The Greenbelt
March 21, 2010
A recent poll showed a high level of support for the Greenbelt. Should it be expanded? Have your say.
Should the Greenbelt be expanded? Have your say.
Jeff Rollings’ story about the Greenbelt in our Spring 2010 issue delves into one of the most important issues we face here in the hills.
Should the Greenbelt be expanded?
Tell us what you think. Comment in the box below.
Thanks for the fantastic article on the Greenbelt. Yes the Greenbelt should be expanded. There are two solutions to urban sprawl – the GTA should insist that developers design denser housing or/and our government reduce immigration numbers to Canada; ultimately our environment cannot accommodate such a large increase in population growth.
Jane Bowen on March 24, 2010 at 9:33 pm |
As my farm is already about 1 km inside the Greenbelt, I may be taken as neutral on Greenbelt 2. I’m against it on principle as well as for other reasons.
The Greenbelt assumes that the landowner no longer owns his own property. The original owner of my farm was granted it by King George IV in 1822. Ever since, the owners have preserved farmland and a woodlot, and now I have planted the entire farm in trees. Does that sound as if I plan to destroy the greenery?
It is monstrous that a government seize control of land without compensation. It is equally monstrous that the Greenbelt Alliance, with its over eighty environmental groups, should be telling the government that they know better than me what to do with this land. I suspect few of them have ever farmed and most are urbanites.
As for trespassers who believe that farms in the Greenbelt are public, I notice that a “Hills of Headwaters” publication printed in 2006 includes a “Greenbelt” advertisement of two pages that says, “Join us in celebrating our living countryside.” Not only does the government seize planning control; it also encourages trespassing.
Farmers are geographically isolated and generally not gregarious; so they do not belong to any lobby movements – or they didn’t until the present government commenced to curtail their right to make farming decisions. (The Ontario Landowners Association was created by MPP Randy Hillier to amend that state of affairs.)
I’m reminded of the poem “The Man with the Hoe.” Back off, government. This land is my land.
Charles Hooker on March 25, 2010 at 8:07 pm |
Not being a farmer myself I would like to know exactly what farmers located in the Greenbelt do not like about the plan and what would they like changed. How can protecting land from development and farming co-exist? Perhaps In The Hills can write a follow-up up article about farmers in the Greenbelt. Let’s work together to have the Greenbelt expanded.
Jane Bowen on March 27, 2010 at 11:54 am |
This letter is on behalf of those farmers who happened to get caught in the Greenbelt plan.
A friend of mine farmed 75 acres, down on McLaughlin Road, and got caught in it. His little spread was his retirement plan. I talked to him, asking if he’d read your article and he says, “Oh, sure.” But like most farmers, it is not in their nature to complain – and for that matter, he thinks the Greenbelt is a good idea.
On page 26, you mention the 2007 study by Richard Vyn, University of Guelph – “over half of the Greenbelt area is negatively impacted by more than a 25% decrease in the value of land assets.” It’s a whole lot more than 25%. Ask anyone, even a decrease of 75% in value is closer to fact . . . on your opening page, you state that “in essence, there are three camps in the argument” – you ought to add a fourth: those farmers, who happened to be in the Greenbelt area, and whose pockets were picked.
My good buddy down there on McLaughlin is comfortable enough. But if he can no longer take care of his little place and decides to sell, it will be mighty difficult. The land is too expensive to farm. So, perhaps someone will want to buy it, tear down his bungalow and build a nice big custom home – but how much can he get for a 75-acre flat land building lot? He might be hard put to get even a million . . . so much for his retirement plan.
The solution – too late for Joe of course – is to tax the developers on adjoining lands. Even a small percentage, say 5%, would create a nice fund for these people who’ve been shortchanged.
It seems like the farmers get it in the neck, every time, and “In the Hills” representation of them in this otherwise excellent article, is disappointing.
John Vibe
Erin, Ontario
- and no, I’m no farmer.
John Vibe on March 29, 2010 at 9:33 am |
I agree with what the Greenbelt intends to do. Preventing urban sprawl and protecting the environment should be considered by both municipalities and the Provincial government. However I think that farmers should be compensated because ‘for the greater good’ doesn’t pay the bills.
Sarah Carter on April 17, 2010 at 12:06 pm |