In early 1994 the United States Department of Agriculture’s Animal Damage Control agency implemented a directive providing guidance to help avoid competition between themselves and private businesses, known as Wildlife Control Operators (WCOs) engaging in similar work. Nearly two decades later some WCOs still complain about having to compete with the Animal Damage Control agency, now named Wildlife Services. Other businesses report enjoying a cooperative relationship with the agency. I analyzed four policies that regulate competition between Wildlife Services and WCOs and found that there is a good amount of guidance given to Wildlife Services in regards to their competitive relationship with WCOs. These guidelines do not carry the force of law, however, and are subject to change and deletion. I conducted interviews with representatives from the WCO community and Wildlife Services and found that the top four factors contributing to conflict are an overlap in similar services, agency advantages, money and pricing, and policy. The top four factors contributing to cooperation were cooperative work, communication, clarified roles, and training and education. Working to decrease the conflict factors and emphasize the cooperative factors will lead to a better relationship between Wildlife Services and WCOs.

A mail survey of randomly selected stratified U.S. households assessed general attitudes toward wildlife and specific concerns about wildlife damage management and the federal Animal Damage Control program. Respondents strongly supported federal government's role in ensuring public safety , engaging in public education, and continuing research into nonlethal control methods. Weaker support was found for lethal control of predators and crop depredators, and financial compensation for losses due to wildlife activities was generally opposed. Lethal methods of control were generally considered to be inhumane and nonlethal methods humane. When asked to rank the importance of factors to be considered when selecting management methods, II human safety ranked highest followed by animal suffering, effectiveness, environmental impacts, severity of problem, and ability to target the specific problem animal. The lowest ranked factor was public opinion. Considered as a whole, results suggest that U.S. citizens want a role in wildlife damage policy formation but respect wildlife professionals ' judgment in specific management situations. This study also assessed attitudes and beliefs about wildlife damage management (WDM) activities and federal government agencies ' roles in carrying out those activities. Multiple regression analysis was used to determine if variables such as environmental attitude, wildlife experience, and sociodemographic characteristics explained levels of support for WDM activities and the importance of the federal government's role . Respondents generally support WDM operations. Differences in respondents' general environmental attitudes and enjoyment of hunting accounted for most of the variation in their attitudes toward WDM practices. Independent variables that most influenced perceived importance of federal involvement in WDM were sex , age, education, and general environmental attitudes.

This study examined the attitudes of employees of the United States Department of Agriculture's Animal Damage Control (ADC) Program. This research examined ADC employees' attitudes about wildlife, the ADC program and ADC employment, wildlife damage management methods, euthanasia and the killing process, and the role of various public and private groups on ADC policy. This study also applied the theory of organizational capture to the ADC program to test its utility in explaining the attitudes and behaviors of employees. Results were based on a survey of ADC employees conducted in January 1995. Survey responses were analyzed to explore associations between employee attitudes and job type or time of service at ADC. Job type was found to be a better indicator of employee attitudes than time of service. Field and management employees tended to have more positive views of ADC and ADC employment compared with research employees. Respondents with different job types perceived different levels of effectiveness and humaneness for wildlife control methods. In general, field employees viewed lethal techniques as more effective and humane than research employees. Similarly, research employees reported nonlethal techniques to be more effective and humane than field employees. Finally, research employees felt that outside interest groups should have more influence on ADC practices than field and management employees felt they should. ADC employees were found to have some characteristics indicative of organizational capture. They had a homogeneous client base, and were resistant to reaching out to nontraditional clients in the face of opposition from traditional clients. However, they were not deflected from the ADC mission. Because respondents indicated conformity to the ADC mission, ADC was found to be at most variably captured by its traditional farming and ranching clientele.