18 ATTACHMENT 04(A) - Laserfiche WebLink

expectation that when a house is bought in a residential neighborhood in Pleasanton, a resident knows what could be in his or her own yard and what was in the neighbor's yard. He believed that there are things one can expect and not have to worry about. He believed that a wild raptor or wild animal on the other side of the fence was not something he would expect in a residential neighborhood. He asked if the City had an enforceable and clear Municipal Code as it relates to animals. He believed a precedent would be set that it would be acceptable to have a caged, wild animal in the back yard and that the definition of "fowl" would be so broad as to allow troublesome birds. He indicated that he did not want this case to be used as a precedent and inquired whether a deadline provision would be applicable in any Municipal Code violations. He indicated his frustration that the project was being heard 14 months later. He would like the Code to be clearly defined and a clock needs to start ticking for resolution of Municipal Code violations. In response to an inquiry by Mr. Carl regarding whether hunting was allowed in Pleasanton, Ms. Harryman replied that hunting was not mentioned in the Municipal Code, and, therefore, staff looked to the State laws. Mr. Carl noted that whether or not an election was involved in the identification process, it did not change the fact that the City had agreed there was a Municipal Code violation which he would like to see addressed. He believed that raptors were beautiful and that they should be able to live free and wild. He believed this was a blood sport and that all blood sports should be banned. He did not differentiate in his mind between this activity and dogfighting or cockfighting. He noted that all Scandinavian countries have banned hawking because they equated it to dogfighting and cockfighting. Mr. Carl referred to emails that he has supplied to the Commission and are available from Karen Diaz, City Clerk, on the public records that relate to hunting with the hawk. He hoped that the applicant could be separated from the issue itself. His primary concern was safety, and he was very concerned about hawk attacks. He distributed printouts to the Commissioners and indicated that if one types "hawk attacks" into Google, 541,000 items are returned; there are 4,500 returns with quotation marks around it. He described a photograph of a person attacked by a hawk in one link. Another link shows an article in the Sacramento Bee where ared-tailed hawk attacked and killed a toy poodle in Sacramento eight weeks ago. Mr. Carl noted that UC Davis and the Lindsay Wildlife Museum stated that while hawk attacks were infrequent, they did occur. He noted that car accidents are infrequent and that he has not had a caz accident in ten years; but he wears a seat belt and pays for insurance because it could happen. He indicated that anything can possible in any risk situation and that this is a behavior that has been down and documented. He noted that the Lindsay Museum ornithologist stated that wild animals or birds that had been in the care of humans prior to being released tended to become confused and may be more aggressive because they had lost their natural fear of humans. He noted that Lindsay Museum staff did not release birds back into the wild for that reason. Mr. Carl did not believe that a hawk equaled a fowl and noted that numerous State agricultural codes were very specific with respect to hawks, fowls, chickens, ducks, and geese; the State recognized fowl as a thing for consumption. He indicated that if a hawk is indeed a fowl and a EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, December 12, 2007 Page 8 of 15