Lawmakers Hear Conflicting Views on S.45Right-to-Farm Protections for Nuisance and Trespass

The House Judiciary Committee heard two hours of testimony on S.45, a proposed change to Vermont—s right-to-farm law that would clarify when agricultural activities are protected from private nuisance and trespass lawsuits, on Oct. 12 during a virtual hearing.

The bill drew contrasting positions from the Agency of Agriculture and conservation advocates over whether the measure properly balances farm viability with neighbors— property and environmental protections. Steve Collier, representing the Agency of Agriculture, told the committee the agency supports a standard that places the burden on plaintiffs to show a farm violated required standards and urged preserving trespass protection in the statute. "We want the law clarified," Collier said. "If a farm is doing everything that we require them to...that standard should govern their relations instead of an individual court deciding an ambiguous law."

Advocates for environmental and public-interest groups said S.45 as written would extend "right to farm" shields too far and risk cutting important remedies for impacted neighbors. Scott Sanderson, director of the Conservation Law Foundation—s Farm and Food Program, said nuisance and trespass suits against farms are rare and that the bill as drafted could make litigation more complex while weakening long-standing drainage and other protections. "Right-to-farm laws are supposed to protect farms from unfair suits while preserving neighbors— recourse when their health or property is actually harmed," Sanderson said.

Why…