By Tim Delbridge
Earlier this month, David Bohnert and I published a new peer-reviewed article through OSU Extension on the economic impact of wolf depredation on Oregon livestock producers. Coincidentally, this came out just after the Governor Kotek signed Senate Bill 777, which authorizes increased compensation for livestock producers that lose animals to wolf attacks. The new legislation allows for compensation up to 5X the market value of the calves, yearlings, goats, and sheep, and up to 3X the market value of other cattle.
The rationale behind this payment multiplier is that total economic losses to livestock producers far exceed the direct financial loss of the killed animals. Other impacts facing ranches that are under wolf pressure, such as smaller (and less valuable) calves, reduced pregnancy rates, and added labor costs associated with wolf management and deterrence, are often more significant than the value of animals killed by wolves. Ultimately, the additional funding required to pay for the new compensation structure was not included by the Ways & Means Committee, creating some uncertainty about how compensation will be provided.
Our analysis on the economic impact of wolf depredation supports the idea that indirect costs faced by livestock producers are significantly higher than the value of confirmed and probable livestock kills. The novel aspect of this Extension publication is that we conducted an electronic survey of livestock producers who were asked to pinpoint the location of their grazing land and answer questions about wolf impact for that specific site. This allowed us to tie producer responses about wolf pressure and economic impact to the spatial wolf activity maps that are maintained by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW).
We found that producers managing livestock within ODFW-defined “Area of Known Wolf Activity” (AKWA) tended to report more significant wolf pressure, and that the financial impact was also higher in these areas. On grazing lands further away from ODFW AKWAs, producers reported fewer problems with wolves and lower financial costs. Although some livestock producers have been frustrated by the process that ODFW uses to officially confirm wolf presence in an area, and some argue that the true number of wolves is significantly higher than the ODFW minimum wolf populations, the strong correlation between ODFW wolf-activity maps and producer reports of wolf pressure shows the value of ODFW data collection and monitoring work.
| Table 1. Response options for the survey question ‘How severe is the wolf pressure at this grazing location?’ | |||
| Survey question text | Number of respondents | Average distance to nearest AKWA* (miles) | Average reported wolf management cost per cow |
| “There are no wolves that affect this area.” | 5 | 10.8 | $0.00 |
| “There are wolves, but they don’t impact us much.” | 4 | 1.9 | $0.07 |
| “Moderately heavy” | 11 | 2.2 | $13.75 |
| “Heavy pressure, but not as bad as some ranchers deal with” | 7 | 3.0 | $20.52 |
| “Extremely heavy” | 6 | 0.2 | $111.85 |
In terms of dollar values, the survey results indicated significant additional management costs and revenue reductions among Oregon ranches that experience wolf pressure. Cattle producers that reported “Extremely heavy” wolf pressure cited increased management costs of roughly $100 per cow, mostly related to additional labor time. These producers tended to be located in the defined AKWAs or just outside the boundaries. The increased management costs tend to fall off sharply within a couple of miles from defined AKWA boundaries.
Based on survey responses and existing literature on the physiological effects of wolf pressure on cattle, we estimate that revenue losses range between $135 and $200 per cow for producers experiencing heavy wolf pressure. This range would be even higher under the record-high prices for beef in today’s market.
Please explore the full publication for additional detail and narrative case studies on specific livestock producer experiences with wolves. This is an area of continuing work with active research projects across the Western US and within Oregon.