HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-15 AgendaANIMAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGENDA
DATE: Wednesday, September 15, 2010
TIME: 2:30 p.m.
PLACE: Animal Shelter
Adoption of Minutes of March 10, 2010
2. Quarterly Report —
a. CLD -016-10— January— March, 2010
b. CLD -027-10 —April —June, 2010
Other Business
a. Follow upon "urban backyard chicken"— Report CLD -004-10
b. Circus elephants and their care
c. Update and check on the 'battery", group housing, in the shelter
d. Photos with Santa for 2010 status and suit
e. "What role does the Animal Advisory Committee play?"
4. Adjournment
5. Next Meeting — To be determined
Clarington REPOR
CLERK'S DEPARTMEN,
1 11
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date: May 17, 2010 Resolution#: O Pq-3cW—10 By-law#: N/A
Report#: CLD -016-10 File#:
Subject: ANIMAL SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT —January— March, 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report CLD -016-10 be received for information; and
2. THAT a copy of Report CLD -016-10 be forwarded to the Animal Alliance of
Canada and the Animal Advisory Committee.
Submitted by:
PLB/CAG
Reviewed by: I .\ 'Lc
Franklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO LIC 3A6 T 905-623-3379
REPORT NO.: CLD -016-10
BACKGROUND AND COMMENT
PAGE 2
Animal Services activities will be reported to Council on a quarterly basis. The
attachment to this report summarizes the activities and revenues pertaining to Animal
Services for the months January to March, 2010, as recorded by staff as at the time this
report was prepared.
Attachments
1. Quarterly & Year -To -Date Statistics
Interested parties to be advised of Council's decision:
Ms. Liz White, Animal Alliance of Canada
Animal Advisory Committee
Attachment 1
1 st Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Dispatch Summary
Issue Types
Animal Control Issues
Attachment 1
1 st Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Total By G/L Code
(start here)
1
1 1
11.
1 1
11•
100-19-190-30705-6400 -Animal Service
- Impound/Surrender Fee
98 905.00
39 2077.06
18
905.00
39
2077.06
100-19-190-30715-6401 -Animal Trap Rentals
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
100 -00 -000 -00000 -6506 -Cash Over/Short
I Account
2 -94.07
0 0
2
-94.07
0
0
100 21 -000 -00000 -6506 -Finance Charges
after NSF
0 0
0 00
0
�0
0
100-19-130-30641-6400 - Licences Paid after
NSF
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
100-19-190-00000-7162 - Vet Services -
-. Repayment for Expenses
0- 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
100-19-190-30720-6400 - Disposal of Animals
7 .510.25
3 205.00
7
510.25 -
3
205.00
''. 100-19-190-35525-6500 - Dog/Cat Licences
1339 31075.00
247 7448.50
1339
31075.00
247
7448.50
523-00-000-00000=6760 - Donations
6 500.00
-
14 648.65
6
500.00
14
648.65
100-00-000-02033-2003 - GST
48 240.50
60 296.64
48
240.50
60
296.64
-100-19-130-35520-6500-Other Licences-
Kennel
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
-100-00-000-02034-2003-PST
48 1 379.23
58 462.51
48
379.23
58
462.51
100-19-190-30710-6400 - Sale of Animals
42 4411.39
56 5672.44
42
4411.39
56
5672.44
;Totals
151037927.30
477 16810.80
1b10
37927.30
477
16810.80
Attachment 1
1 st Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Shelter Statistics - Outgoing by Animal Type
1 1
11'
Adopted------_.—�
3 ----Ol-
22 30
,.
—6 T
8
281 18
Adopted Altered
07—
0
0
0 0-
18
_
0 j 18!
Adopted Offsite
0 -0
0 0
0
0 j 0
1
0 1
Adopted Offsite(Altered)
0 0
7 1 —OT
0
0 7
18
7, 181
Adopted Offsite(Unaltered)
0
�-0 0
0
0 0
2
OT 2.
Adopted Unaltered
21 0
1' 7
1 01
of 10
10
101 101.
Bite Quarantine (Home)
1 0
0, 0
0
_
0
1 o
111 01
DOA
0 0
11j 2
0�
�0� 13
11
13 1 1
DOA - Final Disposiilon
0 0
1 1 v 0
0
0 1 1
0
1 0
Euthanized
1 i 0
41 01
0
0 1 5
2
5 j 21
Euthanized by Offsite Vet
1-011 0
1, 11-0
0 2F
4
2 4
Interred_
0
0
"0
I 0 j 0�
O �W
0 0
Reclaimed
281 0
01 0
I
0
O,_-__ Z8
43]-28
...__.__43
Redemption (Offsite)
0 0—
0 T-0
0
01 0
0
0 0
Released
OT --O
0 j 0
OT
0
1
0; 1 i
Stolen
Transfer Out
0 0
51 0
0 01
21 0
OF
0
01 01
0 71
01
.3
01 0
F 71 3
Unassisted Death
0 0
01 0
01—
0 1
0I 0 1
0 j O 1
Unassisted Death - In Foster
0 0
0�— 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
Wildlife Released
0 0
0 0
OT -6! 0-01.
0; 0
Other T
Total
OF 0
401 .0�
0 0
491 13
�—
T
0 0'
0� 102
0
131
0 0
1021 131
rt
Attachment 1
1 st Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Shelter Statistics - Identification Comparison
Total Length of Stay
¢ e
!2'
Number of
0 49
40
13
0
00
1
Animals
Number of Days
0 3608
1096
731
0
0
0
5435
c7
Average
0 75
29
56
0
0
0
v
Number of
0 60
41
6
1
4
0
112
Animals
U' a
r O
Number of Days
0 5959
1762
185
0
7
0
7913
N
Average
0 99
42
30
0
1
0
Number of
0 49
40
13'
0
0
0
102
0
Animals
�+
Number of
0 3608
1096
731
0
0
0
5435
Days
Average
0 75
29
56
0
0
0
Number of
0 60
41
6
1
4
0
112
o
0
Animals
N
Number of
0 5959
1762
185
0
7
0
7913
Days
Average
0 99
42
30
0
1
0
Attachment 1
1 st Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Shelter Statistics - Incoming (including transfers)
list Quarter 2010
Dog 1 181 01 01 5E 01 161 010) 39
Puppy j 1 1 0 0 �— 0� 1I 0 2
Cat 41 11 1�1 01 25 �rt O'v44
Kitten 012 f 0 ..4F 4 i 7 j 0 0 17
Rabbit 1 01 01 01 01 01 1 01 —01-1
Total -
23 13 1 121 41 50 F--0 T --o-1 103
YTD 2010
Dog 1 181 01 01 5 01 16 . 0 - 01 39
Puppy j 1 1 of _ 0 ol 11 0 0� 2
Cat w 4; 11 1 3 0 25 0 0 44
Kitten 01 20� 4 4 71 0 OF 17
-r-
Rabbit 01 01 01 01 01 1 01 0 1
Totaal23 13 1F 12 4 03
1 st Quarter 2009
Dog 211 01 51 291 01 01 55
Puppy 111 5 01 0 0 7
Cat 4 9 2 351 0 0 50
Kitten j 0 010 13 0 0 13
Mammal I 01 11 0 0�[0 0 1
Total 261 11 12 77; OT 0 126
I
YTD 2009
Dog I 211 01 51 29 01 01 55
Puppy 1 1 5 0 0 0 7
Cat j 41 9' 2 35 01ry 0 50
Kitten �— 0 0 0 13 0 0 13
Mammal V i 1 0 0 I i I 1
Total 26 111 12 77 u I 01 126
Animal Bite/Attack & OTR Summary
Attachment 1
1st Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
-,-De tail =
1st Quarter ''
2009
1st Quarter
2010
YTD
2009
YTD
2010
Dog Bites Reported
2
3
2
3
Dog Attacks Reported
3
7
3
7
DTRs Issued
1
5
1
5
CLc1CIU{,tOIl REPORT
CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date; September 13, 2010 Resolution#: By-law#: N/A
Report#: CLD -027-10 File#:
Subject: ANIMAL SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT — April - June 2010
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report CLD -027-10 be received for information; and
2. THAT a copy of Report CLD -027-10 be forwarded to the Animal Alliance of
Canada and the Animal Advisory Committee.
Submitted by,
PLB/CAG
Reviewed by:
Franklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623.3379
REPORT NO.: CLD -027-10
BACKGROUND AND COMMENT
Animal Services activities will be reported to Council on a quarterly basis. The
PAGE
attachment to this report summarizes the activities and revenues pertaining to Animal
Services for the months April - June, 2010, as recorded by staff as at the time this report
was prepared.
Attachments
Quarterly & Year -To -Date Statistics
Interested parties to be advised of Council's decision:
Ms. Liz White, Animal Alliance of Canada
Animal Advisory Committee
Attachment 1
2nd Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Dispatch Summary
Issue Types
Animal Control Issues
Attachment 1
2nd Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Total By G/L Code
(start, here)
o:.
r i
rr•
r r
rr•
100 -19 -190 -30705 -8400 -Animal Service
Impound/Surrender Fee
47 2500.00
29
7695.00 65
3405.00
68
3772.06
100-19-190-30715-6401- Animal Trap Rentals
1 9.52
3
28.56 1_T
9.b2�
3
28.56
0, 00.000 00000-6506 Cash Over/Short
Account
1 •3.95
0
0
3
•98.02
0
0
100 -21 -000.00000 -6506 -Finance Charges
0 -0
after NSF
0
0
0
0
0
0
100-19.130.30641-6400- Licences Paid after
NSF
0 0
0
0
0
0
I 0
0
100 19-190-00000-7762 Vet Services-
I 2 267.83
-
-. Repayment for Expenses
1
0
0
2
287.63
0
0
100-19-190-00000-7180 Spay/Neuter Rebate
1 50.00
0
0
1
50.00
0
0
100-19.190.30720-6400 - Disposal of Animals
10019-190,35525-6500 Dog/Cat Licences
-6 237 90 l
1857 4123000
3
1137
180.00
29335.00
13
3196
742.16
72305.00x1384
6
385.00
36783.50
52300_000 -00000 -6760 -Donations
9 _740.00.
19 _
-1471.89
75
1240.00
33
2120.54
100-00-000-02033-2003 - GST
60 220.28
59
277.34
4460..778'�
119
573.98
100-19.130-35520-6500 - Other Licences -
Kennel
0 0
0
(98
0 I
0
0 (
0
0
100.00-000-02034-2003 - PST
48 350.14
56
440.01
96 1
729.37
114
_
902.52
10019 -190.30710 -6400 -Sale of Animals
46 4238.86
55
5411.39
87
8650.25
711
11083.83
Totals
2067 49834.38
1381
38839.19
3577
87767.68
1838
55849.89
Attachment I
2nd Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Shelter Statistics - Outgoing by Animal
Adopted
7 1
01
61
2
01
0+
0
14
15
33
Adopted Altered
0
a
8 T
1
01
0
of
28
13 1
37
31
Adopted Offsite
0
01 I
----------
of
-
01
-----
0 1
0
0
2
.........
Adopted Offisita(Alterad)
. . — ----
0 i
— ------------
01
q 1
- - -----
0
0
0
0
121
ie,
30
----- -
Adopted Offsitew,wtar,di
------
6 1
0
5
01
0+
0 --------
5 -
- 3 .1. -----
- -- -------
-
Adopted Unaltered
41
7
1
41 1
01
01
of
161
19,
--
26
----------- ------
Bite Quarantine (Home)
-4-
0 1
0
0
0,
0 1
0
0
!,-
01
1
0
DOA
4 i
-
0
-1
1
0 i
-4 --
0 1
------J
3
-1-1--_
0 1
.... --
15 1!
- -
- - -, -
- 161
- - 2li I --,- -
--,
30
DOA - Final Disposition
----------
0
0 1
1
of
0
0
21
-----------
2 i
31
2.
Euthanized I
1.
1
0
01
0 1
01
.
0;
6
- -
------
7
Eunhanized by Offsite Val 1
0
0
5
- ----- - ------
0
- -
01
0
0 i
6 t
7;
10i
Interred
OI
0
0
01
0
OF
0
----- ---
0i
0
-6, q
Reclaimed
561
2j
31
1
0
0
01
0 1
n 1
891
82t
-------
Redemption (Offsite)
) 1
-
01
0 1 i
0
01
i
0 1
0,
0
Released
0 t
of
1
0.
01
Ot
0+
1,
0
0
StolenF-
0 i
01
0
0
Oi
0
01
0,
0
i
Of
Transfer Out
4
-:
1
- - ----------
1 f
0
------ -
1 1
- ----
71
-- ----
41
14 T
7.
Unassisted Death I
0
0
0
2
0 ;
,
0
G
2
-21----
2r--1-
--- 2 1
Unassisted Dee In Foster
0 i
01
0
0
0
01
0.
01
------
0
--- -
1-11
Wildlife Released
0 ;
- -
0 1
-
0
0 i
O F-
0 1
Ir
01
0
---------
01
01
01
Other
01
0
01
0
of
01
0
01
0,
o
pI
Total i
74
3 i
50 i
----------
151
01
31--
.
Ii
1461
137 1
2481
269:
-4 -------
----- 4 ......
-- --------
----- - --
Attachment 1
2nd Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Shelter Statistics - Identification Comparison
Total
.�zx
Numberof
Animals
•
i®®®��
Average
,
umberofNumber
��
_NAnimals
®
of
Attachment I
2nd Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
Shelter Statistics - Incoming (including transfers)
2nd Quarter 2010
Dog
Cat
Kitten
Mammal
Rabbit
Total
YTD 2010
Dog
56
1 :
� 0
3
5
0
, ---- 1--
01 49:
---, ----- ---
31 0 i
.
0
1 15
-- 1 1-11-1 1.
Puppy
-1,--
3 1
0
0 t
0
0
... .
01
......
0i
3
-------- 1---c—
71
01
--Tii
0.
13
Cat
11
20:
0-
6
0
0 i
61
0
---------
of
-
0
lot
Kiten
0
2.
01
11
4
0'
24
53
-
------ -------
------
--- - --- 4.
2
------
�.-- -
0 I--- 0.;_._
i
I - 1 -1 � 11,
01
iii -I
Mamma
0 2�
0�
0:
01
0,01
0
M - am Mal
0
0
OT,
0
00
1
01
01
0
3
Rabbit
0
0
0
0
0,
- ----------
0
01
0
-----
01
-----
0
Total
Total
70
----------
26
0 j
----
------ - -
5 i
---------- - -
15.
- --
0 i
- — -------
241
---- -
1671
--------
101
0 1
01--..
--- ---
01
of
-----j
317
3
6�
----
2;
102
0; 0i
1
--- ;
z
- ---- -----
- ------
----
2nd Quarter 2009
Dog
281 31
01
11
3
01
- - --
26
-----
01 of
Oj
62
Puppy
1 0------------------
0 1
01
Oi
0.
Oi
0
0i Ol
0,
Cat
41 11.
1
--
- ---- —3-
21
11
01
38
g 0!
0:
60
Kitten0
Or
0
--- - --- 4.
2
38
�.-- -
0 I--- 0.;_._
i
I - 1 -1 � 11,
01
iii -I
Mamma
0 2�
0�
0:
O�
0,01
0
0
Ol Ol
0
21
Rabbit
0
0
0
0
0
— A--
j ---
Total
43: 117
---
0 0
-----
0!
- -
0
---1
11:
3
6�
2
2;
102
0; 0i
0
176
Attachment 1
2nd Quarter & YTD Statistics
2010
YTD 2009
9_--.-
3 i
0:.'8;
--
.----49
0i
0r
01
117
PupPY
2 -.
1 -
0 `;
0
5'
!
.......:----
_.
- .__
0
01 0
0
0,
p
8
Cat
8
20'
��
2<
;.-
._�
..+
..
Kitten
10 !
i
0 -:
of
-�'
— —
0 -
110
0
0
21 51
0-,
Mammal
0
3,0;
0;
0.
0-
01
Rabbit
0
0 -
p ;
p�.
f .._._
01
r
0
-
_
,_.3.1
Total
__
"'
.
69
28
1
3
18 ,
2 I
2 __ _
179
.�—}
0,'
0
0
302'
Animal Bite/Attack & OTR Summary
(; �IREPORT
CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date: March 29, 2010 Resolution#: SPA a%b By-law#: N/A
Report#: CLD -004-10 File#:
Subject: URBAN "BACKYARD" CHICKEN FARMING
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report CLD -004-10 be received;
2. THAT the request to amend the Exotic Pet By-law, By-law 93-161, to allow for
raising chickens on non -agriculturally zoned lands be denied, and
3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report CLD -004-10 be advised of Council's
decision.
Submitted by:
PLO/CAG
Reviewed by:
Franklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO LIC 3A6 T 905-623-3379
REPORT NO.: CLD -004.10
1.0 BACKGROUND
PAGE 2
By-law 93-161, being a by-law to prohibit and regulate the keeping of certain animals
within the Municipality of Clarington was enacted by Council on October 12, 1993.
Section 4(a) establishes the restriction of only allowing the keeping of chickens on lands
zoned Agricultural (A).
On November 23, 2009 Council considered correspondence requesting an amendment
to By-law 93-161 to permit the keeping of chickens in urban areas within the
Municipality of Clarington. Council referred the correspondence to the Municipal Clerk,
the Director of Planning Services and the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington
for comment.
2.0 DISCUSSION
2.1 Staff undertook research of this matter of urban "backyard" chicken farming,
including contacting approximately 20 municipalities, and seeking input from a
variety of publications, the Clarington Animal Advisory Committee and the
Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington. Appendix 1 to this Report is a
summary of the responses from municipalities within Ontario.
2.2 In Ontario, the only municipalities that we are able to determine permitted
chickens to be raised in backyards in urban areas are the Cities of Niagara Falls,
Brampton and Oshawa. It is worthy to note, however, that Oshawa has indicated
that when their current by-law was written, chickens were not prohibited in error.
They advise that they are currently reviewing their Responsible Pet By-law and
expect that chickens will, once again, be prohibited in urban areas.
2.3 The City of Vancouver is currently reviewing the issue. In March 2009, under the.
direction of Council, staff drafted a guideline governing the keeping of backyard
hens. Essentially this guideline provides for:
• Amending the by-law to permit a limited number of hens
• Establishing standard size and location of hen enclosures
• Establishing coop features and basic care for the hens including food, water,
shelter, ventilation, veterinary care, and essential behavours
• Requiring pest control, sanitation standards, and biosecurity requirements
• Impoundment, enforcement and other regulations
• Mandatory registration with the Animal Services on-line registry
• Prohibiting backyard slaughter of hens
• Prohibiting the sale of hens and eggs
This matter is still under review with the City of Vancouver, and as such,
backyard chickens are currently prohibited in urban areas.
2.4 The City of Toronto currently does not permit backyard chickens, despite
pressure from a few select residents. As of last June, the City of Toronto was
REPORT NO.: CLD -004-10
PAGE 3
considering a pilot project, although at that time, the pilot had neither been
defined nor implemented.
2.5 Staff met with the Clarington Animal Advisory Committee and discussed this
matter in detail. Some members were very much opposed to the concept and
others supported the concept, in theory. The Committee passed the following
resolution:
WHEREAS, in theory, it is possible that there are some responsible
people who would be willing to raise poultry; and
WHEREAS the geographic landscape and availability the for organic
poultry and eggs in Clarington provide viable options for the residents of
Clarington; and
WHEREAS there is a lack of a regulatory control in this respect;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Animal Advisory
Committee believes that the Municipality of Clarington is not ready nor
prepared to permit the keeping of backyard chickens in urban, non -
agriculturally zoned areas within Clarington.
2.6 Staff met with the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington and the owners
of a local egg farm to discuss this matter and to seek their input on the
arguments put forth by the requester in her correspondence. While the members
remained open to the concept of backyard farming and acknowledged that the
"odd" chicken here and there in the urban communities within Clarington should
not pose a problem per se, they raised a number of concerns should urban
backyard chickens be permitted throughout the Municipality. Their concerns
were as follows:
2.6.1 Predators — The keeping of chickens in backyards would attract predators
such as raccoons, coyotes, foxes, etc. Additionally, It may attract more vermin
such as mice and rats.
2.6.2 Disposal — Chickens lay for about 300 days. Once the chicken no longer
lays, or when an individual loses interest, the disposal of the chickens would
need to be regulated.
2.6.3 Lack of regulatory control — The Egg Farmers of Ontario (EFO)
standards are enforced by the Canadian Food Drug Agency (CFDA) inspectors
for commercial egg operations. There are no regulations governing "backyard"
chicken operations to protect the community as well as the chickens.
REPORT NO.: CLD•004-10
PAGE 4
2.6.4 Health —With the lack of regulatory control, there is a potential for spread
of disease. (This issue will be discussed in more detail under section 2.7 of this
report.) Chickens purchased/raised for commercial operations are vaccinated to
reduce health risks. There is a potential for increased health risks when chickens
are not vaccinated.
2.6.5 Noise — Chickens cluck and roosters crow. Depending on the density of
the urban area, the noise from the chickens could/would quite reasonably
become an Issue for area residents.
2.6.6 Odour —While a single chicken or two should not produce a significant
odour that would impact neighbours, depending on the density of the urban area
and the degree to which the owner maintains the property the odour could/would
quite reasonably become an issue for area residents.
2.6.7 Liability —Chickens are not generally friendly and should a chicken break
free of the owner's properly, they are extremely difficult to catch. The owner
would be liable for any injuries or damages,
The Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington passed the following
resolution at their January 14, 2010 meeting:
AACC does not support the keeping of livestock on non-agricultural
properties
2.7 The Clarington Animal Services Officers, our in-house experts of animal -related
activities within our community, have raised several concerns, the majority of
which were raised by our Agricultural Advisory Committee (as detailed above in
this Report), including predators, noise, odour, waste management, disease
control, and strays.
Clarington Animal Services currently comprises of one part-time and four full-time
officers as well as one part-time clerical support staff person who provide the
following services to our community: enforcement of animal related by-laws,
sheltering of strays, adoptions, and public education. Animal Services governs
primarily domestic animals (ie dogs and cats), but may also provide advice and
recommendations pertaining to wildlife. At no time has Animal Services become
involved in livestock related matters, with the exception of horses at large.
Existing Animal Services resources would be insufficient to regulate backyard
chickens. Staff would require additional training, accommodations would have to
be acquired/built to house and keep stray chickens, and additional staff would be
required to handle the increased workload of accepting calls, undertaking
investigations, conducting inspections and routine enforcement activities.
REPORT NO.: CLD -004-10
PAGE 5
2.8 Staff contacted the Region of Durham Environmental Health Division for
feedback respecting backyard chickens and related community health concerns.
The Region advised they currently have no existing regulations. The Manager of
Health Hazards advised that should backyard chickens be permitted in urban
areas they would anticipate receiving calls regarding odours, disposal of the
birds, noise, vermin and blood (should there be a killing of the bird or by the bird).
She further clarified though, that the only health-related matter that they would
become involved in would be involving the blood. Additionally, the Manager
provided links to various resource information regarding diseases and viruses
relating to birds/chickens which the spread of is a concern. These include, but
are not limited to the Avian influenza, exotic Newcastle disease, Mereks' disease,
histoplasmosis, salmonella, and citicosis.
2.9 The CFDA Is a regulatory body that, along with the EFO, regulates commercial
egg producing operations. Standard regulations are set and enforced to ensure
the protection of the chickens and the eggs, as well as humans either coming in
contact with the eggs and chicken farming operations and those consuming the
eggs. Staff contacted the CFDA for access to any regulations set for "backyard"
chickens. The CFDA website does provide a "how to" on prevention and
detection of diseases in backyard flocks and pet birds. They did not, however,
have any regulations regarding the keeping of the flocks.
The EFO is an independent, self-governing farming organization whose mandate
is to provide consumers with a guaranteed supply of safe, high quality eggs at
the most reasonable prices possible. The EFO developed a number of programs
and practices to ensure production of safe, high quality eggs. These include an
approved Code of Practice for Laying Operations (covering cage size, lighting,
ventilation, water and feed, waste removal, and pest control), mandatory bacteria
testing of the laying operations, standardized safety and quality programs and
regular on-farm inspections. The EFO confirms that these regulations do not
extend to private "backyard" chicken operations.
Through contacting the EFO, staff also spoke with Dr. Mike Petrik, DVM, Poultry
Veterinarian who authored urban epp farmer. to ten list of chores on behalf of
the EFO. Issues raised by Dr. Petrik primarily deal with hen health, hen welfare,
egg quality, and consequently human health. Through ignorance or a lack of
understanding, the health of the poultry is often compromised whether it is from
inappropriate protection from the elements and predators or lack of nutrition due
to poor diet. Dr. Petrik further stated that he concurs with the issues raised by
our Agricultural Advisory Committee but believes none of them to be
insurmountable if there were a regulatory body to maintain a registry and to
enforce regulations.
REPORT NO.: CLD -004-10 PAGE 6
CONCLUSION
A select few residents of Clarington have expressed an interest in keeping backyard
chickens and claim it to be safe, educational, environmentally responsible, natural and
fun. With the exception of a few select municipalities In Ontario, the keeping of
chickens within urban areas is generally prohibited. 82% of Clarington is zoned
Agricultural, and this geographic landscape, therefore provides an option for those
residents wishing to participate in livestock activities. Research of this matter indicates
that if chickens are permitted in backyards in urban areas, it must be regulated in order
to manage noise, odour, conditions, and to mitigate the transmission of disease. Animal
Services resources are currently maximized and we are, therefore, not able to expand
our services. Currently, within the Municipality of Clarington there are several organic
egg suppliers. As well, many of our local farms offer educational programs. For these
reasons, it is recommended that the request to amend the Exotic Pet By-law to permit
the keeping of chickens in urban areas be denied.
Interested Parties:
Emily Pillinger
Larissa Watson
Brenda and Ron Metcalf
Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington
Clarington Animal Advisory Committee
Egg Farmers of Ontario
Dr. Mike Petrik, DVM
Appendix 1 to
Report CLD -004.10
Z
�
Population
578,047
1,650,455
336,539
46,000
82, 184
900, 000
12, 110
90,000
700,000
Ccombined
Doyouallow chickens
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No—
No
on lands other than
exception
those zoned
miniature
Agricultural?
chickens
class like
eons.
Do you have a bylaw?
__
Yes — 2002
If so, how old is it?
Do you do inspections
No —only on
on the properties of
complaint
people who have
chickens?
Are permits issued?
No
Who enforces [his?
Bylaw
services
What percentage of
_
Only a few
time is spent on this?
complaints in
2009—
mostly
dealing with
chickens not
being fenced
n.No
Is there an issue with
the poop? If yes, how
Is it dealt with?
Do you have
No—
poundkeeper?
Humane
TMoU_nknomUnkown
Society
If chickens not
Yes. They have
No (about 2
No
No
A few
allowed, is there
drafted a policy
calls in last
requests
pressure from the
which will be
6 years)
but not
public to allow [hem?
presented to
many
council in 2010.
Appendix 1 to
Report CLD -004.10
y
Jp
41-�d
3
Y
�
O
i0
0
pO
m
E
Po ulatton
120, 800
32, 000
117, 784
60-70K
152, 000
Do you allow chickens on
No (a couple are
No
No
No
Yes — but
lands other than those zoned
grandfathered)
in error
A ricullura17
-
Do you have a by -lax? If so,
1996
how old is it?
Do you do inspections on the
No
Properties of people who have
chickens?
Are armors issued?
No
Who a this?
Nome
-
What percentage of time is
Deal more
spent on this?
with
enquiries
and
advised
they will
not be
permitted
In the
futureNo
Is there an issue with the
.
poop? If yes, how is it deal)
with?
Do you have a oundkee er?
2
If chickens not allowed, is
No
No
No
A few
Just
there pressure from the public
requests
enqulnes
fo allow them?
reap