1. Call to Order and Roll Call
Present Commissioners: AnneMarie Fortier, Philip Gerrie, Pam Hemphill, Sally Stephens, Shari O’Neill, Susanna Russo, John Denny – SFPD
Absent Commissioners: Ryan Young, Lisa Wayne – Rec & Park
2. General Public Comment
James Yorck – Feb 4th article in the Chronicle titled, “Number one killer of birds is outdoor cats”. Article states that recent estimates of birds killed yearly by cats in the US up to 3.7 billion. Earlier estimates put the number killed at around 1 billion. More birds are killed by cats than by any other single source. Other sources of bird deaths, from Mother Jones Magazine, are from birds flying into buildings, power lines, and wind turbines and from pesticides. Combining these other factors together, deaths are estimated at 1.3 billion compared 3.7 billion attributed to cats. The article further states that unknown/feral cats are responsible for 70% of bird deaths. SF policy does little to address the toll of feral cats on wildlife. It may seem humane to feed large feral cat populations but it is a death warrant for the birds and other wildlife. I have outdoor cats. Our dogs and cats are ecological disasters on some level. I felt this was important to say.
Public Comment closed
3. Approval of Drafty minutes from the Jan 10th, 2013 Meeting
Comr. Russo – Section 5 A the word “ picking” should be removed from Comr. Hemphill’s opening remarks.
Public Comment
Lurilla Harris – Next to last paragraph, “indentify” should be “identify”.
Public Comment closed
Minutes approved unanimously with the two corrections noted.
4. Chairperson’s report and opening remarks
No report from the Chair
5. New Business
A) Discussion only about the importance of microchipping pets. Mary Bellero will tell the story of her dog that went missing for seven years and was united after a vet scanned the dog’s microchip.
Mary Bellero - I was lucky the vet scanned my dog because it was not mandatory that a vet do so. It is done at ACC but not by a private vet. The microchip company told me they have a 98% recovery rate. They are confident this is a procedure that works. I understand that dogs at ACC are microchipped but are not microchipped if the come in as lost dogs. It would be cost effective to have all dogs microchipped then lost dogs could be returned to their owner the same day rather than being taken to ACC. I understand that microchips are sold to the City for as little as $5.25. That would be affordable to everyone in SF. It would save money for the City by not having to house lost pets. It would also save the dog’s life by not having the dog euthanized.
Comr. Stephens – How did your dog get out and what happened?
Mary Bellero – My housekeeper was supposed to watch the dog but didn’t. It wasn’t clear just what happened.
Comr. Stephens – Was the dog brought in with a person?
Mary Bellero – A person brought the dog in because they had found it. Another concern is that dogs are supposed to be registered and licensed with the City. In some cities dogs are registered, licensed, and microchipped for one fee. It concerns me that if all dogs were microchipped there wouldn’t be any discrepancy of who the dog belongs.
Comr. Hemphill – I had a feral in by backyard. After about two years, I trapped and had him neutered and also microchipped for $25 at ACC. He disappeared soon after. He used to wander the neighborhood. I learned they do not scan dead animals, which is a problem, because lost animals can become roadkill.
Mary Bellero – All animals should be microchipped and scanned.
Comr. Hemphill - Is microchipping painful? What is the process?
Comr. O’Neill – It is quite simple. They don’t need to be anesthetized. I’ve chipped my own cats at home. We’ll also do it when we’re spaying or neutering a puppy or kitten and they are asleep. It’s a sub-cutaneous injection in the shoulder area so we know where to scan. It’s the same technique as a vaccine injection with a large gauge needle. My hospital charges around $50 for doing it. There are low-cost clinics. The SFVMA sponsors a low-cost rabies clinic. They do chipping in the same location and they also do licensing. A vet volunteers his/her time there. It could be a one-stop shopping to do all three.
Mary Bellero – When I got my dog, named Little Girl, back, I asked the microchip company how much it would cost. They said at ACC it should only cost $5.
Comr. O’Neill – That is the cost of the actual implant but that doesn’t include the cost of having it done.
Mary Bellero – What happens when animals come into SF from outside the area and they are not chipped?
Comr. O’Neill – We chip all animals that are being adopted. That includes, dogs, cats, and birds. At my clinic, we have a scanner. A number comes up. Not a name. Different microchip companies have different numbering systems. There is an on-line look up to find which company has the database. The problem is the number corresponds to my hospital. We send the customer home with the registration info then they don’t register. I try tracking the person down but am sometimes unsuccessful. Microchipping is a great idea but the client needs to register under their name and to update it when they move. They also now provide other services, for a fee, such as alerting neighbors if an animal is missing. Just registering and updating is free. It isn’t as easy as just scanning the chip and your name comes up. Some people think it is like GPS. A person needs to get the number, find the company, and hopefully, the information goes somewhere.
Mary Ballero – People need to update their information.
Comr. O’Neill – I understand all animals coming into the shelter are scanned and all animals leaving the shelter are chipped.
Comr. Stephens – Talked with Rebecca Katz today. She said animals adopted out of the shelter are chipped. Animals coming in with a tag and their owner picks them up are not necessarily chipped but ACC does recommend that they do so. ACC has license registration events and they encourage getting animals chipped there as well. There are a lot of companies that sell the chips and not all scanners will read every company’s numbers.
Comr. O’Neill – Some animals have two chips. Animals that travel out of the country need a chip with a special frequency. There are some kinks in the system but by and large it works.
Mary Ballero – Your point is well taken. It is important to update the chips information.
Comr. Fortier – There is a small fee from ACC for chipping but then there is an additional fee when registering on line from the company. It seems to me the word is out that chipping is advisable from both the public and private sector. What else can be done?
Comr. Stephens – A lot of companies do charge to register. A non-profit, called Found Animals, registers without charging no matter what company makes the chip.
They will call, text, and email for four days or longer to try and reach the owner. National Microchip month is June of this year. We might ask the Supervisors to put info in their newsletters about that. Your story about your dog being gone for seven years could be a good story for the article.
Comr. Hemphill – How much do the scanners cost? Are they hand-held?
Comr. O’Neill – They are a little pricey. We have an older one and a new one at our hospital. We use both as one may not pick it up.
Comr. Stephens – Speaking with Rebecca today, she also said the officers have the scanners in the trucks with them. If they can get a phone number they’ll just take the animal straight home and not to the shelter.
Mary Ballero – There should be some way t make it lucrative for vets to scan all animals.
Comr. Fortier – Can we have more incentives? It seems like it is lucrative for vets. Beyond encouraging people, not sure what else we can do.
Mary Ballero– The red flag for her dog was that it went to the vet and tags were off. If an animal comes to a vet without tags, they should automatically scan it.
Public Comment
Lurilla Harris – Cats need to be microchipped as well. My friend died recently. I received a call from the SPCA about one of her cats that had gotten lost. My friend had listed me as a secondary and now I have another cat. I suggest you write a letter to ACC to have free or low-cost clinics in the microchip month of June and advertise it widely. ACC should also have free or low-cost clinics periodically as well. One more thing, you have no budget. Why aren’t you yelling for a small amount to pay for copies, etc?
Public comment closed.
Comr. Stephens – This was just a discussion item to bring awareness about the benefits of microchipping.
6. Old Business
A) Discussion and possible action to send a letter to the Board requesting enforcement of existing SF laws that prohibit feeding wildlife in parks, sidewalks, and streets.
Comr. Hemphill – We discussed wildlife feeding last month. I’ve prepared a letter to send to the Supervisors requesting enforcement of existing laws. I’ll read the draft.
“ We are writing to advise you to enforce the existing SF laws regarding the feeding of wildlife. Both the Park and Police Code have sections pertaining to wildlife feeding. People in SF commonly feed pigeons and seagulls junk food. In a few places signs are posted but they are ignored….In our parks people feed ducks, geese, raccoons, squirrels, ravens, and coyotes…. Feeding wildlife creates many problems including population imbalance, attracting rats, and wildlife habituating to humans….People feed with good intentions believing they are helping the animals to survive and are establishing are close relationship with them. Current laws should be enforced with fines. Signs to not feed should include the amount of the fine.
Comr. Fortier – The word “junk food” is misleading. Any human food, to wildlife, is junk food.
Comr. Stephens – The Supervisors do not enforce anything. Why are you sending it to them and what do you want them to do?
Comr. Hemphill – They could request enforcement. Merchants complain about feeding. It could be a project for a Supervisor to take on. They can urge a policy of enforcement.
Comr. Stephens – Who do you think will do the enforcement?
Comr. Hemphill – The Park Police?
Comr. Stephens – Than why not just send it to the Park’s department?
Comr. Hemphill -Because it is also happening in the City where the police do, sometimes, enforce it.
Comr. Stephens– The expert that came last month said these laws are not enforceable. Quote, “We don’t have the resources to hire officers to patrol for these offenses.”… “A public education campaign would be most effective. Prohibitions are hard to enforce. Will courts prosecute? I don’t think so.” The only ones that would realistically enforce it would be the Park Patrol. Talking with the Park makes sense. I don’t think telling the Supervisors to tell ACC to enforce these laws would work. ACC does not have the people to do it.
Comr. Hemphill – It is a city-wide problem so it is a Supervisor issue. We do ultimately need better written laws. However it would be easy to go to common feeding areas for just a few minutes and write tickets. That would change things. It is easy to witness. It would not take the Park Police a lot of time. Some enforcement would make a huge difference.
Comr. Stephens – Most people reading this would assume that this is an ACC enforcement issue.
Comr. Hemphill – It doesn’t say that.
Comr. Stephens – Yes but most people will assume that. Supervisors will take this to mean that this is something else for ACC to do.
Comr. Hemphill – The Park Code and Police Code make it clear who enforces it.
Comr. Stephens – Any law enforcement personal can enforce…
Comr. Denny – Any law enforcement personal can enforce and cite from any local health code, any municipal code, safety code, police code, penal code etc.
Comr. Hemphill – Officers are walking on the streets. They could easily cite feeders.
Comr. Stephens – Officers on the street are looking for human crimes. There may be resistance to street cops going after….it’s a perception. I’m not convinced that increased enforcement will make much difference. I’m all for education. I’m concerned that any enforcement will be expected from ACC. They don’t have the staff to do it.
Comr. Hemphill – Are you concerned that they might have to enforce other laws?
Comr. Stephens – No. Everything gets put on ACC. When the dog walker permit was passed it was put on ACC to implement. They are doing it but it is taking time away from other things. Because it is an animal issue, it is assumed that ACC should do it.
Comr. Hemphill – Maybe the letter needs to be clearer. I am not directing this at ACC in any way.
Comr. Fortier – My understanding of this letter was to present it to the Board in conjunction with additional public education. This letter could be also sent around to the Captains of Police Stations as an educational tool for enforcement.
Comr. Hemphill – It is shocking to see animals out in the daytime looking for food. We are causing the animals to become pests. ACC does not have the resources. We could do a coyote-type flyer in the utility bill but not sure who would actually do that.
Comr. Stephens – Usually a non-profit steps in a pays for it.
Comr. O’Neill – Could we not rephrase the letter to make people aware it is on the books? Make it more informational than asking for something specific?
Comr. Hemphill – Without asking for some enforcement, at least from the Park Police, it won’t make any difference at all.
Comr. Fortier – Could we not just write a letter to the Park Police?
Comr. Hemphill -It’s a big problem that is hard to see in that the feeding is ongoing throughout the day.
Comr. Gerrie – Last month this agenda had both our names on it. This month we split on what we wanted to do. I had wanted to add a line in the agenda to consider asking the Supervisors to rewrite the existing laws to be more forceful and clear. As it is now I don’t see this going anyplace. The letter itself is not clear on what it is saying. The Morris Township NJ ban on feeding wildlife was passed in 2004. I looked for the Minutes on this item but couldn’t find them as it was too far back so I wrote them to ask if this ordinance had been successful in minimizing or stopping feeding. I wrote them, “We were contemplating more do-not-feed signs and education. We do have fines for feeding wildlife but the ordinance is brief, vague, and not enforced. We are also split on whether to include private as well as public land.” They wrote back and said their ordinance has cut down substantially on the complaints. This is not conjecture but 9 years of experience versus our ideas with unknown effect. They said that once people receive a violation notice with a fine and a court appearance they cease. They tried the signage and education route through newspapers, newsletters, articles, etc. They did not really affect their behavior. Once it got around that a neighbor was fined and had to go to court they saw more compliance. It wasn’t the amount of the fine that was a deterrent but the inconvenience of having to appear in court and sit around for hours waiting for the judge to call. This stronger wildlife feeding ban was effective, in my view. Their ordinance exempted backyard bird feeders. It is not the Supervisors jobs to be enforcers.
Comr. Fortier – In NJ was it similar wildlife feeding that was the problem we experience here?
Comr. Gerrie – Yes. In the ordinance it states that enforcement was given to health dept. personnel, animal control officers, and police officers.
Comr. Denny – What is the population of this city? A city of 10,000 people feeding wildlife is much different than people feeding at 16th & Mission.
James Yorck – 300 to 400,000 people. [shouted from the audience]
Comr. Denny – Over how big an area. I’m trying to compare apples to apples.
Comr. Gerrie – Another thing I liked was it didn’t divide public and private land. It just said “within city limits” Last month in the public comment people were saying it was a bigger problem in people’s back yards than in parks. The current law is weak saying to not feed harmful substances to animals.
Comr. Hemphill -We don’t disagree that the laws are weak. We can’t even get enforcement of these laws. The chance of getting better laws are not very high. Kelli was from Marin which has a lot more deer and raccoons. A lot more back yard feeding goes on there than here. Dictating what people can do in their back yards is something our present laws do not address and not one I want to get into.
Comr. Gerrie – No one is going to know who is feeding unless there is a complaint by a neighbor.
Comr. Hemphill – I’m discouraged by how people seem about this. I think writing a letter of our concern that this is a problem that is costing the City money. My thought was to let them know there are laws and they are not enforced.
Comr. Gerrie – My point was to add “or to consider rewriting existing laws.” I wanted to include both. That is not in the agenda so we can’t act on that.
Comr. Hemphill – We could do that. Someone would have to spearhead but it is a hard first step.
Comr. Gerrie – That is where we disagree, I don’t think it is a hard first step. There are no money interests involved to oppose it. There are so many reasons to not feed wildlife and no good reasons to feed wildlife.
Comr. Hemphill - I’m not opposed to change or amend laws. It wasn’t on the agenda but it could be added to the letter.
Comr. Stephens – The concern that people will have is being told what they cannot do on their private property. Exempting bird feeders is good. We should make it super clear from the beginning that the police will not come into someone’s backyard and give a citation for having a hummingbird feeder. That would make us appear like crazy people. Citing people for something they do in their backyards is taking it too far. I’m concerned about adding that dimension to the laws.
Comr. Gerrie – What we do is advise the Supervisors. When we recommended for a rescue zoo, we sent the Supervisors our recommendations. What was finally passed looked nothing like what we had sent them. In the NJ law the person is given a warning first. If the behavior is not corrected or stopped within a certain time period than that person can then be cited.
Comr. Stephens – My concern is what we recommend goes on record and it makes us look like we have gone too far. They City can say whatever it wants on public and park land but it gets much more problematic when it is on private land.
Comr. Russo – This is looking like a more complicated issue than it first appeared. Enforcement and education are components of protecting wildlife. We also need to suggest some changes in the law. My initial and primary discomfort with this letter has to do with advising the Board to enforce laws. They do and can craft laws but it is not their role to enforce. I would like to come back to this next month and look at more options for enforcement including putting more teeth into the ordinance as written.
Comr. Hemphill – Does anyone want to volunteer to take on changing the laws? And volunteer as well at working on the education. If we are not willing to spread this is a wider sense we are doing nothing. Wildlife is not a priority in SF. We could direct the letter to the Park Police and Cc the Supervisors. We’ve written other departments before.
Comr. Russo – As to maybe changing the ordinance, it says in the existing ordinance, ”in any park” change that to “in any public place”. That would include sidewalks but not someone’s backyard.
Comr. Hemphill – That is sec. 5.07 of the Park Code only pertains to the parks.
Comr. Stephens – The Police Code mentions on any sidewalk, street or highway.
Comr. Hemphill – Originally parks were included but were removed in 2007 and changed to just being unlawful to feed the Red Masked Parakeet.
Comr. Denny – Worried that nothing will get done from these discussions. If ducks being fed at Stow Lake is a problem, the Park Police should be called. Sometimes a citizen has more power to get things done. If there is a huge sign to not feed the pigeons and a cop walks by it’s a no-brainer to cite the feeder. If there are hot spots for feeding in the City, accountability is needed to answer what is being done. Emailing or calling the Captain at Mission Station you will get a response and action will be taken.
Comr. Hemphill – I saw someone in Osage Alley at 24th and Mission feeding seagulls as well as pigeons.
Comr. Denny – The beat officer is concerned about robberies, carjackings, homicides, and drug dealing. They are not there to enforce someone feeding the birds. If there is a hot spot a call is needed to whomever is in charge of that jurisdiction. It is easier to address the hotspot areas. You can also call a Supervisor’s aide and get action quickest from that district’s Supervisor. Calling 311 also works. A 311 call will go to ACC, Park Police, or City Police.
Comr. Hemphill - One citizen complaining repeatedly can be seen as a problem. If an organization complains it is more effective.
Comr. Denny – You don’t need an organization to stop the bird feeding at hot spots. Where are the problem areas? Those need to be addressed individually.
Comr. Hemphill – All the hot spots are not new. They have been complained about previously.
Comr. Gerrie - I agree about the effectiveness of complaining. We had an incident last year of a beekeeper’s bees pooping on neighbors cars. One neighbor mobilized the whole block and they complained to their Supervisor, ACC, and the Health Dept. As president of the bee club last year, I heard from all of the Depts. wanting action. One person was able to mobilize the whole block. Government responds to complaints.
Comr. Stephens – You could call Park Patrol and identify yourself as being on this Commission and ask about problem hot spots and ask what are they going to do about it and see what they say. If there is no change we can then revisit it. There is a lot we can do with education, enforcement, and possibly changing the ordinance. The recent new wildlife signage didn’t have the $ fine on it.
Comr. O’Neill – Lets see what might work. Who do we direct it to? Do we go bottom up or top down by changing the ordinance? Do we do a public education campaign? Have there been any citations issued?
Comr. Gerrie – We tried to get an answer to that question from the Park Patrol.
Comr. Russo - We’ve identified three courses of action from Officer Denny’s suggestion to focus on the hot spots. 1. Call 311. 2. Call Rec & Park. 3. Call the local police station. We could also go out to these hot spots with a copy of the ordinance and talk to the feeders and educate them.
Comr. Hemphill – Talking to the people is not very rewarding.
Comr. Gerrie – A person Pam and I talked to at the Palace Lagoon was stunned when we told her it was against the law. She had been feeding the ducks, she said, for 30 years and no one had every told her it was illegal. When the police dept. receives a call about wildlife feeding don’t they refer it to ACC?
Comr. Denny – Yes we try.
Comr. Hemphill – I can create a letter that will list the hot spots.
Comr. Denny – You also have the Park Police and the BART Police.
Comr. Gerrie – I’d be happy to help.
Comr. Fortier - I would as well.
Public Comment
James Yorck – The letter is not well written and rambles. Should not focus on the street feeding areas but in the parks - one or two areas. Stow Lake. Keep out of people’s back yards. Start small.
Public Comment closed
Comr. Stephens – You will pursue the hot spots?
Comr. Hemphill – Yes.
7. General Public Comment
No Public Comment
8. & 9.Items to be put on the calendar for future Commission Meetings and Task allotments
Comr. Stephens – Next month ACC will present about the implementation of the professional dogwalker permits. We will have public comment for that.
Comr. Fortier – Is there a draft out there?
Comr. Stephens – The legislation was passed last year in May or June.
No Public Comment
Adjournment 7 PM
Respectfully submitted by Philip Gerrie
Commission Secretary
