"I have read the Agricultural Plan and proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 1597, 2011 in great detail. I stand unabashedly opposed to almost every aspect of this plan. I find the information provided to Coldstream residents by the Coldstream Ratepayers Association to be a grossly oversimplified explanation of what is a very complex topic. It is unfortunate that this association has the ability to draw the inference that somehow you are not pro agriculture if you are against this OCP. I am frustrated that there appears to be no forum for a rational debate on the long term implications of Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 1597, 2011, or the fact that this Agricultural Plan flies in the face of current world environmental guidelines for the preservation of sustainable agriculture.
My views on the New Rural Ten (RU.10) Zone are as follows:
a) In Coldstream it appears that the larger the farm parcel the more likely it is that the parcel is in forage crop (if it is farmed at all). From a water conservation point of view, forage crop is among the most water intensive crops farmed in the Okanagan. Irrigation of forage crops results in a large percentage of water loss due to evaporation, wind drift, leaks in pipe, and improper rotation of irrigation equipment. Forage crops are extremely reliant on chemical fertilizers and are extremely labour intensive to farm organically.
b) Drip irrigation systems are ideally suited to the Okanagan climate and function optimally on parcel sizes of one to 5 acres. Limiting the creation of smaller parcels, which will grow less water intensive crops, will result inevitably in the restriction of agricultural water to all users or the cost of that water to increase to the point where crops cannot be profitable. If the climate keeps getting drier and the population base keeps increasing you simply cannot keep irrigating forage crops using conventional irrigation methods – we will run out of water.
The David Suzuki Foundation has promoted research by Chappell and Lavalle which showed that “ small farms using alternative agricultural techniques may be two to four times more energy efficient than large conventional farms." Perhaps most interesting is that they also found studies demonstrating "that small farms almost always produce higher output levels per unit area than larger farms." Volumes of research clearly show that small-scale farming, especially using "organic" methods, is much better in terms of environmental and biodiversity impact.” I take exception to the idea that somehow small plot farming degrades sustainability. Sustainable agriculture rests only on a willingness to cultivate. Large lot size has no influence on this – or can be a detriment as it is much harder to farm organically. Even when farmed non-organically, large parcels present problems in terms of finding labour. Owner / operators can often farm small parcels themselves. It is almost impossible to find local labour willing to work agricultural jobs for minimum wage, leading to the importing of migrant farm workers and all of the attendant social problems that entails.
I read the Western Producer whenever I can. The National Farmers Union of Ontario has this to say about the rising price of farmland – “
A global land-grab is underway, one in which farmland in an
increasing number of countries is rapidly passing out of the hands of local farmers and into the hands of distant elites... In coming decades, if Canadian (and global) farmland is allocated on the basis of “ability to pay,” it will
not be allocated to local farm families.” Increasing the parcel size of ALR land puts the price of that land far above what the average Canadian can pay. Hence my reference in my email – “This OCP makes it harder for the smaller farmer to find ALR to farm. It does not protect farm land – just the opposite. It just provides the wealthy a chance for estate homes.”. Coldstream should strive to be “Rural Living at its Best” for all – not just the 1% that will soon be the only ones able to afford to live here.
In response to the new Rural Thirty (RU.30) Zone – I believe that sustainable agriculture is only achievable if the more productive farmland pieces are left for agricultural use, and human habitation is on the rocky sloped areas of the valley unsuitable for farming. From China Today March 30, 2012 - “In order to protect both local economic development and the country's shrinking farmland, Yunnan moved industrial construction and fast urbanization to the barren mountains, then governor and now the newly elected Party chief of Yunnan province, Qin Guangrong said. "It is the trend that construction for economic development is being moved to the hills while good arable land is being preserved to be used by the next generations," Seriously – how bad is it that China has a better grasp of environmental policy than we do?
I have read Maria Besso’s email of March 29, 2012. While I have no doubt that this lady is passionate about this OCP, the reality is that she appears to have not done much research on small plot agriculture. It is also clear that she does not live next to a large scale agricultural operation. I live on Buchanan Road – next to the large orchard and down from the gravel pit. I should invite her for coffee sometime during cherry season when the cannons are going off every seven seconds. Maybe if we’re lucky, a good breeze will be blowing and she can see what the Dustbowl Years really looked like. Logically, her arguments fail in the following ways:
a) Market forces determine the optimal utilization of all economic resources. If 77.6% of all ALR land in Coldstream is four hectares or less, this is because the residents of Coldstream have determined that these are the parcels they wish to purchase and this is the way they want to live. The ALC obviously concurred, as otherwise many of these parcels would not exist. The 184 owners of parcels in excess of four hectares should not have to bear the economic burden of providing pastoral views, while the majority of landowners sit on their already subdivided lots.
b) If, as Ms. Besso states, the ALC for all practical purposes does not approve any subdivision, then Bylaw Amendment 1597, 2011 is a superfluous piece of unneeded legislation. The ALC is funded by taxpayer dollars. It appears to be doing the job for which it was created. Why does this council believe it requires an additional layer of bureaucracy to enforce a provincially mandated policy which is seemingly already adequately enforced ?
c) Ms. Besso never once explains the advantages of ten hectare parcels over two hectare parcels from an agricultural point of view. This appears to be the heart of the matter. Without this information, the whole exercise is moot.
There are so many innovative ways to approach this problem. I know you are on council – have your colleagues review some of the planning decisions from Monterey County or South Livermore Valley California for example. In South Livermore valley for every acre and housing unit developed within a specific urban area, one acre of farm or ranch land in a designated rural area must be preserved under conservation easements and be planted in wine grapes, both at developer expense. That’s pretty amazing. If you are going to go totalitarian – try that. This OCP will affect residents of Coldstream for years to come. I would appreciate some intelligent debate prior to the third reading – we are a democracy after all.
Hopefully this gives you an idea of why I responded to the Coldstream Ratepayers Association mail out.
Roxanne Ronan"
"Are we a democracy?" asks Kia, or is that past tense?"
If you're a Coldstream acreage owner, you may doubt that we are a democracy.
Details on Coldstream Council's changes to the 2009 Agricultural Plan are here: http://www.districtofcoldstream.ca/notices/120314_agricultural_plan.php
Thank you for your thoughtful letter, Roxanne!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Share YOUR thoughts here...