Last fall, Councimember Tommy Wells introduced legislation that would allow residents to raise chickens. DCist offers a good explanation on how the legislation would work: "Under the proposal, you'd have to get nearly all of your neighbors to consent before you could legally keep chickens in your backyard, which would be awfully tricky for some people, and you couldn't have a rooster, only hens. Now we'll just have to wait and see whether the rest of the Council are too chicken to go along."

Chickens on every stoop? Not quite. If the Hill East listserv is any indication, getting residents to agree on the issue seems impossible.  After much clucking, the Hill East listserv has had it with even debating the subject. Today at 1 p.m., "Patrick" writes:

"I think the on-going discussion on this List about this topic for the last number of days indicates that there is a significant amount of opposition to changing the current DC rules and ordanances for urban chickens.

The proponents of this change have tested the waters. It has created a considerable amount of debate, but it is apparent that the majority of residents don't want chickens in their back yards.

Is that not enough to encourage the proponents to be good neighbors and drop the issue or is it about inflicting the desires on the few onto everyone else?"

"Everett" thinks Patrick should stop counting his chickens before they hatch. The debate is far from settled:

"I would agree in every way with this post, except that I think the length of this "debate" indicates a significant amount of support for changing the current DC regulations to permit urban chicken husbandry. Moreover, I think this debate has really made clear that while a majority of residents may not want to personally keep chickens, most would certainly support a change in regulations that would permit their neighbors to do so. Also, I think this debate has really highlighted the fact that most people in Newhilleast prefer Sanka over Nescafe."

The debate did seem far from settled. Earlier in the day, "Greg" wrote:

"'You Can't handle the truth' Colonel Nathan Jessep

I am still awaiting on an answer to the question who in the pro chicken camp would have them on the properties in DC that require no amendment to the law from the council. That is the $2+ million dollar propreties in Upper NW with plenty of land. Not One person has said "YES". So I will stick with the Social Misfits label."

Everett also had chimed in:

"So, in other words, you're asking the chicken husbandry supporters on this listserve, a listserve that is populated by people who live in Newhilleast in ~$500K houses on 750 sq. ft. lots, whether, if they lived in far upper northwest in $2 million houses on 1+ acre lots, they would keep chickens? And this and the price of a dashiki in Uganda have what bearing on our support for the amendment to DCMR 24-900?

Oh right. Nothing.

Cheers!
Everett
@16th & D St. SE

P.S. If I were to live in far upper Northwest on a 1+ acre lot, I would not keep chickens. Rather, I would be militating for a change to Chapter 24 of the DCMR to permit me to keep a small herd of guanacos from which I would gather hair to spin into yarn and knit myself a very cozy faux Slanket."

The article says the bill "was drafted on behalf of a Capitol Hill family," who used their small backyard to house eight hens until animal control intervened. Well's Chief-of-Staff, Charles Allen, said that the family and a few friends approached the Councilmember to request legislation.

"This is all part of that sustainable urban life we're trying to create," Allen said, evoking the recent spike in the popularity of community gardening.

Caryn Ernst, owner of the original chickens, told the Examiner that "from our perspective they were pets." She said her family of four garnered "an egg a day" from their fowl friends. "We already go through a dozen eggs a week, and we would love it if our eggs came from our own backyard."

Allen said the hens had been used for lessons at nearby Peabody Elementary School. Students in one classroom incubated an egg, and then raised the newborn chicken.

Ernst said that a "total stranger" passed a tip to animal control, who then came, confiscated the offending chickens, and took them to a farm in Virginia. Since January 2007, the D.C. Department of Health has carried out 28 livestock pickups, according to Communications Director Dena Iverson. "Please keep in mind they were not all confiscated from owners," she said in an email. Most were strays that were scooped up by the humane society. The rundown of captured livestock-at-large, according to Iverson: "20 chickens, 1 duck, 1 goat, 1 sheep, and 5 guinea fowl."

Allen claimed that "several" constituents have sought out Wells to express their support for the bill, but he "wouldn't hazard a guess" as to how many Ward 6 residents would be interesting in acquiring backyard chickens, if the law were passed.

The backyard chicken bill has its political foes, too. "We also have some neighbors saying 'Absolutely not. I don't want a chicken next door to me,'" Allen says. He pointed out that the legislation includes a mechanism that would bar chicken ownership at the objection of one neighbor.

"Getting a dog or cat in the city and keeping it in your backyard is pretty easy," said Allen. "This is much more stringent than any other pet."

It certainly seems that Councilmember Wells has his finger on the pulse of the community, communicating with neighbors and addressing their concerns in Council. But his constituents aren't only plagued by repressive poultry zoning. Ward 6 had a 21% poverty rate during the last census, over 10 percent unemployment in July, and a violent crime rate a touch above the D.C. average.

"This bill is not his highest priority," Charles Allen said. He insisted that the chickens only became  a major time commitment when reporters began bombarding his office with phone calls.

Wells said he wants to follow the lead of other metro areas like Baltimore and Buffalo, and "be more permissive about urban hens." The "Urban Farming Act of 2009" is currently in committee.

The Georgetown Metropolitan wonders: Does Jack Evans Abuse Parking Laws? There are incriminating photos of Evans' car clearly parked illegally—that is if he were just an average citizen. It is an open question whether he actually deserved a ticket.

Borderstan notes that construction has begun at the 17th-S-and-New Hampshire dog park. Post includes photos! Still, the project might be behind. The writer wonders: "I have not heard anything new on the opening date other than 'spring.' Anyone know anything more about a specific date?"

Bureaucrat310 chronicles a rough commute: "On this particular morning I was running late. Just as I descended into the columbia heights metro station I noticed that the next train would be arriving in 2 minutes. I hustle, run to the turnstile, swipe my card and get the dreaded 'go see a customer service agent' warning..."

Life in Mount Vernon Square posts the agenda for ANC6C's zoning and planning issues slated for its April 1 meeting.

River East Idealist talks about the proposed bag tax: "Nobody likes paying taxes. We pay income taxes, sales tax, property tax, capital gains tax, and even death tax! While no one enjoys giving money to the government, most of us will agree that each tax strategically contributes to the the social benefits of living in Washington DC. If Council Member Tommy Wells has his way, we will pay a 5 cent tax on each plastic and paper bag we consume via the Anacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act of 2009..."

Pop Cesspool confesses: "I do harbor a certain cockiness..."

Something important may be happening to WCP at 2 p.m.