RURAL DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE KNOWLEDGE BRIEF SPRING 2016

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

Common Themes in the Three Agriculture Plans
of the Columbia Basin-Boundary Region

INTRODUCTION
In the fall of 2014, the Regional District of East
Kootenay (RDEK) completed an Agriculture Plan,
joining the Regional District of Kootenay Boundary
(RDKB) and the Regional District of Central
Kootenay (RDCK), which both published Agriculture
Plans in 2011. Together, these three plans cover the
entire Kootenay region, and were all created for a
similar reason: to help promote a viable agriculture
industry. While there are some unique characteristics
of each plan, due to different agricultural practices
and variable cultural and physical settings, they
have a great deal in common with recurring themes,
related issues, and similar recommendations.
The Columbia Shuswap Regional District (CSRD)
also published an Agriculture Plan in 2014, however,
it does not include the two electoral areas that
fall within the Columbia Basin–Boundary Region.
Area A (rural Golden) and Area B (rural Revelstoke)
were excluded because they were not deemed as
agriculturally important. Based on the 2011 Census
of Agriculture data from Statistics Canada, the
agricultural system around Golden appears similar in
both size and characteristics to RDEK electoral areas
F and G, just to the south; therefore, it is reasonable
to assume that they face similar challenges and

CONTENTS
Introduction. . ......................................................1
Increasing Demand, Decreasing Supply.......... 2
Land Supply....................................................... 2
Farmers.............................................................. 3
Financial Viability.. ............................................ 3
Information Needs............................................ 3
Farm Advisory Services. . ................................... 4
New Farmer Training . . ....................................... 4
Land Use and Capability Information.............. 4
Market Research............................................... 5
Alternative Land Access Models...................... 5
Climate Change Adaptation.. ............................ 5
Irrigation. . .......................................................... 5
Invasive Weeds. . ................................................ 6
Policy Suggestions............................................ 6
Investment Needs............................................. 6
Conclusion......................................................... 7

1.888.953.1133

www.cbrdi.ca

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

COMMO N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N D A RY R E G I O N

2

opportunities. The only municipality in CSRD
Electoral Area B is Revelstoke, which just published
a Food Security Strategy (FSS). The Revelstoke FSS
focuses more on access to healthy, local food for
residents, but shares many of the characteristics
of an agriculture plan. Valemount, at the north
end of the Columbia Basin-Boundary Region is in
the Regional District of Fraser Fort George where
they are in the very early stages of developing an
Agriculture Plan. Due to the lack of an Agriculture
Plan and the limited agriculture activities around
Valemount, this area was excluded from this analysis.
The development of the RDEK, RDCK and RDKB
agriculture plans involved extensive public
consultations and received support from the
Regional Districts. All plans recognize that
agriculture in the region faces serious challenges,
and is more than just an industry to be supported.
In addition to being an important economic activity,
agriculture is seen as significantly contributing to
food security, environmental health, and social
sustainability of rural communities. This summary
document highlights the commonly identified
challenges, opportunities, and suggestions outlined
in these three regional agricultural plans in an effort
to assist and promote the implementation of the
most common and highest priority actions.

Rural Development In s t i t u t e K N OW L E D G E B R I E F Spri n g 2 0 1 6

INCREASING DEMAND,
DECREASING SUPPLY
There is extensive evidence that the demand
for locally grown and organic food is increasing,
with all three plans recognizing this demand
as an opportunity to expand local agricultural
production. A recent public opinion survey shows
that 92% of BC residents believe that BC should
produce enough food to feed itself so the province
does not have to rely on import products. In the
Columbia Basin-Boundary Region, 75% of residents
prefer to buy food that was produced locally,
and more than two-thirds would be willing to pay
extra for local food. The fact that approximately
95% of the food consumed in the Basin-Boundary
region is imported from other parts of the province,
from other provinces, or internationally suggests
there is enormous potential for local producers
and processors to expand. The increased demand
for local food is evidenced by the growing number
of farmers markets, community gardens, and
backyard gardening within the region. Expanding
demand is also evidenced by the successes of the
Kettle Valley Food Co-op, the Kootenay Co-op in
Nelson, the Groundswell Network in Invermere,
and the Kaslo Food Hub.
This growing demand, however, is not resulting in a
growing supply. Based on the Census of Agriculture
data, the amount of food being produced in the
region has actually been decreasing in recent years.
In the Columbia Basin–Boundary region, the area
being farmed decreased by 18.6% between 2001
and 2011. Although there are growing numbers
of farmers markets, finding enough producers
to sell at these markets is often challenging for
organizers. The Kootenay Co-op maintains a long
list of products for which there is great demand but
insufficient supply that they would like to purchase
from local producers (and pay a premium for).
This disconnect between the increasing demand
and decreasing supply provides rationale to help
agricultural producers and the agricultural industry
to increase the supply of locally grown food.

LAND SUPPLY

FINANCIAL VIABILITY

The lack of local food supply does not appear to
be due to a lack of land availability. Census of
Agriculture data shows that the area being farmed
in the three regional districts decreased from
183,457 hectares in 2001 to 148,246 hectares in
2011. This means there is over 45,000 hectares of
farmland that have recently been farmed, but are
no longer under production in the region. In the
East Kootenay alone, over 57,000 hectares were
identified as being available and with potential
for agriculture, but not currently being used.
Agricultural land is becoming underutilized because
it is often taken out of production or is unavailable
to farmers due to increasing land values which
are often based on development or recreational
uses as opposed to agriculture. The RDCK plan
notes that approximately half of available
farmland is not currently being actively farmed.
The Kootenay Boundary plan notes that there are
available unused and underused agriculture lands
throughout the region.

If there is a growing demand for local food that is
not being met, as well as land available for farming
and people willing to grow the food, why has food
production not increased? All three agriculture
plans describe the financial challenges faced by
farmers, and suggest that the core of the issue is
that it is extremely challenging for farmers to make
a living growing food.

FARMERS
The lack of local food supply also does not appear
to be due to a lack of interested farmers. The
number of farms and farm operators is decreasing,
and the average age of farmers is increasing (from
54.2 years old in 2006 to 56.6 years old in 2011),
with less than 5% of farm operators under the age
of 35. However, the burgeoning membership in
groups such as Young Agrarians and Farm Folk
City Folk, as well as evidence of increased interest
in farming at various food related workshops and
conferences, suggest that there may not be a
shortage of people wishing to be farmers, although
there is likely a need for educational support for
many new and aspiring farmers.

Across the three regional districts, the 1,273 farms
surveyed in the 2011 Census of Agriculture reported
total gross farm receipts of $71,099,592 and
operating expenses of $64,321,076, which equates
to an average profit of $5,324 per farm. The situation
appears most dire in the East Kootenay, where total
operating expenses exceeded gross sales, so the
average farm is actually operating at an annual loss of
$1,355. These very low (and negative) profit margins
mean that more than half of all farm operators in the
three regional districts have to find paid work off the
farm. If farming became more financially viable, more
young people would be able to get into farming,
more farmers would be able to keep farming, fewer
farmers would have to look for work off the farm,
more land would be put towards food production,
and more food would be produced. The three
Agriculture Plans provide recommendations on how
to improve the financial viability of farm operators
and the agriculture industry which can be placed in
three separate, but related categories: information
needs, policy suggestions, and investment and
infrastructure needs.

INFORMATION NEEDS

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

CO M M O N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N DA RY R E G I O N

There are farm advisory services, training needs, and
information gaps that can be filled by dedicated
staff people, educational institutions, government
programs, research, or agricultural groups.

Ru ral D e v e l op m e n t I n stitu te K N O W L E D G E B R I E F S pr i ng 2 0 16

3

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

COMMO N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N D A RY R E G I O N

4

FARM ADVISORY SERVICES

NEW FARMER TRAINING

There has been a decrease in the availability
of farm advisory services in all parts of the
region. The Kootenay Boundary region lost local
advisory capacity when its Range Management
Officer position was relocated to Kelowna and
subsequently suffered a reduction in available
resources. The East Kootenay plan points to the
loss of individualized extension services that used
to be provided by the Ministry of Agriculture,
helping farmers and ranchers with production,
marketing, business and financial planning. The
Central Kootenay plan describes the frustration
of farmers with the loss of support from the
Ministry of Agriculture, which formerly provided
advice regarding crop selection, irrigation design,
marketing, and pest and disease management.

The plans are less specific in their discussion of the
need for training and education of new farmers, but
all mention the need for programming at secondary
and post-secondary institutions, including
Selkirk College and College of the Rockies. Other
suggestions include training programs such as
the Green Certificate Farm Training Programs from
Alberta and Saskatchewan; partnering with local
or regional agricultural associations such as Young
Agrarians or Farm Folk City Folk; providing access
to farm business management resources such as
SmartFarm BC or Community Futures; promoting
mentorship and apprenticeship programs;
establishing school gardens, community gardens
and community greenhouses; and establishing
incubator farms.

All three plans had high levels of farmer
engagement, and all placed the re-establishment
of agriculture extension services and educational
opportunities as the top priority in each region.
There are three categories of extension services
described: support services for existing farmers;
business development and marketing training;
and training and education of new farmers. There
is an identified need for producers to be kept up
to date on the latest research on new crops and
varieties, emerging technologies and industry
trends, changing consumer demands, and
changing regulations.

LAND USE AND CAPABILITY
INFORMATION

Each plan suggests that the success of the plan
hinges on the hiring of someone to implement the
plans and address the needs for support services,
business development, and marketing training. The
top priority of the RDCK plan suggests a dedicated
staff person be hired, while the first suggestion
of the RDKB plan is to hire an ‘Agriculture
Development Officer’ and the RDEK recommends
hiring an ‘Agricultural Liaison Officer’ as the top
priority. Each of these positions would essentially
fill the void left by the loss of extension services
and would help implement the recommendations
outlined in each plan. The uniformity of this
identified need across all three plans suggests that
establishing these positions may have the biggest
positive impact on the agriculture industry in the
Columbia Basin-Boundary region.

Rural Development I n s t i t u t e K N OW L E D G E B R I E F Spri n g 2 0 1 6

The first step in most agriculture planning processes
undertaken in British Columbia is to complete
an Agriculture Land Use Inventory (ALUI) which
provides a baseline that describes the current
status of agriculture in the region. This inventory is
usually combined with Census of Agriculture data
to provide a comprehensive description of the
agriculture industry. While all three plans used data
from the Census of Agriculture, only the RDEK plan
had the benefit of an ALUI. An ALUI was completed
in the Creston Valley in 2002, and a major
recommendation of the RDCK plan was to update
the Creston inventory and to keep it as current as
possible. The RDKB plan recommends that an ALUI
is completed and made available online, along with
Agricultural Land Capability maps (soil maps) which
do exist for most agricultural regions in BC, but are
not widely available. Even where ALUIs have been
completed, they only represent a snapshot in time.
There is a clearly identified need to create, update,
and maintain ALUIs across the Basin-Boundary
Region. This information is seen as a prerequisite for
effective land use planning, quality research, policy
improvements, and bylaw development.

MARKET RESEARCH

CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION

A commonly identified research need in all three
plans is to identify market opportunities for
specific crops. The RDEK plan has the most detail
on this research gap and describes the need for a
detailed baseline economic study for each sector
to determine the cost of production, revenues,
profit margins, transportation and logistics, market
potential, and best management practices. The
market research should determine the size and
scope of local or regional markets, how effectively
local markets are currently served by local
agricultural products, current and future production
capacity, and potential economic returns and risks.

The plans express variable levels of concern
regarding threats and opportunities linked to
climate change. The RDKB plan places the greatest
emphasis on climate change by highlighting the
need for research and education on the impacts
of climate change on agriculture to help farmers
adapt to changing conditions. It suggests that
information availability on the impacts of climate
change would help local producers adapt and avoid
future problems. The East Kootenay Plan discusses
in very general terms how agricultural practices
may need to adjust due to various impacts of a
changing climate, while the Central Kootenay plan
only briefly mentions incorporating climate change
adaptation in the context of community planning.
The lack of emphasis on climate change may be due
to the many challenges farmers face in the short
term that seem more pressing to their survival and
sustainability. Climate change may be seen as a
problem that is too distant, large, unclear, or difficult
to deal with in the context of agriculture plans.

ALTERNATIVE LAND ACCESS MODELS
All three agricultural plans identified that farmland
is often prohibitively expensive for new farmers,
and development pressures in some areas mean
that agricultural lands are sold based on the much
higher speculation of residential or recreational
values. The loss of farmland due to development is
a major issue identified in the RDEK Agriculture Plan
where pressures seem to be the greatest, and is the
top agricultural concern for the people of BC.
To address the loss of farmland and prohibitive
expense, the RDEK and RDKB plans recommend
research into the feasibility of alternative land
ownership models such as an Agriculture Land
Trust or land cooperative model. There are
examples of both outside the region that make
land more accessible to farmers that cannot afford
to buy farmland at market prices. Those two
plans also suggest the creation and maintenance
of a database of lands for lease to help connect
landowners with potential farmers. In order to be
effective, this database needs to be maintained,
and competing databases should be avoided so
that every interested party goes to the same place.
Young Agrarians currently has an online map that
fills this role.

IRRIGATION
The one aspect of climate change that is
recognized to be an issue in all plans is the need
for increased irrigation due to projected reduced
summer precipitation and increased temperatures.
Education and awareness of efficient irrigation
using, for example, the Environmental Farm Plan
Program was recommended in the Kootenay
Boundary and Central Kootenay plans. The East
Kootenay plan suggests more efficient irrigation,
which would require investments as well as
education, and recommends several policy options:
reduced costs for irrigation; increased access
to municipal and crown land water; reduced
electricity costs for irrigation; improved controls and
management of new water licenses; and guarantees
for existing licenses.

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

CO M M O N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N DA RY R E G I O N

Ru ral D e v e l op m e n t I n stitu te K N O W L E D G E B R I E F S pr i ng 2 0 16

5

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

COMMO N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N D A RY R E G I O N

6

INVASIVE WEEDS
Invasive weeds can significantly impact farms and
farmland, and this impact is likely to increase in a
warmer and drier climate. Each plan recommends
supporting their regional invasive plant programs,
including the Boundary Invasive Species
Society (formerly known as the Boundary Weed
Management Committee), the Central Kootenay
Invasive Plant Committee, and the East Kootenay
Invasive Plant Council to deliver on their Invasive
Plant Management Plans and support efforts to
monitor and control the spread of invasive weeds.
Increased awareness of the threats and treatments
of invasive weeds would help farmers deal with
emerging issues and reduce impacts. Both the
Boundary and Central Kootenay plans suggest
targeting absentee land owners and helping all
landowners with noxious weed problems.

POLICY SUGGESTIONS
Although policy issues and challenges from
both provincial and federal levels are mentioned
and there are some recommendations relating
to lobbying higher levels of government, most
policy recommendations tend to focus on areas
where there is regional jurisdiction. Suggestions
relating to zoning, land use planning, taxation,
bylaws, and full incorporation of agricultural issues
and concerns into Official Community Plans are
included. While each agricultural plan makes
some unique recommendations, there are a few
common themes; all recognizing there are limited
policy options for Regional Districts to profoundly
influence the agriculture industry. Nevertheless,
there are some policy suggestions for Regional
Districts to assist in some way. Common to all three
plans are suggestions to:
•

reduce tax assessment rates or building code
permit fees for farm structures that meet the
National Farm Building Code of Canada;

•

restrict the number and size of non-agriculture
related secondary dwellings;

•

utilize zoning and bylaw tools to reduce the
potential for urban/rural conflict and the loss of
agricultural land to urban expansion;

•

review bylaws related to restrictions on livestock
in backyards in non-agricultural zones;

Rural Development I n s t i t u t e K N OW L E D G E B R I E F Spri n g 2 0 1 6

•

review agricultural zoning bylaws related to
processing livestock and other agricultural crops,
and on-farm businesses;

•

consider policy or bylaw restrictions for
maximum building footprint size and setbacks
for residential buildings in agriculture zones to
reduce the loss of agriculture lands;

•

reduce subdivision, set minimum parcel sizes,
and encourage amalgamation of contiguous
parcels in agriculture zones (smaller parcels are
less likely to be farmed);

In addition, RDEK and RDKB plans suggest that
secondary residences on agriculture lands be
allowed for farm families to help with succession
planning, allowing the children of farmers wishing
to take over the family business to build a home on
the land, and providing housing for farm labour.
RDCK and RDKB plans suggest that a staff person at
each Regional District should serve to help farmers
with government programs, funding opportunities,
regulatory issues, and permitting challenges.

INVESTMENT NEEDS
While many farmers may require investments for
expenses such as fencing, buildings, equipment,
or labour, all plans focus on the lack of supportive
infrastructure in the local food system. The loss of
storage, distribution and processing facilities, the
inaccessibility of tools and equipment, and the lack
of marketing support are all discussed. Many of
the information needs described above would also
require investments, such as: re-establishing farm
advisory services; education; information provision;
research; and supporting regional invasive plant
programs. These financial investments could
be sourced from government funding, private
interests, or non-governmental organizations. The
challenge is to determine where investments would
have the greatest impact, and where returns may
be greatest.
The most commonly referenced infrastructure
need is increased meat processing capacity. All
three plans point to limited slaughter facilities as
a major obstacle for farmers to process meat in
the regions and sell their products locally. The
changes to the meat inspection regulations in
2004 are identified as the main cause of the loss
of meat processing facilities. These changes have

resulted in many new regulatory issues and require
significant capital investments that make building
and running an abattoir a very difficult business to
start and maintain, despite the demand for their
services. The limited number of facilities to kill or
butcher animals for commercial sale in the region
necessitates that many producers truck animals to
abattoirs for processing, which stresses the animals
resulting in reduced meat quality and decreased
profit for the farmer.
All three plans further point to the need to develop
a local or regional marketing strategy to capitalize
on the growing demand for local food. Regional
marketing strategies require coordination and
financial resources. There are some successful
examples to build on such as local food guides,
branding such as the Kootenay Mountain Grown
label, the Kootenay Co-op’s ‘True Local’ campaign, or
the Boundary Country brand.
Other identified infrastructure gaps include the lack
of canning or freezing facilities, few egg grading
stations, challenges accessing commercial kitchens
or grain milling facilities, and limited packaging
options. Innovative solutions are sometimes
suggested to deal with these challenges. Examples
from within and outside the region are cited
as options that should be explored, including:
commercial incubator kitchens; industry clusters;
waste diversion schemes; small tool libraries;
foodland trusts; Community Supported Agriculture;
bulk buying clubs; direct sales; producer cooperatives; values-based food supply chains; and
food hubs.

CONCLUSION
The agricultural plans completed for the Regional
District of East Kootenay, Regional District of
Kootenay Boundary, and Regional District of
Central Kootenay all highlight the need for follow
up action so these documents do not end up as
another report sitting on a shelf. The high degree
of similarity found within the plans indicates that
the agriculture industry in the Columbia BasinBoundary Region faces common issues, challenges,
and opportunities. A region-wide approach
of cooperation and sharing of knowledge and
resources may be an effective way to work towards
the common goal of a viable agriculture industry,
providing locally produced food and food products
to residents across the region.

KNOWLEDGE BRIEF

CO M M O N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N DA RY R E G I O N

Ru ral D e v e l op m e n t I n stitu te K N O W L E D G E B R I E F S pr i ng 2 0 16

7

COMMO N T H E M E S I N T H E T H R E E A G R I C U LT U R E P L A N S O F T H E CO LU M B I A B A S I N - B O U N D A RY R E G I O N

The Columbia Basin Rural Development Institute, at Selkirk College, is a regional research centre with a mandate to
support informed decision-making by Columbia Basin-Boundary communities through the provision of information,
applied research and related outreach and extension support. This report is part of the RDI food systems research
project which is funded by the Real Estate Foundation of BC and Columbia Basin Trust.

To find out more, visit www.cbrdi.ca

1.888.953.1133