- The Washington Times - Monday, November 1, 2010

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The Friday Commentary column by Gene Harrington critical of the D.C. Council’s pending approval of the Wildlife Protection Act (“D.C. Council drafts troubling wildlife act”) represents well the confusion and misunderstanding that has surrounded this initiative since its inception.

This bill is as much a consumer protection measure as it is a reasonable set of prescriptions aimed at reining in the worst and most unethical practices in the pest-control industry. It is irresponsible as well as misleading for wildlife-control companies simply to trap and kill animals and not perform exclusion work to ensure that homes are not reinvaded by the next passing squirrel or raccoon. The devices the bill would ban are those that cause incredible pain and suffering - the body-crushing and leghold traps and snares that have no place in urban wildlife control, if anywhere. The box or cage trap is allowed, and animals caught in those traps can be killed humanely.

The Wildlife Protection Act is a reasonable set of regulations that would bring a previously uncontrolled industry in the District into the ambit of professional and ethical services to the consumer.

JOHN HADIDIAN

Director, Urban Wildlife Programs

The Humane Society of the United States

Washington

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide