cktimes.ca Archives for Ecowrappin'


Ecowrappin'

With Darrell Randell

Taking a look at the long term costs

Tuesday, May 6, 2003

I am not an accountant. I can crunch a few numbers if I have to, but for the most part, I think there enough accountants around that I should not have to. This article will refer to complete accounting of costs as opposed to just the immediate costs.

First a brief history lesson. I do not think that we appreciate today what had to happen here when European settlers first arrived. The biggest threat to them was not from bears and other wild animals, it was from the mosquitoes, and other biting insects, and the "ague" (malaria) that resulted. There was just too darn much water!

In order to make South West Ontario habitable, drainage schemes had to be built. These allowed the drained lands to be farmed, an infrastructure of roads and ferries, and eventually bridges to be built. Impenetrable swamps became harvested fields of grain. Towns and cities became healthier places to live and it was drainage that made it all possible. Because of this we have evolved a generational mindset in SW Ont. "If you drain water, it is good, and we will prosper."

It is of course, at a point now, where we have too much of a good thing. We seem to be heading towards an even drier year than the last two years have been. The statistic I hear thrown around all the time is that in SW Ont. 90% of the wetlands have disappeared. As a result of too much drainage we are now experiencing, water quality and quantity problems, and habitat for wildlife that is so fragmented that some species have disappeared, while others are threatened, and still others seem out of control.

This is where my reference to accounting comes into play. When deciding on land use issues today, there may be long term, but very real costs not immediately associated. As an example, if all the trees are cut down the immediate cost is the removal of the forest. The long term costs are soil erosion, more frequent drain cleaning, water quality, and even having to powerwash the topsoil from your house. It can affect many people.

A true example of what I mean is what has happened in New York City. The quality of the water flowing into the city, had deteriorated to such a level that an $8 billion expenditure would be required to turn this water into usable drinking water.

Even in New York City, $8 billion is a lot of money. An alternative solution was tried. The city actually went to the upstream, source water areas of the rivers and provided enough cash to have landowners do conservation work. They were able to create stream buffers, replant woodlots, rehabilitate wetland areas, help repair septic systems and improve farming practices. This improved the quality of water flowing into the city, and will continue to improve the quality. It was accomplished for $1billion. That is about 12.5% of what the treatment infrastructure would have cost.

It takes time to rebuild these natural systems but the real costs will prove worthwhile. Individual landowners can never foot the bill on their own and should not have to. That is a big part of what is wrong with Ontario‚s Nutrient Management Act. Lofty goals, but no budget announced for the implementation. Society at large benefits, while individual landowners cannot even recover their out of pocket expenses.

Some people volunteer to pay their share of society‚s burden by donating to conservation organizations like Ducks Unlimited Canada.

Clearly society at large has an enormous responsibility to step up. As they have seen in New York City, they also have a lot to gain.



Darrell Randell works for Ducks Unlimited Canada as a Conservation Programs Specialist in South West Ontario. Before that he was a Lambton County Pork Producer for 25 years. He served 2 terms on Sombra Township Council, 1994-2000, and is currently a councillor in St Clair Township. He is a past president of the Lambton County Federation of Agriculture. He was a founding member of the Rural Lambton Stewardship Network and served as chairman of that group from 1995-2003. He and Nancy have 3 grown children, each of whom they are extremely proud.