To the consternation of conservationists and animal rights activists and the applause of agricultural interests, federal agents kill thousands of animals in Wyoming each year to protect crops, livestock and private property.

Wildlife Services is a federal program operated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service. Its mission is to "provide leadership in wildlife damage control to protect agricultural, industrial and natural resources and to safeguard public health and safety."

It is not a business for the squeamish.

Tools of the trade include planes and helicopters for aerial gunning, rifles and shotguns and a variety of snares, traps and poisons. At the national level, this federal agency destroyed more than 2.7 million animals in 2004, an increase of more than a million from 2003, although the budget increased only $3 million from 2003 to $101 million in 2004.

Birds constituted the overwhelming majority of animals exterminated, with grain-devouring starlings as the greatest single species total at 2.3 million.

There's also a wide range of nonlethal tools used by Wildlife Services, including live traps for relocation of animals, low-powered lasers to frighten birds away from airports or dairies, and drugged baits that put animals in a deep sleep so they can be handled for relocations.

Yet there's still quite a bit of criticism of the agency.

"Wildlife Services killed more than five animals per minute in 2004,"said Wendy Keefover-Ring of Sinapu, a wolf advocacy group. "The toll on ecosystems wrought by this one agency is jaw-dropping."

Green Scissors, a coalition that targets what it terms wasteful or environmentally harmful government spending, charges that most of the Wildlife Services budget is focused on livestock protection, benefiting mostly a few Western livestock producers, relative to ag producers throughout the country.

"It's just one subsidy after another," said Franz Matzner, senior policy analyst of Taxpayers for Common Sense, which is part of the coalition.

"The program doesn't work, because predation rates haven't gone down," he added.

Green Scissors further notes that although the number of predators killed by the agency increases annually (especially coyotes), coyote populations remain stable and are spreading geographically.

Green Scissors charges that Wildlife Services' activities make predator problems worse. Biologists have found that when subjected to intense control, not only do female coyotes respond by reproducing at an earlier age and producing larger litters, but pup survival increases, thereby rendering the control efforts counterproductive. They also note that some poisons are not entirely selective, but spill out into the environment and kill other birds and animals.

Supporters, meanwhile, say Wildlife Services fills and important function.

"Wildlife Services does a very good job in Wyoming," said Jim Schwartz, assistant director of the Wyoming Department of Agriculture. "They aren't trying to eliminate every coyote, but focus on predator management and finding the right balance between prey and predator."

Rod Krischke, director of Wildlife Services in Wyoming, said the emphasis on damage control rather than population control of predators means the agency might hit denning coyotes hard a couple of miles around a livestock site, but leave healthy coyote populations farther out. He estimated that at most, Wyoming Wildlife Services takes less than 15 percent of the coyote population.

A much-cited General Accounting Office study in 2001 said the program's benefits exceed costs by a ratio ranging from 3:1 to 27:1. That GAO report also noted a 2000 national livestock loss of half a million livestock, valued at $70 million. In that year, Wyoming sustained $5.6 million loss in livestock to predators.

The GAO also noted that collisions between automobiles and deer cost $1 billion annually, while collisions between aircraft and birds cost $400 million in 2000.

Wyoming's share of the 2004 budget was $2.8 million, of which $2 million was focused on agriculture. That's up from $2.6 million in 2003, $1.8 million focused on agriculture.

A focus on coyotes

Here in Wyoming, coyotes - not wolves or grizzly bears - are the greatest and most persistent threat to Wyoming agricultural interests. According to statistics compiled by the Wyoming Agriculture Statistics office, predators took 9.8 percent of the 41,000 lost cattle and calves last year. Of the 4,000 cattle and calves lost to predators, 2,200 were taken by coyotes - a little more than half of the predator total. In decreasing order, the most damaging predators were wolves (600), mountain lions (500), grizzly bears (300) and black bears, eagles, wild dogs and other predators (tied at 100 each).

Digestive problems (14.7 percent), respiratory problems (21.3 percent), weather (18 percent) and calving (25 percent) caused far more deaths than predators.

Coyotes also hammer sheep and lambs, which are much more vulnerable to predation than cattle and calves. In 2004, sheep and lamb losses were 55,000 animals, of which 55 percent or 30,000 were due to predators. Coyotes took 19,700 sheep and calves or 35.8 percent of the total loss. While all losses totaled $4.33 million, predation cost the sheep industry $2.21 million or 51 percent of the total.

Other predators that killed sheep last year include eagles (3,500 n mostly lambs), mountain lions (1,400), bears (1,000) and wolves (200).

In terms of Wyoming Wildlife Services' field work, Krischke estimated 60 to 70 percent of employee effort is focused on coyotes. Last year, Krischke's staff killed 6,258 coyotes - third in the nation behind Texas (16,702) and Montana (9,751).