A federal agency’s justification for killing thousands of animals in Idaho was faulted by a U.S. District Court as “not convincing and objective” because it failed to consider concerns raised by others, including sister government agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, regarding the potential harm to the environment.
Monday’s decision by Chief District Judge B. Lynn Winmill could have a broader impact on the federal Wildlife Services, a division of the Agriculture Department that removes and kills millions of animals each year. Coyotes, wolves, grizzly bears, beavers, blackbirds, mountain lions, foxes, and a wide range of others identified as nuisance animals are slain on behalf of ranchers, farmers, homeowners and airport operators – actions that are routinely challenged by environmentalists.
Winmill agreed with a suit brought by environmental groups including the Western Watersheds Project and the Center for Biological Diversity, which argued that Wildlife Services gave itself broad authority to destroy native predators in Idaho without conducting a scientific review of how such kills would affect the ecosystem. The court said officials dismissed concerns even when other agencies charged with environmental conservation — the Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game — said the rationale given “was not an objective analysis of the environmental impacts.”
Instead of issuing a final judgment, Winmill ordered the division to work with the plaintiffs to establish a method for determining the impact of its animal control. The court will oversee that future negotiation. (Washington Post)
