Coyote-killing contests have been banned in California and Arizona, but Nevada competitions are routinely organized and advertised in those states. (Photo courtesy of Travel Nevada)
A multi-year effort by conservationists and others to ban what they say is the wanton slaughter of coyotes for cash and prizes has morphed into a movement to end the debate by licensing wildlife killing contests.
On Saturday, the Nevada Wildlife Commission, which has rejected calls to end the contests, debated two proposals from staff on regulating the contests.
The first would set a season for the contests, beginning in September and ending in March, and require the organizer to obtain a special use permit, which could spell out details such as how participants must dispose of dead animals. Additionally, contest participants would be required to get a separate license from the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW).
A second proposal would require people to obtain a license to kill any wildlife, including unprotected species such as coyotes, jackrabbits and squirrels.
Participants who are 12 years old or younger would be exempt from licensure.
Commissioner Eddie Booth suggested that requiring a license to kill any unprotected species warrants public notification.
“Out in Paradise Valley last weekend, there were a number of people out there hunting squirrels on private land,” Booth said. “I don’t know if any of them had a hunting license, or even knew that it was going to be required to have a hunting license.”
“We never wanted this to cross over to recreational hunting,” sportsman George Forbush said during public comment, adding Nevadans will not be pleased “if they have to go out and start getting a license just to go out to shoot squirrels.”
John Hiatt of the Clark County Community Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife, which is made up primarily of hunters, said NDOW’s solutions “don’t really address the basic problem,” the fact that both the Washoe and Clark County Commissions oppose coyote killing contests. “That’s the bulk of the population in the state, and in the end, from a moral and ethical standpoint, it’s very difficult to support” the contests.
“Addressing this issue is akin to trying to put lipstick on a very uncooperative pig,” Hiatt said. “In the end, the pig is still a pig and everybody’s smeared with lipstick. You can’t win in this situation by just regulating it. Essentially, this issue just needs to go away. Killing contests are not supportable.”
Commissioner David McNinch, the only member of the sportsman- and ranching-dominated Wildlife Commission to consistently support a ban of the contests during the prolonged effort, said he is not in favor of establishing a season for killing contests but suggested “there’s some level of support across the board” for requiring a license to kill any wildlife.
Hunters who spoke during public comment, however, oppose any effort to regulate the killing of unprotected species.
When cultures collide
Opponents of killing contests have tried a multi-jurisdictional approach, characterized by a clash of urban and rural interests.
In 2019, the Nevada Gaming Commission rejected an effort to ban the contests because they offer prizes, which critics claimed was akin to unlicensed gambling.
A 2023 legislative measure to end the contests died in Carson City without a vote.
NDOW’s current effort is the first time a state-sanctioned contest has been proposed.
“Regulations without an outright ban will only send the message to the public that this Commission supports these brutal wildlife killing contests,” Nevada resident Stephanie Myers said during public comment. She predicted that once the public is aware of the killing contests, “through billboard campaigns, through social media, once they know about it, the contests will end. Because educated people will not allow them to continue.”
A privately commissioned survey of 675 Nevada voters conducted by Public Policy Polling in 2023 found 78% said “the lives of individual animals have inherent worth and are deserving of protection and conservation,” while 12% said they “think wildlife is a natural resource that should primarily be used to benefit humans without regard to the worth or value of animals.” Ten percent were undecided.
The proposed regulations are “a complete joke”, said Rebecca Goff of Humane World for Animals, formerly the Humane Society of the United States, who noted efforts to regulate killing contests in Colorado and Washington failed.
The states “found after years of regulating contests through permits and quotas that they did not reduce the amount of animal suffering and death and did nothing to reduce the public opposition,” Goff said. In 2020, both states banned the contests outright.
Coyote contests have been banned in California and Arizona, however, Nevada competitions are routinely organized and advertised in those states.
The Wildlife Commission intends to review proposed language for regulating killing contests at its next meeting in May.