published Saturday, May 4th, 2013

Backyard chickens make sense

Should Chattanoogans be banned from enjoying fresh eggs from their own backyards — especially when it's permitted in every other major city in Tennessee?

Not according to Chattanooga City Council member Chris Anderson.

On Tuesday, Anderson will propose an ordinance that, if passed, will allow Chattanooga residents to keep hens within the city limits. Copying a strategy that has worked in other cities, including Nashville and Knoxville, the legislation provides for licensing standards and requirements that limit chicken-related problems such as predators, noise, odor and waste removal.

Anderson's ordinance forbids roosters (hens can produce edible eggs without the help of males -- apparently a result of women's lib efforts), caps the maximum number of chickens allowed per home at 10, forbids the birds from being housed in front yards, and requires the hens be kept in a fenced enclosure that is either covered or at least 42 inches high. At night, the chickens must be secured in a covered, predator-resistant henhouse.

The enclosures and henhouses must be "clean, dry and odor-free" and kept "in a manner that will not disturb the use or enjoyment of neighboring lots."

Under the proposed ordinance, a prospective urban chicken owner would apply for a permit at the McKamey Animal Center for a $50 charge. That fee would cover the cost of the city's chicken coop inspections. After the first year of chicken ownership, Chattanoogans would pay a $20 annual permit fee.

Anderson even made his proposed ordinance risk-free by including a sunset provision that requires the City Council to revisit the law in a year. If the ordinance needs tweaking or the backyard chicken experiment is somehow unsuccessful, appropriate actions can be taken.


Backyard chickens have become a growing trend in cities across America in recent years. Atlanta, Memphis, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles and Seattle all allow urban chickens.

The idea is popular locally, too. In an October 2012 poll on the Times Free Press website, nearly 70 percent of respondents supported allowing backyard chickens in Chattanooga. Other towns in Hamilton County, such as Signal Mountain, allow hens with great results and minimal problems.

Urban chicken enthusiasts embrace the convenience of being able to get fresh eggs from chickens that grow free of hormones and eat a healthy, controlled diet from their own backyards. There are other benefits to backyard chickens, as well. The hens provide insect control, produce useful fertilizer, engage urban children with nature and teach them farming practices, and even become beloved pets.

With basic regulations like the ones included in Anderson's proposal, it's hard to imagine a reasonable case against allowing backyard chickens.

The plan to overturn the backyard chicken ban gets the Chattanooga City Council off on the right foot by recommending to repeal a ridiculous restriction. Anderson clearly believes that it's better for government to allow as much freedom as possible, rather than micromanaging citizens' lives. We'll soon see if other council members agree.

For freedom-loving Chattanoogans, Anderson's efforts to allow residents to keep a few pet hens in their backyards is a step -- or, at least, a peck -- in the right direction.

19
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
AndrewLohr said...

Yeah. (My brother had backyard chickens in Pakistan).

May 4, 2013 at 12:38 a.m.
magenta said...

Wasn't the ordinance to ban originally created in the first place to discourage immigrants moving into the area from south of the border from having livestock in their yards? Since they're known to keep goats, chickens in their yards in their native countries, it was feared they were bringing the practice along with them across the border?

May 4, 2013 at 2:01 a.m.
gjuster said...

Would it be legal to keep chickens like Easy 123 in my back yard? Sorry - that really is a cheap shot, just couldn't resist.

May 4, 2013 at 7:17 a.m.
lightkeeper said...
<p>@gjuster...Iam sure Easy would be the only thing on your property that had any class judging from that cheap azz comment and the best thing you ever ate other than crow

May 4, 2013 at 7:41 a.m.
Easy123 said...

gjuster,

Why do you ask? Does your wife want some cocks? I bet you've had a lot of cocks in your day.

May 4, 2013 at 2:35 p.m.
gjuster said...

Easy -

I am referring to how chicken you are by posting anonymously - hiding with no guts

May 4, 2013 at 3:50 p.m.
Easy123 said...

gjuster,

The majority of people here post anonymously. It's not hiding. It's participating while maintaining privacy. I have guts, I'm just not stupid. I know your kind all too well.

I was referring to how much your wife likes cocks.

May 4, 2013 at 3:54 p.m.
aae1049 said...

gjuster,

People that post hatred from behind a veil of secrecy are major cowards.

Interesting,the people using their real names do not use profanity or sexually explicit commenting. The TFP tolerates it for some reason, or they have not reviewed the complaints from 4 people regarding posted laced with profanity.

May 4, 2013 at 5:54 p.m.
aae1049 said...

Time Free Press Editorial Page Administrator, if you think the posts by Easy123 about GJuster's wife are OK, you are idiots.

May 4, 2013 at 5:58 p.m.
Easy123 said...

aae1049,

"People that post hatred.."

LIE #1

"from behind a veil of secrecy are major cowards."

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. What about people that tell people their names and then lie, spin the truth, and deceive in the majority of their posts?

"Interesting,the people using their real names..."

..lie like dogs.

"do not use profanity"

LIE #2

"sexually explicit commenting"

LIE #3

"The TFP tolerates it for some reason"

The TFP doesn't "tolerate" anything. No rules have been broken. Deal with it, crazy lady.

"or they have not reviewed the complaints from 4 people..."

...that are known liars.

"posted laced with profanity."

LIE #4

"Time Free Press Editorial Page Administrator, if you think the posts by Easy123 about GJuster's wife are OK, you are idiots."

I'm not the one that brought up chickens. gjuster did. I just figured his wife would have to like them if he was going to start bringing them home.

Your mind must be in the gutter! What a depraved character you are. You better be careful who you call "idiot", idiot.

May 4, 2013 at 6:01 p.m.
fairmon said...

No roosters please. Roosters are worse than a barking dog that consistently disturbs the neighbors.

May 5, 2013 at 3:39 a.m.
aae1049 said...

Well yes, gjuster you can keep chickens called Easy123, they make lots of noise, while hiding in the woods scare of their own shadow, unless they are hiding :-)

May 5, 2013 at 9:56 a.m.
Easy123 said...

aae1049,

Your ignorance of proper grammar and syntax makes me laugh out loud.

It really chaps your bulbous behind that you don't know who I am, doesn't it?

:-)

May 5, 2013 at 10:11 a.m.
jjmez said...

Easy, these people wouldn't be out in the open if they didn't have family and friends from local law enforcement on up to and including members of local judicial system having their back. They're the true essence of the definition of the word coward.

May 5, 2013 at 10:14 a.m.
Easy123 said...

jjmez,

I have absolutely no doubt about that. That's why aae1049 wants to know my name. She wants to "investigate" me.

I'd be ashamed to have my name out in the open if I lied, deceived, and manipulated as much as that shrew. These people have no idea how much damage they are doing to their own reputation on this site. I might not be very nice, but I'm no liar.

The funny thing about it is several people on this site do know who I am. Psychopaths like aae1049 and her ilk aren't privy to such information.

May 5, 2013 at 10:19 a.m.
aae1049 said...

Jjmez, Having my back, that is so funny. No one has my back. Another sexist underestimating women. I could care less who you are. you sound like someone bitter from the campaign trail or .......

I would match my reputation over both of you little girls hiding behind user names.

My post was directed to my friend gjuster,who is a real friend of mine. I could care less about cowards hiding behind user names.

I make no apologies for decades of civic work and having great friends.

May 5, 2013 at 10:34 p.m.
Easy123 said...

aae1049,

"Having my back, that is so funny. No one has my back."

So your police officer husband doesn't have your back? What about all your friends in high places? Throwing them under the bus, eh? What would those folks think if they knew of your self-centered comments?

"Another sexist underestimating women."

LIE #1. Your gender was never brought up by jjmez. jjmez seems to be stating the obvious. The remark was not and cannot be construed as sexist. You are truly a disingenuous idiot.

"I could care less who you are."

LIE #2. That's, literally, all you care about.

"you sound like someone bitter from the campaign trail or ......."

You sound like a delusional cockalorum.

"I would match my reputation over both of you little girls hiding behind user names."

You mentioned the word "sexist" earlier. Referring to men as "little girls" is a sexist remark denigrating young women because you're implying that "little girls" are weak in some way. You're truly an idiot.

I know for a fact that I have a better reputation than you do. I'd bet jjmez does as well. It wouldn't take much to have a better reputation than a lying, manipulative insane person though.

"My post was directed to my friend gjuster,who is a real friend of mine."

Would you like a cookie?

"I could care less about cowards hiding behind user names."

Do you mean "couldn't care less"? That would be the correct phrase if you are trying to convey how little you care. However, even if you typed the phrase correctly, it would still be LIE #3 because you care very much about "cowards hiding behind user names". Check your last 25 posts. That is the theme of nearly all of them.

It is very obvious that it bothers you not know who other people are. You want to investigate them. You've made that fact clear.

"I make no apologies for decades of civic work and having great friends."

Do you make apologies for your aversion to honesty and truth? Your tendency to manipulate and twist the words of others in order to libel them? Your egregious ignorance on many subjects? Your disingenuous nature and constant attempts to feign indignation? I bet you don't apologize for any of that either.

May 6, 2013 at 4:10 a.m.
inquiringmind said...

Easy123 you prove the point that one is best measured against those who tends to be their enemy. If you could go back to school (Sunday School or middle school) and learn some of the rules of civil behavior and debate, you might actually engender a meaningful conversation. Your profanity, derogatory word play, name-calling and generally hostile attitude demean us as humans. The sad thing is most of us don't really care about aae1049 and her crusade against windmills, or your bloviating with her.

May 6, 2013 at 7:42 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.