EPA keeps killing animals with cyanide?

I didn't find the actual notice, but this is bad right?

https://www.trappersreport.com/stor...s-to-kill-foxes-and-coyotes_892019130018

M44s have been used for many years nothing new, don't buy into the hype it a very regulate way to control predators in less populated areas.

Absolutely NOT bad. It is a very effective tool with extremely controlled situational use. I would guess more coyotes and foxes are killed by automobiles in every state as compared to those selectively removed with M44s.

be a lot easier to catch heavy westerns if they were banned

I think its time to put an end to federal wildlife services. whats the cost per coyote up to now? 7-800 dollars? put a 500 dollar bounty on them nation wide (a hundred would buy a new 4 wd pickup again) and see how many get killed

I wish they would help me out with all these hawks

Does the trap have any adverse ecological effects? Aside from death of the targeted animal of course LOL

No! They are a spring loaded devise that throws the cyanyde into the target animals mouth. There it mixes with saliva and causes death very quickly. Very effecient tool that is strickly regulated.

Apparently not always into the "target" animals mouth.

If you came across this article from the Guardian, a UK publication, without any background about M44s, and the first thing you saw was the title "Trump administration authorizes 'cyanide bombs' to kill wild animals" then yeah this would be bad. And that's the point.

It's the bread and butter of the animal rights movement and their networks across the globe. As the Guardian self-righteously admits: "in our natural world, we refuse to turn away from the climate catastrophe and species extinction. For The Guardian, reporting on the environment is a priority. We give reporting on climate, nature and pollution the prominence it deserves..."

Their source for this article is the Center for Biological Diversity here in the US, a major pain in the arse for trappers and hunters. In short, it's a hit piece spoon fed to the Guardian almost verbatim from the Center for Biological Diversity. They have money, connections and resources that we don't.

Note: I can't and won't link to the August 7th press release from the Center for Biological Diversity because it violates forum rules, but you can look it up yourselves if you wish.

Too many non-targets where i live -- not a huge fan. Usda in our area seems to have this as their only response

I can see why it's strictly reg'd. Clever idea, though... I can't say I'm a fan, but every tool has it's place!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M44_(cyanide_device)

x2!!!

I'm not against the use of M-44's, cyanide guns, coyote getters, grab & die rigs, or whatever.

But,

What about secondary mortality of non-targets

which feed upon the carcasses of animals killed by these devices ?

Seems to me that the cyanide poisoning & subsequent death of non-targets

which scavenge the carcasses of the original target were a major factor

for cyanide guns, etc being outlawed by federal legislation in the 1970's.

Just playing devil's advocate here so don't bite my head off.

w

Cyanide guns have never been outlawed so far as I know. I know some were being used mid 70's in Colorado. Those were fired with a 38 case and the cyanide in place of the bullet. They have been used with a spring for a long while. Last I knew the guy setting them not only had to put out signs he had to have an antidote kit in reach while setting them. Had to pass an applicators test. There are rules. Like private property only. Guys set them and they don't get checked for weeks sometimes. Its not uncommon to find an old one that's been in place for years. I could go on about some of the predator control programs run by usda in particular, and some counties, but there is no point. Most people think if its the government doing it then they know what they are doing. Professionals. Wildlife biologists.

That's why the cost per coyote killed, or beaver killed, to the taxpayer, is in the several hundreds of dollars. Maybe thousands by now. Some of you computer literate guys should be able to look up cost of programs dived by the number of animals killed.

My dad used cyanyde guns from well before I was born in 47. I grew up with them, and one day one went off and shot a pretty little 38 sized hole in the center of dads palm. He was a better part of a half mile away when it happened, and walked back to the house, where mom had a fit about taking him to the doc. Dad said, "I just walked a half mile from where it happened, if it was gonna kill me, it would have already happened"!

As for other things dying off the carcasses of the coyotes, I never saw one shred of evidence. I skinned many animals killed with getter guns, and believe that most of this is false info, designed by those that don't believe we should harm a blade of grass, but go mow their lawns every three days!

Might some confusion between cyanide (single use) and the problems they had with 1080 poison for lacing whole carcasses! 1080 is still used but is limited to sheep collars as far as I know, again single use collars.

Your charge that sometimes they don't get checked for weeks is the same charge they make on traps.Apparently ,only govt programs are open to these charges.Privately run programs apparently are all above reproach.

Could you be any more clueless????


Please look into things before skying your colossal stupidity.

Prussic acid aka B-17 aka Laetrile aka hydrogen cyanide is a NATURALLY OCCURRING organic compound that DISSIPATES AT 78.1F. It is not persistent in the environment and poses no long term risks.

Almost like those who came up with the M-44's knew what they were doing. Unlike the majority of people commenting on the internet these days...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_cyanide

https://www.britannica.com/science/hydrogen-cyanide#ref240237

Unfortunately there are more than a few sheepmen here in the west that still have several lifetimes supply of 1080. Big sheep operation just to the west of me that still uses it regularly and I find dead coyotes laying on the property we hunt and manage.

were some ranchers in N.D. still using 1080 in the late 90's.


Buck they don't get checked for weeks. They are lethal. They are all on private property now. Or at least they are supposed to be. Just like snares, they don't all get picked back up either.

Would not want to get caught using it that's for sure!

Cyanide is a much more humane death than strychnine.
Strychnine is banned in most places because of the prolonged painful death and its insidiousness to other animals after the fact.

Maybe some should be set where there are WOLF problems!

That poison garbage was outlawed here on may 10th 1849 for killing wolves.Too many other valuable furbearers were destroyed along with the wolves,
marten and foxes being the ones mentioned in the statute.

1080 wasn't around in 1849. Its also k9 specific. Unlike cyanide though its not quick. Im not a fan of tax dollar control programs but those cyanide guns have to be pulled to discharge. coyote doesn't get more than 10 feet 99% of the time. 1080 is slow and ugly

The statute specified "strychnine and all other poisons".
No poisoning of wild furbearers/predators here since 1849.

FYI some animals it has less of a affect on like large animal that the body mass that it greater then the small amount of cyanide that the M44 puts out. The M44 can keep working for weeks and will lump up after long periods of time. A shoulder blade bone is often placed over the gitter to protect it from the weather longer then it not being covered.

The capsule is about the thickness of a pinky finger as long as the nail and has a relatively small amount of powder as most of it is plastic. The spring is stout a setting tool is needed, no powder on the new M44s the early ones used a .38 brass with a primer to shoot the powder. Like said the powder hits the saliva and becomes a gas that is the "danger time" breathing is not recommended! When pulled they are pointed away from the user and shot in a safe direction.

Don't know of any humans that ever died from M44. Accidents have happened if I remember right they carry amyl nitrate in case of a accident to counter the poison.

Home work would do a lot of good for some of you. Experience is better than most opinions. This is sounding like politicians of today. Talk to people who have used them to get the information to build your own knowledge. Very effective tool, they are not a bomb, there is very little noise to them. (Spring Loaded) as has been said)

Scott

I wish somebody would post just what each coyote aphis kills costs taxpayers. I found where some hogs were more than 10 grand each and some wolves were almost 5 grand each.

Well Wyoming banned the us M-44s it appears...

https://www.trappersreport.com/story/Agreement-stops-cyanide-trap-use-on-Wyoming-public-land

Yes, and again, this came about from a lawsuit filed in January of this year by the Center for Biological Diversity. The "agreement" they reached goes further than just banning M-44s -- see the snippet of the full "agreement" below.

The larger issue here is not whether you agree with the control methods of APHIS but with the organizations behind these court decisions, which are spreading like crazy. Does this have an immediate and direct impact on trappers in Wyoming or elsewhere? No! But these decisions and actions will have an effect when such litigation reaches our doorstep if not before. We're all part of the broader food chain here....

they are still used on private property, they have been in continuous use since they were invented.

so whats the cost per coyote killed by the feds? how about hogs and beaver?

The only pertinent question is how much private sector money was saved by the actions of the feds (APHIS)?
They don't indiscriminately start killing coyotes and beavers. Damage to livestock or damage caused by beavers (DOT) is assessed, a monetary agreement is created and signed by the livestock owner, livestock association or DOT, and the work gets done. If it doesn't make financial sense to the livestock producers, or DOTs, they would stop signing up for it.
Could private trappers do this kind of work? Sure, but the logistics are not there. You need a widespread organized effort of many people to cover the vast areas of coverage for these types of issues. Private trappers don't have that. If they did, the livestock producers, and Departments of Transportation would have them do it all.

your funny