Preservation of Agriculatural lands

Fight for the Fruitlands

248

Environmental Stewardship

Chapter 13

Preservation of Agricultural Lands Society (P.A.L.S.): The Fight for the Fruitlands

Gracia Janes

Introduction

Long recognized as the "garden of Canada," Niagara is a sliver of prime fruitland nestled mainly between Lake Ontario and the Niagara Escarpment. Fruit growing - both tree and grape, al- lowed by the interaction of the Lake, the Escarpment, and the excellent soils-has been a way of life since Loyalists began cul- tivating the region in the late 1700s. By the late 1800s and early 1900s, it was the main industry in Niagara. Unfortunately, with the construction of the Queen Elizabeth Way in the 1930s, the erosion of the land base accelerated, until by the late 1950s the fruitland of Niagara seemed doomed to vanish under the impact of industrial encroachment.

It was about this time that some special people started to take an interest in the area and to put in place the roots from which P.A.L.S. grew. Professors Ralph Krueger and Len Gertler began their long-term studies of Niagara fruitlands and the loss of thou- sands of hectares to urban development. As in any important cause where action is vital, it is not only essential that public awareness be high-which it already was as far as the apprecia- tion of the beauty of the fruitlands was concerned-but also that the problem be documented. These two scholars did this well.

The result, during the late 1950s and into the late 1960s, was a swelling chorus of preservationist voices, such as those of the

250

Environmental Stewardship

Fight for the Fruitlands

251

agrologist, Dr. Harold Upshall (a former director of Vineland Ex- perimental Station and an early P.A.L.S. supporter) and Mel Swart (Reeve of Thorold, Regional Councillor and longtime MPP for Welland/Thorold).

Then the media picked up the theme. The St. Catharines Stand- ard, a local Niagara region newspaper, featured stories about the loss of land across Canada to urban sprawl and used Statistics Canada figures to show that Niagara was developing agricultural land faster than any other metropolitan area in Canada at that time.

By 1970, the Regional Municipality of Niagara became an entity (Figure 13.1). An amalgamation of twelve municipalities, its main mandate was to preserve Niagara fruitlands. The Regional aim was to work co-operatively and to dispense with municipal competition for fruitlands. Two fruitland preservationists, Mel Swart and Don Alexander, the latter a radio broadcaster, were elected to the Regional Council immediately. These two, bolstered. by Bill Andres (later an M.P.) and John Graaskamp (later a Ni- agara Falls alderman), were perhaps the first politicians to give political "care" to the unique fruitlands and were responsible for making fruitland preservation a major component of the Niagara Regional Plan.

But it was difficult to persuade many more politicians of the value of preservation and after most of these politicians left coun- cil by the late 1970s, there was never more than one preser- vationist, and sometimes none, left to fight the battle through the ensuing years. In the local municipalities, the race was on to de- velop as much land as possible within urban boundaries. Al- though regional planners took a preservationist stance in the early planning document, Dept. of Planning Document (DPD) 750 (which showed only half of the 3,200 hectares proposed for development was necessary), the local thinking that growth was good and preservation of fruitlands unnecessary was reflected in the Regional plan approved in the summer of 1976.

TOW

LAKE

ONTARIO

TOWN OF WEST LINCOLN

ONTARIO

Kilometres

TOWN OF LINCO

TOWN

CITY

ON-THE-LADI

ST. CATHARINES

FALLS

U.S.A.

WELLAND

TOWNSHIP

WANFLEET

Town

CITY

FONT EXCE

FORT COUBOUTI

Figure 13.1: The Niagara Region, Ontario

P.A.L.S.' Beginnings

LAKE

ERIE

Fortunately for the land, a random event sparked the formation of P.A.L.S., the group that was destined to spend the next fifteen years fighting for fruitland preservation. In the spring of 1976, Brock University invited to a community action seminar all of the fruitland preservation groups active at that time. Bringing to- gether these dedicated individuals, all fighting for the fruitlands and ready for action, set the stage for the formation of P.A.L.S. later that year.

Niagara Grapevine. Of paramount importance was the pres- ence at the Brock meeting of the group "Niagara Grapevine." The St. Catharines-based group was leading the battle against the proposed multi-million dollar Highway 406 through the historic

252

Environmental Stewardship

12 Mile Creek valley and into the fruitlands of west St. Ca- tharines. This was to be a completion of a previously-built section of the highway between Thorold and a major mall in south St. Catharines. Grapevine represented citizens city wide, who saw the highway as a waste of money, a non-solution for north and south traffic congestion, and a destroyer of valued natural and urban history.

At its peak, from 1970 to 1976, Grapevine became very active in municipal elections in St. Catharines and was responsible for arousing public interest in land preservation. Its most important information for this purpose came from a land use study by Bruce Krushelnicki (1976), which revealed the existence of precondi- tions for massive urban development of the fruitlands of West St. Catharines. It showed, for example, that prominent Toronto speculators had bought land for prices ranging from $20,000 per hectare in 1976 to $55,000 in 1978. Alarmed by the pro-develop- ment stance of the City Council, where battles raged over the Highway and the urban boundaries of West St. Catharines, Grapevine members interviewed incumbent and potential Coun- cil members regarding the issues of conflict of interest, Highway 406 and the preservation of fruitlands. They then distributed over 30,000 flyers with candidate comments. The two councillors. with the most obvious conflicts of interests were defeated.

Grapevine not only benefitted from the expertise of public activ- ists, but was able to tap into the enthusiasm and creativity of its younger members, who tried such public awareness stunts as planting grass in the shape of the words "Stop 406". The grass alerted those passing by until construction started in 1978. Busi- ness interests were behind the original 400 route and won its eventual completion as Highway 406, possibly the most expen- sive bit of highway in the province (over $100 million for four miles).

Grapevine's early campaigns were excellent training grounds for all concerned. Where else could such expertise in publicity, re- search, public relations, public speaking and finding one's way through the government and political thicket be gained? People

Fight for the Fruitlands

253

who were to be the founding members of PALS such as Bob Hoover, John Bacher and Gracia Janes, helped with research, led tours of the proposed route of the 406 through the 12 Mile Creek valley, initiated a newsletter, facilitated the Ombudsman's re- view, lobbied politicians at Queens Park and testified at hearings. They were ready for the meeting at Brock.1

The Grandonis (The Committee of 1,000). A second experi- enced group at the Brock meeting that day was a Niagara Falls group. led by dairy farmer Peter Grandoni, his sister Jean, and Norm Mitchinson, later an alderman for Niagara Falls. Known as the Committee of 1,000, and one of Ontario's largest environ- mental groups at that time, it had spent countless hours over the years fighting against development and for a protective plan for the sensitive Shriner's Creek.

The Grandonis, joined by James Hasler, P.A.L.S. president 1986- 88, and PALS researcher John Bacher, successfully fought to pre- vent the location of a sludge site on prime farmlands in Niagara Falls. More recently, in 1988, they were responsible for the map- ping of fill lines by Niagara Falls (one of only two municipalities to do so) and thus for the provision that all new subdivisions re- quire sump pumps in new houses to pump water to the storm water drainage system.

The Grandonis have also become two of P.A.L.S.' most valued ex- perts on foodland preservation and the importance of farmlands as part of the broader environment. Thus, while their efforts to preserve Niagara Falls foodlands were largely unsuccessful, their experiences leading into the larger Niagara struggle proved to be invaluable.

The Pelham Environmental Action Group. The third group represented at the Brock meeting was comprised of citizens from Pelham who had been fighting to prevent the urbanization of Pel- ham, the widening of Highway #20, the acceleration of aggregate mining, and the subsequent proliferation of sand and gravel pits on the fruitlands of the Fonthill Kame.

254

Environmental Stewardship

Its leaders included John Cooper, a naturalist and engineer who was later instrumental in the Provincial acquisition of a portion of the Wainfleet Bog, and Kadie Denton, a professional planner, artist, and writer who used her planning skills in early public meetings to help P.A.L.S. set the stage for the 1979/80 Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearings in Niagara. Kadie and John were joined by Bill Forster (P.A.L.S.' first treasurer), Dorothy Daley (community activist), Anne Robinson and Liisa Harju (P.A.L.S. presidents 1982/83 and 1984/85), and local farmers such as Rodney Wright.

P.A.L.S. Becomes a Reality

With these activists at work in Niagara, all that was needed to trigger the formation of a land preservation group such as P.A.L.S. was the Brock meeting, some political leadership and, most importantly, the Regional initiative to open the fruitlands to development.

Development of the fruitlands was being planned despite the ef- forts of a conservationist Regional Planning Committee (led by Don Alexander and Mel Swart) to have urban boundaries re- duced. Instead of supporting the Committee's own objectives to preserve the fruitlands of Niagara, the Regional politicians set up a series of regional planning meetings which served to focus pub- lic attention on the fruitland issue.

In preparation for the determination of urban boundaries and agricultural policies for Niagara, planners had worked since the formation of the Region to document agricultural and urban trends. The resultant document, DPD 750, was the focus of the subsequent meetings, and was almost the undoing of regional ex- pansionists since it stated that proposed regional boundaries in- cluded double the land necessary to meet population needs, and made a case for a shift in growth to southern municipalities, away from the fruitlands of the north.

The public, including soon-to-be P.A.L.S. members, responded in great numbers, attending many meetings, and writing numerous

Fight for the Fruitlands

255

letters and briefs. The opposition to cuts in the amount of land dedicated to development came from individuals holding develo- pable land and was co-ordinated by speculators in the area. As documented in Regional Memo 400 (1976), the general public was solidly on the side of fruitland preservation. Despite this, the Re- gional politicians opted for massive growth and planners were directed to bring forward "more detailed" studies to back their

case.

Later in the spring of 1976, P.A.L.S. supporters met informally in Mel Swart's office, and determined that a broadly-based regional preservationist group was needed to raise public awareness and fight for Niagara fruitlands. It was then that P.A.L.S. was created. using a Secretary of State grant and a student provided by Gord Lugsdin, of the Regional Niagara Social Services department, to formulate its Charter and By-law. Legal work was done by a cousin of founding member Les High, a fruit farmer from Lincoln. Incorporation and charitable status were obtained by September 1977 and the ground was laid for future participation in Ontario Municipal Board Hearings.

The group was quite large, with about 20 Board members, and met in the early days at Brock University in the Department of Urban and Environmental Studies. Its first president, Dr. Robert (Bob) Hoover, from that department, had a feisty group to lead. All members had a vote and, for the first year, the chair was shared among those who wished to be more active.2

The First Charge in the David and Goliath Battle

From the beginning, P.A.L.S. relied on the media to raise public awareness about Niagara fruitland preservation, and the first charge in the long preservationist battle was featured across the country via radio, the press and TV. To gain public attention, media-wise P.A.L.S. members issued press releases regularly and staged a media event in July of 1976. This involved dramatizing an expansion of farm boundaries into 12 Mile Creek valley (site)

256

Environmental Stewardship

of the 406) as farmers Roy Johnson and Les High planted a sym- bolic fruit tree. P.A.L.S. then cut the tree down and staged a mock funeral march to the Regional headquarters. Here, a funeral ceremony marked the "burial" of the fruitlands and the crowd entered the special Regional Council meeting to present briefs. The councillors, intimidated by the size of the crowd and the

pres- ence of the media, postponed the meeting to a later date. This was very much the type of event for which Greenpeace was noted and although P.A.L.S. never attempted anything similar, it was vital then to have the media attention—and it certainly worked.

The following month, on August 5, 1976, such methods were un- necessary, as the press were by then anxious to follow happenings at Regional Council chambers, where over 200 persons attempted to squeeze into a room suited for 100. The crowd in the chambers, and in the overflow room via closed circuit TV, saw a lengthy and dramatic round of pro-fruitland speeches. Not only were the local citizens present, but there was support from all across the pro- vince. However, it was soon evident that the Regional councillors were unprepared to listen. Perhaps the clearest sign was the fact that Gordon Hill, president of the Ontario Federation of Agricul- ture (OFA), was unable to speak due to the protracted nature of the meeting. As William Archer, Chairman of the subsequent Re- gional Review, noted in his report, "It was a dialogue of the deaf." No wonder, since the preservationist councillors, with the excep- tion of Don Alexander, had moved off Regional council and the remainder were fighting for boundaries that would protect indi- vidual municipal turf.

This early skirmish served P.A.L.S. well, for it signalled to the provincial government that there was broad public support for fruitland preservation. Hence, with an election approaching in the spring of 1977, the provincial government dispatched two pla- neloads of politicians to Niagara, to announce that it could not afford a loss of one tenth of its fruitlands and would preserve 1,200 additional hectares (actually 710 hectares, due to land al- ready developed or removed from boundaries prior to 1977). This move effectively threw the whole issue to the OMB.

Fight for the Fruitlands

The Case for the Land

257

Over the next five years, from 1976 to 1981, continued media cov- erage focused public attention on the lengthy Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) Hearings regarding the regional boundaries and Official Plan of Niagara. Here, too, experience was the teacher and indicator of things to come, as a preliminary OMB hearing in Thorold (circa 1977) pitted Dr. Robert Hoover of P.A.L.S. and Russel Yungblut, grape and dairy farmer with the Niagara South Federation of Agriculture and the Ontario Federation of Agricul- ture (OFA), against Leon's Warehouse who wished to place a fur- niture store on 10 hectares of grape land in Thorold. The case was won, the grape land preserved and the foundation laid for a 1978 hearing into the same area as part of the larger OMB hearings.

In preparation for these hearings regarding the grape and gen- eral foodlands of Thorold and Niagara Falls (southern munici- palities) and the northern fruitlands (Niagara-on-the-Lake, Grimsby, St. Catharines, Lincoln, and the Fonthill Kame in Pel- ham), P.A.L.S.' top researchers, Dr. Robert Hoover and John Bacher, swung into action. Their expertise and energy were es- sential because other development proponents, including munici- palities, developers, and individual land owners, had placed. development applications for a further 36 parcels before the Board. P.A.L.S. had to survey each parcel carefully and to counter the pro-development case.

prepare

The hearing on Niagara South lasted eight weeks, from October 1978 to December 1978, and P.A.L.S., backed by the Niagara South Federation of Agriculture, won most of the land in dispute (560 hectares of grape and 120 hectares general). Unfortunately, most of the grapeland in Niagara Falls was lost. P.A.L.S. believed that if its farm expert, Peter Grandoni, had testified (as he did successfully in the second OMB hearing), a good case could have been made for these excellent lands. Unfortunately, they followed the advice of their lawyer, who felt an ordinary (farmer) witness from the public would be overwhelmed by experts called by the opposition. A lesson learned here was that it is not always neces-

258

Environmental Stewardship

sary,

if one has a fair chair, to call the traditional expert to make the best case.

The second OMB hearing, on the northern fruitlands (November 1989 - November 1990) was delayed by unsuccessful legal at- tempts to disqualify the chairman and a change of P.A.L.S. law- yers that was necessitated by a lack of funding (despite an attempt to get legal aid funds). In the hearing, P.A.L.S.' sole law- yer was pitted against over 50 lawyers for the region, municipali- ties, developers and individuals. Again, P.A.L.S.' main expert witness was Dr. Hoover, and this time he faced ominous odds as the press (quite favourable at the first hearing) and lawyers at- tacked him personally and professionally, the latter in order to make their case, the former, to make headlines. But this hearing signalled another win for fruitland preservation. The OMB chair- man ruled that a further 680 hectares remain zoned as agricul- tural, that infilling and intensification should take place in the northern municipalities (P.A.L.S.' arguments), and that redirec- tion of development to poorer lands in the south of Niagara must begin.

All told, the decisions of 1979 and 1981 (when added to the 200 hectares taken out of the urban area before the hearings commenced) meant that 1,600 hectares were won through P.A.L.S.' efforts. And while P.A.L.S. would have preferred far more restrictive urban boundaries (i.e. 2,800 hectares), the Board's ruling that the boundaries abutting tender fruit and grapeland should be 'permanent' meant that 20,800 hectares of fruitland would be protected from urban uses a welcome decision for the group that had taken on such a David and Goliath struggle. P.A.L.S.' satisfaction at preserving the land was augmented by the Board ruling that "P.A.L.S. was acting in good faith in carrying out what it perceived to be a necessary role as supporter of the Cabinet decision and a protector of the public interest, since there was no volunteer to undertake the task." But the battle had just begun!"

Fight for the Fruitlands

Box 13.1

Funding - An Important Component of Land Preservation

259

The positive decision in the second OMB hearing was certainly dependent on the presence of P.A.L.S., with a lawyer, throughout this lengthy hearing, and this in turn was contingent on P.A.L.S.' ability to raise substantial funds from as many persons and groups as possible across the country. It was fortunate for P.A.L.S. that its case was well known across Canada, and the P.A.L.S. board (coordinated by Gracia Janes), with their many contacts and media skills were able to pull together a high profile campaign to raise funds. A logo was picked, a brochure printed and honorary supporters were solicited, including Pierre Burton, Laura Sabia and John Sewell. Special letters were sent to suit different audiences, (eg, labour and environmental groups), individual presentations to foundations were made by Mel Swart, Russel Yungblut and Robert Hoover, and a regular newsletter was created. Especially ef fective were a P.A.L.S. Blossom Walkathon and a P.A.L.S. Peninsula art and craft show. These events initiated by Gracia Janes and Liisa Harju not only elicited broad support from the arts and environmental community, but also from the gen- eral public. They have continued, throughout the years, to raise substantial funds (the Walkathon, as of 1990, over $90,000 and the Art show over $70,000).

But these initiatives took time to gather momentum, and the hearings were enor mously costly. In the interim, 30 members signed notes of credit with the Royal bank (totalling $30,000). Despite this, the high costs of the first six weeks of hear ings and some preparation for the second case ($52,000) triggered a change of law- yers and a second visit to the Legal Aid board. Here again, old friendships paid off. The appointment came as a result of encouragement from a friend of Gracia Janes from the Provincial Council of Women of Ontario, who intervened on P.A.L.S.'be- half. Friends from the farm community (Ed Kurtz, Russel Yungblut) came to the Legal Aid meeting with P.A.L.S. Board members. Others sent letters supporting the view (and bolstering P.A.L.S.' case) that their land would be affected. Coinciden- tally, the chair of the Legal Aid committee at that time was Rod Barr,who had several years before accompanied Grapevine members on their trips to the Ministry of Highways. Clayton Ruby, a known advocate for the underdog, was a committee member as well. Legal aid was granted. This support and, subsequently, the per- sonal sacrifices of lawyer Peter Elliot while P.A.L.S. awaited the actual funds, helped keep PA.LS. in the case to the end.

After the Hearings

After the major 1978/79/80 OMB hearings in Niagara, P.A.L.S., together with friends and allies, carried on with research, fund raising and education over the next ten years. At first, the aim

260

Environmental Stewardship

was simply to monitor the permanence of the Regional bounda- ries and hence to prevent urban expansions. For the most part, with a few minor exceptions, these did not occur and only later, in 1988 and 1989, did the permanence look fragile as the Region began to review its Plan and the individual municipalities in the North, under pressure by area farmers, pushed for more develop-

ment.

Waterlines and Aggregate. From 1981 to 1986, other concerns prevailed, as P.A.L.S. fought to prevent waterlines being in- stalled in farm areas for urban uses, and against aggregate min- ing on the Fonthill Kame. While the waterline hearings proved successful in that it was ruled new waterlines would require re- strictions and, in the case of urban uses, an Official Plan amendment, prevention of aggregate mining on the Fonthill Kame proved elusive at first.

In the Kame case, P.A.L.S. came up against the full weight of the aggregate lobby and a hostile Board, and lost. Two applications were allowed by the OMB and in the second case, involving Tele- phone City Gravel, P.A.L.S. was assessed substantial costs of $4000. This decision found P.A.L.S. some new friends, as the Ca- nadian Environmental Law Association (CELA) led the success- ful charge to have the Provincial Cabinet lift costs. P.A.L.S. President James Hasler eventually persuaded the Province to fund a study of the Kame, especially the fruitlands in the area.

Severances and Conformity

During the 1980s, P.A.L.S. also was concerned about the large number of building-lot severances on land designated as agricul- tural. While P.A.L.S. intervened and sometimes won in the most controversial cases (sometimes with the help of the Niagara South Federation of Agriculture), the number of applications es- calated so dramatically in the latter part of the 1980s that by 1988 P.A.L.S. switched tactics to an attempt to change Regional policy in the context of the Regional Review of 1988-91.

Fight for the Fruitlands

261

While severances were evidence that the Regional Plan was not being adhered to with any vigor, a further problem, that of con- formity, flouted both regional and provincial planning objectives. The Provincial Planning Act requires that all local plans conform to the upper tier of government and P.A.L.S. spent many years attempting to have this enforced in Niagara. The issue still lingers, as many local municipalities, particularly Thorold (seem- ingly with regional approval), have yet to bring their plans into conformity with the Region.

Broadening Interests

By the late 1980s, the Region again seemed poised for growth. Urban uses such as churches, dumps and severances were prolif- erating on the best lands. Land speculation was rampant along the Queen Elizabeth Way between St. Catharines and Grimsby, and in Niagara Falls, fill dumping in streams, illegal uses on farmlands and severances continued to severely erode farming in the "shadow fruitbelt."

As the number of issues grew, so did P.A.L.S.' involvement. P.A.L.S. members developed expertise as they researched and ad- vocated on issues ranging from aggregate mining, top soil strip- ping, and churches in agricultural areas to the Environmental Assessment Act and Foodland Policy. In these advocacy activities, P.A.L.S. supported old friends, such as the Grandonis in Niagara Falls and the Niagara South Federation of Agriculture, and new friends both in the region and beyond.

and to promote the 3 Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) as a better way to handle Ontario's wastes. Further afield, P.A.L.S. encour- aged and advised the citizens fighting against a hockey arena on

262

Environmental Stewardship

prime lands in Kanata, and the Haley family seeking to secure its century farm near Brantford from a highway interchange."

A Crisis for the Land and for P.A.L.S.

Meanwhile, in Niagara, P.A.L.S.' greatest challenge loomed large on the horizon. This unpredictable outside influence, Canada's Free Trade Pact (FTP) with the United States, would test P.A.L.S.'metal to the very limit. Fruit and grape cultivation were the only agriculture pursuits openly recognized by the Federal government as having the potential for considerable 'dislocation" (interpret as lost farms for fruit growers) by the FTP. Never was there such pessimism in the farm community, nor for P.A.L.S." members, for the FTP threatened the fruitlands as no developers ever had and its impacts seemed uncontrollable.

P.A.L.S. saw the pessimism growing, perhaps before anyone had articulated it. A P.A.L.S. survey of over 500 farmers in the sum- mer and fall of 1987 showed that farmers were deeply concerned, about the U.S. advantages of farm benefits/subsidies (e.g. 3 per cent interest rates), a longer growing season, lower wages and input costs, and an eventual loss of protective tariffs for our fruit. The playing field would not be level. The FTP would surely bene- fit the Americans and seriously damage fruit growing in Niagara.

This called for drastic action, so P.A.L.S. invited Eugene Whelan the architect of marketing boards in Canada, former agricul- tural minister for Canada, and an initiator of tariff barriers at GATT for fruit-to Niagara on May 12, 1988 to stir up the farm community. The event focussed P.A.L.S.' efforts on the need for solutions that would meld the desire by farmers to continue farm- ing and P.A.L.S.' desire to help the farmers preserve the land.

It was vital that something be done immediately. The Regional Review had given the public an opportunity for input and many farmers began to use this to seek loosened land use restrictions through a clause in the 1981 Plan that allowed for a change in its preservationist mode if economic times changed for the worse. P.A.L.S. Conservation Strategy (along with its Support for Farm-

Fight for the Fruitlands

261

Broadening Interests

Of particular and ongoing concern has been the battle to prevent the Ontario Waste Management Corporation (OWMC) from sit- ing an enormous toxic waste facility in the West Lincoln farm community. Here, P.A.L.S. continued to work with a broad diver- sity of farm and urban groups (chaired by John Jackson) to show the harm such a facility would cause in this unique area of Niag- ara, and to promote the 3 Rs (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) as a better way to handle Ontario's wastes. Further afield, P.A.L.S. encour- aged and advised the citizens fighting against a hockey arena on

262

Environmental Stewardship

prime lands in Kanata, and the Haley family seeking to secure its century farm near Brantford from a highway interchange."

A Crisis for the Land and for P.A.L.S.

Meanwhile, in Niagara, P.A.L.S.' greatest challenge loomed large on the horizon. This unpredictable outside influence, Canada's Free Trade Pact (FTP) with the United States, would test P.A.L.S.' metal to the very limit. Fruit and grape cultivation were the only agriculture pursuits openly recognized by the Federal government as having the potential for considerable 'dislocation" (interpret as lost farms for fruit growers) by the FTP. Never was there such pessimism in the farm community, nor for P.A.L.S." members, for the FTP threatened the fruitlands as no developers ever had and its impacts seemed uncontrollable.

Fight for the Fruitlands

263

ers document) had already explored the broader issues related. to GATT and Free Trade and had, as well, looked at greater op- portunities for marketing and, perhaps most importantly, at the concept of land trusts.

The P.A.L.S. Board then decided to explore the land trust concept in some detail. After many board meetings, P.A.L.S. presented a land trust plan to a 'think tank' of P.A.L.S. supporters in April of 1989. At that meeting, the six farmers present were united in their opposition to government (trust) land purchase (by fee sim- ple) with long term inter-generational lease back. They were equally determined that strong legislation was necessary to pre- serve prime land. More meetings were held, and the concept of purchase of easements (at first called development rights) was put forward. Using this mechanism, the farmer could continue to own the land and yet (through an easement on the land title) no development could take place.

P.A.L.S. then moved quickly to develop its legislation and trust package more thoroughly highlighting the need for foodland preservation, the methods used elsewhere, the need for trusts and legislation to preserve classes 1-4 lands, and the need for funding mechanisms. The need for public investment in land pre- servation was seen as most important. This proposal was sent out province-wide for comment from as many groups as possible and was quickly endorsed by such groups as the Friends of Whitevale, Friends of Foodland, Association of Peel People Evaluating Agri- cultural Land (APPEAL), and the Niagara South Federation of Agriculture. Many others, such as the Provincial Council of Women of Ontario, were very supportive.

The next step was to bring it to the local farmers, by then suffer- ing from bad weather, the economy, and the FTP. The opportunity came quite unexpectedly in November 1989 when a small group of farmers in Niagara-on-the-Lake asked Gracia Janes to a meet- ing to explain the concept of easements (development rights). She went well prepared. P.A.L.S. not only had discussed this with supportive farmers and amongst themselves, but it had also re- ceived an article from Ron Steele of Niagara south (P.A.L.S. area

264

Environmental Stewardship

representative), regarding the progress of development rights and agricultural land preservation in the United States. The local farmers seemed interested and Gracia found herself (accom- panied by John Bacher) on a bus with farmers heading to Ottawa to meet 10,000 other farmers to protest the Free Trade Pact. She used the trip time to explain development rights (easements) to her fellow passengers, one of whom was Arnold Lepp, president of the Niagara North Federation of Agriculture. Arnold recog- nized the potential for easements to help farmers and the use of easements became part of the ongoing Provincial/Federal/Re- gional talks regarding the plight of the Niagara farmers.6

In the spring of 1990, P.A.L.S. organized a Land at Risk Confer- ence at Brock University. There, environmental writer and jour- nalist Michael Keating challenged land preservationists from across the province to think of land loss as a national disaster, on a par with the Amazon rain forests, but at a local level. Partici- pants went on to highlight and discuss the loss of land to every use imaginable - dumps, urbanization, aggregate mining, and all the rest. The conference broadened support for P.A.L.S.' legis- lation and trust package and led directly to the formation, a few months later, of a loosely knit group called the Countryside Coa- lition, co-chaired by Guelph professor Stewart Hilts and Gracia Janes. Bringing elements of heritage, natural areas, and food- lands interests together, the group hoped to formulate a plan for a healthy countryside that would preserve natural areas and foodlands for the future.

The election of the New Democratic Party (NDP) government in 1990 brought land use matters to a head. Fruitland preservation had been part of its election platform, with the premier-elect making a quick stop in Niagara to point out land flips along the Queen Elizabeth Way between Lincoln and St. Catharines on the best fruitlands. Over the summer leading up to the election, St. Catharines, the largest community in Niagara, had held public planning meetings to determine its future. These public meetings further highlighted the rift between conservationists and the farmers of West St. Catharines. P.A.L.S.' representative, John Bacher, backed by Doug Woodard (Niagara Greens and P.A.L.S.),

Fight for the Fruitlands

265

spent many evenings arguing with the farmland development proponents. Independent members of the group confirmed that every topic intensification, potential shared growth with Thorold, the greening of the City-led to farmers' calls for ex- pansion of the boundaries. By summer's end, it looked like the ground had been laid for expansion.

The election changed that, and P.A.L.S. was blamed for this change of direction. The Minister of Government Services con- sulted P.A.L.S. about fruitland preservation and quickly drew an- tagonistic responses in the press from the farm contingent. This, combined with the knowledge that the NDP wished to preserve Niagara fruitlands and the promise by St. Catharines that it would not enlarge boundaries and would, instead, share growth with other municipalities, led some farmers to cry foul' and to seek other more radical methods of fighting P.A.L.S.

On February 27,1991 P.A.L.S. faced 150 farmers, who vocifer- ously demanded memberships as they sought to overturn the P.A.L.S. Board and in this way stop its work. Fortunately, P.A.L.S. had had two days warning from farm friends and the Board moved quickly to suspend memberships until its Letters Patent and By-law could be reviewed. P.A.L.S. also had some pro- tection from immediate takeover, through a section of its By-law, that prevented members from being elected as Board members, unless memberships were of a three-months' duration. Luckily, only three farm memberships were taken out in the days leading up to the Annual meeting and hence, no farmers from the take- over group could be elected as Board members.

What ensured P.A.L.S.' success in thwarting the overthrow plan was not only a kind warning about the attempt from a group of eight farmers and quick P.A.L.S. action, but also guest Senator Herbert Sparrows' (author of Soil at Risk) humorous and farm- oriented speech and the backing of 40 P.A.L.S. members, who had. turned out to hear the Senator and to give needed moral support to President Gracia Janes. In the months following that momen- tous meeting, P.A.L.S. Board members consulted each other and

266

Environmental Stewardship

a lawyer to update P.A.L.S.' By-law, so that it could adequately protect the group from hostile takeover bids in the future.

The events of that evening and continued harassment of P.A.L.S. by a small group of pro-development farmers attest to the fact that P.A.L.S. is perceived as a threat to some in the farm commu- nity, both those who favour development and those who believe that P.A.L.S. is responsible for all farm woes and are just urban people who have no right to help or hinder farmers. While the majority of farmers in Niagara remain uninvolved, the conflict underlined the need for P.A.L.S. to move quickly to resolve the foodland preservation issue.

The context within which it appeared P.A.L.S. could move quickly was the Provincial Task Force, set up by the new Minister of Ag- riculture, Mr. Elmer Buchanan, and headed by Huron County Planner Gary Davidson. Davidson, Len Roozen (of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food), Regional Planner Alan Veale and farm- ers Arnold Lepp (Niagara North Federation of Agriculture) and Dick Teather (Tender Fruit Producers Marketing Board), worked hard to find solutions to the problems of the Niagara fruit indus- try. The Minister had determined that the previous Federal/Pro- vincial Task Force was correct and that immediate solutions must be found. The Task Force was therefore to work quickly to provide an action-oriented agenda for the Province. While not a part of this important committee, P.A.L.S. pursued its study of easements and met once with Gary Davidson to outline in detail the methods to pursue and the enabling financing methods for the purchase of conservation easements.

The Task Force did work quickly, sending its recommendations on to the Minister by the end of April, 1991. P.A.L.S., the farmers, the regional planners and apparently the Ministry and Provin- cial appointee Gary Davidson were happy with the results. It was recommended (along with other actions for interest relief and lower input costs), that a plan for purchase of easements be in place by 1992, a plan that would unfold over a ten-year period or more, be voluntary, cost close to $95 million (no more than the grape pullout program of 1990, where no land was preserved) and

Fight for the Fruitlands

267

be enhanced by a very strict Regional land use policy. The only point of difference was the suggestion, at the last minute, by the farmers on the committee, to give interim payments of

up to $1,750 per hectare to either all farmers or just those most in need. P.A.L.S.'agreement with interim payments for all fruit farms was based on the widespread economic difficulties in the Niagara tender fruit industry (as documented in the previous federal/pro- vincial report) and on the hope that many more farmers would join the easement program in the short term.

The response from Queen's Park was at first very discouraging. The Minister was interested in easements, but the bureaucrats obviously were not. Taking advantage of a very high Provincial deficit and low standing in opinion polls, some staff were able to move to weaken interest in the easement approach (as too costly and perhaps transferable immediately to other areas in the Pro- vince at even greater cost). The resultant response promised nothing but further talks, and we sensed we should not get our hopes up for easements in Niagara.

Fortunately, further intense dialogue between Gary Davidson, the Region, the farmers, the Minister, and P.A.L.S. brought home the need for more immediate action and, more importantly, main- tained the Minister's interest in easements, perhaps as a 'pilot' project in Niagara.

In 1991, at the time of writing of this brief history of Niagara and the P.A.L.S.' battle to preserve Canada's Niagara fruitlands, P.A.L.S. is mustering its knowledge, energies, "friends" and pub- lic support for fruitland preservation, to mount an intense lobby of the government. The message it will bring to the government is an important one, since this may be the last chance to preserve the fruitlands. Already, in the absence of immediate moves to help the farmers economically and, under the pressure of pro-de- velopment politicians and some farmers at the local level, the Re- gion is moving to loosen land restrictions. If the provincial government moves immediately to help in a more concrete fash- ion through easements, it will weaken this development momen- tum and save the land for the long term. If it fails, the only

268

Environmental Stewardship

alternate mechanisms would be the imposition of provincial plan- ning controls or a reserve system such as British Columbia's where income support systems have been very costly and have been eroded over time, and amendments to the Act have allowed good land to leave reserves and non-farm uses to be made of farmlands.

P.A.L.S. sees easements as the only permanent solution for Niag- ara, one that is in the public good-both for the farmers and to ensure that the public shares in land preservation for the future. Such a programme is not a bottomless pit and, despite a skyrock- eting deficit, is affordable in the context of a phased-in plan over a ten to twenty year period. It is a vital part of P.A.L.S.' ultimate goal foodland preservation for the generations to come of the best lands in Canada by the best methods possible. Ironically, never have so many been in favour of a solution while it seems so close and yet so far from attainment.

Conclusion

All public interest groups have similar tales to spin. But some- how P.A.L.S.'story seems different. Perhaps this is because of the special quality of the "backyard' P.A.L.S. seeks to protect. The Ni- agara f

Preservation of Agriculatural lands

Fight for the Fruitlands

This website uses cookies.