Look deeper and you’ll see a robust approval process that puts consumer, environmental and animal safety at the forefront of an exhaustive examination of the scientific data on the use of gene-edited pigs as food. The approval by Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) formally recognizes that pork from PIC’s PRRS-resistant pigs is as safe and nutritious to eat as pork from non-gene-edited pigs on the market. So, the same but different. But how and why?

Stuart Smyth has some thoughts about that. A professor at the University of Saskatchewan, Smyth’s areas of research include agricultural biotechnology and its intersection with regulatory processes, both here and abroad, and he’s very pleased to see Canada approve the PRRS-resistant pig. He advocated hard for it.

“Gene editing is the next wave for all agricultural innovation,” he says. “We’re seeing it in a wide variety of crops and it’s good to see the same scientific process applied in this case.”

As with any agricultural innovation, gene editing can be misrepresented or misunderstood. Context, says Smyth, is everything. Knowing why this gene-edited pig was developed, what problems it solves and, as important, what problems it does not create is key for consumer acceptance, not only of the technology, but of the process that approved it.

What goes into the regulatory decision

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is a devastating virus that has major economic and emotional problems for hog farmers around the world. PRRS infections can cause breathing problems in pigs, fevers, appetite suppression, stillborn piglets and death. There are no effective treatments and while there are PRRS vaccines, they’re only partially effective.

PIC used CRISPR gene editing technology to remove a tiny portion of DNA where the virus enters and infects the pig. Without that snippet, the virus has no way to enter the animal, making it effectively resistant to PRRS.

It’s worth taking a moment to look at what Health Canada and the CFIA considered when approving PIC’s gene-edited pig. As Smyth points out it’s not the first time Canadian regulatory agencies have reviewed and approved agricultural innovations made using this technology. But until now, only gene-edited crops have gone through the process. The PRRS-resistant pig was the first gene-edited livestock up for approval, and the question for him was: would an animal be treated differently than a plant?

Smyth didn’t think it should. He made a submission to the regulatory agencies advocating that the scientific process used to assess gene-edited plants should apply to animals, too. “As long as a plant had no foreign DNA in it, it was approved,” he says. “I argued on the merits that the same scientific system should also apply here. There is no difference.”

To be clear, Health Canada and the CFIA look at much more than whether foreign DNA is present in the gene-edited organism, although that is a key difference between traditional genetically modified (GM) organisms and gene-edited ones (the former typically involves DNA introduced from other species, while the latter typically involves highly targeted changes within an organism’s own DNA).

In the case of the PRRS-resistant pig, regulators looked at how the pig was developed (using CRISPR technology), the composition and nutritional quality of the meat compared to non-edited pigs, the potential for these pigs to cause allergic reactions and the health status of the pigs themselves.

It is, says Smyth, a thorough process that looks for chinks in the armour before saying yes. “They would have done research to look at what had been changed from a genomic perspective,” he says. “They’d have done some research into the actual edit, which gene was involved and how much was it changed. They’d have looked for unintended risks.”

Why it matters for Canadians

Canadian approval of the PRRS-resistant pig comes in the wake of approvals in Brazil, Columbia, the Dominican Republic, Uruguay and the United States. Smyth says this is good news for hog farmers here in terms of competing on the world market. “It will cost us more to produce pork without this technology,” he says.

Indeed, economic modeling conducted by Jayson Lusk at Oklahoma State University shows increased productivity and lower production costs for those countries that adopt the PRRS-resistant pig. That’s important for the Canadian industry, a net exporter of pork that needs to stay competitive to be viable. On a farm level, he says the impact is no less important as it will save farmers the high costs of vaccinations, biosecurity measures, constant monitoring, and the truly devastating need to euthanize sick animals.

Smyth acknowledges that Canadian approval of the PRRS-resistant pig is a step change in agricultural technology in this country, but one consumers can have confidence in. Gene editing has been used to successfully to treat sickle cell disease in humans for years. A teenager in B.C. was recently cured of chronic granulomatous disease, a rare immunity condition, using CRISPR gene editing technology – the same technology used to make pigs resistant to PRRS.

Smyth says that kind of context is important to keep in mind when thinking about Canada’s recent approval of gene-edited pigs. It means less animal suffering and reduced antibiotic use without sacrificing food safety, nutrition or taste.

For more information visit https://www.prrsresistantpig.com/

The post The same but different: gene-edited pigs approved in Canada appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The technology Lusk is talking about is the gene-edited PRRS-resistant pig developed by PIC. And per Lusk’s economic model, we’re talking potentially big cost savings – porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome, or PRRS, is endemic to pig herds around the world and it costs farmers both financially and emotionally.

Indeed, research from Iowa State University indicates that between 2016 and 2020, PRRS cost the U.S. pork industry $1.2 billion per year in lost production.[1] A 2020 report commissioned by Animal Health Canada estimated production losses to PRRS in this country to be $184 million per year (up to 2018).[2]

If the PRRS-resistant pig could lower, or even eventually eliminate those losses, what would that do to the global pork market and economy? What could happen to global supply and trade? To production costs and retail prices? To producer profitability? To pork’s place on consumers’ plates?

[1] Growing Losses from PRRS Cost Pork Producers $1.2 Billion Per Year, New Study Shows. Iowa State University News Service. July 30, 2024. https://research.iastate.edu/2024/07/30/growing-losses-from-prrs-cost-pork-producers-1-2-billion-per-year-new-study-shows/

[2] Inventory Assessment and Gap Analysis of Canada’s Prevention, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery from and Animal Health Event. NFAHWC report prepared for the Animal Health Canada Working Group. February 13, 2020. Page 15. https://www.ahwcouncil.ca/pdfs/AHC_Gaps%20Analysis%20Report_February%2013_EN.pdf

Lusk set out to answer these questions with an economic model that links the supply of market hogs to consumer demand in six major pork-producing regions.[1]What his research found is adoption of the gene-edited PRRS-resistant pig should be largely beneficial to producers and consumers alike, but there are some interesting tidbits in terms of how those benefits could roll out.

Increased productivity, lower production costs

The economic model Lusk built looked at retail-level demand for pork with farm-level hog supply in Canada, China, Japan, Mexico, the U. S. and an aggregated rest-of-the-world (ROW) as the sixth region. Model parameters included, among other things, current production and trade statistics, supply and demand trends, and PRRS prevalence rates in each region.

“The advantage of going through a modelling exercise is that it lets you work through some ‘what if’ questions,” says Lusk. “So, if there were tariffs or import bans or reduced consumer demand, what would happen?” Conversely, what would happen if adoption rates were very low or very high?

While there are many nuances in Lusk’s results, the top line of his research is this: the introduction of the PRRS-resistant pig will likely be positive for pork industries where this technology is adopted. Yes, pork supply will rise and that will result in lower prices, but these will be offset by the significant decrease in marginal production costs associated with a disease-free herd. And any trade or consumer resistance would have to be extremely high to dim these benefits.

[1] Lusk JL. Global adoption of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome-resistant pigs will have significant economic and market impacts. American Journal of Veterinary Research. August 2025.
https://avmajournals.avma.org/view/journals/ajvr/aop/ajvr.25.05.0188/ajvr.25.05.0188.xml?tab_body=fulltext

But these will not be overnight changes, Lusk says. The model assumed a 70 per cent prevalance rate of PRRS-resistant pigs in the five countries by year 12 of introduction. That is not necessarily typical of all new technologies.

“Take GMOs in the late 1990s. That technology went from zero to 100 per cent in about five years,” says Lusk, adding that plant breeding and seed multiplication can be done fairly quickly compared to animal technology. “Breeding enough PRRS-resistant pigs to get into the supply chain takes time, so there is an underlying recognition of the biology at play in the premise of that adoption rate.”

So, if slow and steady wins the race, what will that race actually look like as this technology unfolds?

Productivity vs. production costs

Unsurprisingly, Lusk’s model projects that as pork production rises with the introduction of PRRS-resistant pigs, hog prices will fall. Indeed, his model projects prices to fall in the U.S. and Canada by about 25 per cent by year ten before they stabilize. But don’t panic.

“What people forget is the cost of production versus net profit.” He explains that as PRRS-resistant technology adoption grows, the cost of production significantly likely drops over time. Lower mortality rates, healthier pigs, more viable pigs per sow per year, lower antibiotic costs and no more de-pop/re-pop expenses all lead to a considerable drop in the marginal cost of production – that is, the cost of producing one more kilo of pork.

In Canada, for example, Lusk’s model projects that by year 10, hog production increases by 7%. While the resulting expansion in supply puts downward pressure on hog prices, marginal production costs decline even further. As a result, producers who adopt the technology are producing more pigs and earning higher profits per pig than prior to adoption, according to the research.

“Canada exports a much larger share of its production than other countries,” says Lusk. “Success is reliant on its ability to compete in the global marketplace, and cost of production is a key part of that ability.”

Consumer acceptance

New agricultural technologies have always faced some trade and consumer resistance but, according to Lusk, it would have to be extremely high to negatively impact the benefits that PRRS-resistance are set to bring to the global pork market and producers.

“Say the U.S. adopts the PRRS-resistant pig and consumers say no,” says Lusk. “How big a reduction in demand would offset those production gains?”

He says there would need to be a 10 to 20 per cent reduction in willingness to buy before an impact was felt at the farm gate, and that doesn’t seem likely given surveys that indicate consumer comfort with this technology, and the lower retail price it could bring. “It’s more affordable, high-quality pork at lower prices,” he says.

Lusk says adoption of this technology is key to the pork industry maintaining its place on consumers’ plates. “Pork is at a place today where it’s in competition with beef and poultry,” he says.

It comes down to being able to produce a protein that consumers find delicious, of high quality and affordable. If other protein producers adopt technologies that help them achieve that and the pork industry doesn’t, then consumers will likely choose those other products.

“If pork is the most consumed protein 10 to 20 years from now, it’s because this technology was adopted.”

More information on Dr. Lusk’s research can be found here on the PRRS-resistant pig website.

Source:

1. Growing Losses from PRRS Cost Pork Producers $1.2 Billion Per Year, New Study Shows. Iowa State University News Service. July 30, 2024. https://research.iastate.edu/2024/07/30/growing-losses-from-prrs-cost-pork-producers-1-2-billion-per-year-new-study-shows/

2. Inventory Assessment and Gap Analysis of Canada’s Prevention, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery from and Animal Health Event. NFAHWC report prepared for the Animal Health Canada Working Group. February 13, 2020. Page 15. https://www.ahwcouncil.ca/pdfs/AHC_Gaps%20Analysis%20Report_February%2013_EN.pdf

3. Lusk JL. Global adoption of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome-resistant pigs will have significant economic and market impacts. American Journal of Veterinary Research. August 2025. https://avmajournals.avma.org/view/journals/ajvr/aop/ajvr.25.05.0188/ajvr.25.05.0188.xml?tab_body=fulltext

The post Economic modelling shows few downsides to the adoption of PRRS-resistant pigs appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Optimize® FXC DS combines a highly effective dual-strain Bradyrhizobium with LCO Promoter Technology^TM, a naturally occurring signaling molecule that accelerates the plant–microbe conversation responsible for early nodulation. By kick-starting this communication and providing highly effective rhizobia, soybeans can fix nitrogen sooner, even under stress or in variable soil conditions.

That early boost sets the stage for stronger performance throughout the season. By tapping into nitrogen earlier and more consistently, soybeans are better prepared to handle environmental challenges and maintain yield momentum.

Strong plants need a weed-free environment to reach their full potential. Research has shown that weed interference can reduce soybean yields by 35% with no weed control, and relying solely on a one-pass post-emergent program can still cost growers 3.3 bu./ac., or about $45 per acre in lost potential.¹

Starting clean with a soil-applied herbicide is a proven way to protect yield potential before weeds can steal resources. That’s where Authority® Supreme herbicide comes in. As a pre-emergent herbicide, Authority® Supreme herbicide stops tough grassy and broadleaf weeds before they can compete for moisture, nutrients and sunlight, preventing early-season losses.

The extended, broad-spectrum control that Authority® Supreme herbicide delivers keeps the seedbed clean and allows soybeans to capture the benefits unlocked by Optimize® FXC DS more effectively.

Together, Optimize® FXC DS and Authority® Supreme herbicide elevate nitrogen within the plant and remove the competition early. The result is a more resilient crop, a stronger start, and a greater opportunity for higher yields.

Get sound agronomics working for you next season. New in 2026, both Optimize® FXC DS and Authority® Supreme herbicide qualify for up to 8% back through the FMC CashBack program.

To see how you can increase yields in your soybeans, visit https://ag.fmc.com/ca/en/soybeans-insight-west

¹ 107 fields in Southwestern Ontario were included in the trials and the average yield loss due to weed interference with no weed control was 35%. With some fields having extremely low weed pressure and showing 0% yield loss and other fields with very high weed pressure, causing 88% yield loss. Seven experiments conducted from 2017 to 2019 showed a 3.3 bushel/acre yield loss from relying on a total post-emergence weed control program. This resulted in a $45 per acre loss based on soybean prices during that same time period.

Always read and follow label instructions. Member of CropLife Canada. FMC, the FMC logo and Authority are trademarks of FMC Corporation or an affiliate. Optimize is a trademark of Novozymes A/S. ©2026 FMC Corporation. All rights reserved. 23484– 11/25

The post Success from the roots up appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Here’s a hypothetical for you. Say your bank is promoting a new credit card where certain purchases earn points of some sort. Eligible purchases can only be made in one specific chain store, and the card comes with an annual fee. Would you go for it?

No, you probably wouldn’t because the benefits seem weighted more toward the bank and the store than to you or anyone else. And that, according to Charlie Arnot, CEO of The Center for Food Integrity (CFI) in Gladstone, Missouri, is consumer behaviour 101.

“What we’ve found is that purchase decisions are about benefit,” says Arnot. “If it matters to the consumer, if the benefits align with their values, they’ll accept it.”

This holds true even when it comes to one of the most vital purchases we make: food. The word “values” does a lot of heavy lifting here. Arnot says CFI has been conducting consumer research about gene editing for over a decade and found that consumer acceptance of gene editing is strongly associated with values-based benefits, such as public health, animal welfare and reduced food waste, among other benefits.

This supposition was recently confirmed through two separate consumer research projects (one conducted by CFI and the other by U.S.-based Circana), which found that consumers, in Canada and around the world, have an above average likelihood of buying pork from gene-edited pigs if that means lower antibiotic use, along with other environmental and societal benefits.

“Historically, the thinking was that we need to educate the public about the technology first, and that’s just not the case,” says Arnot. “What gene editing means to them is: reduced need for antibiotics, less animal suffering and better environmental performance. And because they support those outcomes, they’re fine with the technology.”

The research done by CFI and Circana offers a fascinating insight into how consumers think about the use of agtech in the realm of food production. It should come as no surprise that it’s a complex, very human, values-driven process.

Two studies, one top finding

The larger of the two studies was conducted in the fall of 2025 by Circana and commissioned by PIC, developers of a gene-edited pig resistant to porcine reproductive respiratory syndrome, or PRRS.

Circana polled more than 5,000 fresh pork consumers across eight key countries (Brazil, Canada, China, Columbia, Dominican Republic, Japan, Mexico and the U.S.) as to the likelihood they would buy pork from gene-edited pigs. The study was extensive, encompassing multiple generations from 18 to 70 and across genders.

“It’s a robust, significant sample,” says Staci Covkin, Circana’s principal of innovation, consumer and shopper insight. She explains that participants were given a very short introduction to read outlining how farmers have battled PRRS for decades, how gene editing could be a fix for this problem, how animals could be healthier and that pork remains unchanged in terms of taste and safety.

“Then we tested five different messages about the likelihood of their purchasing this meat,” says Covkin. “They were: fewer antibiotics, better environmental sustainability, same pork as you know and love, safety, and cost.”

Covkin says that respondents identified the need for responsibly reducing antibiotic use as the top reason they’d purchase pork from PRRS-resistant pigs. “Not just in Canada, but around the world, this was the number one motivator,” she says, adding that Canadians indicated an above average likelihood of purchase.

This result is mirrored in CFI’s research, also conducted in the fall of 2025, only in the U.S., which looked at consumer acceptance of gene editing in four food products: pork, tomatoes, eggs and bananas. Of all four products, pork from gene-edited pigs statistically outshot all but tomatoes with a purchase likelihood of 84 per cent. “I was surprised by that,” says Arnot. “But it comes down to the things people care about, which are reduced use of antibiotics and reduced animal suffering.”

Benefits and values

“Fun fact about Canada and Japan,” says Covkin. “They are the most price sensitive countries in our research.” Still, Canadians are willing to pay up to five per cent more for pork from gene-edited pigs, while all other nations would venture as far as 10 per cent.

As people learn more about gene editing, they appear to be more open to it. Covkin says Circana has been surveying people’s attitudes toward the technology for a while now and is noticing a trend. “It’s interesting that two and a half years ago, 37 per cent of respondents in the U.S. were familiar with gene editing. Today, it’s 57 per cent.” In Canada, 42 per cent say they are familiar.

“Gene editing technology is offering more consumer benefits than previous agricultural innovations,” says Arnot. “The majority of applications coming to market now are from public companies and universities who all agree on the science. Also, the fact we’re using gene editing in human medicine makes it easier to apply it to agriculture. It’s changed the entire dynamic of the conversation.”

For more information about the consumer research on gene editing and the development of PIC’s PRRS-Resistant Pig, visit the website here PIC PRRS-Resistant Pig.

The post Consumers say they would purchase pork from gene-edited pigs appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

But for livestock producers, biotechnology, in the form of gene editing for improved disease resistance, is still new. Two experts say that how we talk about it now matters for the future of animal health, innovation and the next generation of farmers.

“‘GMO’ is such a frustratingly nebulous term,” says Dr. Alison Van Eenennaam, professor of cooperative extension in Animal Biotechnology and Genomics at the University of California Davis. “The trouble is with the letter O – ‘organism’. It could describe anything, really – a traditionally out-crossed apple, for instance, is technically a genetically modified organism. I’m a scientist. I like precision.”

She says what most people really mean when they refer to Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) are things that have been genetically engineered, such as Bt corn where genes from a soil bacteria were introduced to the corn genome. A feature of GMO technology is that it’s random where the introduced genes insert themselves into the plant’s genome.

While this technology has been beneficial for plant breeders, Van Eenennaam says genetic engineering in this form is prohibitively expensive for the animal industry. That’s why recent advances in gene editing technology are so exciting for this sector.

“Genetic engineering, or GMO, is where we introduce a construct randomly into a genome,” she says. “Gene editing is making targeted changes to the genome. It’s not using DNA from other organisms; nothing foreign is being introduced.” 

Known as CRISPR (Clustered Regulatory Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats), gene editing lets scientists precisely delete or change a small portion of an organism’s own DNA to achieve a specific, predictable outcome – such as resistance to a disease. That precision, that ability to alter a genome at a specific point, recently made gene editing a uniquely powerful tool in the field of swine health with the development of disease-resistant pigs.

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is a serious, deadly virus that affects pigs worldwide. While it can have major financial impact for producers, it can have a huge emotional toll on them, too, since an outbreak often means many animal deaths.

Using gene editing, scientists were able to remove a specific snippet of the pig’s DNA which is the binding site for the PRRS virus. No binding site, no PRRS infections – period. It’s nothing short of revolutionary.

Gene editing as medicine

The gene edit used to breed the PRRS-resistant pig was developed by PIC and was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in early 2025. Full commercialization is waiting on other major pork producing countries, like Canada, Mexico and Japan to approve the technology in their markets. Dr. Jason Hocker, for one, can’t wait for that day. 

“Pre-commercialization, we’re still in the throes of PRRS,” says Hocker, a swine vet with Audubon Manning Veterinary Clinic (AMVC) in Iowa. “It’s an RNA virus, so it’s always mutating. It’s very challenging, and it can feel like a losing battle with Mother Nature being always one step ahead.”

Hocker says vaccines have been tried but aren’t very effective because the virus replicates in unpredictable ways. “All our vaccine technology today just can’t keep up with it. That’s why we’re very excited about this next frontier of medicine.”

And he’s very clear that gene editing to achieve PRRS resistance, is medicine. “PRRS is the most significant disease we deal with in terms of cost, pig health and mortality and the emotional tax on farmers. These are the therapies of the future,” says Hocker. “We have to be intentional about communicating that.”

It is easy to see how a gene edited pig can be seen as a potential solution because it’s not something that has to be done with every pig in every generation. Rather, a PRRS-resistant pig will pass that trait on to its offspring through traditional breeding.

“It’s a synergistic addition to conventional breeding, not a replacement for it,” says Van Eenennaam.

Hocker agrees: “Gene editing eliminates the receptor that the virus binds to, then we use selective breeding like we’ve always done to get PRRS-resistant herds.”

Why start with gene editing for PRRS?

Van Eenennaam says gene editing isn’t a panacea for all the things animal breeders might like to select for. PRRS happens to map to a single gene on the pig genome, so editing that one piece of genetic material is straightforward, or at least more straightforward than trying to edit for problems that are multigenic, like mastitis in cows.

“It’s been years of work sequencing the pig genome, narrowing the focus to the genes of interest and finding the right one,” says Van Eenennaam. “That investment is now beginning to pay dividends. PRRS kills a lot of pigs. I’m glad that disease resistance is the first cab off the rank when it comes to this technology.”

For Hocker, it’s about more than healthy pigs today, it’s about the future of agriculture.

“Farming is a noble profession,” he says. “We produce the food, fuel, pharmaceuticals, fibre – things that everyone needs but only two per cent of us are doing it. So how do we talk to the rest of the world about what’s important to us, so they understand? We have to find a value proposition that’s bigger than just for the industry. We have to show the next generation of farmers that we are here, we are relevant, we do care and want to be on the cutting edge of technology.”

He thinks the conversations about gene editing become more nuanced when human health is involved, and that’s something the ag industry can learn from.

“The victories in human therapies and medicine make me more excited about what could be in animal science,” he says. “It’s worth fighting for. Let’s embrace this then learn how to talk about it.”

For more information about gene editing and the development of PIC’s PRRS-Resistant Pig, visit PIC PRRS-Resistant Pig

The post Understanding the future of gene editing technology appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“If they’re looking to borrow money this fall, an Advance Payments Program cash advance from CCGA offers benefits for farmers that are worth a look.”

Gallant says a cash advance provides farmers with access to up to $1M in financing, including up to $500,000 interest-free. Any amount above that is at CCGA’s interest rate of prime minus 0.25 per cent, resulting in a blended rate that’s well below prime on every advance.

“A cash advance can save thousands of dollars in interest costs,” he says. “Through CCGA, farmers can apply on over 50 commodities including grains, oilseeds, pulses, honey, and large and small livestock.”

Gallant explains a few ways that a fall cash advance could support the farm.

Get access to cash flow from unsold inventory

Farmers can hold onto grain or livestock until they’re ready to market, while still having the necessary cash flow to keep their operation running smoothly.

An advance is low-cost financing

With CCGA’s below-prime interest rates on an advance, it’s a smart financial choice to pay fall bills or take advantage of early-purchase discounts on next year’s inputs.

Manage seasonal expenses more efficiently

Farmers can use a fall advance to cover year-end payments, equipment maintenance, winter feed costs, or whatever their farm needs.

Options for newer farmers too

Just starting to farm? No problem. Farmers can apply as long as they own, store, and sell their inventory separately from others.

“Every farm is different, but post-harvest planning often means bridging the gap between this year’s work and next year’s plans,” says Gallant. “A cash advance can provide flexibility, helping farmers to make confident decisions as they prepare for the next growing season.”

To learn more about cash advances from CCGA, visit Cash Advance | Canadian Canola Growers Association 

CCGA congratulates Manitoba Co-operator on their 100 year milestone. Happy Anniversary!

The Advance Payments Program is a federal loan program administered by CCGA. It offers Canadian farmers marketing flexibility through interest-free and low-interest cash advances.

The post Bridge the seasonal gap with a cash advance appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Commercial farms are growing larger. Smaller niche operators are emerging. Older farmers are downsizing. Younger farmers are growing.

As the sector evolves, so does its farm insurance needs. Farmers should be prepared to examine their insurance coverage as their needs change and ensure they’re covered for new risks.

“The farming industry is fast-paced and it’s constantly changing,” says Wendy Pasaluko-plas, a senior underwriter on the farm team at Intact Insurance. “Intact’s [products are] continuously changing and evolving to align with the needs of brokers and to provide the products that farmers require.”

Pasaluko-plas points out that these constant changes can have a huge influence on farm assets which can impact the values of equipment and farm outbuildings, livestock, crops, and technology. All these factors – and more – mean that insurance coverage needs to be reassessed on a regular basis if it’s going to keep pace with a farm’s needs.

“It’s an investment and farmers need to protect that investment and those assets,” she says. “They want to be covered in the event of any shortfalls or in the event of a loss.”

Partnerships between farmers, brokers and underwriters are key

An open line of communication between farmers and their brokers is so important, Pasaluko-plas says. The more information farmers provide, the better understanding the broker has of the level of risk. This allows the insurer to assess the coverage needs and provide customized quote options for the best possible coverage with the best possible terms.

“The more details and information farmers provide to their broker – and that the broker can then, in turn, provide to the insurance company – the better,” says Pasaluko-plas.

She notes that not all farms need the same level of coverage. A large commercial dairy farm, for instance, likely requires more coverage and more complex options than a small-scale vegetable producer.

Any farmer thinking of expanding their operation also needs to ensure they have the right coverage in place to protect their investment. Pasaluko-plas advises farmers to always include their broker in the conversation at the earliest planning stages of a major project. The more their broker knows about a project’s scope, the better they’ll be able to determine risk exposure. She uses upgrades to a dairy barn as an example.

“Are they adding stalls? Are they adding robotics? Is there going to be a new debris collection system installed? What are their future increases for livestock?” she says. “These are all going to impact the value of that structure. Advising your broker ahead of time allows them to provide for those upcoming changes, assess property values and help provide the proper coverage during the course of construction, but also what will be needed once it’s completed.”

According to Pasaluko-plas, a common mistake farmers make is to wait until renewal time to review their coverage with their broker, which can easily lead to something getting overlooked. Forgetting to add new equipment to a policy is common.

“There are also farmers who have had buildings or equipment on their policies for a number of years – and have been paying for the premiums – and then realize that they don’t have that piece of equipment or that livestock anymore,” Pasaluko-plas says. “Or they’ve changed their operation. At one time maybe they were heavily into cattle farming, and now they’ve changed into sheep herding. Sometimes they make those changes, but they forget to notify their broker.”

Choice and a range of options focused on agriculture

Intact Insurance offers comprehensive options for farms of all sizes and types. Its customer-oriented Risk Control team helps protect farms from unforeseen risks while its dedicated underwriting team, 24/7 claims service, and broad wordings and extensions address a wide range of modern farm exposures and mean that multi-faceted farms can often be placed entirely with Intact.

With a focus on agriculture, and like so many who work on Intact’s farm team, Pasaluko-plas comes from a long line of farmers.

“We have a high level of farm expertise within our underwriting team. The majority of our team have either lived on a farm, grown up on a farm, still live on a farm or have family that are farming. So, we are a very tight group,” says Pasaluko-plas, who has worked at Intact for 23 years. “I always say we’re like an extended family. We communicate well, make time for each other, and support each other consistently.”

Those farming backgrounds also mean they go that extra mile for their customers.

Case in point: Pasaluko-plas recalls driving to work one morning and hearing on a local radio station that a barn Intact insured was on fire. Because of the relationship with brokers and connection to the farming communities, she was aware of the broker and the farmer involved in the fire. Upon arrival at the office, she contacted the claims team to inquire if the loss had yet been reported. She knew that the broker would be part of the volunteer fire department attending the scene and wanted to ensure all hands were on deck to help. She later contacted him to talk about it as it was a heartbreaking loss for all involved.

To see specialized coverage for farm businesses, visit the Intact Insurance website

The post As farming evolves, so must insurance coverage appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

To keep up with these demands, BASF Agricultural Solutions Canada (BASF) is introducing a new hybrid as part of the InVigor canola hybrid lineup to keep pace with these challenges farmers are seeing in their fields.

New for 2026, BASF will be introducing InVigor L355PC to help protect against both new and established soil-borne diseases– all while providing high yield potential. The hybrid is in trials for farmers at Demonstration Strip Trials (DST) across the Prairies this summer. For those in the mid-long growing zones, InVigor L355PC offers a robust disease package to help protect against clubroot and blackleg with strong verticillium stripe performance rating.

“This hybrid in our lineup shows farmers that they can support their yield potential while still managing disease through superior genetics,” says Mark Alberts, senior brand manager, InVigor. “InVigor L355PC is performing very well in DSTs this summer and we encourage farmers to go out and take a look for themselves.”

Together with three new early maturing hybrids launched in 2025, BASF has developed their most complete InVigor hybrid lineup ever to help target each canola farmer’s local concerns, while still offering high yield potential. Combined with their canola crop protection solutions, rigorous testing and backed by a team of agronomic professionals across the country, Alberts says that BASF offers canola farmers the latest agronomic innovations and cutting-edge technology.

“There has never been a better time to find the right hybrids to help manage your canola challenges,” says Alberts. “Combined with the three InVigor hybrids launched for 2025, we now have a hybrid that can meet most needs. Whether you are looking for early to later maturing hybrids, strong disease resistance, harvest flexibility, high yield potential – including health or dual herbicide trait hybrids – you can look across the InVigor lineup to find the best fit.”

Finding solutions to a new threat

Verticillium stripe is a disease that more farmers are becoming aware of and are looking at how to manage. First identified in the Red River Valley in Manitoba a little over a decade ago, the disease was seemingly spreading in association with blackleg, which may have delayed its identification. Now that researchers know what they are dealing with, they have found that the disease is continuing to spread across the Prairies.

“Verticillium can be tricky because while still a soil-borne disease, verticillium moves up the stems of the plant and is easily distributed when harvesting the crop,” say Clint Jurke, regional technical services manager with BASF. “Right now, there is no perfect management solution. However, our breeding team has identified ways to reduce the severity.”

BASF has begun identifying which of their hybrids provide partial resistance to verticillium. While nothing yet has that coveted “R” rating, there are some that will manage it.

“We have been researching the performance of our hybrids against verticillium to see how the different genetics hold up,” says Jurke. “InVigor L355PC, InVigor L358HPC and InVigor L356PC will be a good fit for farmers to assist with this concern. While they won’t be able to escape it completely at this point, these hybrids will offer some protection.”

Combatting clubroot

InVigor L355PC has first-generation clubroot protection which is resistant against most clubroot pathotypes impacting farmers. While the greatest spread and severity is in Alberta, clubroot is an issue across the Prairies. As a soil-borne disease, it is extremely persistent in the soil and can live there for up to 20 years. While genetic resistance is an important tool to help control diseases, growers should use an integrated pest management strategy.

First-generation resistance is appropriate in most fields in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and in many areas of Alberta. But for growing areas where that resistance has started to breakdown, InVigor has products that are bred with second-generation resistance, including InVigor L341PC and InVigor L343PC which were launched in the past few years.

Simplifying harvest

Jurke says pod shatter remains one of the most valuable proprietary traits in the InVigor portfolio, with all hybrids bred with this feature. Pod shatter traits help mitigate risk and offer the flexibility to allow the canola pod to fill better.

“This innovation is of very high value to farmers,” says Jurke. “The longer you leave the crop attached to the ground in the field, the higher yield potential at harvest. When we first introduced this technology over ten years ago, farmers immediately saw the value of this trait, first in straight cutting and later when the advantages in swathing flexibility were determined.”

Pod drop can be another pressing issue come harvest when the pod itself is separated from the plant and is lost on the ground. Primarily related to extreme weather events, which have become more common at harvest, all InVigor hybrid strong pod drop protection.

Prairie trial results show regional performance

For farmers interested in these hybrids, BASF shares comprehensive, real world trial results of InVigor hybrids along with those from their competitors at InVigorResults.ca. Each trial is managed by a farmer cooperator using their equipment and agronomic practices. The trials are each replicated four times, using rigorous protocols that mimic on-farm conditions.

 “One of the most rewarding parts of my job is seeing just how well our seed technology is performing in real time,” says Alberts. “Farmers can visit the website at any time to see how this year’s hybrids are performing across the Prairies, with the DST trial results of InVigor L355PC posted shortly after harvest.”

For information on InVigor’s 2026 hybrid lineup, visit MostTrustedCanola.ca.

The post InVigor lineup tackles verticillium stripe and other soil-borne diseases appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“This project signifies that the fertilizer industry is transitioning to become both more independent and environmentally friendly,” says Genesis Fertilizers president and CEO Jason Mann. “We want to empower farmers to own control of their own input costs while supporting their sustainability goals, helping them grow low carbon grain.”

The vision of this complex is to provide a variety of economic, environmental and industry benefits not only to Western Canadian farmers, but to all Canadian farmers seeking stable and consistent supply and cost of high-quality fertilizers.“ Our primary goal is to build the most cost-efficient production and supply of nitrogen fertilizers to the farmers in Western Canada based on the most advanced technologies available, while considering the carbon impact,” said Mann.

This fertilizer manufacturing complex will be engineered with these latest and most innovative technologies. Genesis Fertilizers is committed to providing the plant’s ownership with the best energy efficient and economically sustainable facility in Canada for today’s and future farming generations.

Farmers who invest in the facility will own a majority stake that represents the nitrogen fertilizer they use on their farm and will be the primary financial beneficiaries of the plant. Farmer investors will have direct access to a consistent supply of high-quality urea fertilizer, meaning they’ll avoid the current market situation of high shipping costs, distribution delays and issues, and a variety of uncontrollable external factors. By having consistent access to a cost-effective supply of fertilizer, local farming operations will have control of a secure nitrogen supply chain and a potential strong return on their investment year after year.

An estimated 20% of Western Canadian farmer-owned acres have the unique opportunity to own part of a fertilizer production and distribution network. As an investor you’ll also have a direct stake in the performance of the production facility. Farmers invest based on their fertilizer requirements, securing their future supply and receive financial distributions based on plant profits, offsetting the cost of fertilizer. This ownership secures both future urea requirements and annual cash distributions from plant revenues.

For more information on how you can invest in and learn more about this project, visit GenesisFertilizers.com.

The post Genesis Fertilizers Building the Next Generation of Canadian Fertilizer Production appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The gift will enable 45 graduate and undergraduate students in the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences to research and design innovative sustainable farming solutions, in areas such as fertilizer use, crossing crops with wild perennial cousins and identifying livestock that produce less methane.

The students will also lead conversations on the benefits of the new techniques.

“This gift not only creates more opportunities for our students to research low-emissions agriculture but also demonstrate their findings to thousands of producers and commodity groups through workshops, podcasts and industry events,” said Martin Scanlon, the Dean of the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences.

“With the pervasive concern of climate change in front of us, the RBC Foundation is helping our students develop innovative and practical solutions to support the transition to more sustainable food production methods.”

Scanlon points to fertilizer use and regenerative agriculture as some of the areas where “big ideas” could have a profound impact.

Ashley Ammeter, Robert Duncan, Mohamed Elhiti and Kenny So from the University of Manitoba Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences discuss crop research at one of the university’s greenhouses. Perennial crops that lessen the need for cultivation are among the innovative farming solutions being explored with the support of the RBC Foundation. | University of Manitoba photo

“One example of a green job in regenerative agriculture is a perennial crop breeder,” said Scanlon. “A perennial crop breeder is a researcher who works to cross an annual crop with a wild perennial cousin to create a plant that does not require reseeding every year, which reduces ploughing and tillage while improving soil health.”

Livestock is another area whose innovations will play a role in low-emissions farming.

“The areas of livestock feed additives and selective breeding explore the use of feed additives to reduce emissions and improve animal health,” Scanlon said. “There is also a lot of potential in helping identify livestock that have better feed conversion and produce less methane.”

Agronomists, perennial crop breeders and animal nutritionists graduating from the University of Manitoba are just a few examples of the expertise to fit the green economy being enabled through the RBC Foundation’s commitment to helping build the talent pool needed for a net-zero economy.

Other RBC Foundation gifts to post-secondary institutions, which in total amount to more than $5 million, include supporting electric vehicle technician education at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, heritage building conservation at Algonquin College in Ottawa and the establishment of a new Bachelor of Sustainability and financial management program at the University of Waterloo.

“The energy transition is also a skills transition,” said Andrea Barrack, senior vice-president of Corporate Citizenship & ESG at RBC.

“Our journey to net-zero relies on the hands and minds of millions of Canadians and will take a concerted effort by those who train and hire the first generation of green economy workers.”

According to a report from RBC Thought Leadership and Economics, 3.1 million Canadian jobs will change over the next decade as the climate transition takes shape, and an anticipated 235,000 to 400,000 new jobs could be added in fields that will demand enhanced green skills. The report also anticipates that eight of 10 major economic sectors will be affected by the green skills shift.

The post Fostering the green skills shift for future farming appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.