Part Four: Strategic Planning & Policy

• Conservation Covenants
• Delegation of Decision-Making To Local Governments and Other Authorities
• Establishing Larger Panels
• Subdivision Applications

Conservation Covenants

Conservation covenants are usually the result of an agreement between a non-governmental organization and a landowner in order to preserve an environmental value. On occasion these covenants involve land in the ALR.

A covenant that would prohibit the use of land in the ALR for farm purposes cannot be registered at the Land Title Office unless approved by the Commission.

The Commission reviewed seven covenants in 2006/07. Two were within the Okanagan valley, two on the Island and three in the Kootenays.

Delegation of Decision-Making To Local Governments and Other Authorities

Delegation is the authorization by the Commission to a local government or other authority to act on its behalf to make use and subdivision decisions in the ALR under section 26 of the Agricultural Land Commission Act.

1. Fraser Fort George Regional District

• Covers seven Electoral Areas which have Official Community Plans (OCP) that were reviewed and approved by the Commission. The original agreement has been in place since January 2001 and subsequently amended as new OCPs are approved by the North Panel.

• During the year the North Panel reviewed decisions made by the Regional District in terms of the delegation agreement. Between January 2001 and March 31, 2007, the Regional District made 34 decisions for subdivision or non-farm use involving land in the ALR. In the 2006/07 the Regional District made 10 decisions under the delegated decision-making authority.

• While the North Panel generally concurred with the majority of the decisions made by the Regional District, it identified a small number of issues that it wished to discuss with the Regional District. These issues included subdivision in the areas surrounding Prince George referred to in the OCPs as the Prince George Fringe area and decisions made in terms of Section 946 of the Local Government Act.

2. Regional District of East Kootenay

• Wasa-Ta Ta Creek-Skookumchuk-Sheep Creek area Land Use Bylaw. Agreement in place since 2003 and renewed on November 1, 2006 for an indefinite term.

• Since the agreement came into effect, three decisions have been made by the Regional District for subdivision or non-farm use, all of which have been made within the 2006/07 fiscal year.

3. Oil and Gas Commission

• The delegation agreement with the Oil and Gas Commission (OGC) has been in place since April 2004. The agreement delegates decision-making ability regarding specified oil and gas related proposals within the Peace River and Northern Rockies Regional Districts.

• In 2006/07 a total of 839 oil and gas activities on ALR lands were exempted from making an application based on reporting and reclamation conditions. The OGC received 39 Schedule “B” post reclamation reports where ALR lands were no longer needed for oil and gas use. The OGC Deputy Commissioner approved six applications and referred four applications to the North Panel for decision. Seventeen complaints were received by the OGC regarding oil and gas activities on ALR land and two investigations took place.

Emerging Issues: Establishing Larger Panels

During the past year the Commission has explored the concept of establishing Inter-Regional Panels in certain instances. The establishment of such a Panel would be application or issue specific and may involve:

• An application or issue that straddles Panel boundaries

• An application or issue of a substantive nature either in terms of size or having the potential to impact decision-making in two or more Panel regions

• A substantive planning review

• An application or issue that is potentially precedent setting

• An application or issue of provincial significance

• A situation where a Panel may benefit from the input of other Commissioners having experience or expertise as it relates to an application or issue

The process for establishing a larger Panel is still in the developmental stages and will only be considered where there are unique and specific circumstances. Conceptually, the process for establishing a larger Panel would involve the preparation of a staff report as it relates to the proposal, review of the report by the ALC Chair and the Vice-Chair of the Panel, followed by a decision of the Chair on whether to establish a larger Panel consisting of the Panel in which the application or issue arose and additional Commissioners as deemed necessary.

Subdivision Applications

Over the course of the year the consideration of subdivision applications formed a large part of the workload in each Panel Region. Subdivision proposals are based on a wide variety of reasons such as family estate settlements, real estate development, providing family members with properties, inter-generational farm transfers and financing to name a few.

When it comes to considering individual applications, Commissioners are faced with making decisions based on the evidence before them as provided by the applicant(s), local government, staff and their own observations following site inspections.

An example of a potentially positive subdivision from an agricultural perspective may involve the creation of a small lot for a family member on non-productive ground to ensure the family member continues to have an active role in farming the parent parcel or if the subdivision facilitates the inter-generational transfer of a farm. However, these considerations are a small part of the comprehensive review. The Commissioners must also take into consideration many other factors such as existing parcel size, prior subdivision and non-farm use approvals, agricultural quality and suitability of the land, potential impact on adjacent and nearby farm operations, regional influences, etc.

Where a subdivision is proposed to create a non-farm, rural residential parcel(s), even if the parcel is intended for a family member, it often carries unacceptable consequences to agriculture. A subdivision may lead to developments that would not only remove land from production, but would also introduce an element of risk for farm operators by potentially compromising the continued use of established farm management practices. For example, the use of bird cannons by berry farmers is a an ongoing source of irritation to nearby residential areas and calls are routinely made to local governments seeking the discontinuation of this farm management practice.

As members of an administrative tribunal, the Commissioners must consider each application on its own merits and in the context of the objectives of the Agricultural Land Commission Act – namely is the subdivision in aid of agriculture or will agricultural potential be diminished.