Comments on: At planning meeting, Oaklanders debate over urban animal husbandry

By: Oakland North’s biggest news stories of 2011 – Oakland North : North Oakland News, Food, Art and Events

Fri, 30 Dec 2011 20:04:28 +0000

[...] July Oaklanders came out in force to debate the city’s regulations, particularly over whether backyard animal husbandry should be allowed. In other outdoorsy news, the parks committee split its vote over the hotly contested proposal [...]

By: Pluck and Feather » Media Coverage

Pluck and Feather » Media Coverage — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 18:17:20 +0000

[...] July 22, 2011 At planning meeting, Oaklanders debate over urban animal husbandry (Oakland North) [...]

By: Oakland Urban Livestock Report explores impacts of raising animals on city farms – Oakland North : North Oakland News, Food, Art and Events

Wed, 05 Oct 2011 00:32:08 +0000

[...] At planning meeting, Oaklanders debate over urban animal husbandry [...]

By: Leonard Raphael

Leonard Raphael — Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:33:00 +0000

The debate might be different if the City Mothers and Fathers had the cajunes to give the residents the very unpleasant truth which the residents do not want to hear: that our City has both feet firmly planted on fiscal bananna peels.

To paraphrase Councilmember Pat Kernighan at a constituent’s meeting earlier this year: we are about two year’s away from insolvency.

Unless people who raise animals for food are willing to pay annual fees that cover the realistic costs of inspections and complaints, there will be no enforcement of the standards of care for the animals.

Are people willing to shell out say $450 a year to cover inspections and enforcement actions? The costs of that, plus feed, plus vet care, plus land costs, not to mention your time will quickly result in meat costing far above what you’d pay at even Whole Foods.

-len raphael, cpa
temescal locavore meat eater

By: Kerrick

Kerrick — Sun, 24 Jul 2011 16:48:27 +0000

It’s really important that the city is taking a look at these issues. When you are considering how to live a life that is more humane, more ecological, and more healthful, you quickly realize that an important step towards those goals is to localize as many functions of your life as possible. A backyard hen house will be cleaner, safer, more humane, and more pleasant for birds and humans than an industrial scale “free range” operation that crams chickens into a giant barn. But because we can put the industrial-scale chicken barns in places where other people live rather than right next door, they’re easier to ignore.

A neighborhood where people grow and use their own food feels safer and more resilient to me. If I have trouble getting the food I need, I feel secure because I can pick from my backyard garden, or swap with my neighbor who also grows vegetables. I eat meat—I get sick if I don’t—and I feel more secure in neighborhoods where I know I can swap with a neighbor for eggs or a chicken for stew. I feel even better knowing I can raise my own—and it’s a huge factor when I choose someplace to live. I wouldn’t live in a neighborhood where my neighbors would try to stop me from growing kale, and I don’t want to live in a neighborhood that wouldn’t allow me to keep chickens.

I think the city should consider a volunteer committee to respond to concerns about animal treatment. It is a big concern of mine that people are educated about how to keep animals safe, healthy, and happy. If they choose to kill and eat them, they should do it in a way that is humane and safe. A volunteer committee could educate the public about these issues, respond to neighbor concerns, and serve as a resource to rescue inadequate environments. But first the city should acknowledge that within certain reasonable limits, residents have the right to produce their own food, barter or sell their excess, and raise animals to do so.