Have you guys heard about this?
MATTAWAN, MI -- A Mattawan family's farm may be safe, but changes under consideration by the Michigan Agriculture Commission could strip future small farmers of protection under Michigan's Right to Farm act, according to an "action alert" sent Jan. 7 by the Michigan Small Farm Council.
Kelly VanderKley's farmKelly VanderKley's turkeys walk around in their pen on Friday, July 26, 2013 at her small farm in Mattawan. File photo
The group's mission "is to protect and extend the rights of urban, suburban, and rural small-scale farming operations throughout the state," according to its website.
Those rights are threatened by proposed changes to Michigan's Generally Acceptable Agricultural Practices (GAAMPs) currently under review by "first bring(ing) operations as small as a single animal under the control of the Site Selection GAAMPs," the alert warns, "and then using (a new category) to exclude those operations from Right to Farm protection in residential areas."
Kelly VanderKley and her husband, David Hunter, sought Right to Farm protection for their Antwerp Township hobby farm last year when neighbors complained about their animals and manure on the 4.8 acre of land. The farm underwent strict scrutiny by the state inspector to assure practices were in compliance with all applicable environmental requirements, VanderKley said, and were judged to be in compliance with current standards.
The Michigan Right to Farm Act provides nuisance protection for farms and farm operations which are in conformance with GAAMPs. Right to Farm was originally designed to protect commercial agriculture operations from being pushed out by changes in local zoning or land uses that conflict with common agriculture practices. GAAMPs are reviewed annually by scientific committees of various experts, revised and updated as necessary, according to a recent news release from the Michigan Department of Agriculture announcing this year's deadline for public comment is Wednesday, Jan. 22.
The proposed revisions worrying the Michigan Small Farm Council are tweaks to the GAAMPs for Site Selection and Odor Control for Livestock Production Facilities.
The Site Selection GAAMPs have never applied to most small farmers, the council alert explained, because "Livestock Production Facilities" have been defined as having 50 animal units or more, far greater than the number of animals held by most small farms in Michigan.
"In the proposed changes, MDARD defines a new term, Livestock Facility, as one with any number of animals - including a single animal," a step, the alert warns, that "for the first time brings small farm operations under the control of the Site Selection GAAMPs. And then in a second step, MDARD creates a new class of sites - Category 4 sites - that are not ever acceptable sites for Livestock Facilities."
Category 4 sites are defined as those exclusively zoned for residential use.
Those changes could be the kiss of death for enterprises such as backyard chicken flocks, or small acreage hobby farms such as VanderKley's that keep a few animals on suburban acreage, said Michigan Small Farm Council member Randy Buchler, of Shady Grove Farm in the Upper Peninsula community of Gwinn.
"It would exclude a whole bunch of people who are seeking Right to Farm protection... and strip the small farmers of their right to be protected by a state law."
A circuit court judge ruled in Buchler's favor when he cited Right to Farm to protect his own farm's existence on residential property in Marquette County, the largest county in the state, he said.
"What they are trying to do is to take away Right to Farm protection from people trying to be self sufficient but not able to do agriculture on any level according their local zoning.
"The way it looks to us," Buchler said, "this would allow local ordinances to trump state law."
Mitigating conflict
"The GAAMPs look at nuisance risk and are intended to help mitigate conflict," said Jennifer Holton, spokesperson for the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.
"The committee recognizes that when you add in animals into those densely populated areas, it increases nuisance risk as well as the potential for conflict," Holton said. "This proposal recognizes that there is a continuum - there are places ideally situated for livestock, and there are places in the state where livestock should not be located. "
"The proposal also recognizes size and scale in a new way - there are places where large livestock facilities can be located - and the new category recognizing that small scale livestock (4-H, a couple of horses, etc.) can fit well in other places."
Public Comment
People are invited to submit their thoughts on the site selection or any other GAAMPs by mail or email, or to attend the GAAMPs public input meeting at 9 a.m. Jan. 22, 2014, in Room A at the State Secondary Complex General Office Building, 7150 Harris Drive, Dimondale.
Written comments may be submitted to the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development's Environmental Stewardship Division, P.O. Box 30017, Lansing, MI 48909, postmarked no later than Jan. 22, 2014.
E-mail should be directed to WilcoxR2@michigan.gov, and must arrive by p.m. on Jan. 22, 2014.
MDARD will forward all comments received by the due date to the respective GAAMPs Task Force chairpersons for consideration. The GAAMPs Task Force Chairpersons then present proposed GAAMPs to the Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development for final adoption.
Public comments are accepted and considered at scheduled commission meetings before final versions of the GAAMPs are approved.
For a copy of any of the GAAMPs, including the proposed revisions, click here or contact MDARDs Environmental Stewardship Division at 517-284-5619, or toll free at 877-632-1783.
Public comment will be taken on all eight GAAMPs, though there are proposed changes only in the GAAMPs for Manure Management and Utilization, Pesticide Utilization and Pest Control, the Care of Farm Animals, Site Selection and Odor Control for New and Expanding Livestock Production Facilities, and Irrigation Water Use.
Currently, there are no proposed changes in the GAAMPs for: Nutrient Utilization, Farm Markets, and Cranberry Production.
12 Oct ’12
Sadly, yes; I have been following this (and writing more than a few letters to my representative, senator, and a few bureaucrats in Lansing regarding it). In the past, Michigan's Right to Farm Act has been one of the strongest in the country and has offered a lot of protection to urban and suburban homesteaders; current MI RTF protects anyone who wants to have livestock and can do so within reason. Depending on what they end up doing to change the GAAMPs, this may no longer be the case here. People like myself who live in a township that has an ordinance against chickens are able to have poultry under current RTF law (since it specifically states in the law that it supersedes ALL county and local regulations). They are attempting to change the Generally Acceptable Agricultural Practices so that urban and hobby farmers cannot rely on the Michigan Right to Farm Act anymore because the new GAAMPs will be written specifically with big farming in mind. Cities like the one I work in (Flint) have been fighting for this for years; there is a lot of push back at the municipal level to ban chickens and other livestock inside the city (regardless of your lot size). I hope this doesnt end up happening; a lot of small time homesteaders are going to have the chair pulled from beneath them if this happens.
12 Oct ’12
that's crazy, i can't imagine if that happened here, if someone came to me and said get rid of your animals, i don't know what i would do
It's for our own protection... Who knows what would happen if we entrusted urban folk with that kind of power.
that's crazy, i can't imagine if that happened here, if someone came to me and said get rid of your animals, i don't know what i would do
It's for our own protection... Who knows what would happen if we entrusted urban folk with that kind of power.
LOL, awesome!
5 Mar ’12
I think this will definitely hurt some of the urban farming going on in Detroit. There aren't any restrictions where I live and the people who live in my township would shoot somebody if they came on their property. Seriously. We live out in the woods away from everything so this doesn't affect me as much, but is still a concern.
22 Feb ’12
that's crazy, i can't imagine if that happened here, if someone came to me and said get rid of your animals, i don't know what i would do
I'd say "that's nice" and contact my lawyer, mostly so he would know what I was talking about when I told him I'd been arrested.
At some point a line must be drawn and for me that would be it...
Most Users Ever Online: 698
Currently Online:
117 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
2 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
easytapper: 2149
DangerDuke: 2030
groinkick: 1667
PorkChopsMmm: 1515
Gravel Road: 1455
Newest Members:
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 12
Topics: 11482
Posts: 58640
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2
Members: 19842
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Administrators: K