What is your interpretation of "personal pleasure, companionship or protection"

[aliciaslocomb]

We are trying to clarify a local ordinance, so I am asking for responses to the following question:

Have chickens "extensively and historically" been kept for "personal pleasure, companionship or protection"?

Thanks! - Alicia

 

[Pyxis]

!

I'd say most people who are keeping chickens who are not big time egg and meat farms are keeping them for personal pleasure. We're not keeping them to make a profit, and we're not really farming them. They could also certainly be considered as companions - I know of several instances where they have been kept as therapy animals, and some people also keep them as house pets. So I would say, at least extensively, they are kept for pleasure. One would only need to visit this site to prove that As for protection, probably not. They really aren't guard animals.

 

[User395221]

The latter yes. As Pyxis said, backyard chooks are kept for personal pleasure and companionship, just like other pets.

The "hard part" of meeting that definition is looking at the meaning of "extensively and historically". You'd need to look at the incidence of suburban chicken keeping to determine how "extensive" it is in your area. "Historically" might have had a better chance of being established in the 1940s (or whenever) than it is now, but again, you'd need statistics and information as to the pattern of backyard chicken keeping over time. When I was a kid, it was IMO "extensive" because everybody had chickens. Now, in my experience, few do.

If the crux of the exercise is to show that chickens are pets and not farm animals, I'd be digging out all the info you can find about the incidence of backyard keeping in your area. My gut reaction - no, "extensively and historically" chickens are farm animals.

 

[donrae]

As the question is phrased, no they have not. They've historically been livestock. Just cause they're pets now doesn't mean you can re-write history and say they've been pets or companions in years past.

 

[memphis]

X2. Donrae is correct.

 

[jak2002003]

Historically people keep chickens for eggs and meat.

 

[Pork Pie]

I'd leave the issue of interpretations to all the wonderful lawyers (

). they make big bucks out of semantics!

CT

 

[Egghead_Jr]

We are trying to clarify a local ordinance, so I am asking for responses to the following question:

Have chickens "extensively and historically" been kept for "personal pleasure, companionship or protection"?

Thanks! - Alicia

"Extensively and Historically" chickens are livestock. There is no getting around that. For the last decade and society being so far from it's food that when it gets near them now they are pets is not congruent with historical relations of people and food supply.

 

[realsis]

hi, I think it's saying basically chickens can't be slaughtered. NO meat birds. If they are for eggs and pets then ok.