Saskatchewan’s newest farm organization is finding trouble getting accepted by the old crowd.
The Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan came under fire last week from four established farm groups, which joined forces to denounce the way APAS raises money.
The new association is being funded by rural municipalities through an annual membership fee of 10 cents per acre, or half a mill on their base agricultural assessment for 2000.
That has irked some of the province’s voluntary membership groups, who say some farmers in those member RMs are being forced to support APAS against their will.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
“The problem is the mandatory nature of it, where farmers aren’t allowed to direct their money to the farm organization of their choice,” said National Farmers Union spokesperson Stewart Wells.
He said the system would be more palatable if farmers who don’t support APAS could opt out or get a rebate on their portion of their RM’s membership fee.
Many other checkoff-funded organizations, like Keystone Agricultural Producers or the Western Grains Research Foundation, allow farmers to get their money back.
The Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association and the Saskatchewan Cattle Feeders Association joined with the NFU in criticizing the APAS funding.
“Producers deserve the opportunity to fund the lobby organization they feel best represents their needs and interests,” said cattle feeders vice-president Marsha Cannon.
No group should be able to decide it speaks for everyone and then “tax” producers to fund its activities, she said.
APAS president Terry Hildebrandt said it is unfortunate that some groups seem to be lining up against the new organization. He said all farm groups need to work together to try to improve the situation for the province’s farmers.
“I hope they’re not afraid we’ll try to squeeze them out,” he said. “We want to work with them.”
APAS wants to speak for all sectors of agriculture. It is offering associate memberships to other farm groups and plans to set up advisory committees that include representatives from other organizations.
Hildebrandt said while the existing farm groups in the province work hard and do a good job, most of the province’s farmers are not represented by any farm group.
“I wouldn’t say they’ve failed, but they’re just not able to do the job because of a lack of funding and a lack of membership,” said Hildebrandt.
He also took issue with the criticism that farmers are being forced to support APAS through their taxes whether they want to or not.
Each RM makes a democratic decision whether to join, and at ratepayer meetings, APAS generally wins overwhelming support. In any democratic structure, whether it’s farm groups, rural councils or general election, the minority must abide by the will of the majority, he said.
Hildebrandt said some farmers who would like to be part of APAS have been denied because their RM has voted not to join.
Wells said a better idea might be for all RMs to have a farm organization checkoff and then allow each ratepayer to indicate which, if any, group they want to support.
“APAS may end up with more money by having 80 percent of the farmers out of all the RMs, rather than have 100 percent of 40 percent of the RMs under the mandatory set-up,” he said.
So far, about one-third of the province’s 297 RMs have joined APAS, with more expected to sign up following ratepayer meetings this spring.
