Farmers in a central Alberta county have lost a legal battle with their municipality over new rules that they say restrict their right to farm.
A judge with Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench sided with Ponoka County in the dispute, indicating the municipality’s area structure plan meets provincial and municipal requirements.
The Ponoka Right to Farm Society, which has argued the plan hinders the abilities of future generations to farm, said it was disappointed by the decision.
John Hulsman, spokesperson for the society, said members won’t appeal the decision at this time, but many now feel uncertain about their future.
Read Also
Saskatchewan RM declines feedlot application, cites bylaws
Already facing some community pushback, a proposed 2,000-head cattle feedlot south of Swift Current, Sask., has been rejected for a municipal permit, partly over zoning concerns about the minimum distance from a residence.
“They aren’t sure how to move forward with the next generation, where they have multiple children that want to farm,” he said.
The new area structure plan in the county restricts new confined feeding operations from establishing on certain sections of land.
The county enacted the rules to mitigate a potential influx of confined feeding operations, as well as ease potential conflicts between farmers and town residents in the future.
The rules allow confined feeding operations currently in the area to expand, and it lets smaller new intensive livestock farms to establish.
While the society says the rules impede the right to farm, much of the debate in late February in court circled around legislative requirements.
The lawyer for the society argued the area structure plan didn’t meet standards set out by the province. The guidelines require municipalities to outline the sequencing of proposed development, land-use, population density and the location of transportation routes and utilities.
The lawyer for the county argued the plan, even if its wording wasn’t perfect, did meet the provincial guidelines.
In his ruling, Justice James T. Neilson concluded Ponoka County’s area structure plan and its amendments to the municipal development plan were not unreasonable.
His decision said the area structure plan was consistent with the county’s municipal development plan and did not violate sections of the province’s Municipal Government Act. The act outlines regulations and guidelines that municipalities must follow.
Despite the ruling, Hulsman said the society will continue to lobby to protect the agriculture industry.
