In states where govt. controls systems are not strong, private can help, but should 1 keep in mind that it is not in their best business interest to eliminate market through complete hog eradication. Eradication will require targeting an entire geographic range of local establishment 1 to prevent re-colonization; a scope of action which private industry cannot accomplish because large scale contiguous landowner contracts are rare to nonexistent. Eradication demands all inclusive organization of landowner cooperatives with consistent services provided across property boundaries regardless of landowner interest in financial contribution, central leadership, and provision of consistent services which can only be realized by public sector involvement. EIS should consider control alternatives in areas of mixed public and private 1 ownership, as limited access to private property providing feral swine refuge is a primary problem. Proposed action must address issue of swine transport because this is the primary 14 means by which problem is spread and primary obstacle to long-term success. Review laws regarding swine transport and quantify impacts on feral swine populations. Include state animal health agencies in any discussions b/c these are the agencies 2 that actually regulate the movement of live hogs. Collaborate with states to determine if restrictions on transport and relocation are 1 possible or desired and how WS may be able to help address new feral swine establishment challenges. Supports proposal for research to develop better management tools and improve 1 cost effectiveness. Priority should be given to research methods which focus on objective of direct population reductions and on interactions between wild hogs and livestock. Support financial incentives for feral swine control research and cooperative 3 efforts. Research and development needed: Support research into feral swine behavior and 5 biology and into technology development; Fund research into scientific methods for control and eradication of feral swine; also research to minimize impacts to non-targets; more effective methods to preclude escape of domestic swine. EPA product registration process takes years, we cannot wait years, we must begin ` to control swine now with the methods we have. Supports systematic disease monitoring. 1 Integrate overlapping disease control aspects of feral swine management with 1 APHIS-VS BB/PRV program. Provide funding to animal health agencies. 1 Funding should be made available to colleges and universities for disease 1 surveillance.
In states where govt. controls systems are not strong, private can help, but should keep in mind that it is not in their best business interest to eliminate market through complete hog eradication. 1 Eradication will require targeting an entire geographic range of local establishment to prevent re-colonization; a scope of action which private industry cannot accomplish because large scale contiguous landowner contracts are rare to nonexistent. Eradication demands all inclusive organization of landowner cooperatives with consistent services provided across property boundaries regardless of landowner interest in financial contribution, central leadership, and provision of consistent services which can only be realized by public sector involvement. 1 EIS should consider control alternatives in areas of mixed public and private ownership, as limited access to private property providing feral swine refuge is a primary problem. 1 Proposed action must address issue of swine transport because this is the primary means by which problem is spread and primary obstacle to long-term success. Review laws regarding swine transport and quantify impacts on feral swine populations. 14 Include state animal health agencies in any discussions b/c these are the agencies that actually regulate the movement of live hogs. 2 Collaborate with states to determine if restrictions on transport and relocation are possible or desired and how WS may be able to help address new feral swine establishment challenges. 1 Supports proposal for research to develop better management tools and improve cost effectiveness. Priority should be given to research methods which focus on objective of direct population reductions and on interactions between wild hogs and livestock. 1 Support financial incentives for feral swine control research and cooperative efforts. 3 Research and development needed: Support research into feral swine behavior and biology and into technology development; Fund research into scientific methods for control and eradication of feral swine; also research to minimize impacts to non-targets; more effective methods to preclude escape of domestic swine. 5 EPA product registration process takes years, we cannot wait years, we must begin to control swine now with the methods we have. ` Supports systematic disease monitoring. 1 Integrate overlapping disease control aspects of feral swine management with APHIS-VS BB/PRV program. 1 Provide funding to animal health agencies. 1 Funding should be made available to colleges and universities for disease surveillance. 1
finalFeralSwineEISscopingreport%20for%20Web.docx