During a recent government meeting, significant concerns were raised regarding the wildlife services contract, particularly the use of M-44 and foothold traps. Lehi Griffin, a local rancher, criticized the proposed contract changes, arguing that they lacked public scrutiny and accountability. He highlighted that several counties, including four in California and two in New Mexico, have opted out of similar contracts due to concerns over the methods employed by wildlife services.

Griffin pointed out that the proposed contract deviated from previously agreed terms, which prohibited the use of M-44 traps and foothold traps unless there was an imminent threat to human safety. He emphasized that local taxpayers are contributing substantial funds to support ranchers, raising questions about compliance with state anti-donation laws. Griffin urged the commission to revert to the original contract language that prioritized non-lethal methods for wildlife management.

Frances Gonzales, a resident of Bayard, shared her personal experiences with wildlife services, recounting traumatic incidents involving her dog and the impact of wildlife encounters on her community. She expressed gratitude for local law enforcement's response to wildlife threats, contrasting it with her concerns about the potential consequences of wildlife services' actions.

The discussions underscored a growing demand for transparency and community involvement in wildlife management decisions, as residents seek to balance ranching interests with the safety and well-being of both people and animals. The meeting concluded with a call for collaboration to ensure that the wildlife services contract aligns with community values and legal standards.