Michigan Right to Farm Law, what does it mean?

[blackswan]

Just a couple of thoughts after the meeting in New Baltimore. I am going to put together a summary (as best that I can) and I will email it to the participants.

1. Thank you everyone who came out and shared their stories, information, and expertise.
2. Everyone that attended were 'pro BYC', no one came out to debte or argue.
3. We started formulating our immediate goals with a greater pool of people to address 2013 GAAMPS changes.
4. We shared our individual stories related local government battles. Those that were successful shared tips and tactics to work to get BYC approved.
5. Made commitments to work together for the immediate common goals and follow up and communicate.
6. Backyard Chicken Keepers of Michigan is an offical group for the purpose of having a voice at the State level.

Let's keep this going

Educate, Advocate, and Promote Backyard Chicken keeping in Michigan while protecting our rights to urban farming.

 

[MI-CHick]

Just saw this - due today at 5

MI Dept. of Agriculture & Rural Development Seeking Public Input on Agricultural Management Practices
Contact: Heather Throne 517-373-1085


July 20, 2012
...
LANSING, Mich. - The Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) today announced a public input meeting and review period has been scheduled for August 22, 2012 in order to gather comments on the 2013 drafts of the state's Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices (GAAMPs).

Public comment will be taken on all of the following GAAMPs. There are proposed changes in the GAAMPs for: Manure Management and Utilization, Site Selection and Odor Control for New and Expanding Livestock Production Facilities, the Care of Farm Animals, Irrigation Water Use, and Farm Markets. The GAAMPs regarding Nutrient Utilization, Cranberry Production, and Pesticide Utilization and Pest Control have no proposed changes for 2013.

The GAAMPs Public Input Meeting will be held at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, August 22, 2012, in the Forum Conference Room at the State of Michigan Library and History Center located at 702 West Kalamazoo Street, Lansing, MI 48915.

Written comments may be submitted to MDARD's Environmental Stewardship Division, P.O. Box 30017, Lansing, MI 48909 and postmarked no later than August 22, 2012, or sent via e-mail to [email protected] by 5 p.m. on August 22, 2012. MDARD will forward all comments received by the due date to the respective GAAMPs Task Force Chairpersons for consideration prior to final review and adoption.

The Michigan Right to Farm Act provides nuisance protection for farms and farm operations. In order to have this protection, the farm or farm operation must conform to GAAMPs, which are set by the Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development. These GAAMPs are reviewed annually by scientific committees of various experts, and revised and updated as necessary. Public comment is accepted and considered before final versions of the GAAMPs are approved.

For a copy of any of these GAAMPs, including the proposed revisions, please visit www.michigan.gov/gaamps, or contact MDARD's Environmental Stewardship Division at (517) 373-9797, or toll free at (877) 632-1783.

 

[jphillips]

Attending these meetings was discussed at the New Baltimore meeting. I'll post on metro detroit backyard chickens facebook too.

Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development​

Proposed 2012 Meeting Schedule


Here are the remaining dates for this year

*Wed., Sept. 12, 2012 Coopersville Farm Museum
9:00 a.m. 375 Main Street, Coopersville, MI

Wed., Oct. 31, 2012 Constitution Hall, ConCon Room
9:00 a.m. 525 W. Allegan St., Lansing

*Wed., Dec. 12, 2012 GreenStone Farm Credit Services, Room 112
9:00 a.m. 3515 West Road, East Lansing
​

*Lansing Ag Club Breakfast 7:00-8:30 a.m.

 

[wingless]

Thanks MI-Chick -

RaZ and I drove out to Lansing today and attended that GAAMPS meeting, and I think a lot of other folks responded by email. Hope you did too.

The meeting was a little bit odd, because none of the people who I thought we would be addressing - like the GAAMPS review committee - were there. Instead, a lawyer from MDARD stood at the podium and sort of managed a recorded discussion between just a handful of us who were sitting in a small auditorium in front of him.

There were two contingents of people - 3 with concerns about traditional farming, and especially what to do with the huge amounts of waste products, and then 3 with concerns about urban farming. Two of the urban farmers were RaZ and I, of course, and the third was a lawyer representing Brighton, or a township near Brighton - this guy of course supported the changes to the GAAMPS that would weaken our RTF protection by handing regulatory control to the townships. In any case, it was clear to everyone that the proposed changes are serious on a number of levels, and I think the point was well made that the proposed changes are unnecessarily broad - I think both RaZ and I at one point or another talked about establishing separate GAAMPS for urban farmers that are appropriate for urban/residential issues as an option that comes much closer to solving the problem than a blanket exemption of all of us from RTF protection! I think that point was heard.

And then RaZ made a very nice comparison between this RTF situation and the building code in Michigan, which used to be controlled at the local level and is now controlled at the state level - but enforced at the local level - as an example of how MDARD could structure this. In this worldview MDARD would write a set of GAAMPS for residential farmers which, if met, would earn the commercial farming operation RTF protection. But, just like the building codes, the enforcement would come from local ordinance officers; this is important, because it would relieve MDARD of this huge problem of how to do all the work they already do and then ALSO to get out to every residential/urban farm with 3 hens that might need their attention. It was the first comprehensive vision of how this could all work not only from our perspective but potentially also from MDARDS that I've heard. So that was fun.

I will say again that going to these meetings is really satisfying. I guess we won't know whether we made a difference until the Ag Commission votes in December, but every time I go to one of these I feel like the perspective shifts a little. You just have to go and speak to be heard. It's that easy. And then you also get to hear about the problems other folks are having, like the smell coming off manure lagoons - and if that doesn't give you perspective then truly nothing will!

The Ag Commission has three more meetings this year, with the important vote on the 2013 GAAMPS scheduled for the meeting in December. Full schedule is here: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdard/2012_Commission_Meeting_Sch_369246_7.pdf

 

[wingless]

Well, that just goes to show, jphillips, that great minds do indeed think alike. Thanks for actually posting the schedule and not just the link!

 

[jphillips]

Thank you for going and thank you for sharing the information with us. I will make an effort to attend the remaining meetings.

 

[RaZ]

I will say again that going to these meetings is really satisfying. I guess we won't know whether we made a difference until the Ag Commission votes in December, but every time I go to one of these I feel like the perspective shifts a little. You just have to go and speak to be heard. It's that easy. And then you also get to hear about the problems other folks are having, like the smell coming off manure lagoons - and if that doesn't give you perspective then truly nothing will!

The Ag Commission has three more meetings this year, with the important vote on the 2013 GAAMPS scheduled for the meeting in December. Full schedule is here: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdard/2012_Commission_Meeting_Sch_369246_7.pdf

It may not be all that easy for people to stand up and speak to their beliefs or rights. Your voice may quaver and you may not think that your are articulating what you really want to convey. You may be intimidated by the "power players" like attorneys or commissioners. But you can do it.

Many people have a profound fear of speaking in public. This is especially true if someone else is speaking against you, your beliefs or rights. If you are uncomfortable speaking in public. please write a letter to those in charge. Ask for help from those who support your (our) cause.

I would like to see everyone who can take the time to go to one of these meetings do so at least once. You will find that you have a lot of common ground with these people. And you'll get an idea of how those who oppose us look at the rules. It can really help you make your argument for keeping your flock.

And please thank those who go the extra mile and speak on your behalf when you can't be there in person.

 

[wingless]

Ha! Full disclosure: the voice that sometimes quavers is mine!

I get that for a lot of people these meetings are too far away or they have other commitments. There have certainly been times in my life that I would not have been able to engage the way I am now. I just want to be sure that you all know that going to court to keep your chickens is not your only option. Going to Ag Commission meetings is free, and when you go you have the ear of the decision makers on things like changes to the GAAMPS. And even though my voice sometimes quavers, every time I talk to them they ask me to come back. And in the discussion they learn more about why urban farming is important, and about what the impediments are. And by attending the meetings, I learn about other issues facing the agricultural community that I would otherwise be unaware of. And just like that, common ground is established.

RaZ and I car-pooled to the last two meetings - the Ag Commission meeting in August and then the GAAMPS meeting yesterday. It seems likely that we'll be doing the same for the remaining Ag Commission meetings in Sept (Coopersville, on the west side of the state), Oct (Lansing) and Dec (Lansing). We have room for at least two more in my little Mazda, so let me know if you'd like to join us.

 

[jphillips]

In my latest letter from my city they quoted from GAAMPS

This GAAMP does not apply in municipalities with a population of 100,000 or more in

which a zoning ordinance has been enacted to allow for agriculture provided that the
ordinance designates existing agricultural operations present prior to the ordinance’s
adoption as legal non-conforming uses as identified by the Right to Farm Act for​

purposes of scale and type of agricultural use.

I was a bit confused because of what MRTFA states. Wingless recommended I write Jamie Clover Adams, the director of the MDA for clarification, my email:

Jamie Clover Adams,
I reside in Sterling Heights and I am the owner of 3 hens. I am having a difficult time with the city. One point that has come up is GAAMPs states:
This GAAMP does not apply in municipalities with a population of 100,000 or more in
which a zoning ordinance has been enacted to allow for agriculture provided that the
ordinance designates existing agricultural operations present prior to the ordinance’s
adoption as legal non-conforming uses as identified by the Right to Farm Act for
purposes of scale and type of agricultural use.
I clearly am not in a agriculture zone and my city does have an ordinance that states no poultry on less than 8 acres. Due to urban sprawl it is near to impossible to acquire 8 acres so this ordinance is at best out dated and at worst discriminatory. Can you help me to understand if I truly do not have the protection of the MRTFA and GAAMPs?




Their response

Thank You for your e-mail dated August 22. Director Clover Adams has asked me to respond to you directly.
Protection under that Right to Farm Act is not a determination the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) makes; this determination is made by the courts. MDARD’s role within the Act is to determine if landowners are in conformance Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices (GAAMPs). Your reading and interpretation of the GAAMPs is correct. Since the Siting GAAMP was intended to address nuisance issues on farms in rural Michigan, set-backs and conditions for having chickens or any other livestock were developed for that purpose. This includes zoning that allows agriculture. As you can imagine, defining nuisance conditions for situations where homes and people are very close to one another becomes very difficult. The broad application of RTF in these situations is also very difficult because the Act does not specify livestock restricts at all. As an example, you may want 3 chickens but your neighbor may want 5 pigs – a broad application of RTF would allow for this to occur. The GAAMP limitation avoids the possibility of this thus reducing the neighbor versus neighbor nuisance situation.

That is not to say that there may be acceptable numbers and types of livestock in backyards. We simply believe that within a more urban situation, this is a local community decision.

 

[ernurse]

I am confused on this. Does the GAAMPS you are quoting only apply to urban cities of 100,000 people or more. I too am having difficulties at this time with a complaint by my neighbor of the 2 pigs I have on my 2.5 acres.

So if I live in a township of less than 100,000 people am I still protected by the RTFA considering I have met all other criteria of GAAMPS?

thank you for any info--Kathleen