Right-to-farm ordinances protect nurseries

All across the United States farm ground is under severe pressure from sprawling development. The federal government, under the direction of the Environmental Protection Agency, has come to recognize the importance of planning where growth occurs in America. Going beyond the development debate of growth/no growth, the EPA has come to recognize planning that can meet a number of different development strategies simultaneously. Under the term coined as Smart Growth (1), the EPA has developed the following principles in order to preserve the quality of life in and around cities and counties.

Urban Influenced farmland
Land near cities and towns is classified as urban-influenced (UI) farmland (2). A case can be made for the importance of farmland closest to our nation's cities and suburban areas. The American farmland Trust (3) reports that 86% of nation's fruits and vegetables, and 63 % of our dairy products, are produced in UI areas. UI farm ground also provides avenues for select-your-own farms, including pumpkins, berries, Christmas trees, and flowers. The rate of farmland loss is accelerating as public policies exaggerate the competitive edge that development has over farming (2).

Urban fringe entertainment farming is protected by Right to Farm ordinances

Nurseries and population
A major portion of the green industry supplies products to where the bulk of people live, namely urban/suburban areas (4). The leading states in retail garden center sales (California, New York, Texas, others) all have large urban populations. In the Pacific Northwest, Oregon's largest wholesale nursery producing areas are located in Clackamas, Marion, Multnomah, and Washington counties, which are all near the large metropolitan cities of Portland and Salem. In Washington large nursery producing counties include Thurston, King, Skagit, which are home to Olympia, Seattle, and Mt. Vernon, respectively.

Reality of rural living
Over much of the United States low-density development has lead to discontinuous sprawl that has increased the amount of "edge" (5) between agricultural and residential areas. New homeowners choose to build in a rural countryside because of the aesthetic qualities of open space, including views of forests, open valleys, water courses, and pastoral scenes. Unfortunately, they fail to understand that rural landscapes often have been developed and preserved as well-tended farms including nurseries, orchards, Christmas trees, berry farms and livestock operations. Thus farms create many of the landscape and amenity values that attracted them there in the first place (6). Non-farm neighbors, who have relocated to lots next to farms, have expressed concerns over agricultural noise, odors, dust, presence of picker crews, and other common agricultural activities. Many of these common farming activities tend to be seasonable however.

Right-to-farm ordinances
Since the late 1960's state legislatures all across America have enacted anti-nuisance laws to give agricultural activities sufficient protection from nuisance lawsuits. Generally these laws have been designed to ensure that growers can continue to carry on normal farming practices. Such anti-nuisance laws or ordinances have been given the name right-to-farm (RTF). Today, RTF laws (6) are in affect in all 50 states, though they differ in scope and functionality.

In the cases of conflicts between neighbors and farmers on UI lands there are two types of laws to consider. Neighbors can bring nuisance lawsuits against farmers who appear to be using unwanted agricultural practices or development. In the Midwest, neighbors have used nuisance lawsuits to stop large confined feeding animal operations from being built or continuing to operate. Secondly, if the farmer has been using standard farming practices, RTF laws should help protect against unwanted lawsuits. In general, when RTF laws are upheld, they tend to favor the continuation of normal agricultural practices when challenged by nuisance complaints (7).

Generally accepted agricultural management practices
When lawsuits arise against growers, courts have to determine whether the farming practice is unreasonable or not. In some states generally accepted agricultural management practices (GAAMPS) are considered (8). GAAMPS are defined by the state department of agriculture. GAAMPS can be thought of as best management practices (BMP's). In other states, counties can determine what constitutes an RTF ordinance (9). County government will often develop their own RTF standards (10).

RTF no substitute for zoning
RTF laws should not be considered tools for zoning. They lack the planning and urban development plans for the installation of roads, sewers, and lot sizes. In the Northwest both Oregon (11) and Washington (12) state governments have set up formal laws for land use planning. Nonetheless, Northwest land use planning places heavy influence on preserving agricultural and open space lands.

Appreciation for local agriculture
The conflicts between farmers and residents on the urban edge of cities and counties will always occur. Right-to-farm ordinances should be thought of as educational tools to inform the public of the value of local agriculture. For new residents moving into an established farming area, an RTF ordinance provides them with a good explanation and appreciation of the consequences of living next to an operation that my generate noise, odor, dust, or frequent movement of machinery at certain times of the year. These relatively minor drawbacks must be weighed against the positive aspects of living near a productive rural landscape that can preserve the views and attributes of rural living.

Local agriculture can provide funs for all age groups.

References
1. About Smart Growth, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.

2. Agricultural sustainability and smart growth: Saving urban-influenced farmland. 2001. Edward Thompson, senior vice president, American Farmland Trust.

3. Farming on the edge. 2003. American Farmland Trust, Washington, D.C.

4. Agriculture's business contributions to the urbanizing society. 2002. Lorna Butler and Dale Maronek, co-chairs for organizing a CAST report (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology) entitled: Urban and Agricultural Communities: Opportunities for Common Ground, Task Force Report No. 138, 124 pp. A 2-page summary is located here.

5. Land use: Recent trends and environmental impacts. 2001. United States Environmental Protection Agency Smart Growth Network. In: Our Built and Natural Environments. This is a 102-page PDF document.

6. Right-to-farm law in Oregon. 2001. Brent Searle, Oregon State Department of Agriculture. In: The Agriculture Quarterly, spring, 2001.

7. Nuisance and right-to-farm. 2001. Agriculture Policy Project, Henry A. Wallace Center for Agricultural & Environmental Policy, Winrock International, Arlington, VA.

8. Balancing the right-to-farm with the rights of others. 1998. Janie Hipp, National Agricultural Law Center-University of Arkansas. In: Proceedings of the National Public Policy Education Conference: Increasing Understanding of Public Problems & Policies, a conference held September 20-23, 1998.

9. Right to Farm. 2002. Pierce County Council, Tacoma, WA.

10. County right-to-farm ordinances in California: An assessment of impact and effectiveness. 2001. Matthew Wacker, Alvin Sokolow, and Rachel Elkins. University of California Agricultural Issues Center Brief, Number 15.

11. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Salem, Oregon.

12. Growth Management Services, 2003. WA Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development, Olympia, WA.

First posted: December, 2004.