The Right to Grow and Raise Your Own Food

[MOpalB]

Update:

Still have all my hens and roosters! I am now beginning to post my journey on my YouTube channel Test of Freedom. The first video explains how to sue our public servants when they violate your rights under color of law. Yes, this is the step I am taking since they drew first blood. My next video will be up (I hope) in a few days to explain the steps I took prior to our court date for our silly little chicken ticket. I will be delivering my paperwork this week to my district court and will post the video of that along with how to file your own civil suit.....so stay tuned, be entertained and educated!!!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHeQV5hmV2yqIpd3YHt1NGw

 

[Florida Bullfrog]

I’ve looked through this thread.

As an attorney myself, I often run into lay people who confuse “what the law is” with “what the law ought to be,” and people have a tendency to conflate their view of “what the law ought to be” with whether something is a “constitutional right.” If a person feels strongly enough about the “ought to be,” they almost always to declare it to be a right enshrined by the Bill of Rights in the Federal Constitution, even if there is no historical or legal basis for whatever it is to be considered a Constitutional Right.

There’s no Right to Raise Chickens in the Federal Constitution. Your milage may vary in state constitutions. If you think that right should exist in the Bill of Rights, the Founders gave us an amendment process by which new Rights can be added.

 

[MOpalB]

I’ve looked through this thread.

As an attorney myself, I often run into lay people who confuse “what the law is” with “what the law ought to be,” and people have a tendency to conflate their view of “what the law ought to be” with whether something is a “constitutional right.” If a person feels strongly enough about the “ought to be,” they almost always to declare it to be a right enshrined by the Bill of Rights in the Federal Constitution, even if there is no historical or legal basis for whatever it is to be considered a Constitutional Right.

There’s no Right to Raise Chickens in the Federal Constitution. Your milage may vary in state constitutions. If you think that right should exist in the Bill of Rights, the Founders gave us an amendment process by which new Rights can be added.

I am not an attorney but I am one of We the People who fully comprehend that I have unalienable rights. As long as my actions cause no harm or damage to another or their property there is no crime. The issue with the current "legal" system is that it turns everyday people into common criminals with their multitude of codes and rules to turn a quick buck for the city/county/state. I do not believe I ever said the "right to raise chickens" was in the Constitution. I have the right to own property just as everyone else does. The man posing as "code enforcement" came onto my property trying to regulate my property. What gives him the right to decide what I should and should not own?

 

[hillbillyfarmer]

GREAT thread! You definitely have my attention!

 

[DaikaijuTorira]

The issue is not changing the ordinance. The real issue is challenging the whole notion that any level of state government can interfere with your fundamental right to provide yourself with the necessities of life. Can the state stop you from growing and raising food? Note, this is different than saying you have a "right to food." One has to be careful about how to frame the right. A "right to food" can be construed to mean a right to have food provided for you. To me, the right that is much more easier to defend is the right for any person to pursue, through his own efforts, the necessities and sustenance that he needs to live. Framed this way, the right you have is to use your own industry, on your own land, to raise and grow your own food. It's not a right to have things handed to you - it's a right to use your own hands to provide for yourself (a much easier concept for people to accept and agree with and one that is supported in the case law).

I agree completely. This is exactly what we've been thinking every time we've heard the concern that poultry would have a negative effect on property values. Where is the value of property if not in the ability for the owner to provide for themselves and their family the basic necessities of life? I tried checking for Florida's RTF act (didn't even know we had one) and I have a question: "Except as otherwise provided for in this section and s. 487.051(2), and notwithstanding any other provision of law, a local government may not adopt any ordinance, regulation, rule, or policy to prohibit, restrict, regulate, or otherwise limit an activity of a bona fide farm operation on land classified as agricultural land pursuant to s. 193.461, ...." (Full Text) Would this be translated to mean our version of the act does not provide protection for land already outside the agricultural zones within Florida? MichAttorney, Hello and and thank you for providing this great information, I still plan on researching more to see if there is some way to make it work for here, but for now my layman brain can't take anymore legalese. :/ You wouldn't happen to have a partner/friend in the Tampa Bay area, would you?

 

[RaZ]

Okay, Pretty sure everyone will send their roosters to attack me for this, but here goes anyway. When I read this, I totally agree with all of you. It seems like an important right. But then when I think about it from the opposite extreme, I wonder. For example, I think everyone should be able to have a tomato plant in their yard/balcony. And, in a yard, a few chickens is nice. But what if people go crazy? Say put a cow on the apartment balcony? Or cover the balcony in 12 inches of dirt and plant a garden? Dont the downstairs neighbors have the right to not have that? Honestly, people move to certain apartments, HOAs, neighborhoods because of a certain "look". Its true whether you live in the country, or the city. I just wondered where you guys all draw the line. Because while I have 3 chickens in my backyard and hope my neighbors dont notice, I really wouldnt want someone to move in nextdoor with 35 roosters and a cow. (Our backyards are about the same size as our house)This just isnt the place for that.

Just wondered what you guys thought about that sort of thing.... not trying to be disagreeable

No roosters here to attack you, but my ninja hens might visit.

Seriously though, your argument just doesn't pass the acid test. Just having a few chickens does not lead to having cows in the yard or balcony. I've heard the same "concern" from my city council that say "if we allow chickens, then someone will want a cow". No sane person would ever attempt that, IMO. However, they can have several Great Danes with no issues at all.

The point is that any person can go "crazy" and that is a completely separate issue from sound animal husbandry.
Having a few chickens for eggs, growing a garden for food is a matter of personal choice and should not be subject to the objections of a neighbor who prefers to get their food from the commercial grocer.

The problem lies with the neighbor who has an undue interest in what I do within the boundaries of my property. Case in point; my yard is totally enclosed by privacy fence, yet a disgruntled neighbor trespassed into my yard, took photos of my chickens and filed a complaint with the ordinance officer. Now I am facing criminal charges for keeping barnyard animals in the city. Because I am fighting that ticket, I have drawn the wrath of the ordinance officer.

Since I received the "chicken ticket" I have been cited for numerous violations which all centre around "farming within city limits". Among those tickets are citations for growing crops. A tomato plant in a pot on my front porch; a cherry tree in the front yard...and my favourite charge, ornamental millet that the OO said was corn. When my kale blooms, I'm sure that I'll get another ticket.

I apologize if I rambled on, but my few hens are not causing any distress or hardship to any neighbor. My vegetable garden did not invade any neighbor's space. Yet, I find myself facing criminal charges in district court because I am not permitted to provide for myself.

 

[WYNot]

ALL of our "rights" infringe to one degree or another on our fellow citizens. The "right to bear arms" is one example that has been in the news a lot in recent years. Laws (and rights) are in place because we live in a society and aren't just a collection of feudal family estates. Any time you take part in any form of government you are trading some things for others. It's easy to say you don't want to be part of society until you are the one who wants to call the fire department or have clean drinking water. When we opt to live together in a society we take on obligations.

The concept of "rights" has evolved over time, just look at the civil rights movement. And what one perceives as a human right is also going to depend on what country you live in, your socioeconomic status, your religion. how you were raised, personal beliefs, etc. Sometimes people from many fractions can come together and agree on "universal" standards of human rights such as the "Geneva Convention".

In any event no one is literally holding a gun to anyone's head in this country. You can vote. You can take part in government and even run for office. You can move to a different county or state. And finally, if changing the way government works is not an option for you and you simply can not live with it you can leave and move to another country.

Changing the government is what this particular forum is all about.

Uhm no my rights do not infringe on anyone else. I have the right to free speech, doesn't mean anyone has to listen. I have the right to be secure in my person and possessions, that does not infringe on anyone else. And just how does my right to keep and bear arms infringe on someone?

And yes, there is literally a gun to your head nowadays. Refuse to participate in this so called affordable health care system and see how fast the gun is put to your head demanding that you participate in this "wonderful" system. If it were so good, they wouldn't need to force people to participate under threat of being thrown in a cage or killed. If an idea is sooo good, then let it win in the marketplace of ideas. Win my cooperation with your arguments not through force.

Just because we live in a "society" does not grant others the right to tell others how to live or behave. So long as I do not aggress against another or another's property, NOONE should have any say in what or how I act, behave, etc. Don't like me doing drugs, too bad. Until I harm you or your property, what business is it of yours? What gives you the so-called right to throw me in a cage for my behavior when it has no direct impact on you.

Uhm no, as I mentioned true, honest-to-goodness rights are not going to vary from place to place. True, honest-to-goodness rights do not impose obligations on others in order for you to exercise them. These so-called "rights" to housing, medical care, food, etc do impose obligations on others. You are in fact making slaves out of those who provide such services. You can exercise your right to free speech by simply speaking, you place no obligation on anyone to provide you with that. If you try to exercise your "right" to free medical care, you can only do so by making the doctors and nurses your slaves and forcing them to provide such services. You are forcing them to provide you with their skills and services. They took the time and expense to earn those skills. Those skills belong to them and they are free to use them as they see fit. You are free to go earn those skills for your own use but you have no right to dictate to them how they will provide you with the benefits of their skills and knowledge.

I'm a technical writer. That is a skill that I have worked many years to hone. I offer my skills in free exchange for a paycheck. That paycheck is arrived at by mutual agreement between me and my employer. No one has a right to my skills/talents/knowledge/productivity except under a mutually agreed upon exchange. What makes doctors and nurses any different? What makes you think you have a right to their skills/talents/knowledge/productivity except under mutually agreeable terms?

I do honestly want to hear the reasoning behind a person's belief that they have a right to someone else's skills/talents/knowledge/productivity.

And just for the record, I'm perfectly capable of providing my own clean water and the fire department around here is a volunteer force. We don't steal from our neighbors to provide them a service they may or may not want.

 

[MOpalB]

Try again. "Tenement".

There is no privately held, truly Allodial property in the US, though there are places where certain properties have the appearance of Allodial Title with regard to State or local law. Nor do I foresee the US Gov't granting you a land patent over one of its holdings at any time in either of our foreseeable lifetimes.

The US Government only has jurisdiction over the 10 square mile parcel of land allotted to it. The issue is most people do not realize this. So, while it may have tenement over those that reside in its borders that jurisdiction does not carry over the the state nationals.

Private property was created in the United States of America through the issuance of land patents that transferred title of public lands to named individuals, and to their heirs and assigns forever. Each patent was signed by the President of the United States in office at the time. These transfers were direct from the national government to the individual. The States were not involved. Present-day parcels can be traced back to their original patents.Every private parcel, ranch, or farmland in the country has a land patent associated with it.

As Americans it is time that we learn how to start enforcing the Constitution. Most of us believe that the government has far more authority than what they actually have.

I refuse to be a slave to forced contracts not held (18 USC 3571).

 

[MOpalB]

I was simply engaging in a conversation with you regarding the information you supplied in your first response.

While our Constitution is an amazing document it is not self executing. There has to be a power behind it to enforce it. That power is We The People!

I realize that my silly little chicken ticket will not free up all of the land that has been stolen from the American State Nationals. However, there is a remedy for everything under the sun. One just has to have the courage to implement it and go toe to toe with their public servants. All it takes is one little ripple of hope and others might be inclined to start enforcing their constitutional rights back into existance.

The federal government has no jurisdiction outside of the 10 square mile parcel of land assigned to it. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution is very clear on this regarding land.

Anyway - I am getting off track again. I will only post about my little chicken ticket and the outcome of my court date from here on out for anyone that may find interest in what I am trying to achieve for myself.

 

[24Elsinore]

In Illinois we have had a Right to Garden Act floating around for a while. This is the current iteration which I like because it includes all sorts of gardens including pollinator gardens.

https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fu...=0633&GAID=16&LegID=129106&SpecSess=&Session=

Frustratingly enough a lot of people are against the bill because they think, since it mentions that municipalities and the state retain regulatory powers, that it is actually granting those regulatory powers. What's really frustrating is a lot of these same people probably want their gardens to be protected.