The Farming and Food Production Protection Act (FFPPA) and Nuisance Complaints

Agdex#:	700
Publication Date:	02/05
Order#:	05-013
Last Reviewed:	02/05
History:	Replaces The Farming and Food Production Protection Act (FFPPA) and Nuisance Complaints, Order No. 03-113
Written by:	Hugh W. Fraser - Engineer, Horticultural Crop Protection & Post Harvest/OMAFRA; Finbar Desir - Farm Implements Coordinator/OMAFRA

---

PDF Version - 92 KB

---

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Consultation Process
3. Main Themes of the FFPPA, 1998
4. Why Agriculture Needs the FFPPA
5. Definition of an Agricultural Operation
6. What is Normal Farm Practice?
7. Normal Farm Practices Protection Board (NFPPB)
8. Seven Nuisances Outlined in the FFPPA
9. By-Law Issues
10. What the FFPPA Does Not Do
11. What to Do When a Nuisance Conflict Arises
12. What to Do When a By-Law Conflict Arises
13. How to Apply for a Hearing of the NFPPB
14. What to Expect at a Hearing
15. The Decision of the NFPPB
16. Enforcement
17. Further Information

Introduction

Rural Ontario is changing. Farms are increasing in size and complexity, and fewer people living in rural areas are farmers. In 2001, farmers made up only 1.7% of Ontario's total population of 11.4 million people, and only 10% of the rural population. That is, only about 1 in 10 people living in rural Ontario actually farms, and the number of farmers is dropping.

Urban residents are moving to towns and villages, rural routes and concession roads, drawn by the quality of life in rural Ontario. They value the tranquility, the sense of community and the lifestyle.
Farmers appreciate their lifestyles as well, but they also see rural Ontario as a place of business, where the agri-food industry provides their livelihoods and contributes $25 billion a year to the provincial economy.

As in many areas where industry and residences are located side-by-side, conflicts about the way business is carried out sometimes arise between farmers and their neighbours. Not surprisingly, nuisance complaints sometimes come from farmers themselves.

To ensure that the rights of all rural Ontario residents are respected, the Ontario government passed Bill 146, the Farming and Food Production Protection Act (FFPPA), in May 1998.

Consultation Process

Before drafting the legislation, the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food consulted widely with rural residents. Eight regional meetings drew close to 1,000 farmers, rural landowners and municipal leaders.
Representatives of Ontario's agricultural community said that to conduct their business, they needed to be protected from complaints and nuisance lawsuits regarding normal farming practices. They said that the existing Farm Practices Protection Act, 1988 was out-of-date and inadequate.

Rural, non-farm residents felt that farming operations needed to be more clearly defined. They said that farming practices should be better explained to create a better understanding of the types of disturbances that stem from them, such as odours or noise. They wanted the Farm Practices Board, which held hearings on nuisance complaints, to be more representative of rural Ontario.

Rural municipal leaders, who often deal with conflicting interests, said that clearer definitions and greater understanding would better meet the needs of all rural residents.

Main Themes of the FFPPA, 1998

There are two main themes in the FFPPA.

• Farmers are protected from nuisance complaints made by neighbours, provided they are following normal farm practices.
• No municipal by-law applies to restrict a normal farm practice carried on as part of an agricultural operation.

Why Agriculture Needs the FFPPA

In its preamble, the FFPPA outlines the reasons why this legislation is important.

"It is desirable to conserve, protect and encourage the development and improvement of agricultural lands for the production of food, fibre and other agricultural or horticultural products. Agricultural activities may include intensive operations that may cause discomfort and inconveniences to those on adjacent lands. Because of the pressures exerted on the agricultural community, it is increasingly difficult for agricultural owners and operators to effectively produce food, fibre and other agricultural or horticultural products. It is in the Provincial interest that in agricultural areas, agricultural uses and normal farm practices be promoted and protected in a way that balances the needs of the agricultural community with provincial health, safety and environmental concerns."

Definition of an Agricultural Operation

The FFPPA broadened the definition of an agricultural operation to an:
"agricultural, aquacultural, horticultural or silvicultural operation that is carried on in the expectation of gain or reward".

Examples listed in the Act include:

• draining, irrigating or cultivating land
• growing, producing or raising
  • livestock, poultry and ratites
  • fur-bearing animals
  • bees
  • cultured fish
  • deer and elk
  • game animals and birds, or
  • any additional animals, birds or fish prescribed by the minister
• the production of agricultural crops, greenhouse crops, maple syrup, mushrooms, nursery stock, tobacco, tree and turf grass, and any additional agricultural crops prescribed by the minister
• the production of eggs, cream and milk
• the operation of agricultural machinery and equipment
• the application of fertilizers, soil conditioners and pesticides
• ground and aerial spraying
• the storage, handling or use of organic wastes for farm purposes
• the processing by a farmer of the products produced primarily from the farmer's agricultural operation
• activities that are a necessary but ancillary part of an agricultural operation such as the movement of transport vehicles for the purposes of the agricultural operation, and
• any other agricultural activity prescribed by the minister conducted on, in or over agricultural land.

What Is Normal Farm Practice?

The Act defines a normal farm practice as one which:

1. "is conducted in a manner consistent with proper and acceptable customs and standards, as established and followed by similar agricultural operations under similar circumstances, or
   
   
2. makes use of innovative technology in a manner consistent with proper advanced farm management practices".

Some believe normal farm practice means 'customarily' or 'commonly done'. However, just because something is commonly done, does not make it normal. The real question is, 'Would a farmer with average, to above average, management skills use this same practice on his/her farm under the same circumstances?'

What is normal, or not, varies depending on location, type of farm, method of operation, and timing of the farm practice. Normal is site specific for a given set of circumstances, and may change over time.

Under the Nutrient Management Act, 2002 (NMA) any practice that is consistent with a regulation made under the NMA is a normal farm practice. Similarly, any practice, which is inconsistent with the NMA regulation, is not a normal farm practice.

Normal Farm Practices Protection Board (NFPPB)

The FFPPA established the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board (NFPPB) to hear from parties involved in formal complaints that cannot be resolved through mediation efforts. In other words, holding a hearing with the NFPPB is to be used as a last resort. The NFPPB then conducts a hearing to determine if the disturbance causing the complaint results from a normal farm practice.

The very existence of the board aids in resolving nuisance issues. For those issues that cannot be resolved through local mediation, the board provides a less expensive and quicker forum for complaint resolution than the courts.

In coming to a decision, the NFPPB hears from the parties involved and considers the relevant sections in the Act. The NFPPB:

"may appoint one or more persons having technical or special knowledge of any matter before the Board to assist it in any capacity in respect of that matter".

'Experts' must be summonsed by the NFPPB to ensure that they appear at a hearing. Each affected party can also call witnesses to speak on their behalf. The affected parties and experts may offer their opinions about whether a particular farm practice is normal. However, only the NFPPB can render a legal decision concerning a normal farm practice for that location, farm type, method of operation, and timing of farm practice.

For example, consider a hearing about noise from equipment used to scare birds away from vineyards. The NFPPB might decide that it was normal to use this equipment:

• in a location where few, if any, neighbours lived nearby, but not normal if there were many residences nearby
• in a vineyard in the Region of Niagara, but not normal if used to scare coyotes from sheep pastures in Bruce County
• with a method of operation using automatic shutoff switches, but not normal using manual shutoff switches
• when bird pressure was greatest during the timing of early morning and late afternoon, but not normal during the middle of the day during hot weather when birds eat less frequently.
  

Decisions by the NFPPB must be consistent with any directives, guidelines or policy statements issued by the Minister of Agriculture and Food in relation to agricultural operations or normal farm practices.

The NFPPB consists of at least 5 members appointed by the minister. The minister also appoints the chair and vice-chair. NFPPB members serve for 3 years, but can be re-appointed for a maximum of 3 more. Members include respected farm peers from across the province, engaged in many types of farming. The chair or vice-chair plus 2 other members constitute a panel for hearings. The board tries to hold its hearings in the counties or regions where the cases originate. To avoid conflict of interest, panel members for a particular hearing are always selected from geographic areas away from the case.

Seven Nuisances Outlined in the FFPPA

The new legislation added light, vibration, smoke and flies to the previous list of noise, odour and dust as disturbances for which farmers are not liable, provided these disturbances result from normal farm practices.

The bulk of farm nuisance complaints are about odours emanating from manure handling and storage. However, examples of other nuisance complaints might include:

• light from greenhouses at night, or farm equipment used at night
• vibration from trucks, fans, or boilers
• smoke from burning tree prunings, or other organic wastes
• flies from manure, or spilled feed
• noise from crop drying fans, or irrigation pumps, and
• dust from field tillage equipment, or truck traffic.

Nuisance issues do not include activities that could be harmful or dangerous to people or the environment. These activities are covered under other legislation.

By-Law Issues

The FFPPA states that "No municipal by-law applies to restrict a normal farm practice carried on as a part of an agricultural operation." A farmer who feels that a municipal by-law is restricting his/her normal farm practice may apply to the board for a hearing. The board will determine if the practice restricted by the by-law is a normal farm practice. If it is, then, under the FFPPA, the by-law does not apply to that practice at that location. The board cannot strike down the by-law. It can only rule on whether or not the practice under consideration is a normal farm practice, at that location and under those particular circumstances.

A farmer who is planning to engage in a normal farm practice restricted by a municipal by-law can also use the legislation. For the board to hear his/her case, the farmer would have to prove that he/she is planning to implement the normal farm practice.

When a hearing is to be held, anyone who owns property within 120 m of the site of the farm practice is entitled to be notified of the hearing and to participate in it. This applies only in by-law cases.

What the FFPPA Does Not Do

The FFPPA is intended to ensure that farmers can carry out normal farm practices knowing that there is legislation to protect them against nuisance complaints. It does not mean that they will not get complaints. It also does not give farmers the right to pollute, or to violate the:

• Environmental Protection Act
• Pesticides Act
• Ontario Water Resources Act.

The FFPPA has sometimes been incorrectly referred to as the 'Right to Farm Act'. This gives the connotation that farmers can do whatever they wish on their own property, regardless of the consequences. This is not the case. Farmers are protected from liability concerning a nuisance only when the activity causing the nuisance is a normal farm practice. At the same time, this legislation does not prevent anyone from pursuing an injunction against a farmer charged under another Act.

What to Do When a Nuisance Conflict Arises

When a neighbour is bothered by any of the 7 nuisances under the FFPPA, he or she should first try resolving the matter by speaking with the farmer believed to be creating the nuisance. This helps open up the lines of communication. Many complaints are resolved this way. However, if the complaint is not resolved, neighbours or farmers can seek assistance from the local Municipal Agricultural Advisory Committee or the municipality. If further mediation is still needed, neighbours or farmers can call OMAFRA's Agricultural Information Contact Centre at 1-877-424-1300. Staff will arrange for the most appropriate OMAFRA agricultural engineer to contact the parties and facilitate the conflict resolution process, with the goal of avoiding a hearing. The OMAFRA engineers will work with the parties to address contentious issues before they escalate. Where necessary, they may call upon other experts with knowledge of agriculture issues. This process has proven to be very successful in resolving conflicts about nuisances. Over 98% of all such nuisance conflicts are resolved this way in Ontario.

Only after the mediation process has been tried will a case be accepted for a hearing by the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board.

What to Do When a By-Law Conflict Arises

A fraction of one per cent of the complaints received by OMAFRA involves municipal by-laws. This is because there is usually much consultation between municipalities and OMAFRA when by-laws are being developed. Since any related conflicts involve contravention of a by-law, there is generally little room for negotiation or mediation. Farmers or municipalities involved in by-law conflicts should call OMAFRA's Agricultural Information Contact Centre and OMAFRA's conflict resolution process will be initiated. If not resolved, the case may then proceed to the Board for a hearing.

How to Apply for a Hearing of the NFPPB

Once all other voluntary or mediated efforts have failed, an applicant may make a formal application to the NFPPB.

Applications for nuisance complaints must state:

• the name, street and mailing address of the applicant (neighbour who is complaining about a nuisance and making the request for a hearing), including a telephone number where they can be reached during normal office hours
• the name, street and mailing address of the respondent (farmer alleged to be creating the nuisance) and the location of his or her operation
• the nature of the complaint, including; date(s) of complaint(s); pictures if they are helpful; how the nuisance affects the applicant; and what authorities have been involved in trying to resolve the issue.

Applications for by-law complaints must include:

• a copy of the by-law in question
• the by-law number, the date it was passed, the name of the municipality that passed it and the address of the municipal office
• a description of the practice to be reviewed; and
• the name and address of the applicant.

In short, the more information the applicant can supply, the better. The NFPPB makes decisions based only on what it hears from each of the parties involved at the hearing. Information in the application is extremely important, since the NFPPB may refuse to hear an application if it is considered to be trivial, frivolous, vexatious, not made in good faith, or if it appears that the applicant has insufficient personal interest in the subject matter.

Once the NFPPB decides to hold a hearing, a date and location is chosen. It can be difficult to choose a suitable date, since it must fit the schedules of the NFPPB, the applicant, the farmer, any persons having technical or special knowledge of any matter in the hearing that may be testifying, and any lawyers that may be present for either party.

Forward all applications to the:

Secretary
Normal Farm Practices Protection Board
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs
1 Stone Road West, 3rd Floor
Guelph, ON N1G 4Y2

What to Expect at a Hearing

Applicants and respondents ("parties") should be aware of the following before attending a hearing.

• A hearing is not as formal as a court proceeding, but still very structured; the parties and audience should remain courteous and respectful at all times.
• For the convenience of the parties, hearings usually take place in local municipal buildings.
• Hearings can be attended by anyone, but only those affected, or those invited to give testimony, are allowed to speak.
• Lawyers are not necessary at hearings, but participants may decide that legal representation would be worthwhile, depending on the nature of their case.
• Each party sits at a table facing the Board. As witnesses are called to testify, they sit at a separate table.
• Attendance usually ranges from as few as 10 to several hundred people, including the board panel, the parties, witnesses, interested neighbours and members of the general public.
• If the applicant or respondent wishes to ensure experts attend to speak on their behalf, they can ask the board to have the(se) expert(s) summonsed. This must be done far in advance of the hearing date.
• Board hearings range in complexity and there is no fixed length of time to complete a hearing. However, it usually takes a minimum of one-half day to as many as 5 days or more.
• Hearings are normally held in council chambers, but they can be held in big community halls if large audiences are expected.
• As letters, pictures, aerial photos and other items are referred to in the hearing, they become submitted as articles of evidence for consideration by the board, and are not returned to the people who brought them.
• The board will not consider complaints about problems other than the 7 nuisances and the by-law issues outlined in the FFPPA, because it does not have jurisdiction over other matters.

The sequence of events in the hearing is normally outlined by the chair of the hearing panel at the outset of the hearing.

• The applicant outlines his/her version of events, why he/she believes he/she is aggrieved. This is followed by a cross-examination by the respondent, and questions from the board. Those invited or summonsed to speak on behalf of the applicant then give their testimony, are cross-examined, then questioned by the board.
• The respondent outlines his/her version of events followed by a cross-examination by the applicant, and questions from the board. Those invited or summonsed to speak on behalf of the respondent then give their testimony, are cross-examined, then questioned by the board.
• Experts summonsed by the board to attend the hearing outline their expertise on the topic, and answer questions from the board, the applicant and the respondent.
• The applicant then summarizes his/her case.
• The respondent then summarizes his/her case.
• This completes the hearing and it is adjourned. The board panel then deliberates to arrive at a decision.

If a dispute has continued for a long period, the applicant and respondent may not be on speaking terms. The hearing might be the first time they have been in the same room for a long period. It can be uncomfortable for them. However, hearings often become a 'healing session', and a chance to finally air both of their concerns on the issue. Often, concerns about farm practices arise from a misunderstanding or a lack of communication. Comments such as, 'I didn't know that', or 'Why didn't you tell me first', or 'I just want you to understand that the odour bothers me', are commonly heard at hearings. That is why OMAFRA continues to work with farm organizations and rural municipalities to increase awareness of the realities of rural living, and why OMAFRA's agricultural engineers offer abatement, conciliation and mediation services for nuisance and by-law complaints.

The Decision of the NFPPB

The NFPPB has 3 options available to it after a hearing. In a nuisance case the board shall:

• dismiss the application if it is of the opinion that the disturbance results from a normal farm practice
• order the farmer to cease the practice causing the disturbance, if it is not a normal farm practice, or
• order the farmer to modify the practice in the manner set out in the order so as to be consistent with normal farm practice.

If the board rules that the practice causing the disturbance is a normal farm practice, the farmer is free to continue the practice under the protection of the Act. The board will not entertain further complaints unless circumstances have changed appreciably.

In a by-law complaint, the board may rule that the practice in question is a normal farm practice, is not a normal farm practice, or that it will be a normal farm practice if the farmer makes specific modifications.

The decision is issued in written form, with reasons explaining why the board decided the way it did. It normally takes 4-6 weeks after a hearing for the decision to be issued. This is quick compared to the court system.

Under the Act, any party to a hearing may appeal an order or a decision of the board, on any question of fact, law or jurisdiction. The appeal must be made to the divisional court of the Superior Court of Justice, within 30 days of the date of the order or decision.

Enforcement

Like other regulatory agencies, NFPPB orders and decisions are enforced in the same way as court decisions. The procedure for enforcement is established by the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, which governs agencies, boards and commissions of the provincial government. First, one of the parties or the board must file a certified copy of the decision or order with the Superior Court of Justice itself. The decision or order then becomes a decision or order of the court, and is enforceable as such. The party seeking enforcement would apply to the court at the court offices.

Further Information

For more information on solving nuisance complaints, pick up a copy of the following OMAFRA Factsheets, or visit our web site.

• Odour Control of Livestock and Poultry, Order No. 03-111
• Bird Control on Grape and Tender Fruit Farms, Order No. 98-035

This Factsheet was written by Hugh W. Fraser, MSc, P.Eng., an agricultural engineer with OMAFRA at Vineland, who has given testimony at 6 board hearings, and Finbar Desir, P.Eng., An agricultural engineer with OMAFRA and acting secretary to the board.

This Factsheet was reviewed by:

• George Garland, P.Eng., OMAFRA, Guelph
• Robert P. Stone, P.Eng., OMAFRA, Brighton
• Robert Stephens, LLB., Chair, NFPPB.
  

Do You Know About Ontario's Nutrient Management Act?

The provincial Nutrient Management Act (NMA) and the Regulation 267/03 regulates the storage, handling and application of nutrients that could be applied to agricultural crop land. The objective is to protect Ontario's surface and groundwater resources.

Please consult the regulation and protocols for the specific legal details. This Factsheet is not meant to provide legal advice. Consult your lawyer if you have questions about your legal obligations.

For more information on the NMA call the Nutrient Management Information Line at 1-866-242-4460, e-mail nman.omafra@ontario.ca or visit www.omafra.gov.on.ca.

Factsheets are continually being updated so please ensure that you have the most recent version.