Ministry of Agriculture and Lands

Review of Wildlife Damage
Control Guidelines on Propane Cannons

ISSUE		FREQUENCY

Noise	Noise generally	11
	Enjoyment of property/livestyle	20
	Effect on animals/humans	13
	Volume (decibel level)	8
	Health/safety	8
	Business opportunity	2
	Bylaws (superceded by Farm Practices Act)	2
	TOTAL	64

Timing	Schedules (time on/off)	27
	Frequency	12
	TOTAL	39

General Operation	Malicious intent on the part of farmer after complaint was made	4
	Cannon malfunction	2
	Lazy farmers	1
	TOTAL	7

Effectiveness	General	10
	Visible predation	7
	Preventative vs. remedial operation	5
	TOTAL	22

Noise Barriers	Placement or lack of	8

Direction Cannon Pointed		6

Development	Who was there first	9
	Real estate values	3
	Realtors/investors not informing purchasers	2
	Tourism	1
	Poor subdivision planning	1
	Disregard for ALR	1
	TOTAL	17

Normal Farm Practices	Adherance to guidelines/stricter rules	8
	Enforcement of guidelines	7
	Lack of understanding by non-farming community	3
	Economic impact of stricter regulation	1
	TOTAL	19

Absentee Farmers		10

Other	Effectiveness of peer group	4
	Contravention of WCB rules	3
	Education/communication	3
	Passing the buck	3
	No one responds/listens	3
	Cost ($100 filing fee) to launch a complaint	2
	Propane cannons used for other purposes	1
	Reasonableness	1
	Political/racial	1
	Feeding birds on adjoining properties	1
	Cannons not so noisy in comparison (airports, highways, etc.)	1
	TOTAL	23