Vermont senators hear divided testimony on S.45’s expansion of right-to-farm protections to trespass

Vermont senators heard sharply divided testimony Feb. 27 on S.45, a bill that would expand the state’s right-to-farm protections to cover trespass and otherwise limit when neighbors may sue farms for harm.

Supporters of the bill told the Senate Judiciary committee it would shield farmers from costly, uncertain litigation and protect agricultural operations that comply with law and accepted practices. Opponents — including attorneys and environmental advocates — said the proposal would undercut property rights, create barriers for plaintiffs seeking relief for water- and property-damaging practices, and rely on regulatory determinations that state agencies do not consistently reach.

The debate centered on two main changes in S.45. The bill would extend right-to-farm protections beyond nuisance claims to some trespass claims, and it would bar nuisance or trespass suits unless the plaintiff can prove the farm violated certain water-quality or pesticide requirements or engaged in activities not common to similar farms. Proponents described the change as a needed shield for farms; critics said it sets a high evidentiary hurdle that effectively denies property owners remedies when farms cause physical invasion or environmental damage.

"CLF opposes S.45 because it doesn't solve the problem," Scott Sanderson, director of the Conservation Law Foundation’s Farming & Food Program, told the committee. Sanderson argued that nuisance and trespass lawsuits against farms are rare and that Vermont’s existing right-to-farm framework already…