The amendment’s broad scope has sparked discussions about accountability, environmental impacts, and the rights of those affected by agricultural practices. Critics argue that, while the intent may have been to protect farmers, the law disproportionately favors larger agricultural operations, potentially leading to environmental degradation and diminished rights for affected communities. A recent case under this law involves a dairy farm whose manure lagoons flooded into a neighbor's land during heavy rains, causing the neighbor to file a claim for nuisance and trespass. The court found that the dairy farm had been in business for at least a year and that their storage methods had not changed, so the court dismissed the claims. Afterward, the neighboring landowner was also required to pay the attorney and court fees. (Ehler v. LVDVD, L.C.). Farmers, especially those with generational family farms, have used the amendment to safeguard against unfair regulations imposed by municipalities encroaching on their