Special Areas requests for water

[cakadu]

I keep asking myself why we want the land to do something it was never intended to do? We try to raise annual crops on marginal land and wonder why the bounty isn't there. We try to grow crops on land that is better suited to grass growth, yet we still persist in trying to grow crops. And the biggest wonderment o all is why we want to grow more of what we can't already sell at a price that will put some decent money in a producer's pockets.

The situation that is happening in the Special Areas - aside from the water - is not unique. People moving away, leaving farming etc. is happening in just about every rural area that there is, regardless of whether there is water or not. Does that mean that all rural areas will be given the cash injection to get them whatever they need in order to survive and/or grow? Don't get me wrong, I am all for rural revitalization.

The other thing that we haven't even given much consideration to is what cumulative effect will all this drilling activity have on the underground formations? We have some idea, but we certainly have no concrete evidence or body of knowledge with respect to the flurry of drilling activity and how it will cumulatively affect our groundwater supplies. I look at all the proposed activity within my own county and shudder to think of where it will all end up, especially now that oil has hit $60/bbl.

All of the things that we are doing cannot be looked at in isolation. If you talk to any of the irrigation managers down south, they never have enough water and are always looking for more and god forbid you talk about not being able to meet their allocations.

The solutions also cannot be looked at in isolation. One needs to look at the greater good in all of this. Speculating that the value-added industries will move out there because there is water is just that - speculation. You have people that want activities for their kids. Even in my own little community the parents often go outside of the community for the activities their kids participate in because they just aren't here or in the alternative, aren't up to the parents expectations of where their kids are at or their potential.

How many people have moved to the south because of irrigation? How many industries went there? 60% of the industries in the Lethbridge area are owned by American companies and are the goliaths that many are fighting against.

Should we share our resources with others who don't have them - yes. How we do that and how much we do that is something else. I'm curious, how many of you would be as willing to share if the water were coming out of your basin? It's always easier to spend someone else's "money".

I forget who said it but the quote goes something like, "...in the past, wars were fought for many reasons, in the future, wars will be fought over water."

[grassfarmer]

I share many of your concerns on this topic Cakadu. You are right that we should ponder the value of the crops that will be grown under these new irrigation projects. I hope it's not barley silage for yet more feedlots given the predicament of the beef sector. It's notable that most in favour are quoting all the amounts of water that are currently flooding southern Alberta - what about the dry years in the Oldman watershed? the irrigation places that had their allocations cut and saw their crops wither in the recent drought years even with their expensive irrigation. We need to look at water use on a broader basis before deciding we have enough for this project.
To maintain agriculture in the drier areas we need more than water, we need a viable return for their produce.

Maybe if they were to grow the best quality grassfed, longhorn beef in North America and sell it direct to US consumers at $5lb hanging weight they could make more money than growing barley, feedlot silage or confinement hogs once all the fertiliser, fuel, spray, machinery,transport, manure hauling and irrigation costs are paid?
Bear in mind that we have only a finite supply of oil and severe limitations on water availability which make the high tech farming route environmentally unsustainable.

[cowman]

I will admit I haven't got out to any meetings on this proposed water diversion, so might not be up on all the facts and figures, however I do believe the main idea was not so much irrigation but water for livestock operations, homes and industry?
In my opinion this is about the best idea I've heard in a long time for many reasons. The establishment of a viable intensive livestock industry away from the populated areas is a good thing. Special areas has lots of open spaces and they are eager to have these operations, the corrider doesn't want anymore CFOs...looks like the perfect solution to me!
The mayor of Red Deer put it very well I thought? He said he really doesn't care where the water goes after Red Deer has taken what it needs!
The concept of at least one large dam and a series of created wet lands into Stettler county is a very good idea. A pipeline to serve the needs of special areas is then very feasable?
Consider the spin off benifits of a large reservoir on the eastern boundary of Red Deer County? Consider the economic activity that will be generated? As much as people bemoan the loss of their rural livestyle around Glennifer Lake the reality is the infrastructure has been vastly improved to service the Lake developement and their own net worth has risen sharply!
Quite simply their property is worth more today than it would have been if the dam wasn't there?
The quality of the water below the dam is much better than it was before the dam was built. That is just a fact.
I'm old enough to remember how it was before the dam was built. Practically every year Red Deer got a big flood in the spring and the river got very low in the fall. Now, with the dam, the water is fairly consistant? Without a doubt the dam helped a lot in the recent flood.
Personally I would much rather see my various governments spend my tax money on something like this than blowing it on such wonderful things as adscam, gun registry, Canadian Wheat Board, free give aways to brutal dictators, making us all speak French! And I would much rather see the water go to some needy farmers out east than poured down an old oil well so they can water it out before its time! Of course I doubt those "needy farmers" are slipping a few bucks to the Klein Tories!

[cropduster]

Thanks for your comments Cowman!Maybe there should be a thread on just what is a Klein Tory!

[blackjack]

...from what I understand the plan would be to use the Berry creek and the Sounding creek as a natural canals...I haven't been there for a while but alot of people on the east side of province use the lake at Sherness mine for rec purposes...I see it as a major positive for farmers and the towns out that way...but I could be a little bias I lived out there for eighteen years...

[blackjack]

Linda, in fact irrigation districts have cut back allottments to numerous producers over the past few years.

[blackjack]

cowman, if you think that anyone is going to be able to dictate that the Confined Feeding Industry is going to have to locate in a defined area of the province then you obviously don't know just how strong their lobby group is.
Municipalities are having a difficult time defining specified zoning for CFO's, much less the Province trying it.

Not trying to put words in your mouth but is it your view that if a family wished to construct a feedlot, hogbarn, dairy or poultry operation they would be advised that it must locate in Special Areas or some such place? What are you going to tell the colonys that are continually expanding their feeding operations, and new colonys that are locating in various municipalities.
Might be fun to hear the reaction when they were told they had to relocate to a specified area !!!

Equipment dealers would be on the rampage if all the cfo customers were in one location vs having them spread around and the dollars they inject into the urban economy spread around.

It would be interesting to hear the response of the commodity groups to your suggestion.


A very unique idea cowman, but I doubt if it will ever fly.

[cakadu]

Does anyone remember Taiwan Sugars attempts to build out in that area? Shot down flat. Would have brought all the things that you are talking about as being benefits to the area, but the people there did NOT want it. Will they be any more willing now?

Cowman, I agree with the comment that once the water flows by here, what difference does it make? Well, it might make some in the future because to my knowledge we have no long-term studies done on the groundwater and recharging. They would be expensive and for the long haul to be sure.

The real concern that I had about the meeting(s) is that there are no presentations and to some extent I can understand them not wanting to give presentations because it controls the process and takes any thunder there might be away from grandstanders. Having said that though, if you control the process, you control the outcome to some extent as well. After you watch this taped presentation, then you can go around the room and look at various displays and talk with people. You are also given a 4 page document to read - with all the "answers" to the evaluation form that they want you to fill out. They strongly encourage you to fill the form out before you leave - ostensibly because if you take it home, then you won't fill it out.

Based on the information you are given you are supposed to give an evaluation even though you may need time to process all of the information given.

There doesn't seem to be much of a response in terms of who will move out there, if the water is available.

I also don't foresee the head offices of many companies locating in this area even with water. There seems to be a number of assumptions made and the biggest one is that people will flock to the area if there is water and so far I have seen no evidence in support of this.

My ambivalence about this project keeps growing and I am certainly not convinced that this is the best use of the amount of money that this will take - not only to build it, but to operate it annually. Sure the economic benefit is pegged at 70 cents on the dollar, but how long will it actually take to reap the benefit. Models work fine and so does theory, but reality is another matter entirely.

[cakadu]

Linda, the Taiwan Sugar application was in Flagstaff County, and you are correct there was huge opposition, and it split the county council in two.
That is one key reason why the provincial government made the decision to remove the authority for siting confined feeding operations from municipalities and appoint the NRCB as the regulator for the AOPA legislation.
Decisions are based on economy, effect on the environment, community and the appropriate use of land. It takes the local politics out of the decision also takes the heat off the municipal council.

One key requirement in the applicants ability to obtain a water licence, and if Alberta Environment is of the view that ample water is not available then no licence will be issued, and the NRCB will not issue an approval regardless of whether all other criteria are met.

Regarding water studies, most counties now have done ground water assessments in partnership with PFRA, so your county should have the information on file.

[cakadu]

Emrald, the groundwater studies I would be interested in seeing is a cumulative effect of all the drilling activity and right now that is a big unknown. We should be aware of lessons that have been hard learned in other areas. The Colorado River is one that comes to mind. It has been allocated to the point that there just simply isn't enough water. How many industries, farms etc. were hurt because of the cumulative shortfall? The Colorado is a mighty big river.

What about infrastructure? Like all the rest of the municipal areas it too will end up costing in the long run and the municipalities involved will be scrambling for money just as many of our counties are.

The point about Taiwan Sugar is that it would have brought value-added industry, jobs, a fairly significant economic benefit, perhaps kept the kids at home and it was soundly and emphatically rejected. What will be any different about other proposed feedlots and/or confined feeding operations - water issues aside? People do not want these things in their back yards.

Cowman, what helped to significantly boost the land values around here was far more a consequence of all the demand primarily by European buyers than the lake dwellers. Bear in mind that the area structure plan did not allow for any of the development that you presently see around the lake, let alone for any increase in that development. It would have far greater value as a natural area and if the only way we can see value in a natural or recreational area is to develop it, then we are truly in a sad state.

Everything is moving at such a fast pace that we have no idea of what the final consequences of our actions are going to be. The biggest point to bear in mind is that we are only borrowing these resources, they are not ours to do with as we will. We could very well be painting future generations into a corner with little or no option. Wouldn't it be nice to leave them some options?

[cowman]

Linda: I agree there was a lot of European buyers of farmland but there was also a whole lot of land bought up by Calgary businessmen. The anticipation that eventually the area will flourish as a recreational area was a driving force behind these purchases. And quite frankly from what I heard at the land use meetings that is the goal?
People want to be near water and have a view of the mountains. They like lots of spruce trees and green areas. They will pay for it...more than agricultural activity can afford. I believe the area south and west of the dam, really meets all those expectations?
emerald: Should a family be able to build whatever operation they want? How about if I owned some land right on the edge of Red Deer? Should I be able to build a feedlot or hog barn, even if I meet all the regulations? The fact is the "rules" might say I should be able to...unfortunately then the real world takes over?
Whenever people and agriculture collide, agriculture is going to lose! That is just a fact of the real world?
The injection of huge amounts of money into CFOs from wealthy Europeans was not a good thing in my opinion. They came in with unrealistic dollars and upset the "natural" planning system! The hog barns were being squeezed out of the developed areas before they came in with their mega bucks!
As far as Hutterite colonies go, why would they be treated any different than any other large feeding operation? Hutterites know the value of a dollar and if the price is right they have no problem relocating. After all they do it every twenty years or so?
I wonder what the prediction of costs and benifits of the *****on dam and Glennifer lake were like before the dam was built? I do remember a fierce battle about the merits and costs before it was built. I would suggest it probably was one of the best things that ever was done for the Red Deer river and the city of Red Deer? I truly believe you could call it a success story? Or am I wrong?

[cowman]

cowman, you would not be able to locate a feedlot or hog barn etc. near an urban centre such as Red Deer because of the inability of meeting the minimum distance separation from an urban centre or neighbours, plus most large centres have an intermunicipal development plan with their urban neighbour which will include buffer zones where no confined feeding operations are an accepted land use.

In land that is zoned agriculture it is a different matter. Applicants for confined feeding operations must meet all criteria, including set backs and they depend on the size of the operation.

Linda in some communities there is a vocal opposition and on the other hand a silent group of supporters for feeding operations. In many areas that grow a large amount of grain, and transportation costs are through the roof, confined feeding operations are welcomed due to the opportunity to market grain locally .

Appropriate use of land is one criteria where municipalities are in the drivers seat with respect to development of confined feeding operations. If the municipality sets out areas where no confined feeding operations are allowed within their municipal development plan then any application in that area will be denied.
Citizens of a municipality have opportunity for input at the MDP development stage and can clearly indicate to their council the land uses they feel are inappropriate.

I wonder how the agricultural community feels about the Glennifer Lake development in their midst ?

I drive highway 16 nearly every day and the new landfill on the Enoch Reserve is something to behold. Rank odor, garbage flying all over the highway and stuck in fencelines, and line ups of gravel trucks entering the site off the highway.
The odor of rotten garbage on a daily basis must be terrible for the community around the site but they likely had no say in the development because it is on reserve land which is governed by the feds.

If I had a choice I would live beside a feedlot anyday vs a garbage dump with hundreds of trucks entering and leaving and rotton odor 24/7. In fact I do live beside a couple of feedlots, but live far enough away ( 1.5 miles) that under the county permit system I did not have any input at the time they were approved.