Here are the 'Top 10' shortcomings of a recent incomplete and misleading article about The Highland Companies ("Melancthon farmers taking stand on land use").

1. The reporter did not give us a chance to address most of the issues raised. She asked two very narrow and precise questions, one of which wasn't even mentioned in the story.

2. The article fails to note that the acquisition of land involved willing sellers exercising their right to dispose of their property as part of their personal or estate planning. In fact, a number of people approached the Company about selling their land, not the other way around.

3. The article ignores the fact that the next generation of family members continues to operate most of the acquired farm acreage. And millions of dollars have been invested in upgrading those operations.

4. It is our understanding that the Dufferin Potato Growers Association disbanded, in large part, because our critics wanted to use its funds to attack the Company instead of for other purposes.

5. There is considerable question and little evidence that potatoes can be designated a specialty crop. The potatoes we grow are common varieties grown in other parts of Ontario and Canada. As well, the issue involves a number of matters that affect all landowners and their ability to make decisions about their property. It is our understanding that the Ontario Potato Board recently declined to support our critics' request to support the application for specialty crop designation. In addition, the Province has prioritized land uses in addition to agriculture, including renewable energy and aggregates.

6. Everyone knows that the area is rich in mineral aggregate resources. This fact has been acknowledged by area planners and the importance of the resource has been recognized by the provincial government.

7. The article ignores the fact that the Company has disclosed its plans in a number of ways and in a number of settings. We've said that we're studying activities in addition to, not in place of, our farming operation. We've said that, like others have done, we're looking at wind power and aggregates in Melancthon Township. And we've said that if we pursue any of those activities, we will do so in an environmentally, socially and economically responsible way.

8. The article furthers the myth of "a big hole in the ground" covering thousands of acres at once. We've said that this would not be our intention if an application is filed. Progressive rehabilitation limits the size of any active extraction area, ensuring that agriculture would continue on the vast majority of the land. Progressive rehabilitation returns the land to other uses more quickly. And we've said we're looking at rehabilitation to agriculture, which research indicates is a viable option. The fact is that any aggregate project would impact a very small percentage of the existing farmland in Melancthon Township at any one time.

9. The article is misleading as to the reason the Company declined our critics' invitation to attend a meeting. The group asked that it be held in mid- March, less than 8 weeks after the previous public meeting. In an open letter the Company said it had little new information to add given that fact.

10. The article seems to accept our critics' claim that the Company has harmed the community. In fact, and as our actions and announcements make clear, we are working hard to contribute to the community's well-being. At a time when other businesses are shutting down, cutting back and laying off, we have been investing in the area and its future. We are creating jobs and generating tax revenue for local services. In addition, we are the largest local private sector donor to community causes, organizations and events. We are also looking for other ways to help make life better for people, such as helping to recruit doctors and working to bring the YMCA to the area.
Michael Daniher
Representative
The Highland Companies