Connect with us

Agriculture

European farmers continue to protest New World Order’s anti-food agenda

Published

10 months ago

18 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

As the farmer-led protests in the EU rage on, globalists are slowly learning that labeling those demanding the ability to provide food for the future as ‘extremist’ is not going to work.

Farmer protests in Europe continue to escalate, with Belgian farmers blockading the capital yesterday, Monday February, 26, with 900 tractors and driving through police barricades.  

Belgian farmers sprayed police with manure and lit bonfires with tires in a fiery day of action which saw barbed wire and anti-tank obstacles placed outside European Union institutions, and police dousing the crowd with water cannons.  

The action comes days after a convoy of Spanish farmers lead an estimated 20,000 people to protest outside the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture.  

The plea of one Spanish farmer at the February 21 protest was stark. Silvia Ruiz, 46, a livestock farmer from the north-central area of Burgos told The Associated Press.  

It is impossible to live from the rural industry, which is what we want, to live from our work. That is all we ask for.

 Video from Madrid showed the scale of the protest, at which AP said banners were displayed reading “Farmers in Extinction” and “There is no life without farming.”

Spanish farmers conducted another four-day national action in early February, their complaints echoing what The Daily Telegraph called “common talking points from what has been an eruption of farmers protests in the Netherlands, France, Belgium, Germany, Poland, Greece, Italy and Spain over recent months.” Protests have also emerged in England and Wales in recent months. 

Reasons to be fearful

The reasons given by farmers for their Europe-wide action present a direct challenge to the policies of European governments – which they say are resulting in extreme pressure on small-scale farmers. British farmers issued a desperate plea last September, saying they too were “struggling to survive.”

So what are the issues facing European farmers? This report examines the policies and practices which have combined to produce a hostile environment for Europe’s small scale farmers. 

Agenda 21 – a coordinated effort?

A documentary published by the Epoch Times in September 2023 argues that soaring food prices and food shortages “have little to do with climate change – but are the direct result of an environmental policy that was conceived over 30 years ago.”

The reference in the documentary, titled “No Farmers: No Food” is to“Agenda 21,” the United Nations’ “Master Plan for Humanity” for the 21st Century. Now renamed Agenda 2030, with that year being given as the target for the agenda’s implementation, it is a program that dates back as far as 1989. 

The agenda’s seemingly laudable goals to “eradicate global poverty,” reduce consumer waste and combat the degradation of the natural world whilst promoting prosperity can be seen in another dimension. 

An ‘excuse for government to do what they want’

Christian journalist Alex Newman says in the documentary that this noble-sounding agenda simply “gives government an excuse to do whatever they want, under the guise of meeting these goals.”

From its inception, the “master plan” demanded increased “trade liberalization,” the strengthening of “international institutions” backed by a series of “development banks” from government and private finance to drive accelerated global coordination. 

Yet “trade liberalization” and a punitive regulatory environment are two factors cited by farmers across Europe which they say are threatening their very existence.  

‘Green’ farmers also in protest

Farmers who support measures to limit pesticide use and the move to less polluting means of production have also mobilized to protest against “the neoliberal policies in agriculture the WTO has been promoting for decades which have led to the systematic impoverishment of farmers.” 

A group called the European Coordination Via Campesina (ECVC), which represents small-holder farmers in 21 European countries, highlights the worsening struggle for survival faced by small-scale farmers. In a February 25 report, farmers Morgan Ody and Vincent Delobel spoke out in advance of the World Trade Organization’s 13th ministerial conference in Abu Dhabi.  

These are the people who produce Europe’s food – whether conventionally or organically, on a small or a medium scale. They stand united by a shared reality: They are fed up with spending their lives working incessantly without ever getting a decent income. We have reached this point after decades of neoliberal agricultural policies and free trade agreements. Production costs have risen steadily in recent years, while prices paid to farmers have stagnated or even fallen.

The effect on small-scale farmers has been devastating – but beneficial for corporations.  

“All the while, through mergers and speculation, large agroindustrial groups have gotten bigger and stronger, putting increased pressure on prices and practices for farmers.”  

‘Like the Soviet Union’

This argument, coming from farmers supportive of sensible “sustainable development” measures, echoes a warning given by U,S, conservative scholar Victor Davis Hanson. 

Hanson’s segment in “No Farmers: No Food” treats this issue as a matter of the concentration of food production in the hands of the state – or under its direction. 

They feel that humans don’t need meat-based protein. They want to either force people to follow their paradigms – or they want to buy or accumulate farmland and that’s how they’re going to farm it.

It’s sort of like Mao’s cultural revolution or the Soviet Union – and it results in disasters.

At least 45 million people are said to have “been starved, tortured or beaten to death” under Mao’s “Cultural Revolution,” with the forced collectivization of farms in the Soviet Union contributing to a famine which caused the deaths of at least 3 million people between 1931 and 1934. 

Hanson says this example does not deter the “academic mind,” which “always has the answers, but never in the real world.”

What is happening in the real world is, according to Hanson, the systematic global consolidation of farming in the hands of state and corporate power. 

“They want large blocks [of farming] run by the government – or by private consortia” where meat can be largely eradicated by the control of agricultural production. 

The real world action of Bill Gates

Hanson cites the example of Bill Gates’ purchase of large tracts of farmland, coupled with the stated objectives of his “philanthropic” organization.   

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had by 2017 granted an estimated $6 billion of investment in the future of farming according to one small farmer’s campaign group, GRAIN.  

Its 2021 report argued that the foundation is “driving the food system in the wrong direction,” saying “[Gates’] funding overwhelmingly went to research institutes rather than farmers. They were also mainly directed at shaping policies to support industrial farming, not smallholders.” 

Far from providing “the substantial flow of new and additional financial resources to developing countries” exhorted by the 1989 UN statement on Agenda 21,  the Gates Foundation sends 80-90 percent of its funds to U.S. and Europe based NGOs, “buying political influence” and promoting a “corporate-industrial farming agenda.”  

The funding patterns of Gates’ so-called charity “illustrates the point of where the priorities of the Foundation lie.” 

Killing small farmers

These priorities are opposed to those of small farmers – whether in the developed or the developing world. Both populations are plagued with farmer suicides – from India through Australia and the United States, given plummeting prices and the increasing pressure to consolidate farming. Studies in Ireland, France and the U.K. show far higher rates of suicide amongst farmers – a trend that has continued over the last decade, as this 2015 report shows. 

The pressure driving farmers to desperation is related to a model exampled, as Alex Newman argues, on that adopted in China. 

“We are seeing that in China now, where these giant, mechanized, corporate, big-government controlled mega-farms are displacing all these little small family farms,” he says.

The stated aims of Agenda 30 may be an example of Hanson’s “academic answer” – which is contradicted by the real world effects it has produced.  

Ally versus ally?

Diplomatic tensions now accompany farmer protests, and have spread beyond Eastern Europe to the West. 

The Prime Minister of France Gabriel Attal responded to recent protests in France, acknowledging a further dimension of the threat to small farmers’ livelihoods: cheap imports from Ukraine.  

Attal said his government is working to protect French farmers against imports from Ukraine of chicken, eggs, sugar and cereals. 

“Solidarity with Ukraine is obviously essential, but it cannot be to the detriment of our farmers,” the prime minister said.

Attal’s remarks, reported by Britain’s Independent on February 22, recall the ongoing blockade of the border by Polish farmers – undertaken in protest against cheap imports. 

Poland continues to block Ukrainian grain

Farmers have attempted to block imports of Ukrainian grain, with two acts of grain destruction alleged in the past month. Ukrainian news outlet European Pravda reported the following incident  

On the night of 24-25 February in Poland, Ukrainian grain exports suffered the most extensive damage since the beginning of the farmer protests, with the attackers damaging 160 tonnes of Ukrainian grain.

A social media post recorded the aftermath of the grain spill, showing the alleged sabotage. 

The incident comes weeks after a similar event on February 11, when according to the same report, “Polish farmers protesting near the Ukrainian border spilled some grain from three Ukrainian lorries near the Yahodyn-Dorohusk checkpoint.” 

The Ukrainian deputy Prime Minister Alexander Kubrakov complained of “160 tons of Ukrainian grain destroyed…[in] the fourth case of vandalism at Polish railway stations.”

Farmers fighting for a viable life are now fracturing former alliances, showing the state-level impact of the issue of food security. 

Against the grain

Polish farmers began their attempts to block Ukrainian imports in late November, with assurances from the new Polish Minister of Agriculture providing only a temporary pause. The protests follow a troubled year for Ukrainian grain exports, with the EU conceding to demands from Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia with a temporary ban on Ukrainian maize, wheat, rapeseed and sunflower seed from May-June, 2023. 

The ban was extended until September 15. When it was lifted, Reuters reported that “Slovakia, Poland and Hungary imposed national restrictions on Ukrainian grain imports after the European Union executive decided not to extend its ban on imports into those countries and fellow EU members Bulgaria and Romania.” 

The reason supplied was to protect domestic farmers from being undermined by cheap imports.  

“The countries have argued that cheap Ukrainian agricultural goods – meant mainly to transit further west and to ports – get sold locally, harming their own farmers.” 

Following the elections on October 15, the incoming Polish government of Donald Tusk, a noted globalist, appears unwilling to confront the farmers directly. Last week, the Polish government snubbed the Ukrainian delegation, failing to appear at a recent meeting convened by Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky to end the crisis. According to Agence France Presse (AFP): 

Ukraine’s prime minister went to the border with Poland on Friday [February 23] hoping to end weeks of protests by Polish farmers but he said no-one from the neighboring government turned up for talks.

Zelensky proposed the frontier meeting, issuing a statement saying Ukraine’s grain did not go to the Polish market “at the request of the Polish side.”

Zelensky’s remarks appear to be contradicted by the continued attempts to export Ukrainian grain into Poland. 

He added: “We are willing and will do everything to resolve this issue.” 

But Tusk’s chief of staff Jan Grabiec told AFP that Warsaw had not sent a delegation because a meeting “makes no sense at the moment.”

He said the two sides were “far” from a deal to end the showdown. 

“Unfortunately, there is not yet a Ukrainian proposition that allows to hope for an end to the deadlock in commercial relations.” 

The two governments are set to meet on March 26 in an attempt to resolve a crisis, which by then will have been ongoing for over ten months. The snub by Tusk’s pro-EU and pro-Ukraine administration shows the extraordinary power of the farmer’s movement in shifting public opinion on an alliance which formerly saw Zelensky receive a “hero’s welcome” in Poland last April. Going against the Ukrainian grain was unthinkable only a year ago.  

Farmers and the future

The farmer protests have been caricatured as “agrarian populism” – a progressive phrase intended as as slur. In characterizing these protests as irrational, and bracketing them with extremism, critics such as the U.K.-based European Consortium for Political Research seek to frames this crisis as one which “emphasizes the antagonistic relationship between the virtuous peasants and people from the countryside on the one side, and the evil and corrupt urban elites on the other.” 

Yet the farmer movement is not driven by fantasies of good and evil, but by basic reality. Farmers across the world claim the current system is threatening their very existence.  

Many are taking their own lives, with many others taking to the streets. It seems that some governments are now taking notice. As the protests continue, the message is breaking through to the would be managers of the Master Plan for Humanity – that if the demand for food and a future without misery is defined as extremist, then it is not the small-scale farmers who must give way. 

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 8 hours ago

Rand Paul Releases Report Detailing $1,000,000,000,000 In Gov’t Waste. Here Are The Worst Offenders

armed forces / 9 hours ago

Canadian military deployed ‘gender advisors’ to Ukraine, Haiti  at taxpayers’ expense

Frontier Centre for Public Policy / 12 hours ago

Christmas: As Canadian as Hockey and Maple Syrup

Agriculture

The Role of Satellite Imagery in Developing VRA Prescription Maps

Published on December 20, 2024

By

Since its appearance in the 1980s, precision agriculture has revolutionized farming, offering innovative solutions to age-old challenges. One of those is Variable rate technology (VRT), which plays a key role in improving efficiency and sustainability in today’s farming methods.

By applying inputs like fertilizers and water in different quantities across the field, VRT helps optimize crop yields and reduce costs. This technology relies on data collection and analysis to create detailed VRA prescription maps, allowing for customized input applications. 

With the right equipment and technology, VRT can significantly improve agricultural productivity.  Today’s advanced tractors, equipped with built-in terminals and specialized software integrated with a precision agriculture platform, use prescription maps to accurately apply variable rates of water or chemicals based on GPS location and management zones.

Variable Rate Technology In Precision Agriculture

Precision agriculture is a game-changer, moving far beyond traditional farming methods. Often called satellite farming, this approach focuses on crop condition monitoring, measuring, and responding to variability within fields. One of its standout innovations is variable rate application (VRA), which has caught the attention of farmers worldwide for its immense potential.

Why is VRA so important? It goes beyond simply fertilizing, seeding, and applying pesticides. It’s about utilizing technology to apply various expendable materials on and beneath the field automatically. 

Farm management software simplifies contemporary farming by combining data and technology to improve farming efficiency, sustainability, and profitability. Precision agriculture platforms consolidate operations, crop health monitoring through satellite imagery, and offer real-time suggestions, enabling farmers to make informed decisions for the best use of resources (through VRA) and increased productivity.

Variable rate application offers numerous advantages for modern agriculture:

  1. VR fertilizer enhances farming efficiency.

Adjusting rates based on soil health and plant needs helps save resources and increase yields. Research shows this method can lead to higher net income and healthier soil compared to using uniform rates: “The net incomes of VR management zone were 15.5–449.61 USD ha−1 higher than that of traditional spatially uniform rate fertilization.”

  1. VR irrigation saves water, time, and fuel while reducing machinery wear.

Applying the correct amount of water to different parts of the field based on soil moisture levels and crop requirements reduces wear and tear on irrigation equipment compared to uniform irrigation.

Studies claim: “Variable rate irrigation (VRI) can increase water use efficiency and productivity by applying water based on site‐specific needs.”

  1. VR seeding increases crop yield by adjusting seeding rates based on soil fertility.

VR seeding adjusts seeding rates based on soil fertility and other factors to optimize plant populations and yields. It is commonly used alongside variable rate fertilization as part of a comprehensive precision agriculture strategy. 

Findings show that: “The application of VRS to the seeding of various crops shows positive agro-economic trends, additional yields, and higher economic returns.”

  1. VR pesticide reduces environmental pollution and improves pesticide efficiency.

VRT helps farmers target pests more accurately and use less pesticide. 

Studies have found that “VR management zone reduced the use of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) fertilizers by 22.90–43.95%, 59.11–100%, and 8.21–100%, respectively, and it also increased the use efficiency of N, P, and K by 12.27–28.71, 89.64–176.85, and 5.48–266.89 kg/kg, respectively, without yield loss.”

This demonstrates the ability of variable rate technologies to improve pesticide effectiveness and reduce environmental pollution in agriculture.

Using Various Technological Means For Informed Decisions

Applying different technological tools is essential for implementing variable rate technology in agriculture. This includes smart machinery, fertilizers, seeders, soil sensors, geographic information system (also called GIS), and the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) applications for field mapping. Additionally, having supporting infrastructure, which helps manage and analyze info from different sources, is crucial for successful implementation.

Understanding the location, timing, and methods for seeding, fertilizing, and harvesting is key in remote crop monitoring and precision agriculture, where data plays a vital role in managing resources effectively.

This information is taken from a wide variety of data sources.

  • Sensors. Moisture, soil nutrients, compaction, weather stations (humidity, temperature, wind speed)
  • Drones and satellite photography. Field hyperspectral imaging.
  • GNSS. Event coordinates, also points and times for obtaining time-series data
  • Spatio-temporal data sources. Spatio-temporal specific data (trajectories of agricultural machinery, spatiotemporal points, event points, time-series information)
  • Maps. Field boundaries, soil type, surface levels)
  • AI solutions. Prediction of weather conditions, detection of plant diseases.

However, simply collecting raw data is not sufficient. It is necessary to process this information to extract valuable insights, make informed decisions, and enable automatic alerts and control signals for agricultural equipment. Thus, you must have the capability to:

  • Gather data;
  • Transform the data to extract valuable insights for precision farming gear;
  • Upload the data into agricultural equipment;
  • Retrieve real-time data from tractors, seeders, fertilizers, and other machinery.

By following these steps, farmers can make the most of modern technology, optimizing their farming practices and boosting efficiency.

Use Of Satellite Images In Building VRT Maps

Satellite crop monitoring imagery can be used to generate different kinds of VRA maps for various purposes. As nitrogen is one of the most critical elements plants need, building map for its proper application is a major task. 

Nitrogen fertilization maps play a crucial role in optimizing the application of water, nitrogen, and crop protection products. 

When creating a VRA map for nitrogen fertilizer, you can choose from various indices that provide valuable insights:

  • MSAVI is sensitive to uncovered soil and, therefore, is ideal for planning VR fertilizer application in the early stages of growth.

Example:  Early in the growing season, a corn farmer uses MSAVI to detect patches of uncovered soil in their field. This helps them apply fertilizer more accurately, ensuring that nutrient-rich areas receive the right amount of input and promoting uniform growth.

  • ReCI measures chlorophyll content in leaves, helping to identify field areas with faded and yellowed vegetation that may need additional fertilizer.

Example: A soybean grower notices using ReCI that certain sections of their field have yellowed leaves, indicating possible nutrient deficiencies. They apply additional fertilizer to these areas, restoring plant health and boosting overall yield.

  • NDVI indicates biomass accumulation zones and areas with low vegetation that might demand larger amounts of fertilizer.

Example:  A cotton producer uses NDVI to map out zones with varying levels of biomass across their field. They adjust their fertilizer application rates, applying more in areas with lower vegetation to support growth and maximize their harvest.

  • NDMI is well-suited for VR irrigation by identifying areas that are under water stress.

Example: During a hot summer, a vineyard uses NDMI to pinpoint areas suffering from water stress. They adjust their irrigation system to provide extra water where it’s needed, ensuring the vines remain healthy and productive.

    • NDRE helps identify stressed or dying vegetation in the middle to late stages of a season, aiding in effective fertilization strategies.
  • Example: During the season, a wheat farmer uses NDRE to identify patches of the field where the wheat plants are showing signs of nutrient stress or poor growth. By applying a mid-season nutrient boost specifically to these stressed areas, the farmer improves the overall health and yield potential of the wheat crop.

Field Productivity Maps

Field productivity maps can be created by analyzing satellite images to pinpoint areas with high or low crop yields. By using the NDVI index and advanced machine learning algorithms, different productivity zones can be identified.

Key applications of productivity maps include:

  • Potassium and phosphorus fertilization

Historical productivity zones data can help avoid excessive application in areas where these nutrients may have accumulated with time.

  • Variable rate planting

Farmers can apply different seed amounts in various productivity zones to either maximize yield or achieve uniform distribution across the field.

  • Land evaluation

Field productivity can be assessed before purchasing or renting land; it helps reduce risk and enhance profitability.

  • Targeted soil sampling

Soil sampling efforts can be focused on key areas indicated by productivity data, rather than relying on generic grid sampling.

As you see, variable rate application (VRA) is a cost-effective method that can save you 10% on planting and cultivation costs based on the characteristics of the soil. To fully benefit from VRA, it’s important to understand the technologies involved, such as sensors, GNSS, earth observation pictures from drones and satellites, and digital maps, which provide crucial data for analysis and implementation. We sincerely hope that you succeed in your farming endeavors with modern technology!

______________

Author Vasyl Cherlinka

Vasyl Cherlinka is a Doctor of Biosciences specializing in pedology (soil science), with 30 years of experience in the field. With a degree in agrochemistry, agronomy and soil science, Dr. Cherlinka has been advising on these issues private sector for many years.

Continue Reading

Agriculture

Restoring balance between renewable energy, agricultural land and Alberta’s iconic viewscapes

Published on December 7, 2024

By

Alberta is known around the world for many things – some of the most breathtaking and iconic scenery on earth, a world-class agricultural industry that puts high-quality food on tables across the globe and a rich history of responsible energy development. Alberta is a destination of choice for millions of visitors, newcomers and investors each year.

To ensure Alberta’s continued prosperity, it is imperative that future energy development is balanced with environmental stewardship, protecting Albertans’ ability to use and enjoy their property, and safeguarding agriculture for continued food security.

Alberta’s renewable energy sector has grown rapidly over the past decade, yet the rules to ensure responsible development have not kept up. As a result, municipalities, agricultural producers and landowners across the province raised concerns. Alberta’s government is fulfilling its duty to put Albertans first and restore the balance needed for long-term success by setting a clear path forward for responsible renewable energy development.

“We are doing the hard work necessary to ensure future generations can continue to enjoy the same Alberta that we know and love. By conserving our environment, agricultural lands and beautiful viewscapes, our government is protecting and balancing Alberta’s long-term economic prosperity. Our government will not apologize for putting Albertans ahead of corporate interests.”

Nathan Neudorf, Minister of Affordability and Utilities

Amendments to the Activities Designation Regulation and Conservation and Reclamation Regulation provide clarity for renewable energy developers on new and existing environmental protections.

These changes will create consistent reclamation requirements across all forms of renewable energy operations, including a mandatory reclamation security requirement. Albertans expect renewable power generation projects to be responsibly decommissioned and reclaimed for future generations. Alberta’s government stands firm in its commitment to protect landowners and taxpayers from being burdened with reclamation costs.

“We want to protect landowners, municipalities and taxpayers from unfairly having to cover the costs of renewable energy reclamations in the future. These changes will help make sure that all renewable energy projects provide reasonable security up front and that land will be reclaimed for future generations.”

Rebecca Schulz, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas

Alberta’s government committed to an ‘agriculture first’ approach for future development, safeguarding the province’s native grasslands, irrigable and productive lands. The protection of agricultural land is not only essential to food production, but to environmental stewardship and local wildlife protection.

The Electric Energy Land Use and Visual Assessment Regulation follows this ‘agriculture first’ approach and enhances protections for municipalities’ most productive lands, establishing the need to consider potential irrigability and whether projects can co-exist with agricultural operations. These changes are critical to minimizing the impacts of energy development on agricultural lands, protecting local ecosystems and global food security. With these new rules, Alberta’s farmers and ranchers can continue to produce the high-quality products that they are renowned for.

“Our province accounts for nearly 50 per cent of Canada’s cattle, produces the most potatoes in the country, and is the sugar beet capital of Canada. None of this would be possible without the valuable, productive farmland that these new rules protect. Understanding the need for an ‘agriculture first’ approach for energy development is as simple as no farms, no food.”

RJ Sigurdson, Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation

The new Electric Energy Land Use and Visual Assessment Regulation also establishes specific guidelines to prevent projects from impacting pristine viewscapes. By establishing buffer zones and visual impact assessment zones, Alberta’s government is ensuring that industrial power projects the size of the Calgary Tower cannot be built in front of UNESCO World Heritage sites and other specified viewscapes, which will support the continued growth and success of Alberta’s tourism sector.

As Alberta’s population and economy grows, it is critical that the province has the additional power generation needed to meet increasing demand. Power generation must be developed in a balanced and responsible manner that promotes environmental stewardship, ensures the continued enjoyment of Alberta’s beautiful landscapes, and safeguards food security by protecting Alberta’s valuable agricultural lands. By encouraging the responsible development of additional power generation with these new regulations, Alberta’s government is listening to Albertans and ensuring the electricity grid is affordable, reliable and sustainable for generations to come.

Summary of Policy Changes

Following the policy direction established on February 28, 2024, Alberta’s government is now implementing the following policy and regulatory changes for renewable power development:

Agricultural lands

The new Electric Energy Land Use and Visual Assessment Regulation takes an “agriculture first” approach.
• Renewable energy developments will no longer be permitted on Land Suitability Rating System (LSRS) Class 1 and 2 lands unless the proponent can demonstrate the ability for both crops and/or livestock to coexist with the renewable generation project,

• In municipalities without Class 1 or 2 lands, Class 3 lands will be treated as Class 1 and 2.

• An irrigability assessment must be conducted by proponents and considered by the AUC.

Reclamation security

Amendments to the Activities Designation Regulation and Conservation and Reclamation Regulation create consistent reclamation requirements across all forms of renewable energy operations, including a mandatory reclamation security requirement. There will be a mandatory security requirement for projects located on private lands.

• Developers will be responsible for reclamation costs via a mandatory security or bond.

• The reclamation security will either be provided directly to the province or may be negotiated with landowners if sufficient evidence is provided to the AUC.

Viewscapes

The Electric Energy Land Use and Visual Assessment Regulation ensures pristine viewscapes are conserved through the establishment of buffer zones and visual impact assessment zones as designated by the province.

• New wind projects will no longer be permitted within specified buffer zones.

o Other proposed electricity developments located within the buffer zones will be required to submit a
visual impact assessment before approval.

• All proposed electricity developments located within visual impact assessment zones will be required to submit a visual impact assessment before approval.

Municipalities

The AUC is implementing rule changes to:

• Automatically grant municipalities the right to participate in AUC hearings.

• Enable municipalities to be eligible to request cost recovery for participation and review.

• Allow municipalities to review rules related to municipal submission requirements while clarifying consultation requirements.

Continue Reading

Trending

X