Letter: West Grey Opts Out of Protecting the Saugeen River
Judi Smelko writes on behalf of Saugeen Preservation Society Inc. in reaction to West Grey Council's decision not to pause approvals on new aggregate extraction land uses.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
On November 4, West Grey Council voted against implementing an Interim Control By-law (ICBL) to pause approvals on new aggregate extraction land uses while they review and strengthen outdated aggregate and environmental policies.
The decision comes after nearly a year of public engagement and growing concern about three new proposed gravel pits all within close proximity to each other and the Saugeen River. Local residents, business owners and the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters asked Council to update the policies.
The Saugeen Preservation Society, which I represent, hired experts who warned that existing policies will not protect the community, the river, and the surrounding ecosystems from harm.
“Nobody actually thinks the Municipality of West Grey or Grey County has adequate public health and safety aggregate policies; they are clearly out of date and overdue for an overhaul,” said David Donnelly, one of Canada’s leading environmental lawyers and counsel to the Reform Gravel Mining Coalition.
Instead of taking immediate local action, Council voted to defer responsibility to Grey County, effectively leaving West Grey without direct protection or control until the County’s next policy update in 2027.
At a time when many Municipalities are becoming aware of the need for modern aggregate policies, West Grey Council had an opportunity to lead. The ICBL was their strongest tool to ensure gravel development happens responsibly.
By rejecting it, they’ve passed the buck and left residents and the Saugeen River exposed to unnecessary risk.
In September, West Grey’s ICBL decision point drew attention from the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH), and County representatives, a move that delayed the original vote.
After further consultation, the issue returned to Council on November 4th, when members voted against the ICBL despite significant public support.
“Given the simple function of an ICBL — to press pause on consequential projects until policies have been evaluated for their adequacy — we are disappointed by West Grey’s decision. Uncertainty around which level of government is responsible for this issue continues to be a serious barrier to timely and meaningful action,” said Matthew Robbins, Fish and Wildlife Biologist from the Ontario Federation of Anglers & Hunters.
During Tuesday’s meeting, chambers were filled to capacity, with many residents and supporters also watching online. When Council voted not to proceed, the reaction in the room was immediate. Voices of disappointment echoed through Council chambers: “Shame!” and “You should Google Walkerton!”
“Saugeen Preservation Society did their civic duty by trying to get an ICBL adopted to study the problem of aggregate extraction impacts to the environment and human health. The industry got what it wanted, Council clearly didn’t listen to residents,” said Donnelly.
While the County’s scheduled aggregate policy review in 2027 may eventually bring some updates to policies, SPSI warns that the delay leaves communities vulnerable and at significant risk.
It’s a mixed bag. We’ve had meaningful discussions with Council, and we believe some members truly want what’s best for West Grey. But in the end, despite having four active applications, the urgency was ignored.
We’re not done yet. We’ll keep working to bring balance back to protect citizens, fisheries and the Saugeen River as soon as possible.
Until policy updates are in place, our organization and local residents say we will continue to advocate for immediate action to establish responsible and consistent gravel management. As it currently stands, the application process is inconsistent, and anyone can put a gravel mine next to rural residences and the Saugeen River.
Judi Smelko
Saugeen Preservation Society Inc. (SPSI)
Letters to the Editor do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of The Owen Sound Current and its editor or publisher.
It seems to me that policies should precede actions instead of the other way round. It's like saying "Go ahead with whatever you want while we decide on what is the right course".