Evidence of meeting #85 for Agriculture and Agri-Food in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was great.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Now we'll go to the video conference and Professor Sean Smukler for seven minutes.
Dr. Sean Smukler Assistant Professor, Junior Chair of Agriculture and Environment of the University of British Columbia, As an Individual
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you all.
As mentioned, I'm an assistant professor. I'm the junior chair of agriculture and environment at UBC's faculty of land and food systems. I'm an agricultural ecologist. My role here is to help farmers reduce their impact on the environment but also to help reduce the environment's impact on agriculture. Specifically, my role is to help farmers with climate change adaptation.
I'm also the chair of the B.C. agricultural climate adaptation research network, ACARN. This is a network that comprises five universities in the province, industry, NGOs, and government organizations. The objective of this research network is to enhance B.C. agriculture's capacity to adapt to climate change.
My knowledge and experience are focused mainly on B.C., but I think some of what I'll say applies broadly to farmers across the country.
Here in B.C. we expect to see temperatures and precipitation increase. Increased temperatures could present a great opportunity for our growers here, as we would see increased numbers of growing degree days. The challenge, however, with increased precipitation is that we're expecting to see this on the important shoulder seasons: in the spring, when farmers are trying to get their fields ready for planting, and in the fall, when the farmers are trying to harvest. In case you don't know, when you put heavy equipment on saturated soils, you can potentially cause irreparable damage to that soil, impacting the productivity of the system and the long-term sustainability of the farm.
In terms of the projections for B.C., the models suggest that we could see increases of up to 12% to 15%, even by 2030, in terms of precipitation. If we were to capitalize on the increased growing degree days, we'd for sure need to do something about drainage.
The other important thing to note is that increased precipitation in the shoulder seasons is not necessarily good for our water dynamics in terms of the production season. With increased precipitation, we're actually expecting a reduced snowpack. The snowpack is where we store our water for use in irrigation in the summertime. As that resource is reduced, we may be turning to groundwater resources more frequently for irrigation. The problem is that we don't have a good handle on the status of our groundwater here in B.C., or on the changes to it. We also haven't planned well in terms of forward thinking in terms of other water resources.
I think you're also interested in hearing about soil, and that's what a lot of my research is focused on. It's clear that if we change our management of soil, we could help address some of these problems. We could also help to mitigate the impacts of climate change broadly. By increasing soil organic matter through a number of different management practices, we can potentially increase the water-holding capacity in the soil, improve soil structure, improve infiltration rates, and overall improve the resilience of our crops and our farming systems.
There are a number of well-known management practices that can increase soil organic matter. The challenge is in getting farmers to adopt these practices in the face of labour or other economic constraints. Some of these practices need to be incentivized in some way. Broadly across Canada, it's possible that we could substantially increase our soil organic matter on the 20% of our agricultural lands that are currently considered moderately to severely degraded and are not currently sequestering carbon.
Climate change is a huge challenge for agriculture, as it is for other sectors, but farmers are going to be some of the first and hardest hit. As we heard earlier, farmers are already recognizing that problem. They are recognizing the problem here in B.C. The major challenge is that this is a big, slow-moving beast, and it's hard to differentiate the challenges of fluctuations in weather patterns we have seen in the past with the ongoing and quite dramatic changes we're expecting to see.
We just held a workshop last week with a number of industry groups, and it's clear that they have a whole set of research priorities that are related to pest management, nutrient management, disease control, and managing for irrigation, but many of their research priorities are not consistent with what some of the long-term research priorities should be.
For us as researchers who are thinking about the long game, the challenge then becomes some of the more dramatic impacts that are going to happen with climate change. How do we get funding when we need industry to match it? Industry is clearly looking at the near term, and that's important, it's critical, but we also need to be playing the long game. How is it that we're going to do that research for projecting industry needs 10 or 30 years down the road if we need that industry match and they are focused on today?
What I ask of you all is to help think outside of the box. How do we get the funding into research so that we are ready for the big changes that are coming?
We also need to be thinking in ways that are going to address the complexity of this situation. Climate change is incredibly complex. We need to be thinking about the economics, the environmental problems, as well as the social issues that are involved, and we need to be thinking about some of the opportunities for our local farmers but at the same time consider the agricultural situation across the nation.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Professor Smukler, I'm going to have to ask you to conclude, if you can, as we're running out of time. Please give a short conclusion. We'll have time to ask questions.
Assistant Professor, Junior Chair of Agriculture and Environment of the University of British Columbia, As an Individual
That was it. I just wanted to point out that the problems are both local and national, but we really need to be thinking internationally not only in terms of opportunities but also in terms of responsibilities.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you very much, Professor Smukler.
Now we'll start our question round.
Mr. Barlow, you have six minutes, please.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Oonce again I appreciate our witnesses' great information. It's always great to see young producers get together and come up with initiatives and projects like this one that you guys have taken on. It's really good to see that you're thinking outside the box, tackling some of the issues you face, and doing it together as a group, which is fantastic to see in the watershed that all of you share.
My riding is southwest Alberta, so I'm in the heart of cattle country, with a little bit of potatoes on the south end. Cavendish has just opened up there.
The one thing I'm glad you brought up is the issues with PMRA and imidacloprid, which I'm assuming is the one you were talking about when you were talking about wireworm. I know this has a huge impact on potatoes, but canola and pulse growers also use it in Alberta. I know the horticulture industry in Ontario relies on it a great deal.
I understand you guys as a group have about 20,000 acres. Can you talk about the impact that losing some of those tools would have on your industry? I think that's the message we need to get to PMRA. We're seeing, as I think a lot of my colleagues would agree, a discussion going on in silos. Health Canada and PMRA are not talking to the agriculture sector. They don't understand how the decisions they are going to make will impact our producers and our agriculture economy.
Can you talk about it, just so we can have it on the record? Do you have an idea of what the economic impact would be if you lost some of those tools that are in your tool box?
Board Member, East Prince Agri-Environment Association
That's a great question.
If we start losing more tools in our tool box to manage wireworm, it will be devastating.
Wireworm is a funny animal to manage. There are regions that aren't experiencing any problems yet, and there are other regions where production ground is almost non-existent. We're talking about an animal that doesn't just affect potatoes, as you commented, but we're the first ones to notice the blunt hit from it.
You can see ranges. I have crop insurance employment history, and I've seen dockages of up to 25% to 30% in crops. I believe you guys, Jason, suffered a 30-acre or 40-acre loss two years ago that exceeded a $120,000 value.
Vice-Chair, East Prince Agri-Environment Association
We had a field basically go completely down to it. It was a variety that we were unaware that wireworm seemed to especially like. We've since used the protectants that are available to us now and we've been able to manage that. In our studies on our own operation, wireworm is just creeping into our area, but it's doubling every year. It's just like the old penny story.
Vice-Chair, East Prince Agri-Environment Association
Yes. The first year, it was a $2,000 cost to us. Now it's up to $16,000. If we don't manage that and hold it, it's just going to keep going. We're working with some of the AAFC scientists on management through other crops and whatnot, but we need both tools. The other crops that are hard on the wireworm don't do it all by themselves.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
The other part that is sometimes overlooked is that having some of this new technology and this innovation has had a substantial impact on water and soil conservation. Were you to lose some of these fungicides and pesticides, you would likely have to go back to other chemicals that are certainly much more harmful and you would have to be spraying on the land much more than you are now. Is that not correct?
Board Member, East Prince Agri-Environment Association
Absolutely. There are chemicals out there that will kill the wireworm parent, the click beetle, on contact, but you are looking at insecticides being sprayed a lot more than they are now, significantly more.
The way we're managing it right now is an in-furrow process. It's safe. We are trained professionals in this field. It's regulatory that you do have to be certified and your employees have to be certified. We have legislative buffer zones. We abide by crop rotation acts. We abide by sensitive area acts and so on and so forth.
The problem I see with PMRA's decision-making process—I'm not 100% aware, but I know a bit about it—is that they'll look at it as a global spectrum. They have to start zeroing in on the actual locations where these pesticides are used and used the most, because there are reasons behind that. It may not have anything to do with what's going on in Saskatchewan, but it matters a lot in P.E.I., or vice versa.
Until there are other alternatives, I can't see how they can take that away from us.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
You hit the nail on the head. We're decertifying them faster then we can find replacements. I think that is something we really have to focus on.
We had an opportunity to meet with the crop development centre at the University of Saskatchewan. They're on the other side; they're trying to come up with these new tools to help you, but they are taking so long to get to the CFIA process to be certified that we can't possibly replace one with the other. There's a real disconnect there in terms of helping our producers.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you, Mr. Barlow.
I just want to remind the committee that I know we've referred to wireworms being a factor of climate change, but I just want to make sure that we stay focused on the subject. I know you made the link and I appreciate that. This is just to remind us that this is about climate change and soil conservation, but I know the link was made.
Conservative
John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB
I was just trying to say which product is harmful and which is no problem.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
Mr. Chair, thank you.
I'd like to thank Mr. McKenna, Mr. Webster, and Professor Smukler for joining us today as witnesses at committee .
Since I'm blessed to be the member of Parliament for Steveston—Richmond East in B.C., I'll begin my questioning with Professor Smuckler.
You talked about climate change and the need to simultaneously mitigate but also adapt to some of the changes. You also talked about the distinction between near term and long term and the need to think outside the box.
Professor Smuckler, can you talk a bit about your thinking outside the box?
Assistant Professor, Junior Chair of Agriculture and Environment of the University of British Columbia, As an Individual
Yes. Thinking outside the box means thinking about the various scenarios we might be looking at.
You know that climate change is a problem already in our region, but we will be facing intersecting issues in the future, such as development. In coming up with solutions, in anticipating the problems, if we don't do so within the greater context of the complex issues we're likely to be facing, we might not come up with the right solutions.
For example, I work on drainage in Delta, and one of the biggest hurdles for making such a major investment in infrastructure there is that while we know the technology works, we don't know what level of investment is going to pay off. In the context of land prices and in the situation of many of the farmers we work not owning their land, they're unlikely to make those investments. On the other side of the coin, we have some of the highest-valued real estate in Canada, and if those farmers are not successful on that land, I think we're going to be making some wrong choices in the way we manage that land going forward.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
You identified some factors that would usually be beyond the scope of non-traditional agricultural factors. You talked about land. Can you elaborate a little on that in two ways: the factors you would include, and also elaborate a little on factors like foreign investment?
Assistant Professor, Junior Chair of Agriculture and Environment of the University of British Columbia, As an Individual
We've done some projections on local food security in the region, and the factors that we need to be considering are the way climate change is going to impact places like California and the changes in the market across....
We now live in a completely globalized food system. We need to anticipate those changes in a way that's going to benefit our local producers. On one side we have a great opportunity to enhance our local agricultural production, and on the other side we have these increasing pressures of real estate and the challenge of making major investments to stay relevant and successful. We have this confluence of challenges that are both near term and long term, so in coming up with solutions, we need to be thinking about those long-term scenarios and anticipating them.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
Professor, have you looked at the different regional approaches?
For example, you talked about Delta. Farming in Delta, Richmond, Surrey, or Pitt Meadows would be different, and it would be different from farming in the Peace River Valley. Can you elaborate a little on whether you have looked at a regional approach for the province of B.C.?
Assistant Professor, Junior Chair of Agriculture and Environment of the University of British Columbia, As an Individual
Yes. Our regional approach included the entire Lower Mainland when we did our analysis, and it's clear that we can meet many of the local needs for food. Certainly if we expand our region to places like the Peace, we can include a greater diversity of opportunities. The challenge just becomes how we make that system efficient.
The workshop we held last week was focused on the fact that places like the Peace don't have the support they need in research and development for their agriculture. All our efforts are now completely focused on the Lower Mainland.
Liberal
Joe Peschisolido Liberal Steveston—Richmond East, BC
Professor, thank you.
Mr. McKenna, you talked about eight different projects your group is looking at. Can you talk a little about some of the projects you think are, if not more important, projects that you would like to emphasize?
Board Member, East Prince Agri-Environment Association
Sure. Right now we're focusing on soil health and ways to improve organic matter, as he spoke about, and we're working with crops that offer a fumigant benefit to combat...I don't want to be in trouble with the wireworm again.
It came in because we're seeing longer growing periods with no frost. That's including your mustards and your different cropping mixtures and so on and so forth. That probably would be priority number one.
It's doing more than just improving soil health; it's about managing our nitrates properly so they're not getting into our watersheds, and it's also about controlling soil erosion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Pat Finnigan
Thank you, Mr. McKenna. We'll move on.
Ms. Brosseau, you have six minutes.