Impacts on Agriculture and Farmers



ALTO HSR · Executive Summary · Agricultural Impacts

Impacts on Agriculture and Farmers from the ALTO High-Speed Rail Southern Corridor

Eastern Ontario — farm severance, land loss, and the lessons of HS2

⚠ Breaking: Canada’s Farm Organizations Call for Project Suspension

On March 3, 2026, the Beef Farmers of Ontario announced formal opposition to the ALTO project, following a resolution passed by members at their Annual General Meeting on February 19. BFO On February 27, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture and l’Union des producteurs agricoles issued a joint call for the immediate suspension of the ALTO project. On February 25, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture passed a resolution at its Annual General Meeting urging the Government of Canada to halt the project. OFA/UPA Joint Statement

Critical Finding

The ALTO southern corridor would bisect Eastern Ontario’s agricultural heartland with a continuously fenced, impassable rail line. At 300 km/h, no level crossings are possible. OFA Farms will be permanently severed. The UK’s HS2 project affected 213 farm holdings NFU UK — and farming families reported “generational devastation.” NFU HS2

February – March 2026

Canada’s farming organizations call for project suspension

In a coordinated national response, Canada’s major agricultural organizations have moved from concern to formal opposition — calling for the ALTO high-speed rail project to be suspended until meaningful assessment and consultation with affected farming communities has taken place.

Ontario’s farmland is a strategic provincial and national asset, and the highest and best use of our arable land is for agriculture — and let’s not forget that agriculture and agri-food is a cornerstone of Ontario’s economic prosperity.

— Drew Spoelstra, President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture OFA

Projects deemed to be of ‘national interest’ must not compromise the vitality of rural communities, the long-term viability of agricultural businesses and farmland, maple and forestry potential, or the food security of the population, which should be the true priority. Mirabel Airport is an example that should not be repeated.

— Martin Caron, President General, l’Union des producteurs agricoles OFA/UPA

The OFA and UPA joint statement demands that provincial and federal governments and Alto:

Stay out of prime agricultural areas

The proposed alignment is currently planned through some of the most productive farmland in Ontario and Quebec.

Avoid breaking farms into smaller pieces

Keep fields and farm operations whole.

Protect farm drainage systems

Tile drainage is essential for crop production across the corridor.

Address construction impacts and ongoing costs

Including fencing and the building, upgrading, and long-term maintenance of safe farm crossings for equipment and livestock.

Ensure independent, thorough, and publicly available agricultural impact assessments

Before route selection, not after.

CFA Resolution — February 25, 2026

The Canadian Federation of Agriculture’s Annual General Meeting passed a resolution urging the Government of Canada to immediately halt the proposed project to allow for a thorough economic, social, and environmental impact assessment. The resolution further states that if the project proceeds, it must ensure full access to farmland, maple groves, and woodlands with properly sized agricultural crossings (minimum 10 metres) and fair, proportional compensation recognizing that HSR’s permanent impact is more significant than highways or transmission lines. OFA/UPA Joint Statement

BFO Resolution — February 19, 2026

Members of the Beef Farmers of Ontario voted strongly in favour of a resolution at their Annual General Meeting on February 19 calling on BFO to formally oppose the proposed project. On March 3, BFO announced it stands united with the OFA and UPA in calling on the Government of Canada and the federal Minister of Transport to immediately halt the ALTO project. BFO warns the proposed route would cut through key beef-producing counties across central and eastern Ontario, expropriating and dividing farms with a fenced rail corridor, closing local roads, disrupting wildlife movement, and delivering no clear social or economic benefit to the affected rural communities. BFO

Scale of representation

The OFA represents 38,000 farm families across Ontario. The UPA represents 42,000 agricultural producers and 163,000 forest landowners across Quebec. Together with the CFA and BFO, these organizations represent the vast majority of affected agricultural producers in both provinces. OFA/UPA BFO

The Problem in Numbers

Agricultural impact at a glance

~2,800
farms in the four affected counties (Frontenac, Lennox & Addington, Hastings, Leeds & Grenville)
~12 ac/km
of farmland permanently removed by dedicated HSR right-of-way
$51B
annual contribution of Ontario’s agriculture and agri-food sector to the provincial economy
Why the Southern Route Harms Farmers

Six ways the corridor damages agricultural operations

⛔ Impassable barrier

3-metre security fencing along entire corridor. No level crossings at 300 km/h. OFA Farms split in two with equipment and livestock unable to cross. CBC

🚧 Road destruction

Thousands of daily construction truck trips on roads designed for farm equipment. Spring weight restrictions compress hauling into fewer months.

💧 Drainage disruption

200 km linear excavation intercepts tile drain and watershed systems across hundreds of farms. Waterlogging and crop loss for years. OFA The OFA/UPA joint statement specifically calls for protection of farm drainage systems essential for crop production. OFA/UPA

📉 Blight & uncertainty

From announcement to construction could be 10+ years. Property values fall, credit tightens, farm investment freezes immediately. NFU UK, HS2 Phase 2 evidence

🌾 Land loss

1,000–1,500+ acres of active farmland permanently removed — in a region that lost 15.4% of Frontenac’s cropland between 2011 and 2021. StatCan Census 2021

What HS2 Taught Us

The UK’s HS2 project provides direct evidence of what happens when HSR is built through farmland

The UK’s National Farmers’ Union documented the impact of HS2 Phase 1 (London–West Midlands) on agricultural businesses over a decade of planning, construction, and compensation disputes. NFU Archive

213 agricultural holdings directly affected along the London–West Midlands route. NFU UK

Compensation chronically delayed; crop loss payments outstanding years after construction. NFU Evidence Session

Farmers reported to Parliament as “feeling suicidal” from prolonged uncertainty and broken commitments. NFU Select Committee

A chronic lack of respect for farm businesses, which are often viewed as just being in the way.

— CLA Surveyor, HS2 Parliamentary Evidence NFU Evidence Session

UPA President invokes Mirabel precedent

In the OFA/UPA joint statement, UPA President General Martin Caron specifically cited Mirabel Airport as an example that should not be repeated — a direct reference to the expropriation of over 97,000 acres of prime Quebec farmland in 1969 for an airport that was eventually demolished, with much of the land never returned to agriculture. OFA/UPA

Eight Recommendations

What must be in place before route selection

1

Agricultural Impact Assessment

Map every affected farm before route selection. The OFA/UPA joint statement demands assessments that are independent, thorough, and publicly available. OFA/UPA

2

Binding Farm Access Guarantee

Grade-separated crossings every 2 km, built before construction severs farms. The CFA resolution requires properly sized agricultural crossings (minimum 10 metres). CFA

3

Enhanced Compensation

Going-concern value, not just land price; capital gains tax relief. The CFA resolution demands fair, proportional compensation recognizing HSR’s permanent impact is more significant than highways or transmission lines. CFA

4

Anti-Blight Protections

Guaranteed purchase at pre-announcement value; interim income payments. NFU HS2 Phase 2 response

5

Construction Protections

Enforce spring weight limits; independent agricultural liaison with stop-work authority. The OFA/UPA demand that farmers’ concerns about construction impacts and ongoing costs be addressed — including fencing and safe crossing maintenance. OFA/UPA

6

Independent Agricultural Commissioner

Binding dispute resolution without requiring farmer litigation. NFU demanded this of HS2

7

Mitigation Land Limits

Cap environmental offset land take from productive farmland. Full access must be maintained to farmland, maple groves, and woodlands. CFA

8

High-Performance Rail Study

Assess 200 km/h alternative that allows level crossings and avoids severance. AGCanada

Bottom Line

Canada’s farm organizations have spoken — suspend this project

Alto prefers the southern route because agricultural land is cheaper to build on than Canadian Shield granite. The construction savings are captured by the project; the costs are borne by rural communities that will never board the train.
The OFA, UPA, CFA, and BFO — representing 80,000+ farm families and 163,000 forest landowners across Ontario and Quebec — have formally called for the project to be suspended.
The CFA resolution demands a thorough economic, social, and environmental impact assessment and meaningful consultation with affected agricultural, forestry, and rural communities before the project proceeds.
If Canada builds HSR, it must treat farming communities fairly. These eight recommendations provide the framework — but only if adopted before the route is selected.

Submit your comments by April 24, 2026 →