Chickens In Ludlow

February 2011

Amanda Lewis
Amandalewis1050@gmail.com
Facebook: Chickens in Ludlow

1
Table of Contents
Introduction………………………………….……………..…...….3

Chickens and the History of Suburban Development…....…4

Chickens in Ludlow’s Proposed Ordinance…….…….....…..4

Backyard Chickens are not Farm Animals……………...……5

Backyard Coops are Attractive and Clean………….…….……5

Chickens Are Not a Nuisance…………………………………….6

Chickens are Not Smelly……………………………………………………....……..6

Chickens are Not Messy……………………………………………………………..6

Chickens are Not Noisy………………………………………………………..……6

Chickens Do Not Attract Rodents/Predators…………………….…….…...……7

Chickens Do Not Pose a Public Health Risk…………….………………….……..7

Chickens and the Environment……………………………….…8

Water Quality and Runoff…………………..………….….………..……….…..…..8

Living Sustainably……………………………………………………..…….....…….9

Chickens and Property Values…………………...………..……10

Lot Size Doesn’t Matter…………………………….…....……….10

Chickens Are Educational…………………………........……….11

Chickens and Emergency Preparedness……….………..……11

Chickens and the Economic Crisis……………………..…..….11

The Urban/Suburban Chicken Movement…….………..…….12

Appendices………………………………………….………...…….13
Appendix A: The New Coop de Ville (Newsweek 11/17/08)………..…..13

Appendix B: History on Prohibition of Chickens……………….…….……17

Appendix C: Examples of Urban Backyard Coops……………...………..18

Appendix D: Realtor Letters…………………………………………………..20

Appendix E: Area Cities and Their Chicken Laws…………………………23

Appendix F: My Report from the Board of Health………………………….44

2
 Introduction

In the post‐WWII decades, many urban and suburban communities

around the country instituted laws intended to distance us from our
then‐unfashionable rural roots. It was a time when neighborhoods were
built without sidewalks, “ChemLawn” seemed like a great name for a
business, and keeping chickens in the backyard served as an
uncomfortable reminder of the fact Grandma used to slaughter a hen on
the back porch every Sunday morning. Suburbanites seeded their lots
with grass, installed lawn sprinklers, sprayed and sprayed and sprayed,
and passed laws prohibiting chickens in urban and suburban
backyards.

In recent years, many of us have started to realize that maintaining a

close connection to our food is a positive, not a negative, and is a part of
living a more sustainable lifestyle. As people grow more concerned
about the economy, the environment, food safety, emergency
preparedness, and animal welfare, they are returning to the basic skills
their grandparents understood well. Farmers’ Markets are experiencing
a revival and people are gardening more, canning their food and raising
chickens. In response to citizens’ requests, many municipalities across
the country have adopted ordinances allowing residents to keep a
limited number of egg-laying hens as pets, and communities around the
nation are changing decades‐old laws forbidding the keeping of
chickens.

Our request is not unreasonable or unusual. Cities across the country,

large and small, allow a limited number of backyard hens. For example,
chickens are allowed in Seattle, Chicago, Denver, Madison, Fort Collins,
Vancouver, and New York. In fact, according to Newsweek Magazine,
more than 65% of major U.S. cities now have chicken-keeping
ordinances (Appendix A).

3
 Chickens and the History of Suburban Development

Why Were Chickens Prohibited by Earlier Lawmakers?

The birth of the modern suburb was a time when many of us were
seeking to define ourselves as sophisticated and more like those in the
cosmopolitan city than like those in unfashionable rural small towns and
farming communities. The car was a symbol of that cosmopolitan
lifestyle, so we eliminated sidewalks – why, after all, would anyone walk
who could afford to drive? The sidewalk became a symbol of poverty
and backwardness. Later generations regretted that decision and many
have retrofitted sidewalks and streetlights in their neighborhoods.

The keeping of chickens and other food‐producing animals was also

unfashionable during the decades immediately following World War II,
and for similar reasons. The problem wasn’t one of chickens creating a
nuisance; it was one of wanting to seem modern, cosmopolitan, and
sophisticated. (Appendix B)

Chickens in Ludlow’s Proposed Ordinance

We propose that chickens not be added to the City’s definition of

livestock.

If the city feels chicken-keeping needs to be controlled more than is

already adequately addressed by current ordinances, 91.03[B7], which
requires an animal’s pen, yard, lot or other enclosure to be kept in a
sanitary condition and free from preventable offensive odors, or 95.01
(Public Nuisance 4) which forbids animals repeatedly at large, (PN 5)
which forbids noise in an excessive, continuous or untimely fashion or
(PN6) which forbids animals from urinating or defecating on property
not belonging to the animal’s owner or creates an unsanitary condition,
we propose that an ordinance pertaining only to chickens be created.

Chickens in Ludlow proposes the following (CIL’s Proposed Ordinance):

1. Single family homes within the City of Ludlow shall be permitted to

keep no more than six (6) laying hens for household egg gathering.
4
2. Roosters are prohibited.
3. Slaughtering on property is prohibited.
4. Chickens and their enclosures must be ten (10) feet from property
lines and not visible from the street.
5. Enclosures must be attractive and well-maintained.
6. Chickens and their enclosures must be kept in a neat, clean and
sanitary condition free from offensive odors, excessive noise, or any
other condition that would constitute a nuisance.

Backyard Chickens are not Farm Animals

For thousands of years, chickens, like dogs and cats, have lived
alongside people in backyards large and small in cities and small towns.
Unlike a half‐ton bull or 400‐pound hog, a six‐pound hen is not
inherently a farm animal.

The typical laying hen starts to produce at four to six months, lays nearly
daily until she is 6, and then lives another two years. A crucial point is
that for backyard chickens (unlike their counterparts on farms), the end
of productivity does not bring on the end of life. Commercial chickens
are bred to produce large numbers of eggs very quickly and then to be
culled and used for such things as animal food and fertilizer. Suburban
hens, however, are treated as individuals. They are typically named,
and when around age 6 they stop producing eggs, they are ‘retired’ and
treated as pets for the remaining year or two of their lives.

Chickens are friendly, social, intelligent, affectionate, entertaining,

low‐maintenance, small, quiet, and inexpensive to keep. They are
quieter and cleaner than most dogs. They uniquely offer suburban and
city‐dwelling children the opportunity to understand a little more clearly
where their food comes from, and they offer all of us the opportunity to
produce a little of our own food.

Backyard Coops are Attractive and Clean

Unlike large commercial poultry operations or rural farms, people in
cities and suburbs who keep chickens in their backyards tend to keep
them in attractive, well maintained enclosures and treat their chickens

5
as pets. Backyard coops are no more of an inherent eyesore than a
trampoline, play structure, or hot tub, and in fact many are portable so
that the chickens are never in one place long. Appendix C contains
examples of backyard coops on suburban and city lots.

CIL’s Proposed Ordinance requires that coops be attractive,

well‐maintained, clean, sanitary, and free of odor or other conditions
that would cause a nuisance.

Chickens Are Not a Nuisance

Chickens Are Not Smelly

Chickens themselves do not smell. Any possible odor would come from
their droppings, but 5 hens generate less manure than one
medium‐sized dog. The average chicken keeper is also a gardener, and
(unlike the feces of dogs and cats, which carry pathogens and can’t be
composted) chicken droppings represent an excellent source of free
organic fertilizer when composted. Unsanitary conditions can result in a
buildup of ammonia in large‐scale operations, which is why commercial
poultry facilities often smell. This is not the case for small backyard
flocks.

CIL’s Proposed Ordinance requires that chickens and enclosures be

maintained in a sanitary condition free from offensive odors.

Chickens are Not Messy

Chicken enclosures used in city and urban settings tend to be attractive
and are easily maintained. Small flocks are managed with a minimum of
time and energy on the part of their owners.

CIL’s Proposed Ordinance requires that enclosures be attractive and

well maintained.

Chickens Are Not Noisy

Hens are quiet birds. It’s only roosters that are known for loud morning
crowing, and roosters are not necessary for the production of eggs. The
occasional clucking of hens is generally not audible beyond 25 feet.
Some hens give a few squawks while actually laying an egg or bragging

6
about it afterward, but this noise is very short‐lived and much quieter
than barking dogs, lawn mowers, leaf blowers, passing trucks, children
playing, and other common neighborhood sounds.

CIL’s Proposed Ordinance requires that chickens be maintained in a

manner free from excessive noise and that chickens and enclosures be
kept 10 feet from the property lines, a distance at which most normal
chicken noises are barely audible.

Chickens Do Not Attract Rodents/Predators to the Area

The truth is that rodents already exist in Ludlow and are attracted to any
unprotected food source like bird feeders/seed, dog or cat food, open
trash cans and dumpsters. There are preventative measures in both
chicken food storage and coop design to prevent and or eliminate this
concern.

Chickens Do Not Pose a Public Health Risk

The type of Avian Influenza that is contagious to humans has not been
found in North America. Bird Flu is spread by contact with the
contaminated feces of wild migratory waterfowl. So the key issues are
sanitation and contact with wild birds. Unlike rural farm birds which
might co‐mingle with migratory birds or drink from a shared pond,
backyard chickens are contained in an enclosure and watered inside
this enclosure.

As reported in Newsweek Magazine (Appendix A):

…as the Washington‐based Worldwatch Institute (an environmental
research group) pointed out in a report last month, experts including the
Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production have said that if
we do see it, it'll be more likely to be found in factory‐farmed poultry
than backyard chickens. As GRAIN, an international sustainable
agriculture group, concluded in a 2006 report: "When it comes to bird
flu, diverse small‐scale poultry farming is the solution, not the problem."

Unlike cats and dogs which are prime vectors for rabies, parasites, and
tick‐borne diseases, backyard chickens actually keep your yard
healthier for humans by eating ticks and other insects.

7
Salmonella, which has been associated with raw eggs, is a problem with
factory farmed eggs, not with backyard chickens.

Chickens and the Environment

Water Quality and Runoff

According to the OSU Extension Service
(http://ohioline.osu.edu/b804/804_3.html)the average laying hen
produces .2 ‐ .3 pound of droppings per day, as compared to the
average dog which produces 1 pound (according to the National Pet
Alliance.)

Unlike dog and cat waste, chicken droppings can be composted for use
on gardens and reduce the need for chemical fertilizers. Chickens
reduce the need for pesticides and herbicides by eating bugs and
weeds. By their very presence, chickens discourage the use of chemical
lawn and garden sprays by their owners. Chicken keeping is likely to
represent a net improvement in water and runoff issues rather than the
opposite.

Issues of manure runoff from egg‐producing chickens are associated

with huge factory‐style egg farms that generate tons of manure each day
in a very concentrated area. For those of us who wish to continue to eat
eggs in a sustainable fashion, low‐density backyard chicken keeping is
the solution to runoff issues, not the problem. Gardeners using
commercial organic fertilizers are very likely to be using
chicken‐manure based products, and those keeping chickens will have
less need for even these. So keeping chickens won’t increase even the
net amount of organic fertilizers used; chicken‐keeping gardeners will
simply be producing it themselves rather than purchasing it.

Living Sustainably
Increasing numbers of us are interested in living more sustainably, and
many communities, Ludlow included I am sure, are encouraging citizens
to reduce waste and consumption of resources. Backyard chickens allow
us to reduce our carbon footprint by producing some of our own food.
Every food item we can produce organically and on our own property –
just outside our back door – is one less item that must be shipped to us

8
and shopped for. Every item of food we raise ourselves represents a
step in living a greener, more sustainable, lifestyle.

People who have backyard chickens are less likely to use chemicals and
pesticides in their yards and gardens because it’s healthier for their
chickens. In return the chickens eat weeds and bugs that normally
plague unsprayed yards.

Composted chicken manure is one of the most efficient natural fertilizers

and is provided for free with no need for transport.

Backyard chickens eat grass clippings which might otherwise end up in

the landfills and food scraps which might end up in the garbage and
sewage.

Chickens and Property Values

Local Realtors say that the presence of an attractive, well‐maintained
backyard chicken coop is no more likely to affect values for neighboring
properties than the presence of an attractive, well‐maintained backyard
rabbit hutch. (Appendix D.)

In addition, some prospective home owners may be attracted to a

community with a progressive stance on green issues such as chicken
keeping. It’s impossible to know which stance is more likely to attract
rather than repel the greater number of prospective home buyers – the
one that encourages conformity, or the one that encourages
sustainability.

Lot Size Doesn’t Matter

Chickens require very little space. Shelter for five or six hens does not
require any more space than that represented by many kitchen tables,
and a run of 4 square feet per hen is sufficient to keep them happy and
healthy. Households all over the country are keeping chickens on city
and suburban lots. Whether a backyard chicken‐keeper has a quarter of
an acre or three hundred, he is likely to keep his hens in an enclosure
with the same small footprint.

9
In order to assure the smallest of lots or unusual lot configuration doesn’t
mean chickens can be near enough to neighboring properties to cause
an annoyance, CIL’s Proposed Ordinance requires that chickens and
enclosures be 10 feet or more from property lines, which is the distance
at which most normal chicken noises are barely audible.

Chickens Are Educational

Chicken keeping offers suburban children the opportunity to learn

where their food really comes from and about healthy, sustainable,
nutritious food. They will see firsthand how kitchen scraps become
garden fertilizer which in turn produces beautiful vegetables. Instead of
simply hearing, “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle,” they will actually experience
it. Suburban kids can participate in 4H or FFA programs through
keeping chickens in a suburban yard.

Chickens and Emergency Preparedness

Many governments are asking community members to prepare for
emergencies, whatever the cause. Many members of our community
recently experienced firsthand the effects of an area wide emergency
on food supplies. Backyard chickens provide a constant stream of fresh
eggs without regard to the availability of electricity or refrigeration.
Backyard hens will help our community be more food self‐sufficient
under any circumstances.

Chickens and the Economic Crisis

The cost of food has risen dramatically lately, including the cost of
high‐quality protein‐rich nutrient‐dense food such as eggs. Cage free,
organic eggs cost about $4 a dozen at Krogers. In comparison, four or
five backyard hens will require a total of about $60 in feed each year
and lay about 120 dozen eggs between them, depending on breed and
age. That’s a savings of over $400 a year. In addition, an egg provides
about 7 grams of protein, which means those 120 dozen eggs –obtained
at a cost of $60 per year ‐‐ will almost supply the complete protein needs
of the average woman. The ability to raise some of your own food can
help provide a greater sense of security in insecure times.
10
 The Urban/Suburban Chicken Movement
Chicken keeping is very popular among those who are concerned about
the environment, among those concerned about food safety and
security, and among those interested in self‐sufficiency and
preparedness. Dozens of newspaper and magazine accounts of
communities which have changed their laws to allow chickens have
been written. Several environmental and educational organizations here
in the Northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati area are offering classes in
Beginning Chicken‐Keeping, and these have proved popular.

By allowing chicken-keeping, Ludlow can join an elite class of

communities leading the way in promoting sustainable living. Let’s not
change our ordinances now to prohibit chickens at the same time the
rest of the Nation is doing the opposite.

11
Appendix A:
The New Coop de Ville (Newsweek 11/17/08)

The New Coop de Ville

The craze for urban poultry farming.
Jessica Bennett
NEWSWEEK
For Brooklyn real‐estate agent Maria Mackin, the obsession started five years ago, on a trip
to Pennsylvania Amish country. She, her husband and three children—now
17, 13 and 11—sat down for brunch at a local bed‐and‐breakfast, and suddenly the chef
realized she'd run out of eggs. "She said, 'Oh goodness! I'll have to go out to the garden and
get some more'," Mackin recalls. "She cooked them up and they were delicious." Mackin and
her husband, Declan Walsh, looked at each other, and it didn't take long for the idea to
register: Could we have chickens too? They finished their brunch and convinced the
bed‐and‐breakfast owner, a Mennonite celery farmer, to sell them four chickens. They
packed them in a little nest in the back of their Plymouth Voyager minivan and headed back
to Brooklyn.

The family has been raising chickens ever since, in the backyard of their brick townhouse in
an urban waterfront neighborhood called Red Hook. Every Easter, Mackin orders a new
round of chicks, now from a catalog that ships the newborns in a ventilated box while they
are still feeding from their yolks. When they are grown, she offers up their eggs—and
occasionally extra chickens, when she decides she's got too many—to friends and
neighbors, and sells a portion to a local bistro, which touts the neighborhood poultry on its
Web site. She gives the chicken manure—a high‐quality fertilizer—to a local community
garden in exchange for hay, which she uses to pad the chickens' wire‐fenced coop.
Occasionally, she kills and cooks up a chicken for dinner—though, she says, her chickens
are egg layers and aren't particularly tasty. "We joke and call ourselves the Red Hook
Poultry Association," says the former social worker, who at one time housed 27 chicks
inside her kitchen—for six weeks. "Sometimes people are like, 'This is really kind of
weird'."

As it turns out, Mackin is hardly an anomaly, in New York or any other urban center.
Over the past few years, urban dwellers driven by the local‐food movement, in cities from
Seattle to Albuquerque, have flocked to the idea of small‐scale backyard chicken farming—
mostly for eggs, not meat—as a way of taking part in home‐grown agriculture. This past
year alone, grass‐roots organizations in Missoula, Mont.; South Portland, Maine; Ann Arbor,
Mich.; and Ft. Collins, Colo., have successfully lobbied to overturn city ordinances outlawing
backyard poultry farming, defined in these cities as egg farming, not slaughter. Ann Arbor
now allows residents to own up to four chickens (with neighbors' consent), while the other
three cities have six‐chicken limits, subject to various spacing and nuisance regulations.

That quick growth in popularity has some people worried about noise, odor and public
health, particularly in regard to avian flu. A few years back in Salt Lake City—which does
not allow for backyard poultry farming—authorities had to impound 47 hens, 34 chicks

12
and 10 eggs from a residential home after neighbors complained about incessant clucking
and a wretched stench, along with wandering chickens and feathers scattered throughout
the neighborhood. "The smell got to be unbelievable, "one neighbor told the local news.
Meanwhile, in countries from Thailand to Australia, where bird flu has spread in the past,
government officials have threatened to ban free‐range chickens for fear they are
contributing to outbreaks. (In British Columbia, where officials estimated earlier this year
that there are as many as 8,000 chicken flocks, an avian flu outbreak four years forced the
slaughter of more than 17 million birds.)

But avian flu has not shown up in wild birds, domestic poultry or people in the
United States. And, as the Washington‐based Worldwatch Institute (an environmental
research group) pointed out in a report last month, experts including the Pew Commission
on Industrial Farm Animal Production have said that if we do see it, it'll be more likely to be
found in factory‐farmed poultry than backyard chickens. As GRAIN, an international
sustainable agriculture group, concluded in a 2006 report: "When it comes to bird flu,
diverse small‐scale poultry farming is the solution, not the problem."

Many urban farmers are taking that motto to heart. In New York, where chickens (but not
roosters, whose loud crowing can disturb neighbors) are allowed in limitless quantities,
there are at least 30 community gardens raising them for eggs, and a City Chicken Project
run by a local nonprofit that aims to educate the community about their benefits. In
Madison, Wis., where members of a grass‐roots chicken movement, the Chicken
Underground, successfully overturned a residential chicken ban four years ago, there are
now 81 registered chicken owners, according to the city's animal‐services department.
"There's definitely a growing movement," says 33‐year‐old Rob Ludlow, the Bay Area
operator of BackyardChickens.com and the owner of five chickens of his own. "A lot of
people really do call it an addiction. Chickens are fun, they have a lot of personality. I think
people are starting to see that they're really easy pets—and they actually produce
something in return."

Because chickens can be considered both livestock and pet, farming them for eggs—or
keeping them as pets—is unregulated in major cities like New York and Los Angeles. But it
isn't legal everywhere. According to one recent examination by urban‐agriculture expert
Jennifer Blecha, just 65 percent of major cities allow chicken keeping, while 40 percent
allow for one or more roosters. (Hens don't need roosters to lay unfertilized eggs.)

Chicken slaughter, meanwhile, tends to fall under a separate (and generally stricter) set of
regulations, though they're not always enforced. Most cities that allow chicken farming
limit the number to four or six per household, so many urban farmers aren't raising enough
chickens to slaughter and sell anyway—though they may cook up a meal or two at home. If
they want to slaughter more, there are mobile slaughterhouses in places like Washington
state that will do the dirty work for you: USDA‐approved refrigerated trucks will pull right
up to your doorstep.

Chicken farmers are finding each other on sites like TheCityChicken.com,

UrbanChickens.org and MadCityChickens.com. BackyardChickens.com logs some 6million
13
page views each month and has some 18,000 members in its forum, where community
members share colorful stories (giving a chicken CPR), photos (from a California chicken
show), even look to each other for comfort. "I am worried that non‐BYC people won't
understand why a 34‐year‐old woman would cry over a $7chicken," writes a Stockton, N.J.,
woman, whose chicken was killed by a hawk.

Over at UrbanChickens.org, which launched this year, founder K. T. LaBadie, a master's

student in community planning, provides updates on city ordinances, info about local
chicken‐farming classes and coop tours and has been contacted by activists hoping to
overturn chicken bans around the nation. In Albuquerque, where she lives with her
husband and four chickens—Gloria, Switters, Buffy and Omelet—residents can keep 15
chickens and one rooster, subject to noise ordinances, as well as slaughter the chickens for
food. In July, LaBadie wrote in detail of her first killing: she and her husband hung the bird
by its legs, slit its throat, plucked its feathers and put it on ice. Then they slow‐cooked it for
20 hours. "It's not pretty, it's kinda messy, and it's a little smelly," she writes. "But it's quite
real."

Meanwhile, at MadCityChickens.com, the Web site created by the Madison Chicken

Underground, chat‐line operator Dennis Harrison‐Noonan has turned his chicken love into
a mini‐business: he's sold 2,000 design kits for his custom‐made playhouse chicken coop,
which retails for $35. "It's really not that crazy to think that people are doing this," says
Owen Taylor, the urban livestock coordinator at Just Food, which operates the New York
Chicken Project. "Most of the world keeps chickens, and they've been doing so for
thousands of years."

Historically, he's right. During the first and second world wars, the government even
encouraged urban farming by way of backyard "Victory Gardens" in an effort to lessen the
pressure on the public food supply. (Until 1859, there were 50,000 hogs living in
Manhattan, according to Blecha.) "It's really only been over the last 50 years or so that
we've gotten the idea that modernity and success and urban spaces don't involve these
productive animals," Blecha says.

There are a host of reasons for the growing trend. "Locavores" hope to avoid the carbon
emissions and energy consumption that come with transporting food. Chicken owners and
poultry experts say eggs from backyard chickens are tastier and can be more nutritious,
with higher levels of supplements like omega‐3 fatty acids. Their production cost is cheap:
you can buy chickens for as little as a couple of dollars, and three hens will likely average
about two eggs a day. You can also use their waste to help revitalize a garden. "There've
been recalls on everything from beef to spinach, and I think people want to have peace of
mind knowing their food is coming from a very trusted source," says LaBadie. "As gas
prices go up, and people realize how food is connected to oil and transportation, they are
bound to realize they can get a higher quality product cheaper if they get it locally."

Keeping a chicken is relatively easy, too—assuming you don't get too attached.
(That's a talk Mackin says she had with her kids early: these chickens aren't pets.)

14
They'll eat virtually anything—"pork products, string cheese, even Chinese take out,"she
laughs—and they feed on bugs and pests that can ruin a garden. They can withstand harsh
weather conditions. (In one oft‐told tale, a Maine woman lost her chicken in a blizzard and
found it, a day later, frozen solid with its feet stuck straight in the air. She thawed it and
administered CPR. The chicken made a full recovery.) And much like New Yorkers, not
much bothers chickens grown in urban environments. "[Those] raised in a really controlled
environment like factory farms are very fragile, both physically and emotionally," says
Blecha, who lives in St. Paul, Minn., with her partner and six chickens. "My chickens, I mow
the lawn a foot away from them and they don't even look up from their pecking."

But even urban chickens, who can live more than five years, can die easily: from predators
like dogs or possums, catching a cold or sometimes for no apparent reason at all. Once, one
of Mackin's chicks got stuck in a glue trap. She drowned it, to put it out of its misery. "That
was really sad," she says. (Mackin doesn't name her chickens, for that very reason.)

But the overall experience seems to be positive for everyone. "We have people calling
weekly to say, 'This is really cool'," says Patrick Comfert, a spokesman for
Madison's animal‐services department, where the chicken ban was reversed in
2004. "Chicken people love it, the neighbors don't care, we have no complaints."
Minneapolis enthusiast Albert Bourgeois sums up the appeal. "Chickens are really fun
pets," he says. His flock is named Cheney, Condi, Dragon, Fannie and Freddie.
The next one, he says, will be Obama.
URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/168740

15
Appendix B:
History of Prohibitions on Chicken-Keeping

From Harvest of the Suburbs (2006) by Andrea Gaynor:

“In the 1960s it appears that, as Andrew Brown‐May has suggested, ‘the increasing
restriction on the keeping of productive animals was based as much on the abandonment
of a perceived outdated rural era in favor of a progressive urban ideology’ as it was on
concerns for health or the obviation of nuisances. This ‘urban ideology’ – part of the
‘modern outlook’ – included an element which lauded consumption and disparaged at least
some types of production. Margo Huxley has proposed that such ‘by‐laws’ can be seen to
support consumerist trends in domestic life by regulating the amount of
(non‐horticultural) food production which can be undertaken on suburban blocks’, but
they can also be seen as participating in the creation of those trends. (ed –
emphasis mine.) In other words, the exclusion of productive animals from residential
areas was one way in which various state instrumentalities – generally operated by
middle‐class technocrats – sought to produce clean, modern communities people with
cosmopolitan commuters and consumers. Although vegetable gardening and fruit
production remained acceptable suburban pastimes, in the ideal modern suburb, the whine
of the Victa motor mower would no longer have to compete with cuckling and cackling…”

16
Appendix C:
Examples of Urban Backyard Coops

The Playhouse Coop

www.madcitychickens.com

The Eglu

www.omlet.us

17
Plans from Purinamills.com

And the resulting coop

18
A Chicken Tractor

Home.centurytel.net/thecitychicken/tractors.html

19
Appendix D:
Letters from Real Estate Agents

20
21
22
Appendix E:
Area Cities that Allow Chickens
A note here, I took the liberty of editing the list to only include local cities with the
exception of Louisville and Lexington. I thought it would be useful to show those two
because they are larger cities with people a bit more packed in, and lots the same
size if not smaller. A full list can be found at
http://www.ca.uky.edu/smallflocks/Ordinances.html

ALEXANDRIA

Chapter 90 of the city ordinances for Alexandria pertains to keeping animals.

§ 10.02 DEFINITIONS.

DOMESTIC ANIMAL. Any animal converted to domestic habitat. (KRS 446.010 (12))

§ 90.02 ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE.

A. No person who is the owner of any animal shall permit it to run at large in the public
road, highway, street, lane, or alley, or upon unenclosed land, or permit it to go on any
private yard, lot, or enclosure without the consent of the owner of the yard, lot or
enclosure.
B. The owner of an animal who permits it to run at large in violation of this section is liable
for all damages caused by such animal upon the premises of another. Penalty, see §
90.99

§ 90.04 DYEING OR SELLING DYED CHICKS OR RABBITS.

No person shall sell, exchange, offer to sell or exchange, display or possess

living baby chicks, ducklings, or other fowl or rabbits which have been dyed or
colored; nor dye or color any baby chicks, ducklings or other fowl or rabbits; nor sell,
exchange, offer to sell or exchange or to give away baby chicks, ducklings or
other fowl or rabbits, under two months of age in any quantity less than six, except
than any rabbit weighing three pounds or more may be sold at an age of six weeks.
(KRS 436.600) Penalty, see § 90.99

§ 90.05 ABANDONING DOMESTIC ANIMALS PROHIBITED.

23
No owner of a domestic animal shall abandon the animal. Penalty, see § 90.99

BELLEVUE

SECTION 9.5 – ANIMALS: Exotic animals, farm / livestock animals, and/or wildlife
are not permitted to be bred, raised, kept and/or housed on any property in any zone
within the City.

Article VII - Definitions

Agriculture: The use of land for purposes including but not limited to dairying, farming,
floriculture, horticulture,
pasturage, viticulture, and animal and poultry husbandryand the necessary accessory
uses for packing, treating, or
storing the produce; provided, however, that the operation of any such accessory use
shall be secondary to that of
the normal agricultural activities.

Animals, Farm / Livestock: (1) All cattle or animals of the bovine species; (2) all
horses, mules, burros and asses or
animals of the equine species; (3) all goats or animals of the caprice species; (4) all
swine or animals of the porcine
species; (5) all sheep or animals of the ovine species; (6) all fowl or animals of the
order Galliforme (gamebirds); (7)
all ducks and geese or animals of the Anatidae (water fowl) family; and (8) all
ostrich, emu, rhea and cassowaries.

COLD SPRINGS

Based on the ordinances listed below, it is possible to keep poultry in Cold Springs
under specific conditions.

§ 92.03 CERTAIN CONDITIONS DECLARED A NUISANCE.

(L) Keeping of animals. The keeping of cattle or poultry within 100 feet of a dwelling
other than the dwelling of the owner of the animal, or failure to keep the animal's pen,
24
yard, lot or other enclosure in a sanitary condition and free from preventable offensive
odors.
(Ord. 1988-21, passed 7-11-88; Am. Ord. 1992-13, passed 6-16-92) Penalty, see §
92.99

Additional poultry-related ordinances:

§ 90.04 DYEING OR SELLING DYED CHICKS OR RABBITS.

No person shall sell, exchange, offer to sell or exchange, display or possess living baby
chicks, ducklings, or other fowl or rabbits which have been dyed or colored; nor dye
or color any baby chicks, ducklings or other fowl or rabbits; nor sell, exchange, offer
to sell or exchange or to give away baby chicks, ducklings or other fowl or rabbits,
under two months of age in any quantity less than six, except that any rabbit weighing
three pounds or more may be sold at an age of six weeks.
(KRS 436.600) Penalty, see § 90.99(C)

COVINGTON

The city ordinances for Covington are available online.

Definition: FOWL. Any and all fowl, domesticated and wild, male and female, including
chickens, ducks, turkeys, pigeons and geese. You can keep poultry for commercial
purposes, but NOT within 100 feet of another residence. A minimum of 10,000 square
feet of land is required. To breed animals for commercial purposes (which would include
hatching and selling baby chicks) requires a license. Falconry is not allowed.

§92.07 NOISE CONTROL

(A) Nuisance. No person shall make, continue, or cause to be made or continued, any
loud, unnecessary, or unusual noise or any noise that either annoys, disturbs, injures, or
endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace or safety of others within the city. The
following loud, disturbing, and unnecessary noises are considered public nuisances and
violations of this code, but said list shall not be deemed all-inclusive:
(5) Animals, birds. The keeping of any animal or bird that causes frequent or long
continued noise that disturbs the comfort or repose of any persons in the vicinity is
prohibited.

25
§90.11 LICENSE REQUIRED TO RAISE ANIMALS
(A) Any person engaged in raising or breeding any animals for commercial purposes or
otherwise shall obtain a license from the city and comply with all applicable zoning
regulations. Each application for a license shall state the number and kind of animals to
be raised, and the location of the premises to be used for that purpose.
(B) The Finance Director shall issue the license for raising animals.
(`77 Code, §840.2, Sec. I(f),(g)) (Ord. O-33-03, passed 6-24-03; Am. Ord. O-23-05,
passed 5-17-05

§90.12 HARBORING FOWL

(A) Subject to the city’s zoning regulations, no person shall own in the city any chicken,
duck, guinea, goose, pigeon, or dove, or any species of fowl of the avian or aquatic
family for commercial purposes, within 100 feet of any residence therein.
(B) No person shall permit any such chicken, duck, guinea, goose, dove, pigeon, or any
fowl of the avian or aquatic family to run or be at large within the city. However, the
provisions of this section shall not apply to any fowl confined in coops at market
places or stores where the fowl is sold for food, except that any fowl kept for sale
shall not be permitted to run at large at the place where the fowl is kept for sale or the
owning of pigeons and birds of prey for the purposes of falconry.
(`77 Code,§840.2, Sec. I(h)) (Ord. O-33-03, passed 6-24-03)

§90.16 ANIMAL CARCASSES

(A) The body or part of any animal to be used for human food shall not be transported
through any streets, unless it is covered so as to protect it from insects, animals, dust,
and dirt.
(B) No person shall permit any dead horse, cow, sheep, or other animal carcass to
remain within the city longer than a reasonable time for removing or burying the animal
carcass.
(C) When a dead animal is found in the city, the owner shall promptly and properly bury
the animal when notified to do so by an animal control officer or enforcement agent.
Where the owner is unknown or neglects or refuses, an animal control officer or
enforcement agent, or their designee shall bury the animal.
(`77 Code, §840.2, Sec. I(m)-(o)) (Am. Ord. O-31-01, passed 8-7-01; Am.Ord. O-33-03,
passed 6-24-03)

26
§90.20 DEPOSITING ANIMAL REFUSE IN PUBLIC PLACES
No person shall deposit any dead animal matter, offal, or any solid refuse animal matter
in any sewer, watercourse, vacant lot, or pond in the city. The depositing of the refuse
animal matter in any such place is declared a public nuisance.
(`77 Code, §840.2, Sec. I(z)) (Ord. O-33-03, passed 6-24-03)

§ 90.21 MINIMUM AREA LIMITATIONS

(A) No animal shall be kept on any lot or parcel of land within the city consisting of less
than 10,000 square feet in area.
(B) The provisions of division (A) above shall not apply to the keeping of: (1) Small
household pets to include, but not be limited to dogs and cats; or (2) Animals for
commercial purposes where such use is lawful under the zoning code.
(`77 Code,§840.2, Sec. I(y)) (Ord. O-33-03, passed 6-24-03)

§92.11 ANIMALS AND ANIMAL EXCREMENT

(A) No person shall keep or maintain any animal in the city in such a manner so as to
become a public nuisance or to disturb the peace, comfort, or health of any person
residing within the city. The keeping of all animals within the city shall also be subject to
all pertinent regulations of Chapter 90 of this Code of Ordinances and the Kentucky
Health Department.
(B) No animal shall be kept on any lot or parcel of land or property within the city
territorial limits consisting of less than 10,000 square feet in area. However, this
provision shall not apply to small household pets, such as dogs or cats, or those
animals kept or maintained for commercial purposes, which is a lawful use under the
zoning code.
(C) (1) Any person having the custody and control of any dog, cat, or other domestic
animal on public property shall have the responsibility for cleaning up the excrement of
the animal and disposing of such feces in a sanitary manner. It shall also be the duty of
said person to have in his or her possession suitable equipment or supplies to pick up,
remove, and dispose of the animal excrement. (2) No person shall allow excessive
animal excrement to accumulate on his or her premises, including his or her yard. For
purposes of this section, EXCESSIVE shall mean more than five separate deposits or
droppings of animal excrement. Excessive accumulation of animal excrement is a public
nuisance and shall constitute a violation of this code, subject to the remedies set forth in
§ 92.18 and §92.99 of this chapter.
(D) No person shall deposit any dead animal matter, offal, or any solid animal matter in

27
any sewer, watercourse, vacant lot, public right-of-way, or pond or lake in the city. The
depositing of the refuse of animal matter in any such place is a public nuisance and
shall constitute a violation of this code, subject to the remedies set forth in §92.18 and
§92.99 of this chapter.
(Ord. O-13-03, passed 4-1-03)

CRESTVIEW HILLS

No specific mention of poultry in the Crestview Hills ordinances but based on the
information below they are not specifically prohibited.

"DOMESTIC ANIMAL.quot; Animals that are habituated to live in or about the

habitations of human beings, and which are kept, cared for, sheltered, fed, or harbored
for use as a pet or as a source of food, raw materials or income.

"LIVESTOCK." Cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses or any other animals of the bovine,
ovine, porcine, caprine, or equine species.

§ 90.07 ANIMALS TO BE UNDER CONTROL.

(A) It shall be unlawful for any person to permit any animal owned or harbored by him or her, to
run at large. When livestock are running at large, Animal Control or the police shall make
reasonable efforts to notify the owner as soon as possible. If reasonably possible and feasible,
the owner of the livestock shall be notified prior to the actual capture and impoundment of the
livestock.
(Ord. 2006-3-1, passed 4-13-06) Penalty, see § 90.99

ERLANGER

The city ordinances for Erlanger permit you can keep poultry, but not within 500 feet
of any residence other than your own. The raising of homing and racing pigeons is
allowed, under specific conditions.

§91.04 KEEPING FOWL AND LIVESTOCK; RUNNING AT LARGE

(A) No person shall keep or harbor any fowl or livestock within the incorporated limits of
the city within 500 feet of any residence therein other than the residence of the owner.
(B) No person shall permit any fowl or livestock to run at large within the corporate limits
of the city; provided, that the provisions of this division shall not apply to any fowl

28
confined in coops in any store where that fowl is sold for food, except that any fowl kept
for sale shall not be permitted to run at large at the place where the same is kept for
sale.
('69 Code §90.50)(Ord. 840, passed 2-15-55)

§91.05 HOMING OR RACING PIGEONS

(A) There is exempted and removed from the applicable provisions of §91.04, the
raising and breeding of homing or racing pigeons within the city.
(B) All lofts, bins, and other structures used by residents of the city to raise, breed, and
otherwise house homing pigeons shall conform to all existing rules and regulations of
the planning and zoning regulations of the city.
(C) It is further provided that no structure shall be so located on any lot that is closer
than 100 feet from the nearest adjoining residence.
(D) Any loft or structure used for the purposes herein set out shall be not less than six
inches above the ground and shall contain adequate ventilation and circulation. The
structure shall be kept clean and free from any offensive odors and shall otherwise be
built in accord with all acceptable standards and practices for the raising and care of
racing or homing pigeons.
(E) Plans and specifications for the construction of the lofts shall be first submitted to
the City Building Inspector for approval, and, in addition thereto, be inspected and
approved.

FLORENCE

The city ordinances for Florence don't specifically address whether or not you can
keep poultry but they do have an ordinances preventing any such poultry from 'running
at large.'

§ 91.15 ANIMALS DISTURBING THE PEACE.

It shall be unlawful for any person to keep within the city any animal which by reason of
frequent or continual noise or unsanitary conditions, disturbs the peace, comfort, or
health of the neighbors.
(Ord. O-4-86, passed 2-11-86) Penalty, see § 91.99

§ 91.16 ANIMALS, LIVESTOCK RUNNING AT LARGE.

(A) It shall be unlawful for any person(s) to permit any animal owned or harbored by
him, to run at large as defined in § 91.01 in any area of Boone County.

29
When livestock are found running at large, the animal control officer or county police or
other peace officer shall make reasonable effort to notify the owner as soon as possible.
If reasonably possible and feasible, the owner of livestock shall be notified prior to the
actual capture and impoundment of the livestock.
(B) This section shall not be construed to allow the keeping or harboring of any animal
in the city, the keeping or harboring of which is prohibited by any other statute,
ordinance, regulation, or law.
(Ord. O-1-1897, passed 3-1-1897; Am. Ord. O-42-76, passed 9-28-76; Am. Ord. O-30-
88, passed 11-8-88) Penalty, see § 91.99

"LIVESTOCK." Cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses or any other animals of the bovine,
ovine, porcine, caprine, or equine species.

FORT THOMAS

According to city ordinances for Fort Thomas It is illegal to raise poultry for profit but
you can apply for permission to keep female chickens for personal, family or home use.
If approved, a license is issued but it can be revoked if certain conditions are not met.
No roosters are allowed and the number of chickens must be less than 100. You can
NOT keep turkeys, guineas, ducks, geese or pigeons.

§91.04 RAISING CHICKENS OR RABBITS

(A) It shall be unlawful to keep or raise chickens or rabbits for sale or profit in the city.
(B) It shall be lawful to keep or raise chickens and rabbits in the city for personal,
family, or home use. However, any person desiring to raise or keep chickens or
rabbits shall make an application in writing and signed by him to the Zoning
Administrator requesting that a license to do so be issued, and agreeing therein that the
city, by its officers or members of the Police Department be permitted at all times to
inspect the premises for the purpose of determining whether or not they are maintained
in a sanitary condition and whether all of the provisions of this section are observed.
(C) The Zoning Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to issue licenses to
applicants pursuant to the terms of this section, without any charge or expense to the
applicant whatsoever. It shall be unlawful to use, operate, or maintain any coop, hutch,
run-way, or enclosure for chickens or rabbits within 50 feet of any dwelling house,
except the dwelling house on the same premises.
(D) It shall be unlawful for any person to raise a rooster in the city or for any one

30
family to keep or raise more than 100 chickens. It shall be unlawful to let any
chickens or rabbits run at large; and it shall be unlawful to keep or raise chickens or
rabbits or to maintain any coop, hutch, building, or enclosure for them in an unclean or
unsanitary condition.
(E) In the event that any person fails to comply with all of the requirements of this
section or violates any of the terms of this section, the license for the raising
of chickens or rabbits to that person shall be revoked by order of the appropriate court
of the city, or by resolution of the City Council.
('83 Code, § 91.04) (Ord. 623, passed 5-3-43)

§91.05 RAISING FOWL PROHIBITED

It shall be unlawful to keep or raise turkeys, guineas, ducks, or geese in the city.
('83 Code, §91.05) (Ord. 0-24-75, passed 11-3-75)

§91.06 ANIMALS OR FOWL RUNNING AT LARGE

It shall be unlawful to permit any animals or fowl to run at large on the streets of the city
or permit the same to trespass upon the land of another.
('83 Code, §91.06) (Ord. 0-24-75, passed 11-3-75)

§91.07 PIGEONS DECLARED A NUISANCE

(A) It is hereby declared that pigeons are a public nuisance, and it shall be unlawful for
any persons to harbor, keep, or feed flocks of pigeons within the city.
(B) Whenever it shall appear, on complaint of citizens or otherwise, that pigeons are
constituting a nuisance in any part of the city, the Chief of Police shall be authorized to
use all necessary means to destroy the pigeons.
('83 Code, §91.07) (Ord. 0-15-71, passed 8-2-71)

FORT WRIGHT

It is unclear from the city ordinances for Fort Wright whether or not poultry can be
kept since the definition of livestock does not include poultry.

LIVESTOCK. Cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses or any other animals of the bovine,
ovine, porcine, caprine, or equine species. [Does not appear to include poultry]

§90.07 KEEPING OF LIVESTOCK PROHIBITED.

The keeping of livestock is prohibited. No person shall keep any livestock whether

31
owned by him, or not, on his property within the city, except grandfathered farms.
(Ord. 581-99, passed 4-14-99)

HIGHLAND HEIGHTS

The city ordinances for Highland Heights permit the keeping of poultry under certain
restrictions.

ANIMAL. Any live vertebrate creature.

DOMESTICATED. Any animal kept, cared for, sheltered, fed or harbored for use in
work, for use as a pet, or as a source of food, raw materials or income.

§91.05 ANIMAL FIGHTS AND RACES

(A) It shall be unlawful for any person to stage, cause, instigate, permit, observe, or
attend any dogfight, cockfight, bullfight or other combat between animals or between
animals and humans.
('81 Code, §820.1, §5(d))
(B It shall be unlawful for any person to set free any hare, rabbit or other animals in the
city for the purpose of chasing, fighting, or having a race thereafter.
('81 Code, §820.1, §5(e))

§91.07 GIVING ANIMALS AS PRIZES

No person shall give away any live animal as a prize or for inducement to enter any
contest, game or other competition, or as inducement to enter any place of business or
to use as an incentive to enter into any business agreement, whereby the offer was for
the purpose of attracting the trade.
('81 Code, §820.1 §5(n))

§91.08 COLORING ANIMALS

It shall be unlawful for any person to color, stain or dye or otherwise change the natural
color of any live animal or to offer such colored animals for sale in the city. [Expands on
the state regulations against coloring chicks and ducklings]
('81 Code, §820.1, § 5(o))

§91.12 KEEPING AND STORAGE OF LIVESTOCK

(A) The keeping of fowl or small animals whether or not primarily for gain is permitted
provided that the enclosures for such fowl and small animals shall be at least twenty

32
feet distance from every lot line.
(B) The keeping of horses, cows, and other livestock whether or not primarily for gain
shall be permitted only in an enclosure which shall be a distance of at least one hundred
feet from every lot line.
(C) Animal wastes. No manure or bedding shall be stored or kept within one hundred
feet of any lot line and same is prohibited unless stored or kept in a sanitary manner
and so as not to emit or produce noxious or objectionable odors to the extreme that
such may constitute a public nuisance.
(D) Any person using the public streets of the city for riding of or transportation of
horses, cows, or other livestock shall be responsible for the cleaning and proper
disposal of manure, waste, or any other matter left on said streets as a result.
('81 Code, §820.2)

§91.13 COMMERCIAL ANIMAL ESTABLISHMENT.

Any person operating a commercial animal establishment shall post a visible notice
containing the names and phone numbers of persons to be notified in case of an
emergency.
('81 Code, §820.1, §5(h)

LEXINGTON-FAYETTE COUNTY

You are allowed to keep poultry, providing the proper stipulations are followed with
regard to housing and odors. If selling hatchlings, a minimum of six must be sold at
one time.

State law reference—Agriculture and animals, KRS ch. 246 et seq.

Sec. 4-1. AUCTION SALES ON STREETS

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell by public auction any loose animal on any
street, alley or public highway within the urban county or to expose for sale thereon
animals in droves, herds or flocks.
(b) Each violation of this section shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding twenty-five
dollars ($25.00).
Cross references: Auctions generally, § 13-23 et seq.

Sec. 4-6. FIGHTS; WAGERING

(a) Intentionally causing or instigating the fighting of animals or fowl in the urban county

33
is hereby prohibited.
(b) Any person who shall be present at and abet or encourage any such fights and any
person who shall bet any money or other thing of value upon the results of any such
fight shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not less than one hundred dollars
($100.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or imprisonment for a term not
to exceed twelve (12) months, or both, for each act which shall be a separate offense.
(Ord. No. 10-99, § 1, 1-28-99)

Sec 4-7. SELLING DYED CHICKS OR OTHER BABY FOWL

Any person who shall sell or offer for sale at retail living baby chicks, ducklings or other
fowl which have been dyed, colored or otherwise treated so as to import artificial color,
shall be subject to a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) nor more than
five hundred dollars ($500.00) or imprisonment for a term not to exceed twelve (12)
months, or both, for each act which shall be a separate offense.
(Ord. No. 10-99, § 1, 1-28-99)

Sec. 4-8. SELLING CHICKS OR OTHER BABY FOWL IN SMALL NUMBERS

Any person who shall sell or offer for sale at retail living baby chicks, ducklings or
other fowl under two months of age in any quantity less than six shall be subject to a
fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) nor more than five hundred dollars
($500.00) or imprisonment for a term not to exceed twelve months, or both, for each act
which shall be a separate offense.
(Ord. No. 10-99, § 1, 1-28-99)

Sec 4-10. FOWL GOING AT LARGE

(a) No person owning or having in his custody and control any fowl shall permit same to
run at large, or to go upon the grounds or property of another, or beyond the bounds of
the property of such owner or person in control of such fowl.
(b) Any person who shall violate any provision of this section shall be fined not less than
one dollar ($1.00) nor more than twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each offense.
State law reference—Strays and animals running at large, KRS ch. 259.

Sec. 4-12. NOISY ANIMALS, KEEPING

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to keep, pasture or harbor within any area of the
urban county except those zoned agricultural any bull, cow or other animal that bellows
or otherwise makes such noise as to disturb the peace and quiet of the people in the

34
neighborhood where the same is kept.
(b) Any person violating this section shall be fined not less than five dollars ($5.00) nor
more than fifteen dollars ($15.00) for each offense.
Cross reference—Noise disturbances, § 14-71 et seq.

Sec. 4-12.1. GIVING AWAY LIVE ANIMALS AS PRIZES PROHIBITED

(a) As used in this section "animal" includes every living creature, domestic or wild,
except a human being.
(b) It shall be unlawful within any area of the county for any person to offer or give away
any live animal as a prize or reward in connection with any raffle, protest,
demonstration, promotion, or as a part of any gratuity or pecuniary exchange to induce
entry into any game, contest or other competition, except livestock offered or given
away as a part of a farm youth education program.
(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the auction or sale of animals.
(d) Any person who shall violate this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to
a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) or imprisonment for a term not to
exceed twelve months, or both for each offense. Each offering or giving away of an
animal in violation of this section shall be deemed a separate offense.
(Ord. No. 201-91, § 1, 9-5-91; Ord. No. 282-95, § 1, 12-7-95)

Sec. 4-12.2 NUISANCES CREATED BY ANIMALS

(a) It shall be unlawful for the owner or harborer of an animal to permit:

1. Any animal to attack, chase or snap at pedestrians or passersby;

2. The accumulation of animal excrement so as to cause unsightly litter or fouling of the air
by odor and thereby create an unreasonable annoyance or discomfort to neighbors or
others in close proximity to the premises where the animal is kept or harbored; or
3. Unsanitary conditions in enclosures or surroundings where the animal is kept or
harbored.

(b) Any person who violates this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than
twenty-five dollars ($25.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) for a first
offense; not less than fifty dollars ($50.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500.00)
for a second offense in a twelve-month period; not less than one hundred dollars
($100.00) nor more than five hundred dollars ($500.00) for a third offense in a twelve-
month period; and not less than two hundred dollars ($200.00) nor more than five

35
hundred dollars ($500.00) for a fourth and each subsequent offense in a twelve-month
period. Each day's continuance of any such violation shall be a separate offense.
(c) Any animal which is the subject of any violation of this section may be impounded as
set forth in section 4-21.
(Ord. No. 31-93, § 1, 3-11-93; Ord. No. 108-2009, § 2, 6-25-09)

Sec. 4-21. IMPOUNDMENT.

(a) Any dog, fowl or head of livestock found running at large within the urban county,
unless accompanied by the owner, custodian, possessor or harborer, and under his
immediate control and not confined on the premises of the owner, custodian, possessor
or harborer, shall be taken up by an animal control officer and held in the animal shelter
designated as the urban county animal shelter. Each dog, head of livestock
or fowl shall be there confined in a humane manner for a period of not less than five
days and each cat shall be there confined in a humane manner for a period of not less
than three days, unless sooner claimed by their owners, custodians or persons entitled
to possession thereof, and may be disposed of in a humane manner if not otherwise
claimed, sold or adopted. Equine and bovine livestock shall be confined for the period
required by state law.
(b) The urban county animal control officer may transfer title to all animals held after
the legal detention period in subsection (a) hereof has expired and the animal has not
been claimed by its owner, custodian or other person entitled to possession thereof,
provided the person to whom title is being transferred licenses said animal and pays for
rabies inoculation for said dog or cat, together with the boarding and adoption charges
levied by the urban county animal shelter, and in addition thereto pays the pickup fee
payable to the animal shelter provided in subsection (c) hereof.
(c) Any owner, custodian or other person entitled to the possession of a dog, cat, head
of livestock, or fowl impounded under subsection (a) hereof may claim the animal upon
proof that said dog or cat has been inoculated against rabies or purchase of a
vaccination voucher from the animal shelter; payment of boarding charges at the rate of
eight dollars ($8.00) per day, including the first and last day of impoundment, levied by
the urban county animal shelter; payment to the urban county of any fine due under
section 4-19(e) hereof; compliance with the redemption requirements for dogs and cats
under subsection (d); and payment of a pickup fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for
each fowl or head of livestock impounded, which pickup fee shall be paid into the
general services fund of the urban county government. The agency designated by the
urban county government responsible for enforcement of this ordinance may waive all

36
impoundment and boarding fees if the impoundment of an animal resulted from an
emergency situation, such as fire or natural disaster.
(d) In addition to the requirements in subsection (c) above, any owner, custodian or
other person entitled to the possession of an impounded dog or cat may redeem the
animal by paying a redemption fee. For the first impound within a twelve-month period,
the fee is twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for an altered dog or cat and seventy-five dollars
($75.00) for an unaltered dog or cat. For the second and each subsequent impound
within a twelve-month period, the fee shall be doubled. Twenty-five dollars ($25.00) of
the fee from each impound fee for an unaltered dog or cat shall be paid into the general
fund and the balance shall be paid into the spay and neuter fund. In lieu of paying the
impound fee for an unaltered animal, the owner may elect to have the animal spayed or
neutered by a licensed veterinarian provided by the Lexington Humane Society, at a
cost not exceeding the sum of fifty dollars ($50.00).
(Ord. No. 5387, §4, 12-9-65; Ord. No. 58-74, §1, 4-18-74; Ord. No. 108-77, §1, 4-21-77;
Ord. No. 168-77, 1, 6-30-77; Ord. No. 233-96, §5, 11-21-96; Ord. No. 316-2000, §1, 10-
26-00; Ord. No. 90-2005, §9, 4-21-05; Ord. No. 285-2008, §1, 12-9-08; Ord. No. 95-
2009, §1, 6-25-09)

Sec. 4-23.1. RESPONSIBILITY OF OWNER TO REMOVE ANIMAL EXCRETA FROM

WASTE REMOVAL AREAS
(1) The custodian of every animal shall remove any excreta deposited by his/her
animal(s) within the urban service boundary on public walks, streets, recreation areas or
private property belonging to another.
(2) Any excreta not removed in violation of subsection (1) above is declared to be a
public nuisance.
(3) Any person violating any provision of this section shall, upon conviction thereof by a
court of competent jurisdiction, be fined not more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for each
violation.
(Ord. No. 122-91, § 1, 7-2-91; Ord. No. 39-93, § 1, 3-11-93)

LOUISVILLE-JEFFERSON COUNTY

In the ordinances for Louisville the definition for livestock includes poultry. There is a
separate definition for what constitutes poultry. The keeping of poultry are allowed, with
some restrictions based on land available and whether they are crowing or non-crowing.

37
§91.001 DEFINITIONS
Definition of livestock: Cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, llamas, buffaloes, or any
other animals of the bovine, ovine, porcine, lagomorph, caprine, or equine species, deer
and elk, whose regulatory requirements are under KRS Chapters 150 and 246, as well
as poultry, ratites [technically ratites are poultry], and cervine, that are privately owned
and raised in a confined area for breeding stock, food, fiber, and other products.
Definition of poultry: Chickens, ducks, turkeys, or other domestic fowl.

(7) All livestock other than poultry as set forth in subsection (8), below shall be
confined by a fence in good repair sufficient to prevent the animal(s) from leaving the
owner's property. Livestock found not restrained by a fence in good repair and which
present a threat to public safety may be removed and the owner charged with a
violation of this section.
(8) All crowing and non-crowing poultry must be kept on tracts or lots of at least 0.5
acres or more, unless a tract or lot is on less than 0.5 acres and only houses five or less
non-crowing poultry, and no more than one crowing poultry in accordance with the
remainder of this subsection. All crowing and non-crowing poultry shall be kept in a
fence or structure of sufficient height and construction to prevent the animal(s) from
leaving the owner's property. The fence or structure must be in good repair. All gates or
doors to the fence or structure shall fit properly and shall be locked or secured by a
latch. Poultry associated with an agricultural use shall not be subject to the restraint
requirement as set forth herein.

§ 91.010 SANITARY DISPOSAL OF ANIMAL FECES REQUIRED

(A) It shall be unlawful for any owner or person in charge of a dog, cat, ferret, or other four-
footed mammal, poultry or other fowl to permit such animal to be on school grounds, metro
parks or other public property, or on any private property other than that of the owner or person
in charge or control of such animal without the permission of the owner of said property, or on
any streets, sidewalks, highways, or rights-of-way of the Metro Government other than duly
designated bridle paths, unless the owner or person in charge of such animals:
(1) Has, in his or her possession, a suitable device for the picking up, collection and proper
sanitary disposal of the animal feces or manure.
(2) Immediately removes all feces deposited by such animal(s) and disposes of same in a
sanitary manner.

38
MAYSVILLE

Couldn't find any city ordinances specifically allowing (or not allowing) the keeping of
poultry, but based on the ordinances below it is implied that they are.

§191.02 ANIMALS RUNNING AT LARGE ON FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT

No person being the owner of any domestic animal or fowl shall permit the animal
or fowl to be herded, kept or detained or allowed to run at large on the flood protection
project or its right-of-way.
(1991 Code, §191.02) (Ord. 233, passed 2-12-1951)

§ 191.03 PUBLIC NUISANCE TO HARBOR ANIMALS THAT DISTURB THE PEACE

It shall be unlawful for any owner to fail to exercise proper care and control of his or her
animals to prevent them from becoming a public nuisance. Excessive, continuous
barking or making such noise as to disturb the peace and quiet of the neighborhood at
any time during the night or day; molesting passersby; chasing vehicles; trespassing
upon private property in such manner as to damage property; and habitually attacking
other domestic animals is declared a public nuisance.
(1991 Code, §191.03 (Ord. 654, passed 4-13-1971)

§190.06 ANIMALS
It shall be unlawful to own, possess or harbor any animal or bird that frequently or for
continued duration howls, barks, meows, squawks or makes other sounds that create a
noise disturbance across a residential or commercial real property line or within a noise
sensitive zone. This provision shall not apply to public zoos or animal shelters.
(1991 Code, §190.06)

.NEWPORT

Couldn't find any ordinances specifically allowing for the keeping of poultry, but content
of other ordinances would indicate that it is allowed.

AGRICULTURE: The use of land for agricultural purposes including agriculture,

dairying, farming, floriculture, horticulture, pasturage, viticulture, and animal and poultry
husbandry and the necessary accessory uses for packing, treating, or storing the

39
produce; provided, however, that the operation of any such accessory use shall be
secondary to that of the normal agricultural activities.

LIVESTOCK: Domestic animals of types customarily raised or kept on farms for profit or
other productive purposes.

§96.02 POSSESSION OF LIVESTOCK, WILD, EXOTIC, UNDOMESTICATED

ANIMALS AND REPTILES.
It is unlawful for any person to possess, harbor, keep, maintain, display or have in his or
her possession or in his or her control, in any public place within the City, any livestock
or any wild, exotic or undomesticated animal or reptile or to possess, harbor, keep,
maintain, display or have in his or her possession or control any dangerous animal or
reptile in any place within the City.
(1995 Code, §6.04.020) (Ord. O-94-22, passed - -)

§96.03 EXCEPTIONS
The provisions stated herein shall not apply to any licensed pet shop; any zoological
garden; aquariums, any bona fide licensed veterinary office, clinic or hospital; any bona
fide educational or medical institution where the animals may be kept as live or for
study, treatment or sale; any circus, carnival or other entertainment event which is
authorized and permitted by law.
(1995 Code, §6.04.030) (Ord. O-94-22, passed - -)

§96.04 PROTECTION OF BABY FOWL

It is unlawful for any person to sell, or offer for sale, barter or give away, baby
chicks, ducklings or other fowls as pets or novelties or to dye, color or otherwise
artificially treat baby chicks, ducklings or other fowls in the City. Nothing herein shall
be construed to prohibit the display or sale of natural chicks or ducklings in proper
brooder facilities by hatcheries or stores engaged in the business of selling the same to
be raised for commercial purposes.
(1995 Code, §6.04.040)

§96.05 CRUELTY TO FOWL

It is unlawful for any person to overcrowd domestic fowl or poultry in any crate, box or
other receptacle, or to fail to provide proper food, water, shelter or sanitation for same.
(1995 Code, §6.04.050)

40
§96.06 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS GENERALLY
It is unlawful for any person to neglect or cruelly treat or mistreat any animal in any
manner or form, or to fail to provide adequate food and shelter for any animal owned or
harbored by him or her or to abandon any animal within the City.
(1995 Code, §6.04.060)

Questions/Comments · Copyright © An Equal Opportunity University

University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture

Last Updated: Wednesday, August 25, 2010

41
Chicken Keeping in Ohio and Property Values from
http://cincinnatilocavore.blogspot.com/2009/06/chicken-keeping-and-property-values.html

Suburb Chicken-Keeping Ordinances* 2007 Average Home Sales Price**

Indian Hill Permit $1019K

Terrace Park Generally Permit $ 400K

Mariemont Permit $ 345K

Wyoming Generally Permit $ 326K

Symmes Township Permit $ 313K

Montgomery Generally Permit $ 297K

Evendale Generally Permit $ 288K

Glendale Generally Permit $ 274K

Mason Essentially Prohibit $ 213K

Madeira Generally Permit $ 212K

Blue Ash Case by Case*** $ 202K

Loveland Generally Permit $ 174K

42
Fairfield Essentially Prohibit $ 166K

Sycamore Township Essentially Prohibit $ 165K

Sharonville Restricted $ 157K

Milford Generally Permit $ 152K

Springdale Essentially Prohibit $ 144K

Reading Restricted $ 131K

Deer Park Generally Permit $ 130K

Silverton Essentially Prohibit $ 127K

St Bernard Generally Permit $ 124K

Norwood Prohibit $ 119K

Mt Healthy Essentially Prohibit $ 116K

* Generally Permit: chicken keeping is allowed under minor restrictions intended to prevent chickens
from becoming a nuisance. Restricted: chicken-keeping is allowed, but ordinances will prevent a
significant number of residents from keeping chickens. Essentially Prohibit: chickens are allowed under
such profound restrictions as to prevent most residents from keeping chickens.
** Source: city-data.com
*** Blue Ash requires "suburban farms" practicing "poultry husbandry" to have at least five acres, but they
don't define "poultry husbandry." The city compliance inspector I asked about this said that a few
backyard chickens would likely be handled on a case-by-case basis if there were complaints.

43
Appendix F:
My personal Report from the Board Of Health based on an Anonymous Complaint

44