Still no response from the City because my MP sent his email to the wrong person. Sigh. This is the email I sent to my MP originally: --- Hello, Following the Spectator article I will link to below, a colleague of mine was given the following email response. Ill let you read it, and then I have these questions for you: -On several occasions. Which occasions? I need dates. -How many animals? Why rabies, because its a very rare disease, scary though it may be? WHERE were these mangy animals? What do they mean by attempts to capture? -What is an habitual nature? Its a redundant statement. Nature means something habitual. I dont understand this statement at all. -In the situation cited re: the Beach coyotes, how does that apply to the current situation? What do they mean: hazing didnt work there, so it wont work here, allegedly... therefore well shoot the animals...? If you would, please contact Bill Young on my behalf and see if he can answer these questions or relate them to a higher office who can. I am copying Andrea Horwath. I generally trust her judgment, and I would like for her eyes to read this email. Wildlife and land issues are of great importance to all Canadians, being an enormous part of our history and natural heritage. I take pride in supporting that natural heritage by advocating for our wildlife, our parks, our waterways, and our wilderness. Thank you in advance for anything you can find out. Heres the article: thespec/news-story/4418820-coyote-sightings-down-but-officials-still-urge-caution/ Here is the email response to the article: This coyote situation involved many calls from the public in the fall of 2013. The public where reporting coyotes in the area that appeared sick, injured, concerns of rabies and that the animals were approaching or could be approach by people. Officers responded on several occasions in attempts to capture the animals that could be visually viewed suffering with “mange” however officers could not apprehend the animals. It was decided based on several factors including the animals state of health, the lack of fear towards humans and close proximity to human activity that euthanizing the animals for humane reasons and public safety was appropriate. The animals exhibiting the contagious mange would in our opinion, not survived through the harsh winter of 2014. Mange causes a thickening of the skin, serve loss of hair, itching and potentially a long and drawn out death. Officers have been given tools for the purpose of hazing coyotes including air horns however, in this case respecting “sick” animals and the habitual nature that was exhibited I do not believe hazing was a viable solution. Euthanasia is not something “Animal Services” takes likely and in fact historically we have proven otherwise removing or attempting to resolve issues of conflict by way of education. That being said, public safety cannot be minimized and if a coyote has lost its fear of humans and exhibiting threatening behaviour, removing the problem maybe the only recourse. The 2010 beach strip situation was substantially different as we had been dealing with “healthy” coyotes that had been accustom to human food and had lost its fear of humans. In that case “hazing” was used with little effect and eventually the most habituated animal was captured. You may recall that Animal Services was directed by the Province to euthanize that healthy captured animal. Hoping these comments help. regards Bill Young, CMM, AMCT, MLEO(c) Director, Municipal Law Enforcement Parking & By-law Services
Posted on: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 18:46:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015