It was an audacious crime in the heart of the nation’s capital that garnered news coverage from outlets across the world: A stealthy red fox — a wild animal native to the D.C. region — managed to break into the heavily fortified flamingo habitat at the Smithsonian’s National Zoo, slaughtering 25 of the exotic pink birds. Now, zoo officials say they’ve caught and killed the culprit. Maybe. Or maybe it was another fox, innocent, but in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Zoo spokesperson Pamela Baker-Masson confirms the suspect was caught in a trap at the zoo on Thursday night or early Friday morning. The fox was humanely euthanized, she says, because zoo staff feared that now that it had learned how to get into the enclosure, and gotten a taste of flamingo, it would strike again, putting all the zoo’s birds at risk. The Washington Post first reported the news of the fox’s death.

Zoo staff are still working to confirm that the captured fox was indeed the culprit, possibly using DNA testing. There was no concern the fox carried rabies or was otherwise sick; it displayed normal, healthy fox behavior, hunting at night. After it was euthanized, the fox tested negative for rabies.

Baker-Masson says the zoo does not routinely set out traps for wildlife, and does not plan to capture and kill every fox that enters the zoo grounds. After all, foxes are common in the District and throughout the region — particularly in Rock Creek Park, where the zoo is located.

“It is the zoo’s goal to coexist with the native species around us, especially because we are adjacent to Rock Creek Park,” Baker-Masson says in an email to DCist.

But this particular fox — if indeed it was the culprit — was an especially skilled predator, she says. Having breached the flamingo exhibit’s defenses — which have successfully repelled predators since the enclosure was designed in the 1970s, and which were replaced and updated just five years ago — this animal demonstrated “a learned behavior which will most likely be repeated and must be considered an ongoing threat,” Baker-Masson says.

Plus, the culprit in this case showed “surplus killing” behavior — killing more prey that it could eat. “The predator(s) had buried its prey, and we anticipated its return,” says Baker-Masson.

But why did the zoo — whose official mission and vision speak of “saving species” and creating “a biodiverse planet where wildlife and nature thrive” — kill an apparently healthy native wild animal, rather than relocating it?

“Relocating the fox was not a viable consideration because of the robust and healthy fox population within the DMV region,” Baker-Masson explains. “Red fox populations exist at near or at capacity in this region and currently are increasing due to their annual birth of kits. Relocating the fox could have jeopardized his wellbeing and/or the foxes already using that home range.”

It’s not the first fox found on federal land in D.C. to be euthanized this year: In April a fox was killed, along with her three kits, after biting multiple people on Capitol Hill. This was a more clear-cut case: the mother fox tested positive for rabies.

D.C. law protects wild animals and discourages against using euthanasia, but the law does not apply to the zoo, as it is on federal property, says Natasha Garcia Andersen, a wildlife biologist with the District Department of Energy and Environment.

“Euthanasia is always the last resort,” says Garcia Andersen. “Unlike other neighboring jurisdictions, we do allow for the relocation of wildlife, and we have areas set up around the District where wildlife can be relocated if they are a problem where they’re at, as long as they’re healthy and not a danger to the public.”

In fact, she says, she did speak with zoo staff after the killing of the flamingos, while the fox was still on the loose. They discussed relocation, and Garcia Andersen suggested releasing the fox far from the zoo — possibly on the other side of the Anacostia River — to prevent its return.

D.C. law does not prohibit euthanizing healthy wild animals, though it makes it impractical in most cases. A resident with a fox problem could, theoretically, capture and euthanize the animal legally, but only if they had access to means to humanely kill and dispose of the animal, following guidelines from the American Veterinary Medical Association. Most residents, Garcia Andersen says, wouldn’t have the tools to lethally inject or gas an animal. And transporting the wild animal across state lines, dead or alive, would be banned under federal law.

A person who kills a wild animal in an inhumane way could be charged with animal cruelty.

Most residents dealing with pesky wild animals in D.C. hire licensed animal control companies, which are regulated under the District’s Wildlife Protection Act of 2010. That law states that such companies “shall recommend and employ nonlethal means in preference to lethal means for the control of problem wildlife,” and that wild animals shall be “euthanized if relocation or rehabilitation are not feasible.”

A company that violates the law and inhumanely kills a wild animal could be subject to hefty fines. What’s more, most companies operating in the District don’t have the practical ability to legally euthanize animals, says Garcia Andersen, because they would have to have euthanasia equipment on their vehicle, and have permission to transport the dead animals to another state for disposal.

The vast majority of “problem wildlife” caught in D.C. are handled with nonlethal methods, says Garcia Andersen. The latest data available, from 2020, show that 450 wild animals were handled by wildlife control companies. Of those, just 16 — all raccoons — were euthanized. Squirrels made up the largest category of “problem” animals, accounting for 303 of the animals in 2020, 249 of which were relocated, while 54 were “excluded,” meaning they were fenced out of the attic or garage or crawlspace where they’d taken up residence.

Other “problem” animals included birds (17), bats (14), and groundhogs (7). There were no foxes reported.

The wildlife protection law does not apply to invasive commensal rodents, such as rats or mice. After its passage, the law was misunderstood or mischaracterized by Ken Cuccinelli, then attorney general of Virginia and Tea Party darling. Cuccinelli claimed that the District was using the law to send rats to Virginia, and compared undocumented immigrants to the invasive rodents. The mistaken claim was also taken up by conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who called Councilmember Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3), the law’s author, a “babe,” and sparked a wave of hate mail to her.

Residents with problematic wild animals — fox or otherwise — can find a list of licensed wildlife control companies on DOEE’s website.

This story was updated to include new information from the zoo.