Critical Incident Review Report

Transcription

1 Critical Incident Review Report Category of Incident: Dangerous Wildlife Date of Incident: Sept 18, 2014 Report Number: Overview On September 18, 2014, a cougar was within a few metres of the entrance and exit doors at the South Health Campus in Calgary. Fish and Wildlife Officers were called to respond and euthanized the cougar out of concern for public safety. To ensure proper procedures and protocols were followed, Minister Denis ordered a review into the incident. The review found that euthanizing the cougar was the most appropriate response to ensure public safety, particularly as it was in an urban area. Cougars are large predators whose speed and agility can make them difficult to contain and/or locate after being hit with a tranquilizer dart. In incidents of cougars entering urban areas, officers refer to Alberta's cougar response matrix, which is a result of collaboration between Fish and Wildlife Officers and problem wildlife specialists. According to the matrix, euthanizing the cougar was an option because the animal failed to avoid humans or human-frequented locations and its presence was a public safety risk. The review found this approach is consistent with that of other jurisdictions. With the province's population growing and moving into areas that were once wildlife habitat, incidents such as this are expected to continue, where large, predatory animals enter into urban areas and sometimes very close to people. For these reasons, euthanizing these animals will likely continue in the interests of public safety and other considerations such as the health of the animal and relocation options. It remains paramount that the proper tactics and tools are used for the safety and well-being of all concerned, for both people and animals. Accordingly, it is also recommended that this incident be used as a case study for officer training purposes. Critical Incident Review Report Page 1

2 Critical Incident Review Report Category of Incident: Dangerous Wildlife Date of Incident: Sept 18, 2014 Report Number: Incident Details At 0735hrs on September 18, 2014 the Provincial Radio Control Center (PRCC) received a call from the Calgary Police Service (CPS) reporting that a cougar had been observed in a stairwell at a construction site on Market Street near the South Health Campus in Calgary. At 0738hrs, the PRCC received another report that a cougar was spotted at the South Health Campus. The PRCC received two additional calls regarding cougars, all of which led CPS to assume there were two cougars in the area. The Calgary Police Service received numerous 911 calls reporting cougar sightings. In accordance with established call-back protocols, the PRCC contacted the nearest Fish and Wildlife Officer on duty, who was in the Oyen area. That officer contacted another officer in Strathmore who was to start their shift at 0800hrs. There were no officers on shift in Calgary at the time, but there were two on call for that area, and they were called in to respond. An officer from Strathmore was also dispatched to assist. It was approximately 0930hrs when the first Fish and Wildlife Officer arrived after picking up their patrol unit from a Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch warehouse facility. CPS already had a number of officers at that location watching the cougar near the entrance to the facility. The Calgary Police Service advised that a second team had secured the construction site where another cougar was believed to be in a stairwell. The area surrounding the South Health Campus had been cleared of people and the perimeter secured to restrict public access (Fig 1). Two parks conservation officers were on scene at the request of CPS to assist with containing the cougar. The Calgary Fire Department was present with two ladder trucks positioned to observe the animal. The CPS helicopter was dispatched to observe the area from above. In cooperation with CPS patrol and the CPS tactical team, Fish and Wildlife Officers prepared a plan to deal with the cougar. Branch officers requested that security personnel from the health facility clear the public from windows on the first and second floors to ensure their safety. All floors above were occupied and officers were aware that a number of people were watching the situation develop and using various electronic devices to capture the event on video. Critical Incident Review Report Page 2

3 Strip Mall Photo 17 New building construction Photo 15 Hotel construction Photo 14 Cougar location Photos 1-10 Fire Hall Photo 18 New Construction area Photos Indicates roads blocked by CPS Fig 1 See Appendix 1 for site photos. Source: Google Maps. Fish and Wildlife Officers initial plan was to immobilize the cougar using tranquilizing equipment. Police vehicles were parked to form a funnel to channel the cougar to the south of the building and away from the populated residential area if it ran. The CPS tactical team was positioned on fire department ladder trucks for backup if required. The cougar was concealed when officers approached. Officer 'A' had loaded a tranquilizer rifle with a dart containing Telazol and Rompun. Officer 'B' was armed with a shotgun with 1¼ ounce slugs, while Officer 'C' carried a.17 HMR that fires a light, frangible bullet that is often used in urban environments to ensure public safety. Officers approached to within five feet of the cougar before they could see it in the tall grass. Officer 'A' took aim and pulled the trigger in an attempt to dart the animal. The rifle did not discharge because the safety was engaged. Officer 'C' believed the tranquilizer rifle had malfunctioned, and as the cougar got up to leave cover, Officer 'C' placed a shot from the.17 HMR to the back of the cougar s head. The shot knocked the animal down but failed to kill it. Officer 'C' transitioned to his duty pistol and shot the cougar once in the head. Officer 'B' then administered a killing shot with his shotgun. The incident was captured on video from the third floor of the South Health Campus and posted on YouTube and CBC.ca/news (links below). It is important to note that the view from above does not represent what Fish and Wildlife Officers saw from their situation on the ground. When officers first approached the area they weren t certain the cougar was still there because it was concealed in the tall grass. The incident generated significant media attention and the graphic nature of the video prompted an emotional response from some members of the public. Reactions ranged from harshly critical to fully supportive of the officers actions. Critical Incident Review Report Page 3

4 3. Background Information Cougar Response Matrix in Alberta The Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch employs a standard response protocol for dealing with large carnivores such as cougars (Appendix 2: Cougar Response Matrix in Alberta). Cougar Management in Alberta: Environment and Sustainable Resource Development establishes hunting seasons for cougar in order to maintain viable populations, provide hunting opportunities, mitigate conflicts with people and livestock and manage predation on wild ungulates (Appendix 3: Management Plan for Cougars in Alberta). Fish and wildlife officers respond to a number of cougar-related complaints each year (Fig 2). Please note that numbers for 2014/2015 do not reflect an entire year. represent a partial year / / / / / /2015 Fig 2 Cougar Occurrences Human Injury category includes one in 2005/2006, two in 2011/2012 and three in 2014/2015 Alberta has a robust cougar population, evidenced by government personnel, professional wildlife managers and members of the public who are detecting cougars in areas where they have not been seen in decades. Cougars are adaptable and tend to give birth to many young. With the rise in deer and small mammal populations in Alberta, predator populations, including cougars, wolves, coyotes and black bears, are healthy. Cougar hunting seasons begin on November 1 st each year for residents of Alberta, and December 1 st for non-residents. The season remains open until the last day of February or when the Cougar Management Area (CMA) quota is reached. Each of the 36 CMAs has a specific harvest target. A person who is the owner or occupant of privately owned land may at any time of the year hunt, but not trap, cougar on subject lands without a licence. Under that authority Critical Incident Review Report Page 4

5 the animal must be registered within one week of the kill (Appendix 4: Cougar Hunting in Alberta, or- mywildalberta.com/hunting/gamespecies/cougarhuntingalberta/documents/cougarhuntinginalberta-oct2013.pdf). Last year a total of 237 cougars were recorded killed in Alberta (Appendix 5: The 2013 Cougar Mortality in Alberta Report). The known annual mortality of cougars has steadily increased since 1971 (Fig 3) Native Hunting Nonresident Hunting Resident Hunting Self Defense Road/Train Kill 150 Problem Wildlife Natural Landowner Other Illegal Found Dead Accidental Trap Fig 3 Annual Cougar Mortality in Alberta from 1971 to Present Fish and Wildlife Officers are required to euthanize wildlife in the course of their regular duties. Injured wildlife, nuisance or problem animals and wildlife that pose a danger may compel an officer to kill an animal in the public interest. Seventy one per cent of all animals euthanized were injured wildlife or road injured wildlife. (Table 1). Species 2009/ / / / / /15 Total Ungulates Black Bear Grizzly Bear Cougar Wolf Coyote Other Total Table 1 Critical Incident Review Report Page 5

6 Protocols for Responding to Dangerous Wildlife in Other Jurisdictions During this review, four jurisdictions provided information about their protocols specific to the control of cougars in urban settings. Saskatchewan Saskatchewan is experiencing an increase in cougar occurrences. Cougars in urban environments remain rare in Saskatchewan; however, the last incident of a cougar in an urban area of Saskatoon resulted in the animal being euthanized. Saskatchewan has no documented protocol to respond to cougars in urban areas. British Columbia Cougar complaints in British Columbia are first assessed by an operator at a provincial call centre. Using a flow chart to determine next steps, the operator may direct the call to a conservation officer for a response or an additional risk assessment. An officer will euthanize a cougar if it attacks pets, livestock, is aggressive towards people or if it is situated in a confined area. Although every situation is different, a cougar that shows signs of habituation to people or places (e.g. buildings) may be assessed as an elevated risk level warranting a lethal response. If a situation is assessed as low risk (natural behaviour), officers may take no action and communicate that message to the public. It is standard operating procedure to use hounds to tree a cougar before making any attempts to tranquilize it. In most situations, officers are required to leash dogs to track down and recover an immobilized cougar. British Columbia authorities do not recommend tranquilizing a free-ranging cougar without dogs. British Columbia will not relocate problem cougars. Arizona All cougars captured in the State of Arizona are euthanized. Officers shoot free-ranging cougars if there is a possibility of them escaping a containment area. They may choose to tranquilize an animal (and euthanize it later) if escape from a containment area is unlikely and the situation is in public view. Montana The State of Montana has had a policy since 1991 that addresses responses to cougar complaints. Any cougar discovered in an urban environment is immediately removed. When deciding on the best course of action, officers take into account a number of factors, including population density (human), behaviour of the cougar, etc. Although some animals are immobilized, in most situations cougars are shot. Officer Training and Oversight Before being considered for employment, Fish and Wildlife Officer candidates require a minimum two-year diploma in the natural sciences from a recognized institution, which includes wildlife management and problem wildlife management courses. Most officers in the Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch have a four-year applied degree in conservation law enforcement along with additional related experience prior to being hired. Fish and Wildlife Officer recruits receive approximately 40 hours training at the academy in problem wildlife control. In addition, they are required to pass a chemical immobilization course (24-hours) administered by a veterinarian affiliated with the Canadian Veterinary Association. The course includes training on how to euthanize animals in Critical Incident Review Report Page 6

7 accordance with established animal care guidelines. Officers must pass an eight-hour recertification course every three years. All Fish and Wildlife Officers are required to pass an 80-hour firearms course for pistol, rifle and shotgun and recertify annually at a 20-hour recertification session. The Alberta Peace Officer Program, administered by Justice and Solicitor General, regulates the law enforcement element of the Branch s program while the internal command structure ensures oversight of all operations, including problem wildlife control. The Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch operates in four regions across the province. Each region has a problem wildlife specialist who is available for consultation and to assist in responding to serious incidents involving problem wildlife. The Branch also has several bear response team leaders that specialize in responding to grizzly bear occurrences and serious black bear incidents. All officers involved in the Calgary cougar incident were up to date with their training and certifications. 4. Incident Findings Using the Cougar Response Matrix in Alberta, the cougar in the Calgary case fit into the Condition B category as a habituated animal, as follows: The cougar s presence and or actions create the potential for public safety or property damage. The cougar at this point has not had any actual physical contact with humans or property. When a cougar approaches humans or remains in human-frequented areas, and displays behaviours that are a cause for public safety concerns and fails to avoid humans or human frequented locations and structures. In this classification euthanizing the animal is an option. The cougar s tendency to remain in an area frequented by people and inside a construction site placed it in the Habituated classification. The area was contained and well controlled with respect to public access. Euthanizing the animal fell within policy and was done in a manner to ensure public and officer safety. All firearms were discharged in a safe manner. The good intentions of the officers to attempt to tranquilize a free-ranging cougar in an urban environment were misguided and came as a direct result of pressure, real and perceived, placed on them by the public, media and political/social factors. In such situations, officers often feel compelled to conduct a soft catch of an animal rather than euthanize it on scene in public view. This review has confirmed that in other jurisdictions, they believe the safest and most effective way to respond to a cougar in an urban setting is to euthanize the animal using a suitable firearm. The attempt to tranquilize the animal failed because the trigger safety was engaged, which prevented the rifle from firing the tranquilizer dart. The malfunction was attributed to officer error. Following the failed attempt to immobilize the cougar, a second officer made the decision to euthanize the animal to prevent it from escaping the confinement area. A necropsy conducted on the cougar indicated that the first shot taken with the.17 HMR was a well-placed head shot; however, the bullet did not have sufficient mass to penetrate the skull. The intent of a head shot is to cause trauma to the central nervous system to immediately incapacitate and kill the animal. The second shot from the.40 calibre pistol Critical Incident Review Report Page 7

8 hit the head but was ineffective due to shot placement. The third shot fired from the shotgun incapacitated the animal and killed it. The Canadian Council of Animal Care Guideline #43 (Appendix 8), describes the method for euthanizing animals with firearms. The guideline states that, a shot to the brain of an animal produces a quick and humane death; it is best attempted when the animal is immobilized by injury or physical restraint. In free ranging situations a successful shot to the brain may be difficult to achieve and may result in accidental injury to the animal. Under these conditions a shot to the heart and lung area may be more appropriate. The cougar was concealed in tall grass cover, compelling officers to engage in dangerously close proximity (photos 4-9). Although a vehicle could have been used to get closer to the animal (rather than approaching on foot), officers ruled out that option because they felt it could have prompted the cougar to flee from the containment area. A Calgary Fire Department ladder truck could have been used to gain another vantage point likely a better option if the cougar made an aggressive move towards them. Photo courtesy of CBC News. Cougar necropsy The cougar carcass was submitted to the University of Calgary for necropsy. Toxicology reports were not available at the time of writing; therefore, this is a preliminary report only (Appendix 7). The necropsy report speaks to the general health of the animal and the location and effect of the gunshots. Equipment used Officers responded to this incident using a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with slugs, a.40 calibre Glock pistol, a.17 HMR rifle and tranquilizing rifle equipment. The.17 HMR rifle should not be used for large carnivores (Appendix 9). The Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage in Alberta Manual recommends a rifle calibre of.243 or larger to be used for a cougar (Appendix 10). The Response to Cougar Conflicts Manual that forms part of the Western Conservation Law Enforcement Academy training program does not recommend shooting a cougar in the head because the shape of a cougar s skull can cause a bullet to deflect if the shot is high (Appendix 11). Cougars will move away from a location after being hit with a tranquilizing dart. The speed and agility of a cougar can make it difficult to locate the animal after being been hit with a dart. British Columbian authorities will not attempt to tranquilize a free-ranging cougar, and will only do so when treed and when trained dogs arr on site and ready to track the animal when it flees. Depending on the dosage of drug, the injection site and the cougar s physiology (presence of adrenaline), immobilizing drugs may take a few to several minutes to take effect. Suitable drug injection sites for immobilizing wildlife vary among species. The target areas for cougars are indicated in black (Fig 4). Injury to muscle or tissue caused by the injection of a drug can be significant. In the Calgary example, the situation of the cougar in tall grass would have made it extremely difficult to hit a suitable target site. Critical Incident Review Report Page 8

9 Fig 4 Suitable injection site for a cougar Chemical Immobilization of Wildlife 3 rd Edition, Canadian Association of Zoo and Wildlife Veterinarians There are a number of variables to consider when deciding to tranquilize a cougar. One is the ability to locate the animal after it has been tranquilized. In most successful cases the cougar is well confined and hounds are available to track the animal. The most important factor to consider is whether or not tranquilizing a cougar will increase the risk to public safety. Although tranquilizing an animal may be the most palatable option to some members of the public, it is not recommended because it comes with significant risks and there are many factors that could drastically change the outcome of a situation. As well as the social justification common in urban areas of the province to refrain from euthanizing cougars and other wildlife, the Fish and Wildlife Enforcement Branch also experiences significant opposition from rural residents and agricultural producers when cougars and other species of wildlife are relocated from urban environments to the countryside. Additionally, there is no biological reason for immobilizing and relocating cougars in Alberta. The population is healthy. This review finds that the attempt to immobilize the free-ranging cougar in the Calgary situation was not a viable option for the following reasons: The cougar was on the ground and free-ranging. The animal was habituated to human activity. The cougar was concealed in tall grass cover and could not be seen from ground level. Generally, cougars will attempt to escape the area after being tranquilized. Escape of the animal from that location would have been an unacceptable outcome. A residential neighbourhood was located north of the South Health Campus location and the cougar was exhibiting habituated behaviour (frequenting buildings and demonstrating a lack of fear of humans). The proximity of the cougar to the officers placed officers at significant risk. Critical Incident Review Report Page 9

10 The tall grass may have prevented proper shot placement of a tranquilizing dart. Darts often result in injury to the animal. The drug may not have had the desired effect and the cougar could have escaped. A wounded animal is a dangerous animal. If it had escaped wounded, it would have created a dangerous situation in close proximity to residential neighbourhoods. There is always potential that the dart could dislodge from the animal and be lost, thus representing another public safety risk. There was considerable discussion about the possibility of hazing the cougar away from the building; however, that option was dismissed based on the possibility of the animal entering into a more populated residential area. The Calgary Police Service helicopter was on scene and had an aerial view of the situation. It is equipped with FLIR thermal imaging equipment. Had the animal escaped the area, the helicopter could have been utilized to track the cougar; however, a priority call for the machine would have quickly removed it from the operation. It was three hours between the time Fish and Wildlife Officers received the first report of the cougar and the time it was euthanized. Fish and Wildlife Officers work irregular hours in order to provide optimum coverage. In this situation, the first officer on the scene had worked into the early morning hours the previous night. Other officers were on days off or not scheduled to start until later in the day. One officer travelled from Strathmore into Calgary to assist. All officers responded as soon as they could. Rush hour traffic contributed to the delay. With the current manpower situation in Calgary, such limitations are a reality. For more information, refer to: All Personnel Memorandum APM-O-12 - Fish and Wildlife Officer Expectations During Standby Duty (Appendix 12) All Personnel Memorandum APM-O-17 - Fish and Wildlife Officer on Call Expectations during Designated Status (Appendix 13). Some members of the public perceive that officers never intended to tranquilize the cougar because there was no trap or cage at the scene. Although the absence of a trap would have prompted some logistical issues, officers would have been able to safely transport the animal to a warehouse facility by physically restraining it and administering additional immobilizing drugs until it could have been placed into a trap. Witness Interviews and General Correspondence Four members of the public were interviewed about this incident; two who had witnessed the incident, one who called to report the cougar sighting and another who viewed videos of the event online. That witness was positioned at an upper story window at the South Health Campus where the video footage was taken (Appendix 6: witness statements). The common themes taken from the interviews, the letters received from the public and online commentaries include: Some members of the public did not perceive the cougar as a threat. Some people believe a tranquilizer should have been used. Critical Incident Review Report Page 10

11 Some members of the public belief a net could have been used to capture the cougar. Many expressed concern that in the absence of a cage or trap, officers had planned to kill the cougar rather than immobilize it. Many were upset because it took three shots fired at close range to kill the cougar. 5. Recommendations: Prepare an Operational Directive identifying appropriate firearms for individual species. In light of protocols from other jurisdictions, this report is recommending these changes to the Cougar Response Matrix of Alberta: the matrix should no longer include tranquilizing the animal as an option, and instead, the matrix should direct officers to either euthanize the animal or leave it alone depending on the circumstances. Ensure a response plan is developed prior to deployment and that all team members are familiar with their roles. Identify a lead officer to administer lethal control and ensure shots are not fired in close proximity to other officers, as was the case in this incident. Ensure officers consider alternate approaches to dangerous wildlife rather than approaching on foot. In this case, the cougar could have been approached by vehicle or accessed from a window above. Develop publicly available information on management of human/wildlife conflict. Critical Incident Review Report Page 11

12 List of Appendices 1. Photos of scene 2. Cougar Response Matrix Guidelines and Chart 3. Management Plan for Cougars in Alberta 4. Cougar Hunting in Alberta Cougar Mortality in Alberta 6. Witness Statements/Information 7. Necropsy Report 8. Canadian Council of Animal Care Guideline Recommendations on Use of the 17 HMR by Fish and Wildlife Officers Problem wildlife manual - Cougar, Lynx and Bobcat Response to Cougar Conflicts - Western Conservation Law Enforcement Academy 12. All Personnel Memorandum APM All Personnel Memorandum APM-O-17 Critical Incident Review Report Page 12