As Ponoka County moves ahead amending its policies in hopes of limiting the concentration of confined feeding operations (CFO), those changes will have to fit a constrained and limited set of regulations.
Jean Olynyk, senior communications specialist with the Natural Resources Conservation Board (NRCB), answered some questions regarding just what the NRCB can consider and what approval officers and the review board look at a CFO application.
Olynyk explained the NRCB must strictly follow the Agricultural Operation Practice Act (AOPA).
“AOPA requires applications to be consistent with the land use provisions in the municipality’s municipal development plan (MDP). Approval officers must deny applications that are not consistent with the land use provisions in the MDP,” she stated.
AOPA — which was put in place by the province in 2002 to regulate CFOs in a more consistent administration across Alberta, in part because of too much local political influence and conflicting approvals — has specific environmental standards on ground and surface water protections, minimum distance separation and strict manure application and record keeping standards.
“Municipalities can establish exclusion zones through their land use provisions — for example, from towns or villages or from environmentally sensitive areas,” Olynyk said.
“However, (municipalities) cannot impose technical standards and requirements that are different from the legislated requirements of the act and regulations.”
Those two restrictions are part of why Ponoka County has retained planning consultant Bob Riddett to recommend adjustments to its MDP.
“Approval officers determine whether an application meets the technical requirements set out in the act and regulations. All applications are forwarded to the municipality, Alberta Environment and Parks (which is responsible for water usage and licensing), Alberta Health, Alberta Agriculture and Forestry and Alberta Transportation for their feedback and input,” she added.
However, any issues or concerns a municipality or other affected party raise, approval officers can consider these when making a decision. But if these items raised fall outside AOPA or conflict with any technical or other requirements, then the items are not taken into account.
That leaves just one option, an appeal of the decision to the NRCB board for a review.
Which is why Ponoka County CAO Charlie Cutforth came up with the recommendation to council, in order for issues regarding manure management, water quality and the large collection of CFOs to be dealt with in the approval process.
The last application that was reviewed by the NRCB board was rejected as it was inside a current exclusion zone. There are 27 other CFOs within a six mile radius.
“There must be a specific reference in the MDP. The suggestion was if there was a way to draft something into our document, there may be some hope,” he stated during the council meeting April 10.
“Land use bylaws alone will not be considered.”