Mark & Amanda, Urban Farmers on FCN

[RMHoward]

Its the American way now.  Knowingly break the rules, get cited for breaking rules, then insist that the rules be changed in your favor.  Its the "everybody else is doing it" syndrome.  Im sure there are other reasons (health/waste concerns) that this is not allowed in densly populated areas.  There is pleny of rural land available for this if one wishes to pursue this lifestyle.

your attitude on this is the typical american attitude that got us into the mess we are in.

There really isnt 'plenty' of rural land to exploit, RMHoward.  Maybe there was back in the 1930s, but as history bore out, that land runs out pretty quick. 

And the point isnt the availablity of land.  Its the oil and resources necessary to get that produce and agricultural product to your table.

The amount of money we spend on oil and infrastructure in order to transport and prepare that food exceeds the value of the food itself, so perhaps you like the rising costs of food at the supermarket or being SOL if there is ever a breakdown in the transportation lines, but a lot of people don't.

And please spare us all the whole 'break rules and force people to conform' bs.  How did those things become illegal in the first place, because they werent even a couple of decades ago.  Changing the laws to conform to the wishes of the citizens is um....kindof what democracy is all about.  So if you don't mind letting Americans continue to act like Americans and function within a democratic republic that functions by the rule of law, that would be awfully decent of you, im sure.

Duval Dude, I don't think there is anything wrong with being connected to the food in such a direct manner.  Agri friendly and sustainable is the new chic and upscale anyways.

Now does that mean that without a few guidelines that Jacksonville won't succeed in turning even the poshest neighborhood into a scene out of petticoat junction, probably by erecting hogpens while code enforcement figures out a way to demolish all the libraries and hospitals, so your points are well taken.

Amanda, Sigma.  Are there discussions in place on how to handles the health and code concerns of multiple urban ag developments in the same neighborhood?

Utterly rediculous response Stephen.  I believe in following established rules/laws and believe most of them are in place for a reason.  The fact is that these folks are in violation of city ordinances.  The ordinances were put in place on advice of folks much smarter than you and a little smarter than me.  Its illegal.  Get over it.   No lectures about Democracy from you, thanks.  Democracy means electing officials to change the way things are done, not, disregarding existing laws.  You would argue folks can pick and choose the laws they wish to follow?

Well whether its rediculous or ridiculous I suppose is in the spell of the binder.  The laws were established by another group of people that wanted things to change.

Not because they were smarter, or better, or better equipped to understand what they were doing, but for all the reasons, good and bad, venal and selfless, truthful and misquided that go into our local democracy.

These ordinances may or may not be in conflict with the principle that people should have the right to their own property and to pursue happiness.  They may have been well crafted, they might not.

Apparently you believe that you have the right to simply take those rights away from people.  I suppose you agree with this Adverse Possession nonsense as well?  After all, its a law on the books right?  It seems to condone stealing property, so why would we ever change that?

Absoluetley not for AP.  Its a scruge.  However, people will always find loopholes in otherwise well intentioned laws. Fix the laws.  Dont break them. 

[avs]

No one is claiming bigotry or racism but you, good grief - I was just using previous laws that have been amended as an example.   As humankind acquires knowledge we evolve and develop and so do our laws.  That is how cultures and societies develop.

Again, over 700 cities in the US have amended their laws.  It shouldn't be explored if it was something that wasn't working.  But that isn't the case.  There are lots of people in Jax who are keeping hens and goats "underground"  we are asking the city to work with us to codify it, based on other cities amended codes, and put some parameters around it for those already doing it, no one is promoting a free for all

[sheclown]

Amanda is challenging the way we think about the food we eat. Good for her and for all true urban pioneers

[RiversideLoki]

[Miss Fixit]

Well, alrighty then!

Back to urban agriculture.

I haven't decided whether or not I am cut out to raise chickens, much less goats.  I do have friends and have had neighbors all over town - in San Marco, Avondale, and Mandarin as well as in Springfield - who keep chickens in their back yards.  Without exception their chickens are cleaner and less of a nuisance than most of the dogs owned by other neighbors.

One of the great things about laws regulating urban agriculture is that they allow local government to create a framework under which they can monitor these activities to ensure that environmental concerns are addressed. 

Someone mentioned concerns about numerous property owners with livestock on adjacent lots where houses are only ten feet apart.  That's easily addressed in an ordinance - require minimum setbacks for livestock enclosures, minimum lot size, etc.

Require those who want to raise chickens to obtain a permit.  Use the permit fees to facilitate inspections.

Not a big deal - sort of like requiring licenses and immunizations for dogs...

[John P]

If its good enough for nyc, chicago and portland its good enough for Jacksonville.

[Dog Walker]

The changed the law in Sarasota to allow raising hens in urban back yards.  We can do it here.  They put in a bunch of common sense limitations like "If it crows, it goes" and setbacks for the coops so neighbors wouldn't be bothered and a limit on the number of hens, etc.  Things to keep any animals from being a bother to the neighbors.

[avs]

Yes, all we are asking is for the city to set parameters.  Mark and I are a big advocates of the permitting and permitting fees as well.

[RMHoward]

Well yea AVS, sure.   Im all for amending laws.  But, normally we amend them first, not break them.  Not the other way around.  Nice try though.  Its the nature of arguments here to claim bigotry or racism to be the root of one's opinion when they arent the same as your own.  You will fit right in.

With the passage of the New York Marriage Equality Act, the number of gay couples in the U.S. who are eligible to marry has now doubled.  Approximately 9 million Americans are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) -- slightly less than four percent of the population, according a recent study by Gary Gates of UCLA's Williams Institute. Approximately half of lesbians and gay men are members of same-sex couples, including an estimated 160,000 who are married, according to Gates' research. Nearly one in five same-sex couple households are raising children, compared to about 45 percent of heterosexual couple households, according to figures from the American Community Survey (ACS).

The list below, drawn from Gates' analysis of data from the ACS, shows the 15 metros that have the largest percentage of same-sex couples raising children under 18 years of age. The densest concentrations of such families are not necessarily in the places where you'd expect to find them. Especially surprising are the metros that don't make the cut -- like San Francisco and New York.




http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/06/top-metros-for-same-sex-couples-with-children/241113/?&utm_content=Google+Reader

Yet another list Jacksonville should not be proud to be near the top of.

Well, since you asked.  My definition of "leftist" especially as it pertains to this forum would be as follows:  If a Republican said the sky was blue, a leftists would argue tirelessly that the sky was any other color  than blue rather than be in the unenviable position of actually agreeing with the Republican.  A leftists would rather see the US fail at any endeavor led by a Republican President, whether it be war, economic health, etc. rather than see any credit given to that President, or his party.  A leftist will, in a heartbeat, call you a racist, homophobe or even a terrorist if you happen to disagree with this President's policies.  A leftists hates the thought of our international borders (especially the one with Mexico) being closed to anyone who wants to cross into our country.  A leftist will argue that: certainly the State of California should provide free college tuition (among other services) to the children of illegal immigrants just because they have been here forever, regardless of the fact that they 1.  cant afford it, and 2. its wrong, 3. the taxpayers foot the bill 4. children of legal immigrants are not given this.  A leftist will ignore the fact that unions in this country are out of control and hurting the competitiveness of our evil rich corporations.  Leftists will insist on continued exorbinate union benefits regardless of whether companies, states, local govts can afford them or not.  A leftist will insist on unending unemployment benefits for everyone.  If someone suggest otherwise, then they brand them as being uncaring or heartless. A leftist never accepts responsibility for his/her actions/policies and is skilled at shifting blame and will not hesitate to do so (talk to W about this).  There is no "the buck stops here" sign on current leftist desk.    So, now you hopefully have an idea of what my definition of what a leftist actually is.  Perhaps it doesnt match what you have been taught, or teach in your elitist circles.  And as for the word regime, I meant it in the negative way that it came across.  It fits nicely with the countless (how many) CZARs appointed by the talking suit that answer to no one and ride roughshod over all those evil wealthy corporations.

Wow,
Obviously a bunch of (entitlement generation) liberals frequent this post. I'll buck the trend.   Im sure most of you hate George Bush and love Obama (talk about second coming). I dont like Beck's delivery.  But most of what he says is true IMO.  Continue badmouthing the last administration with your blinders on if you wish. Believe it or not, a point will come when you wont be able to blame Bush for all of our woes.
Rick

Stephen,
You can copy/paste all the "America is the Great Satan" liberal propaganda you wish while sipping on your grande latee at Star Bucks.  Your immediate direction for me to move out of country is the reason for the "nasty little fellow" comment.  I stand by that.  You are.  Not trying to impress you at all.  We certainly wont agree on anything political for sure.  You obviously subscribe to the "we got what we deserve" mentallity on 911.  Those evil American oil companies operating in the Gulf surely warranted that response.  Your mindset dictates that America kiss ass worldwide for the foreseeable future to make up for our past transgressions.  See you in the history forum. 
Rick

With the passage of the New York Marriage Equality Act, the number of gay couples in the U.S. who are eligible to marry has now doubled.  Approximately 9 million Americans are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) -- slightly less than four percent of the population, according a recent study by Gary Gates of UCLA's Williams Institute. Approximately half of lesbians and gay men are members of same-sex couples, including an estimated 160,000 who are married, according to Gates' research. Nearly one in five same-sex couple households are raising children, compared to about 45 percent of heterosexual couple households, according to figures from the American Community Survey (ACS).

The list below, drawn from Gates' analysis of data from the ACS, shows the 15 metros that have the largest percentage of same-sex couples raising children under 18 years of age. The densest concentrations of such families are not necessarily in the places where you'd expect to find them. Especially surprising are the metros that don't make the cut -- like San Francisco and New York.




http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/06/top-metros-for-same-sex-couples-with-children/241113/?&utm_content=Google+Reader

Yet another list Jacksonville should not be proud to be near the top of.

Quite the contrary, although Im sure there are a few old bigots who feel otherwise.


Quite the contrary Stevie.  Believing in man-woman unions raising children does not make you a bigot, it places you in agreement with the vast majority of Americans. This is similar to your slanted belief that when anyone disagrees with Obama, he must be a racist.  You are predictably quick to call folks who disagree with you and your beliefs names like bigot, racist, etc.  Its what you and your kind do.

really?  My kind?  Nothing to see here folks, no bigotry at all!

Well thanks Stephen.  I see you are facinated by my postings.  I dont regret any of them.  Your skill at the "copy and post" thing is really out of this world, as are you opinions.  Feel free to print and hang in your office.

[strider]

Goats=pets with benefits

[avs]

^ 

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Goats=pets with benefits

http://www.youtube.com/v/DWbU0x0NVh0?

[Debbie Thompson]

AVS's neighbors have no issue with the goats and chickens.  She and her family take excellent care of them.  They feed her family, and they are pets as well.  Well cared for animals are not an issue. I live in the area, but not next door to AVS. I would, however, have no issue with them if I did. I may even be lucky enough to buy a few extra fresh eggs from them.

[dougskiles]

Great job done by Amanda, Kevin Songer and the panelists.  I wasn't able to stay for the Q&A, but found the presentations to be informative and passionate.  Thanks for putting the event together.  And I also thank Lori Boyer for taking the time to educate herself firsthand on the issue.

[Springfield Chicken]

I'd rather have Amanda's goats for neighbors than many of the PEOPLE I've lived next to in my life!