Coalition of Animal Sanctuaries Urges Ban on Backyard Chickens

[valereee]

Rachel, I do think that many government representatives are sort of on the fence about allowing chicken-keeping. If someone comes along with an argument like this one that abandoned chickens will become a burden on already-overwhelmed shelters, it might tip the balance to the other side.

Quote:

 

[fancbrd4me02]

Hi everyone - I'm going to put my two cents in. When I read the colitions resistance to backyard chicken keeping (Restisting re-zoning, stricter husbandry laws) I have a different reaction. I think a lot of you are forgetting about some really bad problems that certain urban communities are facing with illegal operations involving chickens. When you look at the facts, it's impossible for animal control/police to deal with these operations due to lack of funding & man power. Where I live, a lot of people are taking advantage of backyard chicken keeping to do really unsavory things with thier dogs & chickens. I do think that these sanctuaries/groups see this as a logical way to slow down the explosion of these illicit groups, and get more funding or power to enforce it. Lets face it, do you really think that this is aimed at Mr. & Mrs. Responsible chicken owner? Sorry, it's not. Sad that responsible people suffer, but lots of people don't want to pay the taxes for more law enforcement, animal control, etc. so situations like this get out of control, and everyone ends up being punished. Those of you living in rural areas can't know how awful the situation is in cities overrun with this problem. I hate that it comes to banning things. But go to a shelter with nearly 100% pit bulls that will be euthenized week after week becuase people want to do what they want whenever they want. After a while, you would decide that what these people want is to not behave responsibly, and have other people clean up thier mess. If we as a country had decided to get more enforcement & funding for animal welfare laws, we wouldn't be in this mess. The ultimate motivations of the group perpetuating it matter less than the fact that by ignoring social problems/animal abuse that we have given these groups a lot of power. (And we have ignored it - it's not a priority, there hasn't been taxes collected sufficiently to enforce the laws, no enforcement = really huge problems.)

So what's my point? Stop worrying about your rights, and start going after the so-called rights of the people making other people look bad Lets get some funding for animal control, law enforcement. Next time there is something on your ballot about a tax for law enforcement, maybe you should think about voting for it instead of worrying about goverment interference. I just think complaining about other people's eating habits isn't getting you anywhere. The criminals/bad pet owners are providing the ammo for these groups to go after your rights. How about stopping them?

 

[mistyfeather]

people that belong to these kind of groups will not want any one to keep chickens. no mater how nice your coop is, no mater how well fed and happy your birds are, a vet could look at your flock and say they were the healthiest chickens he ever saw, and a person from one of these groups will walk right up to you and say " you are treating these birds in humanely. what .... you keep them pened? you say they only free range 8 hrs. a day?that is no where neer enough fredom !you should not have these chickens , you dont care about them!" there expectations are so far out there none of us will never be exceptable chicken owners to these people.

 

[AZKat]

Quote:
I'm sorry, but I do think that this is aimed at people who are interested in keeping backyard chickens for eggs. I'll repost the link, to save everyone the hassle of going through the whole thread
http://www.farmsanctuary.org/pdf/Collective Position Statement on Backyard Poultry.pdf
if you read it, its pretty obvious that they aren't concerned with cities legalizing chickens and then having problems with people raising chickens for illegal or immoral purposes. They are concerned that people are going to be buying chickens for the purposes of raising eggs or meat, and end up dumping the birds (especially unwanted roosters) on sanctuaries, and that people are going to be buying from hatcheries.

I don't think that this is reason to panic, but I do think that we need to be aware that there is a new source of organized opposition to backyard chicken keeping, and to be ready to counter the objections they are raising. The good thing is that this should be fairly easy to do, since its a simple fact that, for example, chick sexing is much more accurate than 20-50%. For that matter, its possible to order from hatcheries that don't send extra chicks for warmth, and who put food (in the form of grow-gel) in the box with the chicks, or to buy chicks locally.

 

[valereee]

ACZKat, I agree. This is not a reason to panic. It's just a reason to be prepared to counter arguments we haven't seen before. Up until now, those seeking to get ordinances passed to allow backyard chicken-keeping and those who rescue abandoned chickens have had more in common that not. We agreed that chickens should not be mistreated so that people could have eggs.

The problem here is that our proposed solutions to this issue are very different. My proposed solution is to keep my own hens. Their fear is that my solution won't solve the entire problem.

I think that when we approach our government representatives, we need to:

1. Counter the arguments they're making that are MOST likely to resonate with those government representatives,
2. IGNORE the arguments that probably won't resonate, and
3. Allow those who support these not-so-compelling-to-most-government-representatives arguments to dilute the overall impact of their opposition by focussing on those arguments.

So, argument-by-argument, let's consider which of their arguments are likely to be persuasive to government representatives and which ones aren't.

1. Municipal shelters will be inundated with chickens. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

2. Hatcheries are like puppy mills. Not likely.

3. Shipping day-old chicks is cruel. Not likely.

4. Chicken-sexing is more art than science. May be persuasive because it contributes to #1 and because roosters may annoy neighbors/provoke complaints.

5. Roosters may be unwanted and are often illegal. May be persuasive because it contributes to #1.

6. Chickens attract rodents. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

7. Lack of professional medical care. May be persuasive because it can contribute to #1 if chicken-keepers can't afford to pay for veterinary care.

8. Enforcement costs. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

9. Slaughter. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

10. Roosters will be killed. Not likely.

So that leaves us with coming up with countering arguments that we should make sure we include in any approach to our government representatives for arguments # 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

Without getting into value judgements about the arguments, can we come up with counterarguments to each?

Val



Quote:

 

[AZKat]

Valereee, I totally agree with you, and I'll make a start at countering those points.

1. Municipal shelters will be inundated with chickens. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

If someone wants or needs to find a new home for a pullet or a laying hen, its fairly easy to rehome them via craigslist, or through informal networks of chicken owners. It is a little more difficult to find new homes for roosters, but it isn't that difficult.


4. Chicken-sexing is more art than science. May be persuasive because it contributes to #1 and because roosters may annoy neighbors/provoke complaints.

Chick sexing is 90-95% accurate. Chick-sexers are highly paid, skilled professionals, and hatcheries base their reputation on delivering what people order. For people who want to make sure they don't accidentally get a rooster, there are several 'sex-linked' breeds that can be sexed with 100% accuracy at birth based on the color/pattern of their feathers. Many feedstores also allow people to return roosters if they buy them by accident.

5. Roosters may be unwanted and are often illegal. May be persuasive because it contributes to #1.

Unwanted roosters are often unwanted because cities ban roosters. How often and how loudly a rooster crows depends on a number of things, including the personality of the bird. Several cities allow people to keep roosters, or a single rooster, as long as the rooster doesn't create a noise disturbance.

6. Chickens attract rodents. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

Chickens eat rodents. Chicken owners are also highly motivated to keep rodents out of their chicken's feed, which is easily done by keeping the feed in a rodent proof container.

8. Enforcement costs. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

In cities that currently allow chickens, complaints about chickens are much less common than complaints about cats and dogs. Most chicken owners, like most dog and cat owners, are responsible and take careful care of their animals.

9. Slaughter. Very likely to be persuasive if not countered.

For many people who own small flocks, their chickens become pets, and are allowed to live out their natural lifespan, even if they are no longer productive. People who do choose to eat their birds are very careful to educate themselves about how to humanely kill their birds, and take care to do it discreetly.​

 

[valereee]

It's tricky to try to claim anything is true of all. I'm sure there are any number who would say the government can't tell them not to slaughter a chicken on the driveway where the neighbor's preschooler can see.

Maybe: Owners of chickens, just like owners of dogs and cats, can be required to responsibly dispose of their dead pets. Some chicken-friendly cities don't allow slaughter; some don't allow slaughter to be visible from neighboring yards/the street.



Quote:
For many people who own small flocks, their chickens become pets, and are allowed to live out their natural lifespan, even if they are no longer productive. People who do choose to eat their birds are very careful to educate themselves about how to humanely kill their birds, and take care to do it discreetly.

 

[valereee]

This might not be strong enough...arguing that they aren't that bad might make it look like we just don't have a response to this. Maybe we could add something to it reiterating that surprise roosters are rare, that roosters are possible to rehome, and that chicken-keepers are no more likely to dump a pet at a shelter than any other pet owner? Given these three things, I'd actually be surprised to hear that there are all that many roos in shelters. And, in fact, a quick call just now to the Hamilton County (Cincinnati OH) Humane Society/SPCA confirmed this: there are currently zero roosters or chickens there, they've occasionally seen them over the years, but they've got a list of people who will take them, have had no problems rehoming them and were very surprised to hear that there've been reports of an increase in rooster intakes anywhere in the country. Probably worth a call to your local shelters to check, if anyone ever raises this argument in your town. I suspect these claims of shelters overwhelmed by roosters may be overblown.

Quote:
Unwanted roosters are often unwanted because cities ban roosters. How often and how loudly a rooster crows depends on a number of things, including the personality of the bird. Several cities allow people to keep roosters, or a single rooster, as long as the rooster doesn't create a noise disturbance.

 

[valereee]

Okay, quick check of these shelters' websites.

Animal Place -- no adoptable animals listed on their site, but they placed 400 hens this time last year from a factory-farm rescue.
Chicken Run -- 2 roos listed as up for adoption, one stray, one owner surrender
Eastern Shore -- currently has 40 roosters in need of adoption, all rescued from a "live market cruelty case" -- not sure what that means, but these aren't owner surrenders.
Farm Sanctuary -- currently has 65 roosters: 60 from the same "live market cruelty case" as Eastern Shore's roos, two other rescues. Three owner surrenders.
Sunny Skies -- 3 roosters.
United Poultry Concerns -- according to their annual report took in 40 chickens in 2008. It's hard to tell from the phrasing, but it sounds like almost all were hens, with possibly as few as 2 roos.

 

[AZKat]

Quote:
I like that language a lot, although I would add something like "Many chicken owners consider their chickens to be pets, and choose to let their chickens live out their natural lifespans. Others do choose to eat some of their chickens, but those who do choose to do so take care to educate themselves about the proper way to slaughter a chicken."
I do think that is a fair statement that anyone who is going to kill a chicken is going to try to figure out how to do it beforehand, if only because improper slaughter will spoil the meat.