Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Call for End to USDA's Wildlife Killing Agency
RENO, Nev. - Conservationists argue in a new report that U.S. taxpayers should stop subsidizing a $100 million program that kills more than 1 million wild animals annually, a program ranchers and farmers have defended for nearly a century as critical to protecting their livestock from predators.
More than 90,000 of the 121,524 carnivores killed in 2007 were coyotes. But the trapping, poisoning and aerial gunning of the predators also is taking an increasing, unintended toll on other creatures, including 511 black bears and 340 endangered gray wolves in 2007, according to a copy of the report obtained by The Associated Press.
(AP file) Citing concerns about the economy and the potential for a fresh look at the decades-old controversy in the new Obama administration, 115 environmental groups signed onto a recent letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack urging him to abolish the U.S. Agriculture Department's Wildlife Services.
The American Sheep Industry Association, National Cattlemen's Beef Association and more than 70 other livestock production and state agriculture offices in 35 states countered with a letter citing more than $125 million in annual losses to the sheep, goat and cattle industry as a result of predation.
A report by conservationists released Tuesday documents significant increases in recent years in both the number of carnivores killed and the size of the agency's budget - $117 million in 2007, up 14 percent from the average from 2004-06.
"We ask Mr. Obama to get out his scalpel and protect the public's hard-earned dollars from this unscrupulous agency," said Wendy Keefover-Ring, director of carnivore protection for WildEarth Guardians based in Bozeman, Mont.
More than 90,000 of the 121,524 carnivores killed in 2007 were coyotes. But the trapping, poisoning and aerial gunning of the predators also is taking an increasing, unintended toll on other creatures, including 511 black bears and 340 endangered gray wolves in 2007, according to a copy of the report obtained by The Associated Press.
Hundreds of thousands of other animals, including ravens and raccoons, also are killed through the program.
Aides to Vilsack referred questions about the program to USDA's Animal, Plant, Health Inspection Service, which oversees Wildlife Services.
USDA spokeswoman Carol Bannerman said Vilsack intends to review all agency programs but that it would be weeks before he had any idea about possible changes he wants to make.
Bannerman said the federal agency kills predators only when livestock owners or state officials request their assistance. She said most of the time those private individuals or state agencies provide about half the funding for the effort.
"From our perspective, we certainly feel that we have a responsibility to respond to those requests," she said from APHIS headquarters in Riverdale, Md.
Bannerman said the agency is required to review each individual project "and move ahead only if there would be no long-term negative impact on the environment."
"With that mandate ... we can give people an outlet to deal with a problem that if they took into their own hands could have longer-term negative impacts," she said.
The agricultural commodities' groups said in their letter to Vilsack about a month ago that livestock losses to predation cost producers more than $125 million a year.
"Without non-lethal and lethal predator control by Wildlife Services, these numbers could easily double or even triple," said Skye Krebs, an Oregon rancher and president of the Public Lands Council, which spearheaded the letter along with the National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
"The agency provides a means for striking a balance in the wildlife-livestock interface, including limiting the spread of disease from wildlife," Krebs said.
- Posted in



7 Comments so far
Show AllThese programs become even more important as consumers increase their demand for cage free, outdoor produced, and non-confined animal production. It sounds a bit inhumane to demand that farmers raise their animals in the outside elements and then don't allow the farmers to protect their livestock from predators.
Bulls**t!
1 million wild animals annually, a program ranchers and farmers have defended for nearly a century as critical to protecting their livestock from predators.
**this should be linked to the article yesterday about hamburgers as a hummer.
Wild horses are also being rounded up and killed thanks to ranching interests.
You want to stop it?
Dont eat meat.
Having a return to "free range" cant work in the 21st century.
It was always a bad dietary system.
Ranching also leads to polluting of rivers.
Just dont eat meat.
It isnt as hard as you think.
We'll never see an ecologically sound policy as long as livestock industries dominate the landscape.
And just to correct the human supremacist vocabulary above:
"To be humane is to be cruel, vicious and unrestrained, like humans.
To be inhumane is to be compassionate, restrained, moderate, like non humans."
As a result of animal rights groups putting horse slaughter facilities out of business, thousands of horses are now being turned out into the wild. The result, wild horses do not accept domesticated horses and they (domesticated horses) are now diseased, malnurished and dying.
I can assure you that noone is rounding up wild horses...because they are not worth anything.
>>>Webber wrote:
Dont eat meat.
Having a return to "free range" cant work in the 21st century.
It was always a bad dietary system.
Ranching also leads to polluting of rivers.
Just dont eat meat.
It isnt as hard as you think.
We'll never see an ecologically sound policy as long as livestock industries dominate the landscape.
Webber, that was very succinct - people need complex answers and explanations only when they are not ready to face reality or are in denial. For some reason, Bob Dylan's song comes to mind:
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind,
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
You're right - this article should be linked to Hamburgers are the Hummers of Food in Global Warming: Scientists.
Want to bet these ranchers get conpisated for every loss? By the way what about the Winter kill? you know the livestock that either starves to death or is froze?
And if i am not mistaken all these ranchers get to take their livestock to feed on public lands.
Wasn't just last year those ranchers went balistic when the government wanted to raise range fees?
if i am not mistaken these Freeloaders haven't had a Range fee increase in a many a year.
anybody looked at the cost of meat lately? It just keeps going up even with all those preditors killed with our tax dollars.
And those ranchers are always against any other citizens getting handout or services. Look at their voting records and who they support?
Or by the way if you look at most of those slaughtered so call preditors menu. you will findmostly smaller creatures not livestock.
genaman, excellent observation. I wonder if anyone will be willing to debate your points using facts and figures. Take away all the subsidies, raise land tax on par with land use for other commercial purposes, and we'll see the real price of meat. People in North America, South America & Australia (New Zealand included) have a distorted image of reality because they do not consider the history of violent colonization, and all the vast stretches of land that suddenly became available to a much smaller population than in other parts of the world, where people have to optimize their land use to grow their food. Consequently, in other parts of the world, meat-eating is generally a luxury, that ordinary people reserve only for special occasions - because meat is way too expensive, compared to grains and vegetables. Of course, the danger is that as some of these countries become wealthier, their per capita meat consumption is also increasing. A lot of meat products are exported from these 'colonized' countries to other countries - and these exports are actually subsidized. For a country that calls itself 'advanced', 'developed', etc., why would you want to export beef and other meat, and import cars and electronics? Closer examination of the so-called capitalism in the US and other such countries (we have to include Brazil, that wants to become the number one beef exporter!) - will reveal that it is actually based on a great deal of land, water and other resources that are enormously subsidized. The book "Beyond Beef: The Rise and Fall of the Cattle Culture" by Jeremy Rifkin is a great read, if anyone wants a historical perspective on this subject.