livestock

In praise of roosters

I received the following defense of roosters.  This is in regards to proposed changes to the "keeping livestock" bylaws for rural residential neighborhoods.
 


As a Backyard Chicken Farmer with 16 chickens – 1 rooster and 15 hens – who has completed extensive research in small flock farming and has years of experience in raising backyard chickens, I offer the following thoughts and adjustments to the Proposed Zoning Bylaw Regulations:

Parcel Size

  • Adjust #2 from 500m to 2500m to 500m to 2000m.
  • Adjust #3 from 2500m to 4000m to 2000m to 4000m.

 

This reduction from 2500m to 2000m would fall more in line with actual property sizes and be less limiting.

Owning horses: Open house on 10 March 2016

Just a heads-up that the RDOS is coming back to the issue of "keeping livestock".  This aroused some interest especially on the West Bench. The main thread on the issue is here.

 

You may recall that the fundamental problem with the existing bylaw is that it has been amended in dribs and drabs over the years and has become difficult to enforce.  Hence the need for a re-write.

Issues: 

Differing views on livestock ownership in rural areas

As this thread indicates, the RDOS is currently in the process (very slow process, admittedly) of updating "keeping of livestock" bylaws in Area F and elsewhere.  One of the issues we struggle with in regional districts is the "uniformity" of our bylaws: should the rules in all rural areas of the RDOS be the same?  In some ways uniformity would be tidier.  It would certainly simplify bylaw enforcement.  However, an argument can be made in favor of the idiosyncratic traditions and norms that emerge in neighborhoods over time.  RDOS planner Chris Garrish has provided a good example of this from a public consultation in Heritage Hills (east side of Skaha Lake) in Electoral Area D.  As you may know, Heritage Hills is a much newer neighborhood than the original West Bench.  Here is Chris's email to me: