Andrew Holota, in his column on June 27, (Make some noise about those cursed cannons) makes some interesting comments, and ends with challenge to speak out against the use of cannons for the protection of blueberries.

Unfortunately, he has quite inappropriately attacked the Farm Practices Protection (Right to Farm) Act (FPPA) as the culprit in the case – legislation enacted in 1995, by the way, and hardly an antiquated piece of legislation as Mr. Holota states. I can only conclude that Mr. Holota has not read the act, or has read it, but not understood it.

The act does not protect farmers to do “Whatever We Please And To Hell With Everyone Else...”

A farmer must earn the protection provided by the act from unwarranted nuisance complaints. This protection is earned through an adherence to normal farm practices, but much more than this, a farm operation must not be in contravention of the Public Health Act, Integrated Pest Management Act, Environmental Management Act, the regulations under those acts or any land use regulation to gain this protection.

The act also established what is now known as the Farm Industry Review Board that can hear and investigate legitimate complaints and seek resolution. This is an avenue of potential resolution of concerns about farm operations that did not exist prior to the enactment of the FPPA.

The rub here is that the use of cannons has been an established, normal farm practice for some time and this, not the FPPA, is what should be the focus of attention. Farm practices are always evolving and subject to change, particularly in response to technological advancements. Therefore, if it is determined that the use of cannons is not an appropriate normal farm practice in all or part of the farm area, the act would not protect the use of cannons.

Moreover, the FPPA requires that land use regulations must also be respected to gain the protection of the act. There is scope here for a bylaw to address this concern but there appears to be a catch-22 in that the City of Abbotsford seems to regard the whole regulatory question of noise emanating from blueberry farms within the city as a provincial problem – a position that appears out of step with other municipalities.

Work on a bylaw resolution would in all likelihood require the approval of the Minister of Agriculture and Lands but importantly such an effort would force the city and province to the table to jointly seek resolution around the development of a regulatory package to address the issue.

In the end, the act will protect only what is regarded as a normal farm practice. Defining a normal farm practice is the key.

Barry Smith