Owen Sound Chicken (and other fine creatures) Bylaw

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Anne Finlay-Stewart on February 19, 2010 at 15:57

bak bak bak bak bak bak bak bak

Permalink Reply by Shane Jolley on February 19, 2010 at 17:09

I'll take that as a yes!

Anne Finlay-Stewart said:

bak bak bak bak bak bak bak bak

Permalink Reply by Ang Freeman on February 20, 2010 at 18:40

YES! I would be so excited to have that bylaw overturned and have chickens quietly or not so quietly going about their day in our backyard. Waking up and gathering a few eggs, creating a chicken supportive network of people who want to learn together, training chicken-sitters so that chicken owners can go away for a few days without worrying about their feathered friends - these among others are ideas (such as heritage breeds) that have been tossed around over an egg breakfast.

I would also be interested in looking into other feathered friends like quail, which make a great micro-enterprise (although I bet their are different laws about drawing income from having birds vs. for personal use).

K-W has just been through the discussion. I think it is o.k. in Kitchener, but not Waterloo, unless you had chickens before the bylaw was firmed-up, as it was a-legal before it was illegal. There are definitely people there who have made pretty clear presentations before their own city council that we could draw on.

Ron and I also just picked up a Rodale Press book entitled "Chickens in your Backyard: A Beginner's Guide" by Rick and Gail Luttmann, 1976. I'm sure parts are dated, but I'm sure raising chickens hasn't changed that much in 30 years.

Sign me up for wooing the council. This could be one of the first Transition Town projects. Looking forward to meeting soon to plan out more possible endeavors for those interested.

Permalink Reply by Ang Freeman on February 20, 2010 at 18:52

Madison Wisconsin is doing some pretty exciting work with chickens

Check out trailers for a film at http://www.tarazod.com/filmsmadchicks2.html

and for more info on raising chickens, coops, breeds, etc www.madcitychickens.com

Permalink Reply by Anne Finlay-Stewart on February 23, 2010 at 0:06

We should show the Mad City Chicken video.
Here's this week's Orange Crate

Due to scheduling conflicts, we celebrated Christmas with my sister’s family last weekend. Not a moment too soon, I realize, but the delay meant we were able to include three birthdays, Family Day and Valentine’s in the celebration. In keeping with the primary holiday, we had turkey for dinner – a big fat delicious organic bird from a Grey County farm. While passing the gravy and cranberry sauce, I got to tell the story of another local turkey farmer who benefitted from the power of the media and consumers.
Matthew Dick and his wife Janice decided a few years ago that they would fill growing consumer demand by raising organic turkeys. Getting organic “credentials” for their turkeys required that they give the birds a vegetarian diet without antibiotics or animal by-products common to poultry feed such as pork fat or bone meal. It also meant keeping the turkeys on pasture – out in the fresh air and sunshine.
The first time I heard about Matthew Dick he had already lost an appeal to the Ontario Farm Products Tribunal , who upheld a ruling by the Turkey Farmers of Ontario that every turkey producer with quota (raising over fifty turkeys) should keep them under cover to protect them from any risk of infection with bird flu from wild birds. Effectively, these representatives of commercial turkey operations, the smallest of which seem to have confinement barns of 35,000 birds, were telling Matthew that he could no longer raise organic turkeys on his farm.
Enter a newspaper reporter who pointed out the apparent motives of the Turkey Farmers of Ontario, and their glaring lack of evidence of any risk. Enter her readers, consumers who want the option of eating food produced in Ontario under organic standards. And trailing behind but seeing the writing on the wall, enter the (now former) Minister of Agriculture who intervened where she had previously refused, and Matthew and Janice put their Christmas turkeys back outdoors.
In fact, the 60,000 turkeys that had to be destroyed in British Columbia due to an avian flu outbreak were confined birds – never exposed to wild birds or sunshine or fresh air, but regularly wading in each other’s droppings. These are precisely the stressful conditions under which, according to some scientists, pathogens like those causing avian flu thrive and mutate.
Now I’m about to wade into some droppings myself. The kind that got councilor David Adair some interesting correspondence and not the good kind. Why is it that in Owen Sound we can keep pigeons or rabbits or dogs or cats or chain saws for that matter, but not chickens?
Chickens produce much less waste than cats or dogs. It does not smell once it’s dry, and does not contain excessive nitrogen that pollutes waterways. It does not have to be collected into plastic bags that will never break down and put in landfills to become “perpetual poop”. And it can be used as fertilizer because it does not contain pathogens and parasites. Chickens are a gardener’s delight not only for what they add in the way of soil amendment but because they eat weeds, grass clippings, veggie trimmings, slugs and bugs. They don’t attract flies – as a matter of fact they eat them, along with mosquitoes and ticks. Hens, unlike roosters (sorry boys), are fairly quiet and at night they perch indoors in silence. Not always true of cats and dogs and certainly not motorcycles or chainsaws. Rodents are only interested in the chicken feed, which should be stored properly, and predators are no more interested in chickens than they are in squirrels or, frankly, Fluffy.
And the eggs. How much fresher , thriftier or more local could food get?
We’re going to have a committee about this, I can tell. We’re going to have public meetings. And we’re going to hear both sides of every argument that every community before us heard when they changed their bylaws. I am convinced of this because it is the Owen Sound way – give new ideas a chance, let everyone have their say, don’t be too hasty, and always be willing to compromise. And who can argue with that?
But I am equally convinced that one day we will join New York, Chicago, Vancouver, Brampton, Niagara Falls and the other one hundred and growing North American cities who permit and control urban chickens. And one day when my family comes for a holiday from Toronto, another city considering chickens, the Easter eggs will be more local than ever.

Permalink Reply by Lishui Springford on July 3, 2010 at 11:31

I'm new to the group, but this is a big one for me - I'd love to see chickens as prevalent in the landscape as dogs, cats, and seagulls... :)

Permalink Reply by Shawna Cox on November 15, 2010 at 19:09

yay chickens!

Permalink Reply by Ang Freeman on January 10, 2011 at 14:41

All this time we have been talking chickens but I had not actually read the Owen Sound by-law.  Now in my clutches I thought I would post the key points here for y'all.  

 

Excerpts from By-law No. 1997-089:  A By-law to Prohibit the Keeping of Certain Kinds of Animals in the City of Owen Sound

 

2.  No person shall keep, or cause to be kept within the City of Owen Sound, and animal listed on "Schedule A" 

 

[From Schedule "A" A List of Animals of Which the Keeping is Prohibited in the City of Owen Sound

14.  All domesticated fowl, save and except pigeons, with the exception that all domesticated fowl may be kept in accordance with Section 7 of this By-law within the areas defined on Schedules "C1" and "C2" to this By-law.]

 

7.  Despite Section 2, this By-law does not prohibit the keeping of an animal listed on Schedule "A" to this By-law, in the places or under the circumstances provided for on Schedule "B"

 

[Schedule B: A List of Places Where the Keeping of Certain Kinds of Animals is not Prohibited

Not a direct quote this includes:  1. Veterinary Hospitals 2.  With liscence which permits keeping animals such as circuses, fairs and petting zoos 3.  Harrison Park Sanctuary 4. In care or control of the Animal Control Officer or Owen Sound Rep]

 

"C1" and "C2" are city maps that show "General Rural Areas"  like West Rock on the West and anything East and South of 8th St E by hospital and toward Compost area etc. 

 

8.  Despite Section 2 (above), persons may keep, or cause to be kept, the domesticated horse, ass, cattle, goat deer, swine, sheep, or domesticated fowl, int he areas shown as the General Rural Area as shown on "C1" and "C2".

 

10.  No person shall keep, or cause to be kept, any pigeons or rabbits within the limits of the City of Owen Sound in any coop, cote, pen, building or enclosure of any kine, the outer limits of which are within twenty-five feet of any dwelling house int he said City.

 

11.  No person who keeps, or causes to be kept, pigeons or rabbits shall keep, or cause to be kept, the said pigeons or rabbits in a  coop, cote, pen, building or enclosure of any kind that is not clean or sanity or that is or may become a nuisance, or that is or may become injurious or dangerous contrary to the Health Protection and Promotion Act, or any regulations thereunder.

 

So.... what I understand is that chickens are indeed not currently permitted within Owen Sound in residential areas.  Pigeons and rabbits are, if they are not within 25 ft of a home.  I could have chickens in Owen Sound if I made my yard into a petting zoo, OR if we collectively worked to change the By-law. 

 

FYI tarantulas and iguanas are currently welcome here.  I rather cuddle a chicken, thanks.

 

If you want a paper copy of the By-law for your records I am happy to make a few copies.  Just let me know and I can have them available for Saturday's Transition Gathering.

 

I would also like to arrange a first organizing meeting on the topic of urban chickens.  So if you are interested and can make it, come to my house on January 17th - 780 4th Ave W, Owen Sound at 7:30 pm.

 

Please let me know if you want to be involved but can't make it.

Permalink Reply by Lishui Springford on January 10, 2011 at 15:07

So what we should talk about is the parameters of the changed by-law. We could re-write it the way we'd like it and then submit that to council, continuing to address the intent of the original by-law, which is to prevent smelly, noisy, and inhumane practices from starting conflicts in town. Off the top of my head:

 

fowl not permitted within 50ft of neighbouring a house or a well

for properties with an enclosed outdoor space up to 1000 square feet - maximum 8 chickens or ducks

for properties with an enclosed outdoor space 1000 to 5000 square feet - maximum 16 chickens or ducks and maximum one rooster

for properties with 5000 or more square feet of outdoor space  - geese and turkeys permitted, and maximum 8 fowl per 2500 square feet

animals must be put into a predator-safe enclosure every evening at dusk

eggs and meat for non-commercial use only.

 

etc

 

just throwing that out there.

have a great day!

Permalink Reply by Shane Jolley on January 10, 2011 at 18:10

Good thoughts.

Meeting about this next Monday night at Ang Freeman's. Are you going?

 

Shane.

Lishui Springford said:

So what we should talk about is the parameters of the changed by-law. We could re-write it the way we'd like it and then submit that to council, continuing to address the intent of the original by-law, which is to prevent smelly, noisy, and inhumane practices from starting conflicts in town. Off the top of my head:

 

fowl not permitted within 50ft of neighbouring a house or a well

for properties with an enclosed outdoor space up to 1000 square feet - maximum 8 chickens or ducks

for properties with an enclosed outdoor space 1000 to 5000 square feet - maximum 16 chickens or ducks and maximum one rooster

for properties with 5000 or more square feet of outdoor space  - geese and turkeys permitted, and maximum 8 fowl per 2500 square feet

animals must be put into a predator-safe enclosure every evening at dusk

eggs and meat for non-commercial use only.

 

etc

 

just throwing that out there.

have a great day!

Permalink Reply by Ang Freeman on January 19, 2011 at 15:14

Chicken Meeting Notes from February 17th, 2011

 

7 excited people attended the meeting - a nice mix of "Chicken Wanters" and "Chicken Supporters"

 

In general meeting participants agreed that we will attempt to change the OS City Bylaw rather than encouraging urban chicken owners (or wannabe's) to break the By-law.

 

Also, agreed that the start of a fresh council (rather than prior to elections) is a good time to initiate this work because of the slow speed of bureaucracy and By-law change.  Also because there is fresh chicken-supporting energy on council.

 

Our immediate actions will include the following:

1.  Ron/Ang - will acquire study done by Jacqueline Jolliffe "Balking at Bocking: Urban Chicken Policy in Canada" which outlines what has worked (or not) in several communities across Canada. Will post report if available.

2.  Shawna - will research info from cities where By-law exists regarding any problems that exist (ie. number of By-law complaints annually, and what are they for?)

3.  Shane - will find out which committee at council would work on this issue.

4.  Ang  - is compiling a list of each community in Canada with By-law or where attempted with comparison info - will post online

5.  Ang will look into what is included in the Mundare, AB course for chicken ownership and look into possible educators locally

 

Future steps:

1.  Prepare materials for council

2.  Determine person and strategy for presenting to council

 

Timeline?  To have a presentation or materials to council by Easter?

Next meeting in February TBA

 

 

Permalink Reply by Lishui Springford on January 19, 2011 at 16:56

this by-law might be an important one: http://lin.ca/resource-details/9344 It looks pretty typical of municipal by-laws from this part of the world

here's a little legal tidbit on this: if this is the correct by-law, then it is unenforceable. All ordinances/by-laws/acts etc have to draw authority by creating a contract-type agreement between the government and the governed. That means

• there needs to be some valid reason for putting this by-law into effect, because it essentially reduces people's rights and freedoms... this valid reason is missing from this by-law
• there must be a clear statement of who is responsible and in what way. Instead, much of this by-law is applicable to property ("all trees must..." and "unused refrigerators shall...") rather than to persons. Only human beings can be held responsible and therefore much of this by-law is unenforceable
• every law must have a remedy available so that a person can act honourably and avoid having to go to court. This by-law is unlawful because it suggests that the Chief Building Inspector can slap an order on a property (not a person) and that if a person (not a property) wants to appeal this order, that person has to pay a $200 non-refundable fee to do so. Not fair!

anyway, I bet there are other by-laws that cover this chicken issue, and I bet they're equally badly-written. This may mean that Council will have to look at re-writing the by-law from scratch, which could take quite a while or might be too big a can of worms right now.

It would be very helpful if we find out all the legislation that is being used (noise? pollution? Ministry of Environment legislation?) in this case and go through it in this way. It may turn out that there actually isn't any enforceable anti-chicken by-law, and perhaps a simple memorandum of understanding or something like that could do the trick.

 

cheers

Lishui

 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page