Travis County Commissioners Court
November 9, 2004
Item 52
52 is consider and take appropriate action on proposed interlocal with Texas
wildlife service, a department of Texas cooperative extension, to address
a coyote problem in Travis County waoeu cross-sharing a wildlife management
specialist. Good morning.
>> good morning, judge and Commissioners. Travis County extension
office. We are back from last week with some answers to some of the questions
that you had asked of us. The contract modifications that were proposed by
county attorney have been approved by wildlife services and Texas cooperative
extension and you should have those with the changes to the contract that
were requested. The city has provided us with a copy of their estimate of
the value of the in-kind services. There was a question you had related to
the budget. It comes up to in the neighborhood of 19,000. $19,238. Plus the
$10,000 cash contribution to the contract. And then we've also included a
piece into the plan that's outreach and education for citizens, just related
to how they can help to mitigate the problems that they are dealing with in
terms of coyotes. So those three changes that you asked for or questions that
you asked have been addressed and what you have before you today I think.
>> can we just get on the record the specifics that we're
recommending for citizen participation, citizen involvement?
>> sure. Well, the things that we have in our plan would
be, number one, just as soon as something is in place, just an awareness campaign
to let people know what to do in the event that they encounter coyotes or
encounter wildlife. The other would be beginning with an educational seminar,
kind of a broad-brush seminar for anybody that's interested from Travis County
attending and that's where they would learn more specifics about what they
can do, the things they can do individually to help with, you know, making
their property and their pets hopefully less attractive to coyotes. And then
an ongoing effort to speak to homeowner associations, civic clubs, continue
to develop educational materials and leaflets that will be passed out through
those avenues and a.p.d. And city staff as well. This will be a cooperative
effort between wildlife services extension and the city of Austin also. So
that's kind of the approach that we're taking to the education and the outreach.
>> wildlife services, city of Austin, the county extension
service and to the extent the neighborhood associations, other organized groups,
individuals want to get involved, I guess.
>> absolutely. That's what we depend on to bring the crowds
together for us.
>> also mentioned the outreach that would also be placed
as far as Travis County media, television.
>> yes, absolutely. That's in here as well. Both Travis County
and channel 6, yeah.
>> for the city and also the county.
>> right.
>> make sure that's there so when the public views that they
will know that that is which they can refer to.
>> we're going to work on a 30-minute video program that
could be run over and over. Informational tips.
>> for those who wonder how a technician in fact implements
the management program, can you just generally describe how that's done?
>> yes, sir. I知 sure that we will receive complaints from
citizens around the city and the county concerning the various coyote problems.
Of course animal control, local officials to discuss how those calls will
be relayed to our biologist. It may be that in the particular situation we
conduct control activities in that immediate vicinity. The technician will
also give advice concerning things that the individual landowner or property
owner could do to modify the coyote behavior and reduce the problem. Or it
may be that our particular action involves conducting activities away from
that particular site where the problem coyote or coyotes are actually coming
from. So we're going to have to evaluate each situation, but we intend to
make a personal response to these calls when we receive them.
>> i've got two technical questions. The first is probably
either for david or dorinda. Often to this point information that's been getting
out to the public about the coyotes and I so appreciate what you all have
been doing and the proactive situation with the animal control and the meeting
that was -- that I attended along with councilmember mccracken a couple weeks,
up to this point you all have been properly labeling it this is what the city
of Austin is doing. When we all signed this agreement here, are we going to
have kind of a joint billing of any kind of information that gets out into
the community that this is truly a joint effort of the city of Austin and
Travis County? Because, a, it is, but also, we need to whenever we can reenforce
to the community that despite our differences of opinion sometimes, sometimes
the city and the county work very well together to make good things happen
in the area of public safety.
>> right. Commissioner Sonleitner, david lowery, city of
Austin, health and human services. Absolutely. I mean you are correct, the
initial communications was part of sort of that city-based effort. We're in
partnership with the police department and so forth. And we wanted to make
it really clear that this was just an early message to the community pending
this agreement. Once this is in place, I mean I believe you are absolute correct,
this is a true partnership and it's our intention that we're going to be working
together in terms of the educational efforts, materials that we distribute.
We should format them in a way that it reflects the partnership. We intended
to that.
>> I appreciate that the second question is really, on a
[indiscernible] when we talk about the area of jurisdiction, it talks about
within Travis County and the city of Austin. And it certainly was never my
intent when we started about this partnership and we started hearing about
problems not only in the city of Austin but there are other areas that have
problems with coyotes. Pflugerville is just one of many areas. I always thought
that this agreement was going to handle unincorporated Travis County and specifically
the city of Austin because we would have work to do to get other jurisdictions
to say yes, you may come within our jurisdiction, and I certainly intended
that if the city of Austin was going to be asked to partner with a little
bit of cash in addition to in-kind services that are worth tens of thousands
of dollars, we certainly weren't going to say we're going to charge the city
of Austin to be a part of this partnership, but somehow we would not ask for
the same kind of contribution, more modest because the size of the cities
are different from other cities. I certainly had no intent to to say the city
of Austin has to pay to get into this partnership with us, but somehow Pflugerville
or whatever other uninincorporated city would not. It seems like we would
treat all of the unincorporated cities equally in terms of we would ask for
some kind of participation and money. Because that certainly was never my
intent that the city of Austin would be asked to pony up money and we certainly
wouldn't have the same kind of expectation although in a different amount
because the size of the counties are different from anybody else. Can somebody
clarify that for me?
>> well, you don't have the authority to enter some other
city without some sort of agreement, do you?
>> correct. We would obtain authorization from each entity.
>> my intention when I addressed this squarely was that if
a city were to contact us or you and indicate participate in participating,
we would look at their; and try to figure out terms of participation basically.
And I do agree that if the other entities are contributing in kind and financially
to participate, then they would too. My thinking, and somehow Pflugerville
contacted me, what I said was, and I didn't quote you, but I caught myself
para phrasing you, that if the coyotes are on the move, then when we're in
an area we were authored to be, we would try to help out. But if they were
like on a private property owners' property or in city with which we did not
have an agreement, what you all could do would be very limited.
>> correct. But we could talk to that entity or that individual
and see if they were willing to sign an agreement to allow us on the property.
And of course those coyotes don't recognize boundaries so it may very well
be to your advantage to go into some of those areas if we determine that the
animals that are causing the problems are actually traveling into those locations.
So it can be a complicated --
>> let me follow up because that is -- when I talked to marietta,
whether we really do need to have a substitute page with language that clarifies
this jurisdictional question, right now it says within Travis County taken
city of Austin. That would seem to say we have automatic authority to go in
other jurisdictions when that is not the indication. We need to have some
kind of a legal authority and some kind of a contract amendment with those
other cities. If we say unincorporated Travis County, it says that clearly
is an area where we have the jurisdiction and we have the right to do it.
And that we would need to get an appropriate amendment with those other cities
that specifically says, yes, we're going into Pflugerville and we've got their
signoff. And so marietta has come up with something that changes that to say
this agreement shall be performed only within the unincorporated areas of
Travis County and the city of Austin. Participation in this agreement by other
incorporated municipalities within Travis County will be handled by amendment
to the agreement pursuant to section 10.12. Which makes it very clear that
we have got to have these legal questions about permission to be in other
counties related to their firearms regulations and et cetera, et cetera.
>> that's okay, isn't it?
>> [inaudible].
>> that's what we're suggesting.
>> whatever agreements are necessary. Of said authority in
there so this other would just clarify that.
>> exactly.
>> we wouldn't enter those areas without permission.
>> I understand, but it doesn't say that in the contract
and that way the rewording that marietta has come up with is another substitute
page to say that exact language. I think it's actually necessary so there
is no ambiguity as to what jurisdiction we have the right to be in. That's
just another step.
>> of course, we did refer to the fact in that contract that
we would comply with all state, local laws and regulations and [inaudible]
and our policy manual specifically states we must obtain the authorization
before we go, so it is implied in that contract.
>> but we never deal with implied anything.
>> the release agreements in access is specifically already
in here already. This other just clarifies our jurisdiction.
>> so the other is, like you said, that's already in there.
>> let me just add something real quick like. That means
if I live -- since this agreement is between the city of Austin and Travis
County, let's say I live in manor, for example, and I maybe on the outer fringes
of the city and there are coyotes on my property and they are very vicious
and they got me and my family, somebody cornered in where we can't get out
of the house, stuff like that. Just describing a decision a -- describe ago
situation. Does that mean [indiscernible] or for safety reasons you could
not intervene in a private property type setting on private property?
>> we have no problems working on private property.
>> even though if it's in the city limits?
>> as long as the city has given us the authorization and
thus these -- to conduct these control activities within the city because
frequently there are ordinances in place that prohibit us from doing that.
But once you get outside the city limits, those ordinances generally don't
exist in the state of Texas.
>> all right. I understand. I just wanted to get some clarity
because there's maybe some folks out there that say well, I知 in the city
limits of Travis County. I知 on private property. And we need to get some
clarity. But if they were actually outside of any incorporated area in Travis
County, you wouldn't need any kind of permission.
>> only that individual property owner's permission.
>> individual permission. On the other hand you need both,
the city's and also the individual's. So two in one time situation.
>> correct.
>> thank you.
>> yes, sir.
>> question I get most is this. How does the technician determine
when lethal control is appropriate versus some other kind of control?
>> the individual -- the technician is going to have to go
to the site and make some determination about the threat or the problem that
the coyote has caused. I mean obviously if it's killed a pet, it would appear
to me that that's a concern to the citizens and the court and the city of
Austin, and that's one that I assume we would address. If this has recurred
repeatedly or re think that animal is likely to repeat that activity, then
we would choose to conduct lethal control operations in that area to remove
that animal. You know, if it's a threat to an individual, if an individual
feels threatened by those coyotes or by the activity, I think those are situations
where we need to conduct lethal control activities.
>> do we think the average lay person would be able to describe
one coyote differently than another?
>> no, sir. No, sir. But if we're observing coyotes in a
particular area, we're going to remove coyotes from that area. In other words,
if there are coyotes walking a city street in a particular neighborhood and
they've attacked pets, we're going to begin to remove those coyotes from that
area until that doesn't occur. And part of what will really be the problem
for the immediate time being, but will also be a remedy in the future because
it's going to instill some behavior modification in those coyotes that's going
to have a lasting effect on the population in that area.
>> my final question is do we monitor the program periodically
to determine whether or not we think we're having success?
>> yes, sir, we will. You know, I suppose the folks in the
county could say, well, you know, we make it only say you are having an impact
on coyote problems in the county we no longer see coyotes, but I think i've
tried to make it clear in the meetings i've attended that coyotes are part
of the landscape in Texas and Travis County and Austin and they are here to
stay. So we're going to continue to see those animals in the future. So I
don't think we can use that as a legitimate means of monitoring the progress
of the program. I think really what we will be taking a look at is how often
these problems occur after we begin to conduct these activities. This is a
problem that we're going to have to continue to address in the future. If
you fix your car today, you don't expect it to stay fixed for the rest of
your life. If you lower the crime rate in Travis County today, you don't find
the law -- fire the law enforcement departments. If you rid your home of invading
pests, you know you are going to have to treat the property again some day
in the future. The same applies to coyotes.
>> okay. Anything else from the court?
>> judge, I would only ask do we have a feel, and jeff, maybe
you can answer this and maybe a homeowner official here, if we do this is
this something that is satisfying other that the homeowners find accepting
with regards to what is going to be done with this situation? I知 certainly
-- I mean I defer to you, jeff, and then obviously you bring in the Texas
wildlife services. They are the people that are the professionals doing this.
I just don't want the neighbors to come back and say, well, you know, you
really didn't do anything about our problem. I mean because it was clear to
me, I still have those images of people packing in this room and I think that
most people wanted something done to them immediately and I still don't think
that the way that the service goes about this, not to say it's wrong, but
the service of the professionals, they know how to deal with this and I知
comfortable with that. But I really want the neighbors to understand that
this is -- if we do this, we're turning it over to you, and if we get a phone
call in precinct 3 office, I知 going to say you know what, I知 calling either
jeff or I知 calling the wildlife services and say here is the issue, will
you all take care of this. I just really want people to feel like what we
are going to do, they realize we're about to spend almost $50,000 by the time
we throw the city's input in along with the cash. So that's serious dollars.
Do we have a feel author that, jeff? Do we think the neighbors are like, yeah,
sign up and we're going to sit back and watch you all take care of the issue?
>> sure. I think I can speak for only those that i've talked
to directly, but the feedback I知 getting is that most of the people that
i've talked to are happy that something is happening. They -- I think they
understand that this is not a situation where if this person starts tomorrow,
then Thursday they are not going to see coyotes. They know it's something
that's going to take time. I think the thing we have to stress to them and
we're going to continue to stress to them is this is not something that wildlife
services can do on their own. We still have to have some cooperation from
residents. As we educate them on things they have to do, they have to do those
things to help mitigate the problems. Some of the things like feeding pets
outdoors, leaving pet food outside 24/7, those kinds of things are just things
that we're going to educate people on and they can help a whole lot to go
along with operations wildlife services is going to be conducting.
>> I attended a meeting along -- many others, law enforcement
up at murchison junior high two weeks ago yesterday. And there were a lot
of folks who were not present at our Commissioners court meeting, and was
it 100%, of course not because you still have folks that have issues related
to animal cruelty, methods of trapping. There are just issues. But the overwhelming
majority of the folks that were there were basically yes and can do you it
yesterday. And in fact, it even ended with people going up to maps and specifically
marking places and streets where they thought that the coyotes hung out and
where they've been spotted. And unfortunately it continues today. Anne left
just yesterday was visiting somebody on a totally different issue saying what's
going on and this woman's dog was killed yesterday in her backyard. It's awful.
It is continuing and we need to do something. Doing nothing is not an alternative
here.
>> well, I知 certainly not -- I just want everybody to understand
-- [multiple voices]
>> but you all get comfortable because we're serious about
wanting to do something and that's the reason I think that, you know, we are
probably going to take action.
>> we need to have a six-month status report how the situation
is progress. Now, is there somebody who would like to give us information
we have not heard before?
>>
>> we're very willing for any education, any professional
advice, any support. We are very much willing to help, and we appreciate so
much. Because it's no longer is a question of nuisance like deers. We are
faced with public safety here and imminent human attack. And to live in fear
is unacceptable as citizens of Austin, Texas.
>> move approval of the funding and 30,000 from the allocated
reserve, with the stipulation that we will -- we will have a six-month status
report.
>> and judge, is it all right for the alternate language
that clarifies the jurisdictional questions --
>> I thought that was the end.
>> [overlapping speakers].
>> and just a technical comment. Today on the agenda you
have to approve the interlocal with the wildlife services. The interlocal
with the city of Austin will need to come back next week. You've already discussed
everything. It was not posted correctly and there's two interlocals that y'all
will be signing. We'll bring that next week.
>> any more discussion?
>> good morning.
>> this is a little different from last week's presentation.
>> I have some new information on to share very briefly.
>> state your name.
>> my name is donna morrison, I知 a resident of northwest
terrace and I知 here to comment briefly on the draft contract with Texas wildlife
services. While the proposed work plan out lying the agreement provides a
good start at identifying services and activities to be performed by Texas
wildlife services, the plan needs to include a much greater amount of detail
regarding specific steps that will be taken by Texas wildlife services. I
ask for you to reconsider more specific language to ensure program accountability.
And it really ties in, judge, to what you were talking about in terms of how
they go about implementing the program. The language is not spelled out in
the contract. I've passed out a document that describes as an example the
coyote program implemented by the city of los angeles in 2002. La's program
includes a detailed step by step description of the actions to be taken by
wildlife specialists. I would ask that you revise the word plan in attachment
a to include several of the items detailed in this policy. I'd like to take
a brief moment to review the language that you might consider adding to the
work plan. If I could just draw your attention to pages 3 and 4 of the document
that I passed out, 3 and 4 of the la city policy. You will see steps that
i've starred on page 3, progressive deterrent program. And it actually lays
out strep a, and on page 4 step b, step c. And i'd like to just go through
very, very quickly. Strep a discusses an initial home visit to assess the
residents' property and activities and recommend modifications the resident
should take to proactively deter coyotes. Step b lays out upon receiving a
second complaint the wildlife specialist reassesses the situation, including
documentation that the resident has implemented, at theter rent methods discussed
in strep a. Step b is also further investigation to possibly identify problem
coyotes, behavior problems, tracks, step c, instances where the wildlife specialist
has determined further action that is necessary for public safety reasons
a trap may be set. However, it is important to remember that traps may also
catch non-offending coyotes, domestic dogs and cats. And other wildlife. The
alternative is to shoot the animal with a tranquilizer dart. If traps are
used, they should be live animal catch traps or other humane trapping methods
only. The current word plan does not limit it to only main trapping methods.
I urge you to revise this language. And let me -- if you look on page 4 it's
very clear in the language that when an attack or an imminent threat of an
attack on a human by a coyote has occurred it causes immediate removal of
such coyote. It pretty strong language. I would also that a coyote complaint
report be completed after each investigation. The report should include the
progressive steps taken to solve each complaint and the information should
be kept on file and compiled on a quarterly basis or whatever the court would
deem necessary. We need one wildlife specialist in our county should be able
to do this program. In closing it is important that the community knows what
to expect from the county and city. And the only way to accomplish this is
to clearly spell out the actions to be taken. I ask you to consider including
more specific language on the specific steps that will be taken by Texas wildlife
services to ensure program accountability. And it really protects yourselves
so that when people come back and ask you what's happening, what's going on,
you can actually -- there's actually a process that's laid out as to this
is what happened, but an individual case-by-case basis. The information is
compiled on whatever base you deem necessary so you can appropriately evaluate
what's going on.
>> so the big question should be what should be in the contract
as opposed to implementation steps that the technician takes? If in fact we
cover the public education program that mr. Riply outlined, we are a long
way down the road toward an appropriate management program. Let them meet
with residents, implement the program similar to what's been implemented in
other counties, and then come back to us five or six months down the road
and share the plan with us. Do you see what I知 saying? At some point we have
to turn the experts loose and say fix our problem. And it helps me to know
that you're really talking about a biologist, I guess, not just a person with
a pistol. And I guess I知 sort of -- I知 not an expert in this area, but it
does seem to me, though, that in Travis County we would want to deal with
the real and perceived problems, but we want the right person out there doing
it.
>> as a resident I would prefer to know that the wildlife
biologist is going through a set protocol in every situation, and that other
measures are thoroughly exhausted before lethal control is taken against the
coyotes. And I feel that the only way to ensure -- it's a very subjective
-- when you asked -- I think you asked him what determination would be used
to take lethal control. And I feel that it's a very subjective process, and
I知 sure the police officers have protocol that they go through. I don't know.
But I just feel that it would be better for the court, better for the community.
As are resident I would feel better if I knew for sure that the wildlife biologist
was going to go through on the first complaint this is what happens, on the
second, and then lethal control taken. And from that whole process is if there's
imminent danger or threat, immediate removal. A loophole where if there's
an imminent danger that something can be done immediately. Repeated coyotes
-- it's very subjective as to what one person considers and feels to be a
threat, I just feel that it's a better protection to go through a process.
And also I wanted to make the point about the trapping issue, that the language
in the contracts I don't believe specifically limits traps that are humane
traps. And it's important to note that you may be also trapping people's dogs
and cats. And I think the city of la even had a document that the residence
have to sign to acknowledge so they don't sue the city, that the trap may
catch their dog or their cat. And to not hold the city or the county accountable
for that. So those are the things to keep in mind.
>> we talked about humane traps before. And I don't know
that the cages that we mentioned, some other sort -- something else that would
be put on the traps, right?
>> yes, sir.
>> so instead of it being like the bear trap that we see
in the westerns, it would be --
>> I知 sure that when you mention a leg hole trap, many people
have visions of a trap with teeth in it, steel jaws. The traps that we will
be using in this area will be padded jaw traps, offset jaws. They are humane
traps. Of course --
>> the vrs first time you were here, you mentioned that the
liability issues shift to the federal government.
>> that's correct. If our folks are working outside their
area of authority, if they're in violation of state policy, laws or regulations,
then that would be our liability. Of course, we don't intend to do that. Now,
is it possible that a pet can be captured in a leg hold trap? Certainly. You
should know that up front. Before this program is over there will be a dog
caught in a leg hold trap. That will be done sooner or later.
>> what is the result of an animal being caught in a leg
hold trap?
>> there may be no damage to the animal. These are padded
jaw traps and we will release the animal. We will be checking these traps
on a daily basis. But understand also that within the city there's a leash
law in effect, is that correct? Those animals should not be there. Outside
the city limits a person doesn't have the right to law their animals to straw
on to other properties -- stray on to other properties. It's been our experience
when legal issues came up a pet on somebody's private -- concerning a pet
on somebody's private property outside the city limits, that it ended up being
the responsibility of the individual pet owner that allowed that animal to
venture into areas where it shouldn't be. So if anybody has any questions
about specifics of this program, what we will do or what we won't do, I want
to make it very clear up front so we all know what we're getting into. She
mentioned the need to know exactly what methods. All that will be outlined.
We're going to sign an agreement for each individual property in the city
that we work on. We will specify the methods that we use in that agreement.
We'll do the same on private property.
>> do you have like a form that you have used in the past?
>> yes, sir.
>> make that available to us and maybe we can share it with
those interested.
>> okay. And I believe i've given a copy of that to some
of the officials that I met with already.
>> he makes good points. I guess my concern is rather than
putting the specifics into a contract, we basically use them as implementation
steps and see how this unfolds for the first six months. There are a whole
lot of things that residents can do to help alter the behavior of coyotes.
>> yes, sir, there are.
>> and you said it yourself that without the full cooperation
and support of residents, we can't make the management program work anyway.
It would be effective a whole lot faster if we have residents helping the
technician carry out his duties and responsibilities. But if you send that
sample contract with us, maybe I can give mr. Ripley a copy. Maybe give ms.
Morested a copy of that. Anything else today? This is new territory, y'all,
so in six months we'll see out well we do. All in favor? That passes by unanimous
vote. Thank you. [ applause ]
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 3:14 PM