(taken from
http://www.canadageese.org)
Public Health
Those looking to justify the killing of Canada geese turn to the use of scare tactics with remarkable predictability. The strategy involves creating the illusion that Canada geese are a threat to public health. The mere assertion that a "health issue" exists has been an effective way to generate fear about the presence of Canada geese and an artificial urgency about what must be done. Interestingly, among the most outspoken on this issue are individuals who are unqualified to make health risk assessments. Park managers, rangers, hunters, outdoor columnists, wildlife managers, mayors, etc., are suspiciously too willing to offer their epidemiological assessments despite their lack of credentials. The origin of their information can usually be traced to something they were told by one of the other unqualified parties. While less common, there are cases where allegedly qualified individuals (i.e., health commissioners) render false information under political pressure from anti-goose forces.
In most cases, the health scare does not involve the geese per se, but rather, their droppings. The basis of the argument is that Canada geese must be killed because goose droppings contain human pathogens (disease-causing bacteria). As has been pointed out in the literature by Weiner, et al. (Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Aug. 1979, p. 258), and at a public presentation in Rockland County, New York (Sept. 22, 1993), by Dr. Milton Friend, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Waterfowl Infectious Disease Specialist, Canada geese are not carriers of microorganisms (pathogens) that significantly threaten public health.
In fact, in New York, the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) attempted to strengthen their campaign against geese by testing goose droppings for human pathogens. (It is interesting to note that these tests were carried out after they had already claimed that geese were a " threat." The outcome of their study was never publicized because they were unable to prove their point. They managed to confirm what was already known: Canada geese do not pose a health threat even remotely serious enough to justify their mass destruction. The Coalition has contacted the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and various state health departments on this matter and these sources have indicated that no human illnesses have been linked to the presence of Canada geese in the suburban setting. Yet, as indicated in a 1991 report from the Town of Greenwich, Conn., none of this is news:
"Examination of goose droppings showed only expected bacteria in normal concentrations (Carolyn Baisley, Director of Environmental Health and Laboratory for the Town of Greenwich, pers. comm.). To date, state pathologists know of no cases where human illness can be ascribed to goose droppings (fide The Northeastern Research Center for Wildlife Diseases, Pathology Department, University of Connecticut). Indeed, only a few diseases can be transmitted to humans from birds. Thus, it appears that the primary concern is the unsightly and unpleasant concentrations of droppings rather than a health risk."
-Management of the Canada Goose in the Town of Greenwich, Conservation Commission position paper, page 4, Greenwich, CT, February, 7, 1991.
After making the health issue the central theme of an anti-goose campaign, and after the slaughter of 251 Canada geese (including several goslings) in Clarkstown, NY, came the admission that the health scare was unfounded (NY Times, 9/9/96 article, "Goose Round-up Flopped, But Mayor is Undaunted").
