Monthly Archives: August 2009

Greeley Urban Hens Editorial

Tonight is our meeting with the Greeley Urban Hen Coalition. We will decide our formal name at the meeting. But we also had some more press regarding having chickens in Greeley! Our new friend, Jessica Harris, who was also interviewed in the article that Britton and I were in, was the featured editorial guest columnist in the newspaper yesterday.  Here is a link to the editorial, as well as a reprint. I thought she did a great job and loved the comparison to the amount of room people live in on a daily basis to the amount supposedly “required” for chickens.

Chicken Picture
¡Viva La Gallina! Long Live the Hen!

Here is the article as printed in the newspaper. For an unabridged version, check out the urban hen website.

Greeley Policy on Hens is Fowl by Jessica Harris

I recently inquired at the city of Greeley concerning the possibility of keeping laying hens (no roosters) on my property, as I’m interested in learning more about self-sustained and natural living. I’ve a good-sized back yard with plenty of space for a large coop and completely enclosed pen. I also thought it was a good idea, considering the tough economic times, to learn how to be more self-sufficient. While I’ve no interest in butchering a chicken, the thought of fresh, chemical- and hormone-free eggs, combined with an interesting pet, intrigued me.

The practice of backyard chicken rearing has become popular in many urban towns in the past few years. Cities such as Fort Collins, Loveland and Boulder have recently passed ordinances allowing hens to be kept in residentS’ back yards.

Being excited about the prospect of my own “urban hens,” I immediately did what any reasonable person would do — I researched. I literally obsessed over every piece of information I could find on keeping chickens within the city. I also carefully read the Greeley Municipal Ordinances referring to livestock (or specifically the ordinance on fowl). I saw no reason, or law, that would prevent me from properly and legally keeping two or three well-cared for pet hens in my backyard with the appropriate pen and coop.

Apparently, I was wrong. My family found this out while doing the right thing and calling the office of city planning, just to make sure. We were told was that while yes, it’s acceptable to own chickens per the animal ordinance of city codes, under chapter 18.58.030 of the Municipal Codes, this allowance becomes reliant upon figures that would allow literally no one (without a yard that could rival your local mansion) to own laying hens within city limits. The figure that I was given by the office of City Planning is 4,326 square feet of unused land per chicken. Just for reference, this is approximately 385 times the suggested square footage necessary to keep a single chicken as per just about any poultry site, hatchery, association, or expert out there deems necessary. It’s also about 1,000 square feet bigger than I fit a family of four humans, three dogs and a cat in and call home.

I understand that the land usage bit had most likely been tacked on in an effort to keep people from creating bizarre barnyard hovels in their duplex parking lots. But that doesn’t keep me from being angered and disappointed that this “stipulation” also prohibits those of us who are responsible pet owners, who understand the benefits of raising backyard hens for pets, healthy eggs, mineral rich, natural fertilizer and insect control, from doing so.

In all the years that I’ve lived in this town, I’ve heard repeatedly about Greeley’s “hometown attitude,” “pioneer spirit” and “rich agricultural roots.” Yet, as a resident of Greeley, it would seem I’m not really allowed to be a part of any of that. Nor am I allowed to make any attempt at self-sustained, natural living unless, of course, I can afford that extra lot or buy a farm.

I’m starting to think that we don’t live in such an agri-centric town after all. We can have our cow-painted mailboxes, or slippers or other assorted household items, and we can go to the Greeley Stampede and play cowboy for a day, but unless you have a yard the size of Nottingham Field, don’t expect to take an active role in that agricultural heritage we are supposed to be so proud of and not mind when the air is “not so fresh.”

Jessica Harris is a Greeley resident, a mother of two, an avid animal lover and a writer.

What do you think of this post?
  • WOW (0)
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Bummer (0)
  • Whoa (0)

Letter to City Code Enforcement about our Pet Chickens

This is our response to the Greeley city code division. We have also contacted our representative in our ward.

Greeley City Code Enforcement

1000 10th Street

Greeley, CO 80631

This letter is in response to a courtesy warning of a city code violation we received on 8/14/2009 at our property  in Greeley.  We believe there is an error in the violation and that we are not out of compliance. The warning says that we need to reduce our number of chickens from four to one because of a code under land use for commercial livestock. It states the land size that we need to raise “chickens, broiler & layer; rabbits” (18.58.030). However, these chickens are not used for commercial purposes and we do not have an agricultural business or farm of any sort. These chickens, our girls, are simply our pets, and are not kept for “economic (business) reasons”.

 When we looked online for any restrictions on keeping pet chickens, we did not find any. In fact, we found that our girls would fall under pets as domesticated birds:

 7.04.097 Domesticated animal. Domesticated animal means a pet or companion animal that is kept by humans for companionship, amusement or for the beauty of its appearance or utterances, rather than for economic reasons. A domesticated animal may include, but is not limited to, dogs, cats, fish, parrots, doves, cockatiels, budgies, cockatoos, finches, macaws, any other domesticated birds (except wild birds), nonpoisonous snakes under six (6) feet in length, rodents (including hamsters, guinea pigs, mice, gerbils, chinchillas, degus, flying squirrels and rats), sugar gliders, rabbits, ferrets and pot-bellied pigs. (Ord. 8, 2006 §1).

 Rabbits (who are also listed under the 18.58.030 code as only allowing one per 1/10 acre), pigs (also under 18.58.030) and other animals listed above could be raised for either economic purposes or for pet purposes but are not restricted in number if they are pets. In our case, our girls, Henrietta, Salt, Football and Greenfoot, are raised as pets. There is no agricultural business involved and we are not breaking any animal code by responsibly raising them as such.

 Thank you for your time.

 Sincerely,

 Cassie and Britton Kauffman

What do you think of this post?
  • WOW (1)
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (1)
  • Bummer (0)
  • Whoa (0)

A Fight for our Right to… Chickens?

White Chicken says what

Yep, that’s right. After the article in the paper came out about us and our chickens, we had a visit from the city Code Inspection office. Apparently we are only allowed to have ONE chicken because the code says you can only have one per 1/10 of an acre and we have .16 acres. That was not what we were initially told, but apparently that’s the case. No matter that we have an EMPTY FIELD behind our house. Or that there is a house on the other side of the fence with horses…no that would make too much sense to allow chickens in our backyard.

violation
The Chicken Ticket

So, now we are going to have to fight for our right to have chickens. Crazy. I wasn’t really even interested in this fight. I just wanted to be left alone, my property, my business. And get this, when I called the city to find out if we could get a variance for our chickens, they said it would be $300! It is considered a MAJOR variance. A major variance? For three little animals that weigh about 2 pounds each? And there are no guarantees that we would get it! And come to find out from this particular planner that there is NO limit to the number of dogs and cats a person can have as long as they aren’t breaking any other code violations like noise, smell, confinement rules, etc.

So compared to unlimited dogs or cats, having a few chicken hens doesn’t seem to hurt anyone. They are not noisy -the neighbors’ dogs are much noisier, they aren’t dirty -you can just spray the poop right off and it becomes fertilizer unlike dog poop, they don’t pose a threat to public safety as they can’t bite or kill anyone as dogs can. And each of these possibilities would already be covered by existing codes as they are for dogs and other pets.

Keeping chickens as pets has the additional benefit of food production and food security. I can’t see why anyone would think that having four backyard chickens is detrimental to society. If you support local food, environmental and economic sustainability, food security, healthy lifestyles and responsible pet ownership, please support us in being allowed to live in Greeley with our chickens.

We are going to fight this and we will need your help. If you are in the Greeley or northern Colorado area, we will be meeting next Thursday, August 20, 2009 at Ramseier Farm Park, 6:30pm to talk strategy. Please come if you can.

What do you think of this post?
  • WOW (0)
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Bummer (0)
  • Whoa (0)

Colorado and Puerto Rico State Quarters

2009-Puerto-Rico    Proof-Colorado

We’ve seen quite a few Colorado quarters since we have the Denver Mint right near here, but I recently ran across a Puerto Rico “state” quarter. I was holding it upside down and said to Britton, “Wow, this quarter looks like Puerto Rico”. I had no idea that they had made a quarter for it. I thought the design was pretty cool. The first thing that ran through my mind was, “Is Puerto Rico going to become a state?” since I thought these quarters were only for states.

But apparently, it is also for districts like Washington D.C. and the territories as well, although I haven’t seen any other quarters for territories such as the US Virgin Islands, Guam or any of the other outlying islands but they supposedly exist. If Puerto Rico were to become a state, it would change a lot of things about it. Some for the better and some for the worse.

According to an article on the Puerto Rico quarter it has one of the fewest mintings ever for a quarter which also made it seem extra special and rare.

What do you think of this post?
  • WOW (0)
  • Awesome (0)
  • Interesting (0)
  • Useful (0)
  • Bummer (0)
  • Whoa (0)