A journal entry from OreCAT Director Jayne Miller after attending last night’s Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) town hall meeting in Corvallis about cougar.

September 29th, 2010

ODFW Cougar Ecology by Dr. Jackson

Corvallis, Oregon

Krystal and Moon drove all the way from Grants Pass to attend this meeting with me.  There were about 100 people there, hunters of course sat in the back, except for one hunter supporter who made her distaste for my questions known by hitting me in the back several times with her fist.  This kind of assault from hunters is disturbing.  And sitting in front of me was a female ODFW officer who tried to scare me by repeatedly turning in her chair and staring at me and calling me rude because I asked  questions such as issues about no wildlife corridors, or why so many strategic positions are  vacant at ODFW such as the Hunter Reporting Big Game Statistics, or if Dr. Jackson was soft peddling overturning M18 in order to support killing cougar with hounds because he talked about this so much.  They recently filled the Carnivore Species Coordinator, but still vacant are Wildlife Corridor/Linkages Coordinator, and Conservation Strategy Coordinator.

At the meeting Dr. Jackson stated that ODFW research showed that more cougar are poached than taken legally.  Cougars killed due to complaints (including just seeing them) are the same amount as taken legally.  Dr. Jackson could not give an answer why mother cougars are allowed to be killed and why there is no humane plan for the cubs.  After M18 ODFW started selling more cougar tags and are not limited as before M18.

ODFW study information on collard cats was very enlightening and spoke to the impact that humans have on cougar mortality.  When talking about how many tags to sell, 32% of cougar are poached, 27% are killed legally, 27% are killed from conflict, for a total of 86% of cougars killed by humans.  When tags are sold, only the legal percent are considered and not the other human caused deaths..  So again, the numbers are wrong when you leave out all the formulas.  When you’re making cougar management policy that is based on only a small section of the data, you’re making a bad policy.  Cougars killed by natural causes:  37% from other cougars, 31% from disease, 20% from parasites, and 11% from injury.  It is disturbing to learn that cougar weights are down to 133 pounds for males, and 82 pounds for females.  Deer are much smaller now too.  Seems human predators are damaging our wildlife.  Males use to weight 150 pounds and females 120 pounds.

Dr. Jackson did not have an answer when told that Dr. Jane Goodall, The Smithsonian, and other world famous biologists do not support Oregon’s Cougar Management Plan as accurate or good. He stated that ODFW believed it was good, but I asked him if that were so, why did ODFW not correct at least the Smithsonian article referencing our bad plan?

Dr. Jackson’s graphs were interesting.  We could then see that the assumption that young dispersing cougars that had been raised by their mothers and not orphaned from hunting were NOT causing the conflicts.  ODFW assumed there would be a big influx of conflicts when cougar left their mothers, but shown on the graphs, this was not the case.  Cougars orphaned from hunting their mothers were the conflict issues.  Hunting and killing cougar for sport makes it unsafe for humans, livestock, pets and wildlife.

In California where hunting has been banned for decades, they have one of the lowest livestock loss rates due to cougar of any State with cougar in the Union.   Mountain Lion Foundation has received an award from the Governor of California for the outstanding work they have performed regarding helping Californians co-exist with cougar.  See www.Mountainlion.org.

For good scientific information read:  “Cougar, The American Lion” by Kevin Hansen.

For insights as to the driving economic factors of killing animals for fun, read: “The American Hunting Myth”, by Ron Baker.

“In the absence of hunting by humans, cougar populations will remain relatively constant and the unhunted cougar population in California area was relatively stable and with a low turnover of residence” see page 31 from the book “Cougar, The American Lion.”  Where as in Dr. Jackson’s review of Oregon’s cougar studies, too many of the collared cats where killed and only their unbuckled and removed collars were left.

Krystal asked Dr. Jackson why it was ok to kill a mother cougar (as mentioned above) with dependent young that can’t live without her, but bear with cubs and deer with fawn or other mothers can’t be killed.  Dr. Jackson could not answer this question and asked someone in the crowd if they were there and could answer our question.  That person was not present and even though Dr Jackson did the study and has a doctorate;  he could not answer the question what so ever.

Best I can say about this meeting is that the hunters can be violent against those who want to protect cougar and ODFW has room for improvement.  Dr. Jackson was however, a very pleasant person and I enjoyed his presentation and his kindness towards me. Regardless of the hunters’ distractions and assault of me, Dr. Jackson did a good job.

Jayne Miller

Oregon Cougar Action Team
www.OreCAT.org

September 30, 2010

Scott Raine, Chairman
Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners
1100 Valley Road
Reno, Nevada   89512

Regarding:   Predator problem?…or Wildlife Commission problem?

Dear Chairman Raine

Still suffering the effects of “predator fatigue”…a condition I acquired at your commission meeting last weekend where I’m sure the word “predator” was mentioned well over a hundred times by commission members…I shall nonetheless do my best to describe why, in my opinion, we have not “a predator problem” in Nevada but a “wildlife commission” problem.

While I fully understand that there is a general desire for greater mule deer numbers among sportsmen and the commission, the grossly apparent obsession with predators by several members of the commission  …blaming them as the cause for “low” numbers of deer…goes far beyond anything supportable by available information, looks mean-spirited and bigoted,  fatigues the listener, creates acrimony between the commission and its constituents and department personnel, takes valuable time and money away from other pressing wildlife issues, and does nothing to create a useful, working relationship among sportsmen, CABs, and others.  In short, it’s crazy!!

While you were correct in suggesting that I lack understanding about matters related to sportsmen and hunting issues when we were talking about the proposed black bear hunt on KNPR a few days ago, I do keep showing up at commission meetings…some 35 years after my first time…hoping to become educated about those topics you think I fail to appreciate.  (I suspect the predator “issue” is one example.)  Unfortunately, all I got from your last meeting was a headache, and no enlightenment.

So, I thought I’d present what I DO know about mule deer numbers, predator issues, and related items and see if there can be some discussion of facts, and not obsessions or mythology, as a way to move ahead.

• The best current summary of the status of mule deer in Nevada….which includes a very nice historical section, looking back 130 years at deer numbers and how they have fluctuated…is “Nevada’s Mule Deer”, a well-done monograph prepared by Tony Wasley, NDOW big game biologist, and printed by NDOW in 2004.  (It is available on NDOW’s web site.) This document looks at a host of factors which affect current mule deer numbers, including the role of predators, and concludes with this statement.  “We must actively protect existing mule deer habitat while we create and restore new mule deer habitat because the reality remains that as mule deer habitat goes, so goes the mule deer.”

• According to Mr. Wasley’s document, mule deer numbers in Nevada have exceeded 200,000 during two periods of time in the past 130 years.  The first was (roughly) 1945-1960; the second, briefer occasion was (approximately) 1985 – 1990.  Those two periods account for approximately 20 years out of the 130-year span presented in that document.  Alternatively, mule deer numbers were below 200,000 for 110 years out of 130 total years, or 85% of the time.  The number of years when deer numbers were at or below 100,000 appears to be about 70 years, or 54% of the time.

• According to the well-respected text, Mule and Black-tailed Deer of North America (1981, edited by Olof Wallmo), the decline of the mule deer population in Nevada, (following the “hey-days” of mule deer proliferation across the West during the 1950′s and early 1960′s) began in the early 60′s.  Information supplied by George Tsukamoto showed that mule deer numbers of 246,000 in Nevada in 1960 declined to 150,000 in 1970 (page 230).  To help interpret this decline, you’ll recall that I presented the Mule Deer Restoration Committee earlier this year with a copy of a paper by Guy Connolly, detailing the history of the use of Compound 1080 on public lands.  According to Connolly, Nevada had more bait stations deployed on public lands (over 2000) than any other western state during the early 1960′s….the very time when mule deer began their decline in this state and across the West.   The significance of this correlation is, of course, that coyotes were being killed in huge numbers  while simultaneously, deer numbers were rapidly declining, making it absurd to postulate a predator-related cause for the rapid and massive decline of mule deer in Nevada or across the West.

• During the past 10 years, large numbers of predators have been killed in Nevada (over 80,000 coyotes; over 2000 mountain lions) while mule deer numbers have declined by approximately 25,000 to a current, apparently stable number of just over 100,000 animals. During this same time period, the wildlife commission has developed and nurtured its predator obsession, the legislature passed AB 291, generating nearly $3 million to kill predators, and additional sportsmen’s dollars from the Heritage Fund have  been used to pursue this misguided obsession.

• Claims of the presence of a current “predator problem” lack substantiation.  For example, there is no current, reliable, believable, documented population estimate for coyotes in this state.  Claims that coyotes are present in abundance merit no more credence than claims of paucity.  The same is true for the mountain lion.  For sportsmen and commissioners to claim the former (abundance) and disregard the equally plausible latter (paucity) is to simply express an opinion….based on anecdote/mythology and/or personal bias…but with nothing more to back it up. To add complexity, I’m sure you’re aware of hypothetical calculations by biologists as to what it would take to significantly suppress coyote populations in an area….the killing of 75% of the coyotes in an area for 3-4 years running.   Therefore, without having a clue as to base population numbers, random killing of coyotes, no matter how vigorously pursued, seems useless and absurd.

• It is also true that population numbers for all of Nevada’s big game species (elk, pronghorn, bighorn, mountain goat), except for mule deer, are at recent historic high levels.  It is difficult to postulate a major predator problem, knowing that predators will turn to alternative prey items if mule deer are not available.  Yet, the high numbers of other game species show no such (predictable) effect.

• In a large, 5-year, $350,000 project to kill coyotes and mountain lions near Secret Pass to benefit mule deer which has recently been concluded,  my recollection is that about 2500 coyotes were killed, as well as several lions.  Yet, Tony Wasley, NDOW’s deer biologist, was unable to show any sustained benefit for mule deer that resulted in the addition of adult mule deer to the existing population. I’m sure we both recall Mr. Wasley’s excellent, credible analysis which was presented at your Mule Deer Restoration committee meeting in Elko earlier this year. His analysis stands unrebutted.

• To credibly assert the presence of a “predator problem”, it would need to be shown that, given a piece of habitat, mule deer occupying that habitat are in tip-top physical condition, adult mortality is low, fawn production is high, and a high density of predators exists as well.  This notion of carrying capacity, well-recognized  by wildlife biologists, defines the conditions under which one might assert the presence/absence of a “predator problem”.  A simple “low” doe/fawn ratio is ambiguous on its own, since such a ratio is more likely, in this state, to be related to poor habitat conditions than to predators.  It is well known that fawn production diminishes in the face of poor habitat.  There has been no showing by the commission or the department of a “predator problem” as defined in this specific biological manner.

• What does the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) Mule Deer Working Group have to say? In one of its sections, “The West that Was…No Longer Is”, the authors bemoan the glorious days of 50-60 years ago when mule deer were numerous all over the West.  The decline is, in their eyes, related to habitat issues (90% shrub diet in 1954; 80% herbaceous in 1994, per Ken Mayer).  Predators are described as “playing a shifting role”…whatever that means, and the authors do not credit predators with the decline.  (I’ve included a copy of this paper with this letter.)

• WAFWA’s Mule Deer Working Group document, “A Place for Predators” describes the complexities of the predator/prey relationship, a host of variables which need to be considered in defining a predator problem or declaring that one does/does not exist.  From a broad perspective, it states, “However, most of the environments where mule deer exist today have been altered by fire suppression, development, fragmentation of habitat and other factors.  In these habitats (most of the West), biologists believe predation does not cause declines in deer populations.” (I’ve included a copy of this paper with the letter.)

• To be sure I wasn’t missing something, I took a look at the WAFWA agenda for the July, 2010 Joint Directors/Commissioners meeting, held in Alaska.   (I’ve printed off a copy for you and included it with the letter.)  As you can see, topics included the Gulf oil spill, Sage Grouse, legal issues, recruitment of hunters and anglers, but nary a word about Nevada’s predator problem.

• To be doubly sure, I printed off a copy of the agenda for Mule Deer Working Group at the same Alaska meeting.  (Copy enclosed).   As you can see, of the 19 agenda items, there isn’t a single reference to Nevada’s predator problem, or a predator problem anywhere in the West for that matter.  Somehow, this pressing, urgent, relentless “predator problem” obsessed over by some members of the  commission, has not even made the radar screen anywhere.

By the way, I do have a question.  Once in a while, a commissioner or a sportsman will make mention of the need for a “balance” between predator and prey.  While that idea has a reasonable-sounding tone to it, I have yet to see where the line is drawn, or what the formula looks like.  The concept of “balance” would suggest, for example….so many of these, so many of those.   If that is true, I’d like to know how many coyotes I can expect per 10,000 deer, or how many lions as well.   And how will I know that the balance is being observed and respected, instead of simply being a meaningless utterance which precedes another request for more predators to be killed.

So, I’m back to where I started.  Which is it….a “predator problem” or a “wildlife commission” problem?  As far as I can see, it’s the latter.  Here’s my thimble-sized summary:

• It’s a pipe dream to think there’ll be 200,000 mule deer in this state anytime in the near or foreseeable future.
• Killing predators to try to achieve this pipe dream is…bottom line…destroying public property without any justification, and wasteful of all sorts of resources.
• It would be better to start looking at habitat improvement and whatever else is possible; better to start now than later.
• It is clearly time for the commission to try to mend some fences with the CABs and other constituents.  Acrimony is getting us nowhere.  Also, a new governor is coming to town……the implications should be obvious.

Let me know if I can help in some way.

Sincerely

Don Molde

Here is another photo taken at our fundraiser on Saturday, September 18th, 2010.

Julia Di Sieno and John Corbett

John Corbett and I were both bidding on this gorgeous African lion pendant, donated by POSH.  John later asked me to STOP bidding on it.  Of course I let him bid higher on the item, as I could no longer afford the price range it was headed for.  John bid highest on the pendant then he announced that he got it for me as a gift.  WOW!  He is a wonderful friend!  Here is a photo taken when he gave me the pendant.

I thought this might be a cute piece for the CTAL website… after all it’s a lion, and I am a leo!  Rahrrrrrrrr.

Julia J. Di Sieno
Executive Director
Animal Rescue Team, inc.
www.animalrescueteam.net

Take nothing but photographs. Leave nothing but footprints. Kill nothing but time.

For immediate release
September 23rd 2010
Contact: Julia J. DiSieno
Executive Director
Animal Rescue Team, Inc
(805) 234-3810

Emcee & Auctioneer John Palminteri and Animal Rescue Team Executive Director Julia DiSieno announcing the auction winners.

Local Wildlife Fundraiser a Smash Hit

Animal Rescue Team, Inc. held their fourth annual Wildlife Fundraiser last Saturday (September 18th 2010).

[See the original flier for the Fundraiser]

The event location and part of the food was donated by Manny’s Mexican Restaurant on Mission Drive in Solvang.

Guest enjoyed a live auction hosted by John Palminteri and a spectacular slide show of hundreds of animals rescued and successfully rehabilitated this year. The slide show was created by Animal Rescue Team Advisory Boardmember Arthur White.

Guests enjoying the silent auction with the help of Animal Rescue Team mascot, Romulus, an abused wolf-hybrid rescued and successfully rehabilitated by Ms DiSieno

Notable guests supporting the event were Pedro Nava, 35th District State Assemblyman, his wife Susan Jordon, singer Jim Messina, actor and singer, John Corbett, actress Bo Derek, 24th congressional hopeful Tim Allison, and Animal Rescue Team Co-Founder Michael Behrman, M.D.

Emily Jensen keeping guests entertained with her guitar.

Sponsors for the event included Jordano’s Inc., Arthur Earl Winery, Teri Romero and Emily Jensen.

All monies raise at this event will go to support the important work done by the Animal Rescue Team in the Santa Ynez Valley, California.

For more information about Animal Rescue Team Inc., wildlife care,
or to volunteer, go to:

www.animalrescueteam.net

Injured wildlife in the Santa Ynez Valley should be reported to the Animal Rescue Team’s Hotline at (805) 896-1859.

The following edition was emailed to Mountain Lion Foundation newsletter subscribers on Thursday, September 23rd.  To receive the MLF Review in your inbox, click on the green box to sign up:

Because the following newsletter is posted as an image, the web links will not work.  To read more about any of the articles under the MLF Cougar Clippings heading, visit our Newsroom.  Any additional relevant links are posted below the newsletter.

Home Newsroom Library States Forum Donate About

MLF Cougar Clippings (click here for both the CDFG & Nebraska articles)

Cougar Comment Blog

Become a Member

The following edition was emailed to Mountain Lion Foundation newsletter subscribers on Wednesday, September 15th.  To receive the MLF Review in your inbox, click on the green box to sign up:

Because this newsletter is posted as an image, the web links will not work.  To read more about any of the articles under the MLF Cougar Clippings heading, visit our Newsroom.  Any additional relevant links are posted below the newsletter.

Home Newsroom Library States Forum Donate About

MLF Cougar Clippings

Nebraska Map Enlarged

Berkeley Meeting Poster ,   recap

Become a Member

WOW, Pedro Nava and his dear wife Susan Jordon’s promotion for our event… I am speechless!     — Julia

The Ellen De Generes Show video referred
to above can be viewed here:

For more information about the event, see the post
ART Inc Invites You to Our 4th Annual Fundraiser!

Julia J. Di Sieno
Executive Director
Animal Rescue Team, inc.
805 896-1859
www.animalrescueteam.net

I ask you all to come to the BH Mountain Lion Foundation’s educational talk, held this Saturday in the Northern Hills — an area void of understanding and in desparate need of education regarding predators in general and cougars more specifically.

Tom Huhnerkoch DVM,RN
MOUNTAIN CATS TRUST (501c3)
605-584-1958
ccats@mato.com

An announcement from the Cougar Rewilding Foundation:

Certain PBS affiliate stations across the U.S. will begin airing LORDS OF NATURE in September 2010 — and over the next year. Broadcast dates are listed on the LordsOfNature.org website, organized by state.

Lords of Nature presents the engaging story of a science
now discovering the great carnivores as revitalizing forces
of nature, and a society now learning tolerance for the
beasts they had once banished.

View the TV Schedule

Watch the Trailer

For more information, visit AnimalRescueTeam.net