BOWLING GREEN — Residents were mostly critical Monday evening of a proposed ordinance that would prohibit the outdoor feeding of wild animals, except for songbirds, during a meeting officials called to solicit public comment.

“If this ordinance is passed, law-abiding people would be breaking the law to feed backyard animals,” Richard Beaverson, the first to speak before Bowling Green City Council’s Transportation and Safety Committee, read from a petition he said had garnered 114 resident signatures in opposition to the legislation. “We should never be put in the position to break the law.”

Several others who spoke after him reiterated some of his suggestions that the city’s animal-control officer be replaced, that more Deer Crossing signs be posted and more drivers obey the speed limit on Wooster Street, and that Wintergarden Park somehow be improved to cut down on deer meandering into populated areas.

And even Chris Haar, who said she supports the proposal, voiced doubt that it will effectively curb Bowling Green’s deer population.

William Herald, the committee’s chairman, remarked in an interview before the meeting that Ohio state park regulations already forbid the public to feed wild animals and waterfowl in such parks and related waters “except in an area where signs are posted indicating that wildlife may be fed or when permitted as part of a park-sponsored nature program.”

Bowling Green needs its own wildlife-feeding law, Mr. Herald said, paralleling the situation to the existence of traffic laws at both the local and state levels.

Amanda Gamby, the city’s communications director, said at the meeting’s outset that the legislation was inspired by mounting residential complaints about wildlife, particularly deer, wild turkeys, and raccoons.

But Matthew Reger, a Wood County Common Pleas judge who emphasized he was speaking as a private city resident, questioned whether the ordinance is “the least restrictive means to accomplish” the city’s goal.

“And is there a compelling state interest to propose this?” he asked.

City council met following the committee’s 45-minute hearing and conducted its formal second reading of the ordinance, but neither it nor the committee took any other action.

Mr. Herald said a third reading will be on council’s June 17 agenda, at which time the resolution could be passed, failed, or tabled. He then encouraged city residents to email their suggestions and concerns about the proposal to williamjherald@gmail.com.

First Published June 4, 2024, 1:33 a.m.