POLL: Should Congress disband Wildlife “Killing” Services?

  • 9.1K

—ever heard of it? No, not the . That’s something different. The Fish and Wildlife Service is part of the Department of the Interior, charged with enforcing wildlife laws, restoring habitat, and protecting fish, plants, and animals. isn’t your state fish and game commission, either, which issues hunting and fishing licenses and manages local wildlife.

Wildlife Services is a federal agency under the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and it specializes in wild animals that threaten livestock—especially predators such as coyotes, wolves, and cougars. Outside the ranching community, few have heard of Wildlife Services.

Since 2000, the agency has killed at least two million mammals and 15 million birds. Although it’s main focus is in the West, Wildlife Services also does things like bird control nationwide at airports to prevent crashes and feral pig control in the South.

A Wildlife Services trapper in Idaho holds a wolf shot from the air. Photograph by USDA

Reporter Christopher Ketcham’s investigation, out this month in Harper’s Magazine, doesn’t mince words. The article is called “The Rogue Agency: A USDA program that tortures dogs and kills .” Ketcham exposes Wildlife Service’s use of poisoned bait, neck snares, leghold traps (which are banned in 80 countries), aerial gunning, and cyanide traps to go after animals that have attacked, or allegedly attacked, livestock grazing on public lands. Ketcham’s sources—former Wildlife Services trappers—told him they’ve witnessed or participated in these practices themselves and that theygo on to this day.

Rancher John Peavey was grazing his sheep on a public land allotment in Kimama, Idaho, when this photo was taken. He says the Wildlife Services predator control program is vital for his business’s success. Photograph by Rebecca Hale, National Geographic

Ranchers who graze their cattle and sheep on public lands say the service is vital, that they couldn’t sustain their operations without “taking care of the predation,” as rancher John Peavey in Idaho told Ketcham. If livestock get killed, ranchers are entitled to full compensation for the dead animal, Ketcham says, plus they can call in Wildlife Services to take out the predator.

But in most cases, the article notes, killing predators is not a scientifically sound wildlife control method. Killing an adult male mountain lion, for example, tends to lead to more attacks on livestock because that established male kept out the more aggressive teenagers.

Studies have shown that this is true for wolves and black bears too. And as for coyotes—an ecologist found that where coyotes are culled, more pups in a given litter are likely to survive. That’s why even though Wildlife Services has killed nearly a million coyotes in the past decade, their numbers always bounce back.

Watch USDA’s Secret War on Wildlife

Ketcham’s reporting tells of indiscriminate killing and inhumane methods—from family pets getting stuck in traps to the use of poison that causes a slow and painful death. Ketcham’s report also raises questions about how America’s public land is being managed, land that exists as much for the coyotes as for the ranchers, as much for the hikers and their dogs as for the fishermen and deer hunters.

It’s an issue that Ketcham, who’s currently a fellow at MIT’s Knight Science Journalism Program, has spent years investigating, and one he’s passionate about. He spoke to Wildlife Watch earlier this week.

The headline is pretty strong: “The Rogue Agency.” Can you explain?

Congressman Peter DeFazio would tell you that it’s unaccountable and secretive. He has tried to get information about its finances and its operations, and he couldn’t get it.

Carter Niemeyer, a wildlife biologist and wolf advocate, used to work as a trapper for Wildlife Services. He is critical of ranchers who rely on the agency, saying they’re shifting costs of their operations onto the public. Photograph by Rebecca Hale, National Geographic

Wildlife Services seems to be freely violating their directives, especially when it comes to the EPA’s rules on the use of pesticides. [A whistleblower Ketcham interviewed filed a complaint about how some supervisors would help employees cheat on their tests to get certified to use poison in the field.] They appear not to be operating with any kind of science-based system to justify their lethal control against wildlife. And when their own trappers are found to be committing what appear to be cruel and inhumane acts against wildlife, nothing happens to those trappers.

How did it get to be like this?

Since its founding in 1885, Wildlife Services has served one purpose—to clean up the American West for the ranching industry, so they wouldn’t have to deal with predators or other animals they deemed pests. There’s an old ethos in the ranching community—control and domination of the landscape. It’s an almost biblical mandate to dominate the natural world.

Why has hardly anyone heard of this agency?

These are not people who are forthcoming about information. I spent a year working on this story, and contacted Wildlife Services multiple times to ask to go out in the field with a trapper to observe their lethal control operations. They never granted me that request, claiming it would endanger me. Then I sent them a list of 35 questions, almost none of which were directly answered. If they’re not going to a respond to an informational request from a senior congressman in the House, do you think they’re going to answer a reporter?

You interviewed a former Wildlife Services trapper, Carter Niemeyer, who said ranchers refuse to accept the true cost of their business model. What does he mean by that?

Ranchers who run their livestock on public land impose a huge cost on the public in terms of direct subsidies provided by the federal government, and also via indirect subsidies like the government’s predator control programs. Take the case of Idaho sheep rancher John Peavey. He tells me that to feed his cattle with a haying outfit on private land would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. When he lets his sheep out to graze on public grass, that’s hundreds of thousands of dollars he keeps in his pocket. How he turns a profit, then, is by feeding off the taxpayer—a common loathsome practice of business known as corporate socialism. He also imposes a cost on the public’s wildlife: He has them killed to ensure the safety of his animals. Accepting the real cost of running livestock in the backcountry of the public domain would mean accepting that when you put defenseless domesticated animals out into the wild, they are occasionally going to get eaten. And you have to also accept that wolves have every right to eat them. It’s their land too.

What do you want people to take away from this?

The public needs to be outraged, needs to take action. That means creating a countervailing public interest to the dominant special interest of the livestock industry. If there’s any sort of trouble on public lands that affects ranchers in any minor way, that stockman calls his congressman, calls his county commissioner, calls his councilman. He gets in their office, gets in their face, and starts yelling. We need a countervailing representative like that for the public interest, for the wild.

This article was first published by National Geographic on 12 Feb 2016.

We invite you to share your opinion whether Congress should disband Wildlife “Killing” Services? Please vote and leave your comments at the bottom of this page:

POLL: Should Congress disband Wildlife (Killing) Services?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Thank you for voting.

In the event that you voted that Congress should disband Wildlife “Killing” Services, please sign the petitions:

Stop slaughtering millions of wild animals

Stop the USDA’s Wildlife Services from Senselessly Slaughtering Our Wildlife

Stop the indiscriminate wildlife slaughter

Thank you for your support.


Subscribe to our FREE Newsletter




Founder and Executive Editor

Share this post with your friends

  • 9.1K

Facebook Comments

Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
Doug Casner

What a bunch of crap. We give the ranchers the privilege of running their cattle on OUR land and then they expect US to pay to have OUR WILDLIFE exterminated. This is an abomination.

Cecile Lemay


Adahya Linda

For Heaven's sake Yes stop it , our wildlife is at perril & destroys the eco system !!!!

Tierra Chapman

YES, by all means, please stop this ravage on America's wildlife. Furthermore, anyone who loves wildlife needs to boycott beef and lamb which are unsustainable here in the 21st century. When these ranchers livlihoods are as endangered as wildlife and wild spaces, we will regain a harmonious balance here on this one shared Earth. These wild spaces are home and habitat to the wild animals that live there. Join the 21st century and stop these culls.

Eve Botelho

Stop killing wildlife. this is outrageous. Wildlife protection shoild be the priority, not ranchers.

Maureen Ellen McGill

This is outrageous, systematically killing wildlife for ranchers to breed more methane, shame on the USA.

Marilyn-Brian Ashman

Heartbreaking, the way humans think it's okay to Rip, then, Reap the Benefits, of our Beautiful Planet!!!. I wouldn't be affraid if someone warned us of a Meteor aiming for Earth, because this will End all of the human race (cancer)
But Unfortunately, all the Creatures would be gone as well 🙁 🙁

Thomas Martin

Ranchers who lease the public's land to run cattle should not expect the taxpayers to pay for predator control, nor should it be legal for them to kill our wildlife. Eliminate this service and I would go as far to say do not lease federal lands to anyone so they can make money for themselves. Ranchers who lease tend to believe the leased land is theirs and it is not. End this welfare business.

Leigh Lofgren


Maria Manuela Lopes

Shame and Disgusting.

Nora M. Edgeworth