There’s been quite a flash flood of emails over the last few days about Official Plan Amendment 48 (OPA 48) and a claim that the document ignores how much we value our river systems.
Nothing could be further from the truth! From my perch, there is no Council in recent history that values the rivers as much as the current one!
Let’s have a look at the facts:
An Official Plan is comprised of many parts, all working together to form one integrated plan.
Everytime something changes in an official plan, it is called an Offical Plan Amendment (OPA).
OPA 48 is just one of a series of amendments made in the past few years. Yes, it is true that OPA 48 removes many previous references to our river systems. But that’s because an earlier amendment (OPA 42, passed by Council in July 2010) is a far stronger and more comprehensive document — called the Natural Heritag Strategy — and it’s ALL in there and more.
OPA 42 not only contains significant protection for river systems, but it also treats whole environmental systems in context — ie. valley lands, grades, moraines, vegetation — which is a much more progressive approach to environmental protection, including rivers.
I’ll be honest, I am not sure where the campaign to reinstate the Rivers System language back into OPA 48 is coming from, but to do so would be redundant. If it is deeply embedded and enhanced in OPA 42, why repeat the same material in OPA 48? Yes, OPA 42 is under appeal to the OMB right now, but it seems to me that the if we include the same language in OPA 48, we run the risk of having OPA 48 being appealed to the OMB as well. This would stagnate the whole Official Plan and we need to move forward. The major points of contention at the OMB are not related to the river systems language, and all protections in the current OP remain in force until OPA 42 is settled.
For more info on what is included in both OPA 42 and OPA 48, here is the link:
Consultation on OPA 42 and OPA 48 was extensive, including the involvement of the Rivers Systems Advisory Committee.
So where do I stand on the primacy of our rivers? Let me tell you a bit about my relationship with the Speed and Eramosa. Most of my formative years were spent on the banks of the Eramosa River in Puslinch Township. We swam, fished and ice-skated (yes, on the Arkell Woolen Mill pond) in the river. I now live one block from the banks of the Speed and walk its bank several times a week. No one values our two rivers more than I…I was recently asked (and accepted) an invitation to speak about the heritage of our rivers at the Two Rivers Festival.
I believe our rivers — and their connected systems — are well proteced in OPA 42.