The shallow rights of the Canadian Farmer

Canadians recently broke out the BBQs and frisbees, gulped down some Tim Horton’s coffee and plastered maple leafs on t-shirts, hats and car windows to celebrate Canada’s 142nd year as a nation. As I sat in the Glenmore Resevoir Park in Calgary, Alberta I admired the families from far-off cultures and the freedoms we all share as Canadians in this indelibly beautiful country. Yet for all of the freedoms we enjoy there is a significant responsibility we have abdicated. We speak of having a progressive or democratic nation yet it is based on a limited definition. We have handed over the decision-making power to an elite political class and relegated our duty as true democrats. An example from the fields of Alberta come to mind.

A place to have interesting discussions and find delicious food is typically the farmer’s market and Edmonton was no exception. My brother recommended that I read the “Farmer’s News” at the stand for First Nature Farms where organic meats and produce were being sold. The white board next to the stand indicated the trials of dry spring experienced by Albertan farmers and a few other odds and ends, but the statement at the bottom caught my attention. A corporate entity was flexing its muscle to get its own way at the expense of a tax paying, law abiding citizen. We struck up a conversation with the farm operator, Jerry Kitt.

First Nature Farms owns a large section of land near the BC / Alberta border. On their property lies a 30 acre section of forested land. This rare private forest is now under threat, even though it is on private property and property taxes have been paid for over 30 years. Unfortunately for farmers, private property only goes as deep as six inches of soil; the resources further below are owned by the Crown. This regulation had dire implications for First Nature Farms when natural gas was discovered below their property.

ConocoPhillips, the third largest integrated energy company in the USA, has an immense scope and thirst for expanding their natural gas supplies. Under Mr. Kitt’s farm lies an untapped natural gas resevoir and that means his land is threatened. ConocoPhillips approached the Government of Alberta and procured the rights to the lucrative resources below the ground; the provincial government was all too quick to agree to the prospect of increased tax revenue. One of the largest companies in Canada approached a small rural organic farmer with an offer to compensate for the cutting down of the forested section of land on the Nature First Farm. Mr. Kitt was not interested; instead he made a simple request to the company. His two part request included that ConocoPhillips plant the 15 truckloads of timber that would be felled on his property in a tree farm of their choosing. He was also aware of the heavy machinery that would be required to dig and insert the piping necessary to extract the natural gas. He requested that ConocoPhillips buy carbon credits equal to the emissions generated.

Mr. Kitt is concerned for the environment and lives within a framework of deep rooted values.

This fair request that was denied by the Corporation and by the Albertan Government raised an interesting question in my mind:

Who actually owns the land? What does it mean to be the rightful owner of the property?

Perhaps this is just a case of a simple law that has been in place since Canada’s inception, yet it does make me wonder about the control of the corporations on Canadian governmental decisions. A citizen who pays both provincial and federal taxes has no suitable recompense for the land he has loved and protected for decades.

[Side note: Another example of democracy’s demise is being felt in my hometown of Chilliwack, BC. The City of Chilliwack is building a new arts center with a one time cost of CDN$30 million and an annual running cost of $500,000. There was no referendum to seek the insight or approval of the tax-paying citizenship. With such a large purchase and annual commitment (for a municipality) is it not a responsibility of the government to hear the voice of the people regarding such a significant project impacting the future of the community?]

I do not have the answers to any questions here, but I do wonder what a different style, a more honest and engaging form of democracy would look like.