The proposal for a new animal control bylaw came about because of two chickens in my yard. But rather than deal with the actual complaint an obvious discriminatory animal control bylaw was drafted.

The chickens are well behaved, live in a movable pen, provide nutritious eggs, and provide a lot of enjoyment and education for the neighbourhood and do no more harm than the birds in the trees. During the October 2, 2008 council meeting during my presentation Mayor Lynn Acre asked Paul just what was the complaint and all he could say was that “it was against the law to have chickens”. So why don't we deal with the issue and resolve any perceived problems?

On October 2, 2008 in Paul’s presentation to council under the section entitled Legal Opinion, a nameless legal adviser “suggested the current regulations could be enforced on the basis that keeping chickens in an urban area is not normal.” Arguing that chickens should be banned because they are abnormal today fails to provide any practical reasoning since just less than 50 years ago it was normal for many people to have chickens in Port burwell. In my research, there is no reason not to have chickens that I can find other than discrimination.

Also consider that in Paul’s comments on Oct. 2, 2008 :
“Staff suggests the rationale for implementing or not implementing regulations for controlling such animals would be whether the community as a whole wants animals raised and housed in urban areas versus the safety and other impacts.” So why has he proposed a new bylaw that does not take into consideration the communities input?

So what we are really doing with the new animal control bylaw is deciding if our municipality should have chickens but what we are getting is a bureaucratic costly nightmare.

Paul gave a report on Nov. 5, 2009 on animal control. In it, his main concern was what other municipalities are doing. Overall, he elected to stop us from having any chickens. and it seems he arrived at his conclusion before he did the report and the proposed bylaw. He did not consider the people of Bayham and our more pressing need of providing food for the many people that are out of work. Even the study he presented “ Residential Urban Chicken Keeping” was most enthusiastic about keeping backyard chickens and is filled with valuable information about sound reasons for keeping chickens. Did any of our counselors read it? He did not consider the many reasons for my having the chickens and it was not my idea at all but a 13 year old girl who figured out that this was an excellent way to resolve the problem of local quality healthy food. I merely designed the chicken tractor, she did the research. How fitting that a 13 year old pointed us in the proper direction!

Let me quote from the study provided:

“This question of whether or not cities allow backyard chickens keeping has increased substantially over the past 5 years as citizens become more interested in participating in their own food production.”

Also “ the recent increase in urban backyard chicken keeping has come about for three main reasons. First the local food movement itself has become very popular which has sparked a new interest for many in backyard food production. Since chickens are one of the smaller protein producers they fit well into a backyard food production model. Second, rising energy and transportation costs have caused concern over increase in food costs and backyard eggs offer a cheaper solution as they do not have to travel far to reach the plate. Lastly many citizens are becoming increasingly concerned about food safety and with meat recalls and other animal industry issues in the news backyard chickens offer many a safer solution”

Note especially the conclusion of this paper, “Many cities and towns are now looking at how they can be more sustainable and allowing urban chickens is one step towards that goal of increased sustainability. Not only can backyard chickens provide residents with a fresh and important food source but they also bring about an increased awareness of our relationship to the food cycle.”

And it goes on to state:
“by forming a just and well thought out prochicken ordinance cities can allow citizens to keep chickens while also addressing the concerns of other stake holder groups.”

And it goes on “With that said, city council should approach the issue of urban chicken keeping with a “how” rather than a yes or no as a growing list of pro chicken cities across the nation shows that it can be done successfully.”

So how did Paul Groeneveld conclude that a ban is justified other than this was a forgone conclusion?

Note too that his report did not interview anyone in Byahm who has backyard chickens.

The bylaw is also dependent on complaints so that any person or group with a gripe with a neighbour can abuse the system.

If we are to register each animal how will Paul recognize the same chicken and if an egg hatches is that considered a continuation of the life of the bird. Clearly the new bylaw is far too complicated and riddled with errors and should not be adopted by this council.

Note the most recent recommendation in Vancouver which is notably missing from Pauls report:

City of Vancouver
DRAFT GUIDELINES
KEEPING OF BACKYARD HENS
On March 5, 2009, Council directed staff to develop guidelines for the keeping of
backyard hens. The guidelines were to both protect public health and welfare, and
ensure humane treatment of hens. This document outlines the draft guidelines that
staff recommends, as well as the rationale behind each recommendation. The
proposed guidelines would be implemented through changes to the Zoning and
Development and Animal Control by-laws. Actual by-law language may differ from the
guideline descriptions below.
I. Changes to Zoning and Development By-Law No. 3575