On October 16, 2011, about 28,000 people descended on Honeywood, Ontario for what might go down as the tastiest protest in the province’s history. Foodstock offered opponents of a quarry proposed for the area a day-long food festival featuring top-flight chefs from across the country preparing food onsite and with local ingredients. The brainchild of renowned chef Michael Stadlander, the pay-what-you-can event raised money to offset the costs associated with the citizen-led opposition to the proposed 937 hectare quarry. Dwarfing the numbers of protesters that turned out for the Occupy Toronto protests that launched the day before, Foodstock made the papers and even the national news.
Tonight we’re looking at the issues raised by that proposed quarry in Melancthon Township, the “Mega Quarry.” But in truth, we could be looking at any of a number of such battles between local communities and companies proposing to expand or open new quarries in several places across Ontario.
In the very same neighbourhood as the “Mega Quarry,” residents in Duntroon, Ontario have put over $550,000 of their own money into opposing the Walker quarry in Clearview Township. In Caledon, Ontario, the Coalition of Concerned Citizens defeated the Rockfort Quarry proposal after a protracted fight that ended with the Ontario Municipal Board siding with residents. In Flamborough, residents waged an expansive and expensive campaign opposing the St. Mary’s quarry proposal. While their efforts helped secure a rare ministerial zoning order which effectively cancelled the project, the company has now appealed that decision based on NAFTA rules about treating industries the same ways across the continent.
Such battles are emblematic of an ongoing tension in the province: the need for farmland versus the need for aggregate (gravel, to the uninitiated), the need to protect environments and watersheds versus the need to supply an ever-growing province with fundamental building materials. There are no easy answers and for citizens who find themselves in the vicinity of a proposed quarry they don't want, they have few options beyond banding together to try to oppose the project. Companies looking to develop new sources of aggregate face an uncertain process and need to sink a lot of money into a proposal without knowing if it will be good money after bad if there’s a group opposing it. Protecting Escarpment Rural Land (PERL) has also been waging a high profile quarry fight, and got an early profile boost thanks to founding memeber musician Sarah Harmer and her Escarpment Tour.
In the most recent election campaign, Premier McGuinty pledged to review the Aggregate Resources Act, in an effort to “move Ontario forward on both environmental protection and clearer policies that will support the industry and protect communities.” It’s an important recognition that the current process puts citizens and industry on a collision course more often than either would like. When the province took responsibility for aggregates back in the 1980s, it did so in part to designate aggregate as a special commodity that shouldn’t be subject to NIMBY rejections across the province. That continued through the last decade with the Green Belt and the Places to Grow Act setting aggregate apart for special consideration. But as one battle after another bogs down in the province, all sides finally agree it’s time to look at things again. What can or should the province do to balance these competing demands? What would you do?
Follow Hilary Clark on Twitter.
