Kaleigh VanBokhorst - GEOG 4390

  In this blog I shall explore what makes up 'rurality' in Canada and the world at large. Please note: This blog was created for the course GEOG 4390 at the University of Guelph. The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of the University of Guelph. The University of Guelph is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by this blog.    

[pdgeog4390-19]

Future of Rural Canada

Immigration

A surge in Canadian urbanization has left the rural on the decline. Currently, 35 percent of Canada’s population lives in one of the three largest cities of Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal. The population growth in urban centres is driven by a combination of immigration from abroad and the migration from rural areas. However, immigration rates of newcomers to the countryside has grown in recent years, largely in the form of secondary migration. A trend is emerging whereby immigrants are transitioning to rural areas after previously settling into major cities. Immigrants initially seek a life in big cities due to the wealth of services and programs they offer. As more immigrants make the switch, it increases the likelihood that new immigrants will choose rural areas as their initial settling places. An influx of immigrants to the countryside will increase ethnic diversities and serve to extinguish fears regarding barriers to acceptance in these regions. Realizing the benefit of increasing their immigrant populations, many small cities have been making efforts to attract newcomers to the area. For example, Simcoe County has recently published an informational website to attract immigrants, which can be translated into fifteen different languages. If immigrant settlement patterns continue to change, rural Canada could see major demographic and economic transformations.

https://immigration.simcoe.ca/ - For more information

Agricultural Productivity

As climate change continues to threaten the landscape, Canada will serve to benefit in terms of agricultural productivity through longer growing seasons. This will give Canada the capacity to grow crops where not previously possible.

As conditions in vulnerable areas (such as the majority of Africa) worsen, Canada has the opportunity to become of the world’s next leaders in sustainable food production. Global populations are expected to exceed 10 billion by 2050; in order to keep up, 70% more food needs to be produced within the next generation. As the environment deteriorates, resource conflicts will be inevitable. Thanks to social media and communications, we are already witnessing citizens protesting over access to food in places all over the world. Most notably in 2011, when powerful images of a riot in Tunis went viral that showed a man wielding a baguette as a weapon.

Having access to affordable food and water is a privilege that many of us take for granted. Current technological advancements have allowed rates of food production to surpass that of population growth but at great social and environmental costs. Although we are producing enough food, it is poorly distributed, and the price fluctuates depending on current prices of oil. According to the new Canadian Food Guide, fruits and vegetables should make up 50 percent of our diet, yet we are underproducing these nutritional foods at only 4 servings per person per day. A significant portion of our diets now include oily, fatty and sugary foods – a reliance on which can lead to many health issues such as obesity, diabetes, high cholesterol/blood pressure, heart disease and stroke.

Current estimates predict that we will run out of oil within the next 50 years, this will have drastic implications on food pricing and availability, especially concerning distribution to remote rural communities. The scarcity of oil will hopefully spur a transition towards renewable, green energy sources that are safer and cheaper alternatives in the long term.

Technology

There have been many technological advancements in the agricultural industry that have allowed us to increase yields using smaller plots of land and minimal human intervention. Driverless tractors, GPS precision farming, field mapping via drones and the robotic milker are only some of the examples being implemented within farming operations today.

Robotic milkers are becoming more common worldwide and are known to improve qualities of life by reducing labour demands. Robotic milkers also have health and safety implications as they can be programmed to measure temperatures, bacteria levels and for immediate disease detection.

Perhaps one of the hottest topics in farm-tech debates remains the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) in consumer products. GMO’s are organisms whose genetic material has been artificially altered. This is typically done through the insertion of one specie’s gene into another specie’s genome via a gene gun. Despite scientist claims that GMO’s are perfectly safe to eat, reduce soil-damaging tillage, reduce carbon emission and reduce the need for the most toxic herbicides in favor of milder ones, consumers remain reluctant. There have been numerous success stories associated with GMO’s, most notably the Rainbow Papaya which is accredited for single-handedly saving Hawaii’s $17 million papaya industry. In the 1960’s, the papaya industry began incurring severe economic losses due to the spreading of a papaya ringspot virus by aphids. By 1997, Hawaii’s papaya industry was collapsing. The Rainbow papaya variety was developed in the U.S. by scientists at Cornell University which featured a gene that made papaya plants resistant to the ringspot virus – similar to the way a vaccine works on humans. The Rainbow Papaya produced immediate results and had stopped industry decline within four years of its implementation. Papaya is native to Central America and has become the first genetically modified fruit to be grown as a commercial product.

Resources

https://www.canadianimmigration.net/news-articles/is-immigration-to-rural-areas-in-canada-s-future/

https://grist.org/food/why-gmos-do-matter-and-even-more-to-the-developing-world/

http://fortune.com/2016/11/19/hawaii-gmo-pesticide-regulation/

https://www2.hawaii.edu/~doisteph/Papaya/rainbow.html

As always, thanks for reading.

Paige

[kvgeog4390]

Hey Paige, the increase in new immigrants to Canada choosing to settle outside of large urban centres as small communities and support networks are established in these smaller settlements is very interesting. As Canada prioritizes skill in trades or otherwise and education in immigration I wonder how this will seek to fill some of the gaps in rural service provision. Will this decrease the need for rural dwellers with chronic medical conditions to migrate to cities? How will this counteract some of the rural trends that we have discussed?

As the impacts of climate change are realized more, Canada’s role as a agricultural exporter will change a great deal – increasing opportunity for agriculture in some areas while posing new pests and challenges in others. Not to mention other Canadian industries which will be altered such as pipelines and other physical infrastructure built on permafrost and in northern Canada. Also, for those using traditional food preservation such as first nations who may still use cold cellars dung into the ground or Mennonite who once harvested ice blocks in February to preserve food through the summer – what will happen to rural food security?

Very interesting post, a wide and indepth summary of canadian and global challenges that will affect rural and urban spaces in the coming generation as a result of policies and climate change.

[kvgeog4390]

Say Cheese and pick a filter

In lu of our class excursion to Millbank and St Jacobs on Friday to present on various components of rural life in two close but quite different towns, I noticed something interesting – why was cheese priced so differently? In the Millbank cheese factory a literal brick of cheese, and I mean a brick this guy was hefty, could be purchased for a few dollars - $3.48 is the price that sticks out in my mind. Comparatively in a St Jacobs, a much smaller piece, maybe a quarter of the size was priced three times as much! What’s with that?

Though cheese is my no means an indicator of a town at large, these price differences for the same product show that one town was created to promote a certain mentality of what rural areas are – or in the very least what the visitor idealized. Though lovely and walkable with cute shops St Jacobs aims to promote the message that they are a cute little rural place that people visit because it is St Jacobs and a nice little drive to the country before taking your $9 dollar cheese slices and artisan sausage home. I would be very surprised if those living in St Jacobs would ever go into the shops for shopping anything other than a single gift here or there – they most defiantly would go down the street to the actual grocery store for their cheese purchases. Alternatively in Milbank the grocery store there was certainly gentrified to a point with a cute barn like exterior and the cheese store was one of two businesses to have websites of their own. The stores in Millbank were directly firstly to the residents of the town with a consideration to the occasional tourist brought in for Anne Mae’s pies the next street over.

Cheese aside, the underlying question is how rural spaces and ‘the country’ are shaped by how we desire these spaces to look? Further, what does this do to those who call the areas home if their home is drastically changed and gentrified for the consumption of weekend tourists who zoom in for a few hours and zoom out with some cheese and a meticulously carved wooden chair or two? In our discussions we learned that St Jacobs is facing a rising exodus in the last few years of Mennonite families in particular who say that the area is getting too busy. Mennonite families are by no means an attraction, they are people first, a people who are commonly associated with the St Jacobs and Waterloo area and are facing increased pressures to move away as the area becomes busier. If ‘the country’ no longer feels like home to those who grew up there – how much rural is left in the area? And how much staging and cost goes into maintaining rural idylls?

[pdgeog4390-19]

Good afternoon Kaleigh, 

I too was puzzled by such contrasting prices of cheese that occurred in communities less than 30 kilometers away from one another. After visiting both Millbank and St. Jacobs, it is clear to see that Millbank targets their products toward local residents while St Jacobs caters their products to tourists. St Jacobs has maintained a certain aesthetic that reflects the stereotypical rural idyll in which urban dwellers expect to see when travelling outside of the city. An example of this, as discussed in class was the creation of a “St. Jacobs Country” marketing campaign for the sole purpose of attracting tourists to the area. The establishment of services such as hotels, chain restaurants and souvenir shops are largely in response to the one million tourists drawn in by the St Jacobs Farmers’ Market. It is upsetting that this increase in recognition of St Jacobs as an economically prosperous town has resulted at the expense of the Mennonite community. The Mennonites are leaving St Jacobs to settle in more remote areas in order to practice their lifestyles in peace, away from the gawking eyes of tourists. 

I especially liked when you said, “If ‘the country’ no longer feels like home to those who grew up there – how much rural is left in the area?“. Rural and urban areas are often distinguished from one another by population and degree of development; as rural towns such as St Jacobs begin receiving influxes of both people and industry, at what threshold does it lose its rural designation? I fear that St Jacobs has fallen victim to creative destruction whereby new industries have brought about the demise of what existed previously, including Mennonite people and culture. Hopefully the Mennonite families and residents of St Jacobs can continue coexisting for generations to come.

[kvgeog4390]

Hi Paige, i too hope that families who identify themselves as country dwellers can continue to do so even as their communities are slowly more connected to others, and to larger settlements. While cheese is a strange metaphore to focus on for a blog, i found it very interesting in understand who a community exists for. Is it a functional price that a family would use for shopping? Or is it for a tourist to collect in a fun Hallmark type town in which the experience is being bought as much as the product itself? I find it interesting how we have a clear rural-urban divide about what these places should be and how much of each can be included into the other. For example, why can’t can green spaces that may be ‘rural’ at first glance be found in urban areas? Why can’t community festivals and fairs occur more often in cities? And on the flip side, how can rural places be spaces of education and innovation just as much as cities are?

[tdgeog4390-19]

Not all that Glitters is Gold

The meaning of rural:

Looking back on my very first post about my initial thoughts of rural Canada, I had a very personal and narrow perspective. I mostly thought about the geography of rural Canada and the physical features that separated the provinces from each other. Don’t get me wrong; diversity and Canadian nature are very important aspects of rural space, but after exploring more dimensions over this course, I have come to realize the real complexity behind this term. I really feel like the meaning of rural is different for everyone, as it is the remote spaces that people give recognition to in accordance with their experiences. For example, we all think to analyze the countryside of Ontario, but I bet the discussion would be very different if this class were being held in northern Canada, or on the west coast… or say, Africa! This was especially brought to my attention during Abdul’s presentation in class and in one of the exhibitions at the art gallery which told the story of third-world fishermen risking their lives, and usually becoming drug users. 

Rural Canada is also a beautiful space, but it is also where a lot of destruction and conflict arises involving the extraction of natural resources. I think that we could relate rural to the saying, “not all that glitters is gold”, in that although everything may appear beautiful and simple, there is a certain evil that is behind that aesthetic curtain. I think that there is a lot of work left to be done in making sure we don’t destroy the purity of rural Canada, while still encouraging community development.

How do I envision rural Ontario in 10-100 years?

I think that populations in smaller townships will start to grow. An article from Calgary states that as residents grow older, and younger people move out of these towns, rural communities across Canada are looking to encourage immigration as a way to rejuvenate their workforce and expand their tax base. Therefore I think it is likely that rural areas may become more culturally diverse over time, which would be interesting. I suppose an example of this is the increase of Mexican immigrants working in tomato greenhouses in Leamington, Ontario, which I have seen first hand. The challenge is attracting them and convincing them to stay in the country rather than in the more opportunistic cities, but some provinces have started to improve on this by collaborating small towns with provincial and federal governments. Initiatives such as customized immigration plans (towns in N.B), social media campaigns (in B.C.), Temporary Foreign Worker Programs, and simply making rural communities more welcoming has drawn the interest of workers from Germany, Russia, and the Philippines.

I don’t think there will be much change of Rural Ontario in the next 10 years, but within the next 50 years, I would predict that we would start to notice these population shifts. Although it is expected to be very slow, even migration of Canadian citizens out of urban centers may be likely as cities become overcrowded and overpriced without expanding in time. In the next 50-100 years, I would imagine a St.Jacobs-like transformation to occur in many rural communities that are nearby a larger ‘city’ center. As discussed in class, we had all agreed that St.Jacobs was on the edge of being classified as a rural town. Towns in Ontario may be likely to see similar transformations if marketing strategies for tourism and businesses enhance. 

With 2030 global water shortage and 2050 food shortage threatens us, author Robert Giles believes in a rural future, and has made a case study in West Virginia. The design is pitched as the dynamic, systems-solution to long-term global problems. It is made up of over 150 small businesses, guided by GIS and prescriptive software based on the latest science, working together to manage rural lands profitably and to meet rising food and water needs. Although ideas like this may be far fetched, I think the concept is admirable, showing the real opportunities of rural land. Lastly, I could also envision rural Ontario becoming a very green functioning society in the very distant future (~100 years). Already many urban and rural centers around Ontario have begun to prioritize green infrastructure and technology by using nature for community economic development and resilience. I would only imagine this to increase as Canada continues to realize the importance of our environment and protecting rural resources.

How do we get people to care about rural Ontario?

I think it’s important to remind people of the relationships in rural communities, opportunities and the productivity they offer. Rural Ontario is home to many resource industries and agriculture, with about 17% of Canadians living in these areas. Looking back at the presentations during the rural symposium, it is clear that agri-policies are not enough to address rural communities, and that issues are more specific. I think that the best approach is applying place-based development for the future of Ontario, focusing on youth, transportation, and economy.

On January 17, 2019 the director, Brent Royce, of Ontario Federation of Agriculture (OFA) released a statement discussing the need for investment in Ontario agriculture and rural communities. The video below is a 2-minute audio of OFA’s advice to the government.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=167&v=uQS5q6sOKjc

Royce declares that investing in rural Ontario will create economic opportunity for everyone. Specifically, investing in natural gas, infrastructure, transportation, health care, and rural schools. Royce says that Ontario’s economy has the most to gain from prioritizing neglected regions in the province, and that it it will jump start farms, agri-business and rural communities, all while stimulating all of Ontario in the end. The OFA understands the province’s current fiscal situation and the need for restraint, but they also know that sound public investment in Ontario agriculture and rural communities will pay dividends and will ultimately improve Ontario’s fiscal outlook by driving the economy forward.

Ultimately…

The future of rural Canada will likely look very different among provinces, as there are many different conceptions of ‘rural’, and there is no one universal model for rural innovation. One thing is for sure, we need more connectivity and more meaningful development within rural Ontario. Rural policy needs to be prioritized and be considered at the very start of policymaking in Ontario, Canada, and worldwide. Does anyone else have different thoughts on how we can best approach the sustainability of rural Ontario?

-P.s. thank you all for the great discussions over the semester! Good luck to everyone in your future adventures! :) 

References

https://calgaryherald.com/news/national/canadas-small-cities-and-rural-areas-desperate-for-immigrants

https://www.cicnews.com/2016/10/rural-areas-and-small-cities-across-canada-eager-to-attract-more-newcomers-108558.html#gs.49deoq

http://www.ruralsystem.com/rural-future/

[kvgeog4390]

I really like how you compared your thoughts and perceptions of rural from the start of the semester to show how your perceptions have shifted with the new perspectives that we have spoken about over the course of the semester. i too had a narrower view of rurality than i do now, one that was far more based on what the function of the rural area is and the forms of settlements that were there. wilderness and remote spaces were a separate category in my mind from the urban and rural spaces which i had previously envisioned.  

Acknowledging the destructive action or rural industries, industries of any sort for that matter, is an important reminder of the view of development and progress being centred on shaping natural spaces into a way that is useful for society at that point in time. Seeing beyond the rural idyll and aesthetic is nessessary for understanding authentic rural spaces. Storybook rural and people forcing functional rural spaces to become the pretty ones desired have the possibility to remove livelihood and displace people when wealthy come in and strive to create a recreational rural opposed that they desire opposed to what works and is established in that place.

The Calgary article about small township growth is very interesting as rural to urban migration to access services and be connected is very interesting. The pricing out of some young people who desire a yard and space for family is to be expected, I am curious and excited for shrinking communities to become more diverse and accepting of those who may be different from themselves.

Sustainability in rural Ontario I think needs to center on increased connectivity with services such as education and health care so the necessity of moving to the cities is lessened. Also, increases in green technology will provide longer term life for communities as peak oil – the max we shall ever receive – has already past and we need to transition to other energy sources that do not need to be physically connected to pipelines or tankers.

[kvgeog4390]

Where do we go from here?

guiding question: Having worked through rural ideas for a while now, tell us what it all means. How do you envision rural Ontario in ten years? 50 years? More? What is the future of these places? And how do we get people to care?

The future of rural Ontario, rural Canada for that matter, is deeply subjective to what you determine as rural. We know that rural is far more than the industry or the amount of wild spaces that exist within the community boundary, it is all of these things in addition to the people and the memories and the social networks and so much more that may be subjective to individuals even within the same community.

I see rural spaces of the future as being far more connected to each other and to all Canadians. This connection will come in the form of increased telecommunications for needs such as health care, education, and the sharing of regional heritage. Greater communication among people will break down the rural-urban divide and reach a place of dialogue in the value of rural spaces as more than just places to provide cities with raw materials for use and manufacturing. As we have seen in this course, rural is defined by various components: industry, community atmosphere, quietness, and so forth. Through dialogue a point in-between the rural idyll and authenticity to have the cleanest rural with the most realism. The prewar era functional farms of Babe are long gone, yet the new can still be useful and creating in sustainable ways that will ensure that generations will still have access to food sources and natural spaces.

Building off the need for sustainable actions in all spaces, especially rural as they are commonly left out of climate adaptions, as outlines by Daniel, I see increased value to climate adaptations and mitigation in communities. This can include action such as increased carbon tax credits for home creation and retrofit with climate future awareness built in. Furthermore, every building will have some zero emissions energy generation be it a form of solar panel or wind power that has minimal to zero perceived impacts on wildlife and people.

I foresee rural industries becoming cleaner. Firstly, end fossil fuel extraction and increase renewable energies, transitioning those working on tar sands and oil rigs and in pipeline production into solar panels and alternative ways of energy transportation. Also for innovation that can remove the sediments of mercury and other pollutants from water ways that will not stir up settled pollutants making them worse. Areas like Grassy Narrows in Canada that are rural yet overlooked will be heard and supported.

I hope that existing rural places, particularly those whose main employment have died off, are revitalized and find new industries to make themselves relevant and self-sustainable. I know this will not be the case for all, some will close and their citizens remaining will move to larger places. For rural places with the capacity to have a future, possibilities using existing infrastructure such as in geothermal green energies in obsolete mines that can support hydroponics for produce based green houses. GoodLeaf Farms, based on Nova Scotia and now in Guelph too, is doing this to provide locally grown produce that meets nutritional needs of people so the community may remain even if isolated as long as energy can be provided for it to produce. For rural areas who are unable to revitalize or reinvent or create new in spaces that have dropping population I see them amalgamating in many cases. I would like to say all will remain and become vibrant again, yet the urban migration trend highlights this as a far more realistic pathway. I see those people who appreciate the rural ambience and activities, bringing them into cities. Community festivals and meetings, integration of green spaces into cities, bringing in the rural aesthetics that may be lost. Periphery zones of around cities of semi urban activities and semi-rural that have agriculture and feeding industries if you will for cities may increase, John Freidman in Agropolitan Development: Towards a new strategy for regional planning in Asia called these desakota in southern Asia.

I see greater connectivity, among and between so called rural and urban. I am not from a rural place, in-spite of this I think that we can get people to care about the necessity of rural spaces be highlighting the value of ecosystem services in society to improve human health and counter act climate change. By having green spaces, a characteristic of many idyll rural spaces near urban there is a potential to improve connection with those spaces to gain a better understanding of the function. Actions like quarries can be suppressed when people see the value of biologically diverse spaces. As attendees of the Aggregate and Agriculture seminar at the 2019 Rural Symposium saw, priority needs to be for sustainable services such as food provision and air quality maintenance over industry. Also, as in Perceptions of Wind Turbines in Rural Communities, also from the 2019 Rural Symposium, having informed and communicative representatives having discussions on what and how changes will be occurring may ease some concerns – from both rural and urban camps. With greater connectivity and communication I see rural spaces dictating what they need and also communicating why this works for them. In the wake of the updated Canadian Food Guide it shows that the Canadian government sees the need for variety and place specific needs in supporting Canadians, even Ontarians are highly diverse and require different supports. With less of a mold to fit into and more of a list of objectives with government or other groups of power in the area such as NGO or private citizen with vision.

As we saw in Maddy’s presentation, priority for water skiing was given over food provision – altering values by having discussions with children from a young age into the value of local foods and how first nations have a right to food sovereignty. This will create a generation that grow up with this understanding. Further, having mediation and community forums so different parties can discuss concerns and priorities have the potential to lay ground work for future cooperation. Furthermore, we discussed how settlements are changing in The Nature of Things, how suburbia will need to be replaced by complete and connected communities as we move away from cars for human and environmental health, towards the understanding that environmental health creates human health. Discussion that lays out that this transition is not coming to take your house next year if you live in the suburbs – instead building up urban centers so that in 20 years when your children want to live in connected places they can as upcoming generations have different priorities than their parents.

Reference reading

Friedman, John., Douglass, Mike. (n.d) Agropolitan Development: Towards a new strategy for regional planning in Asia. United Nations Centre for Regional Development. Pergamon Press.

Adams, Jenn. (march 13, 2019) Perceptions of Wind Turbines in Rural Communities: a case study in Orono Ontario. Rural Symposium 2019. Hosted by the School of Environmental Design and Rural Development at the University of Guelph & Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

Reichheld, Jeff., Hehl, Emily. (march 13, 2019) Aggregate and Agriculture: Understanding the impacts of aggregate production on agriculture and identifying mitigation strategies. Rural Symposium 2019. Hosted by the School of Environmental Design and Rural Development at the University of Guelph & Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

[kvgeog4390]

Say Cheese and pick a filter

In lu of our class excursion to Millbank and St Jacobs on Friday to present on various components of rural life in two close but quite different towns, I noticed something interesting – why was cheese priced so differently? In the Millbank cheese factory a literal brick of cheese, and I mean a brick this guy was hefty, could be purchased for a few dollars - $3.48 is the price that sticks out in my mind. Comparatively in a St Jacobs, a much smaller piece, maybe a quarter of the size was priced three times as much! What’s with that?

Though cheese is my no means an indicator of a town at large, these price differences for the same product show that one town was created to promote a certain mentality of what rural areas are – or in the very least what the visitor idealized. Though lovely and walkable with cute shops St Jacobs aims to promote the message that they are a cute little rural place that people visit because it is St Jacobs and a nice little drive to the country before taking your $9 dollar cheese slices and artisan sausage home. I would be very surprised if those living in St Jacobs would ever go into the shops for shopping anything other than a single gift here or there – they most defiantly would go down the street to the actual grocery store for their cheese purchases. Alternatively in Milbank the grocery store there was certainly gentrified to a point with a cute barn like exterior and the cheese store was one of two businesses to have websites of their own. The stores in Millbank were directly firstly to the residents of the town with a consideration to the occasional tourist brought in for Anne Mae’s pies the next street over.

Cheese aside, the underlying question is how rural spaces and ‘the country’ are shaped by how we desire these spaces to look? Further, what does this do to those who call the areas home if their home is drastically changed and gentrified for the consumption of weekend tourists who zoom in for a few hours and zoom out with some cheese and a meticulously carved wooden chair or two? In our discussions we learned that St Jacobs is facing a rising exodus in the last few years of Mennonite families in particular who say that the area is getting too busy. Mennonite families are by no means an attraction, they are people first, a people who are commonly associated with the St Jacobs and Waterloo area and are facing increased pressures to move away as the area becomes busier. If ‘the country’ no longer feels like home to those who grew up there – how much rural is left in the area? And how much staging and cost goes into maintaining rural idylls?

[mrgeog4390-19-blog]

You Can’t Eat Gravel

This years Rural Symposium put on by the school of Environmental Design & Rural Development at the University of Guelph left me with loads to ruminate on this past week. Such as, integrating a multitude of worldviews into collaboration practices, the necessary role of planning in building communities and how to uphold our non-human kin as equal stakeholders. While I feel like I could and would like to expand on all of these topics and the rich reflections they ensued in myself, I am going to focus my energy on the tension felt in rural spaces in terms of prioritizing land use. Further, while I feel that this theme popped up in several presentations, it emerged strongest for me during the presentation on “Aggregate & Agriculture: Understanding the Impacts of Aggregate Production on Agriculture and Identifying Mitigating Strategies”.

I would like to take this space to reflect on the mentioned tension as I feel it sits at the base of most rural considerations and was extremely evident during the mentioned presentation. For example, my previous reflections on utilizing land for agriculture versus urbanization as well as last weeks consideration of land repatriation versus continued settler use.

Bringing it back to the symposium, the presentation for me really highlighted this common issue of prioritizing certain activities and uses in terms of managing, utilizing and conserving rural spaces. Specifically, aggregate extraction and agriculture. Both of these activities can be equated to the base of everything we do… aggregate materials such as gravel, concrete and limestone physically build up our environments while agriculture fuels our survival. How does one value one over the other then?

As was mentioned, both are immeasurably valued in our society. Further, this tension manifests biophysically as the majority of aggregate operations are found amongst some of the best agricultural soil in the country. It really does become a choice then of food or concrete. As mentioned in the title, no you cannot eat gravel, however, the trend of using these materials for built environments does not seem to be slowing. As a result, demand for both is extremely high.

Does it have to be a prioritized choice though? To that it seems more unclear. The photo attached below which can be found on a poster board downtown Guelph seems to suggest we can  indeed have the best of both worlds. It suggests that old aggregate operation sites can be transformed into productive agricultural soil. While I do question how productive those sites are and can be restored to, especially since the sign is backed by a gravel company, it does offer somewhat of a solution to land prioritization in suggesting that maybe we really can have it all.

Sign in Downtown Guelph put up by GravelFacts.ca 

While I do not have the answers to which activity should and is typically valued over the other, I do think it is an important question to ask. For this reason, I am glad there are some interested folks who are diving into answering this question. While the research for the “Aggregate & Agriculture” project is in the preliminary phase I do believe it is important research, especially the focus on lived experiences of farmers. Further, I believe this research does highlight a key tension in managing rural spaces, the tension of land use and which activities should be valued over others. I especially think this issue will only become of more relevance as rural spaces continue to diminish while simultaneously demand for these products whether it be food, fuel or building materials increases.

I am curious to know what you folks think about the topic. Should one activity be valued over the other? How can we maybe ensure the use of  both within the same area?

In warmth,

Maddy

[kvgeog4390]

Hi Maddy - very interesting post. The common social world view that natural spaces need to be managed to be valuable is such as convoluted and sometimes counter intuitive topic. The conflict between farming and mining in the same areas is full of nuanced issues of which is more valuable and in what terms of scale. Geologically humans have been here for such a short amount of time and in thousands of years maybe agriculture can return in a similar capacity to the region - my concern is that replacement of top soil will be impossible to replicate in the same capacity in any of our life times. As we seek to create more intensive and dense cities we will need these aggregate materials, yet we will also need to eat. As much of Ontario farmland is already under pressure from development and transformation I wonder if mining operations in the current methods are viable. 

In answer to your questions i think that agriculture is more valuable than mining and wonder if we can use what we have more effectively in order to create connected and dense settlements with less of a geographical footprint. I really don’t know how both can occur in the same area. Reflecting back on the mega quarry that was proposed in Ontario in 2012 the massive and infinite need for water removal contaminating water that will irrigate much of Southern Ontario agriculture, while also providing water for many of our major cities - yet likely being full of mining chemical run off gives me pause. I know that a mega quarry of that scale is not to occur in the region, yet if a dozen are operating in unison what does these mean for regional agriculture? nothing good. 

I think both agriculture and aggregate mining are necessary - yet can not occur together and agriculture needs to be prioritized.

[tdgeog4390-19]

Winds of Change: Rural Attitudes Matter

I’m glad that we were introduced to Guelph’s Rural Symposium because I got to listen to a variety of topics and get an idea of what is expected by graduate students in their master’s research (which I’m sure some of us are considering for the future). Before attending, I knew that there would be a good turnout because Guelph is very involved with Southern Ontario agriculture, but I didn’t realize that there are so many studies and support for rural Ontario- on social, economic, environmental, and spiritual spectrums. After attending the morning session, the presentation that I found the most interesting was the very first one, “Perceptions of Wind Turbines in Rural Communities: A Case Study in Orono, Ontario”, by Jenn Adams. I think this is because I was introduced to the impacts and controversial topic of wind turbines last semester in a FARE Land Economics course. In this course, we spent a few days discussing the wind turbine developments in Melancthon, Ontario and how it influenced people’s property values based on proximity and visibility of the turbines, as well as resident’s opinions. Below I have provided the link to a podcast in which our FARE class recorded in November 2018 with Professor Brady Deaton, interviewing Dr.Richard Vyn, who is the author of the article “Property Value Impacts of Wind Turbines and the Influence of Attitudes Toward Wind Energy”.

Podcast: https://www.uoguelph.ca/fare/institute/podcasts#propertyvalue

Article: http://le.uwpress.org/content/94/4/496.refs

This presentation reminded me of the complications faced with renewable energy development in rural Canada. Like the Melancthon township, Orono is predominantly a farming community, who generally have negative perceptions around wind turbines due to their aesthetics, noise, economic influence, environmental effects, and accused “health” effects on humans and livestock. In the Melancthon case, while some residents are largely against wind turbines, some have shown interest and are excited about having additional energy, as well as a possible return of funds. In Orono, Jenn mentions that there is no lack of support for renewable energy, so why are there negative attitudes towards wind turbines? Using the not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) theory, Jenn made an important realization that rural community member’s perceptions on wind turbines will determine the support for turbine developments in Orono. This is interesting when you consider other Canadian rural towns, such as in Alberta, who have had very different experiences. Residents here don’t have large controversy because wind turbines have been around much longer than in Ontario. Similarly, when turbines first went up in mid-2000s in Ontario, community attitudes were neutral. I think that over time, the possible increase of media attention and development may have shifted attitudes towards turbines in rural jurisdictions. It’s almost like a ripple effect; the more that the message gets out that people think turbines are bad, the more people will consider that mindset (hetero-thinking becomes homo-thinking).

This has made my understanding of rural Canada more complex, coming to terms that not only do these communities face environmental and economic barriers, but also forms of social and psychological barriers. Perhaps being disconnected by large innovations that would be experienced in more urban centers has caused rural residents to develop a sense of nervousness and lack of trust, worried that innovations, such as wind turbines, will reduce their living and agricultural conditions. This idea is touched upon in the article form class, “Canada’s Rural Problem (1923)”, under the section, Work of Socialization.

I thought that Jenn’s research was interesting because it explores the attitudes of rural communities on development. It gave me the impression that rural residents are hesitant and passionate about technological developments occurring within their townships. I think these communities have a right to be ‘on alert’ about developments on the land, as rural Ontario is sensitive and must be protected with sustainable strategies to ensure it isn’t taken advantage by large companies. However, in class, we often talk about rural spaces as being the victim, but perhaps in cases such as these, where falsely lead perceptions discourages rural support of clean energy, they are unintentionally victimizing themselves.  

[kvgeog4390]

Hey Taylor! Really great post, I love how you brought in so much secondary data and the podcast is really interesting, great job there!

The issue of wind turbines seems to be on going with huge supporters on both sides of the discussion, and i like how Jenn highlighted the roll of public education and voice sharing before the introduction as being highly relevant, and also a source of conntention from the so called loosing side when action occurs against what they wanted. She highlighted how people would have loved to come to more community events and learn more as they like the idea of renewable energies yet have questions about personal and ecological health. She also highlighted how public forums can be misunderstood by community members who think their disapproval of a plan is enough to stop it, they were heard - and disagreed with. Greater and clear discussion can support the concerns of both groups by offering educational supports for supporters, showing those who have questions more clear answers and giving opposition time to be heard. 

My opinions on wind turbines aside, the role of NIMBY seems to have greater aesthetic weight than scientific supports. Though slightly off topic, when Kraft Dinner changed their recipe they told no one for a whole year with no one noticing. Showing that people may be more worried about change and what if than the actual issue itself. I fully support rural communities holding stead fast against developments they don’t support, i also support green infrastructure and more efficient energy methods that reduce our GHG emissions and environmental impacts. 

[kvgeog4390]

Who says first impressions don’t matter?

This week while attending the 2019 Rural Symposium, an annual event co-hosted by the School of Environmental Design & Rural Development at U of G and OMAFRA, I found the presentation Understanding the Barriers to Livestock Production in the Clay Belt Region of Northern Ontario by Sara Epp very interesting. The irony of a vegetarian focusing on a presentation centered at face value on livestock production aside, the themes of; coordination with diverse groups across language differences, and the decrease of young people in rural settings are overarching themes transferable to other rural topic focuses as well.

Her research was done through coordination with the University of Hearst – a small Ontario university that is Francophone. I was surprised that an Ontario university, and the surrounding region being French speaking. It highlights the unexpected barriers that arise when researching communities far different from our own and how joint efforts are needed to complete things more effectively. This is transferable to working with First Nations or Mennonite groups who we may think we are fairly well versed in, but upon meeting realized there are factors deeply relevant to the locals of the area that we as outside researchers take for granted.

Epp highlighted the values of both perceptions and reality in those moving to the area, this matter too in regards to those studying the areas as we feel inadvertently into the perceptions in creating our visions of what rural areas should be. She specifically said “sometimes perceptions matter more as they shape our choices in ways we do not realize,” I found that really interesting in term of the rural idyll .

Epp expanded this further into the draw versus drive faced by young farmers to the area. There is a challenge of young farmers staying in the field when far more lucrative mining options are available in the region. From perspective that has been looking a lot at the rural to urban migration trends this is transferable to the larger trends of rural abandon and aging communities – why would people work harder for less when fewer options for health care, education, recreation and connectivity also exist in rural areas? The perceptions of rural areas being places of wilderness and bears and hard work may draw some in – but it will drive more away at the same time. Barriers of economic and social and ecological challenges are more overt and easily measured – but measuring perceptions is much more difficult, yet are vital in understanding and ensuring the life of rural spaces and communities.  

[kvgeog4390]

What issue, is treated as a nonissue for rural Canada?

An issue about rural Canada that I find troubling is the loss of urban-rural relationships. When we think of rural areas agriculture and industries such as mining, forestry and fisheries come to mind – these are simultaneously called dirty and greatly demanded by urban dwellers in Canada and around the world. As a result of displacing so called dirty industries oversight and encouragement for them to clean up processes as much as possible are lost while perpetuating these narratives of dirty farming and etc. When we do see them in the media socially we seem to forget about them within a week, gladly going back to consuming in the way that we had before – forgetting where goods came from, if we even asked.

This can be looked at from an environmental perspective, an economic perspective, a food based perspective and a human rights based perspective – among others. In urban areas/the world markets we benefit from the food and materials that rural areas provide, accepting the consequences of biodiversity loss and water contamination in the “there” because “here” we perceive ourselves to be unaffected. In Only Alberta First Nation left under long-term boil water advisory to break ground on treatment plant it is shown how rural areas can face greater consequences of rural industry yet have far few supports than urban areas. This particular first nation, the water in this community is contaminated by industry and community members are now receiving a water treatment plant they have been waiting since 2011 for. There is a disconnect between caring for those in too many rural communities despite the major contributions that they make to society and the economy.

In a previous blog we spoke about the relationship between rural and urban spaces, how they are interconnected and lean upon each other for mutual success. The rural-urban disconnect is a continuation of this, when the relationship is invisible from one perspective we forget how deep the connection is tied. When Canada strengthens the services and resources available to rural communities Canada as a whole will become stronger. In no way do I think it will be easy, Canada is both large and complex – yet supporting and communicating with rural areas needs to be a priority, whether they provide a service to Canada in large and clear ways or not.

[kvgeog4390]

Why is the role of nature taken for granted in our communities?

In our week off, I created as assessment of ecosystem services in Vancouver and the Lower Fraser River Valley as a result the importance of green infrastructure being integrated into urban spaces and the irony of suburban spaces in dividing people who are seeking greater connections are fresh in my mind.

People are drawn to the suburbs for lower prices and more space to raise families with a sense of community, maybe searching for the greenery and better air quality that is lacking in the nearby city too. A romantic name like Heritage Glen or Rural Acres create a sense of a cozy community, being able to live out of the city but able to access it easily too. But how accessible are urban developments that do not have quick and user friendly bus routes, walk-able grocery store access, or social events that bring the community together regularly? Are suburbs really just cities without these collective infrastructure in which people are trying to reconnect with the green space that many urban areas are lacking?

Urban spaces can have integrated green spaces which are accessible to all, are part of the city infrastructure, and very importantly; are built for people not cars so are far more connected to each other. The rural idyll of a community that knows and supports each other can occur in highly urbanized spaces too when people are regularly connecting with their communities and neighbour by doing away with urban design that necessitates cars.

Portland for example is a leader in building around existing green spaces and integrating in designed green spaces such as insulation’s of greenery around storm water drains to promote ground water refill, slow storm water from entering drains, and reducing physical and chemical waste from rushing into drains. These green infrastructure are ecologically better and economically better as they reduce flooding costs and water treatment facility pressure, and are far more sustainable than grey infrastructure methods of pipes and pavement.

Original green spaces such as wetlands and forests are the best option for green infrastructure, while manufactured ones when original is lacking are a secondary objective and requires ecological consultations. The Cheonggyecheon Stream in Seoul, South Korea for example replaced an overcrowded high way that was integrated into the city for almost 50 years with a water front space that is greened and walk-able, fed by ground water and water pumped from subways. It is imperfect with is concrete base that stops ground water refill and is not accessible for those with mobility limitations; yet it provides a walk-able green space for most and has improved air quality in the region significantly by connecting formerly divided areas of the city with walking paths.

The relationship between suburbs and cities is very close. Yet the classical categories are both ineffective for people and ecology. By designing and re-urbanizing with connectivity and complete communities, those in which the needed services can be accessed by all, some of the urban versus suburban distinction melts away.

[esgeog4390-19-blog]

Hi Kaleigh! I completely agree with your ideas about green spaces in urban communities!

One line from the film “The Nature of Things: Lost in the Suburbs” from David Suzuki that I found particular interesting was about how people should not have to get in their car and drive a great distance to have access to nature and green spaces. They used the case study of Portland, Oregon to demonstrate the feasibility and importance of natural areas in urban landscapes, and you also discussed it in your post. In the film they suggested improving boulevards with trees and creating wider sidewalks for pedestrians to promote walking or biking, and in your post you suggested increasing vegetation around storm water drains. Both of these are great ideas, and what makes them even better is how simple they are! It is very possible for cities to plant trees and other vegetation in order benefit society is various ways. Any amount of new vegetation would prove useful in increasing water drainage, removing excess carbon dioxide from the air, and reducing flooding. Although these are a few simple suggestions, there are also more large-scale actions that can be taken in increasing urban green spaces. 

One example is the recently established Rouge National Urban Park. This park is located in the Greater Toronto Area which makes it easily accessible to many urban residents. This would hopefully motivate people to explore nature and find appreciation for the natural environment. An interesting point that I just learned it that more than 75% of land in Rouge National Urban Park has been altered or disturbed. However, Parks Canada has been working to restore its native ecosystems to increase productivity. This is an amazing example of a successful project involving the repurposing of disturbed landscapes for the benefit of society and nature. 

Hopefully projects like these continue to happen in order to improve the connectedness between society and nature.

[kvgeog4390]

hey hey! I loved that line from the nature of things too! it is ironic that car culture advocates for greater connectivity, but it provides bubbles of life and existence in which the middle is left out and anesthetized into a perfect little world. 

Rouge National Park is a great example of ecological restoration - as is Portland urban redevelopment and green infrastructure investments. We as humans seem to forget that being a part of ecology is not a bad thing, we do not need to let go of all the indoor spaces in order to have high quality outdoor spaces maintained and rehabilitated. 

Great talk!

[kvgeog4390]

Why is the role of nature taken for granted in our communities?

In our week off, I created as assessment of ecosystem services in Vancouver and the Lower Fraser River Valley as a result the importance of green infrastructure being integrated into urban spaces and the irony of suburban spaces in dividing people who are seeking greater connections are fresh in my mind.

People are drawn to the suburbs for lower prices and more space to raise families with a sense of community, maybe searching for the greenery and better air quality that is lacking in the nearby city too. A romantic name like Heritage Glen or Rural Acres create a sense of a cozy community, being able to live out of the city but able to access it easily too. But how accessible are urban developments that do not have quick and user friendly bus routes, walk-able grocery store access, or social events that bring the community together regularly? Are suburbs really just cities without these collective infrastructure in which people are trying to reconnect with the green space that many urban areas are lacking?

Urban spaces can have integrated green spaces which are accessible to all, are part of the city infrastructure, and very importantly; are built for people not cars so are far more connected to each other. The rural idyll of a community that knows and supports each other can occur in highly urbanized spaces too when people are regularly connecting with their communities and neighbour by doing away with urban design that necessitates cars.

Portland for example is a leader in building around existing green spaces and integrating in designed green spaces such as insulation’s of greenery around storm water drains to promote ground water refill, slow storm water from entering drains, and reducing physical and chemical waste from rushing into drains. These green infrastructure are ecologically better and economically better as they reduce flooding costs and water treatment facility pressure, and are far more sustainable than grey infrastructure methods of pipes and pavement.

Original green spaces such as wetlands and forests are the best option for green infrastructure, while manufactured ones when original is lacking are a secondary objective and requires ecological consultations. The Cheonggyecheon Stream in Seoul, South Korea for example replaced an overcrowded high way that was integrated into the city for almost 50 years with a water front space that is greened and walk-able, fed by ground water and water pumped from subways. It is imperfect with is concrete base that stops ground water refill and is not accessible for those with mobility limitations; yet it provides a walk-able green space for most and has improved air quality in the region significantly by connecting formerly divided areas of the city with walking paths.

The relationship between suburbs and cities is very close. Yet the classical categories are both ineffective for people and ecology. By designing and re-urbanizing with connectivity and complete communities, those in which the needed services can be accessed by all, some of the urban versus suburban distinction melts away.

[tdgeog4390-19]

Hey!

I enjoyed reading your post this week because it’s a topic that I have also found myself discussing recently. I’m currently at an environmental conference at Queen’s University and one of the problems we were asked to addressed in a case competition today was how to develop smart cities on brownfields, presented by the company, Stantec. I think that the redevelopment of cities has become an important project for future sustainability, and that there is incredible potential for creating greener communities, that essentially model successful rural living. Incorporating green technologies into communities is shown to have many of benefits for the environment, yes, but also from a socio-economic standpoint. For example, revitalizing these once contaminated, and abandon brownfields into productive space is likely to decrease crime rates, increase employment, strengthen education systems, and encourage residents to reconnect and migrate closer into these once wasted spaces.

Although, these approaches are clearly designed for more urbanized centers. Relating more to the course, I wonder if these similar green innovations could be implemented in rural communities? Obviously the scales of operation would have to be readjusted in order to make a meaningful impact on rural space, without wasting resources and implementation processes. I also think that incorporating such systems have the potential to align with the approaches addressed in the “Policy and Practice in Rural Development” section within the Strengthening Rural Canada (2016) document. These are: (1) traditional economic instruments, (2) Innovation investments in technology, (3) community economic development, and (4) community development and capacity building.

https://smartcities-infosystem.eu/scis-clusters/brownfield-development

[kvgeog4390]

Hey T, that conference sounds great! a really interesting and relevant topic is making better use of our urbanized spaces, be is urban cities of less urban settlements in rural areas. Transitioning that to rural areas such as mined and forestry areas would be very interesting! Having these conversations provides the ability to ask how we can use our spaces with less impact, and when we have impacts - how to make them minimal and provide mitigation methods so all benefit more. 

We don’t seem to think about Green communities as much in a rural setting as we do in the city, which is funny because they have a greater green infrastructure already in place than the mechanized and designed urban spaces do! more permiable spaces that filter ground water and can mitigate flooding, greater quality greenery that provides greater air quality too. I know this is based on assumptions of romantic rural spaces, they can be polluted too by old infrastructure and a history of resource extraction. 

Moral of the story - everywhere needs more green infrastructure! 

Great talk!

[esgeog4390-19-blog]

My Suburbia

The film “The Nature of Things: Lost in the Suburbs” from David Suzuki addressed many interesting and important ideas about suburbia and the urban sprawl in North America. For the past several decades suburban landscapes have been increasingly popular due to their convenience and affordability. This film displayed this popularity, while also bringing our attention to varying urban dynamics in cities in Canada, Mexico, and USA. Although many significant points were discussed, there was one idea that resonated the most with me. 

This idea was regarding the value of suburbia. 

When asked “Where do you want to live?” most people will not respond that they want to live in the suburbs. 

So why do so many people end up living in these suburban regions?

Because it is convenient and affordable. 

Suburban areas are seen as a “compromise” because although residents do not technically live in the city, they are close enough to the urban landscape without paying insane amounts of money for housing. It is also very easy to access the cities through various transportation routes such as car, train, or bus. Other benefits of living in suburbia include the close proximity to multitudes of stores, malls, entertainment, and recreation. As seen in the film, the couples that were interviewed as they were moving into suburbia stated that they were moving there for their families. They appreciate the affordable housing while also having close grocery stores and larger backyards. 

This reminded me of my parents as they moved to Aurora, Ontario to start their family. They moved into a brand new house in a subdivision that had just been built. This lifestyle suited them perfectly as the house was ideal for a family (nice backyard, access to schools and parks) while also being convenient for their jobs. My dad worked in downtown Toronto, so it was very easy for him to commute on the 404 or take the Go Train. 

Fast forward 15 years… 

With two kids in university and one almost done high school, their life in suburbia is no longer necessary. Although they still appreciate being close to grocery stores and malls, they realize that they could find a more appropriate place for them to live outside of subdivisions. 

I often ask them why they chose to live in Aurora for so long, and their answer is always “It served its purpose.” This response is even more clear now after watching this film. They chose to live there so we could have access to quality eduction, spaces to play, good food, and so they could have decent jobs. And now as they prepare to move, I know that a new family will likely move in to support their own lifestyle through the convenience and affordability of suburbia.

[kvgeog4390]

Hey hey! Very nice post, you summarized the common urban boom of north american from the documentary really well. 

How is the closeness of grocery stores subjective and effected if cars were no longer an option? Costco runs would need to adapt for sure. I grew up in Mississauga and would only be able to pick up a few items on a whim if i was busing home. While i was fairly fortunate, i know that food deserts in suburban and urban areas are too common and therefore necessitate a car all too often in Canada. This article from the Huff Post Canada goes into Canadian food deserts further. Closeness becomes subjective when that factor is removed. 

When I shared with friends in Holland that my commute to school was about 45 minutes they almost fell over! More than a 20 minute commute to school or work or frankly anywhere was very unusual for them. Grocery shopping for staples like bread and milk and the protein for the next couple days would occur for them 2-3 times a week - the adventure that is grocery shopping in Canada is quite different. While no city is perfect, the multitude of bike and walking paths in Holland - though designed and manufactured - put people first. Suburbs exist in Amsterdam too, yet are connected by the same transit and bike lines to the city. 

The suburbs in Canada are a strange pseudo-urban spaces that are both accessible (if you have a car) but expensive to the environment and in the value of commuters time. While cities have massive rents, some have decent inner city transport (like Calgary with its fare free transit section), yet much are still built around the car as well - which is super confusing.

[kvgeog4390]

Why is the role of nature taken for granted in our communities?

In our week off, I created as assessment of ecosystem services in Vancouver and the Lower Fraser River Valley as a result the importance of green infrastructure being integrated into urban spaces and the irony of suburban spaces in dividing people who are seeking greater connections are fresh in my mind.

People are drawn to the suburbs for lower prices and more space to raise families with a sense of community, maybe searching for the greenery and better air quality that is lacking in the nearby city too. A romantic name like Heritage Glen or Rural Acres create a sense of a cozy community, being able to live out of the city but able to access it easily too. But how accessible are urban developments that do not have quick and user friendly bus routes, walk-able grocery store access, or social events that bring the community together regularly? Are suburbs really just cities without these collective infrastructure in which people are trying to reconnect with the green space that many urban areas are lacking?

Urban spaces can have integrated green spaces which are accessible to all, are part of the city infrastructure, and very importantly; are built for people not cars so are far more connected to each other. The rural idyll of a community that knows and supports each other can occur in highly urbanized spaces too when people are regularly connecting with their communities and neighbour by doing away with urban design that necessitates cars.

Portland for example is a leader in building around existing green spaces and integrating in designed green spaces such as insulation's of greenery around storm water drains to promote ground water refill, slow storm water from entering drains, and reducing physical and chemical waste from rushing into drains. These green infrastructure are ecologically better and economically better as they reduce flooding costs and water treatment facility pressure, and are far more sustainable than grey infrastructure methods of pipes and pavement.

Original green spaces such as wetlands and forests are the best option for green infrastructure, while manufactured ones when original is lacking are a secondary objective and requires ecological consultations. The Cheonggyecheon Stream in Seoul, South Korea for example replaced an overcrowded high way that was integrated into the city for almost 50 years with a water front space that is greened and walk-able, fed by ground water and water pumped from subways. It is imperfect with is concrete base that stops ground water refill and is not accessible for those with mobility limitations; yet it provides a walk-able green space for most and has improved air quality in the region significantly by connecting formerly divided areas of the city with walking paths.

The relationship between suburbs and cities is very close. Yet the classical categories are both ineffective for people and ecology. By designing and re-urbanizing with connectivity and complete communities, those in which the needed services can be accessed by all, some of the urban versus suburban distinction melts away.

[kvgeog4390]

Who to have at Goldilocks’ table?

If a significant decision was to be made about transportation development in a rural northern Ontario community, and five people would meet to make a final decisions, a variety of values and positionality must be represented.

Firstly, an environmentalist who has done research in the area as to the effects of transport changes through an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). They would have local and general knowledge of the issue and area to given informed clarification for the rest of the group. EIA completion would show that all components have been investigated to prove that the transport development is the best out of a variety of options, and that safe guards are in place to minimize impacts.

Second, a first nation’s representative of the area. While a first nations group may not currently live in the area, which would ideally have been addressed before this round table. All of Canada had first nations groups at some point, this person would serve to remind the spiritual and cultural insights of the area. Hopefully they have a connection to the community to know local needs as well.

Third, a government representative who may not be of the community but asks good questions and puts sustainability as the first priority. Someone such as Julie Payette, the current Canadian Governor General, who has pushed back at policies asking informed questions about why such action was to be taken beyond ‘just because.’ In a CBC news article in which she stated “climate change, migration and poverty” as central to the Canadian focus and reminds Canadians what priorities should be, stating “let go of the personal agenda, to reach a higher goal and to do what is right for the common good.” Ideally having someone educated in environmental studies who is empathetic to the need of those around them would be excellent, while she may not be a realistic table guest the values that she supports would be.

Fourth, he mayor of the community to provide insight into the community needs built on personal and town hall knowledge of the communities needs and hopes. Hopefully this person would be informed on a variety of community perspectives that they will integrate into decision making while still possessing the local passion for their rural community.

Finally, a transport Canada representative of the expanding transport infrastructure. Is it an airport, road, rail line? In the article “Strengthening our rural voice to bring sustainability to the North” an airport retrofit was discussed. This representative would have participated in the EIA and be informed on appropriate next steps.

In reality, I think that transport development would be decided mostly by transport representatives and political forces in the rural area – mayors and members of parliament. A first nation or environmentalist perspective may be included but I would guess that only one, and any assessments created would be looked at in passing but would not be the major focus of the meeting. The main question would be industry and town sustainability, environmental sustainability would be a secondary concern – not necessarily the goal plans are built around.

[esgeog4390-19-blog]

Demographic Shifts of Rural Canada

Many Canadian rural communities are experiencing a major demographic shift. However, each town is experiencing these changes in a unique way. Some populations are getting smaller and older, while others are getting larger and younger. The main determining factor is location. For the past several decades towns around the GTA have been growing to accommodate for the growing urban populations. Towns that were once rural and now completely overcome by subdivisions and commuters. 

The opposite has held true for the town of Terrace Bay in Northern Ontario. This town was established as a result of the forestry industry and it all started with a pulp and paper mill. The industry flourished and many people moved there for work, causing a massive population boom. Unfortunately, after many financial struggles, the pulp and paper industry is not as dominant as it once was, and citizens of Terrace Bay have decided to move to new places. The population in 1991 was 2,477 and 20 years later the population had dropped to 1,471. This decrease can often be quite detrimental to a community. 

https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=3558054&Geo2=PR&Code2=35&Data=Count&SearchText=Terrace%20Bay&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&GeoLevel=PR&GeoCode=3558054&TABID=1

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Terrace+Bay,+ON/@48.7691178,-87.0863085,12.31z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x4d4353d4424ee84d:0xcdd649ede015c15a!8m2!3d48.783999!4d-87.0966258

Since Terrace Bay is no longer being supported by the pulp and paper industry, it must look for new ways to boost their economy and bring in new residents. The first step, however, is showcasing the town to whoever is interested to prove that it is a quality place to live. This is mainly being done through tourism. 

Terrace Bay is home to many beautiful features including waterfalls, hiking trails, and beaches. These images have now become the promotional tools to advertise this town to the rest of the country with the hopes of attracting tourists. It also offers many recreational opportunities such as a golf course, canoe rentals, and Slate Islands Provincial Park. 

http://www.terracebay.ca/visiting/attractions/aguasabonfalls/

Even their website seems to be more directed to visitors than to the residents. “Visiting” is the second heading at the top of the page, and I find this unusual compared to other town websites that I have seen in the past. The website also highlights their most popular features and attractions in a very obvious way, which proves their reliance on tourism. 

http://www.terracebay.ca/visiting/attractions/

I believe that Terrace Bay will be successful as a tourist destination because it is a very beautiful part of Northern Ontario and offers a lot of recreation activities. However, I find it disappointing that this town, along with many other Canadian rural towns, has suffered from urbanization leading to their ultimate reliance on tourism. This shift away from primary industries has been very detrimental to rural towns across the country and many have not been able to recover. Fortunately, I do believe that Terrace Bay will be able to attract new residents through the current use of tourism, however that might not be for many years. 

[kvgeog4390]

In news and pop culture we are reminded that Canadian rural areas are shrinking as people opt for urban areas that offer greater services and employment opportunities, especially when industries in Canada either dry up regionally or move somewhere new. Tourism is an excellent opportunity for rural areas to counteract the mass exodus of residents by drawing in tourists and those looking for a change of place and pace. Highlighting environmental qualities which make a region attractive puts value on ecosystems that may otherwise be threatened by development. When an industry such as a paper mill leaves there may be pressure to increase extraction of a valuable good such as timber or minerals from the area to be sent elsewhere. 

As tourism leaves a lesser trace on the landscape than extracting a good such as timber it is more sustainable – yet is highly dependent on what visitors what to see and value in an area and tourist do not have the same attachment to of knowledge of an area that a resident would. Areas which choose tourism as their main industry will constantly need to consider and evaluate changes they make to the area for the sake of those coming in at the expense of residents. If trails are restricted to residents, but tours frequently are permitted what does this mean for those who call the area home?

[kvgeog4390]

Sorry, you’re growing what?

In researching Canadian towns that are faced with current or near future demographic shifts, common features to addressing this and remaining relevant and viable in existence are creativity and adaptability that asks how can we do the most with what we have? A town that choose a unique pathway to evolve and seek sustainability is Atholville, New Brunswick with was double effected by industry closure and primary production closure in a short period of time. As part of CBC summer 2018 showcase of communities adapting to demographic and other change called transformation Atholville proactively addressed the coming demographic shift that would draw young people away in the search of employment. When the paper mill and yarn factory closed down, they permitted the BC based company of Zenabis to enter the town and transform the yarn factory in a hydroponic facility for growing cannabis for medical and recreation demands. As agriculture feeds cities, yet is vilified for the smells or perceived effects of the process, the growth of cannabis is demanded by urbanites yet is controversial. Retrofitting the former factory for this purpose serves to capture by-products that may be associated with the production that urban areas may oppose having close to large urban centers. By containing the process in a building no smells and no product losses can occur, which could be worries if production were to be occurring in a local field.

Furthermore, the nearby mine that provided employment for the town which was shut down early was transformed to a geothermal energy facility to provide energy for regional businesses. This energy is far more sustainable than fossil fuels and while working towards green energy infrastructure goals of Canada, it also provides the opportunity for affordable energy which will continue to require educated people to remain in the community and for the community to continue to grow and provide necessary services to create incentive for the town to be a place of opportunity.

While the town has choose to go a more cash crop focused roots, if issues of food security for the town were to occur, there is a possibility of integrating food crops into a hydroponic program for local consumption. Either way, urban demand shall continue to drive production and the economy of Atholville, NB while ensuring that employment options for the town remain to deter the brain drain of young people who may be drawn to urbanized areas for greater employment opportunities. The manager of Zenabis, May Nazair, calls the adaption that she has seen in the town as a testament of “the resilience of rural Canada.” From within the community assessed what they had and choose a direction to meet their economic needs while providing a range of income opportunities from the geothermal plant to Zenabis.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/transformation-canada-series-cbc-news-1.4722096

[kvgeog4390]

What does that filter hide?

How is rural Canada portrayed in contemporary society? Think about art, music, film, news, etc. How might this influence decisions being made about it?

Pop culture depicts rural Canada as places with a deep connection to living simply and a tighter knit community network than you might find in the city. Like the seaside image below from, “10 Cute Towns In Newfoundland That Are Definitely Worth The Road Trip,” they are picturesque, quaint and colourful. Yet those within are often struggling to get out. Like Ariel in Footloose young people want to leave, and the few jobs are often working in local factories or with whichever resource the community is based around. Rural Canada is either depicted as idyllic and beautifully rural or as slow and exhausting. Keeping on the theme of Newfoundland, the map shows how 600 towns have opened and closed in the 500 year history of the province. A town or two a year may not be that bad, yet most of these towns died between 1930 and 1970, a rate of loss greater than any other Canadian province, yet a trend that has been occurring nation-wide as urban areas grow. Loss of employment in fisheries as stocks are depleted from off shore commercial fisheries and brain drain of young people to urban education and employment are two central features of this.

https://www.narcity.com/ca/nl/stjohns/best-of-nl/10-cute-towns-newfoundland-definitely-worth-road-trip 

http://theindependent.ca/2011/04/07/the-abandoned-communities-of-our-province/

Rural areas that are successful and thriving in Canada seem to be one of two things, picturesque or dramatically altered for economic extraction. Few farms today look like the farm in Babe and survive only through the goods they produce, they are larger and louder and nosier and smellier – they are functional farms that produce a lot and well for the needs of those in the cities. The same goes for mines and fisheries. The pretty ones, like Bogle Seeds – the sunflower farm near Hamilton that in a week went from being a nice way to supplement an income to being ‘closed for good’ after an influx of people sought their ideal picture for Instagram. Damaging plants, crossing four lane highways, and ignoring the requested entrance fees – resulting in the family announcing this will be the last planted sunflower crop. Cases like this demonstrate how the rural is valued when it is pretty – but not respected by those who tour through seeking photos or to consume the areas with minimal concern for sustainability. Rural either needs to be pretty or far away and giving cheap goods in the eyes of many Canadians.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-how-the-quest-for-the-perfect-selfie-forced-an-ontario-sunflower-farm/

Rural areas hold a key position in generally being among the first to experience environmental changes as they are commonly far closer to natural processes than those in built up areas. Loss of livelihood such as fish indicates a loss in environmental health. Oil spills or mining pollutants will effect nearby areas, often less populated and/or marginalized communities, and smaller rural populations have less of a political voice and social outrage weight than if the same event were to happen in Toronto. When fishing communities bring attention to fish dying from pollutants from an oil leak national outrage and action may last for a few days, and the Athabasca First Nation has been under boil water advisories off and on for 10 years – why? Fewer people are effected, those people have less of a political footprint, and we prefer to look at the pretty pictures. These polarized images of rural areas lead it to be idealized for what we want it to be, not what it is and how everything that exists is for us to consume at any desired rate. In a society that values social media as reality we need to be far more critical of the images we see and importantly, what is cropped out.

[esgeog4390-19-blog]

Very insightful post! I find it very interesting how rural communities can be portrayed in a way that is so different from reality. Small rural towns are often advertised as picturesque, cute, and unique which draws in high amounts of tourism. However, more often than not, these towns are economically struggling due to a downfall in primary industries. This was the case with Western Newfoundland. The main industry was fishing and many local fisherman relied on this industry for their income and livelihood. After new regulations were instated to prevent overfishing, these fishermen were forced into unemployment which drastically impacted the economy. Now the community is struggling for income. However, these unfortunate events are masked by the advertisements that label the community as quaint and picturesque. These advertisements could potentially be beneficial as the tourism could bring in some additional income to the town, but tourism would only exist for 4 months of the year. This therefore would not be enough to economically sustain the community. The creation of a “tourist town” is dangerous because it hides the unfortunate realties of the citizens of the community. For these people, the town is not “cute” but instead an area that has failed to provide them with a prosperous life. This is not just a reality for the people of Western Newfoundland, but for rural communities all over the world. 

[kvgeog4390]

Thanks, the concept of a tourist town interests me. While bringing in income to a town or area, it is a challenging situation as the line between reality and marketed images is delicate. The dilemma of bringing in economic revenue when an area may have lost a major income source for the area at the cost of commercializing a home has no perfect answer. I know that I am not immune to enjoying rural settings that have been commercialized and designed specifically for the consumption of weekend visitors. I am no expert and don’t come from a rural setting so I don’t know what the right degree of commercialization is for an area, and turn to rural community members to decide what is right for them. If I were to be asked I may give inputs on what I like of the current area, being aware that what I like would be classified into “things to do” and that those things may not be what a community desires themselves. Looking at the map of abandoned settlements alone in my original post, I wonder, if given the opportunity, if some of those settlements would have been content to stay where they called home if it cost a little commercialization – or if it would no longer feel like home if say a fishery dependent community now received much of their revenue from activities such as whale watching tours. What are your thoughts on the Bogle Seeds sunflower instance this summer? In our quest to consume an aesthetic costs are paid by those who depend on an area for livelihoods.

[dw-geog4390-blog]

The idea of a tourist town is really interesting, especially when framed as the two of you have, as a new method of commodifying rural landscapes. Tourist towns seem to be an extension of the “use it, abuse it, lose it” attitude shown towards rural towns and especially company towns that have historically relied on primary industries. Perhaps the tourist town is the swan’s song of town whose purpose for formation was unsustainable resource extraction, such as those Kaleigh cited in Newfoundland.   I really like this article from the Globe and Mail which gives an overview of how company towns - the extreme form of rural communities reliant on specific industries - are coping with modern economic challenges. What is evident to me is the effort needed by relatively small companies to remain rooted in their company towns. If companies are either large enough to be globally mobile or are unwilling to remain rooted it’s easy to see how rural communities can become sidelined by the industries they’ve worked for. Seeking out new business in tourism can, therefore, be framed as a response to local abandonment by larger economic forces. Unfortunately, the tourism industry relies on attracting outsiders who may quickly decide that a rural community is not worth their time and money. Like you said Kaleigh, communities may have to cater to elements that are largely unhelpful for themselves for the sake of tourism growth. As the Globe article suggests, there is likely a solution in supporting entrepreneurial efforts that allow communities to reach out into new markets and build a diversified local economy. I guess the challenge becomes how do we support new growth in a way that fosters sustainability, positive local impacts, and self-determination.

[kvgeog4390]

The concept of rooting a industry or idea in a place is very interesting. We have been seeing lately with the GM plant which is to be closing in Oshawa – corporations do not have the place based rooting that an industry of an area does, motivations differ. What is best for the company is at the cost of those who are to depend on it. The transition of abandoned rural towns to tourist destinations is an unstable one as tourism puts greater power into the hands of consumers/visitors who may not understand the finer details of how and why the area is as it is. 

Further, a single negative press release on the area – a fishing town with a history of whaling for example – can change demand and attention to the areas. Or a small change in transportation which removes a town from the main transport track will have massive effects on an area that bounced back from a loss in primary industry only to be empty once more. The little town of Radiator Springs, in the animated movie Cars, comes to mind. Sustainable growth and program design is indeed challenging so that a community does what is right for them while retaining the diversity of economic streams that they need. Cleaning up docks so they smell less fishy, or gentrifying barns to increase tourism may come at the cost of incomes – this is not a fit for all towns, autonomy matters too.