ALERT: Help stop coyote killing in Greenwood Village!
Will LaPage wrote
this poem for our campaign against
trapping.Trapping, poisoning, and snaring was abolished in Colorado in the 1996 elections through the passage of citizens' ballot initiative Amendment 14. Citizens continue to fight against this horror to which there is no excuse. There are humane solutions to human wildlife conflicts and humane ways to co-exist with wildlife.
The City of Greenwood Village is killing coyotes who they claim are a risk to companion animals and children in the area.
One leashed dog has already been caught in the well-hidden traps and many more humans and wild and domesticated animals are at risk. Colorado Revised Statue 33-6-201 prohibits the use of leg-hold traps with few exceptions, one of which is trapping “for the purpose of protecting human health or safety” (33-6-205). This is likely how the city manager was able to acquire permission to proceed with this barbaric form of “animal control.”
ACTION!
Please contact Greenwood Village City Manager Jim Sanderson and politely request that the city immediately halt all trapping of coyotes.
Your talking points:
• The citizens of Colorado voted to ban trapping in 1996 precisely to avoid situations like this
• Trapping ensures a cruel, drawn-out and tremendously painful death for animals
• Scientific research shows that efforts to contain coyote populations may actually increase their numbers
• Traps are dangerous to citizens, domesticated animals, birds and other wildlife
• This is not a long-term solution; more coyotes will simply move in
• Greenwood Village should be more creative and proactive in its problem solving
• Wildlife is integral to Colorado and citizens must learn to coexist with it
Contacts: City Manager Jim Sanderson: jsanderson@greenwoodvillage.com / 303-486-5749 Mayor Nancy Sharp: nsharpe@greenwoodvillage.com / 303-486-5741
City Council: mlogan@greenwoodvillage.com, mfroelich@greenwoodvillage.com, dkerber@greenwoodvillage.com, Aingebretsen@greenwoodvillage.com, gmcreynolds@greenwoodvillage.com, kblilie@greenwoodvillage.com
9News coverage of this can be found here: http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=69721
Please forward this on. Thanks for taking action!
- Chris
Christopher R. Jones Operations and Programs Coordinator Rocky Mountain Animal Defense 2525 Arapahoe #E4-335 Boulder, CO 80302
303-449-4422 / www.RMAD.org Rocky Mountain Animal Defense has been advocating for animals and serving the public since 1994.
- - - - -
Hi Everybody,
This is the first in a series of accounts regarding recent battles over wildlife in Colorado in an attempt to educate the public about some alternatives to the mismanagement of our wildlife by the agencies in charge.
Hopefully, these accounts will explain some of the human wildlife conflicts we've experienced and introduce some of the effective humane, non-lethal alternatives to the prevailing "Killing the animals is the way we have always done it. We won't try anything else" attitude.
This collective attack on Amendment 14 by the Colorado Springs Airport, the FAA, and the USDA Wildlife Services was the first (that was not done by a rancher/trapper - there are lots of those) that I am aware of. Here are the steps we took to save the coyotes by stopping the trapping at the Colorado Springs Airport and create a win win situation.
Note: Amendment 14 abolishing trapping, poisoning, and snaring of Colorado's wildlife was approved by Colorado voters in the 1996 elections PROVIDING AN EXCEPTION FOR THE USE OF SUCH METHODS BY CERTAIN GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING HUMAN HEALTH OR SAFETY.
This exception was written with what would be classified as a valid danger to human health and safety in mind, not the mere presence of animals. If that were the case, we would have to kill every animal in the world. It was intended to allow for the use of trapping when proven it was absolutely necessary (and would actually work for a specific purpose), and as a last resort where it has been proven that all else has failed, and it certainly was never intended to be used as the first course of action.
Here is what the agencies won't tell the general public, what the press often won't print, and what took place.
Gayle Hoenig
Bravo Bend Wildlife Sanctuary
Wildlife Rehabilitator Specializing in Bats and Coyotes
- - - - -
Friends in "High" Places
Saving Airport Coyotes
Author Gayle Hoenig, 2000
Colorado Licensed Wildlife Rehabilitator
Specializing in bats and coyotes
Bravo Bend Wildlife Sanctuary
To some, coyotes are known as the "singing trickster" and are referred to as "God's dog". Surely "Wiley" must be one of God's favorite creatures. He is a fascinating animal who has learned to survive the most horrible persecution and atrocities under the US Department of Agriculture's agenda to wipe him off the face of the earth.
I have always been the champion of the weak, persecuted, abused, and the under "dog" It is therefore no surprise that I have somehow taken on the role of defender and protector of coyotes. Reviled by some, and loved by others, beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder. In these eyes, "Wiley" is "top dog."
My first coyote rescue was in 1965 when I rescued Diablo from a roadside zoo and gave him sanctuary for life. Over the years I have become a wildlife rehabiltator working with most species, and specializing in bats (now there's persecution for you) and coyotes. I have established a 35-acre wildlife sanctuary located in wonderful coyote country, a huge, remote area called Bijou Basin. Surrounded on three sides by an 18,000 acre ranch, and with a 1,000 ranch on another, my sanctuary is a safe haven for the native wild animals that inhabit the land and is permanently protected by the HSUS Wildlife Land Trust.
Along with many others across the globe, I have taken on a lifelong commitment to end trapping, and have written a book, near completion, on Amendment 14 which voters passed in the 1996 elections banning trapping, snaring, and poisoning of Colorado's wildlife.
.
One cannot mention traps without envisioning a coyote in one. Wiley just happens to be the excuse that trappers repeatedly give to defend their use of traps and to convince the uninformed public that they are the only things that work to protect livestock against predators. During the 1995 Colorado Division of Wildlife stake holder’s meetings regarding trapping, trapping proponents stated that "The public needs to be educated about trapping so that they would see how necessary and beneficial this "scientific" method of "'wildlife management" is to "the animals themselves."
In 1948 Dr. Harry Lillie, a Welsh physician who spent half of his life helping humans, and the other half helping animals, did just that. He went out on trap lines to investigate trapping first hand. The following is an excerpt from Dr. Harry Lillie's 1975 Congressional Testimony.
Next day was the last before leaving Meadowlake. A Magpie was the first casualty, dead with both legs in a squirrel trap. Where the forest had been part clear felled, John had set a coyote trap close to an old derelict homestead. There was nothing there and the trap gone. Snow was falling for the first time since Primrose Lake.
For half an hour we searched in widening circles until John shouted. What had been a beautiful happy creature who with his friends had sung us to sleep in the cabin, was now an emaciated twisted body. He had dragged the trap with its heavy anchor pole until the chain had snarled on a fallen tree. His smashed leg and paw was stripped to the splintered bone in the trap jaws. One single chewed sinew alone had held him from getting away on three legs. He had no strength left to sever the sinew. Had he escaped he could no longer have caught even a mouse to help keep him alive.
John stood looking down at the lovely head pillowed on the trap. "Harry, I forgot about this trap until this afternoon. Six weeks since I set it. I reckon I deserve all that's coming to me for this. Poor bastard. Day after tomorrow I'll start to check every foot of this line, just in case. And I guess I'm going to end up lifting every trap, snares and all. Oh Christ yes. It's all wrong Harry! Poor little devils. What harm do they ever do to us that we do this to them?"
Yes, we do need to educate the public about trapping.
Our fight to save the pack of approximately eight to ten coyotes living on the Colorado Springs Airport property, 7,200 acres of prime wildlife habitat, began with a small article in the Colorado Springs Gazette in February of 2000
Airport vs.coyotes
Request to trap animals denied
It stated that a request to trap and kill coyotes at the Colorado Springs Airport had been denied. The El Paso County Department of Health and Environment cited a lack of documentation in denying the application.
The airport wanted permission to trap coyotes under a provision of Amendment 14 which Colorado voters passed in the November, 1996 election which prohibits trapping, poisoning and snaring of Colorado’s wildlife. Amendment 14 allows exemptions in matters of public health and safety.
The article stated that about a year ago, a twin-engine jet struck and killed a coyote during a landing. Last March, 13 Canada geese struck a turboprop aircraft on approach to the airport. No one was injured but the airport asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture to find ways to deal with wildlife hazards. Last month, the department sought a permit for the airport to use leg-hold traps to capture the coyotes and then kill them.
Airport officials said runway fences, cage-trapping and chasing coyotes with sirened vehicles didn't work. Health officials said that they needed documentation including how many coyotes live at the airport, how often they're seen and federal guidelines for such hazards.
The article also stated that neither the Agriculture Department nor airport officials knew Tuesday whether the airport would submit a new request.
We have to consult with our wildlife person again and see if there's an alternate way to get rid of the coyote problem," Airport Manager Gary Green said.
Gazette
Panic stricken, because the trappers, ranchers, and hunters, among others, were already trying to overturn amendment 14, in fact it was already being challenged in court, I called Dan Bowlds at the El Paso County Health Department, who was in charge of issuing the trapping permit. I gave Dan the following reasons why he should not issue the trapping permit if the airport submitted a new request.
Some wild species, such as the lynx, respond to persecution, slaughter, and loss of habitat, by simply dying out and becoming extinct. Wily responds to these threats to his species in just the opposite manner. In a healthy ecosystem and stable coyote pack, only the dominant male and female, called the alpha pair, breed and reproduce. When this pack is disrupted by the loss of either one, or both alpha leaders, the pack responds by all of the females breeding. This results in not only in more litters, but they also have more pups per litter.
The method the airport chose for addressing the potential problem is one of the cruelest in existence and wouldn't work to get rid of coyotes. It would only cause suffering and serve to increase the coyote population.
The Colorado Springs Airport didn't have a public safety problem, only a "potential".
One coyote strike is not a history or a pattern.
It happened over a year ago. This can hardly be considered an emergency.
No one was injured and there was no damage to the plane.
The airport's "wildlife person" just happened to be a wildlife biologist/trapper for the US Department of Agriculture's "Wildlife Services", USDA/WS. Formerly named Animal Damage Control (ADC), they changed their name to Wildlife Services to give the impression that they "worked" with wildlife, rather than slaughtered it. Many wildlife advocates refuse to call them Wildlife Services. We call them the Animal Death Corps.
Of course the ADC was going to recommend trapping and killing. That is what they do for a living. They are not going to search for, and employ, alternate means to killing. Perpetuating the coyote population is job security that will keep them in business.
Facts and needs regarding - Coyotes
Coyotes need a place to live (habitat, territory.)
Wildlife habitat is shrinking with human overpopulation, growth and development.
Coyotes are one of the most adaptable wild animals on earth. Coyotes can survive anywhere, even in the heart of a big city, but they are going to take the prime habitat first. The Colorado Springs Airport is prime coyote habitat. Coyotes are going to occupy it. They will always occupy it.
It would be wise to learn to co-exist with the established population, and to keep them off the runways.
The coyote is one of the most intelligent animals on the planet. Man will never win a battle of wits with a coyote and shouldn't waste his time.
The ADC slaughtered 28,000 coyotes in Colorado 1998. Wouldn't you think that not one person would have a coyote problem after that? Yet every year they still kill about the same amount of coyotes. Doesn't that tell you something? Are humans going to kill 28,000 coyotes a year forever, and still have the same (real or perceived) coyote problems and concerns?
The ADC eradicated the wolf, and look what they have done to our ecosystems now. There is a coyote explosion. If they were able to eradicate the coyote, there would be an explosion of something else.
I told Dan that I was sure if the health department would let me work on a humane, non-lethal solution to excluding the coyotes from the airport operating area, I could put together a team to find one.
That evening a letter to the editor from Jann Nance, protesting the trapping and killing of the coyotes appeared in the local paper and the next evening the following letter.
PRESERVING WILDLIFE
There must be a better way to keep coyotes from runways
The banning of cruel leg traps in Colorado in 1996 was much overdue. We were one of the last states to embrace this truly humane law. We cannot regress because of scare tactics. Airport officials state that about a year ago, one coyote wandered out and caused a disturbance by being killed by a twin-engine jet; therefore it is necessary to violate Amendment 14 and set out inhumane leg traps on 7,200 acres of airport grounds. This procedure will be done on a continuous basis and will trap, torture and destroy hundreds of animals. Isn't this overkill?
If efforts to deter coyotes at the airport have failed, perhaps more
thought is needed. There are many clever minds here and surely there is a fence or device that can keep coyotes at bay.
Lorraine L. Danzo
Colorado Springs
Isn't that amazing? Two women, who do not work with coyotes or fly airplanes, have enough sense to realize that this is unnecessary, and that there has to be an alternate solution. The ADC can only think of one solution? One of the most inhumane in existence? For those of you who are not familiar with the Department of Agriculture's eradication agenda for wildlife please check out this website.
http://pdi.enviroweb.org/index.htm
Luckily, Jann's name was listed in the phone book. I learned that Jann had also talked to Dan Bowlds that day, in addition to Colorado Springs Airport, USDA/WS, the FAA, and several small airports. We discussed what steps each of us would take to try to stop the trapping.
Jann took charge of the phone calls, going through all files she could gain access to, making copies of all documents, and requesting documents and data from all agencies involved.
Notes from Jann:
I called the Aeroclub at the Air Force Academy (333-4423), which consists of
smaller aircraft pilots, and spoke with "Chuck", asking about any critter
problems on the runways. Chuck said that, in spite of their foothills
location, they had "no animal problems." While coyotes are always a concern,
they don't consider them a threat to human life. Pilots just need to be
aware of them.
I called the Denver International Airport Operations Manager, "OPS 7"
(303-342-4200) and spoke with Lisa. I asked her about their coyote problem.
She said that their plan was to kill as much of the coyote's prey as
possible, mostly prairie dogs, which they hoped would reduce the number of
coyotes. They haven't had any luck with getting rid of the rabbits. Trapping
of coyotes has not been considered. When I asked her if they used the USDA,
ADC, or WW, she said not to her knowledge, but they have their own
environmental staff and for me to call them.
12 April 00 I called the environmental division of DIA (303-342-4431) and
spoke with two people, Tammy and Bob. Tammy said that they use several
consultants but didn't recognize any of them as a part of USDA or ADC. Bob
said that he doesn't do anything with coyotes and never heard of the ADC.
I called the local FAA, asking about airstrike reports. I was told to call
the main operations in Denver at 303-342-1134, since everything would go
through that branch. So I did and spoke with a lady who didn't know who I
should speak with but suggested I try Bob Laughlin (?) ext., 1113. I tried
and left a message to give me a call. Getting nowhere and wasting lots of
folks time.
I them spoke with a lady at the old Colorado springs Airport (591-2288),
asking about coyote problems. She said that there had been sightings. When
coyotes are on the runways, someone chases them away. She also said that
most of the sightings are out east, where the larger commercial aircraft
operate, so the threat is negligible. A few, however, are sighted on the
west side where smaller private plane operate. They are a concern there.
I worked on getting together a team of coyote experts, pilots, and animal control people who only use humane methods in resolving human/wildlife conflicts. We ended up with an impressive team of people qualified to address this issue, some of which were:
Team working for humane solutions to wildlife human conflicts
Gayle Hoenig - Wildlife rehabilitator
Bravo Bend Wildlife Sanctuary
http://www.angelfire.com/co4/coyotewatch/index.html
Jann Nance – Anything but your average citizen
Don Gierard, retired military pilot.
Mike Lackey, pilot, former Inspector General Peterson Air Force Base, retired
from the military and currently flying commercial planes for Southwest
airlines. Flies small private aircraft.
David Crawford - Director, Rocky Mountain Animal Defense (RMAD)
http://www.rmad.org/
Nicole Rosemarino - Wildlfe Specialist/Coordinator RMAD
http://www.rmad.org/coyoteairport.html
Jack Murphy - Urban Wildllife Rescue
http://www.urbanwildliferescue.org/
Marc Bekoff - Professor at the University of Boulder and recognized coyote
authority/expert
http://www.literati.net/Bekoff/
Wendy Keefover-Ring - Sinapu - Dedicated to recovery of native carnivores in
the Southern Rocky Mountains, and to restoration of the wild habitat in
which all species flourish.
http://www.sinapu.org/
Brooks Fahy - Predator Defense Institute
http://www.enviroweb.org/pdi/index.htm
Stephanie Boyles - Peta Wildlife Biologist
http://www.peta-online.org/alert/00/135.html
Karen Chapman - Wolf Advocacy Alliance
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/BrokenArrow/CSA1.html
Neiel Cavin - In Defense of Animals (IDA)
http://www.idausa.org/
Stephen Wells - Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF)
http://www.idausa.org/
Sumner Matthes - Sarasota in Defense of Animals
American Sanctuary Association
http://www.monomania.com/sda/
John Hadidian - Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
Dennis White - Southwest Regional Director (HSUS)
Jim Reed - Director of Sanctuaries (HSUS)
Danielle Bays - HSUS Wildlife Biologist
http://www.hsus.org/
Bob and Elissa Angell - Political Voice for Animals (PVA)
http://www.pva-colorado.org/
Wildlife Damage review (WDR)
http://www.azstarnet.com/~wdr/home.html
http://www.azstarnet.com/~wdr/links.html
Catherine Riddell - Wildlife Biologist, and DOW
Volunteer
Connie Perham - Pikes Peak Wildlife Preservation Society
David Shurtleff - Pikes Peak Wildlife Preservation Society - Same e-mail as
Connie
Dan Fosha -Rocky Mountain Chapter, Sierra Club
http://www.rmc.sierraclub.org/index.html
Darlene Kobobel - Wolf Rescue Center, Lake George
http://www.wolfrescue.com/
Hilary Wood - Founder - Front Range Equine Rescue
http://www.frontrangeequinerescue.org/
Ginger Kathrens - Producer and film maker - Nature films - Currently making
a film on coyotes.
http://www.taurusproductions.net/
http://www.savewildhorses.org/
Jolene Thompson - President of Friends of the Gold Camp Trail
Judy Enderle
Linda Thompson
Melissa Waz - Tampa Florida - Continental Airlines employee.
Ted Bahora - DOW Volunteer (Wildlife Rescue and
Release)
Tommy Butcher - Our computer expert
Now we had everything but a solution to excluding the coyotes from the airport operating area. I sent a letter to Gary Green, Director of Aviation requesting a meeting.
March 24, 2000
Mr. Gary Green
Director of Aviation
Colorado Springs Airport
7770 Drennen Rd.
Colorado Springs, CO 80916
Dear Mr. Green,
RE: The Coyote "Problem" at the Airport
Dear Mr. Green:
I am a licensed Colorado wildlife rehabilitator, specializing in working
with bats and coyotes. I would like to offer some information regarding
coyotes, which may be helpful to you in evaluating the coyote "situation" at
the airport.
1. Coyotes are extremely territorial. They establish a territory, will
tolerate or "allow" an "intruder" (another coyote) to pass through, but will
not allow it to take up residence.
2. The present coyote population at the airport is established. My
understanding is that there was one coyote "sighting" on the runway, and
"possibly", one coyote that was hit. This indicates that the present
population is reasonably airplane "savvy" since coyotes have inhabited that
land as long as there have been coyotes in Colorado. If one was hit, it is
most likely dead; so I doubt that it will cause any future "problems."
3. If you allow the Animal Damage Control (ADC) division of the Department
of Agriculture to slaughter the present population, other coyotes will just
move into the now "vacant" territory, and you may end up with a larger
population than you already have.
4. Coyotes respond to declines in their numbers by having larger litters.
The new residents may have a larger pack than the previous ones.
5. What you will accomplish if you continue to pursue this futile line of
reasoning (destroy X amount of coyotes), is to cause indescribable agony and
suffering to countless numbers of animals on a continual basis. You will
accomplish nothing except to have a larger coyote population than the
present one, and one that is less familiar with the "rules of the runway."
My understanding is that the ADC is doing an assessment of the coyote
population at the airport. It won't matter. The coyote population for that
particular territory is established. With 7,000 plus acres of prime
wildlife habitat, you will always have at least the present number of
coyotes. The ADC should know that, and probably does; but they are in the
business of slaughtering predators and they do it in the most inhumane ways
possible.
I would appreciate it if you would please check out these Websites and
become informed about the agency you are dealing with and consider using my
team instead.
Sincerely,
Gayle Hoenig, Bravo Bend Wildlife Sanctuary
CC:
Mary Collins, Community Relations Manager, Colorado Springs Airport
Dan Bowlds, El Paso County Health Department
Pam Zubeck, Gazette
At our first meeting with the airport officials, I had shown a film of a rancher who had been losing his sheep to coyotes. He got a donkey, and never lost another sheep. Donkeys, mules, and burros will defend territory against coyotes. They simply will not tolerate them around and will chase them off. I figured that if we could fence off the airport operating area and contain the donkeys between it and the perimeter fence, the donkeys would keep the coyotes away from the runways. Picture a moat around the runway area, but a pasture instead of water and donkeys instead of alligators.
The donkeys could be obtained from the wild burro adoption program, and from farm sanctuary that saves abused farm animals. The guard animals would be free, the cost of the fence minimal, and if they needed manpower for the fence, they could get volunteers and people that have to perform community service. This was just one idea. There are probably a lot of options to explore as alternatives to trapping and killing.
I also wanted the airport officials to see that even though this is a proven method of guarding livestock, the ADC and, very few people in the agricultural community, employ this humane method of livestock protection, and that we need to explore every humane idea and possibility as alternatives to "what we've always done". This history of "Whenever there is a conflict between man and animals, the animals always lose", has got to stop. We have got to find ways where everybody wins.
The following from IDA, In Defense of Animals, is the first of many action alerts that appeared on animal rights, and many other types of organizations’, websites all over the country. This occurred as a result of the failure to get a commitment from the airport officials to halt the trapping while we searched for a solution.
http://www.idausa.org/alert/currentalerts/a_colorado_coyote.html
Coyotes are being trapped and killed right now!
In order to deal with an unsubstantiated concern for airport safety regarding the presence of coyotes, the Colorado Springs Airport applied for, and has received, an unjustified exemption to Amendment 14, which bans the trapping, snaring, and poisoning of Colorado's wildlife.
The FAA and the USDA, using Wildlife Services (Animal Damage Control) for the killing, have begun killing coyotes at the Colorado Springs, CO Airport.
ADC/WS has already trapped and killed one coyote and they do know that there is a den of pups on the property. Dozens of coyotes are reported to inhabit the surrounding area.
What You Can Do
Your letters of protest are urgently needed. Please e-mail them immediately to the Colorado Springs Airport Director, Gary Green, or via snail mail to:
Gary Green
Director
Colorado Springs Airport
7770 Drennan Road
Colorado Springs, CO 80916
719-550-1910
Several prominent Colorado Organizations and specialists have proposed alternatives to the abhorrent trapping and killing, among them:
Gayle Hoenig (wildlife rehabilitator specializing in coyotes)
Rocky Mountain Animal Defense
Sinapu (Colorado Carnivore defense and wolf recovery -Boulder)
Marc Bekoff (professor, researcher, and recognized coyote authority - University of Colorado in Boulder)
Jack Murphy - Urban Wildlife Rescue (Denver, CO)
These people have provided detailed plans to build an affordable fence similar to the one at the Portland Airport (which effectively keeps coyotes off the airport runway). They have also offered to safely capture and relocate coyotes while the fence is being constructed.
*** For those IDA activists in Colorado, the aforementioned groups are having a meeting with airport officials on Friday, July 14, 3:30 p.m., at the Colorado Springs Airport.***
Additional Information
In approximately 1.6 million "operations" over the past decade of FAA records of air/ground animal strikes, there was only ONE incident of collision with a coyote at the Colorado Springs Airport no damage occurred and only 71 instances in the entire U.S., the damage was merely mechanical and involved brief aircraft down time. No one was ever injured.
Wildlife Services directed the airport to immediately request an exemption from Amendment 14 so they could trap and kill the coyotes because, in 1997 alone, over half of Wildlife Services budget (around $45M) was exclusively for killing coyotes. "It's their bread and butter".
The airport officials have chosen the cruel method of trapping which will not resolve their zero wildlife policy on airport property (7,200 acres of prime wildlife habitat). Indiscriminate killing of coyotes exacerbates - not mitigates - the population problem. In an established population of coyotes, only the alpha pair will have pups. When the alpha pair are killed off, all the subordinate coyotes in the area will then breed, increasing the population even more.
Although the airport management maintains that they are willing to listen to proposals that are long term and effective, such as a coyote proof fence or possible relocation, the Colorado Springs Airport rejected the "Portland" fencing and are planning to use asphalt tailings (not nearly as effective) which will be implemented over two years.
Finally, a quote from a commercial pilot familiar with the presence of coyotes:
"I've never had, nor have I met another pilot, who's ever had a coyote present itself as a hazard to a plane at an airport. I flew T-38s at Sheppard AFB, TX and the coyotes would be walking between the airplanes on the ramp and while we were taxiing! I've seen plenty, but never had one come close to getting in the way of an aircraft. We see coyotes around Meadowlake all the time--no problem with them.
I am a Southwest Airlines pilot I own a hangar and light aircraft. I fly from 56 cities with the airlines and have flown light aircraft in about every state is the US and a few in Canada. I retired from the military as a pilot with 25 years service."
-Mike Lackey, Southwest Airlines pilot
PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY
At our second meeting with the airport officials. Live trapping and relocation was suggested. I did not want to see the suggestion of live trapping and relocating pursued for the following reasons.
Coyotes mate for life. The chance of getting both Alpha leaders is pretty slim. I do not want to see this family unit/pack destroyed.
I have my doubts that anyone can even catch them in a live trap.
It is not proven that they will not try to come back to what is their territory and get killed by traffic or shot by someone trying to get back.
There is no place to relocate them that is not already occupied. They may die of starvation just trying to find a new territory.
Ranchers are still trapping, no matter what the public thinks. They may still end up in a trap. They are safe here if we can convince the airport to let us find methods to keep them off the runways.
Relocating cannot be done until the pups can fend for themselves. They are just being born about now.
It will not solve their "perceived" problem. Other coyotes will move into the territory.
Although live trapping and relocating was a horrible, non-solution to a non-problem, we were willing to consider just about anything in order to save the coyotes from the horrible suffering from a trap and ultimate death.
I made sure that each airport official and employee who attended the meeting had a copy of the following article.
Killing Coyotes and the Ironic Boomerang Effect
By Wendy Keefover-Ring, Sinapu
Where coyotes have been controlled, ingress from outside populations
will replace the void and the ratio of females to males will increase
(Knowlton, 1972). Connoly and Longhurst (1975) found that 75% of the
local breeding coyote population must be reduced to significantly
reduce local populations for more than a short period. They
postulated that coyote control causes an increase in litter size
(from 4 to 10 pups) and increases the number of yearling females
breeding.
Rich Olson finds that not all coyotes kill livestock and that
eliminating all coyotes in a "problem area" can lead to disaster for
livestock producers. Coyotes have a territorial instinct. By
leaving coyotes accustomed to eating their natural prey in place they
will, in the long term, reduce livestock depredation. Coyotes defend
their territory from "intruders" that may prefer livestock. On the
other hand, by indiscriminately removing all coyotes from an area,
invites unintended consequences of inviting in animals conditioned to
eating domestic livestock (Olson 1996). Robert Crabtree suggests a
different reason for the coyote boomerang effect.
His ten year canid study in Yellowstone National Park reveals that
wolves, unlike humans, are adapted to significantly reduce and
maintain a reduction in coyote populations. He raises other salient
points:
... The actual reduction in the density of coyotes at first decreases,
but is immediately compensated by ingress by lone animals or shifts
in surrounding social groups. "The primary objective for loners or
replacement coyotes is to find a temporal opening, defend and exploit
the food resources in that social group, pair-bond and breed." (Dr.
Robert Crabtree, correspondence 11/4/97).
... Control measures result in otherwise "behaviorially sterile"
females breeding when a void in territory opens up. Like wolves,
coyotes only allow the alpha pair to breed. Disruptions to the pack
cause all females within that pack to breed. (Crabtree,
correspondence 11/4/97).
... "Reduction results in a smaller social group size which increases
the food per coyote ratio . . . this food surplus is biologically
transformed into . . . higher litter survival rates . . . the
increase in food availability improves the nutritional condition of
breeding females which translates in higher pup birth weights and
higher pup survival." (Crabtree, correspondence, 11/4/97).
... Higher pup survival translates into the need for more food for the
pups, especially during the months of May, June and July, when pups'
demand for calories dramatically increases. Hungry pups mean that
parents need to find readily available abundant amounts of prey,
subjecting sheep to increased predation.
In sum, human persecution of coyotes constantly destabilizes the
population causing an otherwise large numbers of non-breeding members
of a pack to breed. Continual control measures, ironically cause
livestock growers to lose more livestock in late spring and early
summer as coyote populations rebound and coyote parents search for
large amounts of easy meat (domestic livestock) for large litters of
puppies.
Moreover, essentially no studies have been done to date on
the long-term effects of this form of predator control on coyote
population dynamics, nor those of the two other most commonly aerial
gunned species in the lower 48 states: the bobcat and the red fox.
However, a fairly recent hypothesis, that of predator-mediated
coexistence, is becoming increasingly substantiated in the research
literature (Crooks & Soule (1999) and Henke & Bryant (1999)). This
hypothesis suggests that when frequency-dependent predation and
preference occur, prey abundance distributions tend to become more
even, resulting in increased diversity over ecological time. In other
words, a keystone predator, such as the coyote, can influence faunal
community structure.
When the top-down regulators are removed, according to
Michael Soule (conference at Vermejo Park, March, 2000), two trophic
cascades occur. In the first pathway, the carnivore's prey species
(i.e. elk and deer) are both reproductively and behaviorally
"released." They become diurnal and move less frequently, resulting
in greater impacts to the localized ecosystem in terms of the plant
and soil community. Since the return of the wolves in the Lamar
Valley, elk hide in trees more and stay in smaller bunches.
In the second pathway, when top-down regulators (wolves,
mountain lions, bears, jaguars, and coyotes) are removed,
meso-predators (i.e. racoons, skunks, house cats, fox) are "released"
to prey upon smaller vertebrates and reproduce with abandon. Crooks
and Soule found in California chaparral fragmented parcels of land,
song birds were wiped out after coyotes were killed. In areas where
coyotes remained, the songbird diversity was much greater. In
another study in Texas, Henke and Bryant found that were coyotes were
removed, certain rodents were "released" and resumed habitation.
Wild predators kill wild prey in the natural world. They provide the
unique service of removing the weak, sick, diseased and malnourished
from the population. Predators, therefore, improve the overall
health of the ungulate population and in turn prevent over-grazing
and the resulting soil deterioration.
Then Jann found a letter sent in March, to Gary Green, Director Colorado Springs Airport, in one of her routine searches through the health department files. Mary Collins is the Public Relations Director at the CS airport.
Here are some excerpts:
I am enclosing materials that I sent to Mary Collins on March 17, 2000. This material describes a fence that can be connected to your existing fence that is 100% foolproof for keeping the coyotes off of the runaway. It is in effect at the Port of Portland Airport in Oregon. POP has assisted 10 other airports in the country in adopting this fencing. Sharon Gordon, POP Airport Wildlife Specialist, has offered to assist the Colorado Springs Airport in answering questions, sending diagrams, ideas they have had, whatever you need if someone will contact her. Her phone number is 503-460-4179.
Unfortunately, coyotes do not respond to trapping the way one might think. Trapping makes coyote populations respond with a number of complex mechanisms which boost their numbers. Subordinate members begin breeding and bearing larger litters of pups with higher birth weight and survival of pups increase. Ms. Gordon told me that Port of Portland had started the process with trapping and killing the coyotes and the more they killed the more there were. They then came up with an alternate solution.
She states that they added the apron to cover a 7 mile circle by having a contractor excavate around the fence attach the bottom portion with hog rings and then put the dirt back. This is a one-time cost and is 100% effective. It cost the Portland Airport $220,000 for materials and labor. However, the FAA does provide funding for runway upgrades and safety and they approved a grant for Portland that provided 30% of the monies. Sharon says the FAA is very interested in supporting this venture as it relates to safety for aircraft.
As I told Mary, my fiancee and I are available to help with this program in any way. I am looking forward to hearing from you and how you plan to proceed.
Connie Perham
Both the airport and the health department had this humane solution to the airport's "perceived" problem on file since the very beginning and never mentioned it or the fact that there were other people out there working on this same issue. We had been frantically searching for this very thing!
I called Connie, and she and David took charge of working with the airport in regard to the coyote exclusion fence. They gave a wonderful presentation to the airport officials on the fencing at one of our meetings with them.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING D R A F T
Friday, 14 July 2000, at 3:30 p.m. at the Colorado Springs Airport
PRESENT: Amendment 14 Task Force (Gayle Hoenig, Connie Perham, David Shurtleff, Linda Thompson, Tommy Butcher, Don Gierard, and Jann Nance); Airport Staff (Gary Green, Director of Aviation; Gary Campbell, David Bird, Mary Collins); as well as Catherine Carter, citizen; Erin Emery of The Denver Post, Mark Greenblatt of KOAA-TV; News crew of Channel 13; and Becca Blond of the Gazette
The first issue addressed was the status of the trapping. The airport stated that one coyote had been trapped and shot, and two others shot so far. This brought up further questions as to the specifics about the trapping and shooting: were the coyotes adults or pups, how and where were they shot (especially since we had been told that it was not possible to shoot them unless they were trapped first); when, where, and how often were the traps checked, etc. The airport said they did not know any details, other than that the traps were to be checked every six hours. It was mentioned that Wildlife Services stated that the traps would be placed in the evening and checked in the morning, meaning the 6 hour interval would be impossible to maintain. The airport knew nothing further and stated that we would have to contact Wildlife Services directly for details. We stated that we thought it strange that the airport didn’t require documentation.
We asked Mr. Green to stop the trapping altogether and proceed with direct shooting is they insisted on continuing the killing. He stated that he would discuss the matter with Wildlife Services but would make no promises.
Mr. Green indicated that he felt we were giving out inaccurate information on the situation, based on the number and context of e-mails he had been receiving. He indicated that he was inundated and didn’t appreciate it, to which Gayle responded that if he would stop the killing, the e-mails would also stop. She said he was wrong to kill the coyotes, especially with the use of leghold traps. Furthermore, it was a citizens right to contact public officials when they had concerns they felt were being improperly addressed.
Asphalt tailing for the fence. Mr. Green stated that the airport had not yet begun to use asphalt tailings. We asked specifics about the application. Mr. Green mentioned using a slurry that would harden, after we pointed out that tailings alone won’t be enough. David presented a display showing photos of gaps at the bottom of a portion of the airport fence where it would be easy for coyotes to crawl under without digging. David mentioned that he had checked the opening several days apart to see if steps had been taken by the airport to fill in the gap. None had been taken. It was still there, bringing into question the diligence on the part of the airport to pursue “non-lethal” means. Mr. Green reiterated that the fence was to be checked almost daily, and that they had apparently been remiss by overlooking the the large opening.
David also stated that even with a hardening slurry around the bottom of the fence, it would probably not be as effective in the long run as the “portland fence technique” that he had been promoting with a chain skirt under the fence covered by dirt. He felt it would also be more cost effective. Mr. Green agreed and said he would check into it further.
The question was asked why the Wildlife Hazard Assessment had not been completed PRIOR to taking lethal steps. Mr. Green stated that the report would not be ready for at least six months and the urgency of the situation required that he take steps immediately (killing) to insure public safety. To which we pointed out that the available data indicated that there really isn’t any problem with coyotes at all. Mr. Green disagreed.
Jann asked why the airport was so concerned about coyotes (a non-threat) yet it did not protest when plans were underway for land adjacent to the airport was be purchased as Open Space. This would insure continued wildlife habitat (including around Big Johnson Reservoir just south of the airport along the flight line). She pointed out that FAA regulations state that such areas should be prohibited adjacent to airport property, or at the very least have the potential threat acknowledged and acted upon accordingly. Airport staff stated “nobody asked us.”
Gayle brought up the idea of a citizen volunteer work force to help put in the fence. There were numerous Division of Wildlife volunteers looking for something to do. She felt it would be good PR for the airport.
E-mail from Gayle to Connie:
Connie,
This is the original message to Russell George and others. The portion you need is Presentation #4. The contact is Marco Musiani. His e-mail is listed along with the information on his presentation. I asked him if he would help us with the issue of excluding the coyotes from the Colorado Springs airport operating area, and he said yes. He has a protocol in place ready for testing on coyotes. The airport would be a perfect place to test the use of fladry. You will probably have to remind him that I contacted him for help with getting an alternative to the coyote slaughter they are getting ready to launch here. He said yes to that too, but the DOW won't invite the three people to participate (Mike Phillips, Marco Musiani, and Will Pitt) who agreed to help. You will have to have Marco explain fladry to you. He will probably want to do a presentation on fladry for the airport officials and those working with them on this issue. Anyway it is worth checking it out. It has been awhile since I contacted him regarding this, so I hope he remembers who I am. Let me know if/how this progresses.
Gayle
Division of Wildlife
Russell George, Director
6060 Broadway
Denver, Colorado 80218
Telephone: (303) 297-1192
Dear Mr. George:
The following is a list of presentations regarding studies on coyotes at the
Carnivores 2000 Conference held this November, 2000, in Broomfield,
Colorado. This list/schedule was taken from the 208 pages of data and
information from the Proceedings and Agenda from the Carnivores 2000
Conference. As you can see there have already been numerous studies
conducted on coyotes. If anyone has thought of it, it has probably already
been done, and more than once.
At the end of this listing, you will find the introductions and descriptions
of four presentations numbered 2, 4, 5, and 6, that were given by
researchers at this conference. I feel that if these experts on predators
would be invited to join your "Predator Management Advisory Committee", we
can divert this proposed "coyote study", which would involve killing
predators in one area and leaving them alone in another, and find
constructive, non-lethal ways to do studies on wildlife. As you can see, # 5
and # 6 have that capability and have already done this type of study. This
proposed predator persecution by the "Predator Management Advisory
Committee" could include aerial gunning, habitat modification, non-lethal
methods, on-ground shooting, regulated hunting, and traps and snares when
and where legal, and further imperil wildlife and ecosystems.
http://insidedenver.com/news/1206pred7.shtml
Jann Nance and I talked briefly with Todd Malmsbury, DOW spokesperson, at
the conference. My understanding was that he and one other person were the
only two DOW personnel at that conference. I am trying to understand why
we, who are trying to save our wildlife treasures and the ecosystems which
they sustain, are attending everything we can in order to get information on
how to do this; and the Colorado Division of Wildlife, who has the
responsibility of protecting our wildlife and their habitats, had two people
in attendance at this conference. This, in light of the fact that this
conference was held very close to the CDOW headquarters. Is it because
wildlife management, and the "Predator Management Advisory Committee" do not
need to know what research and studies have already been done and what the
results were, because they have already made up their minds to continue with
"the slaughter plan", so why learn alternatives?
No matter what studies you try, you will get different results every year
you do them, due to all the many varying factors. These factors vary from
year to year and apply to both predators and prey, i.e., disease, food
availability, weather conditions/patterns, hunting, roadkill, birth
mortality, loss of habitat from development, interference in wilderness
habitats from people who are "getting away from it all", poachers, poisons,
and pollution. In addition, these factors may effect only one of the two
study areas; and in the meantime while you conduct these virtually worthless
studies, thousands of coyotes will be needlessly slaughtered.
Marco Musiani, #4 gave an excellent presentation on his research with light
barriers, known as fladry, which may be very useful in our efforts to
exclude coyotes from areas where they have no real incentive to be, such as
the Colorado Springs Airport operating area.
In order to provide the best and most accurate information to the people on
my network listing, we need to fill in this black hole referred to as "they"
the "Predator Management Advisory Committee". I would appreciate it if you
would provide me a list of these committee members, their titles, and how
they were chosen.
I realize that this is a lengthy e-mail, but this is a very important issue;
and I am trying to provide you with as much information as I can in order to
divert this proposed slaughter into something constructive and positive. If
you are interested in contacting any of the other presenters listed, I will
be glad to provide addresses and phone numbers for you.
I have asked Michael Phillips, Turner Endangered Species Fund,
tesf@montana.net, Phone (406)556-8500, and William Pitt, National Wildlife
Research Center Utah State University Logan, UT 84322-5295 ww@cc.usu.edu,
(435)245-6091,if they would be willing to contribute their expertise; and
both have offered their help with this study and would like for you to
contact them.
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Gayle Hoenig
------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
4. Light Barriers To Protect Livestock
from Wolf Depredation
MARCO MUSIANI (1), LUIGI BOITANI (2), CAROLYN CALLAGHAN (3),
TIMOTHY kAMINSKI (3), PAUL C. PAQUET (1) AND ELISABETTA VISALBERGHI (4)
1 The University of Calgary Faculty of Environmental Design, 2500 University
Drive NW Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4 Canada mmusiani@ucalgary.ca
ppaquet@sk.sympatico.ca
2 Department of Animal and Human Biology
University of Rome Italy
3 Central Rockies Wolf Project Canmore, Alberta, Canada
4 National Research Council Rome, Italy
In areas where guard dogs are not used, typical methods for controlling
wolf depredation on livestock are culling and building substantial fences to
exclude wolves. These methods have two major drawbacks. Culling can threaten
wolf populations, and conventional fences are expensive and difficult to
maintain. An ancient wolf-hunting technique may offer a cost-effective,
reliable solution to the problem of livestock depredation. This technique
known as fladry and used to hunt wolves in eastern Europe and Russia,
consists of driving them into a bottleneck formed by 10 x 50 cm flags
hanging from ropes stretched above the ground.
We are conducting research on captive and wild wolves' avoidance of
fladry and other light barriers (LBs), including electric ropes and wire
fences. Our results show that fladry and electric ropes can be used to
prevent wolves from accessing food sources. Fladry was also effective in
confining wild wolves overnight. LBs may be used, in addition to or in
substitution of conventional fences, as new means to protect livestock from
depredation by wolves. In addition, LBs offer ranchers the opportunity of
moving LB-enclosed areas to accommodate nomadic tending of livestock.
Further experiments are being conducted in Canada to test the efficacy of
LBs against black and grizzly bears, puma and coyote.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
-----------------------------------------
COYOTES, ECOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR
5. A New Approach To Understanding Canid Populations Using an
Individually-Based Computer Model
WILLAIM C. PITT(1), FREDERICK E KNOWLTON(l) AND AKIKO OGAWA(2)
1 USDA/APHIS/WS
National Wildlife Research Center Utah State University
Logan, UT 84322-5295 ww@cc.usu.edu
2 Department of Forest Resources Utah State University
Logan, UT 84322-5215
Ensuring the welfare of wild canid populations depends upon the ability
to integrate our best understandings of species biology, the environmental
aspects upon which those populations depend and the factors controlling
species abundance. Toward this end, we developed an individually based
computer model using Swarm to mimic natural coyote populations. Swarm is a
software platform that allows the user to describe individual behaviors for
all individuals, link those behaviors in each concurrent time step and
assemble behaviors and objects in a hierarchical framework. Our model stands
apart from previous modeling efforts because it relies on field data and
explicitly incorporates behavioral features, such as dominance and
territoriality, as major determinates of species demography. Individual
variation, such as status within territorial social groups and age-based
reproduction are assumed, but assumptions typically associated with most
demographic models are not needed. The eventual goal is to incorporate other
environmental components such as prey abundance and/or competing carnivores.
This type of model could also provide insights into potential management
alternatives for when the gray wolf is removed from endangered status in
Minnesota.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---
--------------------------------
NON-LETHAL PREDATOR CONTROL
6. Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge:
A Case Study
BROOKS FAHY
Predator Defense Institute PO. Box 5446
Eugene, OR 97405 pdi@teleport.com
In spring, 1995, pronghorn antelope on the Hart Mountain National
Antelope Refuge located in southeastern Oregon, suffered extremely low fawn
survival. Hoping to ensure high fawn survival in the following year,
managers of the refuge chose to initiate lethal predator control to reduce
coyote populations. Predator Defense Institute (PDI) and other supporting
organizations threatened suit and temporarily halted aerial gunning plans.
Although the fawn survival rate increased the following year, refuge
managers this time opted to kill coyotes by opening up the refuge to coyote
hunters. PDI and others filed suit and succeeded in stopping the hunt. This
year the fawn survival rate is at an all time high without the use of lethal
predator control methods. Currently the refuge is drafting a new
comprehensive management plan which would break away from ecosystem
management and give refuge managers authority to implement lethal predator
control without public approval.
Then the Colorado Springs Gazette ran this.
Subject: Damaging Newspaper Article on the Coyote Situation
Jann just read me a lengthy article written by Claude Oleyar who claims to
be a wildlife biologist, that was printed in the Gazette this Sunday. Jack
Murphy and I debated Claude (a trapper who is an opponent of Amendment 14)
and a rancher on live TV, on Channel 11, for about an hour, during the
Amendment 14 campaign. Claude is in the nuisance animal control business,
same as Jack Murphy. Jack uses "Humane solutions to Wildlife Conflicts" and
is opposed to trapping or any cruelty in any form to any animal. Jack is in
so much demand that he needs to be cloned. Claude thinks the answer is
killing the little suckers! Now it is interesting that the Gazette would
print a lengthy article written by a trapper, and refuse to even print some
of our animal activists' letters. Jann has written a rebuttal that is a
beaut. I'll bet the Gazette either won't print it, or if they do, they will
edit it to death. Anyone out there that can help us with this? Fair and
equal print space?
Jann’s Letter (which theGazette would not print)
Subject: Response to Oleyar
DATE: 15 August 00
TO: Tell it to the Gazette, fax 636-0202
SUBJ: Response to "OTHER VOICES: We can't manage wildlife with emotion"
As a proponent of Amendment 14 and part of the "animal rights activists"
task force protesting the use of leghold traps at the Colorado Springs
Airport, I would like to make a few points omitted by Mr. Oleyar.
Mr. Oleyar, a wildlife biologist, is obviously employed in the lethal
control of wildlife. I would imagine that trapping and killing animals is
his bread and butter, so to speak. The passage of Amendment 14 has obviously
made his job harder. No wonder he feels that the tools of his trade have
been taken from him by uninformed, emotional, animal rights activists. Well,
we ARE informed. And yes, witnessing an animal caught in a leghold trap IS
emotional, at least for most of us. The vast majority of these animals are
innocent of any wrongdoing. Most of the coyotes ever trapped and killed have
never gone after a cow or a sheep, but are sentenced to pay the ultimate
price - and hideously at that. Why? Because all coyotes have the "potential"
to attack sheep/cattle, OR be hit by an aircraft on a runway. In other
words, they are being persecuted because they EXIST, not because there is
any actual threat.
Apparently, the Gazette considers Mr. Oleyar to be an "expert" because he is
a wildlife biologist. Let me remind the Gazette and Mr. Oleyar that we also
have a wildlife biologist on our task force, as well as one of the world's
leading coyote behaviorist. We are NOT the uninformed public he leads one to
believe. Does he feel threatened because we DO know what we are talking
about and we have the data to back us up? Those in his profession provide a
necessary service, they just need to learn to do it without the cruelty.
Quick, cheap, and easy is no longer tolerated by an informed public.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has always waged war
against wildlife, and coyotes in particular. But why are they even involved
in the airport issue? Because they have a department (Wildlife Services)
dedicated to eliminating, at taxpayer expense, "problem" wildlife,
especially coyotes. It is not surprising, therefore, given their history,
that their ONLY recommendation was to trap and kill the coyotes immediately.
They frankly weren't concerned about "other means" of handling coyotes. The
USDA, together with the FAA, determined unilaterally that any sightings of
coyotes on the airport grounds are a "potential" threat to human health and
safety and that an exemption to Amendment 14 is therefore warranted. OK. So
just what kind of a potential risk are we talking about? What are the odds
of an aircraft collision with a coyote injuring humans? Apparently no one at
either the FAA or the USDA have even attempted to calculate the odds.
Certainly nothing has ever happened at the CS Airport, or anywhere else for
that matter, that has resulted in injury to a human. The FAA was only able
to show minor damage to aircraft and down time as the result of all past
coyote-aircraft collisions. Therein lies our objection. Amendment 14
specifically states that if you are requesting an exemption for "human
health and safety" reasons, then economic reasons do not qualify as a
justification (33-5-203(2)). Quite the contrary, the "evidence" they DID
provide convinced us that coyotes presented no threat at all to the
thousands of air carrier operations flying in and out of the CS airport.
Airport staff (as well as the vast majority of pilots we interviewed) has
all but admitted that the threat to air carriers is non-existent.
We are still baffled as to why the USDA and the FAA considered the situation
"urgent" enough to require trapping immediately. When I was discussed this
issue with Wildlife Services they inquired about the results of a survey of
the existing population. I said none had been done. Yet, as soon as the
exemption was granted the killings began. I strongly suspect that two of the
three coyotes killed were pups, since Wildlife Services was able to approach
them close enough for a lethal gunshot without using leghold traps. That's
within their right to do so, but, why the rush? These animals have been
around forever. Just how urgent a threat to human health and safety is a 12
-18 lb coyote pup anyway?
Keep in mind that the airport is surrounded by open space, which is the
ideal habitat for coyotes. Killing the coyotes on the airport is a very
short-term solution because others will soon replace those killed. Mr.
Oleyar will agree with that. The airport agreed. Even Wildlife Services
agreed with that assessment. That's another reason we wanted to focus on a
coyote proof fence BEFORE the killings began.
The reason Amendment 14 was written and passed by voters in Colorado was to
stop the UNNECESSARY cruelty. The spirit and intent of Amendment 14 was that
non-lethal measures should be tried first, then non-prohibited methods
(shooting), and prohibited methods (leghold traps, snares, and poisons) ONLY
AS A LAST RESORT. A "potential" threat is not justification for last resort
measures. After all, anything with teeth, claws, and beaks CAN be a
"potential" threat to human health and safety. Secondly, when prohibited
devices are used, we object to the indiscriminate practices employed to
manage the problem animals, resulting in many innocents being slaughtered in
the hopes that the guilty will be among them.
Mr. Oleyar stated that overpopulation of some species is a problem. I agree.
But it's our fault. Overpopulation of many species is the direct result of
the complete failure of "animal management" practices employed by many state
and federal governments. When you kill off one species, many other species
are affected. For instance, back in the early 1900's the USDA was very
instrumental in extirpating the wolf because of the threat to livestock and
the potential threat to human health and safety. There were consequences of
that kill-off. For one, the coyote population exploded (wolves do not
tolerate coyotes). The deer population then exploded (wolves eat them,
coyotes seldom do). The USDA then targeted the coyote but not as
successfully as with the wolf. Coyotes are much more resilient, adaptable,
and tend to produce larger litters when their social hierarchy is disrupted
and their numbers forcibly reduced. It is especially ironic that deer have
turned into a much greater threat to human safety than the wolves ever were
(i.e. the thousands of people killed or injured in car/deer collisions).
There are many other examples, so please, Mr. Oleyar, don't preach about the
benefits of properly "managing" wildlife populations.
As for his reference to the our task force trying to save the coyotes at the
airport through the use of "loopholes" in the Amendment, let me point out to
Mr. Oleyar that it is the FAA, the USDA, and
the airport doing just that. Exemptions SHOULD be given to protect human
health and safety, if, in fact, there IS a threat. What is a "potential"
threat to human health and safety? That is the loophole in Amendment 14 that
is now being tested at the CS Airport. If a "potential" threat is determined
to be valid justification for an exemption to Amendment 14, without any
evidence to prove the threat, or before other measures have been diligently
pursued, then the amendment itself has just been nullified.
In spite of all this, our proof that killing coyotes would not eliminate them from airport property, the airport went right ahead and pursued and obtained their trapping permit and employed the use of the US Department of Agriculture to carry out the slaughter of the coyotes.
It took them three tries to finally obtain their permit. They did it without any substantiating documentation of coyote strikes (the one and only strike at the Colorado Springs Airport had never even been submitted to the FAA, and therefore, was not even on the report.) or validating documentation to justify an exemption to Amendment 14. The third request for a trapping permit was accompanied by a strong arm letter from the USDA and a strong arm letter from the FAA, and a list of "coyote sightings" at the Colorado Springs Airport. Who is going to stand up to two powerful "Federal Government Agencies"? Not the local county health department.
It is absolutely imperative that this trapping does not take place. If this airport is allowed to trap on unproven, unfounded, frivolous grounds, anyone anywhere in the state will be able to get a trapping permit for anything for any reason. As you already know, trapping coyotes is only going to increase their coyote population, and so this trapping will need to be done on a continuous basis because they will always have coyotes.
If The CS airport is allowed to get away with this, it will also set a precedent for airports, both large and small, all over the country to implement this means of eradicating unwanted wildlife from airport property. Whatever airports decide to do, they will just have to do it without traps.
It amounts to unnecessary, avoidable cruelty to animals who have committed no crime other than that of being born coyotes. One either accepts that it is OK to do this to non-human creatures or that it is not OK. If it is not OK, then fight to stop it. It is not OK for one, or ten, or one million. We fought too hard to pass Amendment 14 to have it weakened and chipped away at until it is worthless in preventing the suffering caused by traps, snares, and poisons.
From a guide to trapping for children…
"To ensure death, pin the head with one foot and stand on the chest of the animal with the other foot…"
And society wonders what is wrong with our children? Why we have kids killing kids? Why we have kids killing adults? Why there is no right or wrong? And what is a conscience? What kind of person teaches their children that it is OK to torture other beings that share this planet with us?
"When you give a personal lesson in meanness to a critter or a person…..don't be surprised if they learn their lesson."
Humans need to learn that they don't respond to wildlife conflicts with cruelty. They find humane methods that work. We have done that. The airport will just have to work harder and faster on the fence. We are willing to help them do that. We offered to get them help with donations of material and volunteers from the community.
I was tempted to title this account of our fight for our coyotes "Beginner's guide to picking a fight with a large city owned airport, the local county, the state, the FAA and the Feds (Wildlife Services/Animal Damage Control), with a follow up entitled “When you have mastered these we will progress to picking international fights." As the saying goes, "Learn to pick your battles." Well, as the saying also goes, "They started it."
It is amazing to me that 10 months later, with thousands of animal activists across the country behind us, national attention, and three attorneys working on what is now a "case", this issue still hasn't been resolved and is still being negotiated. It amazes me that anyone would fight this hard to be allowed to commit this kind of cruelty. In contrast, it amazes me that this many people care about one family unit of coyotes and will fight this hard to save them. Wiley has worked his magic on many people.
We finally ended up with a team of three attorneys, a temporary restraining order for the halting of the trapping, and the possibility of a lawsuit. The attorneys drafted an agreement, which, to my knowledge, most of the team agreed to sign. The agreement did not bind the airport to agree to stop trapping and not to apply for anymore trapping permits. For this reason some of the team would not sign it, Jann and I among them.
The group that has agreed to sign this agreement feel that by doing so, they
can work with the airport and get the fence up so that they won't need to
trap. I hope they can accomplish this, but if that is the case, they should
feel comfortable about the airport not needing a trapping permit.
I am told that they have meetings with the airport and some of the coyote exclusion fence is in place. Since we are no longer part of the team, we are not kept informed and cannot report on this issue.
If you think it is futile to fight for something you believe in, remember this. Either way, your voice will be heard, and "The loudest sound in the world is silence."
Historical Congressional Testimony on Trapping - A MUST READ!
http://www.tribeofheart.org/tohhtml/testimony.htm
Suggested reading "War Against the Wolf"
Rick McIntyre, Editor
Over 100 historical documents and modern articles documenting the evolving attitudes toward wolves in America from 1630 to 1995
Wild Neighbors: The Humane Approach to Living with Wildlife
Edited by John Hadidian, Guy R. Hodge, and John W. Grandy
Published in cooperation with The Humane Society of the United States, this book shows readers how to peacefully coexist with furry and feathered inhabitants of the urban landscape. Packed with detailed ‘how-tos’ for dealing with everything from bats in your attic to deer in your garden. The book also provides background info on more than 30 animals and ‘fun facts’ about each animal.
Humane Society of the United States Wildlife land Trust - We protect wild
animals by protecting where they live.
http://www.wlt.org/
As a result of this fight to save the coyotes, Tommy Butcher, one of our team members, wrote
“The Lesser Species Act.”
This is an act to show the hypocrisy of killing coyotes, or other
animals, by ranchers, developers, airports, etc., because the animals are
a nuisance or perceived as a "danger". Hopefully, this might personalize
these people's actions a bit. Hey, if nothing else, maybe it could
actually be passed.
This is an act proposed to rid the nation of lesser species. Lesser
species as defined by "man" would be a species of:
1. Lower intelligence
2. A danger to others
3. Something that is misunderstood
4. And was not "invited" into our path
5. Something born to a parent of a lesser species
Now as someone who has a very high IQ, I would say that this would
describe about 90% of the human population. So what to do about this
situation? Well, we can follow the example of some airports.
Just think of all those nasty people that cut you off, see #4 and #2.
Well, we can just trap them or poison them. Who cares if their kids will
die from starvation. Not my problem. Oh, and there can always be a
mandatory IQ test for children in school; and if you're not... well,
let's say at least a 90 then you're fair game as well, see #1.
As for #3, well this could take on many forms, someone with a disability,
something that someone does, but we ourselves do not understand, etc.
Therefore, most people are fair game. Wouldn't the world be a great place
if we could just casually remove everything or everyone that annoyed us?
Imagine leaving your house in the morning and kissing your children
goodbye for the day. You get in your car and begin your drive to work.
You're going down the same path you and your parents have always used,
but now something looks different. It appears that someone has built a
structure on the side of the freeway. "Oh", you think to yourself, "A new
building." You wonder what it might be. All of a sudden you run over a
landmine that I set. Well, I did not invite you onto my area of this
freeway (see #4).
Unfortunately, the mine did not kill you. Instead, it only blew your leg
to pieces and trapped you in your car. Unable to leave, you sit there in
pain for hours, maybe even a day. You think of your little children,
about how they will go hungry and die without you there to raise them.
After a few hours of reflection and pain, you see a figure walking over.
You're scared, but you cannot move because you are trapped. You look up
and see me. I smile, and in a split second I shoot you in the head,
ending your pathetic life.
I sigh. What unintelligent creatures. I mean, I placed a sign, written in
a language I made up, for all to see. Not my problem if they can't
understand it (see #1). I mean, this car produces exhaust that makes me
cough. It could have run over a child; and frankly, the noise bothered
me (see #2, #4 and #3). Now lets make sure this does not happen again. I
reach into your pocket and remove your driver's license. Hmmm....home
address. Well let's just make sure there are not any more of these
unintelligent creatures around to bother me in the future.
So I go to your home, and I knock on your door. I look around the room
and see your children huddled together in the corner. Of course they are
scared of me. I'm a superior creature. I can think, make up my own
language, even create weapons of mass destruction, like the one I'm about
to use to slaughter them with. Well, now that I've finished that little duty,
I should probably check my other mines and see if I've caught anymore of
these stupid creatures that I did not invite onto my land.
One might want to read this story very carefully because you never know
when/if it might happen to you. We have had leaders like this in the
past, i.e., Hitler, Napoleon, etc. Moreover, we will probably have more
of these in the future. Will you be affected, or will it be your
children? Where will you be? You might want to start checking your IQ,
and making sure you don't step on too many people's toes. You never
know, they just might not understand you.
Tommy Butcher - 2000
_______________________________
Final note: The coyote exclusion fence is in place and I hear that it is a great success.