United States

Department of

Agriculture

Animal and

Plant Health

Inspection

Service

Veterinary

Services

National

Animal Health

Monitoring

System

Wildlife Services

September 2007

Sheep and Lamb Predator

Death Loss in the United

States, 2004
Mention of companies or commercial products does

not imply recommendation or endorsement by the

USDA over others not mentioned. USDA neither

guarantees nor warrants the standard of any product

mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to

report factually on available data and to provide

specific information.

USDA:APHIS:VS:CEAH

NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7

2150 Centre Avenue

Fort Collins, CO 80526-8117

970.494.7000

E-mail: NAHMS@aphis.usda.gov

http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov

#N498.0907

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits

discrimination in all its programs and activities on the

basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and

where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status,

parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or

part of an individual’s income is derived from any

public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who

require alternative means for communication of

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,

etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202)

720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of

discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil

Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20250–9410, or call (800) 795–

3272 (voice) or (202) 720–6382 (TDD). USDA is an

equal opportunity provider and employer.

Cover photo APHIS photo library
USDA APHIS VS / i

Acknowledgments

This report was a cooperative effort between two U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA) Agencies: the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and the

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).

Thank you to the NASS enumerators who telephoned and visited sheep

operations and collected the data. Their hard work and dedication were

invaluable. Thanks also to the personnel at the USDA–APHIS–Veterinary

Services’ Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health for their efforts in

generating and distributing this report, and to USDA–APHIS Wildlife Services for

their involvement.

All participants are to be commended, particularly the producers whose voluntary

efforts made this report possible.

Larry Granger

Director

Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health
ii / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

Suggested bibliographic citation for this report:

USDA. 2007. Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss in the United States, 2004

USDA:APHIS:VS:CEAH, National Animal Health Monitoring System, Fort Collins,

CO

Contacts for further information:

Questions or comments on the Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

study methods or requests for additional data analysis: Dr. Katherine Marshall

970.494.7000

Information on reprints or other NAHMS reports: Ms. Anne Berry: 970.494.7000

E-mail: NAHMS@aphis.usda.gov
USDA APHIS VS / iii

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

Terms Used In This Report 2

Section I: Population Estimates—Number of Head 3

A. U.S. Demographics 3

1. Inventory, January 1, 1994 to 2005 3

2. Operations—1994 to 2004 3

3. Lamb crop—1994 to 2004 5

B. Regional Demographics 6

1. Adult sheep inventory—January 1, 1995, 2000, and 2005 6

2. Lamb crop—1994, 1999, and 2004 7

C. U.S. Annual Death Loss 7

1. Loss from all causes, 1994–2004 7

2. U.S. nonpredator and predator death loss—1994, 1999, and 2004 9

3. Regional predator and nonpredator death loss—1994, 1999, and 2004 10

Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses 13

A. Sheep Predator Death Loss 13

1. Losses—2004 13

2. Cause of loss—1994, 1999, and 2004 15

3. Cause of loss by size of operation—2004 17

4. Cause of loss by region—2004 20

B. Lamb Predator Death Loss 22

1. Losses—2004 22

2. Cause of loss—1994, 1999, and 2004 23

3. Cause of loss by size of operation—2004 25

4. Cause of loss by region—2004 27

C. Nonlethal Predator Control 30

1. Control methods 30

Section III: Methodology 35

A. 1994 Death Loss Study 35

1. Survey procedures 35

2. Estimation procedures 35

3. Reliability 35

B. 1999 Death Loss Study 36

1. Survey procedures 36

2. Estimation procedures 36

3. Revision policy 36

C. 2004 Death Loss Study 37

1. Survey procedures 37

2. Estimation procedures 37

3. Revision policy 37

Appendix: Discussion of Pre- and Postdocking Losses 38

Introduction

USDA APHIS VS / 1

Introduction

Each January, USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) collects

sheep data on inventory, lamb crop, and total sheep and lamb death loss.

Inventory and lamb crop estimates (number of head) are published in January

via the Sheep and Goats report. Sheep and lamb death losses (number of head)

are published in May via the Meat Animals Production, Disposition, and Income

report. For NASS’s January 1995, 2000, and 2005 sheep surveys, USDA’s

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) provided funding for a

detailed, retrospective breakdown of total sheep and lamb loss by producerattributed cause of loss occurring during the previous year. Death losses by

predator and nonpredator causes were published by NASS for losses in 2004

(NASS report “Sheep and Goats Death Loss,” released May 6, 2005—

www.nass.usda.gov).

This report provides a breakdown of sheep and lamb death losses in 2004 for all

causes by size group and region, with special emphasis on predator causes of

loss. Where possible, the 1994 and 1999 death losses are provided for

comparison.

The methods used in the study can be found at the end of this report.

Further information on NAHMS studies and reports is available at:

http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov

For questions about this report or additional copies, please contact:

USDA-APHIS-VS-CEAH

NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7

2150 Centre Avenue

Fort Collins, CO 80526-8117

970.494.7000
Introduction

2 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

Terms Used In

This Report

Adult sheep inventory: Breeding rams and ewes 1 year and older, and market

sheep.

Lamb crop: For the Central, Northeast, and Southeast regions (see regions

listed below), all lambs born alive during the calendar year. For the Pacific and

West Central regions, all lambs after docking or branding during the calendar

year.

Lambs: Animals less than 1 year old.

Lamb losses: For the Central, Northeast, and Southeast regions, lamb losses

were tallied for all lambs born alive. In the Pacific and West Central regions,

lamb losses were tallied for lambs after docking or branding. For a discussion of

predocking losses, see Appendix.

Market sheep: Animals 1 year and older for use as feeders or for slaughter.

N/A: Not available.

Regions:

Pacific: California, Oregon, Washington

West Central: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Texas,

Utah, Wyoming

Central: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,

Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Wisconsin

Northeast: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York,

Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island*, Virginia, Vermont, West Virginia

Southeast/Other: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia,

Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina,

South Carolina, Tennessee

*For the 1994 estimates, Rhode Island was included in the Southeast/Other

region. In 1999 and 2004, Rhode Island was included in the Northeast region.

Size of Operation: Number of sheep and lambs on the operation January 1 of

respective year. Size groups are: 1 to 24; 25 to 99; 100 to 999; and 1,000 head

or more.
Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

USDA APHIS VS / 3

Section I: Population Estimates—Number of Head

A. U.S. Demographics* 1. Inventory, January 1, 1994 to 2005

Number of sheep and lambs by class and by year:

2. Operations—1994 to 2004

a. Number of operations with sheep and lambs by year:

*”Sheep and Goats” annual January report, NASS

Number Operations 

Year 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

86,060 79,900 76,600 72,680 71,750 70,000 69,200 68,600 68,150 67,720 67,580 

 January 1 Number (1,000 Head) 

Year 

Class 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

All sheep 

and lambs 9,835.7 8,989.3 8,464.6 8,023.7 7,825.1 7,247.0 7,036.0 6,908.0 6,623.0 6,321.0 6,105.0 6,135.0 

Breeding 

ewes 1 year 

and older 5,844.4 5,403.6 5,134.3 4,911.6 4,569.5 4,336.0 4,234.0 4,071.0 3,939.0 3,773.0 3,609.5 3,572.5 

Breeding 

rams 294.1 257.0 233.8 220.3 202.8 202.5 208.5 202.0 200.5 194.0 188.0 190.0 

Market 

sheep N/A 96.8 77.4 85.1 90.8 82.5 80.0 79.0 72.6 67.8 65.6 74.1 

Breeding 

ewes and 

rams 1 year 

and older 

and market 

sheep N/A 5,757.4 5,445.5 5,217.0 4,863.1 4,621.0 4,522.5 4,352.0 4,212.1 4,034.8 3,863.1 3,836.6 
Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

4 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

b. Percentage of operations with breeding sheep by size of operation and by

year:

c. Percentage of breeding sheep inventory by size of operation and by year:

Percent Inventory 

Year 

Size of 

Operation 

(Number of 

Breeding Sheep) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000* 2001 2002 2003 2004 

1 to 99 22.3 24.1 25.0 25.7 25.5 25.9 27.9 28.8 30.1 29.9 31.7 

100 to 499 22.9 19.9 20.4 20.3 19.2 20.4 22.0 23.8 23.5 23.8 22.0 

500 to 4,999 38.4 41.4 40.9 40.0 42.6 39.0 35.2 33.7 32.4 33.1 33.0 

5,000 or more 16.4 14.6 13.7 14.0 12.7 14.7 14.8 13.7 14.0 13.2 13.3 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Does not sum to 100.0 due to rounding 

 Percent Operations 

 Year 

Size of 

Operation 

(Number of 

Breeding 

Sheep) 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000* 2001 2002 2003 2004 

1 to 99 89.6 91.2 90.9 91.9 90.8 90.6 91.2 90.8 91.1 91.8 92.2 

100 to 499 8.2 6.7 7.0 6.2 6.8 7.3 7.2 7.5 7.3 6.7 6.3 

500 to 4,999 2.1 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.3 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 

5,000 or more 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Does not sum to 100.0 due to rounding 
USDA APHIS VS / 5

Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

3. Lamb crop—1994 to 2004

Lamb crop and lamb crop per 100 ewes on hand, by year:

 Year 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Lamb crop

(1,000 

Head) 5,968.2 5,643.2 5,361.3 5,356.3 5,001.5 4,754.0 4,645.0 4,519.5 4,355.0 4,140.0 4,096.0 

Lamb crop 

per 100 

ewes on 

hand 

beginning 

of year 

(January 1) 102 104 104 109 109 110 110 111 111 110 113 
Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

6 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

B. Regional

Demographics

January 1 Number (1,000 Head) Percent 

Region 1995 2000 2005 

2005 as a 

percentage 

of 1995 

2005 as a 

percentage 

of 2000 

Pacific 740.0 506.5 447.2 60.4 88.3 

West Central 3,237.0 2,547.0 1,974.0 61.0 77.5 

Central 1,258.0 1,032.5 957.8 76.1 92.8 

Northeast 400.0 309.5 314.9 78.7 101.7 

Southeast/Other 122.4 127.0 142.7 116.6 112.4 

Total 5,757.4 4,522.5 3,836.6 66.6 84.8 

For this report, the United States was divided into five regions (see Terms Used

in This Report, p. 2) in order to provide data on smaller geographic areas. NASS

does not publish inventory and death loss data for small sheep-producing States

individually, but collapses the data into an “Other States” group. For estimates in

this report, the Other States were combined with the Southeast region. About 4

percent of U.S. sheep and lamb death loss occurred in the Other States.

1. Adult sheep inventory—January 1, 1995, 2000, and 2005

Nationally, the sheep population declined from approximately 5.8 million head on

January 1, 1995, to approximately 3.8 million head on January 1, 2005.

Regionally, only the Southeast/Other region showed an increase in sheep

population from 1995 to 2005. A similar trend occurred in lamb-crop size during

the same period (table 2)

Number of adult sheep (and number of adult sheep in 2000 as a percentage of

adult sheep inventory in 1995), by region:
USDA APHIS VS / 7

Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

2. Lamb crop—1994, 1999, and 2004

Calendar year lamb crop (and 2004 lamb crop as a percentage of 1999 and 1994

lamb crops), by region:

C. U.S. Annual

Death Loss

Lamb Crop (1,000 Head) Percent 

Region 1994 1999 2004 

2004 as a 

percentage 

of 1994 

2004 as a 

percentage 

of 1999 

Pacific 695.0 494.0 458.0 65.9 92.7 

West Central 3,124.0 2,495.0 1,921.0 61.5 77.0 

Central 1,574.0 1,298.0 1,227.0 78.0 94.5 

Northeast 470.7 367.0 368.0 78.2 100.3 

Southeast/Other 104.5 100.0 122.0 116.7 122.0 

Total 5,968.2 4,754.0 4,096.0 68.6 86.2 

 Number (1,000 Head) 

Year 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Sheep 332.8 314.4 342.6 305.4 297.0 259.8 281.5 274.7 261.7 238.4 215.3 

Lambs 614.7 580.4 578.8 542.8 507.1 488.6 490.2 474.8 428.8 393.8 385.0 

Total 947.5 894.8 921.4 848.2 804.1 748.4 771.7 749.5 690.5 632.2 600.3 

*Meat Animal Production, Disposition, and Income, annual April report, NASS. 

1. Loss from all causes, 1994–2004

A total of 385,000 lambs and 215,300 sheep were lost due to predator and

nonpredator causes in 2004. These totals represent 9.4 and 5.6 percent of lamb

crop and sheep inventory, respectively. While the sheep death loss percentage

has remained relatively stable since 1994, the lamb death loss percentage

declined steadily during the same period.

a. Sheep and lamb death loss due to all causes, by year:*
Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

8 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

b. Sheep death loss as a percentage of January 1 inventory of adult sheep

inventory on January 1 of the following year, by year:

c. Lamb death loss as a percentage of lamb crop, by year:

Percent Inventory 

Year 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

5.8 5.8 6.6 6.3 6.4 5.7 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.2 5.6 

Percent Lamb Crop 

Year 

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

10.3 10.3 10.8 10.1 10.1 10.3 10.6 10.5 9.8 9.5 9.4 

0

5

10

15

Lambs

Sheep

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Percent

Year

Sheep Death Loss as a Percentage of January 1 Following-Year Adult Sheep

Inventory, and Lamb Death Loss as a Percentage of Lamb Crop, by Year

5.8 5.8

6.6 6.3 6.4

5.7

6.5 6.5 6.5 6.2

5.6

10.3 10.3

10.8

10.1 10.1 10.3 10.6 10.5

9.8 9.5 9.4
USDA APHIS VS / 9

Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

2. U.S. nonpredator and predator death loss*—1994, 1999, and 2004

Since 1994, nonpredator causes have accounted for the majority of sheep and

lamb death loss. In 2004, 62.7 percent of losses were due to nonpredator

causes, while predator causes accounted for 37.3 percent.

a. Number of sheep and lamb death losses by cause and percentage of loss by

cause—by year:

Number and Percent Loss 

 Year 

 1994 1999 2004 

Cause Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

Nonpredator 230,025 68.3 183,400 70.6 148,900 69.2 

Predator 106,575 31.7 76,400* 29.4 66,400 30.8 

Total 336,600 100.0 259,800 100.0 215,300 100.0 

*Initial NASS publication showed predator sheep losses of 77,000 head. Subsequent publication only 

revised total sheep loss. Relationship between predator and nonpredator loss was maintained at the 

State level, therefore deriving 76,400 head lost due to predators in the United States. 

b. Number of sheep death losses by cause and percentage of loss by cause—by

year:

Number and Percent Loss 

Year 

1994 1999 2004 

Cause Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

Nonpredator 577,950 61.1 472,700 63.2 376,100 62.7 

Predator 368,050 38.9 275,700 36.8 224,200 37.3 

Total 946,000 100.0 748,400 100.0 600,300 100.0 

*Total sheep and lamb death losses for 1994 have been revised, although the revisions are not 

shown further in this publication since detailed cause-of-loss estimates were not similarly 

adjusted and republished. Sheep losses were revised from 336.6 to 332.8 (thousand head), 

and lamb losses were revised from 609.4 to 614.7; as a result, total losses were revised from 

946.0 to 947.5 thousand head. Total sheep and lamb death losses for 1999 were revised from 

260,900 to 259,800 sheep lost and from 482,000 to 488,600 lambs lost. Since the predator loss 

publication was not reissued, adjustments (reflecting the revised total sheep and total lamb 

losses) were made appropriately to the nonpredator loss category. 
Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

10 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

As in 1994 and 1999, a higher percentage of lamb losses (41.0 percent) than

sheep losses (30.8 percent) was due to predators in 2004.

c. Number of lamb death losses by cause and percentage of loss by cause—by

year:

 Number and Percent Loss 

 Year 

 1994 1999 2004 

Cause Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

Nonpredator 347,925 57.1 289,300 59.2 227,200 59.0 

Predator 261,475 42.9 199,300* 40.8 157,800 41.0 

Total 609,400 100.0 488,600 100.0 385,000 100.0 

*Initial NASS publication showed predator lamb losses of 196,000 head. Subsequent publication only 

revised total lamb loss. Relationship between predator and nonpredator loss was maintained at the 

State level, therefore deriving 199,300 head lost due to predators in the United States. 

3. Regional predator and nonpredator death loss—1994, 1999, and 2004

Total sheep losses declined from 1994 to 2004 in every region except the

Southeast/Other. This decline probably reflects regional population changes,

since the percentage of sheep inventory lost has remained stable. In every

region, nonpredator losses of sheep were higher than predator losses. For the

West Central region in 2004, 41,500 sheep (39.2 percent of all sheep losses)

were lost to predators, compared to the Central region where only 9,300 sheep

(17.5 percent of all sheep losses) were lost to predators. Surprisingly, the

Southeast/Other region encountered a relatively high percentage of losses due

to predators (34.0 percent). Note that for the Pacific and West Central regions,

losses that occurred before docking were not included in the estimates; for the

other regions, losses before docking were included in the estimates. While

difficult to measure accurately, these losses may account for a substantial

portion of total losses. For discussion of predocking losses, see Appendix.
USDA APHIS VS / 11

Section I: Population Estimates, Number of Head

a. Number of sheep death losses by cause and percentage of loss by cause—by

region and by year:

 Number and Percent Loss 

 Year 

 1994 1999 2004 

Region Cause Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

Nonpredator 25,625 64.1 17,700 61.0 18,300 70.4 

Pacific Predator 14,375 35.9 11,300 39.0 7,700 29.6 

Total 40,000 100.0 29,000 100.0 26,000 100.0 

Nonpredator 116,325 62.2 87,500 66.8 64,500 60.8 

Predator 70,675 37.8 43,500 33.2 41,500 39.2 West 

Central 

Total 187,000 100.0 131,000 100.0 106,000 100.0 

Nonpredator 59,800 83.2 54,900 81.9 43,700 82.5 

Central Predator 12,100 16.8 12,100 18.1 9,300 17.5 

Total 71,900 100.0 67,000 100.0 53,000 100.0 

Nonpredator 21,875 76.1 15,900 80.3 15,600 78.0 

Northeast Predator 6,875 23.9 3,900 19.7 4,400 22.0 

Total 28,750 100.0 19,800 100.0 20,000 100.0 

Nonpredator 6,400 71.5 7,400 56.9 6,800 66.0 

Predator 2,550 28.5 5,600 43.1 3,500 34.0 Southeast/

Other 

Total 8,950 100.0 13,000 100.0 10,300 100.0 
Section I: Population Estimates—Number of Head

12 /Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

 Number and Percent Loss 

 Year 

 1994 1999 2004 

Region Cause Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

Nonpredator 18,825 39.2 11,200 37.3 6,800 32.4 

Pacific Predator 29,175 60.8 18,800 62.7 14,200 67.6 

Total 48,000 100.0 30,000 100.0 21,000 100.0 

Nonpredator 108,525 36.9 97,300 42.1 53,000 33.3 

Predator 185,475 63.1 133,700 57.9 106,000 66.7 West 

Central 

Total 294,000 100.0 231,000 100.0 159,000 100.0 

Nonpredator 156,175 83.7 132,700 81.2 117,300 84.1 

Central Predator 30,525 16.3 30,800 18.8 22,200 15.9 

Total 186,700 100.0 163,500 100.0 139,500 100.0 

Nonpredator 50,000 81.9 35,700 81.0 36,300 80.5 

Northeast Predator 11,050 18.1 8,400 19.0 8,800 19.5 

Total 61,050 100.0 44,100 100.0 45,100 100.0 

Nonpredator 14,400 73.3 12,400 62.0 13,800 67.6 

Predator 5,250 26.7 7,600 38.0 6,600 32.4 Southeast/

Other 

Total 19,650 100.0 20,000 100.0 20,400 100.0 

In the Pacific and West Central regions, the percentage of loss due to predators

was higher for lambs (67.6 and 66.7 percent, respectively) than for sheep (29.6

and 39.2 percent respectively) (table 3.a). The percentages of predator and

nonpredator sheep losses in these regions (approximately one-third predator and

two-thirds nonpredator) are nearly reversed for lamb losses (approximately twothirds predator and one-third nonpredator). The highest percentages of lamb loss

due to nonpredator causes occurred in the Central and Northeast regions (84.1

and 80.5 percent, respectively).

b. Number of lamb death losses by cause and percentage of loss by cause—by

region and by year:
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 13

Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

A. Sheep Predator

Death Loss

1. Losses—2004

The percentage of sheep inventory lost to predators was consistently higher on

operations with 1 to 24 sheep and lambs than on operations with 1,000 or more

sheep and lambs. Across size categories, predator losses in the Central region

(0.94 percent) were significantly lower than in all other regions, except the

Northeast region.

Sheep death loss as a percentage of adult sheep inventory on January 1, 2005,

by size of operation and by region:*

Percent Inventory 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs)

1-24 25-99 100-999 

1,000 or 

More 

All 

Operations 

Region Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Pacific 2.35 (0.66) 1.97 (0.52) 2.25 (0.43) 1.16 (0.17) 1.59 (0.17) 

West 

Central 8.77 (2.90) 5.18 (2.47) 1.33 (0.11) 1.80 (0.09) 2.16 (0.26) 

Central 1.92 (0.53) 0.88 (0.25) 0.76 (0.08) 0.74 (0.12) 0.94 (0.10) 

Northeast 1.77 (0.88) 0.81 (0.20) 1.08 (0.17) 0.82 (0.23) 1.16 (0.28) 

Southeast/

Other 1.64 (0.61) 3.36 (1.15) 2.46 (0.80) ** 2.40 (0.49) 

All 

operations 3.06 (0.60) 2.02 (0.53) 1.21 (0.08) 1.61 (0.07) 1.73 (0.14) 

*2004 predator death loss divided by the January 1, 2005, inventory of ewes and rams for breeding 1 

year or older plus market sheep. 

**Sample size <5. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

14 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

0 2 4 6 8 10

Southeast/Other

Northeast

Central

West Central

Pacific

Region

Size of

Operation

(Number Sheep

and Lambs)

1 to 24

25 to 99

100 to 999

1,000 or

More

All

Operations

Percent

Sheep Death Loss as a Percentage of Adult Sheep Inventory on

January 1, 2005, by Size of Operation and by Region

2.35

8.77

1.92

1.77

1.64

1.97

5.18

0.88

0.81

3.36

2.25

1.33

0.76

1.08

2.46

1.16

1.80

0.74

0.82

0.60

1.59

2.16

0.94

1.16

2.40
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 15

2. Cause of loss—1994, 1999, and 2004

Coyotes were the leading cause of predator loss in 2004, accounting for 51.7

percent of sheep deaths due to predators. Dogs were the second leading cause

of loss, accounting for 22.7 percent of predator losses. Losses due to “other”

predators increased from 1994 to 2004.

a. Percentage of sheep death loss by cause and by year:

Percent Predator Loss 

Year 

Predator Cause 1994 1999* 2004 

Bears 4.3 4.6 4.5 

Bobcats or lynx 2.7 3.0 3.3 

Coyotes 58.5 51.7 51.7 

Dogs 18.4 25.7 22.7 

Mountain lions** 10.7 7.6 7.7 

Foxes 0.8 0.9 0.5 

Eagles 1.8 1.0 1.1 

Other predators (wolves, ravens, 

vultures, other animals, and 

unknown predators) 2.8 5.3 8.6 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Cause-specific percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding. 

**Also known as cougars, pumas, and panthers. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

16 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

In 2004, 1.73 percent of the January 1, 2005, adult sheep inventory was lost to

predators, which is similar to the percentage lost in 1999.

b. Percentage of January 1 following-year adult sheep inventory lost, by cause

and by year:

Percent Inventory 

Year 

Predator Cause 1994 1999 2004 

Bears 0.08 0.08 0.08 

Bobcats or lynx 0.05 0.05 0.06 

Coyotes 1.08 0.88 0.89 

Dogs 0.34 0.44 0.39 

Mountain lions 0.20 0.13 0.13 

Foxes 0.01 0.02 0.01 

Eagles 0.03 0.02 0.02 

Other predators (wolves, ravens, 

vultures, other animals, and 

unknown predators) 0.05 0.09 0.15 

All predator causes 1.84 1.71 1.73 

*Unknown predators were included in “Other predators” in 2004. 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 17

3. Cause of loss by size of operation—2004

The percentage of sheep death loss due to coyotes was lower in the smallest

operation size category than in the larger size categories. The percentage

attributable to dogs decreased as operation size increased.

a. Percentage of sheep death loss by cause and by size of operation:

Percent Predator Loss 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs)

1-24 25-99 100-999 1,000 or More 

Predator Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 0.6 (0.5) 1.4 (0.5) 2.8 (0.5) 8.4 (0.7) 

Bobcats or lynx 2.7 (2.2) 0.7 (0.6) 3.4 (1.0) 5.8 (0.6) 

Coyotes 32.3 (7.4) 66.2 (7.1) 57.8 (4.1) 55.9 (1.5) 

Dogs 54.4 (8.7) 21.6 (4.5) 19.1 (5.1) 5.7 (0.7) 

Mountain lions* 5.0 (1.9) 1.4 (0.5) 6.4 (1.3) 10.9 (0.8) 

Foxes 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 0.2 (0.1) 0.8 (0.3) 

Eagles 0.0 (0.0) 0.3 (0.3) 0.4 (0.2) 2.2 (0.3) 

Other predators 

(incl. wolves, 

ravens, vultures, 

and other 

animals) 0.9 (0.5) 1.3 (0.6) 3.9 (0.8) 3.0 (0.5) 

Unknown 

predators 4.1 (1.8) 7.1 (2.8) 6.0 (1.1) 7.3 (1.3) 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Also known as cougars, pumas, and panthers. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

18 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other predators*

Mountain lions,

cougars, or pumas

Dogs

Coyotes

Percent

Size of Operation

(Number of Sheep

and Lambs)

Predator Cause

1 to 24

25 to 99

100 to 999

1,000

or More

32.3

54.4

5.0

0.9

66.2

21.6

1.4

1.3

57.8

19.1

6.4

3.9

55.9

5.7

10.9

3.0

Percentage of Sheep Death Loss by Cause and by Size of Operation

*Wolves, ravens, vultures, and other animals.
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 19

b. Percentage of January 1 following-year adult sheep inventory lost, by cause

and by size of operation:

Percent of Inventory 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs) 

1-24 25-99 100-999 1,000 or More 

Predator Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 0.02 (0.01) 0.03 (0.01) 0.03 (0.01) 0.13 (0.01) 

Bobcats or lynx 0.08 (0.07) 0.01 (0.01) 0.04 (0.01) 0.09 (0.01) 

Coyotes 0.99 (0.25) 1.34 (0.47) 0.70 (0.05) 0.90 (0.05) 

Dogs 1.66 (0.51) 0.44 (0.10) 0.23 (0.07) 0.09 (0.01) 

Mountain lions 0.15 (0.05) 0.03 (0.01) 0.08 (0.02) 0.17 (0.02) 

Foxes 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.01 (0.00) 

Eagles 0.00 (0.00) 0.01 (0.00) 0.01 (0.00) 0.04 (0.00) 

Other predators 

(incl. wolves, 

ravens, vultures, 

and other 

animals) 0.03 (0.01) 0.03 (0.01) 0.05 (0.01) 0.05 (0.01) 

Unknown 

predators 0.13 (0.05) 0.14 (0.05) 0.07 (0.01) 0.12 (0.02) 

All predator 

causes 3.06 (0.60) 2.02 (0.53) 1.21 (0.08) 1.61 (0.07) 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

20 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

4. Cause of loss by region—2004

Coyotes accounted for the highest percentages of losses in every region except

the Southeast/Other region, where dogs accounted for the highest percentage of

predator loss.

a. Percentage of sheep death loss by cause and by region:

Percent Predator Loss 

Region 

Pacific 

West 

Central Central Northeast 

Southeast/ 

Other 

Predator 

Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 1.7 (0.5) 6.0 (0.8) 0.0 (0.0) 1.9 (1.0) 1.4 (1.3) 

Bobcats or 

lynx 0.3 (0.2) 4.9 (0.8) 2.9 (2.7) 0.2 (0.1) 1.1 (1.1) 

Coyotes 51.7 (3.9) 56.1 (2.7) 57.0 (5.3) 66.2 (6.6) 21.0 (7.8) 

Dogs 15.5 (3.1) 16.0 (3.1) 31.7 (5.2) 27.5 (6.8) 52.4 (12.5) 

Mountain 

lions* 14.0 (2.3) 7.2 (1.1) 2.7 (0.9) 0.1 (0.1) 3.3 (3.3) 

Foxes 0.0 (0.0) 0.6 (0.2) 0.0 (0.0) 0.2 (0.1) 0.0 (0.0) 

Eagles 0.0 (0.0) 1.5 (0.3) 0.5 (0.4) 0.0 (0.0) 0.0 (0.0) 

Other 

predators 

(incl. wolves, 

ravens, 

vultures, and 

other animals) 0.9 (0.4) 2.7 (0.5) 1.4 (0.7) 1.2 (0.9) 6.6 (2.2) 

Unknown 

predators 15.9 (4.7) 5.0 (0.8) 3.8 (0.8) 2.7 (1.1) 14.2 (6.9) 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Also known as cougars, pumas, and panthers. 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 21

b. Percentage of January 1 following-year adult sheep inventory lost, by cause

and by region:

Percent Inventory 

Region 

Pacific 

West 

Central Central Northeast 

Southeast/ 

Other 

Predator 

Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 0.03 (0.01) 0.13 (0.01) 0.00 (0.00) 0.02 (0.01) 0.03 (0.03) 

Bobcats or 

lynx 0.01 (0.00) 0.11 (0.01) 0.03 (0.03) 0.00 (0.00) 0.03 (0.03) 

Coyotes 0.82 (0.09) 1.21 (0.18) 0.54 (0.07) 0.77 (0.20) 0.50 (0.20) 

Dogs 0.25 (0.05) 0.34 (0.10) 0.30 (0.06) 0.32 (0.12) 1.26 (0.46) 

Mountain lions 0.22 (0.05) 0.16 (0.02) 0.03 (0.01) 0.00 (0.00) 0.08 (0.08) 

Foxes 0.00 (0.00) 0.01 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 

Eagles 0.00 (0.00) 0.03 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) 

Other 

predators 

(incl. wolves, 

ravens, 

vultures, and 

other animals) 0.02 (0.01) 0.06 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.16 (0.03) 

Unknown 

predators 0.25 (0.09) 0.11 (0.01) 0.04 (0.01) 0.03 (0.01) 0.34 (0.17) 

All predator 

causes 1.59 (0.17) 2.16 (0.26) 0.94 (0.10) 1.16 (0.28) 2.40 (0.49) 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

22 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

B. Lamb Predator

Death Loss

1. Losses—2004

In the West Central region, 5.22 percent of all lambs born were lost to predators

in 2004. The Central region had the lowest percentage death loss due to

predators (1.57 percent of lamb crop). Generally, differences in death loss

across operation sizes were not statistically significant.

Percentage of lamb crop lost by size of operation and by region:

Percent Lamb Crop 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs)

1-24 25-99 100-999 

1,000 or 

More 

All 

Operations 

Region Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Pacific 4.65 (1.53) 3.32 (0.70) 3.51 (0.30) 2.44 (0.31) 2.98 (0.26) 

West 

Central 12.14 (3.20) 6.28 (1.61) 5.24 (0.50) 4.76 (0.13) 5.22 (0.22) 

Central 2.26 (0.52) 1.28 (0.21) 1.60 (0.16) 1.55 (0.11) 1.57 (0.12) 

Northeast 2.53 (0.96) 2.66 (0.54) 2.47 (0.29) 2.32 (0.54) 2.56 (0.33) 

Southeast/

Other 6.12 (1.97) 4.85 (1.33) 2.50 (1.19) * 4.68 (1.06) 

All 

operations 4.43 (0.65) 2.70 (0.32) 3.22 (0.22) 4.18 (0.11) 3.86** (0.12) 

*Small sample size (<5) 

**Rounded up to match published NASS number 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 23

2. Cause of loss—1994, 1999, and 2004

Coyotes accounted for the highest percentages of death loss in lambs in 1994,

1999, and 2004 (69.4, 64.3, 64.2 percent of total predator loss, respectively).

a. Percentage of lamb death loss by cause and by year:

Percent Predator Loss 

Year 

Predator Cause 1994 1999 2004 

Bears 2.9 2.1 3.5 

Bobcats or lynx 2.4 5.3 5.6 

Coyotes 69.4 64.3 64.2 

Dogs 7.9 11.0 9.3 

Mountain lions** 6.5 4.9 4.8 

Foxes 4.4 3.8 2.5 

Eagles 5.0 5.1 3.5 

Other predators (wolves, 

ravens, vultures, other 

animals, and unknown 

predators) 1.4 3.5 6.5 

Total 99.9 100.0 99.9 

*Cause-specific percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding. 

**Also known as cougars, pumas, and panthers. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

24 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

In 2004, 3.86 percent of all lambs born were lost to predators. Coyotes,

accounted for the loss of 2.47 percent of all lambs born in 2004.

b. Percentage of lamb crop lost by cause and by year:

Percent Lamb Crop 

Year 

Predator Cause 1994 1999 2004 

Bears 0.13 0.09 0.13 

Bobcats or lynx 0.11 0.22 0.22 

Coyotes 3.04 2.65 2.47 

Dogs 0.35 0.45 0.36 

Mountain lions 0.29 0.20 0.19 

Foxes 0.19 0.16 0.10 

Eagles 0.22 0.21 0.14 

Other predators (wolves, 

ravens, vultures, other 

animals, and unkown 

predators) 0.06 0.15 0.25 

All predator causes 4.39 4.13 3.86 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 25

3. Cause of loss by size of operation—2004

The percentages of lamb death loss due to coyotes were similar across

operation sizes. However, the percentages of predator losses attributable to dogs

ranged from 29.2 percent on operations with 1 to 24 sheep and lambs to 2.1

percent on operations with 1,000 or more sheep and lambs.

a. Percentage of lamb death loss by cause and by size of operation:

Percent Predator Loss 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs)

1-24 25-99 100-999 1,000 or More 

Predator Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 0.0 (0.0) 1.2 (0.4) 0.9 (0.2) 7.0 (0.5) 

Bobcats or lynx 1.5 (1.2) 2.1 (0.7) 6.0 (0.8) 8.5 (0.5) 

Coyotes 55.7 (6.9) 66.9 (3.6) 66.5 (1.6) 58.6 (1.0) 

Dogs 29.2 (6.2) 19.9 (3.4) 7.3 (1.3) 2.1 (0.4) 

Mountain lions* 2.6 (1.4) 1.2 (0.3) 2.6 (0.4) 6.9 (0.6) 

Foxes 0.6 (0.5) 2.2 (0.9) 3.8 (0.6) 2.3 (0.2) 

Eagles 1.8 (1.2) 1.4 (0.5) 5.0 (1.3) 4.2 (0.3) 

Other predators 

(wolves, ravens, 

vultures, and 

other animals) 3.5 (1.5) 2.1 (0.7) 2.8 (0.6) 6.0 (0.4) 

Unknown 

predators 5.1 (2.4) 3.0 (0.9) 5.1 (0.7) 4.4 (0.4) 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Also known as cougars, pumas, and panthers. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

26 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

b. Percentage of lamb crop lost by cause and by size of operation:

Percent Lamb Crop 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs)

1-24 25-99 100-999 1,000 or More 

Predator Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 0.00 (0.00) 0.03 (0.01) 0.03 (0.00) 0.29 (0.02) 

Bobcats or lynx 0.07 (0.06) 0.06 (0.02) 0.19 (0.02) 0.36 (0.02) 

Coyotes 2.47 (0.53) 1.81 (0.24) 2.14 (0.16) 2.45 (0.09) 

Dogs 1.30 (0.31) 0.54 (0.12) 0.24 (0.04) 0.09 (0.01) 

Mountain lions 0.12 (0.06) 0.03 (0.01) 0.09 (0.01) 0.29 (0.03) 

Foxes 0.02 (0.02) 0.06 (0.02) 0.12 (0.02) 0.10 (0.01) 

Eagles 0.08 (0.05) 0.04 (0.01) 0.16 (0.05) 0.18 (0.01) 

Other predators 

(wolves, ravens, 

vultures, and 

other animals) 0.15 (0.06) 0.06 (0.02) 0.09 (0.02) 0.25 (0.02) 

Unknown 

predators 0.23 (0.11) 0.08 (0.02) 0.17 (0.02) 0.19 (0.02) 

All predator 

causes 4.43 (0.65) 2.70 (0.32) 3.22 (0.22) 4.18 (0.11) 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 27

4. Cause of loss by region—2004

The percentages of lamb crop lost due to coyotes ranged from 38.2 percent in

the Southeast/Other region to 73.4 percent in the Pacific region. The

percentages of lamb crop lost due to dogs ranged from 30.0 percent in the

Southeast/Other region to 5.5 percent in the West Central region.

a. Percentage of lamb death loss by cause and by region:

Percent Predator Loss 

Region 

Pacific 

West 

Central Central Northeast 

Southeast/ 

Other 

Predator 

Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 2.3 (0.8) 4.8 (0.4) 0.5 (0.4) 1.0 (0.3) 0.1 (0.0) 

Bobcats or 

lynx 0.4 (0.1) 8.5 (0.5) 1.9 (1.0) 0.7 (0.6) 0.7 (0.4) 

Coyotes 73.4 (3.4) 60.3 (1.4) 65.4 (3.3) 72.1 (4.9) 38.2 (5.5) 

Dogs 9.8 (2.5) 5.5 (1.2) 20.2 (3.3) 11.6 (3.2) 30.0 (6.5) 

Mountain 

lions* 8.6 (2.1) 4.9 (0.4) 0.8 (0.4) 0.1 (0.0) 2.7 (1.7) 

Foxes 0.4 (0.1) 3.2 (0.4) 1.2 (0.2) 0.9 (0.3) 3.2 (1.9) 

Eagles 1.5 (0.2) 4.5 (0.6) 3.7 (1.1) 1.6 (1.3) 0.1 (0.1) 

Other 

predators 

(wolves, 

ravens, 

vultures, and 

other animals) 1.5 (0.4) 3.8 (0.4) 1.3 (0.5) 5.9 (2.1) 19.9 (2.5) 

Unknown 

predators 2.1 (0.6) 4.5 (0.4) 5.0 (1.1) 6.1 (3.6) 5.1 (2.0) 

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

*Also known as cougars, pumas, and panthers. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

28 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other predators*

Mountain lions,

cougars, or pumas

Dogs

Coyotes

Percent

Pacific

West

Central

Central

Northeast

Southeast/

Other

Predator Cause

Region

Percentage of Lamb Death Loss by Cause and by Region

*Wolves, ravens, vultures, and other animals

73.4

9.8

8.6

1.5

60.3

5.5

4.9

3.8

65.4

20.2

0.8

1.3

72.1

11.6

0.1

5.9

38.2

30.0

2.7

19.9
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 29

The percentages of losses due to bears, bobcats, and eagles were substantially

higher in the West Cental region than in the other regions.

b. Percentage of lamb crop lost by cause and by region:

Percent Lamb Crop 

Region 

Pacific 

West 

Central Central Northeast 

Southeast/ 

Other 

Predator 

Cause Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Bears 0.07 (0.03) 0.25 (0.02) 0.01 (0.01) 0.03 (0.01) 0.00 (0.00) 

Bobcats or 

lynx 0.01 (0.00) 0.44 (0.02) 0.03 (0.02) 0.02 (0.01) 0.03 (0.02) 

Coyotes 2.19 (0.23) 3.15 (0.17) 1.02 (0.09) 1.85 (0.28) 1.79 (0.48) 

Dogs 0.29 (0.08) 0.29 (0.07) 0.32 (0.06) 0.30 (0.09) 1.41 (0.48) 

Mountain lions 0.26 (0.07) 0.26 (0.02) 0.01 (0.01) 0.00 (0.00) 0.13 (0.08) 

Foxes 0.01 (0.00) 0.17 (0.02) 0.02 (0.00) 0.02 (0.01) 0.15 (0.09) 

Eagles 0.05 (0.01) 0.24 (0.04) 0.06 (0.02) 0.04 (0.03) 0.00 (0.00) 

Other 

predators 

(wolves, 

ravens, 

vultures, and 

other animals) 0.04 (0.01) 0.20 (0.02) 0.02 (0.01) 0.15 (0.05) 0.93 (0.19) 

Unknown 

predators 0.06 (0.02) 0.23 (0.02) 0.08 (0.02) 0.16 (0.10) 0.24 (0.11) 

Total 2.98 (0.26) 5.22 (0.22) 1.56 (0.12) 2.56 (0.33) 4.68 (1.06) 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

30 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

C. Nonlethal

Predator Control

1. Control methods

Nonlethal predator control methods were used by 31.9 percent of all operations.

a. Percentage of all operations by nonlethal predator control methods used:

Percent Operations, 2004 

Control Method Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Guard dogs 10.3 (1.0) 

Llamas 4.4 (0.5) 

Donkeys 3.0 (0.3) 

Fencing 16.6 (1.4) 

Lamb shed 9.9 (0.7) 

Herding 1.9 (0.3) 

Night penning 10.6 (0.8) 

Fright tactics 0.7 (0.1) 

Removing carrion 3.9 (0.4) 

Culling* 4.4 (0.4) 

Change bedding 2.8 (0.4) 

Frequent checks 4.5 (0.4) 

Other 1.2 (0.1) 

Any method 31.9 (1.4) 

*Culling as a nonlethal strategy: Producers sometimes remove older, sick, or injured sheep from a 

flock for overall herd quality. In addition, it is suggested that fewer predators are attracted to the flock 

when these animals—which are more susceptible to predation by mountain lions, bears, and black 

vultures—are removed. 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 31

For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, over half used

fencing as a means of predator control in 2004. About one-third of operations

that used nonlethal predator control methods used guard dogs, lamb sheds, and

night penning for predator control in 2004.

b. For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, percentage of

operations by nonlethal predator control methods used:

Percent Operations 

Year 

Control Method 1994 1999 2004 

Guard dogs 28.2* 28.2 31.8 

Llamas - 13.2 14.0 

Donkeys - 9.0 9.1 

Fencing 29.6 57.0 52.5 

Lamb shed - 46.0 30.8 

Herding - 6.6 5.7 

Night penning - 42.6 32.9 

Fright tactics 7.2 5.1 2.2 

Removing carrion - - 11.7 

Culling - - 13.8 

Change bedding - - 8.9 

Frequent checks - - 14.0 

Husbandry 29.6 - - 

Other 4.7 6.2 3.8 

*In 1994 this category was guard animals. 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

32 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

c. For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, percentage of

operations by number of nonlethal predator control methods used:

Number of Control 

Methods Used Percent Operations 

Std. 

Error 

1 43.8 (2.8) 

2 24.2 (1.9) 

3 11.1 (1.4) 

4 9.3 (1.5) 

5 5.0 (0.8) 

6 3.5 (0.7) 

7 or more 3.1 (0.3) 

Total 100.0 
 Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

USDA APHIS VS / 33

For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, the West Central

region had the lowest percentage of operations (38.4 percent) that used fencing

for predator control. Guard dogs, lamb sheds, and night penning were used by

similar percentages of operations across regions.

d. For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, percentage of

operations by control method and by region:

Percent Operations 

Region 

Pacific 

West 

Central Central Northeast 

Southeast/ 

Other 

Control 

Method Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Guard dogs 26.5 (4.2) 34.8 (3.4) 27.5 (2.9) 38.4 (8.3) 39.1 (6.8) 

Llamas 15.0 (4.1) 19.8 (3.3) 13.2 (1.9) 12.0 (4.0) 7.1 (3.0) 

Donkeys 6.9 (2.1) 13.8 (2.5) 7.0 (1.2) 7.2 (1.6) 19.3 (4.3) 

Fencing 62.6 (5.3) 38.4 (3.5) 47.4 (4.8) 61.3 (7.8) 60.4 (5.4) 

Lamb shed 40.5 (5.6) 27.8 (3.0) 32.6 (3.4) 27.4 (5.0) 26.3 (6.0) 

Herding 6.1 (1.6) 8.2 (1.7) 4.2 (0.7) 7.3 (3.0) 2.7 (0.8) 

Night penning 37.7 (4.9) 34.0 (3.4) 33.8 (3.4) 33.3 (5.4) 22.9 (4.8) 

Fright tactics 3.6 (0.9) 3.0 (0.5) 1.9 (0.4) 1.4 (0.5) 1.9 (0.9) 

Removing 

carrion 22.4 (4.5) 13.4 (2.5) 12.6 (1.6) 5.0 (1.2) 11.3 (4.7) 

Culling 19.9 (4.2) 17.6 (2.7) 14.9 (1.7) 9.3 (2.9) 4.9 (1.3) 

Change 

bedding 9.5 (1.7) 9.7 (1.4) 7.0 (1.2) 10.4 (4.5) 7.3 (2.1) 

Frequent 

checks 19.9 (3.5) 18.8 (2.1) 11.1 (1.7) 12.9 (3.6) 8.3 (1.7) 

Other 2.1 (0.7) 3.7 (0.8) 4.8 (0.8) 3.6 (1.0) 4.6 (1.9) 
Section II: Population Estimates—Predator Losses

34 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, the percentages of

operations that used fencing as a means of predator control ranged from 58.1

percent of operations with 1 to 24 sheep and lambs to 38.3 and 38.5 percent of

operations with 100-999 and 1,000 or more sheep and lambs, respectively. A

higher percentage of operations with 1,000 or more sheep and lambs used guard

dogs compared to the other operation sizes.

e. For operations that used nonlethal predator control methods, percentage of

operations by control method and by size of operation:

Percent Operations 

Size of Operation (Number of Sheep and Lambs) 

1-24 25-99 100-999 

1,000 or 

More 

All 

Operations 

Control 

Method Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error Pct. 

Std. 

Error 

Guard dogs 32.5 (4.2) 28.1 (2.2) 40.4 (3.4) 56.4 (1.4) 32.3 (2.7) 

Llamas 11.2 (2.1) 17.5 (2.5) 20.5 (1.7) 21.2 (1.0) 14.0 (1.5) 

Donkeys 8.1 (1.3) 10.0 (1.6) 16.5 (1.9) 10.2 (0.7) 9.5 (0.9) 

Fencing 58.1 (4.1) 44.9 (2.8) 38.3 (3.5) 38.5 (1.4) 52.2 (2.8) 

Lamb shed 29.5 (2.8) 35.5 (2.7) 29.5 (2.0) 23.8 (1.0) 31.1 (2.0) 

Herding 4.6 (1.1) 6.9 (1.1) 7.9 (0.9) 29.9 (1.1) 5.9 (0.9) 

Night penning 32.2 (3.0) 37.1 (2.9) 31.1 (2.1) 21.8 (1.2) 33.4 (2.0) 

Fright tactics 1.4 (0.3) 2.9 (0.5) 4.7 (0.7) 11.9 (0.8) 2.3 (0.3) 

Removing 

carrion 9.4 (1.5) 16.1 (2.2) 17.5 (1.5) 20.8 (1.0) 12.2 (1.2) 

Culling 8.0 (1.4) 22.1 (2.4) 25.6 (1.8) 34.0 (1.2) 14.0 (1.3) 

Change 

bedding 7.4 (1.9) 9.6 (1.4) 12.5 (1.1) 26.2 (1.0) 8.7 (1.2) 

Frequent 

checks 11.2 (1.8) 17.1 (1.8) 20.6 (1.5) 36.2 (1.3) 14.1 (1.3) 

Other 2.8 (0.5) 5.5 (0.9) 6.0 (0.6) 8.3 (1.0) 3.9 (0.4) 
Section III: Methodology

USDA APHIS VS / 35

Section III: Methodology

A. 1994 Death

Loss Study

1. Survey procedures

A random sample of U.S. producers was surveyed by NASS to provide data for

these estimates. Survey procedures ensured that all producers (except those in

Alaska) had an opportunity to be included in the survey, regardless of operation

size. Data were collected from approximately 75,000 cattle and sheep producers

during the first half of January by mail, telephone, and face-to-face interviews.

Large operations were sampled more heavily than small operations. An

additional nonprobability survey was also conducted in a few western States.

Regardless of when producers responded, they were asked to report death

losses for sheep and lambs for the 1994 calendar year. Based on the original

data collected during January, a report entitled “Sheep and Goats Predator Loss”

was issued April 27, 1995. This report contained data for death loss by cause for

predators only and was on a State and regional level. Value of the losses was

also included.

2. Estimation procedures

Total sheep and lamb death losses from all causes were published in the “Meat

Animals, Production, Disposition, and Income—1994” report (released April 13,

1995). In setting the estimates for the report, total predator and nonpredator

losses were estimated as a percentage of total losses set previously, and

specific predator and nonpredator losses were estimated as a percentage of total

predator and nonpredator losses, respectively.

3. Reliability

Since all sheep producers were not included in the sample, survey estimates are

subject to sampling variability. Survey results are also subject to nonsampling

errors, such as omissions, duplications, and mistakes in reporting, recording,

and data processing. The effects of these nonsampling errors cannot be

measured directly. They are minimized through rigid quality controls in the data

collection process and through a careful review of all reported data for

consistency and reasonableness.
Section III: Methodology

36 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

B. 1999 Death

Loss Study

1. Survey procedures

A random sample of U.S. producers was surveyed by NASS to provide data for

these estimates. Survey procedures ensured that all sheep producers,

regardless of operation size, had an opportunity to be included in the survey.

Large operations were sampled more heavily than small operations. About

13,800 producers were contacted during the first half of January by mail,

telephone, and face-to-face interviews.

2. Estimation procedures

Total death losses from all causes for sheep and lambs were as reported in Meat

Animals, Production, Disposition, and Income—2000 report (released April 27,

2001).

In setting the predator loss estimates, total predator losses were estimated as a

percentage of total losses, and specific predator losses were estimated as a

percentage of total predator losses. The Sheep and Goats Predator Loss report

was published May 5, 2000, by NASS. Nonpredator loss percentages by cause

of loss were generated by APHIS based upon analysis of the data collected in

January 1999.

3. Revision policy

Revisions to previous estimates of total death losses are made to improve the

current estimate. Previous-year estimates are subject to revision when current

estimates are made. Estimates for losses from all causes are subject to revision

in the following year’s Meat Animals, Production, Disposition, and Income report.
Section III: Methodology

USDA APHIS VS / 37

C. 2004 Death

Loss Study

1. Survey procedures

A random sample of U.S. producers was surveyed by NASS to provide data for

these estimates. Survey procedures ensured that all sheep producers,

regardless of operation size, had an opportunity to be included in the survey.

Large operations were sampled more heavily than small operations. About

22,000 operators were contacted during the first half of January 2005 by mail,

telephone, and face-to-face interviews.

2. Estimation procedures

Total death losses from all causes for sheep and lambs were as reported in

“Meat Animals, Production, Disposition, and Income—2004” report (released

April 28 2005). In setting the predator and nonpredator loss estimates, total

predator and nonpredator losses were estimated as a percentage of total losses,

then specific predator and nonpredator losses were estimated as a percentage

of total predator and nonpredator losses. Death losses by predator and

nonpredator cause of loss were published in the “Sheep and Goats Death Loss”

report (released May 6, 2005).

Nonpredator cause of loss percentages by cause of loss, region, and operation

were generated by APHIS based upon analysis of the data collected in January

2005.

3. Revision policy

Revisions to previous estimates of total death losses are made to improve the

current estimate. Previous-year estimates are subject to revision when current

estimates are made. Estimates for losses from all causes are subject to revision

in the following year’s “Meat Animals, Production, Disposition, and Income”

report.
Section III: Methodology

38 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

Appendix: Discussion of Pre- and Postdocking Losses

In the Western States (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Oregon, Montana,

New Mexico, Nevada, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wyoming) NASS defines lamb

crop as lambs marked, docked, or branded. These States make up the Pacific

and West Central regions in this report. In the remaining States, lamb crop is

defined as lambs born. The individual State versions of the January 1 Sheep and

Goats Survey questionnaire reflect these differences.

For the States in the Pacific and West Central regions listed above, NASS

reports* only lamb losses that occurred after marking, docking, or branding.

However, the questionnaire used in the Pacific and West Central States did

include a question regarding lambs lost before marking, docking, or branding.

Five States (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana) publish State-level

losses separated into pre- and postdocking. These States also conduct cause-ofloss surveys on annual or biannual basis and publish the results.

The exclusion of predocking losses from the two reports is due to the fact that

lambs in the Pacific and West Central regions are usually born on range and,

therefore, less likely to be observed. It is difficult for producers in these regions

to accurately estimate the number of lambs both born and lost before marking,

docking, or branding. However, this method leads to the exclusion of a large

number of losses. In addition, no lambs lost due to lambing problems are

counted in these States, as these losses would obviously all occur in the

predocking period. Examination of the published predocking losses in the five

States provide an estimate of the magnitude of losses that occur before docking

(see table a).

With the exception of Colorado, over half of all reported lamb losses in each of

the five States occurred in the predocking period. In Colorado, only about onethird of all losses (32.1percent ) occurred predocking. The percentage of total

predator losses that occurred in the predocking period (table b) ranged from 20.0

percent in Idaho to 48.1 percent in Wyoming. For nonpredator losses (table c),

Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Wyoming show at least two-thirds of reported

nonpredator losses occurred in the predocking period, while in Colorado, 26.1

percent of nonpredator losses occurred in the predocking period.

* NASS publications: “Meat Animals, Production, Disposition, and Income” (April) and the periodic

published in May approximately every 5 years “Sheep and Goats Death Loss.”
Appendix

USDA APHIS VS / 39

a. Number of postdocking lamb losses, predocking lamb losses, and predocking

lamb losses as a percentage of total lamb losses, by State, 2004:

Number of Lamb Losses 

State 

Postdocking 

NASS 

Reported 

Predocking 

State 

Reported Total 

Predocking 

Losses as a 

Percentage 

of Total 

Losses 

Colorado 19,000 9,000 28,000 32.1 

Idaho 12,000 13,000 25,000 52.0 

Montana 14,000 17,000 31,000 54.8 

Utah 18,000 19,800 37,800 52.4 

Wyoming 18,000 26,000 44,000 59.1 

b. Number of postdocking predator lamb losses, predocking predator lamb

losses, and predocking predator lamb losses as a percentage of total predator

lamb losses, by State, 2004:

Number of Predator Lamb Losses 

State 

Postdocking 

NASS 

Reported 

Predocking 

State Reported Total 

Predocking 

Losses as a 

Percentage of 

Total Losses 

Colorado 8,000 5,100 13,100 38.9 

Idaho 6,800 1,700 8,500 20.0 

Montana 7,900 2,900 10,800 26.9 

Utah 14,800 9,800 24,600 39.8 

Wyoming 14,000 13,000 27,000 48.1 
Appendix

40 / Sheep and Lamb Predator Death Loss, 2004

c. Number of postdocking nonpredator lamb losses, predocking nonpredator

lamb losses, and predocking nonpredator lamb losses as a percentage of total

nonpredator lamb losses, by State, 2004:

Number of Nonpredator Lamb Losses 

State 

Postdocking 

NASS 

Reported 

Predocking 

State 

Reported Total 

Predocking 

Losses as a 

Percentage 

of Total 

Losses

Colorado 11,000 3,900 14,900 26.2 

Idaho 5,200 11,300 16,500 68.5 

Montana 6,100 14,100 20,200 69.8 

Utah 3,200 10,000 13,200 75.8 

Wyoming 4,000 13,000 17,000 76.4