ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP WINS SETTLEMENT IN PREDATOR MA

WildEarth Guardians claimed victory in a settlement agreement last week after the USDA Wildlife Services agreed to curtail some of their predator management practices. The settlement requires that these protections remain in place pending the program’s completion of a detailed and public environmental review of its work.

Under the agreement, Wildlife Services must provide an environmental analysis of the effects and risks of its management practices in Montana by May 15, 2021. Pending completion of its analysis, Wildlife Services has also agreed to eliminate some of its tactics used to control predators.

Of the curtailed management tools taken away from the Wildlife Services, 41 counties in Montana will not be allowed to use Sodium cyanide control devices (M-44 devices) on all lands as well as all public lands across the state. The agreement also reads foot snares that target coyotes can not be used unless they have a breakaway cable incorporated to the snare.

The Wildlife Services also lost the privilege of using Quick-kill body grip traps as well as neck snares for targeting black bears and grizzly bears. Black bears and cougars also gained protection on federal lands by eliminating them as a target for lethal take by Wildlife Services. As part of the agreement as well, Wildlife Services can not remove any wildlife in Montana’s specially protected areas such as designated Wilderness, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, and Wild & Scenic River corridors.

Wolves were also granted additional protections in the settlement agreement. Lethal control of wolves will be authorized only after confirmed livestock depredation(s) involving wolves, has been determined by Wildlife Services. Upon confirmation of wolf/wolves as the cause of livestock depredation(s), Wildlife Services, under MFWP authorization, may responsibly identify, target, and remove the offending wolf/wolves.

The settlement agreement comes after WildEarth Guardians sued Wildlife Services in November 2019.

This doesn't surprise me in the least. These AR people will not stop until ALL lethal take by WS is halted. They dreamily believe they are saving these beasts. Fact is, they just alienate the vast majority of the rural public, which in turn means even more predators die at the hands of vigilante woodsmen.....case in point, the UP fellow arrested recently for killing 16 or 18 wolves in the last eighteen months!

Actually, they will never stop untill all take of any kind is halted. Too many morons in this country that live in dreamy land! WS has a stigma that turns people off, and that don't help either, and sometimes causes conflict with the very people that should be their allies, that would be us trappers. I feel it is odd that nothing had been said about this lawsuit since it has been filed, and I wonder if the trappers would have rallied to support them if they had known about it. From what I've seen posted here and elsewhere, I don't think so, and that is sad!

"Protecting animals" is for public consumption and fund raising. For managers of anti organizations the driver is one-upmanship/bullying and fat expense accounts, improving their own financial environments. The managers understand wildlife dynamics more than they admit. And the issue isn't just wildlife. Those clowns have no respect for farm animals.

I have a little different take on the subject. Although I hate to see the AR's get any victory anywhere, I'm not too saddened to see this one. In States like Washington that have essentially outlawed fur trapping, WS is still allowed to use their tactics to remove predators, tactics that licensed fur trappers can't use. We have no chance of ever getting fur trapping back if there is someone (the Feds) who can step in and manage predators at the taxpayers expense.
This move by a judge just makes the job that fur trappers do for free more valuable.

Waggler stated my view exactly!

I have a rancher friend in northern Montana who runs sheep and cattle. A couple of years ago he lost 230 sheep to coyotes. He called me in March to tell me that the USDA had just flown his place and the surrounding area and had taken 210 coyotes in 12 hours. He said the gunner was complaining of a sore shoulder. He also has an ADC guy that has 15 "getters" on his place continuously. He is not going to be happy with this. He said he fights the environmentalists more than the coyotes and the weather.

I see it as their winning anything is bad for all of us Waggler. You Washington fellas have already gotten the green shaft from them. Another win from them is,in my opinion, NOT going to benefit fur trappers in the least......even if Uncle Sam is put completely out of the wildlife lethal control business the chances of regular old fur trapping being reinstated is nil. In that scenario, if my grandsons are trappers in the future, they will likely be nuisance wildlife operators....and a far cry from the schoolboy trappers most of us were. It saddens me to ponder on it.

Pretty sad when the Anti's are running the show. They got a great big boost when it was decided they would be reimbursed for their lawyers court cost win lose or draw.

If they win this it will only help seal the deal on ALL trapping and hunting of predators. They USDA are the ones that can afford to fight them. Our National as well as state trappers don't have deep enough pockets and that is a fact.

Are people still allowed to neutralize nuisance animals on their own property by themselves or thru an agent?
If so then its a nothingburger.

I'm with waggler. First and foremost fur trappers and hunters should have full acess as first responder on wildlife issues. Second where the private sector can provide a service the gover mentioned should step out.

But I hate it whenever the antis get any joy.

I guess you fail to see that a lot of the depredation takes place when the fur has no value. Fur trappers won't continue to do it for free when fur doesn't have much value.

Then pay the trapper.

Why should property owners get taxpayer funded services at below cost when the private sector can provide the same service? Particularly when most of those property owners are running for profit operations on said property.

More federal jobs, that’s just what we need.

Tough one. I dislike settling lawsuits Out-Of-Court simply for the attorney's convenience (which is the way they like it). The State of NE DOR has contracts in place with WS and NO Private animal removal is allowed on State Rt-of-Ways which has been a bur for some of us. The G&P has a list of nuisance trappers that the public can ask for but the state DOR's sure won't (or can't) use them. Years ago I was requested to trap some beaver along a state highway (for free) and I asked the state DOR person to contact the adjoining landowner to see if I could access the better trap sites on his land. Man,,, you would have thought I asked to have his first born son!!!!! Unfortunately without a dialog with the administrators of a gov agency this is a reaction that you can get. When you ask to harvest animals on State Rt-of Ways you are told that permission to trap is not granted on any highway (however you can harvest hay during drought years, salvage aluminum cans for recycle $, etc.,--- funny huh!). Years later the animal problems continued to the point where Highway money (tax money) can (must) now be used for that animal damage removal. At one of our conventions the Furbearer Biologist even mentioned the fact we should promote the fact that we ,as harvesters, provide removal services AND increase a foreign trade balance in favor of the U.S. FREE to the public. But now they the taxpayers, pay and that foreign trade is lost. I have mixed feelings on all the above comments as I have seen both sides as I run a small ADC business and get paid for marketable animals in and out of the legal take season. Still a tough one for me to decide.................... the mike

Anyone who thinks the anti's will stop with restricting WS is dreaming. I find it funny how many think anyone loosing trapping rights is a good thing. All the ones that do, are looking at $$ for themselves.

Wyoming is under pressure right now I heard from anti group wanting to eliminate snares and wanting a 24 hour trap check a buddy of mine said its bad this time.

I think this move by the judge that restricts WS will actually make it harder for the antis to eliminate snares, etc.. Trappers will now have a greater justification for the services they provide.

Yep, I agree, Mark. We have a lot of WS people come through the Trappers College, and while most are good folks, the thing that gets me is they hire people all the time that have a degree from some college, but not a bit of trapping experience. Maybe they feel thhat they're not corrupted with bad habits yet! I would think if you hire a trapper, they should know how to trap!

I think what made WS vulnerable in this court case is the use of poison. I really don't see the equivalence between poisoning an animal and trapping; other than either method can kill them.
I think that the day that trappers and exterminators are considered the same thing, then our days are over.

Double Ditto on this!

THANK YOU

Now if we can see our way to understanding that nuisance trapping ain't fur trapping.

But wit all the big national PCOs buying up and setting up "wildlife divisions" the day is coming when all wildlife is pest control.

Where does the money for WS come from? What does WS charge an hour? Do they charge mileage, expenses, rooms, per diem? If so when? I have heard it ask and never seen anyone answer. You seem to know its below cost.