Pigeon-feeding ordinance is for the birds

To the editor:

With all the rampant economic and social woes facing Clark County, it is amazing that the Clark County Commission will be holding a public hearing Tuesday on an ordinance that would ban the feeding of pigeons in unincorporated areas of the county.

Despite the hyperbole about pigeons being “flying rats” and spreading disease to humans, it is unclear what the impetus is for the proposed ordinance banning the intentional feeding of pigeons. Pigeons actually serve a useful function in cleaning up discarded food scraps left by humans who litter the environment. Pigeons are vilified for the droppings they leave behind even though all living creatures produce excrement. It would be interesting to know how many cases of disease transmission between pigeons and humans have actually been documented by the Southern Nevada Health District.

The proposed ordinance is flawed for three reasons. First, it is overly broad and would virtually prohibit the feeding of any birds or outdoor animals. Homeowners who enjoy feeding wild birds have no way of feeding the many varieties of birds, including migratory birds from the Pacific Flyway, and at the same time preventing native pigeons and doves from sharing the food.

Second, it is overreaching and violates the private property rights of homeowners in the rural, unincorporated areas of Clark County. Many of the residents of the unincorporated areas of Clark County chose to live in a more rural setting. These unincorporated areas are home to many large horse properties (which are magnets for birds) as well half-acre and larger estates.

Third, it can be enforced only by means of selective enforcement. Neighbors with inharmonious relationships will use the ordinance to harass one another by reporting incidents of “pigeon feeding” to authorities.

It is unlikely, however, that owners of large horse properties whose livestock feed provides a constant food source to native birds will be asked to stop feeding their livestock. Instead, the elderly neighbor on Social Security who enjoys bird watching and feeding the feathered visitors in his or her yard will face stiff fines.

The lame attempt in the draft ordinance to exclude the unintentional feeding is disingenuous in that it contains a proviso that “the person has not been given written notice concerning the lingering, roosting and/or congregating of pigeons.” Pigeons and other birds may in fact linger, roost or congregate for a variety of reasons, including seeking shade or shelter, food provided by trees and shrubs, and sources of water such as irrigation drips or sprinklers. A homeowner cannot be held accountable for the behavior of wild birds, and the enforcement authorities should not be granted unfettered discretion to decide that the unintentional feeding of pigeons, incidental to the feeding of other birds or animals, is the cause of lingering or congregating pigeons.

Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani, who is sponsoring this ordinance, may believe that the loathsome pigeon should be banished from every property in unincorporated Clark County. If, however, she really wants to regulate an invasive species that is harmful to Clark County residents, perhaps she could focus her efforts on local politicians instead of God’s innocent creatures, who cannot speak for themselves.

The amount of waste created by ill-conceived and poorly written regulations far exceeds that left behind by pesky pigeons.

S. Larimore

Las Vegas