OP comment: Bernard Pope, Ontario Farmland Preservation

Comments on the Simcoe County Official Plan Draft

By Bernard Pope Ontario Farmland Preservation July 27, 2012

The Draft version of the Simcoe County Official Plan that was recently released by the County has the basis for general guidelines for the County and the lower tier municipalities in the County.

There are a number of areas, however, that leave too much room for interpretation and no mechanism for strict control. Many of the words and phrases appear to be included to placate the reader.

From my perspective, the authors do not seem to understand, that when dealing with Land Class as defined by the Canadian Land Inventory, this method of classification is old, outdated and in many cases completely wrong because of the methodology of extrapolation. The original scale of the survey was mapped at one inch per mile or 1:63,360.

It is no surprise, that the scientists at the University of Guelph, as well as the land planners at the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs acknowledge the inaccuracies of this system of guidance for land acquisition and use.

Because of modern farming practice, which includes tile drainage, organic incorporation into soil, minimum till, rotational grazing and rotational cropping, much or most of the land being farmed is of higher quality that in the years that Dr. Hoffman studied the soils of Simcoe County, in the 1960’s.

With the advent of modern testing methods, there is beginning to surface proof that grass-fed beef may have a higher ratios of Omega 3 to Omega 6 fatty acids. This leads to better use of grazing land and potentially better health for consumers of beef.

It follows logically, that the gap between the original soil surveys and the existing soil conditions is great enough to warrant an ongoing assessment and record of lands proposed for development. The Green Energy Act has used the Canadian Land Inventory to guide developers of renewable energy and great areas of good agricultural land are being lost because of this misdirection.

It further follows that if a parcel of land is proposed for development, that the proponent be required to present, as a first step, Site Specific FIELD Soil Studies to the Municipality, County and OMAFRA, to confirm the CLI mapping. This study should be provided by a Pedologist (Soil Scientist) who is accredited by OMAFRA and paid for by the County though funding by the proponent. The results of the study would then be incorporated into the new, updated CLI mapping system.

OMAFRA has stated that the updating of the CLI maps is in progress.

The questions for the County are these;

1- How will the County ensure that the modern designations of Land Class be included in the updated Official Plan and thereby erase doubts of what is prime agricultural land?

2- How will the County acknowledge in the Official Plan the value of the agricultural sector in the County, so it is clear to all, that agricultural land has to be protected and indeed preserved for the ongoing prosperity of farming and ranching families?

3- Will the County embark on a strategy of farmland preservation (trusts) for further generations? If not, why not? Ontario Farmland Trust is currently working with the County.

The Grow Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, as amended, states that all development should be built from a current settlement outward and that there should be an existing infrastructure (ie: transportation system, municipal water and sewage systems) and that ‘leapfrogging’ for future infill not occur.

The Plan also calls for justification for a development. That to the general public should mean that a development has a proven requirement. The council of the day should then authorize a multi consultant study with options for growth with accurate costing forecasts for each of the options accepted as worthwhile for study.

The above methodology would then be considered with direct, recorded public input and by that nature, be democratic. In other words, if a proposed project is needed, most will agree and the transparency of the procedure will be respected.

Mayor Jeff Lehman of Barrie has implemented this method for old Barrie and the annexed lands to the south and no doubt will win awards for this holistic planning.

The questions are as follows;

1- How will the County’s Official Plan ensure that decisions on development are based on growth outward from a community’s core and not from a distant proposal, far from the existing community?

2- How will the County’s study of need for development be financed?

3- How will the County ensure that the cost of infrastructure, required for development, not become a burden for existing tax payers?

4- How will the County ensure that there is full transparency in process with the involvement of the municipality, consultants and the public?

5- Since jobs are required for a complete community, will there be active recruiting for companies to establish in a community before there is residential development?

6- Since there is no existing infrastructure in many of the small areas of proposed development, why would the County allow private systems? Would this not encourage ‘leapfrogging’and thereby erode the intent of the Growth Plan?

7- Since many areas of the County are stable agriculturally, what compensation would be allotted to an enterprise that has invested greatly for the benefit of the next generation, who upon that investment had counted on a healthy prosperous livelihood? How can large modern agricultural equipment co-exist on urban type roads?

In summary, please be aware of the following;

– Dr. E.G.Pleva, addressing the Ministry of Environment in 1974, stated that Ontario had to have a farmland preservation policy by 1980

– The Provincial Policy Statement of 1996 made clear that agriculture and agricultural lands, in the Province had to be afforded protection

– The 1999 Economic Impact Study of Agriculture on the Economy of Simcoe County, by Harry Cummings and Associates, commissioned in part by the Simcoe County Board of Education, the Simcoe County Federation of Agriculture and Human Resources Canada, emphasized the importance of agriculture in Simcoe County. That report stated that for every dollar made from the prime producer(farmer), there was $1.95 made in support of farming. (An update of that study is pending)

– The Provincial Policy Statement of 2005 continue to make clear that agriculture and agricultural lands, in the Province, had to be afforded protection

– At the 2011 Annual General Meeting of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, in Toronto, the president, Mark Wales announced that agriculture in Ontario was now the number one value-added sector in the in Ontario

– Agricultural land is becoming more expensive and the prices are generally being set by farmers as reported in the August/September issue of Better Farming

It is clear that the County and the Municipalities are under great pressure from developers. These developers tend not to have responsibility in the community at the end of their project.

It is also clear that agriculture is most important, in not only the County, but the Province and Canada. As the world grows at an unsustainable rate, the food land is being lost and will not return. 

Historically, if a solution was to be found, society found a farmer.

It is of great importance that the County of Simcoe lead the way in allowing farmers to prosper and to set an example to the world that preservation of farmland is a most noble goal.

I urge the County Council and Staff to critically review how prosperity, not growth, should be the mandate of the Official Plan.

Bernard Pope

Ontario Farmland Preservation

bernard@ontariofarmlandpreservation.org