Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!

Counties aren't wild about animals

Story and photos by Graham Baker

Animal rights groups pricked up their ears last fall when the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) quietly shed its responsibility to regulate ownership of wild animals, which left counties to figure out what to do with all those lions, tigers, and bears and other cagey beasts out there in rural backyards and petting zoos.

"We were never in the animal welfare business. We weren't funded for it and our officers weren't trained for it. We were in it as a public safety issue, and so we'll continue to answer calls from sheriffs' offices to lend ourhelp," said Lt. Commander L.D. Turner of TPWD's Law Enforcement Division.

Turner said TPWD's authority overwild animal regulation had beenrepealed in 1995 in order to turn the public safety issue over to the local level. That responsibility did notlapse until Sept. 1 of last year. TPWD's law enforcement division sent letters to Texas county judges inJune of 1996 suggesting that they prepare local ordinances.

Counties that want to take on the responsibility of regulating the owners of the critters have the authority to hire a qualified animal control officer or ordain the sheriff as agent-in-charge of inspecting tiger cages and capturing rogue elephants and other wild life responsibilities

But a number of counties have simply outlawed ownership of the animals altogether.

"We thought about hiring an animal control officer, but that would have been another full-time position with salary and benefits," said Guadalupe County Judge James Sagebiel.

Lindy Coats of Lampasas County has bred and raised big cats for two decades. To maintain her exhibitor's license from the U.S. Department of Agriculture,she must maintain safe and sanitary living conditions for her animals.

Instead, Guadalupe County adopted a model of Local Government Code Chapter 240, banning ownership of any lion, tiger, ocelot, cougar, leopard, cheetah, jaguar, hyena, bear, lesser panda, binturong, wolf, ape, elephant, or rhinoceros.

Harboring a critter on the list is a Class C misdemeanor which carries a fine of $200 to $2000 daily. The order can't be applied inside city limits or to exhibitors or owners licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture.

Sagebiel is already encountering resistance to the ban. A petting zoo that went out of business this summer left without entirely wrapping up its affairs, and some of the animals were taken in by a suspicious concern hidden from view in the woods in the eastern party of the county.

With the wild animal ban freshly on the books, his office and the sheriffs office would like to take inventory in the county and clean house, but they have not been able to determine what kinds of animals the group is bringing in or even why. Sagebiel fears something wild might be going on in the back woods.

Big paws of a mountain lion.

"They're real secretive and haven't wanted the sheriff's deputies on the property. They all report to a fellow they call 'Father.' That's the kind of thing that just gets your attention," Sagebiel said.

Commissioners there did make one compromise upon signing their order: a jaguar named Mariah was allowed to stay. Mariah's owner, Jim King, would not have qualified for a USDA license because he keeps the cat solely for his own enjoyment. But King had received a permit every year from TPWD, and even his neighbors supported him.

The court proceeded cautiously, however, to first inspect the jaguar's cage. Judge Sagebiel drew the short straw.

"Everyone around there I talked to seemed comfortable with him having the cat. It's a really nice cage. It's built well. He put some money and time into it," said Sagebiel.

"There's no such thing as rehabilitating one of these creatures. Once they've lost their fear of humans, they're that much more dangerous,"said Lindy Coats.

Animal rights groups believe King's cat is a rare exception. They paint a grim picture of African cats leashed to trees and bobcats left to roam the house with free access to infants and children.

There is no shortage of stories of maulings across the state. No one keeps count of the exact number, but JoAnne Jackson, director of the Waco Humane Society and member of the Texas Humane Legislation Network, has a folder thick with news accounts of attacks all over the state.

"This is not an animal rights issue or the rights of individuals to own whatever they please. This is a public safety issue," said Jackson.

Jackson had hoped to convince McLennan County commissioners to prohibit private ownership of the animals, but County Judge Jim Lewis said they weren't prepared to impose a total ban.

"We don't have any group of citizens outraged one way or another. The sheriff is already dealing with wild dogs. There's just so much involved in regulating them that we probably won't do anything unless it becomes a nuisance," Lewis said.

Jackson expects it will become a nuisance. She sees the state flooding with ill-bred and poorly kept animals.

Animal rights groups report that some people become wild animal owners without realizing how much food it takes to keep the animals healthy, such as the several chicken quarters per meal that this cat requires.

"Basically, anyone can go out and purchase one of these animals. When Parks and Wildlife (regulated wild animals), they would inspect the cages and the animal's care and feeding. When more people find out they don't need a permit, they'll go out and get themselves a big cat and tie it up out back," Jackson said.

Her Waco office recently accepted a Bengal tiger from an owner who could no longer afford to board him, although he had been "really cute, I'm sure" as a cub, Jackson said.

Zoos will not take them, and unless a qualified home or a sanctuary can be found, the animals must be destroyed.

"That's not fair to anyone. Letting just anyone own one of these animals is an injustice to the animal and a public menace," said Jackson.

Graham Baker is staff writer at COUNTY.