The High Social Costs of Aerial Gunning

Each year since 1939, the federal government and cooperators, which include counties, states, and industry groups, have spent between $20.5 and $36 million on killing predators for the benefit of livestock growers. Peak spending came in the mid-1960s, and then again in the late 1970s [see chart - Figure A] (click here to open chart image in a seperate window). In the past two decades, spending has diminished [Figure B], although the numbers of animals killed has not.

In the decades between 1939 and 1997, Wildlife Services killed over 5 million predators for livestock protection. In 2004, Wildlife Services killed an estimated 2.7 million animals, or about 1 animal every five seconds to protect farmers, ranchers, and others. (In 2004, most deaths came from poison, and non-native starlings were the primary target.) In the past two decades, appropriations from the U.S.D.A. went down, while spending from cooperators (other federal agencies, states, counties, or industry groups) went up [Figure C].

Industry groups and taxpayers have funneled $1.6 billion dollars into predator-killing programs between 1939 and 1998, according to a new study to be published in the journal of Conservation Biology (Berger, 2006). That investment did not benefit sheep ranchers, the study found. Kim Murray Berger, Wildlife Conservation Society research scientist, writes, “that the decline of the sheep industry has been associated most closely with unfavorable market conditions rather than predation losses casts doubt on the value of continued carnivore control, except perhaps at a very local scale” (Berger, 2006). In other words, based on 60 years of data, Berger found that lethal-predator controls did not shore up a sheep industry that has been battered by unfavorable market conditions.

Aerial gunning of wildlife occurs in 17 Western and Midwestern states, on both public and private lands. Although the Federal Airborne Hunting Act, 16 U.S.C.A. §742j(1), makes it illegal to “hunt, harass any animal, or shoot from the air,” exceptions allow certain federal or state agents to conduct “research” or “to protect domestic livestock or crops.”

South Dakota and Wyoming fund their own predator-control programs. Private individuals with a valid state permit may aerial gun in some states.

The Federal Government’s Aerial Gunning Program:
In 1931, Congress ordered the Secretary of Agriculture to find ways to “eradicate” wildlife considered a nuisance to the agricultural industry, and made provisions to subsidize farmers and ranchers for this program (7 U.S.C. § 426). In the early 1940s, the practice by the federal government to aerial gun wild native carnivores program gained a foothold.

Social Costs:

• According to one study by federal researchers, the cost of killing a coyote is between $185 and $805 per individual (Wagner and Conover 1999). The overhead includes maintaining a fleet of aircraft, wages and other employee compensations, and fuel and ammunition costs — for starters.
• The real costs of the program remain hidden, however. Wildlife Services refuses to fulfill our numerous Freedom of Information Act Requests concerning their aerial-gunning budget. When Congressman Mark Udall (D-CO) intervened on our behalf, Wildlife Services still failed to give us documentation relating to the costs of their wildlife-killing program.
• Since 1989, Wildlife Services has experienced several aircraft crashes, resulting in numerous injuries or fatalities to federal agents (details here). Obviously, flying close to the ground while chasing coyotes, foxes, or wolves can lead to trouble, such as flying into powerlines, trees, or land formations. Flying low leaves little maneuvering room when pilots experience unexpected gusts of wind.
• In 2004, the USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) chastised Wildlife Services for illegally giving away aircraft parts to the Wyoming Woolgrowers. Upon information and belief, WS was worried that their controversial aerial gunning program would be shut down; they wanted to ensure continuity of carnivore deaths (view the report).
• In 2004, the USDA OIG found that WS left their fleet of aircraft unsecured and vulnerable to theft, or even for use in terrorist attacks (view the report). (A third 2004 OIG report chastised WS for its inability to account for inventories of hazardous pesticides and controlled drugs.)
• In 1997, while aerial gunning for coyotes, WS personnel fired numerous shots near people on their private land (view the report).
• The Department of Labor confirmed that federal employees killed or injured on the job received $524,279.29 in Worker’s Compensation and Survivor Payment benefits for the period June 1986 to November 2000. This figure is probably the tip of the iceberg, because it does not include contract employees.
• Other costs include the amounts expended by the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration to investigate and clean up aerial gunning crashes.

The State of South Dakota conducts its own aerial gunning program, and has experienced three crashes since 1998:

• May 19, 2005: while chasing a coyote from a low-flying plane, officials experienced two injuries. According to the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, the pilot, Gary Hansen, experienced a head injury and lacerations to the face, when his head hit the dash board; he required hospitalization. His gunner, Mel Utter, received a gash on the forehead.
• March 30, 2000: Pilot Michael Harmon and gunner Kevin Hoult were not injured when their plane crashed after the gunner accidentally shot the engine.
• May 11, 1998: officials’ plane crashed after experiencing a “wind shear.”

Bibliography:
Berger, Kim Murray. 2006. Carnivore-Livestock Conflicts: Effects of Subsidized Predator Control and Economic Correlates on the Sheep Industry. 20 Conservation Biology 3:751-761.

Wagner, Kimberly, and Michael Conover. 1999. Effect of Preventive Coyote Hunting on Sheep Losses to Coyote Predation. 63 Journal of Wildlife Management 2: 606-612. [This study had several methodological problems. See discussion in Brian Mitchell et al. 2004. Coyote Depredation Management: Current Methods and Research Needs. 32 Wildlife Society Bulletin 4: 1209-1218.]

Records received from the Department of Labor pursuant to a Freedom of Information Act Request.

Records received from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Federal Aviation Administration pursuant to Federal of Information Act requests. See also: http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/month.asp.

Sheriff’s report from the Office of the Sheriff, Sierra County, City of Downieville, California.

16 U.S. Code Annotated §742j(1).

U.S. Department of Agriculture/Animal Plant Health Inspection Service/Wildlife Services’ Annual Tables: “Number of Animals Taken and Methods Used by the WS Program” at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/tblfrontpage.html.

---

Wildlife Services official “calling” coyotes.
Once he hears the coyotes howl, the official radios coordinates for the aerial-gunning plane flying in the vicinity.
(From the High Plains Film, Killing Coyote).