FYI - most of the News-Register article was sourced from the Capital Press article, Winery shindigs raise land-use questions.
On-site commerce stirs debate in ag circles - News-Register.com:
Yamhill County isn't the only one struggling with [events on farmland]. Counties around the state are also grappling with the issue.
But the Oregon Farm Bureau and the Oregon Board of Agriculture have taken note. They have developed resolutions on commercial extension of traditional agricultural uses for legislative consideration next session.
The Oregon Wine Growers Association has also gotten involved, preparing draft legislation at the request of a pair of Salem Republicans - Sen. Jackie Winters and Rep. Kevin Cameron.
Current law already makes provision for some farm-direct sales on land zoned for exclusive farm use, according to Jim Johnson, land-use coordinator for the Oregon Department of Agriculture. For example, farms can sell crops raised in their fields at roadside stands and vineyards can serve samples of the finished product in on-site tasting rooms.
It also sets an upper limit for off-site additions to the product line, according to Katherine Daniels, farm and forest lands specialist with the Department of Land Conservation & Development. She said Oregon law stipulates an outlet association with an agricultural enterprise can't generate more than 25 percent of its total sales from incidental items not produced on the premises.
The county typically allows rural wineries to operate a small tasting room, stage one to three events a year and host wine tours, said Assistant County Counsel Rick Sanai, who handles the land-use docket.
The rules aren't hard and fast, he said, nor are compliance and enforcement.
This is clearly one of the big problems: the lax attitude by the county towards any enforcement across the board has led many to ignore the rules, not just winery-based events but also other aspects.
Local farmers sometimes feel wineries and vineyards get special treatment because they represent a booming tourism industry, Sanai said. That makes the issue particularly contentious.
What's unfolding in Yamhill County is also happening around the state. The state Board of Agriculture articulated its view this way in a resolution adopted by unanimous vote on Dec. 16: "Be it resolved (that the board) does not support the use of agricultural lands for activities related to entertainment and tourism, and other events, except under strictly defined circumstances."
Among "strictly defined circumstances" cited by the board are compatibility with other farm and ranch operations in the area and direct correlation between the events and the "commercial farm use or processing activities occurring on a farm or ranch operation."
Both the Oregon Farm Bureau and state Board of Agriculture also want to make it clear that any such activities should be secondary to the main use of the land in question, not primary.
The winery association has yet to firm up the language of its proposed legislation, but is hoping to produce something capable of earning broad support.
The Capital Press also noted:
The Oregon Farm Bureau's resolution reads: "We support the right of an agricultural producer to vertically integrate the farm operation. ... Non-production based commercial activities should be accessory and auxiliary to the farm use on the subject farm and not the primary use."
Unfortunately in terms of defining or updating the rules, these positions are not helpful -- they simply restate what is already in the land-use laws which already require such activities to be "in conjunction with" farming activity, defining excess as more than 25% of income from non-farm products, etc.
Recent Comments