon lighthouse dominates a landscape of towering cliffs and gently rolling farmlands. Photo courtesy John Sylvester Photography

The much photographed Cape Tryon lighthouse dominates a landscape of towering cliffs and gently rolling farmlands. Photo courtesy John Sylvester Photography

Published on February 6, 2012
Published on February 6, 2012
Steve Sharratt  RSS Feed

Farmers seek change to Lands Protection Act

Topics :
P.E.I. Federation of Agriculture , Iceland , Canada , Queens

P.E.I. farmers don’t want to be “fenced in” when it comes to land limitations and plan to seek legislative changes allowing for as much as a 50 per cent increase in acreage ownership for big corporate farms.

Like Roy Rogers singing “Don’t Fence Me In” on his trusty horse Trigger, Island farmers want to shoot some holes in 30-year-old provincial legislation they say impedes growth in the agricultural sector.

It was a resolution that came from the floor at the annual meeting of the P.E.I. Federation of Agriculture and calls for individual ownership of arable land to increase from 1,000 to 1,500 acres and corporations to up size their combos from 3000 to 4500 acres.

“A lot has changed in 30 years (since original legislation was enacted) and farmers who support this resolution say it would increase their competitiveness and reduce the red tape,’’ says Bertha Campbell, chair of the federation. “And from an environmental point of view, expanded land limits would have the positive impact of not forcing farmers to clear some ‘less suitable’ land that they now own.”

The resolution, approved by the federation, calls for changes to the Lands Protection Act, a venerable piece of legislation enacted in 1980 to help control the purchase of Island farmland sought by such operations as Cavendish Farms in an effort to prevent corporations from acquiring too much property in the million acre farm.

“The Federation of Agriculture realizes that land ownership is a sensitive issue,” said Campbell. “But not addressing it, is not a solution.”

P.E.I. is the only region in Canada to limit the amount of land that can be controlled by any one person or corporation.

Thirty years ago, there was almost 1,000 dairy farms in P.E.I., but that number has dwindled to less than 200 operations providing the same amount of milk production. In the potato world, she said, 825 farms in 1982 with an average size of 81 acres have become 275 potato operations with an average size of 310 acres.

“There has been a lot of consolidation of smaller farms into somewhat larger farms,’’ she said. “This is neither good nor bad; it is simply a reality of farming in the 21st century.”

The Queens County-based farmer said consolidation in agriculture has happened mainly due to decreasing margins which means farmers require a larger land base in order to sustainably operate.

“Farmers want to farm within the laws of the provinces, and be in compliance at all times, but sometimes the restrictions imposed by the current Lands Protection Act make it difficult. There is a very real need to ensure that the main economic driver in the province (agriculture) remains competitive, and that outdated legislation does not impede growth.”

Comments

  • Username
    Farmer
    - February 8, 2012 at 15:10:53

    Not all farmers support this move by the Federation of AGriculture. Surely 1,000 acres per individual or 3,000 acres for a corporation should be enough to make a living on. Why would any farmer want to work more and receive less? Start increasing the limits and where will it end. We might even go back to the days of absentee landlords - surely not!

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Romeo Gallant
    - February 7, 2012 at 20:31:00

    Leave the land limit where it is. If you open that door and a farmer cuts corners he will cause 50% more damage. If profits are not big enough, try cutting back instead of going bigger. Bigger means higher fuel costs and more pesticides depending on the type of farm. If anything cut it back to 800.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    John Jamieson
    - February 7, 2012 at 20:22:37

    The fact is that farming ion the 21st century is not the same as it was when my grandfather was farming with 10 milk cows, some pigs and a few acres of potatoes. Many Islanders are nostalgic about the way things were when farms were small and farmers could make a reasonable living off a small acreage. Growing food is a noble profession and requires a great deal of skill and business savvy and we need all the tools we can to make it work. There are few today willing to take on that challenge. Increasing the amount of acres farmers can control will make them more competitive and will not change the Island any more than the building of the bridge did. Compared to farms in Canada our farms on PEI are tiny and family owned (whether incorporated or not).

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    sick country folk
    - February 7, 2012 at 14:30:09

    It's funny when potato prices are good like this year, the sky becomes the limit for acreage. I'd like to see acreage reduced so our environment, that is, our air, water and soil would detoxify themselves. A study done in the early 1980's suggested the island's environment could sustain up to 67000 acres of potatoes without having real detrimental effects on the environment. Yet, today there's still 85000 acres in production. There's not much diversification of crops in this area. I feel as many islanders do that spraying weekly is destroying our health & environment(highest cancer rate in canada). Where is going to end? I wish consumers would demand more organic products and be given much more Gov. support.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Downtown Doug
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:42:17

    I tend to think that the small farming industry is indeed unable to compete with off island products just because of our geographic separation and because the economy of scale compared to other Canadian farms. You aren't, pun intended, comparing apples to apples here. We are a rural community yes, but we aren't necessarily a competitive one. I like the idea of being innovative with our farming practices and specializing in high quality products where volume isn't the only competitive edge. On another note, why do we not have a reforestation project active on PEI. The number of acres of land now seen just growing up with brush instead of potential forest for later generations is pathetic. Letting it grow 'naturally' only works when there are other trees to provide the healthy seeds. We have long since harvested those trees so now it is our responsibility to plant viable healthy seedlings where brush is growing up!

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    jweale
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:27:44

    Bertha Campbell says: “There has been a lot of consolidation of smaller farms into somewhat larger farms. This is neither good nor bad; it is simply a reality of farming in the 21st century.” Does it not seem odd for the chair of the Federation of Agriculture to take such a neutral approach to her dwindling membership? It's a sadly fatalistic approach to consider this "a reality of farming in the 21st century" when it is really a product of the failed large- scale, commodity-based vision for PEI's agriculture. The proposed expanded limits will do nothing to diversify our agricultural sector, but will see our agricultural economy further entrenched in this unsustainable and rapidly collapsing cheap commodity production model. How is that in any way progressive?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    spud
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:27:19

    The problem with corportations today is they are running out of children and grand children who they can put 1000 acres in there name and get around the lands protection act !!! Your comments please Bertha on Cavendish Farms Indian River Farms and Long River Farms or do they already control your farm and every other potato farm on PEI

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Greed and more greed
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:21:13

    Greedy friggin farmers! They can all form companies which they do in the majority. Get treated like Lords of the country side. Pay miserable small wages. Pollute the air, land and water to grow french fries and now they want more. Why do these few people always just keep wanting more. If they cared a hoot about our food and health they would abandon the potatoes french fry industry and seek ways of growing wholesome, organic food for the local market. But they are in it for one thing - the money. Greedy bunch that they are...

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Downeaster
      - February 7, 2012 at 20:26:08

      i suppose you would prefer all farms on PEI to disappear so you could get all your food from the China, Brazil or Argentina where all farming is controlled by multinationals. The level of ignorance you show is appalling!

  • Username
    SG
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:13:31

    We need more organic faming on PEI and less chemicals. Also why are PEI Potatoes being sold in Plastic Bags? I opened a bag of Russets I had just purchased at Sobeys yesterday and the Stench took my breath away. I buy local 99% and believe in supporting our Island Farmers but such product quality is not acceptable. IMO Potatoes shouldn't be in Plastic Bags or sitting under store lights.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      fc
      - February 7, 2012 at 15:42:21

      why don't you buy the potatoes in the paper bags? They are in the store with the "plastic bag" potatoes, right next to them. Consumers can wring their hands all they want, but they have to buy the things the say they want. There are organic farmers on the Island. Support them if it is important to you, buy their produce. But most consumers would rather buy cheap produce from South America, than buy local. Until you put your money where your mouth wants to be, farmers are just going to have to play by the rules that the big corporations set, and try to make a living.

  • Username
    pmm
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:11:31

    I take issue with how farmers manage the land. Many consolidated not to stay afloat but rather to accomodate the mass production required by Irvings and MacCains. The companies called the tunes and farmers who signed contracts with them saw in the long run how it was not so lucrative for them. In the meantime we all paid by poor practises by farmers. Why do they think we needed the Lands Protection Act and Environmental legislation. Farmers need to work with others, police themselves and get the chip off their shoulders and take some responsibility before they can ever expect to be given more land. They now own and lease thousands of acres of property each.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Ed Gallant
      - February 7, 2012 at 14:13:25

      PMM - Good post I entirely agree with you. Look at what is happening in Prince County. Fish kills go on every year and nothing is done about it. The farming community will not take any responsibility at all. They are ruining the land to the point that nothing will grow unless tons and tons of fertilizer are put on it. That to has an effect on our streams and rivers. This has gone on to long,all in the name of a 6 inch french fry.The big corporate farmers already get around the restrictions.

  • Username
    Neil
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:09:02

    Shadyacres, IRAC is a weak organization and I wouldn't leave them as my only step in preventing large corporations from buying up most of the Island.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Farming to-day
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:08:04

    Thank you Shadyacres. Some people do not realize what drives this Islands income and it is not golf or tourism and until we have a better gov't that knows the value of ALL markets everything will stay the same.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Silky
    - February 7, 2012 at 12:06:59

    As a former Islander I have seen the result of big farms that have taken over the Island. The land looks like prairie with no trees or even a small woodlot but the way I know the farms were bought by corporations are the fallen in roofs of the once beautiful proud barns and houses. Why was there not some penalty for not preserving these homes at least if not the land around. Surely some tax penalty to give incentive to sll the residences along with an acre or so?? The result is the killing of a neighbourhood and disappearance of a community. It was so sad to drive through my old community at night and see no lights in the houses. Just ghosts of th past. The rape of the land!

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    French Fry Cartel
    - February 7, 2012 at 09:53:03

    This is not driven by farmers, this is the potato cartel. Contracted acreage dedicated to foods for fatso people. The water table has been destroyed by the cartel and they are the biggest employers of lowest wage earners who are seasonal workers and perennial unemployment insurance working poor. These are not farmers, these are french fry producers to scared to speak up when the processors select and cancel them one by one. Ask the former head of the potato board.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    country boy
    - February 7, 2012 at 09:52:40

    If you want a landscape of chemical laden farm land that is mined instead of farmed to produce more potatoes then go ahead and allow massive factory farming. The impact. Silted up water ways, polluted air when the wind blows destroying any top soil that is left, more health problems related to the over use of chemicals on a small land base and ground water that is full of nitrates. If that is what islanders want then follow the Factory Farm model. I can't understand when farmers are complaining that they aren't making any money and yet they want to plow under every inch of land. There has to be a balance.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Just-A-Farmer
      - February 7, 2012 at 12:23:54

      Looks like there still exists a lot of misinformation out there re how PEI Farmers treat their most valuable asset. It's pretty hard to understand how the Farm Community continues to survive as well as it does if they've mined thier land to oblivion as has been suggested by a few. For anyone that's really interested in understanding the situation all they have to do is look back over the past 20+ years to see that the changes in how land is managed are astounding. Yes, hedgerows have been removed BUT they've also been replaced. Hundreds of acres of land have been improved with soil conservation practices such as strip cropping, grassed waterways, boundaries around environmental sensative areas, better crop rotations, etc., etc. As far as the big bad potato being the enemy, the uninformed should know that through the efforts of the Potato Farmers themselves there has been a concentrated effort to better manage the acres planted each year to match the expected demands of the marketplace. This has resulted in a reduction of over 25,00 acres of potato production over the last 5 years. At the same time these very same Farmers have indeed been inovative and introduced new crops to their farms like Crambe, Canola, Borage, Soybeans, & Buckwheat. The problem with these new grain crops is that the margins are much smaller than those in the horticulture industry so more land is needed to grow sufficient acreage to provide a sustainable income. Without sustainable income levels Farmers have no way to reinvest in newer production methods which allow for improved land stewardship and continued profits. It's fine to dream of being able to make a living off of 500 acres of land but the economic realities of the day are not the same as they were "way back when". For those who wish to try and in some cases succeed that's great but at the same time please don't ask for restrictions on the rest of the Farm community that will not allow them to suceed either.

  • Username
    Short sighted
    - February 7, 2012 at 09:50:36

    This approach will not solve Farmers' problems. Time for PEI farmers to set themselves apart from the crowd. Specialize, innovate, grow new crops, find new markets. The Super Farm model is doomed to collapse as surely as the Super Banks did. Don't make them "too big to fail" or we'll all be bailing them out eventually.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Neil Mader
    - February 7, 2012 at 09:43:17

    I do not support this legislative change. The consolidation of small farms into corporations didn't help farmers in PEI in the past, they just have bigger debt loads and compete in increasing competitive commodity markets now. This suggestion will just allow the big guys to get bigger while making it harder for the little guys to compete. Rather than farm consolidation, which failed environmentally and economically in the past, I think this province should look toward diversification and specialization for the future. Why compete against third world countries for the cheapest commodity products when we have access to high end markets in New York, Boston, Toronto, Japan and Europe?

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    John B.
    - February 7, 2012 at 09:32:32

    It will not happen while gis is is power.He perfers golf corses and the devil can have the farmers.He has not learned where his food comes from , or I should say where the best food comes from, His is possibly already processed.... I prefer to know where mine is raised and coming from what food it has eaten... Have a good day.

    Submit a Comment

  • Username
    Quiet Observer
    - February 7, 2012 at 09:31:29

    Reduce it? No way! I suppose if you want a bunch of abandoned farms and fallow land, then rducing it might work. PEI cannot operate in isolation of the rest of the world. We need to be price competitive with everyone else or we will not be able to sell of produce off Island, where most of it goes. If it weren't for PEI being able to ship it's farm productions to the rest of Canada, the US and offshore, this would be a very poor little province.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      no way
      - February 7, 2012 at 12:43:58

      One of Olive Crane's more recent predecessors J Angus MacLean brought about these controls in the late 1970s as a means to keep industrial agriculture at check. This was and remains a very relevant argument in the 2010s. The Tories have always been pro-rural and keeping the family farms intact without allowing the Irvings (supported by Ghiz) from buying up the Island.

  • Username
    no way
    - February 6, 2012 at 23:18:06

    PEI should actually be going the other way and reducing the acreage allowed for corporations from 3000 down to 2000 or 2500. And an individual should be reduced from 1000 down to 500. The amount of subdivision of land taking place these days is nothing short of astounding and we need to put limits to that as well. As J Angus MacLean said, PEI doesn't have mining or oil and gas. Our only natural resource is the land and we need to protect it collectively.

    Submit a Comment

    • Username
      Peter
      - February 7, 2012 at 09:31:57

      Just be careful that the corporation don,t end up owning most of the land and controling when the small farms can sell their product. Like when they open up the amount of water a person or processor could own in the mussel industry. The processors end up own over 80 percent of the leases and can control when a grower can sell his product.or worst wouldn't buy his product in hopes he can force him out of business. [HAS HAPPEN] Oor Government Don't care about the small guy.

    • Username
      ShadyAcres
      - February 7, 2012 at 09:48:21

      Are you suggesting farmers are not the stewards of the land? The size of farmers in PEI growing. I think people would be very amazed to see how many family owned farms in PEI are at or near thier acreage cap and would like the ability to purchase more land. Off island corporation are still regulated by IRAC when the try to purchase land on PEI. IRAC holds the right to not allow them to by land. I would gladly see land in agriculture, feeding our province and nation, rather then land being subdivided and developements built. This is a major issue in PEI and one that should be looked at from both sides. Agriculture contributes multi-millions of dollars to our economy every year. I agree with J Angur Maclean, but if do not allow that land to be used to it full potential, if it can be used for agriculture, what value to us is it?

Submit a Comment

Submit a Comment

This form is NOT used for emailing the article to a friend. Please use the "Send to a friend" link at the top of the page for that purpose.

The Guardian is not responsible for posted comments. Please be polite and confine your comments to the subject of the posted story. If you have an account, please sign on to it..

(we keep all emails private)
Agreement

We ask that users remain courteous. You may not post insulting, discriminatory or inappropriate content, which may be removed at our discretion. We are not responsible for user content and opinions. Use of this site as well as content submission & ownership are governed by our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.

Member organizations should be non-profit in nature, and promote legal activities. Any organization found promoting illegal activities or commercial products or services will be deleted from the site.

I agree with these conditions.

Advertising

Expert bloggers

Ride for Heart
Blogger
Heart and Stroke Foundation
Preparation is key
[Sponsored]

More bloggers here

Newsletter

Please enter your email to receive our free newsletter

Subscribe to news alerts
loading...

The Guardian Twitter

Advertising