SaskCanola and SaskFlax saw formal voting on an amalgamation plan during the two organizations’ annual general meetings and the plan “was met with widespread approval,” they said.

The formal merger involves amendments to provincial regulations, executive director Tracy Broughton says, so both commissions will now work with the Agri-Food Council, which oversees all Saskatchewan agri-food agencies, to get that work done before the amalgamation takes effect starting Aug. 1.

“The collaborative efforts are expected to streamline operations, enhance research initiatives, and provide a more cohesive voice for oilseed growers in the province,” Broughton said in a release.
That same week, the board of Sask Wheat elected Jake Leguee of Fillmore as its new chair and Jocelyn Velestuk of Broadview as vice-chair.

If Jake’s name sounds familiar, you may have seen it most recently in our Jan. 16 issue with Lee Hart’s report on the Canada’s Outstanding Young Farmers event at Laval, Que., where Jake and Sarah Leguee represented Saskatchewan as its OYF finalists. Jake has been on the Sask Wheat board since 2017, chairs the Canadian Wheat Research Coalition (CWRC), previously chaired Sask Wheat’s research committee and was a director with Cereals Canada.

Jocelyn is now on her fifth year with Sask Wheat’s board, and also sits on Sask Wheat’s research committee, represents Sask Wheat on the Prairie Recommending Committee for Wheat, Rye and Triticale (PRCWRT) cultivar voting panel, and is secretary/treasurer with the CWRC.

Meanwhile over at Sask Barley, Cody Glenn was elected that week as chair and Matt Enns to the vice-chair role. Glenn is a certified seed grower and owner of Southline Ag Services in Climax, while Enns farms near Rosthern and is a co-founder of Maker’s Crafted Malts.

Jake and Cody replace Brett Halstead and Keith Rueve as the chairs of their respective boards.

The post Saskatchewan crop boards under new leadership appeared first on Grainews.

Producer support for the merge of SaskCanola and SaskFlax was “overwhelming,” the groups said in a Jan. 10 news release. The organizations held a joint annual general meeting to share results of member feedback before taking the issue to a vote. The vote passed with “widespread approval,” the release said.

“The collaborative efforts are expected to streamline operations, enhance research initiatives, and provide a more cohesive voice for oilseed growers in the province,” said Tracy Broughton, who is executive director of both groups.

The two organizations have been sharing an office, management and staff since early 2023, but have kept separate boards of directors and governance structures.

The SaskCanola board voted to keep its current leadership with Keith Fournier as chair and Dean Roberts as vice-chair. SaskFlax also voted to keep chair Greg Sundquist and vice-chair Patricia Lung in place. The boards will continue to provide separate leadership until final audits are complete, the release said. They will then merge into one board and staff.

The groups will work with the Agri-Food Council to amend regulations and officially amalgamate by the beginning of August.

The groups put out a call for grower feedback this summer as the they considered the merger.

In a July interview, Broughton told the Western Producer she’d heard concerns of canola’s interests swallowing flax. While provincial regulations should address that, Broughton said, canola growers have vested interest in keeping both crops viable.

In a news release at the time, Sundquist said amalgamation would minimize costs for flax growers and “better leverage investment opportunities.”

In 2023, Saskatchewan farmers produced about 224,000 metric tonnes of flax, as per the province’s website. Producers grew about 9.7 million tonnes of canola.

—Geralyn Wichers is associate digital editor of AgCanada. She writes from southeast Manitoba.

The post Sask. canola, flax groups vote to merge appeared first on Grainews.

The disease monitoring program, offered by SaskCanola in conjunction with the Saskatchewan agriculture department, is free to producers across the province. Blackleg and clubroot testing have been available through the program for the past few years but this is the first year of testing for verticillium stripe.

Kaeley Kindrachuk, an agronomy extension specialist with SaskCanola, says the increasing incidence of verticillium stripe in neighbouring Manitoba prompted the decision to add the soil-borne fungal disease to the program’s testing lineup.

“In the last couple of years … Manitoba has really had a problem with it. And if we’ve learned anything from the other canola diseases or any diseases in general, it’s that it doesn’t stop at the border,” she says. 

“We’re trying to be proactive with verticillium stripe. This will give farmers and agronomists some more insight into what’s happening in the field.”

Verticillium stripe doesn’t appear to be as prevalent in the province as other canola diseases, says Kindrachuk, but that doesn’t mean it’s not already present. Because its symptoms are similar to those of other diseases, it may be going undiagnosed or misdiagnosed, which is why testing is important.

“That confirmation through sending that sample to the lab and getting the lab confirmation will help farmers and agronomists with their decision-making in the future,” she adds.

The procedure for blackleg disease race and verticillium stripe testing is relatively simple. Growers and agronomists are asked to collect 10 random stem samples several paces apart and repeat the collection in at least three different areas of a field before allowing them to dry overnight.

They can then email SaskCanola (blacklegtesting@saskcanola.com) for a testing code and fill out an analysis request form. The air-dried samples must be packaged in a brown paper bag labelled with the testing code, sampling date and analysis request form, and sent by mail to Discovery Seed Labs.

In the case of clubroot testing, individuals can obtain a soil sampling bag by contacting the SaskCanola office. Soil samples should be collected in late summer or at swathing from areas that are at high risk of clubroot, including field entrances, high traffic areas and low lying spots. 

Samples can be dropped off at any Saskatchewan agriculture regional office or Discovery Seed Labs in Saskatoon for testing.

Kindrachuk says uptake for the testing program in recent years has been lower than what officials would have liked. She attributes that to dry conditions and low disease pressure in the province and hopes the addition of verticillium stripe testing will help renew interest in the program among producers and agronomists.

“It’s really difficult to manage your canola field when you don’t know what’s in it,” she says. “This (testing) is just another tool in the toolbox for farmers. It’s just something to help them manage their canola fields or their land better. 

“It’s not to say farmers aren’t (already) managing it well, but more information will help with their decision-making.”

SaskCanola also provides online resources for producers on its website (saskcanola.com) including the field scouting guide ‘Is It Blackleg or Verticillium Stripe’ as well as Canola Encyclopedia pages on the major canola diseases.

Manitoba offers a similar testing program through the Manitoba Canola Growers and its Pest Surveillance Initiative Lab. The Get Tested program offers free blackleg, clubroot and verticillium stripe testing to members.

The post SaskCanola expands disease testing program appeared first on Grainews.

SaskCanola and SaskFlax said Wednesday their new “management collaboration” will translate to efficiencies for both commissions with “a full staff complement to support both boards.”

Both organizations will now operate out of the current SaskCanola office at Innovation Place, a research and technology park next to the University of Saskatchewan campus in Saskatoon.

SaskCanola’s current executive director Tracy Broughton will manage both organizations as their new exec.

The two organizations emphasized they maintain their separate boards of directors and governance structures under the new collaboration, and canola and flax levies will still be collected separately.

“Finding administrative and operational efficiencies within our industry ensures that growers’ levy dollars are put to the best use,” SaskFlax board chair Greg Sundquist of Watrous said in a joint release.

“Our commissions were created with similar mandates and key focus areas — research, extension and market development. We are excited about the opportunities this arrangement brings to oilseed growers.”

“A lot of flax growers in our province are also going to have canola in their rotation, so it makes sense,” SaskCanola board chair Charlene Bradley of Stranraer added in the same release.

The new arrangement removes a question mark over the management of SaskFlax, which in late August put out a call with the Flax Council of Canada seeking a joint executive director for SaskFlax and president for the council, with a deadline of Oct. 21.

A SaskCanola representative said Thursday the Flax Council of Canada is not involved in the SaskCanola/SaskFlax arrangement.

SaskCanola, set up in 1991, is a farmer-led, levy-supported organization backing research, advocacy and market development work, while SaskFlax, operating since 1996, supports research and market development through checkoffs on flaxseed and flax straw. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post SaskCanola, SaskFlax merge offices, management appeared first on Grainews.

First, a quick review. The Canola Council is funded partly by farmers, through the levies that come off your cheques when you sell canola. It’s also funded by the canola industry: buyers, crushers, exporters and chemical companies. The Canola Council focuses on things like market access and increasing demand. And agronomy.

The Canola Council has about a dozen great agronomists on staff. You see them at field days and conferences, and you read their recommendations in regular emails from the Canola Council. You’ve seen many of them quoted here in Grainews, for example in Lee Hart’s story on the cover of this issue where he quotes Council agronomist Autumn Barnes.

On December 5, the Canola Council announced many changes to its strategic priorities. One of these changes will mean less time in the field for their agronomists. The agronomists will focus less on individual field walks and one-on-one farm support, and more on presentations to groups. They won’t administer the Canola Performance Trials, which have been a great source of unbiased information. They’ll help out our provincial governments less with pest and disease surveys. If you were thinking of getting involved in the Council’s Ultimate Canola Challenge, a program focusing on new production practices, that program is over.

I talked to Jim Everson, Canola Council president. He says the Council’s agronomists can make better use of their time working with private agronomists to “amplify” the information they develop, rather than working with farmers one-on-one. He’s probably right. I’m not sure how many farmers phone the Council’s agronomists directly, but I suspect most call a local retail or private agronomist. But still, any day we lose an unbiased source of agronomy information, people whose jobs aren’t directly tied to product sales, is a worrying day.

Charlene Bradley from Stranraer, Sask., is a farmer and a member of SaskCanola’s board of directors. She also represents SaskCanola on the Canola Council’s board. She believes that, as the number of private agronomists has grown across the Prairies, we have a growing need for specialists (like the Canola Council agronomists) to support them. “We believe we’re doing what’s best for the industry,” she said. And, if they identify areas where things need to be changed, she says, they’ll change it. “It’s the first year in. We’ll assess the situation over the first year and see if we’ve got the right mix.”

Saving money

The agronomy cuts and other changes at the Canola Council will save money. The Canola Council is lowering its budget from $8.7 million in 2017 to $5.2 million in 2019. Here in Saskatchewan, Charlene Bradley said, SaskCanola will contribute $0.15/tonne to the Canola Council, as compared to the $0.23/tonne we contributed in the past. (This contribution comes from the levies farmers pay to provincial canola associations: $0.75/tonne in Saskatchewan; $1/tonne in Manitoba and Alberta).

“Excellent,” the Saskatchewan farmers are thinking. “A 26 per cent discount on my canola levies. Great timing, now that I’m getting about $2/bushel less for my canola than a couple of years ago.”

Not so fast. SaskCanola is keeping the $0.08/tonne. “There are other items that we will be picking up,” Charlene Bradley said. These include more canola promotions, and maybe some support for the Canola Performance Trials.

Let’s say Alice is a Saskatchewan farmer planning to seed 2,000 acres of canola this year. If she grows 40 bushels/acre, she’ll have 0.907 tonnes of canola per acre — 1,814 tonnes. At $0.75/tonne, when she sells that canola, she’ll pay levies of $1,360.50 to SaskCanola. If SaskCanola passed their savings from lower payments to the Canola Council on to Alice, she’d save $0.08/tonne, or $145.12*. Now, if SaskCanola was to mail Alice a refund cheque for $145.12, Alice would probably blow the whole wad (and another $200) at Costco. I’ve seen the goofy things people accidentally buy at Costco, and I’m sure $145.12 would be better spent promoting canola. But it only seems fair to make sure Alice knows these savings will not move down the chain and into her wallet.

SaskCanola tries to keep us posted. But that can’t be easy. In 2018, only 1,159 farmers bothered to vote in the SaskCanola board elections. You’re thinking, “that’s not many.” Guess what? It’s 35 per cent more than voted the last time they held an election. The moral? If you want to know what’s going on in unbiased agronomy, if you want to have a say about it, and if you want your $145 back, you’re going to have to start paying attention to these levy-collecting groups.

*Note: In the original version of this article, I accidentally got the wrong answer converting 40 bushels/acre to bushels/ton (I used the bushels/ha figure, 2.69, which would have been a heck of a crop for Alice). As a result, it appeared that Alice was paying a lot more to SaskCanola than she actually is, and that her refund would have been $432 rather than $145. I apologize for this error, and thank Karla Bergstrom from Alberta Canola for pointing it out. – Leeann

The post Editor’s Column: Changes afoot at the Canola Council of Canada appeared first on Grainews.

Researchers are learning more about the pathogen, developing new clubroot-resistant seed varieties and finding better ways to measure the presence of clubroot. But for now, planting resistant seed, rotating crops to avoid planting canola within two years on the same field and sanitizing agricultural equipment that may carry clubroot spores are still the most effective tools farmers have to protect against infection.

• Read more: Clubroot is coming to a field near you

Unfortunately, Bruce Gossen, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada research scientist, told delegates, though long rotations and sanitization are effective, “growers won’t use them.” Farmers reliant on immediate cash returns from canola crops are reluctant to implement longer rotations — surveys have found that 10 to 15 per cent of farmers do not give their soil the recommended breaks from canola. As well, farmers find that fully sanitizing agricultural equipment to remove all clubroot spores is time consuming, which is especially problematic during busy seasons.

Researchers are assessing the potential of using soil amendments like lime and fumigation to lower the load of clubroot spores in infected soil. Gossen says liming “looks positive,” as a way to keep the load of clubroot spores low, but the costs of fumigation are too high for widespread use. “There’s not a lot that can be done on a large scale,” he said.

“This is not an easy problem to solve,” agreed conference attendee Carol Holt, farmer from Bashaw, Alta., and agronomist with Univar. “There are limited control measures and they can’t be easily applied.”

Clubroot has only recently affected North Dakota and the Peace River region of Alberta, but international delegates from countries including Japan, China, Poland, Sweden and Germany brought stories of their long history with clubroot, which also impacts other cruciferous crops such as broccoli and cabbage. “We think it’s just started, but we’re just the last to get it,” said conference delegate Wayne Truman, Saskatchewan farmer and SaskCanola board member.

The post No silver bullet for international disease appeared first on Grainews.

The provincial government on Tuesday announced the creation of two advisory boards: a policy development board and technical review board.

Specific members haven’t yet been named to either board, but the province said the policy advisory board will include members from Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS), the Western Canadian Wheat Growers, the Saskatchewan Farm Stewardship Association and the Saskatchewan Canola Development Commissions (SaskCanola).

The policy board will also include members from the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities (SARM), the Saskatchewan Conservation and Development Association and Ducks Unlimited Canada, the province said.

The technical review board, meanwhile, is to be made up of experts with backgrounds in water management, engineering and hydrology, the province said.

If a drainage project’s “proponent” believes a technical error has occurred, the province said, he/she/they can provide information to the technical board and ask for a review.

“For example, if there is a question on the adequacy of an outlet, this board would review it and provide technical advice.”

The creation of the two advisory boards comes as the provincial Water Security Agency Amendment Act, introduced in November, passes third reading in the legislature, the government said Tuesday.

The amendments lay out a new process to deal with unauthorized drainage on Saskatchewan farmland.

“Our government’s goal is to create responsibly-managed agricultural drainage networks focused on controlling and organizing water management in the province,” Scott Moe, the provincial minister for the WSA, said in a release Tuesday.

“This will ensure mitigation of impacts to downstream landowners while continuing to provide benefits to producers. The advisory boards will provide input and advice on agricultural water management policies as we move forward with the strategy.”

The WSA is now working with “hundreds” of Saskatchewan landowners on organized drainage projects covering over 160,000 acres, the province said. –– AGCanada.com Network

The post Saskatchewan to tap farm leaders for drainage board appeared first on Grainews.

These small plots were 1.5 to 2.1 metres wide by five or six metres long. Field scale data will be added to the website soon.

The CPT program is managed by the Canola Council of Canada, and funded by your canola levies through the three Prairie canola grower groups: the Alberta Canola Producers Commission, the Saskatchewan Canola Development Commission (SaskCanola) and the Manitoba Canola Growers Association.

The post CPT small plot data is now online appeared first on Grainews.

The seed guides come out of the CPT directly, says Curtis Rempel, vice president, crop production for the Canola Council of Canada. The trials look at a wide variety of new canola varieties and test them — in different conditions — to see how well the different varieties perform.

It’s important to know up front that the Canola Council of Canada is the arms-length organization that manages the trials. They make sure protocols are designed properly, they audit test sites to ensure consistency, and they organize the data and statistics. But, the Canola Council does not fund the trials, says Rempel. There are two funders: provincial farm organizations (Alberta Canola Producers Commission, Manitoba Canola Growers, SaskCanola and the B.C. Grain Producers Association) plus the life science companies (seed companies).

Given the importance of these trials, what do farmers need to know about them? Interestingly, the seed companies register more varieties than they commercialize, and when varieties are through the registration process the initial trials on seeds (pre-commercial) are done without herbicides and without taking particular management styles into account. This is done so that the seeds can be initially tested solely on their genetic strength, says Rempel.

In the post-management part of the process, herbicide is applied and farm management styles are taken into account. Canola varieties turn over every three to four years, says Rempel, so the trials look at new seeds that are just coming onto the market vs. commercially standard older seeds, which have historically had good results. They look at “running yield improvements,” says Rempel.

Using the results

Online, farmers can look at the results of all the trials. What’s usually most helpful are results in the areas close to where you farm. For example, if your farm is in Saskatchewan, you can zoom in on the map on the Canola Performance Trials website and see the test sites in Saskatchewan. Clicking on sites close to your own farm may give some useful data based on the varieties that were tested near your location and their outputs.

Another way farmers can use the trial results, says Rempel, is to search for desired yields for their area. For example, if you’re comfortable with 60 bushels per acre, you can look to the map and the data to see which varieties gained those kinds of yields in your area or in areas with similar environmental conditions. You can take local environmental conditions for your own area into account as well.

“No variety wins every trial,” says Rempel. “With some, the yield potential is lower but they are consistent, with others they have a high yield, but more intense management is needed.” The Canola Council of Canada doesn’t comment on which varieties are the most interesting or the “best” since the trials cover a variety of regions, conditions, management styles, and herbicide management. Rempel suggests that farmers look at the data with their particular questions in mind: yield, yield stability, and how you want to split up your own acres.

There are just no bad varieties these days, says Rempel. A lot of the choice comes down to what your management style on your own farm is because “farmers may not want to manage each acre the same way.”

New developments

The newest development in this year’s trials is pod shatter management.

“We’re on the cusp of this exploratory work this year, and it will be ongoing,” says Rempel. There are a few varieties available on the market now, but there will be more and better representation from all the companies regarding pod shatter in the very near future.

Pod shatter can lead to yield loss, so garnering new varieties that can protect against this is “good for growers.” Remember, varieties are rolling over very often and they’re always improving, says Rempel, and plant scientists are doing excellent work with canola, the “absolute acumen” is incredible. So take a look at http://www.canolaperformancetrials.ca to see what’s working where you farm. †

The post The Canola Performance Trials appeared first on Grainews.

If you haven’t seen the film yourself, you can check it out at licensetofarm.com. It’s about half an hour, and features unscripted interviews from farmers, scientists, communications specialists, and other industry. Personally, I thought it was well done. It cost about $200,000 to produce, and $150,000 of that came from SaskCanola.

The film’s audience is not consumers. It’s farmers like you. The goal is to inspire farmers to start talking to consumers about what they do.

In the back of my mind, I worried a little that SaskCanola was preaching to the choir with this documentary. But then I thought it was probably better to focus on getting their audience (you) to act, rather than trying to be everything to everyone.

The reality is there’s no silver bullet to slay consumers’ food fears, and so it’s not fair to judge the film against those standards. Instead, the question is whether it will meet that goal, of getting farmers talking.

Time will tell, but from what I’ve seen on social media, it’s certainly inspiring farmers to speak up. It’s also garnered coverage from non-farm media. One farmer in my Twitter network had even asked an online commenter to email him to carry on the conversation (I think that might work really well, but I’d be a little cautious about giving out your personal information. I say this as someone whose personal info is already in the wild. It can be nerve-wracking).

Think like a consumer

I know very little about how clothing is manufactured. I read the stories about factory fires and poor working conditions. I don’t like the idea of people being exploited or the environment being trashed so I can have relatively cheap clothing, but I have no idea what to do about it.

That’s how many people feel about their food. But to make things worse, some are afraid their food might make them sick. Add that up, and you get an effective argument for more food labelling, etc.

I’m all for better ingredient labeling. I know people with serious food allergies to everything from eggs to quinoa.

Personally, I don’t think GMOs fall into the need-to-label category. I’d rather focus on nutrition and ingredient labeling. But when the food and ag industry says GMO labels are unnecessary, people assume it’s because the industry has something to hide.

Reciting scientific facts alone aren’t enough. People don’t necessarily trust science these days, and sometimes they have very good reason for that distrust. Any researcher can skew results through the experiment’s design or data analysis. Consumers don’t generally have the time or expertise to check whether that’s the case.

So if you’re speaking with someone who doesn’t know a lot about farming, have a little empathy. We’re all ignorant about something. Listen to what they say. Explain how you know what you know. Whatever you do, don’t tell them their food sensitivities/anxieties are bunk. Think of how annoyed you feel when a stranger tries to give you unsolicited health or nutrition advice.

People talk about ag advocacy a lot these days, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with advocating for your own interests. I don’t think that’s necessarily what these conversations should be about, though. They can also be about both parties learning something new and walking away with a better understanding of each other, even if they don’t agree on everything.

For an interview with Alexei Berteig, director of “License to Farm”, visit Grainews.ca/video.

The post Ag reporting gets more glamorous appeared first on Grainews.