AAA Feedlot

[kpb]

I see in my local newspaper that I received today that AAA Feedlots has declared bankruptcy. AAA (east of Didsbury) has been involved in a prolonged legal battle over licensing regulations, etc. with a group of Mountain View ratepayers over the feedlot expansions, etc. and lost a court decision to this group in November. Prior to losing the court decision the feed lot had receieved approval from the ERCB to expand the feedlot to, I think, about 15,000 head from , I think, 5,000 head.
My regards to Simon and his family who started this feedlot from scratch a few years ago, worked hard to get it going only to lose it to lawyers fees, etc. The people who opposed this feedlot want us all to make a living from 20 cows, 5 pigs, 3 goats and a couple of sheep on 160 acres of land. And then these same people bitch that they can't make a living off the land.


kpb

[rkaiser]

The court action resulted in overturning the NRCB approval of the feedlot to house 18,200 head of finishers and feeders.

[rkaiser]

Forgot to add that the original permit issued by the municipality was for 2500 head. The expansion was approved by the NRCB after a hearing in 2003.

[kpb]

thx for the numbers, emerald, they had slipped my tired brain. Also, of course, the NRCB, not the ERCB.


kpb

[cowman]

So if the NRCB approved the expansion what was the problem? I thought the deal was the government took the decisions away from the municipalities and gave it to the NRCB so we could all avoid these kinds of deals? I know the municipalities were happy as a lark because they wouldn't have to make any tough decisions anymore and could now blame the NRCB. But if any group can take their decisions to court and get them overturned, what was really accomplished? Seems to me they took the politicians out of it and handed the whole thing to the damned lawyers?

[kpb]

cowman, yes, like many other items, it makes you wonder who's running things in this country. The NRCB approved the expansion of this feedlot--it was the first one they had reviewed since decision-making powers had been handed to it from, as you point out, the local municipalities. AAA had met all the new environmental rules. However, the local group of malcontents appealed the decision to court, as is the right of anyone who has been involved in one of these quasi-judicial decisions. And the court quashed the NRCB decision last November. My understanding is that AAA had re-applied to the NRCB for approval but I guess they ran out of money.
This has been dragging on for a couple of years now and regardless of what anyone thinks about feedlots, they are still a fact of existence in this industry and, last time I looked, legal to own and operate. It's a crying shame that political correctness always wins out these days.

[kpb]

The NRCB had dealt with numerous decisions prior to AAA. AAA was the first hearing for a cattle feeding operation of the magnitude of AAA that the NRCB had held.
Administrative tribunal decisions may only be overturned if in the courts opinion the tribunal erred in law or jurisdiction.
In the case of AAA the court ruled that the NRCB should have required the operator to retrofit the entire feedlot to meet AOPA standards, not just the portion that was the subject of the hearing( which was the expansion of the feedlot.) Hence the court overturned the decision of the NRCB panel.
The NRCB panel felt that the existing feedlot that had a municipal approval did not have to be brought up to AOPA standards, and the amendments to the AOPA legislation clearly state that existing operations do not have to meet the standards in the legislation, only new and expanding operations are required to do so.
However the court took a different view.