Michigan Right to Farm Law, what does it mean?

[WashtenawFarmer]

So happy about the result today....Many thanks to those who worked to bring this about. I am also very impressed with and grateful to the Commissioners and the Director. They are respectful, willing to listen, and responsive. Of course, they are inevitably going to have some different ideas about how to approach the issues we're dealing with here than some of us do--but I feel very encouraged. After dealing with my Township (our Supervisor is well-known for rolling his eyes and sighing at citizens who express opinions with which he disagrees), this was such a breath of fresh air.

I think we need to continue to meet the Commission halfway--more than halfway--in terms of being civil and professional in our approach, trying to understand their point(s) of view, being respectful of their time, and so on. In my view, they have not only dealt with us in good faith, but have shown an admirable willingness to question their own proposed actions. I worked for the City of San Francisco, long ago, and my brother works for DOD--from what I know of government and government officials, I think we've gotten extremely lucky.

The work has just begun, of course. I hope that MDARD will reach out to include us in some capacity, to help inform their process going forward. Certainly if the Site Selection GAAMPS Committee holds more public meetings, as I imagine it will, we should attend--but while speaking at meetings is a good start at giving input, I think the issues involved are complex enough that a better, less formal venue for dialogue would ideally be found.

Completely off-topic: I found some of the presentations today (especially Greenstone's and the one about the pet food recall) quite fascinating. It was a nice lagniappe.

 

[cowcreekgeek]

Although I couldn't be there, I had emailed my comments to several of the members of the Commission and had given them to Wingless to take to the Commission and present them in person just to make sure they were in the public record.

I just got off the phone with Wingless and we had a great conversation. I was very glad to hear that it went well today and that the Commissioners were very happy with the spirit and enthusiasm of the group who are advocating for our little slice of farming life. It just shows the power that a polite, respectful, thoughtful group of individuals can have on policy. It's all very encouraging. Little did I think I would be involved in something like this and I gotta say, it sure is fun.

Well, on to the next step and to get more involved in the process.

Milton Ogle championed many causes for the rights of the poor, and was my friend and neighbor for many years. We'd play chess, and argue ... just about anything, really. His belief was that a poor man w/ an attorney was the greatest threat to greed, and the oppression it perpetuates, whereas I held the position that the Internet provided the greater opportunity to have his concerns heard.

We were both right ... so *very* glad, for the good folks of Michigan, to see you join in their cause ~'-)

 

[tndalexander]

Well done video -- esp. the music, and time-lapse. Question the wisdom of bringin' cattle into the mix, when they've clearly no pasture w/in that small plot, but I love seein' so many young adults so involved w/ their operation: That's one of the many benefits that are too often not used to persuade others to support faming operations w/in primarily residential areas. Everybody hopin' to change minds should ask to borrow the part where they're all painting/improving, and the planting ... who could be so selfish as to say no to that?

Now, the post you quoted was typed when I was of the belief that both requirements were to be met, but the Court has expressed opinion, and established precendents, that require only either one to be ... and, it appears the opposition is gonna go the very direction I suspected they would, as to render moot the protections of this Act, by simply including w/in the GAAMPs a requirement for all to comply w/ local zoning 'n such ... as if it's of any real concern to chickens that live in such places ... clearly, they coulda provisioned for some reasonable exceptions/exemptions. But, they won't. Ever.

That's why I've been encouraging everyone to get proof on paper, prior to the other side gettin' a grip on it ... they'll absolutely stop the backyard farming concept, for those that hope to do so later, but they're not likely to ever stop those that have proven to exist prior to these changes to the GAAMPs, or the later 'corrective' revisions to the Act itself (which, no doubt, will eventually come )-;~

So how would you go about getting it on "paper" this is a good point and you can never be too covered

 

[cowcreekgeek]

So how would you go about getting it on "paper" this is a good point and you can never be too covered

Licensing of a business varies from state to state, but, for starters?

You'll have to go to the big, scary IRS to obtain an Employer Identification Number (EIN) ...

​

Gotta love it, when that's what folks see ... no *wonder* people fear our government. Anyhow ...
If you don't wish to consent to "monitoring, interception, recording, reading, copying or capturing" then you can simply download Form SS-4, or call their toll-free number, 1.800.829.4933, to obtain one immediately.

Since Michigan doesn't require all operations to obtain a license, I'd suggest picking something that *does* require one, preferably issued by MDARD themselves, such as a greenhouse, or nursery/plant dealer/grower, or as an organic producer, with my theory bein' that I can't imagine MDARD sayin' no to continuation of your operation when it was MDARD that issued your license. But, beware ... there are costs involved, and some ain't cheap.

But, I figure "Doing Business As" most probably *is* cheap, and you could throw in the word "Farm" as a part of your new business name.

Important: Never, ever lie, in order to obtain what you want. If your local codes forbid chickens, then see if you can start a new business growing vegetables ... it's still a farming operation, and still lawful where you're at, so you'd be in compliance. However, once you comply in one manner, you should be able to later transition to another productive use of your farming operation to, for example, use chickens to produce fertilizers. Or, even to raise chickens for the purpose of their eggs, so as to support your primary operation. You get the idea ...

Here's another link: SBA.gov's Obtain Business Licenses & Permits

And, Michigan.gov's Michigan Business One Stop (Business Licensing), where I captured this ...

​

Really?

 

[RaZ]

Important: Never, ever lie, in order to obtain what you want. If your local codes forbid chickens, then see if you can start a new business growing vegetables ... it's still a farming operation, and still lawful where you're at, so you'd be in compliance.

I think you are missing the point of this discussion thread. Local codes are being used to supercede the State Law. That is why so many of us are in the fight. Some local codes allow chickens (for example), other place absurd limits (acreage, number, type, etc.) and other codes disallow them entirely based on an arbitrary land use designation.

The bottom line is that State Law has precedence over local ordinance. Period.

 

[Mahalo]

Subject: City of Troy Code Chapter 90.70.20 (f)


Dear Council members,

It has come to my attention that City of Troy Code 90.70.20 (f) violates the Michigan Right To Farm Act (MRTFA) (1981, Act 93 as amended 1995) and I respectfully request the city council consider amending the city code to more accurately reflect the growing desire for all citizens to raise poultry for local sale and self sustaining purposes.

Currently, code 90.70.20 (f) prohibits the raising of chickens on lots smaller than 0.75 acres without a waiver from the Animal Control Appeals Board. This code violates the language and conditions set forth in the MRTFA and related court decisions.

The original intent of the 1981 MRTFA was to protect the farmer against nuisance complaints from encroaching development and suburban sprawl. In its original version, MRTFA allowed local units of government to also exert regulatory control over farming operations through local zoning regulations. However, in 1999 the legislature passed an amendment to MRTFA that specifically prohibited local units of government from attempting to regulate farming beyond the state-wide MRTFA provisions.

Beginning June 1, 2000, except as otherwise provided in this section, it is the express legislative intent that this act preempt any local ordinance, regulation, or resolution that purports to extend or revise in any manner the provisions of this act or generally accepted agricultural and management practices developed under this act. Except as otherwise provided in this section, a local unit of government shall not enact, maintain, or enforce an ordinance, regulation, or resolution that conflicts in any manner with this act or generally accepted agricultural and management practices developed under this act.

As a result of the 1999 MRTFA amendment, everyone in Michigan with a commercial farming operation that follows generally accepted agricultural management practices (GAAMPS) is protected by the Right to Farm Act including residential backyard chicken farming. Specifically, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld that backyard chicken farming met the criteria of the MRTFA in Shelby Township v. Papesh (267 Mich. App. 92; 702 N.W.2d 9the 2 (2005)).

With respect to residential backyard chicken farming, two GAAMPS must be considered. First is the GAAMPS for Care of Farm Animals and second is the GAAMPS for Site Selection and Odor Control for New and Expanding Livestock Production Facilities. The GAAMPS for Care of Farm Animals pages 52 to 56 provide general management, environment, facilities, equipment, and health care practices but do not restrict the number of chickens nor specify land requirements. The GAAMPS for Site Selection which define among other criteria, setback distances and other dimensional requirements only apply to “Livestock Production Facilities” with animal populations in excess of 50 animal units (in the case of chickens that number is 5000 hens).

My recommendation to the council is to amend the current City of Troy Code and remove any reference to lot size. In lieu of a lot restriction, I propose similar language used in Ferndale and Ann Arbor code:
a. Must obtain a permit
b. Keep no more than 8 hens.
c. The principal use of the person’s property must be for a single-family dwelling or two-family dwelling.
d. No person shall keep a male chicken (rooster).
e. No person shall slaughter any hens outside of the primary residence, visible by neighbors.
f. Any person keeping hens shall remain subject to public nuisance animal controls.
g. must comply with GAAMS Care of Farm Animals
h. All enclosures for the keeping of hens shall be constructed, repaired and maintained in a manner to prevent rats, mice, or other rodents from being harbored underneath, within, or within the walls of the enclosure.
i. All feed and other items associated with the keeping of hens that are likely to attract or to become infested shall be so protected so as to prevent rats, mice, or other rodents from gaining access to or coming into contact with them.
j. Chicken coops and enclosures shall be at least 20 feet from any residential structure not owned by the permitee unless written permission is granted from the owner of the affected residential structure.

I believe that the above recommended revisions to the City of Troy Code is a reflection of the growing desire for residence to raise backyard chickens and still maintain the civility of living a residential community. The advantages of living in a city that promotes a smart, sustainable, organic lifestyle far outweigh the uninformed reluctance naysayers that refuse to embrace change. There are many economic and politically compelling reasons to keep hens. Chickens recycle food and yard waste into a nitrogen-rich fertilizer organic soil builder for your garden. Chickens serve as organic insecticide and pesticide by eating insects and weeds. Chickens naturally work the soil by scratching and digging. They mix manure with compost to make valuable mulch. Residential backyard farming promotes genetic diversity in chickens. Because factory-farm operations prefer pretty much the same type of high-volume laying breeds (or in the case of meat, heavy, fast-growing meat birds), the preservation of rare, heritage breeds is threatened. If we lose these beautiful breeds, we wipe out genetic material from a species, perhaps losing genes that could save the poultry industry one day if the standard production breeds fall susceptible to illness. And maybe the most important aspect of backyard farming is the promotion of family values and self accomplishment. Families with gardens and farming operations generally develop a stronger appreciation for the land and the energy it takes to produce the foods we eat.
Okay folks, I need some help editing my letter to the City Council of Troy, any comments would be greatly appreciated:

 

[cowcreekgeek]

Subject: City of Troy Code Chapter 90.70.20 (f)
**snipped**
Okay folks, I need some help editing my letter to the City Council of Troy, any comments would be greatly appreciated:

Beautifully worded, and -- although restrictions of any kind may be in violation of this Act as it stands? Very reasonable expectations to hold folks to.

I would consider preparing responses to any specific requests for your suggested revisions, and the many benefits of backyard chickens, rather than including them in the letter itself. Copies of the Court opinion(s) and the Ferndale and Ann Arbor Code should be included w/ each letter provided.

Touch very briefly upon suggestions 'n such, so as to compel them to ask for more detailed information ... and, have it ready/waiting for when they do (reach in your briefcase, 'n hand it to em, rather than sayin' you'll have to get back to 'em another time ~'-)

Letters like that oughta earn you the opportunity, should you ever consider steppin' up to serve the folks in your town from the other side ...

 

[cowcreekgeek]

I think you are missing the point of this discussion thread. Local codes are being used to supercede the State Law. That is why so many of us are in the fight. Some local codes allow chickens (for example), other place absurd limits (acreage, number, type, etc.) and other codes disallow them entirely based on an arbitrary land use designation.

The bottom line is that State Law has precedence over local ordinance. Period.

Not missin' the point, at all -- just hopin' to have it miss those that hope to start as quickly as they can, and in a way they can almost certainly continue.

Absolutely agree w/ your perception of the facts, and that the Act (as currently written) trumps all. Period.

Chicken Advocate (how did that happen?) = bein' drug into battles, that lead men of character to war.
Criminal Chicken Keeper? Or Chicken Keeper Criminal? = Accused of criminally possessing unlawful poultry:
"Criminal Keeper of Criminal Chickens"
​

 

[Mahalo]

thanks, appreciate the suggestions

 

[LKirts]

Now its my turn.
Just got my violation of ordinance 80, friday 12/14/12
Seems i have until the 20th to get rid of my chickens.

Did my homework. Copied the MRTFA, GAAMPS, many courts cases, etc plus a letter and delivered it to the zoning offices in reply to the violation.
i knew it would be coming.

here are the animal ordinances in davison michigan.

http://www.davisontwp-mi.org/departments/ordinances/docs/Misc_livestock.pdf

I cant believe you have to have 40 acres to have one chicken? but only 2 per horse?

I have 5.5 acres with a total of 28 vacant acres around me. My neighbors , the two closest to me are my customers for my eggs. There are horses all around me. Plus crop fields.

What else do I do, or can i do to be prepared for whatever comes next?