The big pit
The quarry’s effect on fish and wildlife is also of vital concern. John Werring is a Vancouver-based aquatic habitat specialist with the David Suzuki Foundation. It was his job to respond to Highland’s 3,100-page application last spring and send it to MNR by the April 26 deadline. (The public was given a month and a half to comment on the application. The ministry eventually extended the deadline to July 11.) “It is important to note,” Werring wrote in his letter of objection, “that this section [downstream from the quarry lands] of the Pine River will be destroyed if the project is to proceed as planned.”
Werring’s main worry is about the fish, mostly brook and rainbow trout, that live in the river. “The Pine River is primarily fed by groundwater,” he explains. “They [Highland] are going to increase the stream temperature, which will change the entire dynamic of the water downstream.”
Werring is also critical of the wildlife surveys, undertaken as far back as 2008 by Highland’s environmental consultants, Edmonton-based Stantec Consulting Ltd. “They need to go back at different times of the year,” says Werring. “They say there’s no fish habitat [on the quarry land] but they have no data.” He expressed the same concerns about surveys Stantec conducted in 2008 of amphibians and of two at-risk bird species, the Henslow’s sparrow and the bobolink, insisting that “the project should be subjected to a detailed environmental review” before a licence is granted (see sidebar, page 35).
When I contact Stantec to ask about the surveys, the company’s media relations officer, Rachel Sa, says that the “gentleman who did the consulting work for Highland no longer works for us.” She adds that she’s not at liberty to tell me who he is and that Stantec does not discuss its work for clients with the media.
Now that the official comment period has ended, Highland has two years to address the concerns expressed by the thousands of letter writers who have objected, including Werring and Anne Bell, director of conservation and education at Ontario Nature. “Given the scale of the proposed development, we believe that it demands unprecedented review and consultation, with clear proof and broad agreement about how to mitigate unacceptable impacts,” wrote Bell.
Clearly, it’s going to be a long fight. (A recent OMB decision denying an application for a much smaller quarry in Caledon came on the heels of a decade-long battle.) But Cosack is resolute that the community will stop Highland. “Big business cannot do what it wants when it comes to food and water. They think this is a small, uneducated community and if they give a new clock to the arena, we’ll be happy. But we are all working together to stop this insane project.”
What you can do
On blustery, sunny Earth Day last April 22, more than 300 people (and a few horses) gathered at Queen’s Park in Toronto before heading out on a 120-kilometre Stop the Quarry walk. Five days later, the group emerged from the fog and drizzle to end the protest walk at a Shelburne-area farm. In all, more than 1,000 protesters of all ages had joined the march in order to draw attention to the proposed mega-quarry in Melancthon Township.
The event drew considerable media attention to the issue and resulted in the Ontario government granting a 75-day extension (until July 11) to the official objection period.
That period has now passed, but the North Dufferin Agriculture and Community Taskforce (NDACT), which is spearheading the effort to stop the Melancthon megaquarry, still needs your help. The organization is desperately short of funds. In the words of NDACT member Sandi Wong, “NDACT needs money to fight this. It has retained lawyers who have to be paid. Highland has a water expert; we have to have a water expert. They have a blasting expert; we have to have a blasting expert. We, the citizens, have to come up with the money to fight this.”
Here’s what you can do:
- Purchase (for $10) and display a Stop the Quarry sign from NDACT.
- Write to or e-mail any, or all, of the following people:
Premier Dalton McGuinty dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
Sylvia Jones, MPP for Dufferin-Caledon sylvia.jones@pc.ola.org
John Wilkinson, Minister of the Environment jwilkinson.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
Linda Jeffrey, Minister of Natural Resources ljeffrey.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
In your e-mail or letter, express your concerns and end with a statement such as the following: “Since this is the largest quarry application ever filed in Ontario, I request that you elevate this file to a full environmental assessment. Please give this request your full attention.”
C.R.
Sandi Wong pours me a glass of wine as we sit on her lofty deck and brush away the occasional blackfly. In the fields that fall away from the house, I can hear the unmistakable trill of bobolinks staking out their nesting territories in the long grass.
“You know what they call the soil they push away to get at the limestone?” she asks. “It’s called ‘overburden.’ Isn’t that sick? As though there’s something wrong with it.” The spectre of this quarry has clearly taken over the couple’s lives. “You know what?” she says. “I don’t paint anymore.”
“We are fighting as hard as we can,” says Wolfson, “but there’s no money. It’s stupid that ordinary citizens would have to pay to fight against a big company like Highland.”
Are you NIMBYs? I ask. “Yes,” says Wong, “but that’s not why we’re fighting it.”
“This is in everyone’s backyard,” says Wolfson. “My heroes are the guys fighting this every day – farmers like Carl and Dave and Ralph. We can walk away, but they can’t. Some families have been farming here since the 1850s. They made the decision to stay on the land.”
Wong shows me a printout of a chart Highland has released on noise levels. On a scale of 1 to 10, it rates a slamming door as 1. It rates hammering as 4. Jumping up and down as 9. And blasting, the sound of blowing up limestone six days a week? That gets a 1.
“If it wasn’t so terrible,” says Wong, “I’d be laughing.”
Cecily Ross is a freelance writer living in Creemore, which is downstream from the proposed Melancthon quarry. She is also editor of Food In The Hills magazine.
Derek Armstrong on Wed, 24th Aug 2011 8:04 pm
We must fight the mega quarry to the end. It’s rape of the land and destruction of an entire ecosystem. Interetingly, though, you mentioned the “In the far distance, I can make out a stand of wind turbines. Despite the controversy the towers have been generating over the past few years, they are beginning to look insignificant – ” Maybe not so insignifcant. Just received on Friday a letter “NOTICE OF PROPOSAL” to develop the overlapping and surrounding land around the quarry as a monstrous wind farm called DUFFERIN WIND POWER PROJECT. I was so upset about the whole thing, and the loss of control over our own communities we’re experiencing, I started a new site http://dufferinwindpower.com. It’s meant to inform as information comes out before and after the public meetings on Sept 12-15. One more thing to fight!
Barbara Springgay on Thu, 25th Aug 2011 2:24 pm
Thank you for researching/writing this article. It provides an accurate picture of this ultra-rich farmland and this huge and potentially disastrous proposal. I would love to see an article that features an interview with a farmer or several farmers……from those who sold and later learned that the farmland was not intended for potato use, those who represent potato crops, dairy, beef, and market garden crops………for whom this Class 1 farmland is their businesses, their home 7 days a week, 12 months a year, and the place where they too intended to retire. The negative impact on their life/plans as well as the population from Orangeville to Collingwood and the Georgina Bay needs to be reported over and over again. Thank you for starting this discussion in ON Nature. I look forward to future articles from you.
Sandi Wong on Fri, 26th Aug 2011 4:48 pm
Thanks to Cecily for a clear, well researched article that draw attention to this horrendous proposal.
This proposed site is upstream, upwind and ABUTTING the Niagara Escarpment, the Greenbelt and the UNESCO biosphere; yet it is beyond protection under current legislation. This must change.
The few jobs that Highland/Baupost promises will never replace the art tourism and recreational, not to mention farm and food jobs it will take.
Ontarians can never turn over control our precious resources of farmland and water to anyone; not least a Boston hedge fund, who has no regard for our citizens’ future or well being.
Sue Ennis on Sat, 27th Aug 2011 2:20 pm
Thank you for a balanced report on the mega quarry proposal. While no one denies the need for aggregates, the shortcoming of the Aggregate Resources Act is that it allows companies to proceed without a full Environmental Assessment. This needs to be changed. The significant potential impacts to our quality of water cannot be ignored.
There are too many places in the world where the fight for clean healthy water has been lost. Ontario should not be one of those places.
Sue Ennis
Jim Montgomery on Fri, 2nd Sep 2011 10:21 pm
This quarry proposal is outrageous – thank you for educating those of us who value and advocate for the remainimg arable land in Ontario. Well done. From these endangered landscapes future generations will lose food production for themselves and for export. Do not let people accuse you of a “not in my back yard” selfish form of activism, as the issue is universal.
I would urge you to consider raising the international profile of the Big Pit by linking to:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/contact/
and asking them to consider it as a “suggestion for a new campaign”
Please continue to keep us informed.
Austin Whitten on Mon, 5th Sep 2011 11:52 am
The Toronto Star carried a backgrounder story in April – http://www.thestar.com/news/article/979570–potato-farmer-proposes-mega-quarry
The patchwork nature of what has been assembled is obvious from the map in the planning report for the project, available at http://highlandcompanies.ca/images/uploads/pdf/application/02_Planning_Rationale_Report_and_Aggregate_Resources_Act_Summary_Statement.pdf
If you want to support opposition to the mega quarry, there is an upcoming event you can attend:
Foodstock Melancthon Township October 16, 2011 – Canadian Chefs’ Congress:
On October 16th, 2011 we will gather 20,000 people on the remaining Melancthon farmland that did not sell out to the Highland Companies. Hosted by over 70 of Canada’s top chefs from around the country, this event will celebrate Ontario’s bounty of food and water and the connection between producers and consumers of local food. To get more information or for tickets visit: http://canadianchefscongress.com/
I’m working through Culinarium, Toronto’s only purely locavore food store – http://www.culinarium.ca/ – organising a bus leaving from Toronto to attend the event. If you are interested, contact me at awhitten@rogers.com
Bronwyn Fitz-James, Architect on Wed, 7th Sep 2011 4:40 pm
It seems that we architects should take a stand against “dirty” limestone, concrete and gravel products. If we have begun paying attention to the stewardship of forest products, why we do not already have a similar set of standards for aggregates is a mystery. I applaud the efforts of “the Ontario Stone, Sand and Gravel Association, collectively known as the Aggregate Forum,(who have) announced the development of a certification program that will enhance standards of environmental stewardship and community engagement across Ontario’s aggregate industry.”
I can’t wait to see this come into effect as it offers some insurance that the same folly might be not be undertaken again in the future.
Clearly there is a better way to get limestone products to build with. Lets label the responsible manufacturers and add them to the Leed points program.
George Powell on Thu, 22nd Sep 2011 5:31 pm
I have been attending the Walker and MAQ proposed new quarry application hearings in the Blue Mountain (Collingwood) area. The Walker Hearing was before the Consolidated Hearing Board and was opposed by the Niagara Escarpment Commission, a private citizen, Clearview Community Coalition, a local group of citizens and the Blue Mountain Watershed Trust (BMWT). Final statements were submitted in July of this year after 13 months of deliberation, well beyond the 21/2 months originally thought to be required and at great expense to those opposing the hearing. The MAQ hearing is presently before the Ontario Municipal Board and is opposed by Grey Matters, a local coalition of concerned citizens, the BMWT and a Grey County planning organization. Testimony is scheduled to be complete by October 20th of this year. Both these quarries are sited at the headwaters of major area watercourses and have Provincially Significant Wetlands within the sites. The final floors of the two quarries ares 20 metres below the present water table and could potential impact area residences and the wetlands. Ministry of Natural Resources and Ministry of the Environment have accepted the MAQ Reports and have not been present at the hearings and have not had the benefit of hearing testimony or cross examination of experts. No minutes of the hearings are available and it is very difficult to hear and see evidence presented to form a better understanding of the issues. With respect to these two hearings area politicians have been silent.It is in my opinion a flawed, extremely expensive process.