Full Title Name:  Brief Summary of Wildlife Services

Share |
Rachel Pemberton Place of Publication:  Michigan State University College of Law Publish Year:  2020 Primary Citation:  Animal Legal & Historical Center Jurisdiction Level:  Federal 0 Country of Origin:  United States
Summary: This summary describes the role and function of Wildlife Services within the USDA. It describes management practices, both lethal and non-lethal as well as the concerns that have been raised with respect to WS methods.

In the United States, the federal Wildlife Services (WS) agency administers the Animal Damage Control Act of 1931 (ADC) in order to control wildlife when it conflicts with human activities. The ADC authorizes WS to determine the best methods and practices to eradicate, suppress, and control a variety of wildlife species that may injure industries such as agriculture, horticulture, forestry, and animal husbandry on state, federal, public, and private lands. In addition, under the Rural Development, Agriculture, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1988, WS may, if requested, enter into an agreement with any entity or individual in the United States to control injurious and/or nuisance mammals and birds.

WS uses a variety of nonlethal wildlife control methods, including several practices that allow WS employees to either physically move the harmful or injurious animal(s) away from the site of the conflict or to prompt the animal(s) to leave the site. However, WS also employs a troubling practice called “denning,” which occurs when (1) gas cartridges are used to fumigate animals within their den or burrow, or (2) when an animal’s den or burrow is physically excavated. Unfortunately, WS also uses several lethal wildlife control methods, which may be categorized as “killing” or “euthanasia.” In 2018, over 2.6 million animals were killed or euthanized by WS. When euthanizing an animal, WS employees are instructed to use methods described in the most current available euthanasia guidelines issued by the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA). However, the agency and its employees are not required to document or record the decision-making process when they choose to euthanize an animal.

One of the most troubling lethal control methods employed by WS is the use of M-44 cyanide capsules. M-44s are spring-activated devices that are scented with bait and eject a lethal dose of sodium cyanide once the device has been triggered by an animal. Despite numerous legal restrictions on how WS may use these devices, accidents are not uncommon. As reported by the Center for Biological Diversity, in 2017 M-44s placed by WS temporarily blinded a child and killed a family dog in Idaho, killed two family dogs in Wyoming, and killed a wolf in Oregon.

Many wildlife and animal welfare organizations, including the Center for Biological Diversity and Predator Defense, have voiced concerns over WS’ practices and the agency’s overall lack of accountability. However, in recent years the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has made progress communicating and collaborating with WS in certain states. In 2017, NRDC reported the successful completion of over a dozen collaborative nonlethal predator control projects using electric fencing in states including Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, and Wyoming. In 2018, NRDC collaborated with Wildlife Services and other entities to install an electric fence around a California orchard, adopting a preventative strategy to keep black bears away from the crops before conflicts could occur.

In California, several counties have cancelled, suspended, or modified their contracts with Wildlife Services over concerns about the agency’s practices. Leading the way in 2000, Marin County ceased contracting with WS and instead approved an alternative program designed around community collaboration, multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement, and a cost-sharing system. Most recently, in 2020 Humboldt County approved a new contract with WS under modified terms that restrict the use of lethal control methods, prohibit WS from using lethal control on beavers, and generally restrict the use of certain lethal control methods such as pesticides, lead ammunition, and body-gripping traps.

Share |