Fire Wildlife Services! Local Organizations’ Letter to Humboldt County

Posted on July 19, 2014 by Monte Merrick

Bird Ally X; Environmental Protection Information Center
North Group, Redwood Chapter, Sierra Club;
Klamath Forest Alliance; Friends of the Eel River
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
July 18, 2014
Humboldt County Supervisors
825 5th St., Room 111
Eureka, CA 95501

Re: Support for Terminating Humboldt County’s Contract with APHIS-Wildlife Services
Dear Supervisors Bohn, Fennel, Bass, Lovelace, and Sundberg,

The undersigned organizations write to express our support for the June 30, 2014 request from the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), the Center for Biological Diversity, and other groups to terminate Humboldt County’s contract with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s APHIS- Wildlife Services (Wildlife Services) and bring the county’s wildlife control activities into compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The Wildlife Services program relies on antiquated and cruel methods to kill wildlife, and it operates under a heavy veil of secrecy despite being funded by taxpayer dollars. Non-lethal alternatives are time-tested and prove to cost less while being more effective in protecting livestock, and we urge Humboldt County Supervisors to join Marin County, Sonoma County, and the City of Davis in moving toward an alternate approach.

According to the Washington Post, Wildlife Services killed more than 4 million animals last year alone, including 75,326 coyotes, 866 bobcats, 528 river otters, 3,700 foxes, 973 red-tailed hawks, and 419 black bears.1

The agency uses snares, traps, poisons, and aerial gunning to kill wild animals, often killing pets and other non-target animals by mistake. An investigative series by the Sacramento Bee found that between 2000 and 2012, Wildlife Services “accidentally” killed more than 50,000 non-problem animals, more than 1,100 dogs, and several imperiled species – including bald and golden eagles.2

In addition to endangering outdoor recreationists and their pets, these practices disrupt the natural balance of wildlife populations, degrade habitat, and increase disease, causing the “loss of many ecosystem services that benefit human society directly and indirectly.”3

In spite of these impacts, Wildlife Services operates with a complete lack of transparency or oversight of its actions, and has steadfastly refused requests from the public, lawmakers, and others to disclose details on the lethal methods it employs, the poisons it uses, and how its money is spent.

Bipartisan members of Congress, including Elton Gallegly, R-Calif., and Jackie Speier, D-Calif. are calling for national reforms and requested a congressional investigation of the program. And due to related questions and controversies, the Office of Inspector General is now conducting an audit of Wildlife Services.

Marin County ended its contract with Wildlife Services in 2000, choosing instead to develop and implement its Livestock and Wildlife Protection Program, which assists ranchers with livestock protection in a nonlethal manner. The Marin County Agricultural Commissioner calls it a “good move” that substantially reduced livestock losses to predators, saying it cost more to operate in the beginning than today, but it now operates at about half the cost as it did under the Wildlife Services contract.4

The City of Davis voted unanimously to end its contract with Wildlife Services in January 2013 after the agency killed five coyotes, including four pups, without consulting City staff, which “did not concur that these animals exhibited behavior that warranted removal.”5

The City of Davis now implements a Coyote Management and Coexistence Plan at an estimated cost of $8,000 a year. Sonoma County also recently elected to forego its contract with Wildlife Services and is now exploring a program similar to the one used in Marin County.

We encourage you to take this opportunity to take the lead of other local governments and help establish a regional model the rest of the nation can emulate. Humboldt County citizens are known for their environmental ethics and forward-thinking ideas. The time has come to end the outdated practices employed by Wildlife Services here, and to come together as a community to realize a better solution that protects our public trust resources and values.

Sincerely,

Monte Merrick
Bird Ally X
PO Box 1020 Arcata, CA 95518
mm@birdallyx.net

Natalynne DeLapp
Environmental Protection Information Center
145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521
natalynne@wildcalifornia.org

Diane Fairchild Beck, Conservation Chair
North Group, Redwood Chapter, Sierra Club
PO Box 238 Arcata, CA 95518
dfbeck@northcoast.com

Kimberly Baker
Klamath Forest Alliance
PO Box 21 Orleans, CA 95556
kimberly@wildcalifornia.org

Scott Greacen
Friends of the Eel River
PO Box 4945 Arcata, CA 95518-4945
scott@eelriver.org

1) Fears, D., USDA’s Wildlife Services killed 4 million animals in 2013; seen as an overstep by some, Washington Post (June 7, 2014)

2) Knudson, T., The killing agency: Wildlife Services’ brutal methods leave a trail of animal death, Sacramento Bee (Apr. 28, 2012)

3) Bergstrom, J.B., Arias, L.C., Davidson, A.D., Ferguson, A.W., Randa, L.A. & Sheffield, S.R., 2013, License to kill: reforming federal wildlife control to restore biodiversity and ecosystem function, Conservation Letters, v. 6, p. 1-12

4) Scully, S., Sonoma County’s contract for wild animal control under fire, Press Democrat (June 1, 2013)

5) Staff Report from Robert A. Clark, Interim Public Works Director, City of Davis to Davis City Council (Jan. 15, 2013)

Protect Gray Wolves under California Endangered Species Act

Posted on May 23, 2014 by Monte Merrick

In 2011, something very dramatic happened in California, something that hadn’t occurred since 1924. A wild wolf tread on our land. OR-7, perhaps as famous now as any other wolf ever has been, traveled into Northeast California that year and stayed through most of 2012. OR-7, or Journey, as he was named by school children to help protect him from poachers, dispersed from his birth area of Northeast Oregon eventually traveling over 1000 miles to the northern counties of California

The only known photograph of OR-7 in California (source California Dept of Fish and Wildlife)

The presence of OR-7 in California sparked the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Big Wildlife, the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC), and the Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center to petition the California Fish and Game Commission to include the Gray Wolf as an endangered species in California under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) as they make their anticipated recovery.

Now OR-7 is possibly mated and raising pups in the Rogue River National Forest. If so, another layer of criticality is added to our concerns. Pups that eventually disperse from Southern Oregon will surely enter California. The need for protection of this obviously endangered species will be even more apparent.

Bird Ally X/Humboldt Wildlife Care Center (BAX) stands with CBD, EPIC and the other petitioners in their call for CESA protection using the science of ecosystem-based management; that is, that wolves and other apex predators are a necessary and desirable component of healthy watersheds, forests, and range, and warrant state-specific legal protection in California. We agree with the petitioners that all things point to listing the Gray Wolf as endangered in California.

The only thing that stands in the way of wolf recovery in our state is the space that we provide them. That space has a name: endangered species protection.

It is an easy observation that habitat must be given to wolves if they are to have a place in our shared world. It may be less easy to see that a similar space must be provided within the public mind. California’s returning Gray Wolves must be invited, if they are to be welcome.

We respectfully disagree with the assertion that adequate protection for wolves is achievable through a variety of obscure regulatory codes. Public ignorance was the key factor in the extirpation of California Gray Wolves. A critical feature of the wolf’s recovery must be public education.

However important regulation, enforcement, and administration are in protecting endangered species, CESA is more than this – it is also a tool for public awareness, public education and the expression of the values of the citizens of California.

As wildlife rehabilitators, BAX strongly supports and promotes co-existence with our wild neighbors. Our commitment to our patients requires our allegiance to the health and well-being of all wildlife. If we are to effectively advocate for California’s natural heritage, we need the cooperation of the state. Listing the Gray Wolf as endangered will provide not only the legal protection wolves need, but also the framework for a better understanding of the contributions predators, and all wild animals, make toward the health and beauty of our lives and our world.

As wildlife rehabilitators, each day we talk with members of the public resolving conflicts between people and wildlife. A sparrow nest in the chimney, a raccoon in the backyard, a shopping plaza that destroys a colony of nesting herons – these and myriad other scenarios await us every time the phone rings. Each time, we must advocate for wild animals, for the laws that protect them, and for the best possible outcome, which includes greater understanding and appreciation for the natural world that sustains us. The best possible outcome includes greater respect for wildlife and wild space.

These experiences on the front line of wildlife protection teach us that rescuing endangered species is much more easily accomplished using tools that speak to each of us. The language of endangerment cuts across all cultures and perspectives. When we say that a species requires special protection, we either mean it or we don’t. We are either welcoming the wolf home to California, or we are not. If we are, then we must provide the welcome that will make a real difference, not just in the Fish and Game Code, but in the understanding of the people who must yield something so that the wolf might live. Only listing Gray Wolves as endangered can do that.

As do most Californians, from enthusiastic open space lovers, such as those of us who call Humboldt home, to the urbane citizens of the world class cities to our South, we look forward with excitement to the restoration and recovery of the Gray Wolf to their historic home in our state.

Speak up for Wolves!

Posted on May 16, 2014 by Monte Merrick

It is reasonable to conclude California may host a functioning pack of Wolves within ten years.*

Listing of Wolves in California is absolutely inevitable.**

* Chuck Bonham, Director, California Department of Fish And Wildlife

** Richard Rogers, Commissioner, California Fish and Game Commission

California’s first wolf in 90 years may have pups in Oregon!

Posted on May 12, 2014 by Monte Merrick

OR-7, in one of the only photos taken while he was in California (photo: CDFW)

Exciting news! OR-7, or Journey, the most famous wolf in the world, first wild wolf in western Oregon since the 1940s as well as the first wild wolf in California since 1924, may have finally found what he was looking for: a mate!

As reported today, biologists tracking Journey since he was a pup in Northeast Oregon have strong evidence that the wandering male has met up with a black female wolf in the Rogue River/Siskiyou National Forest in Southwest Oregon. While it isn’t confirmed that they are denning or have pups, their movements, still being captured by Journey’s radio-collar, indicate the strong possibility. It will be mid-summer before biologists will approach the pair to see if they have pups.