It seems there may a bit too much ambiguity in the statute that allows for
interpretation of what is reasonable or manageable. Not being a neighbor, I
couldn't say whether the birds are being properly managed but the
accompanying photo seems to show a fairly well-managed bird house with capacity
for proper care of a large number of birds.
I agree that his home should be grandfathered in. South Jordan, shame on you!
Just because a judge has "allowed" the city of South Jordan to destroy
this elderly man's hobby passion, does not mean that it should do so.Yeah, the rule of law and all that (which I usually support), but in the
list of priorities, this should fall somewhere near the very bottom of things
any city should ever take to court, let alone exercise its brute force police
powers over.This is in the same category as sending a SWAT team to
shut down an unlicensed lemonade stand run by a six year old.How
about if the city exert some more effort on policing gangs, cracking down on
drug dealers, or arresting illegal immigrants, instead of busting up an old
man's pigeon loft?But, I can just about guarantee that the city
bullies will carry out the destruction of this man's pigeon loft, just to
show mere "citizens" know who is in charge.Shame on the
city, and specifically any and every city employee or contractor who chooses to
"just follow orders" and engage in such an action.
Doesn't South Jordan have better things to do?
This is what happens when you have a judge and gov't officals making
It seems unreasonable that city or suburban residents move into a farming area
because of the atmosphere and then want to suburbanize or citify the farming
area and get rid of all the animals. Next to go will be the sheep. Farmers are
eventually forced out of business whether they want to stay in business or not,
in many cases suffering losses from which they cannot recover.
First he should be grandfathered in and second doesn't the city have more
important things to do?
Wow! I'm dumbfounded! This is like that story of the police in Orem
dropping the old lady to the ground and arresting her for not watering her lawn!
Unbelievable! Only in Utah are police and city officials so bored and with so
little to do that they have time to go and prosecute an old man for his bird
coop. Talk about government overreach!
I'm kind of surprised at everyone's comments here. There were,
according to the stories, upwards of 300 pigeons at various times. There are
only 2 pigeons that hang out around the balcony at my office, and it is
absolutely disgusting. These aren't farm animals, they aren't
'pets'. They aren't special homing pigeons or show pigeons.
They are rats with wings, that he likes to feed. If he had a reasonable number,
sure, but upwards of 300? That is disgusting, and the city absolutely should be
responding to the neighbors completely reasonable complaints. I'm sure if
your next door neighbor had 300 pigeons, chickens, cats, mice, snakes, sheep,
etc.., everyone here would want something done about it.
I feel like some of these comments didn't read the article at all.
Complain about moving in and changing a rural community? His house was built in
1996, not 1896, he is the guy who moved in. And others believe he should
'absolutely' be grandfathered in. Even if he was, the ordinance back
in '96 said a 'reasonable' amount of birds. In what world is
300+ pigeons reasonable? It just feels like so many people are so ready to
attack anything that 'government' does, they don't even stop and
think for a minute. 300+ pigeons. If it was cats, I don't think anyone
would be talking about how this old man should be allowed to keep his 300+ cats,
because he really likes them, and he had a kitten when he was a kid.
Dansimp, you make a good point. There was an ordinance when he moved in,
although unspecific as to what a reasonable number was, the ordinance's
intent was not changed, just clarified, the birds were not confined to his
property and that amount of birds would make a mess with neighbors' yards.
That number of birds would be a nuisance to the neighborhood. It's a
different situation than it would be with farm animals. If the farm animals are
confined to the owner's property, it's reasonable to grandfather them
in. If they had roamed someone else's property, they are encroaching on
someone else's property rights. As long as he is intentionally feeding
them, not confining them and not limiting their numbers, he's contributing
to the nuisance.
I don't think this guy goes out and brings these birds home to roost so how
he can be held accountable is ridiculous. People put out dog food and cat food
outside and it attracts ground vermin (skunks, rats, mice, moles, and every
thing that flies) and its called survival in the animal world.His
approved zoning permit should be grandfathered and transferable and he has no
control of birds and he can't shoot or poison them so its something the
neighbored will have to live with, they are the intruders, not the pigeons. The
only thing the city can say is how many coops he can have according to his
permit using the same logic limiting the number of cats and dogs a household can
have on one property.Apparently there is plenty of insects and bugs
and worms for the pigeons to flock there and the birds have lost habitat so they
go where they determine it to be safe. I have Dove who nest in my yard and find
them a resource controlling insects rather than a pest.
So, if this guy had a bunch of friends with guns, would he become a national
hero if he mounted an armed resistance?
Then trap the birds and remove some of them but reasonable and manageable are
unenforceable and the district court should overrule in this case.This is
a case where a city employee, the code enforcer, takes a case to another city
employee, the judge, and it is prosecuted by another city employee. Who do you
really think is going to win in this case. The appeal is to a non-city
Feed the birds, tuppence a bag,Tuppence, tuppence, tuppence a bag."Feed the birds," that's what she cries,While overhead, her
birds fill the skies.All around the cathedral the saints and
apostlesLook down as she sells her wares.Although you can't see
it, you know they are smilingEach time someone shows that he cares. Richard and Robert Sherman Feed the Birds
Joe Blow: Stay on topic and don't try to turn this into a gun debate. My2Cents: There is NO reference in the news article about an approved zoning
permit, so where you got that idea is a total mystery.If this were a
cat lady with 100 cats, would you like to be the neighbor? I'll lay odds
that not one of you defenders of personal freedom would like to be neighbors
with 300 pigeons either. Nobody wants to destroy his hobby - until his hobby
begins to infringe onthe rights of his neighbors to the clean and peaceful
enjoyment of their property. Either you make that reasonable accomodation or
you lose the privilege. Saying "it's hard to limit my pigeons"
doesnt' get you a free pass - especially when you are feeding and breeding
Limiting the number to 40 is a simple matter of reducing the space available to
the pigeons and putting out less food. While I agree that some form of
grandfathering is appropriate, these are rats with wings. If he were providing
food and shelter to 300 rats that were free to come and go as they please you
can bet the comments here would be different.He needs to take
measures to limit the capacity of his pigeon house to 40 birds. And 40 is a lot
I live in South Jordan. Thirty years ago, when we first moved here, the city
was agrarian. There were open fields and farm animals everywhere. Gene Fullmer
lived down the street, just across the West Jordan border. But his mother, his
two brothers, Jay and Don, and his sister all had homes in South Jordan. All of
their yards abutted each other. They had sheep and horses on their property. At
one time Gene raised mink. The cities did not interfere.Now, South
Jordan is more like other cities. Some people who move in think that they can
dictate to others how others use their property. Boris Majnaric's pigeons
were there first. Mr. Majnaric has constructed attractive coops for those
pigeons. Should the city hire "hunters" to kill wild birds
because some people find them objectionable? How many robins or quail or
mallards can I allow to fly into my yard and eat from my garden before a
"judge" turns my yard into a shooting range?
To "dansimp" the problem if you grandfather him in under the ordinance
from 1996 is that there is no definition of "reasonable". You may say
10 is reasonable, but he may think 400 is reasonable. How to do you measure
reasonable? If you can't measure it, then it becomes opinion, which can be
different from person to person.