In ancient times, fleet footed heralds were sent to deliver news from person to person, town to town, and even from camp to camp during times of war. The message might be good news or bad news. The unfortunate bearers of 'bad news' were an easy target for an annoyed receiver of unpleasant reports and were often, quite literally, shot.

Highland Companies representative Michael Daniher's letter, " 'Top Ten' problems with recent article," aims to shoot the messenger, but read carefully, his list rarely applies to anything actually written in the article "Melancthon farmers take stand on land use". He appears to be communicating Highland Companies' vision in the guise of criticisms not applicable to the article.

The article stemmed from the very words the farmers spoke on March 26, in Melancthon Township. The fact Mr. Daniher compared the opinions of community voices to a Dave Letterman 'joke list' is revealing.

Mr. Daniher refers to the article as "incomplete and misleading." Is he suggesting that any article that does not include the Highland Companies' point of view is "incomplete and misleading"? If so, where are the opinions of Melancthon citizens in the submissions Highland Companies has put forth in the media?

Here are Mr. Daniher's "Top Ten" problems, followed by the Messenger's response:

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.

This story was based on an interview with a group of area farmers. The article was about them. The question put to Mr. Daniher, "which wasn't even mentioned in the story" was posed in a phone conversation and replied to by e-mail. It was as follows:

Q: The farmers would like to know where the Highland Companies profits will go i.e. whether or not the profits will stay in Canada?

A: "Like any business, it will decide how best to use its financial resources."

This reply did not answer the question, therefore not included in the article. It was followed by promotional information on Highland Companies.

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.

Nowhere in the article did the farmers question their neighbours' right to sell their properties. They never uttered a negative word about anyone who had sold property. The question they raised is: What will happen to that land now?

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.

The article was about the farmer's concerns for aggregate on farmland, not about generational farming.

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.

At no time did the farmers speak negatively of the farmers in the Association. They clearly acknowledged regretful divisions in the community that had arisen as a result of the lack of information about the massive land acquisitions by Highland Companies and expressed sadness over a loss of community, including the sudden dwindling and disbandment of a 60 year tradition where great community camaraderie was enjoyed by potato farmers.

5: There is considerable question and little evidence that potatoes can be designated a specialty crop. ...

The farmers stated that the soil, not the potato, should be protected by the townships' Official Plans with a "Specialty Crop Designation".

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.

Nowhere in the article did the farmers deny the presence of aggregate resources in Melancthon. They stated, "We do not oppose aggregate. Just not on this soil."

7: The article ignores the fact that the Company has disclosed its plans in a number of ways and in a number of settings. ...

Mr. Daniher speaks of the vision Highland Companies has for its corporation in Melancthon but reveals nothing specific. These farmers, NDACT and individual citizens have repeatedly asked for more transparency.

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. ...

The farmers never said it would cover thousands of acres at once, but about 300 Melancthon citizens showed great interest in the size of the hole when they gathered for a public meeting in January.

9: The article is misleading as to the reason the Company declined our critics' invitation to attend a meeting. ...

How is omitting the fact that it was "eight weeks" after a public meeting "misleading" or even relevant?

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. ...

The farmer's are "the critics" making the "claim". Others might call them guardians, or concerned citizens. They expressed the view that people make a community; reminiscent of the 4H pledge: hearts, heads, hands, and health make a community. They used words like "tension", "division", "annihilate" and "disbanded" in reference to the current situation, and referred to multiple Melancthon homes and barns scheduled for demolition as a sad loss of community.

They wanted their community, for miles around, to recognize the potential loss of food production and a possible threat to their water — which sources from the Melancthon Headwaters.

They encouraged "open public discussions" about "the best use of the land". That was their message.

This messenger ends the message as it began: with a little bit of history. It is interesting to note, that in 'days of old', the messenger was meant to be protected from the recipients of bad news by the concept of chivalry and virtue.