Chickens feed on lemons in Bargersville resident Amanda Dilley’s backyard Aug. 18.
Daily Journal File Photo
A Bargerville family has 60 days to rehome their chickens and come in compliance with town ordinance or risk fines.
For years, Amanda Dilley and her family have harvested home-grown vegetables and collected fresh eggs from their chickens. It’s become a daily routine for Dilley and her three-year-old son, she said.
Dilley and her husband moved to Bargersville five years ago after he finished a military assignment in Germany. The family wanted to start a new life growing their own food and raising chickens. They did so without complaints until August of this year when Dilley received a notice she was in violation of the town’s animal ordinance. A neighbor brought it to the town’s attention in August, she said.
“I’m gonna have to tell my son that we have to get rid of the chickens,” Dilley said through tears. “That’s something we do every single day, we go and feed them. We go and get eggs. Every time we pull into the driveway he’s like ‘there’s our chickies.’ It’s our routine, he’s learning from it. It’s one of our responsibilites we do together. He understands this is a part of our food system.”
The chickens have helped Dilley feed herself, her family and some of her neighbors, she said. Now, in less than 60 days, Dilley has to find a new daily routine for her and her son and a new home for her chickens.
Dilley said she is going to wait to tell her son until the 60-day time period comes closer to an end. She worries that he won’t understand, she said.
“It’s important to us as a family,” Dilley said. “We don’t get rid of animals. They are ours to care for so this goes against how we treat our animals.”
Fines for nuisance animal violations can go up to $1,000, but the fines have been on hold while Dilley and town officials worked to come up with a resolution. Since then, Dilley has met with town officials in hopes of coming up with an agreement that was satisfactory for everyone.
While there is an ordinance restricting livestock ownership, until this month the ordinance didn’t specifically mention poultry. Town officials recently amended the ordinance to include poultry in the town’s definition of livestock.
“No person having ownership of an animal shall, within the incorporated limits of the town … keep any livestock or poultry on the property having a lot size less than one acre,” the revised ordinance says.
The ordinance provides room for conditional variances if the town council finds the animals aren’t disturbing residents in the neighborhood. Dilley appealed for a variance to keep her chickens. However, the town council denied the variance 4-0 at the Dec. 12 town council meeting, with one member absent.
Dilley said she wasn’t given a reason for the denial and she’s left wondering what, if anything, she could do to save her chickens.
She would do “anything” to keep her chickens. She worries that the decision could set a precedent for others.
“A group of four people literally can decide what I do in my own backyard,” Dilley said. “They have a power that I didn’t anticipate.”
