Dear Editor,
Matthew Claxton [Painful Truth: Rural-urban brawl incoming, Aug. 17, Langley Advance Times] brings up an interesting, but debatable point, when he says that “it’s in the interest of all British Columbians to preserve farmland.”
While I do (somewhat) understand his perspective, I question the priorities of anyone who holds that opinion.
There is a very real flip side to that argument.
I personally think that all those blueberry farmers in Richmond, and those corn farmers east of the Fraser should be allowed to subdivide and develop those vast tracts of farmland if they so choose.
First of all, if you own it, you should be allowed to do with it what you want.
We have far too much regulation in this country.
Secondly, we have a very real housing shortage in the Lower Mainland that has never been addressed.
Increasing taxes such as the misguided foreign buyers tax have done absolutely nothing to bring home prices within reach of the middle class.
It’s just another tax grab.
If developing farmlands brings the dream of home ownership to those who will otherwise never be able to afford it, then I am more than willing to accept even a tripling of the price of my corn.
If you own your own home you can grow your own.
I don’t buy the argument that the Lower Mainland has a land shortage.
I see literally thousands of acres of land that could be developed.
Leave the farming to the Okanagan/Similkameen.
Thomas Solski, Langley
