Ukraine’s agriculture was hit very hard by the war. Most of the country’s farmers were on the verge of impoverishment and were forced to learn how to survive. From these farmers you may learn which lessons are better to learn in peacetime, to better be ready for possible shocks.

Farmers usually follow recommendations when planting and growing crops or raising livestock. A farmer knows that for best results, he should apply a certain amount of fertilizer and spray the plants with the necessary pesticides to protect them. Careful cultivation and preparation of the field are also necessary.

But in the past two years, Ukrainian farmers were forced to learn to grow grain with minimal budgets. If they used to apply 600 kilograms of fertilizer to a hectare of land, today they grow a crop using 150 or 200 kg.

This forces them to look for other ways to nourish their crops. It also changes how closely they sow seeds and the spacing between rows. In many cases it has promoted wider use of inexpensive biostimulants, though it’s not proven they will help.

As I have observed farmers throughout the war, I have seen that the best results come from farmers who actively experimented before the war, and sought to reduce their cost of production even in peacetime.

While storing grain on the farm may be commonplace in Canada, it’s more limited in Ukraine. If a farmer doesn’t have a place to store the grain they grow, this can become a serious problem during wartime.

Overloaded regional elevators may refuse to accept crop for drying and storage. Grain can spoil. Due to the instantaneous increase in energy prices, the cost of grain elevator services may increase several-fold and it will be unprofitable for the farmer to use.

Therefore, it is better to have their own storage, even if it is primitive. This will give the farmer time to make the best decision.

During the war it is almost impossible to sell grain at a normal price, while the cost of fuel, animal feed and various food products is high. Many Ukrainian farmers began to process their produce and sell finished products to earn additional money. Farmers’ interest in animal husbandry has also increased. But it is clear it was better to start doing all this long before the war, in order to have the opportunity to perfect production processes.

In times of war, banks and supply companies have limited resources and lend money and resources only to guaranteed reliable customers. If a farmer has such a reputation, they have a better chance of finding financial support to grow a crop.

Ukrainians have a good saying: “Friends are known in trouble.” A farmer must have many friends and good acquaintances, including other farmers, managers of supply companies and neighbours. In times of war and other disasters, this makes it possible to get quick support and coordinate efforts to overcome a problem.

For example, overcoming the consequences of rocket fire or clearing snow after a heavy snowfall.

It is worthwhile to create regional farmers’ clubs and communicate regularly to know everyone personally. A farmer will not survive apart from other people.

Before the war in Ukraine, some financially secure farmers believed it was not necessary to own their own seeders, high clearance sprayers or combines.

They thought this machinery could be easily rented and the farm wouldn’t have to own and maintain it.

Today,  agricultural companies that have their own agricultural machinery have the greatest chance of survival. It is more profitable, because the operating costs are lower than renting.
When there is a war in the country, all industries suffer, especially the provision of services. A farmer may simply not find a sprayer or combine in time.

So, if they have such an opportunity, they should buy their own agricultural machinery. It is also very useful to have their own excavators and trucks – especially trucks – because one of the biggest problems in wartime is logistics.

A farmer should try to buy fuel, fertilizers and pesticides for the next season as soon as they can afford it. This is what saved many farmers I know, when there was nothing to buy in the first months of the full-scale war.

Over time, the market normalized, but before that it was necessary to survive during four or five months of acute shortage of fuel, pesticides and spare parts, all during the spring sowing season.
No farmer should completely rely on third-party companies. If they have reliable and qualified employees, they should try to keep them at work.

In times of upheaval, it is better to have people around who know how to repair agricultural machinery and have a good knowledge of agronomy. A farm should have a few people it can rely on who are professional in their field.

Always keep in mind the possibility that electricity and natural gas may be out for extended periods of time. It is very good to have solar panels and wind generators and definitely diesel generators. Their power should be enough for basic life needs and to ensure the minimum functioning of a livestock farm.

It is very good if a farm can heat its buildings with firewood. This is an excellent backup option.

One of the biggest problems during the war is sudden disappearance of mobile communications and the internet due to missile attacks. A farmer can instantly lose touch with other people and won’t know what’s happening in the country or on the next street.

Therefore, farm workers must have wireless walkie-talkies and equipment that allows them to connect to the internet in the absence of electricity. Some farmers found that their traditional land lines worked best in these conditions.

A farmer who hopes to survive should not be paralyzed by fear, and should be ready to take control of their own destiny.

In times of wars and natural disasters, state bodies cannot save everything and help everyone at once. It makes no sense to sit back and wait for someone to come and solve problems.

Under such conditions, each farm turns into an island of stability for the surrounding residents. Farmers immediately take the initiative into their own hands. They provide people with food and organize people’s self-defence to maintain order. They solve infrastructure problems and organize support for the army. 

This makes it possible to prevent social upheaval, because all people receive the necessary means of living and see that law and order has not disappeared.

These are hard lessons, learned over the past two years, and I hope Canadian farmers never have to learn them first-hand.

—Ihor Pavliuk is a farm journalist based in Ukraine who has filed regular contributions to Glacier FarmMedia publications over the course of the war. 

The post War teaches Ukrainian farmers tough lessons  appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“There’s a number of loud voices that tend to dominate the conversations,” says Ian McCreary, a grain and cattle farmer from Bladworth, Sask. McCreary is co-leading the Prairie Farmer and Rancher Forum with Gord Bacon, former CEO of Pulse Canada. Farmers for Climate Solutions is organizing the forum.

McCreary says many of the innovative farmers and ranchers aren’t talking to each other about what they’re doing to improve sustainability on their farms. The forum organizers plan to bring together 36 randomly selected producers for three meetings, held in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Each meeting will run over two-and-a-half days.

Some producers will have received invitations in the mail, but other producers from the three Prairie provinces are welcome to register as well. The more people who register, the more representative it will be of western Canadian viewpoints, McCreary says.

Producers do not need to hold any particular view on the environment or climate change to participate, but they must earn most of their income from farming or ranching, and be able to attend all three forums. Forum organizers expect to recruit people with diverse opinions.

McCreary’s wife, Mary Smiley, is facilitating the discussions, and her goal will be to set the tone “to make sure that everybody, regardless of how much their opinions differ, treat each other respectfully,” says McCreary.

Participating producers will also get a phone call before the first session to ask questions, so forum organizers can build the agenda around those questions, he adds.

“And then similarly, the agenda for the second set of meetings will be determined by the discussions and the questions that come out of the first set of meetings.”

McCreary says that to some extent they’ll be able to manage diverse views “by answering people’s questions, providing information and creating an environment where people who disagree with each other can have respectful conversations about ideas that have the potential to work for more than just individuals.”

McCreary sees a few potential outcomes from the forums. One is a report that outlines how to create a more sustainable future. Another is a network of farmers and ranchers who are trying new things, who can discuss what works and what doesn’t on their operations. He also hopes to find a practical way to measure gains in sustainability on the farm.

“You can’t measure nitrous oxide coming off your fields. You can’t measure methane coming off your cattle herd and it’s really difficult to know the volume of carbon dioxide that came from the nitrogen fertilizer that you used and that was produced.”

McCreary is no stranger to farm politics, having been a Canadian Wheat Board director for 10 years and having chaired a community pasture patrons association. Afte that, he decided to take a break from farm boards, unless it was focused on long-term sustainability or relations with First Nations.

While combining one day, he got a call from someone asking if he’d be interested in chairing a task force looking at climate solutions for the farm. At first he tried to deflect the request, but then looked into who else was involved.

The people involved weren’t interested in “screaming and sort of waving placards. They’re interested in trying to find solutions. And so I agreed to chair this task force.”

Farmers for Climate Solutions is a relatively young organization focused on the science around climate, as well as what’s practical for producers. Part of McCreary’s focus is keeping it as grounded as he could on Prairie issues, as it’s difficult for people from the Maritimes or Vancouver Island “to understand how vast the Prairies are.”

Interested producers can register online or by calling 1-833-537-1758. The registration deadline is Nov. 28. More information is available on the FCS website.

— Lisa Guenther is editor of Canadian Cattlemen.

The post Coalition seeks farmers, ranchers to join climate change forum appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The Do More Agriculture Foundation has launched AgTalk, a platform for those in the Canadian agriculture industry. It is a partnership between the foundation, RBC, BASF and the McCain Foundation and is facilitated by Togetherall, an online mental health support community used by more than 250 private organizations.

“We are the national voice and champion for mental health in Canadian agriculture and we’re working to change the culture in agriculture to one where all are empowered to take care of their well-being,” said Do More Agriculture executive director Megz Reynolds at the June 20 launch in Regina.

Why it matters: Mental health advocates say farmers often suffer in silence from high levels of stress, anxiety, burnout and depression.

The platform will be monitored at all hours by licensed clinicians and open to anyone involved in agriculture aged 16 and up.

Reynolds pointed to a now well-circulated study from the University of Guelph in 2016-17, in which 35 per cent of surveyed producers met the classification for depression and 58 per cent met the classification for anxiety. About 45 per cent reported higher stress.

Another survey from the same researchers in 2021 had no better results. Over twice as many farmers suffered from suicide ideation compared to the national average and 76 per cent were experiencing “moderate or high perceived stress.”

About a quarter said they “felt their life was not worth living, wished they were dead, or thought of taking their own life” in the year prior to the survey.

As well as being anonymous, developers say Ag Talk focuses on easy accessibility.

“You could be in the cab of a piece of equipment; you could be in the barn and you don’t necessarily need to tell anyone that you’re connecting for support, because sometimes you don’t want people to know in your life that you’re reaching out,” Reynolds said.

Jonathan Sweat, vice-president of BASF Agricultural Solutions, noted his own experience with mental health.

“Growing up in agriculture myself, growing up in a farmhouse, you witness the stress firsthand,” he said. “And of course it doesn’t stop with growers. It goes beyond farmers to the people like us who serve farmers.

“This is something that I think will be warmly received and I look forward to seeing how this goes. Having access to mental health support is essential for those living and working in the farming environment.”

Reynolds later said farmers are often concerned about sharing stories with people they may know personally. Because of this, AgTalk will connect farmers to help from all across Canada, not just in their own communities.

“If I’m a farmer in Nova Scotia, I don’t want to connect to another farmer in Nova Scotia because that’s too close to home and I’m not going to feel comfortable sharing,” she said.

Reynolds also noted the stigma often attached to mental health.

“External stigma is what is going to keep someone from booking an appointment with a mental health professional in their community because they’re afraid someone will drive by and see their truck parked outside.

“Internal stigma is what keeps someone from being able to recognize that there is something going on, that they’re possibly struggling and then being able to accept it.

“In agriculture, we’re a very stoic industry,” she said. “There’s a reason there’s a saying, ‘cowboy up’ or ‘tough it out.’ Traditionally, people have connected talking about mental health — or being open about the fact that maybe you’re having a hard time right now because of everything that’s going on out of your control — that [it] means that you’re weak, which of course it doesn’t.”

Reynolds said sources of stress and anxiety for farmers can come from a wide variety of areas, including weather, disruptions caused by the war in Ukraine and the pandemic.

“It really feels like the hits just aren’t stopping coming. They just keep coming and you’re getting less time between the challenges,” she said.

“It could be the weather. It could be not being able to say what you’re selling your product or your quantity for. It could be living and working with family.”

She added that many farmers feel anxiety over the possibility of activists disturbing their operations or exposing them to biosecurity risk.

‘Self-maintenance’

Reynolds said AgTalk will focus on ‘self-maintenance’ rather than ‘self-care.’

“Self-care comes across too fluffy sometimes.”

In contrast, self-maintenance is about recharging internal batteries, “especially before going into some of those really busy seasons,” and taking the chance to control the stress-causing aspects of farm life when the opportunities arise. This could include financial literacy or emergency preparedness, she said.

More information on AgTalk can be found at the Do More Agriculture Foundation’s website.

The post Platform promises anonymous, farm-based mental health help appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

They study team is “looking for farmers, ranchers, or anyone who works or lives on a farm” to participate, researchers said in a recent notice.

Their study is in the form of a 10- to 15-minute online survey.

Researchers involved in the study say global-level research shows farmers experience high levels of, or elevated risk for, stress, anxiety, depression and/or psychological distress.

Similarly, a national-level survey of 1,132 Canadian farmers found higher levels of stress, anxiety and depression but “lower levels of resilience” compared to the general population.

The sample group for that national survey, however, included just 98 Alberta farmers, or 8.7 per cent of the total sample, while Alberta farmers make up 21.4 per cent of Canada’s farmer population, the researchers said.

The survey would examine what aspects of running a farm are found to be most stressful, how farming stress impacts mental well-being, how farmers cope with stress and whether they experience burnout.

The study is led by Dr. Rebecca Purc-Stephenson, an applied social psychologist and professor at the university’s Augustana campus at Camrose.

The post Survey to look at farm stress from Alberta angle appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The Simpson Centre for Food and Agricultural Policy, a think tank operating out of the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, says its three recently released reports aim at “providing a neutral and evidence-based analysis of each party and their respective election priorities for the future of the ag sector.”

The reports, it said, “are intended to be a tool for agricultural organizations and stakeholders to use as a jumping-off point for discussions in the lead-up to the Alberta elections.”

The second of the three, titled Primary Producers’ Voices on Policy in Alberta, details results from a survey of 297 Alberta farmers and their concerns on the topics of climate, spending, markets/commodities/trade and technology/research.

The demographics of the farmer respondents were broken down into categories of 18-39, 40-60 and 60 and older.

Sixty-one per cent of respondents in the 18-39 group agreed their farm has been positively affected by federal climate change regulations. The two older groups did not view the situation the same way, however, with only 56 and 23 per cent agreeing respectively.

All demographics strongly agreed investment in research for emissions reductions should be a government priority.

The responses related to spending were not as decisive. On the question of whether the Alberta government provides strong incentives for new farmers to begin their careers, 51 and 52 per cent of the 18-39 and 40-60 groups voted they agreed, while only 21 per cent of those over 60 did.

Agreement that the government should prioritize subsidizing agriculture input costs was similarly tepid, ranging from 40 to 60 per cent.

The category of markets and commodities saw more noticeable agreement, however. All demographics generally agreed upon priorities related to the topic, such as opening up in new international trade markets, ensuring fair returns for commodity producers, incentivizing Albertan commodities and investing in new processing facilities.

Likewise, in the category of technology and research, every group agreed Canadian agriculture research has benefited their farms and investment in innovation technology in Alberta should be a high priority.

There was also consensus that the government should have significant involvement in the agriculture sector.

The first report, The Role of Political Parties in Shaping Agriculture Policy, outlines the track records of Alberta’s previous United Conservative Party (UCP) and New Democratic Party (NDP) governments.

According to the report, “the NDP government funded investments in research, food safety and animal health,” whereas “the UCP government has taken a direct-investment approach with Albertan producers and decreased ministry expenses for increased capital spending.”

The report’s conclusion states the NDP has emphasized increased protection for those working on the agriculture sector, and the UCP has focused more on giving control over to agricultural workers to make decisions about their individual daily operations.

It also concludes the NDP has focused more on research and funding the ministry of agriculture, whereas the UCP has prioritized direct investments.

It also notes many similarities between the two parties, however, such as how they have both invested in agribusiness.

The third report, An Overview of Party Visions, was just released Thursday and summarizes what the parties have promised in their platforms.

Among the more significant pledges were the UCP commitment to expand the Feeder Assistance Loan Guarantee from $2 million to $3 million, and the NDP’s promises to “create an Alberta value-added incentive program to help companies access capital,” create a food incentive task force and “increase staff for services and agri-food and value-added approvals.”

More about the surveys, party history and election pledges can be found in the full reports.

— Jonah Grignon reports for Glacier FarmMedia from Ottawa.

The post Pre-election reports analyze Alberta’s ag issues appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“The immigration of scientists, data engineers, and entrepreneurs has been recognized as critical to Canada’s growth. A similar approach needs to be adopted to attract farmers,” the authors wrote.

The report, released Sunday and titled Farmers Wanted: The labour renewal Canada needs to build the Next Green Revolution, is a collaboration of the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), Boston Consulting Group and the Arrell Food Insitute at the University of Guelph.

It notes there’s a global crunch coming as many farmers near retirement age, and not enough is being done to fill that gap.

In Canada, 40 per cent of farmers are expected to retire by 2033, “placing agriculture on the cusp of one of the biggest labour and leadership transitions in the country’s history,” the report reads. That will come on top of an already-expected shortfall of 24,000 farm workers over the same time frame.

MORE READING: Does Canada have enough young farmers?

The report’s authors say the first short-term step in addressing this crisis should be to identify and recruit 30,000 permanent immigrants who want to establish their own farms and greenhouses, or take over existing ones.

Canada, they wrote, has had a long history as a destination for international farmers from the Netherlands, U.S., U.K., China and India — and there are new opportunities to “attract operators who have lost their farms because of regulatory policies in other nations.”

In the Netherlands, for example, 3,000 farmers with the largest emissions will be bought out in a 24.3 billion-euro (C$35.6 billion) program. The country will also have to reduce its livestock population to a third of its current size over eight years. In New Zealand, a 2019 law that requires producers to reduce emissions by 10 per cent in the next three years is already forcing farms to scale back. The EU has lost more than four million farms since 2005. It all adds up to a potential talent pool for the agriculture sector, the authors said.

In the medium term, Canada needs to do a better job of promoting “agricultural education across colleges and universities to attract new students,” and the report says the blueprint to expanding agriculture education is already in place.

Faced with falling student numbers in the 1990s, education institutions expanded their reach by revisiting their curriculum with an eye to drawing in students who weren’t from a farm background. They focused on topics outside of agricultural science, and included topics such as food security, sustainability and international development. Enrolment at ag schools bottomed out in 2003, and since then has grown by 40 per cent. Canada now has among the highest post-secondary agriculture enrolments in the developed world.

Despite this, the authors said there’s still room to further expand the scope of agricultural education in Canada.

“For instance, no full-time MBA program among Canada’s top 10 business schools currently offers elective courses in agribusiness,” they noted.

Longer-term, Canada should “accelerate the adoption of autonomous and mechanized solutions on farms.”

They write that “smart” agriculture technology and practices will promote higher levels of efficiency and productivity, reduce environmental impact and promote sustainability, as well as “reduce the need for low-skilled labour.”

The national shortfall, they said, is in the investments needed to develop the technology: “We should strive to be more ambitious with funding as every dollar invested in R+D generates $10 to $20 in GDP.”

Most of the money spent on this research comes from the public purse, to the tune of about $450 million in 2020. Private sector investment lags, at just $108 million the same year.

Capital investment in agriculture has risen faster than in other Canadian industries over the last 15 years, but has mainly been concentrated in the crops sector.

For farmers themselves, the report urges putting a priority on succession planning. It notes Canada’s farm acreage has declined from 167.01 million acres in the 2006 census, to 153.69 million in 2021.

“Without clear transition plans, valuable farmland may sit idle and unproductive,” the report said. “By contrast, clear and established plans make the process of transferring land, knowledge, labour and ownership easier for new generations taking over.”

Farm operators who want to sell their farmland should consider the sale to “eager new producers entering the industry, productive operators, or farmers new to Canada” to help ensure their land’s productivity does not slow.

The post International farmers may ease Canadian human capital crunch appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

A former president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture is taking the helm of Canada’s largest general farmers’ organization.

Keith Currie of Collingwood, Ont. was acclaimed as the new president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture this week during the CFA’s annual general meeting in Ottawa.

As CFA president, Currie replaces Mary Robinson of Albany, P.E.I., who had led the organization since 2019 and decided to step down from the post this year, the OFA said in a release Tuesday.

Currie, who served as OFA president from 2016 to 2020 and as CFA first vice-president since 2019, said he “look(s) forward to working with our members and stakeholders to advance the interests of Canada’s agriculture sector.”

The OFA on Tuesday hailed Currie, a hay and sweet corn producer, as a long-time advocate for the agriculture industry at both the provincial and federal levels.

“Keith has a wealth of knowledge, experience and insight when it comes to Canadian agricultural production and will be a valuable leader for our industry, OFA president Peggy Brekveld said Tuesday. “We are privileged to have an Ontario representative in this role and I have no doubt that he will continue to be a strong voice for farmers across the country.”

Currie is expected to lead the CFA in “advocating for policies and programs that support Canadian farmers and promote sustainable and profitable agriculture” and work to strengthen the CFA’s relationships with government officials and other stakeholders, OFA said.

Currie is joined on the CFA’s new executive roster by Todd Lewis as first vice-president and Pierre Lampron as second vice-president.

Lewis, who farms at Gray, Sask., just south of Regina, previously served from 2016 to 2022 as president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS).

Lampron, a dairy farmer in Quebec’s Mauricie region, has been president of Dairy Farmers of Canada since 2017 and replaces Lewis as CFA’s second VP. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Former OFA president to lead CFA appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The amendments were added to a gun control package that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government introduced last year after the mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, where a gunman killed 19 children and two teachers in their elementary school.

The package includes a ban on the sale of handguns and prohibitions on the sale of large-capacity magazines.

“(The) government’s intent is to focus on AR-15s and other assault-style weapons — not guns commonly used for hunting,” Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino said in a statement. “(It’s) about certain guns that are too dangerous in other contexts.”

Mendicino said he was working with colleagues in parliament to find a solution “that will keep assault-style weapons off our streets.”

Trudeau enacted the handgun freeze in October under executive order, and in November, his government amended the package to ban certain rifles and shotguns that hold more than five rounds, among other changes.

While most of Trudeau’s gun-control measures have been popular among voters in the past, those amendments set off fierce criticism by the Conservative Party, the largest opposition bloc, who described them as an attack on Canadian hunters.

They also drew opposition from the left-leaning New Democratic Party (NDP). Trudeau’s Liberals have a minority in Parliament and they rely on the NDP to pass legislation.

“Hunting rifles are not the problem. No one believes that going after hunters will reduce violent crime across the country,” Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre said in a statement after the amendments were withdrawn.

Canada has stricter gun laws than the U.S., but Canadians can own firearms with a license. Some firearms must also be registered, though not most long guns: rifles and shotguns.

Canada’s gun homicide rate is a fraction of the United States’ rate, 2020 data showed, but is still higher than other wealthy countries and has been rising, with handguns the main weapon used in the majority of firearm-related violent crimes between 2009 and 2020.

— Reporting for Reuters by Rami Ayyub and Steve Scherer.

The post Canada withdraws proposed measures banning certain rifles, shotguns appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

That’s exactly what I experienced Feb. 24. The first thing I did was fill my car with gasoline. Then we bought a lot of products we thought we might need — medicines and household products, mainly.

I can say that at the moment, my family is provided with resources for several months ahead.

However, I also understand how difficult it is now to ensure the normal operation of an farm under these conditions. I am an agricultural journalist in Ukraine, and my father is a farmer.

With grain grown on 72 per cent of the area of Ukraine, that affects us all. And potentially many beyond our borders.

The coming spring

Much of the world is wondering. Will Ukrainian farmers be able to sow grain this spring? It’s an important question for my country and the world.

Ukrainian grain normally supplies seven to 10 per cent of the world market. The well-being of people not only in Ukraine, but throughout the world, depends on the normal work of farmers in Ukraine.

At home, agriculture is the backbone of our society. Farms in Ukraine are socially important companies. In the provinces, these are the main employers for people.

In addition, farms ranging from 1,500 to 5,000 hectares often play the role of social and communal services.

They voluntarily, or within the framework of a social contract, allocate money for the repair of roads and communications, for schools, kindergartens and hospitals. Therefore, the well-being of local residents largely depends on the normal work of farmers.

This, in turn, depends on whether farmers can sow grain this spring, grow and harvest. The timing of the seeding season will play a role in that.

The sowing campaign in the southern regions of Ukraine sometimes begins in late February and early March, if the spring is early.

At this time, despite the cold, sunflowers are sown in the south to use the moisture in the soil. In early April, farmers begin to sow corn, sunflower and soybeans throughout Ukraine. This process ends in mid-May.

It’s a long window, and it exists for two reasons. The first is the unpredictable weather conditions in recent decades. In March it can be very warm, and in May it can be very cold.

The second reason is the shortage of powerful tractors and large seeders. These machines are expensive, so farmers cannot buy enough of them.

Reason for hope

While the war has exacted a terrible human toll already, the soldiers of Ukraine have mounted a strong defence.

Russian troops, as I write this, control less that 15 per cent of the territory of Ukraine, and approximately 70 per cent of the country has not yet seen any military action.

If this situation continues in the future, then farmers in most of Ukraine will be able to sow grain. Taking into account the experience of 2014 in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, some fields will still be sown even in the combat zone. This is contained in the genetic code of the Ukrainian people: bread must be sown at any cost.

To explain this phenomenon, I will cite an old Ukrainian proverb: “Ivan dies, but sows rye.”

That is, no matter what happens, you need to work and believe in the best.

However, there are also problems. Due to hostilities, there was a shortage of fuel. Many Ukrainian farmers have previously stockpiled diesel fuel at their bases, but not all. At the same time, fuel has become very expensive — already it costs 25 to 38 hryvnias per litre (C$1.08-$1.64). There’s almost no fertilizer being imported, which has also caused an increase in prices. The story is very similar for pesticides and herbicides.

Therefore, I predict that most farmers will drastically reduce the cost of growing crops. There was a lot of rain and snow in Ukraine last autumn and winter, and the moisture reserve in the soil is now large. We have very fertile soils, so one year you can work with a minimum amount of fertilizer or no fertilizer at all. The harvest will be lower, but this is not the most important thing now.

Aiding military

The fact is that the main efforts of Ukrainian farmers today are focused on helping the army as much as possible and strengthening the country’s defense. I have many farmer friends on Facebook. Almost all of them are now allocating money to help soldiers and civilians.

For example my friend Yuri, who works in the region south of Kyiv, produces canned meat and vegetables and refuels military equipment. Ukrainian farmers also buy helmets, body armour, weapons and medicines. In addition, they organize the production of camouflage nets, anti-tank structures and other necessary things.

Almost every agricultural company has its own equipment repair base. This was very useful in 2014 during the first Russian invasion, and even more important today. Ukrainian farmers repair military vehicles for free, which allows them to be sent to the front faster.

Not only the farmers themselves help the army, but also their workers and neighbours. So, today many people are doing everything possible to win: donate blood, weave nets, make sharp “hedgehogs” against the aggressor’s trucks.

Delayed development

Once the immediate crisis passes, there will be the lingering effects of this war on the agriculture sector in Ukraine.

Our agriculture industry has been undergoing a wave of change, which has been derailed by the war.

Last year Ukraine allowed the purchase and sale of land. However, most of the fields are still on lease. Their owners are residents of villages and small towns, each of which is the owner of a small plot of land from three to 10 acres.

These small plots are rented by large agricultural holdings and farmers. Ukraine has a very diverse structure of the agricultural market. The country has large companies that grow grain on an area of hundreds of thousands of hectares, as well as medium-sized companies from 1,000 to 5,000 hectares. In addition, there are tens of thousands of farmers who grow grain in areas ranging from five to 500 hectares.

In a good year, a farmer in my native Cherkasy region in central Ukraine can get an average yield of 12 tons of corn per hectare, nine tons of wheat and over four tons of rapeseed. At the same time, he invests in land at least half the amount of money compared to a Canadian farmer.

However, weather conditions in Ukraine are unstable and there is a severe drought about once every four years. In this case, farmers receive big losses. In addition, in the dry southern and eastern regions, farmers grow lower yields. Sunflower, winter wheat and barley are mainly sown there.

However, the rapid development of agricultural technologies in Ukraine over the past 15 years, the use of new European and North American agricultural machinery has allowed Ukrainian farmers to make high profits. This money is invested in further development, in particular in grain storage, irrigation systems and logistics.

Each farmer wants to get the maximum profit from the grown grain and creates a special infrastructure for this.

Many of these plans were disrupted by the war.

One thing that is appreciated here in Ukraine is the support of Canada and its people during this time. It is important, and it has already saved many lives. Ukraine will not forget this.

— Ihor Pavliuk is an agricultural journalist who lives and works in Ukraine.

CORRECTION, March 10: An unexplained technical glitch caused incorrect or no captions to appear with several photos that were previously attached to this article, across several of our sites. The photos have been taken down until the glitch can be fixed. Thanks for your patience.

The post Bread and war: Farmers in the fight for Ukraine appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The farmers parked tractors on a national highway near the town of Larissa in central Greece, where they faced off with police.

Kostas Tzelas, head of the Karditsa agricultural association, said the rising prices for fuel and electricity had increased production costs by 50 per cent.

“They don’t solve the basic problems that we have to maintain our farms and villages,” Tzelas said. “We ask for substantial measures that will give a real solution to our problems.”

Greece has spent about 1.7 billion euros (C$2.48 billion) subsidizing power bills for farmers, households and businesses to help them with rising energy prices.

High energy costs have been the main driver of inflation, which accelerated to 5.1 per cent in December, the highest in the country in 11 years.

Tzelas, speaking at the rally outside Larissa, the largest city of Greece’s central agricultural heartland, said: “That is why we are out on the streets, the countryside will become deserted, villages will be deserted, people will not be able to cultivate and we will no longer be able to live in our villages.”

Earlier on Friday, the government unveiled an additional 170 million euros in financial aid for the agriculture sector.

Agriculture Minister Spilios Livanos said in a televised statement that despite its tight finances, Greece had offered one billion euros in aid to farmers last year.

“At this difficult point of multiple major outside crises, we’re standing by our producers,” he said.

The package includes subsidies to cover 80 per cent of the additional costs farmers face on their power bills from August up to December and half of this cost for January and February.

A sales tax on fertilizers will be cut by 46 per cent to 13 per cent.

Farmers, who said the latest measures are not enough, have staged several protests in the past over social security laws and pension contributions.

The farm sector accounts for a small part of Greece’s output, but it employs hundreds of thousands of people, most of them seasonal workers.

— Reporting for Reuters by Alexandros Avramidis; writing by Angeliki Koutantou.

The post Greek farmers stage tractor protest against soaring energy costs appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.