Proper Handling Of Trapped Nuisance Wildlife

Captain Tom Belt, Department of Fish and Game Law, Enforcement Division, Region 3 in Yountville, addressed the CNWCOA membership at the January 23rd meeting where he provided the State's official responses to the eight questions on the proper handling of trapped nuisance wildlife previously posed to the Department by our Association. Chief Greg Laret and Captain Belt obtained input from all six regional DGF offices in the preparation of the responses provided below. While the answers given may not be as precise and detailed as we might have hoped, we, who have to work under these rules, are grateful to the Deputy Director Sonke Mastrup, Greg Laret and to Tom Belt and to all of the others who helped articulate the Department's unified response.
  1. Does the California Department of Fish and Game have a statewide policy regarding the relocation of nuisance animals trapped in urban areas and on private property and is the Chief of the Wildlife Protection Division authorized to define or otherwise articulate the Department's position on this matter?

    Answer: A policy statement is not needed. The California Code of regulations, Title 14 (T14), Section 679 (f) (4) states in relevant part: "…These regulations do not authorize any person, facility or organization to accept, possess or relocate nuisance wildlife. Any healthy wildlife trapped in towns or cities or removed from under buildings or otherwise taken or trapped because of human/animal conflict shall be immediately released in the area where trapped or disposed of as directed or authorized by the department."

    This regulation essentially provides a person trapping nuisance wildlife with two options. The first is to immediately release the wildlife in the area where it was taken. The second option is to dispose of the animal as directed by the DFG. This could include euthanizating the animal or when circumstances dictate, releasing it in another appropriate location. NWCOs may euthanize nuisance nongame mammals and raccoons without obtaining DFG authorization in each case.

  2. If its true, as some say, that each of the five Regional Patrol Chiefs is allowed to define a relocation policy based on his independent interpretation of the Fish and Game Code of Regulations, will you provide us with the current relocation policy for each Fish & Game Region?

    Answer: The regulation requires a person who traps a nuisance animal to release it where taken. The regulation also allows the DFG to determine what other action is appropriate which allows flexibility in how nuisance animals are handled.

  3. Is it true that the Department currently authorizes licensed wildlife rehabilitators to relocate raccoons, skunks and opossum into the wild, but prohibits licensed vertebrate pest control operators from doing the same?

    Answer: Licensed wildlife rehabilitators are authorized through a permit or Memorandum of Understanding to possess, treat, and rehabilitate injured, orphaned or diseased wildlife. However, the same regulation that prohibits licensed pest control operators from relocating nuisance wildlife also prohibits licensed rehabilitators from relocating nuisance wildlife. Accordingly, if a raccoon, skunk, or opossum was trapped because it was a nuisance, it would be unlawful for a DFG - approved wildlife rehabilitation facility to accept ,treat and eventually release the animal.

    An exception to the above exists when the immature progeny of a nuisance wildlife parent is trapped and the property owner does not want to "immediately" release the nuisance animal. Under these circumstances, the DFG has allowed rehabilitation facilities to accept, rehabilitate and release the nuisance wildlife's progeny.

  4. Regarding Section 671.6 (2), what is the Department's understanding of the word "disease" and the phrase "potential for disease"? Do not all living organisms have a potential for some sort of disease? Answer: "Disease" can be defined as any departure from normal; however, the Department is interested in diseases which have the potential of spreading from one animal to another (contagious) and that can impact wildlife populations. All living organisms do have a potential for some sort of disease if exposed to disease agents(s); however, the Department would define the "potential for disease" as those cases in which there is a high likelihood of contagious disease present or exposure based on the totality of the situation.

  5. If its true that both urban and rural raccoons may show evidence of Raccoon Roundworm Disease (Baylisascaris procyonis) would the Department suspect any and all raccoons found in California to have the "potential for disease" and would that then be the basis for prohibiting their relocation. Or would that determination have to be made for each individual raccoon being considered as a candidate for relocation?

    Answer: Evidence suggests that in some areas of California, a high percentage of raccoons are infested with the intestinal parasite Baylisascaris procyonis. It is, therefore, assumed that the parasite is endemic in raccoon populations throughout the State. The possible presence of B. procyonis does not preclude releasing raccoons. However, as in question 5 above, if it doesn't appear healthy, don't release it. Nuisance wildlife, including raccoons, cannot be relocated but they may released in the same area where taken.

  6. Some of California's NWCOs hold valid Trapper's Licenses and wonder if possession of this license authorizes the relocation of those animals such as raccoons and bobcats caught during their respective trapping seasons?

    Answer: No, it is against the law for licensed trappers to relocate wildlife. CCR T-14 Section 465.5 (g) (1) reads: Immediate Dispatch or Release. All forbearing and nongame mammals that are legal to trap must be immediately killed or released."

  7. In those situations where NWCOs may be prohibited from relocating nuisance wildlife they are left to choose between either euthanizing the captured animal or immediately releasing it on site. What method would the Department advocate for euthanizing bobcats, skunks, raccoons and opossum trapped on residential properties? Would the NWCO be permitted to transport the nuisance animal to his place of business and euthanize it at that location even thought the act may occur several hours later?

    Answer: The DFG recommends any method of euthanasia approved of by the American Veterinary Association.

    Regarding transporting the animal to the NWCO's place of business, the animal should be euthanized within a reasonable proximity to where the animal was trapped and as soon as practical. The DFG may authorize transportation for euthanization on a case-by-case basis.

  8. NWCOs whose work entails the live trapping of California Ground Squirrels have customers requesting that the nuisance animal be taken alive, transported off their property and then released into the wild. Does the California Department of Fish and Game regulate this activity?

    Answer: This activity falls within the same regulation cited in the answer to Question 1.If the ground squirrels are being trapped because they are a nuisance, it is unlawful to relocate the ground squirrels without specific DFG authorization. The DFG does not authorize relocation of ground squirrels.


Back to the CNWCOA Home Page