No More Homeless Pets Forum
October 4, 2004

Co-Existing with Wildlife

Sharon St. Joan

As we continue to develop open space, can we peacefully co-exist with wildlife? How can you handle calls from people asking for help with wildlife problems? If your shelter accepts wildlife, how can you make their stay more comfortable? Sharon St. Joan of Best Friends Animal Society and Laura Simon of The Fund for Animals will offer their tips and insights.

Introduction from Sharon St. Joan:

Most of us who love animals also care a great deal about wildlife, but sometimes we feel at a loss as to what to do if we find an injured baby bird at the foot of a tree or a fawn who seems to be all alone.

Is it okay to pick them up? Is that against the law? Is it good for the animals? Where does one take an injured owl or a duck with a broken wing? Who takes care of wildlife? If someone brings a baby bird to our shelter, do we need a permit to accept it? How do we care for it? How can we find a licensed wildlife rehabilitator?

As well as the difficulties of knowing what best to do with orphaned or injured wildlife, there are so many other questions related to our encounters with wildlife. What can we do about "nuisance" wildlife? What can we suggest to our neighbors who feel threatened by wildlife -- who fear that the woodpecker may damage the house, the geese may ruin the lawn, the squirrels may eat the birdseed? In this week's forum, we invite any questions related to wildlife encounters. The world of wildlife can seem unfamiliar and a little mysterious; we feel on less sure footing than when we are relating to dogs and cats, with whom our species shares such a long, intertwined history.

Introduction from Laura Simon:

The Fund for Animals Wildlife Hotline receives thousands of calls from panicked members of the public about nuisance, orphaned or disabled wildlife they've encountered. Whether it's a raccoon in the chimney, a skunk family under the deck, or a baby bird fallen from a nest, much of the time the solution involves modifying human behavior in order to "fix" the problematic animal behavior!

This forum will provide humane, easy and hands-on solutions for a wide variety of wildlife problems that one might encounter.

Questions

Trapping and transferring animals out of yards -- is it humane?
Humanely dealing with rats
Deer in urban areas and convincing officials that bow hunting is not an answer
Rescuing and caring for pigeons
Helping injured animals on the road
Changing wildlife laws and how "nuisance" control companies do business
Dealing with mouse problems at a shelter
Do we need a more hands on or hands off approach when dealing with wildlife?
Protecting pets from coyotes
Humanely handling Canadian goose problems
Getting the word out about wildlife misconceptions and myths
Helping shelters prepare to refer or handle wildlife calls
Non-native species vs. native; can't we create plans that honor all life?
Caring for baby birds

Trapping and transferring animals out of yards -- is it humane?

Question from a member:

I constantly hear my friends talk about how they catch raccoons or rabbits in live traps and then release them out in the woods somewhere. To me, this sounds like a death sentence. You are taking wildlife out of their habitat and throwing them into completely unfamiliar surroundings, and into habitat for other established wildlife already. I guess it is better to give wildlife a chance rather than trapping and killing, but I still would like to be able to convince people not to trap at all and learn to live with the wildlife. They say that rabbits are eating their garden and raccoons are getting into their attic, and they can't let them destroy their house. Do you have any thoughts on this or advice I can give?

Response from Laura:

I agree with you. The trap and transfer "solution" is not only inhumane but it is also ineffective. As long as there's food or a nesting/denning site to attract animals, more members of that species will simply move in once the former resident(s) was taken away.

What we try to do is encourage people to remove what's attracting the animal, not the animal himself. For example, the raccoon-in-the-attic situation usually occurs in the spring or summer, and it's usually a mom with cubs. The best way to resolve this is to let her leave on her own, taking them with her, and then block up her entry hole. If people can't wait for them to leave on their own, they can convince the mom to leave sooner by putting ammonia soaked rags, a blaring radio and lights all around the attic. Mom will feel threatened by these novel and scary smells and sounds, and usually she'll move her young to another den site that night.

The real solution here is home proofing. If your house is sealed up, it doesn't matter how many wild animals live around your home, because they won't be getting in!

When people complain about a raccoon causing damage, such as ripping shingles off a house when her entry hole is blocked, the reason is that there are usually babies trapped inside and she's merely doing everything in her power to get back to them! We try to get people to realize that animals have powerful maternal instincts, just like we do.

People often don't realize that relocating an animal, even to a nice looking place, is not necessarily humane. The relocated animal panics and tries desperately to get back to the habitat she knows and is often beaten up by resident animals or killed while trying to return home. In addition, most relocated animals (in spring and summer) are mothers -- thus they've just been separated from their young who will most probably starve. All these are reasons why we encourage people to evict and exclude animals, rather than relocate them.

Regarding the rabbit situation, we stress the importance of tolerating and co-existing with them. People can put low mesh fences around their gardens to keep all digging animals out. The bottom part of the mesh fence needs to be buried, in a reverse L-shape, which creates a "false bottom" to prevent dig-unders. See www.fund.org urban wildlife center link, and go to the Co-existing with Skunks fact sheet to see a diagram of this fence. Again, relocating rabbits just leads to more rabbits taking their place, as long as the habitat is attractive to rabbits.

It is difficult to change the human mindset that removal solves all ills, but we often make some headway by focusing on the ineffective nature of this strategy in addition to pointing out how it's inhumane and often leads to starving orphans being left behind.

Response from Sharon:

Yes, you are absolutely correct to be concerned about this. It is generally estimated that only about one half of wildlife that are trapped and re-located will survive. During some seasons of the year the mortality rate is much higher. For example, in the fall, many small mammals such as squirrels, construct a system of burrows and tunnels. They are dependent on these to survive the winter. If they are released at a site where the ground will soon be frozen, they will not survive.

Often, in the spring, the mother animal is trapped and then re-located. Then the babies have no mother. Wildlife rehabilitators receive numerous calls from people who simply did not think first, who released the mothers and now are asking rehabilitators to care for the babies, who, of course, would stand a much better chance of survival being raised by their mother.

As you have mentioned, in a new territory, raccoons, rabbits, and other small mammals are at a great disadvantage. They are released into the already-claimed territory of established animals of their own species or underneath the tree where the great horned owl likes to perch.

There is always a reason why wildlife comes into people's yards. Generally, there is something good to eat. Trash cans need to be the kind with locking lids. There are ways to protect plants -- a small fence around plants will keep out rabbits. Some chicken wire or hardware cloth, in a basket shape, buried underneath roots of plants will help with gophers.

It also will help if your friends and neighbors can simply enjoy the presence of the wildlife, and be willing to share a bit of their garden with them. Talk with your friends. Let them know how you feel about wildlife. That can go a long way towards helping the animals. Many people simply do not know that re-located wildlife often do not survive. Thank you very much for caring about the wild creatures!

Humanely dealing with rats

Deer in urban areas and convincing officials that bow hunting is not an answer

Question from Norma:

Our city council, in its wisdom, has decided that the best way to solve the problem of deer in the city is to send out bow hunters to kill them. I should say that we are in the woods next to Lake Superior, and the deer have always been here. The city is growing out from the center (as do all cities) and wooded areas are cut down to expand Wal-Mart or to build new homes, etc. I should also mention the highest speed limit within the city is 35 mph on main, wide streets, 25 elsewhere. On the streets where the speed limit is 35 it is very easy to observe deer near the road, since the sides of the streets are also clear. (Of course, one has to be on the lookout for deer.)

People complain about damage to their cars (they have insurance; what about damage to the deer?). People complain about damage to their gardens. Deer eat my garden also. I'm learning which plants to use that they won't feed on. I also spray the plants with a product that contains dried animal blood which repels the deer.

My question: what, if anything, can those of us who value the wildlife do to convince the city that it will do no good to kill deer?

Response from Sharon:

Thank you very much for your question! Yes, unfortunately, that is happening in so many cities and communities. Generally, getting this situation reversed requires a concerted campaign and a lot of perseverance.

These are a few steps you can take; adapt them as needed to fit your particular situation.

First, make some phone calls to find out information, if you haven't already done so. When making information-gathering phone calls, this is not the time to express your opinion, just ask questions, as a concerned citizen. It always works best, as I'm sure you know, to be pleasant, polite, and persevering. You could, for example, say that you really appreciate all the good work the City Council has been doing (or something else that is both true and pleasant); you are concerned about the deer being hunted by bow-hunters; and you are calling to find out from the City Council what their reasons are for feeling that there are too many deer. Did someone complain about the deer? Are they causing accidents on the roads? For now, you just want to get their viewpoint, not express your own. You can do that later.

Find out how the Council arrived at this decision. What were their reasons? Who made the decision? By what process were the bow-hunters invited to kill the deer? (Maybe the head of the bow-hunting association is a relative of someone on the City Council. That would be useful to know.) Was there a time for public comment? Were citizens informed of these plans? Were non-lethal alternatives considered?

Also talk with your state wildlife (game and fish) department. Are they aware of this; have they issued a permit? What is their reasoning, etc? Ask a lot of questions.

Talk with everyone: officials, local organizations, friends, neighbors, and the media. Get together with other people to work with you, or locate a group that is already actively working against this. Write letters, go to visit the City Council, get publicity in the media. If the deer hunt is already happening this year, just continue to work against it, to prevent it from happening again, being always pleasant, energetic, logical and unstoppable.

Focus on reasons which will make sense to a broad base of people, such as the community as a whole was not consulted in this decision; bow-hunting can be dangerous to humans near residential areas, as well as inhumane to the deer; non-lethal alternatives need to be considered.

If you'd like more detailed help with this, please e-mail me at Best Friends Sharonsj@bestfriends.org. Good luck! Thank you so much for caring about the deer!

Response from Laura:

Norma, this is one of the most difficult situations we handle. The reality is that deer can survive in very high numbers and they can have a visible impact on their environment, unlike other species for whom self-regulating mechanisms kick in much sooner!

We try to convince community leaders that deer removal merely results in the surviving deer having more food and more offspring, thanks to a reproductive response called "compensatory reproduction". Thus the population rebounds quickly after hunting season, as does who would normally have one fawn may instead have twins or triplets. The result is that new fawns soon replace those who were previously killed. Trying to control deer by hunting creates a yo-yo effect, from a population perspective. This result has been documented in the scientific literature.

The reality is that our roadways have completely bisected and fragmented deer habitat. With an increased number of drivers on the roads each day, it's no wonder car collisions have escalated. It has been shown, by the way, that there are far fewer deer/car collisions in areas where drivers go 45 MPH or less.

In terms of solutions: highway reflectors can be installed (Strieter light warning reflectors) in "hot spot" areas. These reflectors create an optical illusion of a fence and are created by the oncoming car's headlights bouncing off the reflector.

I wrote a booklet on the best available deer problem solutions which is accessible on www.fund.org, just go to the Urban Wildlife Center web link and then scroll down to fact sheet #7 "Co-Existing with Deer."

In a nutshell, the best repellents are those that have putrid eggs or bloodmeal as their main ingredient. Some perform better than others; the best seems to be Big Game Repellent Deer Away (purchase and comparison info is in the booklet). For planting around homes, there certainly are plenty of flowers, shrubs and trees that deer find less palatable than others. Again, a full listing is in our booklet. Fences work well as long as they are high enough (8' woven wire) or if electric, if they don't have too much space between wires (i.e. no more than 9 inches).

In efforts to convince towns not to hunt, we usually stress how this solution is not only ineffective but also inhumane. Bow hunting is the most inhumane type of hunting since up to 1 out of every 2 deer hit is crippled, not killed outright. For those of you who want scientific studies which validate this statistic, just contact me at my email address lsimon@fund.org. It is very upsetting for people and children in urban/suburban areas to see crippled deer staggering around their neighborhoods, and the deer suffer terribly.

Some communities have worked with state officials and the HSUS to implement immuno-contraception programs, but this method is still considered experimental and very labor-intensive. To get this kind of program off the ground requires much red tape and interagency cooperation, etc., since it is not yet FDA approved for widespread use.

What do we recommend? I have proposed that towns implement a massive public education campaign to teach people how to co-exist with deer. We have offered mass copies of our booklet to any town that wants to do this. So far, no takers, but I'm still hopeful! I stress that hunting won't work; so that option should be taken off the table since the result will be a population rebound and an endless cycle of killing.

I also encourage advocates to question on what basis the hunt is being proposed, i.e. how has "too many deer" been validated? How many complaints and what type have been lodged and by whom? How have deer numbers and deer browsing rates been assessed? Where is the science or data behind the claims? How will a solution be matched to a particular, site-specific problem? I point out that less deer won't prevent the remaining ones from eating someone's roses or tulips. Sometimes going after a community's lack of substantiation for killing deer can be effective.

Overall, this is a tough issue to win. I'm sorry I don't have an easy answer for you. Hopefully some of the information I'm providing can help you in your efforts!

Rescuing and caring for pigeons

Question from Michelle:

My partner and I rescued a young wild pigeon three months ago who had been shot in the wing. It was clear to the rehabber that she would never be able to use the wing again. The rehabber said we could either euthanize her or, since federal wildlife laws do not apply to pigeons and other non-native species, we could bring her home and care for her and allow her to live her life at our house. We chose the latter route and brought her to a bird vet for antibiotics and care. Her wound is still there but is almost healed, but she cannot fly.

We have constructed a large space for Pepi, the pigeon, but she is lonely and she hates us, being a wild bird and being that we have been doing unpleasant things to her wing since we rescued her (keeping it open to heal, wrapping it, giving her antibiotics, etc.) We have asked local rehabbers to tell us if they get any pigeons that can't be rehabbed so we can adopt one to be her companion, but to no avail. We have looked for places that have unrehabilitatable pigeons or doves where we might be able to bring her to join the flock, also to no avail. Finally, a parrot rescue on the south shore in MA said we can bring her there to live in an aviary with cockatiels and budgies.

My question is twofold: 1) do you think that a pigeon would be able to socialize and be happy with cockatiels and budgies, especially given that they can fly and she can not, and 2) regardless of the answer to that question, do you know of anyone or any group in the northeast that has rescued pigeons or doves where she might be able to live?

If the answer to both questions is no, do you then have suggestions as to where we can adopt a bird who would be a good companion for her and how to otherwise make her happy? We have never had a bird before. We have multiple cats and dogs, but no other birds. I see things for birds all the time in pet food stores, toys and such, but do not know what would interest a pigeon.

Response from Sharon:

It was very kind of you to rescue Pepi and care for her! First, just a word about her care, it sounds like you're doing a terrific job, with good instructions from the vet and the rehabbers. Be sure that Pepi has access to pigeon grit (available in feed stores) and a good quality pigeon grain (sold as mixed seed in large bags in feed stores). Pigeons have a high requirement for grit; they do not survive without it. And, obviously, she needs clean water, which I know you're giving her.

Sometimes, a small wild pigeon needs a mixture of wild birdseed and pigeon grain for a while until she gets used to the bigger pigeon grain (some never adjust to bigger grain). Pigeons permanently in captivity also appreciate a variety of minced greens, minced very fine. The pigeon cannot tear or chew them.

She'll need appropriately sized perches that she is able to reach, with a diameter of about three-quarters of an inch. When a pigeon has a broken or injured wing, you'll want to be careful about having natural perches that have a fork in them (that are "y"-shaped), because the bird can easily catch the wing in the angle where the two sections meet and re-injure the wing. Natural perches are fine otherwise.

Pepi also needs a nest box. They're easy to make, a one-foot square cube constructed of plywood (one-foot on each side), with a frame holding it together. Leave one side completely open. You can attach a couple of 2 x 2's underneath it, to keep it off the floor. Face it sideways so that she can either look at you or hide in it if she prefers. Buy some nice clean straw (from a feed store) which she'll like in the box and around where she walks; it needs changing probably twice a week so that it stays clean. There are other types of bedding, if you prefer.

You'll also want to examine her now and then to be sure she's healthy and doing well. Ask one of the rehabbers you know to show you how.

Now, the reason for mentioning all these things is that they are important, and also, to answer your question: no, I'm afraid, is the answer, budgies, cockatiels, and other small parrots are not companions for a pigeon. I very much doubt that they would relate to each other in any way at all. Also, because pigeons are quite hardy, they can sometimes carry diseases without becoming ill themselves, but they could pass these diseases on to the psittacines (parrots), who could become seriously or fatally ill. Doves and pigeons are all doves of various species, so in a pinch, your pigeon could co-exist with domestic doves. However, this is not ideal either.

Sadly, there are many, many injured pigeons, and many rescued pigeons are brought to rehabbers. Sometimes wildlife rehabbers cannot or will not take in pigeons because of the threat of disease, or because they do not have the extra resources available. Some wildlife rehabbers, however, do take in pigeons, and those who do are pretty well overjoyed to find someone who'd like to care permanently for a disabled pigeon. If you contact me at Best Friends, and give me the area where you live, I can refer you to additional rehabbers you can call. I'm sure we'll find someone that will happily give you pigeons.

Depending on the amount of room you have, you may take in one or more pigeons, although six or eight are a better grouping. They would need a sheltered, predator-proof, well-constructed, outside aviary. If that's not an option, one mate for your pigeon would be best. If they are fighting, they are both males. If they do not seem to be affectionate, they're probably both females. Also, you need a mate with a disability somewhat comparable to the one you have, not one that can't get around at all and not one that flies well.

I'd be happy to help you in any way. If you contact me, we'll see how we can help Pepi. Thank you for rescuing her!

Response from Laura:

I don't know much about what species can intermix well with pigeons; this is not my area of specialty. But since pigeons are social birds, I agree that your bird would be a lot happier with other pigeons. My biggest concern about mixing him with parrots is disease-related. I don't know if it would be a good idea for that reason for parrots and pigeons to be housed together.

Often racing pigeon fanciers have birds that don't fly well. I suggest contacting your local racing pigeon club to see if they know anyone who takes in handicapped birds or is willing to give up some to your care. Here in CT, we have several people who do this. If you're interested, call our hotline at 203-389-4411. You can also try the American Racing Pigeon Union website, www.pigeon.org and ask where and if you can locate companion pigeons in need of long-term care in your home state. Good luck!

Helping injured animals on the road

Question from Cindy:

What should you do when you find injured wildlife on the road or wildlife that is not injured but could easily be in harms way? I recently was driving on a very busy highway and saw a mother duck and her young in the median by a concrete barrier. I had no idea what to do and was afraid I would push her into traffic. I've also been in situations where I've seen squirrels or opossums still alive after being hit and don't know if I should try to pick them up or what. We don't have anyone who will come out to help wildlife. Our wildlife officers will only respond to injured deer and then shoot them.

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

I agree with you Cindy. Road hit deer/car situations are the worst to deal with.

The first thing to consider is your own safety. All too often it is just too dangerous to stop your car. The second thing you mentioned is quite true; too often we do more harm than good by scaring animals into the road, particularly ducks with ducklings. My general recommendation is to not stop to help animals cross the road.

Keep an animal carrier, heavy gloves, a blanket, flannel shirt, and an implement like a shovel in the car at all times. IF it is safe to stop for an injured animal, or to stop for orphans clustered around a dead mother, and if the animal(s) is not in a location where getting to him means your own life might be in jeopardy, then you can try to push him/them into the animal carrier. Then call your state fish and game agency, nature center, or animal shelter for the name of a rehabilitator in your area who can take in the animals. Be especially careful with adult, potentially biting animals though. Animals can hurt you when they're fearful and in pain. They don't realize you're trying to help!

We actually support having the police euthanize road-hit deer. Adult deer are extremely difficult to rehabilitate, since they are so stress prone. They often do harm to themselves in captivity and develop stress-related, serious ailments. Many wildlife rehabilitators have opted to take in fawns only for this reason. A well-placed shot by a police officer may provide the speediest, most humane euthanasia for badly injured deer in this circumstance. Obviously, the nature of their injury must be carefully evaluated, but in general, if a deer is car-hit and can't get up, they are usually mortally injured and suffering.

These are all such difficult decisions to make, I know!

Changing wildlife laws and how "nuisance" control companies do business

Question from a member:

I live in the Midwest, and a few years ago our wildlife laws changed to require that skunks, opossums, and raccoons that are trapped either be let go on the same property, be held for 65 days to check for rabies, or be euthanized. When property owners call "wildlife removal" companies with nuisance complaints on these particular species the people are many times not being told of this law and either told that they have to be killed or that they will "take care of it for them". So people think the animals are being relocated and not killed, not realizing how ambiguous the response was. They could so easily give people humane, easy ways to remove the animals without trapping or killing!

I am just a private citizen and so frustrated because thousands of these species are now being killed as a result of this law. How can I take on the wildlife laws or the wildlife removal companies to change how they deal with these species?

Response from Laura:

I couldn't agree with you more. The best way to solve nuisance wildlife conflicts is to remove what is attracting the animal (i.e. food, den site) and to use exclusion methods to keep them from areas they're not wanted. Ironically, it's usually the human behavior, like sloppy garbage disposal practices or the leaving out of cat food, that causes the supposed animal problem.

You're so right that many wildlife removal companies deceive the public into thinking they're providing a humane solution when they aren't. Many companies tell clients they must kill the animals instead of letting clients know that on-site release is allowed and that the animals don't have to be killed.

There are some good, ethical nuisance control operators out there who use truly humane tactics, such as evicting animals on-site as a family unit, using heated "baby boxes" to keep the young warm while the mother is retrieving and relocating them, and completing each job through structural exclusion so the problem won't recur. Unfortunately, those using humane tactics are in the minority.

One of our biggest projects is trying to pass legislation around the country to regulate this fledgling, yet fast growing, "nuisance wildlife control" industry, which profits from people's fears over wildlife in their suburban and urban backyards.

We passed a precedent-setting law here in CT to regulate the nuisance wildlife control industry several years ago. It requires that practitioners get trained in humane non-lethal techniques, that they use AVMA -approved methods of euthanasia (i.e. to prohibit them from using common methods like drowning and acetone injection to kill animals) and to require that they provide an educational flier to all clients to inform them about both lethal and non-lethal options for solving nuisance conflicts. Even though this law is good, it still doesn't provide enough oversight of the wildlife extermination industry.

My suggestion is that you contact the HSUS for their model nuisance wildlife control operators bill (mbrasted@hsus.org). If you're willing to help lobby it through your state legislature, with our assistance and by networking with others, that would be great!

The other way to help is to educate your community about humane ways to solve nuisance wildlife problems. You can get the information you need on this by going to our website, www.fund.org. Go to the urban wildlife center link, then scroll down and read our species-by-species fact sheets on co-existing with wildlife. We outline common problems and their solutions for individual species. One way to publicize this information is through the local newspapers, Letters to the Editor or by trying to interest your paper in doing a feature story on the topic.

This is a huge, relatively new wildlife cruelty issue and one that is fast growing. I am glad you're interested in working on it!!

PS: We have written standards that we provide to animal shelters who want to make sure that any nuisance control operator they refer to uses humane tactics. For a copy of these standards, just go to www.fund.org, click on urban wildlife (on the left), and scroll to the bottom of the page.

Response from Sharon:

Yes, that is a sad situation. Thank you very much for your concern and caring for these animals who are, as you so clearly know, real animals, not just "nuisance" animals.

Unfortunately, there's a very similar situation in many states with regard to deceptive "wildlife removal" companies; I'll return to that in a moment. Let me first just say a little about the realities of trapping and releasing these animals that may be useful to know for anyone who may not be familiar with the dangers in doing that.

There are similar wildlife laws in many other states too, including Utah, where we are. There is, to some extent, a good reason for these laws. First, skunks and raccoons are what are known as "rabies-vector" species. Although they are unlikely to carry rabies, they are more likely than most other species to carry rabies, particularly in areas where there have been recent cases of rabies among wildlife. That is the reason they are treated differently under the law. Clearly, one does not want to spread rabies by allowing these animals to be trapped and released elsewhere; that would be harmful to people and to other animals. (Because we do not have opossums in this area, I'm going to leave the part of your question that concerns them to Laura to answer.)

Secondly, as we mentioned in the Forum yesterday, although people often have very good intentions when trapping and releasing wildlife, only about half of wild animals who are trapped and released in a different location survive. There is also the frequent occurrence of mothers being trapped and released away from their babies, of animals being trapped just before winter and then released on to unfamiliar, frozen ground, away from known food sources, or of animals being released in the territories of other animals. Basically, trapping and releasing any wildlife is not a good idea, even where it is legal, unless done in exceptional circumstances by a licensed wildlife rehabilitator or by state wildlife officials and for the animals' benefit. Trapping and releasing wildlife can also endanger the humans who are doing that and other animals at the release site. So, as one can see, trapping and releasing wildlife really isn't the answer.

The best way to relate to "nuisance" wildlife is not to remove the wildlife, but rather to remove the source of food which has attracted the animals. Either that, or remove the possibility of their being a "nuisance".

Sometimes the "nuisance" is only in our heads. Many people think of skunks as animals that spray constantly. Most skunks very rarely spray, only when they feel very threatened. The various species of large striped or hooded skunks that are found in most of the country do not climb. If people have secure, safe fencing for their dog(s), there will be no way for a skunk to enter and spray the dog, who will have probably expressed an unwelcome interest in the skunk! A dog sprayed by a skunk is, indeed, a real, not an imaginary, problem! Good fencing will benefit the dog as well as the skunk.

If the skunk is moving into the garage, generally a gentle person, moving with care, can escort him/her out without being sprayed. Then the garage door needs to be kept closed. Again, if this is done in spring or in winter, it may be life threatening to the skunk or to the skunk's babies.

If there is a fear, or an actuality, of raccoons getting into the house, then after the animal has been encouraged to leave and has left all the animal's entranceways can be sealed. There is a procedure for doing this to avoid separating babies from their mothers or trapping the animal inside. It's best to find out exactly how to go about this first, because there are a number of things that can go wrong. There are many websites with helpful information, for example, www.hsus.org (the HSUS website) or www.fund.org (the website of the Fund for Animals that Laura Simon is representing here on the Forum, which has terrific information about "nuisance" wildlife!)

Regarding your very relevant question about "wildlife removal" companies being deceptive in relation to the fate of the wildlife they remove, this is really extremely common. I think sometimes simply because the people removing the wildlife just find it a lot easier to say that the animals will be fine, there's nothing to worry about. It's easier rather than telling the truth, which is that they may be killed or released inappropriately and not survive, or in some states, may be required by law to be killed. One suggestion might be to require these companies to have a printed brochure or statement outlining clearly what will be happening to the wildlife who are removed. The personnel doing the removal could be required to give this out at the time wildlife is removed. This is a complex issue, tied in with many other issues; for example, should wildlife removal companies be in business at all?

I hope you'll pursue the wonderful desire you have to help these animals. They are so often thought of as "just a nuisance". One way to do this is to develop a circle of people as interested as you are yourself, or join an existing group. Contact as many people as possible to find out more facts, then find out more about how to help these animals. You can contact wildlife officials, wildlife rehabilitators, other organizations, city officials and others. Then you'll know a lot more and you'll be able, with others, to develop a plan of how best to help. We'd love to know how you are doing with this, and we may be able to help with ideas or contacts; feel free to contact me at Best Friends if that would be helpful.

Comment from Susan:

As a past nuisance wildlife control operator (WCO) and current cat rescuer, I would like to offer these suggestions for the person with the concern about WCOs. Wildlife control businesses often do take a moment to ask callers "do you have a bungee cord on your garbage can" etc. As rescuers know, people are often not willing to take personal responsibility for problems on their property and want someone to just "make it go away."

As a part-time WCO, I did not want a lot of calls, and spent a lot of time trying to convince people to tolerate animals. It's not always so easy, especially when talking on the phone takes up an hour and pays nothing, and setting a cage trap takes an hour and pays $45. After returning four nonpaying hour-long phone calls, many trappers get very cynical and just say, "The heck with it. I'll just go set a trap."

Wildlife control businesses are businesses. It's important to remember that while some of them do rescue animals, their mission is not rescue. It is bringing home enough money to pay the bills. For full-time WCOS, wildlife control is in fact their only source of income.

Some businesses learn that exclusion and non-lethal consulting is as profitable as removal. But others simply come from an average background and start out by plopping down a cage trap. Many of them learn by trial and error because state training is poor. I might point out that many rescuers start out the same way too... remove the cat, plop down a trap, take it to the shelter... before they consider more involved options like TNR. How long did it take the domestic animal control community learn about TNR? How many communities still don't know it is an option or consider it inhumane? Change takes time.

That doesn't mean you can't move change along a little faster, though. The best way you can immediately make a change in local wildlife control practices is to teach those who are most reachable by you... the rescuer and the shelter. Reach out to your local animal rescue community. In my experience, landowners who are concerned about wildlife (or are hoping for a free solution) often contact animal shelters first. They are usually turned away because "we don't do wildlife" or "we don't handle nuisance issues." Only then do they turn to the Yellow Pages.

Just saying, "Don't use the nasty WCO." without offering another solution doesn't help the landowner. If you offer the caller a solution, or a WCO you approve of on most points, you have helped solve the problem. Make sure the solutions you offer actually work. Just because you can buy an ultrasonic animal repeller doesn't mean it works. It doesn't. Research your info pages carefully.

Shelters should consider adding good sound wildlife information to their webpages, and send their callers there when they don't have time to talk. Actively seek out local wildlife control people they can work with, whose methods they approve of, and refer callers to that WCO. Put these referable WCOs on your webpage. Keep their numbers in your Rolodex. Give business to good people. This is true of every referral you give, not just WCOs. If we don't refer anyone, or just say, "Look in the Yellow Pages," we aren't helping.

Concerning creating laws that require WCOs to use AVMA methods of euthanasia only: this usually limits most WCOS to carbon dioxide gassing only (which is AVMA sanctioned even though most domestic animal shelters won't use it), and eliminates access to other non-AVMA methods that may be more humane. In my opinion, legislation should prohibit specific killing methods that have been proven inhumane... not limit trappers to AVMA methods that they do not have legal access to. Shelters can use sodium pentobarb because they have multiple staff members. WCOs cannot. I only know of one private sole-proprietor WCO in the United States who has managed to obtain a license for controlled drugs (there may be more).

These laws are usually proposed to ban the use of acetone and drowning. The solution: ban the use of acetone and drowning.

Concerning ammonia as an animal repellent... use with care and pass this warning on when you advise others to use it. Young animals can be killed with ammonia if their mother does not return to note the smell and remove them quickly. Never block a burrow with an ammonia-soaked rag because the animal won't push through the noxious rag to exit and can be trapped inside and be killed by the fumes. Take a whiff of the rag yourself (CAREFULLY) and don't put it any closer to the animal or its only exit than you would want to have it to you. Average people have a tendency to believe "more is better." More ammonia is definitely not better. Use it as a last resort.

This has been a great topic. Thanks for hosting it.

Dealing with mouse problems at a shelter

Question from Monica:

How does a shelter humanely deal with a mouse problem? All of the regular tactics for reducing a mouse population in other situations are very difficult in a shelter, i.e. there is always food out and sealing up every hole to the outside is impossible with outdoor runs, etc. We have diligently tried to get rid of the mice, including humane traps, but we are getting nowhere. For every mouse we trap there seems to be another waiting in the wings. Is there anything that would repel the mice? Is killing the mice the only solution, and how do we do that in a no-kill shelter environment?

Response from Sharon:

Probably all shelters have a similar problem to one extent or another. Where there is food and access to the outside, it's a bit like having a sign in mouse language that says, "Dinner Here".

However, don't give up. Killing the mice by using rat poison is a really, really bad idea, as mentioned earlier in this Forum. Killing mice with standard mouse traps is a bad idea as well. It's unpleasant for the people as well as the mice, and they don't simply stop arriving. The problem just continues.

The best approach is multi-faceted. First, obtain a number of large humane traps. Be really sure to check them every morning, and put tape over the entrances to the traps if you store them. There's nothing more depressing than finding a dead mouse in a "humane" mouse trap, for reasons we won't dwell on.

The traps containing the mice need to be diligently taken far, far way, maybe to a nice garbage dump. They will not multiply endlessly, because predators will be attracted to the site too. But it is likely that most of the mice will live happily for a while.

Invest in a number of ultrasonic mouse repellant devices. Resident mice tend to become used to them after a while, but new mice will be deterred, and hopefully, you won't still be having resident mice. Read the labels carefully or check with the manufacturer to be sure you're getting a good product that works well and that will not be audible to dogs and cats. They are designed not to be audible to dogs, cats, and humans. We have had no trouble with birds hearing them, but I believe they are likely to be very upsetting to any rodents and possibly some other animals. Just to be completely on the safe side, keep an eye on the dogs and cats too. I've never heard of a dog or cat being bothered by them, but it doesn't hurt to be careful.

Minimize the food being out in any way that is possible without depriving the shelter animals. Extra-yummy food, or special treats, might be reserved for certain times of day. Review all the storage containers you're using. It's important to be really sure there are only mouse-tight containers. As you no doubt know, many lids are not mouse-proof, and a mouse can easily slip under them. Keep everything, especially food-storage areas, even more spotlessly clean than usual.

Look at the openings that lead to the outside runs. See if there is a way to put some metal sheeting up that would help. Metal sheeting can be expensive, but perhaps you can get some donated. It's impossible to design a way to do this at a distance. It takes an engineer's eye and a good knowledge of the jumping abilities of mice, but it is often possible to put up something around openings that the mice simply slide down so they can't get in.

For additional ideas, do an Internet search; there are a lot of ideas on various sites.

It is time-consuming to follow up on all these points, and time is probably something you're short of, but with perseverance, I think you'll be able to significantly diminish the problem. You may be able to find a priceless volunteer who would like to take this on as a project.

It is a significant and very common problem. Thank you for asking about it; I hope this will be useful. If anyone else has some good solutions, please e-mail me. They would be really helpful to know about!

Response from Laura:

Monica, you hit all the answers in your question, excluding the mice physically and keeping food in sealed containers is the best way to avoid growing a large mouse population.

The only other partial solution I can offer is a better way to catch them: You can put a large outdoor garbage can (aluminum, 50 gallon) just under a counter that the mice use, and put a lot of food and lids of water in the can. The mice will jump in to eat the irresistible feast but cannot jump out, and that way you can catch many mice at once.

There really is no repellent or scare device that I know of which keeps mice away. I should mention that one of the worst, most barbaric devices ever created is the glue trap, which should never be used to catch any animal.

I 'm sorry I don't have a perfect answer for you. You may just need to live with the mice and keep the numbers lower by using the capture strategy outlined above!

Do we need a more hands on or hands off approach when dealing with wildlife?

Question from Celeste:

In general, would you say that a hands-on or hands-off approach is best for wildlife management? Should we be feeding, building shelters, even breeding wildlife? Or is it better to leave them to their own devices, even if that means a higher mortality rate some years due to starvation, disease, predation, etc?

Response from Laura:

Our organization generally supports hands-off management while recognizing that in certain situations, intervention may be required. We see, time and time again, how human actions such as the feeding of wild animals, results in animals getting dependent on artificial food sources. The result is higher mortality (when animals exceed the food resource) and diseases spread in areas where animals congregate in unnatural densities for food.

Let's look at the case of the supplemental feeding of deer in Michigan: In this state, the winter feeding of deer has been a cultural habit for residents as well as providing consistent business for many local stores. Stores would sell carrots and deer feed which was dumped by pail and truckload in areas around the state. The result was high population growth (appreciated by hunters). Then suddenly, when Chronic Wasting Disease arrived, the deer herd was hard hit. The spread of this highly contagious disease has had serious repercussions (mass mortality of deer and the threat of disease spread to the livestock industry), entirely due to the misguided feeding activities of humans. Even now, businesses depend on the sale of deer food and many people are still unwilling to stop doing it, despite new restrictions on this activity.

When people feed bread to geese and ducks, they are not only getting the animals dependent on an unnatural food source, but bread offers no nutrition. Therefore ducks who are fed bread all winter are loaded with empty calories and suffer serious malnutrition effects, if not death.

Overall, I've come to the conclusion that the hands-off approach for wildlife is generally much healthier and natural, even if that means higher mortality of animals due to natural factors.

Response from Sharon:

That's a very profound question and one that's really at the heart of how we as humans relate to the wildlife with whom we share our planet. I tend to feel that all of us need to be wary of dictating to others and to other organizations what is the best or "only right way" to help wildlife. In my experience, every species is different; every habitat is different. Also, what each of us feels called to do is different, and who are we to say that what another person is trying to do to help wildlife is useless or "not worth doing"?

Sometimes it's a simple question of facts, knowledge and information. Most of us who've been active in wildlife rehabilitation do understand quite clearly, for example, that it's sometimes inhumane to keep alive a disabled wild bird who will never fly again. It's not always inhumane; much depends on the individual, the nature of the species, the nature of the disability, and a number of other considerations. Wildlife laws and wildlife authorities do their best to accommodate these complexities.

But you are asking about the wildlife management of species and habitats. I don't think one can simply say that a hands-off approach is best, or that a hands-on approach is best. To oversimplify the question is to risk making everything black or white, and that's not how the real world is.

A completely hands-off approach, assuming the world and the human race continue on their current course (and who knows if that's a correct assumption?) would lead to the extinction of all wild areas and all wildlife in the not-too-distant future. For as far back as history and pre-history go, our species has taken over the earth, destroyed the forests, and hunted wildlife to extinction. This process continues today, at an ever accelerated rate. The more technologically advanced we become, the better we are at destroying the earth, the air, the water. (Not to depress anyone; after all, there are very heroic people who are working to help both the animals and the earth.)

On the other hand, a completely hands-on approach leads to all wildlife existing in some sort of nature preserves. This tends to take away the wildness that is really the essential nature and the beauty of wild animals.

Each situation, I feel, requires a fresh approach. Take the programs that have captured, bred, and released the condors, for example. There are valid points of view on both sides. One could say, and many people do, that this is a species that is just going to have a lot of difficulty, no matter how much human help is given, existing in the modern world, and that it is perhaps better and kinder to just let them go, with dignity, into extinction. But are we certain that we have the right to say that? Many people have worked for long hours and long years so that the condors could fly again, and it is magnificent to see them fly again! Who knows yet if this attempt will ultimately succeed or fail? None of us knows. Surely, if we wish to criticize something, we would do better to find fault with all the human indifference and cruelty towards animals that exists in the world, rather than to criticize those who are dedicated to helping animals, even if their way of helping is different from ours.

I feel the answer often lies in gaining real knowledge of the species, the habitat, the actual real consequences of any intervention, and the causes of the threats that wildlife face, rather than simply coming to an abstract position and trying to wrap it around every real situation. To take one more example, to build a walkway under an expressway, so that turtles can cross safely is an act of kindness. To do nothing and "let nature take its course" is nonsense, because there's nothing "natural" about the expressway or the speeding cars.

As has been said in various ways, no act of kindness is wasted, and perhaps that could be a guiding principle. Acquiring the knowledge to help appropriately, rather than just blindly assuming we already know all there is to know about helping wildlife, is an important aspect of kindness. Knowledge and kindness go together. Thank you for your very thoughtful question.

Comment from Celeste:

I have lived in Southern California, Montana, Colorado and Oregon. As you can imagine, between those 4 states I've been exposed to just about everything except armadillos! :)

There's a book I really like, titled, "'Who Ate the Backyard?' Living with Wildlife on Private Land" by Charle Craighead. There is a section for each species, with a true story, information about, "how to attract, avoid, or simply live in peace with the animals that inhabit the same places we do in the Rocky Mountain Region."

Protecting pets from coyotes

Question from Patti:

I live in a residential area near a town. There is a lot of wildlife around. Lately, the coyotes have been coming to the fence in my backyard. Have they been known to climb fences? Mine is 5 feet high. I have two dogs plus a cat pen within the yard. The cats are free to come and go as they please to the pen but can't get out of it. (Stray cats have been able to get into it over the top) Lately I have been concerned about letting any of them out in either fenced area when it is dark. But I did see a Coyote at the fence one morning so daylight may not be safe for them either. Any advice?

Response from Sharon:

I don't like to tell you this, but I would be seriously concerned, and I think you'll need to make some changes in your fencing.

Here at Best Friends we are in a naturally very wild area, surrounded by undeveloped land for miles around. There are many coyotes everywhere, as well as other large predators. We love the coyotes, and I personally really love listening to them howl, and watching them.

We keep the animals in our care safe with very good fencing and secure, well-constructed enclosures.

First, with your current fencing, you are absolutely right that it is dangerous to let any of your animals out after sunset or early in the morning. In the case of the dogs, you could accompany them for a brief outing after dark. I'm assuming the dogs may be small to medium sized. Large, active dogs are good coyote deterrents.

I'm not absolutely clear about the configuration of the cat pen you've mentioned, but I'm assuming it's somewhat similar to the other fencing and is open on the top. I hope the fencing material you have is sturdy. Chain link fencing or sturdy welded wire is what is required. If you'd like to know exactly what we use here, for the cat and dog enclosures, people do often ask us, and you're certainly welcome to write to us for that information.

To keep out coyotes, I would suggest chain link fencing at least six feet high, with additional fencing on the top that goes out at an angle, two or three feet. Hardware stores and home improvement stores understand this concept and have special attachments they sell with which to construct angled fencing on the top. The principle is that when the coyote (they are dexterous climbers) gets to the top, he won't be able to go over the angled fencing. This must go all the way around. If it goes most of the way around, with just a couple of areas where there's a big rock to jump up on or a convenient tree, or a smaller gate that can be climbed over, that will NOT do the job. If there has to be a gate, it needs to be closed with a bolt lock or another secure lock or fastening that neither a coyote nor a raccoon will be able to open.

If you have coyotes in your neighborhood, you probably have a host of wildlife that you do not see, possibly, depending on the area where you live: raccoons, ring-tailed cats, bobcats, foxes. You will certainly have great-horned owls, who do regularly prey on cats and cat-sized dogs. You may have golden eagles who will also prey on small animals.

A cat pen needs to be fully enclosed in order to be safe, particularly from owls and eagles. Cat enclosures can often be attached to the side of the house, by a window for the cats to use to go out, and can be built of wood 2 x 2's or 2 x 4's with either welded wire or hardware cloth (the hardware cloth with one-half inch squares).

Most of the aviaries in the Best Friends bird area are built of hardware cloth and wood 2 x 4's; coyotes walk among them at night, but there have never been any difficulties with the coyotes or any other predators. These aviaries are also built so that the sides extend two feet into the ground (coyotes dig) and then, buried under the ground; the wire sides also extend two feet out horizontally.

Another way to provide protection from digging is a fence that goes one foot down and then is buried in a concrete footing. A temporary way, inexpensive, but labor-intensive, is to line the fence along the bottom with rocks about a foot in diameter -- when the coyote starts digging, the rocks fall into the hole as he digs it, preventing any useful hole from being dug. Another temporary possibility is to run a two-foot roll of hardware cloth on the ground along the outside of the fence, kept in place by large rocks. This doesn't solve the climbing problem, only the digging problem, and these temporary measures are less than perfect.

The most dangerous times are at night, early morning, and after sunset, but there is no time of day that is free of risk. It would be safest to accompany your animals whenever they go out (with a flashlight at night), until you're able to improve the fencing. Because of the danger of great-horned owls, having your cats out at night isn't safe even if you are with them.

I'm sorry this all probably sounds a bit grim and difficult, but I'm sure we'd all rather take whatever steps are needed than take unnecessary chances with our animals. If you need more help with this, please feel free to e-mail me at Best Friends.

Response from Laura:

Yes, coyotes can jump over or dig under fences; they are quite agile. They are also opportunistic, which means they can be active night and/or day to take advantage of certain food sources. They mainly prey on small mammals like mice, squirrels or rabbits. Yet I understand your concern, since they sometimes do go after cats and very small dogs like Bichons.

My best suggestion is that you put a "Coyote Roller" on top of your existing fence. This is a freestanding cylindrical device that attaches to the top of a fence, and literally "rolls" any animal off who is attempting to climb over. Officials at the Arizona Fish and Game agency have gotten much positive feedback on this device, and they should know, since many coyote/human interactions occur in Arizona cities on a daily basis! A Coyote Roller can be purchased by calling Roll Guard: 619-977-6031 or www.coyoteroller.com

You should also not leave cat food or dog food outside, since that will attract coyotes. It's best to feed companion animals indoors or if that's not possible, at set times of the day when you can feed your animals directly, then take the food bowl away.

Hope this information helps!

Humanely handling Canadian goose problems

Question from Julie:

An ongoing problem in our community has been how to handle the large number of Canadian Geese that hang out at parks and golf courses. The geese leave feces everywhere and as a result the park district wants them removed; as they say, it can be a health issue for visitors. Are you aware of any programs that are working to solve this type of problem humanely?

Response from Sharon:

Yes, there are programs that offer humane solutions. You may go to www.geesepeace.org or to www.canadageese.org. HSUS www.hsus.org also offers extensive information. At Best Friends, we're also working on a project, along with Dr. Kim Danoff of the Avian Welfare Coalition to gather together practical and easy-to-use information concerning humane methods of relating to Canada geese. This should be completed in a few months.

There are many humane and effective methods. Usually they work best when a combination of methods is used, and they may take some time and some work. There is no need at all to kill the geese. Methods generally used to kill geese are very barbaric and tend to be upsetting to many residents, to families and children, as well as to those who consider themselves animal people (and, of course, to the geese!). This in itself provides some incentive for municipal authorities to seek humane methods.

Again, it is human intervention which has caused this problem. Early in the Twentieth Century, Canada geese were believed to be extinct in the United States. In an effort to re-introduce them, many Canada geese were released on to lakes and ponds where they had never been before. This caused thousands of them to lose touch with their ancient migratory patterns, and today, their descendants are resident geese, who do not migrate, but live where they are all year round. Now, in the United States, there are two populations of Canada geese, the all-year round resident geese and the seasonal geese who migrate from Canada.

They are very beautiful, graceful, and intelligent birds. Geese live and migrate in families. Here at Best Friends, after we had rehabilitated a Canada goose for two months last year, when she was ready for release, we took her back to the lake near where she'd been found injured. Her mate immediately recognized her from the other side of the lake, and flew across to where she was being released. The two swam off together. We don't know how she explained her absence to him, but they were clearly overjoyed to be together again!

Response from Laura:

Well, the good news is that there are indeed a number of groups working to humanely resolve human/Canada goose conflicts! Our office routinely councils towns and other entities on ways to minimize potential conflicts, The Humane Society of The United States (HSUS) has set up model programs, including those involving egg addling, and there is an organization called Geese Peace (www.geesepeace.org) that is devoted entirely to helping communities resolve their problems with Canada geese.

What it boils down to is that parks, golf courses, and suburbia in general create *ideal* habitat for Canadian geese. Geese prefer bodies of water surrounded by closely cropped vegetation - something that is not in short supply in suburban America! The continual removal of Canada geese from an area will never resolve the underlying issue. As quickly as geese are removed from an area, more geese will move in, as there is nothing to discourage them from being attracted to this ideal habitat. As a result, the objective of goose control is to teach geese not to rest and forage at locations where doing so would impact human activity. This can be accomplished by utilizing a number of techniques such as chemical repellents, trained border collies, egg addling, and habitat modification.

Habitat modification is the most effective, long-term solution for goose conflicts. For example, putting a rocky vertical bank, hedge or low fence along ponds will block the geese's clear sight line and prevent geese from having easy access from pond to lawn. Unable to detect approaching predators, the geese will feel unsafe and choose a more appropriate habitat.

In situations where habitat modification is not an option, chemical repellents may be effective. A repellent called Flight Control has proven very effective at parks and golf courses. This multi-sensory repellent works by giving geese a sense of digestive upset combined with a visual warning system seen only in the UV spectrum of light, which geese can see but people cannot. As a result, geese learn to quickly avoid areas of grass sprayed with Flight Control. Also, Flight Control is not harmful to humans, so it is safe to use at parks and other recreation areas.

Trained border collies are also used by golf courses and airports to harass geese away from areas where they're not wanted. Geese become very alarmed by the trained dogs stalking them and move elsewhere. It is essential to use dogs specifically trained by qualified handlers to "stalk" geese, and to commit to using the dogs on a regular basis so as to reinforce the perceived presence of a predator in the area. Also, geese should not be harassed when they are flightless or have young.

I also wanted to point out that although goose feces are unsightly, many people are surprised to learn that they are not disease causing. Actually, there is only one known case of Canada geese being directly associated with human disease, and this one particular case involved a person who had an allergic hypersensitivity. So although people may want goose feces removed for obvious reasons, it's important that they don't confuse disease issues with aesthetic concerns.

Finally, Canada geese are smart birds so a combination of techniques is often necessary. No single recipe will apply to every situation. If you would like more information for a specific problem in your town or community, feel free to contact our office and I can put an information packet together for you.

Getting the word out about wildlife misconceptions and myths

Question from a member:

It seems like there are so many misconceptions about wildlife and it is often hard to sort out fact from fiction, like the standard one if you touch a baby bird the mother won't come back for it, or when people see baby birds on the ground and rescue them but really they are just learning to fly. I wonder how many birds are taken from their moms, because people don't know and take the bird in and try to care for it. How can individuals find out what is true and what is not and how do we get the word out to the general public, so that it becomes standard knowledge instead of the falsehoods that are accepted as truth? Is there a humane education program that could go into schools?

Response from Sharon:

What a great question! Absolutely, one of the things about wildlife is that really we are all in some state of ignorance, including those of us who've worked with wildlife for many years. The wild beings of this planet are in some real sense unknown, mysterious, different. They live on the planet we think of as ours, but they do not live in our world. They live in their own world, with its own laws and ways of doing things, with its own beauty and majesty; they know things we will never know... about the tides, the stars, the winds, the trees, the weather, the seasons, the other creatures.

One way we can expand our knowledge is for each of us to start from the point where we are and to begin to notice wildlife -- not just to see, as we all do, the dogs, the cats, the familiar domestic animals that we know and love, but also to see and watch those we do not always notice, the little songbird who hides in the branches and then flies away from us, the fox who walks through the trees in the early morning, the bats that appear at twilight. Noticing this other world that exists alongside our own, is a way of enriching our own lives. It is also a way of gaining a different perspective on the familiar animals we live with, who once also were wild.

On a practical level, getting to know and offering to volunteer with a wildlife rehabilitator or at a wildlife center is one of the best ways to learn about wildlife. Often there are many opportunities to help; there is the actual care of the animals, and there are usually educational programs that gladly accept volunteers and that do go into schools. Some training is needed, and then one can continue to learn more and more while teaching others. Parents and teachers can encourage their schools to invite local wildlife groups to give regular presentations.

On the Internet, we can all become actively involved with learning more about wildlife and with wildlife advocacy, working hard with organizations who are supporting wildlife and the preservation of wild habitats. The truly essential thing every wild creature needs is habitat to live in, wilderness areas that connect to other wilderness areas, that are undisturbed, undeveloped and unpolluted, that are protected.

Every single time we devote our attention to wildlife, or speak out or write a letter on their behalf, or show a child or an adult something new or amazing about a bird, a butterfly, or a deer, we have helped all wildlife. Every time we relate to wild places and wild creatures with a sense of awe and with kindness, then we have helped to bring more kindness and reverence for life into the world we all share.

Thank you all for your questions and for your interest!

Response from Laura:

For a long time, I have wondered why so many people believe that merely touching a baby bird means that the parents will abandon him. All of us were raised on that myth! My suspicion is that mothers got tired of their kids bringing home endless baby birds and created a story to stop it!

Our experience running a wildlife hotline is that people have many misconceptions about wildlife and truly don't understand wild animal behavior. For example, if a raccoon is ripping shingles off a roof, what they see is a violent and bad-tempered animal instead of a mother desperately trying to get back to her babies after the homeowner unwittingly closed her entry hole.

We have written up answers to common species-specific questions. Take a look at our Co-existing with Wildlife series at www.fund.org, go to urban wildlife link and then scroll down to the fact sheets. I encourage you to review the information contained in this material which corrects many of the misconceptions that the public tends to hear and believe.

In terms of how to better educate the public: I don't know of a good urban wildlife educational program for the public school system. I agree with you that there should be one! I try to use the media to get the word out, i.e. try to get papers to do feature stories, write letters to the editor, and press releases on seasonal wildlife problems and solutions. The Fund also has some PSAs on our website on how to humanely resolve wildlife problems. People are welcome to use these or to contact Tracey McIntire in our main office at tmcintire@fund.org for copies in beta format which many TV stations prefer to use.

I would welcome ideas from readers on how we can do a better job getting the word out. It is frustrating to see how little the public knows about the wildlife in their own backyards and how to humanely resolve conflicts!

Helping shelters prepare to refer or handle wildlife calls

Question from Holly:

What advice do you have for shelters that are not generally equipped or prepared to handle wildlife on how to deal with situations when people bring you injured animals or species with which you are not familiar? We have had to deal with alligators taken from house raids, birds, an ocelot, and baby raccoons. Even though we may just be providing temporary care until we can get them to a nature center or zoo, we don't have any idea on what to feed or how to provide safe housing. Is there a site we can go to or a group to call that will tell us these types of things?

Response from Laura:

I always encourage shelters to develop solid advice networks so that you have people to call for help or advice immediately. For starters, I'd recommend contacting your state fish and game agency and ask for a listing of wildlife rehabilitators in your area. Then I'd suggest calling each one to find out what species they handle and what other help they can provide, such as do they do rescue of wildlife or have volunteers who do, etc. The personal contact is everything. Do get to know these people by phone and establish a rapport.

Some rehabilitators only handle a few species and a low volume. Others are equipped to handle more of both. It's important that your phone staff have a working knowledge of who handles what so they can make good referrals. I also recommend that shelters donate animal food to rehabilitators who work with you so that it feels like more of a reciprocal relationship and one that recognizes that rehabilitators generally pay for animal care out of their own pocket. So by giving them referrals, you're costing them money. That's why it's extra nice to give something back to the rehabilitators you work with!

I'd be happy to send you a copy of the manual we published on "Wildlife Care Basics for Veterinary Hospitals: What to Do Before the Rehabilitator Arrives". It was written by Irene Ruth and intended to assist veterinary hospitals who often find disabled wild animals being dumped at their door. As you well know, the care and housing of wildlife is very different from that of domestics, with the reduction of stress being a key and vital consideration in the housing of wildlife. Just send us your address, and we'll send you a copy in the mail (the same goes for readers who work at other shelters).

You should also consider joining the wildlife rehabilitators list serve, which can give you timely advice on the temporary care for different species. However, do underscore that you're looking for temporary care since rehabilitators get prickly when non-rehabilitators try to care for species they're not licensed or equipped to handle on a longer term basis! The website is: http://listserv.nodak.edu/archives/wlrehab.html.

I also recommend that your phone staff become familiar with our Preventing Orphaning and Co-existing with Wildlife fact sheets, so that they know what questions to ask when a call comes in about a supposedly orphaned animal. (These are available through www.fund.org, go to urban wildlife link, then scroll down)

Sometimes people misperceive situations and "kidnap" an animal, not realizing the mother is nearby. The fact that the baby animal is alone doesn't necessarily mean he's orphaned (certain species, like deer and rabbits, don't stay with their young, whereas other species rarely leave their young alone much, like raccoons). It's important for phone staff to know these species-specific differences in behavioral ecology, so they can give good advice and referrals and separate out calls concerning animals that truly need help from those that don't.

I don't know where to refer you for information on exotic animal care, other than encouraging you to form relationships with zoo staff who you can call upon for advice about different species. Try to get home numbers for after-hours advice. Ask nature centers, rehabilitators, and your state agency if they have experts for particular species that they'd share with you. Build those networks!!!

Response from Sharon:

The person you need to be in contact with is a licensed wildlife rehabilitator. It's a really good idea not only for shelters, but also for any individuals who are somewhat wildlife-conscious to keep on hand the contact information of one or more licensed wildlife rehabilitators.

You may also go to the library section of the Best Friends website (www.bestfriends.org) for more information on how to find a licensed wildlife rehabilitator. First go to "You and Your Pet ", then to "Pet Care", then to "Wildlife Care". There you'll also find several articles on how to rescue, and when not to rescue, various wildlife species. You may find it helpful to be familiar with this information because, I imagine, you're probably also receiving phone calls, like "What do I do about the baby bunny in the road?" In many cases people "rescue" young wild babies without realizing that they don't need rescuing at all, that their mother knows where they are and will return to feed them.

To find a wildlife rehabilitator during business hours, you may call or e-mail the National Wildlife Rehabilitators Association, 320-259-4086, nwra@nwrawildlife.org, or the International Wildlife Rehabilitation Council, 510-383-9090, office@iwrc-online.org, or you may go to www.wildlifeinternational.org. You may also ask your state wildlife (game and fish) department; or you may contact Best Friends, either Wild and Feathered Friends at birds@bestfriends.org or myself at sharonsj@bestfriends.org.

Thank you, Holly, for asking about this. It definitely works best to have the contact information ahead of time. Go ahead and contact the rehabber(s). Ask her/him for the best procedure for getting a bird or animal to her. Do they have certain hours? Should you call first? Do you need to transport the animal to them? Usually, an individual does need to transport the animal to the rehabber (ask them how to do this in the best way). In the case of a shelter like yours, you may be able to arrange for a volunteer (your volunteer or theirs) to make regular transportation trips.

One of the most important questions to ask is what species the rehabber accepts. Some accept all native species; one may accept only chimney swifts or bats; another may accept mammals or songbirds, but not raptors. To be reasonably well prepared you need to have one or more rehabbers who will accept small mammals, songbirds, and raptors, and in addition, someone who will accept species you frequently receive, such as alligators.

Most wildlife rehabbers will not take in exotics. Among other reasons, there is often a threat of disease spreading from exotics into native wild populations. By "wildlife" is meant native wildlife; "exotics" refer to animals and birds from other countries, even if they've been bred here in this country: sugar gliders, parrots, non-native snakes, etc. You may also need knowledgeable contacts who will accept exotics that you may not be prepared yourself to keep and care for.

As you know, it isn't legal for any shelter, pound, humane society, or zoo, or anyone else to possess native wildlife without a permit. It is, however, entirely legal to keep the wildlife for a short time for the purpose of turning the animal over to a licensed rehabber. You may want to be certain that the zoos or nature centers you work with do have on staff a licensed rehabber, if they are accepting native wildlife. For native mammals and native reptiles, the laws may differ somewhat from state to state. For native birds, only a person or organization that is permitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may accept them for rehabilitation, or when relevant, for educational purposes.

When you have found one or a few rehabbers that you are able to work with easily, then seek their advice on the temporary care of wildlife. In the case of nearly all injured and orphaned animals (especially baby birds, who need to eat very frequently), it's essential to get them to a rehabber really quickly... within an hour, if possible. Also, work with the rehabber, so that you'll be able to provide some temporary care and appropriate feeding for species you receive a lot, or until you can organize some way to transport the animals quickly. (The normal rule is not to put any food or water ever into the mouth of any wild creature; it usually does far more harm than good, instead, the animal needs to go immediately to the rehabber.) But, in the case of a shelter like yours, it may be helpful to learn, from a rehabber, some temporary care.

Thank you very much for the question! Hopefully, this will be helpful with some of the animals you receive.

Non-native species vs. native; can't we create plans that honor all life?

Question from multiple members:

In New Jersey several municipalities are instituting feeding bans, which include feral cats... or in other areas, like Florida, proposing to kill ferals. In some areas feeding bans are justified by the need to protect other species of animals like least terns. In other areas certain species are being eradicated because they aren't "native" and are competing for food with other species, even though humans introduced them. How can we create programs that honor all life?

Response from Sharon:

I would suggest that you go to the website of Alley Cat Allies, http://www.alleycat.org. There you'll find resources available on exactly this topic. I also encourage you to review previous forum week archives on feral cats.
You can find past Forum Q&A on the Best Friends website through this page: http://www.bestfriends.org/nomorehomelesspets/weeklyforum/forumarchives.cfm#feralcats.
You may also contact our No More Homeless Pets staff for additional help with your particular situation by emailing nmhp@bestfriends.org.

My knowledge is in the area of birds and wildlife, rather than feral cats. I do, however, agree completely that it doesn't make sense to eradicate certain species because they are not "native". In many cases, it is actually not correct that the "non-native" species are competing for food and therefore leading to the disappearance of "native" species.

For example, in the case of mute swans on the Chesapeake Bay... first, there is some controversy about whether or not mute swans are or are not native. Secondly, studies have indicated that the deterioration of the quality of the lake water is caused by human agriculture, including the run-off from pig farms. It may have nothing to do with the mute swans.

It's a complex topic. Defining which species are native and which are not can be very arbitrary. Furthermore, in the vast majority of cases, it is human activity that is at the root of the problem, not the natural behavior of animals in the wild. One thing we can certainly support, however, is banning the release of non-native species into the wild. This is certainly a problem. Pet tropical fish and pet turtles should never be released into the wild, nor should any exotic birds or any other exotic species. In most cases they do not survive. When they do, they may carry diseases that threaten native species, and their presence and behavior may also threaten native species.

On the other hand, for those animals of non-native species who are already living in the wild, it seems unkind, pointless and counterproductive to kill some species to save others. This is a controversial topic. Various laws and various governmental and non-governmental organizations find themselves on various sides of this issue.

Your point about honoring all life is really important. It seems that that is what all of us who love animals are seeking to do -- to honor, respect and help all life -- and to stand up for the protection of the earth and the animals' habitats, so that all the wild ones will have their homes too, as well as all the tame ones.

Response from Laura:

This is the most difficult of all issues to answer! While we recognize that so-called "non-native" species can sometimes have a tremendous impact on native wildlife, we don't support the lethal control of the non-natives. Instead, we try to find humane and ecologically compatible solutions, which can be quite a challenge!

I must note, however, that it is a bit ironic that the one species (human) who has had the most devastating impact on all other species is the one that continually points the finger elsewhere, i.e. at "non-native" species, when humans are typically the ones that introduced those species to the new area to begin with.

Regarding cats: we do advocate the keeping of domestic cats indoors due the tremendous toll they take on wildlife. On our wildlife hotline, we receive hundreds of calls a year about cats crippling and orphaning birds, chipmunks, baby squirrels, rabbits, etc. Often our plea to people to keep their cats in or build them large outdoor enclosures falls largely on deaf ears, which is frustrating. We view these situations as a human behavior problem. The cats aren't to blame for their predatory instinct; it's the humans who let them roam free who are responsible. Plus, the average life span of an outdoor cat is 2-3 years, whereas an indoor cat can live 15+, sometimes 20 years. So it is much more beneficial to the cat to be kept inside as well. For feral cats, we advocate spay-neuter as a solution to the expanding feral cat population issue.

Introduced, non-native species can impact and endanger native species, there's no doubt. Even so, many times the non-native species that are persecuted are often NOT competing for resources with other species to the extent that they are accused. Take for example the case of mute swans, who have been accused of having a detrimental impact on submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in places like Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. Largely for that reason, federal officials were going to issue permits to kill tens of thousands of mute swans nationwide until a lawsuit by The Fund for Animals put a halt to this lethal control plan.

SAVs are underwater plant communities that are critical for the proper functioning of water body ecosystems. The reality is that SAVs have been severely reduced by agricultural run-off and other pollutants, including the waste run-off from the massive poultry farming industry on Maryland's Eastern Shore where chickens outnumber people by one thousand to one.

All too often, non-native animals are considered "pests" and the native vs. non-native argument becomes a convenient justification for eradication attempts. Regardless, these cases must be looked at on a case-by-case basis, and our arsenal of tools, removal and relocation, fencing, spay/neuter/immunocontraception, can be strategically applied with careful analysis, forethought and cooperation between all the players and stakeholders.

The bottom line is that many of these issues are challenging, complex, and don't have easy answers.

Caring for baby birds

Question from Seda:

Couple of months ago, I found 3 baby birds in our backyard. 2 of them were dead; half eaten probably either by my outdoor cat, or other stray cats that come into our backyard, and one of them was still alive hopping in the grass. I know that it is a learning process for baby birds to learn how to fly (while the parent(s) are watching them) when they leave the nest like this. I looked for a nest, but could not see one. Since the 2 of them died horribly -- it was horrible I assume -- I thought it was a better idea to get the alive one inside. So, I put the bird in a 25-gallon fish tank, put some hamster litter on the bottom of the tank. But the problem was, I did not know what to feed the bird.

I called the wildlife center, and they told me to take the bird to them immediately, which was impossible at the time. Planning to take it there tomorrow, I decided to feed it KMR (which I always have, since I foster kittens, and cats), as a last resort. The baby bird drank KMR but unfortunately, it died the next day before I was able to take it to the wildlife center. I have later learned that birds actually cannot metabolize milk!!

I was really sad. In a way, I starved the bird to death! I was wondering, in case of a similar situation, what I should be feeding the bird until I can take it to the wildlife center. I cannot take my outdoor cat inside because I have 6 indoor only cats, and my outdoor cat is FIV (+), and they are not friends with each other. Or, should I leave the bird outside and let the nature take its course?

Response from Laura:

You are correct that baby birds spend a period of 4-5 days on the ground learning how to fly, and this is when they are most vulnerable to predation by outdoor cats and other animals. Even though the two dead siblings nearby was not a good sign, my first suggestion would have been to make further attempts to reunite the bird with his parents. A lot of times adult birds that are "supervising" their fledglings are not obvious... it depends on the type of bird. Mocking birds, blue jays, and robins will most likely make their presence known, whereas more timid birds like house sparrows will be off "waiting in the wings" for people to leave the area.

In this situation, even if a nest cannot be seen, you can place the baby bird in a wicker basket and tack up the basket securely on a nearby branch or high on the tree-trunk. The basket shouldn't be too deep because adult birds will not jump into anything they can't see out of. It is also important that the basket be placed as close to where the baby bird was found as possible, since adult birds may have difficulty locating their young if they are moved too far away.

After tacking up the wicker basket, step back and observe from afar. If the parents are in the area you should see them fly down and feed their baby within 20-30 minutes. If you are unable to observe the bird for any length of time, you can also check back in an hour and look for droppings in the basket. Baby birds defecate after they've been fed, so if you see fecal material, the parents have fed him!

If the parents do come back, leave the baby bird in the basket. Hopefully this will keep the bird off the ground for the few extra days he needs before he can fly. However, a fledgling bird tends to hop around, so don't be surprised if he does end up on the ground again. After all, that's where he would normally be at this point in his development. That's why we recommend that people ask their neighbors to please keep their cats in, if only for a few critical days, until the fledgling has flown.

If the parents do not return, you can use high quality canned cat or dog food as a temporary food replacement for the baby bird. Take some canned cat or dog food and add just enough warm water to make it a bit mushy. Then, using the handle part of a spoon, place a chunk of the cat or dog food on the middle of the bird's tongue when the bird is gaping. NEVER force food down a bird's throat; this will cause them to aspirate.

Typically, baby birds need to be fed every 15-20 minutes from dawn until dusk. This is a lot of work but it's what the parents would do. This underscores the need to make every attempt to get birds back to their parents!

Food or water should never be "squirted" into a bird's mouth because the opening to the bird's airway is right behind the tongue. Likewise, a bird should never be force-fed. If he is not gaping or doesn't open his mouth when food is placed before him, don't make any further attempts to feed him. Instead, the bird should be kept warm and in a quiet place and taken to a licensed rehabilitator as soon as possible, because it is highly likely something is wrong.

Finally, it is important to know that canned cat or dog food is only a temporary food for baby birds. Cat or dog food does not provide adequate nutrition for a bird. The result will be severe malnutrition and developmental problems.

I'm sorry you had such a bad outcome given your good intentions! Perhaps you will consider building a large outdoor enclosure for your outdoor cat? It is astounding to learn how many animals one outdoor cat can kill or mangle in a lifetime. Keeping cats indoors solves so many problems from the outset!

One more thought: I would discourage you from allowing an FIV-positive cat to free-roam due to the greater likelihood that he may encounter and transmit the disease to other cats.

Response from Sharon:

Thank you for your question. Yes, it is very sad when we try to help a little bird, and then it dies, even though we did the best we could. Unfortunately, your story is one that happens over and over again to many kind people who are trying to help little birds. Wild baby birds are much, much harder to care for than people generally realize.

First, I know that this may not be possible for you right now, but you could begin thinking about it; perhaps you could build an outside enclosure for your outside cat. If you e-mail info@bestfriends.org and ask about this, then you'll be put in contact with someone who can offer helpful ideas on how to do it.

Getting back to the baby bird, yes, you did do exactly the right thing in bringing the baby bird inside. Because his two siblings had already been killed, it's fairly certain that he would have been killed too.

One of the things it can be useful to know, with regard to baby birds, is the difference between a fledgling, who is just leaving the nest, and a nestling, who is still too little to leave the nest. If you go to the "wildlife care" information on the Best Friends website (www.bestfriends.org), you'll find information that will be helpful in knowing how to tell the difference. You'll also find information on what needs to be done to help a fledgling and what needs to be done to help a nestling; they need to be related to quite differently. By the way, it is not true that the parents will not feed the baby if it has been touched by human hands; in fact, the parents will be delighted to have the baby back.

I know that you know this because you did look for the nest, and you weren't able to find it. It is often very hard to locate the nest, and in that case, a nestling needs to be brought inside, which is what you did do. Even if you had found the nest, since two of the siblings had been killed, it would still have been best to bring the baby bird you found inside.

You were also absolutely right to call the wildlife center. Baby birds need to be kept warm, and although some rehabbers do use small fish tanks, it is much better for the person finding a baby bird to put the baby in a shoe box on a heating pad set on low. First, put several very small air holes in the shoe box lid, then in the bottom of the shoebox, put a couple of paper towels, then, out of tissues, make a little nest, not too high, that fits precisely around the baby bird; put the baby bird into it; put the lid on the box (the baby bird does not need to see out and is best kept in the dark for a few hours); then put the shoebox on top of a towel and the towel on top of a heating pad set on "low".

Feel the heating pad occasionally to make sure it does not feel too hot. Ninety degrees is about right for most baby birds. After the baby bird has been warmed up for ten or fifteen minutes, then, ideally, you would transport the baby bird to the wildlife center, and you could bring the box just as it is, with the little bird inside it. You would bring the heating pad too, and even though it would no longer be plugged in, it would keep the box warm for a bit. You could put a little tape on two sides of the box to be sure the lid stays on. You can read more about all of this in the "Wildlife Care" section of the Best Friends website. Also you may find it helpful to read the reply to the previous question about finding a rehabber, although it seems that you already know rehabbers at the wildlife center.

The point at which things began to become difficult in relation to the little bird was that you weren't able to transport the bird to the wildlife center. Unfortunately, it really requires a lot of training and special food and equipment to keep a baby bird alive for many hours until the next day. For every extra hour you keep the bird, the less likely it is that she/he will survive. Little birds often go through a pattern: at first they may be cold and somewhat lifeless, then they seem more lively, then they seem really, really hungry and very active (at this point they may look healthiest, and people think, "oh, the bird is doing really well", but in fact, the bird is already on the way downhill), then the bird becomes quieter, begins to have visible difficulties, and then, sadly, dies.

I don't know your circumstances, of course; you mention that you were fostering kittens, which is very kind of you. Some people have small children. Some do not have a car during the daytime. Perhaps there is a way, in the future, that a neighbor, a friend or a relative could transport a little bird. In some cases, the rehabber or a volunteer may be able to pick up a bird (though that's the exception since they may have a hundred other baby birds to care for -- and baby birds often need to be fed every half hour). You might give it some thought and see if there would be a way on another occasion to transport the bird quickly, within an hour, to the wildlife center. That's really going to be necessary in order for a baby bird to have a good chance of survival. In the care of a wildlife rehabber who cares for songbirds, the baby bird will have a very good chance of survival and release back to the wild.

The rule is that you should not put any food or any liquid into a baby bird's mouth; there is a great risk of drowning them as well as starving them. The only real answer is to find a way for the baby bird to be transported to the wildlife center quickly. You might also explain your situation to them, and perhaps they could help with transportation; or perhaps they might agree to give you a little emergency training in baby bird care if you were to volunteer there and spend a little time learning.

I hope this has been helpful. Please don't feel bad about the little bird, since you did your best. That is all any of us can do.

Co-Existing with Wildlife

Introduction from Sharon St. Joan:

Introduction from Laura Simon:

Questions

Trapping and transferring animals out of yards -- is it humane?

Question from a member:

Response from Laura:

Response from Sharon:

Humanely dealing with rats

Question from Martha:

Response from Laura:

Comment from Sharon St. Joan:

Deer in urban areas and convincing officials that bow hunting is not an answer

Question from Norma:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Rescuing and caring for pigeons

Question from Michelle:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Helping injured animals on the road

Question from Cindy:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Changing wildlife laws and how "nuisance" control companies do business

Question from a member:

Response from Laura:

Response from Sharon:

Comment from Susan:

Dealing with mouse problems at a shelter

Question from Monica:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Do we need a more hands on or hands off approach when dealing with wildlife?

Question from Celeste:

Response from Laura:

Response from Sharon:

Comment from Celeste:

Protecting pets from coyotes

Question from Patti:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Humanely handling Canadian goose problems

Question from Julie:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Getting the word out about wildlife misconceptions and myths

Question from a member:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Helping shelters prepare to refer or handle wildlife calls

Question from Holly:

Response from Laura:

Response from Sharon:

Non-native species vs. native; can't we create plans that honor all life?

Question from multiple members:

Response from Sharon:

Response from Laura:

Caring for baby birds

Question from Seda:

Response from Laura:

Response from Sharon: