An appraisal to determine whether the Department of the Interior is doing a proper job in controlling rodents and predators will by a panel of distinguished scientists at the request of Secretary Stewart L. Udall.
Among the problems that will be studies are whether the Federal Government should attempt to control rodent and predators on private as well as public lands, whether some animals are being threatened with extinction as a result of the Government’s control work and whether there is too much control or not enough.
The study is being made by the “Leopold Committee,” the same group that recently submitted a report on wildlife management in the National Parks administered by the Department. Committee chairman is Dr. A. Starker Leopold of the University of California’s Department of Zoology, Assistant to the Chancellor of the University at Berkeley.
In asking for a review of his Department’s predator and rodent control activities, Secretary Udall has called for the first top-level appraisal in many years of the Government’s program to control animals that prey on livestock, massive bird depredations, and rats and mice. The program also included research on bird control at airports and the control of rabies-bearing species, such as skunks and foxes. The program has long been known for the Government trapper who hunts coyotes and mountain lions in the west.
The Department’s control program involves about $1.9 million annually in Federal funds and $3.5 million contributed by farmers and ranchers and State and local governments.
For many years animal lovers and conservationists have raised questions whether the Government is doing “too much”—to the point that some species are being endangered by the control program. At the same time, some farmers and ranchers have asked that the Government do much more, especially to prevent large crop losses from massive bird damage. The Leopold Committee will attempt to answer such questions.
Secretary Udall asked the Committee these specific questions:
- What should the Government’s role be in providing protection to people, game and livestock from nuisances and depredating birds and mammals? Does the Federal Government have an obligation to provide these services on private lands as well as public lands?
- If this is a proper function of the Federal Government how far should it go in providing these services?
- Should it be limited to a program of research to find the best control methods and the publication and dissemination of this information? What additional research is possible in areas such as range ecology and predator damage in order to better determine whether or not control programs are needed?
- Should it go further and provide and “Extension Service” type program on the Missouri model?
- Should the Federal program provide services in the range and magnitude of the present program? What changes should be made in the present program to meet current and long-range need?
- Should control program series be provided to any segment of the population that will provide the funds, or only after an examination of the situation revealed that there was a need for the work?
- Since the type of series provided by the Predator and Rodent Control Branch are closely connected to agriculture, should the Branch activities be a part of the Department of Agriculture?
- Does the Branch of Predator and rodent Control have a definite long range goal? If so, does the various districts have operational plans that will achieve these goals?
- Have shifting agriculture and populations patterns resulted in a similar adjustment in Branch operations?
- Are any species of wildlife, harmful or beneficial, being endangered to the point of becoming scarce or extinct either directly or indirectly through Predator and Rodent Control operations?
The Committee report is expected in six to eight months.
In addition to Dr. Starker, members of the special committee include Dr. Ira N. Gabrielson, Vienna, Va., President of the Wildlife Management Institute; Dr. Clarence Cottam, Sinton Tex., director of the Welder Wildlife foundation; Thomas L. Kimball, McLean, Va., executive director of the National Wildlife Federation; and Dr. Stanley A. Cain, Ann Arbor, Mich., professor and Chairman of the Department of Conservation, University of Michigan.
