Grass, it’s safe to say, is the Rodney Dangerfield of crops. Like the old-time Borscht Belt comedian who spat out one-liners while twisting his tie, it’s part of the landscape. Its shtick is too familiar. It gets no respect.

I was reminded of this at a meeting that brought scientists and farmers together. The science types – most of them studying grassland birds – were using the jargon of their trade. They divided farm fields into “intensive agriculture,” including corn, soybeans, and horticulture, and “non-intensive agriculture,” – hayfields and pastures.

            The lingo carried on until, late in the day, Lambton County cattleman and cash cropper Chad Anderson stood up and cleared his throat. This whole “intensive non-intensive” thing, he said, really stuck in his craw. Grass is not a second-class citizen, he said. Getting the most out of pasture demands sophisticated management, intensive management, and at least as much or more brainpower than any other crop. Then there are the ancillary benefits of more grass on the landscape: soil fertility, water quality, carbon sequestration, and sustenance for everything from pollinators to birds and wildlife.

            But grass is just grass. It so often draws a shrug, even from the people charged with maximizing its benefits. One example, thoroughly covered by Trevor Herriot, is the federal shutdown of the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA). Closer to home is Ontario’s decision to go from two employees who help farmers manage pastures and hayfields, to just one. The following is adapted from a column I wrote about the issue in the Ontario Farmer, the province’s major farm weekly newspaper.

Saskatchewan has eight forage or pasture specialists. Manitoba has five. Alberta has four, backed by additional folks funded by the province’s Agricultural Research and Extension Council. And Ontario? Until last year, we had two: forage specialist Joel Bagg, and grazier rep. Jack Kyle. Now, with both retired, their roles are being combined into a single position.

Prudent spending is a good thing, but asking one person to cover the entire forage and pasture spectrum is like assigning first base and shortstop to the same ball player: the skills are different, and there’s too much ground to cover. In Ontario, forage and pasture ranges across 3.7 million acres, stretching across an area bigger than many European countries. Not to mention the 1,975-km, 21-hour drive from one side of the province to the other.

But if the task is big, the upside is greater. As the Canadian Forage and Grassland Assn. (CFGA) points out, one extra day on pasture for the country’s cow-calf herd puts an extra $3.5 million in the pockets of cattlemen. Spinoff benefit extend well beyond the farm. Want a cleaner Lake Erie? Put more perennial grasslands in the watershed. Want to buffer climate change or make room for birds and bees? Grasslands do that, too.

Meanwhile, there are grass-focused projects on Ontario’s horizon, projects that could use the help of an expanded corps of agricultural advisors. Beef Farmers of Ontario is pushing to add 100,000 cows to the provincial herd. Whether those cows are in the south or the north, they’ll need more grass. Also in the planning stages is Ontario’s 75,000-acre grassland stewardship initiative, designed to slow the loss of grassland birds and other species depending on hayfields, pastures, meadows and prairies.

So I’m mildly surprised, and more than a little miffed, that the province’s agriculture ministry decided to spend less in the area where there’s so much need, and so much demand.

But being overlooked is nothing new for grass. As Laura Rance wrote in the Winnipeg Free Press, pastures, hayfields and ranges are the “stay-at-home mom” of agriculture – the hardworking, supportive crop that’s taken for granted. You can see this in the way grassland research is funded. Between 1992 and 2007, Canada’s publicly-funded forage research fell by about $44 million annually.

If nothing else, the ministry’s decision has farm groups talking about forage extension, with commodity groups including the beef, dairy, and sheep sectors opposing the move. As the Ontario Forage Council’s Ray Robertson says, “one person cannot possibly cover both the forage and grazier positions in Ontario, and do the job that is truly needed.”

“The forage and grassland sector covers the largest acreage of any crop grown in Canada, and it’s so critical to both the short and long-term sustainability of our soils and the environment,” he adds. “Yet government technical support for forages is lagging far behind other commodities.”

I’d like to think grass can’t be ignored for long – its potential is just too great. Forages and pastures already contribute over $975 million to the bottom line of Ontario farms, according to a 2012 report. Improvements in management, backed by research and extension, can only increase those returns. For the grassroots farmers who value pastures and forages, it’s time to root for grass.

-30-