Raise the Hammer

You know what might happen if we allow backyard hens?

Probably we'll join the ranks of the disease ridden, rat infested slum towns such as Vancouver, New York, Portland, Seattle, etc...

I don't know much about the issue, so I'm not yet for or against hens in the backyard, but I'm surprised you chose to mention New York in your list. New York is considered to be the city with the most rats.

In fact, of the cities in the US with the biggest rat problems (Atlanta, Boston, New Orleans, Chicago, Baltimore, New York), only Boston doesn't allow hens in the backyard.

Another thing I which causes me concern is that even a website devoted to backyard hens admits/warns that rats are a major problem where hens are kept.

I'd be interested to know if any studies have been done on the causes of rat problems, and whether or not there is any correlation with backyard chickens.

I would think that the number of people who actually have backyard chickens in New York is rather small overall, and perhaps not directly connected to the areas where rats present the largest problem. But again, this is just my guess.

Could be totally wrong, but I've always heard that NYC infamous rat problem is due to thousands of restaurants and piles of garbage in back alleys.
To suggest Manhattan is infested with rats because folks in Brooklyn have backyard chickens is a bit much.

I totally agree. I wasn't suggesting that backyard chickens are the reason for New York's rat infestation.

I was just responding to Sean's sarcasm about New York.

Have no fear though, we are allowing tarantulas and snakes.

I have a friend in Portland who has 3 kids and a couple chickens. They love it for the food production and the kids love playing with the hens. Fairly strict guidelines too for those wanting to have backyard chickens. Chickens will never become the blight on our cities that stray cats and dogs are.

Edit: the thing most annoying to me about this isn't whether they vote to allow chickens or not, but that they are choosing to keep their heads in the sand and not even debate it.
Also, as we've found recently is becoming the norm, they ignore excellent advice or staff reports presented to them. Why are we paying for lawyers and staffers if council is just going to sit around and ignorantly pretend that they know better??

Comment edited by jason on 2012-01-16 08:57:31

the thing most annoying to me about this isn't whether they vote to allow chickens or not, but that they are choosing to keep their heads in the sand and not even debate it.

Image

It isn't cool and we need to push that this be reviewed. @SeanCB hit the nail on the head. We want to be a big city, stop ignoring seemingly small issues that could go a long way in changing the way people look at Hamilton.

EDIT:

300 cities across North America have lifted bans on urban chickens

300 cities in North America including the major metropolitans mentioned, realize there is no reason to ban chickens for noise, health or any other reasons.

How do you not read one small paragraph like that and decide it's something that must be reviewed. You couldn't even use an excuse like 'Staff is swamped'. You don't need staff. There are 300 other communities with the document we need to lift this ban. Ask for the right to use it and change out the city at the top. Then spend some time reading it, realize there is no reason to not change this bi-law, and put this to bed. Watch the emails in outrage over this stop. That's gotta save some 'time' in itself. Or maybe council will receive some positive emails and phone calls expressing their joy over such a success story. I bet it would feel good to receive a few of those.

Comment edited by lawrence on 2012-01-16 15:34:54

A bit more background. Over 300 North American cities allow chickens:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunsw...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_chick...

In Hamilton, the definition of domestic animal has not ever to my knowledge included chickens. That's not to pick on chickens. It's not, you know, chickens, or hens, or roosters, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that one thing you have a dramatic impact on the quality [of life]."

Next thing you know people will want to marry them!

Hamilton should certainly allow backyard chickens, but license all urban animals and funnel resources to animal welfare enforcement. Housing a chicken and collecting its delicious ova is one thing. Caring for it and paying to have it treated by a qualified vet if and when it gets sick is another.

So you want to charge a fee to the owner because you are concerned that they won't be able to pay for it's care? Doesn't make sense to me.

The last thing we need is more (needless?) government bureaucracy.

I believe chickens can be easily cared for by a qualified cleaver, hatchet or other means of decapitation.

I really hope the people downvoting this are vegetarians.

Don't forget the beer can to place them over the fire with

I'll be letting my councillor know that I take a solid pro-backyard-chicken stance. This is not untried ground; we have plenty of models for this sort of thing.

Go, chickens!

Was just a suggestion. You can make licensing free, if you like, and make the penalties steep and have them go to help underwrite welfare standards enforcement. Cats and dogs have recommended/mandated shot schedules, so we'd probably look at that in certain situations. And then, just to be progressive, we would allow people to raise cats and dogs for food.

http://www.youtube.com/#/watch?v=ErRHJlE...

“In general, things in a place like Portland are really great, so little concerns become ridiculous. There are a lot of people here who can afford—financially but also psychologically—to be really, really concerned about buying local, for instance. It becomes mock epic. It’s like Alexander Pope’s ‘Rape of the Lock.’ I was standing in line at Whole Foods, and the guy in front of me says, ‘I really wish you guys sold locally made fresh pasta.’ And the cashier says, ‘Look, we do.’ And the guy says, ‘No, no—that’s from Seattle.’ Really? You don’t have a bigger battle?”

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/...

Maybe this is bad advice, espeically coming from me, but I will be there are numerous chickens and other livestock being kept inside city borders. It is against the law, technically, but the city just doesn’t have the resources to enforce it. Again, I know that is the wrong attitude, but the real issue should be moving away from huge, outdated bylaws and toward a more citizen minded approach. I’ve been reading up on the hotel laws as of late, and did you know innkeepers need a certain amount of space to house horses? Horses fine. Chickens no.

I think that's in case the Ti-Cats ever face a Western team in the Grey Cup.

I may be vegan, but this rule seems a little bizzare. If nothing else because of the greatly exaggerated disease, pest and waste problems which come from centralizing chicken "production" into colossal hundred-thousand-bird warehouses. For those who aren't convinced though, here's what chickens can do for you, even if you don't eat them.

• Fertilizing - through nitrogen-rich manure and mineral-rich eggshells
• Organic Waste Disposal - Chickens are walking compost heaps, able to scratch, eat and pick through kitchen scraps and other green waste to greatly accellerate the process.
• Pest reduction - Chickens eat bugs, like most small fowl (ducks, geese etc) are great predators for garden pests.
• No-dig tillage - Many organic operations use "chicken tracktors" (small coops on wheels) to prepare ground for planting because of how effectively they scour and enrich ground with none of the soil-depleting, energy-hogging and carbon-releasing drawbacks of plowing.
• Genetics - factory-farmed chicken are specially bred to be grown in factories, not to be tasty, nutritious or friendly. I've known a lot of farmers, and other breeds are renowned for everything from amazing eggs to their amazing pet-like friendliness.
• Labour - Do you know any "chicken catchers"? Ask them what their job entails...
• Food Security - what do you plan to do if supermarket trucks ever stop delivering for more than a week? In such situations, hungry neighbours are not friendly neighbours...
• Poverty - What about people who can't afford to buy eggs, and don't have the space for an expansive bean and seed garden?
• Freedom - the burden of proof should be placed on those who wish to prohibit something, not those who simply want to be allowed to do it.

All great points. My favourite being the last one.

Freedom - the burden of proof should be placed on those who wish to prohibit something, not those who simply want to be allowed to do it.

Must be time for an after 5 gathering?

"Two chicken inspectors showed up at a farm in Southern Ontario not long ago. They flashed badges and inspected the premises and, sure enough, they found what they were looking for: chickens. About 100 of them, wandering across open pastures, pecking at bugs, worms and blades of grass.

The inspectors quickly put a stop to all that. They told the farmer to get rid of his chickens or face the consequences. Then they visited other nearby farms, issuing threats of fines (up to $10,000 a day), and leaving more than one Amish farm wife in tears.

These were not police, RCMP or public-health officials. They were employees of the Chicken Farmers of Ontario, the body that represents Ontario’s roughly 1,000 chicken farmers, and they have the legal right to “inspect the books, records, documents, lands and premises and any chickens of persons engaged in producing or marketing chickens.” In other words, they can carry out chicken busts. And on this particular bust, their suspicions were confirmed: Delicious pastured chickens were being sold without quota.

Quota is a legal requirement for marketing chickens, turkey, eggs or cow milk in Canada. Without it, the simple bucolic act of selling a block of farmstead cheese or several dozen eggs at a farmers’ market is against the law. It’s been this way for almost half a century. If you want access to the market, you have to pay for it. And access isn’t cheap.

This kind of arrangement is better known as a cartel. Cartels fix prices. Usually, they’re illegal, but not in Canada. In fact, when it comes to poultry, dairy and eggs, not being part of a cartel is illegal – as many an Amish farm wife can tell you.

The Canadian food cartel goes by its own special name: “supply management.” Critics have charged that supply management makes food disproportionately expensive (especially for the poor), cripples our agricultural sector and is holding us back from entering lucrative trade deals with Asia.

But here’s what hasn’t been said about supply management: It is the enemy of deliciousness.

If you have ever wondered why you can buy heritage chickens such as the famed poulet de Bresse in France but not in Canada, or pastured butter the colour of an autumn sunset in Ireland but not in Canada, or why it’s so hard to find pastured eggs here, the reason is supply management.

Great ingredients, as any good cook will tell you, come from small producers who lovingly tend their flocks and the land that sustains them. These artisan producers – the very people attempting to make food local and sustainable – are stifled under supply management because it requires the one thing these starry-eyed pastoralists almost always don’t have: money. A single cow’s worth of dairy quota, for example, costs about $27,000 (up to $40,000 in B.C.). Quota for one egg-laying hen can cost upward of $200."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/food-and-wine/trends/trends-features/why-you-cant-find-heritage-poultry/article2290035/singlepage/

Wow. Just wow. And wow again.

Over time I never found a lot of disagreement between the animal rights books on my shelves and old roommate's fine antique french cooking books. It's well understood that any kind of mistreatment (especially in the hour or so before slaughter) leads to inferior meat. Extend that over a lifetime of cruelty, confinement and crowding, and the quality of the meat you produce will suffer immeasurably. No wonder it's now considered terrorism in America to videotape and publicize these conditions.

We live in a country with some of the most subsidized food on earth, yet also one where average small-farmer incomes tend to be negative. Something needs to change. It's not working for producers, consumers or the chickens involved.

Thanks Leghonrn. That piece of data is sick.

Are there any pigeon racing enthusiasts in the city? What rules cover their birds?

And as far as raising animals in the backyard for food, are there any laws against raising rabbits for food, provided that it is all done humanely?

I know/knew of one. I forget exactly where he lives(d). Maybe Mount Hope? In that area anyway, in a rural area.

Had to leap over a pile of horse crap while crossing the street downtown today. I guess that's considered OK, but hens confined to back yards would be too dirty for us?

What about raising pigeons for food? Squab drumettes anyone?

Sad that the Council don't even try to get the facts about urban chickens,,,, really surprised about Ferguson's comments .. usually he takes a tempered approach. another reason for a term limit for councillors... we need some fresh thinkers ,,, not the same old / same old

One thing I can say about chicken poop, is that in it's 'green stage' it's highly flammable. There could be a problem for some to manage it. It generates a lot of heat, due to the high nitrogen & ammonia content, & can simply smolder & then burst into flames when left in a heap. It needs a fairly long decomp. period before it can be mixed with other substances & used in the garden as fertilizer.

I think that people should probably attend some basic course on urban chicken management before they begin. (if any exist) At least get some books or information online.