First parcel out

[cowman]

Should a first parcel subdivision be automatic or should it be dependant on the soil classification, whether the parcel is fragmented from the rest of the quarter, whether it poses conflicting land uses with neighbouring agricultural operations etc.?
Rural municipalities struggle with this all the time. Former Edmonton Alderman Alan Bolstad just released a paper commissioned by the Canada West foundation on the impact of urban sprawl.
One of the issues raised by the ag community when applications are received for first parcels out is the potential for conflicts due to the mix of agriculture and rural residential on adjacent lands, caused by a lack of understanding of what to expect when choosing to live in the agricultural areas.

[cowman]

My own interpretation of what first parcel out should be this: A farmstead, on a quarter section of land. Could be 2 acres or up to 10. Once that parcel is out there can never be another...ever. But that is only my opinion!
I have some sympathys for the idea of naturally or man made split land...like a creek or a road. I definitely believe some of the rough land on the divide should be considered for multi lot subdivision. It is basically unfarmable and only suitable for rough pasture and yet it is incredibly beautiful and the views are spectacular. The perfect place for a "little bit of heaven" for some wealthy suburbanite!
It is extremely hard to listen to a planner tell you about "saving the agricultural land" while we can see the city of Red Deer continue to strip four feet of deep black topsoil off the best farmland in the county just east of Red Deer! Or how important agriculture is when it is impossible to ever pay for that land...with agricultural production! Now I should qualify that...you can pay for it with an intensive livestock operation...which will pretty well screw all the neighbors who might want to sell to a wealthy suburbanite! In my opinion these big feedlots, dairies and hog barns are not really farms, they are animal factories! Probably should be zoned industrial?
I believe this county needs to realize this fact: This land is just too valuable to farm. It should be developed in a manner that has a real eye on the future! Now that might mean rural residential developement and it might very well mean larger estates for the wealthy to have their horse stables, golf courses, recreational facilities! In the big picture it might be better for the land? Someone who loves it and will spend money to take care of it rather than desperate people trying to eke out a living?
If that is the future for a good portion of this county, then we certainly don't need anymore hog barns, feedlots, or dairies in this county? There is a lot of perfectly good land far from the Edmonton/Calgary corridor for those factory farms?

[cowman]

Okay cowman respond to this question.
If you and your son decided you wanted to build a 5000 head feedlot, you have the land, the money and can meet all the requirements in the Agricultural Operations Practices Act with respect to environmental protection, minimum distance from neighbours etc., and such an operation is consistent with the landuses in your county's Municipal Development Plan, should anyone be able to tell you that you cannot build your feedlot, and if you want to have one you need to move up to the MD of Birch Hills or Saddle Hills county etc. which is likely an eight hour drive from where you live now because that land is where all feedlots and hog barns have to locate in the province ???? This is asuming that your scenario of more appropriate land for such operations away from the Calgary/Red Deer corridor came to pass.

[cowman]

No I shouldn't be able to build a 5000 head feedlot here! If I want to build a factory in the city I wouldn't expect to be able to build it in a residential subdivision?
Here is the real problem with these intensive livestock operations: Most of these operations don't need to be in the more populated areas, but the people building them don't want to live in the sticks! A large percentage of ILOs are being built by newly arrived Europeans and they see no problem with these animal factories? They expect to be close to all the goodies, like shopping, schools, hospitals, cultural events? They, in fact, don't really need to farm...they usually come here with lots of money looking for a home?
Yes, in the country you have to put up with some odors, dust and noise, but I don't believe we should be calling a defacto factory a farm?
I've lived beside a hog barn pretty well all my life and its not a big deal...especially since manure injection has become the norm! We get a few rotten smelling days now and then but its not too bad. This is a relatively small 200 farrow to finish operation which I suspect will not last for more than a few years.
There are places that would really welcome ILOs. It does not make sense to build them in my area. This area should be preserved for the wealthy urbanite who has the money to afford his little piece of heaven! It's all a matter of economics?

[cowman]

There again cowman the folks that wish to build a confined feeding operation also must take into account transportation for grain and animals; the abillity to attract staff and house them etc. There are several large hog operations in the Peace region, that are as you would say, away from urban centres.
Cattle feedlots want to locate near the markets, and for most of them that means southern or central AB. It may surprise you to know that approximately 90% of confined feeding operations in Alberta are family owned, and are an extension of family farms vs being owned by large corporations. Most of them were built as a diversification to an existing farm, either a grain farm or a cow/calf operation.
The larger ones are usually owned as a subsidiary of some other corporation, and have significant staff so setting up in areas where its fairly easy to attract staff is one important consideration.
In some areas that are ' back in the sticks' the availability of water is a huge consideration as is the soil types. Its not a good idea to attempt to locate a confined feeding operation on a sandy piece of land due to the difficulty to meet the requirements of the legislation with respect to compaction of feedlot pens, engineering lagoons, catch basins etc.

[cakadu]

When it comes to first parcel out, there are other considerations as well. Most producers have their "RRSPs" tied up in the equity in the land. By taking out a parcel for themselves to live, they can then free up the rest of the retirement money.

Or how about the case where someone in the family wants to take over the farm, mom and dad don't want to leave but don't want to have their land mortgaged or whatever. By taking a parcel out, the next generation can then do what they have to in order to secure the property for themselves.

Who gets to subdivide and who doesn't is and has to be given serious consideration. For example, if you say that the land in my area is going to be left for agricultural production, then what will you do for me to offset the opportunities that I may or may not be foregoing?

What about building up existing areas over trying to start new ones? Gleniffer Lake is a prime example. I believe that in the original plan, there wasn't to be any permanent development in there, yet now there is increasing pressure to develop it, even though there are by-laws against it.

Those with lands adjacent to the developments that are already there probably want to see the growth because it means increased values for their lands and who can blame them given the current agricultural situation?

Development cannot just happen in isolation though. The other services have to come along with it, otherwise there is a recipe for failure in the making. Some have anticipated future development out here in the Spruce View - *****on area, but to my knowledge there are no plans for things like basic health care etc. out here. In order to survive, an area has to have access to basic amenities such as health care, education, commerce and recreation. Are we too close to Red Deer and access to better shopping choices to become viable commercially? I don't know.

Older folks are likely not going to retire out in this area as they will have to travel for doctors and other health care providers.

Accommodating this expanding growth and the desire to be near all the amenities is going to be challenging for many years to come.

[cakadu]

Having just arrived home via
High River, Sundre etc., it is obvious that many of the flooded areas are adjacent to waterbodies. If first parcels out are to be allowed for fragmented parcels divided from the remnant of the quarter by a water body, who should bear the liability when flooding occurs ? I can tell you that Sundre is under water and driving through it was horrible, any homes near the creeks or river will be in crisis.....High River is in a similar situation. In my opinion this flooding should send a message that development should not occur within the flood plain as it is just to risky .