Noisy fowl aggravate neighbors

Residents from Kaneohe to Kalihi are crying foul at the city’s approach to complaints about noisy chickens.

Of the estimated 400 complaints that come in each month, about 60 percent are unresolved and referred to police, according to the city’s contractor, Animal Haven Inc.

The police can’t say how many citations they issue, because citations for chickens are lumped in with those for barking dogs and other noise complaints in general, said spokes­woman Michelle Yu.

But angry residents say the enforcement is clearly too lax.

Punchbowl resident Kelly Kim said she’s lost sleep and tenants because of the noise from her neighbor’s fowl.

"His roosters crow all day," she said. "I’m really frustrated. The renters said it’s too noisy for them. I cannot even sleep well."

She said she complained to police — who cited her neighbor twice — but chickens were still on the loose in an adjacent property with an absentee owner.

Kim said she finally hired someone to trap the chickens coming onto her property.

"I had to resolve the issue," she said.

Pearl City resident Lydia Gulliver said she’s complained several times about chickens coming from nearby city property in a gulch and flying onto her property, eating her dog’s food and destroying her yard.

"They pick on the grass," she said. "Now I have nothing but dirt. I called the city and county so many times."

Gulliver said she’s too old to be trapping chickens in her yard and that the work should be left to the city contractor.

"I’m 85 years old, and I have to use the cane to walk," she said.

The relevant city ordinance, passed in 2000, limits the number of chickens to two per household. It also prohibits owners from letting chickens make noise continuously for 10 minutes or intermittently for half an hour.

Animal Haven was awarded a $60,000 contract in October to deal directly with chicken complaints.

Under a provision in the contract, the city requires Animal Haven to issue three warnings before forwarding a complaint to police. Although the ordinance does not require issuing warnings, Hono­lulu police recommended the contractor give three warnings to allow violators time to dispose of their chickens, city spokes­man Jesse Broder Van Dyke said.

City officials said the three-warning requirement, included in the contact as far back as 2004-2005, also gives families unaware of the violation an opportunity to correct the problem.

Animal Haven owner Frank De­Gia­como said under his contract, he provides traps to complainants to capture chickens, but he’s not required to capture them.

He said he tries to talk to both sides in a complaint and educate the owners of noisy fowl about the animal nuisance ordinance and ways to quiet what is usually a noisy rooster.

"We try to do mediation, try to pose solutions," he said.

DeGiacomo said about half of the 400 calls he gets every month are from Aiea, Kaneohe and Kalihi.

He said about 40 percent of the total, or about 160, are resolved. The remainder go to the police after warnings are issued.

DeGiacomo said as a matter of procedure, he refers complaints to police after the third warning and tells complainants to call police as well.

Former Honolulu Councilwoman Rene Man­sho, who introduced the chicken noise ordinance in 2000, said there was no discussion at the time about giving violators three warnings. She said her understanding was that police would receive the complaints and enforce the ordinance.

Fines for violations range from $50 for the first offense to between $500 and $1,000 and up to 30 days in jail for two or more violations within two years.

It’s unclear how many citations have been issued or whether anyone has served jail time.

The city’s chicken noise ordinance also gives Animal Haven employees the ability to issue citations if they are deputized by the police. But the Hono­lulu Police Department has yet to deputize anyone with Animal Haven.

"It’s a bad system," said S. Wong, a Wai­pahu resident who didn’t want to give his first name.

Wong said he shouldn’t have to contact police once he’s filed a complaint with Animal Haven.

"I think it’s his (the contractor’s) responsibility," he said. "It’s not my responsibility. The city is paying him to make sure my neighbor follows the rules."

Wong and two other residents — one in Pearl City and another near Punchbowl — said they’ve complained more than three times to the city without results.