Proposed waste changes add paperwork, costs

by SUSAN MANN

Many farmers will face added costs and cumbersome regulations if the Ministry of the Environment adopts wording in a report proposing changes to Ontario’s Waste Diversion Act, say agricultural officials.

Craig Hunter, minor use pesticide and food safety adviser with the Ontario Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association, says the proposals call for different manufacturers with products collected as part of the Household Hazardous Waste Collection program to pay for the collection. Farmers buying fertilizers in bulk won’t be impacted but horticultural growers and others buying smaller amounts in bags will be. Current proposals call for a surtax of 42 cents a kilogram on bagged fertilizer.

Hunter says what the ministry is really doing “is trying to find a way to tax an industry to pay for a program for the urban area but in the end farmers are going to get screwed.”

The ministry should only apply the surtax on fertilizer intended for the urban market and it should be collected at the retail level. Hunter says they’ve proposed that farmers buying fertilizer would just have to show their Farm Business Registration card and be exempt from any surcharges.

Ontario Federation of Agriculture vice-president Mark Wales says the problem of left over fertilizer is only one in urban areas. “I have yet to ever meet a farmer who will throw fertilizer away.”

In its letter to the ministry, AGCare says the definition of ‘producer’ and ‘first importer’ in the minister’s report on the Waste Diversion Act review could “bind small-scale farm businesses, such as those that participate in local farmers markets or on-farm sales, with cumbersome regulatory requirements resulting in very little improvements in waste diversion.”

AGCare executive director Crystal Mackay couldn’t be reached for comment.

The environment ministry accepted public comments on its report until Feb. 1. Spokesperson Kate Jordan says now they’ll be reviewing the public’s comments and deciding “how to move forward.” No final decisions have been made yet on what will be in the changed Waste Diversion Act.

She says this is a priority for the ministry “and we are moving on it quickly.”

About the farm industry’s concerns, Jordan says they will be given “due consideration during the review. We will definitely address their concerns through the review of the public comments.”

Farm group representatives also question why the ministry didn’t credit the industry for developing voluntary waste diversion programs, such as the Clean Farms program. Obsolete pesticides, unused livestock medicines and used sharps (needles, syringes and scalpel blades) are all collected and disposed of properly as part of that program.

Ontario Federation of Agriculture policy researcher Tina Schankula says during the initial consultations it didn’t seem like the ministry would recognize that program as a means of waste diversion and incorporate it into its new rules.

Grain Farmers of Ontario spokesperson Erin Fletcher says the industry doesn’t “want to lose the ability to run those programs.” There’s no need to bring in mandatory waste diversion rules for the farm community, she says: “we’re getting a huge response” for the voluntary programs.

“We just want (the ministry) to recognize that agriculture is doing is great job and that farmers are inherently recyclers,” she adds. “Compost is the ultimate recycling and that’s what farmers do.”

Grain Farmers chair Don Kenny said in a letter to the Environment Ministry that: “We feel there are very few waste diversion issues arising from agriculture.”

Schankula says the ministry needs to look at the type of waste the agricultural industry produces and find out where it ends up. It’s bizarre that the ministry would start proposing regulations without knowing what the waste stream is and where it goes.

Another concern the Federation raised was illegal waste dumping in farmers’ fields and on country road sides. This is a problem already, says Schankula, who hears from farmers across Ontario complaining about large items, such as couches and construction waste, being thrown in fields as people try to avoid waste disposal fees. If the ministry makes waste disposal more difficult and expensive this problem could increase.

Has the ministry heard the agricultural industry’s concerns? Hunter says no. “It’s all about collecting money to run urban-based programs. They want to get their money and they’re not really worried about the impact it has on agriculture.” BF