HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-05-15 PACKET 08.A.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA
MEETING ITEM #�
DATE 5/15/13 � �
PREPARED BY: Community Development Jennifer Levitt
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR
�**********************�*****�******************
COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
The Public Safety Commission will discuss poultry/fowl on urban residential lots at their
meeting on May 14, 2013. An oral summary of their discussions and recommendation will be
presented to the City Council on May 15.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Receive and place on file the Public Safety Commission's recommendation.
BUDGET IMPLICATION $N/A $N/A N/A
BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE
ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION:
� PLANNING
� PUBLIC SAFETY
❑ PUBLIC WORKS
❑ PARKS AND RECREATION
❑ HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS
❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY
❑
�7_���
REVIEWED
�
�
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
APPROVED
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
DENIED
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
� MEMO/LETTER: Memo from Pete Koerner and John McCool dated 5/10/13
❑ RESOLUTION:
❑ ORDINANCE:
❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION:
❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION:
� OTHER: Exhibits
��►/ ► :� •� •Illl_l `_
��G �
Date
********:�*************************�*************
COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER
.,�� , .u�����,�..��u���
CITY OF
� MINNESOTA
TO:
FROM
DATE:
RE:
COTTAGE GROVE
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator
Pete Koerner, Deputy Director of Public Safety
John McCool, Senior Planner
May 10, 2013
Poultry and Fowl in Urban Residential Neighborhoods
Introduction
The backyard poultry and fowl debate continues not only in Cottage Grove, but in other com-
munities across the nation. This interest is a combination of "sustainability," organic food move-
ments, cultural connections with backyard livestock traditions, general interests in producing
one's own food, or it's a simple suburban accessory that some citizens are interested in having
on their property
inquiries to keep
been received.
Keeping chickens and ducks has been the primary discussion, but other public
pigeons, turkeys, pigmy goats, bees, and miniature pot-bellied pigs have also
A vast amount of information can be found for and against the keeping of chickens in the back-
yard of urban residential property. Like other controversial matters, facts supporting both sides
of the discussion do not always result with everyone being satisfied. A variety of articles con-
cerning potential health risks, community opinion survey results, Cottage Grove Advisory Com-
missions questionnaire results, pros and cons, sample regulations, etc. are enclosed with this
packet. Much of this material was previously distributed to the City Council, Planning Commis-
sion, and Public Safety Commission.
The Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission will meet on Tuesday, May 14, 2013, to
again discuss this issue. The meeting will begin at 7:00 p.m. A summary of their discussions
and recommendation(s) will be orally presented at the May 15 City Council meeting.
Mary Britton Clouse from the Chicken Run Rescue organization will attend the Public Safety,
Health and Welfare Commission meeting on May 14. A link showing a 25 minute video their or-
ganization prepared was provided to all City Council and Advisory Commission members. It is
unlikely this video will be shown at the Public Safety Commission meeting because of time
limitations, but you are encouraged to view this video before the meeting. The link is:
https://dc1.safesync.com/LMjTMddC/crr cottaqeqrove.avi?a=8NB8QMFn6tg.
Background
• April 4, 2012 — City Council inquired about City ordinance regulations concerning chickens in
the back yard of urban lots.
• April 18, 2012 — Planning staff response concerning City ordinances about chickens was
reported to City Council.
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 2 of 11
• July 2012 — A complaint about chickens in a back yard of an urban residential lot was
received.
• August 2012 — A complaint about ducks in a back yard of an urban residential lot was
received.
• September 5, 2012 — Owners of the chickens and ducks requested City Council to amend
City ordinances to allow chickens and ducks in the back yard of an urban residential lot.
• September 19, 2012 — Planning staff presented information to the City Council concerning
the September 5 ordinance amendments. The City Council referred matter to Planning
Commission.
• October 17, 2012 — Planning Commission discussed the idea of allowing chickens and ducks
in the back yard of urban residential lots.
• November 21, 2012 — The Planning Commission's comments from their October 17 meeting
were presented to the City Council.
• December 7 to 13, 2013 — Opinion Survey
• December 17, 2012 — Planning Commission discussed the results of the opinion survey and
other relevant documents. The Planning Commission recommended that City ordinances not
be amended.
• January 23, 2013 — Public Safety, Health and General Welfare Commission discussed this
issue and recommended that City ordinances not be amended.
• January 28, 2013 — The Public Safety Commission's recommendation not to amend City
ordinances to allow chickens or duck in the back yard of urban lots was presented to the
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission made no changes to their December 17,
2012, recommendation.
• February 6, 2013 — The recommendations by the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Com-
mission and Planning Commission were presented to the City Council. The City Council
scheduled a workshop for March 20, 2013.
• March 20, 2013 — The City Council held a workshop and requested that additional informa-
tion be provided.
• April 20, 2013 — The chicken and duck issued was discussed at an All City Commission/City
Council meeting.
• April 30, 2013 — Public Safety, Health and General Welfare Commission was scheduled to
again discuss the chicken and duck issue, but the item was pulled from the agenda.
• May 14, 2013 — Public Safety, Health and General Welfare Commission is scheduled to
discuss this issue.
Health
The U.S. Department of Agriculture monitors potential infection of poultry and poultry products
by avian influenza viruses and other infectious disease agents.
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 3 of 11
The National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians, Inc. reports that an inadequate
understanding of disease transmission and animal behavior can increase the likelihood of infec-
tious diseases, rabies exposures, injuries, and other health problems among people, especially
children, elderly or persons with weak immune systems. There are multiple factors tfiat increase
the probability of disease transmission. Animals are more likely to shed pathogens because of
stress-induced confinement, crowding, and increased handling. The Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention reports that poultry may have salmonella germs in their droppings and on their
bodies (feathers, feet and beaks), even when they appear healthy and clean. The germs can
also get on cages, coops, hay, plants, and soil in the area where the birds live and roam. Addi-
tionally, the germs can be found on the hands, shoes, and clothing of those who handle the
birds or work or play where they live and roam.
Young children are especially at risk for illness because their immune systems are still develop-
ing and because they are more likely than others to put their fingers or other items into their
mouths. It is important to wash hands immediately after touching poultry or anything in the area
where they live and roam, because the germs on your hands, shoes, and clothing can easily
spread to other people or things.
The Minnesota Department of Health has expressed concerns for the many kinds of flu viruses
that can infect birds — wild birds as well as domestic birds like chickens or turkeys. Health offi-
cials have been especially concerned about the H5N1 Avian Influenza ("Bird Flu") that can make
people, as well as birds, severely ill. Most people get it from direct contact with birds or their
droppings. Public health experts are concerned that the H5N1 virus could change (mutate) into
a form that is easily spread from one person to another. Most health officials believe that a
pandemic flu will happen and it is just a question of when.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that the H7N9 virus is
another potential health risk to humans and animals. In their report dated May 1, 2013, 82 con-
firmed cases showed that 77 percent were exposed from affected animals. Of these, 77 percent,
76 percent were from chickens and 20 percent from ducks. Even though this strain of flu is pri-
marily only in China, US Department of Agriculture has set up a situational awareness unit to
study this virus in humans and animals.
The attraction of predators and rodents is a public health hazard potentially associated with
urban chicken farming. The presence of chickens on a property might attract urban predators
such as stray dogs, foxes, raccoons, opossums, and coyotes. Failure to maintain a clean envi-
ronment for the chickens could attract mice and rats to the property. Flies are attracted to the
poop and the area where the birds live and roam. Communities are advised to have a system in
place for handling public complaints regarding these issues if poultry and/or fowl are allowed on
urban lots.
Chicken Manure
All animal manure have the potential risk of containing bacteria, but the key to using it as a ferti-
lizer is knowing how to use it safely and correctly. Manure from meat-eating animals (such as
dogs or cats) should not be used as a fertilizer or mixed with compost materials because of the
risk of transmitting parasites or diseases.
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 4 of 11
Chicken manure is a sought after fertilizer because it is rich in nitrogen, phosphorous, and po-
tassium, but also can contain pathogens (such as E. coli and salmonella). According to a study
by the University of Minnesota, it takes six months to a year before you can be ensured patho-
gens are not present in composted manure. The Center for Disease Control suggest that
chicken manure and soiled animal bedding be promptly removed from the animal areas, but not
spread on urban yards or mixed in gardens or compost because humans can easily be in con-
tact with and transport harmful virus, bacteria, and parasites into their home without realizing
potential health risks.
Articles concerning the potential impacts of chicken manure are included in the attached packet.
Questionnaire Results
During the week of December 7 to December 13, the Planning Department posted an opinion
survey about keeping poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. "Survey
Monkey" services were used and the opportunity for citizens to complete this survey was posted
on the City of Cottage Grove's Facebook page on Friday, December 7, 2012. A link to access
the survey was provided.
The survey consisted of 13 questions and was an opportunity for the general public to comment
on the chicken and duck issue. There were 237 survey responses. A copy of the survey was
also available at the front counter of the Cottage Grove Public Safety/City Hall; 14 surveys were
completed at the front counter. The survey responses generally favored poultry and fowl to be
only allowed on acreage parcels. Sixty-two percent would object to their neighbor keeping any
type of fowl and 73 percent would object to their neighbor keeping a rooster. Seventy-five per-
cent of the responses said there should be a minimum lot area requirement and 65 percent
selected between one and five acres. A copy of the 237 survey results, the 100 comments
received through Survey Monkey, and the survey results from the front counter are enclosed.
Nineteen comments were posted on the City of Cottage Grove's Facebook during December 7
to 11, 2012. A copy of the 19 comments and 10 "sharing" comments are enclosed.
Decision Resources was contacted to obtain a cost estimate to prepare a survey that would
provide quantitative data results about this topic. Decision Resources has recommended that a
telephone survey would work best for this type of community issue. The minimum survey sam-
ple is 250 calls and 15 questions. Once the survey questions have been prepared, completing
the survey and preparing a report on the survey results will take approximately two and a half
weeks. The cost for this type of telephone survey is about $4,000. If the survey sample area
increased to 400 calls with additional questions, the cost is about $6,000.
Other City Regulations — Survey Summary
Enclosed is a summary of the ordinance requirements by 52 other communities. This survey
was prepared in November 2012. At that time, 67 percent of the communities surveyed did not
allow chickens on small urban lots, but generally did allow them on large rural and agricultural
lots. The other 33 percent of the communities surveyed did allow chickens on urban residential
lots if certain standards were met. Some cities had a minimum lot area requirement that is larger
than a conventional single-family lot. Examples of the minimum lot area requirement are shown
below:
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 5 of 11
City Minimum Lot Area
Andover 2.5 acres
Brooklyn Park 5 acres
Chanhassen 2.5 acres
Cottage Grove 5 acres
Elk River 5 acres
Forest Lake 5 acres
Inver Grove Heights 1.75 acres
Lakeville 10 acres
Lino Lakes 10 acres
Maple Grove 1.5 acres
Minnetonka 1.0 acre
West St. Paul 5 acres
Woodbury 5 acres
Rural vs. Urban Lot Sizes
The two maps shown below are illustrations showing rural and urban (average) lots sizes. The
green colored areas on the Rural Map identifies all the rural lots that are one acre or larger. The
red boundaries on the Urban Map show the average lot area within 13 geographic areas. Within
these 13 sections, there are a total of 9,618 urban residential lots covering a total area of 2,897
acres. The average urban residential lot for all 9,618 parcels is 0.31 of an acre.
Rural Lot Areas
RESIDENTAIL LOTS GREATER THAT 1 ACRE
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 6 of 11
Copies of both maps are included in this packet.
"Pet" Definition Discussion — Attorney's Response
At the May 1, 2013 City Council meeting, Council discussed the terms "domestic animal" and
"pet" in Chapter 4 of the City's Animal Control Ordinance.
Public Safety staff has reviewed Chapter 4 of the City's Animal Control Ordinance and asked
our City Attorney Sarah Sonsalla provide a legal opinion.
The opinion is that by expanding the regulations in this chapter of the Code to apply to all pets
instead of only dogs and some cases, cats, there would need to be significant additional
changes to this chapter of the Code. The example cited in the legal opinion references danger-
ous dogs. The City's current regulations on dangerous dogs adhere to the provisions set forth in
Minnesota Statutes Sections 347.50 — 347.565, which are applicable only to dangerous dogs.
Requirements include registration, micro chipping, posted warning placards, muzzles, and re-
quired insurance.
Public Safety staff has spoken with City Attorney Sonsalla, and we do concur with the areas that
were identified and the number of additional changes that would need to be made to this Chap-
ter of the Code.
A copy of the City Attorney's memorandum dated May 8, 2013 is enclosed.
Average Urban Lot Area
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 7 of 11
Farm Animal Regulations — Historic Perspective
City Ordinance No. 38, November 1971, allowed "agriculture" as a permitted use in the R-1, R-
2, R-3, and R-4 Residential Districts. The R-1 District required a minimum lot area of three
acres. The R-2 District required a minimum lot area of 1.5 acres. The R-3 District has a 10,000
square foot minimum, and the R-4 District has a 7,500 square foot lot area minimum. This or-
dinance also had a three-acre minimum lot area requirement where farm animals could be kept.
Ordinance No. 248, October 1976, repealed Ordinance No. 38. The new ordinance provided
"farm animals" and an "Agricultural-Urban" definitions. The "Agricultural-Urban" definition cited
that the property is an area five or less contiguous acres and specifically stated..."It shall not
include the raising of animals..."
In August 1983, Ordinance No. 410 defined "farm animal." This definition was about the same
definition found in Ord. 248, but included an exception for customary household pets. Ordinance
No. 410 also provided regulations for "Farming Operations in Residential Districts" (Section 28-
26). This section has the same wording as today's Zoning Ordinance regulations for Farming
Operations in Residential Districts. Effectively it requires a minimum of five acres of land for
keeping any farm animal on less than 40 acres of land.
Today's Zoning Ordinance regulations' concerning chickens or ducks reads as follows:
FARM ANIMALS DEFINITION - Horses, cows, sheep, bees, pigs, chickens, ducks and other commonly
known animals normally associated with farms, but excluding customary household pets.
11-3-7: FARMING OPERATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS:
Agriculture is a permitted use in all residential districts, subject to the following:
A. Sales Of Agricultural Products: Limited sales of products produced on the owner's property may be
conducted on the premises from a roadside stand by conditional use permit. Such stand shall not exceed
twelve feet (12') in height or five hundred (500) square feet in floor area, and no portion of any such
stand shall be located or erected nearer than forty feet (40') to any street line.
B. Farm Animals:
1. Parcels Less Than Fortv Acres: The keeping of any farm animal on parcels of less than forty (40)
acres in size shall be permitted, subject to the following conditions:
a. The property must contain at least five (5) acres in contiguous ownership or leasehold.
b. The property must contain at least one and one-half (1 1/2) acres of land per animal unit. This
number may be exceeded only by conditional use permit.
c. All buildings intended to house animals shall be set back at least sixty feet (60') from all
property lines and at least three hundred feet (300') from a dwellinq other than the dwellinq on the
rp operty in question.
d. All pens, yards or other confinement areas, excluding pastures, where animals are kept shall
be set back at least sixty feet (60') from all property lines.
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 8 of 11
e. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency does not require that a feedlot permit be issued.
2. Parcels Larger Than Forty Acres: The keeping of farm animals on parcels larger than forty (40)
acres in size is permitted, subject to the following conditions:
a. All buildings intended to house animals shall be set back at least sixty feet (60') from all
property lines and at least three hundred feet (300') from a dwelling other than the dwelling on the
property in question.
b. All pens, yards or other confinement areas, excluding pastures, where animals are kept shall
be set back at least sixty feet (60') from all property lines.
c. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency does not require that a feedlot permit be issued.
Coop Standards
Where localities allow for chickens in the back yard, there are common ordinance requirements
for coops and pens. Most communities require the property owner to obtain a building permit
and minimum setbacks for the coop and pen from property lines and neighboring residential
dwellings. The setbacks from the property line ranged from 0 feet to 50 feet, with the common
range being 5 to 10 feet. Setbacks from neighboring dwellings ranged range from 6 feet to 100
feet. The common range was 25 to 50 feet.
The photos below are coop and pen examples. In Minneapolis and Saint Paul, enforcement is
more about coop/pen designs and aesthetics and not so much about chickens. They occasio-
nally find coops constructed of salvaged materials (pallets, assorted boards, corrugated metal or
fiberglass, tarps, etc.). Most of the property owners licensed to have chickens comply with the
rules and regulations, but the small percentage of noncompliance properties expend many staff
hours for code enforcement.
... . .. . . �.1?P1 � �4$•jl�.:k'�=+:�3 :F. s'�
i�
!
�f
�
;�
,. °;�
, -':l
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 9 of 11
—�. �� , -���� _--;
� � � f . . P,�.•' - } .v{.a:;
i
�'���� ..��""� _�
� : J.'
(` _. ..,. -.e .. . ..r . �..e��l.]:I
Advisory Commission Recommendations
Planning Commission
On December 17, 2012, the Planning Commission voted 6-2 to recommend to the City Council
that the City's Zoning and Animal Control Ordinances not be amended to allow poultry and/or
fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots.
Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission
On January 15, 2013, the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission voted 5-0 to recom-
mend to the City Council that City ordinances not be amended to allow poultry or fowl in the
back yard of urban residential lots. The materials (i.e. ordinance requirements by other cities,
emails from individuals in favor and against, public comments, opinion survey results, etc.) dis-
tributed to the City Council on November 21 and to the Planning Commission on December 17
were also provided to the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission for their January 15
meeting. In addition, several articles and documents concerning potential health risks asso-
ciated with raising chickens were distributed to Public Safety Commission members. The
Commission also had questions concerning potential city expenses for enforcement.
Minutes for the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission meeting on January 15, 2013
and the Planning Commission meetings on December 19, 2012 and January 28, 2013 are
included in this packet.
The Public Safety Department also recommended that the city's Zoning Ordinance and Animal
Control Ordinance not be amended to allow poultry and fowl in the back yard of urban residen-
tial lots. A copy of the Public Safety Department's memo dated January 31, 2013 is attached.
On January 28, 2013, Planning staff reported to the Planning Commission that the Public Safety
Commission reviewed the same materials presented to the Planning Commission on December
17. Information provided to the Public Safety Commission concerning potential health risks as-
sociated with raising chickens was also given to the Planning Commission. The Planning Com-
mission did not modify or change their December 17 recommendation to the City Council that
City ordinances not be amended to allow poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of urban resi-
dential lots.
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 10 of 11
Advisory Commission Questionnaire Results
At the April 20, 2013, All Commission/City Council meeting, a questionnaire about amending
City ordinances to allow poultry/fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots, minimum acreage
requirements for keeping poultry/fowl, distance from the property owner's lot wanting
poultry/fowl that must give written approval, and the minimum setback between a coop/pen and
neighboring residential dwelling was distributed to the attendees. This same questionnaire was
emailed to the other advisory commission members that did not attend. There were 31 total
number of responses received. Seventy-four percent agreed with the Planning Commission's
and Public Safety Commission's recommendations not to amend City ordinances to allow
poultry/fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots. Seventy percent of the respondents chose
not to change the five-acre minimum lot area requirement in order to have a farm animal. Of the
30 percent that opted to change the five-acre minimum requirement, 73 percent of the 30
percent selected one acre or greater as the minimum lot area requirement.
Forty-one percent of the responses selected the requirement that only the adjoining landowners
must provide written approval. Fifty percent of the responses chose a 75 to100 foot minimum
setback between the coop/pen and neighboring dwelling and the other 50 percent chose the 25
to 50 foot range. The questionnaire results are enclosed.
Citizen Viewpoints
Aside from the comments and postings on the City's Facebook and questionnaires, the City has
received other letters or email messages from residents concerning this issue. Copies of these
messages are enclosed.
Enforcement
Policing and resolving conflicts between neighbors takes away important staff resources dedi-
cated to life safety and general welfare. As already documented, this matter about keeping
poultry and fowl in the back yard of urban residential lots was the result of receiving complaints
about chickens and ducks in the back yard of two residential properties. The complainants are
disappointed that City staff is not enforcing city ordinances in a timely manner and if ordinances
are changed to allow chickens/ducks in the back yards, even if certain standards are imposed,
they may continue calling the City to complain about the nuisances and impacts such animals
have created.
The Public Safety Department contacted the 17 cities that allow chickens in the back yard to
better understand their experiences for code enforcement, licensing, and resolving neighbor
conflicts. None of the cities contacted specifically documented or tracked detailed information
concerning the chickens in the back yards. About half of the 17 cities had a licensing require-
ment and the same group of cities collected a fee. Most reported that enforcement generally in-
volved staff from Animal Control, Public Safety, Building, and Planning Departments. The Public
Safety's survey was generally consistent with the Planning Department's survey of 52 cities that
was completed in November 2013. A copy of Public Safety's survey is included in this packet of
information.
City staff from the Public Safety and Community Development Departments believes that al-
lowing chickens/ducks in the back yard of urban lots will generate increased work assignments
Honorable Mayor, City Council, and Ryan Schroeder
Poultry and/or Fowl
May 10, 2013
Page 11 of 11
for the City. They will need to respond to inquiries, administer the submission and review of ap-
plications for permits, track ar�d monitor permits, conduct field inspections, and investigate com-
plaints. Occasionally, elected officials may be involved to resolve conflicts between neighboring
property owners.
In addition to city enforcement, some neighborhoods have homeowner association covenants
that may restrict homeowners from keeping farm animals. Homeowner associations have
authority to enforce their restrictive covenants via fines and/or court action if necessary. If cer-
tain types of farm animals are allowed in Cottage Grove urban neighborhoods, the Council will
need to determine licensing, inspection, enforcement procedures that a particular City depart-
ment will be responsible in managing. Enforcement for poultry and fowl will take away from
other code enforcement priorities.
Conclusion
Over the past year, a variety of articles, surveys, reports, and memorandums have been pre-
sented to City Advisory Commissions and City Council. A lot of information about keeping
chickens in the back yard is available on the internet. This information provided a perspective for
the pros and cons. City staff attempted to gauge community opinion about this issue and much
information was obtained from other cities in the metropolitan area and various organizations.
How other local governments address this issue and what have been their experiences, keys to
success, and potential pitfalls has not provided a simple conclusion. What we have learned is
the issue of allowing chickens in the back yard of an urban lot is not just simply amending city
ordinances. Administrating, inspecting, code enforcement, and resolving neighbor disputes can
be time consuming.
Communities discussions on the issue of keeping chickens in the back yard have often been re-
ported by the media, and it is apparent that cities and towns across America are debating this
topic. As often as we hear or read about this, the survey of other communities' regulations in
November 2012 showed that 67 percent of the communities in the Twin Cities did not allow
chickens on small urban lots, but generally did allow them on large estate acreage and agricul-
tural lots. The other 33 percent of the communities surveyed did allow chickens on urban resi-
dential lots. These communities had a variety of code regulations. Even though much of the
discussion has been about chickens, the City should also address other types of fowl (e.g.
ducks, geese, guinea hens, peacocks, turkeys, pheasants, partridges, pigeons, etc.).
A list of the reference materials included in this packet is attached.
Recommendation
The Public Safety Commission will discuss this issue at their meeting on Tuesday, May 14,
2013. An oral summary of their discussions and recommendation will be presented to the City
Council on May 15.
POULTRY/FOWL REFERNCE MATERIALS
May 10, 2013
References made in the memorandum to the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission
and the City Council date May 10, 2013 are listed below:
HEALTH
Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP). May 1, 2013; US Labs
Progress with H7N9 Studies as CDC Urges Readiness
Illinois Department of Public Health. Printed date May 2, 2013; Human Health Concerns About
Raising Poultry
Back Yard Chickens. Printed date May 2, 2013; 10 Health Precautions for Backyard Chicken
Owners
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Printed date April 23, 2013; Avian Influenza A
Virus Infections of Humans
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Printed date April 23, 2013; Risk of Human
Salmonella Infections from Live Baby Poultry
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Printed date April 23, 2013; After You Touch
Ducklings Or Chicks, Wash Your Hands So You Don't Get Sick
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — Online Newsroom. Printed date April 23, 2013;
Multiple Multistate Outbreaks of Human Salmonella Infections Linked to Live Poultry in
Backyard Flocks
University of Minnesota Extension Service; Betsy Wieland, Extension Educator and Nora
Nolden, Intern; Printed date April 23, 2013; Backyard Chicken Basics
National Public Radio — Eating and Health; March 24, 2013; Nancy Shute; Backyard Chickens:
Cute, Trendy Spreader's of Salmonella
Epidemiology Research Center — Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation; James G. Donahue.
November 9, 2011; Prospective Study of Avian Influenza Infection in Backyard Poultry Flocks
and Flock Handlers in Wisconsin
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. October 6, 2011; Salmonella; Investigation
Update: Multistate Outbreak of Human Salmonella Altona and Salmonella Johannesburg —
Infections Linked to Chicks and Ducklings
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. May 6, 2011; Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report (MMWR); Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in
Public Settings, 2011
Minnesota Department of Health. November 19, 2010; H5N1 Avian Influenza ("Bird Flu')
Page 1
Bloomington, MN Government Site. August 15, 2006; Avian Influenza and Pandemic Flu
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Health Risks Associated with Raising Chickens
CHICKEN MANURE
Community Chickens.blogspot.com by Rebecca Nickols; Printed date April 2, 2013
Pluck and Feather — Chicken Poo Chart (graphic); November 11, 2011
QUESTIONAIRE RESULTS
Keeping Chickens in the Back Yard Ordinance — Survey Monkey; December 7-13, 2012 (237
responses)
Keeping Chickens in the Back Yard Ordinance — Survey Monkey Comments; December 7-13,
2012 (100 comments)
City of Cottage Grove's Facebook Comments; December 7-11, 2012
City of Cottage Grove's Facebook — Sharing Pages; December 7-11, 2012
Poultry and Fowl Opinion Survey — City Hall Front Counter; December 7-11 2012
CITY REGULATION SURVEY
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of 52 Other Communities; November 2012
CITY LOT SIZES
Residential Lot Acreages Greater than One Acre — Map
Urban Residential Lot Averages - Map
PET DEFINITION
Sarah J. Sansalla, City Attorney — Response to Council's inquiry about amending Chapter 4 of
the City Codes to include chickens, ducks, and other animals as pets; May 8, 2013
ADVISORY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning Commission - December 17, 2012 Minutes (excerpt)
Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission — January 15, 2013 Minutes
Planning Commission - January 28, 2013 Minutes (excerpt)
ADVISORY COMMISSION QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS
Page 2
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Questionnaire Summary — City Council and Advisory Commission;
April 20, 2013
CITIZEN VIEWPOINTS
Gloria B. Truax, Concerned Citizen (May 9, 2013)
Bob Burtman; 9476 Harkness Avenue Court; Cottage Grove (April 22, 2013)
Chicken Run Rescue; PO Box 11742, Minneapolis, MN (April 20, 2013)
Angel Popowitz; Cottage Grove; (April 17, 2013)
Angel Popowitz; Cottage Grove; (March 21, 2013)
Autumn Carlson; Cottage Grove; (March 20, 2013), includes Chicken Run Rescue
attachments
Jill Sheppard; 9580 — 87 Street; Cottage Grove (March 9, 2013)
Angel Popowitz; Cottage Grove; (February 8, 2013)
Angel Popowitz; Cottage Grove; (December 20, 2012)
Autumn Carlson; Cottage Grove; (December 9, 2012)
Autumn Carlson; Cottage Grove; (December 6, 2012)
Autumn Carlson; Cottage Grove; (November 26, 2012)
Angel Popowitz; Cottage Gove; (November 22, 2012)
David Campbell; 8175 Jeffery Avenue; Cottage Grove (November 7, 2012)
Robert Janicek; 8571 Jeffery Avenue; Cottage Grove (October 5, 2012)
ENFORCEMENT
Public Safety Department's Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey — April 30, 2013; Survey of 17
communities that allow chickens in the back yard.
Page 3
CIDRAP » US labs progress with H7N9 studies as CDC urges readuless
�' -
I�
�'�
Home I Mission & Activities I About Us I Your Support
� -- I Seardi
�I'dF! J-1'1 �i; � '
��?' ±:iV�LUENZA » AVIAN INFLUENZA » NEWS »
Gerier�l tny�J
Vaccines
H7N9 Flu
Novel HiNi
(Swine) Flu
��
Avian �lu
/ News
Overviesv
Case CounC
US labs progress with H7N9 studies as
CDC urges readiness
Lisa Schnirring , Staff Writer
May 1, 2013 (CIDRAP News) - As labs in the United States studv
how the H7N9 virus behaves in humans and animals, state and
local health officials should dust off their pandemic preparedness
plans in case the virus becomes a bigger threat, the US Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said today.
Selected Reacling The CDC made the recommendation in a review of China's H7N9
outbreak and US efforts to learn more about the disease that
Guidelines appears in an early release of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report (MMWR). The CDC has a close collaboration with China's
t�lore Linl<s Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC), and a
team from the CDC was invited by China to help assess the
situation and assist with investigations.
P°,?s�rico�si! 6"!c;
In its epidemiologic review, current as of Apr 29, the CDC said, of
Business FTi,is::,�ti+=� $Z confirmed case-patients with available information, 63 (77%)
were exposed to live animals, mainly chickens (76%) and ducks
(20%).
i 'i'
General Info
i
i
Anthrax
i
i
Botulism
i
i
Plague
�
Smallpox
�
Tularemia
�
VHF
i
r
•
t
Agriculture
�—
Food
�•�
General Info
�i
Irradiation
�
The agency also said at least three family clusters of two or three
cases have been confirmed, which could have involved limited
human-to-human transmission. However, no transmission in the
follow-up of 1,689 close contacts, including healthcare workers,
has been detected, and serologic investigations are ongoing.
A few days aRer the first human H7N9 cases were announced in
China, the CDC urged state and local health officials to boost
their surveillance for people who got sick 10 days after returning
from China. So far 18 states have identified 37 travelers who fit
the description, but none were infected with H7N9. Seven had
seasonal flu, 1 had rhinovirus, 1 had respiratory syncytial virus,
and 28 were negative for influenza A and B.
During that period, the US flu season was retreating to levels
below seasonal baselines, with mainly influenza B detected in low
numbers.
To learn more about the virus, CDC researchers are studvinq
H7N9 gene sequences uploaded by China to the GISAID database
and doing experiments based on two human H7N9 isolates from
China. As of yesterday China had uploaded 19 partial or complete
H7N9 sequences: 12 from humans, 5 from birds, and 2 from the
environment.
Experiments on the human isolates so far show robust replication
in eggs, cell culture, and the respiratory tracts of ferrets and
mice. The H7N9 virus was deadly to mice infected with higher
doses of the virus, according to the CDC.
Page 1 of 3
Give Now ;
Contact Us
��-i�8
�mail Alerts
To keep up on this
and other news,
click here
Thank Yaia!
Unrestricted financial
support provided by
LEADING
UNDERWRITER
FOUNC)ATION
�
MAJOR UNDERWRITER
_ _.. .... .__.....
SUPPORTING
UNDERWRITER
�
I'nilt��i Il��.ilih Fuundali��n
_ .... _ _ ........................... .... .. ...
CONTRIBUTOR
� GILEA�
I�ear�i mc�re
http: //www. cidrap.umn. edu/cidrap/content/influenza/avianflu/news/may0113 mmwr. html 5/3/2013
CIDRAP » US labs progress with H7N9 studies as CDC urges readiness Page 2 of 3
Foodborne t�iseas� Antiviral resistance testing shows that one of the human isolates
is susceptible to oseltamivir (Tamiflu), while the other has a
marker that suggests that it is not. The CDC said it is still
J fr1=i' T J;' � �" � � assessing the clinical relevance of the change, but its
identification is a good reminder that resistance can emerge
Antimicrobial spontaneously or during antiviral treatment.
Resistance
i- Animal testing in China has detected the virus in a small number
BSE F?� v�J[1 of poultry and environmental samples, primarily from poultry
� markets. The CDC said that, as of Apr 17, 4,150 samples had
I
SAR`-� been collected from swine and environments from farms and
�- slaughterhouses, and all swine samples tested negative.
WesP. i��liic
Chinese officials have intensified their animal surveillance to
� Monkeypo;< answer questions about the animal reservoirs of the virus, and
� their efforts will focus on areas where human cases have been
Shemical �er� r,s €sra� detected, the CDC said.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has set up a
situational awareness unit to study, along with the CDC, the
epidemiology of the virus in humans and animals. So far the
H7N9 outbreak strain has not been found in US animals, and
federal officials don't allow the import of live poultry, other birds,
or hatching eggs from countries affected by highiy pathogenic
avian influenza.
Surveillance programs are already in place to detect avian
influenza in commercial poultry, and animal health labs have
screening tests for avian flu that can be used with confirmation
tests at the National Veterinary Services Laboratories to detect
the H7N9 strain in poultry and wild birds, the CDC said.
The USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is
working with the US Department of the Interior to assess
potential movement of Eurasian avian flu viruses into North
America by wild birds.
Researchers in USDA labs are also conducting animal studies to
learn more about the pathogenicity and transmission of the virus,
the CDC said. Early results show that chicke�s and quail show no
signs of illness but shed the virus. USDA Agricultural Research
Service scientists have also completed an antigenic mapping
study to help find isolates that could be used to develop a poultry
vaccine, if needed.
The CDC's report also aired its public health concerns about the
new virus. Compared with other influenza A virus, H7N9 has
differences associated with respiratory-droplet transmission,
increased binding to receptors in mammals' respiratory tracts,
increased virulence, and increased replication.
Though investigations haven't shown evidence of sustained
human-to-human transmission, further adaptation might lead to
more efficient and sustained transmission, according to the
report. CDC experts also noted that the H7N9 virus is much more
severe in humans than other previous H7 viruses have been.
Federal officials have not decided to launch an H7N9 vaccine
program in the United States, but if one is needed, the CDC and
its partners are already working on a candidate vaccine virus and
are planning for vaccine clinical trials.
In the meanwhile, the CDC recommends that state and local
officials review and update their pandemic preparedness plans,
because it would take several months to prepare a vaccination
program, if necessary.
"CDC also recommends that public health agencies review their
overall pandemic influenza plans to identify operational gaps and
to ensure administrative readiness for an influenza pandemic,"
the agency added.
See also:
http: //www. cidrap. umn. edu/cidrap/content/influenza/avianflu/news/may0113 mmwr.html 5/3 /2013
Illinois Fact Sheet: Human Health Concerns About Raising Poultry Page 1 of 5
Human Health Concerns About Raising
Poultry
An increasing number of citizens want to raise chickens in urban
environments as a hobby or they may believe this method of raising
birds for food may be safer or less expensive. Citizens should check to
make sure that flocks are allowed in the area where they reside before
purchasing poultry. This document examines the public health
significance of some common concerns about urban poultry farming.
Bacterial diseases
Salmonella and Campylobacter are common public health hazards
potentially associated with chicken contact. These bacteria are carried
by healthy chickens and are communicable to people through direct
contact, exposure to manure, or consumption of undercooked chicken
and eggs. Infection is characterized by diarrhea, vomiting, fever, and/or
abdominal cramps; small children, elderly persons, and those with
weakened immune systems are more susceptible to severe illness.
Young birds may be especially prone to shed these organisms in their
droppings. This poses a hazard to anyone who comes into contact with
the droppings. The public health hazards associated with Salmonella
and Campylobacter are expected to be limited to those who are in
contact with the chickens or their droppings or consume their meat or
eggs without thorough cooking. There have been several multi-state
outbreaks of human Salmonella infections from handling baby chicks.
These hazards could be mitigated by avoiding contact with poultry
feces, carefully washing hands with soap and water after handling the
birds, avoiding hand-to-mouth contact while working with birds and
education about food safety.
Histoplasmosis
Histoplasmosis can cause a respiratory disease with cough and
shortness of breath. The fungal organism causing this disease is
http://www.idph.state.il.us/health/infect/Poultry.htm 5/2/2013
Illinois Fact Sheet: Human Health Concerns About Raising Poultry Page 2 of 5
present throughout the Midwest but can be concentrated in areas with
quantities of bird droppings. Persons acquire the disease by inhalation
of the organism from the environment. Therefore, it is critical that flock
owners have a method to maintain the property to minimize the
accumulation of bird droppings. Animal waste should be disposed of in
a safe manner.
Avian influenza (bird flu)
Avian influenza is a theoretical public health hazard potentially
associated with urban chicken farming. Birds can shed the organism in
the saliva, nasal secretions and feces. Avian influenza is a viral disease
of birds that is communicable to people through exposure to respiratory
or fecal secretions. The risk of human avian influenza infections in the
United States is extremely low and is expected to be limited to those
who are in contact with infected chickens.
Exotic Newcastle disease
Exotic Newcastle disease, a viral disease that is not normally found in
the United States, is not a significant public health hazard in this
context. While exotic Newcastle disease can cause mild eye infections
in people, the greater concern is that the introduction of exotic
Newcastle disease in privately owned chicken flocks can cause major
economic damage in communities where commercial chicken farming is
an important industry.
Attraction of predators
The attraction of predators is a public health hazard potentially
associated with urban chicken farming. The presence of chickens on a
property might attract urban predators such as stray dogs, foxes and
coyotes. This would increase the probability of conflict between humans
and predators in the urban environment (e.g., animal bites). This hazard
could be mitigated by requiring flock owners to provide sufficient
structural protection to prevent predator access to their flocks.
Attraction of rodents
The attraction of rodents is a public health hazard potentially associated
with urban chicken farming. Failure to maintain a clean environment for
the chickens could attract mice or rats to a property. This hazard could
be mitigated by educating flock owners on the proper care and
http://www.idph.state.il.us/health/infectlPoultry.htm 5/2/2013
Illinois Fact Sheet: Human Health Concerns About Raising Poultry Page 3 of 5
maintenance of chicken flocks including the proper storage of bird feed.
Nuisance issues
The odor and noise that might be associated with urban chicken
farming are not public health hazards. Poultry may escape into
neighbors' yards. Flies might be attracted to the area unless adequate
fly control is practiced. Communities are advised to have a system in
place for handling public complaints regarding these issues if they allow
urban poultry flocks.
Management and handling of poultry in small backyard
flocks
. Keep baby chicks and adult poultry away from persons with
weaker immune systems, including the elderly, pregnant women,
diabetics, patients receiving chemotherapy and people infected
with HIV.
. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that
person not keep chickens if the household has children less than
five years of age.
. Make sure that people who handle the chickens or their droppings
wash hands properly with soap and water following contact.
. Do not eat or drink around the poultry.
. Keep poultry away from food preparation areas.
. Do not wash items, such as water or food dishes, from chicken
coops in the kitchen sink.
. Do not allow poultry to roam in the house.
. Maintain the area where the poultry are present in a sanitary
manner.
. See your physician if you experience fever and diarrhea.
Conclusion
The public health hazards potentially associated with urban chicken
farming should be weighed against individual and community benefits.
http://www. idph. state. il. us/health/infect/Poultry.htm 5/2/2013
� Illinois Fact Sheet: Human Health Concerns About Raising Poultry Page 4 of 5
Public health infectious disease hazards can be mitigated by education
and regulation and are expected to be limited to those who are in
contact with the chickens or consuming their meat or eggs without
thorough cooking.
Communities that permit urban chicken farming are advised to ensure
that flock owners receive educational materials on infectious diseases,
animal husbandry, food safety and biosecurity. These communities also
should have a system in place for responding to community complaints.
References
CDC. Keeping Live Poultry. Available at
http://www.cdc.qov/Features/SalmonellaPoultrX.
CDC. Preliminary FoodNet Data on the Incidence of Infection with
Pathogens Transmitted Commonly Through Food-10 States, 2009.
MMWR 2010;59:418-422.
CDC. Multistate Outbreaks of Salmonella Infections Associated with
Live Poultry --- United States, 2007. MMWR 2009; 58: 25-29.
CDC. Three Outbreaks of Salmonellosis Associated with Baby Poultry
from Three Hatcheries --- United States, 2006. MMWR 2007;56:273-
276.
CDC. Salmonella Serotype Montevideo Infections Associated with
Chicks -- Idaho, Washington, and Oregon, Spring 1995 and 1996 .
MMWR 1997;46:237-239.
National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians. Compendium
of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in Public
Settings, 2009. MMWR 2009;58(RR-5):1-21.
Scallan E et al. Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major
Pathogens. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011 Jan; (Epub ahead of print].
Swayne DE and King DJ. Zoonosis Update: Avian influenza and
Newcastle disease. Jour Amer Vet Med Assoc 2003;222:1534-1540.
United States Department of Agriculture. Biosecurity for Birds. Available
at http://www.aphis.usda.qov/animal health/birdbiosecuritv.
March 2012
http://www. idph. state. il.us/healtll/infect/Poultry.htm 5/2/2013
Illinois Fact Sheet: Human Health Concerns About Raising Poultry Page 5 of 5
���� ��j�d� �p�� Illinois Department of Public Health
535 West Jefferson Street
Springfield, Illinois 62761
Phone 217-782-4977
Fax 217-782-3987
TTY 800-547-0466
Questions or Comments
http://www.idph.state.il.us/health/infect/Poultry.htm 5/2/2013
Page 1 of 3
`.
The URL: http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/ads? was blocked
� � - ��
�
,
�� � _�_ __� _____ _________
�. _ ______P______ _,_ __�______ _ �.
�
. ________ ___ __ ___ _ -
��� -��' �' � - - .
�:.,,,,,.,,��:;.� � ��: Leazning Center �;
.'.� .,. „��;�. ___,r���� —._._-..�. i -_ :-_:. , � �..,_.. __ _-_� _ � ,� __ ..�...:______...<���.._- =�° _ :' '�- ----`'�-. �
Search Discussions, Reviews, Articles, & more! � � , usemame or email ��password ��� � � � •
Advanced Seamh Forgot Password? Remember Me� ��
BackYard Chickens � Leaming Cen[erAdides > 10-health-prew�tions-for-backyard�hicken-ovtners
10-health-precautions-for-backyard-chicken-owner � �, � !
. � '�. Q Subscnbe��.
10 Health Precautions for Backyard Chicken Owners
Note: This page is for people who have a suppressed immune system, asthma, COPD or any wndition lhat makes lhem especially
susceptible to iilnesses. A search of the 8YC Forum or a Google search will help in obtaining further infortnation about each of the
illnesses and precautio�s menlioned below.
In order to remain healthy around chickens, most peop�e don't need to do anything other than wash their hands after handling their
chickens. However, lhere are many people who must be extra cautious because of suppressed immune systems, asthma, COPD
or other conditions that make them more susceptible to illnesses that might be transmitted via chickens. Since one of my little
granddaughters battled cancer (she's doing very well now), I've studied about and now practice strict health preca�6ons in caring
for my small backyard flock.
While it isn't fikely that you will contract an illness from your chickens, it is possible. Diseases such as Histoplasmosis, sa�monella,
farmer's lung, bird flu and staph infections CAN be associated with being around chickens. So if someone in your household is
susceptible to illnesses, the following guidelines will help to minimize your risks.
WaSh Ha11dS. This is a good practice for preventing illnesses from any source. Wnenever you've collected eggs, handled
chickens, worked in your chicken coop or filled water bowls and feeders, always wash your hands with soap and water aftenvards.
W281' 8 f8C2 tnBSk. Chickens create a tremendous amount of dust. That's one of ihe
reasons that ventilation is so important in a chicken coop. If your chicken coop is endose
wear a face mask whenever you work inside il — whether iYs filling feeders and waterers c
Geaning. For me, the ear-loop masks are the easiest to use. I found some on sale at my
grocery store and bought several boxes. I keep a box at lhe entrance to my chicken coop
Whenever I enter the coop lo work, I put on a face mask. If I'm just gathering eggs quickly
usually don't bother since I'll only be in there for a few seconds. However, if you are
especially susceptibfe to lung issues, wearing a mask every time would help.
Mist coop and roost areas with water. A VERY light mist of water will help to
decrease the amount of dust. You don't want the materials (shavings, straw, etc.) to be wi
though. Wet shavingslstraw would only help bacteria grow! A light mist is all that is neede�
Some people like to add bleach or Oxine to lhe water to help cut down on bacteria. If you
bfeach, Oxine or oiher products, be sure lo follow the directions on lhe package carefully 6
keep lhe proportions of the soiution safe for your chickens.
Keep the coop clean. If you r,ave a °poop board° under ihe roosting area, be sure s
keep lhe droppings cleaned up. Putting dry sand under the roosts make it fairly simple to
scoop up the poop frequenily to keep down odor and bacteria. You might want to research
lhe °deep litter meihod° also for managing your coop. I use the deep litter method for lhe coop floor, and I use sand for the poop
boards. Find out what method works besi for you and makes it easiest for you to keep your coop clean.
Change into clean clothing after working in the chicken coop. nfterworkiny in the cnicacen coop, tnere is
usually dust and other unwanled substances on your Gothing. Have a clean set of Gothes ready for afterwards, and wash dirty
Gothes as soon as possibie.
ObS2rv2 yOU� flOCk. Wnenever you're around your flock, pay attention to how lhey look and what they're doing. If lhere is
anything unusual going on, check it out. If a bird appears sick, isolate it from the rest of the flock until you can determine what is
wrong and lake measures to correct it. In caring for animals of any kind, a watchful eye is vital.
Have a pair of "chicken coop ShOBS. I keep a pair of slip-on rubber shoes by the backdoor. Anylime i go out to lhe
chicken coop, I s�ip off the shoes I'm wearing and put on those shoes. When I retum lo lhe house, 1 switch back. This cuts down
on gertns being tracked into the home. Slip-on shoes makes this much easier.
Clos@ly SupBrviSB ChiIdY211 81'OUt1d ChiCkellS. Never leave children unsupervised around baby chicks or older
chickens. There are immediate physical dangers such as an aggressive rooster who sees a small child as a challenge. Health-
wise, children frequently put their hands i� their mo�ths. Help them wash lheir hands thoroughly after handling chickens or eggs.
Wash eggS. There is a lot of disagreement boih about the need to wash eggs and lhe need to refrigerate eggs. You will have
to decide what you're comfortable with. Because of my family's need for extra precautions, I wash all the eggs I gather. As soon
as I bring lhe basket of eggs inside, I wash lhe eggs gently wilh eilher an organic egg cleaner or a mild solution of dish soap. Use
very warm water and don't immerse the eggs in the water. Then rinse them well. After rinsing, pat them dry and place lhem in the
refrigerator. Although washing eggs might remove the °bloom° (the natural protectant that covers the shelq we use our eggs up
quickly. So that isn't an issue for us.
P�BCtic2 biosecurity. Biosecurity is basically a way to keep disease away from yourflock and other people's flocks. Part of
praclicing biosecurity is to keep your chickens away from visitors and other birds, keep shoes, fools and equipment clean, don't
share tools and equipment with other chicken owners, observe your chickens carefully to watch for eariy signs of illness and report
a�y signs of disease or unexpected deaths. When the chickens in your flock are healthy, there is much less risk of you becoming
sick.
Top Contributors
CaroW s �
� support v
The URL:
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net,
was blocked
The link you are accessing
has been blocked by the
Barracuda Web Filter
because it matches a
blocked category. The
name of the category is:
"advertisement-pop-ups"
• If you believe this is an
error or need to access this
link please contact your
administrator.
The URL:
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net,
was blocked
Alphabetical Article List
AIIABCDEFGHIJKL.MNOPQRS�
http://www.backyardchickens. com/a/10-health-precautions-for-backyard-chic... 5/2/2013
Page 2 of 3
Chickens can be an amazing resource for food and entertainment, and keeping chickens is an effeclive step towards self-
sufficiency. With just a few precautions, even peopie with suppressed immune systems and other health issues can enjoy the
benefits of a backyard flock.
Comments �sa�
DMRippy2/22/12 at B:SOpm
Great article! A must read for everyone with chickens! I need to find me some of those masks that go over your ears. I
have to be careful because of allergies and asthma every once in a blue moon. I also have eczema on my hand so to
' keep lhe hand washing down some ( I am a compulsive hand washer anyway) I use gloves for most things, Geaning
pens, mixing feeds anything I can remember lo put them on for. I know someone that keeps hand sanitizer next to the
chick brooders and he uses it before and afier playing with chicks...that would be rough on my hands, but a good idea.
Nifty-Chicken3nsn2 at 16:36am
' Fantaslic information, great job on this adicle! I know for our family ihe #1 ruie is that outside! chicken shoes STAY
. OUTSIDE!!!
��. CafoIJ3116/12 at 11:O5am
Thanks Donna and Nifty.
Donna, I should've included wearing gloves as one of lhe precaulions! I use gloves for just about everything I do around
- the chickens.
Nifty, I even bought rubber "chicken shoes" for each of my granddaughters to wear when they visit and go out to the
chicken house wiih me. I'm a very overvproteclive grandma. :-)
� LOihIfi213/16/12 at 11:SBam .
`" Great artiGe and valuabie info! Congrals!!
d
GoldenSparrow3nsn2 at tz�pm
Thanks so much, lhis is a very good page!
CeroIJ3/16/12 at 224pm
Thanks, Lothiriel and GoldenSparrow. Glad you enjoyed reading it. :-)
� Fiddlehead3/is/72at4:02pm
My family has chicken shoes too! My 2 year old Ioves to put on his camo chicken boots! We went to target and bought 4
pairs of cheap rain boots. I like boots vs shoes b/c if it is muddy or snowy my pants stay dean and dry. These were
-' some easy lo incorporate, basic precautions that anyone can follow. Nice reminder, thanks!
Chtckwhit3/16/72 at 4:tOpm
�` + Wow what great advice. Would you mind if I copied you advice so I could print and post it on my wall in hopes lhat my
E � daughter and granddaughterwould understand it is NOTjust me being picky.
polyanvil3176/12 at 8:09pm
chicken shoes are a great idea, ty for lhe other lips as well
CefOIJ3/76/12 at 8:52pm
Yea for aIl the folks that have chicken shoes!
' Chickwhit - you are welcome fo use this information in any way lhat is he�pfui lo you.
. UtahChickenDad3/17/12ata:Dlam
We have phone company utility box in back corner of our yard, so we have posted sign of BioSecure Area that state to
ask owner for instruction for entering and exiting the area. That way we can try and some control of what come in
-- conlact wilh our flock as neighbor 2 homes down also has flock.
�� JerseyGiantfolk3inn2ats:45am
That's a good ariiGe! And a nice chicken coop...
202roosterlane3/17/12 at s:ospm
Awesome artide thank youf
fhetbOthChICk3/18/12 ai 8:68am
I appreciate this artiGe. Informative and helpfui, thanks
-� DDNONIN20163/19/12at4:t4am
Very nice. Thanks for shari�g wiih alI
r ± ( southemvikingansn2at72:4spm
I'm new to all of this but here's a suggestion anyway. For lhose guests who are not around e�ough to warranl an
`� ' individual pair of boots/shoes why not get the disposabie shoe covers like they wear in lhe O.R.'s at the hospital? That
t ' way everyone's shoes are protected and the chickens are protected loo!
paridisefarm20093izon2 at 3:34am
; Thank you for all your information..
quichelady32on2 at 5:sspm
� I Great article. Thanks!
CefOIJ3/21I72 at 7028am
The URL:
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net,
was blocked
• The link you are accessing ;
has been blocked by the
Barracuda Web Filter
because it matches a
http ://www.bacicyardchickens. com/a/ 10-health-precautions-for-backyard-chic... 5/2/2013
��� �CUrrentiy, Ifiere are 1550 Active Users (357 Members and i 193 Guests)
�ions
ond ago
�onds ago
m�3s a<7o
en pics anyone?T 24 seconds a90
I37 second� agn _ ..
New Articles'
>Convicled Crirtunal ChickenkeeperGy RaZ
>ihe Coop Deville6y Davidlonghair76
>The Coop De Caopby jefflouelia ':
>The Bam600 Peacockby FAinzFox
�Gary Indana Chicken Ordinanceby Pho�oPaige
>The Henporiumby FdyHenporium.�
>StrayPNildlFeral cat RP Charactersby animallover505
icksby Farrtting Frenry
Home�. � Bree�
�, A6ou� BackYard Chlckens ( Join the�Community '�:� AdveN
� ��. �� � 2013 BackYard Chickens is po�ver�
Uevr.NeWAAicles �'AIIAdicies �
ms (.Articles � MyProfile � �
es ���.SUffidentSelLcom �����BackYardHerds.com�. J TheEasyGarden.com ��.
�.
� FAQ � Suppod �� Privacy/TOS ���SifeMap . .. �
CDC - Avian Influenza (Flu) � Avian Influenza A Virus Infections of Hum... Page 1 of 3
� AVIAN INFLUENZA (FLU)
�
E)1R'r.Rn}iC'AI.TH�l�I1+FCdlL! :�:��.:� "�
vian 1nfluenza A Virus Infections of Humans
� is archived and is no longer being maintained or updated: For updatec
on avian influenza, see the CDC Avian Infiuenza website
v/flu/avianflu/) and the World Health Organization (WHO) Avian Influenza
an influ
Although avian influenza A viruses usually do not infect humans, rare cases of human infection with avian influenza A viruses
have been reported. Most human infections with avian influenza A viruses have occurred following direct contact with infected
poultry. Human clinical illness from infection with avian influenza A viruses has ranged from eye infections (conjunctivitis) to
severe respiratory disease (pneumonia) to death.
Since November 2003, nearly 400 cases of human infection with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) viruses have been
reported by more than a dozen countries in Asia, Africa, the Pacific, Europe and the Near East. Highly pathogenic avian
influenza A(H5N1) viruses have never been detected among wild birds, domestic poultry, or people in the United States. The
World Health Organization (WHO) maintains'situation updates '
(http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian influenza/updates/enlindex.html) and cumulative reports of human cases
(http://www.who.inUcsr/disease/avian influenza/country/en/index.html) of avian influenza A(H5N1). Most human cases of H5N1
virus infection are thought to have occurred as a result of direct contact with sick or dead infected poultry.
Other subtypes of avian influenza'A viruses
strains. (For more information, see,"Low Pa
monitor outbreaks of hu
infection in the human "�
rarely, and has been`lirr
change and gain the ab
is important. (See Inforr
Insta
humans, including low pathogenic and highly pathogenic virus
ises.htm " on the CDC Influenza Viruses Web page.) Public health authorities closely
ociated with avian influenza because of concerns about the potential for more widesprea
spread of aviarrinfluenza A viruses from one ill person to another has been reported ver�
and unsustained. However, because avian influenza A viruses have the potential to
asily between people, monitoring for human infection and person-to-person transmission
luenza Pandemics (www.cdc.qov/flu/avian/qen-info/pandemics.htm) for more informatior
n Influenza A Virus Infections in Poultry
aenza outbreaks among poultry occurViiorldwide from time to time. Since 1997, for example, and based on the World
ion for Animal Health (OIE) reporting criteria for Notifiable Avian Influenza in commercial poultry, the United States ha
,ed 17'incidents of H5 H7 low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI), and one incident of highly pathogenic avian
(HPAI) that was restricted to one poultry farm. The U.S. Department of Agriculture monitored and responded,to these
the Un
For
ienced the first highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreak among
(H5N2) which occurred in Texas. The outbreak was reported in a
no report of transmission to humans.
reportable poultry outbreaks of avian influenza, visit the
This was
�nces'`of Avian Influenza A Virus Infections of Humans
ied instances of avian influenza A virus infections of humans since 1996 include:
H7N7, United Kingdom, 1996: One adult developed conjunctivitis after a piece of straw contacted her eye while cleanir
a duck house. Low pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N7) virus was isolated from a conjunctiva specimen. The person w�
not hospitalized and recovered.
H5N1, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, 1997: Highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) virus infections
occurred in both poultry and humans. This was the first time an avian influenza A virus transmission directly from birds t<
humans had been found to cause respiratory illness. During this outbreak, 18 people were hospitalized and six of them
died. To control the outbreak, authorities culled about 1.5 million chickens to remove the source of the virus. The most
significant risk factor for human H5N1 illness was visiting a live poultry market in the week before illness onset.
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/avian-flu-humans.htm 4/23/2013
CDC - Avian Influenza (Flu) � Avian Influenza A Virus Infections of Hum... Page 2 of 3
• H9N2, China and Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, 1999: Low pathogenic avian influenza A(H9N2) virus
infection was confirmed in two hospitalized children and resulted in uncomplicated influenza-like illness. Both patients
recovered, and no additional cases were confirmed. The source is unknown. Several additional human H9N2 virus
infections were reported from China in 1998-99.
• H7N2, Virginia, 2002: Following an outbreak of low pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N2) among poultry in the
Shenandoah Valley poultry production area, one person developed uncomplicated influenza-like illness and had serolog
evidence of infection with H7N2 virus.
• H5N1, China and Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, 2003: Two cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza
(H5N1) virus infection occurred among members of a Hong Kong family, that had traveled to China. One person
recovered, the other died. How or where these two family members we�e infected was not determined. Another family
member died of a respiratory illness in China, but no testing was.done.
• H7N7, Netherlands, 2003: The Netherlands reported outbreafcs of highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N7) virus
among poultry on multiple farms. Overall, 89 people were confirmed to'have H7N7 virus infections associated with poulti
outbreaks. Most human cases occurred among poultry workers. H7N7-associated iliness was generally mild and include
78 cases of conjunctivitis (eye infections); �ve cases of conjunctiviti,s and influenza-like illness with fever, cough, and
muscle aches; two cases of influenza-like illness; and four cases that were classified as "other." One death occurred in z
veterinarian who visited one of the affected farms and developed complications from H7N7 virus infection, including acui
respiratory distress syndrome. The majority of H7N7 cases occurred through,direct contact with infected poultry.
However, Dutch authorities reported three possible instances of human-to-human H7N7 virus transmission from poultry
workers to family members.
• H9N2, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region; 2003: Low pathogenic avian influenza A(H9N2) virus infection w2
confirmed in a child in Hong Kong. The cliild viias hospitalized with influenza=like iliness and recovered.
• H7N2, New York, 2003: In Novem,ber 2003, a patient with serious pre existing medical conditions was admitted to a
hospital in New York with respiratory.syrriptorr�s. The patient recovered and went home after a few weeks. Testing
revealed that the patient liad been infected with a low pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N2) virus; the patient's underlyin�
medical conditions likely contributed to the severity of the patient's illness.
• H7N3, Canada, 2004: ln March 2004; two poultry workers who were assisting in culling operations during a large
influenza A(H7N3) poultry outbreak had culture-confirmed H7N3 conjunctivitis, one of whom also had coryza. Both
poultry workers recovered. One worker was infected with low pathogenic H7N3 and the other with high pathogenic H7N;
• H5N7, China, Thailand and Vietnam, 2003-2004: In late 2003 and early 2004, severe and fatal human infections with
highly pathogenic avian irifluenza A(H5N1) viruses were associated with widespread poultry outbreaks. Most cases had
pneumonia and'many had respiratory failure. Additional human H5N1 cases were reported during mid-2004, and late ;'::
2004. Most cases appeared to be associated with direct contact with sick or dead poultry. One instance of possible;
limited, human-#o-human spread of H5N1 virus is believed to have occurred in Thailand. Overall, 50 human H5N1 cases
`with 36 deaths were reported from three countries.
• H5N1, �ambodia, China; Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, 2005: Severe and fatal human infections with highly '
pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) viruses were associated with the ongoing H5N1 epizootic among poultry in the.,
� 98 human H5N1 �cases with 43 deaths were reported from five countries. �
� H5N1,`Azerbaijan; Cambodia,, China, Djibouti, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, Thailand, Turkey, 2006: Severe and fatal
human infections with pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) viruses occurred in association with the ongoing and
expanding epizootic. While most of these cases occurred as a result of contact with infected poultry, in Azerbaijan, the
most plausible cause of>exposure to H5N1 in several instances of human infection is thought to be contact with infected
dead wild birds (swans). The largest family cluster of H5N1 cases to date occurred in North Sumatra, Indonesia during
May 2006, with seven confirmed H5N1 cases and one probable H5N1 case, including seven deaths. Overall, 115 humai
H5N1 cases with 79 deaths were reported in nine countries.
• H5N1, Cambodia, China, Egypt, indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Vietnam, 2007: Severe and fatal
human infections with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) viruses occurred in association with poultry outbreaks
In addition, during 2007, Nigeria (January), Laos (February), Myanmar (December), and Pakistan (2007) confirmed their
first human infections with H5N1. Overall nine countries reported a total of 86 human cases with 59 deaths in 2007.
• H7N2, United Kingdom, 2007: Human infection with low pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N2) virus resulting in influenz
-like illness and conjunctivitis were identified in four hospitalized cases. The cases were associated with an H7N2 poultr�
outbreak in Wales.
• H9N2, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region, 2007: In March 2007, low pathogenic avian influenza A(H9N2)
virus infection was confirmed in a 9-month-old Hong Kong girl with mild signs of disease.
The Worid Health Organization (WHO) website provides a
Signs and symptoms of Avian Infl
The reported signs and symptoms of avian influenza i
illness symptoms (e.g., fever, cough, sore throat, musc
distress, viral pneumonia) sometimes accompanied by
Antiviral Agents for Avi
za in Huma
nza A Virus In
ions (conjunctivitis) to influenza-liki
(e.g. pneumonia, acute respiratory
!ogic changes.
of Humans
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/avian/gen-info/avian-flu-humans.htm 4/23/2013
CDC - Avian Influenza (Flu) ( Avian Influenza A Virus Infections of Hum... Page 3 of 3
CDC and WHO recommend oseltamivir, a prescription antiviral medication, for treatment and prevention of human infection with
avian influenza A viruses. Analyses of available H5N1 viruses circulating woridwide suggest that most viruses are susceptible tc
oseltamivir. However, some evidence of resistance to oseltamivir has been reported in H5N1 viruses isolated from some humar
H5N1 cases. Monitoring for antiviral resistance among avian influenza A viruses is important and ongoing.
Prevention of Avian Influenza A Virus Infections of Humans
Persons who work with poultry or respond to avian influenza outbreaks among poultry and are therefore potentially exposed to
infected or potentially infected poultry are advised to follow recommended biosecurity and infection control practices including
careful attention to hand hygiene, and to use appropriate personal protective equipment..ln addition, HPAI poultry outbreak
responders should adhere to guidance from CDC and WHO and receive seasonal influenza vaccination and take prophylactic
antiviral medication during an outbreak control response. Responders to LPAI outbreaks should consider this guidance as part c
their response plan. Seasonal influenza vaccination will not prevent infection with avian influenza A viruses. Exposed persons
should be carefully monitored for symptoms that develop durjng and in 7 days after their last exposure to infected poultry or to
environments potentially contaminated with avian influenza A virus-excretions/secretions.
Additional lnformation
��«N��IVYVVYV.VJIIQ.yVV/1 UVIIIiQtIV11J/JJGJ
Enq lish-07-17-2007. htmD
Page last modified May 23, 2008
http ://www. cdc. gov/flu/avian/gen-info/avian-flu-humans.htm 4/23/2013
CDC Features - Risk of Human Salmonella Infections from Live Baby Pou... Page 1 of 4
� �er�fiers fr�r [�isec�se �c�ntrc�l anc� Prev�r�tic�n
Ca� 24/7: Scaving LivQ;;- Prc�t4c;ting PQOpI�
Risk of Human Salmonella Infections from Live Baby
Poultry
Risk of Human Salmone((a Infections from Live Baby Poultry
Peep, chirp, quack! Live baby
poultry, such as chicks, ducklings,
goslings, and baby turkeys, can carry
harmful germs called Salmonella.
After you touch a chick, duckling, or
other baby bird, or anything in the
area where they live and roam,
WASIT YOUR HANDS so you don't
get sick!
Often, live baby poultry may be put on display at stores where children may be able to touch
the birds or areas where they are displayed. Because these birds are so soft and cute, many
people do not realize the potential danger that live baby poultry can be, especially to children.
Cute but risky?
:«_�,t,t e�..
4Ss�,.,,.,�{,�,��
octbresb P,a��e tx�r.
I� u; �� r:� Ilva yai}Kry.
k,J.� �... .. ...� .��F. Ysr
�
�
� �
♦ /�
i � i �4
I�i •b1i1 •i1i
�a►�#���a��a+��r
�rr'.•. . . . . . .
r
k5+5 #� 5
. . �. �— L.�4
� �
(graphic.html)
Large/Teact Version (�ranhic.html)
Each spring, some children become infected with Salmonella, but it is important to remember
that illness can occur from these baby birds or adult birds at any time of the year.
Live baby poultry can carry Salmonella and still loolc healthy, but can spread the germs to
people. Children can be exposed to Salmonella by holding, cuddling, or lcissing the birds and
by touching things where the bird lives, such as cages or feed and water bowls. Young children
are especially at rislc for illness because their immune systems are still developing and because
they are more lilcely than others to put their fingers or other items into their mouths.
How do people get Salmonella infections from live baby poultry?
http://www.cdc.gov/features/salmonellababybirds/ 4/23/2013
CDC Features - Risk of Human Salmonella Infections from Live Baby Pou... Page 2 of 4
Live poultry may have Salmonella germs in their droppings and on their bodies (feathers, feet,
and beaks) even when they appear healthy and clean. The germs can also get on cages, coops,
hay, plants, and soil in the area where the birds live and roam. Additionally, the germs can be
found on the hands, shoes, and clothing of those who handle the birds or worlc or play where
they live and roam.
How do people get infected?
People become infected with Salmonella when they put their hands or other things that have
been in contact with feces in or around their mouth. Young children are especially at rislc for
illness because their immune systems are still developing and because they are more lilcely
than others to put their fingers or other items into their mouths. It is important to wash hands
immediately after touching poultry or anything in the area where they live and roam, because
the germs on your hands can easily spread to other people or things.
How do I reduce the risk of a Salmonella infection from live baby
poultry?
DO
�'r� _ _ �_'_, ��, �>� ��x_t:i, �: I
�� . a�,�<<-�,�� :.�:���,i i
� :,��, t �r�:,�;,: i �,.,,.,,,
�;��.i���, eu� i:��, ,
, , ��,; . �
1._. \ , � �
• Send a Health-e-Card: Teach Hand Washing (htt�://t.cdc.gov/ecards/message.asnx?
cardid=2q�)
• Download a CDC Kidtastics Podcast: Why Parents Should Thinlc Twice Before Givin�
Baby Birds to Youn� Children for Easter �PODCAST - 4:oq minutes�
(htt�: //www2c.cdc.gov,[�odcasts�plaver.asp?f=liii�
Wash hands thoroughly with soap and water right after touching live baby poultry or
anything in the area where they live and roam. Use hand sanitizer if soap and water are
not readily available.
� Adults should supervise hand washing for young children.
Clean any equipment or materials associated with raising or caring for live poultry outside
the house, such as cages or feed or water containers.
DON'T
• Don't let children younger than 5 years of age, older adults, or people with wealc immune
systems handle or touch chicks, duciclings, or other live poultry.
• Don't snuggle or lciss the birds, touch your mouth, or eat or drinlc around live baby poultry.
• Don't let live baby poultry inside the house, in bathrooms, or especially in areas where
food or drinlc is prepared, served, or stored, such as lcitchens or outdoor patios.
• Don't eat or drinlc in the area where the birds live or roam.
• Don't give live baby poultry as gifts to young children.
What are the signs, symptoms, and types of treatment available for
Salmonella infections?
http://www.cdc.gov/features/salmonellababybirds/ 4/23/2013
CDC Features - Rislc of Human Salmonella Infections from Live Baby Pou... Page 3 of 4
� �,_.
a
,�
{ � � , � f ^ f ` � `��.�. �' � �
N � .� �^s� ��
��� � �ff �l�.�� �
• Diarrhea
• Vomiting
• Fever
• Abdominal cramps
t
� �;
:�
can malce people sicic with
Sometimes, people can become so sick from a Salmonella infection that they have to go to the
hospital. Infants, elderly persons, and those with wealcened immune systems are more lilcely
than others to develop severe illness. When severe infection occurs, Salmonella may spread
from the intestines to the bloodstream and then to other body sites and can cause death unless
the person is treated promptly with antibiotics.
You can learn more about the signs, symptoms and treatment of Salmonella infection by
visiting the CDC's Salmonella website (http://www.cdc.�ov/salmonella) . If you suspect you or
your child has Salmonella infection, please contact your health care provider immediately.
Are there any restrictions about owning live poultry?
Rules and regulations vary by city, county, and state ordinances, so checic with your local
government to determine restrictions about owning live poultry.
More Information
Keepin� Live Poultry (http://www.cdc.�ov/features/salmonellapoultry/index.html)
Healthy Pets Healthy People (httn://www.cdc.gov/health�pets)
Poster: Live Babv Poultry and Preventing Salmonella Infections
(htt�: //www.cdc.gov/healthXpets/resources/nosters.htm#poultry�
� Spanish: Reduzca su ries,�o de infeccion por Salmonella por el contacto con crias de
aves de corrals (http://www.cdc.�ov/healthypets/resources/posters.htm#poultry)
vos mains apres avoir touche des canetons ou des poussins pour ne
(http://www.cdc.gov/healthy�ets/resources f posters.htm#poultiy�
Podcasts
Easter I PODCAST - 4:0
Twice Before Givi
malade!
Birds to Y�
� CDC Kidtastics Podcast: Wash Your Hands fPODCAST - 0:51 seconds�
(htt�: f /www2c.cdc.gov/nodcasts/player.asp?f=78A18�)
� CDC Cup of Health Cute But Risky (http://www2c.cdc.�ov/podcasts/player.asp?
f= 8 62 � � �6 #transcript)
http://www.cdc.gov/features/salmonellababybirds/ 4/23/2013
CDC Features - Risk of Human Salmonella Infections from Live Baby Pou... Page 4 of 4
CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weel�ly Report (MMWR)
� Notes from the Field: Multistate Outbrealc of
(http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm62�1a5.htm?s cid=mm62iia5 e)
from a Single Mail-Order Hatcherv in Ohio — March—Seutember 2012
(htt�://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/t�review/mmwrhtml/mm6211a�.htm?s cid=mm6211a� e)
� Notes from the Field: Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Altona and Johannesbur�
Infections Linked to Chicks and Ducl�lings from a Mail-Order Hatcherv — United
States, Februarv—October 2011
(http: %/www.cdc .gov/mmwr/�review/mmwrhtml/mm6iila�.htm)
� Multistate Outbreaks of Salmonella Infections Associated with Live Poultrv — United
States, 200� (htt�://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mmti8o2ai.htm)�
� Three OutbrealLS of Salmonellosis Associated with Baby Poultrv from Three
Hatcheries — United States, 2006
(http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/�review/mmwrhtml/mm�6i2ai.htm?s cid=mm,6i2ai el
• Compendium of Measures to Prevent Diseas�
2011 "�_, IYllr� 1.331V1�iJ (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdt�rrfrr6004.�dt1
� Annendix C: Hand-Washing Recommendations to Reduce Disease Transmission from
Animals in Public Settin�s
(http://www.cdc.�ov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a1.htm?s cid=rr6004a1 w#AppC)
Page last re��iewed: March 25, 2oi3
Page last updated: March 25, 2oi3
Content source: National Center for Emer�ine and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Di�rision of Foodborne. Waterborne, and Emrironmental
Diseases
Page maintained by: Office of the Associate Director for Communication, Division of Ne��s and Electronic Media
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention i600 Clifton Rd. Atlanta, GA
3 USA
Soo-CDGINFO (800-232-46g6) TTY: (888) 232-6348 - Contact CDGINFO
http://www. cdc. gov/features/salmonellababybirds/
�LJ�A. ov ��� -��.
Government�+MadeEasy ~°•���
4/23/2013
� CDC Radio: Hand Washing PSA fPODCAST - o:2q seconds]
(htt�://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/pla e��?f=234161)
CS222453
CDC Online Newsroom - Digital Press Kit: Multiple Multistate Outbrealcs ... Page 1 of 4
�r Cent�rs f�r Qis�ase Gc�ntrol ar�d Pr�ver��ic�n
��]C 2417: Scaving l,ivc�s. PrQt�rting Pc�opl�.'"'
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
CDC News Room
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
' k� l 1 , his Pagee Gr phic�s/Charts � Spolcesperson � Related Linlcs�
.� l� l� �.�d.� �1: � �. �`�� ia� �� _ . I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple Multistate Outbreaks of Human Salmonella Infections
Linked to Live Poultry in Backyard Flocks
Salmonella infections don't just come from contaminated food—they can come from contact with
animals, too. Many Sabnonella infections occur in people who have contact with certain types of
animals. In 2012 there were two records involving outbrealcs of human Salmonella infections
linlced to live poultry:
i. Eight outbreaks were reported which was more than any year in histoiy and these outbreaks
resulted in more than 45o illnesses —and-
2. The largest outbrealc of human Sal�nonella infections linlced to baclryard flocics in a single
year occurred.
Chicics, ducl�lings, and other poultry can carry Sal�nonella. Live poultry may have Sahnonella
germs in their droppings and on their bodies (feathers, feet, and bealcs) even when they appear
healthy and clean.
While it usually doesn't malce the birds sicic, Salmonella can cause serious illness when it is passed
to people. Salmonella germs can cause a diarrheal illness in people that can be mild, severe, or
even life threatening. Infants, seniors, and those with wealcened immune systems are more lilcely
than others to develop severe illness. These simple steps will help protect yourself and others from
getting sick:
• Wash hands thoroughly with soap and water right after touching live poultry or anything in
the area where they live and roam. Adults should supervise hand washing for young children.
• Clean any equipment or materials associated with raising or caring for live poultry outside the
house, such as cages or feed or water containers.
• Never bring live poultry inside the house, in bathrooms, or especially in areas where food or
drink is prepared, served, or stored, such as lcitchens, or outdoor patios.
Learn more about the rislc of human Salmonella Infections from live poultry here.
;Graphics / Images
Since the lggos,
45 Salmonel(a
outbreaks have been
linked to live poultry.
Num6v.��sa(monef/aouebreeks;�:-� Ycar
.. . . . .._ _ .....A�
� � i 6i
' 01� ai,��pee�i
e���i��e8S1��ei1i
s.��t,r.P:"° .',`' ,. � ° e r
__ _
.�
� ('1`\
/ �' �
�/� 1}�'��.�, .
�a 5�
,� �` �
Chicic and ducl�lin�
� __ _ �__,,.����
Chicicens
_ � :��.�.....�. �...�.� I
http://www. cdc. gov/media/dpk/2013 /dplc-live-poultiy-salmonella.html 4/23/2013
CDC Online Newsroom - Digital Press Kit: Multiple Multistate Outbrealcs ... Page 2 of 4
Live Poultry
Salmonella
Infographic
Eniire InfoAra�nhic
This is a description
for image 2.
This is a description This is a descri�tion
for ima�e 2. for image 2•
Related Links
Most Relevant
Outbrealc of Human Salmonella Typhimurium Infections Linlced to Contact With Baby
Poultrv From a Single Agricultural Feed Store Chain and Mail-order Hatcheiv 200� �
Outbrealc of Salmonellosis Linlced to Live Poultiv from a Mail-Order Hatcherv �
CDC Related Links
Rislc of Human Salmonella Infections from Live Babv PoultrX
Feature: Kee�ing Live Poultiy
CDC Public Health Matters Blog: Thinlang About Keepin� Live PoultrY?
Peep, chirp, quacic! What vou should know about Salmonella if vou lceep live �oultr��
Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases
National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases
Educational Posters
Live Babv Poultrv and Preventing Sabnonella Infections
S�anish: Reduzca su ries�;o de infeccion por Salmonella por el contacto con crias de aves de
corrals
French: Lavez vos mains anres avoir touche des canetons ou des poussins uour ne �as etre
malade!
Additional Resources
United States Department of A�riculture's National Poultrv Improvement Plan �
United States De�artment of A�riculture's Biosecurity for Birds �
Contact Information
CDC Media Relations
�404) 639
media cr cdc.gov
Spokesperson
Casey Barton Behravesh, MS, DVM, DrPH, DACVPM
Biographv ;'�';
http ://www. cdc. gov/media/dplc/2 013 /dpk-live-poultiy-salmonella. html 4/23 /2013
CDC Online Newsroom - Digital Press Kit: Multiple Multistate Outbrealcs ... Page 3 of 4
"Most people ca�i tell }�ou tl�at ra��� poulh�� can Ue contaminated �vith Salmonella and that the�� sliould �vash hands after l�andling
the ra��a meat, but tl�e}� don't lcno��a that li��e poultr�� can also have Salmonella."
_ _ _._ _. __._ __ _ _.. ___
"It is important for people to laiow ho��� to safel}� enjo}� their baclyard flocics. People of all ages sliould �vash their hands right
after touching Uab}� aud adult poultry or an}�thing in the areas ���here the poulti�� liees and roams."
; Casey Barton Behravesh, MS, DVM, DrPH, DACVPM - Deputy Branch Chief, Outbrealc
'I Response and Prevention Branch and DFWED Coordinator for Enteric Zoonoses and One
f Health
I
' _ _ i
Multimedia
__.
_— �
:
Podcasts :=. -- ;_ _ _
E
Kidtastics Podcast: Whv Parents Should Thinlc Twice Before Giving Babti Birds to Youn�
Children for Easter
CDC Cup of Health: Cute But Risl�
Videos
' _ , ;,_, �, '
. � . _. . , .
Author: Ceuters for Disease Coutrol aud Preventiou
Date: S/22/2011
Pets Cau Make Peonle Sick �
Slides
http://www. cdc. gov/media/dplc/2013 /dplc-live-poultry-salmonella.html 4/23/2013
Pets Can Malce People Sicic
CDC Online Newsroom - Digital Press Kit: Multiple Multistate Outbrealcs ... Page 4 of 4
Rislcs From Pets and Pet Food Major Outbrealcs of Enteric Zoonoses in 2012
f � • �
Z�r , ;
,� �%�,...
.. ' ',' ,t ,', `�
��� � a
'�
� ����
Author: Centers for Disease Control aud Preveutiou
Date: z/i3/zoi3
Risks From Pets and Pet Paod: Maior Outbreal:s of �uteiic Zoonoses in 2oiz [�
Page last re��iewed: March 6, 2oi3
Page last updated: March 6, 2oi3
Content source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention i600 Clifton Rd. Atlanta, GA 30333� �- °'-�• �
USA U,�A C�OV ' � �
800-CDC-INFO (800-232-4636) TTP: �888) 232-6348 - Contact CDGINFO • .,,�
Government MadeEasy
http://www. cdc.gov/media/dplc/2013/dplc-live-poultiy-salmonella.html 4/23/2013
Page 1 of 2
� the salt
eating and health
r
Backyard Chickens: Cute, Trendy Spreaders
Of Salmonella
by NANCY SHUTE
March 24, 2013 11:59 AM
iStockphoto.com
Backyard chickens have become a coveted suburban accessory, one
that packages cuteness, convenience and local food production in one
fluffy feathered package.
But animal husbandry can be a nasty business, a fact that's often
glossed over by poultry partisans like Martha Stewart and New Yorker
writer Susan Orlean.
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report doesn't do gloss. In its latest
edition, this chronicle of all things contagious reports on a 2012
salmonella outbreak among 195 people in 27 states.
Most had had contact with live chickens, and many had purchased the
birds from an Ohio mail-order hatchery for backyard flocks.
"This outbreak investigation identified the largest number of human
illnesses ever linked to contact with live poultry during a single outbreak,"
the MMWR report concludes, "and it underscores the ongoing risk for
human salmonellosis linked to backyard flocks."
http://www.npr. org/blogs/thesalt/2013/03/24/ 175 05753 6/backyard-chicicens-... 5/9/2013
Page 2 of 2
The hatchery that was the source of the birds participated in a program
to eliminate the spread of salmonella strains that cause illness in birds,
but doesn't certify the poultry as free of strains that could infect people.
But it's no surprise to anybody in the zoonotic disease worid that
chickens can spread human disease. Remember those warnings not to
buy baby chicks for Easter presents? One big reason is that they can
spread salmonella.
Humans can get salmonella from chickens by touching them or their
manure, according to the CDC. The birds can spread the bacteria even
when they look healthy. The agency says the best way to reduce risk is
to wash hands after handling birds — and make sure that children wash
their hands, too.
Public health officials are also worried about backyard flocks and bird flu.
The USDA provides tips on how to keep domestic fowl from playing a
role in a future global pandemic, with no less than backyard poultry
expert Andy Schneider, aka The Chicken Whisperer, as their
spokesperson.
Buying eggs from the supermarket is a relatively recent invention, as
Orlean has pointed out. So maybe the return of backyard chickens is a
return to normal. And that's normal, germs included.
chickens local food salmonella
older
Are Younger Catholics Abandoning Fish On Fridays?
newer
Spanish Town To Host Its First Seder In More Than 50o Years
About
Subscribe
NPR Food Twitter
02013 NPR
http://www.npr. org/blogs/thesalt/2013/03/24/ 175 05753 6/backyard-chickens-... 5/9/2013
Backyard chicken basics : Small Farms : University of Minnesota Extension Page 1 of 5
�' UNIVERSITY OF MINNE50TA I EXTENSION
Small Farms
�ackyard chicken basics
Betsy Wieland, Extension educator
Nora Nolden, intern
PDF version (436 K)
As people are becoming more and more interested in knowing where
their food comes from, the trend of raising backyard chickens is
growing. Raising backyard chickens can be a rewarding experience
and a great way to teach kids about nature, agriculture, and
responsibility of caring for animals. Since most backyard chickens are
raised for laying and not for meat, this fact sheet will focus on layers.
Breeds
� �
� - � :�
, �� , � ��� , f: :�.
�T.!�� � _ -'-'�`��iM
i i - �tt,� . . ;� ! i M1;f
► ` �-�;'�._r������ � .��
�-- �:=�;��s•• , �'
�'��j S'�'��
L �
_ _-�:-: �:
�lew Wampshire Red and �ufif
Orpington hens
There is a wide a variety of chicken breeds, developed for egg production, meat production, and/or good
looks. While many breeds are adaptable to a backyard setting, certain breeds are better than others for
backyard conditions. Medium to large breeds are good for cold winters. A mellow temperament and good
egg laying are also pluses. If you see reference to a bantam bird, that is a small version of any particular
breed. It will look the same, but be smaller. Here are a few examples of great, mellow breeds for the
backyard.
Popular backyard chicken breeds
RHODE ISLAND RED
Hens weigh about 6.5 Ib
Lay brown eggs
Dark red feathers
Dual purpose breed, but most often used for
laying
Hardy breed that does well in small flocks
AMERAUCANA
Many different color varieties
Lay green eggs
Great long-term egg production
Dual purpose breed
Tolerant to all climates
Easy to handle
WYANDOTTE
Hens weight about 6.5 Ib
Lay brown eggs
Dual purpose breed
Great for small flocks and rugged conditions
ORPINGTON
Hens weigh about 8 Ib
A larger dual purpose breed
Lay brown eggs
Many color varieties
http://www 1. extension.umn. edu/food/small-fai�ns/livestock/poultry/bacicyar... 4/23/2013
Bacicyard chicken basics : Small Fai�ns : University of Minnesota Extension Page 2 of 5
"Curvy" shape, good disposition
Heavy size is ideal for cold weather
Many color varieties
Diet
Chickens are omnivores. They eat grains, fruits, and vegetables as
well as insects. Chickens should typically be fed a prepared feed that
is balanced for vitamins, minerals, and protein. A healthy laying hen
diet should also contain crushed oystershell for egg production, and
grit for digestion. A 6-pound hen will eat roughly 3 pounds of feed
each week.
�' � _ �� f �S• � � T ^.
,, : ,_ =:���;'
__
They love fruit and vegetable scraps from the kitchen and garden, as
well as bread. Scratch-cracked corn and oats are a nice treat for the
chickens that does not supply all their nutritional needs, but is fine in
moderation.
Feed consumption may increase in the winter when burning more
calories, and decrease in the heat of the summer. A critical part of a
chicken's diet is continual access to clean, fresh water. This is
especially true in the summer as they cool themselves by panting.
Housing
A quality coop is essential to backyard chicken production. Layers
need nest boxes—one per 4-5 birds. Chickens are descended from
jungle birds, which means they like to be up high, so a place for them
to roost is important. Coops must provide protection from the weather
and predators. There should be a well-insulated area with a light bulb
or heat lamp for the winter months as well as ventilation for fresh air.
Be sure to have a minimum 3-5 square feet per bird, including outdoor
space.
Their main predators are raccoons, rats, owls, hawks, and cats. An
enclosed space for them to stay at night is essential to their
protection. Ensure that the coop is free of small holes for predators to
sneak in. There is an endless variety of coop designs with just as
much range in cost. Find a design that provides easy access and
otherwise suits your situation. There are many books and websites
with coop designs. The image at right shows a simple chicken coop
schematic. The space should be free of unnecessary objects like
woodpiles or equipment, as they attract predators.
Daily care
Qualify feed and clean water
will help Eceep birds healfhy
and prociuc�ive.
HAS�C COOP DEStON (IqfEHYALYICW�
- ��— tJ;r .. _..__� nEJay
4<�M
-- 7N
— _ I
c'L
—� :(Oj�. ��i
<.>.°, ,
�
8.131C C00 � OE51G4 (Ex1fI1Nlll VIM�
I!.sGeicm.p4'.'-n1t::.. : _ —_� ?
r.r..le Ir.!� a ib� (r.!x ( I
[�n1y'���p��3.W..Lc � I
I:ttdirJ:n�+[r:dc�.ft:�dt��. J �. � � e
c;. ��'�� ar rnnn �e� ta �
c.•r;l la n;da.l .
r.. .: i. ��.l. t, .. r� r� _
ClicEc to enlarge. Simple coop
design �or up 40 1� hen� irom
Storey's Guide to Raising
Chickens
Chickens need to be fed and water changed daily. They need to be let out of the coop each morning and put
into the coop at dusk each night to protect them from predators. Eggs should be picked up twice a day. The
coop and pen should be cleaned out weekly to maintain sanitation and odor control.
http://www 1. extension.umn. edu/food/small-farms/livestock/poultry/backyar... 4/23/2013
Backyard chicken basics : Small Farms : University of Minnesota Extension Page 3 of 5
Bird health
Healthy birds will be active and alert with bright eyes. They will be moving around—pecking, scratching, and
dusting—except on hot days when they will find shade. Chickens that are healthy and active will also talk
and sing quietly throughout the day.
As far as laying and eating habits, each chicken is different, so monitor each chicken to get a feel for her
normal production and consumption. Healthy droppings will be firm and grayish brown, with white urine
salts. Roughly every tenth dropping is somewhat foamy, smellier than usual, and light brown.
Chickens raised in backyard settings generally stay healthy and are not easily susceptible to diseases. The
easiest way to find disease in chickens is to know what a healthy bird looks like. When a chicken isn't acting
normal, for instance if she doesn't run to the food as usual or she wheezes or sneezes, start investigating.
The table below lists some possible causes of illness to chickens.
Bacteria
Chemical poisoning
Mold and fungi Hereditary defects
Parasites ; Nutritional deficiencies
Viruses Unknown causes
Credit: Storey's Guide to Raising Chickens by Gail Damerow
Sanitation
An important element to bird health is sanitation. In order to maintain a clean, healthy environment, the coop
and outdoor area should be cleaned out weekly or as needed to control manure and odor build up. Feeders
and waterers should be regularly cleaned and disinfected. Dust baths should be available, as they help
control mites. It is important that at least once a year, usually in the spring, a thorough cleaning is done on
the coop and yard. Also cleaning before introducing new birds to the area will limit the spread of disease. A
fall cleaning is also helpful with mite control over winter.
During this cleaning, safety precautions must be taken in dealing with dust. Wear a dust mask and mist the
walls surrounding the area to control dust movement. Inhalation of dried chicken manure can be harmful to
humans. Rake and clean out the yard. All feeders should be removed and bedding completely cleared out. It
is important to remove dust and cobwebs from corners of the coop. The inside of the coop needs to be
disinfected a€" including troughs, perches and nests. To disinfect, use one-tablespoon chlorine bleach to
one gallon boiling water.
Manure management
Chicken manure is made up of feed residue, intestinal bacteria, digestive juices, mineral by-products from
metabolic processes, and water. In fact, 85% of chicken droppings, by weight, is water. This leads to issues
with humidity and odor. So what are the options for managing manure?
http://www 1.extension.umn.edu/food/small-farms/livestocic/poultry/backyar... 4/23/2013
Backyard chicicen basics : Small Farms : University of Minnesota Extension Page 4 of 5
One option is to complete thorough cleanings of the coop more than once a year. This will control the odor
and fly populations.
Another option is to pasture the chickens. Moveable shelters are a valuable tool for pasturing chickens and
reducing cleaning time. Simply move the location of the house when manure begins to build up. It offers
new space for chickens to graze and peck, and free fertilizer for the lawn!
A third option is composting. Composting can be done right in the chickens' bedding. To start this process,
lay down about 4 inches of bedding. Regularly stir up the bedding to prevent clumping, and add fresh
bedding until it is 10 inches deep by winter.
Continue this process until the bedding gets 12 to 15 inches deep. At this depth, composting actively begins
and after 6 months can kill harmful bacteria. This composting releases heat, which keeps chickens warm in
cooler months and attracts natural fly predators. To maintain the compost, it must be stirred regularly to
prevent crusting. The same process can be done outside of the coop in a separate bin.
Egg production
Hens begin laying at around six months of age and can continue for 5-10 years, with peak production
occuring in the first 2 years. They will lay roughly 6 eggs each week. Egg production drops each year when
the hens molt (replace their feathers in the early fall) and as daylight hours are lost. Hens need at least 12-
14 hours of light each day to continue laying eggs. A regular lightbulb is sufficient to supply this light.
Regulations
There are several regulations that you may encounter with chicken ownership. Raising chickens in the
backyard may require a permit from your city, and each has different requirements and restrictions. It is not
legal in some cities to keep poultry. Some cities may also limit the number of animals you can keep.
If you begin selling eggs or meat, you will encounter additional regulations. The Minnesota Department of
Agriculture Dairy and Food Inspection Division manages and enforces these. Contact them for information
regarding these rules at 651-201-6027.
Purchasing birds
There are several places to purchase chickens. The list below has major chicken hatcheries and links to
their websites. There are also many individuals breeding and selling poultry. Local farm supply stores may
also order them for you.
Major chicken hatcheries:
Murray McMurray's�
Stromberq'�
Hoover's Hatchen�'
Additional information
Online resources
http ://www 1. extension. umn. edu/food/small-fat 4/23 /2013
Backyard chicicen basics : Small Fai : University of Minnesota Extension Page 5 of 5
University of Minnesota Extension Small Farms pro rc� am
BackyardChickens.corr�
Poultry resources� — Oklahoma State University
Small flock informatiorf�— University of Arkansas Extension
Publications
Storey's Guide to Raising Chickens by Gail Damerow
American Standard of Perfection by American Poultry Association
Questions or comments?
Contact Betsy Wieland at eliza003 aC�.umn.edu or 612-596-1175.
�O 2013 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved.
The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer
;;
' � � '': >
�-, i _ .� ,_ - .i,
�
http://www 1.extension.umn.edu/food/small-farms/livestock/poultry/backyar... 4/23/2013
VECTOR-BORNE AND ZOONOTIC DISEASES
Volume 11, Number 9, 2011
O Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2010.0260
Prospective Study of Avian Influenza Infection in Backyard
Poultry Flocks and Flock Handlers in Wisconsin
James G. Donahue' Laura A. Coleman' Jeffrey Bender2 Debra Kempf' Mary F. Vandermause;
Paul J. McGraw3 Dale C. Lauer, and Edward A. Belongia'
Abstract
BackgYOitnd: The continuing epizootic of H5N1 avian influenza (AI) in Asia and subsequent zoonotic trans-
mission has led to heightened concerns about a pandemic and the demand for improved surveillance of poultry
in all sectors, including backyard poultry. We conducted a 15-month prospective study to determine the
prevalence of AI in backyard poultry and extent of transmission to flock handlers.
Methods: Starting July 2007, registered poultry owners in six counties in central Wisconsin were mailed invi-
tations to participate; household members with poultry exposure were also invited. Premises with <1000 birds
were eligible. Participants completed a baseline interview to characterize poultry exposures. Illness in flocks and
flock handlers was monitored using semimonthly telephone interviews and self-report of acute influenza-like
symptoms by flock handlers. Participants provided blood at baseline and at the end of the surveillance period for
serology and, if ill, nasopharyngeal, eye, and throat swabs for viral testing. Blood was also collected at baseline
from a convenience sample of adult poultry.
Results: We enrolled 87 flocks and 128 persons who had regular contact with poultry. Influenza-like symptoms
were reported by 77 (65%) persons. Swabs were collected from 53 persons at 88 iliness episodes. AI was not
isolated, but five persons were positive for human influenza. Twenty-one participants (20%) seroconverted to at
least one human influenza strain, but there were no seroconversions to AI. Blood samples from all 717 birds
tested were seronegative for influenza.
Conclusion: Despite limited biosecurity there was no evidence of AI infection in participating backyard flocks or
flock handlers.
ICey Words: Avian influenza—Influenza/epidemiology—Influenza virus A—Pouitry—Transmission.
Introduction
IRDS� ESPECIALLY MIGRATORY WATERFOWL, S22'VC' dS ridt-
ural reservoirs for avian influenza (AI) type A viruses.
Many different viral subtypes circulate in wild bird popula-
tions, including highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI)
and low-pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) (Alexander 1982,
Olsen et al. 2006). Both HPAI and LPAI can infect domestic
birds, and H5N1 is a specific example of an HPAI virus that
has caused sporadic human infections and large outbreaks in
domestic poultry flocks in Asia and other regions (Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention 2004). H5Nl viruses have not
been detected in North America, but research done in the
1980s demonstrated that ducks serve as a natural reservoir for
AI viruses in the upper Midwest (Mnulesota) (Halvorson
et al. 1983). Seasonal influenza infection in domestic turkeys
has been temporally related to infections in migratory birds,
and the clinical effects of avian viruses in turkeys ranged from
subclinical ulfection to severe illness with high mortality
(Karunakaran et al. 1983, Sivanandan et al. 1991). In 2002, an
outbreak of LPAI H7N2 in Virginia affected nearly 200 farms
utd led to the destruction of more than 49 million turkeys and
chickens (Akey 2003).
Backyard poultry flocks represent a potential source of AI
infections in North America. Backyard flocks are typically
maintanled with lower biosecurity compared with large
'Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Epidemiology Research Center (ML2), Marshfield, Wisconsin.
2 University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine, St. Paul, Minnesota.
3 Division of Aitiinal Health, Wisconsin Department of Agrictilttue, Trade, and Consumer Protection, Madison, Wisconsin.
4 Minnesota Poultry Testing Laboratory, Board of Animal Health, Willmar, Minnesota.
1293
1294
commercial flocks, and they may come into contact with mi-
gratory birds or their habitat. Little is known regarding the risk
of AI infection in backyard pot�itry flocks or the potential for
transmission of avian viruses to human flock handlers. Such
infec6ons may occur and remain undetected if the human ill-
ness is mild or clinically indistinguishable from human influ-
enza strains. Even if the resulting illness is mild, transmission of
LPAI viruses to human flock handlers would have serious
public health implications because of the potential for a re-
assortment event and new human-to-human transmission.
We recruited backyard poultry flock owners and handlers
in Wisconsin to prospectively monitar illness in flocks and
humans over a 15-month period and identify episodes of AI
infection. Baseline and postsurveillance serum samples were
obtained from human flock handlers to identify episodes of
seroconversion to AI viruses without clinical illness.
Materials and Methods
Sampling and recruitment
The sampling frame for the study consisted of 1855 prem-
ises from six coiutties surrounding Marshfield, Wisconsin.
The six-cotmty area was selected because Marshfield Clinic is
the primary provider of healthcare for residents in three of
these counties and a major provider in the other three coun-
ties. As a result, most medically attended episodes of influ-
enza illness would be identifiable in the electronic medical
record. All of these premises reported poultry on the property
as part of their confidential registration with the Wisconsin
DeparhnenE of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection,
Division of Aniinal Health (DAH). Since 2006, Wisconsin has
required land owners to annually register premises with
livestock.
A mailing with information about the study was sent to all
premises by DAH. Interested flock owners were invited to
contact the Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation (MCRF)
for more information about participating in the study. We also
recniited study participants by sending promotional materi-
als to local high-school agricultural instructors, agriculture-
related businesses, 4-H clubs, and related groups. Flock
owners and household members were eligible to participate if
they were at least 10 years old and had routute contact with
poultry.
Only premises that met the backyard flock definition were
eligible to participate. We defined a backyard flock as one
with at least 5 but fewer than 1000 poultry on the premises
(USDA 2005).
Basetine data and sample collection in flock handlers
All study participants completed a baseline telephone in-
terview during the suminer of 2007 to characterize &equency
and types of poultry exposures, including animal care, egg
collection and washing, coop cleaning, culling of birds, and use
of personal protective equipment. In addition, flock owners
completed a flock management survey, based on a USDA
National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) ques-
tionnaire (USDA 2005) that u�cluded housing characteristics,
flock health, vaccinations, contact with migratory bird habitat,
biosecurity practices, bird movement, and carcass and litter
disposal. Participants were asked to provide blood samples for
serologic testing at baseline and at the end of the 15-month
DONAHUE ET AL.
surveillance period. Serum samples were frozen and an aliquot
was sent to the University of Iowa for serologic testing.
lllness surveillance in flock handlers
The surveillance period included the 15-month period from
September 2007 through November 2008. Both children and
adults were eligible to participate if they had routule contact
with poultry on the premise. Illness in flock handlers was
prospectively monitared using senlimonthly telephone in-
terviews. Flock owners were also asked to contact study
staff imtnediately or at least within 48 h if they or other
study participants in their household experienced any acute
influenza-like symptom in between the regular telephone
calls. Signs and symptoms of interest inchtded measured oral
temperature > 38°C, fever (subjective), headache, sore throat,
nasal congestion, muscle aches, cough, or conjunctivitis.
We also screened the electronic medical record for specific
diagnoses consistent with medically attended acute respiratory
infection among parEicipants in the study; nearly all diagnoses
are electronically available within 24-48 h after an outpatient or
urgent care encounter. If a study participant was identified as
having a medically attended acute respiratory infection by
electronic diagnosis codes, the diagnosis was confirmed with a
phone call by a research coordinator and samples were col-
lected. ParHcipants with acute respiratory illness were asked to
provide nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs; conjunc-
tival samples were also collected from those with ocular
symptoms. Swabs were collected only if the date of onset was
less than 8 days before the swab collection date.
lllness surveillance in flocks
Participating flock owners were instructed to call MCRF
study personnel if birds in their flock showed any sign of
illness. Each flock owner was given a laminated card printed
with the clinical signs of AI and toll-free telephone numbers to
call when birds became ill. In addition, flock owners were
asked about flock illness during the regular semimonthly
telephone calls and reminded to promptly report flock illness.
The history of illness and clinical signs observed were docu-
mented by study staff; cases of relatively high morbidity or
mortality in the flock were reported to the area USDA Ve-
terinary Services veterinarian and the Wisconsin DAH for
investigation within 24 h as a possible foreign animal disease.
Unless the veterinarian was able to rule-out AI based on in-
formation provided by the flock owner over the telephone, an
on-farm visit was conducted and diagnostics samples from
the trachea and cloaca were collected. 'I'he samples were tes-
ted at the Wisconsin Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory in
Madison, WI; positive samples were forwarded to the Na-
tional Veterinary Services Laboratory in Ames, IA, for con-
firmatory testing.
To assess the prevalence of AI in flocks, blood (� 3 mL) was
collected for serologic assay at the start of the study period
from a convenience sample of 8-10 adult birds per flock.
Laboratory methods: human
Nasopharyngeal, throat, and ocular swabs that were col-
lected from individual ill flock handlers were individually
immersed in a vial of M4 viral transport media, labeled, and
refrigerated until testing was performed. Real-time reverse
AVIAN INFLUENZA IN BACKYARD POULTRY FLOCKS
transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and viral
cliltures were performed by the MCRF-Core Laboratory.
rRT-PCR was performed on nucleic acid extracts using the
LightCycler� Real-Time PCR System (Roche Diagnostics).
Procedures and primer and probe sequence information for
rRT-PCR was provided by CDCs Influenza Division. The as-
say is a TaqMan real-time detection of the matrix
protein (M1) of influenza A and the nonstnutural protein 1
(NS1) of influenza B; the sequences of both proteins are highly
conserved. The human ItNase P gene primer and probe set
served as an internal positive control for htunan nucleic acids.
rRT-PCR was routinely tested on these samples within 1 day
after collection; samples obtained on weekends were processed
on Monday. Viral culture was performed using MDCK
(Madden Darby canine kidney) shell vials (Diagnostic Hybrid).
After detection of cytopathic effect, or if no cytopathic effect
was detected after 5 days of incubation, the cells were har-
vested from the shell vial. Slides were prepared, dried, fixed,
and stained using immtulofluorescent, Influenza A- and B-
specific monoclonal antibody reagents (Diagnostic Hybrid).
Serum samples from study participants were tested for
antibodies to specific avian and human influenza antigens by
the University of Iowa. The assay included the following AI
subtypes: A/GF/NJ (H4N8), A/Nopi/MN (H5N2), A/Tky/
MN (H6N2), A/BWTE/OH (H7N3), A/Tky/MN (H9N2),
A/Rhea/MA (H10N4), A/DK/Memphis (H11N9), A/DK/
Alb (H12N5), and A/T'ky/MN (H13N2).
Human influenza subtypes tested included H1N1 A/
Brisbane/59/2007 and H3N2 A/Brisbane/10/2007.
Laboratory methods: poultry
Blood was collected from poultry and refrigerated until it
was transparted to MCRF-Core Laboratory, usually within a
few hours. Serum was stored frozen and shipped to the
Minnesota Poultry Testing Laboratory for serologic testing of
antibodies to influenza A using agar gel immunodiffusion.
The shtdy was approved by the Institutional Review
Boards of the MCRF and the University of Minnesota and the
University of Minnesota Institutional Anitnal Care and Use
Comm.ittee.
Results
Flock handlers
We enrolled 87 flocks and 128 persons who had routine
contact with poultry. The median age of the flock handlers
was 45 years, ranging from 10 to 83. We have complete follow-
up information regard'mg illness during the suroeillance pe-
riod for most (83.6%) of the 128 flock handlers. However, 12
flock handlers (9.4%) had less than complete follow-up
(range: 4-24 semimonthly ulterviews) and an additional 9
provided no infarmation during the follow-up period. Of
those who provided illness information, 77 (64.7%) reported
at least one symptom consistent with an acute respiratory
illness during the surveillance period. Nasal congestion was
the most commonly reported symptom; 71 persons (92.2%)
reported this symptom at least once. Cough, reported by 64
(83.1%), was the second most common symptom; feverish-
ness was reported at least once by 35 people (45.5%). Naso-
pharyngeal and throat swabs were collected from 53
individuals at 88 different illness episodes. AI was not isolated
1295
from any individual or swab sample, but five persons were
positive far a hiunan strain of influenza (two influenza A and
three influenza B), all during the 2007-2008 influenza season.
Acute and convalescent blood samples were collected from
104 flock handlers; 15 people provided only the baseline se-
rum sample. Of the 104 subjects, 72 (69.2%) were flock own-
ers,11 (10.6%) were flock handlers less than 18 years old, and
the remainder were adult handlers in the household. Twenty-
one participants (20.2%) had evidence of seroconversion to
one or both of the human strains of influenza (i.e., A/H1N1
and A/H3N2) during the shidy period, but no one had se-
roconversion to any of the AI strains.
Poultry
The median number of birds on the 87 farms enrolled in the
study was 33; three flocks had more than 200 birds each.
Chickens were the most common bird (60.3% of flocks), fol-
lowed by game birds (17.5%), waterfowl (6.7%), and other
species (15.5%).
Management practices that would enhance flock biose-
curity were limited in participating flocks and did not vary
substantially by flock size (Table 1). Use of personal protective
equipment and other individual biosecurity measures was
uncommon (Table 2). The types of biosecurity employed and
their frequency varied with the activity. Hand washing was
reported by most participants, but use of gloves and boots
was infrequent; masks were seldom used.
During 10 months of surveillance, 43 illnesses were re-
ported in 28 flocks. Most illnesses were mild and affected only
a few birds in any one flock. However, two episodes were
deemed serious and were investigated by USDA veterinari-
ans. Samples (swabs and blood) were taken from multiple
birds far culture and serology; there was no evidence of AI
infection in either case.
At baseline, blood samples were tested from 717 birds, of
wluch �82% were chickens, 11% waterfowl, and 7% other
species. All birds were seronegative for influenza A; the 95%
upper confidence limit was 0.4%.
Discussion
Backyard poultry are considered to have a higher risk of
environmental exposure to AI because of direct or indirect
exposure to waterfowl, the principal reservoir of influenza A
vinises (Senne et al. 2006, USDA 2007). Our shidy of backyard
flocks confirmed that conventional flock management pro-
cedures typically recommended to reduce infection with AI
were rarely employed. Similarly, although hand washing by
flock handlers was common, use of gloves, dedicated foot-
wear, and masks when working with poultry was not. A
similar observation was reported in an NAHMS suroey of
backyard poultry conducted in 2004, which covered 18 states
but excluded Wisconsin (USDA 2005). Despite the suboptimal
biosecurity, we found no serologic evidence of infection with
AI virus among the 87 flocks in our study and no active AI
infection among those flocks with serious acute respiratory
illness. Our wmbination of active and passive surveillance of
the flocks revealed no occurrences of serious disease consis-
tent with highly pathogenic AI. However, mild disease or
subclinical infection would have been missed with our sur-
veillance approach. We similarly observed that none of the
flock handlers had evidence of AI infection, although we did
1296
TABLE 1. MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR PARTICIPATING BACKYARD FLOCKS
Prnctice
Number of flocks
Housed with access to outdoors
Pond or stream on or near property
Wild bird feeder on property
Birds introduced into flock in last 12 months
Took birds to location where other birds were present and then retumed
Visit another location with birds in last 3 months
Visitors never allowed into bird area
Health problem in last 3 months
Seek veterinary care nllast 12 months
Any birds vacculated in last 12 months
Birds sold/given away in last 12 months`
DONAHUE ET AL.
Flock size
5-33 birds 34-999 birds
45
43 (95.6%)
22 (48.9%)
31 (68.9%)
22 (48.9%)
6 (13.3%)
21 (46.7%)
17 (37.8%)
19 (42.2%)
3 (6.7°/a)
3 (6.7%)
10 (22.2%)
42
37 (88.1%)
21 (50.0%)
24 (57.1%)
25 (59.5%)
10 (23.8%)
21 (50.0%)
19 (45.2%)
24 (57.1%)
1 (2.4%)
7 (16.7%)
26 (61.9%)
�The median flock size was 33.
b Not counting those hatched on-site.
`p<0.001. All other comparisons were not statisHcally significant (p>0.10).
document infection with human influenza strains during the
surveillance period usnlg both serology and PCR or culture.
As with the poultry, mild manifestations of disease would
likely have been missed. In addition, our screening panel in-
cluded the more common AI subtypes, but infections due to
other strains (e.g., H1N1 or H3N3) would have been missed
(Karasin et al. 2004).
These results must be interpreted cautiously because our
study was based on a small number of flocks and flock owners
and was therefore not represenfaEive of all backyard flocks in
the upper Midwest. Wisconsin is part of the Mississippi fly-
way, but most flocks included 'm this study were not located
nl close proximity to bodies of surface water that are preferred
by migrating waterfowL It is possible that flock exposure to
AI viruses would be greater in those areas.
The relative lack of biosecurity observed in our study the-
oretically represents a hazard for the poultry industry and for
persons working with pouitry. Human infection wiflt AI
viruses, ulcluding the H5N1 strain, has been primarily re-
ported after relatively intense exposure, such as culling or the
care of sick birds (Bridges et al. 2002, Tran et al. 2004, Hayden
and Croisier 2005, Oner et al. 2006). Both activities were fairly
common among our poultry handlers. As a result, backyard
flocks and poultry handlers would be at risk for exposure to
AI viruses if an environmental reservoir is present.
All flocks
87
80 (92.0%)
43 (49.4%)
55 (63.2%)
47 (54.0%)
16 (18.4%)
42 (48.3%)
36 (41.4%)
43 (49.4%)
4 (4.6%)
10 (11.5%)
36 (41.4%)
Even if some proportion of backyard flocks were infected
with AI, the risk to domestic poultry is difficuit to define
with precision. It is conceivable that backyard flocks would
serve to introduce the virus into other sectors of the poultry
industry where it would be difficult to control, such as live-
bird markets. These markets temporarily concentrate birds
from multiple sources in settings that are often lacking in
adequate biosecurity and have been epidemiologically
linked to outbreaks of AI in commercial flocks (Senne et al.
2006, USDA 2007, Cardona et al. 2009). Planning is un-
derway for a national, comprehensive, integrated system
that will enhance surveillance in each of the poultry sectors,
including backyard flocks (USDA 2007). Given that several
outbreaks of highly pathogenic AI in the last 25 years were
caused by mutated viruses of low pathogenicity, the need
for continued surveillance and early detection of AI is clear
(Senne et al. 2006).
In summary, we observed limited use of biosecurity prac-
tices among backyard flock owners and handlers in Wiscon-
sin, but we did not find any evidence of incident infectioitis
with low-pathogenicity AI viruses in flocks or human flock
handlers over a 15-month suroeillance period. Educational
efforts directed toward smaller flock owners and continued
surveillance are needed to minimi�e the potential for zoonotic
transmission of AI viruses in North America.
TABLE Z. NUMBER AND PROPORTION OF BIRD HANDLERS ENROLLED IN THE STUDY �N=12g� WHO EMPLOYED
SPECIFIC BIOSECURITY PRACTICES IN BACKYARD FLOCKS
Direct i�tvolvement in: n Wenr gloves Wenr boots Wenr rnnsk Wnslt hands
Feeding/watering poultry 128 5 (3.9%)
Handling poultry 104 7 (69%)
Handling sick or dead poultry 106 24 (22.6%)
Culling or slaughter 57 10 (17.6%)
Cleaning bird shelter/coop 108 17 (15.7%)
�Gloves/boots designated specifically for poultry-related activity.
b More than 50% of the time or always after specific activity.
16 (12.5%) 0 94 (73.4%)
6 (5.8%) 0 81 (77.9°/a)
8 (7.6%) 0 100 (94.3%)
9 (15.8%) 1 (1.8%) 57 (100%)
24 (22.2°/a) 12 (11.1%) 95 (88.0%)
AVIAN INFLUENZA IN BACKYARD POULTRY FLOCKS
Acknowledgments
The authors are gratefizl to the following individuals for
their contribution to this research: at Marshfield: Nita Herr,
Jackie Salzwedel, Corulna Mueller, Jenny Chadwick, Carla
Rottscheit, Carol Beyer, and Jordon Ott; and at Willmar: Stacy
Pollock. The authors thank Gregory C. Gray, M.D., M.P.H.,
University of Iowa (current affiliation: Emerging Pathogens
I�ZStitute, University of Florida), for serotyping both human
and avian serum samples and Drs. Tim Deveau and Tom
Varty, Veterinary Seroices, APHIS, USDA, Madison, WI, for
their technical advice. Fulally, the authors particularly thank
all of those who provided access to their flocks �Zd who were
so generous with their time. This publication was supported
by Grant/Cooperative Agreement Niunber U19 CI000407
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Na-
tional Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases).
Disclaimer
The contents of this article are solely the responsibility of
fl1e aufllors and do not necessarily represent the official views
of the CDC.
Disciosure Statement
Each of the authors declares that he/she has no competing
financial interests.
References
Akey, BL. Low-pathogenicity H7N2 avian influenza outbreak in
Virgnia during 2002. Avian Dis 2003; 47:1099-1103.
Alexander, DJ. Ecological aspects of influenza A viruses in ani-
mals and their relationship to human influenza: a review. J R
Soc Med 1982; 75:799-811.
Bridges, CB, Lim, W, Hu-Primmer, J, Sims, L, et al. Risk of in-
fluenza A(H5N1) infection among poultry workers, Hong
Kong, 1997-1998. J Infect Dis 2002; 185:1005-1010.
Cardona, C, Yee, K, Carpenter, T. Are live Uird markets reser-
voirs of avian influenza? Poult Sci 2009; 88:856-859.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Outbreaks of avian
influenza A(H5N1) in Asia and interim recommendations for
evaluation and reporting of suspected cases—United States,
2004. MMWR MorU Mortal Wkly Rep 2004; 53:97-100.
1297
Halvorson, D, Karunakaran, D, Senne, D, Kelleher, C, et al.
Epizootiology of avian influenza—simultaneous monitoring
of sentinel ducks and turkeys in Miiutesota. Avian Dis 1983;
27:77-85.
Hayden, F, Croisier, A. Transmission of avian influenza viruses
to and beiween humans. J Infect Dis 2005; 192:1311-1314.
Karasin, AI, West, K, Carman, S, Olsen, CW. Characterization of
avian H3N3 and H1N1 influenza A viruses isolated from pigs
in Canada. J Clin Microbiol 2004; 42:4349�354.
Karunakaran, D, IIinshaw, V, Poss, P, Newman, J, et al. Influ-
enza A outbreaks in Miiutesota turkeys due to suUtype H10N7
and possiUle transmission by waterfowl. Avian Dis 1983;
27:357-366.
Olsen, B, Munster, VJ, Wallensten, A, Waldenstrom, J, et al.
G1oUal patterns of influenza A virus in wild Uirds. Science
2006; 312:384-388.
Oner, AF, Bay, A, Arslan, S, Akdeniz, H, et al. Avian influenza A
(H5N1) infection in eastern Turkey in 2006. N Engl J Med
2006; 355:2179-2185.
Senne, DA, Suarez, DL, Stallnecht, DE, Pedersen, JC, et al.
Ecology and epidemiology of avian influenza in North and
South America. Dev Biol (Basel) 2006; 124:37-44.
Sivanandan, V, Halvorson, DA, Laudert, E, Senne, DA, et al.
Isolation of H13N2 influenza A virus from turkeys and surface
water. Avian Dis 1991; 35:974-977.
Tran, TH, Nguyen, T`I., Nguyen, TD, Luong, T'S, et al. Avian
influenza A(H5N1) in 10 patients in Vietnam. N Engl J Med
2004; 350:1179-1188.
USDA. Part I: Reference of health and management of back-
yard/small production flocks in the United States, 2004. Fort
Collins, CO: National Animal HealEh Monitoring System,
USDA:APHIS:VS:CEAH; 2005.
USDA. National Avian Influenza Surveillance Plan. Fort Collins,
CO: USDA:APHIS:VS:NAHSS; 2007.
Address correspondence to:
Jmites G. Dorialtue
Epiclen:iolog� Reserrrc)t Ce�2ter (ML2)
Mnrsltfiel�l Clinic Researclz Foundatio�i
1000 NorNi O�k Aventte
Marsltfield, WI 54449
E-ninil: donahue.jamesCa?mcrf.mfldclin.edu
CDC - October 6, 2011 - Salmonella Altona / Johannesburg Infections Lin... Page 1 of 6
��nt�r� f�r [�is���� ��r�tr�1 c�nd Pr�v�r�ti�n
�[�� 2417; ��vinc� Liv��. Pr�t��tin� P���I�Et"'
Salmonella
Investigation Update: Multistate Outbreak of Human
Salmonella Altona and Salmonella Johannesburg
Infections Linked to Chicks and Ducklings
• Case Count Map (/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/ioo611/map.html)
• Epi Curve (/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/ioo6il/epi.html)
October 6, 2o11(FINAL Update)
• Collaborative investigative efforts of state, local, and federal public health and
agriculture officials linlced two outbreaks of Salmonella infections to chicks and ducl�lings
from a single mail-order hatchery.
• For both Salmonella Altona and Salmonella Johannesburg outbreaks, findings of
multiple tracebacic investigations of live chicks and ducklings from homes of ill persons
have identified the same single mail-order hatchery in Ohio as the source of these chicks
and duciclings.
• These particular outbreaks appear to be over. However, contact with live poultry can be
a source of human Salmonella infections; therefore, you should always wash hands
thoroughly with soap and water right after touching live poultry or anything in the area
where they live and roam. Adults should supervise hand washing for young children.
Additional recommendations are available (/Features/SalmonellaBabyBirds/) .
• Mail-order hatcheries, agricultural feed stores, and others who sell or display chicks,
ducl�lings and other live poultry should provide health-related information to owners and
potential purchasers of these birds prior to the point of purchase. This should include
information about the rislc of acquiring a Salmonella infection from contact with live
poultry.
Case Count Map
http ://www. cdc. gov/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/ 100611 /index.html 4/23 /2013
Outbreak Highlights
CDC - October 6, 2011 - Salmonella Altona / Johannesburg Infections Lin... Page 2 of 6
-- - -- --------- ---- -------- -- - --- ----- ---
ck man to vie��� a lareer ima�e. Usalmonella/altona-babv-chicks/ioo6iilmau.htmD
��-e�_��r_t���
�,
,�.F _. . ._ . _ _ _ _. _ . . -- --
Introduction
CDC collaborated with public health and agriculture officials in many states and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP) to investigate
two outbreaks linked to chicks and duciclings. The first was an outbrealc of human Salmonella
Altona infections, and the second was an outbreak of human Salmonella Johannesburg
infections. Both of these are rare types of Salmonella, and ill persons in both outbreaks had a
similar geographic distribution. Investigators used the PulseNet (/pulsenet/) system to identify
cases of illness that may have been a part of this outbrealc. In PulseNet, the national networlc
of public health and food regulatory agency laboratories coordinated by CDC, DNA is analyzed
from bacteria obtained through diagnostic testing of ill people.
These outbreaks can be visually described with a chart showing the number of persons who
became ill each day. This chart is called an epidemic curve or epi curve (/salmonella/altona-baby-
chicks/1oo611/epi.html) . These particular outbreaks appear to be over. However, illnesses that
occurred after August 2g, 2011 might not yet be reported due to the time it takes between when
a person becomes ill and when the illness is reported. This talces an average of 2 to 3 weeks.
Please see the Salmonella Outbreak Investigations: Timeline for Reporting Cases
(/salmonella�outbreaks/re�orting timeline.html) for more details.
Salmonella Altona Outbreak Investigation
As of October 4, 2011, a total of 68 individuals infected with the outbrealc strain of Salmonella
Altona were been reported from 2o states. The number of ill persons identified in each state is
as follows: Georgia (1), Illinois (1), Indiana (1), Kentuclry (6), Maryland (5), Michigan (1),
Minnesota (1), Mississippi (1), New Hampshire (1), New York (4), North Carolina (9), Ohio
http://www. cdc. gov/salmonella/altona-baby-chicics/ 100611 /index. html 4/23 /2013
Epi Curve
CDC - October 6, 2011 - Salmonella Aitona / Johannesburg Infections Lin... Page 3 of 6
(12� Pennsylvania (6), South Carolina (1), Tennessee (3), Texas (2), Virginia (�), Vermont (1),
Wisconsin (1), and West Virginia (4).
Among the persons with reported dates available, illnesses began between February 25 2011
and September 10, 2011 Infected individuals ranged in age from less than one year old to 92
years old, and 31% of ill persons were 5 years of age or younger. Fifty-one percent of patients
were female. Among the 62 patients with available information,l9 (31%) were hospitalized. No
deaths were reported.
In interviews, ill persons answered questions about contact with animals and foods consumed
during the week before becoming ill. Forty-two (74%) of 57 ill persons interviewed reported
contact with live poultry (chicl�.s, chicicens, ducl�lings, ducks, geese, and turlceys) before
becoming ill. Of ill persons who could recall the type of live poultry with which they had
contact, 4o identified chicks, ducklings, or both, and 33 �g9�) of 37 ill persons with available
vendor information reported purchasing chicks and ducklings from multiple locations of a
nationwide agriculture feed store, Feed Store Chain A. Ill persons reported purchasing live
poultry for either backyard flocks to produce eggs or as pets.
In May and June 2011, laboratory testing yielded Salmonella Altona bacteria from multiple
samples: three samples from a chicic and its environment collected from an ill person's
household in Ohio, three samples collected from chicic and ducl�ling displays at two locations of
Feed Store Chain A in North Carolina, and three samples collected from a chicicen and two
ducks from an ill person's household in Vermont. Findings of multiple traceback investigations
of live chicks and ducl�lings from homes of ill persons identified a single mail-order hatchery in
Ohio as the source of these chicks and ducl�lings. In June 2011, the Ohio Department of
Agriculture inspected the mail-order hatchery and made recommendations for improvement.
Salmonella Johannesburg Outbreak Investigation
As of October 4, 2011, a total of 28 individuals infected with the outbrealc strain of Salmonella
Johannesburg were reported from 15 states. The number of ill persons identified in each state
is as follows: Alabama (1), Arkansas (1), Georgia (2), Indiana (1), Kansas (1), Kentucky (2),
Maine (1), New Yorlc (4), North Carolina (4), Ohio (3), Pennsylvania (1), South Carolina (1),
Tennessee (3), Vermont (2), and West Virginia (1).
Among the persons with reported dates available, illnesses began between March 1g, 2011 and
July 2g 2011 Infected individuals ranged in age from less than one year old to 6o years old,
and 75 percent of ill persons were 5 years of age or younger. Fifty-seven percent of patients
were female. Among the 22 patients with available information, 9(41%) were hospitalized. No
deaths have been reported.
In interviews, ill persons answered questions about contact with animals and foods consumed
during the week before becoming ill. Seventeen (�1%) of 24 ill persons interviewed reported
contact with live poultry before becoming ill. Of ill persons who could recall the type of live
poultry with which they had contact, 14 identified chicks, ducl�lings, or both, and lo (�i%) of 14
ill persons with available vendor information reported purchasing chicks and ducl�lings from
multiple locations of the same nationwide agriculture feed store identified in the outbrealc of
Salmonella Altona infections, Feed Store Chain A.
Findings of multiple tracebacic investigations of live chicks and ducklings from homes of ill
persons identified the same single mail-order hatchery in Ohio identified in the outbrealc of
Salmonella Altona infections as the source of these chicics and ducl�lings. In June 2011, the
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/100611 /index.html 4/23/2013
CDC - October 6, 2011 - Salmonella Altona / Johannesburg Infections Lin... Page 4 of 6
Ohio Department of Agriculture inspected the mail-order hatchery and made
recommendations for improvement.
Clinical Features/Signs and Symptoms
Most persons infected with Salmonella bacteria develop diarrhea, fever, and abdominal
cramps 12-�2 hours after infection. Infection is usually diagnosed by culture of a stool sample.
The illness usually lasts from 4 to � days. Although most people recover without treatment,
severe infections may occur. Infants, elderly persons, and those with wealcened immune
systems are more lilcely than others to develop severe illness. When severe infection occurs,
Salmonella bacteria may spread from the intestines to the bloodstream and then to other body
sites and can cause death unless the person is treated promptly with antibiotics.
More general information about Salmonella can be found at the CDC's Salmonella webuage
(/salmonella) .
Advice to Consumers
These particular outbrealis appear to be over. However, contact with live poultry can be a
source of human Salmonella infections; therefore, you should always follow the following
recommendations:
• Wash your hands thoroughly with soap and water right after touching live poultry or
anything in the area where they live and roam. Adults should supervlse hand washing for
young children.
• If soap and water are not readily available, use hand sanitizer until you are able to wash
your hands thoroughly with soap and water.
• Clean any equipment or materials associated with raising or caring for live poultry outside
the house, such as cages or feed or water containers.
• Do not let children younger than 5 years of age, elderly persons, or people with wealc
immune systems handle or touch chicks, ducklings, or other live poultry.
• Do not let live poultry inside the house, in bathrooms, or especially in areas where food or
drink is prepared, served, or stored, such as kitchens, or outdoor patios.
• Do not snuggle or lciss the birds, touch your mouth, or eat or drinlc around live poultry.
Advice to Mail-order Hatcheries and Feed Stores Who Sell or
Display Live Poultry
• Mail-order hatcheries, agricultural feed stores, and others who sell or display chicks,
ducklings and other live poultry should provide health-related information to owners and
potential purchasers of these birds prior to the point of purchase. This should include
information about the risk of acquiring a Salmonella infection from contact with live
poultry.
• Mail-order hatcheries and agricultural feed stores should implement interventions to
prevent human Salmonella infections associated with contact with live poultry.
• An example flyer on the risk of human Salmonella infections from contact with live
poultry and prevention recommendations is available in English �[PDF - 795 KB]
(/healthypets/resources/salmonella-baby-poultry.pd� and Spanish � [PDF - �26 KB]
(/healthypets/resources/salmonella-baby-poultry-spanish.pdf� .
• More information on displaying animals in public settings can be found in the 2011
.-. � • r ,. ,� . r . .�., . . . � . . � . . � . � � � .
Settings i�`� [PDF - 1,30o KB] (/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6004.pd�
http://www. cdc. gov/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/ 100611 /index.html 4/23 /2013
CDC - October 6, 2011 - Salmonelia Altona / Johannesburg Infections Lin... Page 5 of 6
Previous Updates
August 2g, 2o11(/salmonella/altona-babv-chicks/o82�ii/index.html�
June 2g, 2o11(/salmonella/altona-babv-chicks/o62c�i1/index.html�
June A. 2o11(/salmonella/altona-babv-chicks/o6oAi1/index.html)
May 2�, 2o11(/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/o52�ii/index.html)
Page last re�riewed: October 6, 2oii
http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/altona-baby-chicics/100611 /index.html 4/23/2013
CDC - October 6, 2011 - Salmonella Altona / Johannesburg Infections Lin... Page 6 of 6
Page last updated: October 6, 2oii
Content source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
National Center for Emer�ing and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID)
Di��ision of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Emrironmental Diseases (DFWED)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 160o Clifton Rd. Atlanta, GA ��.�. �;.����•.�„
3 USA ��� ��� � �
800-CDGINFO (800-232-4636) TTY: (888) 232-6348 - Contact CDC—INFO . a
Governm6nt Mfade Easy
http ://www. cdc. gov/salmonella/altona-baby-chicks/ 100611 /index.html 4/23 /2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 1 of 27
� ��r�°t�rs fic�r ais��s� ��n�r�i and Pr�v�nti�r�
�[7� 24f7, S�ving Liv�s, Prc�t�ctiiig P�pI�,TM'
Morbidity and Mortalitv Weekly Re�ort (MMWR�
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated
with Animals in Public Settings, 2011
National Association of State Public Health Veterinarians, Inc.
(NASPHV)
Recommendations and Reports
May 6, 2oi1 / 6o(RRo4);i-24
Prepared by
NASPHV
This report has been endorsed by CDC, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, the
United States Department of Agriculture-Animal Plant Health Inspection Service, the American
Association of Extension Veterinarians, and the American Veterinary Medical Association.
Corresponding preparer: John R. Dunn, DVM, Co-chairperson, NASPHV Animal Contact
Compendium Committee, Tennessee Department of Health, 425 5th Avenue North, Cordell Hull
Building,lst Floor, Nashville, TN 37243. Telephone: 615-741-594g� F�: 615-741-3857� e-mail:
John.Dunn cr tn.�;ov.
Summary
Certain venues encourage or permit the public to be in contact with animals, resulting in millions of
human-animal interactions each year. These settings include county or state fairs, petting zoos,
animal swap meets, pet stores, feed stores, zoologic institutions, circuses, carnivals, educational
farms, livestock-birthing exhibits, educational exhibits at schools and child-care facilities, and
wildlife photo opportunities. Although human-animal contact has many benefits, human health
problems are associated with these settings, including infectious diseases, exposure to rabies, and
injuries. Infectious disease outbreaks have been caused by Escherichia coli O1g�:H�, Salmonella
species, Cryptosporidium species, Coxiella burnetii, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, ringworm, and
other pathogens. Such outbreaks have substantial medical, public health, legal, and economic effects.
This report provides recommendations for public health officials, veterinarians, animal venue staff
members, animal exhibitors, visitors to animal venues, physicians, and others concerned with
minimizing risks associated with animals in public settings. The recommendation to wash hands is
the most important for reducing the risk for disease transmission associated with animals in public
settings. Other important recommendations are that venues prohibit food in animal areas and
include transition areas between animal areas and nonanimal areas, visitors receive information
about disease risk and prevention procedures, and animals be properly cared for and managed.
These updated 2011 guidelines provide new information on the risks associated with amphibians
and with animals in day camp settings, as well as the protective role of zoonotic disease education.
Introduction
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a l .htm?s_cid=n 6004... 4/23/2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 2 of 27
Contact with animals in public settings (e.g., fairs, educational farms, petting zoos, and schools)
provides opportunities for entertainment and education. The National Association of State Public
Health Veterinarians (NASPHV) understands the positive benefits of human-animal contact.
However, an inadequate understanding of disease transmission and animal behavior can increase the
lilcelihood of infectious diseases, rabies exposures, injuries, and other health problems among visitors,
especially children, in these settings. Zoonotic diseases (i.e., zoonoses) are diseases transmitted
between animals and humans. Of particular concern are instances in which zoonoses result in
numerous persons becoming ill During 1991--2005, the number of enteric disease outbreaks
associated with animals in public settings increased (1). During 1996--2010, approximately 150
human infectious disease outbreaks involving animals in public settings have been reported to CDC
(CDC, unpublished data, 2010).
Although eliminating all risk from animal contacts is not possible, this report provides
recommendations for minimizing associated disease and injury. NASPHV recommends that local and
state public health, agricultural, environmental, and wildlife agencies use these recommendations to
establish their own guidelines or regulations for reducing the risk for disease from human-animal
contact in public settings. Public contact with animals is permitted in numerous types of venues (e.g.,
animal displays, petting zoos, animal swap meets, pet stores, feed stores, zoological institutions,
nature parks, circuses, carnivals, educational farms, livestock-birthing exhibits, county or state fairs,
child-care facilities or schools, and wildlife photo opportunities). Managers of these venues should use
the information in this report in consultation with veterinarians, public health officials, or other
professionals to reduce risks for disease transmission.
Guidelines to reduce rislc for disease from animals in health-care and veterinary facilities and from
service animals (e.g., guide dogs) have been developed (2--6). Although not specifically addressed
here, the general principles and recommendations in this report are applicable to these settings.
Methods
NASPHV periodically updates the recommendations to prevent disease associated with animals in
public settings. The revision includes reviewing recent literature; updating reported outbreaks,
diseases, or injuries attributed to human-animal interactions in public settings; and soliciting input
from NASPHV members and the public. During September 15--1�, 2oio, NASPHV members and
external expert consultants met at CDC in Atlanta, Georgia. A committee consensus was required to
add or modify existing language or recommendations. The 2011 guidelines have been updated with
recently reported information about zoonotic disease outbreaks and prevention measures. This
includes more information on indirect transmission through contact with animal environments and
contaminated objects and unique challenges associated with intensive animal contact venues like farm
day camps. In addition, the guidelines describe the importance of previous knowledge about disease
rislc in preventing illness. New or expanded disease topics include salmonellosis associated with
amphibians and zoonotic influenza.
Enteric (Intestinal) Diseases
Infections with enteric bacteria and parasites pose the highest risk for human disease from animals in
public settings (�). Healthy animals can harbor human enteric pathogens, many of which have a low
infectious dose (8--10). Enteric disease outbreaks among visitors to fairs, farms, petting zoos, and
other public settings are well documented. Many pathogens have been responsible for outbreaks,
including Escherichia coli Oi57:H� and other Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC), Salmonella
enterica, Cryptosporidium species, and Campylobacter species (YY--24). Although reports often
document cattle, sheep, or goats (1,�,14) as sources for infection, live poultry (�), rodents (26),
reptiles (rg), amphibians (�), and other domestic and wild animals also are potential sources.
The primary mode of transmission for enteric pathogens is fecal-oral. Because animal fur, hair, skin,
and saliva (28) harbor fecal organisms, transmission can occur when persons pet, touch, feed, or are
liciced by animals. Transmission also has been associated with contaminated animal bedding, flooring,
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtmi/r� 6004a1.htm?s_cid=rr6004... 4/23/2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 3 of 27
barriers, other environmental surfaces, and contaminated clothing and shoes (12,1�,ig,2g--,32). In
addition, illness has resulted from fecal contamination of food (33), including raw milk (34--37)� and
drinlang water (,38--�0).
Removing ill animals, especially those with diarrhea, is necessary but not sufficient to protect animal
and human health. Animals carrying human enteric pathogens frequently exhibit no signs of illness
but can still shed the organisms, thereby contaminating the environment (4Y). Some pathogens are
shed by animals intermittently and live for months or years in the environment (42--46). Intermittent
shedding of pathogens and limitations of laboratory testing make attempts to identify and remove
infected animals unreliable as a means of eliminating the rislc for transmission. Antimicrobial
treatment of animals also cannot reliably eliminate infection, prevent shedding, or protect against
reinfection. In addition, treatment of animals can prolong shedding and contribute to antimicrobial
resistance (47).
Multiple factors increase the probability of disease transmission at animal exhibits. Animals are more
lilcely to shed pathogens because of stress induced by prolonged transportation, confinement,
crowding, and increased handling (48--54)• Commingling increases the probability that animals
shedding pathogens will infect other animals (g,5). The prevalence of certain enteric pathogens is often
higher in young animals (56--58), which are frequently used in petting zoos and educational programs
for children. Shedding of STEC and Salmonella organisms is highest in the summer and fall, when
substantial numbers of traveling animal exhibits, agricultural fairs, and petting zoos are scheduled
�53�58�59) •
The rislc for human infection is increased by certain factors and behaviors, especially in children.
These factors and behaviors include lacic of awareness of the rislc for disease, inadequate hand
washing, lack of close supervision, and hand-to-mouth activities (e.g., use of pacifiers, thumb-sucking,
and eating) (60). Children are particularly attracted to animal venues but have increased risk for
serious illness when they are infected. Although farm residents might have some acquired immunity
to certain pathogens (61,62), livestocic exhibitors have become infected with E. coli 0157:H� in fair
outbreaks (1�; K. Smith, DVM, Minnesota Department of Health, personal communication, 2010).
The layout and maintenance of facilities and animal exhibits can increase or decrease the rislc for
infection (63). Factors that increase rislc include inadequate hand-washing facilities (64),
inappropriate flow of visitors, and incomplete separation between animal exhibits and food
preparation and consumption areas (12,i6,65). Other factors include structural deficiencies associated
with temporary food-service facilities, contaminated or inadequately maintained drinlang water
systems, and poorly managed sewage- or manure-disposal (19�32,38
Outbreaks and Lessons Learned
In 2000, two E. coli 0157:H� outbrealcs in Pennsylvania and Washington prompted CDC to establish
recommendations for enteric disease prevention associated with farm animal contact. Rislc factors
identified in both outbreaks were direct animal contact and inadequate hand washing (15,66). In the
Pennsylvania outbreak, 51 persons (median age: 4 years) became ill within 10 days after visiting a
dairy farm. Eight (16%) of these patients acquired hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a potentially
fatal complication of STEC infection which involves kidney failure. The same strain of E. coli 0r57:H�
was isolated from cattle, patients, and the farm environment. An assessment of the farm determined
that no areas separate from the animal contact areas existed for eating and drinking, and the hand-
washing facilities were poorly maintained and not configured for children (15).
The protective effect of hand washing and the persistence of organisms in the environment were
demonstrated in an outbreak of Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis infections at a Colorado zoo
in 1996. A total of 65 cases (primarily among children) were associated with touching a wooden
barrier around a temporary Komodo dragon exhibit. Children who were not ill were significantly more
lilcely to have washed their hands after visiting the exhibit. Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis
was isolated from 39 patients, a Komodo dragon, and the wooden barrier (19).
http://www. cdc. gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a 1. htm? s_cid=1 4/23 /2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 4 of 27
In 2005, an E. coli 0157:H� outbreak among 63 patients, including seven who developed HUS, was
associated with multiple fairs in Florida (�). Both direct animal contact and contact with sawdust or
shavings were associated with illness. Persons who reported feeding animals were more likely to
become ill. Persons were less lilcely to become ill if they reported washing their hands before eating or
drinking. Among persons who washed their hands with soap and water, creating lather decreased the
likelihood of illness, illustrating the value of thorough hand washing. Drying hands on clothing
increased the likelihood of illness (6�).
During 2000--2001 at a Minnesota children's farm day camp, washing hands with soap after touching
a calf and washing hands before going home decreased the lilcelihood for illness in two outbreaks
involving multiple enteric pathogens (22). Implicated pathogens for the 84 human infections were
E. coli Oi57:H�, Cryptosporidium parvum, non-0157 STEC, Salmonella enterica serotype
Typhimurium, and Campylobacter jejuni. These pathogens and Giardia organisms were isolated from
calves. Rislc factors for children who became ill included caring for an ill calf and getting visible
manure on their hands.
Disease transmission can occur in the absence of direct animal contact if a pathogen is disseminated
in the environment. In a 2002 Oregon county fair outbreak, 6o E. coli 0157:H� infections occurred,
primarily among children (2g). Illness was associated with visiting an exhibition hall that housed
goats, sheep, pigs, rabbits, and poultry; however, illness was not associated with touching animals or
their pens, eating, or inadequate hand washing. E. coli 0157:H� was likely disseminated to
environmental surfaces via contaminated dust (2g). In 2004, an outbrealc of E. coli Oi57:H�
infections was associated with attendance at the North Carolina State Fair goat and sheep petting zoo
(14). Health officials identified l08 patients, including 15 who developed HUS. In addition to direct
contact with animals, rislc factors included manure contact and hand-to-mouth behaviors. Evidence
indicated that falling down or sitting on the ground in the petting zoo was associated with illness. The
outbrealc strain of E. coli 0157:H� was isolated from shoes and shavings collected from a stroller in
households of petting zoo visitors (z4).
Enteric pathogens can contaminate the environment and persist in animal housing areas for long
periods. For example, E. coli 0157:H� can survive in soil for months (32,42,44,68,6g). Prolonged
environmental persistence of pathogens was documented in a 2ooi Ohio outbreak of E. coli 0157:H�
infections in which 23 persons became ill at a fair facility after handling sawdust, attending a dance, or
eating and drinlcing in a barn where animals had been exhibited during the previous week (,32).
Fourteen weeks after the fair, E. coli 0157:H� was isolated from multiple environmental sources
within the barn, including sawdust on the floor and dust on the rafters. Forty-two weeks after the fair,
E. coli 0157:H� was again recovered from sawdust on the floor. Environmental persistence of E. coli
0157:H� was also described after a 2003 outbreak in which 25 persons acquired E. coli 0157:H� at a
Texas agricultural fair. The strain isolated from patients also was found in fair environmental samples
46 days after the fair ended (1�). In the previously mentioned North Carolina outbreak (i4), the
outbrealc strain of E. coli 0157:H� was isolated from animal bedding lo days after the fair was over
and from soil 5 months after the animal bedding and topsoil were removed (Y4,6g).
Improper facility design and inadequate maintenance can increase rislc for infection, as illustrated by
one of the largest waterborne outbreaks in the United States (gg,�o). In 1999, approximately 800
suspected cases of E. coli Oi57:H� and/or Campylobacter species infection were identified among
attendees at a New York county fair, where unchlorinated water supplied by a shallow well was used
by food vendors to make beverages and ice (� o).
Temporary animal exhibits are particularly vulnerable to design flaws (�.,19). Such exhibits include
animal displays or petting zoos added to attract visitors to zoos, festivals, roadside attractions, farm
stands, farms where persons can picic their own produce, feed stores, and Christmas tree lots. In 2005,
an E. coli 0157:H� outbreak in Arizona was associated with a temporary animal contact exhibit at a
municipal zoo. A play area for children was immediately adjacent to and downhill from the petting zoo
facility. The same strain of E. coli 0157:H� was found both in children and 12 petting zoo animals.
http ://www. cdc. gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a 1.htm?s_cid=1 4/23 /2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 5 of 27
Inadequate hand-washing facilities were reported from a temporary exhibit in British Columbia,
Canada where child-care facility and school field trips to a pumpkin patch with a petting zoo resulted
in 44 cases of E. coli 0157:H� infection (16). The same strain of E. coli 0157:H� was found both in
children and in a petting zoo goat. Running water and signs recommending hand washing were not
available, and alcohol hand sanitizers were at a height that was unreachable for some children. In New
York, 163 persons became ill with STEC 011i:H8, Cryptosporidium species, or both at a farm stand
that sold unpasteurized apple cider and had a petting zoo with three calves (�o). Stools from two
calves were Shiga toxin 1 positive.
Day camps at which children have prolonged close contact with livestock pose a unique challenge with
regard to disease prevention. In the previously mentioned Minnesota day camp outbrealc (22), disease
transmission occurred again even though heightened prevention measures were implemented based
on findings from an outbrealc investigation at the same camp the year before. Similarly, in 200�, an
E. coli 0157:H� outbrealc occurred at a day camp in Florida where prolonged contact with livestocic
was encouraged (Z).
Recurrent outbreaks have happened because of failure to properly implement disease-prevention
recommendations. Following a Minnesota outbreak of ciyptosporidiosis with 3i ill students at a
school farm program, specific recommendations provided to teachers were inadequately implemented
(20), and a subsequent outbreak occurred with 37 illnesses. Hand-washing facilities and procedures
were inadequate. Coveralls and boots were dirty, cleaned infrequently, and handled without
subsequent hand washing.
Education of visitors to public animal contact venues about the rislc for transmission of diseases from
animals to humans is a critical disease-prevention measure. Awareness of zoonotic disease risks is
protective against illness in outbreaks (i4).
Outbreaks also have resulted from contaminated animal products used for school activities.
Salmonellosis outbreaks associated with dissection of owl pellets have been documented in Minnesota
(�2) and Massachusetts (C. Brown, DVM, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, personal
communication, 2008). In Minnesota, rislc factors for infection included inadequate hand washing,
use of food service areas for the activity, and improper cleaning of contact surfaces. Persons in a
middle school science class were among those infected in a multistate salmonellosis outbrealc
associated with fiozen rodents purchased to feed snakes from the same Internet supplier (26).
During 2005--2010, several infectious disease outbreaks were caused by contact with animals and
animal products not primarily associated with public settings. However, these outbreaks have
implications for animal contact venues. Turtles and other reptiles, amphibians, rodents, and live
poultry (e.g., chicks, chicicens, ducl�lings, ducks, turlceys, and geese) are recognized as sources of
human Salmonella infections (19�?��s,73--g3)• Since 2006, three large multistate outbreaks have
been linked to contact with small turtles, including a fatal case in an infant (Zq,8o,84--86). In
addition,l4 multistate outbreaks linked with live poultry originating from mail-order hatcheries have
been reported since 2005 (CDC, unpublished data, 2010). Ill persons included those who reported
contact with live poultry at feed stores, schools, day cares, fairs, or petting zoos (Z). During 2006--
2008, a total of 79 human Salmonella enterica serotype Schwarzengrund infections were linked to
multiple brands of contaminated dry dog and cat food produced at a plant in Pennsylvania (8�).
Contaminated pig ear treats and pet treats containing beef and seafood also have been associated with
Salmonella infections (88--Q).
Risks from aquatic animals include direct and indirect contact with the animal, tanlc, water, filtration
equipment, or other tanlc contents. Multidrug-resistant human Salmonella infections have been
linlced to contact with contaminated water from home aquariums containing tropical fish (g2,93). A
single case of Plesiomonas shigelloides infection in a Missouri infant was identified, and the organism
was subsequently isolated from a babysitter's aquarium (9�). A survey of tropical fish tanks in
Missouri found that four (22%) of 18 tanks yielded P. shigelloides from three pet stores. During 2009-
http ://www. cdc. gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a l.htm?s_cid=rr6004... 4/23 /2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 6 of 27
-2011, approximately 20o Salmonella enterica serotype T�phimurium infections were linlced to
contact with African dwarf frogs, an aquatic amphibian, or their tanlc water or contents (C. Barton
Behravesh, CDC, personal communication, 2oli). Ill persons included those who reported such
contact at carnivals, nursing homes, day cares, pet stores, and other retail stores (s). These findings
have implications for rislc for infection from aquatic exhibits (e.g., aquariums and aquatic touch
tanks).
Sporadic Infections
Case-control studies also have associated sporadic infections (i.e., those not linked to an outbrealc)
with animals including reptiles and farm animals (82,95). For example, a study of sporadic E. coli
0157:H� infections in the United States determined that persons who became ill, especially children,
were more lilcely than persons who did not become ill to have visited a farm with cows (96). Additional
studies also documented an association between E. coli 0157: H� infection and visiting a farm (g�) and
living in a rural area (98). Studies of human cryptosporidiosis have documented contact with cattle
and visiting farms as rislc factors for infection (6Y,99,YOO). Another study identified multiple factors
associated with Campylobacter infection, including consumption of raw millc and contact with farm
animals (101).
Additional Health Concerns
Although enteric diseases are the most commonly reported illnesses associated with animals in public
settings, other health risks exist. For example, allergies can be associated with animal dander, scales,
fur, feathers, urine, and saliva (YO2--lo8). Additional health concerns include injuries, exposure to
rabies, and infections other than enteric diseases.
Injuries
Injuries associated with animals are a well-described and important problem. For example, dog bites
are a substantial community problem for which specific guidelines have been written (iog). Injuries
associated with animals in public settings include bites, kicks, falls, scratches, stings, crushing of the
hands or feet, and being pinned between the animal and a f�ed object. These injuries have been
associated with big cats (e.g., tigers), monkeys, and other domestic, wild, and zoo animals. Settings
have included public stables, petting zoos, traveling photo opportunities, schools, children's parties,
dog parlcs, and animal rides (M. Eidson, DVM, New York State Department of Health, personal
communication, 2003; J.B. Bender, DVM, University of Minnesota, personal communication, 2003;
M.T. Jay-Russell, DVM, California Department of Health, personal communication, 2003; G.L.
Swinger, DVM, Tennessee Department of Health, personal communication, 2003). For example, a
Kansas teenager was lalled while posing for a photograph with a tiger being restrained by its handler
at an animal sanctuaiy (YYO). In Texas, two high school students were bitten by a cottonmouth snalce
that was used in a science class after being misidentified as a nonvenomous species (W. Garvin,
Caldwell Zoo, Texas, personal communication, 2008).
Exposure to Rabies
Persons who have contact with rabid mammals can be exposed to rabies virus through a bite or when
mucous membranes or open wounds become contaminated with infected saliva or nervous tissue.
Although no human rabies deaths caused by animal contact in public settings have been reported,
multiple rabies exposures have occurred, requiring extensive public health investigation and medical
follow-up. For example, thousands of persons have received rabies postexposure prophylaxis (PEP)
after being exposed to rabid or potentially rabid animals, including bats, raccoons, cats, goats, bears,
sheep, horses, and dogs, at various venues: an urban public parlc (S. Slavinsla, DVM, New York City
Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, personal communication, 2010), a pet store in New
Hampshire ii1), a county fair in New York State (112), petting zoos in Iowa ii ,1�) and Texas (J.H.
Wright, DVM, Texas Department of Health, personal communication, 2004), school and rodeo events
in Wyoming (64), a horse show in Tennessee (J.R. Dunn, DVM , Tennessee Department of Health,
personal communication, 2010), and summer camps in New York (115). Substantial public health and
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/n 6004a 1.htm?s_cid=i 6004... 4/23/2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 7 of 27
medical care challenges associated with potential mass rabies exposures include difficulty in
identifying and contacting persons potentially at rislc, correctly assessing exposure rislis, and
providing timely medical prophylaxis when indicated. Prompt assessment and treatment are critical
to prevent this disease, which is usually fatal.
Other Infections
Multiple bacterial, viral, fungal, and parasitic infections have been associated with animal contact, and
the infecting organisms are transmitted through various modes. Infections from animal bites are
common and frequently require extensive treatment or hospitalization. Bacterial pathogens associated
with animal bites include Pasteurella species, rancisella tularensis (116), Staphylococcus species,
Streptococcus species, Capnocytophaga canimorsus, artonella henselae (cat-scratch disease), and
Streptobacillus moniliformis (rat-bite fever). Certain monlcey species (especially macaques) that are
kept as pets or used in public exhibits can be infected with simian herpes B virus. Infected monlceys
are often asymptomatic or have mild oral lesions yet human exposure through monkey bites or bodily
fluids can result in fatal meningoencephalitis (1�,118).
Skin contact with animals in public settings also is a public health concern. In 1995� a total of i5 cases
of ringworm (club lamb fungus) caused by Trichophyton species and Microsporum gypseum were
documented among owners and family members who exhibited lambs in Georgia (lzg). In 1986,
ringworm in 23 persons and multiple animal species was traced to a Microsporum canis infection in a
hand-reared zoo tiger cub (120). Orf virus infection (i.e., contagious ecthyma or sore mouth in sheep
and goats) has occurred after contact with sheep at a public setting (12Y). Orf virus infection also has
been described in goats and sheep at a children's petting zoo (Y22) and in a lamb used for an Easter
photo opportunity (M. Eidson, DVM, New Yorlc State Department of Health, personal
communication, 2003). Transmission of pox viruses in public settings also has been described. In the
197os, after handling various species of infected exotic animals, a zoo attendant experienced an
extensive papular slan rash fiom a cowpox-lilce virus (12,3). Cowpox virus transmission from rats to
humans was also documented among persons who had purchased the rats as pets or had contact with
them at pet stores (Y24). In 2003, multiple cases of monkeypox occurred among persons who
contacted infected prairie dogs either at a child-care center 12 ,126) or a pet store (J.J. Kazmierczak,
DVM, Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services, personal communication, 2004).
Aquatic animals and their environment also have been associated with cutaneous infections (r2�). For
example, Mycobacterium marinum infections have been described among persons owning or
cleaning fish tanks (128,i2g).
Ectoparasites and endoparasites pose concerns when humans and exhibit animals interact. Sarcoptes
scabiei is a skin mite that infests humans and animals, including swine, dogs, cats, foxes, cattle, and
coyotes (Y,3o,lgY). Although human infestation from animal sources is usually self-limiting, skin
irritation and itching might occur for multiple days and can be difficult to diagnose (13z,132). Bites
from avian mites have been reported in association with pet gerbils in school settings (l33). Fleas
from animals that bite humans increase the rislc for infection or allergic reaction. In addition, fleas can
carry a tapeworm species that can infect children who swallow the flea (134,135)• �imal parasites
also can infect humans who ingest materials contaminated with animal feces or who ingest or come
into contact with contaminated soil. Parasite control through veterinary care and proper husbandry
combined with hand washing reduces the risks associated with ectoparasites and endoparasites (136).
Tuberculosis is another disease concern for certain animal settings. In 1996, a total of 12 circus
elephant handlers at an exotic animal farm in Illinois were infected with Mycobacterium iuberculosis;
one handler had signs consistent with active disease after three elephants died of tuberculosis.
Medical history and testing of the handlers indicated that the elephants had been a probable source of
exposure for most of the human infections (i,37). During 1989--1991 at a zoo in Louisiana, seven
animal handlers who were previously negative for tuberculosis tested positive after a Mycobacterium
bovis outbrealc in rhinoceroses and monkeys (Y,38). Other instances of transmission of mycobacterial
species from animals to animal care staff without known transmission to the public have also been
http ://www. cdc. gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/n 6004a l.htm?s_cid=r� 6004... 4/23 /2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 8 of 27
documented (r39--141)• The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has developed guidelines
regarding removal of tuberculosis-infected animals from public settings because of the rislc for
exposure to the public (142).
Zoonotic pathogens also can be transmitted by direct or indirect contact with reproductive fluids,
aborted fetuses, or newborns from infected dams. Live-birthing exhibits, usually involving livestock
(e.g., cattle, pigs, goats, or sheep), are popular at agricultural fairs. Although the public usually does
not have direct contact with animals during birthing, newborns and their dams might be available for
petting afterward. Q fever (Coxiella burnetii), leptospirosis, listeriosis, brucellosis, and chlamydiosis
are serious zoonoses that can be acquired through contact with reproductive materials (z43)•
C. burnetii is a ricicettsial organism that most fiequently infects cattle, sheep, and goats. The disease
can cause abortion in animals, but more fiequently the infection is asymptomatic. During birthing,
infected animals shed large numbers of organisms, which can become aerosolized. Most persons
exposed to C. burnetii develop an asymptomatic infection, but clinical illness can range from an acute
influenza-like iliness to life-threatening endocarditis. A Q fever outbrealc involving 95 confirmed cases
and 41 hospitalizations was linked to goats and sheep giving birth at petting zoos in indoor shopping
malls (144). Indoor-birthing exhibits might pose an increased rislc for Q fever transmission because of
inadequate ventilation.
Chlamydophila psittaci infections cause respiratory disease and are usually acquired from psittacine
birds (145). For example, an outbrealc of C. psittaci pneumonia occurred among the staff members at
Copenhagen Zoological Garden (Y46). On rare occasions, chlamydial infections acquired from sheep,
goats, and birds result in reproductive problems in women (
Transmission of influenza viruses between humans and animals has implications for animals in public
settings. Cases and clusters of human infection with swine influenza viruses have been reported
sporadically since the 197os (149,Y5o); several of these cases have been acquired from swine at
agricultural fairs (YSr--Y53)• Conversely, transmission of human influenza viruses to swine also has
been documented (154). For example, in 2009, an HiNl influenza virus strain emerged, causing a
pandemic among humans with sporadic transmission from humans to swine (155)•
Recommendations
Guidelines from multiple organizations were used to create the recommendations in this report (156--
158). Although no federal U.S. laws address the rislc for transmission of pathogens at venues where the
public has contact with animals, some states have such laws (64,6�,Y59--Y61). For example, in 2005,
North Carolina enacted legislation requiring persons displaying animals for public contact at
agricultural fairs to obtain a permit from the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services
(http://www.nc�a.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/pdf/bvsection/chanter 1o6/gs 106-
�2o.�a.�df � r� ).
Certain federal agencies and associations in the United States have developed standards,
recommendations, and guidelines for reducing risks associated with animal contact by the public in
zoologic parks. The Association of Zoos and Aquariums has accreditation standards for reducing risk
for animal contact with the public in zoologic parks (162). In accordance with the Animal Welfare Act,
USDA licenses and inspects certain animal exhibits. These inspections primarily address humane
treatment but also impact the health of the animal and safety of the public. In 2ooi, CDC issued
guidelines to reduce the risk for infection with enteric pathogens associated with farm visits 66). CDC
also has issued recommendations for preventing transmission of Salmonella from reptiles,
amphibians, and live poultry to humans (s,,�,,Z8,86,163.,164). The Association for Professionals in
Infection Control and Epidemiology Inc. (APIC) and the Animal-Assisted Interventions Working
Group (AAI) have developed guidelines to address risks associated with the use of animals in health-
care settings (2,6). NASPHV has developed a compendium of ineasures to reduce risks for human
exposure to C. psittaci and rabies virus (Y4g,i6,5).
http://www. cdc. gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a l.htm?s_cid=rr6004.. . 4/23 /2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals in ... Page 9 of 27
Studies in some localities have suggested that implementation of these recommendations could be
improved (6o,i66,16�). Stakeholders should strive to facilitate comprehensive implementation of the
following recommendations.
Recommendations for Local, State, and Federal Agencies
Communication and cooperation among human and animal health agencies should be enhanced and
include veterinarians and cooperative extension offices. Additional research should be conducted
regarding the risk factors and effective prevention and control methods for health issues associated
with animal contact.
To enhance uptalce of these recommendations, agencies should take the following steps:
Disseminate this report to cooperative extension personnel, venue operators, and others
associated with managing animals in public settings. States should strive to develop a complete
list of public animal contact venues to facilitate dissemination of recommendations.
Disseminate educational and training materials to venue operators and other stalceholders.
Material formats could include PowerPoint slide presentations, videos, and written guidelines
�i64)•
Encourage or require oversight to ensure compliance with recommendations at animal contact
venues.
To evaluate and improve these recommendations, surveillance for human health issues associated
with animal contact should be enhanced. Agencies should talce the following steps:
• Conduct thorough epidemiologic investigations of outbreaks.
• Include questions on disease report forms and outbrealc investigation questionnaires about
exposure to animals, animal environments, and animal products and feed.
• Follow appropriate protocols for sampling and testing of humans, animals, and the environment,
including molecular subtyping of pathogen isolates.
• Report outbreaks to state health departments
• Local and state public health departments should also report all outbreaks of enteric infections
resulting from animal contact to CDC through the National Outbrealc Reporting System (NORS)
(http: //www.cdc.�/outbreaknet/nors).
Recommendations for Education
Education is essential to reduce risks associated with animal contact in public settings. Experience
from outbreaks suggests that visitors knowledgeable about potential rislcs are less likely to become ill
(14). Even in well-designed venues with operators who are aware of the risks for disease, outbreaks
can occur when visitors do not understand risks and therefore are less likely to apply disease-
prevention measures.
Venue operators should take the following steps:
• Become knowledgeable about the risks for disease and injury associated with animals and be able
to explain risk-reduction measures to staff inembers and visitors.
• Become familiar with and implement the recommendations in this compendium.
• Consult with veterinarians, state and local agencies, and cooperative extension personnel on
implementation of the recommendations.
• Develop or obtain training and educational materials and train staff members.
• Ensure that visitors receive educational messages before they enter the exhibit, including
information that animals can cause injuries or carry organisms that can cause serious illness
(A�nendices A and B).
• Provide information in a simple and easy-to-understand format that is age- and language-
appropriate.
• Provide information in multiple formats (e.g., signs, sticicers, handouts, and verbal information).
http://www. cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a 1.htm?s_cid=rr6004... 4/23/2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals i... Page 10 of 27
• Provide information to persons arranging school field trips or classroom exhibits so that they can
educate participants and parents before the visit.
Venue staff members should talce the following steps:
• Become knowledgeable about the risks for disease and injury associated with animals and be able
to explain risk-reduction recommendations to visitors.
• Ensure that visitors receive educational messages regarding risks and prevention measures.
• Encourage compliance by the public with risk-reduction recommendations, especially compliance
with hand-washing procedures (Appendix C) as visitors exit animal areas.
• Comply with local and state requirements for reporting animal bites or other injuries.
Recommendations for Managing Public Contact
The recommendations in this report were developed for settings in which direct animal contact is
encouraged (e.g., petting zoos and aquatic touch tanlcs) and in which animal contact is possible (e.g.,
county fairs). They should be tailored to specific settings and incorporated into guidelines and
regulations developed at the state or local level. Contact with animals should occur in settings where
measures are in place to reduce the potential for injuries or disease transmission. Incidents or
problems should be investigated, documented, and reported.
Facility Design
The design of facilities and animal pens should minimize the rislc associated with animal contact
Fi ure), including limiting direct contact with manure and encouraging hand washing (A�pendix C).
The design of facilities or contact settings might include double barriers to prevent contact with
animals or contaminated surfaces except for in specified animal interaction areas. Previous outbrealis
have revealed that temporary exhibits are often not designed appropriately. Common problems
include inadequate barriers, floors and other surfaces that are difficult to lceep clean and disinfect,
insufficient plumbing, lacic of signs regarding risk and prevention measures, and inadequate hand-
washing facilities (�,14�19�33�36). Specific guidelines might be necessary for certain settings, such as
schools (Appendix D).
Recommendations for cleaning and disinfection should be tailored to the specific situation. All
surfaces should be cleaned thoroughly to remove organic matter before disinfection. A 1:32 dilution of
household bleach (e.g., one-half cup bleach per gallon of water) is needed for basic disinfection.
Quaternary ammonium compounds (e.g., Roccal or Zephiran) also can be used per the manufacturer
label. For disinfection when a particular organism has been identified, additional guidance is available
(htt��/www.cfs�h.iastate.edu/disinfection �). Most compounds require >lo minutes of contact time
with a contaminated surface.
Venues should be divided into three types of areas: nonanimal areas (where animals are not
permitted, with the exception of service animals), transition areas (located at entrances and exits to
animal areas), and animal areas (where animal contact is possible or encouraged) Fi ure).
Nonanimal Areas
• Do not permit animals, except service animals, in nonanimal areas.
• Prepare, serve, and consume food and beverages only in nonanimal areas.
• Provide hand-washing facilities and display hand-washing signs where food or beverages are
served (A��endiY C).
Transition Areas Between Nonanimal and Animal Areas
Establishing transition areas through which visitors pass when entering and exiting animal areas is
critical. For areas where animal contact is encouraged, a one-way flow of visitors is preferred, with
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a1.htm?s_cid=n 6004... 4/23/2013
Compendium of Measures to Prevent Disease Associated with Animals i... Page 11 of 27
separate entrance and exit points. The transition areas should be designated as clearly as possible,
even if they are conceptual rather than physical (F�ure).
Entrance transition areas should be designed to facilitate education:
• Post signs or otherwise notify visitors that they are entering an animal area and that there are
risks associated with animal contact (A�pendix B).
• Instruct visitors not to eat, drink, smoke, place their hands in their mouth, or use bottles or
pacifiers while in the animal area.
• Establish storage or holding areas for strollers and related items (e.g., wagons and diaper bags).
• Control visitor traffic to prevent overcrowding.
Exit transition areas should be designed to facilitate hand washing:
• Post signs or otherwise instruct visitors to wash their hands when leaving the animal area.
• Provide accessible hand-washing stations for all visitors, including children and persons with
disabilities (Figure).
• Position venue staff members near exits to encourage compliance with proper hand washing.
Animal Areas
• Do not allow food and beverages in animal areas.
• Do not allow toys, pacifiers, spill-proof cups, baby bottles, strollers or similar items in animal
areas.
• Prohibit smoking and other tobacco product use in animal areas.
• Supervise children closely to discourage hand-to-mouth activities (e.g., nail-biting and thumb-
sucking), contact with manure, and contact with soiled bedding. Children should not be allowed
to sit or play on the ground in animal areas. If hands become soiled, supervise hand washing
immediately.
• Ensure that regular animal feed and water are not accessible to the public.
• Allow the public to feed animals only if contact with animals is controlled (e.g., with barriers).
• Do not provide animal feed in containers that can be eaten by humans (e.g., ice cream cones) to
decrease the rislc for children eating food that has come into contact with animals.
• Promptly remove manure and soiled animal bedding from animal areas.
• Assign trained staff members to encourage appropriate human-animal interactions, to identify
and reduce potential risks for patrons, and process reports of injuries and exposures.
• Store animal waste and specific tools for waste removal (e.g., shovels and pitchforks) in
designated areas that are restricted from public access.
• Avoid transporting manure and soiled bedding through nonanimal areas or transition areas. If
this is unavoidable, take precautions to prevent spillage.
• Where feasible, disinfect animal areas (e.g., flooring and railings) at least once daily.
• Provide adequate ventilation both for animals (Y68) and humans.
• Minimize the use of animal areas for public activities (e.g., weddings and dances). If areas
previously used for animals must be used for public events, the areas should be cleaned and
disinfected, particularly if food and beverages are served.
• For birds in bird encounter exhibits, refer to the psittacosis compendium (Y45) for
recommendations regarding disease prevention and control.
• Visitors to aquatic touch tank exhibits who have open wounds should be advised not to
participate. Hand-washing stations should be provided.
• When using animals or animal products (e.g., animal pelts, animal waste, and owl pellets) for
educational purposes, only use them in designated animal areas. Animals and animal products
should not be brought into school cafeterias and other areas where food and beverages are
prepared, served, or consumed.
• When animals are in school classrooms, specific areas must be designated for animal contact
(Appendix D). Designated animal areas must be thoroughly cleaned after use. Parents should be
informed of the benefits and potential risks associated with animals in school classrooms.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a l .htm?s_cid=rr6004... 4/23/2013
HSN1 Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) - Minnesota Dept. of Health Page 1 of 2
Minnesota Department of Health
H5N1 Avian Influenza ("Bird Flu")
You may have heard a lot about avian flu, or "bird flu," in the media. There are
actually many kinds of flu that can infect birds — wild birds as well as domestic
birds, like chickens or turkeys. But recently, health officials have been especially
concerned about one particular strain of bird flu. Known as "H5N1," it can make
people — as well as birds — severely ill.
The H5N1 flu virus has affected hundreds of thousands of birds, and more than
500 humans worldwide. Health officials are concerned that it could become the
next pandemic influenza strain in humans.
However, it's very hard for people to get H5N1 bird flu from each other. Most
people get it from direct contact with birds or their droppings. That's why there
have been so few human cases.
• Avian Flu and Pandemic Flu: The Difference — and the Connection
Avian ("bird") flu and pandemic flu are not the same thing — but there is a
connection. Here's why people are concerned about avian flu.
• Avian H5N1 in Minnesota Birds
Although no cases of animal or human illness have been identified in the
U.S., the avian H5N1 influenza virus is spreading rapidly in birds and
animals in other parts of the world. If it comes to Minnesota, how can you
protect yourself from getting sick?
• Where Is Avian Influenza Now?
Maps and reports show which countries have human cases or outbreaks in
animals.
• For Health Professionals
Information for healthcare providers and laboratories, including how to
identify possible cases of H5N1 influenza and details of infection control
considerations once you have a suspect case.
Case Definition � Infection Control � Caring for Patients � Laboratory Testinq �
Clinical Alaorithm
• For EMS, Public Safety, and First Responders
Fact sheet to help first responders understand the infection control concerns
http://www.health. state.mn.us/divs/idepc/diseases/flu/avian/index.html 4/23/2013
HSNl Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) - Minnesota Dept. of Health Page 2 of 2
around caring for patients with suspect avian influenza, including the case
definition for avian influenza, and some background on the disease.
651-201-5000 Phone
888-345-0823 Toll-free
Information on this website is available in alternative formats to individuals with
disabilities upon request.
Updated Friday, 19-Nov-2010 16:10:53 CST
http://www.health. state.mn.us/divs/idepc/diseases/flu/avian/index.html 4/23/2013
FAQs: Avian influence and pandemic flu Page 1 of 6
-.:��.-:- .
;f , t�:, . ,
��; �� ;��,`. -
�.� > _
4 5
�.� _� �`�� �
t�. _.•'� °? `" .
_ _ � -
w { -._.i_i'_,°;i:f:!;;L
TO E-MAII UPDATES
• f��l: THE CfTY
FOR ANSWER5
Public Health sections:
� Clinic services
- Community
par#nerships
k Emergency
preparedness
► Family health services
• General services
•- Health promotian
- Senior health
Updated August 15, 2006
CITY ��f
BLC��MINGTON
h,51Nh1[�OTA
Avian or bird influenza is caused by viruses that occur naturally among wild birds. The H5N1
variant, deadly to domestic fowl, can be transmitted to humans. People have not developed
immunity to H5N1 and no vaccine is available. The avian flu could become a pandemic flu --
an extremely severe human flu that causes a global or pandemic outbreak. Currently, there is
no pandemic flu.
The Public Health Division and other agencies are working to strengthen systems to detect
outbreaks of influenza that might cause a pandemic. The effects of a pandemic can be
lessened if preparations are made before a crisis. Knowledge is a key element in preparing.
FAQS
►- Q: What if somebody finds an inferte�.i I�ird -- in North America, the U.S., in the Upper
Midwest or here in Minnesota? Does that mean we're having a pandemic?
► Q: Do we need to be concerned ahout a fl�a pandemic?
► Q: How will we know when we have our 4irst infected bird? WhaYs being done to monitor
for H5N1 bird flu in wild birds?
� Q: Has H��19 �ird fl�i already E�ee;� fiound in wild birds here in the U.S.?
► Q: What is being done to monitor for H5N1 bird flu in domestic poultry flocks?
Community Services ► Q: Should consumers be concerned about buying and eating chickens or turkeys?
Divisions: What can they do to protect themselves?
� Coinmunications
r Hu�nan Services
► Parks and Recreation
- Public Health
► Recreational Facilities
Related links:
•- Cornmunity Service�
HOiVIE
� Advisory Board of
' tiealth
► Q: What about eating eggs? Is there any special way eggs should be prepared?
■ Q: What about people who like eating eggs "�unny-side up?"
� Q: Do you want people to report sich or deacl wilcl t�ird�? Do you want people to submit
dead birds for testing, the way you did with West Nile Virus?
k Q: Is this a potential threat to the poultry industry in Minnesota? What's being done to
pPOEec� o�_ir cornmei�cial po�iliry •ilocks?
w Q: Should people be concerned about con�act with wild birds or their dropping�? What
should they do to protect themselves?
► Q: Is it safe to keep "back yard chickens" or other poultry in or near your place of
residence?
� Q: Do birci feeciers pose any health risk for humans?
«� Q: Should people be concerned about �vvirnminq in lake� where waterfowl are
preu�nt?
w Q: Is it safe to eat wifc! c�arna k�irds? What precautions should hunters take?
► Q: What about pets? Are they at risk? And are they a potential threat?
► Q: Have any cases of �viar� i��flu��n�a7 been re}��rtec! in Minnese�ta �o�ltry this year?
� Q: Have any of these birds with the less severe versions of avian flu gone into the foarl
supply?
http://www. ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhall/dept/commserv/publheal/topics/a... 4/23/2013
�E��c�-� BY KEYWORDS Avian influenza and pandemic flu
Go FAQs--Frequently asked questions
FAQs: Avian influence and pandemic flu
Other Web sites
Page 2 of 6
For more information on the avian or "bird flu," please visit the following Web sites.
t Pandemicflu.gov �
� Minnesota Department of Health �
� Center for Disease Prevention and Controi �
►� WHO t� - World Health Organization
Q: What if somebody finds an infected bird -- in North America, the
U.S., in the Upper Midwest or here in Minnesota? Does that mean
we're having a pandemic?
A: No -- the H5N1 bird flu strain is still almost entirely a disease of birds. Right now, this is
still a"bird pandemic" -- not a human pandemic. In rare cases, the H5N1 virus has caused
human illness -- but for the most part, only in people who have had extensive, close contact
with infected domestic poultry or their droppings.
As of August 14, 2006, only 238 human cases of this illness had been reported worldwide,
over the last three years.
Person-to-person spread of H5N1 has been extremely rare, if it happens at all. Unless the
H5N1 bird flu virus changes dramatically, so it can pass easily from person to person, we are
unlikely to see widespread human disease.
Q: Do we need to be concerned about a flu pandemic?
A: Public health officials remain concerned about the possibility of a future pandemic. We
need to be prepared for that possibility. Three worldwide pandemics occurred in the last
century -- and scientists believe that another pandemic will occur some day.
If the H5N1 bird flu strain changes, so it can pass easily from person to person, it could cause
a pandemic. That may or may not ever happen.
A pandemic could be also be caused by a completely different flu virus -- one that we haven't
seen yet.
Public health officials at all levels of government are watching closely for changes in the
H5N1 bird flu virus -- and any other potential pandemic threats.
Q: How will we know when we have our first infected bird? What's
being done to monitor for H5N1 bird flu in wild birds?
A: Surveillance for H5N1 bird flu is already underway on major bird migration routes leading
into the U.S. In the coming weeks, the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service will be working with state officials -- primarily in Alaska -- to test thousands of wild
birds.
Initially, Minnesota will not be directly involved in the federal testing effort. However, the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources will be supporting these efforts, and will be
preparing a plan for wild bird surveillance in Minnesota. Anticipated surveillance efforts in
Minnesota include investigation of waterfowl die-offs, and sampling of birds in connection with
bird-banding and hunter bag-checks.
The University of Minnesota and others will be doing some limited testing of birds, and DNR
will also be assisting with those efforts.
http://www. ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhall/dept/commserv/publheal/topics/a... 4/23/2013
FAQs: Avian influence and pandemic flu
Page 3 of 6
There are many strains of bird flu besides the "H5N1" strain -- and iYs not uncommon to find
them in wild birds. None of them are known to pose a threat to human health. Other bird flu
strains are around all the time. We have experience looking for them and responding to them.
Q: Hasn't H5N1 bird flu already been found in wild birds here in the
U.S.?
A: A strain of H5N1 flu was found in wild swans, in Michigan, in August 2006 -- but not the
strain of H5N1 everyone is concerned about.
There is more than one kind of H5N1 bird flu. Some strains are "high path" (highly
pathogenic) and some strains are "low path" (less virulent). The strain that's currently
circulating and causing some human illness -- in parts of Asia, African and Europe -- is a high
path strain of H5N1. The strain detected in Michigan is low path. Low path strains of H5N1
have been found in parts of the U.S. -- including Minnesota -- as far back as the 1970s.
Q: What is being done to monitor for H5N1 bird flu in domestic
poultry flocks?
A: When poultry producers see disease warning signs in their flocks, they contact their
veterinarian. If the veterinarian suspects a form of avian influenza, he or she is required to
contact the Minnesota Board of Animal Health (BAH).
Minnesota was among the first states to work with turkey growers to establish a voluntary
monitoring network, beginning in 1986. BAH is creating a similar monitoring network for the
state's commercial egg and broiler producers. A turkey processing plant surveillance program
was created several years ago to identify infected flocks.
BAH is working with small backyard flocks to diagnose, control and prevent influenza using
biosecurity, sanitation and disease control measures. The state is working to bring
veterinarians, poultry producers and others up to speed about the warning signs of highly
pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza.
Q: Should consumers be concerned about buying and eating
chickens or turkeys? What can they do to protect themselves?
A: Commercial poultry is monitored carefully for illness -- including different strains of bird flu
-- by state and federal authorities. In Minnesota, chickens and turkeys are monitored for
disease by the state Department of Agriculture and the Board of Animal Health.
Even if the H5N1 bird flu virus were present in poultry, it is extremely unlikely that you would
ever be infected by handling, cooking or consuming it.
Normal precautions for handling and cooking poultry should make it safe to prepare and eat.
These precautions include:
► Cleaning all utensils and food preparation services thoroughly after working with raw
poultry.
� Washing your hands thoroughly after handling raw poultry.
� Cooking poultry thoroughly -- to an internal temperature of 165 degrees or higher -- before
eating it.
K You should be following these precautions anyway, to prevent routine food-related
diseases like salmonella.
Q: What about eating eggs? Is there any special way eggs should
be prepared?
http://www. ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhall/dept/commserv/publheal/topics/a... 4/23/2013
FAQs: Avian influence and pandemic flu
Page 4 of 6
A: There are no known cases in which people have gotten H5N1 bird flu from eating eggs.
Proper cooking kills bacteria or viruses that may be present in eggs. Eggs should be cooked
thoroughly -- so the yolks are not runny or liquid.
Q: What about people who like eating eggs "sunny-side up?"
A: The best way for consumers to protect themselves and their families is by thoroughly
cooking meat and poultry products, including eggs. Eggs prepared "sunny-side up" are
typically not heated to a temperature that kills potentially dangerous bacteria like salmonella
or viruses like avian flu.
Eggs intended for human consumption are typically washed and sanitized before being sold,
so any virus on the shell would be inactivated.
Q: Do you want people to report sick or dead wild birds? Do you
want people to submit dead birds for testing, the way you did with
West Nile Virus?
A: Neither the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) nor the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources has plans to test wild birds for H5N1 bird flu or accept dead birds for
testing. MDH tested dead birds for West Nile Virus as a way to track the presence of the virus
in mosquitoes. That isn't an issue with H5N1 bird flu. Wild birds can carry the H5N1 bird flu
virus, but it usually doesn't make them sick. If you find a dead bird, it's unlikely that it died
from H5N1 bird flu.
If you find a dead bird, simply put it in a plastic bag and put it in the garbage -- and then wash
your hands thoroughly.
Q: Is this a potential threat to the poultry industry in Minnesota?
What's being done to protect our commercial poultry flocks?
A: Commercial poultry is monitored carefully for illness -- including different strains of bird flu
-- by state and federal authorities. In Minnesota, chickens and turkeys are monitored for
disease by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture and the Board of Animal Health (BAH).
There are many different strains of bird flu. Some pose a serious threat to the health of
poultry flocks, and others do not. In the event that a strain of bird flu is found in a poultry flock,
procedures are in place to isolate the sick birds, or take other steps to stop the spread of the
virus.
Different strains of bird flu are around all the time. We have experience looking for them and
responding to them.
Q: Should people be concerned about contact with wild birds or
their droppings? What should they do to protect themselves?
A: In general, people should try to avoid contact with wild birds or their droppings -- not
necessarily because of bird flu, but as a general health precaution. If you can't avoid contact
with wild birds or their droppings, wash your hands, and avoid bringing feces into your home
on shoes or clothing. Clean your shoes or clothing as necessary. A bleach solution and
exposure to sunlight may be helpful for disinfecting shoes.
Q: Is it safe to keep "back yard chickens" or other poultry in or
near your place of residence?
A: If you own birds, a few simple precautions can help you reduce any potential risk to your
birds -- or to your own health.
http://www. ci. bloomington. mn.us/cityhall/dept/commserv/publheal/topics/a... 4/23 /2013
FAQs: Avian influence and pandemic flu
Page 5 of 6
► Monitor your birds daily for any signs of disease. In birds, flu causes swelling around the
head and discharge from the eyes, nose and mouth. The H5N1 strain causes severe
illness and death in chickens and turkeys.
� Keep wild birds -- especially waterfowl -- away from your domestic birds. Avoid exposing
your birds to feed, water or bedding that may have been contaminated by wild birds.
► Avoid exposing your birds to sick birds. If your birds become severely ill -- or die -- consult
a veterinarian promptly.
• Wash your hands thoroughly after working with your birds to minimize your any potential
exposure to bird flu.
Q: Do bird feeders pose any heaith risk for humans?
A: Bird flu is primarily a disease of waterfowl and shorebirds, and is not typically seen in the
"back yard" bird species that visit bird feeders.
Because wild birds can also carry other diseases -- such as salmonella -- a number of
precautions are recommended for people who keep bird feeders:
► Wear rubber or disposal latex gloves while cleaning bird feeders or bird baths.
p Use a plastic bag to pick up any dead birds, and dispose of them in the garbage.
r po not eat, drink, smoke, or rub your eyes or mouth after handling birds, until you can
thoroughly wash your hands.
Q: Should people be concerned about swimming in lakes where
waterfowl are present?
A: The risk of being infected by swimming in the same water with infected waterfowl is
extremely remote. There is no evidence that anyone has ever been infected in this way. As a
general health precaution, bathers may want to avoid shallow areas were waterfowl may be
present -- and especially avoid swallowing any water.
Q: Is it safe to eat wild game birds? What precautions should
hunters take?
A: Eating game birds should not pose a risk, as long as you following thee same routine
precautions that should aiways be followed when handling or cooking wild game:
� Do not eat or handle any game birds that appear to be sick.
� Wear rubber or disposable latex gloves when handling or cleaning game birds.
� After handling game, thoroughly wash your hands, as well any knives, equipment or
surfaces that came in contact with game.
► Do not eat, drink, smoke, or rub your eyes or mouth while handling game.
► Thoroughly cook ail game to an internal temperature of 165 degrees or higher.
Q: What about pets? Are they at risk? And are they a potential
threat?
A: There are no known cases where people have gotten H5N1 bird flu from domestic pets. A
few cases of H5N1 bird flu have been reported in large cats or domestic cats, in Europe and
Asia. In all cases, these animals were infected by eating raw, infected poultry.
Regardless of any potential risk from H5N1 bird flu, pet cats should always be kept indoors to
minimize possible health risks.
Pet birds should not be at any risk as long as they have no contact with wild birds.
http://www. ci.bloomington.mn.us/cityhall/dept/commserv/publheal/topics/a... 4/23/2013
Health risks associated with raising chickens
Many families raise a small number of chickens, particularly in rural ai•eas. In recent
years, however, raising.chickens has become a popular hobby for people who live in
urban areas as well. Iriformation that proinotes raising chickens touts the birds as being
good pets, stress relievers, and easy to keep. Most people though, choose to keep flocks
because they believe the ineat and eggs they grow will be safer and less expensive than
store purchased products. Whether they are pets or a source of food, there are some
issues that need to be considered before deciding to raise chickens. In addition to the fact
that many urban ai•eas will not allow chickens to be raised withui city/town limits,
keeping chickens poses a potential health risk.
Chickens, turkeys, ducks, and other poultry frequently cai7•y bacteria that can cause
illness to you and your family. Baby chicics may Ue especially prone to shed these geiYns
and cause human illness. Young bu•ds are often shipped several times Uefore they reach
a permanent hoine. Shipment and adapting to new locations causes stress on Uirds and
makes them more likely to shed bacteria in their droppings. While anyone can become ill
fi•om exposure to these gei�ns, the risk of infection is especially high for children, the
elderly, and persons with weakened unmune systeins; foi• example, people receiving
chemotherapy or who are HIV-infected. l�ne of the most important bacteria you need to
be aware of is S`almonella.
Bii•ds infected with Saltnonella do not usually appear sicic� Salmonella lives in the
intestine of infected chickens, and can be shed in large numbers in the droppings. Once
shed, bacteria can spread across the chicken's body as the bud cleans itself and
throughout the envuonment as the chicken walks around. Therefore, it is especially
important to carefully wash hands with soap and water after handling young birds or
anything that has come in contact with them. If you ingest Salmonella, you may become
ill. People accidentally ingest Salmonella in many ways, uichiding eating a$er handling
chickens or by touching their hand to their mouth while working with the bu•ds. Typical
symptoms of Salmonella infection a�•e nausea, vamiting, diatrhel, and abdomuial pain.
These symptoms generally develop within one to three days of exposure and may last for
up to a week. Individuals with weaker immune systems commonly have more severe
infections.
There have been several outbreaks of human Salmonella infections resulting from
handling baby chicks. See our CDC website:
http:Uwww.cdc.�ov/mmwi/preview/mmwrhtmUmm4914a1.htm Many ofthe outbreaks
involved young childi•en and most occuired in the spring around Easter. Some outbreaks
have been associated with keepiiig chicks in the classroom.
I still want to raise chicl�efzs. Hmv cun I reduce t/ie risks to myself and tny fumily?
1. Keep baby chicks and adult chickeris away from persons with weaker immune
systems, including the elderly, pregnant women, diabetics, patients receiving
chemotherapy, and people who are infected with HIV.
2. Do not keep chickens if a household has children less than �ve years of age.
3. Make sure that any interaction between chicks or chicicens and small children is
supetvised and that clvldren wash their hands afterwards. Childt less than five
years of age tend to put their hands and other potentially contaminated objects
urto their mouths.
4. Supeivise hand washing for small children to make sure that it is adequate. See
our CDC website for proper hand washing guidelines:
5. Always wash your hands with soap and water after touching chickens or anything
in their• environment. If soap and water are not available, use an alcohol based
hand sanitizer. Bacteria on your hands can be easily transfeiY•ed to objects and
other people in your home.
6. Wash conta�ninated items with hot soapy water or with a mild bleach solution.
7. Do not eat or dt�ink around youi• chickens.
8. Keep chickens away from food pr•eparation areas.
9. Do not wash items froin chicken coops like water and food dishes in the kitchen
sink.
10. Do not allow chickens to roam fi•eely around the house.
1 l. Frequently clean the area where chickens are kept.
12. Visit your physician if you experience abdominal pain, fever, and/or diatrhea.
Additional resources:
Salmonellosis associated with chicks and ducklings ---Michigan and Missouri, Spring
1999. Morbidity and Mortalit�y Weekly Report. Aprii 14, 2000; 49(14):297-29.
http:Uwww.cdc. �ov/mmwr/preview/rnmwrhtml/mm4914a1.htm
Salmonella serotype Montevideo ilnfections associated with chicics -- Idaho,
Washington, and Oi•egon, Spring 1995 and 1996. Morbidity and Mortalrty Weekly
Report. Maich 21, 1997 / 46(11);237-239.
http://www.cda gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/0004694Q.htm
Saltnonella hadar associated with pet ducklings -- Connecticut, Maiyland and
Pennsylvania, 1991. Morbidity and Mortalrty Weekly Report. March 24, 1992 /
41(11);185-187. http:l/www.cdc.�ov/mm��r/preview/mmwrhtmU00016299.htm
Reader's Question: Is chicken manure safe to use as a fertilizer? -- Commu... Page 1 of 2
�� communitychickens.blogspot.com http://communitychickens.blogspot.com/2011/03/readers-question-is-chicken-
manure-safe.html
Reader's Question: Is chicken manure safe to use as a
fertilizer?
by Rebecca Nickols
Q: A friend told me that chicken droppings can transfer harmful bacteria. He said not
to use it for fertilizer. Is he right? — Chris
A: Great question, Chris! All animal manures have the potential risk of containing
bacteria, but the key to using it as a fertilizer is knowing how to use it safely and
correctly. Manure from meat-eating animals (such as dogs or cats) should not be
used as a fertilizer because of the risk of transmitting parasites or diseases, but even chicken manure can
contain pathogens (such as E. coli and salmonella).
Chicken manure,
however, is a sought
after fertilizer for
organic gardeners. It's
rich in nitrogen (N),
phosphorus (P) and
potassium (K), and
when combined with
straw or similar coop
bedding it not only
adds nutrients to the
soil, but also organic
matter. Because of its
high nitrogen content,
though, it needs to age
or compost before it
can be used as
fertilizer. IYs important
to not add fresh or
"hot" manure directly to
the garden in the
spring, otherwise you'll
end up killing or actually burning your plants. Also, some studies have shown that it takes six months to a
year before you can ensure that any pathogens are not present in the composted manure. According to this
study, conducted by the University of Minnesota, even bin composting (in which the manure is maintained
at a temperature between 130 and 150 degrees Fahrenheit for three days) is not a guarantee that all the
bacteria has been destroyed.
http://communitychickens.blogspot. com/2011 /03/readers-question-is-chicken... 4/2/2013
Reader's Question: Is chicken manure safe to use as a fertilizer? -- Commu... Page 2 of 2
The safest practice is to either allow the manure to age for the recommended time or incorporate it into the
fall garden soil. Better yet, allow the chickens to free range in the garden at the end of the summer harvest.
They'll clean up the leftover plants and weeds, scratch up the soil and leave their powerful "fertilizer" as an
added bonus. Then six months later, your spring garden will be ready to go!
Visit my website at ...the garden-roof coop.
Question and Answer, Rebecca Nickols, safety
http ://communitychickens. blogspot. com/2011 /03 /readers-question-is-chicicen.. . 4/2/2013
Pluck and Feather » Chicken Poo Chart (graphic)
Date posted: November 23, 2011
Page 1 of 10
Chicicen Poo Chart (aranhic)
Categories Chicl:ens , UrUan Fanninc 101 , UrUan Livcstock � S Comments
Grody but praguiaric. It is necessazy to ]mow wl�at nonnal and aUnonnal waste loolcs like from your Uirds. To
tliis end, the Pouhrv P�ce Forum has created an online e iide to poulhy feces. Great job PPF! You can view
wUat fliey have created thns far Uut be forewamed, its not nrettv.
Normal
1 � ,o. � � �� -� n� . � 'n c R° �''GY ' .'�'���h� %�'..'� . - c 3s�l
� „��� `.K�e_ :'�;.( �ct�� � j �titi . �;�� w �lY , �,�!L ; ..,,:.�.T v • 1 ;
�� R - '�i . b . :� `4t �� C R � ��Y . � : ..
�, i
sa:.. p, � i � � � �
. {, � � .. ' � ✓�; � y, ,,�'4, � �"` 1 � � �� _� _ . � +�,S.f'�)
c �::w rr . _ � :i "'_ � � \ 'L7 � 6 � � *�'
a.. �..�� ,� , ;
�� � ' �� .a i �r� � �w�: -! �..'ti � Yj
�4 .� � �. 9 E � :l�` �, ?' � t -+ . �
� . . � -r . � � .� � �\ � � ,�;-�� � r' �� r �. �
�. r � � ��.y/ t y' ,: ��+'� �' fi � �L" � ►,1 T' � � �'_
. y. j� �� l� y��� a.1 � 77i �' ' � � . .
" './ � � .� `� / ."� '� � � �'~ i.� `�"
� P i� t'�'\ 1� w'- r .
ti.,
; % e � � S .'� ° r^ ' r„ ..f:. .
_. _� "d,' ..+8�_."_' :'tcL,_---'--'-' -'-�..�7f��S�:_. . m�
� ti.. i '�'�3"r.``, -� ^�rt�'� y
�. ' � '�
i� `ti ,k
� #���
M
.. . .�� 4 . .
Pluck and Feather » Chicken Poo Chart (graphic)
�::„��'�
,..,: �,%�
- � _.� �.
Pichire tal.en by
Page2of10
. _ .. i
_�
,;,. -
, ,
,:� .
� : �� r :
1, " _
� •f`� .-I �� � �• n r �i
' r
x _
: _. , _ _ ' i
/ I
<;'' - 1
:y - _:�
These last tluee pichires have shed intestinal lining iu fliem — quite normal, not a cause for concern.
Coral coloured Urates
T- �- z - --z- r_._ �
� � • . �-+,� _ .='—` i
rl��'_ - - _' \ , .: �
' �� �
' F x ^' �' � •.1
� � ' i
� ` •
I
'. � _l .�. .� .. ♦��
e
http://plucicandfeather.com/chicken-poo-chart-graphiahhnl
4/2/2013
http://pluckandfeather. com/chicken-poo-chart-graphic.html
4/2/2013
Pluck and Feather » Chicken Poo Chart (b aphic)
These are frequendy deposited overnight and are quite nonnal
Oily and Foamy
_� � � ) � !'; '; FA j ^-
�, ♦. �. ,. ,g � � � ', � . a j� ai
. �� I � a f � 1 J ,� � .aL� Q �i � . � ,�, u
. � �- �� � . • � ri�1'�- ° ,. .y�
, �,.}'� ''�,, ryy� �;,— r� :�
� - °4
�''� �r' .+� , '-1 t�
i�R��
_ ' � � � i
µ � t ,�
��� * ib",y�� � ''
;;.,� ��' 4
Page 3 of 10
� . /. �y,..�_'T 'Y"^b'..'���'y`�`A.} . '� W _ "�(o'�4i:�43Q� �=
r
, �. �,e -,- •
_ i` � i
� �A� -,,�
.� T
a '�' � .�r � �` S��•�
/ :- � �. r T ., r , .a.,
1 � .. �� ... y
j� � ��.;1 `. � �, � . {^? u�r.N „ r�Be `-i1s'r!� .; ��
�� �' ``�� �'��r J li TM 4 3� 4�ar �
_ '(�'I.C,.� �"+v� . Y M-' 'w Blm� .\�� p� ?
• 1 x . w s� � i.r�. w��/y ��.
�. ',�.� .J 'f]oa. .. � �j , �FS� . � I
n.a �i � . �� _. �s. � _ !�
� ��1'A t ..s.� � w � a.b ✓ _ � �,...` �
�
..,y �f'�{ ). :, r^ � �. r��.� 5'.,��
� Z.•: �c"' � P ti� F . ' � Gy ?,� �-' : �/ ,� k,. ! "�". i - - � I
- �,,r.._- q �� 4 .���� ' : r ✓:-, f i ► _�` �' ; f � � 'dY�� � \' +� 1:,
i �_,�g, � �S:�b -�, * �1"�;r . �r . . � - �+ . �
'� ; A i � � . ,� � � .� L�, � .� t � � ~�
'-t^�r f" a.r C� !... � �A. � 4 ' ? u
`�';;�� �':�'`�.:� ; �� �i� ' x�' '�i " r n: ;
� < .. ,� .-�.._�V �:!"i., �� -...:.. �,�, � . � � � '`' � 1
� � � _`G , i _ .��, ._ � ✓ � I y�ep� 1
r ?w: _ � '%' ,�� � . .,. .+., -� �� y �`
f .:-d r� , � y ..- � _ � �) : ,,�'�°. Y "'� r -e" , .z � �����'�,�
� � •�� ^^'
- !� �-�'',.�,�' ' r �,'. � i � t ' �' � 7
��:� �. � t� � � %,G�
�. _. �.JC : _: _ s_.,..� •�'. �-�i _ s � +' � _ -t .'r �
-; . - _ — - t ±., �
�� � - �n
� � .,�' �
r '' - �''�'^�,� .k � I �p � � t a " '�1
n
V w - .. � r : . � r ��+ . �
i� � � � i �j.�
r}, "s . _ r . � � 4 1 ° 'yN .� ,m-' '""�+' _ l�"'"'�.'i�^ 1 � . � . �
ys' ,,,at �'� , w} . � �„ i '� ' . �atyc� ;. ."�..
--� '�C 1 Y �F�� �:
", 4 ���" �'��� _ .'P � w � � i � l .. J.�1,e �! r ,,
'X_ �1 �:.ae'� t .�^ ,., ��.
�- � . . ¢ _ y � ' � :i • �
I A �� '���'; � �� , �
.. . :'�+ �ul KL �l�' �7L' '��.. I ' � '
The range of "Nonnal" is lmge shocic
Ceacal
Plucic and Feather » Chicken Poo Chart (b aphic)
' � �. .
� `� ';+�" � , y -
� � s
y i �� _
. \ Pi �i � .�y' . .
',:� � ���~'t
� ��'� � S" �� y j
F� , �'� -�. 'v.
.. , i't d 1-
� a.� - '� �� `�
� � ;,-�� a';� i �!'
� ,�.f+..� �.�i��:,.._ �i.'�: �'�c'�'�`�. � . . . . _... . ..
�p�`'y ?" ���� i'_� �, °,� "
, I � � � � ''
�,- �' � ..'j�
�
, ^ ��
G.-
ra-'! � .,--,.,_, ' I �I' I
� F r x N , 1 ..��
,� {. '� � y . -
� ��,:,` .�.-� ';} ::�- - ^I� �\
�'3._'^_��, � �" 1 ^•'�^ ta . .. .
` ` �_ ti � 1 �_ �,�,��,
.� _ _
� ,, � _ ,. .1
, .r ��,,,,, ��=,
n ' i � � -- I
;, :,
�
f �4 �r't'_. 't . I
�
� �� y � ' �
"Y i
� i c -'''� � ,, 4 ., i � .. I
I .. .. . .a ... .�- ' � I
��; � � _ ��� i���'; 1 � �° N '�W�' - � . � "` j M,�:�
;E� J`. �O � � � ' � r �� �F�'F� �"� a ; `� "9
i ��� '�'. �J.;�r�"�:'� "�'� w �.�'�-�'- . - ,^?,;��fd1!
F � � .w 6 �r . . ' % � � .( I
r [ h � ,
! � ,.. f, ���; " >,� �� �' i '� ` �'� �- ��"
�r � I
�i�? � � � p . ` -
L ty9`. f � t �J "''� � T, w
�J , . I 6c� I IJ � " �
, I j �. �. � � :
� �" t;. a: - �,� ,, +. `r' ��.
IIY ..� �
r�� -���- . ''��z_:1�° �_ �`,�
Page4of10
These are produced from tl�e caecwn of the chicken and aze mnstard to dark brown froth. They aze expelled
every S to 10 droppings.
Fly Maggots
http://pluckandfeather.com/chicken-poo-chart-graphic.html
4/2/2013
http://pluckandfeather. com/chicken-poo-chart-graphic.html
4/2/2013
Pluck and Feather » Chicken Poo Chart (graphic)
�
Page5of10
(pichire curtesy of Vember)
Flies will lay tl�eir eggs on moist cl�icken poo and in wazm weatl�er tliey will very quicl:ly liatch into small
maggots.
Watery
i
:�� y' .
.. �,�. - �,�'.'' �,:�,
� �� ,
-� ' �-r ; . �
.'.. r �,'I � :! Q �'y p �; �
i
. . . ...$+.u..�- �i..�._ _..._.. .� . . . �''..:"r...•
Watery droppings can be produced by hens wliicl� are too hot. It can be a way for them to cool down by
drinlcing a lot and losing some of tlteir ]ieat in freqnent wet droppings. It can also be a sign that die I�ens are
not eating enough too.
Abnormal poos
_ � _ µ
a
. � r '�;i
�
t�
�� ti. ,
• �
t'
- , .A
;i
M �
L
+
- '. n
��
. _.._ � _. �. . . _ . .. . __ i
Coccidiosis produces blood in faeces.
http://plucicandfeather. com/chicken-poo-chart-graphic.hhnl
4/2/2013
Plucic and Feather » Clucken Poo Chart (graphic)
Page 6 of 10
Tlie l�en wl�o produced tl�is specimen was an older bird wUo became very Uiirsty.
SUe is producing a]azge amotmt of watery urates the cause of which is unknown, but cottld possibly be a
]ddney proUlem.
� �- g �
'' � � �� L �e� 4' �, a ,� _,.� '�„��� �
.,�¢ y � �i f � � - ����y '` � . � �>. .w � 1y ��.
: � , 'iC' .+�' —�,•Y . r,
� '� �'� ' � i�W �`'" 'r� n= .. nf i.. � i
.� R ti � : ��. '�� �•�
6',; ,�..�.�' . ' t N�' . . e F�
K� � � � �� '�.'
� ' .. ��� � ' �b . r .� �
�.y � i �
; ~�''.-�. �,.�" - ;� ? `��. '�. � "� �
.
i. ~� . � � � � - �-. �., �, :�,�� �
-- --_ _-__ _ _ - ,��_:-
Tlie hen w]io produced this specimen was aUout 25 weel s old. Sl�e went off I�er food and ate so little she
became lmderwetgl�t. She held I�er ta�l down and was tued. She may have l�ad worms and/or egg peritonitis.
---�r-
� � � ���, �
�ceG �r{� ��""d"'
' r �
�>�c?'�,"�.i'� [ w .,. `
+' ��..�
Worms
http://pluckandfeather. com/chicken-poo-chart-graphic.html
4/2/2013
Keeping Chickens in the Back Yard Ordinance �, �; ;���'VE:I�MC�t��k�1�
1. Are you a Cottage Grove homeowner in an urban residential neighborhood?
Response Response
Percent Count
_ _. _ _ _
YES 86.1 % 204
_ _ -_ __ ._. . .. _. .__ _.._ _ -- --- _ _ ._ - - - ..._ _. __-- --- - _.._
__ _ __ _ _ _ _ __._ ___
NO 0 13.9% 33
answered question 237
_ _ _ _ _ . _
skipped question 0
_ - _
2. Should people living in an apartment or townhouse complex be allowed to keep poultry or
fowl penned-up outside?
__ _ .__._ _. _ _ __ ___ __. ._ _ __. . ___ _ - _ ____._ __ __ _.._ _ .._ __ . ___. _. __ ___ _ _ _..--_ . _____
Response Response
Percent Count
_ - --- _ _ _ _____ _ _ __ __.. _ _. _._ . ......_ - - _-- - - -
YES � 13.5% 32
__ .
NO 86.5% 205
, __. ..._---- _ _ - _ ____ ____ __----- ------ —__ _...___..
answered question 237
_ _ _
skipped question 0
__... _.. _ _. . __ _. ___ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _..---._ _ . -- --- _ __ _ _ _ .. _ __ _
3. Do you object to your neighbor keeping chickens in their back yard?
Response Response
Percent Count
YES 52.3% 124
NO 47.7% 113
answered question 237
_.. __ _ _. _ __ _ _ ._ _ __.._. _._ _ . ___._._ __.
skipped question 0
1 of 5
4. Do you object to your neighbor keeping fowl (e.g. wild ducks, geese, turkeys, etc.) in their
back yard?
Response Response
Percent Count
_-- _ _ _ __ ---- _ _ _ - __ _ __ __ __ --- -
YES 62.7% 148
_ _ -
__
NO 37.3% 88
_ _- - - -
answered question 236
_ __
skipped question 1
_
_ - _ _ _ _ _ __ __ - - __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ __
5. Would you object to your neighbor keeping a rooster(s) in their back yard?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _
Response Response
Percent Count
_ _ __ ._. . _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ._ . _ _ _ __ _ __ .. _.._ _
YES 72.5% 171
_ __- _ _ _ - _ _ -- _ _ _ . ... __. _ _ _ _ - - _ _.. . _...- - _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ -- - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ __
NO 27.5% 65
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ._ _ .__ ___ __ ____
answered question 236
skipped question 1
6. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be allowed to butcher the animal on an urban
residential lot?
Response Response
Percent Count
_ _ _ _ _. .._ _ _
YES 38.6% 90
NO 61.4% 143
answered question 233
skipped question 4
2 of 5
7. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be required to provide coops and fences for the
poultry and/or fowl in their back yard?
Response Response
Percent Count
YES 88.5% 207
NO 0 11.5% 27
answered question 234
skipped question 3
_ _ _
8. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowi be allowed to sell eggs from their urban
residential lot?
Response Response
Percent Count
_ _ . _ . ._ _. _ . _ __ _.._ _ . .. . _ _ _ _ __ .. _._ _ _ ... _ _ _ _ .._
YES 47.0% 111
__ _ _ _ _ . _ __ _ . _ _ _ _ - __ __ -- - __ . _ _.. _ __ _._. _._ .
_ _ _ ___ _. __ _ ..- __ _
NO 53.0% 125
answered question 236
skipped question 1
9. Should keeping poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of an urban residential lot require a
minimum lot area?
Response Response
Percent Count
_ __ _ _. _ _ ._ __ _.. . .. _ . .. _ _
YES 74.6% 176
NO 25.4% 60
answered question 236
skipped question 1
3 of 5
10. If you answered YES to question No. 9, what should the minimum lot area be?
Response Response
Percent Count
_ __ _. _ __ _ - _ _ _ __.. . . _ _. . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _
6,000 square foot lot area 0 11.4% 21
12,000 square foot lot area 0 13.0% 24
One-half acre (21,780 square feet) 0 10.3% 19
One acre (43,560 square feet) 0 13.0% 24
Two acres (87,120 square feet) 0 15.8% 29
__ __ _ ._ -- __ _ ____
_ ____ _ - __.
Five acres (217,800 square feet) 36.4% 67
___. _ __._ . . _.-- _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _
answered question 184
, _
skipped question 53
11. Would you support an ordinance amendment that allows residents on an urban
residential lot to keep other small farm animals (e.g. pigmy goats, pot-bellied pigs,
honeybees, pigeons and other wild game) in their back yard?
Response Response
Percent Count
-- __ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _- - _ _.__ _ _ _ _ --- --- _ .
YES 29.6% 69
NO 70.4% 164
answered question 233
skipped question 4
4of5
12. Assuming the photograph of a coop and pen as shown above complies with all
ordinance regulations; would you accept its placement on the urban residential lot next to
your property?
Response Response
Percent Count
_ _ _ _ _. _ _ - - _ _ _ __ __ _
YES 41.4% 98
NO 58.6% 139
answered question 237
__ _
skipped question 0
__
_ _._ _ _... _ ___ --_ _ ._
13. Do you have additional comments you would like to say regarding a homeowner
keeping poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of their urban residential lot in Cottage Grove?
_ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _.. ____ :_ _,_._
Response
Count
_. _. ._. _ __ .._ _ . _._ . ___ . _._ _ _ . _ . _ __ . _. ____. . .. ._ . -.. _ . ._. . _. _ . _ __
100
_._._ . ... __ _— _ _ _ _ . -- - _ - ---. - - _ _ __ _ _ _._ __._ __ __.._._......__ _ ---
answered question 100
skipped question 137
_ _ _ - - - - - _- -_ _. _ _ - _ __ __ _ __.._____
5of5
� Survey Monkey Comments
z December 7-12, 2012
4 Poultry stinks. Unless you are a poultry farmer, you should absolutley NOT be able to
s keep anything like that on your property. Who the hell wants to wake up to roosters in
5 the city!!
7 12/12/2012 10:32 AMview Responses
9 If this is allowed all neighbors should have the right to say no. The property should
Zo have had zero justified City complaints (tall grass, trash cans...) in the past 3 years. The
11 property owner should be required to have a 6 foot privacy fence installed to the
12 standard of a professional installer.
13 1�/11 /�012 4:49 PMview Responses
14
1s I think that is good, as long as the coop is clean.
16 12/11/2012 12;01 /-�Mview Responses
17
Zs a neighbor of mine had some wild one and then move on to rabbits and stinks and then
19 where do they put the droppings? If you open this it will be a disaster.
20 12/11/2012 11:4�4 AMview Responses
21
22 If I wanted farm life, I would move to the country. I want my neighborhood to be clean. I
23 don't want a stinky set-up next door. I don't want to noise pollution from poultry or other
24 fowl. And I don't want chicken.feathers in my yard. It might be fun for someone for the
2s first month or so, and then it would become work. Would there be setback regulations,
26 and other regulations, that would be STRICTLY enforced? Would there be a limit on
2� how many poultry are allowed? Will structures be taken down if not in use or will they
2s be allowed to sit there and rot? If and when they are taken down, will it be strictly
29 enforced to get decent grass growing there or will the owner be allowed to let the
3o weeds take over? Would the fowl be allowed out of their cages? Would this type of
31 thing bring more birds of prey to the area and make it dangerous for small pets to be
32 outside? My husband and I worked long and hard to get what we've got as have lots of
33 other people. I believe it would bring down the property values. We had a former
34 neighbor here in Cottage Grove who, shortly after we moved into our house, tried
35 raising pheasants in his backyard behind, and in, his shed. It was out of his sight, but in
36 plain view of us. The cage was two feet from the property line. The smell was
3� sickening. After failure, everything just sat there for twenty years. It turned into a junk
3s pile. There was erosion on the site and the hillside. No grass has ever grown there and
39 over the years the dirt area has expanded along with some weeds that I have a hard
4o time keeping out of my yard. I know you would have the ordinances in place, but if the
41 fowl owner is in violation, then it most likely would have to be a neighbor who calls and
42 reports them. If the neighbor asks the fowl owner to take care of something, the fowl
43 owner would most likely get defensive (from my own experience), or worse. Why allow
44 something more to create conflict in neighborhoods? If I were looking to buy a home in
45 CG, I would not buy next to a chicken coop property. And if one of my neighbors
Page 1
46 decides to go the chicken route, I will regret the day that we decided to buy a home
4� here.
48 1�/11 /�01 � 1:17 AMview Responses
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
�1
72
73
74
75
76
77
�s
79
so
81
82
83
84
85
86
s7
ss
89
90
91
Keep them like a dog in a kennel, this really puts a green stamp on your home.
12/10/201� 7:15 PMview Responses
I have kept chickens and my neighbors never knew about it.
12/10/2012 6:45 PMview Responses
DO NOT WANT IT AT ALL.
12/10/2012 �:39 I�Mview Responses
There needs to be a maximum allowable ratio of animals to acreage. A five acre lot
can't support a hundred chickens for example.
12/10/2012 2:08 PMview Responses
I would be more concerned that it would be smelly and people would not maintain
things as they should. If I wanted to live by a farm I would have purchased near one. It
would be hard to regulate.
12/10/2012 12:4� AMview Responses
I would be up at every City Council meeting C O M P L A I N I N G!
12/10/2012 11:56 AMview Responses
My parents used to purchase a dozen or so live farm raised chickens from a country
farmer, and bring them to our residential home and chop their heads off in our back
yard, and boil them and pluck their feathers downsstairs in our home. No thought was
ever given to the the legality of it back in the 1950s. We had easter chickens that my
siblings and I got for easter when we were small children, and we intended to raise
them in a residential back yard pen made out of screens on old wood window frames
nailed together or hinged, and the neighbors around us never complained, but a dog
broke through the screening and had a pleasant meal out of our easter chic{<s that we
had planned to raise and eat ourselves after they were grown. I hate to deny someone
else that we did ourselves in a time that doesn't seem so long ago.
12/10/2012 11:37 AMview Responses
Farm animals belong on a farm.
12/10/2012 11:35 AMview Responses
Just looking at that photo doesn't say much, how close is it to the houses surrounding,
what's the smell like, noise? Not muc to decide on from that photo! I wouldn't want that
anywhere I could see, hear or smell it!
12/10/2012 9:51 AMview Responses
Provides organic eggs!
Page 2
92
93
94
95
96
12/10/2012 9:31 AMview Responses
If you pass the ability to keep poultry then I'm getting a miniature pony.
12/10/2012 9:07 AMview Responses
9� I would not want this messy, smelly, animal attracting nuisance near by home. I would
9s be upset and emberassed to live in a town that allowed this. I BEG of you to NOT
99 ALLOW THIS!!►�►���
100 12/10/Z012 5:34 AMview Responses
101
102
103
104
105
The picture example is not the style I would find acceptable in town. There are plenty I
would. This looks like it is for more birds than I would feel should be accepted.
12/10/2012 6:3� AMview Responses
Zo6 Charge a license fee for each person that does this. Also, when I owned a dog in the
Zo� past, my neighbors called the police at barking constantly, could neighbors call the
1os police on rooster noise as well, how would that work? Some questions to consider here
109 as each noise disturbance call to the police costs the taxpayer money....
110 1 �/9/�012 �:00 PMview Responses
111
112 the only concern is sicknesses that have been associated with chicken coops including
113 respiratory illness emitted from dried poultry/ fowl feces. If the city should allow
114 expanding the ownership of poulty/fowl, they have a responsibility to ensure that all
11s people applying for a permit are educated on the handling and care of poultry/fowl.
116 There should also be high fines if one is caught not adhering to the guidelines.
117 12/9/2012 12:15 AMview Responses
118
119 Gross
120 12/8/2012 10:46 PMview Responses
121
122 i would support it as long as there were rules requiring the pen and area around the
123 coupe were kept clean. that also would require that the POO is disposed of properly
124 12/8/2012 8:02 PMview Responses
125
125 I would be OK with "a few" animals. my neighbors lots (including mine) are roughly 1/2
12� acre lots. If he wants a goat and 2 chickens or something I wouldn't be ecstatic about it
12s but he pays his taxes and he has to put up with my monster drum set.
129 12/S/2012 5:56 PMview Responses
130
131 My property my rights as long as I comply with reasonable common since standards
132 12/S/2012 4:55 PMview Responses
133
134 How on earth do honeybees get lumped in with goats, pigeons, pot bellied pigs and
135 other wild game? I would be all for neighbors keeping honeybees, they help our
136 gardens and flowers! No thanks on the neighbors having pigs or goats.
137 12/S/2012 3:27 PMview Responses
Page 3
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
1��
17s
179
180
Zs1
1s2
183
I am certain that most chicken owners would have much more attractive chicken coops
than the one shown in the picture, but I think that the novelty of having neighborhood
chickens outweigh the potential dislike of the pen.
12/8/2012 3:26 PMview Responses
If raising farm animals is important to them they should move out to a farm. Poultry and
farm animals should not be allowed in the city because of the closer housin situation.
12/8/2012 2:28 PMview Responses
I don't think you want to open "THIS CAN OF WORMS"!!!!
12/3/2012 2:12 PMview Responses
Restrict to no less than a 5 acre lot.
12/8/2012 1:45 PMview Responses
Move to the "country"
12/8/2012 1:06 PMview Responses
I think you open a can of worms when you allow poultry on a common city lot.
12/8/2012 12:54 AMview Responses
Our lots our way to small to have this be allowed. Who would be monitoring that they
keep them code? Is that something else we will have to pay for?
12/8/2012 11:54 AMview Responses
This is a great concept! Both green and cutting edge and good for children to witness.
As a 60 year CG resident I heartily support this.
12/8/2012 11:23 AMview Responses
There should be limits based on square footage to make sure the animals have
adequate space and are comfortable.
12/0/2012 10:57 AMview Responses
If you want farm animals, move to a farm. I live in a city for a reason.
12/8/2012 9:19 AMview Responses
I think they should have a limit on how many chic{<ens they can have --maybe only 6.
Also, I would like to say the example you posted for a coop and pen area is a very
drastic and poor example. I have seen some that look like little dwarF cottages and
penned in very nice. It actually enhanced the yard area.
12/8/2012 8:32 AMview Responses
I love my neighborhood and do not want to see that mess of chicken wire anywhere in
it! Not too mention the noise and the oder. People have a hard time picking up after
their dog, I can't imagine them cleaning up after their poultry. Do people realize that
Page 4
1s3 they poop all day anywhere they want? Yuck! Support a local farmer a couple of miles
Zs4 away and buy his farm fresh eggs and chickens.
185 1�/8/201 � 8:23 AMview Responses
186
Zs�
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
2os
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
zz1
222
223
224
There should be restrictions of course as to the distance a coop has to be to a
neighbors property. It should have to be several feet from any property line-
12/8/2012 7:39 /aMview Responses
There should be something in here that says if my dog (or cat) kills one of these things
because the fowl got loose it isnt the dog owners fault. Also should state that if my dog
or cat freal<s out and barl<s meows at the fowl the fowl has to go, not the dog or cat
12/S/2012 7:29 /�Mview Responses
The picture above doesn't seem very representative ofi a normal coop/pen from what
I've seen. I'd support a more standard looking coop but not this "double-dome" cage. I
don't believe hens fly so there would be no need for this type of structure. They can be
designed much better and are nofi much different than an outdoor dog house/kennel.
12/8/2012 �:1 � AMview Responses
urban areas are not farms!!!!!!!!!
12/8/2012 5:42 AMview Responses
There is a distinct difference between urban and rural. These animals belong on a farm.
12/7/2012 11:25 PMview Responses
They would have to be kept clean and with no odor.
12/7/201 � 11:06 PMview Responses
If someone wants to keep farm animals, they should buy a farm.
12/7/2012 11:01 PMview ResPonses
I think the existing ordinance is fine. Minimum of 5 acres to have that type of
"domesticated" wildlife is fine. I would not want any neighbor of mine with an urban lot
to put up a coop or pen on anything less than 5 acres.
1 �/7/�01 � 10:43 PMview Responses
I think if you would like to have these types of animals you should live ine the country,
where they don't bother anyone else. I{<now I would not like to hear them or smell them
everyday. Barking dogs are enough to deal with, I can't imagine rooster crowing in my
back yard too.
12/7/2012 10:35 PMview Responses
225 Free range Chickens in someone's back yard that is fenced in seems perFectly
226 reasonable to me. Louder animals such as roosters, ducks and geese could be very
22� disruptive to neighbors.
228 12/7/2012 10:02 PMview Responses
Page 5
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
Animals need space. Shouldn't have to be cooped up in a small area.
12/7/�01 � 9:46 PMview Responses
I think that it's ok if it is a farmer that farms land and has at least 5 acres or more!
1 �/7/2012 9:33 PMview Responses
I picked 6000sqft as the minimum area to keep chickens. I'm thinking no more than two
per every 6000sqft.
12/7/2012 9:30 PMview Responses
I hope this goes through, thoughts of moving more rural to have chickens have crossed
our minds
12/7/2012 9:�4 PMview Responses
This is rediculous, should you have farm animals in a residential area... Absolutely Not!!
1 �/7/2012 9:22 PMview Responses
Chicks, ducks and other fowl make much less noise and mess than dogs!
12/7/2012 9:22 PMview Responses
If you want a farm , live on a farm!! Not a city street home!!!!!!! I do not want farm
animals right outside my damn kitchen window!!! Ugh !!!!!!!!!!
12/7/2012 9:06 PMview Responses
The noise, waste products, and disease potential is not acceptable. If someone wants
to keep what I consider to be farm animals, they should simply buy a farm.
12/7/2012 9:04 PMview Responses
2ss I live right next door to the person trying to keep his 4 ducks. They are right under, my
2s9 kitchen window and I smell gross poop every time I open the window. They are so loud
26o that I can hear them throughout my whole house all the time! Especially when we are
261 outside anywhere. Because of the placement of this persons property to mine, his
262 backyard in directly the side of my house where our deck and windows are. I am also
263 concerned about the ecoli issues that go with having ducks as my children have
264 respiratory issues and 95% of ducks carry ecoli in their feces and it is injested by dust
z55 particles being blown in the wind. PLEASE LEAVE THE FARM ANIMALS ON THE
266 FARM!
267 12/7/2012 8:53 PMview Responses
268
269
2�0
271
272
273
These are dirty noisy farm animals that belong on a farm. Not in a bac{cyard of a city lot.
They would bring a whole new set of issues that our city staff. especially police officers
would have to deal with.
12/7/2012 5:51 PMview Responses
Page 6
2�4 Go by land out in the country if you want farm animals. They are loud, smell and is
2�s going to cause lots of other issues down the road!
276 12/7/�01 � 8:41 PMview Responses
277
2�s
279
2so
2s1
282
283
284
285
286
2s�
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
Allowing our citizens the opportunity to raise a sustainable resource is a step in the
right direction for Cottage Grove. I've seen many lovely, aesthetically pleasing chicken
pens and coops. The photo choice seems as if it was selected to sway people's opinion
in a less than favorable direction.
12/7/2012 8:14 PMview Responses
This will totally hurt resale of properties, I would conceder selling if this happens.
12/7/2012 0:09 PMview Responses
Would there be an ordinance on how many animals can be present on specific land
areas? Will there be some kind of recommendation on pen sizes? Roosters
cacadoodldoo'ing each morning? I would live more in the country if I would want that.
I'd really prefer this ordinance to not be passed. What is the proper disposal of carcass'
if they are allowed to kill the birds onsite? I'd assume that some people would still defy
the ordinance and kill their animals on their property which to me could be disease
spreading. Thank you.
12/7/2012 8:05 PMview Responses
This is not acceptable. Please read the article attached to your fb post regarding this.
This is not for a city lot. This is not ok.
12/7/2012 7:45 PMview Responses
I do not want any of this next to me. But, if you do allow it a limit on the number animals
has to be set. Like 4. Roosters should not be allowed. Drive a chicken or turkey farm
and smell it. We don't need that in a neighborhood. If you want to farm, buy a farm.
12/7/2012 7:39 PMview Responses
Sounds like a good idea.
12/7/2012 6:56 PMview Responses
I really don't want farm animals around my home. It would be most frustrating for the
people who do not follow the rules and my guess is CG does not have the proper staff
for funding to enforce any ordinace allowing such things. Please don't allow chickens
nor other farm animals around here.
12/7/2012 6:29 PMview Responses
I <heart> free range birds
12/7/2012 5:41 PMview Responses
PETA=People Eating Tasty Animals
12/7/2012 �:38 PMview Responses
Page 7
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
While there are many who who do it in compliance with the law, I have a huge concern
about those who will not. Can the City afford the cost/manpower to policing it? What
about fowl that get loose? Can animal shelters handle found birds? I think that during
these times of tightening government budgets, Cottage Grove cannot afford to take on
this additional cost.
12/7/2012 5:26 PMview Responses
I think any homeowner in Cottage Grove should be allowed to keep chickens in the
backyard. I don't think the noise is an issue as I am sure my two small children are
noisier than the chickens would be. Also, I have had many occasions where my
neighbors have noisy dogs. I also have had neighbor cats do their business in my yard.
I think raising chickens is a greaf way to be "green" and support raising your own food
and also bed educational for my children. I think of Cottage Grove as more rural than
suburban and I I<now that Sf Paul and Minneapolis allow for chickens in residential lots
so I am surprised that Cottage Grove has not allowed them up to now.
12/7/2012 5:08 PMview Responses
If I wanted to be near these animals I would live on a farm. This is the City. Not
acceptable.
12/7/2012 5:06 PMview Responses
Buy a Farm, I dont want to smell or hear these animals all day and night
12/7/2012 4:56 PMview Responses
This is ridiculus that you are even thinking about this.
12/7/2012 4:48 PMview Responses
The thought of a couple chickens next door doesn't bother me. But looking at the coop
and pen makes me feel property values would be affected. It looks trash to me. Not
sure how to come to terms w/ the paradox of it.
12/7/2012 4:�6 PMview Res�onses
What's behind done to prevenfi the spread of disease bringing poultry into the city?
12/�/2012 �:46 PMview Responses
My aunt and uncle in laws have chickens, they are noisy, you have to have lights on
inside if the coop(typically ran by extension cords) which would be against state fire
code. This would be a horrible idea!
12/7/2012 4-:39 PMview Responses
There needs to be a minimum lot size so the noise and smell from livestock doesn't
infringe on their neighbors. There's also the issue of lower saleability of a home next to
someone with livestock.
12/7/2012 4�:27 PMview Responses
Page 8
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
Allowing chickens or geese would not hurt anyone. Everyone is so concerned about
what is going on in someone else's yard, worry about your own yard. Dogs can be
noisier and more of a problem and actually hurt people vs a few chickens or geese.
Please allow them, what a great educational option for parents/kids as well. Teaching
our youth to grow some of their own food is a wonderful idea!
12/7/2012 4:18 PMview Responses
Dogs barking at all hours of the night can be much worse than a few chickens. Maybe
don't allow roosters as they can be more noisy than chickens. People want to grow
their own food, let them...it is their own backyard after all, not their neighbors or the
Cltl@SIII
12/7/2012 4�:12 PMview Responses
People should be able to put whatever they want in their backyard, so long as it is not a
real danger to anyone
12/7/2012 4:10 PMview Responses
A citizen should be allowed to keep these animals in their yard as long as they don't
harm their neighbors.
12/7/2012 3:56 PMview Responses
This is not acceptable unless you have the space. I am ok with the ducks that live in a
pond on a residents but noisy dirty chickens no thank you! If I wanted to live near farm
animals I would have purchased a hobby farm.
1 Z/7/2012 3:52 PMview Responses
Keeping urban animals is a detriment to the animals along with the neighbors and
citizens. Countless numbers of chickens and ducks are abandoned every year. We do
not need to add to that number in Cottage Grove.
12/7/2012 3:51 PMview Responses
396 If you allow chickens please lower my property taxes when my neighbor builds a
397 chic{<en coop. Absolutely "no". Enforce the rules as they are written now.
398 12/7/2012 3:4-8 PMview Responses
399
40o They belong on a farm.
401 12/7/2012 3:46 PMview Responses
402
403 In regards to coops and fences I feel petiole just need to have at the least a fenced in
404 yard. The chickens should bee allowed to have a grassy area to run around in to bee
4os able to eat grass and bugs. Thank you for considering this.
406 12/7/2012 3:43 PMview Responses
407
4os If you pass it please limit the number of animals/chickens. I thnk it is sure to initate
409 more police calls by cranky neighbors if allowed on smaller properties.
410 12/7/201 � 3:4�2 PMview Responses
Page 9
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
I think they should only be allowed if you have the space (5 or more acres) to support
them, just as things are now. I did not purchase a lot in a residential neighborhood to
smell and look at farm animals every day!
12/7/2012 3:23 PMview Responses
Animals, when not in the coops, must have the owner right next to them in order to
ensure they do not find a way into others yards or injure other community members.
12/7/2012 3:21 {�Mview Responses
I do not want to hear or smell my neighbors farm animals! Ifi I wanted to live next to a
farm I would move there. I will be moving if this passes and my neighbors implement it.
Filthy horrid idea that will only deteriorate my property value
12/7/�012 3:18 I�Mview Responses
Allowing neighbor to keep poultry and farm animals could result in noise that would be
disturbng, injurious to sleep patterns and would interfere in my righfi to enjoy my own
property.
1 �/7/201 � 3:18 PMview Responses
ABSOLUTELY NOT TO THIS AMMENDMENT. I grew up on a FARM in the
COUNTRY. That is where this kind of thing belongs. UNACCEPTABLE. PERIOD. Want
to see property values decrease even more? This would be the way. I want to build the
image of CG, not allow this to happen.
12/7/2012 3:17 PMview Responses
If it a farm that's cool if it's a residence I dont think so....do what Woodbury does...case
closed.......
12/7/2012 3:14 PMview Responses
A limit should be put on the number or "for personal / family consumtion only" should be
apart of the ordinence.
12/7/2012 3:10 PMview Responses
I think it is a good idea
12/7/2012 3:Oo PMview Responses
There is no way I think chickens/ducks should be allowed in a traditional neighborhood.
The coops are very unattractive, chickens/ducks smell horrible, and they are loud. They
belong on a farm, not in a neighborhood!
12/7/2012 3:07 PMview Responses
The amount of excessive noise should be included in the ordinance, the same type of
policy for a dog.
12/7/2012 3:07 PMview Responses
Page 10
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
Raising out own food without hormones makes all the sense in the world... nothing
better that fresh eggs Not to mention the keep the eat their weight in bugs
1 �/7/�012 3:03 PMview Responses
I am ALL FOR poultry being allowed in a residential backyard but I think the number of
adult poultry/fowl or small farm animals should be limited if the animals are in a
residential lot.
1 �/7/2012 3:00 PMview Responses
If I wanted animals in my yard (or next to me), I would move out to the country - or at
least more land area. If my neighbor has chickens - what happens if MY dog eats one
or more? I do not want that responsibility. I also do not want the noise of the animals.
grew up on a farm - animals make noise and smells.
1 �/7/2012 �:59 I�Mview Responses
Chickens and ducks are no worse than annoying constantly barking dogs that are
never dealt with by the city or wandering cats.
12/7/2012 2:53 PMview Responses
Page 11
City of Cottaqe Grove's Facebook Comments
December 7-11, 2012
o Dave LeVake, Terri Tufte, Kim Smrstick Beaton and 9 others like this.
� - ;i
'� �'.�.'' i Kali Ta lor Amanda Kowalski
Y
December 7 at 1:48pm via mobile
�: --
�
.--�-_:�:. Thomas Carlson Here is an article about chickens in the city.
http://www.chickenrunrescue.org/collective%20state%20111809.pdf December 7 at 1:51pm
i�.
Kevin ]ohnson I say.... If you wanna be a farmer buy a farm December 7 at 2:34pm via
mobile
� Jeff Rothecker City of St. Paul allows it and most of their lots are smaller than the ones here in
Cottage Grove. December 7 at 2:49pm
Kevin Johnson Well there you go.... Go live in st Paul....lol December 7 at 3:12pm via mobile
Elspeth Atkinson GREAT article link above! December 7 at 3:17pm
�; +� -
Kelli Jankovich- McDaniel Chickens (Not roosters) make a lot less noise and mess than most
dogs do! A few birds would do no harm. December 7 at 7:36pm
�; �.
��' a Becky Fox I grew up on a farm raising chickens, ducks and geese-I left for a reason and sure
hope my neighbors don't get to raise them in their backyard which is really close to mine! Believe it or not,
you really wouldn't need to drive far to buy them from a local farmer and they are more work than most
people realize.
December 7 at 8:28pm via mobile
;�
Jean )acobs Glaraton Glad to have the opportunity to voice my opinion through the survey.
December 7 at 9:28pm
__---____
I I' �� l I .
�.
� � Jill Eriksen Sheppard if anyone is concerned about the inhumane treatment of chickens then they
really need to consider where the grocery store chickens come
fromhttp://www.youtube,com/watch?v=enwUSjIXSIU
Saturday at 4:48am
�--; ��
I
-��-_:.� Thomas Carlson Last summer we had a chicken fly into our yard in Cottage Grove. Its legs were
bound together tightly with string so it was unable to walk correctly. My daughter caught the chicken and
removed the string and found a place in Minneapolis that would take the chicken and find it a home. It took
a month or two before the chicken was big enough to determine that it was a rooster and not a hen.
Saturday at 7:02am
Dennis Breisler I want a goat. Saturday at 8:29am
i ��-
� Lewis Stein No!! Saturday at 10:32am via mobile
_�_,,_
r
� ��, ^
��a Gene LeVake I don't think you want to open "THIS CAN OF WORMS"!!!!! Saturday at
12:20pm
��J Will Hohenstein Green acres is the place for me. Farm livin' is the life for me. Land spreadin' out
so far and wide Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside. Saturday at 3:58pm
i�
Angel Popowitz really?? i hope this survey on Facebook is not your deciding factor for this
problem that has been sitting on the city council for more than 4 MONTHS!!! are you sending this survey
out with our water bill so it can be seen by EVERY person who lives in cottage grove??? Saturday at
5:20pm
��
Susan Farr Make sure to charge a license fee for each person who wants to do this who lives in
urban CG because you will need to accumulate enougth income to offset the cost of constant calls to the
police for animal noise disturbance caused by roosters. Sunday at 12:06pm
]en Peterson Roosters would not be allowed. Sunday at 8:58pm via mobile
��. � �
`�rr. � Natalie Seim Oltman Jr. High had baby ducks that they hatched in science. Daughter brought
one home. We raised them (2) from babies, and it imprinted with us. It walked around the yard with me
when I watered the garden. It turned it's heads when the jets flew over. They were fun. We made a cage
for them, had a small round pool for water, and like others we knew that had them from Otlman, they get
too big to keep in our yard. They poop a lot, and that needs to be taken care of. You need to keep them
safe because we do have fox around here (so they needed a cage at night). It was a lot of work. I know
some people released the ducks to the ponds, we took ours to a friend's hobby farm. I think if they have a
proper piace for chickens and they weren't noisy I would agree. Ducks, more work! Other cities have these.
Would have to address their waste/poop disposal. As long as the parties surrounding the home agree with
a signature, I would agree. ( I think that is what some cities do). Sunday at 11:11pm
Citv of Cottaqe Grove Facebook — Sharinq Paqes
December 7-11, 2012
Jen LeVake Heriot i would love to have chickens in MY back yard. With the right rules and regulations (no
roosters) it can be a great thingi! Many cities are now considering this; just passed in Stillwater. Hoping Hudson wili
do the same some day. Now having cows, goats or other "farm animals" is a whole other story - ha! I'll have to pass
this on to my family living in CG.
Saturday at 2:35am ��a mobile
Nicole Tennis i do have farm animals in my neighbors backyard. Don't remind Jesse of the wild boar. Too soon!
Saturday at 7:57am ��a mobile
Jill Eriksen SheppardJennifer Schottmuller Bierma Here's the survey link. :)
December 7 at 9:47pm
Jill Eriksen Sheppard via Amelia La Casse
Please give your input to the City of Cottage Grove in favor of allowing backyard chickens!!!
December 7 at 5:09pm
Elspeth Atkinson Amy...good to know!! This is all new to me. I love the idea of fresh healthy eggs. I am just too
wary sometimes and assume the worst of what some people would do.
December 7 at 9:58pm
Jill Eriksen Sheppard I think the chicken industry as a whole are the worst offenders of treating chickens
inhumanely and those that want to raise a few in their backyards are in a different category
http://www. youtu be.com/watch?v=enwU 5j IXS IU
Food, Inc. - Industrial Chicken Farmers
Clip from Food, Inc. in which small southern farmers are beholden to large corpo...
See More
Saturday at 6:51am
Anita Morrill I posted the survey link to our local Urban Chicken Farmers group, too. The questions on the survey
continue to bother me, though, in terms of private property rights. You shouldn't really have to ask "permission" of
any level of government to do as you see fit on your own property.....
Saturday at 9:21am
Anita Morrill As an example, Des Moines code:
http://library.municode.com/HTML/13242/level3/MUCO_CH 18AN_ARTIINGE.html#MUCO_CH 18AN_ARTIINGE_S
18-4AG NOAN EXAN
Sec. 18-4. - Agricultural nondomestic animals and exotic animals.(a)No horse, cow, calf, swine, shee
library.municode.com
No person, while herding or driving any animals mentioned in section 18-4 of thi...
See More
Saturday at 9:30am
Francisco Gonzalez via City of Cottage Grove, MN - City Government
mmm...can I keep an nandu too?
See Translation
December 7 at 3:34pm
� • . • • � • • '
• . � � • .
The definition for "farm animal" in Cottage Grove's City Code includes chickens and
ducks. City ordinances allow farm animals in any zoning district, but a minim of five
acres of land is required. �
The City has been asked to consider allowing poultry a r '�e back yard of
urban residential lots. An urban residential lot is I a 0-100 feet wide lot with a
lot area of 7,500-11,000 sq. ft. (0.17 - 0. e). �
The City of Cottage Grove ar your opinio on i g poultry and fowl in
backyards. — _� � 7
- - '� -
Q YES NO
e you a Cotta meowner in an urban residential 14 0
neighborhood
2. Should people living in an apartment or townhouse complex be 0 14
allowed to keep poultry or fowl penned-up outside?
3. Do you object to your neighbor keeping chickens in their back 13 1
yard?
4. Do you object to your neighbor keeping fowl (e.g. wild ducks, 14 0
geese, turkeys, etc.) in their back yard?
5. Would you object to your neighbor keeping a rooster(s) in their 13 1
back yard?
6. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be allowed to butcher the 0 14
animal on an urban residential lot?
7. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be required to provide 11 1
coops and fences for the poultry and/or fowl in their back yard?
8. Should the owner of poultry and/or fowl be allowed to sell eggs 4 $
from their urban residential lot?
9. Should keeping poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of an urban � � ,�
residential lot require a minimum lot area?
10. If you answered YES to question No. 9, what should the minimum ;
lot area be? Select only one option below: �������
Responses:
�.� � �- ��� � �;=�� � � w
�� �~���=� �'�=� � ,:
0 6,000 square foot lot area �� �����`� ���
��� ��� �' � �� .
1 12,000 square foot lot area ����� �����
�' �� �����
4 One-half acre (21,780 square feet) �� ��� � ���� `� �:
�������'�`"
1 One acre (43,560 square feet) ��� � �
�� �� ���
0 Two acres (87,120 square feet) "��� ����������
�� �� "�,�;3= � �
5 Five acres (217,800 square feet) ��� -�-�����
.�� �����
� ��� ����:
�., .., ,, �`` � � °��� x
�
QUESTION: YES NO
11. Would you support an ordinance amendment that allows residents
on an urban residential lot to keep other small farm animals (e.g. 0 14
pigmy goats, pot-bellied pigs, honeybees, pigeons and other wild
game) in their back yard?
12. Assuming this photograph of a coop and pen complies with all �
ordinance regulations; would you accept its placement on the �
urban residential lot next to your property? ��S
� t jT`S•Ta F�S� �� .
4
. , ,� , , + �
t� � , r
M�� i . a � ���- S ! �...�� �
���� �� ;y �a � t �;,a4_ � 0 13
� i9st y—� �� �
.r � J .,;� � ti.��( j ��� S. � � ��
r c3a �t �
, � Tt � `-y- �, � �,; �
' � � r � i � T �• � � I
/ ] �� j �� �1�< —� � � f i ��' � i •
� �.. � � �
�H ���li 7 _ +�_ r .,' �
. � i:� �
��-� � t f , � ��-��{{��M
�A
s r � � � -"v ..�.� t >
_ �� 4 `� j a` tb . .`k� ....��f
13. Do you have addit omments you would like to say regarding
a homeowner keeping poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of their
urban residential lot in Cottage Grove?
RESPONSES:
1. No chickens, poultry, pigs...Move-
2. Buy rural land for all livestock on 5 acres.
3. I can see a lot of tension amongst neighbors, stinlc, noise,
attracting other animals. These people need to live on acreage to
do such a thing!
4. This should not be allowed.
5. Should not be allowed.
6. Don't allow anv farm animals in the citv. Rats will come.
Thank you for participating in this Opinion Survey. Some of the results from the survey
may be presented to the Cottage Grove Planning Commission on December 17, 2012.
The Planning Commission will meet in the City Council Chambers at the Public
Safety/Fire and City Hall; 12800 Ravine Parkway at 7:00 PM. This meeting is open to
the public.
If you have questions, contact John McCool, Senior Planner at 651-458-2874 or
j mccool(a�cottaqe-q rove. orq.
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities
November 2012
Ci Po ulation PoultrylFowl Allowed License Re . Permit Amount Ins ections Re Max. No. of Chickens # of Hens Roosters Butcherin Coo Re uired Coo Standards Coop Inspection or Coo Setbacks Comments
ty p on Urban Lot p p Q ' g p p p Bldg. Permit p
Setbacks for
accessory Lot must not be on city water or sanitary sewer.
Andover 30,847 No Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited structures in the Lot must be zoned R1, R2 or R3 (Minimum lot
zoning district area is 2.5 ac.)
located in.
Zoning
regulations for
accessory Building permit Ordinance since 2006. Do receive some
Anoka 17,331 Yes No N/A NIA 4 4 No No Yes structure in the inspection. 5 ft. side yard complaints, but typically found compliance.
zoning district
located in.
Apple Valley 49,801 No Unlimited Yes Ag District Ag Buildings Chickens still an ag use and ailowed only in Ag
Districts.
City Council just re-evaluatetl ordinance and
Blaine 58,331 No decided again only allow chickens in agricultural
districts.
Less than 120 sq.
Only on complaint 50 ft. from property Solid fence not less than 4 ft. height is requiretl.
Bloomington 83,671 Yes No N/A basis. 4 4 No No Yes ft. & less than 6 ft. Building permit line. Changed ordinance in 2011.
in height.
Brooklyn Center 30,204 No Chickens not allowed anywhere in city.
Considered a farm animal.
* Ord. currently allows in Urban Reserve with 5
Brooklyn Park 76,238 No'` Yes ac. minimum lot area. City is looking at amending
ordinance to allow chickens in residential
neighborhootls.
Coop or run must
be screened by
solid fence.
Maximum coop
Minimum of 50 feet
height is 10 ft.,
Burnsville 60,664 Yes Yes $50 for two N/A 4 4 No Only in R1A District Yes coop floor must Yes from residential Storage of chicken feetl must be in rodent proof
year permit structure. Min. of 10 container.
be a minimum of
12 inches from ft. to property line.
ground and not
greater than 12
inches.
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities
November 2012
Cit Po ulation PoultrylFowl Allowed License Re Permit Amount Ins ections Re . Max. No. of Chickens # of Hens Roosters Butcherin Coo Re uired Coo Standards Coop Inspection or Coo Setbacks Comments
Y p on Urban Lot Q ' p q g p p p Bldg. Permit p
Chicken is a farm animal and is allowed only in
Champlin 23,223 No Agricultural District. City has very little Ag zoned
land.
Chickens allowed in Ag District. Minimum of 2.5
Chanhassen 23,247 No acre lot area. City Council has looked at
ordinances, but decided not to change ord. Lots
only 15,000 sq. ft. in area.
Chaska 24,002 No Animal & Fowl Ord. Agricultural district only.
No ordinance. Tell people they can't have
Columbia Heights 19,619 No chickens. Ordinance proposed 7 yrs. Ago but not
supported by CC.
Council discussed three year ago. Decided they
Coon Rapids 61,766 No do not want farm animals in urban
neighborhoods.
Cottage Grove 34,828 No Limited by PCA Farm animal. Minimum of 5 acres of land.
feedlot regs.
Crystal 22,168 No * * Being tlebatetl. Only enforce ord. based on
complaints received.
Roof structure, 1
sq. ft. of window
for every 15 sq. ft. Yes, building permit Coop antl pen area
of floor area. required if coop is must setback a
Duluth 86,256 Yes Yes $10 Annual Annually 5 5 No No Yes Minimum coop greater than 120 sq, minimum of 25 ft.
and pen area from adjoining
must not be less f t ' residential structure.
than 10 sq. ft. per
chicken.
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities
November 2012
Cit Po ulation PoultrylFowl Allowed License Re Permit Amount Ins ections Re . Max. No. of Chickens # of Hens Roosters Butcherin Coo Re uired Coo Standards Coop Inspection or Coo Setbacks Comments
y p on Urban Lot Q ' p q g p q p Bldg. Permit p
Minimum coop
area is 2 sq. ft. Coop and attached
per chicken and 5
sq. ft. for pen. fencetl area must
Initial antl annual setback a minimum Attached fence area is required antl must be
Eagan 64,456 Yes Yes $50 annually inspections. 5 5 No No Yes Coop and pen With building permit. of 10 feet from rear completely enclosed. Eggs cannot be sold.
must be lot line and 5 feet fro
connected and m sitle lot line.
completely
enclosed.
Chickens only allowetl in rural areas and only if
Eden Prairie 61,151 No legally non-conforming use. CC is discussing
honeybee in urban neighborhoods.
Edina 48,262 No Chickens consitlered livestock. Livestock
prohibited in residential districts.
Elk River 23,101 No Minimum lot area is 5 acres.
Enforce only if complaint received. Has been an
Faribault 23,409 No issue of discussion, but not widely supported.
Planning Commission recommended ord. CC
Farmington 21,369 No denietl ord. amendment because they do not
believe chickens should be in urban residential
districts.
Aliowed only in agricultural districts with a
Forest Lake 18,591 No minimum of five acres with a minimum of two
grazable acres.
Determined in the 50 feet from all �
Fridley 27,515 Yes Yes $100 annual Annually None N/A N/A Yes None Yes residential
review process
structures
Golden Valley 20,427 No * * In process of evaluating. Probabiy Feb. 2013
direction from CC will be given.
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities
November 2012
PoultrylFowl Allowed Coop Inspection or
City Population License Req, Permit Amount Inspections Req. Max. No. of Chickens # of Hens Roosters Butchering Coop Required Coop Standards Bld Permit Coop Setbacks Commenfs
on Urban Lot 9•
4 per acre and a 4 per acre and a One acre minimum. Food container required.
25 ft. setback from
Hastings 22,217 No Yes minimum of one minimum of one No Not addressed Yes Solid floor Yes 350 ft. mailed notice. School, museum or
acre of land. acre of land. property line agricultural uses only. Fence required.
Hopkins 17,701 No
Inver Grove Only if complaint 25 feet from Agricultural Districts only. Minimum of 1.75 acre
Heights 33,774 No Yes Yes received property lines parcel. Considered ordinance in 2011 but no
action taken.
Unlimited in Ag Unlimitetl in Ag Chickens allowed in Ag District with a minimum of
Lakeville 56,534 No District but 10 acre District but 10 Yes Yes 10 acres of land.
minimum acre minimum
Lino Lakes 20,505 No Minimum of 10 acres and in Rural, Rural
Executive, and Rural Business Districts.
Max. # of hens Max. # of hens Accessory structure
Maple Grove 62,436 No 12 chickens per ac. and roosters is antl roosters is setback for Ag Allowed in Ag District with a 1.5 acre minimum.
12 per ac. 12 per ac. district.
Interior floor Leg banding required for each chicken. Climate
At time of license space a minimum 5 ft. from rear antl control maintained between 32-85 degrees
Maplewood 38,374 Yes Yes $75 per year approval and 10 10 No No Yes of 4 sq. ft. per side property lines. Fahrenheit. Runs a minimum of 10 sq. ft. per
renewals. bird. Minimum bird.
height 6 ft.
Minnetonka 50,046 No Minimum of one acre for farm animals.
New Brighton 21,496 Yes No NIA NIA NIA NIA N/A N/A No None No None No restrictions. If complaints received, they
determine if action is necessary.
$0 for up to 3 Accessory structure
New Hope 20,486 Yes Yes poultry/fowl. No 3 3 No No No N/A Building permit. setback for zoning Can apply to get permit for more than 3
$75 for 4 or poultry/fowl.
district located in.
more.
Wire fencing in pen must be a minimum of 18
Unlimited but 25 feet from any inches above the ground. Chickens must be kept
Northfield 20,454 Yes No NIA NIA requires a minimum 6 No N/A Yes N/A NIA residential structure in covered structure or fenced enclosure at all
of 5 acres. on adjacent lot.
times.
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities
November 2012
City Population PoultrylFowl Allowed License Req. Permit Amount Inspections Req. Max. No. of Chickens # of Hens Roosters Butchering Coop Required Coop Standards Coop Inspection or Coop Setbacks Comments
on Urban Lot Bldg. Permit
Setbacks for
Oakdale 27,538 Yes Yes No fee. Periodically Depends on size of Depends on size If approved by No Yes None Building Permit for accessory structure 75 % of owners/occupants within 150 feet.
lot. of lot. neighbors. accessory structures. in the zoning district
for property.
Plymouth 71,263 No Based on State y
Statute Rural areas onl
Prior Lake 23,010 No
10 ft. from property
Ramsey 23,865 Yes No NIA Upon complaints 6 6 No No Yes None Building Permit Lot size determine how many chickens.
line.
Proposed Ord. Proposed Ord. Proposed Ord. Proposed Ord.
Richfield 35,376 Yes * No N/A N/A 3 3 Yes No Amendment Amendment Amendment Amendment * Started process to amend ordinance.
Coop floor a Minimum of 75 feet
minimum of 12 from adjoining Must obtain written permission from neighbors
Rosemount 22,139 Yes Yes $25 annually N/A 3 3 No N/A Yes inches and not Yes residential shows yards border the property. Maximum loft
more than 24 structures and a height is six feet. Must screen loft or coop from
inches above minimum of 10 from view by fencing or evergreen plantings.
ground. property line.
5 ft. from property
Roseville 33,807 Yes No N/A NIA No limit No limit Yes N/A No No Building Permit line and 6 ft. from Not regulated.
house
Savage 27,147 No
Shakopee 37,652 No Only in Rural or Ag Districts
30 feet from
Shoreview 25,118 Yes $30 for two years 2 years At the time permit is 4 4 No No Yes Yes residential
issuetl.
structures
South St Paul 20,275 No
St Louis Park 45,505 No
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Survey of Other Communities
November 2012
Ci Po ulation PoultrylFowf Allowed License Re Permit Amount Ins ecfions Re . Max. No. of Chickens # of Hens Roosters Butcherin Coo Re uired Coo Standards Coop Inspection or Coo Setbacks Comments
ry p on Urban Lot p ' p q g p a p Bldg. Permit p
Coop and pen 3 ft. sitle antl rear No chickens in the house. Must provide a secure
Not yet Every two must equal at yard setback and 6
Stillwater 18,299 Yes determined years. Periotlically 5 5 No No Yes least 10 sq. ft. of Yes ft. from other and well ventilatetl roofed structure. An attached
area per chicken. structures.
pen and protective overhead netting is required.
West St Paul 19,605 No A minimum of five acres is required.
White Bear Lake 23,820 No Council votetl it tlown two years ago.
Wootlbury 63,143 No Chickens allowed on five or more acres of land.
52 Communities Surveyed
17 Communities (33)% allow poultry/fowl on urban residential lots
35 Communities (67%) prohibit poultry/fowl on urban residential lots
Five communities in the process of evaluating ordinances.
Cottage
� Grove
� Pride and PrpSPerity Meet
Legend
!"�t':I Residentiai Parceis Greater than 1 acre
� City boundary
Mississippi river
Major Roads
.: . .; , .,, ' Q , f!"� >�' ._''� .:I
� gSYH Sfi (CR a � i�...�� W �q ... _.
>,
�' a � Ri J
� ¢ xni��� ..
o _.
n-- � _ . . ¢.. i_' .., r�s ,
�. � �
- o �� �. , '��a
.��: .
., . �-o�, ��: I � - _. ^ _,�
' '°°""`� �bTH ST (C:SA . �_ �
��` �' ,
� � f .W N -
9 C 2 Z
C, ,' � N O ' w .
F` } r Y = a � _
S � Z _ � � U � ' '
L� s� �� a: ¢
3 '�..Ci � C �... ,
.9 .. ` . . ' . �.
�OTH ST gj
- ,_,-..�,
FA � s�o z�
T E r�L �� d �� .
H �� ���� . � �O� �. . . . . o ?65TH S�
.... . .. Gc� �. . . ; . V � rt
. _..._ I . � p ' ���. .GQ ��: j
' �I� �� -- I
TH S7 (C.S.A.t{
, ,_�
�
.._._ . . s e �� 77TH ST�...._
� _ _ � - __ ._.,.�,,.—.""�'_'
-", �
� . .. � �Q, � . . '< . .
ti � –
, e�
c
.. �..- � . Q' .. BOTH ST� �'m
. .. .,__. . ..
... �___ .u�. - o:
w
� ' . �. J
Q - _ -
} ,,_ `; _
W `` � ..
� ____ , ¢ � 95THST.� , �� _ : . �. � �.
� . __ _ . _ . u.F .,_ � .. �' :,. . � .:..
.. �� t00TH S� �� � y
`
' ,., i ...1 \ �.�_. � z�l .. . __ , c
. � ,.. � T �' `, P
. - � I ' ' •�.. .1DOTHST __._.. fl .F'°p '�.
_ _ __..
i �� ! �
" . 103RD STI ' �. . O I �
' W ¢ S
�
�
_• / ��. ,> � p � . I__ �.
/ J �, ...._._.� ... »."___ '._.... . { . . .
.! J' i . i� �'.,
Q
W �
I I
r :� � � , -° 1' I ',
• _ �� tto r , �
; � o � _...._ _.. , � �� � ._..
�
_ . __ o
,J
.� . . . T��� � R ., � 9 �� .... ... . - , .� , .
__ _ - -' .. - ���. _ . `�
�, _
, ..�.
�� _ _ , ' �
. �
, __._� ' ��j.
. — N ;;�
_ �, . .
�
_ - _ _.._.� . .
- _ , - _ _ _.. W E
_
- __ _
.S
RESIDENTAIL LOTS GREATER THAT 1 ACRE
¢
w
Sarah J. Sonsalla
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
�
�"� (612) 337-9284 telephone
p � (612) 337-9310 fax
�'����V� ssonsalla@kennedy-graven.com
_ _ v _ _ � http:Uwww.kennedy-graven.com
CHARTERED
MEMORANDUM
TO: John McCool, Senior Planner
Craig Woolery, Director of Public Safety/Chief of Police
FROM: Sarah J. Sonsalla, City Attorney
DATE: May 8, 2013
RE: Amendment of Chapter 4 of the City Code to Include Chickens, Ducks, and Other
Animals as Pets
I reviewed the changes to the Chapter 4, the Animal Control section of the City Code that
were proposed by Council Member Thiede. In summary, the term "domestic animal" has been
removed and replaced with the term "pet." A"pet" includes all of the animals that were defined
by the Ordinance as "domestic animals" but ducks, chicicens, and pot-bellied pigs have been
added. An animal meeting the definition of a"pet" must have primary sleeping quarters in the
house or a heated enclosure and weigh less than 200 pounds. The regulations relating to dogs
and cats have been changed so that they now apply to all "pets."
It is my opinion that by expanding the regulations in this chapter of the Code to apply to
all pets instead of only dogs and in some cases, cats, there would need to be significant
additional changes to this chapter of the Code. For example, the City's regulations on dangerous
dogs have been changed by this proposal to "dangerous pets." The City's current regulations on
dangerous dogs adhere to the provisions set forth in Minnesota Statutes Sections 347.50 —
347.565 which are applicable only to dangerous dogs. If the City would like to regulate
dangerous animals that are not dogs, it will need to change this section of the Code so that it is
clear that the procedure set forth in the statute must be followed with respect to dangerous dogs
and that a different procedure that does not cite to the statute must be followed with respect to a11
other dangerous "pets" (although the procedure could be the same or similar to the one in the
statute).
There are also numerous regulations in this Ordinance that the City may not want to
apply to all "pets," or that are really not feasible to apply to a11 "pets" such as leash requirements
("pets must be continuously under restraint on a leash"), licensing of pets (does the City really
want to license a fish?), the wearing of collars and tags (this is not feasible for some pets such as
a fish), vaccination requirements, and neutering and spaying requirements.
423631v1 SJS CTI55-1
Based on the number of additional changes that would need to be made to this Chapter of
the Code, it is my opinion that if the City wants to allow additional non-domestic "farm" animals
in residential areas, such as chickens and ducks, that it consider adopting separate regulations
that apply to these animals. Since these types of animals are included in the definition of "farm
animal" in the City's zoning regulations, the zoning regulations would also need to be amended
if the City wanted to allow these types of animals to be lcept on an urban residential lot that is
less than five acres in size.
It should be noted that service and therapeutic animals are a separate issue and will need
to be allowed by the City regardless of the City's regulations if it is shown that a reasonable
accommodation must be made by the City pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA"). These types of animals probably do not include chickens and ducks.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you.
423631v1 SJS CT155-1 2
City of Cottage Grove
Planning Commission Minutes (excerpt)
December 17, 2012
Discussion Items
7.1 Continued Discussion on Allowing Chickens and Ducks on Residential Lots
McCool summarized the staff report, which included the results of his survey of 52 other
communities in the metropolitan area, Cottage Grove's Facebook page announcement of the
Planning Commission's consideration of this issue, the results of the Survey Monkey opinion
survey, the results of the survey available at the City Hall front counter, and other written
responses received by the City. He asked the Planning Commission to make a recommen-
dation on whether the Commission wants to direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment
to allow farm animals on urban residential lots. City staff, based on the results of the surveys
and information from the 52 other communities surveyed, recommended that the ordinance
not be amended and continue to allow farm animals on any residentially zoned property that
is a minimum of five acres.
The second alternative reported to the Planning Commission was to prepare an ordinance
amendment to allow farm animals, or specifically chickens and/or ducks in urban residential
neighbors. A tentative schedule on how to proceed was described to the Commission if they
recommended to staff that an ordinance amendment be prepared. McCool reported that the
Public Safety Commission will review this information at their meeting on January 15, 2013.
The Public Safety Department is responsible for the enforcement of animal control. Planning
staff requested the Public Safety Commission and Public Safety staff to participate in any
amendments allowing farm animals in urban residential districts.
Harter asked about portable coops, which are being used for urban chickens to help prevent
property damage. McCool responded that some communities allow those but have specified
setback requirements. The general intent of portable coops is to mitigate matted down ve-
getation in the pen area. Harter stated he would be in favor of getting more public feedback
and looking at amending the ordinance.
Reese noted that public health information was not included in the report.
Rediske stated that the packet included an email from Autumn Carlson regarding Chicken
Run Rescue and asked if it was possible for that group to address the Planning Commission.
Brittain stated most communities allow farm animals but the majority of those cities required
lots to be 1.5 acres or larger. He does not see enough justification to amend the ordinance.
Pearson stated that he has talked to people about this issue and the overwhelming response
is to not allow chickens or farm animals on residential lots. Wehrle agrees that there is an
overwhelming majority of residents that don't want to see poultry in the backyard. He rec-
ommended that the ordinance not change. Ventura stated that an ordinance amendment
warrants a look but is concerned about conversations she has had with residents as well as
many of the comments that appear in the report. There seems to be an overwhelming com-
munity response against changing the ordinance. Rostad commented that he agrees with
the comments for not allowing it. He has surveyed a number of people and there was no de-
Planning Commission Minutes
December 17, 2012
Page 2 of 2
sire for this. He thinks there could be a lot of problems trying to draft an ordinance that
makes sense.
Harter realizes this may not be popular but there probably won't be an overwhelming number
of people with chickens if an ordinance is passed. Most people he knows who have chickens
use them for eggs, not pets or to slaughter. He would like to gather other information that
might work in our community. He would be willing to spend time doing research, including
looking at health and safety issues.
Bob Burtman, 9476 Harkness Court South stated that he has four ducks in his backyard. He
believes most of the people who participated in the survey do not live by anybody with ducks
or chickens. He also noted that lots in St. Paul, which allows chickens, are smaller than his
lot. Regarding getting the approval of neighbors, he asked why a small percentage can dic-
tate what a person can do on their own property. He asked that the ordinance be changed to
allow for chickens and ducks on urban lots.
Kim Carlson, 7687 Hyde Avenue South, stated this past July they had a baby chicken fly into
their fenced backyard that was bound with string around both of its legs. After removing the
bindings, the chicken stayed in their yard for several days. Her daughter watched the
chicken to ensure it was not attacked by neighborhood dogs and cats. The daughter con-
tacted Chicken Run Rescue, which took the chicken. Carlson explained that this group tries
to find owners for rescued chickens. She stated that a lot of issues should be looked at be-
fore making a decision regarding allowing poultry and fowl on urban lots.
Harter agreed that a lot more information could be presented, and he volunteered to
research what might work for Cottage Grove.
Reese stated that he strongly opposes changing the ordinance because of public health is-
sues. The CDC reported a salmonella outbreak due to live poultry in backyards where 200
people were infected in 27 states, 34 percent were hospitalized, and 2 died in October 2012.
Harter made a motion to proceed with the process of an ordinance amendment on the
timeline laid out by staff. Rediske seconded. Motion failed on a 2-to-5 vote with 1
abstention (Ventura).
Ventura stated she would vote yes to continue with further research but feels without that
information if it is too early to start putting together an actual ordinance amendment.
Brittain made a motion to not change the ordinance. Reese seconded. Motion passed
on a 6-to-2 vote (Harter and Rediske).
Rediske agrees with Harter about getting additional information, including having Chicken
Run Rescue speak to the group.
Harter stated that more information is needed before the City makes a decision on an issue
that is becoming more popular.
PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
January 15, 2013
1. Pursuant to due notice, a meeting of the Public Safety, Health and Welfare
Commission was held at the City Hall Council Chambers.
01A. CAL.L. TO ORDER: The January 15, 2013 meeting of the Cottage Grove
Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Hagen, Jodi Lewis, AJ Jannsen, Jim Neuenfeldt, Dave
Barkow
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lori Hedican, Nick Maciejewski
STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Director of Public Safety Pete Koerner, Fire Chief Rick
Redenius, Senior Planner John McCool
01 B. Approval of agenda:
Chairperson Brian Hagen presented the January 15, 2013 agenda of the Public Safefy,
Health and Welfare Commission for review. On a motion by Commission member Jim
Neuenfeldt, seconded by Commission member Jodi Lewis, the January 15, 2013
agenda was accepted and approved by the Commission. Motion carried.
2. OPEN FORUM
Chairperson Hagen invited citizens present to address the Commission regarding any
matters that were not on the approved agenda.
There being no items, Chairperson Hagen closed the Open Forum segment of the
meeting.
3. Community Development Presentation
03A. Senior Planner John McCool regarding poultry and fowl
Senior Planner McCool provided the Commission with a short presentation. He
informed the Commission that at the Planning Commission's January meeting, it was
decided not to proceed in drafting any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance or Animal
Control Ordinance for this matter and that some of the Commission members
expressed concerns for health risks that these types of animals might pose in urban
neighborhoods. They requesfied that the Public Safety, Health and Welfare
Commission also have an opportunity to review and make recommendations.
Page 2
PSHWC Meeting
January 15, 2013
At the conclusion of the presentation, the Commission was asked to make a
recommendation whether or not amendments fo the City Code should be drafted for
purposes of allowing poultry and/or fowl in the backyard of urban residential lots.
The Commission's main question and concern was how the City would enforce the
ordinance if amended and what would be the challenges. They were advised that none
of the cities surveyed were able to estimate a dollar amount for time spent on
enforcement. If asked, Law Enforcement could do a review of calls for service
pertaining to complaints on poultry/fowl in their cities but this would provide a number
only. John McCool did note that the amount of people wanting poultry/foul would be a
small percentage.
Another Commission member did ask who from the city would enforce? Captain
Koerner advised the Commission that enforcement would need to be a coordinated
effort. The animal control portion would be handled by the Community Service Officer
and anything pertaining to the coop would be handled by the Planning Department. A
similar comparison is that with a dangerous dog, the Community Service Officer works
with the City Clerk to ensure proper registration and compliance. We do coordinate the
kennel inspection with the planning department/code enforcement.
The Commission was concerned about the type of coop and how we could enforce the
upkeep and to keep it clean. Commission members felt that if the coop did not receive
routine cleaning that it would create a health hazard. ln regards to coop locations, they
were concerned about setbacks from neighboring yards. It was felt that if there were
an amendment that the license fee would need to be set high to ensure the person
would maintain the coop.
Commission member Jannsen was aware of "urban farming" however would not want to
see the chickens slaughtered on site.
Commission member Neuenfeldt commented in regards to lot sizes, a concern was that
if allowed in a smaller lot, how much of the lot is actually taken from the home/structures
and driveway. A comment was made that at least 3 acres would be needed.
The Commission also commented about having one hundred percent of the neighbors
being in agreement with a homeowner being allowed. Commission members felt this
would be very difficult to get one hundred percent.
Page 3
PSHWC Meeting
January 15, 2013
After an opportunity to ask questions and have discussion, a motion to not proceed in
drafting any amendments to the Zoning Ordinance or Animal Control Ordinance for this
matter was made by Brian Hagen, seconded by Jodi Lewis. Motion carried.
The Commission had no additional comments at this time and thanked him for his
presentation.
4. OLD BUSINESS
None at this time.
5. NEW BUSINESS
None at this time.
6. RESPONSE TO PREV(OUSLY RAISED COMMENTS AND REQUEST
None at this time.
7. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND REQUESTS
None at this time
8. STAFF REPORTS
Q8A. POLICE - Captain Koerner advised the Commission that fwo new police
officers have been hired, Nick Bailey and Scott Schaver. Nick Bailey was a
Reserve and CSO here and Scott Schaver was on the Fire Department for 9
years and was a CSO here as well. He added that the city will be hiring two
replacement CSOs.
Captain Koerner informed the Commission that the city has an agreement wifih
the Woodbury Animal Humane Society to use as our impound facility. Our 10
year agreement with Park Grove Pet Hospital has ended and cost savings was
an issue for agreeing to use the Animal Humane Society.
There is a drop box for unused medicine drive up located at the South
Washington County Service Center so now citizens won't have to drive to
Stillwater to drop off their unused medicine.
City of Cottage Grove
Planning Commission Minutes (excerpt)
January 28, 2013
Discussion Items
7.1 Update on Allowing Chickens and Ducks on Residential Lots (Public Safety Com-
mission Discussion)
McCool reviewed the previous steps taken regarding allowing poultry and fowl on residen-
tial lots and the future direction to the City Council on February 6, 2013. He also reviewed
the Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commission's recommendations.
Heurung asked how many families have chickens or ducks on urban lots. McCool
responded that there is one property with chickens and one with ducks. Heurung suggested
grandfathering the current properties so they can keep their chickens and ducks. McCool
stated that because chickens and ducks have never been permitted, there can be no
grandfathering.
Harter asked about granting an individual variance. McCool stated that they can make ap-
plication for a"use" but the court does not recognize that.
McCool then discussed a request to allow a service pig.
Bob Burtman, 9476 Harkness Court South, read a statement outlining his position to allow
poultry and fowl on residential properties.
No action was taken by the Planning Commission.
Poultry and Fowl Ordinance Questionnaire Summary
City Council and Advisory Commission
an
Email Commission Total Questionnaire
Responses Mtg.Apri120, Responses Responses
2013
11 20 31 1. Accept the Planning Commission's and Public Safety, Health and
9 14 23 (74%) ❑ YES Welfare Commission's recommendations not to amend City
2 6 8(26%) ❑ NO ordinances to allow poultry and/or fowl in the back yard of urban
residential lots.
11 16 27 2, Amend the City's Zoning Ordinance to change the five acre minimum
3 5 8(30%) ❑ YES requirement to a different minimum acreage requirement.
8 11 19 (70%) ❑ NO
a) If you think there should be a change for the minimum acreage
requirement, what should that change be? (check one)
� � 10 acres
� 2 ❑ 5 acres (current requirement)
❑ 4 acres
1 ❑ 3 acres 73 % of the responses said one acre or greater.
❑ 2 acres
� 2 ❑ 1 acre
� ❑ 0.50 acre
� � ❑ 0.25 acre
b) Neighboring property owner/tenant's written approval? (check one)
5 3 ❑ 100 % adjoining landowner/tenant. (41% of the responses)
� 2 ❑ 100 % property owner/tenant within 150 feet.
2 2 ❑ 100 % property owner/tenant within 500 feet,
� Less than 100% and 150 feet.
1 � None of the above — Alternatives needed.
c) Minimum setback between coop/pen to a neighboring residential
dwelling. (check one)
4 4 ❑ 100 feet
1 1 ❑ 75 feet
3 3 ❑ 50 feet
� 2 ❑ 25 feet
❑ 15 feet
❑ 10 feet
COMMENTS RECEIVED:
1. No poultry or fowl in urban residential — Huge administrative problems.
2. Need further study. Need to address other animals like goats, pigs, etc. Be more comprehensive.
3. This belongs on farmland, not residential.
4. Just say no. Nothing real good coming from this. Dirtiest and smelliest fowl. They carry diseases and
parasites. Lice outbreaks.
5. Pilot trial this year. Allow 20-30 families for one year then revaluate.
Vote NO for Chickens on May 15, 2013
City Counsel/Public Safety
May 9, 2013
Smell — you can't clean up behind chickens like you can dogs - all the chicken wastes soak into
the ground — when it rains there was an intense sour smell. The top layers of dirt would need
to be replaced to get rid of the smell. I lived on a farm with chickens.
Tax Payers Money — the police come out to monitor our pet owners with barking dogs and
dogs at large — who are they going to pay to catch the chickens "that accidently got loose"?
-Priorities -How much money does our city and county governments want to pay to monitor
and control the behavior of the people with chickens. Look at all the time and money already
spent to hash over allowing chickens in our neighborhoods at the expense of all for a handful
of people —the chicken owners may make it sound like the policy is for all the people But in
reality — think about it. We have approximately 33,000 people in the city.
People opposed spending our hard earned money on a much needed city hall which works for
all the people not just a handful.
Chickens - Thorn in the side of their neighbors — one more thing to bring unrest in our
neighborhoods. Adding fuel to the fire - another way to draw the neighbors into another
neighbors problems.
Too Menial to Report! how silly does it sound to call the police to come out due to chickens
running around our neighborhood. When I called the police for crimes of my neighbors —the
neighbors would laugh at me and say — their crimes were to menial to report And/But the
people Don't quit — if the menial crimes don't �et dealt with the crimes �et bi��er and bi�ger.
Like dogs — then people will want to start bringing the chickens into our eating establishments
or want a park just of chickens — because the people as they are Don't quit.
Crimes in Court —neighbors being charged in court for (Careless Driving — because someone
almost hit a chicken). ?(Murder because someone driving threw ran over the chicken or the
neighbor had the chicken for lunch). ? The chicken (animal) becomes one of the family and
therefore can used to control others in society. Sounds absurd but it happens people being as
they are Don't Quit.
Page 2
If — and I say If- the code/policy is passed to allow chickens in our neighborhoods;
a. Charge the owner $50 per chicken to have them licensed.
b. If —the police are called even one time on the chicken owner — have all chickens
removed from property and revoke any further license to own chickens in town.
c. Policy to say — license tags must be kept on chickens at all times as do cats and dogs in
our neighborhoods.
d. Charge the chicken owner $100 per chicken if not licensed.
e. As part of policy the owner carry a bag to pick up any droppings left behind when taking
their chicken for a walk.
f. If the chicken is caught on someone else's property they can have it for supper. When
we were kids on a farm — we had chickens as pets but when it came to prepare for
winter the pets became supper.
I went to a garage sale off 80 — I mentioned chickens and the women started (aughing
— she said I never saw this before but one of her neighbors walked by with a chicken on
a rope - May 9, 2013.
Sincerely,
�,°���.- � � ���-�-� �.
GLORIA B. TRUAX
Concerned Citizen
i / i i � '
P �l,e,'�'l�- � (� S /> 7 (�g�n �`��—�
Apri122, 2013
Dear Neighbors,
I am not sure how many of you know that I have been dealing with the City Council and other City
Commissions ever since the neighbors that live behind us made a complaint about our ducks last August.
After that complaint, I asked 19 of you who live around us to put your names on a petition asking the Ciry
to allow us to keep the ducks. It hasn't been that easy. To do this, the City Council needs to amend the
current animal ordinance. In the last nine months, there has been much discussion and information gathering
by the City so as to make a responsible decision regarding this issue. There has also been one article in the
Star and Tribune which came out on Thanksgiving Day and at least three articles in the Washington County
Bulletin. This is an issue that come across the desk of many other Cities in Minnesota in the last few years.
Just because this ordinance could be changed doesn't mean that all of a sudden everyone in Cottage Grove
is going to have chickens or ducks in their backyards. In all of Duluth where this is allowed, for instance,
there are only 30 known coops. I believe that there may be a vote on May l and I am not sure what the
outcome will be. So once again, I am asking you, my neighbors, to help me out with your comments to our
City officials. You can write to them at: Attention: Mayor & City Council, City of Cottage Grove, 12800
Ravine Pkwy. S., Cottage Grove, MN 55016, or you can go online to cottage-grove.org then click on
Contact the Council under GovernmentlMayor & Council. You then can either send an email to the Mayar
and each Council member or try to contact them by phone. I thank you for helping me out with this matter.
If you have any questions, feel free to give me a call.
Sincerely,
Bob Burtman �
,/"
s
� J
, �����
��:..�-% e� _. � � ,
� �
��
�
��--�✓ � -�� -� ..--��' `�-�'� �' `�-�-''�,�-�-. `'
�' ._ � � � ` �
�� , �
�! �
�
� i �
�
. ��� � �
.�-�---�-z..� .�..�,�,�- . �� -�'.�-- ;
�/� -:��"��''��.a--� �
�%�-��-'
� � � /� � ��'
��
Chicken Run Rescue
PO Box 11742
Minneapolis, MN 55411
chickenrunrescue@comcast.net
April 20, 2013
We thank the City Council and advisory commissions for the
opportunity to share what we have learned about caring for
chickens and other domestic fowl in an urban environment.
Recommendations for Cottage Grove
DO NOT reduce lot size limit
OR if lot size limit is reduced
• Permit as pets only
• DO NOT prohibit roosters
• Prohibit slaughter, breeding, sale or barter
• Limit number of birds to 5 or fewer
• Require 100% consent of neighbors
• WRITTEN guidelines for care
• Cap number of permits
• Allot for additional administrative staff and resources
• Allot for enforcement and capture training
Help all animals by adopting a plant based diet.
Help individual chickens by adopting them as companions.
http://www.chickenrunrescue.org
John McCool
From: Angel Popowitz <angelpopowitz@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 3:11 PM
To: John McCool
Subject: Re: Meeting
John, what can be done about this? So the city council has rules about people filing out special
paperwork to do exactly what they are doing but they can wave the fee's, and the paperwork,
and just allow people to keep breaking the city laws? How long can this go on? It seems like
they are just going to sweep it under the table because they don't have the 60 day time frame
that the paperwork adheres them to. Is there no rules on making some sort of decision or
holding up the laws?
Angel Popowitz
www. angelpopowitz.blo gspot. com
From: John McCool <jmccoolna.cottaqe-qrove.orq>
To: 'Angel Popowitz' <anqelpopowitz(a�yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 2:18 PM
Subject: RE: Meeting
Son•y for the change in meeting dates. I do not know when the City Council will want this issue back on their
agenda. As soon as they decide, I will notify you of the meeting date as soon as I'm told when it will be.
John McCool, AICP
Senior Planner
651-458-2874
-----Original Message-----
From: Angel Popowitz [mailto:angelpopowitz(a�yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 11:28 AM
To: John McCool
Subject: Meeting
Just wondering why the packet you previously sent me for the meeting today is not on the agenda anymore
tonight? I work evenings and I took off work for this meeting, it would be nice for a little heads up if its not
being talked about again??? Thanks.
Angel Popowitz
Www. angelpopowitz.blo�spot. com
An eg lpopowitz(c�yahoo.com
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
John McCool
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Angel Popowitz <angelpopowitz@yahoo.com>
Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:38 PM
John McCool
Duck feces
more information on E Coli and Duck Feces:
study of the % of ducks in a duck fa��n that have E Coli:
htt� ://scialer�t.net/fulltext/?doi=aj ava.2012.3 51.3 5 5
Research Article
Isolation of Escherichia coli from Ducks and Duck Related Samples
F. Adzitev, C.Y. Lievv, A.P. Aronal and N. Huda
ABSTRACT
�he conventional met
�amnles were obtaine
Farm A (80.33
samples exam
1 (82.44%). T
for EscherichiG
consequently f
hod was used to isolate Escherichia co/i from ducks and duck related samples, The
d'from a wet market and two duck farms. The average occurrence ofEscherichia
was highest in duck faeces (87.93%), followed by duck intestines (81.25%), soil
rater (50.00%) samples. The prevalence in Farm B(90.45%) was higher than in
� occurrence of Escherichia coli did not differ significantly (p>0.05) among'the
� addition, most of the isolates belongs to the serotype 0517 (82.44%0) and biotype
y'indicates that ducks like other farm animals are primary reservoirs'
odborne poisoning or illness e
ypes and the opportunity for cross contamination and '
through the consumption of contaminated food.
F. Adzitey, C.Y. Liew, A.P. Aronal and N. Huda, 2012. Isolation of Escherichia coli from Ducks and Duck
Related Samples. Asian Journal ofAnimal and Veterinary Advances, 7: 351-355.
DOI: 10.3923/ajava.2012.351.355
URL: http:/Iscialert.net/abstract/?doi=ajava.2012.351.355
ANOTHER ARTICLE ABOUT AVIAN FLU/BIRD FLU :
i
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hello,
autumnfall555@yahoo.com ,
Wednesday, March 20, 2013 8:01 AM
Kathy Dennis; John McCool
Re: City Council Workshop - Poultry & Fowl Discussion
Cottage Grove presentation.docx
I appreciate the email regarding the city council and the poultry and fowl discussion. Thank you!
I received an email today from the Chicken Run Rescue, an organization that was mentioned at previous city
council meetings. The owner provided me with a presentation similar to the one they gave to Golden Valley on
the chicicen topic. The presentation was updated to fit the Cottage Grove situation. I would love if you could
pass this on to city council members so they can talce a look at the information the rescue provides. Thank you!
Here is the presentation:
Autumn Carlson
�`_ —"_. �
IViHr�
CRR Presentation to Cottage Grove City Council
3/10/13 --
1. Chicken Run Rescue is the only urban chicken rescue organization in the country.
CRR has worked with Minneapolis Animal Care and Control (MACC) since 2001 and
with the Animal Humane Society's 5 Metro Area shelters since 2007. After their
release from impound, Chicken Run has provided close to 850 birds and a few goats,
pigs and sheep with temporary shelter and vet care, located and screened adopters
within 90 miles of the Twin Cities and transported the birds to their new homes.
CRR currently has 767 Metro Area subscribers to our adoption newsletter whose
primary interest is caring for companion chickens.
CRR is a primary stakeholder in any policy affecting animals intended for
agricultural purposes in the City. We have invested $80,000 since starting CRR, not
including substantial wages lost from our small business.
As of March 2012, over 400 permits have already been issued by MACC (up from 26
in 2001) and approximately 15 new applications arrive per week. MACC staff is
working diligently but is months behind in processing paperwork and performing
inspections. The City lacks the means to regulate and enforce what is currently
allowed.
Permitting of an animal is a privilege not a right because it impacts the resources of
tax funded municipal services such as animal control. There are provisions in city
ordinances for the keeping of companion animals because they are widely viewed as
family members and as long as the animals are properly cared for and they do not
negatively impact other residents in densely populated neighborhoods, that practice
is compatible with urban living. Many other municipalities currently revising urban
farm animal policies will inevitably need to revise them again once the long-term
consequences of such activities become apparent.
2. Some recent incidents indicate that proponents of urban animal farming object to
government interference and regulation.
-- In 2009, MACC requested an increase in permit fees to cover expenses of the
increasing number of permits. The requested amount was cut in half by pressure
from urban animal farming proponents. If city residents are unable or unwilling to
pay the application and permit fees to cover the City's costs for regulating domestic
fowl, what is the likelihood of investing in their proper care?
-- This is a quote by Novella Carpenter, an urban animal farming activist in Oakland,
CA:
"Our particular neighborhood is called Ghost Town. It's because there are so many
abandoned lots. There's drug dealers on the street, there's prostitutes, people
growing weed... I take this sort of state of anarchy of our neighborhood to my
advantage."
�
;
!U i,i
a
- �J
1
� —__ --- �
� �
MAK 0 �u ►;i '
I've provided a link to her 2011 video interview titled: Obsessives: Urban Farming:
Novella Carpenter's backyard is a pigsty.
http://www.chow.com/videos/show/obsessives/55298/obsessives-urban-farming
I encourage Commission members to view it. It should strike fear in the hearts of
City Planners, neighborhood associations, residents and people who care about
animals everywhere.
- In July, 2011, CRR received a report about an urban farm located at 24th Street and
Snelling Avenue alongside the Hiawatha Light Rail that introduced a flock of 49
birds that May. However, repeated vandalism by local youths and complaints about
the lack of care and protection of the birds brought the egg business to a halt in July.
Business owners reported that the urban farm had to be relocated 3 times due to
complaints from neighbors.
- In the summer of 2011, Theo Wirth Children's' Garden coop was removed after
repeated theft of birds, vandalism, shoddy appearance and concern for safety and
care of birds caused Bryn Mawr Neighborhood Association to complain to
Minneapolis Park Board.
- In February, 2012, a 311 public comment site (now removed) was full of boasts by
people who posted that they have had chickens for years and Animal Control does
nothing about it due to lack of staff and funds to enforce.
- Prior to 2012, urban animal farming activists in Oakland, CA have used the term
companion animals to open door to urban farm animals and are now pushing for
slaughter. Oakland resident Ian, Elwood, Co-Founder of Neighbors Opposed to
Backyard Slaughter, wrote:
"The "Animals Ordinance"
In El Cerrito, California a group of residents convinced the city to create an "animals
ordinance," allowing people to keep pigs, goats, and chickens in the backyard. The
city led the majority of people to believe that residents wanted to keep these
animals as pets...
By leading the general public to believe that the new animals being shepherded into
the city were pets, they avoided public scrutiny on a crucial issue to their cause.
Slaughter. Once the discussion around slaughter began, it created controversy, but
not enough to change the course of the originally proposed ordinance. Since
slaughter was not explicitly addressed by the policy, it left the door open for people
to kill the animals in their yards. But the public still believed that the original
ordinance - the one that referred to goats, rabbits and chickens as pets - was the
same law that was passed.... In addition to ethical concerns, animal farming can be
expensive, and could easily cost more money than most Oakland residents could
afford. Allowing animal farming only appeases those in Oakland who have animal
farms as hobbies, writing boolcs, blogs and articles for locovore food columns about
their mis-adventures in animal farming in the city."
2
�-----�- -----�
MAR 1 0 2013 �
A
�
3. Permit compliance is a challenge to enforce.
For every permit there can be anywhere from 3 to 25 birds per household. These
figures only include city residents actually going through the required permit
process and do not include people who are unaware of or unwilling to get permits.
There could be anywhere from 540 to 4500 new permitted chickens in Minneapolis.
Since the compliance rate for cat licenses is about 3%, its reasonable to assume the
same for chickens, so there could be an additional 18,000 to 150,000 un-permitted
chickens in Minneapolis alone. The same trend is occurring in St. Paul, Metro Area
suburbs and nation wide. Those figures do not include the number of offspring that
might be produced by accidental or intentional breeding.
Animal complaints rank at the top of the demands for city services in Minneapolis.
The explosion of activity has created a whole new population of animals requiring
regulation, administration of permits, enforcement / inspections, sheltering costs
for impounded / seized / surrendered birds, and complaint response including
residents engaging in backyard slaughter which is an issue of concern for zoning
and health agencies as well. Chickens attract flies, bird mites and lice, mice, yard
birds, squirrels, raccoons, dogs, coyotes, fox, mink, opossum, rats, owls, bobcats,
hawks, snakes, weasels and vandals.
Other public hazards exist as well- I've provided a link to 2/27/12 Fox News
coverage headlined as Urban Chicken Farm Fire Scare in Minneapolis
http://loku.com/content/urban-chicken-farm-fire-scare-in-mpls#
4. Capture of strays taxes an already overburdened and understaffed agency with a
whole host of new challenges, not the least of which is the time consuming task of
capturing strays. CRR is routinely contacted to capture strays who local agencies
have been unable or unwilling to catch.
5. Abandoned, seized, surrendered birds abound.
As illustrated by the chart Increased Demand for Placement of "Urban Farm"
Animals,
(http://www.chickenrunrescue.org/surrender_chart.pdf�
backyard chicken-keeping raises serious concerns about ordinance enforcement
issues, and the burden placed on already overwhelmed local shelters and rescue
organizations when birds are abandoned, seized, or surrendered- particularly for
the unwanted roosters (always pitched to CRR as 'beautiful, friendly, very loved
since they were chicks and don't want them to go somewhere where they will be
eaten' and won't use craigslist because the people are creepy.)
-birds abandoned, seized, or surrendered arrive almost always in groups, not as
single animals.
6. The condition of the birds we receive are in increasingly poor condition as
illustrated by the chart Veterinary Expenses for Urban Rescues as Indicator of Poor
Care
C�
� � -- ��
'' MAR � 0 2013 ?
��
,
(http://www.chickenrunrescue.org/vet_chart.pdf�
The most common causes of health issues are associated with inexperience or
indifference and require vet care:
• Inadequate Shelter: frostbite, hypothermia, heat stress, infectious disease,
injury, parasites, foot problems, stress
• Improper Food: emaciation, dehydration, nutritional deficiencies, toxicity,
feather loss, reproductive disorders
• Poor Breeding Practices: deformities, organ failure, neurological disorders,
blindness, infectious disease, mutilation (de-beaking, pinioning)
• Overcrowding: stress, injury from aggression, over mating, feather loss,
infectious diseases, injury, parasites, lack of access to shelter, food and water, rest
• Caging: feather loss, stress, injury
- Inappropriate shelter is a huge concern. Chickens are Tropical Jungle Fowl and
require serious protection in Minnesota climate. According to the Minnesota
Department of Agriculture, "Minimum Temperature 55°(f�, maximum temperature
70°(F)"* is the optimal temperature range for the health and comfort of the birds.
*Poultry Your Way: A Guide to Management Alternatives for the Upper Midwest", 2005
Other dark consequences of the chicicen keeping fad:
- killing and disposal of males who comprise 50% of the birds hatched (see "INSIDE
A HATCHERY", with footage of chick sexing, rooster disposal and de-beaking.)
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/video-shows-chicks-ground-alive-
iowa-egg-hatchery-article-1.406395
- killing or disposal of hens whose egg production peaks at 18 months of age. Flock
breeds can live to 14 years but in the wild have a life expectancy of as much as 30-35
years.
- home videos of do-it-your-self backyard chicken slaughter abound on YouTube.
- shipment of day old chicks by mail-a process that subjects them to temperature
extremes, injury, and sustenance deprivation.(our Lowry Post Office hates handling
live baby birds in boxes and complains of crying and crowing. There are no
prohibitions on mailing adult birds.)
- startup costs for caring for chickens average $2000- 4000, supplies and utilities
$300 per year per (privacy fencing is a must)
- vet care has cost us an average of $100 minimum per year per bird and there is a
lack of avian specialists available to treat the birds. At the Minnesota Veterinary
Medical Association Conference in February 2012, there was a presentation
regarding the increased need for specialized veterinary services to identify and
treat chicken diseases emerging in backyard flocks.
7. Recommendations if chickens are to be allowed:
�
� G
�IAR � 0 2013 ,�
4
-- Do NOT prohibit roosters. For every backyard hen, there is a dead or abandoned
rooster. Prohibitions on roosters have no fact based justification and discourages
people from accepting responsibility for all the males winding up in the city. If
chickens are to be allowed, both sexes need to be allowed equally. Roosters can
make wonderful companions and they protect hens, find food and choose nesting
sites. We have had multiple roosters for 11 years and have never had a single
complaint. Our neighbors love the sound and we are conscientious about keeping
them indoors until the ambient noise level of the neighborhood is well underway
each morning. Crowing of roosters should be handled like any other noise complaint
like barking dogs, music, machinery, traffic noise or any other disturbance that a
well written noise ordinance can regulate. If permit neighbors will not sign off on
the permit regardless of the sex, then so be it and no chicken permit should be
issued. Otherwise, the cities that ban them are complicit in the abandonment/death
of 50% of the birds being brought into the city. This would never be acceptable
policy for any other species. Further, the sex of the birds can't be determined until
they are 4-6 months old so it's unenforceable.
Here's some rooster facts to consider:
cockatoo 135 decibels (often constant)
dog 90 decibels (often constant)
med rooster up to 90, decibels (not constant)
bantam rooster (dependent on breed) about 30 decibels (not constant)
hen's egg cackle about 70 decibels (incessant till she lays)
-- Comprehensive and strictly enforced standards of care are essential.
MN cruelty and neglect laws have a double standard for companion animals vs
agricultural animals. Maximum penalty for an act of cruelty to a companion animal
is a felony. The same act of cruelty to a chicken is a misdemeanor unless the owner
can demonstate they kept them as a companion animal. They obviously deserve the
same legal protections from cruelty, neglect and standards of care as dogs and cats.
CRR will be happy to assist with drafting a policy or ordinance. We have worked
closely with Mpls. City Planner on related issues in Minneapolis and she has
requested our participation on a technical advisory board for future chicken related
ordinance plans.
Aly Pennucci, AICP, LEED Green Associate, City Planner, City of Minneapolis
Community Planning and Economic Development, 612.673.5342, aly.pennucciC�minneapolismn.gov
0
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MUNICIPAL REGULATION OF URBAN CHICKENS
(http://www.chickenrunrescue.org/chickencareandrequirerev2310.pd�
was written at the request of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control in collaboration
with MACC staf£ It had been used as a model by neighborhood organizations in
Denver, CO and Oakland, CA and has been endorsed by farm animal sanctuaries all
over the country. There is no other document like it. The last page of it contains
�------ - ,
,
il
�IAR 1 0 7013
specific information that must be included in an effective policy. Housing
appropriate for Minnesota climate and protection form predators is not negotiable.
-- Permit chickens as companion animals only and be prepared to enforce
protections as such.
-- Do NOT prohibit roosters. For every backyard hen, there is a dead or abandoned
rooster.
-- Prohibit breeding, encourage adoption
-- Prohibit sale or barter of eggs
-- Get a slaughter ban in place. The least we can do for animals if they do end up
living in our city is to prevent them from being killed.
One can achieve all of the goals of urban farming (food security, community
building, etc..) much better without animals. Animals are not necessary part of
farming.
Once the animals are allowed it is very hard to regulate what residents will be
allowed to do to them. Perhaps its better to keep animals out of harms way to begin
with.
0
March 9, 2013
Mayor Bailey
Cottage Grove City Hall
12800 Ravine Parkway
Cottage Grove MN 55016
Dear Mayor Bailey,
I would like to offer my support of allowing backyard chickens in residential lots in
Cottage Grove. Having "pet" chickens, which also produce eggs and teach my children
about responsibility and where food comes from, would be very beneficial. I can see that it
is not a topic that the council really wants to pursue further but I think if you took a step
back and looked at both sides you may be surprised.
Several concerns have been raised about backyard poultry. One of those concerns
was noise. I have had plenty of noisy neighbors over the years whether it was a teenager's
choice of car, a constantly barking dog, or repeated late-night parties. Even my own
children are far from quiet and we spend a lot of time in the backyard. There will always be
things that neighbors don't see eye-to-eye on. However, if a homeowner was given consent
by the majority of his/her neighbors to keep backyard chickens then that should be
enough. �
Another'concern is backyard chicken owners who do not take good care of their
poultry. I think you will find that most backyard chicken owners would be responsible
individuals looking to live more sustainably and keep things local. I would expect the
incidence of poorly cared for chickens would be the same if not less than those individuals
who do not take good care of their dogs and cats. Please read attached article "Healthy &
Local Food".
When the planning commission was reviewing the backyard chicken topic one of the
main concerns raised was the risk of Salmonella contamination from backyard poultry. If
they had done further research they would have found evidence that you are much more
likely to contract Salmonella from grocery store meat and eggs than from chickens in your
own backyard. Please read attached excerpt "Q: Is Salmonella a concern with backyard
chickens?"
I hope that you will truly give the issue of backyard poultry the research it deserves.
Sincerely,
� �� ��
cS �
Jill She �ard
Jill Sheppard
9580 87ti� Street South • Cottage Grove MN • 55016
1
Dear Jill,
Thank you for the letter in support of ailowing Chickens in residential lots in Cottage Grove. I
am currently doing a lot of research on this issue. I will tell you I upfront that I have not been a
supporter of this change. I have asked for more data and have even did research on the
chicken group based in Madison Wisconsin. (MadCityChickens.com)
I am concerned with the upkeep and placement within each property where those who want
them may have a neighbor who is against it. (This is currently the case with the requests
currently before us in Cottage Grove)
I will continue to keep an open mind and continue to reach out to other cities to find out how
they are dealing with issues as they arise by allowing chickens and ducks in residential
neighborhoods.
Thank you again for reaching out to me.
Sincerely,
. �r
Myron Bailey
Cottage Grove Mayor
John McCool
From: Angel Popowitz <angelpopowitz@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 5:40 PM
To: John McCool
Subject: Re: Results?
Can you tell me who I need to contact and tall< to them about it? I think it's ridiculous that this issue had gone on as long
as it has. I have expressed my feelings toward this subject to everyone I could think of. I work evenings. I stay home with
my kids during the day and my husband stays home with them in the evening. I don't I<now what more I can say in
person. He is directly next to my house with those ducl<s. I WILL be calling the cops the second we are bacl< hanging out
outside. They are unbelievably loud and they don't stop (as my video displayed). They definitely are under the noise
complaint laws. If they were dogs, they would have to be delt with. So I hope they tal<e that situation under advisement
when they make the next decision. I was also trying to not have to confront my neighbor face to face and now deal with
that situation. Please let me know who I can contact and write them emails or call them. Thank you.
Angel Popowitz
Www.an�elpopowitz.blo�spot.com
An�elpopowitz@yahoo.com
On Feb 8, 2013, at 3:08 PM, John McCool <Imccool@cotta�e-�rove.or�> wrote:
> The City Council referred the matter to their meeting March 20, 2013. They did receive and place on file the
recommendations from the Planning Commission and Public Safety, Health and Welfare Commissions. A few Council
members thought an ordinance amendment should be granted. Others wanted more information, but did not specify
what information they wanted. The owners of the chickens and ducks both attended the meeting and spoke to the
Council about changing the ordinance. Once again, nobody from the public spoke against the proposal. Despite all the
information given to the Council and the recommendations not to amend current ordinance regulations, I suspect some
of the Council members are still interested in allowing these animals in urban residential neighborhoods.
>
> I know you have express your objections to the ducks, but come Council members are not hearing objections or
concerns from anyone, so that's probably why there is still some consideration to change the ordinance. Council
instructed city staff to defer enforcement for the chicken and duck issues until they meet on March 20. We'll have to
wait until then to I<now what they will decide.
> If you still have any objections, you should talk to the Council members.
> John McCool, AICP
> Senior Planner
> 651-458-2874
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Angel Popowitz [mailto:an�elpopowitz@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2013 2:41 PM
> To: John McCool
> Subject: Results?
>
John McCool
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Angel Popowitz <angelpopowitz@yahoo.com>
Thursday, December 20, 2012 125 PM
lohn McCool
Re: Poultry and Fowl - City of Cottage Grove
So since the ordinance will be staying the same, what is being done about my neighbor who has the ducks? Are you guys
enforcing the rules and mal<ing sure he gets rid of them? Does he have a time frame to get rid of them? Thanl< so much!
Angel Popowitz
Www.an�elpopowitz.blo�spot.com
An�elpopowitz@yahoo.com
On Dec 20, 2012, at 12:33 PM, John McCool <Imccool@cotta�e-�rove.org> wrote:
The Cottage Grove Planning Commission met on December 17 and discussed whether or not city
ordinance regulations relative to poultry and fowl in urban residential neighborhoods should be
amended. At that meeting, the Planning Commission decided not to proceed with preparing an
amendment to City Code ordinance regulations to allow poultry/fowl in the back yard of urban
residential lots.
A summary of the Planning Commission's discussion regarding this matter and their decision is
tentatively schedule to be reported to the City Council for one of their meetings in February 2013. Our
office will send a notice to you in advance of the City Council meeting once that meeting date has been
decided. A copy of the materials to be distributed to the City Council will be provided to you before the
meeting.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 651-458-2874. My email address is imccool@cotta�e-
�rove.or�.
,�ohn �1cCooC, AIC�I'
Senior 1�'lanner
6S1-4S8-2874
<image001.jpg>
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.svmanteccloud.com
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Mr. McCool,
Autumn Carison <autumnfall555@yahoo.com>
Sunday, December 09, 2012 6:46 PM
John McCool
Autumn Carlson- Chicken Ordinance presentation
When a chicken flew into my yard this summer we brought it to a chicken rescue in Minneapolis that has taken
in more than 800 chickens over the years. I keep in contact with them and also am a volunteer at The Chicken
Run Rescue. The owner of the rescue, Mary Britton Clouse, has offered to give the Cottage Grove planning
commission a similar presentation of what they were asked to give to Golden Valley Environmental
Commission. They are very knowledgeable when it comes to chicicen issues and ordinances. They also have
written plans to use for inspection guidelines at the request of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control and St.
Paul Animal Control. Having them present would add more information and ideas to the discussion. Let me
know if you would want them to present at a future meeting.
Thanks,
Autumn Carlson
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.svmanteccloud.com
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Mr. McCool,
Autumn Carlson <autumnfall555@yahoo.com>
Thursday, December 06, 2012 5:44 PM
John McCool
Re: Keeping of Poultry in Urban Residential Neighborhoods
�
Thank you for tracking me down and responding. I'm sorry about the email mishap. I appreciate the information
regarding the meeting. I hope the linlcs and resources I sent are useful. I will continue to look for resources that
may be helpful to aid in having an infoz�rned discussion. I will reattach the links I sent before onto this email.
My previous correspondence was done by fax so I don't know how many people wanted to type in all of the
URL addresses to follow the links. I hope that the planning commission will realize what a detriment having
poultry in the backyards of urban lots would be for the animals, neighbors, and the city. I will be attending the
meeting on the 17Th. Thank you for your consideration. Here are some links to loolc into:
Increased Demand for Placement of "Urban Farm" Animals
http://www.chickenrunrescue.or�/surrender chart.pdf
Veterinary Expenses for Urban Rescues as Indicator of Poor Care
http://www.chickenrunrescue.or vet chart.�df
Casualties of Urban Agriculture
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150602336545201.676806.475016785200&t p�e=3
http://www.worldpoultry.netiLayers/Health/2012/ 11 B ackyard-chicken-owners-hurting-birds-1109147 W/
http://www.washingtonpost. com/local/backyard-chicken-boom-produces-fowl-xesult-unwanted-
roosters/2012/11/23/4fd39524-33 de-11 e2-9cfa-e41bac906cc9_story.html
5/1/2012 Utne Reader pown on Their Clucic: Abandoned Farm Animals Fill Humane Societies staff
http :I/www.utne. com/enviroxunent/humane-societies-zmOz 12rnjzros. aspx
2/1/2012 Chow Magazine the Dark Side of Backyard Chickens Joyce Slayton
http ://www. chow. com/fo o d-news/ 104627/the-dark-side-of-backyard-chickens/
http://www.citytv. cozn/toronto/citynews/news/locaUai�ticle/182978--backyard-chicicens-debate-defeired-
indefinitely
Autumn Carlson
1 ��z����
To:1'v�yron Bailey, I�ei�ial� Lehrke, dustin t��sen, Jex� ��tvr�on, I��.ve Tl�iede, .Tr�lziz Burbar�, T�slu1
Iv�cCool, I�athy T7ennis
1 rona: A�zt�uran Car�s�rn
Hello,
M� r�axn� is Auttur� ��,rlson, and T�m a jutiipr �.t p��t �Ii�h Schaal, I pr�vip�u�ly s�nt an. eznAil ta
th� �ity couin�il me�rit��rs and �.1ae masYar About tlie far�vI a�l ���t�ge Grd�ve topi�. r war�ld lik� �o
pravide znvr� i�tt�rm�tic�n f+�r t�iem an� the also t1�� plAnning commissiar�. I�n inter�sted �.n�.
��incetne�, abp�t th� �`ar�vl orcli�t�zice issu� I am �Fpos�c� tc� �llo�in� fc���v1 in th� cit'y af Gc�tk�g�
,��rov� f�rr inulti�le reason� in�Iudi�i� al�arid�n�d fawl, �unn�c��sary st�ferir��, t�pke�p c�sts, anc�
�i2�re. 'th�re are a f�t�v iterr�s #11�'t I would lik� t� brir�� up. Wit�t ��v�ry bacleyara �en thar� �re
ra�sters ��h� �re str�'F�rin�, T�x r�i�ny �iti�s r�oster� �re nat �.11�w�d, �ecaus� zoQSt�r� �r� n�t
�,11�'wed tli�y are se�t� �s dispos�bl� �ncl either cii� �r suffe�r inunens�ly. A1so la�t su�tn�ier 1
found a young Uhick�n in, my ��t��ge C'rrt� bacl�y�rd. Thi� �lucke� �was batrnd by its legs t�xus
havin� �a �nciu�� �ufferi�ig �Eor an ttr�l:c�ld perip� of t�x�. Th� ca�t to ha�use �hickens pra�rer�y is
c�uite a Iar�� �m�uri�, .Annua.11� �nclivid�u�1 chic�Cens �ost $�$$ for the �xtensiv� atnatm1:,af
str�rplies naeded. C�n ta�► of that there are sfar� �p cc�st� t�f �3,87� �zd �v�n mare for veterir�a�rian
costs, Many f�nzl�i�s just d�z�'# have ih� ftr�anci�l nieans �cr ��i�e chi��€�ens prap�r•ly. The ��esults ��`
uninfa�rr�ed citiz�n� c�n be sh���m iii th� �t� Tribim� �rticl� tiii�d "Cattage �rove deb�tes i�
:�o�vl is f�,i�". in this at�lz�Ie th�re i� � pictur� sk��wn of ��hild wh� has ta �er�r� �v�r it� her
�hit�keii's c�pp, This is �,��blernatiG b�caus� chickeiis ar� indeed birds and n��d vertical �p�Ge to
�hri�ve in their 1i�ing t�u�r��r�. Ther� wauld b�; �r� iner�a�i�n� ��ount p� c�sts �s�ooiat�c� �i�11 th�
cit� ofi �attage �rc�ve to ke�� the ru1�s in �lle ordinances upf�elci city wi��. � would �Fpreciate
�her� ta �� an infarm� discussio.� c��l tllis tapiG_ For t�at �����n, T am �endin� �oa�ze linlc� t�at
sl�c����r the ha.t7�#'t�l effe�ts c�f ��xbanlsul�►xt�i�� fo«� k��ping ancl th�t pravici� ��ampl�s o�' what
at�er �citi�� hav� ��n� with tfi� is�t��. Tl�ank y��« far yat�r ��nsid�ratip��„
ht�p:�/�rww.wc�rldpc��liay.n�t/L�y�rsnTea,Ith/�01'�/I Z/B�ckyard.achi�l��n-own�r��hurtin��lairds-
1 � 0� 1471�f
h�t�:f/v�n��.r�a�hingtan�►�st GOITII�OCd1I�A.GjC�&1'd-��11CIt0t1 -bcrt��x7-produ�;�s-fo«1-r��ult-un�uv�ziled-
t�avstc���/ st�ry.httnl
�/1.I201.� �tn� Re�c��a• T:lavrn c�n 7`��eir Cl���,: A�a.t�d�x�ed ��arn� .Animal� Fill �-luman� �ocie���s
sta�iF �tt�:/lw�rr��; utne.cotn/�xlviranmen't/l�urt�an���o�ietie�-�r�a�212mjEr�s.ASpx
�/112Q � 2+�l�aw Iv��gazin� th� .Dark �ic�� r�F �acl€��xd �'hickens Jayc� Slaytan
ht�p://��w�v. cha� b�.�kyard-chick�nsl
ht�p:lJww�v.city�v d-ef�icle�#�s-��ba��.
deferred- inde�initely
Autu�YUi ��rl�an
Z�1ZQ �JG'd �2�OlS �JNI11I�iQ31SISSG' �L5L89LZ59 �� ��� �Z��f9�1Z2
From: Angel Popowitz [mailto:an�elpopowitz@Vahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 5:09 PM ,
To:John Burbank
Subject: Ducks
Hi there. So I was wondering what's going on with this duck situation? I read the star tribune article about this situation.
I don't think you all understand that this man has no space for these ducks. His back yard backs up to the whole side of
my house. His ducl<s are in the farthest bacl< of his yard which is the closest to our side of our house by our deck and
under our kitchen window. I wish you would come out and see where he has these ducl<s placed. Of course any other
neighbor barely hears or sees them because he is on a corner and they are the farthest from everyone else but us!
Please let me know what is happening with this!!! Thank you!!
Angel Popowitz
Www.an�elpopowitz.blogspot.com
An�elpopowitz@Vahoo.com
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
David Campbell <davelcamp@gmail.com>
Wednesday, November 07, 2012 5:34 PM
John McCool
Re: Planning Commission Comments - Report to City Council RE: Backyard Chicken Ord.
Thank you for the update. I do not have a problem with keeping chicicens. I have a problem with my neighbors
keeping chickens, I have this problem because their yard is a dump. � If they were clean and their yard was
maintained (to the city requirements) I would not have complained. I will not get into what I do for a living but
I can assure you that I know about property valuation. Based on my years of experience in this area I can assure
you that my property is worth less money and it will take me much longer to sell my home, simply because
these people live next door.
I have the following recommendations.
1. People who want chickens should not have a legitimate city complaint in the past 3 years. (no trash in the
front yard, no high weeds...). They should have a proven track record of keeping their property in good (city
acceptable) order.
2. The coop and such should comply with specific standards. I would guess that PETA or some other animal
society would have good guidelines.
3. Every neighbor should have to "sign off' on the application. I have rental property next to me so I think that
it is unlikely that the home owners really care.
4. The homeowner should have a 6 foot privacy fence installed to at least the standard of a professional around
the whole bacic yard. I have no problem with the home owner installing the fence but it should be of a specific
quality. . �
5. The homeowner should pay a fee and agree 3 or 4 inspections each year. I think that the property owner
should pay enough in fees to cover this cost rather than making all of the residents pay for their "hobby".
Thanks again for keeping me in the loop.
Robert Janicelc
8571 Jeffery Ave S
Cottage Grove, MN 55016
651-458-1021
October Sth, 2012
City of Cottage Grove
Planning Commission
7516 80` Street
Cottage Grove, MN 55016
Dear Planning Commission et al.:
I am a long-time resident of our City, and I am writing primarily to share information regarding the subj ect
of urban chickens. Although I am a supporter of this topic, I have provided both supportive and not so
supportive information in the interest of the Committee making the best informed decision possible for all
residents in CG. I have also provided some humor, I'm hopeful that this effort does not offend or make
light of this situation, but provide a bit of levity that seems to be often missing in our busy lifestyles.
The subject of urban chicken keeping and city farming are popular topics of late, with many communities
amending existing or adopting new rules for land use including the allowance of what was once considered
livestock animals such as chickens.
On one side of the fence (no pun intended), you have folks who immediately envision cute fuzzy chicks for
their children, or who have a harkening back to their farmstead upbringing, or simply people who have an
irrational fear of food boine iliness and believe that keeping your own chickens for eggs somehow totally
prevents this risk.
On the other side of the fence you have folks that believe chickens are truly farm animals with no
personality and should exclusively be treated as such and that allowing urban chicken keeping will result in
people having cows and horses in their residential backyards and chickens running rampant throughout the
neighborhood.
Somewhere around the fence line is the truth; in fact both sides of the argument above contain blatant
misinformation. If one were to research cities with existing laws the n�uth would probably be more on the
side that urban chicken keeping does succeed and truly is of little or no impact, pro or con, on a city such as
ours.
I'm hopeful that the Committee can see through the emotion and above the ignorance that seems to be
inherently related to this issue and see it for what it really is and that is a handful of people wanting to keep
another type of non-dangerous, quiet, non-intrusive animal as a pet (with egg rewards!). The safety net for
the City on this issue is revoking a potential amendment to city code; it is huly a low risk proposal with
great marketing payoff and revenue generating potential. I urge the commiitee to make an informed
decision based on facts and data, I'm confident that based on facts and data your decision will be a
supportive one.
I look forward to your recommendation to the Council, and politely ask that you keep me infoimed on this
issue via email at bob@bitstream.net.
Sincerely and with due respect,
. ,
p� �7 r� '� rr' r. i�.-.,>.._.. ���
! �;� �� i.-, �,. .. � i_J B
ocr o a 20�2 �
ct�Y c�� carr��� cfzu�i�_ y
POULTRY AND FOWL ORDINANCE SURVEY
FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS
APRIL 30th, 2013
ENFORCEMENT BUILDIN6 INSPECTIONS FOR ANY DISEASE/HEALTH PREDATOR OR
�� LICENSING REQUIRED LICENSING FEES RESPONSIBILITY COOPS IMPLICATIONS RODENT ISSUES
Animal Control or Planning
Department (depending on
ANOKA No None type of complaint) Building Permit/inspection None None
Building Permit if greater than
BLOOMINGTON No None Environmental Health 120 sq. feet None None
BURNSVILLE Yes $50/2 year permit Animal Control/contracted Building Permit None None
Building Permit if greater than
DULUTH Yes $10 annually Animal Control 120 sq. feet None Unknown
Animal Control (if unavailable Building permit required and
EAGAN Yes $50 annually Police handle) inspection by Animal Control None None
Planning and/or building
FRIDLEY Yes $100 annually Planning Department department annual inspection None None
$75 initial/$50 yearly
MAPLEWO00 Yes thereafter Animal Control Yes No No
No (no city Animal Control or Planning
ordinance/enforced Department (depending on
NEW BRIGHTON under state statute) None type of compiaint) None Required None None
$0/up to 3 fowi Animal Control/if unavailable
NEW HOPE Yes $75/4 or more CSO's or Police handle Building Permit required None None
Community Service Officer or
City Inspections (depending on
NORTHFIELD No None type of complaint) None Required None None
Building Permit required/Z
Police Department/Code inspections per year by Code None - however issues None - however issues
OAKDALE Yes None Enforcement by CSO Enforcement addressed at inspections addressed at inspections
Building Permit if greaterthan
RAMSEY No None Police Department 120 sq. feet None None
RICHFIELD No None Community Service Officer None Required None None
ui e ines on y o ui ing
Permit Required (recent
ROSEMOUNT Yes $25 annually Community Service Officer change) None None
Building Permit required if
ROSEVILIE No None Community Service Officer over 120 sq feet None None
One - chickens died from
SHORVIEW Yes $30/2 year permit Planning Department Building Permit required unk disease None
STILLWATER Permit Required Not yet determined Animal Control Building Permit required None None