Speak up- The Goverment is trying to regulate chicken owners

[Iluveggers]

Another well-meaning law that hurts backyard chicken owners.

Because some stupid people go and buy their kid a single chick for Easter, NYS decided to prevent that by having a 6 chick minimum for selling. Sounds rational at first. But if you are only allowed 4 birds in your town, now you have to sell 2 of them which is illegal, or raise all 6 up to 10 weeks (which would be against your town rules) so you could sell the 2 older birds and not break a state law.

Also hurts people if they need a chick or two for a hatch where only 1 chick survived, or want 3 chicks to put under a broody around the 3 week mark. Maybe make it a state law that localities have to allow a minimum of 6 chickens for owners then, or lower the minimum to 4 or even lower if you can prove you have a flock. Even if I go in and buy 6, then decide I want 2 more a few days later when another amazing breed comes in, I can’t just add 2, I would have to purchase 6 more.

Laws made by people who don’t get it.

 

[DParker75089]

Any government overreach into areas where government doesn't belong affects everyone by setting precedents for further overreach into additional areas.

I don't disagree. But that doesn't change the fact that what was claimed about the proposed regulatory changes impacting backyard poultry was false. Also, is this now a political forum where we're going to sound the alarm about every single instance of attempted government overreach? If so I suspect there will be little time or space to devote to much of anything else.

 

[3KillerBs]

I don't disagree. But that doesn't change the fact that what was claimed about the proposed regulatory changes impacting backyard poultry was false. Also, is this now a political forum where we're going to sound the alarm about every single instance of attempted government overreach? If so I suspect there will be little time or space to devote to much of anything else.

You may not be aware, but it was revealed on one of the Avian Flu threads that at least one federal government agency does not class backyard chickens as poultry because the owners are not engaging in commercial sales of meat or eggs.

The precedent is already set to change a definition and apply this law to us.

 

[DParker75089]

You may not be aware, but it was revealed on one of the Avian Flu threads that at least one federal government agency does not class backyard chickens as poultry because the owners are not engaging in commercial sales of meat or eggs.

The precedent is already set to change a definition and apply this law to us.

What some other agency does or does not classify BYCs as is irrelevant with regard to the impact of the proposed regulatory changes under discussion. That doesn't even set a precedent of any kind, as regulatory agencies are already free (and always have been) to change the definitions of the terms they use within the confines of the legislation that created the agency and the specific regulations. So, if the agency that is proposing THESE regulatory changes issues a subsequent proposal to change any definitions that would result in an impact to BYCs then these changes will become an issue for keepers of BYCs. But for now they are not, nor is there yet any reason to conclude that they will become one.

 

[CovidtimeQuail]

I don't disagree. But that doesn't change the fact that what was claimed about the proposed regulatory changes impacting backyard poultry was false. Also, is this now a political forum where we're going to sound the alarm about every single instance of attempted government overreach? If so I suspect there will be little time or space to devote to much of anything else.

I agree with you. I'm not entirely sure this statute applies to backyard poultry -- if anything, local laws are a more restrictive element than this broad brush non-enforced proposed mandate.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

What some other agency does or does not classify BYCs as is irrelevant with regard to the impact of the proposed regulatory changes under discussion. That doesn't even set a precedent of any kind, as regulatory agencies are already free (and always have been) to change the definitions of the terms they use within the confines of the legislation that created the agency and the specific regulations. So, if the agency that is proposing THESE regulatory changes issues a subsequent proposal to change any definitions that would result in an impact to BYCs then these changes will become an issue for keepers of BYCs. But for now they are not, nor is there yet any reason to conclude that they will become one.

It's usda-aphis who is currently using the non poultry designation to refer to any backyard not part of the commercial food supply. The proposed regulations govern Asus regulations a pond avians. If they choose to exclude backyard flocks as non poultry because they are part of the commercial food supply, as they are currently describing those blocks regarding Avian Influenza, then all these regulations would infect apply to the majority of backyard owners. That's why agency interpretations matter. They are already using the term in a way that would scoop us all up Adele the definitions would suggest otherwise.

 

[3KillerBs]

What some other agency does or does not classify BYCs as is irrelevant with regard to the impact of the proposed regulatory changes under discussion. That doesn't even set a precedent of any kind, as regulatory agencies are already free (and always have been) to change the definitions of the terms they use within the confines of the legislation that created the agency and the specific regulations. So, if the agency that is proposing THESE regulatory changes issues a subsequent proposal to change any definitions that would result in an impact to BYCs then these changes will become an issue for keepers of BYCs. But for now they are not, nor is there yet any reason to conclude that they will become one.

You have a remarkably rosy view of the nature of government agencies and their desire to accumulate power.

 

[DParker75089]

It's usda-aphis who is currently using the non poultry designation to refer to any backyard not part of the commercial food supply. The proposed regulations govern Asus regulations a pond avians. If they choose to exclude backyard flocks as non poultry because they are part of the commercial food supply, as they are currently describing those blocks regarding Avian Influenza, then all these regulations would infect apply to the majority of backyard owners. That's why agency interpretations matter. They are already using the term in a way that would scoop us all up Adele the definitions would suggest otherwise.

In other words, as I already pointed out, if they opt to later do something that they are not currently doing (and in fact is the opposite of what they are explicitly doing) and have given no indication of any intention of doing then...and only then...doe these regulations become an issue for BYCs.

 

[DParker75089]

You have a remarkably rosy view of the nature of government agencies and their desire to accumulate power.

That comment is as false and without basis as the original title of this thread. I am libertarian by nature, and have a healthy skepticism and inherent distrust of government agencies and the desire of those who run them to accumulate (and hold) power, and I have said nothing at all to indicate otherwise. But I don't let that distrust cause me to ignore the facts, make up ones that do not exist and generally let my imagination get the better of me. The fact is that the regulatory changes in question do not do what the OP claimed and what so many others blindly accepted as fact because they either did not read the actual proposed changes, or they read them but did not understand them. The latter is at least understandable as bureaucratic legal/regulatory language is often difficult to parse and make sense of.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

In other words, as I already pointed out, if they opt to later do something that they are not currently doing (and in fact is the opposite of what they are explicitly doing) and have given no indication of any intention of doing then...and only then...doe these regulations become an issue for BYCs.

Currently there are no regulations for them to enforce against backyard poultry owners. We are reassured that these regulations they propose won't apply to us because we are Poultry.. And you tell us we should be reassured in spite of the fact that this agency already refers to Backyard blocks as non poultry. This regulation doesn't substantially change the definitions of poultry. So I'm not certain we should draw the same confidence from their lack of agency actions thus far. It's hard, certainly not impossible, but hard for an agency to enforce a regulation which doesn't yet exist.