News & Commentary
Coyote Awareness Week: Challenging Fear, Embracing Coexistence
Coyote Awareness Week: Challenging Fear, Embracing Coexistence
Coyotes are one of the most persecuted wild animals in North America. Despite their intelligence, adaptability, and crucial ecological roles, they are subject to relentless killing—over half a million coyotes die each year in the U.S. alone. This staggering number, more than one coyote killed per minute, is fueled by outdated myths, fear-driven policies, and a deeply ingrained war against predators that dates back to European colonization.
Predator extermination campaigns in the 1800s–mid 1900s nearly wiped wolves, mountain lions, and bears off the map. But when the focus turned to coyotes, they responded to this persecution with resilience and adaptability, tripling their range in the last century and filling vacant niches left where wolves were extirpated. Yet rather than celebrating their resilience to adapt to a human dominated world and the important roles they play in our urban and rural communities, our society has often labeled the coyote as a “pest” or a threat to human communities.
Unlike other carnivores, coyotes have virtually no protections under state wildlife laws, allowing unlimited, year-round killing by almost any means, including trapping, poisoning, aerial gunning, and in wildlife killing contests. Federal agencies like USDA Wildlife Services further enable this persecution, killing nearly 70,000 coyotes annually, mostly at the request of the livestock industry.
Coyote’s ability to adjust to changing conditions and diverse environments, along with their ability to survive and thrive in the face of relentless persecution, has left them vulnerable to insufficient legal protections. In almost every region of the United States, coyotes are legally allowed to be killed, sometimes incentivized through bounties, in unlimited numbers 365 days of the year, using almost any means, including killing contests, trapping, poisoning, hounding, baiting, aerial gunning, and unregulated recreational killing.
Accurate numbers do not exist for how many coyotes are killed through “sport” or wildlife killing contests, because state agencies often do not track or monitor the killing of coyotes, and this number is likely a very low estimate. Even with this underestimate, it translates to: 41,666 coyotes killed every month; 9,615 coyotes killed every week; 1,370 coyotes killed every day, 57 coyotes killed every hour; and 1 coyote killed every minute.
But the science is clear: killing coyotes doesn’t solve conflicts—and sometimes, it can actually make them worse. Disrupting coyote family structures leads to more breeding by younger animals, larger litters, and potentially increased conflicts with livestock from younger animals who don’t know how to target proper prey. Instead of lethal “management” that has been proven ineffective, we need policies that promote coexistence, respect, and sound ecological principles.
Coyotes play a vital role in maintaining healthy ecosystems. They regulate rodent populations, limit disease transmission, and control mesocarnivores like skunks and raccoons, which helps increase bird diversity. Whether in rural landscapes or urban neighborhoods, they provide essential ecosystem services that benefit us all. Yet, instead of recognizing their value, our society has labeled them as pests, subjecting them to brutal and indiscriminate killing methods—including trapping, poisoning, aerial gunning, hounding, and wildlife killing contests.
Coyote Awareness Week, created by Project Coyote, is a call to rethink our relationship with these intelligent, resilient animals. By understanding coyote behavior, reducing human-caused attractants, and using humane hazing techniques when needed, we can foster coexistence instead of conflict. This week is centered on teaching communities nationwide about coyote ecology, behavior, and compassionate coexistence. We believe that if we can change hearts and minds about coyotes, the world will be a more compassionate place for all wild lives.
Wildlife for All is proudly signing the Coyote Pledge to:
- Recognize the Importance of Coyotes: Take responsibility to learn about the critical role coyotes serve in our ecosystems, helping to maintain biodiversity and healthy environments.
- Dispel Myths and Misconceptions: Share accurate information about coyotes in your community (in-person and on social media) to address common myths to promote understanding and reduce fear.
- Support Community Coexistence Efforts: Learn how to keep coyotes wild through humane hazing and reduce attractants that can lead to habituation in your yard and community. Together we can positively manage interactions between humans and coyotes in urban, suburban, and rural areas.
- Educate and Inspire Action: Use Coyote Awareness Week to educate your community about the benefits of living alongside coyotes by sharing Coyote Awareness Week emails and social media posts or creating your own.
- Advocate for Ethical and Science-based Wildlife Policies: Support policies in your state and at the federal level that protect coyotes and oppose inhumane practices like indiscriminate trapping, wildlife killing contests, and hounding.
Coyotes have been here since the Pleistocene, adapting to human expansion with remarkable resilience. It’s time to end the war on coyotes and advocate for policies that reflect science, ethics, and public values. Let’s build a future where coyotes—and all wildlife—are treated with the respect they deserve.
When Beavers Do It Better
When Beavers Do It Better: A Lesson in Letting Nature Lead
When governments stall and bureaucracies tangle themselves in red tape, nature often steps in with a solution. That’s exactly what happened in the Czech Republic, where a group of beavers did what humans couldn’t—build a dam that saved a river.
Authorities had long debated a plan to construct a dam to protect the Klabava River from sediment and acidic runoff. The project was expensive ($1.2 million), bogged down in permitting issues, and seemingly going nowhere. But while officials argued, eight beavers got to work.
Very quickly, they built the perfect dam—efficient, durable, and strategically placed to maximize water quality and habitat benefits. Their structure not only stabilizes the river but also creates a thriving wetland that supports fish, birds, other mammals, and even humans. And unlike human-made infrastructure, the beavers will maintain it for free, continuously adapting it to meet the ecosystem’s needs.
As Jaroslav Obermajer of the Czech Nature and Landscape Protection Agency put it: “Beavers always know best. The places where they build dams are always chosen just right—better than when we design it on paper.”
This story is more than just a feel-good moment—it’s a lesson in humility. Too often, wildlife management follows the thought process that we must control, manage, and engineer nature to function properly. But in reality, ecosystems have been self-regulating for millions of years. Instead of constantly trying to dominate the natural world, what if we stepped back and let it do what it does best?
We can follow the lead of the Czech officials. Instead of rejecting this unplanned intervention, those folks embraced it. As environmental journalist Ben Goldfarb said:“Instead of saying, ‘That wasn’t what we planned originally,’ they recognized that these animals are filling that ecological function very well and said, ‘We’re going to let them keep doing it.'”
Beavers: Nature’s Master Engineers
For decades, scientists have recognized that the North American beaver (Castor canadensis) provides a host of ecological benefits across its range, from northern Mexico to Alaska. Beaver ponds and wetlands:
✔ Filter out water pollution
✔ Support salmon and other fish species
✔ Sequester carbon
✔ Control flooding
✔ Serve as natural firebreaks
These structures also create habitat for scores of other species, from aquatic insects, fish, and amphibians to larger creatures like herons, whooping cranes, moose, and bison. In fact, the largest beaver dam on record—located in Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada—stretches the length of seven football fields and is so massive it can be seen from space.
Beavers don’t just help nature; they help humans too. In Oregon, beavers built dams on the property of a multimillion-dollar stormwater treatment facility. When scientists studied the results, they found that the beavers filtered out heavy metals and other pollutants twice as effectively as the human-built system.
Beavers: America’s Best Firefighters
The benefits of beaver engineering are even clearer in the face of wildfires. After the Sharps Fire in Idaho scorched mountainsides and forests, entire landscapes were reduced to ash—except in the valleys where beavers had been at work. There, the land remained lush, wet, and green.
Recent studies confirm that beavers are among nature’s best firefighters. By building dams, forming ponds, and digging canals, they irrigate vast stream corridors and create fireproof refuges where plants and animals can shelter. In some cases, their wetlands can even stop fire in its tracks.
“It doesn’t matter if there’s a wildfire right next door,” says study leader Emily Fairfax, an ecohydrologist at California State University Channel Islands. “Beaver-dammed areas are green and happy and healthy-looking.”
Beavers aren’t just dam-builders; they’re ecosystem engineers who create wetlands, sequester carbon, and enhance biodiversity. Yet in North America, they’re often trapped and killed as nuisances. Imagine what would change if, instead of removing them, we embraced their role in restoring degraded landscapes.
Despite their immense ecological benefits, beavers are still trapped and hunted in every U.S. state, often treated as nuisances rather than the keystone species they are. Their dams, which slow water, reduce wildfires, and create vital wetland habitats, are frequently labeled as problems and destroyed to accommodate short-term human interests. People complain that beavers eat and use their favorite trees for dams without looking at the larger picture.
Time and time again, we see that beavers provide far more value alive than as a pelt. It’s time to shift our perspective—to recognize beavers not as pests, but as partners in conservation. Instead of killing them for a fur coat, we should be protecting and working alongside them to restore ecosystems, build climate resilience, and secure clean water for future generations.
This Czech beaver brigade offers a powerful reminder: nature knows what it’s doing. Too often, humans believe we must control nature to make it function properly. But in reality, ecosystems have been self-regulating for millions of years. Instead of constantly trying to dominate the natural world, what if we stepped back and let it do what it does best?
Beavers already have the blueprint—we just need to get out of their way.
Arizonans Rally Against Hounding—and HB 2552
Arizonans Rally Against Hounding—and HB 2552
Photo originally posted on Game and Fish Magazine and taken by Scott Haugen.
Arizonans Rally Against Hounding—and HB 2552
Last week, more than 50 dedicated wildlife advocates joined us for a powerful webinar to discuss our campaign to end the cruel practice of hound hunting in Arizona. Our movement is growing, and your voices are making a difference.
Just hours before our webinar, we saw proof of that impact: HB2552, a bill designed to block the Arizona Game & Fish Commission from even considering a rule on hounding, failed to pass the Arizona House in a narrow 30-28 vote.
This is a major win for wildlife and for the democratic process, but the fight isn’t over yet.
HB2552: A Power Grab to Undermine Wildlife Protections
Arizona lawmakers wrote HB2552 for one reason: to strip the Game & Fish Commission of its authority before it could even consider our petition to end hounding. Rather than letting the public process play out, special interest groups and their political allies tried to preemptively shut it down.
HB2552 was not about science, conservation, or public input. It was about consolidating power, keeping decision-making in the hands of politicians, and catering to narrow special interests. This bill would have permanently blocked the Commission from regulating the use of hounds in hunting, no matter the ecological consequences or public will.
The defeat of HB2552 is a victory for everyone who believes wildlife policy should be shaped by science, ethics, and democratic participation—not backroom deals and industry lobbying.
Why does ending hounding matter? Our rulemaking petition calls for an end to the use of packs of dogs to chase down and kill bears, mountain lions, coyotes, bobcats, and other wildlife. This brutal practice is not only inhumane but also poses serious risks to non-target species, including endangered jaguars, ocelots, and Mexican wolves.
Hounding violates fundamental principles of fair chase and creates chaos in ecosystems, forcing animals to flee over long distances in terror. It even puts hikers, pets, and other public land users at risk. Ending hounding is a necessary step toward a more just, science-based wildlife management system in Arizona.
Take Action
While HB2552 was defeated, we know that industry-backed politicians will continue trying to obstruct wildlife protections. We must stay engaged and hold our elected officials accountable.
Here’s what you can do:
➡ Contact your legislator – Thank them if they opposed HB2552, or ask them to reconsider their vote if they supported it. Let them know that wildlife policy should be based on science and public input, not political favors.
➡ Support our rulemaking petition – The fight to end hounding in Arizona is far from over. The Game & Fish Commission needs to hear from you! Stay tuned for opportunities to submit public comments and show up in person.
➡ Spread the word – The more Arizonans know about hounding, the stronger our movement becomes. Share this blog post and talk to friends, family, and community members about why ending hounding matters.
➡ Show up on April 11 – The Commission will meet to discuss wildlife rules, and we need to make our presence known. Even if you don’t want to speak, wearing red will signal our strength and unity.
Last night’s webinar proved that Arizonans are ready for change. The failure of HB2552 shows that even against powerful special interests, we can win. Let’s keep up the momentum and fight for a future where wildlife is managed with ethics, science, and public accountability at the forefront.
End Hound Hunting In Arizona
End hound hunting in Arizona to protect wildlife.
Hound Hunting in Arizona: Take Action to Protect Wildlife
Arizona’s wildlife is facing an unnecessary and outdated threat: the use of packs of hunting dogs to pursue and kill mammals like mountain lions, bears, coyotes, and bobcats. This cruel practice, known as hounding, doesn’t just harm the target animals—it also puts federally protected animals, entire ecosystems, and even public safety at risk.
That’s why a group of organizations—including the Center for Biological Diversity, the Grand Canyon chapter of the Sierra Club, the Mountain Lion Foundation, Lobos of the Southwest, Wild Earth Guardians, Wildlife for All, Conservation CATalyst, Madrean Archipelago Wildlife Center and Animal Defense League of AZ—submitted a rulemaking petition to the Arizona Game & Fish Commission to end hound hunting in Arizona.
Now, we need your voice to help make this change a reality.
Arizona’s Game & Fish Department has a legal duty to protect the state’s wildlife. However, current regulations still permit hounding for mountain lions almost year-round and allow hounding for bobcats, foxes, and badgers for eight months annually. Shockingly, some species—including coyotes, skunks, and rabbits—can be hunted with hounds year-round with no restrictions.
This level of unregulated, relentless pursuit is not sustainable or humane. Between 2020 and 2023, hound hunting led to the killing of 748 mountain lions and 323 black bears in Arizona alone. This high level of hunting pressure is neither ethical nor scientifically justified.
The Dangers of Hound Hunting
Hound hunting is more than just an extreme form of hunting. It involves packs of dogs chasing animals for miles, often for hours or even days, until the exhausted prey can no longer run. The practice causes immense stress and suffering—not just for the intended targets, but for many other species as well.
Hounding harms federally protected species. Arizona is home to rare and endangered species, including jaguars, Mexican gray wolves, and ocelots. These animals have already suffered due to habitat destruction and human activity, and hounding only increases the risks they face:
- Jaguars: At least five of the last eight jaguars documented in the Southwest have been impacted by hound hunting, with some being chased, treed, or forced to relocate. Hounding is allowed in 65% of federally designated jaguar critical habitat within the Coronado National Forest.
- Ocelots: These mid-sized cats are at risk of being chased or killed due to their resemblance to bobcats, a legal target for hounding. Records and hunter testimonials confirm that ocelots have been pursued and treed by hounds at least a dozen times with no repercussions from AZGF.
- Mexican gray wolves: Arizona acknowledges the risk of mistaken identity between wolves and coyotes, especially during summer months when wolf pups are active. Hounding of coyotes in wolf-occupied areas increases the risk of harm to these endangered animals.
Hounding has ecological and ethical concerns. Beyond direct harm to individual animals, hounding disrupts ecosystems
because packs of hunting dogs create a “landscape of fear.”
- Wildlife are constantly on edge, disrupting natural behaviors and migrations. Uncontrolled packs of dogs chasing
wildlife across large areas will affect their normal behaviors, causing countless species to abandon habitat which particularly harms ground-nesting birds. - Hounded animals experience extreme stress, which can affect reproduction rates and territorial behavior, leading to broader ecological consequences. Hound hunting has huge impact on deer populations and deeply affects fawn survival.
- The use of vehicles off designated roads, such as ATVs, to follow hounds is in violation of Arizona’s prohibition on using motor vehicles to pursue or take wildlife.
- Arizona regulations require hunters to be present for the entire hunt. However, GPS and telemetry technology allow hunters to track hounds remotely, often violating the intent of this rule.
- Arizona allows commercial guiding services to use hounds for hunting on public lands, even in areas where protected species like jaguars and Mexican wolves are known to roam. This increases risks to these species and public land ecosystems.
- There are documented instances of packs of hounds attacking hikers and mauling pets, making public lands feel unsafe for families with pets or kids due to uncontrolled hounds.
The Myths of Hound Hunting
Some claim that hound hunting helps manage wildlife populations or benefits conservation, but the facts tell a different story:
- Hound hunting isn’t selective. Packs of dogs chase any animal they come across, including non-target and protected species.
- Hounding can spread diseases like rabies impacting public health and safety. One hound hunter lost an entire pack to a rabies infection after his dogs encountered—and killed—an infected skunk, which he did not witness. He only discovered the rabies infection later. Arizona is currently experiencing a number of rabies outbreaks in several counties.
- Killing carnivores can increase conflict. Removing mature, established cougars or bears disrupts ecosystems and can lead to more human-wildlife conflicts.
- Hound hunting doesn’t help deer populations. Science shows that factors like habitat loss and climate change have a far greater impact on deer numbers than carnivore populations.
- Hound hunting provides little revenue. The financial contribution of cougar and bear hunting is minimal compared to the damage it causes to Arizona’s wildlife and ecosystems.
Some Arizona Lawmakers Are Trying to Silence Us
Some Arizona lawmakers introduced HB2552, a blatant attempt to silence public input and scientific debate on wildlife policy—just as the Commission is set to consider our two petitions to ban this cruel and ecologically damaging practice.
HB2552 was revised from its original intent that would have stripped the Arizona Game and Fish Commission of its authority to regulate hound hunting instead of allowing a fair and open debate on our petition—a move that would set a dangerous precedent for wildlife governance in Arizona. However, this revised version still codifies hound hunting into law in an attempt to pre-empting the public petition process through the Commission. Read more about this bill.
Join Us in Protecting Arizona’s Wildlife
Arizona’s hounding regulations are outdated, inhumane, and ecologically destructive. It’s time for change. Ending recreational hound hunting will:
- Reduce the risk to rare and federally protected species.
- Protect entire ecosystems from unnecessary stress and harm.
- Ensure Arizona’s wildlife management aligns with modern conservation values.
We need your support to get these rulemaking petitions passed. Take action today by urging the Arizona Game & Fish Commission to ban hound hunting.
How To Take Action:
- Write the Arizona Game & Fish Commission members to support our rulemaking petitions. Use this page: scroll to each member and use the form linked after their bios that says “Contact Me.”
- Contact your state senator and urge them to oppose HB2552.
- Reach out to Governor Hobbs and let her know where you stand. Ask her to veto HB2552 if it comes across her desk.
- Write a letter to the editor of your local paper to raise awareness.
- Recruit others by sharing this information on social media and within your community.
- Show up on April 11 when we present these petitions at the Arizona Game and Fish Commission meeting in Phoenix. You don’t have to speak—just being there and wearing red will show our collective power!
Thank you for taking action! Let’s End Hound Hunting in Arizona.
New Mexico Reform Bill SB 5 Passes the Senate
Great news: New Mexico wildlife governance reform bill SB 5 passes the Senate.
Momentum for Wildlife: SB 5 Passes the Senate—Onward to the House!
Big news out of New Mexico! Senate Bill 5 has officially passed the Senate with strong bipartisan support and is now headed to the House of Representatives. With three weeks left in the legislative session, we’re calling on House members to get this historic bill across the finish line!
SB 5 is a groundbreaking step for wildlife governance:
SB 5 represents a rare and powerful example of bipartisan leadership and broad coalition-building. Conservation advocates, hunters, scientists, and policymakers from across the political spectrum came together to support this bill, which will provide the New Mexico Department of Game & Fish with the tools, authority, and funding needed to modernize wildlife management.
This is not just a victory for New Mexico—it’s a model for the nation. SB 5 proves that when we prioritize science, ecosystems, and public interest over outdated special-interest politics, we can build a future where wildlife and people thrive together.
Thank you to everyone who made this possible. This victory wouldn’t have happened without the leadership of Senators Wirth, Campos, and Brantley, as well as the many organizations and individuals who worked tirelessly to push this bill forward. We are proud to be part of a coalition of 20+ organizations representing tens of thousands of New Mexicans who support this effort.
What’s Next?
The bill now moves to the House of Representatives, where we need all hands on deck to ensure its passage before the session ends on March 22. Stay tuned for action alerts—we need your voice to make sure New Mexico leads the way in creating a wildlife management system that works for all.
Read More
Game Commission overhaul passes Senate after three-hour debate
By Nathan Brown, Mar. 1, 2025, Santa Fe New Mexican
NM lawmakers are considering reforming the Game Commission. What does that mean?
By Hannah Grover, New Mexico Political Report, Mar. 3, 2025
Bill aiming to reform New Mexico game commission passes Senate
By Isaac Cruz, KRQE News, Mar. 3, 2025
Bipartisan reform of State Game Commission deserves support
Op-ed by Pete Campos and Peter Wirth, Santa Fe New Mexican, Feb. 28, 2025
After fishy debate, Senate approves bill modernizing NM Game and Fish department
By Dan Boyd / Journal Capitol Bureau, Albuquerque Journal, Mar. 1, 2025
March Wildlife Commission Meetings
Speak up for wildlife at March Wildlife Commission Meetings.
March Wildlife Commission Meetings
And just like that, it’s March. Are you ready to keep up the pressure with this month’s wildlife commission meetings?
Wildlife commission meetings are critical opportunities to influence state policies and ensure that wildlife is managed in a way that reflects ecological principles and public values. Your voice matters. Whether you choose to attend in person, speak virtually, or submit comments, participating in these meetings is a meaningful way to stand up for wildlife.
Below is the list of every state with a wildlife commission meeting in March, listed from first to last by date. As you plan your comments and engagement, use the resources on our Resources Page and Advocacy Toolkit to prepare. Check below for meeting details by state and instructions for how to engage. Let’s make a difference!
Oklahoma
Meeting Date: March 3
Location: Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation 1801 N. Lincoln Blvd. Oklahoma City, OK 73105
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Meeting starts at 9 a.m. It’s not clear how to comment or speak; we suggest emailing the department to ask. It’s also unclear if there is a virtual participation option. Read more on their website.
Colorado
Meeting Date: March 5-6
Location: 6060 Broadway, CPW Headquarters – Hunter Education Building, Denver, CO 80216
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: 8 a.m. Wed, March 5 through 5 p.m. Thu, March 6. The cutoff to speak online was Feb. 28 at noon but you can still show up in person to comment or email the commission (though these won’t be counted in the official public record if received after noon on 2/28).
Action: There is a wolf program update, item 16a. On the consent agenda, there is a review of final regulations for sage grouse hunting, item 3.1.
Alabama
Meeting Date: March 6
Location: Gordon Persons Building Auditorium, 50 N. Ripley St., Montgomery, AL 36130 (enter at right – Ripley/Pelham – corner)
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Meeting starts at 9 a.m. Comments are in-person only. Those who wish to address the Board must register between 8:00 and 8:30 am. Please bring 18 copies of all documents you wish to distribute to the Board to the Registration Table. Make sure your name and organization are on each document. After registering before the meeting, the person wishing to speak should go to the designated microphone when called. After being recognized by the Chair, the person should first give his/her name, city and county. The time limit to speak is three minutes. If several persons wish to speak on the same subject, the group should choose one speaker to represent them. The Chair may or may not choose to call on each person in that group to speak for additional information. Questions or debate from Advisory Board members shall be limited to 10 minutes. No person may speak twice until all registered speakers have spoken, and then only at the discretion of the Chair.
Louisiana
Meeting Date: March 6
Location: LDWF Headquarters, Joe L. Herring Room, 2000 Quail Drive, Baton Rouge, LA 70808
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Register for the Zoom webinar to comment online/virtually or to watch live. Commission meetings begin at 9:30 am. Commission meetings are open to the public To comment, you can attend the meeting in person at the location listed above, submit written comments before the meeting by emailing Comments@wlf.la.gov. Your email must include the agenda item # in the subject of your email. The body of your message should include your name and address before your comment. During the Zoom meeting you may submit comments by using the ‘Q&A’ feature at the bottom of the Zoom application. During the designated comment period, click ‘Q&A’ at the bottom of your Zoom window, type your name, physical address, and question/comment, and then press ‘enter.’
Action: At the monthly meeting on Feb. 6 in New Orleans, the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission (LWFC) approved a Notice of Intent to extend wild alligator hunting season to Dec. 31. The extension would apply to both the West and East zones. The season would run from the last Wednesday in August until Dec. 31 in the East Zone and from the first Wednesday of September until Dec. 31 in the West Zone. The goal is to “increase harvest opportunity” because the season currently runs 60 days. To see the full NOI go to https://www.wlf.louisiana.gov/
The Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission (LWFC) adopted notices of intent for the 2025-26 and 2026-27 hunting seasons, 2025-26 general and Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) hunting seasons and rules and regulations, 2026 general and WMA turkey hunting season and rules and regulations, and 2025-26 migratory bird hunting season and rules and regulations at its January meeting. The LWFC also adopted several amendments to the NOI at its February meeting. To view the full notice of intent, proposed amendments, all regulation changes and proposed hunting season dates for the upcoming hunting seasons, go to https://www.wlf.louisiana.
South Dakota
Meeting Date: March 6-7
Location: Ramkota Convention Center, Pierre, SD
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Livestream watch link. Zoom Meeting Link | To join via conference call, dial 1.669.900.9128 | Webinar ID: 912 6417 6710 | Passcode: 970458 | To provide comments, join the meeting in person, via zoom, or via conference call per the info above. To conduct the public hearing and/or open forum as efficiently as possible we ask those wishing to testify to register by 1 pm CT by email to Liz.Kierl@state.sd.us. Testifiers should provide their full names, whom they are representing, city of residence, and which proposed topic they will be addressing. Written comments can be submitted here. To be included in the public record, comments must include full name and city of residence and meet the submission deadline of seventy-two hours before the meeting (not including the day of the meeting).
Action: Oppose the expansion of mountain lion hounding on public and private land. More information here.
Nevada
Meeting Date: March 7-8
Location: MDC Headquarters, 2901 W Truman Blvd., Jefferson City, MO 65102
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Thursday, Feb. 6, 10 a.m. – Workshop and Closed Executive Session. Friday, Feb. 7, 8:30 a.m. – Regular Open Meeting. Any person who would like to comment to the Commission about a specific agenda item must make a written request to the Director at least four calendar days prior to the meeting. The time allotted for public comment and the number of speakers will be at the Commission’s discretion.
Action: Oppose the codification of wildlife killing contests; the commission is trying to skirt banning these by trying to regulate them instead by requiring participants to hold a hunting license. Let the commission know this does not fix the problem.
New Jersey
Meeting Date: March 11
Location: Assunpink Wildlife Management Area – Central Region Office, Large Conference Room,1 Eldridge Rd., Robbinsville Twp, NJ 08691
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: The public is welcome to attend and participate in the public portion of each meeting. Meeting starts at 10 a.m. and will be held both in person and via GoToMeeting (audio only). Per the website, public comments may be made in person or online and will be limited to 3 minutes per person. More information about the Commission is on its website, including a meeting guide and how to connect. For help, contact Kristen.Meistrell@dep.nj.gov.
California – Marine Resources Committee only
Meeting Date: March 13
Location: California Natural Resources Headquarters Building, Second Floor, 715 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Meeting documents are not yet available. Commission meetings are live-streamed (also referred to as a live webcast) with full audio and video. If you simply want to observe the meeting, but do not wish to comment on any item, we encourage you to view the live webcast available at www.fgc.ca.gov. How to join (if you plan to provide comment). More on all meetings in 2025.
Michigan
Meeting Date: March 13
Location: Blandford Nature Center, 1715 Hillburn Ave NW, Grand Rapids, MI 49504
Details: Click here for agenda and details.
Notes: Coffee with commissioners at 8:30 a.m. Meeting starts at 9:30 a.m. Persons registering to provide comments on a topic listed on the agenda on or before the Friday preceding the meeting will be allowed up to 5 minutes for their comments. Persons registering to comment on a topic not listed on the agenda, after the Friday preceding the meeting, or at the meeting will be allowed up to 3 minutes. If you are unable to attend the meeting but wish to submit written comments on agenda items, please write to Natural Resources Commission, P.O. Box 30028, Lansing, Michigan 48909, or email nrc@michigan.gov. Read more on the Commission website.
Hawai’i
Meeting Date: February 14
Location: 1151 Punchbowl St. Room 132 (Kalanimoku Building), Honolulu, Hawai‘i
Details: Meeting agendas are posted at least 6 days prior to the date of the meeting but an agenda for this month was not available when this webpage was posted. Keep checking back on this webpage.
Notes: Meeting starts at 9.a.m. Attend in person and arrive at least 15 minutes prior to the meeting start time in order to add your name to the sign-in sheet. To speak virtually, email blnr.testimony@hawaii.gov. Include your name and the agenda item on which you would like to testify. Once your request has been received, you will receive an email with the Zoom link. Requests may be also made during the meeting. Meetings will be livestreamed at: https://youtube.com/c/boardoflandandnaturalresourcesdlnr. To submit a comment, email blnr.testimony@hawaii.gov no later than 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting to ensure time for BLNR Member review.
Kentucky
Meeting Date: March 14
Location: #1 Sportsman’s Lane, Frankfort KY and Livestreamed Online
Details: Click here for agenda and details. (Agenda not available at time of webpage publishing.)
Notes:The meeting will start at 8:30 a.m. (ET) in the Administration Building on the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources’ campus in Frankfort. It will be open to the public.The meeting also will be livestreamed and archived on the department’s YouTube channel at youtube.com/FishandWildlifeKY. A link to the livestream also will be posted on the department’s homepage at fw.ky.gov at the start of the meeting. Anyone wishing to address the Commission orally must sign in before the meeting and will have 3 minutes to speak during the public comment. Members of the public may submit emailed comments on Commission business items anytime to FW.PublicAffairs@ky.gov; these comments may include statements of support or opposition, or express concerns or questions. Emailed comments regarding a business item that are received before 5 p.m. at least two days before a scheduled meeting that includes opportunity for public comments may be read by staff during the public comment segment of the meeting. The Commission chair reserves the right to select representative comments to be shared orally or read from emails, subject to availability of time and potentially redundancy of comments.
Oregon
Meeting Date: March 14
Location:ODFW Headquarters Commission Room, 4034 Fairview Industrial DR SE, Salem, OR 97302
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Meeting starts at 8 a.m. Members of the public can view a livestream of the meeting via the agency’s YouTube channel or on the Commission page. Members of the public may also view a livestream of this meeting at ODFW Headquarters, 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, Salem. Comment and testimony are limited to 3 minutes or less. Submit written comments and/or register to speak virtually by 8 a.m., March 12. Those who would like to provide virtual testimony must register no less than 48 hours in advance to receive a testimony link to the meeting. To provide testimony on an agenda item in-person, registration will be available at the meeting. To provide in-person public comment, fill out a “Witness Registration” form available at the meeting.
New Hampshire
Meeting Date: March 18
Location: Fish and Game Headquarters, 11 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH
Details: Agenda was not available when this webpage was published. Keep checking this webpage for details.
Notes: Meetings are generally at 1 p.m. on the third Tuesday of every month. Meetings of the NH Fish and Game Commission are open to the public, unless otherwise noted.
Indiana
Meeting Date: March 18
Location: Fort Harrison State Park, The Garrison, 6002 North Post Road, Indianapolis, IN
Details: Agenda was not available when this webpage was published. Keep checking this webpage for details.
Notes:10 a.m. ET/9 a.m. CT. All meeting agendas are posted a week prior to the meeting.
Maryland
Meeting Date: March 19
Location: Department of Natural Resources Wildlife and Heritage Service, 580 Taylor Avenue, Tawes State Office Building, E-1, Annapolis MD 21401
Details: No agenda was available at time of webpage publishing; meeting schedule is listed at the end of the January agenda.
Notes: Google Meet. Note: Unless notified otherwise, all meetings will be held via Google Meet. When meeting in person, they will be held in the C-4 Conference Room of the Department of Natural Resources—Tawes State Office Building beginning at 10:30 a.m. Available parking is located at the Navy Stadium Parking Lot. Send written comments to wac.dnr@maryland.gov.
Arkansas
Meeting Date: March 19-20
Location: Little Rock
Details: Click here for agenda and details (note no agenda is online at time of webpage publishing).
Notes: Unclear how to speak at meetings or provide virtual testimony or written comments. 2025 meeting schedule is here.
Wyoming
Meeting Date: March 19-20
Location: Cody
Details: Agenda not available at time of webpage publishing; keep checking back for updates
Notes: This meeting will be conducted in person and via Zoom. Please note there are different links for each day. If you wish to speak to the Commission and comment on an agenda item in person, please complete the comment form provided at the meeting. If you wish to speak to the Commission and comment on an agenda item via Zoom, please submit an Advanced Agenda Item Comment Form, which is attached to the agenda, by Monday, March 17 to toni.bell2@wyo.gov.
Virginia
Meeting Date: March 20
Location: 7870 Villa Park Dr, Suite 400, Henrico, VA 23228
Details: Click here for agenda and details (note no agenda or details besides location and time were available at time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Meeting starts at 9 a.m. Public comment on agenda items and non-agenda items are welcome at any regularly scheduled Board or Board Committee meeting. Please see the meeting schedule for dates and additional details,
Nebraska
Meeting Date: March 20-21
Location: Ord
Details: Click here for agenda and details (note agenda was note available at time of webpage publishing)
Notes: It is not clear from the website how to speak at a meeting, or how to submit comments beforehand. It is also unclear if the meeting will be livestreamed and if virtual participation is possible.
Washington
Meeting Date: March 20-22
Location: Kennewick
Details: Click here for agenda and details (note no agenda is available at the time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Registration for those wishing to provide virtual comments closes at 5 p.m. the day before the meeting begins. Registrants will be called upon and typically have 3 minutes to speak. If you are unable to participate, you can submit your comments on the Commission contact page.
Arizona
Meeting Date: March 21
Location: Region V
Details: No agenda is available yet.
Notes: Members of the public may view the meeting from any Department Regional Office. Members of the public attending in person wanting to speak on a specific agenda item may submit Speaker Cards (Blue Cards) if they wish to speak to the Commission and may only address the Commission by attending in person or from any regional office. Copies of any presentations, documents, etc. discussed during the meeting will be available by contacting sprice@azgfd.gov. No discussion or action will be taken by the Commission on topics raised in public comment. Any items requiring further discussion or action will be included on a future Commission meeting agenda. View live webcasts at www.azgfd.gov/commissioncam.
Tennessee
Meeting Date: March 21
Location: Buffalo Ridge Refuge, Humphreys County, TN
Details: Click here for agenda and details (note no agenda is available at the time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Meeting starts at 9 a.m. No agenda listed and it is unclear how to watch remotely, or how to provide comments.
Alaska
Meeting Date: March 21-28
Location: Anchorage Egan Civic & Convention Center
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: All portions of the meetings are open to the public and a live audio and video stream will be provided. Meeting material including agenda, staff reports, and public and agency comments on proposals can be accessed on the meeting website as it become available. Oral testimony is expected to begin that morning following the conclusion of agency reports. Anyone wishing to testify before the board must sign up at the meeting location before 10 a.m. Saturday, March 22. Public testimony will continue until everyone who has signed up has been given the opportunity to be heard. However, state Fish and Game Advisory Committee and federal Regional Advisory Council representatives may elect to provide testimony later in the meeting. Deliberations on the proposals will begin following public testimony and continue through the remainder of the meeting.
Written comment deadline is Friday, March 7, although comments will also be accepted once the meeting convenes. Those who wish to provide written comments on proposals must include the proposal number(s) for which the comments pertain, and the submitters first and last name, and community of residence. Comments submitted by the March 7 deadline are limited to 100 single-sided or 50 double-sided pages. Comments submitted by the deadline will be included in the board meeting workbook and posted on the meeting website before the meeting. Once the meetings begin, written comments will be accepted online. Written comments can also be submitted in person at the meeting, or via fax to 907-465-6098. Comments submitted during the meetings are limited to ten single-sided/five double-sided pages in length from any one individual or group. Comments submissions during the meeting will be logged with a record copy (“RC”) number and distributed to the board and posted on the meeting page. For more information about the board meeting process, please contact Kristy Tibbles.
Delaware
Meeting Date: March 25
Location: Dover
Details: Click here for agenda (not available at time of webpage publishing) and details
Notes: Meeting starts at 7 p.m. No information on how to speak or comment available at time of webpage publishing but the site says virtual connection details will be announced.
Georgia
Meeting Date: March 25
Location:DNR Board Room 2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, SE Suite 1252 East, Atlanta, GA 30334
Details: Click here for details. (note the meeting agenda was not available at time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Meeting starts at 9 a.m.It is unclear how to sign up to speak, submit a comment, or if virtual participation is possible. Here is the full 2025 meeting schedule.
Idaho
Meeting Date: March 26
Location: Idaho Fish and Game – Headquarters, 600 S. Walnut Street, Boise, ID 83712
Details: Click here for agenda and meeting details. (Note: agenda not available at time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Watch via Zoom; call-in number is 253-215-8782 and webinar ID is 912 8782 3590. Per the website, “The Fish and Game Commission usually holds a public hearing in conjunction with each regular meeting. Members of the public who want to address the commission on any topic having to do with Fish and Game business may do so at the public hearing. All testimony will be taken into consideration when the commission makes decisions on agenda items at the meetings.” It is unclear how to submit comments in advance or if virtual comments/speaking is allowed. Here is the full 2025 meeting schedule.
Massachusetts
Meeting Date: March 26
Location: MassWildlife Field Headquarters, 1 Rabbit Hill Road, Westborough, Massachusetts
Details: Click here for agenda and details (note agenda is not available at time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Meeting starts at 10 a.m. Unclear how to submit comments or speak at meetings, whether in person or virtually. Attendees can go in person or join via Zoom, passcode 989800. Or join via audio: (929) 205-6099. Webinar ID: 863 9175 7210. Passcode: 989800. Anyone wishing to be placed on the agenda to speak at the monthly business meeting must begin by notifying the Board in writing 2 weeks prior to the Board meeting; for more detailed information, contact Susan Sacco.
Texas
Meeting Date: March 26-27
Location: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Headquarters, Commission Hearing Room, 4200 Smith School Road, Austin, TX 78744
Details: Click here for agenda and meeting details
Notes: Work Session: 9 a.m. Wednesday, March 26; commission meeting: 9 a.m. Thursday, March 27. Comment online through 5 p.m. March 26 using the links in the meeting agenda. The site reads, “Live streaming video and audio will be available,” but links were not available at time of webpage publishing.
Kansas
Meeting Date: March 27
Location: Topeka & Shawnee County Library, Marvin Auditorium BC
Details: Click here for agenda and details. (note no agenda was available at time of webpage publishing)
Notes: Meeting starts at 12 p.m. You can watch and comment via Zoom. The link to register will be shared with the agenda. Once registered, you will emailed a link to “Join the Meeting.” You will be muted upon entering the meeting. To comment or ask a question, use the “Raise Hand” feature or type your question in the chat function. Watch Live video/audio stream at https://ksoutdoors.com/commission-meeting.
Ohio
Meeting Date: April 2
Location: Wildlife District 1 Office, 1500 Dublin Rd., Columbus, OH
Details: Click here for agenda and details
Notes: Meeting begins at 6 p.m. Comments for open forums during Ohio Wildlife Council meetings must be about a current rule proposal. If you have a topic that is not a current rule proposal, please email the council with your comment or question (wildlife.council@dnr.ohio.gov), or speak to a council member before or after a meeting. If the topic falls within the wildlife, fish, or law section, feel free to reach out at our open houses or email the Division of Wildlife at wildinfo@dnr.ohio.gov. Speakers must register by 5 p.m. Monday, March 31. The Public Comment Form must be completed and submitted to wildlife.council@dnr.ohio.gov. Along with the form, submit any handouts you plan to provide. Speakers are limited to 3 minutes. There will be a maximum of ten speaker slots available. PowerPoint presentations are not permitted.
Arizona Officials Back Bill to Undermine Wildlife Protections, Silence Public
Arizona Officials Back Bill to Undermine Wildlife Protections, Silence Public Input
Ocelot image courtesy of the Center for Biological Diversity. Photo available for free media use with appropriate credit.
Arizona Officials Back Bill to Undermine Wildlife Protections, Silence Public Input
PHOENIX— The Arizona Game and Fish Department and the Game and Fish Commission are backing a bill to strip the state’s wildlife agency of its power to regulate the use of dog packs for hunting mountain lions, bears and other animals. The bill would also subvert state law by gutting the public’s right to petition on wildlife policy and hound hunting, while circumventing public hearings and internal reviews.
Conservation groups recently petitioned the commission to ban using dog packs in Arizona, citing serious risks to wildlife, public safety and ethical hunting practices. The petitions say releasing packs of hunting dogs on public lands threatens endangered animals including ocelots and jaguars, increases the risk of conflicts with people, violates the principle of fair chase and leads to inhumane treatment of wildlife and dogs.
“By backing this bill, Arizona’s top wildlife officials are subverting the public’s right under the state constitution to petition for rulemaking on dog pack hunting,” said Russ McSpadden, a Southwest conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Ethical gymnastics like this raise grave doubts about the commission’s commitment to endangered species protection and its capacity to review our pending petitions.”
On Feb. 10, state Rep. Lupe Diaz (R-Benson) said in a committee hearing that he helped write House Bill 2552 to counter recent petitions asking the commission to ban hounding. At the same hearing Arizona Game and Fish Commissioner James Goughnour said “the Commission supports this bill.” The Arizona Game and Fish Department’s Ed Sanchez and David Fernandez signed in as supporters of the bill.
The Game and Fish Commission, which oversees the Game and Fish Department, is responsible for setting regulations related to hunting, fishing and wildlife conservation, ensuring decisions are based on scientific principles and public input. Arizona’s constitution guarantees the public’s right to petition the government.
“Efforts by Arizona legislators to strip the commission’s ability to respond to public concerns, scientific evidence and ethical considerations concerning dog-pack hunting are in blatant violation of the public trust,” said Sandy Bahr, director for Sierra Club Grand Canyon (Arizona) Chapter. “It’s almost unbelievable that the Arizona Game and Fish Department and commissioners would support this wildly undemocratic attack on the American model of wildlife management, which the department and commission claim to uphold.”
Hound hunting poses a clear and documented threat to federally protected jaguars and ocelots in the Southwest, with multiple recorded incidents of hounds chasing and treeing these endangered cats in Arizona. At least five jaguars — Macho B, Border King, El Jefe, Sombra and an unnamed jaguar — have been pursued by hounds in the region since 1996, with Sombra abandoning his preferred habitat because of the presence of packs made up of as many as 30 dogs.
Similarly, packs of hunting dogs have chased or treed endangered ocelots more than a dozen times in Arizona since 2011. The repeated pursuit by hounds disrupts natural behaviors, causes physical stress and forces these rare cats from their essential habitats, threatening their survival and broader species recovery efforts.
“The Game and Fish Department’s job is to steward Arizona’s wildlife, not to rubber-stamp political schemes that benefit a small group of trophy hunters,” said Chris Smith, wildlife program director at WildEarth Guardians. “By supporting H.B. 2552, the department is subverting its own authority and facilitating the continued harassment of endangered jaguars and ocelots.”
Arizona allows packs of dogs to chase and attack mountain lions, bears, coati and bobcats for sport. According to Arizona Game and Fish data, 748 mountain lions and 323 bears were reported killed by hunters using packs of dogs between 2020 and 2023. A 2020 study estimated that the state’s entire mountain lion population was between 1,166 and 1,715.
“Arizona’s wildlife belongs to all of us, not just a handful of special interests,” said Erin Hunt, managing director at Lobos of the Southwest. “If passed, H.B. 2552 would elevate private interests over science and democratic process and put endangered species at risk.”
Hound hunting relies on GPS-collared dogs, remotely tracked via smart devices, to pursue wildlife, violating fair chase principles and state restrictions on electronic hunting. Additionally, uncontrolled hounds pose risks to public safety, sometimes attacking people on public lands.
“This isn’t just about hound hunting,” said Michelle Lute, director of Wildlife for All. “It’s about whether Arizona’s wildlife policies in regard to hounding will be shaped by science and public participation or dictated by lawmakers doing the bidding of trophy hunters behind closed doors. If legislators can strip the commission’s authority at will, simply to derail a petition from the public from even being heard, then no wildlife policy is safe from political interference.”
Arizona hunters have raised concerns about hound hunting, questioning its fairness and ethics. Many argue that hounds give an unfair advantage, undermining the principle of fair chase.
As one long-time hunter said in the White Mountain Independent, “The dogs are an unfair advantage. Why should we spend $25 on a tag when the animals are all slaughtered the first weekend?”
“Public input is not a nuisance — it’s a fundamental right,” said Josh Rosenau, director of policy and advocacy at the Mountain Lion Foundation. “The Game and Fish Commission has the time and expertise to make thoughtful changes to hunting rules, including when, where or how hounds are used by hunters. By stripping the agency of that power before they even respond to a citizen petition, they’re taking away Arizonans’ voice in managing the wildlife that belong to everyone. This is a blatant power grab, and it must be stopped.”
About Wildlife for All
Wildlife for All is a national organization dedicated to reforming wildlife management to be more democratic, just, compassionate and focused on protecting wild species and ecosystems. Through research, advocacy, and education, we aim to protect wildlife and ensure that policies reflect the values of all Americans.
Right to Hunt Amendments: a Solution in Search of a Problem
Right to Hunt amendments are a solution in search of a problem.
Why Right to Hunt constitutional amendments are a solution in search of a problem
Lately, we’ve been talking a lot about the power of language and the ways in which entrenched hunting interests manipulate narratives to maintain control over wildlife management. From the absurdity of calling grizzlies a “renewable resource” to the deeply flawed framing of predators as criminals, these rhetorical strategies all serve a larger goal: ensuring that our current, broken system remains intact. That brings us to one of the most blatant examples of this culture war in action—Right to Hunt amendments.
At first glance, these amendments might seem like a reasonable safeguard for a long-standing American tradition. But scratch the surface, and you’ll quickly find they are a solution in search of a problem. No state is threatening to outlaw hunting. No serious conservation group is advocating for an end to all hunting. So why the push to enshrine it in state constitutions? Because large pro-trophy hunting and gun organizations need a perpetual sense of victimhood to keep their audience engaged—and donating.
These amendments claim to “protect” hunting, but from what exactly? Hunting is legal in every state. So why push these laws? Well, it’s not about protection. It’s about fear. It’s about creating a false sense of crisis. Groups like the NRA and trophy hunting organizations use these fights to rally their base—convincing hunters they’re under attack while raking in donations.
And make no mistake, this is an ongoing battle. Right now, eight states are actively considering Right to Hunt amendments:
- Missouri – HJR56 (2025 session) – Legislation
- Oregon – SJR13 (2025 session) – Legislation
- New Jersey – ACR125 (2024-2025 session) – Legislation
- Ohio – HJR1 (2025-2026 session) – Legislation
- Iowa – HJR1 (2025-2026 session) – Legislation
- New York – S02428 (2025-2026 session) – Legislation
- Michigan – HJRC (2025-2026 session) – Legislation
- West Virginia – HJR16 (2025-2026 session) – Legislation
Right to Hunt amendments aren’t about securing access to sustainable food sources or ensuring ethical wildlife management. They are about codifying hunting as the dominant, unquestionable form of interaction with wildlife. They strip states of the ability to adapt management policies based on new ecological data, favor hunters over the general public, and, in many cases, explicitly elevate hunting and trapping above non-lethal solutions.
These amendments are also deeply political. They serve as a rallying cry to activate hunters with manufactured outrage, making them believe their way of life is under siege when, in reality, it’s being catered to at every level of wildlife governance. The real threat here isn’t to hunting—it’s to the possibility of reforming wildlife management to prioritize ecosystems over special interests.
If hunting organizations were truly interested in conservation, they would welcome nuanced discussions about wildlife policy. Instead, they rely on fearmongering and misinformation to push these amendments through, ensuring that they remain the loudest voice in the room. It’s time to call these efforts what they are: a political ploy designed to entrench an outdated and extractive approach to wildlife management under the guise of “rights.”
The real question isn’t whether hunting should exist. The question is whether our wildlife policies should continue to be dictated by those who see animals as nothing more than targets and trophies—or whether we should move toward a model that values entire ecosystems, biodiversity, and the broader public interest. These amendments aren’t about protecting a right; they’re about ensuring that the status quo never changes.
If we care about the future of wildlife, we need to move beyond this manufactured crisis. Our laws should reflect science—not political theater.
Take action: If you live in one of these states, contact your legislators and tell them to oppose these amendments.
The Truth About Wildlife Killing Contests
Bloodsport Disguised as Wildlife Management: The Truth About Wildlife Killing Contests
This weekend, in Marbleton, Wyoming—just miles from where, last year, Cody Roberts ran over a young wolf with a snowmobile and brutally tortured her after—another act of animal cruelty is set to take place. A bar is Marbleton is hosting a wildlife killing contest, misleadingly named the “Song Dog Shootout,” where participants compete to slaughter as many of these highly intelligent and social animals as possible for cash and prizes.
Yet again, we see the worst kind of cruelty inflicted on wildlife under the guise of “predator management.”
When advocates called attention to the cruelty and recklessness of these contests, the organizers doubled down. In a Facebook post defending their event, they dismissed critics as “uneducated” and claimed that the contest was about “predator management,” not killing for sport.
The response from the event’s host—a local bar—was full of misinformation. They justified the contest as necessary to protect wildlife and livestock, stating that coyote populations are out of control and need to be “thinned.”
But the facts tell a different story. The truth is, wildlife killing contests have nothing to do with management and everything to do with bloodlust.
Coyotes are Not a Threat to the Ecosystem—They are Part of the Ecosystem
The claim that coyotes are a “threat” to wildlife is not only false—it’s completely nonsensical. How can a species that evolved as part of an ecosystem be a danger to that very system? Coyotes play a crucial role as mesopredators, keeping rodent populations in check, preventing disease outbreaks, and maintaining the food web. Removing them disrupts these natural processes, leading to unintended consequences and ecosystem instability.
The idea that wildlife needs to be “managed” by humans, particularly through indiscriminate killing, is rooted in a flawed and outdated worldview. Nature has successfully regulated itself for millennia without human intervention. It is only when we interfere—by exterminating predators, fragmenting habitats, and altering food sources—that ecosystems begin to unravel.
Killing Coyotes Does Not Protect Livestock—Coexistence Does
The idea that indiscriminately slaughtering coyotes helps “manage” their populations is scientifically false. Proponents of these contests claim that coyote killing protects livestock, but decades of research tell a very different story. Studies have consistently shown that indiscriminate lethal control methods are ineffective at reducing livestock losses. If the goal were truly to protect livestock, non-lethal deterrents would be the priority—not killing contests.
A USDA study (Shivik et al. 2003) found that increasing predator removal led to more livestock losses, not fewer. Another long-term study at the University of California Hopland Research and Extension Center (Conner et al. 1998) found that as trappers removed more coyotes, lamb predation actually increased. Why? Because when dominant territorial coyotes are killed, it creates a vacuum that invites new, often younger and less-experienced coyotes to move in. These younger coyotes are more likely to target livestock, as they lack the learned hunting skills of older pack members who primarily prey on natural food sources.
Additionally, research has shown that coyote populations respond to lethal control with a biological countermeasure: they reproduce more. When coyotes are heavily hunted, their litter sizes increase, and more pups survive to adulthood (Blejwas et al. 2002). This means that killing coyotes not only fails to reduce their numbers but can actually cause a population boom—and this in turn may lead to more conflicts, not fewer.
Contrast this with non-lethal coexistence strategies, which have been proven to work. Livestock guardian animals, fencing, range riders, and proper husbandry practices significantly reduce losses without the need for indiscriminate slaughter. In fact, some ranchers have discovered the concept of “guard coyotes”—non-offending, territorial coyotes who keep sheep-killing coyotes out of their area (Shivik 2014). By killing coyotes indiscriminately, killing contests actually remove this natural protection and open the door for increased predation.
The research is clear: lethal control does not reduce coyote populations long-term. Instead, it disrupts their social structure and triggers an increase in reproduction and migration, often leading to more coyotes in the area (which, to be clear, we don’t think is a bad thing at all but likely the people who believe in killing contests’ efficacy do).
The Real Purpose of Killing Contests: Industry-Backed Bloodsport
If these contests are not about protecting wildlife or livestock, what are they really about? The answer is simple: they exist to fuel a culture of gratuitous killing.
Despite their claims of “management,” wildlife killing contests exist for one reason: the thrill of the kill. These events turn wildlife into moving targets, rewarding people for slaughtering as many animals as possible. Wildlife killing contests are not about conservation. They are about cruelty. They are about turning the systematic extermination of a species into a game.
Last fall, Rolling Stone exposed how wildlife killing contests are propped up by the trophy hunting and gun industries, with millions of dollars flowing into these bloodbaths. These contests are about thrill-killing, not management. Even within the hunting community, they are causing deep divisions, with ethical hunters calling them out for what they are—an embarrassment and a disgrace to the values of fair chase and respect for wildlife.
It’s time to end the slaughter. Wildlife killing contests have no place in a civilized society. They are cruel, ecologically destructive, and serve no legitimate purpose beyond indulging the worst instincts of those who participate. Science has already debunked the myths that killing coyotes helps wildlife or livestock, yet these contests continue under the false banner of “management.”
But perhaps the larger issues is how our culture normalizes wildlife killing contests. Part of the reason killing contests persist is that much of the public is still unaware they even exist. When people hear about them for the first time, their reaction is almost always the same: “How is this still legal?”
Yet, rather than being condemned, these contests are sometimes inadvertently promoted—even by trusted media outlets. Just last week, NPR’s Instagram account posted about the “World’s Largest Rattlesnake Roundup” in Sweetwater, Texas, describing it as a long-standing tradition that draws crowds from around the world. What they failed to mention is that these events involve the mass killing of snakes for entertainment, often using brutal methods like gassing them out of their dens.
When wildlife killing contests are framed as “predator management,” harmless “traditions,” or community gatherings, it creates the illusion that they are normal, acceptable, or even beneficial. In reality, they are relics of an outdated and unscientific approach to wildlife.
So What Can You Do To Stop Wildlife Killing Contests?
For this Song Dog Shootout in Marbleton, there’s not much hope. The organizers clearly won’t listen to reason. Wyoming lawmakers have failed to act on the egregious act of snowmobiling over wildlife, repeatedly rejecting efforts to ban the practice in this legislative session, so they certainly won’t stop this killing contest.
That means it’s up to the public to demand change. If we want to create a future where wildlife is managed ethically and scientifically, we need to end these contests once and for all. It’s time to recognize wildlife killing contests for what they are: an embarrassment to ethical wildlife treatment and a stain on our collective humanity.
Ten states—Arizona, California, Colorado, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont—have already banned killing contests. There are serious pushes to do the same in other states like Illinois, Maine, and New Hampshire. It’s time for the rest of the country to follow suit. If you care about wildlife, if you believe in science-based policy, and if you oppose senseless cruelty, speak out against coyote killing contests. Demand that lawmakers take action to end these atrocities once and for all.
- Learn more and spread awareness – Many people have never heard of wildlife killing contests. Share this information with friends, family, and your community to help expose the reality of these events.
- Urge your state lawmakers to take action if your state hasn’t banned killing contests – Contact your state legislators and demand a ban on wildlife killing contests. Ten states have already banned them—yours could be next.
- Support organizations fighting to end these contests – People are working to outlaw wildlife killing contests. Donate, volunteer, or help amplify their efforts.
- Hold media outlets accountable – If you see an event like the Sweetwater Rattlesnake Roundup being portrayed as a harmless tradition, speak up. Write letters, comment on posts, and push for responsible reporting on these issues.
Wildlife deserves better than to be used as live targets for human entertainment. It’s time to put an end to the “Song Dog Shootout” and every other killing contest like it.
What Happens When Science Takes a Backseat to Politics?
What happens when science takes a backseat to politics? You get U.S. wildlife policy.
If Wildlife Management Is “Science-Based”… Why Do Politics Decide Who Lives and Dies?
Wildlife management is often presented as a purely scientific endeavor—decisions made by trained professionals using data, population models, and ecological principles. But if that were true, why do political ideologies and personal biases so often determine which species are allowed to exist and which are sentenced to extermination?
Take, for example, the recent confirmation hearings for Interior Secretary nominee Doug Burgum. During the proceedings, Senator Jim Risch of Idaho made his stance on certain predators abundantly clear:
“They’ve already had a discussion about grizzly bears; we don’t want grizzly bears. They kill people. The federal government already gave us wolves, we had them all killed off about 75 years ago, and some yee-hoo decided we needed them back here again.”
This is not science. This is personal preference. It is ideology masquerading as management. And it is the dominant force shaping wildlife policy across the United States.
When Science Takes a Backseat to Politics
The rhetoric from Risch—and many others like him—reveals a deeply ingrained view of wildlife that is based on control and fear, not ecological understanding. Science tells us that grizzly bears and wolves play vital roles in maintaining healthy ecosystems. Science tells us that predators regulate prey populations, prevent disease spread, and contribute to biodiversity. And yet, when science conflicts with political agendas, it is ignored, twisted, or discarded entirely.
We see this pattern time and again:
- State legislatures passing laws to undermine federal protections for species that inconvenience ranching and hunting interests.
- Wildlife commissions stocked with politically connected appointees who prioritize extractive industries over ecosystem health.
- Management agencies pressured to inflate ‘harvest’ quotas to appease special interests rather than follow ecological best practices.
In other words, wildlife policies aren’t being determined by what’s best for ecosystems. They’re being shaped by who holds power and who shouts the loudest.
The Myth of “Predator Control”
Risch claims that Idaho “had them all killed off” 75 years ago, as if that was some sort of victory. But the reality is that removing apex carnivores creates chaos in ecosystems. When wolves were eradicated from Yellowstone, for example, elk populations exploded, leading to overgrazing that devastated native plant life and altered entire river systems. It was only after wolves were reintroduced that the park’s ecosystem began to recover.
And yet, despite decades of scientific research confirming the benefits of predators, politicians like Risch continue to frame wolves and bears as threats to be eliminated. His argument is not about ecological balance—it’s about power. When science takes a backseat to politics, it serves these interests. Who gets to decide which species belong? Who gets to dictate which animals live or die?
Wildlife management should be rooted in ethical, science-based principles that prioritize ecosystem health, not the political whims of those in power. That means:
- Removing politics from wildlife commissions and ensuring they are staffed with ecologists and conservation scientists with ethics training, not just ranchers and trophy hunters.
- Ending predator eradication policies that cater to outdated fears and industry interests.
- Shifting from a ‘game species’ model to an ecosystem-focused approach that values all wildlife, not just those deemed useful to humans.
Take Action
If we don’t push back, these political decisions will continue to drive species toward extinction while propping up a broken system of wildlife management. We need real reform, and that starts with people demanding change.
- Attend your state’s wildlife commission meetings. Find upcoming meetings at Wildlife for All’s February Wildlife Commission Meetings page.
- Call your elected officials. Demand they oppose Elon Musk’s takeover of public lands and agencies. Use 5 Calls for scripts and contacts.
- Join the larger movement for systemic change. General Strike US is organizing mass action to fight back against government corruption and corporate overreach.
- Push for ecosystem-level protections. Your state agencies, state legislators, and state wildlife commission need to hear your voice. And they need to keep hearing it until they listen.
Wildlife management should not be a political chess game where species are moved, removed, or exterminated based on who holds office. It should be a science-based, ethical system that respects the role of all species in maintaining the health of our planet. The time to demand change is now.