She said bylaw officers did not raise the noise issue in any of their dealings with them. in R1 districts.Дobler said Mahoney was speaking about her and CzarneckiвЂ™s case. Mahoney specifically cited SectionВ 4.3 of the community standards bylaw, which bans annoying noises between 11 p.m. ItвЂ™s strictly related to the noise of the rooster.вЂќ

вЂњItвЂ™s not related to the size of the property. 24, 2021, committee of the whole meeting, Mahoney, without naming Dobler and Czarnecki specifically, said the county was investigating two rooster complaints under the animal control bylaw. The Gazette was unable to determine if SectionВ 5.4вЂ™s ban on roosters also appliesВ to livestock as defined under SectionВ 7. (SectionВ 7.2 says one animal or bird unit isВ equivalent to one donkey, five llamas, or 10 chinchillas, amongВ other animals.) вЂњIf we didnвЂ™t have birds, we could have 15 llamas. вЂњTheyвЂ™re mixing up Sections 5 (urban hens) and 7 (animal livestock),вЂќ Dobler said. While SectionВ 5.4 bans owners from keeping roosters, Section 5 itself refers to urban hens, which areВ associated with R1 properties smaller than 2.47 acres.ДЄs Dobler and Czarnecki haveВ three-acre plots, they believeВ their properties should be regulated under SectionВ 7.1, which states that R1 properties between 2.47 acres and 3.95 acres in size can keep up to three вЂњanimal or bird unitsвЂќ of livestock, poultry, or fowl, which translates into up to 30 вЂњducks, turkeys, chickens, pheasants, geese, or other similar fowl.вЂќДobler argued SectionВ 5 did not apply to her birds under this provision as they areВ considered livestock. 17 enforcement order signed by Sturgeon County protective services manager Pat Mahoney provided by DoblerВ to The Gazette showsВ that her household had been cited under SectionВ 5.4 of the animal control bylaw.Дobler and Czarnecki argue that this section does not apply to their lands. вЂњMy husband said thatвЂ™s not true, and the officer said, get rid of the roosters.вЂќДЄ Sept. вЂњA bylaw officer came and told us we canвЂ™t have roosters,вЂќ Dobler said. Chicken fightДobler and Czarnecki said they were visited by county bylaw officers inВ May and told to get rid of their roosters within two weeks. She currently hasВ one rooster and 20 hens. She used to have 13 roosters, but cut back to one this summer under pressure from county bylaw officers.ДoblerвЂ™s neighbour, Stacey Czarnecki, has lived in Juniper Hill for four years and has kept chickens for the last three on her three-acre, R1 site. The family brought in its birds early in 2020, prior to the passage of the countyвЂ™s revised animal control bylaw in OctoberВ 2020.Дobler said she currently hasВ about 25 chickens, one rooster, and two ducks. When she bought the site in 2019, she said county bylaw officers told her she could have up to 30 chickens and roosters on the site.

That section states that вЂњno Owner or Hen Keeper shall keep a Rooster.вЂќ вЂњOwnerвЂќ is defined as anyone who keeps any animal, while вЂњHen KeeperвЂќ specifically refers to urban hens.Дobler, who participated in EdmontonвЂ™s urban hen pilot project, has lived on a three-acre site zoned R1 south of Redwater since January 2020. 30 in regard toВ Section 5.4 of the county's animal control bylaw. Juniper Hills resident Samantha DoblerВ isВ set to appeal an enforcement order issued by county bylaw onВ Nov. Two Sturgeon County chicken owners say the county is pressuring them to get rid of roosters they believe theyвЂ™re allowed to have under county law.

Juniper hills ca