A ban on sewage ejectors remains the number one issue in rural Manitoba, says Doug Dobrowolski, president of the Association of Manitoba Municipalities.
It’s been six months since the provincial government changed the rules regarding residential sewage disposal.
New sewage ejectors are now banned and homeowners must re-place existing sewage ejectors when they sell their property.
The rule change sparked a flurry of letters to the editor at newspapers across Manitoba because many rural residents believe the ban is unnecessary, unscientific and an unfair financial burden.
Read Also
Farmers urged to be grain-safe this fall
Working around grain bins comes with risk, from farmers falling to drowning in grain: Experts have five tips to help avoid grain-related accidents this harvest.
Estimates vary but it could cost Manitoba homeowners $20,000 or more to replace a sewage ejector with a septic field or other disposal system.
While rural residents in Manitoba continue to debate their province’s new sewage regulations, the Alberta government changed its sewage disposal rules around the same time without controversy.
“As we developed this standard, a lot of people had the thought or attitude that they (sewage ejectors) should be banned altogether.
“However we didn’t go that direction,” said Alf Durnie, chief inspector of private sewage systems for Alberta Municipal Affairs.
“…we’re not going to totally ban (them), but we can put some new requirements in place to minimize the density of these systems because they’re not the best,” Durnie said.
Sewage ejectors are called open discharge systems in Alberta and jet disposal systems in Saskatchewan.
The Alberta government now permits only four open discharge systems on a quarter section of land. Homeowners must also evaluate sites for suitability before installing new systems.
“The new standard of practice that came into effect in December in Alberta, mandates that there be proper site evaluations,” said Keith Gylander, executive director for the Alberta Onsite Wastewater Management Association, which attempts to improve practices within the private sewage industry.
Property owners pay for the site evaluation, which costs $2,500 to $3,000, he added.
“We have to dig test pits to make sure the soil is capable (of treating the sewage).”
Gylander said the Alberta Wastewater Management Association sent a letter to the Manitoba government protesting the province’s ban on sewage ejectors.
The letter said open discharge and sewage ejector systems work if soil conditions are appropriate and the location is right.
“As long as the sites are properly evaluated in terms of setback distances from neighbouring property lines, open water courses and things like that, open discharges are still viable,” Gylander said.
“If you’re in the middle of absolutely nowhere, if there’s 30 miles between you and your neighbour and you’ve got four sections of land, the impacts on public health and safety are really mitigated because of those distances. A ban completely negates the importance of a proper site evaluation.”
Dobrowolski would like the Manitoba government to adopt an approach similar to the one in Alberta, where each site is evaluated to determine if it is suitable for a sewage ejector. However, Mike Gilbertson, Manitoba Conservation’s director of environmental services, said the decision to ban was based on nutrient loading and human health concerns.
“On the environment, our concerns relate to issues around nutrients, both phosphorus and nitrogen,” he said. “On the human health side, there’s concern with pathogens. In particular, fecal coliform counts were very high in the discharge.”
Gilbertson said environmental standards evolve over time and sewage ejectors are no longer acceptable.
