Greenspace

 We're going to devote today's blog to conservation issues.

My good friend Sven is in the midst of a mini crusade against the Conservative government's changes to the greenspace rules.  He is particularly incensed by a warehouse development that will be built on "sensitive" wetlands.  For context, every lot where each of us lives today could have been, at one time, declared "sensitive".

He may have a point in the particular case that has aroused his anger.  But there are two sides to every equation.  The following example demonstrates that.

The Town of Grimsby had planned to extend Livingstone Avenue (the main route through the downtown), from Casablanca where it currently ends west to Oakes Road where it would intersect with Main Street (old highway 8).  This is within the Grimsby urban area.  

It would cause traffic to bypass David's greenhouse, but he has enough of a reputation and following to overcome that downside, so he's in favour, for the good of the Town.

Some of the residents on Hunter Road in particular (the middle point of the extension) started posting "Save The Tree Lot" signs on their property.  Tree Lot?

Scrub growth on marginal clay farm land is more like it.

Here is another picture of the section under discussion, taken from Main Street across from David's property.  You can see the John Deere factory, which is on the South Service Road, in the background.

Flat, heavy clay, marginal farm land.  Not "sensitive" at all.

However, the government of the day, sensing a vote getter opportunity from the local residents, declared this section of Grimsby as "Greenspace".  The immediate effect was to thwart the Town's plans and reduce the value of the land by more than two thirds.

Self employed farmers like David do not benefit from company pension plans - unless, like David, they are fortunate to have a wife who works for a company that does.  Most farmers must save for their retirement, a difficult task for sure.  Alternatively, they have to hope for a beneficial sale of their property when they are ready to retire, to carry them through their leisure years.

It would be interesting to work out how many hundreds of thousands of dollars of land value disappeared with the government's decision, and how many votes that got them.  I'm guessing that the farmers subsidized each vote with at least one hundred thousand dollars of lost value in their lands.  Quite a tradeoff!

There is a story about a potato farmer down the road from David's property, before David bought, who asked the Niagara Escarpment Commission for permission to have a Chip Truck on his property.  The answer was NO, and he eventually went into bankruptcy, had a heart attack, and died.  His wife lost the farm.

I am all in favour of conserving our greenspace.  But, not on the backs of individuals who unwilling pay the price.  The government should compensate at current fair market value for land they want to preserve.

One model that I like is the one that the Bruce Trail Conservancy uses.  When land comes up for sale that includes a part of their trail, or would improve their optimum route, they solicit donations from members and ask the government for funding help to buy the property.  I don't mind having the government spend my taxes on such initiatives.

Bottom line here:  if what the Conservative government has done helps Grimsby get control of its destiny again, I'm in favour.  If they are just trying to help line the pockets of big contributors, I'm not.

--------------------------------------------------

Every year Dofasco gives its employees and retirees a souvenir nutcracker.  This year's model is particularly appropriate for our times.  Well done!

---------------------------------------------

Gardened for a couple of hours today.  If the rain isn't too persistent tomorrow I'll hopefully make more progress on completing the latest garden.

---------------------------------------------

Stay well.  Keep smiling.