St. Albert Gazette - November 2, 2005
By Peter Boer Staff Writer

In the 1,400 acres Albert Lutz farms with his brothers out near Legal, there is a field that would be ideally suited for a slough. There are low-lying spots that have retained water in the past that could easily support waterfowl and hay growth.

The problem, says Lutz, is the bottom line. However many acres of land he pulls out of his field to promote conservation are that many acres Lutz isn't growing barley, wheat, oats, peas or canola. "In order to survive in this industry, we need to produce, produce, produce," said Lutz.

Lutz, however, has become a local proponent of a revolutionary farm-management system that would pay farmers to give up some of their land for conservation purposes. Known as the Alternate Land Use Services (ALUS), the program would stand as a public-private partnership between the landowner and the government that would promote sound ecological practices on Canada's farms.

"Now I can put some acres aside and balance things out, move things around. It's another alternative," said Lutz, who gave a presentation to Sturgeon County council Oct. 25. "I think every Canadian citizens tends to buck conservation because it's always shoved down our throats, but there's no person who doesn't want that."

The ALUS concept centres on the idea of paying farmers to grow conservation, as well as crops on their land. The idea calls on government to provide financial incentive for farmers to sacrifice farmland for environmental practices.

Though innovative in Canada, the idea is not new internationally. European governments traditionally reward farmers for maintaining a landscape that is environmentally correct. The United States has a similar 'set-aside' program. To date, the government of Canada had taken no action on the issue.

"I think part of the reason we're behind is we are under the impression we had an abundance of land, that there were no tremendous environmental pressures," said Rod Scartlett, Executive Director of Wild Rose Ag Producers. "We've kind of turned that tide now and are seeing the benefits of strong environmental practices on the farm."

Under the ALUS program, a farmer who traditionally farms right to the edge of a slough on his land would be compensated for backing off from the shore and allowing the area to grow naturally.

"The benefits would be cleaner water for the community and the preservation of wild life, not just ducks, but other birds the rural or urban public would like to see," said Scartlett.

ALUS could also stand as a bridge between the urban and rural communities. Robert Sopuck, vice-president of the Delta Waterfowl Foundation, told Sturgeon County council ALUS could effectively mesh the wants of city-dwellers and the needs of farmers.

"Our society sends different messages. We want more food and fibre, but we also want clean water, biodiversity and clean landscapes," he said. "Farmers are often given conflicting signals on this."

Money talks

One issue that will always be a source of conflict, said Lutz, is money. Any ALUS program would need to provide enough compensation to make the program financially worthwhile. He's never talked to a farmer who has a problem with the idea, only with the potential loss of revenue. "What it's going to boil down to is to sit down and talk dollars and cents," said Lutz. "If the dollars and cents work out, I want to be first in line for a pilot project."

Manitoba will be launching Canada's first ALUS pilot project next spring, at a cost of $1.9 million. Agriculture Minister Doug Horner said he and his provincial colleagues will be watching that project carefully. "There's a lot of different projects trying to add value to producer's incomes, and I think this is one," said Horner. "But if you have a rebate on natural gas, a fuel rebate on diesel, [ALUS] is another substantial tax payer component we have to make sure is affordable."

Sturgeon County, however, isn't going to wait to begin planning for a pilot project. As soon as Lutz and Sopuck concluded their presentation, council voted unanimously to send the proposal to the county's Agricultural Service Board. "If it's the public good, the public should pay for it," said Coun. Donald Rigney (Div. 5). "I think it's ideally suited to the rural-urban conflict."

If both the province and Sturgeon hop on board, Lutz said he is more than ready to let that slough on his land grow. "I could go in there, plug these ditches, retain water, farm around them and have the hay growth for conservation of wild life, and still get paid," Lutz said. "If you can sell conservation to the landowners and farmers, how can you not sell it to the urban?"

---

Morinville Free Press - November 1, 2005

Conservation group gets Sturgeon Support
by Gina MacArthur

Sturgeon County is throwing its support behind a conservation group that prides itself on working with farmers to protect the environment.

Delta Waterfowl Vice President Robert Sopuck made a presentation to county council on October 25, at the request of local farmer Albert Lutz. Sopuck told councillors that Canada is behind the U.S. in finding ways for farmers to cooperate with conservationists.  "Farmers want to do the right thing," he said, noting that most of them are reluctant to get involoved with conservation groups because of problems they've had with them in the past.

"Farmers cannot manage wetlands for nothing, so they respond to current economic signals by getting reid of wetlands," he says. "We have a policy impasse whereby society is saying 'We want all these environmental benefits' but farmers are recoginizing signals from society to produce as much food as quickly and cheaply as possible."

Sopuck says providing farmers with financial incentives to manage wetlands will change their way of thinking about them. "New farms would provide food fibre livestock and environmental services," he says.

Sopuck says provincial agriculture ministers endorsed the program in a meeting in Kananaskis in July, and Delta Waterfowl is now raising money to start a pilot program across the country. He said the Manitoba government is footing the bill for farmers there to manage 138,000 acres, at a cost of about $600,000 a year from their Agricultural Policy Framework. "We're testing pilot projects across the country and we'll use that information to develop an national program," he says. Sopuck said at this point he's not looking for financial support from Sturgeon County, but rather to introduce the program here and get local governments familiar with the concept. "Canada is the only industrialized country in the world that does not have this kind of program," he says. "This is the only new an original idea in agricultural policy these days."

---

Redwater Tribune - November 9, 2005

New Wetland Management
by Nicole Davis

Long-standing friction between conservation groups and farmers, may be eased with a new project that will pay farmers to maintain wetlands on their farms.

The Delta Waterfowl Foundation’s (DWF) vice-president Robert Sopuck and local farmer Albert Lutz spoke to Sturgeon County council last Tuesday regarding the Alternate Land Use Services (ALUS), which is a new project intended to pay farmers to maintain wetlands on their farms.

Sopuck said Sturgeon County is an ideal place in Alberta for a pilot project to be started. The idea was started in Manitoba by the Keystone Agriculture Producers, who will soon be announcing the start of the project in the rural area of Blanshard, Manitoba.

“Farmers are realizing conservation groups are typically to the detriment of farmers,” said Lutz, who farms 1,400 acres with his brothers. “We’re told to produce and they tell us they want our land. This is a way for farmers to say ‘We agree but we need to be paid for our service.’”

The project, which received general approval from council, will pay farmers per wetland acre to keep wetlands on their property. “This has been a long time coming,” said Councillor Don Rigney. “Most farmers would welcome this.” This project will be purely optional, and farmers can choose whether or not to work with the project and how many acres to donate.

There would be no maintenance of the wetlands, all the farmer would have to do is farm around the wetland.

Even wetlands that had previously been drained and farmed over could be saved and renewed, said Sopuck. The county would not have to invest any money to the project, as DWF would raise funds, looking to the province and federal government for money. Sopuck estimated that the project would cost approximately $600,000 per year for a three-year pilot project.

“The only downfall is the farmers have to farm around the wetland,”Lutz said. “This is almost like another crop rotation, and it evens out risk.”