Urban wildlife: when large wildlife and communities mix, it often ends poorly for the animals

Immobilizing and relocating isn ' t as simple as it might seem

Another common misconception is that Fish and Game can work like a reverse Amazon delivery truck that shows up, puts a large, wild animal gently to sleep and whisks it back to its natural habitat. It takes a large team and special equipment that has to be deployed each time.

Fish and Game has an excellent track record of relocating animals, but it always poses risks. Pearson explains the " behind the scenes" decisions involved with relocating a wild animal.

" Darting and relocating any animal involves the use of potent immobilization drugs that produce significant physiological effects and carry inherent risks, even in a controlled environment," he said. " The risk is not only for the animal, but also Fish and Game staff who have to immobilize and handle that animal."

There are very real risks of an animal dying as a result of using an immobilization drug, including those associated with the drugs themselves, or from situations that arise after darting, but before the immobilization drug kicks in.

Biologists don ' t know exactly how each animal will react to being drugged, or where it might go immediately after being darted, but before the drug takes effect.

An animal might run into traffic, into water and drown, or some place else that can harm them. Even in the best of situations, darting wildlife is always stressful to the animals.

When Fish and Game decides to dart and move an animal, staff takes every step to mitigate these risks. That includes protecting people and traffic by controlling public entry into an area where the animal is located.

" There are many factors to the decision-making that Fish and Game evaluates when deciding to immobilize and relocate an animal," Pearson said. " But it essentially boils down to this: Are there other options for getting the animal out of the area that involve less risk? And if not, does the risk to public safety of doing nothing outweigh the risk involved with chemical immobilization?"

Again, it ' s that tricky balancing act.

Managing a head vs managing a herd

Fish and Game staff have decades of experience with these situations, and if they feel conflict with people is inevitable, often they will immediately move an animal despite it not posing an immediate risk to the public.

While watching and waiting may be preferred by some local residents, Fish and Game biologists and conservation officers know prolonged monitoring of an individual animal can take up a disproportional amount of time and detract from their larger mission of managing whole herds and populations.

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.