Evidence of meeting #17 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was watershed.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Ms. Fox, you talked about green infrastructure and about having more natural areas to work for filtration on the storm runoff systems, and you actually brought up the example that we had here from Toronto and some of the work that they've done. We also had it when we did our national conservation plan. We had witnesses and even developers talking about the fact that there actually is a real attraction to those areas for homeowners. So it goes back to the question of the incentive for the additional cost of living there. People are actually willing to pay that to live close to those areas. Is that something you're also seeing translating out into your areas?
Ms. Fox, you can answer, but it's also open to the rest of the panel. Are you seeing that people really desire that and are actually willing to pay additional for that?
5:05 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Planning, Conservation Ontario
Just anecdotally, people are more willing to pay for properties that are bordering on conservation areas, etc.
5:05 p.m.
General Manager and Secretary Treasurer, Quinte Conservation Authority
We're working on a project right now. At our office we have a fair-sized parking area that we want to redo in pervious pavement, and we want to use it as an example for developers. We can prove that using the pervious pavement, which is a lot more expensive, may negate the need for stormwater ponds, because you're not necessarily taking away the whole drainage area. So that's one example we're getting a lot of interest in.
It's unfortunate that everything that's really good for the environment costs a lot. Everything that we buy that's really good and works well is more expensive than the stuff that's not the best for the environment. When pavement costs $30 a yard and the cost of this pervious material is $80 a yard, that's a hard sell, but we are getting a lot of interest, and we hope that it will be a marketing tool for developers in the future.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
It's actually interesting that you mention that, though, because I know in Winnipeg there have been some regulatory changes so that as far as retention in parking areas goes, period, rather than having water going strictly to storm drains, you actually have to be able to hold a certain amount of volume that can be lost naturally rather than going through a storm system.
5:05 p.m.
General Manager and Secretary Treasurer, Quinte Conservation Authority
That's one of the rules we have in place for the Bay of Quinte cleanup. We're working with the municipalities on that program, and we have funding from the Ministry of the Environment to encourage those programs.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Thank you very much.
I'd like to ask about something that we're not really hitting head-on. It flows from the discussion we had about western Lake Erie particularly, and that is something called the Great Lakes nutrient initiative.
My understanding is that in December 2012, the Government of Canada dedicated some $16 million specifically to address the kinds of problems we've heard about today and at other times—the complex problems of recurrent toxic and nuisance algae, the nearshore water quality problem, the ecosystem health of the Great Lakes—and that this money was intended to advance the scientific research needed to understand and address this.
Maybe I'll start with you, Mr. Murphy. Could you tell me whether you are familiar with that initiative, and how it stacks up in your eyes so far?
5:10 p.m.
General Manager and Secretary Treasurer, Quinte Conservation Authority
I didn't go into detail on what was involved in those 80 recommendations, but the 80 topics that we had to address were nearshore habitats for fish. A lot of fish spawn on the nearshores. We're talking about the nearshore habitat. What type of habitat is growing on the nearshores? Was there wetland improvement? A lot of those things all contribute to nutrient loading—algae blooms, and throw in the climate change and throw in the zebra mussels to make it a lot more complicated. But we have received funding and we have done a lot of research.
Prior to the Bay of Quinte being identified as a remedial action plan area, there was a project called Project Quinte. It was funded by the federal government, working with the provincial government, to start monitoring. This was prior to it being on the hot list. When you go back that far and look at what we've accomplished, and take the money that you're talking about, yes, it's definitely helped. It's helped us do what we had to do.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Woodworth Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON
Have you been able to fund some of the research—
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Sorry, your time is up. I know you only had the last part of Mr. Toet's time, but your time is up.
We'll move now to Mr. McKay.
5:10 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Back to Keswick.
I was in Keswick, and, as you know, it's the Lake Simcoe—
5:10 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:10 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Yes, I recommend a visit.
As you know, it's in the Lake Simcoe watershed and it feeds the Holland Marsh. The local councillor there was telling me that the algae bloom in Lake Simcoe is not so much caused by the agricultural productions, it's actually caused by the urban spread of Barrie, and down in Bradford and that sort of area.
Given what we apparently know, why is that? That's all relatively new development. Why is it the Government of Ontario, in particular, isn't a bit more hard-wired about this perpetual urban spread?
5:10 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Planning, Conservation Ontario
I think I would refer you to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, and to what their modelling is showing in terms of what the relative contributions are between the urban sources and the agricultural sources, and find out what they say.
I just find that surprising. I don't know, though.
5:10 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Planning, Conservation Ontario
I don't know what the answer is for sure, which is why I'm suggesting—
5:10 p.m.
General Manager and Secretary Treasurer, Quinte Conservation Authority
With the Bay of Quinte area, we used funding to do the studies, and we did find out....
Good agricultural practice knows that if they use...I think everybody thinks if you put five pounds on per acre, that's great, why not use ten and make it twice as good? Well, it doesn't work that way. They now have modern equipment that tells them when they're using too much. When they do a good job, the crops are better and they don't have as much runoff as they used to have.
We did testing on the developed areas where there were manicured lawns. The runoff on those areas was far worse—