- Thread starter
- #11
Aunt Theodora
Chirping
PA 750 starts out with definitions
Among them is:
(g) "Livestock" means that term as defined in section 3 of the animal industry act, 1988 PA 466, MCL 287.703.
PA 466 MCL 287.7036 includes "poultry" in its definition of "livestock" in section tt and includes chickens in its list of birds in its definition of "poultry" in section iii.
PA 750-50a covers service animals
PA 750-50b covers companion animals
PA 750-50c covers Police dogs and horses
These are all of the 750-50 sections
The section on companion animals includes, "This section does not prohibit ... customary husbandry or farming practice involving livestock"
I don't think those keeping chickens in a coop outside need to worry. Assuming the governor doesn't decide these laws aren't among those she doesn't like.
The section on service animals doesn't have that exception. Maybe people claiming that do need to worry about this? And/or it is pretty hard to argue that house chickens besides chicks and some short term issues are customary practices.
I couldn't read the Lansing Journal article without signing up for the Journal. So I don't know if her house chickens were the issue or what exactly the issue was.
Has anyone else had a problem?
Oh. You said others had a problems. Sorry for not reading it again.
What in the world do flowers in the front yard have to do with the treatment of animals?
This is a long story. It was release in print in LSJ on front page plus another full page. I am a farmer. I was a farmer's wife, but he passed away. I lived on farms and had my first flock at age 14. My chickens were White Rocks and for eggs and good and to make money. These chickens were exhibition breeds.
Yes, throughout the state. Not just chickens. The AG ruled fog laws cannot be used for chickens so they use anti-cruelty laws. In some cases they do have warrants and in others they don't. Sometimes code compliance comes with ACO to find any code violations. Most people cannot afford a lawyer. Few lawyers want or are qualified to handle chicken or animal cases except dog bites. Some animals are on farms and others in residential zones.
The law has parts that are unconstitutional but legislatures don't want to bother changing them. Worse violation is sodomy.
In too many states where animals are seized, some animals die. In this case the lady had 6 chickens die two allegedly natural and 4 by predators. They were cared for by volunteers and were free ranged. The surviving chickens had combs with frost bite and scars from fighting.
The lady had attended council meets the County Animal Control to have her rooster as a emotional medical support with letters.
Now he is dead.
The law is written in such a way that an tomato bush with wire things was a danger to chickens because it could fall on chickens and thus an unsafe environment. Tomato plant with sturdy tomato supports.
The article is copyrighted.
The nothing in front yard except grass is harassment. The guy is a felon. I will send link to his story later
I am having problems with my hip.
Well. Rereading it, again, looking for what might apply to keeping chickens instead of whether any of it would (except the obvious freezer camp),.... I don't what they could have used.
Many decades ago I had an encounter with a young police officer, what it was about, I don't recall. He told me "Well, mam, that's the law plain and simple." Momentarily I was dumbfounded by this statement. I was certified to teach high school social studies. I then looked up at him and stated, "Officer, there is nothing about the law the is plain or simply."Well. Rereading it, again, looking for what might apply to keeping chickens instead of whether any of it would (except the obvious freezer camp),.... I don't what they could have used.
This law references to other laws. There are Oxford commas. It evens prohibited humans having unnatural sex relations with other adult humans. They know that is unconstitutional but refuse to change it but a bill in Michigan Legislature is soon going to be passed which sets forfeiture to 14 days. A professor Favre (author and lawyer for animal rights) raised questions such as what is "adequate veterinary care?". This bill is a poster child of a law written with good intentions but do just the opposite. In this case by allegedly keeping chickens safe, 6 died in their care. Others have mites and a staff infection.
It is what it is and there are many animal owners that have had animals seized without pre deprivation hearing or notice which is a constitutional right of due process. Chickens were healthy. They had water and food. The ACO committed perjury. Accusations were hypothetical. This was cruel and unusual punishment to innocent chickens and their owner.
Backyard chicken owners better watch their backs.