Some might consider a nearby farming operation a nuisance.  Indiana law generally protects people from nuisances.  A “nuisance” is defined as follows:

Whatever is:

1. injurious to health;
2. indecent;
3. offensive to the senses; or
4. an obstruction to the free use of property;

so as essentially to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, is a nuisance.

A nuisance can be abated by a court-order.  If the complaining party prevails, the court can also order the losing party to pay damages.

Anyone who has spent time near a farming operation knows that the task of farming can be “offensive to the senses.”  Livestock and poultry farming operations produce odor.  Grain farming produces dust and noise.  Most of these conditions are an unavoidable result of farming.  As the Indiana Court of Appeals held, “So long as the human race consumes pork, someone must tolerate the smell.”

So what is a farmer to do?  Fortunately, in 2002 the Indiana Legislature passed what is commonly known as the “Right to Farm Law.”  The law states, “The general assembly declares that it is the policy of the state to conserve, protect, and encourage the development and improvement of its agricultural land for the production of food and other agricultural products.  The general assembly finds that when nonagricultural land uses extend into agricultural areas, agricultural operations often become the subject of nuisance suits.  As a result, agricultural operations are sometimes forced to cease operations, and many persons may be discouraged from making investments in farm improvements.  It is the purpose of the [Right to Farm Law] to reduce the loss to the state of its agricultural resources by limiting the circumstances under which agricultural operations may be deemed a nuisance.”

The Right to Farm Law provides that an agricultural operation is not and does not become a nuisance by any changed conditions in its vincinity after such operation has existed continuously for more than one year, if the following conditions exist:

1. There is no significant change in the type of operation; and
2. The operation would not have been a nuisance at the time the agricultural or industrial operation began at that location.

A “significant change” does not include the following:

1. The conversion from one type of agricultural operation to another type of agricultural operation;
2. A change in the ownership or size of the operation;
3. The enrollment, reduction, or cessation of participation of the operation in a governmental program; or
4. Adoption of new technology by the operation.

The Right to Farm Law is important to Indiana farmers.  It allows farms to continue to operate without the threat of nuisance suits.  It does not, however, protect farmers from such suits where the farming operation is established after the conflicting use.  The question largely comes down to:  “Who was here first?”  So while the law protects existing farming operations, it does nothing to promote or facilitate the development of farming operations in areas that have not traditionally been used for agriculture.

Issues from the coexistence of non-agricultural landowners with farmers will continue to arise from time to time with the expansion of urban and suburban communities into rural areas.  Indiana’s Right to Farm Law offers a layer of protection for farmers who wish to continue to operate and grow their businesses without interference from their new neighbors.

Author: Adam J. Farrar (bio)
Phone: 812.838.5066
email: afarrar@bamberger.com