[Vision2020] Turkeys Banned In New Poultry Regulation

[Garrett Clevenger]

Thanks for the video, Tom.

I think turkeys are being considered for a ban without much thought given to their actual behavior and potential nuisance relative to the other types of animals that are allowed to be raised within the city.

In the video Randy Fife says he added the turkey ban to the ordinance because they are, "big things and possibly noisy things."

However, one could have a cow, horse, sheep or pig which obviously are bigger than turkeys.  Ducks and geese are also allowed, and they are generally noisier than turkeys.

It seems like turkeys should be regulated like chickens: a certain number that are less than a certain age, and then a lower number of turkeys that are of any age (for breeding purposes if someone wants to raise their own turkey chicks).


Councilman Carscallen, if you're following this thread, can you offer an amendment that would allow for up to 6 turkeys less than 6 months old, and 3 turkeys of any age?  

Also, it shouldn't matter what sex the birds are as turkey toms are not like roosters that crow.

That seems reasonable.

Since there already is an overbroad noise ordinance, if any of these animals become a noise problem, than the property owner will be subject to fines.  It seems excessive to over regulate animals most people eat regularly.  The city should be encouraging responsible growing of food, not banning it outright.

Thanks,
 Garrett Clevenger




________________________________
From: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
To: Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net>
Cc: Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Fri, November 13, 2009 12:37:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Turkeys Banned In New Poultry Regulation

Video and draft ordinance of . . .

Draft Ordinance Regulating Poultry
(Admin Committee- November 9, 2009)
http://www.MoscowCares.com/AD_110909_DraftPoultryOrd.htm

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho




> The city council will be considering a new poultry regulation (see below).
>
> My concern is that it bans rearing turkeys within city limits aparrently
> because the city attorney thinks they are too noisy.  Ducks and geese will
> be allowed.  From my experience, ducks and geese are noisier.
>
> I've raised between three and five turkeys at a time off and on here in
> the city over the last ten years with no neighbor complaints.  In fact,
> people seem interested in the birds, particularly kids.
>
> Turkeys are only around for three to five months.  They don't pose more of
> a nuisance than chickens and are less noisy than barking dogs.
>
> Turkeys are very efficient and well-natured meat birds. Losing the ability
> to raise them in the city would be yet another blow to our connection with
> food we eat.
> I hope the city modifies this ordinance to include turkeys.  The current
> wording seems arbitrary.
>
>
> Garrett Clevenger
>
>
> SECTION 1:  That Moscow City Code Title 10, Chapter 4, Section 12 be
> amended as follows:
> . . .
> Sec. 4-12. Maintaining Certain Animals Regulated.
> A. It shall be unlawful to keep or maintain any fowl, rabbits, horses,
> cows, sheep or goats
> within the City, except as provided in this Chapter or as specifically
> provided elsewhere in
> this Code.
>  1. a. Fowl.  For purposes of this subsection, “fowl” shall mean
> domesticated birds
> (galliformes and anseriformes), and shall include chickens, ducks, and
> geese but shall
> not include peafowl, guinea fowl, turkeys, ostriches, or emus.
> i.A person may lawfully maintain four (4) fowl which are more than twelve
> (12)
> weeks from hatch per lot of not less than five thousand (5,000) square
> feet and one
> (1) additional fowl more than twelve (12) weeks from hatch for each
> additional
> twelve hundred fifty (1,250) square feet per lot up to a total of twelve
> (12) fowl
> more than twelve (12) weeks from hatch per lot.
> ii.A person may also mainatin up to twenty five (25) fowl not more than
> twelve (12)
> weeks from hatch, per lot which is of not less than five thousand (5,000)
> square
> feet, if such fowl are not intended for sale and do not comprise a
> commercial
> agricultural use, as demonstrated by the person keeping or maintaining
> such fowl.
> iii.It shall be unlawful for a person to keep or maintain male fowl within
> the City
> limits except for a time period not to exceed twelve (12) weeks from
> hatch, as
> demonstrated by the person keeping or maintaining such male fowl.
> iv.In no event shall the coop and/or run constructed for containing fowl
> be less than
> twenty five feet (25’) from a dwelling other than that of the person
> keeping or
> maintaining fowl.
> v.It shall be unlawful for a person to keep or maintain peafowl, guinea
> fowl,
> turkeys, ostriches, or emus within City limits.
> vi.This subsection shall not apply to zoning districts which allow
> commercial
> agricultural uses, or to areas otherwise exempted by this Code or to uses
> specifically permitted by this Code.
> specifically permitted by this Code.
> Garrett Clevenger
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================


"The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
and the Realist adjusts his sails."

- Unknown
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20091113/bf5cd062/attachment-0001.html