# How Many Horses Per Acre? (Tacoma, Washington State)



## KaskadeHD

So my neighbor has 1 acre of property. It is divided into 2 sections. Both sections are completely muddy. There are a total 4-8 horses she keeps in there. She sometimes will move 2 horses to her back yard which is 1/8 of an acre.

In washington it rains CONSTANTLY, because of this the pasture is a field of mud! This cannot be good for the horses to stand in mud and feces all day long. 2 of the horses are only about a month old.

So what i'm trying to say, is this legal? Is there a certain number of horse per acre ratio? And if you can, please link or just tell me where you found your information, because I am considering calling ASPA, the horses look miserable!


----------



## Chevaux

You'll need to check with your local council/municipality/county to see what they have for bylaws in place to cover these situations. I'm from Canada, mind you, but I've noticed that a number of counties/states appear to have this covered. I think a standard one is 5 (maybe even 2 depending on area) acres for the first horse and 1 acre for each subsequent horse. And you're right, in that size of area and with those conditions the horses probably are feeling miserable.


----------



## alexischristina

Five acres for one horse is an unrealistic expectation, I don't know any area that has that kind of requirement. I believe here the suggestion is one acre for the first horse, with a half acre per additional horse added on. I have three, soon to be four on just under three acres. A few summers ago I had five on just under three acres and they did well. Of course they were fed additional hay and the property itself is very dry, but it was enough space for them. 

IMO the number of horses she has on her property isn't ideal BUT if they're fed and watered it isn't abuse. If they get along, if they get exercise, all is well and good. Mud happens and it's going to happen whether you have one, four or ten horses and so long as their feet are taken care of it shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## waresbear

There is a stable here that sits on 5 acres, they board about 20 to 30 horses, all on drylot pens and in the barn. If it's legal, (check with zoning bylaws, local) and the horses are being cared for, I suppose you could complain about the smell?


----------



## verona1016

There's no such law in Oregon, so I doubt Washington has one either. As long as they appear healthy there isn't really anything you can do.


----------



## waresbear

Unless it is zoned Farmland, one can complain about the smell, farmland no, residential yes!


----------



## Saddlebag

One thing is for sure, the horses won't grass founder - no grass.


----------



## PaintHorseMares

Call your county clerk and you'll get your answer.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## CLaPorte432

alexischristina said:


> Five acres for one horse is an unrealistic expectation, I don't know any area that has that kind of requirement. I believe here the suggestion is one acre for the first horse, with a half acre per additional horse added on. I have three, soon to be four on just under three acres. A few summers ago I had five on just under three acres and they did well. Of course they were fed additional hay and the property itself is very dry, but it was enough space for them.
> 
> IMO the number of horses she has on her property isn't ideal BUT if they're fed and watered it isn't abuse. If they get along, if they get exercise, all is well and good. Mud happens and it's going to happen whether you have one, four or ten horses and so long as their feet are taken care of it shouldn't be a problem.


actually in my county, we have that law. for 1 horse, you have to have 5 acres. for each additional horse, its an additional acre. we can have technically only have 6 horses and we own 10.5 acres. 

im in southwest Michigan.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alexischristina

My mistake. In my opinion it's still completely unreasonable though and in my experience it isn't the norm but again, I can't speak for any areas other than my own.


----------



## Blazeeofglory

I am in Florida, and the rule here is an acre per horse...not sure how it is anywhere else though. 5 acres per horse? That seems alittle absurd.


----------



## CLaPorte432

Its not 5 Acres PER horse. Its 5 acres For 1 horse, and then 1 Additional acre for every additional horse.

It is over-kill, but, in my county, those are the rules. BUT, if you live next to cows, you can have however many horses you want on any amount of acerage. No hows that make sense? 1 Acre next to cows and you have have 1, 4, 7, 20 horses. Its absurd.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Blazeeofglory

Smh. Who comes up with these laws? Obviously not horse people.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alexischristina

Sorry, that one was a typo on my part. :lol: I can only imagine if it were five acres per horse... They would definitely be a luxury item for the rich and famous then.


----------



## Sweeney Road

For the most part, Pierce County AC is not very helpful. Additionally, the number of horses per acre may depend on whether or not the person keeping the horses is within the city limits of Tacoma (or another municipality) or in unincorporated Pierce County. For unincorporated Pierce County, the law states one 'livestock' on 1/4 acre and under. If it's over 1/4 acre, then you can have as many as you'd like.


----------



## stevenson

zoning law here is one hooved animal per quarter but the land must be zoned to keep livestock . You can own ten acres or 100 acres and if it does not have the zoning code for hooved animals you cannot keep hooved animals of any kind.


----------



## QtrBel

Laws have varied in each place I've lived county to county. Typical for where I was at in Tx was 2 acres for the first horse and 1 acre per horse after that for some residential areas and areas zoned farmland they just had minimum acres suggested but if the animals were well kept and in good health it didn't matter.


----------



## gunslinger

Blazeeofglory said:


> Smh. Who comes up with these laws? Obviously not horse people.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Liberal Democrats.....who else would want to tramp on individual liberty?


----------



## PaintHorseMares

gunslinger said:


> Liberal Democrats.....who else would want to tramp on individual liberty?


Well, we are in the most liberal, Democratic, county in NC and there are NO county restrictions on farm animals....acreage/number/anything. The only animals with restrictions are exotic ones, e.g. tigers, etc.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## gunslinger

PaintHorseMares said:


> Well, we are in the most liberal, Democratic, county in NC and there are NO county restrictions on farm animals....acreage/number/anything. The only animals with restrictions are exotic ones, e.g. tigers, etc.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


My guess is being the most liberal county in NC is still way more conservative than most of Michigan. That said, don't be surprised to see this happening where you are....


----------



## xlntperuvian

KaskadeHD said:


> So my neighbor has 1 acre of property. It is divided into 2 sections. Both sections are completely muddy. There are a total 4-8 horses she keeps in there. She sometimes will move 2 horses to her back yard which is 1/8 of an acre.


I'm also in Pierce County, WA. I think it depends on where you are in the county and how the land is zoned. If it's zoned residential there may be restrictions on what kind of animals a person is allowed to keep. There also may be restrictions if this property is part of a subdivision governed by a Home Owners Association. 

If the property in question is located in or near the shoreline of Puget Sound or a watershed that drains into the Sound the rules get really tight. They don't want runoff from animal waste getting into Puget Sound. I know you can't even build on waterfront property in some areas without meeting all kinds of restrictions on septic and drainfield requirements. 

A couple places to check that might have more information are the Pierce County Extension office and Horses for Clean Water: Contact | Horses For Clean Water


----------



## churumbeque

2 acres per horse if you keep them on it and expect grass to sustain them.


----------



## Saddlebag

Just because a horse is standing in mud doesn't mean it is standing in faeces. Horses will select potty areas even when allowed to run on large tracts of land. In the nearby village which governs a large municipality, they came up with a ruling of no livestock, as per dept. of agriculture description, may be kept within 100 ft of the nearest neighbor's dwelling. It's a good law as there were those who's roosters disturbed the neighbors, yet outside the village many had acreages and were a goodly distance from the neighbors dwelling.


----------



## Zexious

I didn't read the whole thread, but wanted to also mention that (at least here in CO) some places are grandfathered in. There is a nearby trail/western type barn that has an absurd amount of horses on their relatively small property.


----------



## xlntperuvian

Saddlebag said:


> Just because a horse is standing in mud doesn't mean it is standing in faeces.


In this case it does. The OP said there were 4-8 horses on 1 acre. Actually it would be _less_ than one acre as the house is also on the property. 

I am in the same area as the OP. Unless you live in this area you have no idea what the mud is like. It is pouring down rain and hail right now as I type this. Average rainfall for September in this area is 1.5". We've already had over 9" of rain for the month of September and the first week of October.


----------

