HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-02-25 Correspondence-~-"~ Cftc. 2'-//- ~-zz~-
~<, ~NL i.q_rr
il;, ,,,,
,lonJ~ A HOVT
;;ira/&x~uuiive
',~:!~¢r A. Kind!or,
i ',h:Jk,rd M, CIu~GtoR Ph.D.
Mkh:ael W. Fo*. D.Sc.. Ph.D..
~ V,'i M~d.. MRCVS
Wm ime umd Habiiai Protection
Wayne Pacefie
f ~ovemm~nt A mslrs and Media
; 'ubhc~ tiens
L ~tep,,~n¢,
Fh~nf.ml D White
C.9 nuanion Animals and Fie d Se[vices
~ ..'avid FL Wifis
Murdaugh Stuaa Madden,
! ~I t~ECTOI{S
H. i (Sonny) Bloch
t)r~aald W Cashen
Aniia W. Coupe, Esq.
JiJdJ Friedman
~ la¢oid H (~a~diner
A!ice R. Garey
, n ~e (~oodall, Ph.D.
.Jrmni[er L~ninq, M.D.
&my Freeman Lee, Litt. D.
~; il[~efJ(] W. Lorenz
Jack W. Lydman
Virginia 5. Lynch
Wi!ILqm F. Mancuso
Thomas b Meinhardt
O, J. Ramsey, Esq.
James D. ROSS
Manlvn G. Seyler
John E. Ta~
(;arrolt S,Thrifi
Robed E. We!born. Esq.
David O, Wiebers, MD.
M~rHyn E, Wilhelm
K. William wisema~
Printed on: reayol¢ paper
WHITE-TAII,ED DEER BIOLOGY
Why do there seem to be so many deer around now?
In the past century, the population of white-tailed deer in North America has
grown from fewer than 500,000 to more than twenty million. As in most large-
scale ecological changes, several factors are probably responsible.
First, all over the Eastern and Midwestern U.S., mosaics of farmland, parkland,
and low-density suburbs have created ideal habitat for white-tailed deer. Such
"deer mosaics" offer a diverse mixture of herbs, shrubs, and grasses within easy
reach of hungry deer mouths, and provide deer with cover for quick escape
from perceived threats.
Second, state game agencies historically managed for larger deer populations by
improving deer habitat and regulating sport hunting to enhance the population's
reproductive capacity (see below).
Finally, new suburban developments tend to exaggerate perceptions of deer
population numbers and aggravate deer-human conflicts. New building
disorients deer, displaces them from their forest cover, exposes them to heavier
vehicle traffic, concentrates them in remaining natural areas, and lures them into
backyards with an attractive display of tasty ornamental plantings.
There is little evidence that the disappearance of natural predators such as
cougars and wolves is responsible for the present abundance of deer.
Do deer control their own population growth?
Deer have enormous potential for population growth. When population densities
are low and food is abundant, does may reproduce in their first year of life, and
prime-aged adult does routinely give birth to twins and even triplets.
l'l~c [It::::::::,-' 5,1;cictv .,;f the i 'UilCd $1:11LCS
2t{}1) !. Nitcot. N~ \\':lsJ]in,'..t'l,~}n. 1)(: 2tH)37
12t}2) -t52-1 I()(I I",\X (2(12) 77,N-6132
However, abundant evidence shows that as deer population size increases, the average female
reduces the number of offspring she produces. Additionally, fawn and adult mortality rise as
populations grow and food becomes scarce. Ultimately, with or without hunting or natural
predators, deer populations (like virtually all animal populations) will reach a ceiling beyond
which they will not go, stopped by limitations on food or other necessities, as well as by disease
and parasites.
Unfortunately, the levels at which deer control their own populations may be higher than those
that are tolerated by their human neighbors.
Can deer populations be controlled by natural predators?
The question of whether prey populations are controlled by their predators has long generated
controversy among animal ecologists, and is not yet resolved. Current evidence indicates that
populations of large mammals such as deer, elk, and moose usually are not controlled by natural
predators, although these predators may help slow population growth. At least one exception
may occur: where prey populations are relatively small and are reproducing slowly (perhaps
because they are occupying poor quality habitat), predators may prevent the prey population
from growing. However, this is generally not the situation where deer-human conflicts are
occurring.
Other practical considerations intervene to prevent introduction of natural predators from being
recommended as a solution to deer-human conflicts. Reintroduction of predators such as wolves
and mountain lions is both biologically and politically difficult to accomplish; nor is there any
guarantee that the predators will stay where they are put.
What effect does hunting have on deer population size?
Enormous controversy exists over whether hunting effectively decreases or increases population
size. Obviously, killing deer reduces deer population size in the short run; equally obviously,
it's much more complicated than that, especially given that the deer population in North America
continues to rise in spite of the millions of deer killed by hunters every year.
The simplest answer may be that hunting could control deer population size, but hasn't, largely
because of the behavior of hunters and the policies of state game agencies. As noted above,
deer have enormous reproductive potential, and respond to diminished
population size (such as that caused by hunting) by increasing their reproductive rate. When this
impressive reproductive potential is combined with a "harvest" that consists principally of bucks,
and a polygamous mating system that allows a few bucks to impregnate all receptive does, the
result is a deer population streamlined for reproduction. In most cases, this "high-yield" deer
population is exactly what is preferred by sport hunters and by the state game agencies that sell
them hunting licenses. Unfortunately, these policies also create a self-perpetuating cycle of
2
births and harvest by sport hunting -- and a deer population that is very difficult to control.
How far does a deer travel during its year?
Deer movements vary with sex and age. Adult does are the most sedentary of deer; they tend
to remain year 'round in a home range as small as 24 acres, and as large as one square mile.
Adult males tend to be much more mobile, especially during the autumn mating season, when
they will search widely for sexually receptive does. Thus, adult male home ranges vary from
as little as one half square mile to four square miles or more. Young deer becoming
independent of their mothers also show sex differences. Young females tend to "bud off'' new
home ranges from those of their mothers, maintaining frequent contacts with their mothers and
sisters throughout adult life. Young males, on the other hand, usually leave their mothers at one
to two years of age and may wander for many miles as they establish their adult home ranges.
Of course, the movements of all deer also depend on the landscape, weather, the availability of
food and cover, and the seasonal cycle. Deer in forested areas generally occupy smaller home
ranges than deer in more open areas'. Especially in northern latitudes, deer may actually occupy
distinct summer and winter ranges, between which they migrate distances of five to thirty miles.
Bad weather and deep snow cover discourage movement; periods of increased movements
accompany the autumn mating (and hunting) season and late spring dispersal of young. Such
seasonal changes in deer movements are reflected in frequencies of deer-vehicle collisions, which
peak in late fall and in spring.
Suburban deer populations may also be constrained in their movements by highways, high
density housing, or other barriers erected by humans. Ecological studies of such populations
are scarce, but preliminary evidence suggests that the ranges of suburban deer may be smaller
than those living under more natural conditions.
How long does a deer live?
As in most large mammals, mortality strikes hard during the first few months of life. Lip to
30 % of all fawns born may die in their first month. However, in environments where food is
abundant and human-caused mortality (especially hunting and deervehicle collisions) is low, a
doe who survives her first year typically lives between twelve and sixteen years. Because of the
rigors of competition for mates, male lifespans are usually shorter.
On the other hand, deer in heavily hunted populations rarely live past five years. Most, in fact,
are killed before they reach three years old.
If deer are small, does that mean they are inbred, starving, or unhealthy?
Not necessarily. Every animal has an "energy budget," whose size depends on the amount and
quality of food available to it. Energy must be allotted to maintenance (simple survival), and
can also be allotted to growth or reproduction. If food is scarce or poor quality, then energy
devoted to growth and reproduction is reduced. Therefore deer can be small because no energy
is available for reproduction and growth; however, this does not mean they are starving, or in
poor health. Small size, in fact, can be a physiological adaptation to scarce food.
Animals can also be small because surplus energy is devoted to reproduction, rather than
growth. Simple evolutionary models indicate that in species with low adult survival -- for
example, heavily hunted deer populations --there is natural selection for early reproduction.
Deer can thus be selected to forego growth. in favor of early reproduction, resulting in a
population of small deer.
Finally, it is often claimed that small size in populations of suburban deer is due to inbreeding.
Almost always these claims are presented without any supporting evidence. Since inbreeding
is most likely to be a problem in v~ry small populations, simultaneous claims of inbreeding and
overpopulation make little sense. Inbreeding is also unlikely because few deer populations are
completely isolated from immigrants, and as few as one immigrant deer per generation will
offset inbreeding effects associated with small population size.
Do deer attack people?
Deer rarely attack people directly. Like all wild animals, however, deer are unpredictable and
possess surprising strength. This means you should always maintain a respectful distance, and
avoid frightening them with sudden movements or noises. When frightened, deer flee using
abrupt and powerful leaps, and may accidentally injure bystanders.
Antlered bucks should be treated with extra respect, especially during the late autumn rutting
season. Antlers are lethal weapons, and bucks wielding them during rut tend to be (in
anthropomorphic terms) restless, reckless, and cranky.
Prepared by:
Dr. Allen Rutberg
Senior Scientist, Wildlife and Habitat Protection
August 1, 1994
HUMANE ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGING DEER-HUMAN CONFLICTS
Deer are eating everything I plant in my backyard. What should I do?
Deer-vehicle collisions are a big problem in my community.
What are the best ways for me to protect myself from collisions with deer? Do "deer
whistles" work?
Are there actions my community can take to reduce the number of deer vehicle
collisions?
Do deer cause Lyme disease?
Would reducing the size of the deer population in my community reduce the risk of
Lyme disease?
What actions can I take to protect myself and my family from Lyme disease?
What other actions can my community take to reduce the risk of Lyme disease?
5
AN INTRODUCTION TO WILDLIFE IMMUNOCONTRACEPTION
December 1993
Why wildlife contraception?
Wildlife contraception offers a safe and humane method to control
wildlife populations when such control is necessary for the management of
conflicts between humans and wildlife. By removing natural predators,
introducing non-native species, providing artificial food sources, and developing
areas previously occupied by wildlife, human activities have brought about
increased levels of conflict with wildlife. Some people fear that swelling
populations of deer, raccoons, and skunks will lead to the spread of diseases
such as rabies and Lyme disease, or increase the number of damaging collisions
between animals and cars. Hungry deer may destroy crops, and some people
also object when deer eat ornamental plantings. Finally, in some areas, free-
ranging populations of deer, pigs, - horses, and goats threaten to disrupt natural
plant communities that we wish to preserve. Immunocontraception should help
solve these problems, especially in suburban and urban areas.
Wildlife contraception may also help alleviate the problem of surplus
animals produced by zoos. By applying wildlife contraception, zoos will be able
to maintain animals in natural social groups without risking the production of
offspring that cannot be accommodated. Such unwanted offspring often end up
in the hands of exotic animal dealers, who in turn sell them to game ranches,
roadside zoos, and other abusive establishments.
The HSUS is strongly supporting the wildlife contraception research of
Dr. Jay Kirkpatrick, Dr. John Turner, and Dr. Irwin Liu.
The Ilmnanc Socidy of the United States
2100 L Street, NX~} XX)tshin~,ton, DC 20037
(202) 452-1100 F:~X (202) 778-61,32
Immunocontraception Fact Sheet
Page Two
What is immunocontraception, and how does it work?
Immunocontraception is a safe, humane, and fully reversible form of fertility control
that works by stimulating the body's specific immune response.
In the female, the unfertilized egg is surrounded by a layer of proteins. Sperm cells from
the male must attach to one of these proteins in order to successfully fertilize the egg. In the
method currently being supported by The HSUS, a female (a doe or mare, for example) is
vaccinated with PZP (porcine zona pellucida), the sperm-attachment protein from a pig. Because
it is a foreign protein, the PZP stimulates the female to produce antibodies. These antibodies
attack the female's own sperm-attachment proteins, preventing the attachment of sperm and thus
blocking fertilization.
On what kinds of animals does immunocontraception work?
So far, immunocontraception with PZP has successfully blocked conception in white-
tailed deer, horses, cats, monkeys, and a variety of hoofed mammals in zoos. The vaccine
is approximately 95% effective at blocking conception in horses and white-tailed deer. PZP is
also effective in.dogs and rabbits, but in these animals, infertility may be irreversible. It does
not work in pigs (which do not show an immune response) or in raccoons.
How is the contraceptive administered to the animal?
The PZP vaccine is delivered with a barbless dart fired from a dart rffie or (at short
range) from a blowgun. The animal does not need to be handled directly.
Prevention of pregnancy for one year currently requires the administration of two shots,
approximately three to four weeks apart. Protection in subsequent years is provided with a single
booster shot each year. Two-shot protocols have now been successfully applied to wild horses
at Assateague Island National Seashore, Maryland, and in northeastern Nevada, and to white-
tailed deer at the Smithsonian Conservation Research Center in Front Royal, Virginia. The two-
shot protocol has also been administered to free-ranging white-tails at Fire Island National
Seashore, New York.
Current research focuses on the development of a vaccine that will provide one or more
years of contraception with a single shot. A one-shot vaccine designed to provide two to three
years of contraception is currently being tested on captive deer and captive horses.
Immunocontraception Fact Sheet
Page Three
What are the advantages of immunocontraception?
1)
The vaccine can be delivered directly by dart, sparing the animal the stress and danger
of immobilization and surgery. The dart technique also reduces the effort and cost of the
treatment.
2)
Unlike hormone-based contraceptive treatments, the PZP vaccine is destroyed during
digestion if it is accidentally eaten. It therefore cannot be passed through the food chain.
3)
More than six years of tests of the PZP vaccine on horses and deer have turned up no
important side effects. The vaccine does not interfere with already-established
pregnancies, and foals born to mothers treated with PZP have now produced foals of their
own. The behavior of treated animals is not significantly altered.
4) In deer and horses, the vaccine is completely reversible.
How much will it cost to use immunocontraception to control deer populations?
· Estimates of the cost of the vaccine itself vary from $5 to $25 per dose. However, the
cost of the vaccine is likely to be much smaller than the labor costs involved in delivering the
vaccine to the deer. Such costs will vary widely from site to site.
When will immunocontraception be ready to use on white-tailed deer?
The existing two-shot vaccine may have limited practical application on small populations
of relatively tame deer. Development of a one-shot, multi-year vaccine preparation will increase
the number of situations in which immunocontraception is practical. If the vaccine preparation
currently being tested proves effective, such a one-shot vaccine is likely to be available by
autmm~ 1995.
Prepared by:
Allen T. Rutberg, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist, Wildlife and Habitat Protection
The Humane Society of the United States
2100 L St. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037
BOX 726,3. MPL$., MH. 55407
Repellents
A common complaint about deer is that they feed on gardens, shrubs, crops, and ornamental vegetation. For those who
experience light to moderate damage, repellents can be highly effective to prevent deer from browsing and to defend
agalnst antler rubbing. Repellents are designed to either be applied direcfiy onto the plant or close by It. The Intent Is to
repel deer in one of two ways: by smell or by taste. It Is important to start applications early, usually when plants first go
dormant In the fall or at the first sign of damage. This will divert deer from the treated area before they eslablish feedlng
patterns. Repellents do require frequent applications to be effective.
The following are the two most effective and recommended commercial chemical repellents.
Hinder (Ammonium soaps)
Hinder repels deer by smell. It can be used on edible vegetation such as vegetable gardens, fruit trees, field crops, and
ornamental plants. Hinder Is a liquid and Is easy to apply by spraying with conventional equipment or by painting. Use
Hinder in the fall after plants go dormant. Hinder should be used again In early spring before anything greens up. Then
apply about eve~, two weeks after the bloom. Caution: When used on flower gardens, Hinder will stain flower petals that
come in contact with the spray.
DEER AWAY (putrescent or Inedible egg solids)
Deer Away is excellent for winter protection. It repels deer by smell. Deer Away Is available In two forms: a two-part liquid
kit for spraying or a dry power for dusting. This repellent is good to use on a variety of evergreens, Christmas flees, and
ornamental plants such as Rhododendron and Azalea. For fruit trees only use prior to flowering.
Do not use Deer Away on edible vegetation.
(Below are the spraying tips and application directions used by the University of Minnesota Landscape Arboretum.)
General Spraying 11~
· apply pdor to period of anticipated damage
· foliage should be dry before spraying
· sunny day with temperatures (should be) greater than 45° F. for 4 hr. at and after spraying to allow adequate drying time
· mix repellent with hot water
· spray large area Including adjacent plants around threatened plants
Labor Day (Biggest concern at this time Is antler rubbing)
Use Hinder to spray woody plant material (if not much lower foliage) to dripping with 1:1 (Hinder:water)
DO NOT SPRAY LEAVESI
Do not spray on succulent bark at more than 1:5
Young frees should be sprayed with 1:10
Sel;)tember
1:10 (Hinder:water) Azaleas - and young trees - first spray should be just after leaf fall.
Early to mid October
Use Deer Away (Deer Away 1:1 water) on most delectable landscape plants (e.g., Scotch pine, arborvitae, yews)
Caution: This product has a strong odorl Spray on plants after first killing fro~t. Repeat spray before December 1.
Late October to Mid-November
Use Hinder 1:5 on plants with less deer pressure (if high pressure, use Deer Away).
Late November
Remember to repeat Deer Away (1:1) application on most delectable landscape plants.
Use Hinder to protect blossoms 1:20 (Hinder:water) tulip and hostas 1:20 herbaceous
DO Not Use Deer Away In Sprlngl
When planting new trees or shrubs dlo seedlings or whips In 1:10 Hinder
Apply on 10-14 day schedule
Summer
Use Hinder (1:20) to protect plants from deer browsing including edible plants. There is no waiting period.
P.O. OOX 'r2~3. MPL$,, M#, 5540!
Fencing
Fencing is the most effective solution to protect gardens, shrubs, crops, and ornamental vegetation, where dccr
browse damage is the heaviest. There are a variety of fence designs developed and available to meet specific
needs. When choosing a style of a fence, It is important to consider the overall size of the area and the topography
of the site. In addition, It may be wise to consurf with an expert to find the best fence for your needs. The initial cost
of fencing may be expensive, however, it is an Investment that will pay off in long-term prevention of economic loss.
Deer still may try to get Into a wire fenced area to feed. They will try either by crawling under or by squeezing
through a wire fence before jumplng over it. Therefore, it Is Important to get the deer conditioned to the fence so
they will learn to avoid it. If the fence is not electrified, repellent bags or other deterrents should be used the first year.
Once deer learn to avoid a fenced area they will no longer consider it a feeding location.
Below are some styles of fences:
Slanted Seven-W"~e Fence
The 7-wire slanted high-tensile electric
fence has been effective in controlling
deer damage under moderate to high
deer pressure. This is a two-dimensional
barrier built In a slanted outrigger
design. All wires are spaced along the
slanted rail at 12-Inch Intervals from the
ground on the crop side to a 4-foot
height on the deer side. The slanted
rails are supported near their tops on
driven posts. The fence covers
approximately 6 feet of horizontal
space and presents a deer with a
perplexing barrier as well as an electric
shock upon Impact. For additional
small animal control, wires can be
added between the ground and the
first and second wires.
...
~ """ '*- ~'~':'.:- ,r-
: ~ ~,~.' '~**; , LINE RilL' 7' LENGTH
Vertical Fence
Vertical high-tensile electdc fences of 6
or more wires appear to be effective in
controlling deer In most situations.
Vertical fence wire spaces should be no
greater than 8-inches from the ground
for the first wire and no more than
10-Inches between remaining wires.
Modifications of vertical fences to
include additional lower wires at 5, 10,
and 15 Inches above the ground will
effectively control raccoons,
wcx)dchucks, and rabbits. Fences as
low as 4 feet in height have worked on
small plots while a height of 7 feet has
worked well on larger acreages.
P.O. 60X 7263, MPLS., MN, 55407
Deer/Vehicle Collisions
Deer-vehicle collisions are a major concern. These collisions are among the most sedous and expensive of all wildlife-
related auto accidents, Deer can suddenly appear in front of a oar's headlights and then become frozen by those lights.
The best way to reduce deer-vehicle collisions is to modify ddver behavior. In some cases, the behavior of the deer can
also be modified. The following are some suggestions for reducing deer-vehicle collisions:
Identify Locations
By keeping records, police and city officials can Identify specific locations where deer-vehicle call'ksions have occurred.
Citizens should be encouraged to report all sightings of deer crassing local roads and highways. The public can be
informed of these sites through the local newspapers and local cable T.Y. These sites can be indicated on county or
township road mops.
Observe Deer Crossing Signs
Always observe deer crossing warning signs. When approaching a posted area, slow down and maintain a slower speed
while passing through those sites.
Drive Defensively
Drive defensively and within the posted speed limits. Slow down if you see deer anywhere along the sides of the road or
highway on which you are driving. On the roads or highways that you drive frequently, moke a mental note to yourseft
where you have seen deer before. Then when driving post those areas, be particularly careful and aled.
Watch For Multiple Deer Crossing
If you see one deer crossing the road, be alert-more deer may follow. Deer usually do not travel alone. Keep in mind that
a deer crossing In front of you may double back.
Hit The horn
If you see a deer on the road or making its way onto the road, hit the horn. The sound gives a deer an audible signal to
avoid.
Be Especially Alert At Sundown
Deer are mostly active at night because they are nocturnal creatures. Be especially alert driving between sundown and
sunrise. If you see eyes reflected in your headlights, slow down immediately.
October Through December Are Dangerous Months
Deer-vehicle collisions can occur during any month of the year. However, October through December are peak months
for these accidents to happen. This is a time of year when deer movements are increased because they are in their
ruffing season. Also, hunters roaming fields and woodlands disturb the animals' natural behavior and movement patterns.
Problem Areas With Frequent Deer-Vehicle Collisions
In problem areas that experience frequent deer-vehlcle collisions, mony measures can be taken:
· Speed limits should be reduced in those areas especially between sunset and sunrise.
Speed limits should be strictly enforced.
· Deer crossing warning signs should be pasted and highlighted.
· Communities can work with the Department of Transpartafion by installing 'Swarefiex Wildlife Warning Reflectors".
~ reflectors are very effective In altedng deer travel in serious problem areas. To a deer approaching a road or
standing in the ditch, the special red-colored Swareflex reflectors reflect light when headlights shine on them. The
reflectors create an illusion of a fence or barrier image to deer. Studies have indicated a significant reduction in
deer-vehicle collisions when these reflectors are used. In some areas no deer-vehicle collisions have occurred. Many
states, Including areas of Minnesota, have already installed these reflectors.
· Trees, Shrubs and Vines
Apache plume
Australian fuchsia (Corma spp.)
Bottle brash (Callistemona spp.)
California Bay
California fuchsia
Carolina jessamine
Catalina cherry
Clematis (Clematis spp.)
Coralbeny
Creeper, Virginia
Current, Golden
Current, Wax
Daphne (Daphne spp.)
Dustry Miller
Edible fig (Ficus spp.)
English lavender
Euonymus (Spindle Tree)
Euryopa (Euryopa spp.)
Fir, Douglas
Goldenrod (Solidago spp.)
Hackberry
Hawthorn
Hazelnut, beaked
Holly (Ilex spp.)
Holly-Grape, Oregon
Honeysuckle bush
Ivy, English
Jasmine
Jerusalem cheery
Juniper, Common (Juniperus spp.)
Lead plant
Maple
Mexican mock orange
Mountain Mahogany
Natal plum
Oak
Oleander
Olive, Russian
Pine, Umber
Pine, Pinon
Pomegranate
PoterrUlla/Clnquefoil
Red-hot poker
Red-leaf or Japanese barberry
Redwood
Rhododendron (Rhododendron spp.)
Sweet gum
Shrubby cinquefoil
Walnut
Skunk brush
Wild lilac
Snowberry, Western
Spanish lavender
Spicebush
Spirea, Bluemint
Rockrose (Cistus spp.)
Santolina (Santolina spp.)
Scotch broom
Spruce, Blue
Spruce, Engelmann
Star jasmine
· Flowers, Ferns, Herbs and
Ground Covering Plants
Aaron's bear
Ageratum flossflower (Agetatum spp.)
Algerian Ivy
Aneomne (Anomone spp.)
Bells of Ireland
Black-eyed Susan
Bleeding Heart (Oicerma spp.)
Bracken (Pterldlum sl0p.)
Blue Star Creeper
Calla Ely (Zantedeschia spp.)
Canterbury bell
Carpet bugle
Chain fern 0Noodwardla spp.)
Chive, ornamental onion (Aliiurn spp.)
Chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemum spp.)
Coneflower, Pmrie
Coreopeis (Coreopsis spp.)
Daffodils (narcissus spp.)
Daylily (Hemerocallis spp.)
Deer tongue fern
English Ivy
Fescue grass (Festuca spp.)
Fleabone, Daisy (Edgeron spp.)
Foxglove (l~igitalis spp.)
Gaillardla/Blankefflower
Golden, Banner
Gumweed, Curly-cup
Harebell, mountain
Houndstongue
Hyacinth, Grope
Iceland poppy
iris (Ms spp.)
Lady Fern
Lavender
Uly (Ullum spp.)
Ely, Madpose
Uly of the Nile
Locoweed, Lainbert's
Manzanita or bearberry
Marguerite
Marjoram
Milkweed
Mullein Pink: rose campion
Myrtle
Naked Lady Hly
Ofien~d poppy
Pasque flower
Pearly Everlasting
Peppermint
Rhubarb
Rock astor
Sentolina
Scorpionweed
Sea pink
Snowflake (Leucojum spp.}
Snow-on-the mountain
Spearmint
Stonecrop, Yellow
Sulphur flower
Sword fern (Nephrolepls spp.)
Thyme
Trailing African daisy
Wake-robin (Tn*llium spp.)
Wood fern (Dryopteris spp.)
Ya~TOW
Yucca (Yucca spp.)
Zinnia (Zinnia spp.)
A reprint from: HSUS News, Fall 1991
Wildlife Contraception
A New Way of Looking at Wildlife Management
By Dr. Jay F. Kirkpatrick
The 11umane Society of the United States
2100 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037
(202) 452-1100
199l The Humane Society of the United States. All rights reserved.
"',' trigger. There was a hiss as the dart
tilL.
sped through the air and htndcd in M2
iump with a salisfying thump. Thc dart lcli
'.)ut a low :renures apter the iniectton.
:r,¢ ,;~ file MARE ('AI,I,ED --M2E'' ~ATCHED ME
',¢~;:5'~:~:::,&;44 carclully. staying on die edge o' the irce
! tiuc and measuring the distance between
min. i could ca4iv hil larac animals
'"' distal'ices ~]'calCl' thal'l thuly illtiers. bill
. wind> ()ll AssatcagtlC. ~1 coastal burl-icr
tl'/ckv. ]he ]llal'C inade ktu'c wc slaycd
lcuM"
bCCll ln(,ctli[tied ill 'ce ~T'[ll'S ill a row.
knew what I plilllllCd h) dr). ] crept
~Vhcll I pocked [irotlnd ~1 lrcc. she
:;.%. linl[icJlitlg [l'~a['sJl ~l-a%~. al'ld prosetiled illC
w]ttl a wonctcrJ'ul view ~!' her backside.'. J
4i!)pcd Lhc S~Lt['IV t,fl'. ,ii]lIcd. alld squcc/.cd
B Y D R JAY I
!i tiiiicd, bul unhappy, M2E wanled nothin~
more to do with me that day or ycar.
M2E is one of aplm~XiuLatclv 150 IL:J'al
~orscs living on Assatcaguc island
riohal Seashore. She is one of the mares
in my study. Each year she is darted with
a conlraceptive vaccine thal provehis
prcgmL]~cy tW b;ocki[Jg thc lL-rlili/ali~,n of
her
The National
a~cs ttlc herd thai livcs ~vilhin the p:u'k
whde the C!uncolcaguc M)Ju[llcm I:ilc
(.'Olllpany gl'a/cs il~ herd al the southern
end of the island oli Ihc Virginia coa,.thnc.
A barrier l~mc'c scpur;flcs lhc I~,t} herds.
(For more il~l~)rl~lat~oH ~m lhc L'hm-.
c'olcaguc pomes. sec Ihc I'all It~89 liSl;S
Ihc horses urc d '. · .. ': ,
~ ~ .~ · .. .
Mi there m 16.~()". . .... . , .
'lbchty lhc A~satca~,:, :'. , :. . '. ,' '.',
[%,,
~gnatcd a cultural resource. As such, their
presence is prutcctcd by the National Park
Scrvicc dcsp~tc the herds' impact on the
fragile isianci coosystem and despite the
claim that they are an exotic species not
native to the island.
In an carlief study, Dr. Ron Keiper, a
Pennsylvania State University biologist,
dctcmfincd the carrying capacity of the
NPS-managed [and. The NPS wanted to
maintain tha( 150-horse herd size without
resorting to a program to capture and
remove animais. For this retLson, in 1985 '"' ..... '"" ....
Sca~,[lorc invilcd mc to bc.oin research on ,,.
cont]'acepti~m as a way to control the lbral-
horse population on Lhc island.
ConLrollim: IDral-horsc populations by ' ~'~~
11]eilrls O[ COll[raccpliOll is not a new con-
ccpl. The Idea was first discussed with fed-
eral ol'ficial~. in 1972. shortly al~.cr the pas-
.... . ~:. \v :j !'~..' ' ... "h'.: Ih,t,e ,ind ~i~':
B. ". x.. \i .h.i · ", u. ,'~: II',1!e~: t,;..., .
· ,,, ;. :...: ...., .',:'.," %,: '",.Iql.' l:111d-
· ' ', ' '. '., ='; ..,.,'.'. ( }1' .. I.:i. I'h,-I.l:,!l.'.l
stemidal hormones and turned to the cut
ting edge of medical technology immuno-
contraception. Basically, it is an approach
that relics upon an anlmal's own ironrune
system to imerl~re with some important
component of the rcproducttve process.
Dr. Liu had previously tcslcd an experi-
mental vaccine on captive lm'al horses in
Calilbrnia with ahnost 1{~) percent success
in inhibiting their IL~rtilily. The vacciuc,
knowu as porcine zona pcllucida, or PZP,
is made from the protein in pig ova. When
PZP was inicctcd into thc mares, their
developed antibodies against that protein.
The antibodies became attached to spcnn
receptor sites on the mares' o~s. 'l'hc antb
bodies occupied the sites on the l&nalcs'
eggs lhat the males' sperm cells have to
recognize and occupy at lerlilization. Our
task was to discover if file PZP vaccine
could bc administered to Ikral mares re
motely, without capturing them. We also
wanled to determine if the vaccine was salk
to give to pregnant animals. We needed
test whether its cl'lbcts wcrc reversible and
whether we would alter the normal social
behavior of the horses in any significant way.
The vaccination program began in March
1988. We identified 26 mares known lobc
lbrtile. Each ouc was given two or three in-
ocularions of PZE
Our results were excellent. Conmtccption
was 100 pcrccnl cft¢clivc. No lbals were
produced by the treated mares in 1989. In
February 1989 we split the test group by ad
ministoring single dosc booster inoculations
to 14 of the 26 mares. Only one such marc
produccd a lbal in 1990. The 12 mares that
did not gel booster shots produced thais
their norn~al. pretreatmenl rates. This con-
firrood the revcrsibilily of the contraceptive
el'Dots of lhc vaccine. Over a lbur-ycnr
period, the 14 mares would have birthed ap
proximately 30 lbals: instead only a single
lbal has bccn born.
~ lbund the vaccine sale lo give to preg-
nant mares. The social behavior of the ani-
mals was not cfl~ctcd; lkmalcs mated but
did not get pregnant. The eft0ct of the vac-
cine was not permanent. Withdrawal of the
vaccine was ibllowcd by norlnal pregnancies
in the mares lhat did not receive booslet
shots.
We have now Ibund a way ~o instilufo mea-
sures to control excessive wild home N~pula-
tion growth by vaccinating mares agains~
pregnancy. The National Park Service is
working on a carclhlly designed manage-
merit plan Ibr Assateaguc Island National
Seashore thai is aimed at maintaining a
population ol about 150 horses with this im-
munoconlraccption tcchuiquc.
In a similar study supNmcd by PNC
potation amt The ItSUS, our research learn
losled PZP vaccine on white tailed deer. In
certain areas, the swelling dccr
population may represent a
thrcal to itsell', l~'onl overpop-
ulation, and to humans, in
Clock,vise from right: Skunk popula-
tions in the wild art, being controlled
via commercially available contraceptive im-
evcr-incrcasing deer-and-car plants; the vaccine PZP has been used to in-
collisions. The vaccine proved oculate species such as the patas tnonkey in
reach the Nfint where PZP vac- '.. . ..... ~,, ~ ..........~,,},, .
cinc will control free-rimming · :..,,'.: ..
deer populatkms. we must first
~'engineer it" into one inocula- : .:........
lion per animal per year. De-
,,'eloping such a vaccine has
become the locus of our re- ·
search aud has bccn made.
possible by The HSUS. ;
;/~ms Begin P'ZP Vaccinations ....
The PZP vaccine has proved '
useful in preycuring pregnan-
cies m captive exotic species in
zoos. In 1990, in collaboration
with Drs. Walttaut Zimmer-
mann and Lydia Koltcr of the
Cologne Zoo and with the sup- ' ' .
port of the European Endan-
gered Species Program, wc
used PZP vaccines on several
of the rare Przewalski's horscs
and bantcngs. This might at
first seem a paradox. %1: usual-
ly think the purpose of captive-
breeding programs is lo pro-
duce arereals, not prevent their '":"&:": '
births, but too much of a good
thing can bc a problem. Zoos relkr to their
dilemma as thc surplus-animal problem.
Recognizing lhc seriousness of thc problem,
more progressive zoos are beginning to use
carefully-controlled contraception pro
grams. A variety of types of hormonal con
m~ccptives have bccn given to captive cx
otic animals by zoos, but preventing preg-
nancies in ungulates and primates has
proved technically troublesome. Dr. Tony
Sacco, of the Wayne State School of Medi
cmc, has been researching li)rms of PZP
vaccine lbr many years with an eye to put-
ting it ultimately It) work in human con-
traccption. Hc recently inoculated a group
of patas lnonkeys at the Calgary Zoo and
a hybrid orangutan (a cross between a
Sumarran and a Borncan orangutah) at the
Toledo Zoo. The orangutan should not bc
bred because it may cause the extinction of
a subspecies. In c{filaboration with the
Bronx Zoo, my colleagues and I initiated
tests of the PZP w~ccine on a variety of
hoofi~d animals including sika, muntjac,
sambar, and axis deer. Research projects are
being planned with a number of other zoos.
Al the University of Calitbrnia at Davis, Dr.
Chcrric Mahi-Brown is directing tests
using PZP vaccine on bison R)r the San
Francisco Zoo.
Dr. Bonnie Dunbar, a Baylot University
School of Medicine researcher, has been in-
strumental in the dcvcMpmenl of the PZP
vaccine. Her cflbrts led to the fi)nnation of
a privately i~.mdcd research cfibrl by 7x)nagcn
Corporation to develop a PZP contraceptive
vaccine lbr cats and dogs. The work of Dr.
Jurrian Dean, of the National Institutes of
Health, has lbcused on the development of
a human-contraceptive PZP vaccine.
Other Approaches to Fertility Control
Several small mammals, such as skunks,
raccoons, and/bxcs, have adapted to urban
cnviromnents with so much success that
they are viewed by some as "nuisance
animals." The phenomenon of growing
populations of city-bound wild animals has
caused some concern, aside from that
generated by upended garbage cans, about
the sprcad of lbx- or skunk-borne rabies and
raccoon-borne Lymc disease. Immu-
nocontraccption can reduce the reproduc-
tion potential of the mammal populations in
a satb, hmnanc way.
In a somewhat dillbrent approach to wild
th:~l complele protection aftbrded to the
wikt horses would lead to an uncontrolled
populalion increase.
Since the social structure of t~ral horses
is highly developed, a single scxtmlly
mature sutllion impregnates anywhere fi'om
one to ten mares each year. From 1972 to
1980, my colleague, Dr. John lhrner, of
lhe Medical College of Ohio, Anne
Perkins, a Montana Stme University
graduate student, and I carried out a series
of experiments designed to promote con-
traception in stallions.
We administered a microencapsulated
tbrm of the male sex steroid hormone
testosterone to stallions in the wild-horse
herds near Challis, Idaho. Given in large
doses, the steroid lowered the stallions'
sperm counts and decreased sperm motil-
ccssful, we were disturbed by thc need to
capture the wild stallions, a procedure that
was hard on Ihc animals, and by the pros-
pect of stcmklal hormones passing through
the tbod chain. Eventually when those
horses die, scavengers such as the golden
eagle will consume their carcasses. The elL
I'ecm of steroidal hormones on such animals
are not known.
With the appointment of James ~htt as
S~reta~ of IntefioL fetal-horse contracep-
tion research crone to a halt. The fetal-
horse dilemma became worse in the next
five years, as costs lbr the Adopt-A-Horse
program increased. More than 20,~
horses were captured and confined in
government corrals as the rate of reproduc-
tion increas~ among the horse herds on
public lands.
it moderate reduclion in thc number of
Ibals born on the island. However, in order
to deliver it sufficicnt volume of the drug,
each stallion had Io be darted Ibm' times.
The cumbersome logistics ',,f this approach
made it clear that it had little utility as a
management reel.
We also used darts to prevent pregnan-
ca.,' in the mares by delivering a slow~release
microencapsulat~ I-[)rm of a contraceptive
called progestin. (It's an ingredient in
several human contraceptives.) The steroid
prevent~s ovulation in most mammalian
species.
The results were scientifically significant
but not exactly what we had in mind. One
hundred percent of the treated mares pro-
duced lbals. It turned out that we had dis-
covered a wonderful fertility enhancer!
it5'. In our field study, stallions were first When Dr. Tt.irncr and I went It, Assa- Despile this setback, we learned valuable
:il}!'~i-~:!~:.:.' ':ii,!.~ immt, bilizcd bv darts shot from a , tcague Island we tried two diflkrcnt ap- · lessons from our studies. They point~ the
::: . ~.."?~;~ helicopter. Thc~ the contraceptives were I preaches. First, we repeamd our expert- way t{, a new approach. In 1987 Dr. Turner
?:?"~.~".' ?[~:[~" adminislcred by hand. The mares bred by ~ mcnt with nficroencapsulatal tcstosteronc, ~ and I join~l ti)rces with an exert in equine
~':~'~'~:~::.~;~}~ those stallions had an 83 percent reduction I using remote delivery this time. W~ ad- I immtmoh,gy. Dr. Irwin K.M. Liu, of the
'~:~3~:;~'¢~ in lbal production. Although the contracop- ministercd the tcslosteronc to several University of Califbmia at Davis. We liter-
"?"(??/:~::::.~;.'~'~j t vc lrcatlnem was pharnaco ogica ly sue- sta Ions, using darts A year later there wits I ally threw onl fifteen years of work with
· :'.'~'J3~_.~"'~?~;*~:':.'~::+'.:-":.-'.::' '.'": ......:,.i.. ......,~.....';~,,:': ..' ....~:::..41'i;;:,.,~.-4:~:::~;":':.':'."'":'"..'..::':" ..~.;': ....'".. "."'.'.',~'r.: '..
.,, ~.' ....... , , , ' , , f,,,,li:'~i ,'., ,.~.,. ,.~..,,.,,,,. ,,.
, ....... . . ...... .. ..... ......... .....,,.,
' "* ' , '" ~ g' ' 'r, ......."*a ." '~ ..... ~' ~
.... . ,. . ~. , ~. g ~-~*,. ,~ ~.. *, ,j~ } .....
ZOOS; Assateague horses live a
normal life after being vaccin-
ated against conception. Only
one foal in four years has
been born to inoculated mares.
.. '., ~ x !.,~..::. ~'
[: ~ / :T [~21~~
- .~ ," ,;.,~,~..
: ~ ,::'4:' ';"~', :":: "'
~ , ~ ,~ .,~,~,?~ ., i~',,~
life contraception, Carrie Bickle, a student
of mine from Eastern Montana College, has
successfully controlled populations of
skunks with small, conunercially available
contraceptive implants recently approved by
the FDA for use in humans. Over a two-
year period, the city of Billings, Montana,
captured and destroyed hundreds of skunks
in order to control the spread of rabies.
Animal-control officials found that as soon
as the skunks were removed, new ones
moved in from the surrounding county. We
developed a strategy based on maintaining
a core population of skunks that would de-
fend their territory but could not reproduce.
In initial tests, funded by the Eppley
Foundation for Research, PNC Corpora-
tion, the Animal Welfare Institute, and Sally
Hunter, of Alexandria, Virginia, Ms. Bickle
live-trapped female skunks and lightly
anesthetized them, working with a pole
syringe. It was a tricky business, but luck-
ily the skunks scored only a few direct hits!
After having a small patch of fur shaved
from their necks, the skunks each had a
single small contraceptive implant placed
just under their skin. The implant, known
commercially as Norplant®, is so small it
can be placed under the skin without
surgery by pushing it through a large
hypodermic needle. After the disinfecting
of the small puncture wound, the skunk is
up and on its way.
After three years of testing, this approach
has proven to be 100 percent effective in
preventing pregnancies in skunks. The
technique was so simple that animal-control
personnel learned the procedure in minutes;
no surgery was required. The program may
seem to be a great deal of work, but not
when you consider the numbers. Every ten
skunks treated represent sixty to seventy
skunks that will never increase the popula-
tion. Even better, no animals were killed.
We plan to test a similar vaccination pro-
gram on raccoons as soon as funding is ob-
tained. Other researchers have found that
Norplant® contraceptives work well on
rodents.
As contraceptive programs move forward,
new applications for wildlife must follow.
In addition, there are one-inoculation PZP
vaccines to be developed and entirely new
vaccines to be researched and applied to
wildlife situations. For example, research
teams at universities in Connecticut and
Virginia have identified anti-sperm antigens
that, when injected in male animals, cause
antibodies against sperm. Such vaccines
would be particularly useful in species like
horses, where a single stallion breeds many
mares.
With each advance in wildlife contracep-
tion, however, comes greater threats of
abuse of this technology. Should contracep-
tion ever be used in an endangered species?
If so, under what conditions? Who should
make the decisions about the use of con-
traceptive technology on wildlife, using
what criteria? What are the allowable limits
of stress to which animals should be sub-
jected in order to apply wildlife contracep-
tion? Such questions must be answered
before fertility control becomes a common
wildlife-management tool. There is a mul-
titude of ethical and moral questions to con-
sider if we are to solve wildlife problems
rather than make them worse. We have al-
ready begun to ask such questions and to
develop responsible and ethical guidelines
for wildlife contraception.
· · ·
Last March, while giving the fourth an-
nual booster shot to the Assateague mares,
I came upon the carcass of an old friend.
This mare, M4, was twenty when she died
of natural causes in December 1990 at
almost the northermost terminus of the
island. Her remains were still pretty much
intact and I could still see her white socks
and the star on her forehead. There were
two small depressions in the sand where she
had pawed vainly after going down, but the
depressions were shallow and I don't think
she suffered long. She had been among the
mares originally inoculated in 1988 and she
was special to us. I briefly laid my hands
on her neck, something no human had done
during her twenty years. She died less than
a mile from where she had been born, and
she had never been roped, captured,
rounded-up, immobilized, or otherwise
harassed, my contraceptive darts notwith-
standing. M4 was born wild and lived free.
She was permitted the dignity to die where
she lived. I am a scientist, but my emotional
self mourned her loss. For a few moments,
in my grief, I lost sight of the fact that I
should have been celebrating her life and not
mourning her death. I almost lost sight of
the tribute her life--and death--represented
to the bold Park Service officials on As-
sateague who elected to find a humane
solution to managing this herd of wonder-
ful animals. I almost missed the whole
picture. ·
HSUS consultant Dr. Jay E Kirkpatrick is
senior staff scientist, Deaconess Research
Institute, and professor of biological
sciences, Eastern Montana College.
Hunting, it is true, is an American
tradition: a tradition of killing,
crippling, extinction, and ecological
destruction. In the 19th and 20th
centuries hunters have helped wipe out
dozens of species, such as the formerly
bountiful passenger pigeon and the
heath hen. They have brought a long
list of others, including the bison and
the grizzly bear, to the edge of
extinction. In fact, in its report on the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, the
U.S. Senate's Commerce Committee
stated, "Hunting and habitat destruction
are the two major causes of extinction."
As a result of the passage of the
Endangered Species Act the hunting of
imperiled species has slowed
considerably. However, the act has not
stopped hunters from maiming and
massacring many millions of wild
animals every year. Unquestionably,
hunting remains America's number one
bloodsport.
With an arsenal of rifles, shotguns,
muzzle-loaded weapons, handguns, and
bows and arrows, sport hunters kill
more than 200 million animals yearly.
They cripple, orphan, and harass
millions more -- all for their pathetic
idea of "recreation."
Here are the details of what hunters
accomplished in 1988:
· Hunters crippled and killed more
than 10 million ducks, even though
duck numbers are at their lowest levels
in decades. In the process hunters rou-
tinely shot protected birds, including
threatened and endangered ones, for
fun and for failure to identify them
properly.
· Hunters killed more than 50 mil-
lion gentle and inoffensive mourning
doves. Much of the carnage occurred
during September, the month when
mourning doves nest their young.
· Hunters often justify their"sport"
by claiming that it prevents deer from
overpopulating. But hunters gun down
predaters wherever they find them.
Aided by high-powered weapons and
sometimes by dogs and baits, hunters
killed 30,000 black bears and more
than 1,000 brown and grizzly bears.
They also slaughtered wolves in Alaska,
mountain lions in 11 of the 12 western
states where they live, and coyotes
(more than 250,000) in each of the 48
contiguous states.
Over 200 million animals are killed by sport hunters in the U.S. every year.
Additionally, another 25% of that number escape maimed or wounded.
· Native hunters shot non-native
ringneck pheasants and bobwhite quail
by the millions. Many of :these birds
are pen-reared and released into the
The Fund for Animals · 200 West57th Street · New York, New York 10019 · (212) 246-2096
Printed on recycled paper
"... A.d guns don't kill deer either!... Deer kill deed"
wild just to be shot. Even if the pheas-
ants, native to the Far East, survive the
hunters' onslaught, their fate is deadly
certain. Soon after release nearly all
the birds succumb to exposure, starva-
tion, or predation, because they are
physically ill-equipped to survive in
the nonnative environment.
· From Asiatic deer to African lions
to European boars, exotic animals --
imported or obtained from auctions or
zoos and then bred for "surplus" -- are
nothing more than living, breathing
targets for fee-paying hunters at pri-
vate shooting preserves. On these so-
called preserves, even if the animals
did run from hunters (and they usually
don't) they'd have no place to hide. To
accommodate the fee-paying and
weapon-wielding hunters, preserve op-
erators offer "guaranteed kills." Thus,
as desirable "trophies," the animals re-
ceive not only a prison sentence on a
fenced-in preserve, but also a firing
squad.
The hit list also includes deer, elk,
moose, musk oxen, bison, pronghorn,
javelina, turkey, raccoon, rabbit, squir-
rel, and dozens of others. Almost any
creature with four legs or two wings is
unfair game for the hunter. Occasion-
ally two-legged animals also fall vic-
tim to hunters. In 1987 210 people
were killed and more than 1,700 were
injured in hunting accidents.
Wildlife Mismanagement
Much of the problem is a consequence
of the way our govemment wildlife
agencies operate. Rather than being
concerned about the needs of wildlife,
they cater to the desires of hunters.
It's a fact that the prime function of
state wildlife agencies is not to protect
individual animals or biological diver-
sity, but to propagate "game" species
populations for hunters to shoot. The
agencies' expenditures demonstrate the
bias. On average they spend well more
than 90% of their funds on game spe-
cies projects. State agencies spend
millions manipulating habitat for
"game" species by buming and clearcut-
ting forests. They build roads through
our wild lands to facilitate hunter ac-
cess. They pen-rear and stock "game"
animals to increase "shooting opportu-
nities." And they pour millions more
into law enforcement of game regula-
tions and into hunter education, which
includes the construction of target
shooting ranges. The fact is, they're out
to conserve hunting, not wildlife.
And as you might have guessed, it's not
just an issue of animal rights, but one of
the public's rights as well. As a conse-
quence of widespread hunting, non-
consumptive wildlife enthusiasts can-
not safely walk in the woods during
hunting season. They get fewer oppor-
tunities to view wild animals, who be-
come skittish or nocturnal for fear of
being shot by humans. And most
importantly, they are denied an equal
voice in determining how our wildlife
is treated. A mere 7% minority of the
public -- the hunters -- has 100% con-
trol of our wildlife.
It's no exaggeration to say that our
wildlife, our wild lands, and our wild-
life agencies are being held at gun-
point.
For additional reading on hunting we
suggest:
Amory, Cleveland. Man Kind?Available
for $7.95 from The Fund for Animals.
Bakal, Carl. The Right to Bear Arms.
1966.
Baker, Ron. The American Hunting Myth.
New York: Vantage Press, 1985.
Benke, Adrian. The Bowhunting
Alternative. San Antonio: B. Todd Press,
1989.
Di Silvestro, Roger. The Endangered
Kingdom. New York:John Wiley & Sons,
1989.
Livingston, John A. The Fallacy of
Wildlife Conservation. Totonto:
McClelland & Stewart, 1981.
Mowat, Farley. Sea of Slaughter.
Toronto: Bantam Books, 1984.
Regenstein, Lewis. The Politics of
Extinction. New York: MacMillan
Publishing Co., 1975.
HELP US STOP::THE::
'WAR ON WILDLIFE'
Only your voice and' your action
can end this senseless slaughter.
Please help us stop the. murder
and mayhem in the . woOds... by
becoming a memberof the Fund.
fo'rAnimals. For more information..
contact us at the address or phone
number on the front of this page. ·
'"'::'"' ....Hunting Fact Sheet ://2
· ...: L,' :i~i~'''"'
FU.N.D. .............
...'. DEEP,:
· ...,'..'..' .'.:. i'".;:: :~:':': ';' ':~." :"';'~
FACTS.." o. c.o.s,
Q: Isn't hunting done to keep animals
from starving?
A: While hunters employ this"shoot-
to-save" logic as a defense of all hunt-
ing, they generally cite only one spe-
cies, white-tailed deer, that is in need
of population control. The fact is,
hunters kill about 200 million animals
per year, and about 3 million are deer.
Therefore, deer make up about one and
one-half percent of the hunters' grisly
toll. It's just not logical to rest a
general defense of hunting on such a
small percentage of the total kill.
No responsible ecologists are
claiming that the millions of migratory
and upland birds, predators, and nearly
all other indigenous animals killed
every year in the U.S. are being hunted
to prevent them from starving. And
when one considers that wildlife man-
agers and gamekeepers stock millions
of animals, many of them exotic, on
state lands and private shooting pre-
serves just to be shot, it is apparent that
hunting is done for human fun, not
animal welfare.
can be sold. The fact is, license reve-
nues pay a significant share of the sala-
ries of wildlife managers and of the
operating budgets of state fish and game
agencies. In one sense, maintaining
large deer populations can be viewed
as an attempt at job security.
Q: But we need some deer manage-
ment, don't we?
A: Some forms of management may
be appropriate, but not those manage-
ment techniques and strategies designed
to increase the number of deer. For
instance, wildlife managers routinely
manipulate habitat. In states across the
U.S., mature forests are burned or
clearcut to create low-lying browse,
which is favored by deer.
In Michigan, for example, $2 from
each deer hunting license goes into the
Deer Range Improvement Program
(DRIP), which drops nearly all its
money into habitat manipulation. Es-
tablished in 1972, that program has
been the prime factor in boosting
Michigan's deer population from an
estimate of less than 400,000 to ap-
proximately 1.5 million today. Over
the years, drips and drops have added
up to a flood of deer.
Wildlife managers also distort the
Q: Well, at the very least, don't deer
need to be managed to prevent them
from overpopulating?
A: The modern day wildlife
manager' s objective is not to maintain
deer populations at low levels, but pre-
cisely the opposite -- to inflate deer
numbers to artificially high levels. For
the wildlife manager, it's a simple equa-
tion: the more deer, the more licenses
Children have natural empathy for animals, but it is often destroyed as they are taught
to desensitize themseves to animal suffering. This child participated in a program to
recruit young hunters that was sponsored by the state of Florida.
The Fund for Animals · 200 West 57th Street * New York, New York 10019 * (212) 246-2096
Printed on recycled paper
natural sex ratio of deer. Because a
single male can impregnate many fe-
males, a herd with a high ratio of fe-
males to males has great reproductive
potential. In order to create such a
distorted sex ratio, wildlife managers
mandate that more males than females
be killed. Some states, such as Utah
and Vermont, sanction the killing of
males only, commonly referred to as
"buck laws." In Vermont and parts of
New York, there are estimated to be as
many as six females for every male,
though deer are born on a one-to-one
sex ratio.
Third, wildlife managers sanction
the widespread killing ofpredators. In
the dollars and cents mentality of the
wildlife manager, every deer killed by
a predator is a potential hunting license
fee lost. That's why hunters kill preda-
tots wherever they exist - mountain
lions in the West, wolves in Alaska,
and coyotes in the lower 48 states.
Q: Even if that's true, don't deer of-
ten starve to death?
A: Hunters and wildlife managers
present a simplistic and exaggerated
picture of starvation. When faced with
nutritional stress, deer respond bio-
logically by:
· decreasing their rate of
reproduction: males reduce their sperm
count and females absorb embryos.
· conceiving and bearing more males
than females (Louis Verme and John
Ozoga, J. Wildl. Manage. 45(3): 1981)
and behaviorally by:
· migrating to other areas where food
is more plentiful. Because deer are
highly territorial, they will return in
spring, thereby avoiding serious
problems on adjacent lands.
· shifting their diet to include less
palatable species than the preferred soft
vegetation. Deer eat more than 600
species of plants.
Q: Does any starvation occur?
A: Yes, some limited amount of deer
starvation is bound to occur, especially
during winters with heavy snowfall.
But the death of one creature offers life
to another. Deer carcasses are criti-
cally important food reservoirs forblack
bears, coyotes, and raptors who rely on
some winter mortality to make it
through long winters.
What's more, there is no such thing
as waste in an ecological system. The
remains of deer carcasses replenish life-
supporting nutrient cycles, including
the nitrogen cycle.
Q: Isn't hunting humane, though?
A: There's nothing humane about
hunting. Rifles and shotguns cripple
hundreds of thousands of deer every
year. Even worse is the staggering
suffering and crippling losses that re-
sult from the use of primitive weapons,
handguns, and bows and arrows, which
are ever more popular among hunters.
In The Bow Hunting Alternative, Texas
bow hunter Adrian Benke has conclu-
sively documented that archers hit and
fail to retrieve more deer than they hit
and successfully drag from the woods.
Thus, the standard crippling loss for
bow hunters is an astounding 50%.
Even if the killing were quick,
hunting is not ethically acceptable. Deer
can live as long as 10 to 12 years in the
wild. But with hunters killing such a
large percentage of deer (in some states
as many as a third of the state's deer in
a single season) no individual can live
very long. The average age of deer in
some states is less than 3 years.
The humane person is not just in-
terested in populations, but in the well-
being and autonomy of each individual
animal. Last year alone, sport hunters
slaughtered about 3 million deer-- most
of them perfectly healthy animals.
Q: Sohuntingisn'tnecessary'tokeep
populations down?
A: No. In fact, hunting creates ideal
conditions for accelerated reproduc-
tion. The abrupt drop in population
caused by a fall hunt results in de-
creased competition among survivors
for food, space, and mates. This results
in an increase in the birth rate among
these s!~_ryj_v..o.r~, Some studies show
that after a fall hunt 2-3 times as many
fawns are born than would have been
born in a reasopably competitive, non-
hunted population.
It's no accid~ent that the states
with the g?eatest number of hunters
have the largest deer herds. Pennsylva-
nia, which has more than a million deer
hunters (more_ humers than there are
members of the standing army of the
United ~!ate_s) also has more than a
million deer.
What's more, there are many land
areas, large and small, public and pri-
vate, throughout the U.S. -- the mil-
lions of acres of national park lands, for
instance-- where hunting is prohibited,
and deer populations are at equilibrium
with their environment. And even in
the wildlife managers' bible, White-
Tailed Deer Management and Ecology
-- the furthest thing from an anti-hunt-
ing tract-- the authors flatly state, "Most
wildlife biologists and managers can
point to situations where deer popula-
tions have not been hunted yet do not
fluctuate:greatly nor cause damage to
vegetation. Certainly deer reach over-
population in some park situations, but
the surprising thing is how many parks
containing deer populations have no
problem."
Q: Whether it's hunters or natural
decimating factors at work, what's the
difference?
A: Natural decimating factors, which
include death by starvation or thirst,
exposure to heat or cold, parasite, dis-
ease, and natural predation, work con-
stantly and persistently to remove the
weak, the sick, and the old.
The hu_n_[ing spasm upsets this
system. Hunting by humans does not
ensure the survival of the fittest ani-
mals, but precisely the opposite -- indi-
viduals who would not normally have
reproductive success will have it be-
cause hunters do not select the weakest
animals, as nature does. By often kill-
ing the ablest, hunters downgrade the
quality of the gene pool. It's no sur-
prise that some ecologists refer to
hu~nt[.ng as "evolution in reverse."
FUND
FACTS
Hunting Fact Sheet. #3.
THE DESTRUCT!O.'.N '.OF,O.U R
NATION'S WATERFOWL
When waterfowl hunters pull the trig-
ger, they scatter not only dead and
crippled birds across the landscape,
but also lead ammunition. The spent
lead pellets cannot possibly be retrieved
by the shooters. They are, however, re-
trieved by millions of ducks, geese,
and swans, who ingest lead pellets
when feeding off lake bottoms. The
result: 2-3 million birds die agonizing
deaths from lead poisoning every year,
according to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service (FWS).
For more than two decades, respon-
sible wildlife advocates have demanded
that waterfowl hunters use steel shot,
which is non-toxic, rather than lead.
But the hunters and their advocacy
groups, such as Ducks Unlimited and
the National Rifle Association, prefer-
ring the ballistic properties of lead to
steel, have resisted such a
. -. change.
After years of bowing to
the wishes of waterfowl
hunters, the FWS has be-
latedly issued regulations
for a complete phase-out
of lead shot across the
country by 1991. Unfortu-
nately, the problem won't
end when the last lead shot
is fired. Lead, you see, is
not only known for being
heavy, but also long-last-
ing.
This hunter took three birds, but for every three
birds a hunter drags from the field dead, one is left
crippled or wounded.
For instance, in Minnesota
lead shot deposited in the
environment by hunters
more than 20 years ago is
killing trumpeter swans at
an alarming rate -- as much
as 15% of the state's popu-
lation in 1988. With hunt-
ers continuing to deposit
lead shot in critical habitat
areas along each of the
migratory flyways, water
birds will be threatened for decades to
come.
Flying the Unfriendly Skies
Unfortunately, water birds face serious
hazards besides spent lead shot. Indus-
trial and agricultural development are
consuming prime breeding habitat.
Drought, perhaps intensified by cli-
matic warming, is parching critical
pothole areas. And sport hunters kill
millions of birds every year.
With all these factors at work, it's not
surprising to leam that duck popula-
tions have been plummeting since the
mid-1950's. According to the FWS's
1988 Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement on the Sport Hunting
of Migratory Birds, "Total ducks, mal-
lards and pintails reached all-time lows
in 1985 and have not recovered signifi-
cantly since. Black ducks have de-
clined steadily since 1955 and are now
at an all-time low. Some species con-
sidered to be lightly utilized and ca-
pable of sustaining greater harvest (e.g.,
blue-winged teal) have also declined in
recent years."
On July 20, 1989, the FWS reported
"Breeding duck populations in prime
nesting areas of the United States and
Canada continued near record low
numbers this spring... Breeding popu-
lations for ducks in all surveyed areas
totaled just under 31 million. This
figure is 8% lower than the 1988 breed-
ing population and 24% below the long-
The Fund for Animals · 200 West 57th Street * New York, New York 10019 · (212) 246-2096
Printed on recycled paper
term average from 1955-88. Members
of 9 of the 10 key species declined...."
Despite these dire days for ducks, the
FWS and the state wildlife agencies
continue to allow duck hunting -- the
only mortality factor they have the
ability to contr61. Take the case of the
black duck, once the most numerically
significant waterfowl species shot in
the Atlantic flyway. Black ducks have
declined by more than 60% since the
mid 1950's, yet hunters legally kill
them every year. Even as far back as
1976, Walter Crissey, a senior scientist
with the FWS, concluded in an exten-
sive report on the black duck: "It seems
to me that all of the available informa-
tion favor the hypothesis that overhar-
vest has been the most likely cause of
the decline."
But black ducks are just one species
that continues to be hunted liberally.
There were 40 species of ducks, geese,
and swans legally hunted in 1988.
According to conservative estimates
from the FWS and state wildlife
statistics, hunters killed and retrieved
as many as 12 million waterfowl in
1987 and more than 8 million in 1988.
Add to that toll an additional crippling
loss (birds wounded but not retrieved)
of at least 20%.
There's no denying, the hunters are
addicted to shooting ducks. And ap-
parently, the wildlife managers are pri-
marily interested in pacifying the 11unt-
ers, rather than protecting the birds.
The Epidemic of Illegal
Hunting
Many hunters, not satisfied with the
existing liberal hunting opportunities,
resort to illegal hunting -- which, by all
accounts, is epidemic. Because of the
difficulty of catching violators and the
lenient penalties meted out against
wildlife violators, the epidemic is un-
likely to be contained.
Comments David Hall, a law enforce-
ment agent of the FWS in Louisiana,
"From some of the cases we made, it
looks like the guys who hunt illegally
are taking four times more than the
guys who hunt legally." But according
to Hall, "It (illegal kill) is not just in
Louisiana, it's every place I've ever
worked."
In December of 1988 the FWS re-
ported the results of a 3 year sting
operation in Texas. According to the
Service, "Forty-one commercial hunt-
ing businesses were investigated, and
agents documented more than 1,300
violations. Violations allegedly oc-
curred on 92% of the hunts observed by
agents."
In Wisconsin Dr. Robert Jackson
watched 500 hunters from spy blinds
and recorded that one in five hunters
violated a game law while being
watched. Subsequently,he interviewed
hunters in their homes and asked the
question,"Have you ever violated game
laws?" About 85% admitted they had.
What's more, besides the deliberate il-
legal killing of birds, there is heavy in-
cidental killing, which is a standard
feature of waterfowl hunting. Studies
conclusively document that many
hunters cannot distinguish between
waterfowl species in the air. This
general problem is exacerbated by the
remarkable fact that the FWS allows
shooting to begin one-half hour before
sunrise -- in darkness, when it is virtu-
ally impossible to identify birds.
There is also deliberate killing of non-
game migratory birds, including en-
dangered ones. Hunters kill dozens of
herons, ibises, hawks, and eagles every
hunting season. In January, 1989 a
snow goose hunter shot a 4 year old
breeding female whooping crane, one
of North America's rarest birds, just
off of Aransas National Wildlife Ref-
uge in Texas.
Ducks Aren't Unlimited
In 1988 Ducks Unlimited had revenues
of $59.7 million. A significant share of
this money went to protect habitat. But
according to experts, the habitat ac-
quired by DU provides habitat for a
maximum of about 2 million ducks.
On the flip side, Ducks Unlimited lob-
bies for liberal hunting regulations and
fiercely opposes any suggestion that
duck hunting be closed, even for a
single season.
What's more, as mentioned, Ducks
Unlimited resisted the adoption of regu-
lations mandating a switch from lead to
steel shot. Taken in sum, the
organization' s actions clearly translate
into a net loss for waterfowl -- Ducks
Unlimited is directly and indirectly re-
sponsible for killing more birds than it
saves.
That issue aside, there seems some-
thing perverse in trying to produce
ducks just to shoot them. Why not just
let these remarkable creatures make
their point-to-point migrations without
the hazards of being shot out of the sky
or poisoned on the ground? Why not
shoot them with cameras instead of
guns? Maybe because there's some-
thing foul about waterfowlers.
For additional reading on hunting we
suggest the following:
Amory, Cleveland. Man Kind? Avail-
able from The Fund for Animals for$ 7.95.
Baker, Ron. The American Hunting Myth.
New York: Vantage Press, 1985.
Mowat, Farley. Sea of Slaughter. Toronto:
Bantam Books, 1984.
Regenstein, Lewis. The Politics of Ex-
tinction. New York: MacMillan Publish-
ing Co., 1975.
HELP US STOP THE
WAR ON WILDLIFE
Only your voice and. your action
can end the slaughter. Please help
us stop this murder and mayhem in
the outdoors by becoming a
member of the Fund for Animals.
For more information contact us at
the address or phone number on
the from:of this:page,: :: i:
1411 Marcy St.
Iowa City, IA
13 Feb 97
52240
Mr. Stephen Atkins
Mr Larry Baker
Ms Karen Kubby
Mr Ernie Lehman
Ms Naomi Novick
Mr Dean Norton
Mr Dean Thornberry
Ms. Dee Vanderhoef
Dear Ladies & Gentlemen:
Recently we were in Orlando, FL. I was impressed with their
downtown street traffic arrangement.
During the daytime hours the street was used by vehicles. At 6:00
P. M. barricades were put in place and the streets became a
pedestrian mall.
During the daytime the merchants had what they wanted and evenings
"that crowd" had use of the streets. It just looked the best of
two worlds.
With a few innovations and modifications, I can see something like
that work in IC. Please give it your serious consideration.
Yours truly,
Clifford Walters
February 18, 1997
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Mr. Clifford Walters
1411 Marcy Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Walters:
Thank you for your recent note concerning downtown street arrangements in Orlando. Copies
have been forwarded to the City Council.
It is an interesting idea and I have taken the liberty of forwarding this suggestion to our
Downtown Strategy Committee. They are actively involved in planning for future downtown
activities. This Committee includes merchants and other property owners as well as those who
frequent downtown.
Let us see what they think of the idea in the context of the other recommendations they are
about to make.
Thanks for writing.
Sincerely,
Stephe!~-~. Arkins
City Manager
cc: Karin Franklin
City Council.
jw/waiters.sa/doc
410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240-1826 · (319) 356-5000 · FAX (319) 356-5009
David L, Keeley
313 College Ct.
Iowa City, IA.
FEB 1 0 ]997
CITY l ,41g.4GB'S OFFICE
2/6/97
Dear Council Member:
I'd like to express my thoughts on the proposed skywalk that is under
consideration. I've read very carefully the Biology departments view's on this
matter and realize a skywalk would be a convenience. But to me its not
worth constructing a structure that will effect the sight of the area, One of
the best things about entering our city from the north on Dubuque street is the
view of the downtown building facades. A.skywalk would obstruct this,
It appears to me that the University is acquiring a great opportunity with the
addition of a new Biology building, Surely they can brainstorm creatively to
arrange labs, classrooms, etc, to facilitate the movement of specimens in a
centralized way, Are they not doing that now in their current building?
Obviously. this will take some working alongside the architects. which perhaps
they are doing anyway,
As an lowa Citian and Ul employee, I truly appreciate the aesthetics of the
campus and the city. I would much prefer the existing open space and clearer
view than see a skywalk overhead, I believe that if pressed to do so, the
Biology department could workout another solution, They mentioned the 50-100
persons that would use the skywalk. but I think about the several thousand that
utilize the space everyday and the many visitors to the city and downtown,
Surely where theres a will, theres a way, Where theres a convenience, lets not
create an obstruction,
Thank you for taking time to listen, I appreciate your efforts very much,
Sincerely,
February 20, 1997
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Ted L. Hofmann
411 E. Market #101A
Iowa City IA 52245
Dear Mr. Hofmann:
This letter is in response to your February 14, 1997, correspondence to the City
Council regarding City News.
You indicated concern that the ordinance requiring property owners to clear
sidewalks of snow was not mentioned. We recognize sidewalk snow is an
important issue and, for that reason, the ordinance was highlighted in our
December 1996 issue of City News (enclosed).
Our Housing and Inspection Services'Department responds to complaints
regarding uncleared sidewalks. Property owners are given the opportunity to
clean the area. If the owner does not comply, the City will shovel the walk and
bill the property owner.
I appreciate your comments regarding City News. We are always seeking new
and interesting topics to keep our citizens informed. In fact, the "doggy"
ordinance information you referred to was requested by our Neighborhood
Associations as a priority.
Sincerely yours,
Enclosure
cc: City Council
Barb Coffey, Document Services
410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240-1826 · (319) 356-:~000 · FAX 319) 356-5009
To: City Council (copy to media)
From: Carol deProsse
Date: February 19, 1997
Re: Questions for which there won't be time at the meeting of 2/19/97
1. For Steve Atkins: Since August 30, 1996, have you made any confidential
or off-the-record remark or remarks to anyone such as selected, individual
members of the council or to any member of the media, regarding Eric Shaw
that would imply he was leading a less than stellar lifestyle, that 'he was no
Boy Scout', or anything that could be construed to be negative? If so, why
would this matter to you, and why would you see fit to repeat something of
that nature, or if you felt it was necessary to talk about it why not talk about it
in public?
2. For Steve Arkins and the City Council: Why would you not want Rusty
Brotherton of the ICPD to go on the air with Osha Davidson to discuss issues
that have come about as a result of the killing of Eric Shaw? Why do you feel
that only the council should discuss this important community issue,
especially since the council has had so little public discussion of the issues
relating to Eric's death?
3. For Steve Atkins/Chief Winkelhake, l.inda Woito: Are any of you aware of
items contained in the DCI report that would cast Eric Shaw in a negative light?
If so, and in each of your opinions, what difference would that make to the
fact that he was shot to death the night of August 307
4. For Chief Winklehake: Was an investigation done into the Dodge Cleaners
incident? (This is the 2nd or 3rd time this question has been asked and to
date no answer has been given.)
5. For Chief Winklehake: In your opinion, should an investigation into the
actions of Troy Kelsay the night of August 30, 1996, be undertaken (a new
investigation, that is; I am aware that he was asked a few questions as a part
of the internal investigation that centered on Jeffrey Gillaspie?) If not, why
not?
6. For Steve Atkins: Do you think you did anything wrong in the way you
conducted yourself and/or oversaw the administrative functions of the city in
the aftermath of the killing of Eric Shaw? If so, what?
7. For Chief Winklehake: Do you see anything wrong with the way you ran
your department prior to the killing of Eric Shaw? If so, what? Do you see
anything wrong with the way you conducted yourself in the aftermath of the
killing of Eric Shaw? If so, what?
8. For City Council: Why have you not had more open meetings for the
public?
9. For City Council: Since leadership is not something for which one can
gather empirical evidence (as one can in the pulling of a trigger), under what
circumstance(s) could each of you see the city manager or the chief of police
bearing some responsibility for the killing of an innocent citizen by a member
of the Iowa City Police Department?
10. For City Council: If you agree with the City Attorney that the actions of
the officers the night of August 30, 1996 were reasonable and legal, though
not wise or prudent, how do you in your own minds define the difference
between reasonable/legal and not wise/not prudent?
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is t~me to move forward with other Council priorities.
~ 40 13193545157 · FEWA 02/19z97 11:43 P02
~F~T~TION .TO..T_._HE CITY COUNCIL OF IO~A CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action reIated to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is time =0 move forward with other Council priorities.
~ 40 13193545157 FEWA 02/19/97 11:43 P02
~F~T~TION. TO....~.H~ CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sy=pathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby l)etition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is t/~ae to move forward with other Council priorities.
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is time to move forward with other Council priorities.
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is time to move forward with other Council priorities.
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is time to move forward with other Council priorities.
PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF IOWA CITY
We, the undersigned, having deepest sympathy for the family of
Eric Shaw, hereby petition the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa,
to close all discussion and further action related to the Shaw
matter. We believe all reasonable effort has been expended. It
is time to move forward with other Council priorities.
02-19-1997 14:2~ ~19~779~7
FEB-19-07 WED 12106 PM D~IN BO.S~ORTH l~ CITY
PLUMBERS SUPPLY
F~X NO, 319 354 8490
02/19/97 11~43
P.02
?,02/02
02-19-1997 15:54 1~19~779~7
~' 4~) 13~35451S?
PLUHBERS SUPPLY
I)2/19/9'7 12
P, 02
~S~,~.:]:O~ '~0 ,~!t~ czT¥ COU~,J~T, pr zoWa_SJX¥
ZZtC ShaW, here~y petition the City Co~cil o~ Iowa C~,
~o clo~e all d~aoussion and £urthe= action relate~ ~o the
matter. We believe all reasonable effore has been]ew~e~ded. It
is tim~ to ~ve forward with other Counoi. l priorities.
Jean Soper Cater, 325 N. 7th Ave, Iowa City, IA 52245, 319-354-5442
Members of the Iowa City - City Council:
My husband David has been an Iowa City resident since 1961. I have lived here since
1969. We have seen many changes in the Council and in the Iowa City Police Department in the
last 36 years. Changes in the size of the force, the policies, procedures, recruitment and training.
We now have younger, better educated, trained officers that are more service oriented. There is
still room for change and improvement. The job is much more difficult than it was during the
past 36 years. There is more alcohol, drugs, and younger people using them. More and faster
cars, more students, a more diverse population, more people own guns, and more people drop on
and off the interstate, which wasn't here then. Crime drops on and off, not just tourists and game
fans.
I have voted for, contributed money to, or worked to help elect almost every single
Council member sitting here. I did that because I thought each of you competent to make fair
impartial judgments based on facts as you knew them at the time. I had hoped you would set
personal agendas aside and represent all of us.
Most citizens of Iowa City have jobs or businesses, children to feed, elderly members of
families to care for and civic, church, school responsibilities and don't have time to come to
these meetings unless an issue personally affects them.
I have been out of town since April. I was here two weeks in early November for my
husband's surgery, four days at Thanksgiving for my 95 year old father's retinal surgery, four
days in early January to prepare for a trip to Houston to visit my grandson and returned Sunday,
four days ago. Iowa City is caught in a time warp over this case. It feels like I'm catching up on
my soap operas. A recapitulation, but the story line has not progressed at all.
In talking with friends and neighbors I find many who feel they've exhausted their sense
of sympathy for the Shaw family because of the excessive hammering of the Police and the
Council and the personal attacks by a few vocal groups who are politically or personally
motivated to continue to grandstand this case. Using the Chicago Tribune and the Media tonight
is an example. This is the second real tragedy the Shaw family must endure.
I knew Eric as one of the neighborhood kids, although I didn't know his parents. We all
must remember this tragedy. No one can possibly understand the Shaw's grief unless they too
have lost a child. Can't we put these vindictive personal agendas aside, and let this family deal
with their loss?
Then we can let the Council, whom we citizens of Iowa City elected, do what we have
given them to do. We don't need a Police Commission. We elected these people to be our
civilian overseers. I just hope they have the courage and fortitude to do what needs to done to
develop proper Police Policies, and continue to support the man they hired to do the job. Most of
us have great respect for the Iowa City Police Department and all their staff. We thank them for
making our town safe for all of us at any age, and for all their services we take so for granted.
Members of the Iowa City Council:
February 19, 1997
I respectfully request that in regard to the Shaw case, a testimonial record of witnesses be
made by an independent commission, and that such record be made accessible to the
citizens of Iowa City before any further decisions are made in this matter by the Iowa
City Council.
A public record should include all of the sworn and unsworn statements of the officers at
the scene on August 30, 1996, the depositional testimony or affidavits from the Shaw
family, including information on the use of the building, the lock or lock mechanisms on
the door, a description of the commercial facility, and accounts by the Shaw family of
their contacts with police officers throughout the evening of August 30, 1996.
Without a sufficient factual record, consisting of the testimony of all material witnesses,
no proper evaluation of the conduct of any person may be made. Conclusory remarks
about what witnesses have stated are frequently offered without any verification or
indexing into a public record, and without reference to contradictory testimony. The
quick settlement of the Shaw lawsuit and the confidentiality of the FBI report and DCI
reports have prevented citizens from knowing and understanding the totality of the
circumstances surrounding the killing of Eric Shaw.
From newspaper articles and editorials, it appears that during the evening of August 30,
1996, an open door was discovered by an Iowa City police officer at a commercial
building. According to the Iowa Law Enforcement Training manual, finding a building
open during the night is a "fact of life;" there exists "many reasons" an officer will find a
door open, one of the most common is that "an owner forgets to lock up." (See
attachment).
A primary issue presented in the Shaw matter is the purpose and motivation of the three
officers at the scene during the time of entry and search of the commercial building. The
conduct of the officers, as well as their statements, must be evaluated by the City Council
to determine whether Officer Gillaspie entered. the Shaw building to investigate a crime.
To date, the judiciary has 'been bypassed. Prior to the entry of the Shaw building, no
search warrant application was submitted to a neutral magistrate for the assessment of
probable cause and for a determination of whether a warrant should issue. The death of a
person lawfully occupying a business building, and engaged in a lawful enterprise,
precluded a magistrate from addressing the legality of the entry and the search at a
Motion to Suppress hearing. The settlement of the Shaw's civil right action prevented a
resolution by jury verdict of the federal constitutional claims the Shaws asserted against
the city.
Upon hearing, it is for the City Council, as the fact finder, to determine whether the entry
and search of the Shaw building was for the purpose of investigating criminal activities.
If a finding of a criminal pnrpose is made by the council, then the warrantless non-
consent search must be justified on the basis of an exception to the requirement of a
criminal search warrant.
Newspaper articles state that the officers at the scene attempted to justify their warrantless
conduct on the bases of knowledge of prior burglaries in the area, an open door to the
Shaw building, and a purported observation of"pry" marks. In Iowa, Chapter 808.3
makes clear that a criminal search warrant is required from a magistrate before entry and
a search for evidence of a crime. Absent consent to an entry by the owner/controller of a
building, a police officer must have probable cause and exigent circumstance for a
warrantless search.
If the Council determines that the entry and search was for the purpose of detecting a
possible crime, the inquiry is at an end as to the proper procedure to be used to evaluate
the legality of any officer's actions. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,
Article I, Section 8 of the State Constitution of Iowa, and Chapters 808.3 and 808.6 set
forth the procedures which must be followed. A finding by the Council that the entry was
conducted to detect criminal activity excludes any justification on a non-criminal basis.
Criminal search warrants are to issue only upon a finding of probable cause, the test for
which is whether a reasonable prudent person could believe that a crime had been
committed or that criminal activity is presently afoot on the premises to be searched.
(State v. Green, 540 N.W. 2d 649, 655 (Iowa, 1995)).
In the absence of a warrant, and the consent of the owner, a warrantless criminal search
may only be legally conducted when a police officer has an objectively reasonable belief
that an emergency exists requiring immediate entry to render assistance or prevent harm
to persons or property within a commercial building. ("Exigent circumstances" must be
such that urgent action is required; State v. Williams, 367 N.W. 2d 314, 316-317 (Iowa
App. 1985)). (See also, U.S.v. Bute, 43 F 3d 531,539 (10th Cir. 1994): a case relying on
the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (1978); the Tenth
Circuit ruled that the Fourth Amendment would not permit a "security check" wholesale
exemption to the warrant requirement as recognized in three states, not including Iowa;
the Tenth Circuit ruled that it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment to apply such an
exemption to all commercial establishments which are found unsecured; such an
exemption made no accommodation for the nature and particular circumstances
surronnding an individual building (Bute, p. 537).
In Iowa, the purpose of administrative warrants is not to discover evidence of a crime, but
to secure compliance with code standards. Chapter 808.14 reads:
"Administrative warrants: The courts and other appropriate agencies of the
judicial branch of the government of this state may issue administrative search
warrants, in accordance with the statutory and common law requirements for the
issuance of such warrants, to all governmental agencies or bodies expressly or
impliedly provided with statutory or constitutional home rule authority for
inspections to the extent necessary for the agency or body to carry out such
authority, to be executed or otherwise carried out by an officer or employee of the
agency or body. 85 Acts, Chapter 38, Section 1.
In State v. Green, 540 N.W. 2d 649.654 (Iowa 1995). the Supreme Court of Iowa held
that there must be specific statutory authority to conduct inspections for a non-criminal
purpose and there must exist a statutory basis for the issuance of an administrative
warrant under Iowa Code Section 808.14. The Court held in Green:
Because there is no common-law right to issue a search warrant...we lack the
authority to expand by judicial fiat the purposes fixed by the legislature to which
search warrants may lawfully issue. (pp. 654-655).
Any person conducting business wishes to have his or her property protected by the
police, but in accordance with lawful procedures. They also have a Constitutional right to
go about their business free from unreasonable official entries upon their private property.
This Constitutional right is placed in jeopardy if a decision to enter and inspect is
removed from the owner's discretion and placed in the hands of state officials, and if state
agents enter upon their land and enter into their building without authority evidenced by a
warrant. The manner of entry and the search must be consistent with the requirement that
before entry state agents identify themselves and announce their authority (See v. City of
Seattle, 382 U.S. 541,543 (1967); Wilson v. Arkansas, 131 L. Ed 2d 976 (1995); State v.
Cohrs, 484 N.W. 2d 223 (Iowa App. 1992).
The "reasonableness" of a warrantless search, required for an emergency-aid exemption
to the warrant requirement to apply, necessitates a showing that the police had specific
and articulable facts indicating that their actions were proper as well as showing that the
scope of the entry and search was limited to that justification. The Iowa City Council
must determine whether the emergency-aid exception was applicable to this case, and
whether the officers had specific and articulable facts to justify an intrusion to preserve
life (State v. Carlson, 548 N.W. 2d 138 (Iowa 1996)). In footnote 3, page 141, the
Supreme Court of Iowa stated:
"The emergency-aid exception must be distinguished from the exigent-
circumstances exception because the emergency-aid exception is invoked only
when the police are not involved in crime-investigation activities."
I request that at any hearing evaluating the conduct of any city employee, or any policy
applicable to the Shaw incident, that the Council make a determination whether the
particular entry and search of the Shaw building was for investigation of criminal
activities, and if so, whether the criminal procedures of Chapter 808.3 and 808.6 were
followed.
The Iowa Administrative Code, Law Enforcement Academy (501) sets forth the
curriculum for the long course at the Academy and the training required for certification.
In section 3.5(2)(e), the curriculum includes building searches. At a prior public hearing,
the City of Iowa City provided a copy of the outline used by the Academy. (See page
attached). The building search procedures detailed in the curriculum raise the question
whether any of the three officers initially at the scene of the Shaw building on August 30,
1996, received training in the long course curriculum (501-3.5. (80B))
J . Kinnamon
Iowa City Resident
ATTACHMENT
~ A. Police, especially during the night, find buildings open.
Its a fact of life. There are many reasons, you. as an'
officer, will find them open.
~ 1. Owner forgets to lock up is one cf ~he most common
reasons.
o
Windows lef~ open.
Lack of employee interest in securing the facility.
iv) An actual burglary.
It is ~ot always easy to determine why the building
is open. It is dangerous to make assumptions.
~ ~?';.~'.~ .~..En~er ~or '~ Wai~
~ 1. I~i'~.'there. is .'.any. other'.. reasonable -.option;
2. Especially if you know someone is inside.
3. Sometimes i~'s better to wait in a hidden position
for the suspect to come out to you.
V~bal"chal~enge
Things to consider
a. Back-up
- never try to search a building alone.
- 2 to 5 people are needed, depending on
structure.
b. Equipment
!. ShotgLun? Is it really necessa---y.?
2. Other equipment.
c. Civilian interferance~
d. Intelligence information.
e. Safe point of entry.
!. Doors and windows.
C. Search Pattern
1. Top-down
Volume 2 - Disk 2A(!i/93) 14
To my City Councilors:
Richard Judson Twohy
POB 2233 · Iowa City · 52244
1]~ ricl~-twohy@uiowa.edu
FEB1819~7 ~
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
February 17, 1997
Here's a letter I wrote today to the Press-Citizen, noting the unbelievable limit
you've placed on public discourse for the "public input" meeting on Feb. 19th.
I left a copy -- under the hallway door -- at 12:15 pm today, for City Clerk Marian
Kerr, with a hand-written note for your attention: "Why can't this be fixed?"
I had to leave it on the floor because NO ONE was available inside City Hall.
The Lobby reception desk was shuttered with a metal barrier to the ceiling, and
all the doors were locked. I was on my lunch-hour, so of course I didn't loiter.
But I did observe, with care and surprise, that there was no sign-up list anywhere for
citizens wishing to speak. And so, needless to say, I have not registered as required,
for permission to address Council on Wednesday night. But I will make every effort
to attend and to watch closely at least the visible tip of this iceberg -- which was once
the open, accountable government of our City.
Please note: your copy of my letter (unlike the original) is now festooned with
a copy of today's editorial -- and last week's tiny announcement of your limita-
tion. ! added these items after finally seeing, this afternoon, an official editorial
comment at the bottom the Opinion page, essentially endorsin~ -- without any
hint of criticism -- your IN-PERSON, work-hours-only, "advance SignUp" rule.
Those items certainly suggest, by the 4-day lead-time between them, that this
was not an accidental oversight by the City, NOR on the part of the newspaper.
And, they give perspective to an odd comment 'by Editorial Page Editor Chuck Baldwin
to me -- when I personally handed him my Letter to the Editor at 12:05 pm. (I still had
not read the enclosed editorial at the bottom of their Opinion Page.) He chuckled and
said: "We probably won't have space to print this. So it'll wind up on the trash heap."
Now that I see what he wrote today, my attitude is this: eIf the issue was important
enough for a new item last week, AND important enough for a separate editorial today
- on a meeting to be held in 48 hours --then it is important enough to print, on time,
a direct critical comment challenging the stance of both our City Council and his paper.
Lastly: It is more than a little ironic that, in this very same issue of the Press-Citizen,
today, there is an article (Page 3A) about a public hearing by Iowa's General Assembly
next Monday concerning juvenile justice.
It says:
"People who want to testify can have their names added to a
list of testifiers by calling the Legislative Information Office"
(and then it gives the phone number.)
That's exactly how to do it for "public input" meetings. Open governing is never easy,
and I know you are doing your thoughtful best for all of us. Yet, if the Legislature takes
citizen "speaker" reservations by phone, then What is our problem here in Iowa City?
Why do our hometown leaders behave, in this case, ard~~
as if a dreadful, terrible secret must not be revealed?
Rich ohy
POB 2233 * Iowa City 52244
rich-twohy@uiowa,edu
Home: 337-9011
Iowa City Press-Cit~,O/
February 17, 1997
, ebru~.~, 997 '?A
Iowa City P~ess-Citizen
To add your voice -
Citizens wanting to ad-
dress the City Council dur- '
ing Wednesday's 7 p.m.
special work session on
police policy can sign up
starting today at the city ~..
clerks office, 410 E, Wash-
ington St. Sign-up must be
.' in oerson. I he cferK's office
~1 ~s o~tween 8 a.m. and ~--
l~,5 p.m, .7.
We citizens are becoming accustomed to half-measures by our City Council on matters
which affect our lives. But their latest gesture is especially snigglish: Yes, the public will
finally be allowed to approach the Sovereign about Eric Shaw at their meeting on 2/19.
BUT, (according to your newspaper on 2/13): If you want permission to speak, you must
not only show up at 7pro Wednesday nisht. You must ALSO sign up in advance, at City
Hall. No phone calls, no Fax, no Email, no US mail. No relatives or friends signing up
for you, either. No, no: you must appear, IN PERSON, at City Hall and make your
request in writing. And, you can only sign up between 8 and 5pm, on work days only.
Hence, if you, ALSO, work for a living from 8-5, YOU cannot address the Soverei
Only citizens of leisure, who can make a social RSVP in person, will be recognized. d,a,'
I guess it's an OK compromise - since, after all, some Councilors didn't wan~ to 'waste
time hearing any of us. When the matter of public input was raised on February 1, Dean
Thomberry resisted the whole idea. I remember his stunning remark: We don't need to
have the community come and talk to us. "We ARE the community." (a direct quote.)
I still dream of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But in this
town, it remains just a dream. (Go, Hawks.) ~'~~~
' ' MO DAN Y~~
Richard Judson Twohy
POB 2233 · Iowa City 52244
rich-twohy@uiowa.edu
Home: 337-9011
Fax: (319) 354-6995
Free: (888) 444-55'44
February 17, 1997
TO THE EDITOR:
Iowa City Press-Citizen
We citizens are becoming accustomed to half-measures by our City Council on matters
which affect our lives. But their latest gesture is especially snigglish: Yes, the public will
finally be allowed to approach the Sovereign about Eric Shaw at their meeting on 2/19.
BUT, (according to your newspaper on 2/13): If you want permission to speak, you must
not only show up at 7pro Wednesday night. You must ALSO sign up in advance, at City
Hall. No phone calls, no Fax, no Email, no US mail. No relatives or friends signing up
for you, either. No, no: you must appear, IN PERSON, at City Hall and make your
request in writing. And, you can only sign up between 8 and 5pro, on work days only.
Hence, if you, ALSO, work for a living from 8-$, YOU cannot address the Sovereign.
Only citizens of leisure, who can make a social RSVP in person, will be recognized.
I guess it's an OK compromise - since, after all, some Councilors didn't want to waste
time hearing any of us. When the matter of public input was raised on February 1, Dean
Thomberry resisted the whole idea. I remember his stunning remark: We don't need to
have the community come and talk to us. "We ARE the community." (a direct quote.)
I still dream of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. But in this
town, it remains just a dream. (Go, Hawks.)
Richard Judson Twohy
J 'FEB 2 0 1997
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
COUNCIL STATEMENl 2119/97
Enclosed are portions of my statement- I left out the middle section
which I read at the council meeting.
For those of you who are new to this tragedy let me introduce the
main player via some of the public statements they have made.
have translated them out of officialese into plain english for you.
Officer Kelsay said that he can find no fault with anything he did
that night. Chief Winkeihake said that if you leave out the
killing, he can find no fault with Kelsay's or Gillaspie's
procedures, except that Kelsay did not have on his bullet proof
vest. While Eric lay dead on his floor Kelsay explained the killing
to an interogating officer as being just the luck of the draw,
nothing he, or Gillaspie could have done to prevent it- try not
going through the door, try a phone call, try asking anyone inside
to come out, try looking through the window or listening at the
door, TRY GETTING A SEARCH WARRANT? Winkelhake said right after the
killing, "Gillaspie will be back out on the streets in a couple
weeks". Gillaspie said two weeks after the killing, "I flinched"-
nevermind that the pull on the trigger was 14 pounds, nevermind that
before he could flinch he had to move to an upright position, raise
his arm, and aim dead on at Eric's heart, nevermind any of this
because Patrick White bought the flinch story. Ernie Lehman told
the people of Iowa City, including Eric's parents, Kelsay is not
responsible, Gillaspie is not responsible, Winkelhake is not
responsible, and Ernie Lehman is not responsible, because all of you
out there are to blame because you hired us. Dean Thornberry
remarked, we don't need to have the community come and talk to us,
"we are the community". Prosecutor White said that Gillaspie
remained outside Eric's shop when he killed Eric therefore he did
did not violate Eric's fourth amendment rights- Gillaspie didn't
have to enter did he Mr White, he sent his bullet on ahead. These
statements and others indicate that many of our public officials
have no idea of the enormity of the horror of this killing.
Some council members seem intent upon making excuses for Chief
Winkelhake. I say there are none. The Dodge Cleaner incident
slapped Chief Winkelhake's face with the danger his officers were
creating by going through open doors without thinking mbout the
consequences. The chief's failure to respond to that incident,
which could easily have ended tragically but did not, cost Eric Shaw
his life. The Chief got his warning loud and clear and he chose .to
ignore it. Did the chief think that his officers could go on
pulling guns on citizens forever and not kill one of them
eventually?
The danger the police were creating for citizens by going through
open doors with guns drawn in comando style silence should have been
obvious to the chief before the Dodge Cleaner incident-~ a
professional should not need a merciful warning o~ the obvious
before taking action. But the chief was lucky, he got his warning,
he just did not heed it. This is not a case of 20-20 hindsight
seeing now what was difficult to see at the time. Ask the Dodge
Cleaner manager if he saw the danger at the time? This is a case of
a complete and unforgivable professional blindness, a case of
dereliction of duty that cost our son his li~e.
Eric Shaw's killing was not a wrongful death, it was a criminal
death. It is not rational to ignore negligence so gross and so
pervasive and so obvious that it made a killing inevitable. With
such blatant disregard for the safety of citizens it was never a
question of if these officers would kill someone, it was when and
w~. That question was answered the night of august 30.
The city council can not provide much justice of cource since
they are not a court of law, but they can hold the men with direct
responsibility for the death of our son accountable and terminate
their employment. When it comes to justice, even a little would
help. Jay Shaw
Councilmembers,
Please find enclosed a copy of my statement of last evening, February 19,
1997.
--Sheldon (Shelton?) Stromquist's remarks about the smugness displayed
at last night's meeting are something I hope you heard with great seriousness.
If you were not paying attention to the expressions on the faces of the city
manager and the chief of police, I encourage you to review the tape to see if
the camera caught what I said later to my husband, was one of the worst
display of attitude that I ever witnessed by those hired to work for the
citizens.
--This is not about 80 signatures on a petition or 145 signatures on a
petition, or about a 1-man committee or a 6-person committee. It is not about
who hired the city manager or about who likes or dislikes what he has done in
the past. It is not about a police department that like any other department
cam be assessed as having both positives and negatives. This is not about
politics or next fa11's election. It is about the killing of a citizen by employees
of the city (Gillaspie and Kelsay) and who shares in the responsibility for what
happened. Of course others share responsibility! How could it be otherwise?
Everyone in city government answers to someone. It is like private enterprise,
the military, or like families. Everyone has to answer to someone or some
higher order, for in the absence of answering--being responsible--there is not
an ordered society.
Very soon I will be leaving this issue to return to the new experiences I
hoped to create for myself by moving to the country. I wish you strength,
courage, and honor.
~~L
Intro:
Structured system: hierarchy, line of authority; citizens, council, city
manager, chief of police, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, police officers
Open door policy; #205 Personal conduct
I am here in the memory of Eric Shaw, requesting that you remember Eric
Shaw as well as his parents and uncle, Jay, Blossom, and Jim Shaw, by doing
what is morally right for a citizen killed because of a policy, though
proclaimed legal and reasonable, was apparently not legal and reasonable
enough for it to remain unchanged in the aftermath of the killing of Eric Shaw.
In fact, it was changed within weeks of Eric's death.
I cannot conceive it possible that anyone, after a careful reading of the
evidence available to us at this point in time, could believe that the night of
August 30th and its aftermath, can be laid at the feet of only one man. I do
not want to believe that the city council can think that no one besides Jeffrey
Gillaspie bears any responsibility for the killing of Eric Shaw. Someone sitting
on a stool inches from an open door to his own place of business, talking on
the telephone to a friend. It is unfathomable to me that the city manager, the
chief of police or officer Troy Kelsay--of whom the city acknowledges guilt in
the settlement reached with the Shaw family--that none of these people has
had enough honor to stand up and say, "I share in the responsibility for what
happened." As the council goes forward with its deliberations, please
remember that no one under you has had the courage to accept any
repsonsiblity in any form, for Eric Shaw's death. Instead, they have been
willing to let the blame lay with the one man who pulled the trigger. Their lack
of honor and courage, replaced with their constant justification as to why they
have no responsibility, should tell you, as it has told many of us, that these
people are not fit for employment with the City of Iowa City.
February 12, 1997
Dee, Karen, Ernie, Naomi, Dean, Dee, and Larry:
Is there some mechanism by which it would be possible to re-open the internal
investigation of Troy Kelsay that was conducted in the aftermath of August 307 According
to his statement to Fortand Sellers of 9-19-97, regarding his assessment of the open door:
1. Page 3, full paragraphs 1-3
--He first saw the two windows, one of which had lights and most of it had light. coming out of it;
--He notices the door standing open and light coming out of the door;--He walked to the door quietly, took a quick look and noticed several pry
marks on the door about which he gives rather det~Jled information;
--He did not stand there as he was dressed in dark c!9thing, no ready
identification that he was a police officer, no vest 6,n, as he wans't planning on
doing anythy that he needed, his .job was basically ~urveillance that night;
--He did not hear anything;--He could not see any body or any shadows or any ~'!gn that anybody was
inside the building;
--He went to the back of the building and saw two more windows with hghts on;--He called the PD, said he had an open door and requested a marked unit to
assist;
--While on the phone he continued to walk around the buldding, back past the
door and to the front to get the correct address.
2. Page 4, full paragraph 2:
--Gillaspie and Zacharias arrive, Kelsay gets on the phone to cancel his request,
points to the door, says something like "Opendoor" to Gillaspie who begins to
walk to the door, cancels his request, follows Gillaspie to the door;
3. Page 7, Answers to questions from Fort:
--He didn't hear anything, he didn't illuminate what he saw as 'pry' marks on
the door (but was still able to provide rather detailed information about them),
and again states that he did hear anything;
4. Page 8, Continuing answers to Fort's questions:
--Never heard anyone say anything prior to the shot being fired;
5. Page 9, Continuing answers to Fort's questions:
--It was duty he volunteered for. (?: Who authorized this duty and who
authorized the overtime?) :
10.
Page 10, Continuing answers to Fort's questions:
--Long justification as to why there was a higher threat le~,el for a business with lights
on;
11. Page 11, Continuing answers to Fort's questions:
--He did not call it a burglary in progess, he didn't assume it was a burglary in
progress, it had some 'trappings' of a burglary in progress, it could have just as
easily been somebody that belonged there and most likely it wasn't anybody thedre,
but he felt the proper person to investigate that was a uniformed officer; why, ff all
that is true, did he not initiate the effort to take time to discuss the situation with
Gi!laspie and Zacharias when they arrived on the scene7 ff he .just pointsto the
building and says 'oven door', it seems natural that junior officers coming off duty.
and following on the heels of a guns-pulled situation, would l~erceive his finding to
be greater than it was and therefore act rashly; 1T WAS SOI.Et Y KEt.SAY'S
RESPONSIBILITY TO HAVE THE SITUATION UNDER CONTROL; HE WAS THE ONE
DOING THE INVESTIGATING, HE WAS ~ ONE WITH THE INFORMATION THAT HE
SAW OR HEARD NOTHING, HE WAS THE ONE WHO HAD WALKED AROUND THE
ENTIRE BLm.DING. It ts true that Gillaspic pulled the trLq~qer, but who led him into the
situation? an officer on h~s second ntqht of bur~qlary detail who had Found literally
nothin~q at the scene, who was the senior officer by almost two ~,ears, and the one
in char~qe of the scene at 1132 S. Gilbert Street the ntqht of Au~qust 30, 1996.
Sincerely,
Carol deProsse
Copies: R.J. Winklehake
Steve Atkins
I.inda Woito
Press (KXIC, PC, CRG, DI, ICON)
State of the City Message
Naomi J. Novick, Mayor
February 25, 1997
Transportation issues were a very important component of our City's agenda last year. For the
first time in 11 years we increased bus fares, and we reduced service during the evening and
Saturday hours to help offset our escalating operating costs and diminishing Federal funds.
However, we also initiated measures such as low-income disc~nts, semester passes, student
discounts, and free bus rides for kids, as promotional efforts to encourage ridership. We will
acquire ten new wheelchair lift-equipped buses this spring and will retrofit our remaining six transit
coaches with lifts soon thereafter, making our entire fleet accessible to persons with disabilities.
This year we will undertake a complete assessment of our transit system: route structure, usage,
etc. to determine if further changes are warranted. Future changes may be minor improvements
or may be comprehensive, depending on the outcome of our assessment. We will also continue
to provide paratransit service to residents who need this service_.
In the area of street construction Melrose Avenue improvement projects remained in the forefront
with the new construction between U.S. Highway 218 and West High School being completed in
1996. The bridge over the Iowa Interstate Railway and the reconstruction of the remainder of
Melrose Avenue from the bridge to Byington Road will be completed in 1997. Thus a long-
standing traffic "bottleneck" will be significantly improved. We will also improve the Melrose
Avenue traffic flow by adding a demand-activated traffic signal at the West High entrance.
We recently completed the Iowa River Corridor Trail between ~Burlington Street and City Park.
During the next two years we will design the extension of the trail south from Burlington Street
either to Sturgis Ferry Park or to Napoleon Park. We will also begin construction of the Willow
Creek Trail in 1997. Because bicycles have become a popular form of transportation, the City
now provides parking for approximately 400 bicycles in the downtown area. Bicycle racks have
been added inside parking ramps and on parking meters where conventional bike racks will not
fit, and these have been widely utilized.
Improving our airport has become a priority as we plan our City's future. Ten million dollars will
ultimately be spent to upgrade the Iowa City Airport and ensure future compliance with FAA
regulations. This will provide adequate airport facilities and services for Iowa City over the next
twenty years and beyond, with approximately 90% of these costs funded by the FAA. The
recently completed Airport Master Plan recognizes the potential for commercial and industrial
development on or near the airport as well as nearby residential development. Therefore,
construction of the Willow Creek Interceptor Sewer has been moved ahead to Fiscal Year 1998.
This sewer will serve the southwest side of Iowa City, including land to the south and west of the
Airport, and will facilitate possible annexation and development in that area.
In planning for future development, we have adopted a revised Fringe Area Agreement with
Johnson County. It reflects a heightened level of cooperation between the City and the County
regarding development of areas adjacent to Iowa City. Limited residential development will be
permitted in the County, with development to urban densities occurring where City services could
be available. Also, we will consult with the County before extending the Fringe Area Agreement
to cover new territory after future annexations.
A new Iowa City Comprehensive Plan is nearing completion and will be reviewed by the Planning
and Zoning Commission and presented for Council consideration this summer. Based on the
2
concept of "building neighborhoods"; this plan reflects the policy recommendations of the Iowa
City Beyond 2000 committee members who worked so diligently two years ago to create
comprehensive goals and vision statements for Iowa City.
We continue to stress the importance of maintaining the integrity of our existing neighborhoods.
Our "Program for Improving Neighborhoods" grants continue, providing $25,000 annually to be
allocated by the City Council to fund proposed neighborhood association projects. The
establishment of traffic calming features in certain areas represents a significant move toward
making neighborhoods safer. More important, however, is the enhanced communications within
and among the various neighborhoods and with the City government that results from the Office
of Neighborhood Services. The 21 neighborhood associations are indispensable to maintaining
and improving this relationship.
In the interest of preserving our older neighborhoods and historic structures, the Council adopted
an ordinance designating 36 structures as local historic landmarks. We also completed a survey
of the Longfellow Neighborhood and the North Dubuque Street corridor, the first step in
determining whether these areas could be designated as historic or conservation districts. Today
we are considering the designation of two new historic districts: the College Green District and
the East College Street District. The Historic Preservation Commission has been working hard
last year.
The Design Review Committee has also been working hard last year. This Committee's authority
has been expanded to include districts outside the downtown urban renewal area. Individual
districts will be designated in the future in areas of the central business district which are not now
included in our design review requirements. Standards for these districts will be set in
cooperation with the affected property owners and businesses.
An ad hoc Downtown Strategies Committee will soon make recommendations on a variety of
measures to enhance and preserve the character and vitality of the downtown area. This will
include a "face lift" of the City Plaza as well as other improvements throughout the central
business district. Parking remains a topic for consideration, and we have developed a plan to
make our parking garages more attractive and user-friendly. We continue to plan an additional
parking garage south of Burlington Street, and we have begun to explore yet another location in
the north side of the central business district.
The major focus for downtown redevelopment is Parcel 64-1a, the only remaining Urban Renewal
parcel. An exciting array of ideas involving concepts for development under a public-private
partnership have been discussed. Integrating the expansion of the Iowa City Public Library into
this development offers a unique opportunity for this community to enhance its library services
in the future, while integrating attractions envisioned for a multi-use facility on this site.
Major new construction and system upgrades in our Water and Wastewater Systems remain
underway, with a target completion date of 2002 for both. All the deep wells which will supply the
new Water Treatment Plant are in place. This year we will begin restoration of the old Iowa River
Electric Power Dam which the City has purchased to ensure adequate pool depth on the river at
our new Water Treatment Plant intake. These plans include restoration of the trail over the dam
which will be integrated into the Iowa River Trail system as a joint project with Coralville.
Development of the new plant site will proceed this year as well.
We will soon finish the connection of the two Wastewater Treatment Plants, allowing for transfer
of sewage from the old plant directly to the new plant as necessary. This will allow for better
balance of the entire system capacity, and after completibn of upgrades to the South Plant, will
provide for full compliance with all current Federal effluent discharge standards.
In conjunction with these projects, a great deal of excavation has occurred, allowing opportunities
for archaeological study. We have cooperated with federal and state agencies to embark upon
these studies, and in addition to the required written reports, we will provide a video report
documenting the results. This visual presentation will be available to all citizens and will be
cablecast over local access television stations.
The new soccer fields near the south Wastewater Treatment Plant will be available for use in
1997. This project will greatly enhance our ability to accommodate the increasing demands for
soccer facilities by the young citizens of our community. I wish to take this opportunity to once
again acknowledge the tremendous support from the Iowa City Kickers who have raised and
donated $140,000 toward this project. We have begun to look at the possibility of expanding the
Mercer Park Aquatic Center to add gymnasium space in the future. All of our improvements
projects will be undertaken with the goal of making our parks and recreational facilities more
accessible to persons with disabilities.
Last year we provided housing accessibility by constructing our first wheelchair ramp that can be
moved from one house to another. Our Public Housing and Assisted Housing programs allowed
us to serve a total of 984 individuals and families in need of housing assistance. Community
Development Block Grant funds provided opportunities for us to operate our housing rehabilitation
program, to provide home repair services through the Elderly Services Agency, to subsidize non-
profit housing development, and to provide down payment assistance to qualifying first-time
homebuyers. We also provided some economic development funding to support the expansion
of a local small business, and we were able to assist in the creation of the new Pheasant Ridge
Neighborhood Center. We also funded other human service agencies.
The Iowa City Human Rights Ordinance was amended last year to add "gender identity" as a
protected class against unlawful discrimination, and efforts by the Human Rights Commission and
staff to highlight the local observance of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in January were
extremely successful.
With recommendations from a citizen committee, the City Council adopted financial assistance
guidelines to use as a framework in making decisions regarding which businesses should receive
publicly funded incentives or assistance. The criteria are based on our Economic Development
Policies and the concept that businesses which receive assistance should pay a good wage,
provide benefits to their employees, and contribute to the overall well-being of the community.
Oral-B Laboratories, a local.manufacturer that fits these criteria, was the first business to apply
for assistance. They were competing for a plant expansion. We are very pleased that Iowa City
was selected as the site for the Oral-B Laboratories expansion. Both the City and the State
endorsed this expansion by offering economic development assistance; however, the Gillette
Corporation decided to proceed without this assistance. This local expansion will add
approximately $3.8 million to our property values and will eventually employ an additional 55
people.
4
Most of the topics in a State of the City Message are about what our City has accomplished. We
tell our citizens that our local government has succeeded in projects that are good for our City.
We usually don't tell you about those instances where your government has failed or where a City
employee has not performed well. However, this one is different.
A most disappointing effort this past year was the special census. With a population growth of
only 410 residents, we fell far short of our original projections. We will be receiving some
additional State and Federal revenue based on this growth, and staff is reviewing the detailed
census information to better understand the level of growth' indicated.
Also, about six months ago a citizen was shot and killed by a City employee, a police officer.
This shooting was absolutely unjustified. This incident has had a dramatic impact on the City
Council, the City Manager, the City Attorney, the Police Department, in fact the entire City
government and all of its citizens. We can assure you that our City Council will continue to study
and evaluate the policies, procedures and training of our police officers. We have committed to
defining our community standards for policing and to implement these standards as written
procedures, and we are doing so. We are also in the process of creating a Citizen Review Board
for the purpose of receiving complaints regarding police practices and behavior and reviewing the
appropriateness of police procedures. We appreciate the many citizens who provided comments
on police procedures, and we expect that we will also have good comments on the Citizen
Review Board Ordinance before we adopt it. Changes in policies and procedures will be made
with our goal of ensuring, to the greatest extent possible, that a tragedy like this will never happen
again in our community. We deeply regret this tragic event and our deepest sympathy continues
to go out to the family and friends of Eric Shaw.
mg~ate~y.nn