How the Fossil Fuel Industry Can Save Itself and the Planet

The fossil fuel industry seems to have a romantic fascination with “all the oil in the ground”, a fascination that shields it from financial reality.

There are two things absolutely true about the fossil fuel industry.

It has a finite end because there is a finite end to the oil and gas in the ground.

The second truth is that extracting the remaining oil and gas keeps becoming more environmentally harmful, but more importantly to the industry, more costly. Indeed we are probably already at the point where their investments would have a greater profit by diverting them from fossil fuels to renewable energy.

But their romantic fascination with “all the oil in the ground” keeps them from seeing this.

If they want to maximize their profit would it not make sense to ration production of the easiest and cheapest oil and gas over future years, while leaving the most expensive and most environmentally harmful resources in the ground. This way prices could be maximized due to reduced supply while the environmental impact per year is reduced as we transition to a fossil fuel free economy, which they can move their investments into.

Glen Cairn Pathway System Deterioration

Bridlewood is not the only Kanata South community with crumblingmulti-use pathways (MUPs) that are deteriorating due to multiplefreeze-thaw cycles every year as a result of climate change.

This pathway through Glen Cairn is also crumbling away.

 

Climate Change, The Pandemic and Multi-Use Pathways (MUPs)

The greatest long term threat to humankind is undoubtedly climate change. While the planet can no doubt survive anything short of a collision with a planet sized meteorite or asteroid, climate change has the potential to be be disastrous to human habitat.

In the short term the greatest threat to humankind is the COVID-19 pandemic.

While both of these threats are said to be non-discriminatory and many claim “we are all in this together”, that clearly is not true because while the threats may not discriminate, our societies and dominant economic system certainly do. Both climate change and the pandemic have a greater impact on the developing world than the developed world, and within the developed world a greater impact on poor and marginalized communities.

But what does this all have to do with multi-use pathways (MUPs).

Climate change has created multiple freeze-thaw cycles every year, rather than one each spring, causing excessive damage to cycling infrastructure, in particular MUPs. At the same time the pandemic has created an increase in outdoor activity and in particular much greater demand for bicycles putting much greater demands on cycling infrastructure including MUPs.

This is is the impact on a typical Ottawa MUP in Kanata.

Bridlewood Small Hydro Corridor Multi-Use Pathway (MUP)

We need to improve our multi-use pathway standards so that they do not completely deteriorate after one winter and connect the MUPs together to create a city wide system for recreational and utilitarian use, commuting, shopping, etc.

While considering this we need to keep these important facts in mind. Improving cycling infrastructure increases the number of people using bicycles for utilitarian purposes like commuting and shopping, which reduces the strain on roads and automobile infrastructure and reduces road traffic congestion. At the same time improving cycling infrastructures costs considerably less improving automobile infrastructure. Leaving the only reasonable conclusion that the most cost efficient way to reduce road traffic congestion is to improve cycling infrastructure.

The Unspoken Privilege – English Privilege

We all know what White Privilege is but no one seems to speak about English Privilege.

English privilege is simply the ability of English language speakers to get by practically anywhere in the world without learning another language. It brings with it a sense of entitlement. English speakers get annoyed when the have to read subtitles because everything should be created for them. They go bonkers when being forced to read French on cereal boxes.

English privilege is, of course, strongly aligned with White Privilege.

The world has English Privilege because of British imperialism and colonialism, “the sun never sets on the British Empire”. The British hordes scoured the earth looking for riches and in so doing pillaged and enslaved it’s peoples. Indeed the whole basis for the sense of Western European superiority is the idea that the societies most successful at warfare and in capturing and enslaving other people are obviously more advanced and culturally superior to the people they enslave.

This relates directly to the idea that societies based on living in harmony with nature are primitive and those based on dominating nature are civilized.

People willing to live peacefully in harmony with nature are obviously inferior to these more advanced societies, at least that is the rationalization the White Supremacists use to justify themselves.

Towards a Green Social Democratic Economy

Background/Context

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.[1][2][3][4] Characteristics central to capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labor, voluntary exchange, a price system and competitive markets.[5][6] In a capitalist market economy, decision-making and investments are determined by every owner of wealth, property or production ability in financial and capital markets, whereas prices and the distribution of goods and services are mainly determined by competition in goods and services markets.[7][8]

Social democracy is a political, social and economic philosophy that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and a capitalist mixed economy. The protocols and norms used to accomplish this involve a commitment to representative and participatory democracy, measures for income redistribution, regulation of the economy in the general interest and social welfare provisions.[1][2][3] In this way, social democracy aims to create the conditions for capitalism to lead to greater democratic, egalitarian and solidaristic outcomes.[4]

The Green New Deal is an ambitious plan for how we can eliminate poverty and create millions of jobs while tackling the biggest threat of our time: climate change. It involves massive public investment in clean energy, transit and climate adaptation work. But the vision is bigger than that: it’s about transforming our entire economy to be safer and more fair, and give everyone a better life. First proposed in the U.S., the Green New Deal is now spreading around the world. In 2015, we joined with dozens of movement leaders to draft the The Leap Manifesto, a 15-point plan for how Canada can decarbonize its economy based on principles of justice. We’re excited about the Green New Deal because it’s even more ambitious than the Manifesto, and it’s being backed by both grassroots movements and politicians.

The Failure of Capitalism

If you are part of the 1%, or perhaps even the top 10%, of wealthy people that call themselves capitalists you are probably wondering what the nonsense of the heading above is. Capitalism is working just fine for you.

But if you are not one of the owners of the means of production, but are the means of production, part of the masses that actually produce the wealth and services that our society depends on you see it completely differently. Indeed even the capitalists themselves are recognizing the market system as it currently works does not serve society and are rethinking the idea that corporations only duty is to shareholders profits and are suggesting corporations also have a responsibility to workers, customers and society. Or at least they want the public to think they have such concerns as a means of placating the masses to prevent the complete abolition of capitalism.

Capitalism unfortunately is based on a lot of assumptions and mythology which simply is not true. Shall we look at some of them.

 

If everyone acts in their own self interest the interests of the society will be served is one of the basic tents of capitalism. Unfortunately it is just a poorly presented justification for greed.

The market will ensure fair prices and wages and an effective distribution of resources to where they are most needed. Clearly not working.

What's good for General Motors is good for America, or more generically, what is good for the mega corporations is good for the country and the society. Has the laughter died down yet.

Competition will ensure the survival of the best ideas and most efficient implementation of them and the failure of the poorest. UNLESS you are too big to fail, then state socialism will bail the capitalists out with the workers money.

No one is too rich and there is no need for income or wealth redistribution because the earth has infinite energy and resources and infinite capacity for development and the environmental impacts that go along with that and there are no limits to growth. Everybody can become a billionaire if they just make the effort. The poor are just lazy. No comment necessary.

Need I go on.

Fortunately social democracy does not require, nor seek, the elimination of private ownership. It only seeks to build a fair society where everyone can contribute with a fair distribution of wealth.

Inequality

We have all read the statistics on wealth and income inequality. It seems unnecessary to repeat them here. But here are a few citations anyway.

The world’s richest 1 percent, those with more than $1 million, own 45 percent of the world’s wealth. (Global Inequality - Inequality.org)

Last year 26 people owned the same as the 3.8 billion people who make up the poorest half of humanity. (5 shocking facts about extreme global inequality and how to even it up | Oxfam International)

Billionaires in Canada have increased their wealth by $20 billion over the last year, says a new Oxfam report on global inequality. In the same time, the 4.5 per cent of the country's wealth held by the poorest half of Canadians remained static. (Obscene gap between rich and poor, says Oxfam | National Observer)

Since 1990, the richest group of Canadians has increased its share of total national income, while the poorest and middle-income groups has lost share. (Income inequality - Canada and world results)

Income inequality in America is the highest it’s been since Census Bureau started tracking it, data shows (The Washington Post)

I wrote this about excessive wealth in an earlier blog post, THE FIFTH COLUMN: On Inequality, Democracy and Taxing the Rich – A Modest Proposal.

So what is excessive income and wealth. There are many ways to measure that, many statistical, but I propose a simpler definition – the amount of wealth and income where increases have no discernible effect on ones way of life or standard of living, where the increase is simply not noticeable in one's day to day life. Let's be generous to the wealthy in determining such levels. I propose an annual income of $1 million dollars and total assets of $100 million as the level that triggers “excessive income and wealth”. Above that no one notices without reading their financial statements.

The thing about excessive wealth is that it makes minuscule difference to the recipients but could make all the world of difference to the poor and underprivileged and to society as a whole if used for the common good. I will not even attempt to list what all that excessive wealth could do if devoted to the common good of society .

But there is another side to excessive income and wealth – it is highly undemocratic. The rich do not cling to their excessive wealth because it makes a difference to their daily lives. They cling to it because it gives them economic and political power. It is not just a matter of economic inequality, is a matter of political inequality.

Democracy is based on equality, one person one vote. Economic power is political power. Excessive wealth skews political power so that the wealthy have more of it. Excessive wealth is inherently undemocratic.

The argument that the rich are simply smarter or work harder simply does not hold water (to use an expression). The extremely wealthy are in that position because of privilege or in a few exceptional cases just plain dumb luck. But there is no moral justification for such extreme levels of wealth and inequality, particularity when you take into account the amount of economic and political power that provides which negates any sense of democracy we think may exist in our societies.

Climate Change

This inequality is taking place in a time of environmental crisis. No need to go on and on about the scientific consensus here. Just a few citations for the record.

UNITED NATIONS UN Climate Change Summit 2019

Major Reports - Climate Change - A Global Issue - Research Guides at United Nations Dag Hammarskjold Library

Canada’s Changing Climate Report | Natural Resources Canada

Some people suggest the solution to climate change lies in the hands of a few big corporations. Others think it only involves moving away from fossil fuels. But in reality avoiding future environmental disaster requires a major remaking of our economy from one based on the concept of unlimited consumption, waste and growth to one based on sustainable living and sustainable development (remember that). We need to refocus our society away from the concept of increasing our standard of living, where standard of living is defined by how much stuff (energy and resources) we consume to one based on increasing our quality of life, where quality of life is defined by how satisfied we are with our life experiences, in effect by how “happy” we are.

Tackling Climate Change and Inequality: An Opportunity to Build a New Society

Too big crises at once. How do we prioritize our response. Fortunately we do not. This is indeed an opportunity to use our responses to both these crises to build a better society.

So let us first look at the so-called “elephant in the room”, the idea that actually doing something significant about inequality is an extreme radical idea that involves stealing the wealth of the mega rich.

Let us assume that we are in an economy where the richest people earn up to a million dollars annually, making more than 10-20 times the income of average workers and that the richest people could acquire wealth of up to $100 million dollars, 100 times what the average worker can save up in a lifetime. Then let us assume someone suggests that is not enough incentive for people to work hard and invest and we should change the system so the wealthy can earn unlimited incomes and acquire unlimited wealth gaining them the economic and political power that that brings with it. Those people would be called extreme radicals with crazy ideas. Rationally that kind of uncontrolled excessive inequality is the crazy radical idea that would undermine society, not establishing reasonable limits to inequality.

Tackling inequality will provide the political opportunity and funds to change our society to deal with climate change. We need to change the economic and political power distribution to do this and there will be economic disruptions and major economic change, which will be for the better in the long term.

How Do We Tackle Inequality

Let us look first at how we tackle the problem of excessive wealth (as defined earlier) and inequality.

Preferably we deal with this outside the tax system and only use the tax system to correct egregious behaviours that continue.

We must start with protections for ordinary working people. We need to start with a minimum guaranteed income for everyone, and not a poverty/subsistence level income but a decent middle class income that allows people to have a satisfactory quality of life.

Side note: Finland’s basic income is making people happier and healthier

When it comes to excess income we should set a societal standard that the gap between the lowest income and the highest income should not exceed twenty times within the society and ten times within any one organization. That leaves lots of room to reward hard work, education or risk taking.

On excessive wealth we hope corporations and organization revise their profit structure so it does not lead to excessive wealth, by reducing exorbitant executive salaries and increasing wages for the people that make the goods and provide the services that create the profits, spending more on making products and services better quality and reducing prices. The days when maximizing profits was the only corporate goal need to end.

There will, of course, be situations of such excessive wealth where drastic measures will need to be taken. They should include, where appropriate, simply transferring corporate ownership to workers co-operatives where the profits can be shared more evenly. They may also include the society, through government, taking ownership of enterprises and devoting the profits earned to the common good. In some cases corporate operations and practices will need to be realigned to better serve the needs of the society as a whole.

Where excessive income and wealth remains we will need to use the tax system to tax away any income over $1 million annually and any wealth in the form of assets over $100 million.

At levels below those that are extremely excessive we need to reform the income tax system reversing decades of tax reductions for high income earners and making it more progressive. We start with eliminating income tax on the minimum guaranteed annual income. Tax rates above that should increase progressively with new higher tax brackets at the upper end.

Corporate tax rates need to be brought back to historical levels before the massive cuts began.

What Type of Economy Do We Need

As we respond to the climate change crisis we must realize that the answer is not simply avoiding a catastrophe at this time by reducing our fossil fuel use and carbon footprint but avoiding future environmental disasters with an economy based, not on consumerism with it's inherent excessive consumption and waste, but on sustainability.

The 4 R's:

One guideline to this is the traditional 4 Rs .

1. Refuse: To refuse waste is often seen as a "radical" choice. As a consumer, the impact of refusing waste is a clear statement to the producer. This choice is a powerful one in that you refuse to take on the responsibility of waste and only wish to receive the wanted or needed product.2. Reduce: As you gain a better understanding of what waste is and the impacts it has on our natural, economic and social environments, reducing becomes a choice of consciousness. Reducing waste allows you to participate at any level.3. Reuse: Using conventional waste to divert it from the waste stream offers a broad spectrum of savings. From plastic containers to shipping containers, the reuse of a product introduces a second life cycle.4. Recycle: Though recycling is the last "R" in this though process, it has become the most commonly used element. Recycling is absolutely important in eliminating waste and will always be part of the ongoing process. Separating out recyclables from other waste is a responsibility that often lies with the end consumer. The problems that arise with recycling are usually the lack of knowledge and accessibility.

I would like to emphasize here that these are listed in priority order with the most important principle being saying no to environmentally unsustainable products and practices.

And “Reduce” has to be meaningful as we move from an economy based on consuming to one based on living.

For example, at a time when families are smaller why are houses bigger. A family of two adults and two children does not need a three or four thousand square foot house. A family with two parents and two teenagers does not need four automobiles. What happened to the family car. Appliances should be built to last twenty or more years. Even computers, tablets, smartphones, etc,. are at a state of maturity now that they do not need to be replaced every two years. When it comes to smaller items it is often the excessive packaging that is the biggest environmental problem. Why do we allow that when it harms the planet and adds unnecessary costs to both the producer and consumer. We simply cannot continue such a wasteful and unsustainable lifestyle. Clothing can be worn until it is actually worn out. These are just simple examples of how we can change our habits with little real impact on our quality of life.

Localism

I would add an additional, and perhaps most important, principle here – localism. A search of the Internet will find many different definitions of localism and environmental localism and political localism. Most of them relate to a certain degree to what I see as localism in this context.

One of the biggest users of energy and resources and contributors to climate change is transportation, and in particular the transportation of goods over long distances.

People make a great deal of noise over personal air travel. However there is a lot of good that comes with people visiting other countries, experiencing other cultures and getting to know other people. There is a also a lot of good to come from international conferences where people get together to try to solve the world's problems that can only be done face to face.

Certainly a lot of business travel, where people are simply travelling to airports and then to meeting rooms and only meeting like-minded people and only discussing internal corporate matters could probably be replaced with electronic communications.

But the big transportation waste of energy and resources (and carbon footprint) has to be the needless global transportation of goods that could easily be produced locally by local workers. There was a time when every town had a sawmill, a textile mill and a factory or two producing consumer goods and providing good paying union jobs.

Now most of our consumer goods are made in the same massive factories in China and most of our clothing comes from the third world. Capitalism is supposed to promote efficiency but when you add the amount of resources and labour to the cost of transportation to market, importing most of our goods from offshore is not efficient. The only measure by which this is profitable is the extremely low value we attach to workers in developing countries and on flags of convenience shipping lines. When you look at what wages used to paid for goods consumed in North America compared to wages are now paid for most goods consumed in North America it is pennies, or less, on the dollar.

But the environmental costs, particularly in terms of carbon footprint, are excessively greater than producing goods close to where they will be used.

Much the same can be said about food. There is a lot of energy and resources expended because we think we should be able to get anything we want from anywhere anytime. That was not even the case 50 years ago when many products were just considered seasonal. We don't need to just eat what we grow in our own backyards but we can adopt a more balanced approach to importing food. And we can certainly encourage more local growing of Canadian produced foods to reduce transportation costs and the related environmental impacts.

We need more than individual tokenism here but an economy built on these principles.

Community Infrastructure Building and A Green New Deal

Capitalism and the so-called free market may do a good job of maximizing short term profits but it needs tempering to serve longer term corporate needs and is a complete failure at serving social needs, often diverting funds to frivolous but profitable expenditures.

Regulations (including labour, environmental, and health and safety standards) can restrain some of the worst aspects of capitalism but only taxation can provide the funds necessary to fulfill our society's needs. This is why, as pointed out earlier in this post, we need a strong progressive tax system especially at the highest levels of income and for corporations.

As well as funding a social safety net in the form of a guaranteed annual income and universal health care and public education, not to mention police and fires services, defence and foreign policy, and on and on, taxation funds necessary public infrastructure.

Side note: Canada Should Be Spending $595 Billion More On Public Services Per Year

This is where the proposed Green New Deal comes in. By building sustainable public infrastructure the public sector can set an example for the private sector on how to do development that is not harmful to the environment.

The most obvious example is transportation which has a huge carbon footprint. Locally improved public transit and cycling infrastructure can reduce the use of individual motor vehicles considerably, even eliminating it's need for short trips. Development of electric transport vehicles, particularly rail, can make a huge reduction in the economic and environmental cost of delivering goods, especially when coupled with production facilities (factories) closer to the final consumers.

The improvement of water, sewage and waste disposal facilities has an obvious environmental benefit.

As well, moving to a more people focused society, as discussed in the next section of this post, will see the need for more educational, arts and community facilities.

And we must not neglect to include publicly funded housing projects to address the chronic need for affordable housing. Public housing projects will provide an opportunity to develop and implement more sustainable building techniques and build housing that has much lower ongoing environmental impacts.

Side Notes: Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design - Wikipedia and Canada Green Building Council - LEED Homes

We now know the best way to provide affordable housing is through co-operative or mixed income housing that does not ghettoize low income earners, Hopefully a guaranteed income at a decent middle class income level will make this less of an issue.

All of this will, of course, provide an employment benefit, increasing the traditional Gross Domestic Product (GDP) standard of living measurement and more importantly increasing the quality of life of the population.

What Type of Society Do We Want

This is the big question. Do we want a society based on people not stuff, living not consuming. But first this.

The Robots Are Taking Over and Taking Our Jobs

Since the first stages of industrialization to the assembly line and beyond to modern robotics there have been two scenarios for this trend. One dystopian. One utopian.

The current capitalist economy tends to be leading us to the dystopian model. As automation leads workers to be more productive, producing more per hour of labour, wages per hour are going down. Workers are earning less for producing more. This is because, unlike early predictions, increased productivity has not led to reduced working hours but to increased unemployment. At some point very few people will be producing a large number goods for a very small number of people and the whole system will collapse.

A New Society For A New Economy

“Whoever has the most stuff when he dies wins” is a reflection of our current capitalist society based on competition where the goal is to prove yourself better than other people by acquiring more stuff, which may include fame and status.

There is a another, more utopian model. The expression "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” reflects a society where everyone contributes according to their ability and has their basic needs met, a social democratic society.

Such a society will produce our basic needs in the most efficient way possible, taking advantage of automation and robotics to free people from the drudgery of producing excessive stuff. We will produce less stuff because our lives will not be based on the status conferred by owning things.

People will still work, but hours of drudgery will be limited and everyone will be guaranteed a decent middle class income. Education will be at the forefront of society with most people serving as both teachers and students. Education, the arts and culture (including writing, music, theatre, movie, TV and video production, etc.) and recreation will provide meaningful employment. There is a huge opportunity for localism here with hopefully a better balance of funding and earnings for local productions compared to international corporate financed productions and so-called superstars earnings.

Connections with the natural world will be emphasized with resource extraction of the wilderness being replaced by sustainable recreation and forms of eco-education and eco-tourism. Sustainable energy sources will replace those based on resource extraction.

A society based on living a more meaningful life will reduce alienation (Side Note: Karl Marx’s Conception of Alienation) and build a sense of community and reduce crime and conflict. While the first stages of new society will allow for some inequality, people realizing they do not want to measure themselves by how much more they own than everyone else will lead to the gradual end of inequality. The lack of desire for the consumption of excessive stuff will put less stress on the planet's resources and environment and avoid future environmental disasters.

And finally Karl Marx and Jesus Christ will rest easily in their graves.

Postscript:

For those asking what about our democratic institutions. That is a completely different blog post. See: THE FIFTH COLUMN: On Democracy

The Truth About the Kanata Lakes Golf Course Development Proposal

Many of you probably see the opposition to replacing the Kanata Lakes golf course with housing as just a NIMBY response of a bunch of privileged entitled suburbanites living in their low density paradise. After all golf courses are not usually considered environmentally friendly and there is a real need for more housing, though whether we need more low density suburban housing is a different question.

However there is a much bigger backstory to this whole issue relating to larger issues of environmental protection and land developers' powers over communities and municipal governments.

All of Kanata Lakes (originally referred to as Marchwood-Lakeside in planning documents), including the golf course, was zoned as Environmental Protection before the developers flexed their muscle threatening to go to the Ontario Municipal Board to get them to overrule the environmental zoning unless the municipal authorities allowed them to develop the land. The result was the flawed 40% agreement applying to Kanata Lakes/South March Highlands.. This was supposedly to protect the most environmentally sensitive lands yet the municipal authorities allowed the developer to include a golf course in that 40% protected “greenspace”. Much of the rest of the 40% was lands the developer did not want to develop anyway. I suppose we should be thankful homeowners lawns were not also included in the 40%.

The fact is we only have the South March Highlands Conservation Forest because the municipality bought those lands as that was the only way to protect them as environmental zoning is almost meaningless in Ontario.

For example a portion of the South March Highlands Conservation Forest within the Trillium Woods was zoned Environmental Protection. When the municipality denied permission to develop it the developer went to the OMB and had the zoning overturned and the municipality was forced to buy the land to protect it from development.

The golf course represents a contractual agreement by the developer (passed on to it's successors) to protect 40% of the total Kanata Lakes/South March Highlands lands as “greenspace”. To allow that 40% protected “greenspace” to be reduced even further would be to admit that communities have absolutely no control over land development and that there are virtually no protections for environmentally important lands in Ontario. It would be to say to the land development industry - go ahead do whatever you want, we are not even going to try to give communities a say in local development decisions anymore.

The solution is not to just acquiesce because trading a golf course for housing might be a good idea but to use this as an opportunity to further strengthen the 40% agreement by swapping the protected golf course lands for more environmentally important lands in the South March Highlands. While most of the KNL (Urbandale/Richcraft) lands are probably too far along in the development stage to be protected there is an environmentally significant portion of lands north of the South March Highlands Conservation Forest including a significant block of land owned by Metcalfe Realty that is zoned Environmental Protection.

The 2008 Brunton report said this about these lands:

Even at 400 ha, the Conservation Forest is presently too small to fully represent South March Highlands natural features and functions. A substantial proportion of that deficiency, however, is represented in the area immediately east and north of Heron Pond. Were the contributions of that area included within those of the present Conservation Forest, total protected floristic representation would rise to 98%. Significant species representation would also increase considerably, rising to 85% of the South March Highlands total. Substantially better representation of Blanding’s Turtle breeding habitat would also be achieved. Conservation management of this adjacent landscape is clearly a desirable objective of impact mitigation for the Conservation Forest.

It is recommended that management planning consider mechanisms for incorporating and protecting the ecological contributions of adjacent lands, particularly those to the north, to minimize negative impacts of the unnatural shape of the Conservation Forest.

Natural environment assessment (existing conditions):

South March Highlands Conservation Forest, Kanata,Ottawa, Ontario, May 2008, Daniel F. Brunton, Brunton Consulting Services, Ottawa, Ontario)

My understanding is that the municipal government has been trying to purchase that land but the landowner wants to sell it as a price suitable for development lands and the municipality wants to buy it at it's value as land zoned Environmental Protection.

I would propose that the current owner of the Kanata Lakes golf course purchase that land and donate it to the city (for inclusion in the South March Highlands Conservation Forest) to replace the golf course lands within the 40% agreement and that the golf course lands then be zoned for housing.

This is not quite a win win situation as no doubt it will not satisfy most of the current neighbours of the golf course, but it will allow for new housing and protect more environmentally important lands while strengthening the spirit of the 40% agreement.

Note: the terms municipality and municipal authorities, etc. are used above because over the time period involved the municipal jurisdiction went through numerous reorganizations from City of Kanata to a regional government model to the current enlarged City of Ottawa. It should also be noted that the ownership of lands comprising Kanata Lakes have passed through several developers over the years.

Further Background Information

Kanata Lakes 40% Plan, City of Ottawa

(click/double click on image to enlarge)

South Mach Highlands Zoning Map
 

(click/double click on image to enlarge)

 Zoning Codes Used on Map
RESIDENTIAL ZONES
Residential Third Density Zone R3
Residential Fifth Density Zone R5
OPEN SPACE AND LEISURE ZONES
Parks and Open Space Zone O1
ENVIRONMENTAL ZONE
Environmental Protection Zone EP
RURAL ZONES
Agricultural Zone AG
Rural Residential RR
Rural Countryside Zone RU
OTHER ZONES
Development Reserve Zone DR


Comprehensive Map of the South March Highlands

(click/double click on image to enlarge) 

THE FIFTH COLUMN: Saving the South March Highlands: Looking to the Future

THE FIFTH COLUMN: Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The South March Highlands

THE FIFTH COLUMN Everything I have written on The South March Highlands and The South March Highlands Management Plan

Primitive vs Civilized Societies

As someone born in 1950 and raised and educated in a Eurocentric culture I learned early that civilized societies are intellectually, socially, and technologically superior to primitive societies. This despite the fact that the indigenous peoples of this land I was born on have for centuries had their own distinct languages, long tradition of passing down oral history, sophisticated social structures, and technologies well suited to the land they live on.

Reflection on actual facts indicates the reality is that the real difference between civilized and primitive societies is that one is based on trying to conquer nature while the other is based on living in harmony with it and only one by it's very existence threatens the future of the human species.

Beliefs That Will Destroy The World

City of Ottawa Kanata South (Terry Fox to West Hunt Club Road) Class Environmental Assessment Study – The NCC Role in Protecting the Greenbelt

Submission to The National Capital Commission
Richard W. Woodley
Bridlewood, Kanata, Ontario
June 21, 2013

I am providing this submission to the National Capital Commission (NCC) because I see the NCC as the Guardian of the Greenbelt while I see the City of Ottawa more as the guardian of roads and car drivers.

Information on this proposal and study is available on the City of Ottawa website here:

http://ottawa.ca/en/kanata-south-terry-fox-west-hunt-club-road-class-environmental-assessment-study

This proposal is in response to the perceived needs of Bridlewood residents for more roads to take private automobiles downtown during rush hours, the same time as the public transit system is optimized for. It relates more to a desire to use private automobiles with less inconvenience of time delays than a real need to improve transportation links downtown, which could be better done by improving public transit options.

The original proposal to solve this perceived problem was to, essentially, extend Terry Fox Drive to the 416 by extending Hope Side Road, which it connects directly to (essentially the same road with only the name changing), through the Greenbelt to the 416.

Apparently, according to the City, everybody agrees that that would be environmentally inappropriate, although I suspect the City simply realized that the NCC would not approve that so they decided they might as well jump on the environmental bandwagon.

So now we have a “compromise” proposal to widen and realign Old Richmond Road and West Hunt Club Road between Hope Side Road and the 416. While perhaps not as draconian as the original proposal for a new road through the Greenbelt, this new proposal still compromises the integrity of the Greenbelt by widening the road corridor through it and purposely increasing traffic through it and thus increasing the risk to wildlife and degrading their habitat.

And the reason it is proposed to do this is to reduce the inconvenience to Bridlewood car drivers during rush hour, the majority of whom could very effectively use the public transit system that is optimized for that time period. A much more effective solution would be to improve the public transit service to deal with any projected needs for more transportation capacity to downtown.

But this is really not about need but the desire of people to use private automobiles, many of them with only the driver in them, during rush hour.

I would urge the NCC to not rubber stamp this proposal from the City but to take their responsibility as Guardians of the Greenbelt and protectors of the wildlife and habitat within it very seriously before approving a proposal based on desire rather than need.

The NCC should also only consider the option that has the least impact on wildlife and it's habitat, the three lane, rather than four lane, proposal.

And finally I wish to draw to the attention of the NCC, although I am certain it is already aware of this, that along this route proposed for widening there are two NCC parking lots, P6 and P11 with trail systems on both sides where crossing from one side to the other is already very difficult and dangerous. If any widening of these roads is allowed the NCC must insist that it include a solution that provides safe passage between the trail systems on both sides of the roads at the locations of those parking lots.

Respectfully submitted

Richard W. Woodley

This submission is also being sent to:

Angela Taylor, P Eng. Senior Project Engineer Transportation Planning Branch Planning & Growth Management Department City of Ottawa Angela.Taylor@ottawa.ca

Valerie McGirr, P. Eng. Consultant Project Manager AECOM valerie.mcgirr@aecom.com

Ottawa City Councillor Allan Hubley Ward 23 Kanata South Allan.Hubley@ottawa.ca

This submission is also being published on my blog The Fifth Column
http://the5thc.blogspot.ca

Mayor Jimmy Really Doesn’t Get It

The following twitter exchange exemplifies Mayor Jimmy's petty reaction to criticism.

I suppose I should be thankful I have not been blocked yet, like so many of the mayor's critics.

Jim Watson ‏@JimWatsonOttawa
Pleased to join @Eli_Ward5 and @AllanHubley_23 and Cyril Leeder at Tanger Outlet ground breaking in Kanata
pic.twitter.com/RXzKKT46gZ

Richard W. Woodley ‏@the5thColumnist
@JimWatsonOttawa @AllanHubley_23 @Eli_Ward5
paving farmland and clearcutting forests sure makes our mayor happy and proud #developersrule

Jim Watson ‏@JimWatsonOttawa
@the5thColumnist and where do you live? Oh yes, a former farmers field.

What can I take from this but the suggestion that somehow anyone who lives on what used to be farmland or wilderness has no right to oppose the inappropriate development of farmland or environmentally sensitive lands. That is a pretty neat trick to basically take away the rights of anyone who lives in a city, in this case the city of Ottawa, to oppose the development of farmland or environmental lands. After all, most cities, including Ottawa, started as rural agricultural areas and before that was wilderness.

But no, because we might live on what was once farmland or wilderness does not take away our rights to be concerned about and oppose inappropriate development.

Mayor Jimmy may want to label us as crazy environmentalists who should all live in cabins in the bush but we are not against cities and development but rather understand that boundaries need to be set, and rules need to be followed, to allow for appropriate development, and appropriate development is not defined as whatever developers want.

Does Mayor Jimmy really expect home buyers to determine what lands are developed by their purchasing choices made after the fact. Does he really think that would work. That people will not buy houses that are already built because they think they should not have been built there, knowing their decisions will not bring the farmland or wilderness back. Does he really think he can transfer the responsibility for proper decision making by the authorities who actually have power to the virtually powerless consumers of these mega corporations' housing developments.

It is the responsibility of the political authorities at the federal, provincial and municipal levels to set limits and establish priorities to protect agricultural land environmental lands. And as more land becomes developed and agricultural and environmental lands become scarcer it becomes more important to protect them. We need to strengthen, not weaken these protections. We need to be more vigilant, not less vigilant, in enforcing the rules.

Politicians, like Mayor Jimmy, need to take these responsibilities seriously and not dismiss criticism in a petty way simply because it is expressed by people who actually live in the City of Ottawa, the people they are supposed to represent.

The Lime Kiln Technical Trail Will Never Be The Same

Today we finally had the opportunity to hike the Lime Kiln Technical Trail for the first time since the Lime Kiln area fire in the Stony Swamp Conservation Area.

(click on map to enlarge)
Things are looking pretty good for the first part of the trail, although you start to see larger and larger signs of fire as you look alongside the trail and then you are in the middle of the Fire Zone. At that point on the map you can see the hike diverging somewhat from the trail as we tried to follow the trail on the GPS and keep watch for the silver Rideau Trail triangles (silver because in most cases the blue paint was removed due to the heat of the fire). Most of the trail within the Fire Zone was unrecognizable although there were a few recognizable trail features along the route we followed.

The fire zone ended shortly before one of the fire roads crossed the trail. At that point the trail continues on the other side of the fire road but due to all the debris pushed up alongside the road we were unable to follow the trail. Knowing it reconnected further along the Fire Road we continued following the road, intending to follow it back from the other end, but when we reached that location we again had the problem of the piled up debris hiding the entrance into the trail, so we ended up missing about 200 metres of trail. After that the Fire Road wiped out most of the trail except for a short portion that ran just alongside it just before the Lime Kiln Bridge.

My guess would be, taking into account the first section of trail, and the section we by-passed, plus the short section of trail at the end, that close to 50% of the trail might be intact in it's original condition. The other 50% will probably need extensive rehabilitation and some of the technical features might never be recovered.

My inclination, however, would be that it would be best to let the natural environment and vegetation recover on it's own before attempting to rebuild the trail. We did notice that there already appeared to be some new growth within the fire zone and on the fire roads. At the appropriate time I would hope that the National Capital Commission (NCC) would consult with all trail users, including mountain bikers, in developing a trail rehabilitation plan.


(select 720p to view in high definition and full screen to view full screen)

Martha Webber on the Destruction of the Beaver Pond Forest

Martha Webber, renowned Kanata/Ottawa botanist, naturalist and educator, wrote the following in response to the news of the final complete clear-cutting of the Beaver Pond Forest in the South March Highlands. It is posted here with her permission.

Is there no way to end the destruction? This old growth forest is not only a refuge for wildlife, First Nation artifacts, but unique in its location within an urban boundary. Ottawa's version of Algonquin park, with trails accessible by foot, bike or public transit in use year round by residents and guests to the city. The "lungs of the world", so called because of air purification, reflected in the health of our citizens. Even on the hottest days of summer, those who walk its trails benefit from clean, fragrant air and escape from constant city noise. Autistic children respond well to this, all of us benefit. Such a walk in Japan is called "forest bathing" for stress reduction and health support. There is still sufficient forest standing to become a city park which would soon recover the cost as an ecotourism attraction.

There are already more new families in proliferating developments than there are schools and other supports available. No consideration is given to endangered plants and animals, even to flora and fauna in general. They have no rights when measured against development money and influence. So much money is available today for major city projects, if some could be postponed ? A forest must be a certain size and quality to support a viable wildlife food chain, and ours is being decimated.

There is so much money being spent in this city today, some of these targets could be postponed for a while. A layer of smog already overlies the city on hot days, without the ancient forest we will require some sort of filter to breathe, as in other major cities like Mexico City, or Toronto, and children and seniors will be especially at risk.

Open Letter to the National Capital Commission re Lime Kiln Trail Fire

The fire near the Lime Kiln Trail has been described as a tragedy. Perhaps not. If houses or roads had been built on the land it certainly would be a tragedy that the forest would never recover from, though some would call it development or progress. But the forest will recover from the fire and, though we all wish it could have been avoided, the fire presents an opportunity.

So what should the National Capital Commission (NCC) do about the site of the fire, I would suggest nothing, or as little as possible, only what is necessary to make the site safe. Please no attempts to make it presentable, or tidy it up, or artificially beautify it. What we have is an opportunity for the public to see a forest naturally regenerate itself, and perhaps a chance for scientists (an endangered species themselves within the current federal government) to study the regeneration.

I would call upon the NCC to allow the public, particularly regular users of the trails, back into the trail system as soon as possible to see the effects of the fire and to start observing the changes as the forest regenerates itself. Please avoid any further damage to the forest from heavy equipment beyond what was obviously required to fight the fire. The only tools likely needed might be rakes to clear burnt wood and debris from the trails. Trail users, who probably know the trails better than the NCC does, will rebuild the trail system by using it.

Simply closing it down would be to ignore a great opportunity and trying to artificially create an unnatural ecosystem or tree plantation would be worse. Let us seize this opportunity to build something meaningful from the ashes of this unfortunate event.

Endangered Species Legislation Wrong Approach

Trying to protect endangered species is simply the wrong approach to protecting wildlife.

What we do is allow open season on development/destruction of wildlife habitat unless it contains endangered species. Then we make a half-hearted token attempt to protect those species, often while still allowing the development/destruction of the habitat they depend on. When that fails and the species is wiped out in that area it is open season on developing/destroying the habitat again.

This of course is because the purpose of the legislation is to interfere as little as possible with development while appearing to care about the environment.

The way to protect wildlife is to protect their habitat from destruction/development before they become endangered, not after it is too late.

We need to strengthen environmental legislation, not weaken it, as both provincial and federal governments intend to do, and not even openly but stealthily using illegitimate omnibus budget bills

South March Highlands Mountain Bikers - Unlikely Trail Heroes

Unlikely, because more often than not the stereotypical view of mountain bikers is more likely to be as trail villains rather than trail heroes.

First, we have the well meaning but uninformed view of many who call themselves environmentalists that mountain biking damages trails, when the vast majority of the research indicates the impact is similar to hiking.

Then, we have perceived concerns of hikers envisioning people on scary looking full suspension mountain bikes, ignoring everyone else, speeding downhill towards them, when the reality is that mountain biking is not the Tour De France and mountain bikers on technical singletrack are usually not riding at racing speeds, primarily for their own safety.

And then we do have places where rogue mountain bikers rule and have little regard for other trail users or responsible trail use, but these are the real exceptions, even if they appear to be the stereotypical rule.

In the South March Highlands the mountain bikers are not seen as villains. This is partly due to a co-operative landowner, the City of Ottawa, and an open-minded and educated environmental community led by the South March Highlands Coalition.

However it is mostly because of the mountain bikers themselves and the leadership provided by the Ottawa Mountain Bike Association (OMBA).

The mountain bikers in the South March Highlands have established a reputation for not only be respectful, courteous and friendly to other trail users but are respected and appreciated by them for the literally thousands of hours of work put into developing and maintaining a sustainable trail system that can be enjoyed by all trail users.

The mountain bikers started riding on existing trails, created by hikers, cross-country skiers and even dog-sledders and built on it, creating a sustainable trail system based on the IMBA stacked loop model where the further you get from the trailhead the more rugged and difficult the trails become. This is a model that serves both beginner and advanced hikers and mountain bikers well.

The mountain bikers put in literally thousands of hours of work on trail building and maintenance creating a sustainable trail system that avoids muddy areas and provides for proper drainage and erosion protection. As well as building a system that is less susceptible to rain damage they also educate and encourage riders not to ride in the mud, and when it is necessary to follow the rule of sticking to the middle of the trail to avoid trail widening.

But they have not done this in isolation from the community and other trail users but have worked with them and the landowner, the City of Ottawa, to develop a management plan for the South March Highlands Conservation Forest and the trail system and are about to sign a joint stewardship agreement with they City to manage the trail system.

They have already created a new map of the trail system and are just beginning to install comprehensive trail signs linked to it in a project where materials are funded by the City and volunteer labour provided by OMBA members. This is a project that will be appreciated by the whole community as this is a near wilderness trail system where people have often become lost on the trails.

Indeed, if you ask just about anyone you see on the trails you will find that in the South March Highlands the mountain bikers are not the villains, but rather the heroes that do so much to make the trails a wonderful experience for everyone that uses them.

The Truth About The Kanata Lakes 60% Plus Agreement

So, what of the so-called 40% agreement to protect environmental lands in the Kanata Lakes development in the South March Highlands. Is it really a myth. Apparently so.

The more I examine and analysis the facts and reality around that so-called agreement the more I realize it was just spin.

What is guaranteed is that the developer has the absolute rights to clear-cut, blast and otherwise destroy the environment to build roads, houses and buildings on 60% of the land. In addition to that 60% they have the right to clear-cut and develop an additional portion of the remaining land as a private golf course, which they have done. Any requirements for them to provide parkland or other amenities must not encroach on that 60% Plus, but come from the remaining land. Any land required to provide stormwater management ponds and other such facilities for their development must not come from the 60% Plus but from the remaining land. Any lands such as designated Provincially Significant Wetlands or Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest or setbacks thereto must not encroach on the 60% Plus, but come from whatever land may be remaining.

The only thing that is guaranteed in the so-called agreement is the developers right to destroy the environment on 60% Plus ++ of the land.

And what of the City of Ottawa (and Kanata previously) as well as local (and beyond) politicians roles in this fiasco. I will leave it to the reader to decide whether they are part of a conspiracy, wilfully ignorant, or simply incompetent.

Help Save the South March Highlands by Voting it One of Canada's Great Places

The Fifth Column has written many times about the most biodiverse natural area in Ottawa adjacent to urban Kanata and threatened by urban sprawl and development.

Now is your chance to help save the South March Highlands by raising the profile of its cause by voting to have it designated one of the Great Places in Canada. We can win this designation if we all take the time to vote daily in the Canadian Institute of Planners Great Places in Canada contest.

Click Here to Find Out More About the Contest

Click Here to Vote for the South March Highlands
Even if you do not believe we can save all of the South March Highland it is still worth the struggle to save as much of it as we possibly can. The more of the South March Highlands we can save, the more of a sustainable ecosystem we will be able to protect for future generations.

Learn more about the South March Highlands below:




Just 20 minutes from Parliament Hill, this is Ottawa's Great Forest: an old-growth paradise that is recreationally enjoyed and spiritually revered. It has untapped ecotourism potential, but threatened by urban sprawl. Spanning over a thousand hectares, this Canadian Shield ecosystem is more than a billion years old. Rich in wetlands and mature forest, it is home to more than 654 species, including 18 species that are at risk of becoming extinct.

This area contains hundreds of mammal, bird, and vegetation species. The fact that they’re all in one place within a major urban city is astounding. No other major city in the world has the biodiversity that this region has. For citizens and tourists alike, the South March Highlands offer an immersive glimpse into Canada's pre-colonial ecology. The forest attracts birders, nature lovers, scouts, biologists, archeologists, hikers, mountain bikers, skiers, photographers...and dreamers.

What makes this forest so special? It's biodiversity is exceptional. The South March Highlands area is rated as a provincially significant Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) for both its Life Science value (895 hectares) and its wetlands (114 hectares). There are 679 known species including 160+ bird species, although there remains much to be discovered. Scientists believe there could be thousands of species in this wilderness. There are also two rare coldwater streams that run through the highlands, providing a life source to many animals that wouldn't normally survive in an urban environment.

The highlands have also been sacred ground for area Algonquins – forming Turtle Island at a time when Ottawa was submerged by the Champlain Sea thousands of years ago. At least three 10,000-year-old archaeological sites have recently been discovered here and are awaiting further study.

Being so close to the city's downtown core, the highlands understandably face growing pressure from groups wanting to develop the land. Many community, recreational, and cultural groups have been champions for protecting this fragile forest. On behalf of aboriginals everywhere, the late Grandfather William Commanda, recipient of the Order of Canada, was dedicated to protecting it. Just before his passing in 2011, he said the South March Highlands are a "national heritage site, one of significant Indigenous importance and as an Algonquin in the unceded, unconquered, and unsurrendered Ottawa River Watershed.”

Other community groups include the South March Coalition, which has put forth a stewardship plan for the area (www.southmarchhighlands.ca). To help protect ecological sensitive areas, a trail system is maintained by the Ottawa Mountain Biking Association. Numerous national groups have recognized South March's special ecology, including the David Suzuki Foundation, the Sierra Club of Canada, and CPAWS.

This great forest is important not only to Ottawa's residents and visitors, but to all Canadians. It's a rare old-growth environment that is home to many species on the brink of extinction. It's a living history lesson in pre-colonial ecology. It's a sacred place that holds cultural and archeological secrets. It's a place to explore, to breathe, and to appreciate Mother Earth – all this only 20 minutes from Parliament Hill!

As Ottawa's suburbs began to grow westward in the 1970s, then-Kanata City planners and provincial environmental officials recognized that the highlands deserved special protection. Engineers also recognized that South March's wetlands were very effective at managing watershed issues – the natural system protected the developed areas from flooding. This foresight in planning is the reason we still have the South March Highland today.

NCC "Grand" "Massive" Greenbelt Expansion More Wish List Than To Do List

According to the Ottawa Citizen:

OTTAWA — The National Capital Commission brought forward a massive expansion Wednesday of the Greenbelt that will see the “emerald necklace” grow by 2,400 hectares in a bid to cement Ottawa’s reputation as one of the world’s greenest capitals.

(View Greenbelt expansion in a larger map)

The effort is part of a grand plan to protect the natural environment and ecosystem of the National Capital Region and connect the Greenbelt to features such as the Carp Hills, South March Highlands, Cumberland Forest and even across the Ottawa River to Gatineau Park.

Over 50 years, parcels of land — large and small — belonging to provincial and city governments, as well as private holders would be added to the Greenbelt through outright purchase or negotiations. By 2067, the Greenbelt would grow to about 24,000 hectares (23,875) from 21,875 hectares today. Overall, 57 per cent would be natural environment, up from 50 per cent today. Nearly 5,800 hectares would be set aside to promote sustainable agriculture, mostly small-scale operations of varied crops and livestock.
...

The biggest parcels of land the NCC hopes to add to the Greenbelt include privately owned land in Shirley’s Bay and provincially owned woodlands and natural areas near the Mer Bleue Bog. The NCC believes it can negotiate with provincial and city governments to make their land part of the Greenbelt while maintaining ownership. Other pieces of land would be part of a study to determine if they should be added to the Greenbelt. The trickier part for the NCC, which is hard-pressed for cash, is to find the money to buy private lands.
...

(NOTE: map in this article is the same map previously released on March 18, 2011 with the NCC Greenbelt Concept Plan documents - rww)

The old saying goes "if it sounds too good to be true ..." and unfortunately this sounds more like good intentions than a real plan. We have a 50 year time span over which much can change, including the NCC Board and leadership. We have no apparent budget but an admitted shortage of funding. And most importantly, some of the most environmentally sensitive lands, such as much of the South March Highlands, are in private hands and planned for development. Are they going to be put in limbo for potentially 50 years - not likely.

And talking about the South March Highlands and other similar lands, just what does "connect the Greenbelt to features such as the Carp Hills, South March Highlands, Cumberland Forest and even across the Ottawa River to Gatineau Park." mean. To me that implies that the Carp Hills and South March Highlands would be added to the Greenbelt and protected - why else connect to them. The Greenbelt is already "connected" to lots of subdivisions. The Ottawa Citizen article is annoyingly vague here and we can only assume the vague wording originated with the NCC. Unfortunately we could not find any official statement on the NCC web site last time we were able to access it (currently appears to be down).

We need more details. We need a timeline telling us when specific lands will be added to the Greenbelt. We need assurance that the NCC has the funding necessary and the willingness to expropriate private land if necessary. And we need to know that all the proposed additions will be protected from development until they are added to the Greenbelt.

Otherwise all we have is a pipe dream.