National Wildlife Refuges: Sanctuaries or Killing Fields?
By Camilla H. Fox, Animal Protection Institute
The first national wildlife refuges were established under the direction of President Theodore Roosevelt, to "preserve wildlife and habitat for people today, and for generations to come." Hunting, trapping, and other activities inimical to preserving wildlife were prohibited in most refuges until the 1950s, when amendments to the Duck Stamp Act resulted in many refuges allowing hunting and trapping. Consumptive wildlife users argued that their monetary contribution to "conservation" gave them the right to kill wildlife on public lands.More than 3,000 Waterfowl Production Areas (WPAs), mostly in the Midwest, are part of the refuge system. Under the guise of "avian conservation," these areas cater to waterfowl hunters and to trappers, with "management" focused on eliminating such occasional bird- and egg-eating predators as foxes, coyotes, raccoons, and skunks. To accomplish this reprehensible task, a national Predation Avian Recruitment Team has been developed under the auspices of the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Their mission is to increase the number of pheasants, quail, turkeys, and waterfowl within the refuge system by "surgically removing" predators. Trappers may kill predators on WPAs without a permit, which is normally required. The fact that the same traps set to target certain predators sometimes kill the very species they are intended to protect doesn't appear to concern the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency charged with managing the refuge system.
Since its inception, the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) has been administered under a collection of presidential proclamations, executive orders, administrative orders, and laws. The Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 authorized "recreational uses" of NWRs, further expanding hunting, trapping, grazing, mining, and other activities harmful to wildlife. In 1966, a "compatibility standard" for allowing public uses on refuges was established with passage of the National Wildlife Refuge System Administrative Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service defines "compatible use" as "a wildlife-dependent recreational use or any other use of a refuge that, in the sound professional judgment of the Director, will not materially interfere with or detract from the fulfillment of the Mission of the System or the purposes of the refuge. The action must also be in accordance with the principles of sound fish and wildlife management and administration, and otherwise must be in the public interest."
Today, before a refuge is opened up to hunting or fishing, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the National Environmental Policy Act process and allow the public to comment on the issue. However, no public comment is required before a refuge can allow trapping; it is up to refuge managers to decide if trapping is "compatible" with the purpose of the individual refuge.
Public Outcry
Over the past 20 years, animal advocates have brought the issue of trapping-related cruelty to the forefront of public consciousness, and efforts to ban or restrict trapping have been successful in some states and local jurisdictions. Public outcry prompted Congress to include language in the 1997 Appropriations Bill directing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to convene a task force to "study the use of animal traps in the National Wildlife Refuge system...[and to] consider the humaneness of various trapping methods...and other relevant issues." It also stipulated that the task force include "interested outside parties."
However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service argued that a task force could not be convened in the allotted time, and convinced Congress to replace it with a nationwide survey that was distributed to every refuge unit manager in January 1997. The ultimate intent of the survey, which requested specific information pertaining to trapping programs on those refuges that allow this activity, was never fully clear.
In its final 87-page report to Congress, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service offered a glowing, self-serving account of the benefits of trapping, concluding that it is "a professional wildlife management tool" that provides "important benefits for public health and safety and recreational, commercial, and subsistence opportunities for the public." This virtual "snow job" told Congress and the public that trapping on refuges is conducted primarily for "facilities protection" and for the protection of migratory birds and threatened and endangered species; trapping for "recreation/commerce/subsistence" is listed as the last of 11 reasons for trapping in refuges. However, a copy of the raw survey data obtained by the Animal Protection Institute (API) through the Freedom of Information Act revealed that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service official conclusions did not accurately reflect the information submitted by the refuge managers. API's analysis of the questionnaire data found that the most common purpose cited by refuge managers for trapping was for "recreation/commerce/subsistence." The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service not only twisted information to form a particular conclusion (trapping is necessary and a good "wildlife management tool"), but excluded vital data, such as the types of traps used and the incidents of nontarget species being killed.
Ending the Cruelty
API and many other groups believe that commercial and recreational trapping and the use of body-gripping traps should be prohibited on all refuges. Humane concerns aside, the use of such traps is not compatible with the preservation of threatened and endangered species that inhabit refuges. In fact, leghold traps, neck snares and other body-gripping devices pose a serious hazard to many of these species and may actually hinder their recovery. As lands specifically set aside to provide animals a safe home, refuges should be maintained as inviolate sanctuaries, not as playgrounds for trappers and other consumptive wildlife users.
Camilla Fox is the founder and executive director of Project Coyote
Trapping on Public Lands: National Wildlife Refuges, Camilla H. Fox PDF