Ontario farmers claim they are ‘bullied’ by proposed neonics ban

In November, the Ontario premier’s office and the ministry of the environment and climate change revealed its plan to restrict the use of neonicotinoid seed treatments. The goal, referred to as “aspirational,” is to reduce the number of Ontario corn and soybean acres planted with the seed treatment by 80 percent by the year 2017. The details of the new rules, regulations and certification for using the pesticide will be determined by July 2015, the province says, following a two month consultation process running through December 2014, and January, 2015.

You’ll note I didn’t say that the ministry of agriculture, food and rural affairs is proposing this plan, even though, yes, technically it is. Want to know why? Because from what I saw yesterday, OMAFRA isn’t the lead on this even a little — premier Kathleen Wynne and her environment minister, Glen Murray, are. And if I were Jeff Leal, minister of agriculture, food and rural affairs, or an Ontario farmer, I’d be feeling more than a little bullied at this point.

Farmers are, understandably, upset over the coming regulations. Wynne and Murray are busy patting themselves on the back and reminding voters how great they are, while simultaneously disregarding what it means on the ground for farmers and the environment. How so? Read on.

A near-ban on neonics fails to consider the reasons the products were introduced in the first place, and what beneficial aspects they offer over past products. A near-ban fails to recognize the incredible amount of work already going in to adapting the farming operation to mitigate risks to pollinators (at farmers’ expense).

Read full, original article: Grown-Up Bullying Alive and Well in Ontario as Farmers Get Steamrolled Over Neonics

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_32_36-PM
Viewpoint: The state of U.S. vaccine policy? Dismal nationally, but some states are stepping up.
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-10.46.29-AM
Viewpoint: How to counter science disinformation? Science journalist offers 12 practical tips
Screenshot-2026-04-13-at-1.39.26-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Safer for children?’ Stonyfield yogurt under fire for deceptive organic marketing
the magic of mRNA
Viewpoint: Anti-vax fake ‘turbo cancer’ claims threaten cancer treatment breakthroughs
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_16_37-PM-2
Viewpoint: Are cancer rates ‘skyrocketing’ as RFK, Jr. and MAHA claim? The evidence says mostly the opposite
Picture1-1
Cooling the planet with balloons: Could a geoengineering gamble slow global warming?
artificial intelligence brain think illustration md
Viewpoint — Digital gods and human extinction: Will we be the first species ever to design our own descendants?
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-01_23_27-PM-2
Viewpoint: Will AI democratize personalized cancer treatment or fuel medical misinformation?
Defense_Secretary_Ash_Carter_tours_the_Microsoft_Cybercrime_Center_in_Seattle_March_3_2016
How criminals are using AI to target social media users and steal their money and confidential data
Screenshot-2026-04-23-at-11.00.36-AM
Regulators' dilemma: Thalidomide, Metformin, and the cost of getting drug approvals wrong
ChatGPT Image May 12, 2026, 01_21_30 PM
How big health brands are funding online medical misinformation 
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.