|
Burgess Park Campaign
In the fall of 2006 we were made aware of land designation changes and proposals that could lead to the sale and development of public park and conservation land in the Pittock Reservoir/Thames River corridor through Woodstock. Our campaign started with a phone hotline and it produced an avalanche of support and a tremendously successful membership drive. A petition was started and it garnered nearly 4000 signatures in less than 2 months. Although our concern is with all of the conservation lands the proposed use of Burgess Park land owned by the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) for the last nine holes of the Sally Creek Golf Course became the focus of our campaign. A public information meeting was attended by nearly 150 concerned citizens and the local newspaper was filled with a news item that captured the imagination of the entire community. The community support for Friends of Pittock and our campaign was loud and clear; they care about the future of these lands and they want it protected and preserved.
Our Proposal
click here for our complete proposal
In this proposal we will outline our arguments as to why we need to preserve the last significant green space that remains in our community and how Friends of Pittock, with the help of local service clubs, will preserve, enhance and naturalize the areas in question. All around the globe the reality of continued human encroachment on natural habitats is becoming painfully obvious.
The need for symbiosis—the art of species coexisting in order to preserve opportunity and biodiversity—is no longer a subject of speculation, but one of harsh reality.
It is our duty to protect our natural heritage for future generations.
Nature conservancy starts at home and the need for the protection and preservation of our natural habitat was described quite eloquently in a recent study authored by the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority, drawing upon a wealth of publications and environmental expertise. The Chair of the Oxford Natural Heritage Study, Woodstock mayor Michael Harding, stated the following in the preamble of this report.
" Natural areas, once removed, take generations and countless
dollars to bring back...our intent can be best described as a
desire to protect and conserve the natural assets, our green
infrastructure, for all time, for the use, health and enjoyment
of future generations"
Chair of the Oxford Natural Heritage Study,
Woodstock mayor Michael Harding
At a time when Woodstock is experiencing unprecedented growth, it becomes all the more important to protect our remaining green space for recreational use and wildlife protection. In many communities valuable green space and wildlife habitats are already a thing of the past. Woodstock is an exception; we have a wonderful nature corridor right on our doorstep, more than 20 km of nature trails surrounded by peace and tranquility—and well maintained and accessible to anyone.
Here is a quote from the Sentinel Review from April 30, 2007. The occasion was an Arbor Day celebration and mayor Harding of Woodstock planted a tree and remarked,
" Please don’t engage in the needless
destruction of trees. It takes 50 years for
a tree to mature, and I don’t want to hear
about anyone destroying that. Trees stand
as silent sentinels for the environment."
He added, "Planting a tree is something
anyone and everyone can do."
Once it’s gone, it will never come back.
From the Oxford Natural Heritage Study:
" There is a growing expectation from the public that urban areas
will be protected as development occurs and that these areas will
be maintained and be publicly accessible—municipalities must plan
ahead for the management of their remaining natural areas in urban
centers—and consider options such as designations and or
acquisitions to protect important components of the natural heritage."
The corridor between Roth Park and Landsdowne Avenue is a prime example of how a narrow green strip—squeezed by encroaching development — is insufficient to sustain wildlife. Therefore, any extension of this token green strip, which would occur if area 2 were to be commercially developed, would isolate and destroy the opportunity for wildlife to flourish in area 3.
The guiding principle of the Oxford Natural Heritage Study, and its principal author the UTRCA, towards preservation and reforestation of significant and sensitive areas, appears to therefore contradict the intent of the land designations changes that are requested; the divestiture of areas 1, 2 and 3.
From the Oxford Natural Heritage Study:
"Natural cover (upland) should be increased to 20% and an additional
10% into wetland/riparian cover of the long-term. The scientific
literature suggests regions with a low natural cover may not have
sustainable ecosystems—increasing natural cover will take
generations, but it must start now."
Ninety-five percent of the wood lots referred to in the Oxford Natural Heritage study are in private hands. We should therefore lead by example and naturalize and reforest publicly owned park and conservation lands. You can’t preach conservation to the private sector if we allow the commercial sale and development of or own public park and conservation lands. There has only been a marginal increase 1.5% in forest cover since 1952. Here is a perfect opportunity to reforest and reclaim nearly 160 acres of publicly owned land and make a significant contribution to increasing the percentage of forest cover.
Let’s start with area 1 and our reasoning as to why this parcel of land should not be developed as a golf course.
We are not against golf courses, but developers should not be allowed to lease or purchase public lands for their own commercial purposes. Public lands should remain in public hands for the use and benefit of the entire community. We propose that this area be returned to a natural state, complete with meadows, natural vegetation, trails and trees. The adjoining trails system of Standard Tube Park and part of Burgess Park cannot be used during spring flooding as this area is part of the flood plain. Area 1 has a higher elevation and will provide a great alternate trail system that can be used 12 months of the year.
The vegetation and trees planted on a golf course are there for esthetics only. The patches are often small and narrow and offer little or no purpose for wildlife. The copious amounts of fungicides, pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers used to keep the greens in tiptop shape are detrimental to the health of wildlife.
Due to the geophysics of this area the natural drainage is the Sally Creek watershed, its wetlands and eventually the Thames River. Measurements of water quality tests undertaken by the UTRCA and produced in the Oxford Natural Heritage Study indicate that contamination levels of our major waterways have steadily gone up over the past decade and the close proximity of a golf course to sensitive watersheds is detrimental to the overall well-being of this area and should not be allowed.
Why should we increase forest cover on publicly owned
park and conservation lands?
According to the Oxford Natural Heritage study—
"Forest cover in Oxford County is 12.5%. This amount
is well below the ideal of 20-30% cover to maintain species
and watershed health—with the low forest cover it is
important to conserve and enhance what remains"
Since 1965—when approximately 2000 acres was either acquired or expropriated to create the Gordon Pittock Reservoir—the UTRCA has done a tremendous job in naturalizing the areas around the lake and the Thames River. Early photographs of those days show a near lunar-like landscape almost devoid of any vegetation.
The fact that the entire community is now fighting tooth and nail to preserve this green space is a testimony to their hard work and vision.
Once it's gone...
Selling area 2 for residential development will provide a one-time cash infusion, but dare to imagine what the entire community stands to lose forever. The commercial development of area 2 would isolate the woodlot—area 3—and the exodus of wildlife would be a foregone conclusion. You don’t cut up a green space in separate blocks and it flies right in the face of every goal and objective put forward by conservation authorities in regards to the health and protection of viable ecosystems and wildlife habitats.
From the Oxford Natural Heritage Study:
" To provide and develop strategies for the long term
protection and rehabilitation of terrestrial and aquatic
natural heritage systems, including woodlands,
wetlands, streams and rivers. Although there are many
healthy and productive areas and waterways in the
County, the loss and degradation of woodlands,
wetlands and waterways is a serious environmental
concern. Across southern Ontario, woodland losses
have exceeded those of almost any major ecosystem.
Forest cover across Oxford County is approximately
12.5%, one of the lowest in southern Ontario. The
majority of these woodlands are small. The best
available information suggests that 20-30% natural
cover is needed to sustain species and protect soil,
water and air quality. Most wildlife species needs
blocks of natural area, with a large diversity of
vegetation types and food sources to survive."
As you can see, we also propose an outdoor study component. Bear in mind that the natural diversity that can be found in the areas in question is incredible—wetlands, lake, river and creek, flood plain, marsh and mature forest growth. And all of this right in the heart of our community and accessible to anyone! Many area schools are within walking distance of the conservation area and the study centre will showcase conservation projects planned and in progress. For instance—Trees for Tomorrow, a wonderful program supported by Stewardship Oxford and the MNR — could find an ideal home here for a seedling and tree nursery. This program involves Woodstock’s youth, schools and nature groups. There are many rare and endangered plant and animal species that can be found here.
|