Water Protection Act regulations that don’t allay farmer worries may be introduced within weeks, Keystone Agricultural Producers fears.
The farm group had hoped to reach a consensus with the Manitoba government on water quality control regulations to avoid a repeat of last winter’s storm of farmer protest, but the government doesn’t seem interested in talking, said KAP president David Rolfe.
That silence is ominous because the government has just announced it will hold a brief autumn sitting of the legislature.
“We suspect the government is ready to move on it,” said Rolfe.
Read Also
Canola oil transloading facility opens
DP World just opened its new canola oil transload facility at the Port of Vancouver. It can ship one million tonnes of the commodity per year.
“We suspect the regulations under the Water Protection Act will be given some discussion (in the session).”
Many farmers are worried about restrictions that could be placed on them by regulations that are too stringent.
The Water Protection Act was passed more than a year ago to some farmer concern, but the real worry for most producers has been the regulations that would be attached to the act later.
When the province released draft regulations last winter it sparked farmer outrage because it appeared they relied on inaccurate, out of date maps, did not provide adequate compensation for land-use restrictions they would impose and left vague other areas of concern.
After a series of tempestuous meetings in rural Manitoba, officials from the water stewardship department began meeting with KAP officials to look for a way to fashion regulations that farmers could support.
Rolfe said progress was made on KAP’s 11 points of concern, but three had not been resolved, including the issues of maps and compensation.
Since those summer discussions the government has not scheduled more meetings.
“We were hoping to continue discussions on those going forward so we could have consensus on the whole package,” said Rolfe.
“Those discussions haven’t taken place, and that’s why we think they’re moving forward.”
Rolfe said he has no idea what the final version of the government’s regulations will be but hopes they are less offensive to farmers.
“The original regulations were contentious issues among farmers and if the government had implemented them as proposed, they would certainly have had a negative effect on the farming economy,” said Rolfe.
