AUSTRALIAN POULTRY FORUM™

“FRIENDS OF THE PEACOCK”

All Officers and Directors areresidents of Palos Verdes Estates, the City that has been embroiled in a court battle to save the wildpeafowl that have been a part of the Palos Verdes Peninsula’s natural landscape since the 1920’s.“The purpose of the FRIENDS OF THE PEACOCK is to protect, promote, and ensure the preservation ofthe wild peafowl in PVE for future generations of property owners to enjoy as part of the naturalcharacter of our semi-rural coastal city,” quotes Ms. Mott from the organization’s mission statement.“We further exist to uphold the Peafowl Management Program adopted by our City Council in 1986,which provides a specific plan for the City to maintain sustaining levels of birds in two historical flockareas known as Espinosa Circle and Malaga Cove Library,” continues Mott.The Peafowl Management Program embodies an agreement reached as a compromise between bothsides of the peafowl issue, through the democratic process, and adopted by the City, but has recentlybeen challenged by a group of eight property owners. Their lawsuit was kept secret from most of thepublic until a local reporter brought the first day of trial to the community’s attention. “We nowawait the Court’s final decision and judgment in the matter,” says Jerry McAlevey. “We are preparedto do whatever it takes to ensure the future of this spectacular symbol of our community, the wild peafowl, even if it means taking our own legal action to enforce the existing ordinances previouslyadopted by the City.” Informal neighborhood surveys conducted by the FRIENDS reveal an incredible85-90% approval rating supporting the birds. The FRIENDS believe any outcome of this trial otherthan a positive one for the City would set a very dangerous precedent. It would challenge the City’sfundamental legislative powers, its inherent police powers, and also conceivably open the door forfuture lawsuits from property owners to rid the City of other wildlife species that may not be to theirliking. “The support from our community for the birds is incredible! Much, much stronger than weever imagined,” says Mott. “Whether a person is passionate or lukewarm about the birds, theyunderstand that this is a critical principle at stake here, even more important than the peafowlthemselves.”BackgroundPeafowl were first brought to the Palos Verdes Peninsula in 1924 as a gift to the Peninsula’s originaldeveloper, Frank Vanderlip Sr., when his ranch was one of the few structures built and he was amongthe first of the early residents. Over the decades, the peafowl have made their way around thePeninsula, and have become an unofficial symbol of the natural character of the upscale semi-ruralcommunity.The City of Palos Verdes Estates’ existing Peafowl Management Program is a result of a negotiatedsettlement to a lawsuit filed in 1985 by the FRIENDS of the Peacock, then a loose association of pro-peacock supporter who spoke out against the unchecked trapping and removal of the birds by a smallnumber of residents who found them a nuisance. Trapping by private citizens is not an option,according to the FRIENDS. Since the birds are wild, they roam freely around the public and privateproperties. Some peacock detractors began luring them onto their property with food, then trappingand eliminating them. If private trapping is allowed, the flocks will be eliminated in a short time, sincethe birds know few boundaries, and naturally pass through most of the neighborhood in the course ofany given day.In a lawsuit filed against the City of Palos Verdes Estates in April 2002, a small group of residents, whodecided they wanted to eliminate the birds, argued that the City violated a 1923 Deed Restriction that prohibited the “keeping” of livestock and “poultry” without written permission from the HomesAssociation. L.A. Superior Court Judge Jane Johnson issued a tentative ruling in favor of plaintiffs,but her final Court order has yet to be handed down. The Judge’s ruling is viewed as prejudicial bymost of the community’s residents, since poultry are not normally confused with the spectacular wildpeafowl that have been an integral part of the Palos Verdes landscape since the 1920’s. The Court’stentative ruling on May 12, 2003 interpreted a Deed Restriction written eighty-years earlier, in 1923,intended to control the proliferation of farms in the upscale community. Rather than joining thePalos Verdes Homes Association to the trial in order to interpret their Deed Restriction, the Judgeissued her own interpretation that many question her jurisdiction to do so.While both the FRIENDS OF THE PEACOCK and the Palos Verdes Homes Association were specificallyand individually referred to in the narrative of the plaintiff’s lawsuit, they were never joined asnecessary parties to the suit, nor were they allowed to give testimony during trial regarding their sideof this very public issue. The Court, in fact refused to hear any witnesses scheduled to be called by theDefense who were pro-peacock. As a result, the FRIENDS sought their own legal representation, butnumerous attempts by the FRIENDS to intervene in the case have been repeatedly dismissed by theCourt.The Palos Verdes Homes Association, which has the sole authority to interpret and enforce the DeedRestrictions in question, has recently passed Resolution 151, at the strong urging of the FRIENDS,giving the City permission to maintain the peafowl, irrespective of the Judge’s interpretation, andgiving any resident of the city the right to keep them on a transitory basis on their property.The FRIENDS assisted by obtaining a sworn Declaration and filing this Resolution with the City’sdefense attorney and the Court itself. This new information is hoped to have positive impact on theoutcome of the trial, which is expected to be announced by week’s end. The FRIENDS believe that ifthe Court interprets the law, the Deed Restrictions, and Resolution 151, without prejudice, the Judgemust reverse her earlier-stated intention to rule against the birds. If the judge rules against the birds,given the facts of this case, the FRIENDS and the general public have no choice but to question theCourt’s very integrity.


http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... l=en&gl=au

You have all done good work. Stay with it

You have my support

It is an important issue and thank you

Well done to everyone involved



Thanks
P.A