To: Honorable Mayor and Members of Town Council
From: Heidi Hugdahl, Deputy Town Attorney
Title
Discussion/Direction: Animal Code re: Ducks, Miniature Goats and Miniature Pot-Bellied Pigs
Body
________________________________________________________________________________
Executive Summary
Staff is seeking direction and action from Council related to the possibility of making additional amendments to the Town’s Animal Code to allow ducks, miniature goats and miniature pot-bellied pigs.
Background
During the course of the comprehensive rewrite of the Animal Code (in 2018), several residents voiced an interest in the possibility of owning miniature pot-bellied pigs, miniature goats, and ducks. Residents expressed their interest, in written form and during public comment (on first and second reading of Ordinance NO. 2018-013 “AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING TITLE 6 OF THE CASTLE ROCK MUNICIPAL CODE.”) (Attachment A are some of the feedback forms from the initial outreach done in 2017 and 2018, related to the Animal Code rewrite, with a specific focus on ducks, goats, and pigs). Insofar as the Animal Code had been completed and was ready for Council consideration - at the time residents raised the topic of pigs, goats and ducks - Council directed staff to further explore the possible implications of allowing goats, pigs and ducks and to bring the matter back to Council for further discussion.
Toward the end of 2018, staff reengaged in discussions regarding pigs, goats, and ducks. On February 19, 2019, the Town Attorney’s Office brought the matter back to Council, via the Town Attorney report, seeking direction. At that time, Council directed staff to reach out to residents. To this end, a communication plan was prepared to advise residents - through various channels - that the matter would be coming back to Council.
It should be noted that any amendments to the code would not override HOA restrictions. Therefore, any code amendments would have a limited impact throughout Town.
Notification and Outreach
The topic (ducks, miniature goats, and miniature pigs) was referenced in the monthly Town Talk (March 2019), in an informational insert included with residents’ water bills. (Attachment B). Additionally, Town staff had compiled an extensive email list that included all residents who had provided written or verbal comments during the overhaul of the animal code or, who had requested to be included on emails or, who had expressed an interest in the animal related issues. Communications also prepared a news release (March 26), social media posts, including updating the website, referencing the matter as a calendar item, and posting on Facebook (March 26, March 27, April 5, and April 9). Additionally, the Town’s LED sign served to advise residents that the topic would be coming back for Council’s consideration.
On April 9, 2019, the Town held an Open House. (Attachment C are the storyboards staff created for the Open House). Although the Open House was not well attended, a number of residents have given written input in email correspondence and responses to online forms. Additionally, some residents communicated directly with Council and Town staff. (Attachment D are the feedback forms and written comments, received in 2019, related to ducks and miniature goats and miniature pot-bellied pigs).
As part of the process, staff reached out to other municipalities to inquire as to whether they permitted goats, pigs, and ducks. And, in the instances where these types of animals were allowed, what their experiences had been. Some municipalities expressed that they wished they had height and weight limitations on goats and pigs. Some shared that they had license, vaccine and other requirements. Because including ducks into the Town’s Animal Code would easily integrate with the existing provision governing chickens, staff focused primarily on issues related to goats and pigs. In this regard, staff learned the following:
♦ Lone Tree
Allows goats and pigs in certain zone districts.
♦ Parker
Allows pot-bellied pigs, and allows goats in certain zone districts.
♦ Centennial
Allows goats and pigs in certain zone districts.
♦ Douglas County
Allows goats and pigs in certain zone districts.
♦ Westminster
Allows pot-bellied pigs, but not goats.
♦ Montrose
Allows pot-bellied pigs and goats.
♦ Englewood
Does not allow pigs or goats.
♦ Craig
Allows pot-bellied pigs, but not goats.
♦ Fort Collins
Allows goats, but not pigs.
♦ Loveland
Is exploring allowing goats and pot-bellied pigs.
♦ Brighton
Allows pot-bellied pigs, but not goats.
♦ Broomfield
Allows pigs and goats in certain zone districts.
Resident Feedback
In the online forms, several residents requested amendments to the Animal Code, which would allow the keeping of miniature pigs and goats within Town limits. Although some residents simply stated yes or no to the question “Please tell us your thoughts on Town Code related to ducks, mini goats and mini pigs,” some provided additional detail in their responses.
Residents expressed a preference for allowing ducks as an option instead of, or with, chickens. There were not nearly as many comments regarding ducks.
Those in favor of allowing goats generally shared their perspective that urban goats are alternatives to dogs and that they are a source of milk, cheese, and wool fiber. Goats are thought to be playful, curious, affectionate, and intelligent. For the citizens who voiced an interest in allowing goats, generally they stated that goats have personalities similar to dogs and that they help keep “landscapes tidy.” Efforts to appeal to raising goats, as part of 4-H, were also cited as a fantastic way to teach responsibility and to learn other important life lessons. Those who advocated for goats pointed to other municipalities that allow them.
Other residents voiced an interest in miniature pigs, citing the fact that miniature pot-bellied pigs are about the same size as some dog breeds, that allowing miniature pigs would add to both the charm and diversity in Castle Rock, and explaining that these types of pigs have the demeanor and personality of dogs. Others observed the feasibility of litter box training pet pigs and appreciated that they are hypoallergenic. Other residents expressed the viewpoint that pigs are “less smelly” and less noisy then cats and dogs, and that pigs are ideal pets for families with children because pigs keep the same “routine” as a child. Additionally, advocates claim pigs are intelligent and can be walked, on a leash or harness, and litter box trained, and that they make clean and wonderful companion animals.
Finally, a number of residents generally emphasized the importance placed on the responsible pet ownership and a desire to see that all animals are cared for and that they do not create a nuisance.
Residents opposed (again, primarily to goats and pigs), generally cited concerns related to noise and other nuisance related issues. Some thought the proposition was simply “ridiculous.” Others expressed that they were against having farm animals in residential communities. Some stressed that they did not have faith in other residents that they would keep the animals contained or leashed, or that goat and pig owners would clean up after them given the problems attendant to many dog owners in Town and their shortcoming when it comes to responsible pet ownership. Concerns were also raised related to sanitary and disease considerations. Also raised were issues concerning being good neighbors and the potential impact. And, the lack of faith was expressed that people would appropriately license or identify any such animals through microchipping or other means.
Additionally, some residents expressed concern of how HOA’s would handle a possible influx of these types of animals, and inquiries were made about what type of education would be provided. Some residents indicated that there should be lot (size) requirements associated with allowing such animals. Other residents indicated that enacting reasonable provisions for allowing these types of animals provides residents with the “adequate freedom of choice in the pet type choices.” Concerns were also raised relative to being an attraction for other wildlife and other possible unintended consequences. Additionally, some residents expressed worry of potentially negatively impacting property values. However, the prevailing notion was shared that people who want these types of animals should live in rural Douglas County. (For additional considerations identified by staff, please see Attachment C, and the board titled “Additional Considerations Regarding Miniature Pigs and Miniature Goats”).
In the event Council directs staff to bring an ordinance forward, as it relates to miniature pigs or miniature goats (again, because including ducks would easily integrate with the existing chicken provision), staff contemplates that any code amendments would have some variation of the following provisions:
Owners would be required to:
♦ Limit the number to one miniature pot-bellied, and no less or more than two miniature goats.
♦ Microchip or collar their goats or pig with identification tags.
♦ Neutering and spaying requirements (pigs) and only altered males (goats).
♦ Vaccinate their goats or pig.
♦ License their goats or pig with the Town.
♦ Adhere to strict weight, size and breed requirements.
♦ Keep their goats or pig confined to their yards.
♦ Be held responsible for any damage their goats or pig may cause to the property of others.
Additional proposed considerations have also been outlined by staff regarding miniature pigs and miniature goats.
Discussion
Many of the concerns raised by residents have been contemplated and discussed by staff and, to the extent possible, addressed in a draft of proposed amendments to the Code-should Council decide to go in the direction of amending the Code to allow ducks, goat, and pigs or some combination thereof. For example, residents expressed an interest in ensuring that goats and pigs are licensed (with attendant fees), and that they be registered through a bonafide miniature pot-bellied pig, or miniature goat registries or certified by a licensed veterinarian as to the breed, which would address potential concerns related to height and weight. Residents also expressed a desire that such animals be required to have identification. By engaging other municipalities, staff has a sense of problems some municipalities have encountered, and ideas about how to address some of the challenges faced by other municipalities.
However, in the event Council directs staff to bring an Ordinance forward (particularly as it relates to goats and pigs), there are a number of potential challenges (primarily related to enforcement actions, space, and additional costs) to the Town and the possible implications if such animals are purchased and what to do if the novelty wanes.
Staff Recommendations
With regard to adding ducks: Staff believes this can be rather easily accomplished and incorporated into the existing code. (There have not been any significant negative impacts with the addition of chickens).
With regard to allowing miniature goats and miniature pigs: Staff would lean away from making a recommendation but if Council is desirous to move in that direction, then Staff is confident that solutions can be found to most of the challenges that have been identified by staff and that other municipalities have faced.
Budget Impact
If Council directs staff to bring a proposed ordinance forward - amending the code - again, primarily related to goats and pigs, there may be budgetary implications related to increased costs attendant to licensing, enforcement, and housing such animals (in the event they escape and their owners cannot be found or in the event these types of animals need to be impounded or otherwise surrendered).
Possible Council Direction
Council could direct staff to bring an Ordinance back that includes ducks, miniature pigs, and miniature goats.
Council could direct staff to bring an Ordinance back that includes only ducks, or miniature goats, or miniature pigs, or some combination thereof.
Council could direct staff to bring an Ordinance back that limits where in Town ducks, miniature goats, or miniature pigs can reside (for example specific neighborhoods or zoned areas).
Council could direct staff to do nothing further, at this time.
Proposed Motions
“I move to direct staff to bring an Ordinance back that includes _______________________.”
“I move to direct staff to do nothing further on this topic.”
Attachments
Attachment A: Feedback 2017 and 2018
Attachment B: Town Talk dated March 2019
Attachment C: Storyboards
Attachment D: Feedback 2019 and Comments