HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-03-09 Minutes
CLARINGTON AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
THURSDAY, MARCH 12,2009
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Tom Barrie
Gary Jeffery
Donald Rickard
Ted Watson
Jennifer Knox
Ross McMaster
Eric Bowman
Brenda Metcalf
Mark Bragg
Mary Ann Found
Councillor Gord Robinson
1-4
REGRETS:
Henk Mulders
Orwin Bandstra
STAFF:
Faye Langmaid
Chair called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m.
Adoption of AQenda
09-07
09-08
da tcalf, seconded by Tom Barrie
nutes of the February 12, 2009 meeting be approved. "
Carried
Business
% loads resolution. Council referred to Directors of Engineering and Operations. Fred Horvath
would like a couple of members to sit down and meet with Tom Barrie, Ted Watson, Gary
Jeffery, and Councillor Robinson volunteered to meet with Fred.
Balewrap disposal. Issues with Ritson Road site have been reported to Durham Region and
are to have been addressed. Eric is taking another load in and will report at next meeting.
Agricultural Hall of Fame. Gary made contact with a Shirley Saar from the Pembroke area.
She was a recipient of the Agricultural Wall of Fame several years ago. She provided several
other names for follow-up. Renfrew holds this event every third year at present. The OFA and
several Producer Groups are in charge of it. Also received a name for a man in Pontiac County,
Quebec across the river from Renfrew County. They hold their event at the Shawville Fair. Gary
will contact other groups and obtain their criteria, Mary Ann will research what the Federation
has done in the past and report back, DRFA previously recognized farm families. It would be
more of a Regional base than just Clarington and does not have to happen on an annual basis.
Hemp growers (biomass). An article from Northumberland Today was circulated about a
meeting with hemp growers for the proposed processing plant in Northumberland. Depending
on the location, Bowmanville will most likely be on the outskirts of the catchment area, after 70
kilometers the cost of trucking would not be economical. Tom Barrie may attend the information
session, if so will provide an update at next meeting.
CORRESPONDENCE
REPORTS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES
2 load restrictions in
A letter from John O'Toole to Minister Bradley (MTO)
support of the resolution put forward by the committee.
407 Committee
The 407 Committee
Faye had a cou
of the over a
lane which s
the 407 and
committee re
the
the r and under passes. The width
into consideration is 6 metres (20') per
IS wider than in the previous sections of
ents from the agricultural community. The
underpasses.
The committ
if it is only b
busy the del
that the width
nto oad over the 407 (at the East Link) is going to be an issue
e cross-section. The members noted that because this road is so
hould farm equipment use it would not be appropriate, it is suggested
anded since the road is scheduled for widening in the future.
The agricultural lands in Hampton adjacent to Holt Road and south of the 407 will have to be
accessed off of Holt Road coming down from the Sixth Concession; that is how they are
accessed now, there is no way to get farm equipment in from the south.
The agricultural lands on Washington Road south of the 407 will have to be accessed off of
Washington will require clearing out of the road right of way from the horse farm north; currently
they are accessed from the north but will be cut off.
DAAC
Perry Sisson attended the last meeting and provided a presentation on flood management.
Durham Federation of AQ
Farm Connections April 7, 8, 9, they have 48 classes coming and another 24 on the waiting list.
Brenda will send poster to Faye for distribution. Everyone is welcome at the public session.
Recent survey by OFA shows that there is no difference between rural and urban residents and
their knowledge about agricultural practices; at one time rural residents understood agricultural
practices to a greater extent than urban residents but that is no longer true.
OTHER BUSINESS
Durham Grows: The proposed amendment to the Durham Region Official Plan to bring it into
conformity with the Places to Grow legislation includes some recommendations that go above
and beyond the Places to Grow legislation. That includes the identification of potential future
growth areas on the whitebelt between Bowmanville and Newcastle.
AACC
March 12, 2009
In addition, the Region has included in its Proposed Amendment new policies to recognize food
security. The Food Security Policy supports the retention of prime agricultural land. Committee
members discussed the future elimination of the agricultural lands between Bowmanville and
Newcastle and reiterated their position that it should be protected.
Moved by Tom Barrie, Seconded by Ross McMaster
09-09
The Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington is supportive of the proposed
policies and direction of the Food Security Policy, Repo No. 2009-P-17 for
Durham Region;
EFW: The onment Baseline Study has been released and is available on the website
for review 0 icking up a CD at the Regional Headquarters. Since many of the members of
the AACC provided agricultural products for the baseline study Faye reviewed the findings of
the study by showing a number of the charts from the study. Essentially the baseline study
provides confirmation of how high quality the agricultural products from this area are. The trace
metals that should be found are being found in the right concentrations and the elements that
should not be appearing are not.
In particular the proposed amendment to Sec
as follows: "Prime Agricultural Areas shall be
of the Region's economy and a secure sou
add a new Subsection
as a significant element
e thought behind the
October 9th, 2008
rowing Durham
tion 13.2.4 Specific Policy Area 0
e Proposed Amendment do not adhere to
rm p,-, n of prime agricultural areas and Clarington
st that they be deleted from the proposal.
Carried
The Committee inquired as to what follow-up and monitoring would be occurring. At this point
the recommendation of the consultants to Joint Waste Management Group and ultimately
Regional Council is that no ongoing monitoring of the ambient air quality, environmental
baseline and human bio-monitoring is necessary. The AACC would like to see ongoing
monitoring of the environmental baseline as this directly impacts many of the members
livelihoods (their crops, their produce). The EFW may have no anticipated effects but there
needs to be ongoing monitoring to show that is the case, especially since many members of the
public have already said that they would no longer buy local. Proving that there are no adverse
effects is the only way to allay peoples' fears. It has been proven over the long term that there
are no detrimental effects of Darlington, but samples are still taken and tested regularly. A
resolution will be prepared and circulated for next meeting.
Pesticides Act and Regulations: An article from the Windsor Star is attached to the minutes.
An update on the new legislation will be provided at a future meeting (May).
Assessments: The Landowners Association will be holding a meeting on Assessments on
Friday, March 20th at 7:00 p.m. at the Rickard Complex. Contact Ross for more information.
AACC
March 12,2009
FUTURE AGENDA
April Meeting- Invite John O'Toole to provide an update, Faye to update on OPG New Build
May Meeting- Gary will provide an update on the Pesticide Act and Regulations
Moved to adjourn
Eric Bowman
AACC
March 12, 2009
Eggheads: Clean out your desks
By Dan Gardner
Windsor Star Tuesday, March 10, 2009
These are tough times. We all need to economize, especially
governments. So I have a suggestion for finance ministers.
Fire all the scientists.
All of them. Just go through the ranks of the civil service, find everyone
with a PhO, and tell them to clean out their desks. Unless their PhO is in
philosophy or something. Those people can keep their jobs in the mailroom.
Who needs them, right? Not John Gerretsen.
Recently, Ontario's environment minister announced his government's
ban on the sale and use of pesticides will come into force on April 22. That's
Earth Day. Apparently the minister is going to save Gaia.
What makes this announcement particularly promising is that Gerretsen
confirmed that one of the pesticides that will be banned is 2,4-0. One of the
world's most common herbicides, 2,4-0 has been used since the Second War
and there's a small mountain of research on it.
And what does that small mountain say about 2,4-0? Well, like all
science, the evidence is often contradictory. And it's extremely complex.
Figuring out what it all means is a very tough job that can only be done by highly
trained people in broad consultation with other highly trained people.
If ever there were a good reason for governments to employ scientists,
assessing the safety of 2,4-0 would be it.
And as it turns out, the federal government does employ scientists to
assess the safety of pesticides. They work for Health Canada's Pest
Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA).
It further turns out that those scientists conducted a comprehensive review
of the research on 2,4-0.
Last spring, after the Ontario government announced its intention to ban
pesticides, but before it settled which pesticides would be banned, PMRA
released the conclusion of its very, very, expensive review: "There is reasonable
certainty that no harm to human health, future generations, or the environment
will result from use or exposure to this product."
That seems pretty clear. But Gerretsen and his government weren't
interested. They banned 2,4-0 anyway.
This clearly demonstrates that governments don't need scientists. They're
a waste of money, what with their big salaries and their labs and computers. Fire
the lot of them.
Think of the money we would have saved if, instead of funding PMRA to
review the science on 2,4-0, the federal government had told all those
Poindexters to get a real job. Drive a cab or something. Whatever. Just take
your PhO and your Bunsen burners and hit the bricks.
Of course this doesn't mean governments should abandon science. Oh
no. Everybody loves science. Even the McGuinty government.
AACC
March 12, 2009
In fact, when he introduced the pesticide ban, Gerretsen cited reviews of
the scientific literature produced by environmentalists and groups like the Ontario
College of Family Physicians.
Admittedly, the soon-to-be-unemployed scientists at the PMRA looked at
the same material and found it to be deeply flawed. In fact, when I spoke to
Leonard Ritter, a professor at the University of Guelph and a leading expert on
pesticides, he suggested some of the people doing that work weren't qualified. "I
don't offer patients advice on when they should have their gall bladder taken out.
And I sometimes think it would be better if physicians, largely family physicians,
who really have no training in this area at all, it would be better to leave the
interpretation of the data to people who are competent to do it."
Still, let's not get all worked up about "competence" and "agendas." What
matters is that by firing all the government scientists and letting third parties tell
politicians what the science says, taxpayers will save a bundle.
Conservatives may object. But that's only because the interested third-
parties informing government policy happen to be folks conservatives don't like.
But different governments can turn to different third-parties. So sometimes it will
be corporations deciding what the science says.
Everybody except government scientists, of course. But who needs
them? Right?
AACC
March 12, 2009