by SUSAN MANN
A Durham Region dairy farmer and the consultant he hired to complete a Nutrient Management Strategy were both fined after pleading guilty earlier this month in a Guelph court room to submitting false or misleading information in the strategy document.
The farmer, Alexander Muir of Elderslie Farm Holsteins located near Courtice in Durham Region, was fined $2,500 plus a 25 per cent victim surcharge and given three months to pay, while Robert Glover of Warkworth was fined $1,000 (plus a victim surcharge which made his total fine $1,130) and given 15 days to pay. He says he paid the fine on the day of the hearing. The case was heard Oct. 3 in the Ontario Court of Justice (West Region) in Guelph.
Ontario Environment Ministry spokesperson Kate Jordan says the farm is owned by Alexander Muir who is in general partnership in the farming business with a family member. That family member wasn’t charged in connection with this incident.
Alexander Muir couldn’t be reached for comment.
Jordan says Alexander Muir pleaded guilty to one offence under the Nutrient Management Act. Glover also pleaded guilty to one offence under the Act. The charge was providing false or misleading information in a nutrient management strategy document, she says.
In an Oct. 3 news release, the environment ministry says the company submitted a nutrient management strategy to the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs for approval. The strategy indicated that milk house wastewater was handled on site in a holding tank and septic bed and was in working order. The strategy was completed and submitted by Glover, the consultant hired by Muir.
Jordan says environment ministry staff investigated and determined the information was false and that the milk house wastewater discharged directly into a municipal ditch.
Nutrient management plans are submitted to and approved by the Ontario agriculture ministry, she says. But “it’s our responsibility to enforce it, which is why we laid charges.”
Glover says he was charged for “lack of due diligence.”
Glover says he went to the farm on September 16, 2010 to obtain information for the strategy, which was needed for a new heifer barn construction, including the farm’s handling of the milk house wastewater. “We stood right in their yard and they said to me that the milk house water is handled through a holding tank in a leaching bed.” Glover says he asked a series of questions, including where the leaching bed was located, if the system is working satisfactorily and how long it had been installed. He says he was told it had been installed eight to 10 years and the system was working satisfactorily.
“I had no reason to doubt them,” he says. “How do you find out anyway? Do you start digging with a backhoe?”
Glover had one of the Muirs sign the required forms for the strategy (before he filled in the information) and told them he’d take the forms home, fill all of the information in and submit it to the agriculture ministry. Glover says “I was fined because I did not give them a chance to read it (the strategy) before I sent it in.”
Glover is listed on the agriculture ministry’s website as having received an Agricultural Operation Strategy/Plan Development certificate from the ministry and has been certified to prepare nutrient management strategies and plans. As for what happens to Glover’s agriculture ministry certification, Ontario agriculture ministry spokesperson Elizabeth McClung says by email a director under the Nutrient Management Act reviewed the facts of the case and Glover’s “license remains valid.” BF
Comments
One day people will care about the farmers instead of putting them down when there is zero left.
Given that supply managed farmers care about nobody else but themselves, and given that corn farmers, thanks to ethanol, are rapidly getting to the same point, what's the point of finding fault with people outside the farm community when there's enough guilt within it?
Stephen Thompson, Clinton ON
"Teach them a lesson" tactics on a public forum doesn't further a discussion and it doesn't solve any problems or make anyone's life better.
We need a vision.
Years ago supply managed farmers bought into a vision and they succeeded. They have respected others who didn't share their vision. Some of these other groups are failing badly and they have blamed everyone but themselves for the failure. Now you and they blame supply management.
Ask a pork or beef producer for an industry vision that would allow an investor to get a proper return on management risk and labor. Then check what they say against reality. Make sure they don't mention government help and make sure they have considered currency fluctuation in their vision.
You are kidding about the vision right? One of the big attractions for the pork and beef guys is the macho appeal of high risk. They have always seen themselves as tough guys who can withstand the low cycles and they fool themselves into believing they make big money during the good times. Any smart business man would laugh at the risk involved and the money made and mostly lost. Remember a high risk investment is supposed to be justified by bringing a high return.
Government and producer interest cannot be trusted to operate in the best interest of the public when not in a free market. When created it may have had a humble rationale, but eventually the stakes rise, and policies become distorted(and they have). In addition, if supply managed farmers had respect for non supply managed farmers they would have done something a long time ago about quota having value so as to not upset land values and borrowing power which has also happened. Supply managed farmers need to realize that they should not be protected at the expense of the consumers, other farmers and any other business that is export oriented in Canada.
Would the free market you refer to be the one where foreign governments protect (subsidize) their food producers and repeatedly erect illegal trade barriers? Or would it be the one where our own and other governments cause feed prices to rise with taxpayer subsidies. No worry supply management where you pass along costs to the buyer is the solution.
One day you will care is correct when all the farmers are gone!
One day you will all care when all the farmers are gone in the industry because of these issues!
Post new comment