John Markus

The applicants, who operate a cow-calf farm, applied to the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board for a determination that their practice of burning slash (leftover wood from land clearing) without a municipal permit is a 'normal farm practice' exempt from the local burning bylaw.

The Board found that while farmers historically have not applied for burn permits, the safety concerns and provincial interests reflected in the Forest Fire Prevention Act and the municipal bylaw outweigh the inconvenience to farmers.

The Board ruled that the burning of slash will only be considered a normal farm practice if the applicants comply with the provincial Outdoor Fires Regulation and the municipal bylaw, or alternatively, if they file an annual Agricultural Burn Planning Checklist, obtain approval from the Chief Fire Official, and permit reasonable inspections.

The applicants sought relief under the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, 1998, alleging that odour and noise from the respondents' new broiler chicken operation constituted a disturbance.

The Board applied the common-law test for nuisance to determine if the applicants were 'directly affected' by the disturbance.

Finding that the noise and odour did not constitute a substantial or unreasonable interference with the applicants' use and enjoyment of their land, the Board concluded it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the application.

The applicants, neighbours of the respondents' horse farm, applied to the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board regarding odour and smoke from the burning of horse manure, hay, and straw on the respondents' property.

The Board found that the applicants were directly affected by the disturbance.

Relying on expert evidence from agricultural engineers, the Board determined that the burning of manure and hay is not a normal farm practice.

The Board ordered the respondents to immediately cease burning hay, straw, or manure on their property.

The Applicant, a rural non-farm resident, applied to the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board complaining of severe odours emanating from the Respondent's greenhouse composting operation.

The Respondent had recently begun composting greenhouse vine wastes and organic vegetable wastes to produce supplementary heat.

The Board found that the Applicant was directly affected by the odour disturbance.

However, recognizing the Respondent's good faith efforts to mitigate the odour and the importance of allowing farmers time to implement new technologies, the Board deferred ruling on whether the composting constituted a normal farm practice.

Instead, the Board issued an interim decision requiring the Respondent to remove stored bales, limit compost turning, obtain a consultant's report, and submit a comprehensive odour reduction plan or terminate the composting operation.

The applicant, representing several rural non-farm residents, complained of severe odours emanating from the respondent's greenhouse composting operation.

The respondent had recently begun composting greenhouse vine wastes and organic vegetable wastes to produce supplementary heat.

The Normal Farm Practices Protection Board found that the applicant was directly affected by the odour disturbance.

However, recognizing the respondent's good faith efforts to mitigate the odour and the importance of allowing farmers time to fine-tune new technologies, the Board issued an interim decision.

The respondent was ordered to remove stored bales, reduce compost turning frequency, and submit a comprehensive odour reduction plan supported by a consultant's report before the Board would make a final determination on whether the operation constituted a normal farm practice.

The applicants sought a determination from the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board that a tire fence constructed on their property constituted a normal farm practice, exempting them from a municipal by-law prohibiting such fences.

The Board found that the applicants were not 'farmers' under the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, as their property was a hobby farm not operated in expectation of gain or reward.

Furthermore, the Board determined that even if the applicants qualified, tire fences are not a normal farm practice due to significant health, safety, and environmental concerns, including the promotion of mosquito breeding and fire hazards.