Doesn't always work that way. Sometime city slickers have been know to move beside a farm and then sue because of the smell and win. So what you have stated is not always true and it doesn't work that way in reality.
Printable View
Doesn't always work that way. Sometime city slickers have been know to move beside a farm and then sue because of the smell and win. So what you have stated is not always true and it doesn't work that way in reality.
What part of what I said is wrong?
Not any more, as judges have said ,the smell comes by way of standard farming practice which is a persons lively hood and you can't interfere with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
When you move to the country you get to enjoy the good and bad smells.
The only ones that have been cracked down upon ,are some of the very large "factory farms ".
I know a guy who used to live above a pizza parlour, I used to like to visit him, he moved because he could not stand the smell ,
to each his own.
Can someone explain to me now that this is all over the internet about port hope .. can some one tell me why this is still not posted on the ofah zone e website. what is the point in having them for each zone if its not being updated for zone members
Here's the info I have.....
BY-LAW #XX/2015The voting of this by-law is being brought to the attention of council to repeal old by laws that were set back in 1962 and 1963. If this by-law is voted in it will mean that it is prohibited to discharge a firearm in the Municipality of Port Hope including, air guns, spring guns, cross bows, long bows, rifles, shot guns or any other firearm. They are working to revise the by-law of the Township of Hope 1409 and the Town of Port Hope by-law 2405-62.
To Be Voted for on July 21st 2015
In this new by law the Municipality wishes to restrict the discharge of firearms to the following occupants:
Animal Control Officer: someone who is appointed by the Municipality to provide animal control services.
Municipality Enforcement Officer: the police or a by law enforcement officer appointed by the municipality
Farmer: person, partnerships, couple or similar agreement actively involved with in earning a substantial amount of their income through cultivation of crops, livestock, or poultry production.
Hunters: people who have all said licenses in order to own a firearm or participate in hunting activities
GENERAL OVERVIEW
• No target shooting by farmers, hunters, or law enforcement unless it is done on a approved target range• No discharge within 300 meters (1000 feet)of any property line or travelled portion of the road• No discharge on any property that is less than 50 acres in size and must be used for agricultural purposes and MUST have approval from the farmer
EXCEPTIONS:
• Law enforcement• A farmer as defined in the bylaw• A hunter having all their licenses and permission from a farmer meeting the requirements of this bylaw• Hunting in the GRCA as it is already governed by a government agency• A farmer or hunter defending his or her property from nuisance wildlife that may be killed or harassed in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act or a permit issued under the Canada Migratory Bird Regulations• “Normal Farm Practice”
REPERCUSSIONS of BREAKING BY-LAW:
First Offence: $300 fine
In Simple words:
The Municipality of Port Hope is trying to ban the discharge of a firearm by any individual within the municipality unless they are a police officer, conservation authority, farmers who own more than 50 acres of land and must make a substantial amount of income from their farm, hunters who have permission from these farmers. People who meet the requirements can then discharge their firearm for the purpose of killing wildlife and have to be a minimum of 300 meters (1000 feet) from every property line and 30 meters from travel portion of any road allowance.
http://www.oodmag.com/community/x-ap...7F85482931.png
Plenty of towns have by-laws like this. Enforcement is another thing all together. And honestly, I think it is ridiculous in general but for rural areas everything on that list can be done safely. I get banning discharge inside a city limit where there is a high population density but in rural communities its just complete BS and unnecessary.
The problem is that the rural area is looking a lot less rural now. My road use to only have 4 farms on it, now there are 8 homes. The farm across from me now has 2 homes facing his back yard from the far side of his farm.
Our Hunt camp is in fear that they will soon be putting restrictions on Hunting in this township. Almost every farmers field is surrounded by homes.
Hypothetical question.....
I have permission on two adjoining properties....combined they are 70 acres, one farm is 40 acres the other that is attached to it is 30 acres, can I hunt on either one of the properties....or am I SOL....
In this particular situation, you would be up the creek without a paddle as neither property has the minimum acreage size.Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
Remembering of course that there is currently a minimum acreage amount in place of 50 acres (listed in their current discharge by-law), so even right now, technically you can't. More the reason to push for the elimination of minimum acreage altogether.