USDA Wildlife Services euthanize geese at City Beach

By Zach Hagadone Reader Staff

The city of Sandpoint issued a statement June 27 that under a migratory bird depredation permit with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services, the resident Canada geese that congregate at City Beach had been rounded up and euthanized on June 23.

“This was not an easy decision,” stated Sandpoint Mayor Shelby Rognstad. “The city of Sandpoint has been dealing with the growing resident Canada goose population at City Beach for over two decades at great expense and our management strategies have been met with little to no success.”

Rognstad added that the numbers of geese at the beach had “become a public health issue for our community and visitors, not to mention a huge deterrent for public use of City Beach. The city and its residents value wildlife. City Beach, however, is a public park, not a wildlife sanctuary. We need to prioritize public health and recreation in our busiest city park.”

The euthanization had been administratively approved by Rognstad, and followed a request from the city to USDA Wildlife Services for a roundup and relocation of the geese in the spring. According to the city, the agency recommended against relocation, citing the possibility of spreading Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in the region.

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game’s Wildlife Health Lab similarly advised against relocation in 2022. In the fall of 2022, the Sandpoint City Council approved a controlled goose hunt at City Beach, which resulted in one bird being killed. A second hunt is scheduled for the fall of 2023.

Other attempts to reduce the population of Canada geese at City Beach — which has been estimated to be around 200 animals — have included signs to discourage feeding; special equipment designed to clean the goose feces in the grass and sand; physical harassment of the birds and hiring dog handlers with trained dogs to herd the geese out of the park; and the use of deterrent decoys, flags and other methods.

“City Parks and Recreation staff has spent countless numbers of hours cleaning up the goose feces in the grass, sand, walkways and marinas,” the city stated. “In all, hundreds of thousands of dollars have been invested in these efforts.”

Meanwhile, beginning in 2016, the city reported that Sandpoint Waterkeepers found rising levels of E.coli in the proximity of the beach.

Capture and relocation of the geese took place in 2019, 2020 and 2021, with identification bands placed on the geese to track whether they would return to Sandpoint from the location they were taken south of town. Each year it was found that most of the geese came back to City Beach.

Rognstad later asked city staff to consult GeesePeace, a Virginia-based program that provides communities with goose management methods and products. According to the city, GeesePeace representatives came to Sandpoint for two days, discussing management strategies suggested by local community members. At that time, GeesePeace recommended egg oiling — a method that prevents eggs from hatching — as well as replacement and/or destruction of nests.

“Implementation of this strategy is challenging given that the geese don’t nest at City Beach or typically within Sandpoint City limits,” City Hall stated. “City staff also reached out to meat processing companies and groups to determine the viability of a harvest of the meat should euthanization be determined a necessary mitigation strategy. These efforts were not successful.”

The issue of what to do — if anything — about the Canada goose population at City Beach has generated years of controversy, with many community members outraged at what they’ve described as inhumane treatment of the birds.

Among the most vocal opponents of the city’s various goose management strategies has been area writer and longtime journalist Jane Fritz, who has testified at City Council meetings and penned numerous letters and opinion pieces in local media.

In a 2019 article published by the

Reader, Fritz wrote that, “the value system guiding Sandpoint’s future has strayed from this nature/wildlife/people interconnectedness which drew many of us here. It now primarily favors people, mostly tourists and their money.” In a 2020 piece, also published by the Reader, she wrote that the city of Sandpoint had “lost its moral compass” by pursuing lethal control methods.

In an email sent June 23 to numerous community members, including media, longtime local resident Janice Simeone wrote, “The birds fly and multiply. Killing hundreds of geese will do nothing. There is just one male and one female that is necessary for reproduction. Because these individuals find the geese offensive due to their droppings on the beach, their idea is to kill them.”

Opponents of the euthanasia strategy have long proposed non-lethal methods such as flashing beacons located in the sand and nearshore waters at the beach, as well using the strategies identified by GeesePeace. However, Rognstad stated, “The only viable solution remaining at this point is a humane roundup and euthanization performed by professional wildlife managers through the USDA Wildlife Services. USDA Wildlife Services has been our partner in non-lethal measures for years and we appreciate the support in helping the city of Sandpoint resolve this problem in the most humane way possible.”

Bouquets: GUEST SUBMISSION:

•“Kudos to The Injectors Club for providing the BBQ Fundraiser for the Senior Center. Thanks also to Super One for their help and to 7B Baggers for lending the cornhole equipment and to the Fiddlers for the music. The Injectors Club raised more than $2,300 to help out the Senior Center. As costs are increasing and more and more people are in need, this will help us so much!”

— By Loris Michael, VP, board of directors

Barbs:

• I always have to laugh when we receive letters from people (more often from the far southwestern edge of our district) claiming there’s this secretive Democratic cabal out there pulling the strings in our schools, libraries and governments, indoctrinating children and single-handedly destroying these “Idaho values” we hear so much about from our lawmakers. We haven’t seen a Democrat hold office in North Idaho since the 1990s. Before that, there hasn’t been a Democratic majority in the Statehouse since the 1960s. Let that sink in a bit. Republicans have held a supermajority over our district and our state since before JFK was assassinated. The Idaho Senate has been controlled by Republicans since 1960, currently with an 80% supermajority to Democrats’ 20%. It’s even more unbalanced in the House, where Democrats hold 11 of the total 70 total seats, representing 17%, compared to Republicans’ 83% (they’ve held this majority since the 1950s). Now that the party is eating itself from the inside out, they label anyone who doesn’t toe the line of far-right extremism as either a “RINO” or as part of some clandestine leftist cabal. This is getting really old to a lot of voters who just want our lawmakers to get to work for their districts again, not engage in histrionic rants about ideological issues that have absolutely nothing to do with Idaho or our citizens. I’m tired of Idaho breaking crazy.

‘We are Priest River’…

Dear editor, Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, would have you all believe that the “liberals are angry” about not getting their way. I am writing this to set the record straight.

I am a First and Second Amendment supporter and a mom. The woman sitting next to me at the school board meeting booing at the board for selecting Branden Durst voted for Trump both times, and has a daughter who just graduated from PRLHS. That man yelling for a recall of board members has a “let’s go Brandon” bumper sticker and has coached both of our sons in football. We are Priest River. We are social workers, laborers, business owners, mental health professionals, teachers, parents, coaches, Democrats, Republicans, independents and libertarians. Our political and religious views vary, but we all have one thing in common: We love our kids and our town. We are parents and we are pissed.

Branden Durst called us “woke.”

If this is true it is only because he woke up all the Mama Bears and Papa Bears in town, and we are ready to do some housekeeping. We have been complacent and have put too much trust in our school board.

We were sleeping but we are now awake. We are reading Idaho State Code, we are learning the laws and we are holding the board accountable. Our elected officials are not hearing our voices, so we are making ourselves heard.

We cannot sit down, we will not be quiet and we will not stop; because our children and their well being is of the utmost importance. All these Mama and Papa Bears will not stop fighting for our kids. Ditch Durst. We want Luckey.

Tatum Schiwal Jones Priest River

‘Make it make sense’…

Dear editor,

In case you’ve missed it, here is a snapshot of WBCSD happenings:

June 7: superintendent candidate forum, Susie Luckey, current Interim superintendent and Branden Durst, unqualified candidate, answer questions from the community.

Prior to the doors opening, I handed out 150 signs that supported Susie Luckey as the choice for WBCSD superintendent.

Chairman Rutledge told the crowd they can’t bring signs in. Community members told him it was a public forum and signs were allowed. He said no, “I make the rules,” and further told one community member that he would have her arrested if she came in with a sign.

The trustees chose to disregard the community support for Susie.

June 12: special board meeting, Rutledge continually defends Durst. Denies validity of a letter from Boise State University stating they would not recommend him for his superintendent endorsement. Rutledge stated they have been friends for years.

Rutledge negotiated the contract with Durst without approval of the board.

June 14: special board meeting, meeting is adjourned in nine minutes. I handed out 151 signs supporting Susie. People kept coming up asking for more. Again, the board of trustees, specifically Keith Rutledge, Susan Brown and Troy Reinbold, refused to acknowledge the community support for Susie.

Hall made a motion to approve the agenda. Rutledge ignored this motion. Brown then made a motion to strike the first agenda item (“Consideration and Approval of Rescinding the Selection of Superintendent Candidate”). Rutledge asked for a motion to second Brown’s motion.

Rutledge, Brown and Reinbold were reading off scripts. You could see this from the audience and you can also see it if you watch the meeting recording.

More than 300 signs for Susie in nine days. Three votes for Durst in that same span. Please, make it make sense.

Whitney Hutchins Priest Lake

Dear editor,

I have read recent letters and feel I should comment. Some of the letters were comments about the reaction of patrons to the defeat of the levy. I can understand their reaction, although I don’t condone it, because even though the levy failed it was the wrong decision. The passing of the levy was crucial for our schools and students. That will be proven in time. With that said, I can understand their reaction. On June 10, there was an article written by Jennifer Swindell of Idaho Education News explaining how our students are being shortchanged by misinformation. She explains how funding from the state is actually applied, confirming what our interim superintendent explained at pre-levy meetings. It’s too bad enough voters didn’t believe her.

In Idaho, especially up here, levies are necessary to keep schools going.

Then there is the issue of the board’s selection of the new superintendent to fill the vacancy, passing over the obvious selection of the one person who can help our district the most. Susie has been here for 40 years and has a wonderful record at the schools she has been principal at. Nothing but positive results, time after time after time. She was also the overwhelming choice of the patrons that the board represents.

Yes, the board represents us keeping in mind what is in the students’ best interest. Their choice has never even been a principal. Look it up. His track record doesn’t please me.

Then I find it quite interesting additional letters have come in from people that aren’t even in our district supporting our board’s choices. They don’t have a say in our district, yet they are lauding some of board members’ choices. There is something that doesn’t quite smell right here folks. Think about it.

Ernie Schoeffel Priest River

Dear editor,

It is concerning that so many in WBCSD haven’t been mature enough to know that they are no longer the majority after they lost the May 16 levy election. Even more concerning is how they have acted after their candidate for superintendent of WBCSD No. 83 was not voted into that position.

The district employees and some parents are turning out in mass for the school board meetings, telling board members, with some even demanding three board members duly elected in their precincts resign because they aren’t working “for everyone in the room.” These board members were each duly elected on their platforms of wanting change and that is what they have been implementing for the voters in their precincts that cast their ballots for that very reason.

Those same people demand more communication and transparency from these three board members, yet I never heard them when other WBCSD No. 83 boards were far less communicative or transparent than this board has been.

Let’s give classic education, along with Quantum Learning, a chance and accept the fact that the board majority has hired the superintendent they felt best to produce the change their constituents elected them to produce and move forward.

Bill O’Neil Priest River

Durst

Dear editor,

He wouldn’t tell me when, where or how it will happen; but, regional Idaho Fish and Game Director Carson Watkins revealed that Sandpoint had hired USDA Wildlife Services to round up “the honkers” at City Beach, including dozens of roughly 2-month-old goslings.

But unlike 2019, 2020 and 2021, this time corralled Canada geese are destined for “lethal removal,” not dumping into another lake south of here only to return. After four years, Wildlife Services gets to do what it does best: kill wildlife (more than a million animals in the past year nationwide). How will they kill them?

Sandpoint City Administrator Jennifer Stapleton knows, but this is her and Mayor Shelby Rognstad’s secret, I guess, because City Councilor Justin Dick did not know about this plan, nor did the media or anyone else, who, if you bother to ask, actually enjoy the geese.

I didn’t expect a death sentence for these families of 150 wild geese, but it could happen this week. It has to happen soon before the young can fly away.

It had to take months for the city to get a depredation permit from Fish and Wildlife, the other federal agency whose work is to protect migratory bird species. Perhaps the failed controlled hunt last fall was justification. Regardless, if you live within the city limits, your taxpayer dollars are subsidizing this planned heinous act. The problem is habitat. We don’t have to create a perfect home for geese. We could adapt — large boulders, flower boxes, peppermint, dogs on leash on sidewalks, Away With Geese predator mimicry — there are lots of humane alternatives to deter geese from even coming into the park.

Kill these birds, and biologists say other migratory geese will fill the void. Then what? Rename City Beach the Killing Fields?

Jane Fritz Sandpoint

‘Country smells of summer’...

Dear editor,

The fresh wet smell of a newborn calf. The dry hot smell of timothy hay in the windrow. The acrid work smell of tractor diesel. The sweat-stained bucking hay bales smell. The long evening smell of approaching rain. The sweet familiar smell of leather. The barelybeat-the-sunup passionate smell of coffee. The slow-down, sit-back-in-the-porch rocker smell of cold beer. The country summer smells that keep us whole.

Steve Johnson

Sagle