Under The Radar: Farmland in the Crosshairs

Friday, November 21, 2025

By Mary Loggan

Canada’s Department of National Defence (DND) has set its sights on Ontario farmland as part of a massive $38.6 billion plan to modernize NORAD, raising fears about the loss of some of the province’s best agricultural land.

At the core of the initiative is the Arctic Over the Horizon Radar (A OTHR), a surveillance system designed to detect missile and aerial threats across the Arctic and deep into North American airspace. To operate, the system requires large, flat parcels of land – and the DND has already begun acquiring farmland for its radar sites.

Two major agricultural properties have been purchased so far: A 163 hectare (400 acre) site in Kawartha Lakes and a 288 hectare (700 acre) site in Clearview Township. Officials estimate that about 4,000 acres will ultimately be needed for two transmission stations and two receiving stations, raising alarms in farm communities about who could be next.

The farmland grab comes at a time when Ontario is already losing an estimated 319 acres of farmland every day, sparking warnings about long term food security. Farmers say the prospect of more expropriations threatens not only their livelihoods, but also the future of rural communities that depend on agriculture.

Will we lose our farm?

The most immediate and pressing question for many Simcoe County farmers is: ‘Will the government take my land?’

Dan de Boer operates a cash crop and cow-calf operation on about 1,000 acres of prime farmland that borders some of the land the DND has already purchased.

“In late July, we received surveys asking whether we were interested in selling land and at what price,” de Boer recalls.

“That’s when the uncertainty started. It’s like a cloud hanging over the farm. We’re asking ourselves: Why are they sending these surveys now?

“Are they coming for more land next? The project needs around 4,000 acres total, with two 2,000-acre sites for transmit and receive stations, so the impact could be widespread.”

de Boer explains that farmers in the area are wondering whether to continue investing in their farms.

“Should we buy seed and equipment? Should we invest in new facilities?”

If the government were to purchase or expropriate land, farmers wonder if they would receive fair compensation and how difficult it would be to relocate.

“We don’t know if the government’s offer will ever match the value of what we lose – or if replacement land will even be available around here.

“Starting over is much harder than it sounds. Some farms have been passed through generations for 100 years.

“That means something to people.” de Boer also stresses the irreplaceable nature of prime agricultural land.

“Once farmland like this is lost, it’s lost forever. And that loss stretches beyond food production. It disrupts the whole community, from feed suppliers to grain elevators and vets. This is the lifeblood of the town.

“We all understand that national defence is important, but shouldn’t feeding the country be important, too? Why can’t we focus on doing both?”

Unanswered questions posed to DND officials at public meetings only deepen the uncertainty.

“We’re left wondering about drainage, flight restrictions, drone use, possible interference with GPS or large equipment, and potential health effects from radar emissions.

“Most of us don’t want to sell, but when you’re dealing with the government, it’s a different ballgame. You get the feeling they can do whatever they want.”

Rachel Brooks and her husband operate a cash-crop and sheep farm near the potential site and also received a survey.

She feels burdened by the project and all the uncertainty it presents. “I worry about what our future will look like if this project goes ahead. How do we move our home, family and business elsewhere? Where would we find the same quality of land and number of acres to replace those lost?

“My family has put 45 years of hard work and sacrifices into building our farm business into what it is today,” she explains.

“The decades of work, missed family events, investments put into soil and building improvements, livestock purchases – building a legacy for our three children and for generations to come - all for what? Just for it to be taken away. Losing our land would feel like all those years were for nothing.

“Farming is our way of life. It is our heart and soul.”

Brooks feels blindsided by the process. “The public meetings were poorly advertised. Many in the community hadn’t heard about the project or the acquisition plans until very late. And those who did attend the public meetings felt as though their questions and concerns went unanswered.”

One thing she did learn at the public meeting: “We were told the radar’s useful life might be only 30 years. How can they justify destroying generations of prime farmland for a project that may be short-lived?

“All Canadian taxpayers will be shouldering the load of the cost of this project. Is this truly how we want to see our hard-earned money spent?”

Her concerns extend beyond the farm gate.

“Where will displaced farmers go when there is no land available nearby?

“How long will it take to rebuild community, relationships, and infrastructure? The local community and economy – from feed mills to fuel supply, from schools to sports teams – are tightly linked to farming families.

“This project threatens to unravel that fabric.”

Potential challenges and further concerns

Farmers who remain in the vicinity could face new, complex challenges.

Paul Maurice, zone director for the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, outlined several operational concerns that many farmers share.

“Modern farming depends heavily on GPS, automated guidance systems, and reliable internet connectivity,” Maurice states.

“The radar stations could interfere with these crucial technologies. Without them, farming becomes less efficient and far more costly.

“Imagine tractors losing GPS signals or not being able to use them during critical planting or harvesting periods.”

Drainage and water management are also critical.

“Radar sites require preparation, such as levelling land and clearing obstructions. Changes in the landscape can alter natural water flow patterns, potentially flooding adjacent fields or harming wetlands that many farms depend on.”

He suggests that an agricultural impact assessment should be conducted on all proposed projects to properly understand and evaluate potential environmental and social issues.

Dave Ritchie, President of the Simcoe County Federation of Agriculture, raises concerns about environmental impacts and the rushed nature of consultations.

“The sites include wetlands and provincially protected natural areas. Any clearing or filling risks serious ecological damage,” Ritchie warns.

“The DND has promised environmental assessments, but this is a huge project moving quickly. Farmers feel they haven’t been adequately consulted or heard.”

He also shares concerns over potential restrictions on farm operations, ranging from flight restrictions on drones to limits on the movement of large equipment, and worries about radiofrequency emissions from the radars themselves.

“There is just so much we don’t know, but we do know there could be serious risks and farmers will be caught right in the crossfire.”

What is the DND doing to engage?

On its website, the DND indicates that it “hosted public engagement sessions to answer questions and provide details.”

Public engagement sessions were held in September in Kawartha Lakes and Clearview Township “to provide detailed information on the radar project and listen to residents’ concerns.”

The website indicates that “following feedback received at the community engagement sessions, the public engagement period has been extended by one month.”

Better Farming contacted the DND by email, seeking responses to farmers’ concerns, along with a response to “low turnout” at the public meeting, which some farmers suggested was perhaps the result of insufficient advertising of the event and farmers not being aware that a meeting was being held.

The following questions were asked:

• What information have you provided to farmers regarding concerns over losing their land or the potential implications to their operations?
• Many have reported a lack of awareness about the project or public meetings being held. What was done to communicate this?
• What would you say to farmers who fear the uncertainty of this project? Will there be any changes to communication methods?
• How do you plan to address the concerns of farmers and community members going forward?

Our questions were not acknowledged or answered, but Nick Drescher Brown, media relations, did respond with the following statement:

“The Department of National Defence (DND) is pleased with the strong public participation at the recent engagement sessions held in Kawartha Lakes and Clearview Township. We appreciate the thoughtful questions and valuable feedback, which contribute meaningfully to the ongoing dialogue. To ensure everyone has an opportunity to provide input, the public engagement period has been extended until Oct. 15. We encourage people to reach out.”

Community impact

While the project may pose numerous challenges for producers in the area, it could also impact the local economy and businesses.

Brooks emphasizes the economic interdependence of farms and local businesses.

“Farms support veterinarians, suppliers, mechanics, grain elevators, and local retailers. If thousands of acres go out of production, the entire local economy suffers.

“It’s not just crop loss. It’s a loss of jobs and small business revenue.

“Around here, farming supports our community and our way of life. You take it away, and everyone down the line could suffer. It isn’t just about what could happen to farmers and landowners. It’s about what could happen to the whole town, economy and community we live in.”

Ritchie agrees.

“Farming is not just a business; it’s a lifestyle and a community. Farming feeds our economy here, and it has for years. How are people going to adjust if this is taken away?”

Brooks also points to the impacts on the community if farmers are displaced from their land.

“Moving farms isn’t like moving a house. It means uprooting entire ways of life. The uncertainty puts stress on families, farmers, and rural towns.”

Brooks says that getting displaced from her farm would be her biggest fear come true.

“We are so involved with our town and community here; we participate in local events and teams, and our children go to school here. If we were forced to relocate, there are no places for us to go around here.

“We would be forced to start over from scratch, far away. Pulled away from our community and family.”

The fight to come

Ontario has been losing farmland at a staggering rate. Across Canada, over 3.5 million acres of farmland vanished between 2001 and 2021, and much of it was top-tier Class 1 and 2 soils.

Maurice warns, “Farmland is a finite resource. Once it’s gone, there is no getting it back. We cannot continue to sacrifice food production capacity, especially given global uncertainties.”

Farm groups and community leaders are calling for better planning, transparency, and mandatory agricultural impact assessments before projects like A-OTHR proceed.

Maurice urges farmers to raise their voices. “Write letters to MPs, engage in public consultations, and make sure your concerns are heard at every level of government.”

Ritchie issued a firm message: “Politeness has not saved farmland – it’s time for organized resistance. The future profitability of family farms and food security depends on it.”

For de Boer, the issue cuts straight to the heart of national security.

“If we don’t grow enough food to feed Canadians, how can we protect them? Real defence begins with saving our farms.” BF

SIDEBAR:

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Canada’s Defence Department is buying Ontario farmland for radar stations under its $38.6 billion NORAD upgrade, raising fears about losing prime farmland forever.
• Farmers near purchased sites worry about expropriation, fair compensation, and whether they can keep investing in their operations amid the uncertainty.
• Concerns run beyond land loss to possible GPS disruptions, drainage changes, environmental impacts, and restrictions on farm practices.
• The DND states that they value public input, while farm groups warn the project threatens rural economies and long-term food security (they are calling for more farmer input and impact assessments). BF