Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Well, it has begun—sort of! It is March 31, 2010, 10:30 a.m., I am sitting in the King Township Council Chambers. The Ontario Municipal Board hearing is about to get under way with respect to the site plan for the York Energy Centre. A 393MW (but licensed for 435MW) natural gas-fired peaker power plant to be imposed on the Stewards of the Land in an area known as the Holland Marsh, (the Salad Bowl of Ontario, Greenbelt, Protected Countryside, flood plain, Specialty Crop Area, to name a few of the pieces of legislation that “protect” this sensitive, high value vegetable food production area) by the proponent, Pristine.

We all stand when the judge enters the room. The lawyer for the proponent and the Township are present, together with some members of the farming community (of which one is a participant), Holland Marsh Growers’ Association Executive Director who is a participant, Concerned Citizens of King Township (CCKT) a couple of whom are participants, the Executive Director for the Global Environmental Action Group who is a participant, along with others who have come to show their support in opposition to the location of this facility.

Some guidelines are laid down by the judge for the media present. After this, it’s down to business.

The referral of the site plan motion is scheduled to commence Tuesday, April 6, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. at King Township Council Chambers. We are advised that Rule 4.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure will apply, and a Form 53 of the Courts of Justice Act must be filed. This is not applicable to summons’ witnesses. The expert evidence will be heard first, and then the participants statements will be heard. The dates for the 10 day hearing are discussed amongst the judge, and the two solicitors, with a couple of these dates being tentative. We are adjourned until Tuesday, April 6/10.

A videographer from Rogers Cable is interviewing several people—one being the proponent’s lawyer. I hear him say that this peaker plant facility is necessary, and words to the effect that it has to go in. Really? And the ONLY available place to build this facility is in the Salad Bowl of Ontario? Less than a kilometer from where our valuable crops are grown, and the waterway we irrigate from!

Our population is growing, and is only going to continue to grow. Taking prime agricultural land out of production, and potentially reducing the yields of the crops on the land remaining as a result of the impact the emissions from the YEC may have on our waterways, and organic based soil seems, to me, a step backward—not forward thinking at all!

I’ve said this before, this power plant is not even going to benefit our area with us having access to the electricity. The energy will be for Bradford, and north-eastern York Region, not the Holland Marsh!

I was also interviewed by Rogers, and asked what I would like to see come out of this OMB hearing? I advised that the land for the YEC is located in the Greenbelt, which was supposed to be protected for green space and food production (Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan). However, the government can step in and impose infrastructure running at 35% efficiency that is clearly a “conflict use”. I’m also baffled that the MOE , or whoever receives the “studies” information has not jumped on at LEAST 2 facts that have come to my attention, as a “lay person”:

1). “all necessary studies have been completed with no negative impact to this area…” regarding the impact from the emissions from this facility on soil. Yes, MINERAL soil—this is key, since studies DO NOT EXIST to show the impact of said emissions on ORGANIC BASED/MUCK/PEAT soil (Specialty Crop Area soils) such as are present in the Holland Marsh. There are many types of soil out there—not just mineral!

2). “the emissions from the YEC fall within acceptable parameters”. Sure they do, if you are farming the land at the Pearson International Airport, which is the airshed that was tested for acceptable emissions levels. The last time I checked, there was no airport in the Holland Marsh. The airshed that should have been tested was right here, and not near the highway either. Why wasn’t the air where the plant will be built tested. My guess, probably because the emissions test would not fall within acceptable parameters!

I find it ironic that at a time when government is pushing Farmers to invest more money (at their own expense) on food safety, food traceability, continued reduction in fertilizer and pesticide use, together with on-going tri-annual certification of Farmers in this regard (all to preserve our environment), requiring Farmers to obtain Permits to Take Water to irrigate their crops, strict human rights rules and regs (as employers we are NOT to put our employees in harms way, but must make sure their workplace is safe—by imposing this power plant in this agricultural area, our health is being put at risk—again, I find it ironic that the government would push this type of industry here), to name a few of the rules we must adhere to--that this same government is calling the Farmers NIMBYs, and pushing this peaker power plant down our throats. Even going so far as to say that the environmental assessment applied to this facility (which is the equivalent to that of a 2 MW windmill) is sufficient for a 393 MW natural gas fired peaker plant!

So, back to what I would like to see come out of this OMB hearing? I would like to see this entire project put on a shelf. We have all this new legislation, and Plans and Acts, but the science, assessments and logic is 40 years old—it must be revised. Municipalities should be allowed to conduct studies in order to see exactly how this type of industry will impact the communities they know, but most of all the Farmers of the Holland Marsh must be allowed to continue to do what they do best—grow safe, healthy, nutritious food for you and me without the additional challenges a peaker power plant will no doubt present to them!

Avia Eek

Holland Marsh Farmer

Views: 81

Comment

You need to be a member of Ontario Agriculture to add comments!

Join Ontario Agriculture

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Nova Scotia invests in beef sector

Farmers have until Dec. 11 to apply for the Nova Scotia Beef Development Program

hio Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Adopts Iowa State University Disease Diagnostic Codes

The Ohio Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory has successfully adopted Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory "Disease Diagnostic Codes" developed by Iowa State University. A Swine Health Information Center funded project has resulted in the successful adoption by the Ohio Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory of Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Disease Diagnostic Codes developed by Iowa State University. SHIC Executive Director Dr. Lisa Becton says the goal of the project was to make better use of diagnostic data when assessing trends for disease detection on a case basis, rather than just looking at PCR results. Quote-Dr. Lisa Becton-Swine Health Information Center: When tissue cases are submitted, a lot of times there is information that is provided by the attending veterinarian that is not always in a standardized framework. The system that Iowa State University VDL developed provides for a standardized coding framework and this is important because it allows further capture of the different p

Rebound in Pork Demand Needed to Support Stronger Hog Markets

The Chief Economist with EA Risk says a rebound in pork demand is what's needed to provide upward price support for hog prices moving forward. The day-two keynote address yesterday, as part of Saskatchewan Pork Industry Symposium 2026 looked at the outlook for the hog market. Dr. Lee Schulz, the Chief Economist with EA Risk, formerly Ever.Ag Risk Management, says although hog supplies are forecast to be similar to year ago levels, weakened demand for pork due to the economy, fueled by a higher cost of living has put substantial downward pressure on hog prices. Quote-Dr. Lee Schulz-EA Risk: Consumers are not keeping up. If you look at real disposable personal income, it's been down four months, month over month here in 2026, pretty large decline here in September. So, consumers are, are, are feeling it. I think they're seeing it, but again, they're also feeling it then in their pocketbooks and what that has done is it's impacted demand across the board. Pork has, has been one of them

Sask Pork Concludes a Successful Saskatchewan Pork Industry Symposium 2026

he Communications and Marketing Coordinator with Sask Pork credits the Sask Pork team and the Saskatchewan Pork Industry Symposium advisory committee with a successful 2026 edition of the annual event. Although the numbers have not yet been crunched, the 2026 edition of Saskatchewan Pork Industry Symposium held this week in Saskatoon drew a possible record number of participants from across North America. Sask Pork Communications and Marketing Coordinator Steve Seto says it was a team effort. Quote-Steve Seto-Sask Pork: Our advisory committee was absolutely fantastic, which is a group of people, industry representation, whether it be packers, genetics companies, everybody that is involved in that committee. They make symposium go. We meet a few times a year and we say, what are the hottest topics, what are people concerned about, what do we need to address? And they are able to help build our agenda and they do a fantastic job. The advisory committee, everybody that was involved wit

Beyond Meat’s Q3 revenue falls 8.1%

Beyond Meat, a plant-based meat alternative maker, reported an 8.1% year-on-year fall in third-quarter revenue, according to Reuters. The company said the decline was mainly due to a drop in the volume of products sold, reported Reuters. Gross margin rose to 19.3%, the highest in five years, which the company attributed to reduced manufacturing, inventory and logistics expenses. The net loss narrowed from a year earlier, helped by improved gross profit and other income. International retail sales rose, driven by increased burger and ground beef sales in Europe. Beyond Meat expects fourth-quarter net revenue of $54 million to $59 million. It said the operating environment remains uncertain and volatile and may affect future results, and it is limiting guidance to the fourth-quarter revenue outlook because of that uncertainty.

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service