A proposal to revive Oregon’s “predator control districts” has gained more traction than a previous attempt did several years ago, having survived this year’s legislative deadlines.

In 2015, lawmakers allowed ranchers to create districts in which they’d tax themselves to raise money for predator control, but the program expired in 2022 after a bill to renew it died in committee.

This year, the House Agriculture Committee has voted, 7-2, to allow landowners to re-establish predator control districts, which could operate in perpetuity with no sunset date under House Bill 2403.

“I don’t believe in the wholesale slaughter of predator species. They are necessary to a healthy ecosystem. But I do believe they are some things that need to be stewarded and controlled,” said Matthew Brady, a sheep rancher near Azalea, Ore., who supports the proposal.

The bill has been referred to the House Revenue Committee, which isn’t subject to legislative deadlines, allowing the proposal to at least remain active through the end of the 2025 session.

Proponents of HB 2403, including the Oregon Farm Bureau, argue that lawmakers should not stand in the way of an effort to “self-organize and self-fund” a solution to predation without relying on public dollars.

“This would allow these individual counties and individual landowners to decide whether they want to tax themselves or not. That’s all we’re really asking for,” said Sen. Todd Nash, R-Enterprise, a sponsor of HB 2403.

When landowners elect to create a district, as occurred in Douglas and Coos counties under the earlier law, they would be annually assessed $50 for properties under 10 acres or $2 per acre for those that are larger, with the money paid to USDA’s Wildlife Services for lethal and non-lethal predator control.

“It’s not about government overreach or increasing regulation. Instead, it empowers landowners,” said Rep. Bobby Levy, R-Echo, the bill’s chief sponsor.

Supporters say HB 2403 is especially necessary at a time when the federal and state governments are reducing funding for predator control performed by USDA’s Wildlife Services, as it would allow private landowners to shore up some of that lost money.

The proposal would not allow counties or landowners to kill, remove or otherwise deter predators in any way that isn’t already legal under current law, said Rep. Mark Owens, R-Crane, a bill sponsor.

“What this bill does do is allow professionals to come in and help,” he said. “This is not changing any of the laws about how you deal with animals.”

But the involvement of Wildlife Services is a major reason that environmental and animal advocates have opposed predator control districts, as they argue the agency “overemphasizes the killing of wildlife,” often with “cruel methods,” such as leg hold traps and neck snares.

“We feel it’s out of touch with Oregon values and its approach is not effective,” said Brian Posewitz, an attorney who represents the Oregon Humane Voters nonprofit and the Oregon Wildlife Coalition.

Citing USDA statistics, opponents say the agency killed nearly 125,000 animals in Oregon in 2023, including 3,200 coyotes, 114 cougars and 237 bears, even though scientific research indicates lethal control is often counterproductive.

“Much of this killing, especially for coyotes, was directed at general population reduction instead of killing specific animals causing problems,” according to the Humane Voters Oregon nonprofit.

Lethal control disrupts the complex social structures of carnivores, increasing the likelihood of conflicts with humans, opponents say.

“Study after study has shown that when resident animals are killed, it leaves a void on the landscape for younger dispersing animals who are more likely to seek easier prey such as livestock,” according to the Oregon Wildlife Coalition, which represents several environmental organizations.

Though HB 2403 ostensibly allows for both lethal and non-lethal methods of controlling predators, the history of USDA’s Wildlife Services indicates its strategy is “lethally oriented,” Posewitz said.

“The result would just be business as usual with Wildlife Services,” he said.