2015 Agricultural Service Board resolutions

Response:
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development

• AFSC uses individual coverage and surcharges/discounts to premiums to reflect an individual’s risk management practices
• AFSC does not always have historical records on where crops have been grown; therefore, it would be difficult for AFSC to enforce a policy which required longer rotations between canola crops
• Contact: Chris Dyck, Sr. Manager, Research and Corporate Data Management, AFSC
• In 2007, clubroot was added as a pest under the Regulation of the Agricultural Pests Act (APA)
  • Under the APA, the landowner or occupant of the land needs to take measures to prevent the establishment of a pest, and control or destroy a pest on that land
• ARD, in consultation with the Clubroot Management Committee, has developed a Clubroot Management Plan (CMP) which outlines the best management practices (BMPs) for controlling this disease. The CMP recommends a minimum of three years between canola crops in order to prevent the buildup of spores in the soil
• The enforce crop rotations under the APA, pest inspectors would need to issue a notice to the landowner or occupant of the land
  • Except under specific conditions, this would be difficult to enforce on a larger scale
• The CMP has been communicated to canola growers, and ARD specialists attend grower and professional workshops, and update canola growers on BMPs for controlling clubroot
• ARD Communications, in conjunction with industry, has developed public messaging on following BMPs for controlling clubroot
• Contact: Dr. David Feindel, Director, Pest Surveillance Branch, 780-422-4911

1. AFSC has systems in place to individualize both premium and coverage offered to producers based on their yield history and loss experience. These systems ensure that producers who use management practices that result in lower yields receive lower coverage, as well those with high claim rates receive a surcharge on their premium. We feel this system does an effective job of recognizing both progressive and questionable management practices.
2. AFSC is not in a position to consistently enforce the use of specified crop rotations. Firstly, for producers insuring for the first time we do not know the cropping history of the land prior to it being insured, and secondly growers are not obligated to insure all their cropped acres which again makes it difficult to know if specific crop rotations are being followed.

• Clubroot is established in more than 30 municipalities throughout Alberta. Clubroot is less of an issue in Saskatchewan and Manitoba
  • Canola growers in clubroot infested regions of the province currently use clubroot tolerant canola varieties
• In 2013, a field north of Edmonton identified where clubroot resistance in all current commercial clubroot resistant canola varieties, was overcome. This new virulent pathotype is referred to as “5x”
  • In 2014, an additional 15 fields were identified where resistance to clubroot was overcome. Whether the pathotype is “5x” or not has yet to be determined, but this does significantly raise the threat to several regions in Alberta where canola is a major crop
  • ARD is monitoring this new pathotype and is closely working with the Universities of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Guelph, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and industry partners toward developing new technologies to counter the development of this and other new virulent clubroot pathotypes
• One of the issues identified in the APA, and highlighted by the threat posed by the new virulent clubroot pathotype(s), is the need for mandatory reporting of high impact pests
  • This would provide ARD, and industry, with the tools to monitor, and quickly respond to threats. A provision for the mandatory reporting of specified high risk pests is being considered in the APA review
• Contact: Dr. David Feindel, Director, Pest Surveillance Branch, 780-422-4911

Response:
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development

• Municipalities have used the Clubroot Management Plan (CMP) as a guide to develop their clubroot policies; however, municipalities are inconsistent in their approach in dealing with clubroot
• In 2014, ARD, along with the University of Alberta (U of A), industry, and municipal inspectors, surveyed more than 6,000 fields, of which roughly 10 per cent were surveyed intensively
  • A standardized clubroot inspection procedure, developed by the U of A and modified to meet ARD’s needs, was circulated to all ASBs who participated in the survey
  • In 2016, ARD will again provide the standardized clubroot procedure to all ASBs participating in the clubroot survey
• The ASB grant program provides roughly $11.5 million annually to support legislative activities, which include surveys
  • ASBs will prioritize their needs, in alignment with regulatory obligations, and after consultation with ARD’s ASB Grant Manager
  • ASBs are encouraged to designate ASB grant money to cover the cost of the clubroot survey
• Contact: Dr. David Feindel, Director, Pest Surveillance Branch, 780-422-4911

Further Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Funding for this program be in addition to the current ASB Grant Program Funding.

Response:
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development

• Weeds are legislated under the Alberta Weed Control Act (WCA) and the associated Regulation. The WCA lists weeds as either noxious or prohibited noxious:
  • “A person shall destroy a prohibited noxious weed on land that the person owns or occupies” (Section 2).
  • “A person shall not move anything in the province if it may spread a noxious or prohibited noxious weed” [Sectuib 4(1))
• Because of the highly invasive characteristics, prohibited noxious weeds are at a high risk of causing serious problems in Alberta, as already observed in other provinces and/or neighbouring states
• The purpose of having prohibited noxious weeds listed on the Regulation is to facilitate a rapid response, and to allow for eradication before the weed becomes firmly established. Prohibited noxious weeds that are listed on the Regulation can become widespread in the province, and at that point eradication becomes difficult and is often not feasible
• The ASB grant program provides $11.5 million annually to support regulatory activities, which includes the removal of prohibited noxious weeds
  • ASBs set priorities when dealing with inspections
  • Municipalities can seek additional funding from sources outside of ARD, such as the Alberta Crop Industry Development Fund
• ARD has been collaborating with Cardston County in exploring the possibility of an intensified survey and control program to eradicate the prohibited noxious weed, spotted knapweed. Heavy infestations occur within the County, some in sensitive areas like water course ways. ARD is supporting the County in developing protocols for their eradication program efforts
• Contact: Dr. David Feindel, Director, Pest Surveillance Branch, 780-422-4911

• Part 1 (2) of the WCA states that a person shall control a noxious weed that is on land the person owns or occupies
• The Alberta Weed Regulatory Advisory Committee (AWRAC) recommended that Canada thistle be added as a noxious weed on the Regulation
  • The AWRAC makes recommendations to the Pest Surveillance Branch of ARD on the risk associated with various existing, new, and emerging weeds, and makes a recommendation as to the addition, upgrade or downgrade of risk, or the removal of weed species from the Regulation of the WCA
  • The AWRAC is represented by members from federal, provincial, and municipal governments; cities; universities; industry; and other interested groups, such as the Alberta Invasive Species Council
  • The original risk assessment identified Canada thistle as a highly invasive weed, having a significant negative economic impact. Since then, Canada thistle no longer meets the AWRAC’s criteria to be considered a noxious weed
  • While the AWRAC has informally discussed the removal of Canada thistle from the Regulation, due to its pervasive nature, neither the AWRAC nor ARD is proposing its removal from the Regulations at this time
• Further discussion with the AWRAC and a more detailed risk assessment of Canada thistle has to be done before it will be considered for removal from the Regulation
• Contact: Dr. David Feindel, Director, Pest Surveillance Branch, 780-422-4911

Response:
AAMD&C Board of Directors
This letter is to inform you that the membership of the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC) has endorsed AAMDC Resolution 3-15S: Legal Opinion on the Jurisdiction of the Weed Control Act on all railways.

As you are aware, a resolution was passed at the January 2015 Agricultural Service Board conference calling for the AAMDC to solicit a legal opinion on whether the Weed Control Act has jurisdiction on CN Rail property. In order to undertake action on this matter, the AAMDC required the support of its membership and a similar resolution was submitted by an AAMDC member for discussion at the AAMDC Spring 2015 Convention. The resolution was debated by members and eventually passed with amendments. The amendment broadened the request for a legal opinion beyond CN Rail to include all railways operating in the province. As such, the AAMDC will not be obtaining a legal opinion solely focused on CN Rail and will instead pursue a legal opinion as directed in the AAMDC endorsed resolution. A copy of this resolution has been attached for your reference.

When received, the AAMDC will share this legal opinion with member municipalities as well as the Agricultural Service Board Provincial Committee.

Resolution #7
Prevention of the introduction of Zebra and Quagga Mussels into Alberta water bodies
Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development direct Alberta Transportation to have all border crossings into Alberta have a water craft inspection station where it is mandatory for all water craft to stop and be inspected for the presence of all aquatic invasive species.

Response:
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development
Bill 13 Fisheries (Alberta) Amendment Act, passed in the legislature on March 19, 2015. Once it receives Royal Assent (is proclaimed into law), watercraft inspections will become mandatory. Inspection stations will be located at commercial vehicle weigh stations throughout the province, as well as main points of entry to prevent invasive mussels from entering Alberta’s waters.

Alberta Transportation


Resolution #8
Monitor Ergot Levels in Livestock Feeds
Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That regulations be put into place by Alberta Agriculture to monitor the use and movement of ergot into livestock feeds until research can determine acceptable levels.

Further Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Agriculture better inform all those involved in feeding, shipping and processing of feed containing ergot of the toxicity, symptoms and devastating consequences of feeding ergot toxic feeds.

Response:
Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development

• While the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has not established maximum tolerable levels of ergot in animal feeds, they have established guideline levels
  • ARD does not have regulatory jurisdiction to unilaterally establish regulatory limits for ergot, or to regulate the use and movement of animal feeds containing ergot, which has not established maximum tolerable levels
  • Regulatory jurisdiction surrounding the manufacturing, sale, and importation of safe, effective, and properly-labelled feeds falls under the federal Feeds Act and Regulations administered by the CFIA
• ARD will publish information on the hazards of the use of ergot-contaminated animal feed on the ARD website www.agric.gov.ab.ca
  • ARD will collaborate with industry organizations to determine the most effective methods for communicating this hazard to producers
• Contact: Dr. Joe Kendall, Veterinary Toxicologist, Animal Health Branch, 780-427-8389

Response:
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development
Environment and Sustainable Resource Development is implementing new elk hunting seasons in wildlife management units 162 and 163 in southeastern Alberta. These additional seasons will occur in areas where there are currently low elk numbers in order to maintain low populations and reduce range expansion.

Our department is increasing the number of antlerless elk hunting seasons for Canadian Forces Base Suffield and creating new hunting seasons for antlered elk. These seasons are in support of lowering elk populations in and around the base in response to landowner concerns. We are also implementing late-season antlerless elk hunting seasons in wildlife management units 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308 and 310 in southwestern Alberta. These seasons will extend into January and are being implemented in response to landowner concerns over agricultural depredation.

Department staff conducted elk population surveys in many wildlife management units throughout the province, including the Peace River area. Updated population estimates will be used to make changes to the number of issued hunting permits for the upcoming 2015 hunting season.

In addition, Environment and Sustainable Resource Development is amending the procedure for landowners to provide greater flexibility in obtaining antlerless elk landowner licences. Landowners who are unsuccessful in either the antlerless or antlered elk special licence draws will be allowed to apply for an antlerless elk landowner licence.

Resolution #10
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Officer availability
Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Justice and Solicitor General hire more staff to fill all positions that are now vacant.

Further Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Justice and Solicitor General reopen office closures from 2014, hire F&W Officers to staff these offices and increase manpower so that all Offices have a minimum of two F&W Officers in them.

Further Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Justice and Solicitor General encourage more awareness and education between hunters and the public and that the level of enforcement of infractions be increased.

Response:
Alberta Justice and Solicitor General
The Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch was moved to Justice and Solicitor General in 2011. Since that time, the number of fish and wildlife officers has remained the same at 144 positions and 30 new officers have been hired to fill vacancies. Another competition is currently underway to fill the remaining vacancies. Over the past year, fish and wildlife officers have been deployed to Vegreville, Camrose, Ponoka, Red Deer and Wetaskiwin districts. There are currently 12 officers working in the Red Deer unit.

Protection of life and property is a priority for the government, which means providing a response to reports of problem wildlife may sometimes shift the efforts to fish and wildlife officers away from the law enforcement mandate. This has been identified as an issue and has prompted discussions between this department and Environment and Sustainable Resource Development to identify efficiencies and create new strategies to ensure law enforcement effort is not diminished.

The Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch understands that community and stakeholder engagement is key to delivering a successful enforcement program and is grateful for the support demonstrated by your organization.

Anyone wishing to report illegal hunting or fishing activity is encouraged to contact a fish and wildlife officer or call the Report a Poacher line at 1-800-642-3800.

Thank you for writing to share the Alberta Agricultural Service Board Committee’s resolution.

Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development


Resolution #11
Wildlife Predator Compensation for Domestic Equine loss
Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resources Development fully recognize domestic equines, including horses and donkeys, as livestock under the Alberta Wildlife Regulation, Section 11 (b).

Further Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resources Development allow owners of domestic equines, including horses and donkeys, to be eligible for compensation when a loss is caused by predation of wolves, bears, cougars and eagles.

Response:
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development
Alberta’s Wildlife Predator Compensation Program provides compensation for food-producing livestock such as cattle, pigs, goats, sheep and bison that have been killed or injured by predators such as bears, wolves, cougars and eagles. The program is intended to provide coverage for food-producing animals at the average market value for the type and class of animal lost.

A committee of representatives from Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, the Agriculture Financial Services Corporation, and Agriculture and Rural Development recently reviewed the program. During this review, horses were considered but not included for compensation because Alberta does not have a significant horse meat market. Horses that have been attacked by predators are usually being raised for personal use or as working stock, not as meat.

Resolution #12
Agriculture Plastics Recycling
Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resources Development together with the Alberta Recycling Management Authority implement a stewardship program that will provide funding and add value to both collection and recycling of Agricultural Plastics in the Province of Alberta.

Response:
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development
Currently a regulated recycling program for agricultural plastics is not being considered. Environment and Sustainable Resource Development and Agriculture and Rural Development are developing an education program for agricultural producers and municipalities, which will include information on the environmental impact of burning agricultural plastics and current options for the disposal of agricultural plastics.

In order for the Alberta Recycling Management Authority to implement a stewardship program for agricultural plastics, a regulation would be required to designate agricultural plastics under the authority.

A stewardship program for agricultural plastics would also likely require environmental fees; that is agricultural plastic manufacturers and retailers would likely pass those fees on to agricultural producers. Recycling regulations for all designated materials, except beverage containers, list activities covered by environmental fees charged on designated materials. The activities are specific to the recycling and management of the designated material. Environmental fees collected on one designated material cannot be used to pay for management of a different material.

Other jurisdictions, such as Saskatchewan, are looking at options to address the waste management of agricultural plastics. The Government of Alberta will stay informed of these developments to determine if those options could be applied in Alberta.

Alberta Recycling Management Authority
Alberta Recycling has an ongoing working relationship with municipalities and regional waste commissions in large part through the 460 municipal collection sites associated with the electronics, tires and paint recycling programs that we have been mandated to manage by the Government of Alberta. Through these relationships, Alberta Recycling has repeatedly been questioned about how an Alberta agriculture plastics program could be developed.

While Alberta Recycling has expertise and experience in developing and running environmental stewardship programs that may provide useful input on an agriculture plastics program, it is not within our mandate to act on agriculture plastics. However, I will raise your letter with our Board of Directors to confirm their willingness to provide input informally if requested by those endeavouring to establish a program. I have also given a copy of the resolution with an accompanying briefing note to the Minister and I am waiting for a response from his office.

I appreciate your concern with this environmental issue and will respond further after our May 2015 Board meeting.

Resolution #13
Pesticide Container Collection Program - DEFEATED AT THE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE BOARD PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE - JANUARY 2015

Resolution #14
Management of Farm and Agricultural Leases
Therefore be it resolved that Alberta's Agricultural Service Boards request
That Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development transfer Management of Farm Development leases and Agricultural leases to The Ministry of Agriculture.

Response:
Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development
The Government of Alberta is not considering transferring responsibility for agricultural public land at this time.

Public land, whether used for agriculture, timber, industry, recreation, or conservation is managed by Environment and Sustainable Resource Development under the Public Lands Act. Public land management focuses on establishing and sustaining an optimum balance of use, conservation, and development of resources, in harmony with the values and needs of Albertans. This stewardship responsibility requires public land managers to ensure that the quantity and quality of public land resources are maintained or enhanced.

One of Environment and Sustainable Resource Development’s core responsibilities is the effective management of agricultural uses on Alberta’s public lands. The majority of agricultural use on public is grazing. Leasing of public land for cultivation (farm development leases), occurs on only about 70,000 acres.

Environment and Sustainable Resource Development has professional agrologists with training and experience in rangeland management. Department staff work collaboratively with agricultural disposition holders to find adaptive and practical strategies that meet the Government of Alberta’s goals for sustainable management of public land and resources. This management task holds a significant responsibility which the department shares with ranchers and farmers, as well as all public land users.

Rent is reviewed every five years and the lessee has the advantage of having the rental rate set for a five-year period while giving the government, and Albertans, the ability to get fair value for leasing the land. Our department is aware that there are some administrative challenges and concerns regarding farm development leases, which are issued to allow annual cropping for a ten-year term. The department is currently reviewing its rental rate policies and your input is being taken into consideration.

Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development

• There is currently nothing in the Public Lands Act (PLA) or Public Lands Administration Regulation (PLAR) that refers specifically to an “agricultural lease” or “farm lease”
• ESRD legislation allows for seven types of public land dispositions intended for agriculture. Two specific disposition types issued for the cultivation of public land include Farm Development Leases (FDLs) and Cultivation Permits (CUPSs), addressed by Section 85-90 of the PLAR
• Section 41 of the PLA outlines that disposition land does not come with a warranty or condition of quality for a particular purpose. Section 63 outlines duties of the disposition holder, which include necessary weed management by the lessee and the continued use of land in a manner that promotes conservation, and Section 77 indicates that the lessee must work within the terms and conditions prescribed on the lease. Fencing and livestock containment requirements are described within PLAR, Sections 27 and 53 (3)
• As of April 2014, over 7,600 public land dispositions covering close to 8.8 million acres of public land were issued for agricultural purposes. Of this, there were only 816 FDLs and CUPs dispositions (i.e. approximately 11 per cent) covering an area of close to 112,000 acres, which is less than two percent of the total public land under some form of agricultural disposition (i.e. cultivation and grazing)
  • Of the 816 FDLs and CUPs, 643 are FDLs covering 104,000 acres
  • The remaining disposition types are intended for livestock grazing, and include Forest Grazing Licenses, Grazing Leases, Grazing Permits, Provincial Grazing Reserves, or Protected Notations allowing for grazing
• The South Saskatchewan Regional Plan contains specific strategies aimed at minimizing the conversion of native grasslands on public land to other uses, such as cultivation-based agriculture. This will likely further decrease the number of FDLs and CUPs issued by ESRD in the future. It is anticipated that similar language will appear in other regional plans
• Returning either partial (FDLs and CUPs) or all of the administration of Alberta’s public land management back to ARD would require significant changes to current government structure, which is not being considered at this time
• Contact: Jason Cathcart, Land Use, Policy, Strategy and Intergovernmental Affairs, 780-427-3432

• FG is a declared pest under the Regulation of the Agricultural Pests Act (APA)
  • Fg is well-established in the southern region of Alberta, but found in trace, or low levels, in most other areas of the province
• Alberta has a Fusarium Action Committee (FAC), which advised the Minister on matters pertaining to Fg
• A science-based review of the Fusarium Management Plan (FMP) was recommended by the FAC. The review was completed in 2013, and presented to the FAC in 2014
• On November 10, 2014, the FAC met and voted to revise the FMP
  • The revision would include the concept of Commonly Found (CF) and Not Commonly Found (NCF) areas
  • This would mean that municipalities designated as CF, having Fg above pre-determined threshold levels (>20 per cent incidence if Fg over a three year period), would have a revised allowable maximum level of Fg incidence on seed for sowing. This maximum allowable level of Fg would be five per cent incidence. The seed would also have to be treated with a seed treatment fungicide registered for use on Fg spp.
  • The Agricultural Service Boards (ASBs) and the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC), voted to retain the zero tolerance policy. Industry voted for the recommended change
• ARD is currently reviewing the FAC recommendations to the FMP. The FMP is being revised, incorporating the proposed changes, and will be sent back to the FAC for final comments by the end of March, 2015
• Contact: Dr. David Feindel, Director, Pest Surveillance Branch, 780-422-4911