Quote:
There is such a disconnect in this country between people and the food chain, and such a lack of support for farming and raising livestock, I and my family only own 2 acres but I get every once of veggies and plan on getting every once of eggs from it that we can. I am writing a letter and pointing out theses things. Poor kid.
I'm sorry but there is a big difference between farming and raising a couple cochins in the city for 4-H. If you think the girl should be allowed to keep her chickens, great! Write a letter, but base it on an argument that can hold some water. Perhaps you believe 4-H is a positive program for youths that encourages community involvement, provides leadership opportunities, teaches responsibility and pride in accomplishments. That would be an awesome argument. Arguing that the girl is farming in the city with a whopping two chickens of a largely ornamental breed is however, going to hurt more than help. The city council will see through it in a millisecond, it will be written off before they've even read the name you signed to the bottom.
We really need to stop abusing the MRTFA as a way to get whatever people want. If you believe that everyone should have the right to a couple of backyard chickens, that's great! I agree! But this act was not designed to function in that manner. Yes, it has a loophole that some people have been successful in exploiting. That doesn't mean that exploitation should continue -- or even that it should have been allowed to begin with. Eventually the abuse will lead to the revocation or the stringent re-writing of the act that will result in actual farmers being put out of business. You think people are disconnected from their food now? Keep abusing the MRTFA until it's made impossible for small farms to exist in close proximity to population centers. The disconnect that you see now will be nothing compared to the disconnect thereafter. This is not the way to get people better connected to the source of their food.
Yes, I realize this won't be a popular opinion here, but someone had to say it. One way or another rampant abuse of the system always leads to that system becoming defunct. The MRTFA is an important law that we need here in order to take agriculture in the right direction in the future. I don't really believe anyone here would want it ruined, but I also don't think people are thinking about the ramifications of their actions when it comes to exploiting it for backyard chicken keepers.
Argue that the girl should be allowed to participate in 4-H because of the opportunities and lessons it offers youth. Argue that the lady who posted here a few days ago should be able to keep the chickens as an alternative therapy for her autistic son. Argue that chickens are of value to a family and community -- eggs, compost, bug control, therapeutic recreation, economic boosters as feed and accessories must be bought, etc. But don't argue that any chicken from here to Ann Arbor is automatically livestock in a farming operation. It's simply not true and aside from hindering your own argument it will eventually hurt many others.
And... I'll step down from my soapbox now.
I truly hope I haven't offended anyone too terribly.
Hi Olive Hill -
This is my first time on the Michigan site (didn't know it was here!) but I have been engaged in an unpleasant debate on a couple of MRTFA threads. I am a very new chicken keeper - just going into my second year - and I apologize if any of my words offended you.
Still, I have to say, I have 3 hens and no longer purchase eggs. I have some left over to sell. How am I not a farmer? This may feel like a great distance from what you accomplish on your farm, but to me it feels like a great distance from where I was before I started keeping chickens. I know how to take care of a small number of food-producing animals. I do chores morning and night. I understand the predators in my neighborhood, and the risks of extreme weather where I live. I can (and have) argued about the benefits of sand in the run, and the risks of heat lamps in the henhouse. I am more interested in agricultural issues than I ever thought possible, and consider myself a part of this community that also belongs to you. I think my grandparents from rural west Michigan would be proud - and amused.
Now that I have chickens, I suddenly have lots to talk about with older people I have known for years, who happened to help raise poultry in their families when they were young. Some in the country, some in Detroit. So any perception that backyard chickens is new-fangled is not true. It is something we lost along the way, but used to be a part of our Michigan culture.
And, right now, there is another thread on BYC from chicken keepers in San Diego county, who are up in arms because the number of roosters they can have will be limited if a new ordinance passes - such that someone with less than half an acre will be allowed no more than 2 roosters! And they are out-raged! They clearly have a different baseline expectation than we do here, because Ann Arbor, at least, has a complete ban on roosters. So this other place thinks roosters are ok, even on small lots, about the size of mine. Is it really so outrageous to think it could also work here? And with a trend toward fewer, larger farms, isn't it in our interest to maintain diversity by encouraging multiple, micro- farming operations?
Finally, about MRTFA. Your post uses words like "abuse" and "exploit" repeatedly for people who use that law to protect their right to keep chickens. That is painful to read, and I hope you will agree it is not the only interpretation. I think it is fair - and not abusive or exploitative - to assume that the law means what the law says. I wasn't a chicken keeper when MRTFA was written, or when it was amended in 1999. All I have is what those legal documents say, and what I read is strong support for commercial farming in Michigan at any level. That seems like smart and forward-looking legislation, and I am really proud to be living in the state that passed it. So I don't feel like I am abusing MRTFA, I feel like I am honoring it. It may be that the law really does mean something else and I just don't understand that yet - or that the law will change and won't mean later what it does now. So my position may have to change. But I would never cynically abuse or exploit a law purely for my own benefit. Even if we disagree I hope you understand that there are well-meaning and law-abiding people on the other side of the debate.
I am really glad to have found this Michigan thread. I have three lovely Faverolles in Ann Arbor, sand in the covered run, pine shavings in the coop, and no heat lamps or insulation. I buy feed from the Dexter Mill, and it smells so fresh I am tempted to eat it myself. My beautiful birds were outside every single day last winter, quite obviously enjoying the brisk winter wind. This summer I expanded the run to give them access to the area directly under the coop, where I realized the winter sun shines when the leaves are gone. I think of it as a winter sunroom, and can't wait to see if they approve.
There is such a disconnect in this country between people and the food chain, and such a lack of support for farming and raising livestock, I and my family only own 2 acres but I get every once of veggies and plan on getting every once of eggs from it that we can. I am writing a letter and pointing out theses things. Poor kid.
I'm sorry but there is a big difference between farming and raising a couple cochins in the city for 4-H. If you think the girl should be allowed to keep her chickens, great! Write a letter, but base it on an argument that can hold some water. Perhaps you believe 4-H is a positive program for youths that encourages community involvement, provides leadership opportunities, teaches responsibility and pride in accomplishments. That would be an awesome argument. Arguing that the girl is farming in the city with a whopping two chickens of a largely ornamental breed is however, going to hurt more than help. The city council will see through it in a millisecond, it will be written off before they've even read the name you signed to the bottom.
We really need to stop abusing the MRTFA as a way to get whatever people want. If you believe that everyone should have the right to a couple of backyard chickens, that's great! I agree! But this act was not designed to function in that manner. Yes, it has a loophole that some people have been successful in exploiting. That doesn't mean that exploitation should continue -- or even that it should have been allowed to begin with. Eventually the abuse will lead to the revocation or the stringent re-writing of the act that will result in actual farmers being put out of business. You think people are disconnected from their food now? Keep abusing the MRTFA until it's made impossible for small farms to exist in close proximity to population centers. The disconnect that you see now will be nothing compared to the disconnect thereafter. This is not the way to get people better connected to the source of their food.
Yes, I realize this won't be a popular opinion here, but someone had to say it. One way or another rampant abuse of the system always leads to that system becoming defunct. The MRTFA is an important law that we need here in order to take agriculture in the right direction in the future. I don't really believe anyone here would want it ruined, but I also don't think people are thinking about the ramifications of their actions when it comes to exploiting it for backyard chicken keepers.
Argue that the girl should be allowed to participate in 4-H because of the opportunities and lessons it offers youth. Argue that the lady who posted here a few days ago should be able to keep the chickens as an alternative therapy for her autistic son. Argue that chickens are of value to a family and community -- eggs, compost, bug control, therapeutic recreation, economic boosters as feed and accessories must be bought, etc. But don't argue that any chicken from here to Ann Arbor is automatically livestock in a farming operation. It's simply not true and aside from hindering your own argument it will eventually hurt many others.
And... I'll step down from my soapbox now.
Hi Olive Hill -
This is my first time on the Michigan site (didn't know it was here!) but I have been engaged in an unpleasant debate on a couple of MRTFA threads. I am a very new chicken keeper - just going into my second year - and I apologize if any of my words offended you.
Still, I have to say, I have 3 hens and no longer purchase eggs. I have some left over to sell. How am I not a farmer? This may feel like a great distance from what you accomplish on your farm, but to me it feels like a great distance from where I was before I started keeping chickens. I know how to take care of a small number of food-producing animals. I do chores morning and night. I understand the predators in my neighborhood, and the risks of extreme weather where I live. I can (and have) argued about the benefits of sand in the run, and the risks of heat lamps in the henhouse. I am more interested in agricultural issues than I ever thought possible, and consider myself a part of this community that also belongs to you. I think my grandparents from rural west Michigan would be proud - and amused.
Now that I have chickens, I suddenly have lots to talk about with older people I have known for years, who happened to help raise poultry in their families when they were young. Some in the country, some in Detroit. So any perception that backyard chickens is new-fangled is not true. It is something we lost along the way, but used to be a part of our Michigan culture.
And, right now, there is another thread on BYC from chicken keepers in San Diego county, who are up in arms because the number of roosters they can have will be limited if a new ordinance passes - such that someone with less than half an acre will be allowed no more than 2 roosters! And they are out-raged! They clearly have a different baseline expectation than we do here, because Ann Arbor, at least, has a complete ban on roosters. So this other place thinks roosters are ok, even on small lots, about the size of mine. Is it really so outrageous to think it could also work here? And with a trend toward fewer, larger farms, isn't it in our interest to maintain diversity by encouraging multiple, micro- farming operations?
Finally, about MRTFA. Your post uses words like "abuse" and "exploit" repeatedly for people who use that law to protect their right to keep chickens. That is painful to read, and I hope you will agree it is not the only interpretation. I think it is fair - and not abusive or exploitative - to assume that the law means what the law says. I wasn't a chicken keeper when MRTFA was written, or when it was amended in 1999. All I have is what those legal documents say, and what I read is strong support for commercial farming in Michigan at any level. That seems like smart and forward-looking legislation, and I am really proud to be living in the state that passed it. So I don't feel like I am abusing MRTFA, I feel like I am honoring it. It may be that the law really does mean something else and I just don't understand that yet - or that the law will change and won't mean later what it does now. So my position may have to change. But I would never cynically abuse or exploit a law purely for my own benefit. Even if we disagree I hope you understand that there are well-meaning and law-abiding people on the other side of the debate.
I am really glad to have found this Michigan thread. I have three lovely Faverolles in Ann Arbor, sand in the covered run, pine shavings in the coop, and no heat lamps or insulation. I buy feed from the Dexter Mill, and it smells so fresh I am tempted to eat it myself. My beautiful birds were outside every single day last winter, quite obviously enjoying the brisk winter wind. This summer I expanded the run to give them access to the area directly under the coop, where I realized the winter sun shines when the leaves are gone. I think of it as a winter sunroom, and can't wait to see if they approve.
