advertisement

Editorial: Wildlife Good Samaritan law needs wisdom as well as compassion

On the front page of Tuesday's Daily Herald, we posed the question "Should helping an injured animal land you in jail?"

The headline referenced the story of Steve Patterson, who defied instructions from state conservation officials not to interfere and rescued two baby eagles whose nest had fallen from a tree near his home. He contacted the Flint Creek Wildlife Rehabilitation Center near Barrington, which sent people to pick up the birds.

Patterson was charged with a Class A misdemeanor, which could bring a fine of up to $2,500 and six months to a year in jail. His first trial ended in a hung jury and he faces retrial this month, although no one really thinks he'd get anywhere close to the maximum penalty.

Still, his story has prompted the introduction of a wildlife Good Samaritan bill by state Rep. Bob Pritchard of Hinckley, and a similar bill by state Sen. Julie Morrison of Deerfield. We say: It's worth talking about, but let's go slow.

There's a lot of sympathy for Patterson - thousands of signatures on petitions, urging the charges be dropped. The Flint Creek people are supporting him, too, arguing the eaglets were dehydrated and had broken wings and most likely would have died had he not intervened.

But Patterson probably isn't the poster child for the argument here - he is a wildlife photographer from LaSalle County who has had run-ins with state conservation law before, including one conviction for baiting an owl to return to a place where he could more easily photograph it.

A Good Samaritan law can make sense if properly worded and vetted to protect people who stumble upon injured animals and feel compelled to assist. As it is, most of those people are probably unaware they are breaking the law.

More and more, critters and humans are crossing paths in the suburbs - endangered birds, coyotes, foxes and even the occasional bear are all creeping back into populated areas. We need updated laws to deal with the updated situation.

None of this changes the fact that for the most part humans need to maintain a respectful distance from wildlife, both for their own safety and for the animals' well-being. In many cases, baby animals that look abandoned aren't. Conservationists say that once an animal has been rescued by a human, the chances that it can ever be returned to the wild diminish significantly (although one of the rescued eagles has been released).

And sometimes it's just the law of nature at work - the cycle of life, eat or be eaten. Animals die out there, and humans must be judicious in knowing when or how to interfere. We value groups like Flint Creek and respect the concerns of people like Patterson, but wildlife rescue isn't a simple business.

Whatever law the legislature eventually comes up with needs to walk a fine line and will require more than just compassion and good intentions.

Article Comments
Guidelines: Keep it civil and on topic; no profanity, vulgarity, slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked. If a comment violates these standards or our terms of service, click the "flag" link in the lower-right corner of the comment box. To find our more, read our FAQ.