Part 2: Farm Tours, Fuel Innovation & Poultry Risk Updates - 03/30/2026

Committee members began weighing in directly on key issues, offering feedback, support, and in some cases, clear direction on what should happen next.

Survey Findings and Next Steps

After the presentation on the agricultural survey, there was little pushback from the committee. Instead, the response was largely supportive.

Bob Rogers (Chair) acknowledged the presentation and moved the discussion forward without debate, asking if anyone had questions. No members raised concerns, and the committee voted to receive the report.

Councillor Sam Branderhorst (Athol) had earlier engaged with survey-related discussions, particularly around agricultural advocacy like Bill 21, and continued to show support for ongoing data gathering and municipal involvement.

The lack of opposition here is telling. The committee appears aligned on the idea that the findings reflect real conditions on the ground and should be used to guide future decisions.

© PEC Council (YouTube)

View the entire PEC Council Meeting; or view our recap.

Farm Tour Push Gains Momentum

The conversation around a farm tour brought out one of the clearest positions of the night.

Bob Rogers strongly supported bringing back a farm tour for council and staff, emphasizing that education needs to happen in person. He pointed out that understanding agriculture cannot come from reports alone and that decision-makers need to see operations firsthand.

No one pushed back. Instead, staff and committee members signaled agreement.

County staff responded positively and outlined different models for how a tour could work, from public-facing experiences to more focused educational visits.

Low-Carbon Fuel Project Draws Support

The discussion around alternative low-carbon fuels at the cement plant sparked one of the more engaged exchanges of the meeting.

Councillor Branderhorst shared firsthand insight from a previous meeting with Heidelberg. She explained that the project would involve burning processed waste materials, including difficult-to-recycle agricultural plastics. She highlighted that materials like bale wrap and grain bags could potentially be used, which are currently hard to manage.

Bob Rogers (Chair) supported this direction and added that recycling programs for these materials already exist but are limited because they require clean inputs. He pointed out that a system that can handle contaminated plastics could fill a real gap.

Rogers went further, stating that he believes the project could be a win for the community, the cement plant, and the broader region, as long as environmental standards are met.

John Thompson also voiced support, noting that the committee should stay involved and help guide the process where possible.

When Albert Paschkewitz joined later, he confirmed that the project has already been approved from a regulatory standpoint and is now focused on sourcing materials locally. He encouraged the committee to think about what agricultural byproducts could be included and emphasized that emissions would be closely monitored.

No objections were raised. The overall tone was supportive, with an understanding that more details will come as the working group develops.

Working Plan and Local Priorities

When the committee reviewed its 2026 work plan, the conversation became more grounded in local, day-to-day concerns.

Bob Rogers brought forward a few ongoing priorities, including surplus dwelling severances and farm-related planning issues. He expressed support for keeping properties in private hands, arguing that ownership leads to better maintenance and long-term care.

The group did not challenge this view, and the work plan was received without resistance. There was also a brief update from Councillor Kate MacNaughton (Picton) regarding agricultural signage, noting that the process is still in the hands of operations staff and that follow-ups are ongoing.

Avian Flu Raises Concern

Toward the end of the meeting, the tone shifted as the conversation turned to avian flu, recently identified in wild birds near Wellington.

Bob Rogers raised the issue directly, expressing concern for local poultry farmers and the potential economic impact if the virus spreads.

John Thompson responded by explaining that outdoor poultry operations are especially vulnerable, while indoor operations can rely more on biosecurity measures. He noted that there is no easy solution for outdoor flocks beyond awareness and caution.

Councillor Phil Prinzen (Bloomfield/Hallowell) added that tracking backyard poultry numbers is difficult because many are unregistered, which makes risk management more challenging.

The group agreed that public awareness is likely the best immediate step, especially as spring approaches and more people begin raising poultry again.

What This Means for Locals

For residents of the County, this meeting highlights a few important realities.

1. There is strong alignment between the committee and staff on supporting local agriculture. Whether it is through surveys, funding tools, or education initiatives like farm tours, the direction is clearly toward more engagement and practical support.

   
   

2. Projects like the low-carbon fuel initiative could have real local impact. If agricultural waste can be reused instead of sent to landfill, it could reduce costs for farmers and lower environmental impacts at the same time. That said, residents can expect more discussion as details become clearer.

   
   

3. Issues like avian flu show how quickly challenges can emerge. For anyone raising backyard chickens or involved in local food production, awareness and caution will be key in the coming months.

Overall, the meeting showed a committee that is not just discussing agriculture, but actively trying to solve problems and stay ahead of what is coming next.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 57:55. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.