I agree Washtenaw Farmer. I am not saying MAEAP confirms environmental consciousness. I am saying it will most likely be required for Right to Farm protection. That was the main reason the judge ruled in our favor is because we got that verification to prove GAAMP compliance. Without that, there really is no PROOF of being compliant.
Shadygrovefarmer,
Here's my concern: I think that before this community accepts the idea that small farms are to be held to a different and much, much higher (i.e., expensive in terms of time and energy) standard than large farms to receive RTFA protection--that is, being MAEAP compliant rather GAAMPS compliant--we need to think hard if there's a different way. I understand completely that in your case, this was the absolutely the right way to go as a practical matter, and that may be so for many, right now--but I question whether as a policy goal it's the right path.
And everyone's situations differ even in terms of the practical side--in the case of my 80-acre LP farm, I think I'd try pretty hard for a GAAMPS inspection before accepting that I had to divert tens of thousands of dollars from other goals for the farm and spend a lot of time I don't have making it MAEAP compliant.