Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Damage Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Appropriations hears support for bill to fund coyote control in Panhandle
Summary
Proponents told the Appropriations Committee that LB 12-31 would move unobligated Panhandle Improvement Project funds to an Animal Damage Control Cash Fund to help counties and producers address rising coyote depredation; witnesses described livestock losses, aerial control operations and requested statutory clarity on county matching.
A proposal to strengthen Nebraska’s animal damage control work drew broad testimony before the Appropriations Committee on Monday.
Alicia Thiemann Brady, legislative aide to Sen. Paul Stroman, said LB 12-31 would transfer unobligated dollars from the Panhandle Improvement Project Cash Fund into the Animal Damage Control Cash Fund for FY26-27 to support the Department of Agriculture’s animal damage program, with a focus on coyote depredation. Brady told the committee the measure is intended to ease county fiscal burden and to provide “science‑based strategies and sustained funding” to reduce producer losses.
Ranchers and county officials who spoke in favor described recurring calf losses and wildlife declines. Spike Jordan, a sixth‑generation rancher from Sioux County, estimated a 2–3% calf loss rate in affected herds and said those losses translate to significant statewide value when calves sell for roughly $2,000 each. Joshua Skavdahl, chairman of the Sioux County Board of Commissioners, and other local officials recounted instances in which multiple newborn calves were killed and described aerial control contracts the county has used to respond.
Pilots and operators offered operational details: Ethan Johnson, who has flown aerial control in Nebraska, said helicopter operations can remove very large numbers in concentrated locations, citing his experience that, in some operations, “the helicopter has killed over 1,000 in 7 days.” Witnesses and producers linked predator pressure to lower weights, reduced hunting species counts and downstream economic impacts for feedlot and dairy operations.
Committee members asked about county matching and statutory limits. Witnesses and NACO representatives said the bill is structured to move existing, localized cash to the animal damage fund rather than creating a new statewide general‑fund obligation; a handout referenced a county match cap of $1,000 per year for specific programs. The Department of Agriculture told senators it would partner with USDA, APHIS and counties if the appropriation is enacted.
The hearing closed with the committee recording proponents 1, opponents 0, and no vote taken that day. The bill’s supporters urged the committee to view the transfer as a targeted, fiscally modest step to protect livestock, rural livelihoods and wildlife populations.
The committee is expected to consider the bill in future committee work sessions; no final appropriation was adopted at the hearing.
