Vermont briefing outlines S.45 changes to right-to-farm law, shifts litigation standard and adds exceptions

Michael Grady, legislative counsel, briefed legislators on S.45 and a Judiciary Committee proposed amendment during a legislative committee briefing, describing how the bill would change Vermont's right-to-farm statute.

Grady said the bill would remove the state's current rebuttable-presumption framework and replace it with a simple rule: "no agricultural activity shall be be or become a nuisance when the activity is conducted in accordance with generally accepted practices." He told lawmakers that the revised standard would tie protection to compliance with Required Agricultural Practices (RAPs), CAFO permit requirements in Title 10, Chapter 47 when applicable, pesticide rules, and practices consistent with customs followed by similar operations in the state.

The change is meant to provide broader legal protection to farming operations, Grady said, but he repeatedly cautioned that litigation would remain fact-specific and involve experts on both sides. He described how other states' statutes range from broader protections (for example, Kentucky and Oregon provisions he cited) to the narrower approach in current Vermont law, which permits a neighbor to overcome protection by showing a "substantial adverse effect on health, safety, or welfare" or a "noxious and significant interference" with use and enjoyment of neighboring property.

Why it matters: The draft S.45 would alter who bears what proof and how courts evaluate nuisance claims. Under the proposed language, a plaintiff would have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that an agricultural activity is not entitled to nuisance protection because it was not conducted in accordance with generally accepted agricultural practices. The bill also includes several carve-outs and procedural steps that…