The Mayor asked Council to bring forward Public Works Report #10.

Report from Administration re

10. Crows in the Urban Area.

1. To update Council on actions taken to-date regarding crows, and

2. To make recommendations regarding the problem of an excessive amount of crows

in the Ward of Chatham.

At the Nov 30, 1998 meeting of Council, the following motion was passed unanimously,

"That administration investigate with Police Services and the Ministry of Natural

Resources the potential of a crow cull".

Crows have roosted in the Ward of Chatham from October to March for many years. At sunrise every morning they leave the roosting area to scavenge for food, only to return to the roost at dusk. The complaint most often received from residents is the crows tearing the garbage bags apart and leaving behind a strewn mess. There are some complaints regarding the mess caused by droppings, the noise crows make, crows tearing apart grub infested lawns, and crows damaging newly planted sod.

To minimize the impact crows have in residential areas, Public Works have been

successful at moving the crows to a central roosting area away from residential areas.

The most effective way to encourage the crows to move has been using noisemakers in the early evening. Public Works have not attempted to move the main roost for fears of dispersing crows back into Chatham

Works have at their disposal several methods to deter crows. They include

suspending fishing line to interfere with bird flight, bright lights shining into the roost, crow distress tapes, and noisemakers. These methods have all been shown to be effective to varying degrees at relocating the crows.

As a result of Council’s motion, dated Nov. 30, 1998, staff undertook the following:

For the safety of residents and onlookers the timing and location of any activity was not to be made public.

Coincidentally, immediately upon finalizing these plans, due to the seasonal

temperatures increasing, the crow population left the urban area. Consequently, the preparation and plans were not acted upon.

Years ago the Town of Essex had a crow problem, but by using a number of bird

bangers were able to scare them out of the town for several years. That method worked well for Essex (approximately the same geographic size as Blenheim) but because of Chatham’s large geographic area, it will be considerably more difficult to ensure the crows do not relocate within the city. Since that time, the crows have returned to Essex and are again a problem. Essex has indicated that the problem of expelling crows recently, is easier, since two years ago all garbage is placed curb side as dry garbage, recyclable garbage or compost garbage in sealed containers.

The Essex situation highlights the need for continued vigilance in deterring crows

regardless of the current roost size. The Essex experience also points to the advantage of sealed containers for garbage and that unless deterred, the crows will return.

Airports do not have a significant problem with crows because the airport environment is not conducive to crow roosting. Crows do not like loud erratic noises (planes) and crows like numerous trees in which to roost, which are also not present at airports.

Crows prefer to roost in the vicinity of a readily available food source, which is not present at airports.

An effective crow deterrent program must:

1. deter the crows from scavenging in the urban center and

move the roosting area to a rural location

If the program moved the roosting area to a rural location but did not deter scavenging in the city, garbage bags would still get torn apart by scavenging crows and the program would fail. The only reason the crows scavenge in the city is to find food. Once the crows do not find accessible food in the city the number of them scavenging in the city will reduce. Food (garbage) can be made inaccessible to the crows by placing garbage in hard garbage containers with locking lids.

Hard sealed containers would also have another benefit to the approximately 17,000 households in the Ward of Chatham, in that it would prevent cats, dogs and squirrels from tearing apart garbage bags. Staff has contacted local retailers to determine the cost of household containers and have concluded that they range from $8.00 to $20.00.

To implement a container policy, council could choose either a stance of recommending to the public that sealed containers be used or alternatively make it mandatory by way of an appropriate bylaw. A voluntary compliance would not guarantee that all garbage be in containers and to a large degree scavenging by crows and their nuisance would continue.

Consequently, it appears prudent to create a by-law to accelerate the residents of the Ward of Chatham to acquire hard sealed containers.

To move the crows to a new roosting location requires making their stay at the current roost unpleasant. This could mean a range of tactics from using scare cartridges, bright flashing lights, crow distress tapes and in the most extreme case, shooting some crows.

Any attempt at moving the crows beyond the current roost location on the west side of Chatham does entail risk. When moving the crows the risk would be that they would not move out as a group but rather disperse back throughout Chatham or begin to roost in a more populated residential area. It would then require significant effort to again drive the crows out of the various residential areas.

Recent newspaper articles (attached) have been written which require clarification to prevent citizens from being misdirected.

shooting blanks to have residents become familiar with the sounds of shotgun

blasts". The sounds some residents will have heard would have been from Public

Works employees, at dusk, firing noisemakers to move the crows out of residential areas in normal course of dealing with the crow problem. As well it should be noted that the Mayor is the Head Of Council and that Administration takes direction from the majority of Council and not any individual Elected Representative, including the Mayor.

Municipality established a list of qualified, safety minded individuals who had

the recruitment of hunters, their training or their plans.". The recruitment of

volunteers was done solely by the Police Services staff. Municipal staff worked in

concert with the Police Services staff to develop plans. Senior Management was

updated on a regular basis as to the progress. One meeting was held with the

Mayor to update him on the status of the plan, but the Mayor had no active role in

developing the plan.

Ontario Federation of Anglers & Hunters in their correspondence of November 10,

1999, extend their full support for the Municipality’s "initiatives to deter and reduce crow numbers by holding a temporary cull within the City of Chatham."

MM Dillon ‘s Chatham office has noted the local problem with crows and has submitted a letter (attached) with several recommendations. Basically, their recommendations are to issue or insist on rigid garbage containers with lids for residential and business areas.

They also suggest that fines be imposed for none compliance.

A telephone poll conducted on CFCO in response to the question

"Would you support a crow cull in Chatham – yes or no?" confirmed 94% voted yes

6% voted no.

1. The cost of moving the crows would be captured within the existing budget for labour ($2800) and materials ($4700) for crow control. Total annual crow control budget for Chatham is $8,800. Once this problem is diminished and stabilized, the annual budget could be expected to decrease.

1. That staff be instructed to prepare an appropriate Bylaw making it mandatory for all residential and commercial garbage, in Ward of Chatham, to be placed outdoors in a hard container with a sealed lid to deter crows from scavenging.

2. That staff be directed to move the crow roosting area to rural location using

whatever means are required.

L.E. Denys, P.Eng. J. G. Pavelka, P.Eng.,

General Manager Public Works Chief Administrative Officer

(REF: R:\WORKS\CROWS

Attachments

Councillor Clarke moved, Councillor Crew seconded:

Councillor McGuigan moved, Councillor Parney seconded:

The Mayor put the Motion to divide the question.

ACTION BY

-Councillor

McGuigan commented that she is in favour of the motion to use sealed

containers but asked that the by-law contain wording to allow the residents an

appropriate amount of time to obtain these containers.

Councillor McGuigan spoke to the second motion and said that she agrees that the crow roosting area needs to be moved but is not in favour of killing the crows. The General Manager advised that the killing of crows will be used only as a last resort. Hesaid that they have successfully used scare cartridges to move them in the past to a central roosting area and intend to continue using this tactic now. Councillor McGuigan said that the second motion is worded too broadly and may include killing of the crows and indicated that she cannot support it.

The Mayor asked about the problem in Essex. The General Manager of Public Worksresponded that the crows have returned to Essex and noted that they will have to remain vigilant once the crows have been removed from the Ward of Chatham.

Councillor Weaver commented that he is in favour of both motions taking into

consideration that the killing of the crows will be used only as a last resort.

Councillor Vercouteren expressed concern about moving the roost to the rural areas and the effect of this move on the farmers. He commented that crows live for up to 50 years and have no natural predators and felt that it would be unfair to move them to the rural areas because of a lack of food sources. The General Manager felt that the crows will scout out the rural areas and be able to successfully scavenge for food.

Councillor Clarke agreed that the crow problem has to be dealt with and will be an ongoing one. He believes that the motions will address this problem.

Councillor Watson clarified that the second motion will allow Administration to

adequately deal with the crow problem and that the killing of crows will be done only as a last resort. He discussed the small budget allocated to deal with this problem and suggested that Administration consider whether or not sufficient funds have been allocated. Councillor Watson felt that the first motion was a good one but will not support the second motion.

Councillor Crew felt that using covered containers for garbage was a good one but questioned the affordability of these containers for some of the residents.

Councillor Crawford moved an amendment to the second motion, Councillor Schnabel

seconded:

Councillor Sulman questioned policing of the by-law and said that he did not want

people fined if they continued to use garbage bags. Councillor Van Gassen agreed that the problem needs to be dealt with and will have to be dealt with on a continuing basis. He referred to the practice in the rural areas years ago and said that farmers would shoot the crows to prevent them from destroying their crops and felt that shooting just a few crows now would be the quickest and cheapest

way of dealing with this problem.

The Mayor clarified with the General Manager that Administration had received direction from Council and from Mr. Thomas to proceed with a crow cull, and that it should be done in consultation with Police Services. The Mayor noted the role of Administration and the direction provided from Administration, not himself, in connection with recent articles by the Editor of the Chatham Daily News. He also clarified that the former City of Chatham did shoot to kill crows approximately 10-12 years ago in residential areas, but that the Mayor did not authorize any present shooting to take place in residential areas and that it is not the intent of Administration to do so. The Mayor felt that he hasthe allegations in the newspaper articles and asked that the matter now be laid to rest.

The Mayor put the Amendment to the second Motion.

The Mayor put the Motion as amended.

The Mayor asked that the vote be recorded.

The Clerk recorded the vote as follows:

Councillor Ascott – yes

Councillor Clarke – yes

Councillor Crawford – yes

Councillor Crew – yes

Councillor Fluker – yes

Councillor Gordon – yes

Councillor McGuigan – no

Councillor Parney – yes

Councillor Schnabel – yes

Councillor Seney – yes

Councillor Sulman – yes

Councillor Van Gassen – yes

Councillor Vercouteren – yes

Councillor Watson – no

Councillor Weaver – yes

Mayor Erickson – yes.

Totals: Yes – 14; No - 2

The Mayor put the first Motion.

Councillor Fluker clarified that Council will be reviewing the by-law prior to it being passed.