g

Animal and 

Plant Health 

Inspection 

Service 

Wildlife Services 

Idaho State Office 

9134 W Blackeagle Dr 

Boise, ID 83709 

(208) 373-1630 

(208) 378-5349 Fax 

Inspection Service (APHIS), Wildlife Services Program (WS) in Idaho to participate in the 

planning process for the development of a new Environmental Assessment (EA) on alternatives for 

reducing damage to agricultural and natural resources, and property; and risks to public health and 

safety caused by various predators in Idaho. Predator species involved in the majority of conflicts 

and damage in Idaho include American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos); badgers (Taxidea laxus); 

black bears (Ursus americana); black-billed magpies (Pica hudsonia); bobcats (Lynx rufus); 

common ravens (C. corax); coyotes (Canis latrans); feral, free-ranging and hybrid dogs (C. lupus 

familiaris, includes domestic dogs); mountain lions (Puma concolor); raccoons (Procyon lotor); 

red foxes (Vulpes vulpes); and striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis). Other predators in Idaho that 

have historically caused only localized damage on an occasional basis include feral/free-ranging 

cats (Felis catus), grizzly bears (U arctos horribilis), mink (Mustela vison), long-tailed weasels 

(Mfrenata), short-tailed weasels (M erminea), and spotted skunks (Spilogale putorius). 

Predation from gray wolves (C. lupus) and fish eating birds (various species) are addressed in 

separate EAs and will not be included in the new EA. If you would like to participate in this 

process, we encourage you to read this invitation and provide information for any one or all of the 

following questions: 

../ What issues or concerns do you have regarding the USDA, APHIS, WS' involvement in 

Predator Damage Management (PDM) in Idaho? 

../ What PDM alternatives (i.e., No WS PDM in Idaho, Technical assistance only, Bounty 

system, Only Non-lethal methods, etc.) would you suggest or propose? 

../ Do you have any relevant information to contribute to the analysis and this process? 

Why are we conducting this analysis? 

TheWS program in Idaho is a cooperatively-funded, service-oriented program that provides 

assistance to requesting public and private entities, and federal, state, county, local and tribal 

governments with the management of damage and conflicts to agricultural and natural resources, 

and property; and risks to public health and safety caused by predators. WS authorization to 

provide this service was provided by Congress in the Acts ofMarch 2, 1931 (7 U.S.C. 426-426b), 

as amended, and December 22, 1987 (7 U.S.C. 426c ). The current program is conducted in 

accordance with Environmental Assessments and associated Decisions and Findings ofNo 

Significant Impact prepared for the Northern/Central, and Southern Idaho WS Districts (USDA 

2002 and 1996) and their supplements. The EAs evaluate the environmental impacts of 

alternatives for WS involvement in PDM in Idaho. Pursuant toWS' internal National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process, and after review of public comments on a draft 

2014 supplement to the Southern Idaho predator EA, Idaho WS determined that preparation of a 

new EA to address all PDM in Idaho is warranted. 
Service (NASS), livestock production (primarily cattle, sheep, hogs, and poultry), and livestock products 

(i.e., milk, wool) accounted for nearly $4 billion or about 53% of total farm commodity sales cash receipts 

and is, therefore, considered a primary agricultural industry sector in the State. Predators are responsible 

for the depredation of a wide variety of livestock including cattle, goats, sheep, swine, other hoofed-stock, 

exotic pen-raised game, and poultry. During 2011 and 2012, predator losses accounted for 23.5% and 

26.9%, respectively, of all losses to sheep and lambs in Idaho, valued around $1.4 million and $1.8 million, 

respectively (NASS 2013). Although predator losses would appear to be only a small portion of total 

livestock production in the state, losses are not distributed evenly among producers, and impacts on 

individual producers can be substantial (Baker et al. 2008). Coyotes were the leading cause of predator 

losses, accounting for 59% and 60% of predation caused by all predators in 2011 and 2012, respectively. 

Wolves were the second leading cause of predator losses, followed by domestic dogs mountain lions bears 

and, other predators, and unknown predators (NASS 2013). 

Field crops such as melons (watermelons and cantaloupes), sweet and field corn, and wheat are susceptible 

to damage by predators such as coyotes; feral, free-ranging and hybrid dogs; badgers; and raccoons. Fruit 

and nut crops and trees can also be damaged by raccoons, common ravens and black bears in Idaho. 

Badger digging and burrowing causes damage to improved and planted pastures because the uneven ground 

hampers the use of planting and mowing equipment and can damage the equipment. Other agriculture 

commodities that can be damaged by predators include aquaculture; beehives; commercial game animals; 

livestock feed; and dikes, dams and impoundments. In Federal Fiscal Year (FY) 2011 through FY 2013 

damage to these types of resources reported to or verified by Idaho WS included $3,931 to beehives by 

black bears and grizzly bears; and $1,500 damage from coyotes, common ravens, and striped skunks 

consuming livestock feed. 

Natural Resources. Idaho WS responds to requests from agencies with natural resources management 

responsibilities for wildlife species that are impacted by predation. If a natural resources management 

agency requests assistance in protecting impacted wildlife species, Idaho WS works with the agency to 

identify and provide the level of assistance requested and needed. In the past, the Idaho Department of Fish 

and Game (IDFG) has requested Idaho WS assistance with coyote predation management for the protection 

of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus); and striped skunk, raccoon, red fox, and coyote damage management 

to protect nesting waterfowl and ring-necked pheasants (Phasianus colchicus). In addition, the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Idaho WS have entered into cooperative service agreements for badger, 

red fox, and coyote predation management for the protection of northern Idaho ground squirrels 

(Spermophilus brunneus brunneus) (a Threatened species). Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus 

urophasianus), bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), and mule deer populations in most areas ofldaho are 

sufficiently healthy that IDFG allows sport harvest of these species. However, in some areas of the State, 

IDFG has not met management goals for these populations and could request Idaho WS to conduct PDM 

activities in an effort to reduce predation and/or enhance local populations of these species. 

Property. Predator damage to property in Idaho includes black bears and raccoons breaking in and 

destroying the interiors of homes or other structures; coyotes, mountain lions, grizzly bears or red foxes 

killing or injuring pets and livestock guarding animals; coyotes causing damage to drip irrigation systems 

by biting holes in the pipe; raccoons and skunks burrowing into or under homes to den; and badgers, 

2 
y 

y 

y

p

their apparent loss of fear for humans. Predator attacks on humans fortunately occur very rarely, qut could 

result in requests for assistance. 

Coyotes; red foxes; badgers; feral, free-ranging, and hybrid dogs; and feral/free-ranging cats sometimes 

create human safety threats when they spend time on or near airport runways. Although there has been 

only 1 incident of these species actually being struck by departing or landing aircraft in Idaho, such 

incidents have occurred at airports in other States. WS has responded to a number of requests from airports 

in Idaho where the presence of small predators and domestic animals on the runway was considered a 

potential public safety hazard. Additionally, the digging activity of badgers near or adjacent to taxiways 

and runways will sometimes deposit soil, rocks, and other debris on the aircraft movement areas, creating a 

hazard of these items being ingested into jet engines and potentially causing damage. 

Questions to be addressed in the proposed EA 

Based on agency relationships, Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and legislative mandates, Idaho 

WS is the lead agency for this project. Idaho WS will use an interdisciplinary approach in compliance 

with the National Environmental Policy Act and agency mandates, policies and regulations to address the 

following questions in the proposed EA: 

• How can Idaho WS best respond to requests to reduce damage and conflicts to agricultural and 

natural resources, property; and risks to public health and safety associated with predators in 

Idaho? 

• What are the environmental impacts of implementing various management strategies? 

• Does the proposed action have significant environmental impacts, thereby triggering the need to 

prepare an Environmental Impact Statement? 

The Lead Agency's proposed action 

At this time, Idaho WS believes that the preferred alternative would be to continue and expand the current 

Integrated Wildlife Damage Management (IWDM) program in Idaho. Idaho WS would continue ongoing 

programs for the protection of agriculture, property, and human health and safety but would increase 

involvement in protection ofthreatened and endangered species, sensitive wildlife, and game species. The 

IWDM strategy would encompass the use of practical and effective methods of preventing or reducing 

damage while minimizing harmful effects of damage management measures on humans, target and nontarget species, and the environment. Under this action, Idaho WS could provide technical assistance and 

direct operational assistance including non-lethal and lethal management methods, as described in the WS 

Decision Model (Slate et al. 1992). Predator Damage Management would be implemented in Idaho under 

the proposed action when requested on private, public, federal, state, or tribal lands where signed Work 

Initiation Documents, MOUs or Annual Work Plans (A WPs) are in place. All PDM would comply with 

3 
(Meleagris gallopavo), and waterfowl (various species). 

When appropriate, non-lethal methods would be recommended and utilized to reduce damage, including 

physical exclusion, cultural practices (e.g., shed lambing and use of guarding animals), habitat and behavior 

modification (e.g., exclusion, chemical repellents, and frightening devices), and capture and relocation. In 

other situations, target predators would be captured and/or removed as humanely as possible using ground 

and aerial shooting, trapping, snaring, M-44s, denning, gas cartridges, livestock protection collars, decoy 

and tracking dogs, DRC-1339, or registered euthanasia drugs. In determining the damage management 

strategy, preference would be given to practical and effective non-lethal methods. However, non-lethal 

methods may not always be applied as a first response to each damage problem. The most appropriate response could often be a combination of non-lethal and lethal methods, or could include instances where 

application of lethal methods alone would be the most appropriate strategy. 

Who are the Cooperating and Consulting Agencies? 

Idaho WS is the lead agency for this EA, and therefore is responsible for the scope, content, and decisions 

made. The IDFG is a cooperating agency in the preparation of this EA. The IDFG has the authority to 

manage resident wildlife, and IDFG has developed and adopted a policy in 2000 for avian and mammalian 

predation management (IDFG 2000). The Policy provides the IDFG direction in managing predator 

populations consistent with meeting management objectives for prey species populations and further states 

that predator populations, as with all wildlife in Idaho, will be managed to assure their future recreational, 

ecological, intrinsic, scientific, and educational values, and to limit conflicts with human enterprise and 

values. WS is also consulting with the U.S. Department ofthe Interior Bureau of Land Management and 

Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, Idaho State Department of Agriculture, Idaho National 

Laboratory, and Idaho Department of Lands. 

What are the issues of concern? 

Idaho WS and our cooperating and consulting agencies have identified the following issues for 

consideration in the analysis. Issues are used to identify and compare alternative management strategies. 

These issues may be addressed in the EA: 

• Effects on target predator species populations 

• Effects on non-target species populations, including threatened and endangered species 

• Impacts on Special Management Areas (such as Wilderness Study Areas) 

• Humaneness and ethical perspectives 

• Effects on recreation and aesthetics (hunting and non-consumptive uses) • Impacts on human and pet safety • Effectiveness in reducing damage and risks to health and safety 

4 
2. Provide Technical Assistance Only. Idaho WS would not conduct direct PDM activities in Idaho. 

Instead, the entire Idaho WS program would consist of only providing technical assistance 

(training, consultations, loaning equipment) when requested. 

3. Provide Nonlethal PDM only. Idaho WS would only use and recommend nonlethal PDM methods 

to resolve predator damage and conflicts. 

4. No Federal PDM by Idaho WS. Under this alternative the Federal WS program would be 

terminated in Idaho. 

How to get involved 

We encourage you to become involved and participate in the planning process for the development of a 

new Environmental Assessment (EA) on alternatives for the reduction of damage to agricultural and natural 

resources, and property; and risks to public health and safety caused by predators in Idaho. If you would 

like to participate in this process, please answer any or all 3 questions in the first paragraph of this 

invitation. All comments must be submitted in writing and received by January 14,2015. We will 

accept comments on the proposal by the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2014-

0105 

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send your comment to State Director, USDA, APHIS, 

WS, 9134 W Blackeagle Dr., Boise, ID 83709, Phone: (208) 373-1630. 

We look forward to receiving your comments. Your contribution will help Idaho WS make the best 

possible decision on reducing damage and conflicts to agricultural and natural resources, and property; and 

risks to public health and safety associated with predators in Idaho. 

Literature Cited 

Baker, P.J., B. Luigi, S. Harris, G. Saunders, and P.C. L. White. 2008. Terrestrial carnivores and human 

food production: impact and management. Mammal Review 38:123-166. 

IDFG. 2000. Policy for avian and mammalian predation management. Idaho Department ofFish and 

Game, 600 South Walnut, Boise, Idaho, USA. 

NASS. 2013 . 2013 Idaho agricultural statistics. United States Department of Agriculture, National 

Agricultural Statistics Service, Idaho field Office, Boise, Idaho, USA. 

5 
USDA, APHIS, Idaho WS program, Boise, Idaho, USA. 

6