Courtesy photo Angela Sprik's child, Audrey, looks at one of the chickens on her property in Perkins. Spriks is pushing back against local zoning ordinances to keep her chickens.

PERKINS – A local resident is ready to go to court if needed to keep chickens on their property.

Angela Spriks resides in Perkins, and her property is situated in an R-1 zoning district, which falls under the purview of Delta County.

After buying her house in 2016, she added chickens to her property in 2017 and has had them ever since.

When Spriks bought the property, she didn’t know she was in an R-1 district, but she says she was told having chickens on her property was fine.

She said she didn’t know her zoning, “Because there’s not a map when you look online. And back then, the township only had a tractor on their front page. So I went down to the (Baldwin) township and asked them, and half of them had farm animals too and told me it was perfectly allowed.”

“They said that we’re in a gray zone (and) that it was allowed here,” Spriks said.

In the past two years, Spriks says she has had run-ins with her neighbor regarding the chickens, the fences, and the chicken coops.

She said her neighbor had taken issue with several things over the past two years, including the appearance of Sprik’s yard, the type of fencing, and the odor.

In August 2024, Spriks received a letter from the county planning and zoning department that reads, “This letter is to inform you that your property is located in an R-1 zoning district, Delta County Zoning Ordinance 76-2. R-1 prohibits the keeping of farm animals such as fowl (chickens, ducks).”

The letter ends by telling Spriks to “Please remove any prohibited animals from the property.”

She says the letter is dated July 17, but she did not receive it until August 8th as it was sent to the wrong address.

According to the local zoning regulations found in Section 202 for District R-1 under Permitted Principal Uses – properties zone R-1 are for, “Single family dwellings. Private garages for non-commercial use. The keeping of domestic animals, such as cats or dogs, in a manner of not constituting a nuisance to neighboring residents. Farm animals, such as horses*, cows, or fowl, are not permitted.”

Horses have an asterisk as riding horses may be permitted through a conditional use permit if the property owner abides by the permit conditions.

Spriks says she and her property should be protected under the Michigan Right To Farm Act.

The Right To Farm Act (RTFA) was enacted in 1981 and is an act “To define certain farm uses, operations, practices, and products; to provide certain disclosures; to provide for circumstances under which a farm shall not be found to be a public or private nuisance; to provide for certain powers and duties for certain state agencies and departments; and to provide for certain remedies for certain persons.”

Michigan State University (MSU) Senior Extension Educator Brad Neuman explained, “With the Right to Farm Act, there are some things about agriculture that can be regulated, other things that cannot, some that cannot but are delegated back to the local government, disagreement over some aspects of all this, plus some issue over what is and is not agriculture.”

Neuman explains that for a property to fall under the RFTA, it must be a farm operation, produce farm products, and be a commercial operation.

If yes, MSU says, “It applies under the RTFA. The definitions of those terms are very broad and all-inclusive. For example, ‘commercial’ can be as little as selling one egg in a year – there is no minimum threshold for commercial.”

A fourth requirement may also apply – following Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices (GAAMPS)

Spriks says the RFTA supersedes the local zoning ordinances.

“It does. Yes, especially if farming was already established before,” she said.

“It also states in there that if the township allows other farming to go on around that, I’m still allowed to farm. You can’t tell one person they can’t and allow everybody else to do it.”

She said basically every other house in the area has a farm animal, whether it be goats, chickens and horses.

In October, Spriks received a letter from MDARD outlining a property visit that took place on June 20, 2024.

The letter states that the Right to Farm Inspector met with the neighbor and reviewed Sprik’s poultry operation.

“He said it was all fine. The only thing is that the agricultural department switched regulations back in 2014 to say that you had to be 250 feet away from a residence.

So, that part I can’t go by because I can’t be 250 feet away from the neighbor. But everything else was good,” she said.

She said the chicken coops are not 250 feet away from her neighbor’s residence.

“The coops are not. There is no way for them to be. I have an acre, and she’s got an acre, and that’s still not big enough to be that far away,” Spriks said.

The letter from the MDARD inspector reads, “At the time of review, I observed that the dimensions of your property do not provide sufficient space to achieve the minimum setback distances from livestock facilities to non-farm residences of 250 feet. This means that your property is classified by the Right to Farm Program as primarily residential.”

Spriks says she is still covered by the RTFA, but her case is up to the discretion of MDARD.

“They may not come down to stand up for me, is what it means. It’s not like a guarantee they won’t, and it’s not saying that they will. It’s kind of it’s up to their discretion. It’s not against the law, it’s just that they changed the rule in 2014,” she said.

On May 6, Spriks received a second letter from the county planning and zoning department.

“This letter is the second written notice to instruct you to remove any farm animals (fowl) from the property. The above-mentioned property is located in an R-1 Zoning District. According to the Delta County Zoning Ordinance 76-2, R-1 prohibits the keeping of farm animals such as fowl (chickens, ducks).”

The letter goes on to state that Spriks must comply within 30 days of the letter (by June 5).

Failure to remove the chickens by June 5 will result in the county zoning and planning board filing a formal report with the Delta County Prosecutor’s Office.

The letter cites Section 707 of the Delta County Zoning Ordinance as its reason for filing a report.

Spriks said she plans to fight the report, even starting a petition entitled “Petition to Amend Zoning Code to Allow Backyard Fowl in Perkins, Michigan.”

Spriks said she garnered 59 signatures from a population of roughly 210 in Perkins.

She said she will attend the next planning and zoning meeting and voice her situation during public comment.

Delta County Building and Zoning Administrator Jack Smith declined to make comments at this time.

Since June 5 passed, Spriks is waiting to see what will happen next and plans to fight in court if necessary.

“My plan going forward is that they’re going to have to either make everybody get rid of all of their animals in every district that goes off of the Delta County zonings, or I’m going to take it to court,” she said.