Category: Farm practices complaint
-
Farm protection under the FPPA (Fact sheet)
Use this fact sheet to understand how the Right to Farm Act protects farmers from nuisance complaints and bylaw enforcement when using normal farm practices. Learn how BCFIRB decides whether a practice is protected or must be modified or stopped.
-
Preliminary decision: Harvey v. HS Jansen and Sons
Complaint related to manure management operations and potential water contamination from a dairy farm affecting the Hullcar Aquifer. Panel adjourned the complaint as other provincial agencies continued work on resolving the broader water contamination issue.
-
Enforcement and Farm Practices Fact Sheet
Use this fact sheet to learn how the Right to Farm Act protects normal farm practices and when BCFIRB can enforce changes, dismiss complaints, or allow bylaw enforcement.
-
Review of B.C. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Wildlife Damage Control Guidelines as they apply to the operation of propane cannons
The Farm Practices Board’s 1999 review of propane cannon use in B.C. weighed farmers’ need to deter bird predation against neighbour noise concerns, recommending stricter guidelines, limited hours, wildlife management plans, and better farmer-community communication to balance right-to-farm with good-neighbour obligations.
-
Decision: Hayden and Kemp v. Island Sea Farms Inc.
Complaint related to noise, odour and debris from a shellfish harvesting operation on Cortes Island.
-
Preliminary decision: Dragland v. Zdralek
Complaint related to noise from barking dogs on a neighbouring farm in West Kelowna. Complaint dismissed as the barking was not part of a farm operation under the FPPA.
-
Preliminary decision: Church/Jauselon & Bird v. Cusheon Lake Farm
Complaint related to noise from barking dogs at Cusheon Lake Farm. Complaint dismissed due to the death of the dog identified as the primary cause of disturbance.
-
Preliminary decision: Moran v. Kato’s Nursery (2007) Ltd.
Complaint related to water drainage issues caused by a nursery. Complaint dismissed as circumstances materially changed and no written submission was provided by the complainant.
-
Preliminary decision: The Corporation of Delta v. Hothi Farms Inc.
Complaint related to the unsightly storage of vehicles, equipment, and scrap metal at a vegetable farm in Delta. Complaint dismissed as the disturbance did not meet the definition of “other disturbance” under the FPPA.
-
Decision: Swart v. Pirjo Holt d.b.a. Serendipity Farms
Complaint related to noise, odour, flies, bright lights and unsightliness from an equestrian centre in Kelowna.