Letters to the Editor

Seeback issues open letter to Strada Aggregates Inc.

November 6, 2025   ·   0 Comments

To the representatives of Strada Aggregates,

Following my Oct. 14 Community Town Hall in Honeywood and numerous conversations with residents, local organizations, and grassroots advocacy groups, it’s clear that many in our community still have serious, unanswered questions about your proposed quarry project.

Before the close of public consultation on Nov. 10, I am formally requesting that Strada provide clear, public responses to the following questions. These concerns come directly from residents, technical experts, and community organizations who have engaged extensively in this process.

I will not be in a position to offer any support for this project until these matters are addressed transparently and substantively.

Environmental and Hydrological Concerns

1. How does Strada plan to address findings from its own integrated transient modelling that predict reductions in the Pine River headwater tributary stream flows of 20–35 per cent at Horning’s Mills?
2. How will Strada reconcile the apparent underestimation — by more than two times — of dry-weather streamflow at Horning’s Mills within its integrated Groundwater Model?
3. Why did the application not include Fisheries Population and Impact Studies or consideration of the historical fish hatchery and culture context?
4. Should the application be approved as submitted on September 18, 2025, what mitigation plans does Strada have for protecting Brook Trout and other fish populations?
5. Why did the submission omit detailed data on absolute changes in transient wetland flows, and on water-quantity and water-quality characterizations for each quarry phase?
6. Why has Strada withheld data in its possession—such as Model Virtual Transient Flows (monthly), streamflow monitoring results, private well data, and the Community WELLness Survey—despite repeated community requests?
7. How will Strada address the deficiencies identified in its groundwater model, including the absence of unmitigated worst-case scenarios and lack of groundwater quality (nitrates) treatment scenarios?

Community and Economic Considerations

• What tangible benefits does Strada commit to delivering to the local community should the quarry be approved—number of local jobs, community investments, or other measurable contributions?
• Has Strada studied the potential impact on wetlands within Ontario’s Greenbelt?
• How often will Strada test for water contaminants, and what specific notification and remediation protocols will be followed if contaminants are detected?
• Given that the site lies within a highly vulnerable aquifer area, has Strada provided comprehensive documentation confirming there will be no negative effects on groundwater quantity or quality, as required by the local Official Plan?

Transportation and Infrastructure

1. Can Strada confirm that the operation will result in 65 gravel trucks per hour in one direction (130 total) on local roads, and did its Traffic Impact Study account for this volume?
2. Why does the Traffic Impact Study not extend to the traffic bottleneck in Shelburne?
3. What is Strada’s long-term plan for the site once aggregate extraction concludes? Residential and Agricultural Impacts
4. What assurances can Strada provide that quarry operations will not compromise private wells—both those of participating and non-participating landowners—and that any impacted wells will be restored or replaced at Strada’s expense?
5. If a water source must be replaced, how will remedial actions be selected and communicated to the landowner? Will all Schedule C options be offered, including water transport and storage solutions?
6. Has Strada consulted with the Niagara Escarpment Commission or local conservation authorities?

Air Quality, Noise, and Wildlife

1. Beyond standard Ministry of Natural Resources requirements, what air-quality studies (including dust, silica, and particulate impacts) has Strada conducted on local agriculture, water, animals, and residents?
2. Has Strada identified the air-quality radius of influence (e.g., two kilometres) and what on-site measures will be used to reduce dust?
3. What studies, if any, has Strada undertaken on the effects on amphibians and pollinators, and what were the findings?
4. What steps beyond the minimum ARA requirements will Strada take to reduce noise impacts for nearby residents?

Property, Business, and Safety

• How does Strada intend to respond if home foundations are damaged by blasting or shifts in the water table?
• Has Strada evaluated the potential impact of the quarry on local businesses and employers?
• Has Strada studied the potential effect of this project on land and home values, and what mitigation measures would it provide if negative effects are confirmed?

Residents of Dufferin–Caledon have engaged in good faith to understand the implications of this project. It is now Strada’s responsibility to match that good faith with full transparency and accountability.

I urge Strada Aggregates to respond publicly to these questions prior to the close of the consultation period. Only with complete and accessible information can our community—and I as its Member of Parliament—fairly assess this proposal.

Sincerely, 

Kyle Seeback, M.P.

Dufferin-Caledon

Editor’s Note: In a response to the Orangeville Citizen regarding MP Seeback’s letter, Strada said:

“Strada Aggregates is committed to a thorough, transparent, and regulated review process under the Aggregate Resources Act (ARA).

“The Melancthon Quarry application, submitted on September 18, 2025, is currently in the formal public consultation phase, with the comment period closing on November 10, 2025.

“All technical studies, modelling results, monitoring data, and proposed mitigation measures are contained within the application package. These documents have been publicly available since submission and were presented at our Open House, attended by residents, stakeholders, and technical experts.

“As outlined in the official ARA process, Strada will provide detailed, written responses to all questions and comments received during the consultation period following the close of the comment period. These responses will be submitted to the commentor and the Ministry of Natural Resources.

“We respect the formal review process and will not circumvent it by addressing individual inquiries through the media. Doing so would undermine the integrity of the public and technical review framework established under the ARA.

“We encourage continued participation in the formal consultation process and thank the community for its engagement. For access to the full application and supporting studies, please visit the project website or contact the Ministry directly.”

Readers Comments (0)