Councillors here are not yet ready to be cooped up in a decision regulating pigeons and chickens on urban properties.
Late last month, councillors heard from planner Sally Stull about the keeping of or housing certain classes of animals and possibly restricting or prohibiting such use in urban areas.
The matter arose in late March with residents concerned about keeping of animals and the number of outbuildings permitted on urban properties in the town. Council was asked to amend its bylaws or to reinstate a previous bylaw that regulated the keeping of animals on smaller lots and prohibited them in urban areas.
Councillors asked staff to review existing bylaws.
The original complaint was about the keeping of pigeons in a residential area.
Stull brought an initial draft bylaw to council. Much of the proposal was similar to a previous draft version. As a result of previous conversations, Stull said there was discussion about how wild animals are kept.
She said wildlife is not supposed to be kept more than 24 hours – and must be turned over to a wildlife custodian or veterinarian within that time. “We do already have a clause in our bylaw to permit that.”
She said the town does not have to worry about that because keeping wild animals is prohibited by the Ministry of Natural Resources.
As for pigeons, Stull said regulations vary. Guelph limits keeping of pigeons to pens that must be 50 feet from any church, school or dwelling – not including owner’s home.
She said Erin could set certain limitations, but it might not limit the actual number of birds kept. She added in the case of the property involved in the original complaint, it came because of the impact of the neighbours’ ability to enjoy their backyard.
“It is up to council to decide what limitations they would like to put in place.”
Councillor Barb Tocher favoured the idea of a bylaw that sets lot line setbacks.
Councillor Deb Callaghan wanted to see regulations regarding pigeons. She said with small properties there needs to be assurances the cages are kept clean and there is a certain distance from property lines.
Councillor John Brennan wondered if there should be a limitation on numbers.
Stull said the current draft would prohibit keeping pigeons in urban areas, but still allow them in rural areas.
Brennan had a tough time with the concept of urban area with regard to this issue. “The keeping of pigeons is a common urban practice.”
He has concerns owners would have to ensure each pigeon is banded to identify it by a certain group or association. “I don’t know enough about pigeons to know whether people would be associated with a specific association. To me, this is like saying a person cannot have a dog unless it is registered through the Canadian Kennel Club – which I don’t think is right.”
He wants a better idea of the numbers connected with those organizations, as compared to those who are not.
Callaghan believes there are quite a few people raising pigeons who do not belong to a specific group. “They just like to have pigeons.”
Mayor Lou Maieron asked how many pigeon aficionados there are in Erin.
Brennan said he has issues with forcing a person to belong to a particular association.
Maieron backtracked slightly, stating there is a property that has gone past what is considered acceptable in the number of pigeons and pens it has in an urban area. A neighbour asked to the town for assistance.
“That is where we started this.”
Maieron asked if the bylaw would allow pigeons within urban areas.
“The draft bylaw before you would not allow them,” Stull said.
Maieron asked, if the bylaw would eliminate animals on properties in urban areas of two acres or fewer.
Tocher added, “Other than domesticated pets.”
Maieron said, “I can understand not wanting to have a menagerie of animals on a property in an urban setting. But if I have two acres … or a pond … what if ducks show up in the pond? God forbid I should feed them, then we would really have an issue. If I have a two acre property and I can’t have five reasonableness.”
He maintained if Erin is going to have a bylaw, “you want to deal with the issue [one property owner with a number of pigeons and cages on an urban lot].”
Maieron said he had no issue with property owners keeping a few pigeons or a couple of chickens in town, especially on a two acre property or in areas where the lot is surrounded by farmland.
“Maybe we should just deal with this guy and his 50 cages.”
Tocher said Erin does not currently have a keeping of animals bylaw and she believes one is needed.
Maieron agreed “No snakes, coyotes … or elephants.”
Callaghan said while some councillors might not have problems with a property owner having five chickens “and the coop was outside your bedroom window, you would have concerns.”
Maieron said he has less of a problem if it is on a two-acre lot.
Tocher remembered an incident “of two neighbours going at it … over a wind chime.”
She asked if council would institute a bylaw because of a wind chime.
Callaghan said a specific number of animals on a property can become a health issue.
Maieron said he had already received emails asking, “Please let me keep my two chickens.”
Tocher said, “We all have.”
Brennan said council did ask Stull to draft the bylaw. He said something is needed to deal with keeping of animals, but “I’m not sure we want to build a bylaw to deal with one miscreant.”
Water superintendent Frank Smedley wondered how the bylaw would fit in with the organic movement of people wanting to raise a few animals.
He said the issue might be setback requirements, which, if sufficient, might eliminate the potential of such operations on small urban lots while leaving the ability to have them on larger properties.
Brennan believes there must be limits in urban areas.
Callaghan asked, “Are you telling me if I live on a one-acre property in an urban area, I can have a bunch of chickens?”
Tocher said, “As long as it meets the setbacks.”
Maieron said he was considering it mainly for small properties in the rural areas.
Callaghan asked if she has a property roughly an acre, would it mean she could raise the chickens “That would really impress the owners of the 10 properties surrounding me.”
The discussion flipped constantly between keeping of the animals and birds on urban versus rural properties.
“Isn’t this all semantics?” Tocher asked. “We have an area in the village of Hillsburgh which is deemed agricultural and there are horses on it … and we allowing that.”
She said, “It obviously doesn’t matter whether this is urban or rural – it depends what the piece of property is. I guess this is going to need a lot more discussion.”
Maieron said, “I think the rural issue is one thing, and the urban is something different.”
Tocher argued council needs to be careful in the wording of urban versus rural because there are properties in the urban areas that are designated as agricultural.”
Brennan said, “Having bandied about a lot of words, what do we want?”
He sees a difference between the urban and rural setting.
Maieron thought some answers might come if the town holds a public meeting as suggested by the planner.
Tocher said the people who would attend are the type that would want to keep two chickens in the backyard. She believes it would end up as a neighbour argument.
Councillor Josie Wintersinger feared it would pit neighbour against neighbour.
Stull said it is not a matter of size, but if a properties are zoned to allow agricultural uses.
Involving properties over two acres would limit the amount of livestock on the property while the other would limit animals to domestic pets.
She stressed here report is the old bylaw that had been in effect.
“The old bylaw had a limit of two acres. Above that, people could keep a limited number of animals.”
Maieron said Wellington County no longer allows severances of lots greater than two acres.
Tocher said, “Then you can’t keep animals. If you move to the country to have animals, you need more than two acres to do it properly.”
Wintersinger said “not if you are talking chickens.”
Discussion moved to if councillors would think about the issue and come back with suggestions for the planner.
Tocher said to Stull, “From all the ramblings you’ve just heard, can you make anything of it?”
Stull said she would prefer council providing direction.
She said the draft bylaw prohibits exotic animals in rural and urban areas.
The next portion of the bylaw considers what animals may be kept on lands designated as agricultural – and which designates a lot size needed to keep a specific number of animals.
Then in any other zone, livestock would not be allowed.
Maieron said council needs to review the report.
Callaghan asked if that meant council would be providing direction.
Maieron said, “We’ll look at this and come back with some suggestions.”
