Voice of the People, Nov. 30

November 30, 2013
  • Wildlife in city
Wildlife in city (Jennifer M. Kohnke)

Wildlife in city

Coyotes in Columbus Park and cougars on Illinois farmland have been making the headlines.

While cities and suburbs were designed for people, we are increasingly learning wild animals are also adapting to our urban way of life.

Sometimes wildlife, as with coyotes, can pose challenges we need to address.

The vast majority of urban coyotes are shy, night-time hunters that help control our rabbit and rat population while staying out of everyone's way.

But sometimes one will attack a dog, or even a person.

What makes them do that?

Often we don't know the answer, though we do know that feeding wild animals in urban areas can lead them to associate humans with food, which can eventually lead to conflict.

Cougars (also known as mountain lions or pumas) have been sighted near Chicago for the last decade.

They are large, potentially dangerous animals that need an enormous amount of habitat.

They will likely never be permanent residents of cities, but we probably will see more and more of them following tiny patches of green space until they end up surrounded by roads and concrete, unable to find their way back. And then what should we do?

Even if we remove one animal from an urban space, no doubt in time another will make the same mistake, and find itself in the same predicament.

At Lincoln Park Zoo's Urban Wildlife Institute, we are working to understand how urban species behave, so that eventually we can change the way we build cities.

We'd like to make sure large species like cougars don't wander into urban areas that aren't suitable for them, and those animals that can live in cities, like coyotes, don't come into conflict with people and pets.

What can you do?

For a start, never feed wild animals. It's always a treat to watch wildlife from a safe distance, but odds are they're doing just fine finding food on their own.

We, people and animals, all live in this ecosystem called Chicago, and we all need to work together to ensure that we can coexist.

Seth Magle, director, Urban Wildlife Institute, Lincoln Park Zoo, Chicago

Early education

Tribune columnist Steve Chapman erred in choosing Head Start to illustrate the inefficacy of government-funded social programs ("Head Start and other failures," Commentary, Nov. 17).

Numerous credible, independent studies have determined that Head Start is, indeed, very effective.

Longitudinal research shows that Head Start participants are more likely to graduate high school and attend college, earn more, have better health outcomes and are less likely to be arrested or incarcerated.

In addition to laying the groundwork for academic skills, Head Start programs build lasting character skills that are foundational to school and life success.

For that reason, the supposed "fade out" that is too frequently used to discredit Head Start is being examined in new ways.

Many researchers now posit that Head Start's benefits don't actually fade out; the skills that matter just aren't measured.

We also know that Head Start has a strong economic effect. Research by James Heckman, the Nobel-prize-winning economist, has found that investment in early childhood development for disadvantaged children provides an 8 percent to 10 percent annual rate of return. Nationwide public support for early learning — especially for children in poverty — is high.

An independent poll recently found that 86 percent of voters support government funding for early learning programs for low- and middle-income families.

Supporting quality early learning programs such as Head Start isn't simply a "nice" thing to do. Elected officials and voters support early education because they know it is a proven, effective way to lift children and families out of poverty.

Diana Mendley Rauner, president, Ounce of Prevention Fund, Chicago

Lure of the gang

Communities that suffer from gang violence have two choices: allow law enforcement to use all legal means to dismantle gangs and enjoy peace and tranquillity, or hinder law-enforcement efforts when mass arrests are made and continue to live in fear.

Communities can't have it both ways.

The protests, marches and hand-wringing over the constant violence would indicate that the majority of law-abiding citizens want it to end. Then what is the problem?

There is a feeling in some quarters that law enforcement is reluctant to make mass arrests of known gang members and leaders because of possible backlash from some members of the affected communities. Wholesale arrests of young males does not sit well with many, and on the surface seems like profiling and giving up on young people.

This writer understands this feeling, having been reluctant to give up on young people during a long career in education. It was felt that with proper guidance and time, a life could be turned around.

At this point in time, a different reality has set in.