Yes, there are alternatives to landfill sites

Letter to Bradford Times March 12 2010
I read with interest the perspective on Dump Site 41 put forward by Deputy Mayor Roughley and Mayor White.
Deputy Mayor Roughley is correct in pointing out that Site 41 was selected before the County took over in 1990 and that the MOE agreed it was a good site. He failed to say the Environmental Assessment Joint Board called the site selection process a fiasco and found there had been a predisposition to select Site 41, which suggested bias. 
The selection and final approval of Site 41 was only the direct result of the intervention of the Provincial Government.
Deputy Mayor Roughley asks – why wouldn’t he agree with the “science” and the MOE?  We all now know that the calibrated model used to approve the site design was never seen by the peer reviewers, including the MOE who issued the Certificate of Approval. The County has failed to access the calibrated model from consultant Jagger Hims (Genivar), preferring to take the Information and Privacy Commissioner to court. The lack of transparency makes all of the science suspect.
Dr. David Charlesworth, hydrogeologist for the Site 41 Community Monitoring Committee, called the calibrated model fundamentally flawed. 
So the opponents of Site 41, “in Roughley’s belief,” didn’t have any alternatives?
In 1990, the Why WYE citizens’ group proposed North Simcoe as a Demonstration Community. “Say no to Landfill. There is another way.” The Provincial Government was in support, but the County wanted Site 41 and chose to ignore the obvious: Zero Waste.
In 2005, when Deputy Mayor Roughley served as Warden of Simcoe County, the Minister of Environment Laurel G Broten wrote to the County of Simcoe and encouraged them to consider new and emerging technologies. More recently Zero Waste Simcoe has lobbied the County of Simcoe to become engaged.
Yes, alternatives have been proposed.
Yours sincerely
Stephen Ogden