Pa. Town Won't Let Amish Men Keep Horses

**Sara Noel** · 06-06-2003, 10:05 AM

By DAN LEWERENZ, Associated Press Writer

ZION, Pa. - Officials rejected a request to change a local ordinance so two Amish men could keep horses on their rural central Pennsylvania property, meaning the men have less than a week to remove the animals or face fines of $100 a day.

The horses are an essential form of transportation for the Amish, who generally shun modern conveniences such as electricity, telephones and cars. Daniel King and Daniel Beiler said they use the horses to pull buggies.

"I ain't going to be able to live very long paying $100 a day," King, 26, said after Wednesday's vote by the Walker Township supervisors.

The men's attorney said they would appeal the ruling.

King and Beiler, 31, acknowledged knowing Walker Township had a zoning ordinance prohibiting horses when they bought the land. The township only allows horses on plots larger than two acres, and does not allow horses within villages or in areas zoned for multifamily residential use.

Keith Harter, chairman of the board of supervisors, said the zoning ordinance was necessary because of concerns about animal waste.

The men's attorney, James M. Bryant, said most of the available land where the men could keep horses was either ill-suited or too expensive.

Bryant said he would immediately appeal a judge's May 30 ruling that established the fines. He said he may also appeal in federal court on the grounds the ordinance violates the Constitution and the federal Religious Land Use Act, which exempts religious groups from most local zoning rules unless the restrictions protect public safety.

"We're living in America here. I can't believe you can't have a horse for religious transportation," King said. "It makes no sense at all."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...orse_ordinance

Should they get to keep their horses or not?

**sixfreds** · 06-06-2003, 10:51 AM

I think no they bought the land knowing that they could not have horses so I think they can not change the rules just because they need the horses I think it is sad but a rule is a rule...

Eileen

**cmu** · 06-06-2003, 11:13 AM

I think that they should be able to keep there horses.... The Amish people do depend on their horsesfor various things...Transportation being one of them. The Amish religion does not use the modern conveninces that we do, and in the constitution it states that in these types of cases there are exeptions to some of the rules...this bring one of them.

Pardon my opinion if you do not agree but I have spent time in Michigan where there are lots of Amish communities... I respect there lifestyles and I wish it were easier for me and my family to "regress" some to do just half of the things they do for themselves without the modern stuff...

JMHO

Chrissy

**mylittle4** · 06-06-2003, 12:35 PM

I feel mixed on if they should get to keep them considering they bought the land knowing the ordinances. I do feel that the ordinance itself should be changed. It is America and if someone wants a horse and it is not endagering or infringing on someone else then they should get to have the horse. So I guess I think they should keep the horses by getting the ordinance changed so that anyone needing the horse like they do should get to have one.

**Kimmomo3** · 06-06-2003, 02:38 PM

Since it was an ordinace before they bought the land they should try to get the ordinace changed, and if they can't they need to live by the laws. But religion is not a reason to change the law.

On a simular vein, the lady in FL should take off her veil for her license picture and shoe her face if she gets pulled over in the future.

These laws are not against any particular religion, it is just that these particular religions have these issues.

**Jeanna** · 06-06-2003, 03:00 PM

I an torn on this issue. If the men knew that the law was in effect then the town has a point. However, because this is the amish was of transportation, farming, and many other forms of life then this is like asking these council men/women to give up their cars and breifcases. I agree that they should try to get the ordinance changed or I guess they need to move.
Jeanna

**Sara Noel** · 06-06-2003, 03:12 PM

I had a funny thought. We live somewhat close to an Amish community. They ride their horse and carriages in town with the cars. My deep thought for the day is are they responsible for the horse waste that ends up in the streets. I mean if people have to poop scoop after their dogs.

Ok...enough thinking for one day.

**Jeanna** · 06-06-2003, 03:26 PM

I don't live around am amish community, but I do live in a small town and you do see some people riding in town at times and the rule here is the horses either have to have a "bag" on them or you have to scoop the mess. Don't know about other towns.
Jeanna

**homesteadmamma** · 06-06-2003, 03:36 PM

My question is, seeing has they knew the ordinances of the town and seeing has they knew they would need to use their horses to drive their buggy, WHY ON EARTH DID THEY BUY THERE???

Our towns by-laws state exactly the same thing. You are allowed to have 2 horses, but you MUST have 2 acres for each horse. We have one family who have 2 horses!!

They can try to get the ordinances changed or they can sell their land and move to where they can have horses. I love the Amish lifestyle and have worked hard at getting our lives simpler, so this isn't about not liking the fact that the Amish have horses. Its about 2 men who knew the ordinances BEFORE they purchased the land.

We have a group of Hutterites here who are wonderful people. They live simply and are inbetween the Amish and the Mennonites BUT they do not use seat belts and often you'll see 10 or 12 get out of a 6 passenger van!!!! Being Amish or Hutterites does not change the fact that they need to abide by the ordinances of where they live.