The Agriculture Land Reserve Needs A Re Think
The move to sharpen up the Agriculture Land Reserve legislation is being met with opposition by former Agriculture Minister Corky Evans , who believes that the legislation that has been around for the past forty years does not require any changes.
There are some glaring problems with the present system. While it is designed to protect agricultural land in areas of the province such as, the lower mainland, Okanagan, and the Kootenay, it applies the same principal to the areas from Prince George north in the province. That you simply cannot do.
Evans, who operates an organic farm, in the Kootenays says consumers don't mind paying for locally grown products that don't come from places like Mexico, USA, and South American countries .The problem is will the consumer pay $3.00 dollars for a Canadian grown head of lettuce over the imported one that costs $1.00? The money available to that family dictates, in many cases,what they will buy.
There is however a much larger problem and it is one that Evans has failed to address in his speeches and that is just how much growing can be accomplished in for example Prince George versus say the Okanagan.
Traditionally, we get one crop of hay off a year in this region, to the south they can get as many as three. We are required because of our climate to feed our livestock more in the winter putting us again at a further disadvantage. Yes there are farmers in this region but many of them are subsidizing their farm operations from other incomes because they enjoy that way of life. So for example, when it comes to them asking to have another home, possibly for a younger generation, located on the same farm or ranch they occupy they have a very legitimate argument as to why things need to be changed.
The removal of agriculture land from the ALR in the lower mainland and the southern parts of the province cannot in anyway be compared with what has been removed in the northern regions, and yet it is . It may create a warm and fuzzy feeling that agriculture land is being protected , but the question remains , where and why?
If the province wants to re think the ALR, they need to do so with these facts in mind , growing in Prince George is much different than growing in Richmond and we need to come to grips with that.
I'm Meisner and that's one man's opinion.
Comments
Very true. B.C. is a very big province with a real diversity of weather and climate. The ALR needs to meet regional needs.
And then, look at the amount of land that has been removed from the ALR in the lower mainland – our real local breadbasket.
Find a way to provide incentives to develop blacktop jungles in areas far removed from productive farmlands. We have lots of room for expansion in PG where productive land and growing seasons are quite different from the area on the other side of Hope (pun intended).
Your not correct Ben, there are means to remove land from ALR, just because we are in the north the land has just as much importants to farmers, ranchers and general public. If you open the doors to wide the major effect will be in the lower main land. And take a look at who is driving the change to ALR.
I was all set to disagree with Mr. Meisner’s viewpoint on this subject, based on the headline.
After reading the article however, I find myself agreeing instead.
If the ALC could somehow have separate and distinct standards for disrete areas of the province, it would probably serve most B.C. residents better. Maintain zoning and subdividing restrictions on the more productive regions, and maybe ease up regulation of agricultural lands in less productive areas
I am concerned with the demand for growth in development of commercial and residential areas in the Fraser Valley that is putting pressure on extremely valuable farm land there.
Land owners, farmers, and developers would have the ability to cash in on a one time basis that then forever removes productive farmland, but where does our food come from then?
We do not want to have to rely on imports to feed our population, and local farmers markets can feed only a limited number of people in the area in which they operate.
metalman.
Seems to me that the ALR has been changed to some degree that allows farmers to have a few development lots on their property. I believe that the Regional Districts have more say now, than they used to.
The farmland on the North West side of Boundry Road, some 700 acres was removed from the ALR without to much difficulty. This of course was for commercial development, and it seems they can get the job done faster than a farmer who wants to build a home for his family.
In any event we need to try and get more use out of our agriculture land, and hopefully get people to run these farms. As the old people get out of the business, and young people refuse to take over, we are losing these farms. That’s a shame, because over the long term we will need them.
Selling off good farm land, or park land to put in some sort of dubious commercial enterprise, or a series of car lots, is in my opinion the wrong way to go. We need to re educate ourselves on the value of goop farms, and good food grown in our own areas.
I just a saw presentation where they talked about northern farming and provided some stats. There’s a lot more going on here than you think. I followed up to get a few for the record. Here are some of the notable ones:
Northern BC (everything north of 100 Mile House)is home to:
4200 farms , 21% of BC’s farms
96% of BC’s canola crop
71% of BC’s alfalfa crop
62% of BC’s hay crop
10% of BC’s vegetable crop
30% of BC’s sheep herd
24% of BC’s goat herd
20% of BC’s dairy herd
90% of BC’s bison herd
20% of BC’s dairy herd
28% of BC’s cattle herd
40% of BC’s horses
and 1000 full-time equivalent farming jobs
The ALR is a 41 year old framework with the emphasis on food security that needs an unconditional and complete review. Nobody knows today to what degree the ALR still fulfills the expectations of food self-reliance because all available data is based on surface metrics and not actual food production capacity.
Productive land in the Fraser Valley was replaced by land in the Peace area. Lots of ranches were divided and sold by quarter sections. Expensive houses, big shops and a couple horses adorn those properties today. They are still listed in the ALR inventory but I doubt that they ever will produce again. The best 12’000 hectares of river bottom land in the Peace will be drowned behind Site C dam. Food or power can be imported, the Government decided on food imports. This is just one indication of Government’s lip service to the ALR. BC’s food self-reliance was 48% overall in 2006 but way lower in essential foods like potatoes, grain and meat and is supposed to shrink to about 25% in 2030.
The people of BC regard the ALR as a convenient freebee and a perceived insurance that their food needs can be provided by BC farmers and ranchers if transport stops or borders close. Government is to coward to point out those wrong expectations and is under the opinion that locking the land in is all that is required to satisfy public demand. Conditions and expectations have changed in the last 41 years. Stakeholders in the ALR better get involved in the review and make sure that a new ALR frame work will be a social contract between the âPublicâ and the ALR land owners, with shared responsibilities and obligations.
Comments for this article are closed.