PUSLINCH — The Wellington Federation of Agriculture and the Township of Puslinch are butting heads over the township's fill and site alteration bylaw.
Presenting to Puslinch council Wednesday morning, Wellington Federation of Agriculture (WFA) president Barclay Nap and former president Janet Harrop said the township's current approach to its fill and site alteration bylaw restricts essential farm maintenance and routine farm activities and improperly uses the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board (NFPPB).
While the WFA made it clear they share the township's concerns about illegal fill, they also disagreed with the bylaw application's "high costs," calling the application process "complex" and "time-consuming."
They later suggested the township remove compost from the definition of fill, develop a new model that incorporates exemptions for low-impact regular farming activities like lane upkeep and graduate the permit structure based on a project's size.
But when it came down to council comments, Mayor James Seeley disagreed with the bulk of the group's concerns, arguing that restricting low-quality fill from entering the township helps rather than hinders farmers.
He later directed staff to reconsider the inclusion of compost in the fill definition, as was recommended.
"When we start talking like that, it's starting to imply that the township bylaws are restricting farmers from fixing their fence rows, picking rocks out of their fields when that's not the case whatsoever," said Seeley. "This bylaw is there to protect farmland."
Seeley went on to refute the WFA's claims that the NFPPB is being abused by the township, instead suggesting farmers caught out by neighbour complaints are abusing it to "try and circumvent our (township) processes because they don't want to comply" to the bylaw.
According to interim CAO Courtenay Hoytfox, no NFPPB waivers have been submitted since the bylaw was created. In 2024, the township had 20 site alteration files processed. Three contacted the township before work commenced; the remaining 17 were the result of complaints or bylaw enforcement.
"The normal farm practice board is not being abused by the township whatsoever," said Seeley.
On the site alteration concerns, Seeley said the township is understanding of normal farm practices but "if you then go and strip every hill back to the chicken barn and change the grade and dig another hole, that not maintenance." He later asked for specific examples of the concerns.
"If we're so bad and we're so wrong and it (the bylaw) is not in the spirit of protecting farmland from all the pressures of the GTA, have them (the farmers) come here and we'll have that conversation," said Seeley.
Harrop said the group didn't attend the meeting to provide specific examples, they just wanted to speak to the overall bylaw in an attempt to "mitigate risks."
Seeley said he can appreciate that but the township needs specific examples to show what a normal farm practice would be and how the bylaw is interfering with it.
"We just want an end product that can be used by both sides," said Harrop.
"And unfortunately you won't want to hear this but we have that right now," said Seeley. "It's just the lack of utilization from the other side."
Isabel Buckmaster is the Local Journalism Initiative reporter for GuelphToday. LJI is a federally-funded program.
