Grainswest - Spring 2026

Spring 2026 Grains West 40 FEATURE in water efficiency programs,” he said. “But with some of the newer initiatives, we were pushed away by complexity, lack of clarity or it just wasn’t worth the time and effort.” Farming in the Palliser Triangle, Kolk is focused on water retention, wind erosion and buildup of soil organic matter. He has invested significantly in conservation practices on his farm, often without program support, because existing initiatives haven’t always aligned with the realities of his region. The disconnect, he said, stems from programs designed to apply broadly across varied landscapes. “You can’t put a broadacre dryland farmer in Swift Current into the same program as a Red River Valley farmer growing specialty crops.” Such one-size-fits-all failure is echoed in the CAPI reports. Standardized programs don’t account for Canada’s immense agricultural diversity and regional concerns. McCann believes a national program with a common set of solutions can’t work well. “Environmental issues end up being national issues and national priorities, but on the ground, they are local issues impacting local regions and local conditions,” he said. “We think the priorities and solutions should be driven locally as much as possible, recognizing priorities will be unique to that watershed or region,” said Jordan Sinclair, CEO of ALUS, a community-led and farmer-delivered national non-profit that supports conservation on marginal farmland. Kolk also pointed to frustration among farmers who adopted conservation practices before funding incentives became available. “I spent money on wind erosion work years ago,” he said. “When support finally came along, the people who had already done it got no credit, but they’re competing for land and cropping against those who were compensated.” Economics comes first for most farmers, and not because they don’t value conservation, but because margins are tight and risk is high. Input costs, commodity prices, taxes and interest payments still drive most land-use decisions. Conservation payments often don’t cover opportunity costs, especially on high value cropland. “If the finances don’t work, you’re not going to keep it up,” said Kolk. “Farmers can’t afford to subsidize society’s interests.” THE PATCHWORK PROBLEM One of the most common frustrations raised in the CAPI reports is the patchwork nature of conservation programs. They vary by province and administrator as well as by the definitions of conservation and sustainability. It is often difficult to judge how multiple programs that target soil health, biodiversity or climate fit together, or whether they can be stacked at all. Each comes with its own application process, reporting requirements and funding window. “National targets for climate and biodiversity don’t translate clearly at the farm level,” said McCann. As a result, success is often measured by acres enrolled or practices adopted, rather than whether environmental conditions are improved. Where governments, particularly provincial ones, once ran most on-farm environmental programs, the delivery has grown fragmented. Administrators now include multiple provincial ministries, the federal government, non- profits and private groups. Stakeholders such as CAPI argue better co-ordination is possible. “Ideally, we’d like to see more collaboration and co-operation between those groups,” said McCann. ALUS aims to simplify this landscape by pooling funding from governments and private partners, offering annual Though he is heavily invested in conservation on his own land, Enchant area farmer John Kolk said some programs don't make sense in the field. Photo: courtesy of Alberta Pulse Growers.