Comment
I have experience with both GLASI priority subwatershed project and with Growing Forward 2. I believe BMP implementation has been much more successful through the GLASI PSP model compared with GF2. I know many producers who were keen to do a BMP project through GF2 but did not want to go through all the paperwork. GLASI used CA staff as extension and this helped implementation immensely. CA staff was able to go through the application and claim process personally and this helped many producers get on board.
This is definitely apparent by the rise of 3rd party contractors that will complete GF2 applications on behalf of producers. This shows that the current GF2 framework isn't work and there needs to be more extension staff available to help producers apply.
[Original Comment ID: 211490]
Submitted February 13, 2018 10:50 AM
Comment on
New Horizons: Draft agricultural soil health and conservation strategy for Ontario
ERO number
013-1373
Comment ID
2119
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status