PROS AND CONS OF RELOCATING WILD ANIMALS

Relocating animals five or 10 miles outside town might not be the best solution to the problems that can occur when humans and wild animals share territory, Cape Girardeau Animal Control Officer Charles Stucker says.

In a way, the city's problems are just being transferred to those who live outside town, he said.

And whether a city animal can fend for itself in the wild depends on how long it's been used to foraging in trash cans, he said.

Dave Wissehr, a wildlife management biologist with the state Department of Conservation in Cape Girardeau, says the success of relocation depends on where the animals are placed -- "what the condition of the habitat is there, whether the habitat is full.

"...If you're just taking the animal from one neighborhood to another neighborhood, certainly there's a chance it won't work."

Raccoons, specifically, are highly adaptable, Wessehr said.

Raccoons are omnivores and very much opportunists, he said.

"They can feed off grubs they might find under logs, fruit, acorns. There's quite a food store out there."

Moving animals out of the city into the country largely is done because of public sentiment, Wessehr said. "If it were up to Mother Nature a lot of those animals would probably die. Some may die when they're released.

"It's a touchy and difficult situation."

Emphasizing that he's expressing a personal opinion, Stucker said he's not convinced relocation is the answer.

"I don't know whether we're doing good or not," he said.

"...It may come to the point when we will have to euthanize or put them in a place where they cannot get in garbage."