Animal Place
July 2018
This scenario has played out hundreds of times with companion dogs in the last 10 years, the most recent victim being the dog of a 14 year old boy in Idaho: The “sprinkler.” An M-44 cyanide trap laid by the United States Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services in an effort to control the population of wildlife species at the behest of the "livestock" industries, all using taxpayer dollars.
It will take a change in federal law, a federal legal injunction, or a
determination by the USDA to temporarily or permanently stop the use of M-44
cyanide traps. There is currently an indefinite ban in Idaho, a temporary
injunction in Colorado, and a temporary ban in six Oregon counties.
Additionally, several activist organizations are suing to implement a
nationwide legal ban via the federal court system while other organizations
are introducing federal legislation. But there is still a need for civic
action.
The first step is to contact your federal representatives and demand
that Wildlife Services find non-lethal and environmentally sound methods of
population control. The work of Wildlife Services has continued unabated
because it is successfully hidden from wide scale public view, but putting
pressure on representatives will help make this a legislative priority.
Find and contact your REPRESENTATIVE HERE.
Find and contact your SENATORS HERE.
The Impact of Animal Agriculture on Wildlife
Imagine your confusion and horror if, while walking on federal public lands,
your dog stumbles across a device that looks like a sprinkler. Orange powder
sprays all over your dog. That powder is sodium cyanide and it creates
lethal hydrogen cyanide gas upon contact with moisture, resulting in a rapid
and painful death.
This scenario has played out hundreds of times with companion dogs in the
last 10 years, the most recent victim being the dog of a 14 year old boy in
Idaho. The “sprinkler”? An M-44 cyanide trap laid by the United States
Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services in an effort to control the
population of wildlife species, all using taxpayer dollars.
M-44s are placed on public lands, often without public notice, with the goal
of killing coyotes and other wild canids often to protect animals exploited
for animal agriculture from predation. The “bite and pull” method by which
they are deployed is indiscriminate, and often the “incidental” victim of an
M-44 is a non-predatory species, a companion animal, typically dogs, or a
human. Additional example of Wildlife Services’ cruel practices include
aerial depredation, or harassing and shooting wild animals from helicopters,
and wire traps that maim any animal they catch, leading to an agonizing and
slow death.
The rationale for USDA Wildlife Services’ work is that the threat to animal
agriculture exceeds the costs and risks of “predator control”. There is
little empirical evidence to support this claim. In addition to a Livestock
Indemnity Program that compensates producers for animals killed by wildlife,
there are many inexpensive, proactive, and non-lethal methods of protecting
herds and flocks from predators. Ironically, predator species encroach upon
ranches and farms because they have been driven out of their habitats and
their ecological niches destroyed by pollution and deforestation caused by
animal agriculture.
Wildlife Services’ methods kill more animals, many of whom are threatened or
endangered, points to their ineffectiveness. Add to these cruel methods of
population control the fact that more and more scientific reports conclude
that Wildlife Services causes environmental harm through lost biodiversity
and disrupted ecological systems. In the words of Kelly Nokes, an advocate
with WildEarth Guardians, “The federal government has a paramount duty to
protect people and wildlife from deadly poisons that unnecessarily endanger
the public, wildlife and companion animals”. There is no justification for
or benefit from the USDA Wildlife Services’ taxpayer funded, ineffective,
non-transparent, and unaccountable war on wildlife.
While USDA Wildlife Services has historically been influenced by the power
of corporate animal agriculture and hunting lobbies in what programs they
choose to operate and how, the fact remains that they rely on taxpayer
dollars to operate those programs. As a taxpayer and American citizen, you
have the power to declare Wildlife Services’ practices unjust and to demand
change.
Going vegan and encouraging others to do the same will reduce the demand for
animal products. As the market shrinks, fewer ranchers and farmers will
request that Wildlife Services kill predators to protect herds and flocks. A
switch to plant-based agriculture will also hopefully lessen the
environmental impacts that pressure wildlife into conflict with humans.
That being said, “pest” management on plant-based farms can be harmful and lethal to wildlife as well, so it is important to contact farms and ask them about their handling of wild animals, like rats, mice, and birds. Financially supporting farms and companies focused on feeding the world in truly sustainable and ethical fashions will be critical in protecting our health, animals, the environment, and the future.
Number of animals killed in the world by the fishing, meat, dairy and egg industries, since you opened this webpage.
0 marine animals
0 chickens
0 ducks
0 pigs
0 rabbits
0 turkeys
0 geese
0 sheep
0 goats
0 cows / calves
0 rodents
0 pigeons/other birds
0 buffaloes
0 dogs
0 cats
0 horses
0 donkeys and mules
0 camels / camelids