back

More on-farm trials are  showing that corn growers who
plant in 20-inch rows can expect to harvest seven per
cent more bushels. 
In 22 on-farm comparisons in Ontario last summer, 20-inch
rows beat 30-inch rows by an average 6.8 per cent, says
Alan McCallum, provincial government crops adviser based
at Clinton. 
"We've got about a dozen farmers in Huron county who have
switched or are in the middle of switching to narrow
rows," McCallum says. "The yield numbers are
encourag-ing...the only factor holding people back is the
cost of machinery conversions." 
In Kent county, Ridgetown college researcher Gord
Scheifele has finished his fourth year of narrow-row
tests, working on farms ranging from 3000 to 3300 heat
units. "The results are consistent with what we've seen
in previous years. That's what makes them so exciting,"
Scheifele says. See Table 1. 
Scheifele also calculated the dollar impacts of an
on-farm, machine-harvested test planted at Kent Bridge
last year, and found that a shift to a row width of 20
inches at a population of 30,000 plants per acre would
earn the farmer an extra $33 per acre, based on corn
priced at $3 per bushel. See Table 2. 
Michigan State University agronomist Steve Poindexter
nods his head when he sees the results. They mirror the
outcome of tests he's planted since 1989. 
"It's the future," Poindexter says. "The way to make more
money is to farm better instead of just farming bigger. 
"Should we farm more acres, knowing we're only going to
get 85 per cent of the yield that the land is capable of
producing, or should we be trying to get 100 per cent out
of the land we're already farming?" 
Jim Dorr, who farms 900 acres in Michigan's Saginaw
Valley, switched to 20-inch rows in 1993 partly as a
result of Poindexter's trials. 
Dorr says he didn't doubt the yield potential of narrow
rows, but had to think twice before spending US$22,000 on
narrow-row equipment, including a new cultivator along
with US$4,500 to modify his six-row John Deere corn head
to handle eight 20-inch rows. 
Dorr says, however, that narrow rows bumped his average
corn yield to 147 bushels per acre, up from 134 bushels
in 30-inch rows. 
"The change in machinery costs work out to US$28.22 per
acre," Dorr says. "Spread over 10 years, which most of
the equipment should last, that's just US$2.82 per acre
each year." 
Even when he calculates his earnings based on the US$2.79
per-bushel U.S. program price, he says he's paid off all
his costs including the equipment changes in his first
two years and has taken an extra US$36.27 to the bank. 
Poindexter says the key to higher yields is better use of
solar energy. "When you see sunlight hitting the soil
between the rows, you know you're not making the best use
of one of the few things we get for free." 
Narrow-row crops are faster to form a canopy, so they
intercept more of that energy. As well, the shade
provided by the canopy helps prevent evaporation from the
soil surface, and  curbs competition from weeds. 
Poindexter says Michigan research shows there's no
increase in lodging, and that instances of yields
dropping because of narrow rows are  rare. 
"The big question is, are you doing things right? If
you've got things that need fixing, you should do that
before you switch," he says. "But if you're feeling
you're maxed out with current practices, then look at
narrow rows. 
"Attitude is the key component. If you want it to work it
will."

back

As Jean Guy Lapointe examines the battleground on a
minus-25-degree, mid-January day, there isn't a trace of
red dog on the squeaky clean snow. On this day his
corn-filled elevator, at the eastern edge of Embrun near
Ottawa, sits quietly, waiting for already-high prices to
nudge a little further upward.
Lapointe has just learned that his wife's cancer has
returned, so he has more important things on his mind
than last month's Farm Practices Protection Board (FPPB)
ruling which says he must build a wall to reduce the
red-dog grain dust annoying neighbour Fran¨oise Bazinet.
He estimates the wall would cost about $1,000.
That's a fraction of the $10,000 he spent for lawyers and
experts to defend him against the complaint brought by
Bazinet. Her case was presented by Ministry of the
Environment officials free of charge.
Agriculture Minister Noble Villeneuve has promised
changes in right to farm legislation. He's been disturbed
by the events at Lapointe's and visited the site
following the Board's decision. "I certainly can't
comment on it other than it's one of the reasons why
we've got to look at the way things are happening,"
Villeneuve says.
Ottawa lawyer Donald Good, who represented Lapointe at
the hearing, claims the board is misinterpreting its own
legislation. In a letter to Lapointe following the
decision, he says the board makes a clear finding that
the operation is a  "normal farm practice. It then
proceeds to deny you this status based on the proximity
of your neighbour's house, notwithstanding that your
operation was there first." Evidence showed the Bazinet
home is 32 feet from the lot line which is a further 31
feet from the edge of Lapointe's elevator.
The FPPB found "the noise level of the elevators was
reasonable."
 The FPPB decided an auger used to remove fines needs a
sock or flex spout. Perhaps the most significant finding,
however, was that where grain handling, drying and
storage systems are located at a reasonable distance from
residential uses, normal farming practice requires a bin
or collection system for red dog.
Even if Lapointe builds a 12-foot wall as he is
contemplating, nothing prevents his neighbour from
lodging further complaints if red dog continues to settle
on her land. Lapointe readily concedes it probably will.
As one the first to grow corn in eastern Ontario back in
1968, Lapointe has found travelling to farms in other
parts of Canada and the United States helps him keep
abreast of corn production technology he can use in his
800-acre operation. "I've never seen a wall like that,"
he says of the structure he's been told to build.
"Two weeks ago one of my employees had red dog on his
lawn in the middle of town. My elevator wasn't operating
so it probably came from the Embrun Co-op which is quite
a bit further away. Red dog can travel up to a mile,"
Lapointe says.
A divisional court could overturn the FPPB ruling but
such an appeal would cost thousands of dollars. By
entrenching his right to farm, Lapointe reasons that a
successful appeal could eliminate further disputes with
his neighbour.
He thinks it could mean a victory for all farmers.

back

Investors in the 1,800-member Seaway Valley Farmers
Energy Co-operative can mark March 31, 1996 on their
calendars. "I would say that day is worth $3 million,"
quipped Seaway president Bud Atkins.
Earlier this month the group signed an agreement with the
Ontario government requiring them to have funding in
place for their $48-million ethanol project by the end of
March. They must comply to receive Agriculture Minister
Noble Villeneuve's recently announced $3 million grant.
The group has already raised more than $5 million through
the sale of common shares and through earlier government
grants. They hope to raise the balance through the sale
of preferred shares and bank loans. An equity partner
will be sought if sales fall short.
Recalling that an issue of common shares sold out in just
10 weeks last year, Atkins doesn't expect any problem
this year. In the coming weeks the group will promote
preferred shares.
Investors' money will remain in an interest bearing
escrow account until the project goes ahead. "We have one
fellow who went out yesterday in the afternoon and got
commitments for $125,000," Atkins said.
At a Jan. 3 Cornwall press conference, the Co-operators
Insurance Company presented Atkins with a $25,000 cheque.
"By investing in the ethanol plant the Co-operators is
investing in eastern Ontario agriculture," declared
Co-operators district manager Georges Laplante.
The same week about 125 shareholders joined Villeneuve at
an information meeting at Finch, north of Cornwall. "I
thought it was very upbeat and I'm quite positive that we
will see a sod turning at the Cornwall site sometime in
the early spring and a processing plant sometime in
1997," Villeneuve told Farm & Country during a telephone
interview.
High corn prices coupled with uncertainty over the
provincial government's commitment to ethanol has
dampened enthusiasm for the project in some circles. But
Atkins said there is no turning back now. "The design and
construction activity schedule is pretty well cast in
stone. We have to break ground as soon as the snow
melts."
Last year Seaway directors concluded they could improve
revenues in the face of high corn prices by diverting
output from automobile fuel in favour of higher-priced
commercial product. Purchasers have already been lined up
for most of their production.
The 50-million-litre facility could also produce drinking
alcohol.
Villeneuve, who has promoted the project as a "green", or
environmentally friendly, fuel oxygenator, sees no
problem with the change. "The bulk of it will certainly
be used in fuel. If they can get a market that fetches
more money in other areas, how can I fault them for
that?"
Bainsville cash croppers Ron and Shawn McRae rank among
the most innovative and efficient in the province. They
have been strong Seaway supporters. Ron was one of 12
founding Seaway directors.
He calculates an ethanol plant won't cash flow with
current corn prices. However, he believes ethanol has a
future.
"I would concede that eventually we will be making
ethanol with some other sort of bio mass rather than
grain. Maybe if we can at least get a plant in place,
then as the new technology evolves, we will be ready to
utilize it."
McRae and his family will limit their investment to
$10,000.