> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: /llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Letter: A presentation on why farmers need crop protection
- URL: /letter-a-presentation-on-why-farmers-need-crop-protection/
- Published: 2026-09-02T11:00:14.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-02T11:00:17.000Z
- Description: Farmers are calling on Ontario policy makers to create a wildlife crop damage compensation program, similar to those in western provinces, to cover targeted losses that regular production insurance misses.
- Author: Expositor Staff
- Tags: Letters to the Editor

### Wildlife have been devastating yields for the past several years

*EDITOR’S NOTE: The Following letter was presented by Bill Orford and Tehkummah farmer Johannes Renecker this past April to government policy makers dealing with wildland crop damage. The presentation is being published below.*

To the Expositor:

For the past number of years, farmers have suffered crop damage and losses to wildlife. These damages aren’t necessarily covered by regular production insurance. This is due to the fact that various wildlife species (ie. Sandhill cranes, Canada geese, black birds) tend to favour parts of the field where crops exhibiting the best quality are growing (parameters can include test weight, protein, etc.). Even though it may not take down the overall yield below the guaranteed production insurance thresholds, it still takes down the grade, substantially reducing the value of the crop and revenue. An example of this would be wildlife targeting an area of the field with higher test weight corn, or higher protein wheat.

Various other provinces in Canada have a wildlife compensation program for damage to crops caused by wildlife. The two examples that I will be highlighting are programs in place by the Saskatchewan Crop Insurance Corp. (SCIC), and Manitoba Agriculture Services Corporation (MASC). 

In the case of the SCIC program, the initial payments are made based on a survey done in August of the given production year at 75 percent of crop prices at that time. Final payments are made based on a six-month average of the given crop price (September to February). Crop grade at harvest is used to determine compensation rates for the part of the crop damaged by wildlife. The major advantage of the wildlife compensation program from the SCIC is that wildlife damage claims do not affect your long-term yields for regular production insurance. According to the SCIC, the customers long-term average yield will be calculated based on the yield before the wildlife damage. This ensures that producers can be more resilient and financially stable given intense geopolitical pressures and volatile commodity prices and input costs. In addition, crops with wildlife excreta can be claimed as wildlife damage. This is covered through a ‘handling allowance’ for cleaning the excreta off of the crop. This is especially advantageous for fruit and vegetable crops, whose value can be substantially reduced by this.

SCIC wildlife compensation program covers a wide range of crops including grains and oilseeds (including crops not covered by regular production insurance), stacked hay, silage bales, crops used for an alternative feeding system, market garden crops, tree nurseries, sod, honey and leafcutter bees. A wider range of crops is covered by the wildlife compensation program because the damage is not “blanket covering” like a weather event would be (ex: drought) but is purposely selective. SCIC will only pay out wildlife compensation payments from the date that it is reported, so farmers would report the damage from the day that it occurs/is discovered.

SCIC uses AI and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to assess wildlife damage. These use high resolution camera systems to assess the damage to the crop prior to harvest. According to the SCIC, 250-350 images are taken per field, which are then combined to create a very highly detailed picture of the field, giving a very thorough image of the wildlife damage occurring in the field. This is especially key for large scale damage caused by bears, deer, or large birds (sandhill cranes, geese, etc).

According to the MASC, producers are eligible for up to 90 percent coverage, and a wildlife damage claim is triggered by a minimum value of $100\. Similar to the program distributed by the SCIC, the amount of crop allowed to be compensated is only the amount of crop lost to wildlife damage. Like the SCIC model, the wildlife compensation program is an entirely separate entity from the regular production insurance program, ensuring that the farmer’s long-term yield is not affected by targeted wildlife damage. The MASC site includes a breakdown of where funding comes from. For 80 percent of the coverage, 60 percent is funded by the federal government, 40 percent is funded by the provincial government. The remaining 10 percent (to complete the 90 percent coverage) is funded completely by the province.

Damage is assessed by MASC adjusters through a site visit, and the amount of compensation is based on the appraisal value of crop lost through wildlife damage only, thereby keeping it separate from production insurance, preventing the long term overall average yield from being affected. 

There are various species covered by both the SCIC and MASC wildlife compensation programs. These include: deer, elk, moose, bear, wood bison, raccoons, ducks, geese, sandhill cranes, blackbirds, antelope (Pronghorn).

Many of these species are also an issue in Ontario and cause substantial damage and economic losses every year to crops. However, many of these losses are not covered by production insurance due to the fact that production insurance is only meant to cover “blanket losses” (ex: drought; excessive rains). Wildlife damage is targeted, purposeful, and specific, and often targets the best quality crops in the whole field, taking down the grade and quality of the crop at the elevator. Such losses are not covered by production insurance despite the claim by Agricorp that production insurance addresses wildlife damage.

Wildlife compensation programs for damage to crops by wildlife are currently in place in the provinces of B.C., AB, SK, MB, QC, and NS. OFA distributed a survey to its members which addressed how much of yield and ultimately economics were impacted by wildlife damage to crops both in 2009 and 2019\. The following are some of the dollar value losses from the 2019 survey done province-wide: corn, $90,653,706; soybeans, $65,237,151; wheat, $11,095,543; forages (hay): $19,160,423; oats, $1.62 million; barley, $2.471 million; beans (edibles), $1.780 million. Total damage of commodities mentioned above: $192,023,877\. 

These numbers will be substantially inflated due to increased production costs, economy inflation, and differing commodity prices from what they were seven years ago. In addition, the upward trend in wildlife population growth, (i.e. sandhill cranes) has also increased the loss in yield/acre, and as a result, $/acre.

OFA has done a number of studies over the past 15+ years regarding crop damage and losses to wildlife. Damage was found to total $39,362,772 in 2009 across all commodities. In 2018, total wildlife damage values across all commodities were found to total $265,803,755, and $214,873,081 in 2019\. These numbers came from surveys done by OFA in those years mentioned, and cover a wide range of commodities, including grains, forages, fruits, vegetables, etc. Factors which increased the total losses to wildlife damage included an increase in the number of commodities reported increased acres in production, changes in commodity prices, and changes in wildlife populations. An updated wildlife damage comprehensive survey will be distributed sometime in the next 1-2 months, and the findings should be finalized soon after.

OFA conducted an additional study in 2021, and found that the total loss from wildlife damage to crops had jumped to $215 million, indicating that given the significant jump in input costs since then (i.e. fertilizer) as well as changes in varieties and commodity prices and wildlife populations will have caused this number to substantially tick upwards. To give an example of population growth of a wildlife species of significance to crop loss, a finding by Environment and Climate Change Canada found that the sandhill crane population is 62 percent above its target population of 60,000\. The proposed hunt with the current limitations in place will only lead to a 0.5-1 percent population reduction per year when it is growing at a rate of 4.4 percent per year. While hunts like this represent a valuable tool, they do not come close to compensating famers for the immense crop losses to wildlife.

Beyond grain crops, potatoes are also a large target along with other fruit and vegetable crops. For example, sandhill cranes targeted a number of potato producers in the Sudbury-West area in 2025\. The resulting overall gross yield was 840,000 pounds. Of this cumulative yield, 336,000 pounds of potatoes were discarded due to damage from pecking of sandhill cranes. This is because prior to harvest, cranes will walk along the row and peck ripe potatoes out of the ground, resulting in the potato being worthless. They are also highly selective in which variety they target. In this case, the cranes preferred while and russet potatoes over red or yellow potatoes. This selective damage is not covered by production insurance, as it is not an “Act of God,” but rather deliberate selective targeting of certain varieties. In addition, cranes will walk along the rows of freshly planted seed potatoes just after seeding in the spring and peck out a seed potato from the ground, take a bite of out if, and move to the next one. Selectivity here is similar to that observed when damage occurs around harvest.

Speaking to farmers in the Kent area, they have been sighted in corn fields as far south as Chatham-Kent as of 2025\. In 2023, sandhill cranes were found in fields around the Listowel area and have done significant damage to corn fields in central Bruce County. For example, one producer reported losing two acres of corn a couple of year ago following emergence. This was due to sandhill cranes, as they plucked corn seedlings out of the ground to eat the seed on the root of the plant. This is also a common problem with cranes with corn production in the north and will continue to protrude to the south part of Ontario as their range expands. Producers in Norfolk have also reported substantial losses in corn to black birds and the same issues with the current production insurance program as was highlighted in my notes sent in the earlier email. In addition, sandhills have been spotted in fields in Norfolk County in high numbers, presenting a potential for further crop damage to occur down the road.

Such targeting by wildlife in general leads to a reduction in quality crop, resulting in grade reductions, and ultimately a small cheque for the farmer, which is not adequately compensated due to the absence of a wildlife specific compensation program. Such issues have been successfully addressed in B.C., the Canadian prairie provinces, ss well as Quebec and Nova Scotia, providing a template for the creation of an Ontario specific wildlife compensation program without a ‘completely reinventing the wheel approach.’