Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wildlife Safety topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Los Alamos Council backs ordinance draft to ban intentional wildlife feeding, votes 6–1 to send revised ordinance back to council

5506664 · July 29, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After multi‑year review and public comment, the Los Alamos County Council directed the county manager to return a revised ordinance prohibiting intentional wildlife feeding; motion passed 6–1 with enforcement and outreach questions flagged by staff and councilors.

Los Alamos County Council members on July 20 directed county staff to implement draft changes to an ordinance that would prohibit intentional feeding of wild animals and to return a revised ordinance for consideration after additional outreach and legal refinements.

The proposal stems from work that began in late 2023 and includes recommendations from wildlife biologists and comparisons with neighboring communities that already have feeding restrictions. Police and wildlife officials said feeding can cause congregation of animals in populated areas, increase disease transmission and alter animal behavior.

Police Chief Dino Scambellone and staff summarized three years of animal‑versus‑vehicle statistics and noted enforcement questions. Scambellone said collision reports peaked in 2024 and that through the first half of 2025 numbers were lower so far, but rut season may raise counts later. He told council that Ruidoso’s post‑ordinance data showed “no measurable difference” in collisions but reported improved herd health according to local staff there.

Public comment split perspectives. Some residents urged the council to act for public safety and wildlife health; others said routine gardening, lawns and bird feeders make enforcement impractical and argued the ordinance would criminalize ordinary property maintenance. “This doesn’t make a lot of sense,” one resident said, arguing that typical landscaping also attracts deer.

Council action and enforcement concerns

Councilor Reiting moved that the county manager implement the draft ordinance changes and return a revised ordinance prohibiting feeding of wildlife; Council seconded the motion and the measure passed on a 6–1 roll call (Councilor Reegor opposed). Councilors and staff emphasized an implementation approach that includes an initial period of warnings and public education rather than immediate criminal enforcement. Staff said state law addressing wildlife feeding remains enforceable by New Mexico Department of Game and Fish; the county ordinance would add a local enforcement tool for county authorities.

Why it matters

Supporters cited animal health and public safety — especially the risk of attracting bears and increasing vehicle collisions — while opponents argued ordinary homeowner activities could be swept up by enforcement. Council members asked staff to refine definitions in the ordinance to distinguish casual gardening from intentional feeding and to outline enforcement resources, expected complaint volumes and outreach plans.

What’s next

Staff will return a revised ordinance that clarifies definitions, notes enforcement approach and describes public outreach and warning procedures before civil or criminal penalties would be applied. Council indicated staff should include guidance about exemptions and how Game and Fish and the county will coordinate enforcement and complaint response.