Iraq vet cited for owning 14 therapeutic pet ducks

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by StrangerInAStrangeLand, Jul 21, 2014.

  1. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    Iraq vet cited for owning 14 therapeutic pet ducks

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    WEST LAFAYETTE, Ohio (AP) — An Army veteran who hurt his back during the Iraq War is worried a citation will result in him losing his 14 pet ducks, which he says are therapeutic.


    Darin Welker said officials in the village of West Lafayette told him to get rid of the ducks in May and cited him for a minor misdemeanor on June 23 for failing to comply. Walker is scheduled to appear in Coshocton Municipal Court for a hearing Wednesday and could face a $150 fine.

    Welker, 36, says the ducks help him with depression and post-traumatic stress disorder and keep him more active.

    West Lafayette, about 80 miles east of Columbus, banned residents from keeping fowl and other farm animals in 2010.

    Mayor Jack Patterson declined to comment on Welker's predicament and referred questions to village police Chief Terry Mardis, who couldn't be reached for comment.

    Welker told the Coshocton Tribune (http://ohne.ws/1zUGruN) that he's had the ducks since March. He said they motivate him to get out of the house so he can feed and clean up after them.

    "They're quite a relaxing animal, and they help comfort me in different situations," Welker recently told the Tribune as he held one duck like a baby and stroked its neck. "(Watching them) keeps you entertained for hours at a time."

    Welker served a year in Iraq with the Army National Guard in 2005 and said he came home with a major back injury that required surgery in 2012.

    The Department of Veterans Affairs paid for the back surgery but declined to pay for physical therapy recommended by his surgeon and did not provide him with counseling, he said. That's partly why he has come to rely on the ducks, he said.

    Welker said he's planning to tell the judge how much the ducks have helped him. He said he has a letter from the VA's mental health department recommending he be allowed to keep them.

    The 14 ducks live in a penned-in area in Welker's backyard, which also has kiddie pools so they can swim.

    ___

    Information from: Coshocton Tribune, http://www.coshoctontribune.com
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Many municipal areas in the United States (cities, towns, even unincorporated suburban regions) have laws prohibiting the keeping of animals that are generally regarded as livestock or farm animals. The usual reasons are:
    • The feces from farm animals have a bad smell which can be carried by the wind into neighboring residential lots, and it's almost impossible for farmers to sweep it up and dispose of it.
    • The feces also look ugly, which reduces the value of nearby homes.
    • Many farm animals make a lot of noise, especially early in the morning, which disturbs suburban homeowners who go to bed later and get up later than farmers.
    • On the balance, if one homeowner keeps farm animals, in most areas this will reduce the value of the nearby neighbors' homes, causing them economic harm.
    I live in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is adjacent to Washington, DC, but was farmland up through the 1960s. When the Capitol Beltway (a circular six-lane high-speed limited-access highway that runs through Virginia and Maryland, all the way around Washington) and the D.C. Metro (a system of subway and above-ground trains into Washington from the surrounding regions) were built, there was suddenly a massive migration of people from the city into the nearby suburbs, where land was cheaper, housing was less crowded, and the crime rate was lower.

    Most of these municipalities have not yet outlawed farm animals, for the obvious reason that there are still many farmers here and they would object. I live in a townhouse (or "rowhouse" as the British call them), yet I could legally have chickens, pigs and goats in my tiny (600sqft) back yard! I would probably not be allowed to have a cow because the Animal Control Department would say that I don't have enough room for her to be comfortable, therefore it would constitute cruelty.

    If one of my neighbors had 14 ducks, it would probably be legal. Frankly I would not mind, in fact I'd think it was rather cute. But some of the other neighbors would be unhappy since ducks can be quite noisy, and in addition they create a lot of feces. They might also attract foxes and coyotes who would start preying on our dogs and cats.

    Many farmers keep a couple of llamas for protection. They're the camels of the New World and are just as mean and cranky as their cousins in the Old World. One of them can kick the crap out of a bear, and two can run off a cougar or a pack of coyotes. But llamas are too big to keep on a suburban lot, and like other herbivores, they create a lot of shit.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,353
    What you must do then, Friend Fraggle, is perfectly clear:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    An example of excessive law making.
    Governments, at whatever level, concern themselves with legislation.
    They churn out new laws to justify their existence,
    whether they are needed or not.

    What is needed here is a mass protest to protect this man,
    who just wants to recover from his pain with an encounter with nature.
    It is possible that he has too many animals, but a blanket ban is intrusive and unfair.

    I only have a small garden, so a couple of ducks would suffice for me.
    I already have a Hedgehog.
     
  8. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    2 questions:

    1) has the world gone just a tad too tight assed?

    2) do vets deserve special privileges?

    (I'd answer yes to both)
     
  9. Arne Saknussemm trying to figure it all out Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,353
    Funny how you're avatar mirrors your questions. Tight assed... special privileges (posing nude)
     
  10. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I don't understand why having a few ducks next door would/should lower your houses value... so long as they are penned and the area kept clean, what's the issue here? Seriously... some people just need to get a grip and stop complaining about stuff...
     
  11. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    A lot of Americans are snooty about living in "primitive" conditions. They don't want to live in a neighborhood that has the slightest impression of farming.

    Which means that a house in that neighborhood won't sell for as much as one with no ducks.

    Of course we're not all like that. I rather enjoy hearing a rooster crow or geese honking.
     
  12. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,635
    Some people don't like them. They make noise, they are smelly etc. Doesn't fit with the image of the perfect suburb.
     
  13. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    I actually detest suburbia...(gives me the shudders)
    aside from it being an ecological disaster, i find no aesthetic pleasure in suburbia
     
  14. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,105
    I would consider that the changes in laws probably reflected the Bird Flu Epidemic, Since animals can pass on the strain amongst themselves.

    It's probably a City citation rather than a state one, meaning if he was outside city limits then he'd probably be able to get away with it.

    Unfortunately that would either mean he'd have to move,

    or alternatively he could try donating them to a local city park with the intention of continuing to care for them. (If he got support of the local community he could get donations for the feed, shelter and veterinary bills to make sure they stay healthy and he'd get to enjoy not just the ducks company but people too and since the ducks would become "Municipal" it gets round the citation problem.)

    In the UK there's usually a public outcry if someone tries to remove the local village duck pond or the ducks from it.
     
  15. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    Or the Community Could Vote to De-Annex the Property ...?

    (1) Obviously.

    (2) There seems something inherently paradoxical about going out to fight for our rights and freedom, and then come home to receive unconstitutional special treatment.

    To the second is an unfortunate answer: If the laws say you can't have fourteen ducks within a zone, then being a war veteran makes no difference.

    And according to our source article, keeping fowl within city limits is against the law, and appears to have been before Mr. Welker obtained the ducks.

    I think what really sucks here is that the VA simply isn't caring for him properly.

    Analogously, consider an issue American society is working through right now—marijuana. Consider any of the states where medical dope isn't available, or just think back a few years before there were any states that allowed it.

    Now, despite what Congress or the DEA might say or have said, doctors have known for a long time that there are medical benefits to be derived from cannabis. (Just like they know there are medical benefits to be derived from psilocybin or lysergic acid diethylamide.)

    So, imagine ... veteran comes home, has some attitude issues to work out as he returns to normal life. There are some people for whom the occasional stoning is very psychologically therapeutic, but what do we do?

    Do we pass a law legalizing therapeutic prescription and use of marijuana?

    Or should we keep it illegal, and just make an exception for veterans?

    One of the most important rights our veterans fight for is Equal Protection. It would seem a patronizing betrayal, at best, to reward them by throwing that out the window.

    Given that Congress isn't going to be helping the VA fix itself anytime soon, though, it's a hard thing to know what to do next. He may be a veteran, but the law is the law, and as I understand our noble service members, they don't fight for us just so we can throw the whole thing out.
     
  16. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    I never meant "throw the whole thing out"
    just kinda like the affirmative action for blacks, women, etc........

    Just "cut him some slack"

    I tried the VA back in the early 70's and didn't like the neurologist's attitude
    It's a rare vet who carries no residual back into civilian life, and personally, I ain't all that rare
    so
    I'd cut him some slack (for awhile--couple years anyway)

    (but then again, I'm prejudiced here)
     

Share This Page