HOW TO FIGHT BACK: When the law overreaches and you feel alone, you need a landowner strategy to push back

Patrick Meyer
farmers forum

STITTSVILLE — Conservation agencies are still some of the worst offenders when it comes to state incursions, says the feisty Ontario Landowners Association, which has a stellar track record of clinching victories for the little fella.

They say the best tools to fight back are allies and knowledge of the law.

You can’t fight the government alone, says Bob Weirmeir, president of the Saugeen Regional Landowners Association, based in western Ontario. The pushback strategy often involves finding a local grassroots movement that shares your concerns and going to a local council to gauge local level support. Being able to get your local council on board is a big boost as council members are accessible and often having a local council on your side can work much faster than a single MP or MPP.

Knock on doors to find neighbors and friends in a similar situation. Prepare petitions and organize open days. Retirees are gold. They often have the time and their work experience can come in handy. You need a speaker. Retired politicians are a great asset. Be prepared to hire an attorney or paralegal.

Sometimes you can get your facility group representative to come to your facility as a witness if you are the subject of an animal police raid.

It also helps to find a sympathetic news medium and use social media (Twitter and Facebook are the most useful). But your best ally is by far a solid understanding of the law as far as your situation is concerned. And that’s not easy, because in many cases even the enforcers don’t understand the law they’re upholding, Weirmeir says.

Here are examples of how knowing the law changes everything.

In Gray County in August, a rural landowner erected a 14-foot by 30-foot Amish shed in a floodplain and his local CA official ordered him to dismantle it.

But municipal law allows sheds on wheels without a permit. So the landowner placed the shed on top of a hay wagon, dug a ditch for the wheels, and backed the wagon by lowering it on his property. Problem solved, said Weirmeir.

Municipal ordinances that only allow one junk vehicle on the property aren’t valid, Weirmeir said, because they violate Section 50 of the Ontario Municipal Act, which says no licensing or permitting system can be put in place for anything that can be licensed Ministry of Transport.

A Gray County bylaw official told a woman who lived in an RV that she had to move because the Georgian Bluffs municipality would not give her an RV permit because she was living on the end of an unopened road allowance. She went to Weirmeir, who told the officer that the township bylaws could not be enforced because of Section 50. A year later, the woman said she had not heard from the officer.

Here’s an important legal tidbit that should keep a conservation agency in line, but there’s one hell of a hurdle to enacting it. You can actually get a community to vote to kick the conservation agency out of your area, he said. Section 13.1 of the Conservation Authority Act states that when two local authorities vote to dissolve the same CA, that is the first step in removing the CA’s powers in those two local authorities. That’s never happened before, but it came close, he said. A successful vote will force a public debate and two-thirds of the board members of the remaining local councils in the CA’s jurisdiction must vote in favor of removal. If it clears that hurdle, the Secretary of Natural Resources still has the final say. But once you get that far, the minister knows there is a problem with the CA and will step in to solve it, he said, adding that solving the problem is what landowners want, since CAs offer useful services.

Longtime OLA member and former president and mixed farmer Tom Black recalled when the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority walked around and said, “You can’t do anything within 100 feet of a ditch.”

“Show me the legislation?” Black shot back in an altercation. Black and OLA’s research director, Liz Marshall, had looked it up. The 100-foot throw back from a ditch was not included in the Conservation Act but in the Federal Ministry of Fisheries and Seas Act, where it is referred to as a “proposed” setback. This means that if you flush the banks of a ditch into the ditch, you’re liable to repair “said” damage, Black said.

Landowners also face a formidable challenge: Laws are constantly changing.

In 2021 alone, numerous paragraphs of the municipal law were changed. Interest groups today often need members who are experts in some areas of the law.

Black argues that sometimes a CA overdoes it and hopes it stays. Since around 2006, some competent authorities have issued building permits on condition that the landowner signs a document allowing the competent authority to visit the property at any time to inspect it. It becomes an easement on your property when you sign this document, he said. Don’t sign the document or strike out the offending parts first, he said.

Weirmeir said most people think CAs are on their side. “85 percent of the population think that the conservation authorities are concerned with planting trees, saving nature trails, horse trails and campgrounds. Few realize the destructive power they have for someone who improves property.”

CAs withdrew in 2019 after the province ordered them to stick to their core mandate, Weirmeir said.

But one of the biggest open problems concerns building permits. By the looks of it, you’ll need to get city planning permission, and you may have to pay $500 to $5,000 to get CA planning permission. “That’s double-dipping.”

Weirmeir is now working with two municipalities to include CA concerns when their Chief Building Officer pays a visit. That would eliminate the need for a second permit, he said.