Mobile Turkey Coop

A mobile Turkey/Chicken Coop fit for a princess!  

Full credit for this design goes to Harvey Ussery and his great book, The Small-Scale Poultry Flock: An All-Natural Approach to Raising Chickens and Other Fowl for Home and Market Growers, which contains the plans we used.

It always seems to start with a square (or at least a square rectangle).  Measured on the diagonals.  This is 9' front to back and 8'3" side to side.  Looking back on this, I should have just made it 10' long, as I ended up using 2' wide plastic roofing panels, rather than the 3' wide metal roofing the author used.

With this coop, I took the extra time to ensure it was also square up to the ridge beam.  This saved alot of hassle, since roof panels went on without being crooked.

Add more rafters and 2 stringers from front to back.

Frame in the opening for the door in front and the nest box in back.  Note the 1x2 furring strips used on the rafters to keep them nice and square.  This also really stiffens up the structure.

Here's the nestbox frame, which sits on the roosts, that you can see in the next photo.  The bottom of the nestbox was covered with 1/2" hardware cloth to allow water and dirt to drain out.

Here you can see the back wall on the nest box, which includes a rectangular door above it for easy access. There is blocking between the rafters and collar ties, which perform double duty as additional roosts and places to hang water and food.  Since we are housing turkeys, we made the roosting bars 4" wide, which is supposed to help prevent foot/leg problems.

 Dylan took care of covering the front and bottom of the back triangle walls with 1/2" hardware cloth.  He LOVES cutting that stuff so much that he tells me how many cuts it takes.  Only 800 wires to cut on this one....  He does appreciate the pneumatic stapler, after having to use a hammer and fence staples to attach poultry netting to the barn's petrified 2x4 lumber.  It's good to let kids learn the manual way of doing things before they get to use the power tools.  It builds character, and they can appreciate how dad built an entire clubhouse with handtools and lumber found on the side of the road--drug home by hand from 3-4 blocks away.

I'm finishing up the roof, and Dylan already has the wheels on.  These wheels are setup to be removable, so you can roll it into place, then drop it to the ground to exclude predators.  It's pretty heavy, so we chose to go with 4 wheels, rather than try to lift one end completely off the ground, like our smaller coop.  The roof is 6' on the diagonal, and luckily, the sheets of plastic roofing are sold in 8' and 12' pieces.  The 12' pieces cut in half pretty easily with heavy duty kitchen scissors (shhh! Don't tell my wife!), so there is no waste.

Here you can see the roosts, attached at the front and back of the coop, which some hangers from the rafters for extra support.  That's the nest box in the back and the door above it.

As pretty as that coop is, when it came time to "wire" up the automatic waterer, which requires the water pressure to be less than 8psi, the solution was to hang a bucket from a tripod from some dead saplings from the woods.  We hung the feeder right in front of the door to make it easy to refill.  

After a week of use, I'd recommend installing wire mesh on the collar tie that the feeder and waterer hang from to prevent roosting and pooping into the foot/water.   Dylan, grab the hammer, hardware cloth and fence staples!

For more up to date pictures, like us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/FiveHensFarm

Our first Mobile Chicken Coop

Upon the maturing of our Polish hen into a Polish rooster, we decided we needed a place to keep him segregated to control the spread of his fertility.  Thus launched the project to build our first mobile chicken coop.  Here's the finished product.  See below for more pictures of the build.

It all starts with a nice square foundation.  We measured corner to corner to ensure the base was square.  The base is 8' x 4' (with technically a 7' x 4' enclosure).  The extra foot was used for the "legs" sticking out to the left.  Those will receive wheels and allow the crossbar to be lifted higher off the ground, than if the wheels were directly under or in front of them.

We then threw caution to the wind and eye-balled the sides as square....this will later come back to haunt me.  Here I am, more concerned about the width of the the enclosed portion of the coop, than the fact that the base to ridge is not quite square.

Attaching the arms to the coop.  These will make it easier to move without cracking your shins on the coop.  These also make up the frame of the floor of the elevated, enclosed coop.  The top of the floor is about 18" off the ground.  This provides built in shade (under the enclosed portion of the coop), when the coop is in the sun, yet allows for a breeze to blow through.

We used 1/2" hardware cloth for the floor of the enclosed portion of the coop, with a center joist for added stability.  While we initially intended on putting wood chips on the floor of the enclosed coop, there is far less mess, if you just leave it bare and let the dropping drop through as they dry (or spray them out with a hose).

Then we apparently forgot to take pictures and enclosed the coop and added a door that lowers via a string.  The left side is hinged for easy access by humans to the enclosed coop.

Then, Dylan volunteered to paint the whole thing in primer.  He really enjoys painting.  The open side of the enclosed coop will be covered with plastic roofing, so no need to add weight here.  I debated covering it with hardware cloth for added security, but I guess we'll see how long the 25 year plastic roofing will last.

 Here you can see the wheels attached.  Notice that I cut the 2x4 at an angle to allow for more ground clearance where the wheel contacts the ground--yet, the coop lays perfectly flat when it's not lifted.

We put a nice coat of barn red on the front and back of the enclosed portion of the coop.  You can also see the 3rd door to the open area of the coop.  The framed door has reinforced corners with plywood.  I'm not sure this was necessary, being that it's getting covered in 1/2" hardware cloth, but it made me feel better.

Then we added plastic roofing on the enclosed coop and 1/2" hardware cloth to cover all openings.  You may think that hardware cloth is excessive and that regular poultry netting would be just fine.  Our experience shows that a chicken that decides to sleep to close to the poultry netting will have it's head removed by a raccoon or opossum.

I didn't use any kind of ridge cap, I just offset the two sides of corrugated roofing so that they matched up tightly at the top.  Any rain getting in will likely just run right down the inside of the roof and out the bottom.  We also installed a nest box in the back corner of the enclosed coop on the side with the door.

I do wish we had built it a few feet longer, or used a vertically sliding door.  As it is, there is only room for a hanging waterer,and I'd like to have room for a hanging, covered feeder.  Instead, we sprinkle in feed every day, which avoids the issue of feed getting wet when it rains.  It also encourages scratching for other food, such as bugs.

Deannexation Reversed. Rezoned with Variance

Quick, long overdue update.  The Deannexation was quickly reversed a day later due to the fact that they technically weren't allowed to vote on it.  During the following days, there were several meetings asking us to consider rezoning with a variance.  After much deliberation, we thought it would be better to work with them (now that they were willing to work with us), and we came to an agreement.

We rezoned, without much debate into "Restricted Agricultural" zone.  This allows a density of 2 animals per acre of pasture, but still disallows the keeping of fowl or swine.

Our Special Use/Variance request was approved for the following:

1) Fowl at an average density of 10 fowl per acre of property (pasture or woodlands)
2) Swine at a density of 1 swine per 3 acres of property (pasture or woodlands)
3) Honeybees (apiary)
4) Roadside stand for farm products (parking provided on our property)
5) Farm Tours, U-Pick-It operations, and seasonal outdoor mazes (long term plans)

While there were no specific restrictions against honeybees at the time, the recent uproar about honeybees in Forsyth county prompted us to include this "just in case".

This was all approved on April 26, 2012.

Finally approved.  Isabel is happy!

Deannexation Complete

Life can now move forward.  In a 2-1 vote, the City of Dawsonville allowed us to deannex from the city.  This returns us to the Residential Agriculture (RA) zoning district of the county.  We were disappointed that they were not willing to update their zoning ordinance to allow hens, but glad they allowed our farm on the outskirts of town to deannex back to the county. 

http://www.dawsonnews.com/section/4/article/9028/

30 Acre Farm, Residential Zoning....

We found a 30 acre farm in foreclosure about 3 miles north of Dawsonville, GA.  We thought we did all the research that we needed to.  Looked it up in the county GIS map and checked the zoning (R-A, Residential Agriculture).  County zoning rules looked appropriate, so we put in an offer.  Frantically getting inspections and quotes on repairs, we failed to discover that it was actually in the city limits of Dawsonville, GA, and zoned R-1 (Residential).  Come to find out, the previous owner requested "Annexation" in to the city back in 2005 (with a default zoning of R-1 for all annexed property), when the real estate market was booming (hoping some developer would swoop in and buy it up, is my guess).  Well, no developers came, and the farm still looks like a farm.  The surrounding area is also undeveloped, large acreage tracts (like over 100 acres each).  So, we looked into how R-1 zoning was defined in this rural town of just over 2000 citizens.

If you read no further than this, please check out this article: http://www.dawsonnews.com/section/4/article/8028/ on the deannexation request.  If you support safe, locally grown food, please click the "like" button in the upper right-hand corner of the article.

Now, back to the zoning issues.  The primary restriction in R-1 that relates to livestock is highlighted:

ARTICLE VIII.  R-1, RESTRICTED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT

Sec. 801.  Purpose and intent.

The restricted single-family residential district is and area where substantial investment in permanent residence has been made or planned. Uses which will devalue investment and undermine environmental quality are prohibited. This district is intended to establish and preserve quiet, stable single-family residential neighborhoods at low densities (up to approximately one unit per acre) free from other uses except those which are compatible with and convenient to the residents of such a district and should be located away from intensive or commercial development, manufactured, industrialized, relocated or temporary housing.

Sec. 802.  Permitted uses.

[The following uses are permitted in the R-1, restricted single-family residential district:]

1.   Single-family detached dwellings, but not including manufactured homes, travel trailers used as residences, or modular homes.

2.   Accessory buildings and uses customarily incidental to the principal residential use of the property, including home gardens, noncommercial greenhouses, and shelters or enclosures for three or less household pets that meet applicable health requirements. The keeping of four or more animals shall constitute a kennel. The keeping of one noncommercial livestock is allowed (with the exception of hogs) on lots with a minimum of five acres, provided that any buildings or enclosures for the maintenance or shelter of animals shall be setback a minimum of 150 feet from any property line. Noise and smell from the commercial livestock must be kept to a minimum.

3.   Churches, temples, synagogues and places of worship, and their solely owned and operated customary accessory facilities, including cemeteries, provided such uses are located on a lot with a minimum area of two acres, principal buildings are setback a minimum of 50 feet from any property line, and parking areas are located outside of the required front yard and separated from any side or rear property line by a minimum six-foot high, opaque fence or wall, or a densely planted landscape strip of at least ten feet in width.

4.   Home occupations, as defined in article III and limited in section 713.

5.   Parks, playgrounds, community centers, tennis courts, swimming pools, golf courses and other recreational facilities, operated on a nonprofit basis.

6.   Public and semi-public buildings and uses, as defined in article III.

7.   Schools, public elementary, middle and secondary.

8.   Schools, parochial and private offering courses in general education substantially similar to that of a public school, not offered for profit.

RESTRICTED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: R-1

TABLE INSET:

Minimum Lot Size	Front Setback	Side Setback	Rear Setback	Minimum Square Footage	Maximum Height of Structure
1 Acre	50'	20'	40'	1,500'	35'

Now, that last sentence is interesting. They elude to commercial livestock, but then comes the new RA (Restricted Agricultural) district that was approved March 2011.  It's more promising, but still has quite a few restrictions.  It also further defines that no fowl (ie. chickens) are allowed in any zoning district inside the City Limits:

ARTICLE XXII.2.  RESTRICTED AGRICULTURAL (RA) DISTRICT

Sec. 2200.2.1.  Purpose and intent.

The restricted agricultural (RA) district is an area which remains rural in character, yet where urban growth and expansion is expected to reach in the future. The regulations of this district are intended to provide a favorable climate for both agricultural and nonagricultural development and to provide orderly, timely, economic growth, as well as to recognize current conditions. The purpose of this district is to permit low-intensity and restricted agricultural uses in those areas which remain rural in character, yet where urban growth and expansion is expected in the future as the city develops. The preferred land uses in the district are agricultural, either active in the form of crops, or passive in the form of forest management or pasture lands with limited animal density. The requirements of the district are designed to encourage the continuing low-intensity agriculture use of the property and protect active urban uses found in adjacent districts of the city.

(Ord. of 3-7-2011, § 1)

Sec. 2200.2.2.  Permitted uses.

1.   Single-family detached dwellings, but not including manufactured homes, travel trailers used as residences, or modular homes. Density of dwellings is limited to no more than one dwelling per two acres (two acres is the minimum lot size for the RA zoning district).

2.   Agriculture, general and specialized farming, including: horticulture, plant nursery, greenhouse, dairy farming, and livestock raising, subject to the restrictions set forth in section 2200.2.3, infra.

3.   Riding stable, provided buildings housing animals are at least 100 feet from all property lines and the lot is not less than ten acres.

4.   Kennel and/or animal hospital, provided buildings housing animals are fully enclosed and at least 100 feet from all property lines and all pens, runs, etc. which are not located in a fully-enclosed building are at least 200 feet from all property lines. The keeping of four or more animals shall constitute a kennel. Minimum lot size for a kennel is five acres.

5.   Accessory buildings and uses customarily incidental to the principal residential and agricultural uses of the property. Buildings and structures which are intended for use or used for the housing or shelter of livestock and silos, granaries, windmills, barns, and similar structures which are related to the operation of an agricultural enterprise shall observe a minimum setback of one hundred feet from any property line and be spaced a minimum of five hundred feet from any residence or business on an adjoining property.

6.   Churches, temples, synagogues and places of worship, and their solely owned and operated customary accessory facilities, including cemeteries, provided such uses are located on a lot with a minimum area of two acres, principal buildings are setback a minimum of 50 feet from any property line, and parking areas are located outside of the required front yard and separated from any side or rear property line by a minimum six-foot-high, opaque fence or wall, or a densely planted landscape strip of at least ten feet in width.

7.   Home occupations, as defined in article III and limited in section 713.

8.   Parks, playgrounds, community centers, tennis courts, swimming pools, golf courses and other recreational facilities, operated on a non-profit basis.

9.   Public and semi-public buildings and uses, as defined in article III.

10.   Schools, public elementary, middle and secondary.

11.   Schools, parochial and private offering courses in general education substantially similar to that of a public school, not offered for profit.

(Ord. of 3-7-2011, § 1)

Sec. 2200.2.3.  Limitation on livestock and domestic pets; prohibition of hogs/pigs and fowl in the restricted agricultural (RA) district.

Horses, cows, goats, sheep, ponies, donkeys and other permitted domestic livestock may be kept, raised or bred in the RA district, provided that only two such animals shall be permitted for each one acre of open pastureland. All such livestock shall be contained adequately by suitable fencing within the specific property, and any buildings or structures for livestock shall be setback at least 100 feet from all property lines. Dogs, cats and other domestic pets may be kept, raised or bred in the RA district, provided that only three such animals shall be permitted for each one acre of lot size and all such domestic pets are subject to the kennel restriction contained in subsection 2200.2.2(4). The keeping or raising of fowl (chickens, etc.) or hogs/pigs, or the operation of a feed lot, is expressly prohibited because of their potential negative impact on adjacent urban use districts. All types of fowl, hogs and pigs are deemed prohibited domestic livestock and may not kept or raised in any zoning district within the city. Noise and smell from the livestock must be kept to a minimum.

So, I talked to the planning department, which suggested I talk to the mayor.  I told him our plans for a sustainable farm with a few of cows, goats/sheep, and chickens and was told, "I'm sure we can work something out"  We shook hands, and he asked me to come to the city council to explain my intentions.  Well, I must have said something wrong during my explanation, because he his response blindsided me.  He stated that they decided a while back that chickens would not be allowed inside the city limits.  There didn't seem to be any flexibility that a zoning change would fix. Bear in mind that this is a 30 acre parcel, surrounded by tracts of over 100 acres, with the exception of one 5 acre tract of foreclosed commercial property (unincorporated) that was recenty sold.  The tract that wraps around the south and west of the property is also unincorporated.  I don't think anyone would be bothered by a few hens laying eggs.  

With that response, I asked if deannexation was a possibility. To which the attorney responded that that was my right, but without anything to vote on, they couldn't give me a firm answer.  After all, they city's stance against the county was that it was the property owner's right to annex into the city, if that's what they wanted.  Well, this property owner would now like to deannex back to the county to the same zoning it was before it was annexed.  

Well, I followed through and asked the county if they would allow the deannexation.  The county approved the resolution, so now I have to petition the city to approve it.  There are a couple of gotcha's, but luckily none that apply to this property.  For instance, you cannot create an "island" of unincorporated property within the city limits (by the way, the same goes for annexation).  Since the property to the south and west of me is unincorporated (technically an unincorporated island--not sure how the annexation that created that island was legally done), and the property to my northeast is unincorporated, that's not an issue.  Also you need 100% of the landowner's signatures.  The bank's asset manager is on board and has signed the petition.  With my signature (not technically an owner yet, but under contract), that gives us 100%.  So, next step, the City Council.

During this, a local news reporter was in attendance at the City Council meeting and the County Board of Commissioner's meeting.  She interviewed me and wrote this article: http://www.dawsonnews.com/section/4/article/8028/ on the deannexation request.  If you support safe, locally grown food, please click the "like" button in the upper right-hand corner of the article.

Death of a Home Build

Before you get to start building and get financing from a bank, you need an appraisal, just as if you were buying any home.  The appraiser uses your house plans and elevation drawings to compare it to other houses sold in the area (as if it were already built).  The number of foreclosures in the area has continued to drive down home values, and like people attempting to sell their homes, we were going to be 30% underwater before we even built the home.  This, of course, negated bank financing.  If we had cash, we could still build, but we didn't have that kind of cash, and financially it made no sense to do so.

For a long time, my wife has been saying that there were signs that we should not build, but I was determined to complete the project.  This was the last nail in the coffin.  Sad, but true, we will not be able to build the house we worked so hard on.  Southland said they had experienced problems with appraisal values of other houses, but had worked through them.  I'm guessing the clients brought more cash to the table to offset the appraisal difference on some of the smaller houses, but we just didn't have that kind of cash.  This project was over.  Killed by foreclosures and banks.

We sent a certified letter (receipt required) letting to Southland requesting that the contract be terminated.  We received the green "receipt" card, but no further communication.  I can only assume that the contract is terminated, and no further action is required.  Ultimately, it cost us $2500 for the drafting and estimating.  They definitely earned the money, and I'm sorry that it ended this way.

Adding Sugar Water Feeders to the Hives

I'm using an "inside the hive" feeder method.  The hive on the left was set up yesterday with just a veil on and no camera crew, but today I figured, I had the bee suit, I should use it.

A little puff of smoke to let them know I'm here and to not bother me (it causes them to take on honey and masks the alarm pheromones):

Take off the top and give them another puff through the top inner screen:

Now it's fully open, nothing stopping them from attacking, but they don't seem to mind (bees really are pretty calm):

Now I place the inner top on upside down (so the notch faces the hive frames). I don't want the notch up, which is the usual method, which allows bees to come in, then down the center hole, because I'm going to cover the center hole with the feeder.  This way, they can still use the top entrance to get to the hive, and the feeder can be accessed later without opening the active part of the hive.

Container of sugar syrup (1:1 sugar to water):

The lid has a series of 1/16" holes drilled into it, that when the vacuum forms, just allows drips of sugar water to hang for the bees:

Positioning the feeder over the hole in the inner cover:

Stack on a couple of empty supers to cover the feeder:

Reinstall the inner screen to ensure no bees get in through the top (not really necessary):

Then put back on the telescoping top (metal covered lid) and cinch down the straps (so no animals can get inside):

Done!