Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ag commissioner reviews wildlife services contract; board asks staff to explore shared‑service options and agrees to study a county fish and wildlife commission
Summary
Agricultural Commissioner Eric Mayberry told supervisors the county’s Wildlife Services contract provides depredation response, feral swine and disease testing support; staff will pursue options to share services with neighboring counties and report back.
Amador County Agricultural Commissioner Eric Mayberry updated the board on the county’s annual financial plan with USDA Wildlife Services, which provides trappers and emergency wildlife response (coyote removals, feral swine work, bear responses and other depredation management). Mayberry said the county participates in a multi‑year cost‑share agreement and that per‑incident costs are modestly higher this year compared with last; the large, multi‑jurisdictional liability and cost environment for insurers and contractors nationally was cited as a driver of higher overall program costs.
Mayberry said the federal contract gives Wildlife Services capabilities (licensed firearms, immobilizing drugs and euthanasia protocols, and disease sampling) that a county employee program would find costly to replicate. He recommended that any major change — for example, standing up an in‑house county trapping program — be considered when the contract next comes up for renewal in 2028. Several supervisors asked whether the county could reduce near‑term costs by sharing a contract or a trapper with adjacent counties. Mayberry said he had queried neighboring counties (Calaveras and El Dorado) about sharing; Calaveras and El Dorado indicated little interest in sharing at this time. He agreed to pursue formal inquiries to other adjacent counties (including San Joaquin and Placer) and report back with options and costs.
Supervisor Dan Epperson asked the board to consider creating a county Fish and Wildlife Commission to provide an advisory forum and to develop local recommendations on predator management, recreational fishing and wildlife education. Craig Baracco of the Foothills Conservancy spoke in support, saying local waterway relicensing and river management issues (including the FERC relicensing of Mokelumne River hydro facilities) make a local advisory body useful. The board gave direction to proceed — staff will return with proposed scope, bylaws and an implementation timeline for a Fish and Wildlife Commission.
Why it matters: Wildlife conflicts and depredation (livestock loss, damage to apiaries and public‑safety incidents) are recurring county concerns. The board requested a near‑term analysis of cost‑share or regional sharing options and directed staff to draft the commission proposal for later board consideration.
