Agricultural tourism is a growing component within New York’s 6.36 billion agriculture industry. More and more farms are inviting the public to have a firsthand experience on the farm and hosting farm tours where visitors can learn about farm operations. 

Agri-tourism businesses, many of which can be found in our backyards, have increased in recent years. According to the latest U.S. Census data, the number of New York agricultural tourism businesses grew from 575 in 2007 to 857 in 2012.

Agri-tourism businesses enable farmers to help the public understand the hard work that goes into farming some of New York’s many crops. From dairy to wineries, New York remains a national leader in the production of milk, apples, grapes, maple syrup, and cauliflower. Farm visitors can learn how many of these crops are processed or harvested. Those who visit a maple producer, for example, in the spring can learn how trees are tapped and how the sap is then turned into syrup. This type of education helps the public understand where our food comes from and what is involved in the day-to-day operations of a farm to help encourage a greater appreciation for farming. Agri-tourism also enables farmers to diversify their businesses and find new retail markets that can often yield higher profits for the farmers.

Despite the benefits for farmers, there are personal-injury liability risks involved in opening the farm to the public. Though most farmers take sensible precautions to make the property safe and include warning signs around dangerous equipment and/or animals, opening the farm to the public creates certain risks for the farmer. As part of the cost of doing business, they have to purchase liability insurance. These insurance costs are growing for farmers largely because state law does not define clear standards for agri-tourism liability similar to how it is defined in the law for other recreational activities. A bill that passed both the New York Senate and the Assembly this year seeks to fix this and help limit agri-tourism businesses’ liability.

Currently, the General Obligations Law carves out specific duties for similar risk activities such as downhill skiing. It provides a definition of, for example, dangers that ski hill operators must warn skiers about and states that skiers have an obligation to comply. The Safety in Agricultural Tourism Act would define agricultural tourism in the General Obligations Law. It would outline duties for those operating an agri-tourism business and, similarly, the duties for agri-tourists. For example, the bill states that agri-tourism businesses would have to post and maintain way-finding signage and delineate paths and areas that are open to the public. The bill also makes clear that visitors would be obligated to comply with signage and other posted rules. Having this stated in the law would likely limit the agri-tourism business’s exposure to liability. While this would not protect the farm from all types of personal-injury lawsuits, it would state some reasonable expectations for the visitors and, thus, limit the farmer’s exposure to liability.

Currently, the rising insurance costs are a deterrent to business in this popular industry. Farmers report that there is more opportunity for growth in agri-tourism, but they have had to turn down opportunities to invite the public on their farms because they cannot afford the liability insurance. It is hoped that if the bill becomes law, this could eventually help lower the cost of the liability insurance and hopefully, encourage more agri-tourism businesses to sprout.              

William (Will) A. Barclay is the Republican representative of the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses most of Oswego County, including the cities of Oswego and Fulton, as well as the town of Lysander in Onondaga County and town of Ellisburg in Jefferson County. Contact him at barclaw@assembly.state.ny.us, or (315) 598-5185.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Thomas J. Donohue issued the following statement Aug. 31 in response to the decision by Judge Amos Mazzant, a U.S. District Court judge in Texas, to grant the motion brought by the U.S. Chamber and other business groups to strike down the Obama administration’s overtime pay rule (Note: The rule would have doubled to about $47,000, the maximum salary that an employee can earn and still be automatically eligible for OT pay):

“[This]  decision is another victory for the effort to free our economy from the regulatory stranglehold of the last eight years. We have consistently said that the last administration went too far in its 2016 overtime rule, and we are pleased that Judge Mazzant granted a final judgment that makes permanent his previous ruling against the overtime rule.

“[The] decision means small businesses, nonprofits, and other employers throughout the economy can be certain that the 2016 salary threshold will not result in significant new labor costs and cause many disruptions in how work gets done. The Obama administration’s rule would have resulted in salaried professional employees being converted to hourly wages, reduced workplace flexibility and remote electronic access to work, and halted opportunities for career advancement. 

“We look forward to working with the Department of Labor (DOL) on a new rule to develop a more appropriate update to the salary threshold.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce led a broad coalition of national and local business groups in a 2016 challenge to the Obama administration’s overtime rule, arguing that the (DOL) exceeded its statutory authority in issuing the regulation and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.           

Donohue has led the U.S. Chamber of Commerce since 1997. The chamber says it is the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations.