Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC

by

Response to Ben DeVries

Response to Ben DeVries’ Questions

Ben DeVries is a Christian animal welfare/rights activist who believes that Christians have been neglectful of our responsibility to the animal kingdom. He asked me to respond to five questions as a way to encourage dialogue. Since his website, Not One Sparrow was shut down, I decided to make the material available on my site.

Question #1. In your book Dominion Over Wildlife? you recognize God’s calling for us to steward his compassion, and to recognize the dignity and value of his creatures, which I appreciate. But I’m wondering about your use of the terminology of “shepherdism” to describe your view of stewardship: “Shepherdism believes that humans ought to use their power to responsibly care for the earth and mitigate the imbalances that inevitably occur due to human activity. Shepherdism rejects the idea that use equals abuse. What is good for animals is conceived as applying first to the continuation of the species rather than to the future of any individual animal.” While there is much to share in common with the foundations of your perspective, doesn’t a verse such as Luke 12:6 recognize God’s attention to each and every animal, a truth which we also deduce from God’s omniscience and care of all creation in whole and in part. And should we not also take a lead from the biblical model of faithful shepherding (such as carefully expounded by former shepherd W. Philip Keller in A Shepherd Looks at Psalm 23), which we know to have been carefully compassionate and infinitely sensitive to the needs of the individual animals, as attested to directly by David and analogically by Jesus?

Dominion over Wildlife? An Environmental-Theology of Human-Wildlife Relations, by Stephen M. Vantassel.
Dominion over Wildlife? An Environmental-Theology of Human-Wildlife Relations, by Stephen M. Vantassel.

Question #2. While you rightly emphasize the priority of human suffering and violence in Scripture due to our having been made in God’s image, is it also possible you minimize the significance of animal pain and violence before God? I know you interact with several relevant passages in your book, but doesn’t Scripture present non-violence as God’s original and ultimate ideal for all creation, and acknowledge the very real suffering of animals as the result of human fallenness (Joel 1:15-20, Romans 8:19-22)? Theologically, if God carefully created each of His creatures and remembers them individually, even marks their passing (Luke 12:6, Matthew 10:29, does he not care about their individual treatment and pain, and desire us to make concerted efforts to minimize the latter?

Question #3. I understand your reasons for focusing on the case study of wildlife harvesting, trapping in particular, in your book. You were addressing a topic of personal expertise and one of the strongest areas of critique from the animal advocacy community, while also addressing an issue with an ancient and likely even biblical history. However, I appreciated the following quote from you: “It is difficult to imagine how the Biblical writers could have envisioned a time when our power over creation would allow us to inflict incredible suffering on animals while keeping them alive, as is done in animal experimentation and industrial farming” (pg. 14). What can we say then about, and to, these animal use models and industries as to how far they frequently miss the mark of Scriptural expectations of domestic animal stewardship and husbandry?

Question #4. Along the lines of my previous question, you mention that Paul “reject(s) any argument that justifies one’s food choices on theological grounds” in passages such as I Timothy 4:1-5 and Colossians 2:16-17 (pg. 96-97). You’re right to acknowledge that vegetarianism was far from a New Testament expectation, and even allowing for the ethical trajectory of redemptive direction which seems to have been inaugurated by the same biblical authors, we’ve also made an effort at not one sparrow not to present vegetarianism as an expectation in respect for the same root freedom of conscience. Even so, doesn’t the theological value of stewardship give us reason to reject certain sources of animal products, such as the industrial farming mentioned above, if we know them to be grossly contrary to God’s will for animal husbandry?

Question #5. Finally, and thank you for taking the time to respond to these questions, from your book as well as your blog post “Why Love One and Eat the Other?” I have the sense that you don’t have place a very high value on companion animals, or keeping pets. Could you perhaps explain why if so, or clarify if this is not the case? While there are certainly excess of pet ownership, many of us who love animals and advocate for them do so because of the unique personalities and vibrancy of life which we’ve found in our own pets, and I often think these relationships offer some of the most poignant insights into how God views each of His beloved creatures, and the relationship of mutual affirmation he ideally desires us to have with all of them. Could you comment on this?

 

Unfortunately, more and more self-professed Christians are adopting a quasi-animal rights perspective on human-animal relations. Whereas the church, for thousands of years, has held humanity has the right and privilege to use animals for human needs and wants (provided they didn’t serve the sole purpose of inflicting pain and injury), these individuals believe that Christ wants us to extend reconciliation to the animal kingdom.

I was invited by Ben DeVries of Not One Sparrow to answer questions related to this issue. I also had the opportunity to ask him questions. I will let you decide whether I answered him in a biblically grounded fashion and whether he did the same.

http://www.notonesparrow.com/blog/2010/5/26/dominion-over-wildlife.html (site is no longer functioning).

 

http://www.notonesparrow.com/blog/2010/5/27/five-questions-for-stephen-vantassel.html

 

http://www.notonesparrow.com/blog/2010/5/28/five-questions-for-not-one-sparrow.html

For the record, I welcome anyone who can explain to me what exactly Ben DeVries position is. I have asked him on several occasions, and I still haven’t received an answer.  For example, 1. When may humans morally kill animals? 2. Since he believes eating meat is a personal decision based on conscience, how does this fact impact his understanding of extending reconciliation to animal kingdom? 3. Is hunting, trapping, and fishing moral and a proper activity for the Christian? and 4. Why didn’t Christ rescue the pigs he saw drown when the demons entered them?

Stephen M. Vantassel, CWCP, ACE, is the owner of Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. He helps people restore their balance with nature through publishing, training, consulting, and the internet. He has published numerous articles in trade and academic publications available at {Stephen’s Academia.edu Page} along with several books {WCC Store}). Listen to his podcast “Living the Wild Life” at {Pest Geek Podcast}. Please subscribe to {Stephen’s YouTube Channel} He is a sought after speaker and trainer. If you would like to have Stephen speak at your event or use his consultation services, send an e-mail to wildlifecontrolconsultant@gmail.com. Copyright All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.

by

Carbon Monoxide for Rodent Control

The combination carbon monoxide for rodent control may seem a bit forced, but the use of carbon monoxide devices for rodent control is growing throughout the country. There are several reasons for the growth in the use of carbon monoxide for control of rodents. Let me list a few.

  1. Carbon monoxide devices are not regulated by the EPA. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) regulates the use pesticides in the United States. But the EPA does not regulate devices. Therefore, pest control operators (PCOs) and wildlife control operators (WCOs) do not need to obtain licenses to use carbon monoxide machines to control rodents. Now states can regulate devices but to my knowledge, none have done so as of January 2021. Colorado regulates how close these devices can be used to occupied structures but does not require a license to use the devices.

    Carbon monoxide for rodent control is produced by this device called Burrow Rx
    Carbon monoxide for rodent control is produced by this device called Burrow Rx
  2. Carbon monoxide doesn’t cause secondary poisoning. More and more customers are concerned about the secondary poisoning risks of traditional anticoagulant rodenticides. They are worried (often with a concern greater than the evidence permits) that their free-range cat or dog or that of the neighbors will eat poisoned rodents and get sick or possibly die. Carbon monoxide leaves no residual in the animals it kills. So if a dog or cat eats a rodent killed by carbon monoxide it will not be harmed by the carbon monoxide. Now the dog or cat may get sick from something else (wildlife carry various diseases that may affect your pet) but it won’t be from the carbon monoxide treatment.
  3. There are various devices available. Make no mistake, the easier you make it to do something the more likely that something will be done. Same is true for carbon monoxide devices. Manufacturers have created carbon monoxide devices with different features and price points. Products include, Pressurized Exhaust Rodent Control, Burrow Rx, Rascal Eliminator, and The Cheetah. There could be others.

Carbon monoxide for rodent control is here to stay as long as regulators don’t regulate the convenience out of the technique. While carbon monoxide for rodent control has many benefits, there are several disadvantages. But that is a story for a future blog.

Stephen M. Vantassel, CWCP, ACE, is the owner of Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. He helps people restore their balance with nature through publishing, training, consulting, and the internet. He has published numerous articles in trade and academic publications available at {Stephen’s Academia.edu Page} along with several books {WCC Store}). Listen to his podcast “Living the Wild Life” at {Pest Geek Podcast}. Please subscribe to {Stephen’s YouTube Channel} He is a sought after speaker and trainer. If you would like to have Stephen speak at your event or use his consultation services, send an e-mail to wildlifecontrolconsultant@gmail.com. Copyright All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.

by

State of the Wildlife Control Industry 2021

State of the Wildlife Control Industry 2021 is a difficult concept to discuss because the data and research regarding in industry is so hard to uncover. We are just not well enough defined as an industry so getting solid data upon which to build a view of the size of our industry is difficult indeed. Nevertheless, some information, even if it is isn’t perfect is better than no information. If for nothing else, the insights will stimulate your own thoughts about how to assess our industry.

Since we do not have direct data on our industry, we often have to rely on statistics from cousin industries. They will act as proxies to help us get a handle on the size and scope of our industry.

Below are some statistics you may find useful. These are gleaned from my presentation, The State of the Wildlife Control Operator Industry.

Stephen M. Vantassel speaking at A ALL Animal Control's Annual Meeting
Stephen M. Vantassel speaking at A ALL Animal Control’s Annual Meeting
  • Pest Control Industry Market Size. Depending on which source you choose, the PCO (i.e. pest control operator) industry is $17.26 billion or $9.4 billion. I would put more weight on the smaller number as I think the larger number includes pest control in agricultural settings.
  • Market Share of the Top 100 PCO companies. The market share of the top 100 PCO companies accrues to a staggering 8.25 billion dollars. If we take the smaller number as the size of the pest control market as gospel, then the top 100 companies take 88% of the total market.
  • Mean wages for PCOs is $39,790/year. Keep in mind, however, that averages can be easily skewed by a few people making a lot of money. However, the average is pretty close given that the median wages are $35,610/year.

How does all that PCO data help us understand the size of the WCO industry? Well, if we understand the biological principle of trophic levels, then we can assume that the WCO industry is about 10% of the size of the PCO market. With more and more PCOs entering the wildlife control market, the question is whether the WCOs can continue to thrive or will they be forced to just survive.

 

Stephen M. Vantassel, CWCP, ACE, is the owner of Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. He helps people restore their balance with nature through publishing, training, consulting, and the internet. He has published numerous articles in trade and academic publications available at {Stephen’s Academia.edu Page} along with several books {WCC Store}). Listen to his podcast “Living the Wild Life” at {Pest Geek Podcast}. Please subscribe to {Stephen’s YouTube Channel} He is a sought after speaker and trainer. If you would like to have Stephen speak at your event or use his consultation services, send an e-mail to wildlifecontrolconsultant@gmail.com. Copyright All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.

by

AVMA 2020 Euthanasia Guidelines

The AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) periodically updates its animal euthanasia guidelines. The latest is the AVMA 2020 Euthanasia Guidelines which now replaces their AVMA 2013 Euthanasia Guidelines. Given the weight that the animal rights protest industry (and even many parts of the wildlife management industry) give to this document, I thought it would be wise to highlight some of the main points and issues this edition raises for wildlife control operators. (I have a training class on euthanasia for wildlife control operators (WCOs). If interested in having me present it to your group, contact me.)

AVMA Definition of Euthanasia

The AVMA understands euthanasia as involving more than just the method used to kill the animal. In their understanding, euthanasia includes why the decision was made to dispatch the animal, how the animal was handled prior to and during the dispatch process and how the carcass was disposed. According to the AVMA, euthanasia must be for the animal’s interest AND done in a manner that is stress free, painless and rapid. The takeaway for WCOs is that we rarely dispatch an animal for it’s benefit. So by AVMA standards, we rarely if ever perform animal euthanasia.

Interestingly, the AVMA does recognize that using a method to kill an animal, even if it caused the animal distress, may be considered euthanasia if the situation made it difficult to use a less painful method. The AVMA understands that some situations, such as free-ranging animals, make laboratory-style implementation of euthanasia methods difficult, if not impossible. Thus even if the technique was not perfectly humane, the AVMA could consider it euthanasia.

Carbon dioxide euthanasia chamber for wildlife
Carbon dioxide euthanasia chamber for wildlife is commonly used by wildlife control operators to dispatch wildlife.

Carbon Dioxide Induced Euthanasia

In my reading of the AVMA materials, it appears that the the Panel on Euthanasia continues to have concerns about the humanness of CO2. They point out that while CO2 exposure can suppress pain it also can cause burning in the nostrils (think soda going up your nose) as well as a feeling of air hunger to name two.  They noted that how CO2 was administered also played a role in the animal’s reaction. Animals reacted differently when placed in a pre-filled container versus being exposed gradually to increasing concentrations of CO2. Even the rate of exposure could play a role with  different volumes effecting different species differently. If you think it’s a bit complicated, you are right. It is.

Thankfully, they have not eliminated the method yet, but they did change the recommendation for use on rodents. They now recommend a chamber volume displacement rate of 30 to 70% per minute where previously the recommendation was 10-30%. As before, WCOs should ensure animals are calm and relaxed prior to placement in the chamber. Animals should be dispatched alone or in family groups. Do not place different species together and certainly not a predator with a prey.

Bottom Line

While I believe that wildlife managers and wildlife control operators have placed too much weight on the recommendations of the AVMA, WCOs who wish to claim that they are “following AVMA recommendations for the application of the euthanasia method” should be aware of these changes. Better yet, they should read the document itself, at least the sections discussing the methods they prefer to use. In the meantime, I hope the wildlife control industry gets moving and creates its own dispatch standards perhaps using those by the American Society of Mammologists.

 

Stephen M. Vantassel, CWCP, ACE, is the owner of Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. He helps people restore their balance with nature through publishing, training, consulting, and the internet. He has published numerous articles in trade and academic publications available at {Stephen’s Academia.edu Page} along with several books {WCC Store}). Listen to his podcast “Living the Wild Life” at {Pest Geek Podcast}. Please subscribe to {Stephen’s YouTube Channel} He is a sought after speaker and trainer. If you would like to have Stephen speak at your event or use his consultation services, send an e-mail to wildlifecontrolconsultant@gmail.com. Copyright All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.

by

House Mice Control Video

I recently gave a presentation on house mice control that was recorded as a narrated PowerPoint video. This House Mice Control Video was created to help property owners and professionals improve their management of house mice in structures. Stephen M. Vantassel is the Vertebrate Pest Specialist for the Montana Department of Agriculture. His presentation was given as part of his role in that job. Stephen is responsible for providing training on vertebrate pest control topics to pest control operators, wildlife control operators, home owners and producers.

This House Mice Control Video details key elements of house mice biology, damage they cause, diseases mice help to spread as well as specific recommendations and tactics to control house mice like a professional pest control operator. Stephen explains that too many property owners do not take house mice seriously enough. He shows the damage that mice can do to structures, in particular building insulation, as well as to vehicles.

The House Mice Control Video runs for a about 1 hour.

 

 

Stephen M. Vantassel, CWCP, ACE, is the owner of Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. He helps people restore their balance with nature through publishing, training, consulting, and the internet. He has published numerous articles in trade and academic publications available at {Stephen’s Academia.edu Page} along with several books {WCC Store}). Listen to his podcast “Living the Wild Life” at {Pest Geek Podcast}. Please subscribe to {Stephen’s YouTube Channel} He is a sought after speaker and trainer. If you would like to have Stephen speak at your event or use his consultation services, send an e-mail to wildlifecontrolconsultant@gmail.com. Copyright All postings are the property of Stephen M. Vantassel and Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC. Text (not images) may be reprinted in non-profit publications provided that the author and website URL is included. If images wish to be used, explicit and written permission must be obtained from Wildlife Control Consultant, LLC.

Recent Posts

Tags

animal rights bait baiting bats birds book review Box traps business cage trapping Cage traps canada geese Canis latrans cats coyote coyotes deer disease dogs euthanasia Featured feral cats flying squirrels frightening devices house mice inspection mice Mus musculus NWCOA rabies research rodents safety Stephen M. Vantassel toxicants training trapping traps wco wcos wildlife wildlife control wildlife control operator Wildlife control operators wildlife damage management zoonotics
%d bloggers like this: