Category: Farm practices complaint
-
Preliminary decision: Pepper v. MacDonald
Complaint related to noise, dust, and runoff from a small poultry operation. Complaint dismissed as the respondents were not operating a farm business under the FPPA.
-
Aquaculture and the Farm Practices Protection (Right to Farm) Act
Use this notice to understand BCFIRB’s expanded jurisdiction to hear nuisance complaints about finfish, shellfish, and aquatic plant aquaculture under the Right to Farm Act.
-
Decision: Harrison v. Jaeger
Complaint related to noise from a barking dog on a sheep farm in Grand Forks.
-
Preliminary decision: Royich v. Cholla Hills
Complaint related to noise from helicopters used on a neighbouring cherry orchard. Complaint dismissed following withdrawal by the complainant.
-
Decision: Campbell v. Mission Hill Estate Vineyard and Hans d.b.a. Hans Estate
Complaint related to noise from propane cannons used for bird control on vineyards in Osoyoos.
-
Preliminary decision: Kaye et al v. Chang
Complaint related to odour and unsightliness from a marijuana grow operation in Chilliwack. Complaint was adjourned on the grounds that the farm had ceased operation.
-
Preliminary decision: Pepper v. MacDonald
Complaint related to noise from chickens and roosters, dust, and water runoff from a poultry operation in Princeton. BCFIRB found the complaint about noise, dust, and runoff was connected to a farm business and referred the matter to a panel for a full hearing.
-
Agri-tourism and complaints under the FPPA
This notice explains that events like weddings, concerts, and races on farm properties are not “farm practices” protected under the Right to Farm Act.
-
Preliminary decision: Harrison v. Jaeger
Complaint related to noise from a barking dog on a sheep farm in Grand Forks.
-
Decision: City of Abbotsford v. Kapoor
Complaint related to dust from lack of crop cover on a vegetable farm in Abbotsford.