Allows backyard chickens throughout the state subject to the provisions of this section and any deed restrictions or neighborhood association by-laws.
H6108 amends Rhode Island’s Right to Farm law to create a statewide framework allowing residential property owners to keep backyard hens, subject to detailed conditions. The bill limits the number of hens to one per 800 square feet of lot area, with a maximum of 10 hens per lot, and prohibits roosters. It also requires the owner to live in the dwelling, restricts hens to backyards or side yards, and sets standards for coop size, placement, fencing, sanitation, predator protection, feed storage, and nighttime confinement.
The bill is designed to permit domestic chicken keeping for egg production, not commercial slaughter or sale of hens. It defines “lot” for purposes of application, requires coops and runs to meet setback and construction standards, and allows cities and towns to adopt ordinances modifying the state limits. It also expressly preserves private property restrictions, such as deed restrictions, condominium rules, and neighborhood association bylaws, which remain enforceable over the state authorization.
The bill would add a new section to chapter 2-23 of the Rhode Island General Laws, expanding the Right to Farm chapter to cover domestic chickens on residential lots statewide. It would create a baseline state rule permitting backyard hens while leaving room for local governments to impose different limits by ordinance and for private covenants and association rules to continue controlling where applicable. The measure would affect homeowners, municipalities, zoning enforcement, and private community associations by establishing minimum standards for keeping hens and clarifying that roosters and commercial hen slaughter are not allowed.
There is limited recorded committee or floor discussion in the provided materials, and no votes are listed, so the overall sentiment must be inferred from the bill’s structure and caption. The bill appears generally supportive of backyard chicken ownership, with a regulatory approach aimed at addressing nuisance, sanitation, and animal welfare concerns rather than prohibiting the practice. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the provided context suggests no documented controversy in the available materials, though the detailed restrictions indicate an effort to balance permissive and neighborhood-protection interests.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be local control, neighborhood impacts, and private property restrictions. Municipalities may be concerned about whether the state baseline limits are too permissive or too restrictive, while residents and neighborhood associations may focus on noise, odors, setbacks, sanitation, and enforcement. Another possible issue is the bill’s express subordination to deed restrictions and association bylaws, which preserves private enforcement but may limit the practical effect of the statewide authorization for some homeowners.