EOS Chair Barbra Clayton urging council to kill proposed “vegetative growth” bylaw

The chair of the environmental group EOS Eco-Energy says she’s pleased  that so many people with scientific expertise took the time to speak against a new bylaw to regulate lawns, grasses and other plants on private residential properties.

“It’s really great to be in a community with so many people who care,” said Barbra Clayton Tuesday night after Tantramar Town Council refused to support the controversial bylaw that sought to eliminate “poisonous or noxious” weeds on residential properties as well as dead grasses and other plants that could provide habitat for “rodents and wildlife.”

“It was a problematic bylaw,” she added, “and it was also heartening that council recognized it.”

Clayton spoke after no one on council would second Councillor Matt Estabrooks’s motion to give the bylaw on “vegetative growth” first reading, thereby stopping it dead in its legislative tracks.

Council took the unusual step of killing the proposed bylaw after receiving more than 20 letters and listening to seven, two-minute presentations, all against the new bylaw.

Afterwards, Estabrooks himself refused to speak to reporters, but other members of council weren’t as reticent.

“I am a country boy,” said Councillor Greg Martin who represents rural Ward 5 in the Aulac/Pointe de Bute area.

“If you drove through my ward, you would notice that a lot of people have very nice lawns, but behind their houses is a place for the wildlife and the butterflies and I couldn’t see a bylaw that would really stop people from enjoying their properties,” he added.

“This is what our community is about,” said Councillor Debbie Wiggins Colwell. “It’s about wetlands and vegetation and it’s very important for biodiversity and this is what we’re all about.”

Wiggins Colwell remembered that years ago when she was a child, people used hand push mowers on their yards, mowing only a strip around their houses and leaving the rest to grow.

“We’ve got to go back to some of those old values and not be so manicured,” she said.

Public presentations (excerpts)

Wildlife professional Garry Donaldson addressing council

My name is Garry Donaldson. I’m a wildlife professional living in town…I’d like to remind the town of the fact that in 2022, we became accredited under the United Nations Convention on wetlands of international importance as a wetland city. At the time, we were the first city in all of the Americas north and south. More recently two sites have come in on the Americas but we’re still the only North American site and what that says to me is that the town is dedicated to wetland biodiversity and you know I commend everybody who’s been involved in that in the Waterfowl Park, the stormwater retention ponds, the quarry project do a great job of conserving wetland biodiversity, but what this proposed bylaw does is the exact opposite for upland biodiversity.

So what I’d like to sort of leave with you tonight is perhaps we need to rethink how we manage biodiversity. Let’s park or recycle this particular bylaw and then work together. There’s a load of expertise behind me here in the room. I don’t think it would be hard to come to a potentially non-regulatory approach to meet whatever concerns were brought forward in the draft bylaw.

Fmr Sackville Councillor Sabine Dietz

Sabine Dietz: If this bylaw were to go through,  you’d have to come to my property every single year,  and I think the fines would mount to thousands and thousands of dollars because I would not be willing to change the approach that we have at home to the biodiversity and to nature, and how we keep our property…

In terms of safety, I think the town already has enough in its bylaws to maintain road access and visual security around property, so that’s already in your power, that’s not needed. And I have to be honest, I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a fire being caused by debris around a house.

My name is Richard Elliott and I thank you for the opportunity as a professional ecologist, conservationist, and longtime resident of Sackville and Tantramar, to indicate why I think the draft vegetation bylaw should be withdrawn. I consider the three reasons that were used to justify the law to be unclear, inadequate, and misleading.

First, I see no evidence that accumulated dry grass represents a significant fire risk in our community, which I think is much more likely related to the presence of debris, dry woods, or wood piles.

Richard Elliot, former Chair Climate Change Action Committee

Secondly, possible effects of un-mown lawns on property values are unsubstantiated and unreasonable, and I think they’re much more likely to be related to unsightly accumulation of rubbish, construction materials, derelict vehicles, or dilapidated buildings. And I know that all of these are well addressed under Regulation 2018-19 of the New Brunswick Local Governance Act.

And thirdly, the unacceptable edict not to encourage habitat for rodents and other wildlife, flies in the face of efforts by our municipality and by many residents, including those who’ve written you letters and many who are represented here this evening, to improve our quality of life by enhancing wildlife habitats in our community.

In my letter to you, I emphasize the importance of ensuring broader and representative community consultation when undertaking initiatives such as this, ensuring that the by-law could apply across all residential properties without limiting other community activities, clearly defining all key terms in the legislation, not relying on passive education or offloading this obligation to our by-law officer, and rejecting the proposed penalty system.

None of these needs have been met, and I conclude that the proposed bylaw overreaches its intent, is based on unproven or invalid assumptions, and does not reflect the overall perspectives and priorities of our community, is unnecessary and should be withdrawn, and efforts made instead to address the localized concerns expressed by Councillor Estabrooks through more targeted and less draconian measures. Instead, Tantramar must continue to provide opportunities to support its local biodiversity and wildlife habitats, which indeed have attracted many of us to live in this community in the first place.

Margaret-Ann Capper

Margaret-Ann Capper: The bylaw calls for removal of any dead vegetation. Given the rural nature of our small town, I believe this clause needs to be revisited. I live on a double lot in a wooded area. The small area of property is mowed. The rest of the property I manage, picking up large limbs of trees, pruning, hiring professional arborists every year at considerable expense to fell and remove dead trees. I believe it should be sanitized in that way.

During our more and more frequent rainstorms, my property drains one half of the water from our cul-de-sac. I direct it into the woods where the detritus, ferns and complex understory absorbs huge amounts of water. There is a considerable benefit to town storm management in having vegetative sinks such as you find on my property, despite this bylaw stating that, quote: “There are no environmental implications anticipated.”

Climate change adaptation is very much about creating and maintaining complex natural systems. Bylaw 2025-17 would create the contrary of that, allowing a sanitized monoculture which would not benefit natural systems or the health of our residents. I strongly recommend that the wording of the bylaw, the draft bylaw, be revisited or that it be rescinded altogether.

Sean Blaney

Sean Blaney: I’ve spent 26 years based in Sackville working on plant ecology. I’m here as a concerned town citizen asking for the withdrawal of this bylaw.

Vegetation, both living and dead, does a lot of good for us and for the planet. Pulling carbon out of the atmosphere and storing it, forming fertile soils and providing structure and food that supports all of the life around us. As much as possible, property owners should be allowed to make their own choices about vegetation on their properties.

A short lawn is not the only legitimate choice and is in fact, not the best choice for the environment. Lawn maintenance bylaws are notorious for preventing good people from making positive choices to have less intensively managed yards.

And these bylaws are prone to being misused in neighbor disputes that are not really related to vegetation. This bylaw infringes on property rights based on aesthetics and non-issues. We do not have overgrown vegetation causing human poisonings or rat infestations or any other major problems in Tantramar.

Sackville rightly celebrates its environmental record but this bylaw, which is vague and questionably enforceable, does not live up to the standards that allowed us to be designated as Canada’s only United Nations wetland city.

I’m asking Council to avoid unnecessary regulation of yard vegetation and to not move forward with any vegetation management bylaw.

Mira Dietz Chiasson

Mira Dietz Chiasson: My name is Mira. I live out on Highmarsh Road and I wrote you a letter. I sent it on January 30th I believe and I want to touch upon a few things that I mentioned in that letter.

My first point, poisonous or noxious plants. This part of the proposed bylaw is impossible to enforce and it also doesn’t make any sense. To explain that, I have a few examples for you. Potato plants, rhubarb leaves, crocuses and irises all have poisonous parts so I don’t think that makes any sense at all.

Secondly, eliminating habitat for rodents is pretty much impossible without also eliminating habitat for beneficial wildlife. For example, bees, butterflies, birds, bats who provide us humans with important ecosystem services ranging from pest control to enjoyment, improved mental health and food through pollination as well. Beneficial wildlife need dead vegetation to complete their life cycles so removing dead vegetation is going to directly harm those animals. The actions proposed by this bylaw are also not the actions of a climate leader. Eliminating habitat for wildlife will negatively affect Tantramar’s natural assets and reduce biodiversity in our area.

I want to mention aesthetic considerations. Those are highly subjective. Forcing everyone into conformity is not fair and I want to quote the City of Dieppe’s website. They recently rescinded their lawn height bylaw and their website says I quote: “aesthetic criteria for lawn maintenance are arbitrary and unconstitutional.”

Finally, I hope you will not move forward with this proposed bylaw.

Barbra Clayton, Chair EOS Eco-Energy

My name is Barbra Clayton. I’m here as the chair of EOS Eco-Energy and I wanted to mention that EOS will be submitting a petition which has already gleaned at least 50 signatures, if not like 60 by now, recommending that Council not approve this proposed bylaw on the vegetation.

Essentially we are deeply concerned that the proposed bylaw as written will undermine efforts by EOS and other people and organizations in Tantramar to enhance biodiversity and climate resilience and that it reflects a failure to accurately apply the climate lens which EOS and the Climate Change Advisory Committee have supported the town in developing.

Particularly clauses 3a4 and 3a5 which require the clearance of dead vegetation and prohibit residents from encouraging rodents or wildlife. These will effectively prohibit naturalized gardens and lawns and they don’t take into account the diverse and often wooded nature of many yards in Tantramar. Also this is problematic because we think that encouraging homeowners to enhance lawn biodiversity and grow native non-invasive wildlife-supporting vegetation is valuable in itself and it’s important in mitigating and adapting to the risks associated with climate change. Native biodiversity makes soils healthy and better equipped to absorb runoff and mitigate flooding.

The high moisture content provided by the deep underground root systems of native species also reduce fire risk.

Thus we have concerns that the bylaw does not reflect proper use of the climate lens and that by implementing this bylaw the municipality would be moving farther away from its climate goals reflected in the climate lens. These are stormwater management, thriving natural assets, climate adaptation and climate leadership.

Therefore we urge Council not to approve the bylaw and further, EOS would be happy to offer assistance in crafting another bylaw that meets concerns of Council without compromising environmental and climate goals.

For previous coverage, click here and here.