Common Issues Found on Ontario Farms
After hundreds of Farmland Health Check-Up assessments across Ontario, clear patterns emerge. These are not theoretical problems — they are real, measurable soil conditions found on working Ontario farms.ds on the depth and cause of the problem:
Subsurface Compaction
70-80% of fields
Compaction layers typically at 15-20 cm depth. Often worse on headlands, grain cart paths, and manure application areas. Most farmers are unaware of the severity until penetrometer testing reveals 350-500 psi.
Inadequate Drainage
50-60% of fields
Tile systems installed 30+ years ago at spacings too wide for modern yield targets. Partially blocked or deterioting clay tile lines reduce effectiveness.
Organic Matter Depletion
40-50% of fields
Fields in continuous corn-soybean without cover crops show SOM levels 0.5-1.5% below county averages. Reduces water-holding capacity, nutrient mineralization, and biological activity.
Active Erosion / Eroded Knolls
30-40% of fields
Topsoil depth on knolls averages 8-15 cm compared to 25-40 cm in mid-slope positions - correlating with 30-60% yield reductions on eroded areas.
Structural Degradation
30-40% of fields
Poor aggregate stability, surface crusting, and platy structure at tillage depth. Compounds effects of compaction and drainage limitations.
Example Findings and Recommendations
The following examples represent typical FHCU findings from Ontario farm assessments.
Example 1: Clay Soil Row Crop — Kent County
BENCHMARK FIELD
120 ac, Brookston clay, 10 m tile (2012). Corn-soybean-wheat + cereal rye. 5-yr avg: 215 bu/ac. SOM: 4.1%. No compaction.
UNDERPERFORMING FIELD
120 ac, Brookston clay, 10 m tile (2012). Corn-soybean-wheat + cereal rye. 5-yr avg: 215 bu/ac. SOM: 4.1%. No compaction.
Prioritized Recommendations:
-
Retile to 10 m spacing at 90 cm depth (estimated yield response: 25–35 bu/ac)
-
Subsoil to 30 cm in dry conditions following retiling (additional 10–15 bu/ac)
-
Introduce winter wheat and cereal rye cover crop to rebuild organic matter
Example 2: Mixed Soil Operation — Wellington County
BENCHMARK FIELD
80 ac, Guelph loam, well-drained. No-till 12 years. SOM: 4.5%. Corn: 225 bu/ac. Excellent aggregate stability (4 min slake test).
UNDERPERFORMING FIELD
110 ac, Harriston silt loam, 6% slope. Conventional tillage. Corn: 180 bu/ac. Eroded knolls yield only 120 bu/ac. SOM: 1.8% on knolls.
Prioritized Recommendations:
-
Transition to no-till or strip-till to halt further erosion
-
Target eroded knolls with additional organic matter (manure, compost)
-
Implement multi-species cover crop program
The Value Proposition: ROI of Acting on FHCU Findings
Yield Improvement
Drainage improvement: 20-40 bu/ac corn
Compaction remediation: 10-30 bu/ac corn
Rotation diversification: 10-20 bu/ac corn
Erosion control on knolls: 15-40 bu/ac recovery
Input Cost Savings
Reduced N loss from better drainage: $15-25/ac
Eliminating P on high-test fields: $15-25/ac
N credits from legume cover crops: $20-40/ac
Lower fuel from reduced tillage: $5-15/ac
Long-Term Soil Capital
Organic matter building: +0.1% SOM/year
Structure improvement: measurable in 3-5 years
Erosion prevention: protecting irreplaceable topsoil
Land value: healthy soil increases farm valuation
Total Farm-Level Impact
The Numbers
On a 500-acre Ontario corn-soybean operation where 300 acres are underperforming by an average of 30 bu/ac, the annual unrealized revenue is approximately $49,500. Adding input savings brings the total annual opportunity to over $57,000. Over 10 years, the cumulative impact exceeds $500,000.
The Farmland Health Check-Up is free. The return on the time invested — typically 2–3 hours of field time with a Certified Crop Advisor — is potentially tens of thousands of dollars annually.
Connection to Ontario Programs
The Farmland Health Check-Up evaluates organic matter through several complementary approaches:
-
SARFIP— Funding for cover crops, buffer strips, and erosion control practices
-
Canadian Agricultural Partnership programs — Cost-share for drainage improvements and precision agriculture
-
OSCIA programs — Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association programs supporting soil health practices
What Happens After the Checkup
-
Review findings with your CCA or agronomist — Funding for cover crops, buffer strips, and erosion control practices
-
Develop an implementation plan — Start with highest-impact, lowest-cost changes
-
Connect to nutrient management planning — FHCU findings integrate directly with formal nutrient management plans
-
Apply for cost-share funding — Use FHCU documentation to support applications
-
Track progress — Repeat assessments over time to measure improvement
