Canadian farmers are experiencing a sense of déjˆ vu.
Two years ago, North Dakota tried to bring in legislation that would slow imports of Canadian grain and livestock grown and raised using chemicals not approved in the United States.
It recently tried again with similar legislation that could set the stage for increased inspections of agricultural products imported to North Dakota.
Haulers of those products, specifically crops, would have to carry a health certificate showing these three things:
- Chemical residues do not exceed limits set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
- The product has no trace of chemicals not approved for use on that same agricultural product in the U.S.
- There are no traces of chemicals for which a maximum residue limit has not been set by the EPA.
Read Also
Strong cattle prices boost forage sales, reps report at Ag in Motion 2025
Representatives from Proven Seed and BrettYoung at Ag in Motion 2025 are reporting strong forages sales across Western Canada this year, driven by high cattle prices, as well as more producers establishing new, higher-quality stands and exploring drought-tolerant varieties.
Violations would be punishable with 30 days in jail and a $1,000 fine.
“I guess it’s more of the same from some of the people in North Dakota,” said Weldon Newton, vice-president of Keystone Agricultural Producers.
Supporters of the bill that was introduced in the North Dakota legislature say it reflects the frustration festering among state producers.
“It’s a frustration on the part of producers who feel they’ve been shorted on certain (trade) issues,” said Judge Barth, a marketing specialist for the North Dakota Wheat Commission.
“I wouldn’t say it’s something that popped up recently. It’s been an ongoing issue.”
Agriculture commissioner Roger Johnson supports the legislation. He said it addresses two issues: fairness and food safety.
“There are (pesticides) that continue to be available in Canada that are illegal to use down here.”
That leaves farmers in North Dakota at a disadvantage, Johnson said.
A similar bill was passed by the state legislature two years ago. It was vetoed by then governor Ed Schafer and did not become law.
However, the current governor, John Hoeven, said he would have signed the legislation and the sentiment in North Dakota now is that the new bill has strong support.
The Canola Council of Canada suggests U.S. federal law would supersede the state law since federal legislation covers pesticide residues under the EPA. The Food and Drug Administration looks after enforcement.
Meanwhile, a second bill introduced in the North Dakota legislature would charge a tariff on agricultural imports that are sold in the U.S. more cheaply than they are in Canada.
The tariff is described in the bill as an inspection fee. It could not exceed the difference in price.
Johnson said he does not support the legislation in its current form. He described it as a “murky kind of bill” whose intent is hard to understand. It would also be hard to administer, he said.
“I’d be surprised if it survives. Certainly I’d be surprised if it survives in its current form.”
Canadian trade officials are watching closely. They question whether the two bills can meet U.S. trade obligations in their current form. There is still time for amendments.
