The Current Program and Future of ADC in the USDA

The ADC program was transferred to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in December 1985. The ADC mission continues to be the protection of American agriculture and other resources from wildlife damage. Changes have been implemented to enhance the program, and efforts are continuing toward additional improvements

THE USDA-APHIS-ADC PROGRAM IN THE UNITED STATES

The ADC program was transferred to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in 1986. Shortly after the transfer, the Secretary of Agriculture established the National Animal Damage Control Advisory Committee (NADCAC). Current and future issues facing ADC are discussed in the context of NADCAC recommendations

Panel—What are Cooperators\u27 and Customers\u27 Expectations of Extension Wildlife and Fisheries Programs, and What are the Future Opportunities?\u3cbr\u3e PERSPECTIVES FROM USDA-APHIS-ANIMAL DAMAGE CONTROL

I am pleased that you have asked me to be part of this panel. The ADC program depends a great deal on Extension Wildlife and Fisheries Programs, and your success is very important to us. Thus, I am delighted to have the opportunity to discuss ADC\u27s expectations and share our thoughts about the future. I should also point out that we in ADC are honored that you view us as a customer. Based on our experience, if you don\u27t have a customer service focus, there is no future to worry about

ANIMAL DAMAGE CONTROL: ARE WE PREPARED FOR THE NEXT CENTURY?

I am pleased to be here with you today to discuss Animal Damage Control (ADC). I am also very pleased to see the number of ADC people attending this conference. It is an important indication of our professionalism. During the past several months, I have spoken to many of our people in ADC to challenge them to think about the future of our program. I have also spoken to many of our cooperators such as livestock organizations and resource management agencies about the same thing. This has been done in an effort to broaden our thinking about animal damage control as a service or profession, and as a program delivering that professional service. We are controlled by our paradigm which might be described as the lens of our mind\u27s eye. It might also be called the sum total of our experiences that govern how we see things or interpret what our eyes see. Over the\u27years, a paradigm has been created about ADC which to the non-user or observer of our program has been extremely negative. This in turn has resulted in another paradigm by the service beneficiaries and professionals within the program which has become competitive with the other. Over the years, this has produced highly independent thinking and action by each group operating within the constraints of their own paradigm. In ADC, this independence has produced a mind set so strong that it has become life-threatening to our program and the profession. We have to realistically confess that in maintaining this independence we have been narrow-minded, even close-minded to new ideas. Our thinking had become so homogenous that new ideas or thoughts which did not meet our tradition test or were outside our paradigm were viewed with suspicion, and those who harbored such thoughts were ostracized by their peers. Our thinking was so inbred and our defense mechanism so strong that opportunities for change could not even be seen, much less acted upon. We became so independent and caught up in our paradigm that anyone who criticized the program or its actions was viewed with the same suspicion; we made no distinction between constructive professional or scientific critique and the views of animal welfarists or animal rightists. We were so programmed to act within the ADC paradigm that it began to act as a rope around our necks; the more we struggled, the tighter it got to the point we almost hanged ourselves

The USDA-APHIS-ADC Program In the United States

The ADC program was transferred to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in 1986. Shortly after the transfer, the Secretary of Agriculture established the National Animal Damage Control Advisory Committee (NADCAC). Current and future issues facing ADC are discussed in the context of NADCAC recommendations

DYNAMICS OF WILDLIFE DAMAGE MANAGEMENT

Wildlife damage management is a dynamic profession. Our focus has shifted from dealing with primarily agricultural interests. In addition to agricultural issues, we now deal with endangered species protection, human health and safety, and wildlife damage management issues in the urban environment. The dynamics of wildlife damage management are influenced by the changing needs of society, professionalism among our ranks, and the political process. Professionalism and meeting the needs of the public continue to be the most important part of the dynamics of wildlife damage management

RESPONSES OF THE ADC PROGRAM TO A CHANGING AMERICAN SOCIETY

Changes in the Animal Damage Control (ADC) program are reviewed relative to changes in American societal background and attitudes. Many of the program changes that occurred in the past were imposed on ADC in response to external factors, while more recent program changes have been and will continue to be more self-directed. Examples of ADC\u27s proactive approach to dealing with critical issues are provided

CHARTING A FUTURE: PROCESS AND PROMISE

The Animal Damage Control program has been heavily involved in strategic planning since its transfer from USDI to USDA. The first effort was undertaken in 1989 by the program\u27s management team. It was an introspective, critical look at what changes were needed to improve the program\u27s strategic position in the natural resources community. That plan failed to achieve the desired objective due principally to the lack of involvement by ADC employees and others outside the program. In 1991, a more comprehensive effort was begun known as Futuring. In this process, a representative from each organizational level of the program and representatives from wildlife management organizations formed a Futuring Committee. The analysis and recommendations of this group were the basis of the new ADC strategic plan. The involvement of employees and other interests made this effort far more successful in giving the program strategic alignment with the natural resources community