Mule Deer Fanatic

I have long held the opinion that Montana folks are salt-of-the earth, common sense type people. Now, I am starting to wonder. Have they been invaded by huggers or what?

In Helena, they have a few more mule deer in town than some folks like, so they have spent all kinds of money studying the problem and finally decided to have the cops catch the deer in nets, then shoot them, then feed them to the needy. Just a short distance from Helena, there is a deer unit that has a much lower than desired mule deer population. The deer in Helena are fairly safe from predators and the ones outside are not. The deer have been talking and have decided they like it better in town.

For some strange reason, no one has thought of moving the deer. Lately though, the Helena bunch has been talking about having a yearly archery hunt, but they do not think the archers will be successful enough to kill the requisite number of deer. And, if a hunter shoots a muley which then dies on someone’s front porch – o’ brother.

In contrast, over in Billings, some folks want to build a bridge across the Little Missouri. Some other folks are resisting on the basis that a bridge would cause problems for all the mule deer in the river bottoms. What it all boils down to is this: no matter which side of the fence you are on – them mule deer sure cause a lot of problems.

Some sources are reporting heavy winter mortality in Western Wyoming mule deer herds. With wolves moving into that area, who knows if the cause is snow or big puppies.

The hunting community, via certain organizations – like the Mule Deer Foundation, is up in arms about the BLM leasing rights to oil drilling companies. Such parties are claiming that the deer herd has diminished by half since the drilling started.

If, indeed harsh winters are killing large numbers of mule deer, the loss may have nothing to do with drilling, but may be purely coincidental to drilling.

A fact that is going unmentioned here is that wolves and grizzlies are increasing their presence in the area in a big way. Both drilling and harsh winters may only be scapegoats.

Two different reports, one in May and one in June indicate a high winter mortality amongst Mule Deer in South Western Wyoming:
—————————————
Associated Press – May 26, 2008 4:45 PM ET

GREEN RIVER, Wyo. (AP) – A mortality survey of Wyoming’s largest mule deer herd indicates that the harsh winter took a toll on the animals.

The annual mortality surveys for the Wyoming Range mule deer herd were conducted this spring near Cokeville, Pinedale and Big Piney and near Leroy in the Bridger Valley.

Wyoming Game and Fish Department biologists and others counted 313 dead mule deer during the Cokeville, Pinedale and Big Piney surveys.

Officials said an additional 340 dead mule deer were found on the Leroy survey in Uinta County, for a total of 653 dead deer.

Game officials noted an unusually high number of adult deer deaths.

Information from: Star-Tribune, http://www.casperstartribune.net

Parts of deer herd hit hard by rough winter
Deaths high around Cokeville, but Pinedale, Daniel fared well.

By Cory Hatch Jackson Hole, Wyoming
June 4, 2008

A harsh winter and poor forage led to a high number of mule deer deaths for portions of the Wyoming Range herd, including some animals that summer near Jackson.

Gary Fralick, a wildlife biologist for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, said volunteers counted 313 dead mule deer in the Cokeville area, most of which succumbed to starvation or other effects of winter. Thirty-eight percent of the animals were adult and 58 percent were fawns. An additional 340 winter-killed mule deer were found in the Leroy area.

The relatively high percentage of adult deaths compared with fawns is typical during a harsh winter, Fralick said.

“We had severe snow accumulations and extreme temperatures,” he said. The plants deer feed on “are just in poor shape and are not able to sustain these herds over the hard winter because of drought and because [they] are getting old and decadent,” he said. “On that particular winter range, every three years you can pretty much count on a winter that will take a significant portion of that population.”

Fralick said relatively low winter mortality for portions of the herd in the Pinedale, Big Piney and Daniel areas likely compensated for the hit on the population. Winter mortality for the entire herd likely ranged from 5 percent to 15 percent, he said.

“What that means is the other segment of the deer on the winter range came out in outstanding condition,” Fralick said. “There was good winter survival [in Daniel and Big Piney and the Pinedale Mesa] those deer came through the winter in pretty good shape.”

The mule deer herd is the largest in Wyoming, stretching from Interstate 80 to the Snake River Canyon, and in the past has ranged from 20,000 to 50,000 animals.

During a two-year radio-collar study that started in 1990, Fralick said, researchers documented deer from the Cokeville area that migrated to summer ranges in the Greys River Range, the Grayback Ridge area, the Snake River Canyon and into Hoback Basin.

“There’s major movement off of those winter ranges,” he said. “These deer are migrating from winter to summer range 180 to 200 miles.”

Fralick said the high mortality last winter could mean fewer deer going back to summer range in places like the Smiths Fork, Commissary Ridge and the south end of the Salt Range.

Fralick said hunting seasons this year are already set, and most of those seasons’ limits are already conservative. But he said this year’s winter kill could affect hunters in a couple of years.

“That’s going to translate into fewer 2-year-old bucks in two years,” he said.

Heavy rain and snow this winter and spring could help restore forage in the Cokeville area, but Fralick said it’s too late for some of the plants.

“A lot of the browse plans have been dying over the past five years,” he said. “The ones that are still alive it’s going to benefit, but the trend has been toward dead and decadent on these browse plants.”

Fralick said other factors also take a toll, including human land use, drought and especially motor vehicle collisions.

“We lose 200 to 600 or more deer every year on Wyoming Range highways,” he said.

Bob Wharff, executive director of the Wyoming chapter of the Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, criticized the Wyoming Game and Fish Department for not initiating emergency feeding for mule deer populations that were hard hit this winter.

———————–

Comment:

“I’m mad that Game and Fish didn’t feed the deer,” he said. “They have told us numerous times that if the conditions got bad that they would institute an emergency feeding program. It makes no sense to me to not take care of that population. I do think we’re morally obligated to do that.

It is indeed unfortunate that a man with so much potential finds himself in such a situation, but Kirt Darner may have fixed himself up good this time.

—————————————

According to reports from several New Mexico newspapers and the Colorado DOW, Darner admitted to illegally transporting wild elk and receiving two stolen bighorn sheep heads.

His plea was entered Monday in New Mexico District Court in Grants. He faces more than 41⁄2 years in jail and a minimum of $10,000 in fines and restitution. Sentencing has not been set.

Darner’s name and near-legendary reputation are familiar to many hunters.

Once featured in Remington advertisements for bolt-action rifles, Darner had his hunting license revoked for three years in 2001 by the DOW after wildlife officers discovered a hunter Darner was guiding illegally shot from the window of a truck at an elk decoy.

Also, the hunter did not possess a valid permit for that hunting unit.

Darner made his name on his purported ability to outsmart and kill trophy sized mule deer bucks, but over the years his reputation faded considerably after run-ins with wildlife officers and at least one of his trophies were discovered to have been killed by other hunters.

Darner also once was featured in the popular book, “Colorado’s Biggest Bucks and Bulls,” and had several entries in the Boone & Crockett Club record book. He pulled those entries himself after a disagreement with Boone & Crockett officials over the validity of his claims.

An Associated Press report Monday said Darner and his wife, Paula, were co-owners of the 40-acre Lobo Canyon Ranch north of Grants when they were indicted in February of 2006 on multiple charges related to the theft of the sheep heads and the transport of the stolen elk. The Darners were accused of drugging and illegally moving three state-owned elk from the Lobo Canyon Ranch to the Pancho Peaks ranch and game park in southeastern New Mexico in 2002. Kirt Darner was paid $5,000 for each elk.

Mew Mexico Game and Fish Department officers, during a search at the Darner property in February 2005, discovered the heads of desert bighorn sheep and a Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep inside a vehicle.

The heads allegedly were stolen in 2000 from a Montrose taxidermy shop. The shop was preparing the mounts for the Colorado DOW, which estimated the value of the heads at more than $20,000 each when stolen.

The DOW had offered a $4,000 reward for information about the sheep-head thefts. According to the DOW, no one has been charged with the theft of the heads; Darner was charged with receiving stolen property.

As part of his plea, Darner, 69, agreed never to hunt, fish or possess firearms in his lifetime. He also agreed not to operate as a guide or outfitter in New Mexico or Colorado

This project was started in 2002 and should be completed by now, although I haven’t yet seen any results published. Chances are the outcome was pre-determined. This is another project that is a colossal waste of time and money. I, personally, do not need a study to know that an animal, any animal, humans included, are effected by what they eat, or don’t eat. But, I also don’t need a study to know that once a doe has been eaten by a lion or a coyote, she won’t be having any more fawns.

If habitat is an issue, the time and money would be far better spent by just going out and improving habitat. Habitat is killing far less mule deer than predators. If WSU really wanted to help the deer – as opposed to just spending research dollars, they should just go kill some predators. I think the truth is – they want to blame anything but the predators for the “20 year decline in mule deer”.
——————————————–

Mule deer research includes ultrasonography, WSU nutrition study with captive herd
Posted August 2002
By W. L. Myers, Jr., Wildlife Biologist
WDFW Wildlife Program

WDFW’s five-year research project to learn more about mule deer populations in northeast and north-central Washington is now in its second year with expanded activities underway. The project includes body condition scoring using ultrasonography for comparison with a captive deer herd diet and nutrition study at Washington State University (WSU). The study area, where to date 184 mule deer does have been captured and equipped with radio telemetry or satellite GIS (Geographical Information System) collars, covers all or parts of Chelan, Okanogan, Ferry, Stevens, Lincoln, Adams, Whitman, and Pend Oreille counties. In many of these areas, mule deer populations have been declining, as evidenced by survey results and hunter harvest.

One factor in those declines may be low nutrition forage. Doe deer with diet deficiencies could have later-than-optimal pregnancies, produce fawns with low birth weights, abort fetuses, have stillborns, or not even conceive. Poor nutrition is reflected in deer body condition and fat levels. Those conditions are being measured through ultrasonography (the same ultra-sound technology used in human health care) in the collared does when they are re-captured twice a year – once going onto winter range and again as deer leave the range at the end of winter. This body condition information from wild deer in the study area will be compared to body condition data collected from the captive herd at WSU to determine if diet deficiencies are part of the problem. The WSU deer diet study involves 40 female mule deer fawns. Some of the fawns were collected in spring 2002 from state licensed wildlife rehabilitators who receive them as orphans or pick-ups. Many were captured from the wild in an area of Whitman County where mule deer have been causing agricultural crop damage and hunting permits have been increased to reduce their numbers. The fawns will be held in captivity for the rest of their lives, so they are purposely being habituated to their human handlers for ease of operation as the study proceeds.

Once the fawns are weaned from their bottle-fed milk formula, group feeding trials will begin. Some groups will receive high nutritional diets, others low. Their body condition will be measured periodically using the same ultrasonography as in the wild deer re-capture portion of the research. They will be bred by captive bucks and their reproductive success or failure tracked.

By comparing the body condition measures between the captive deer on controlled diets and the wild deer, WDFW researchers hope to gain information that may connect the physical condition and fawn production of individual deer with on-the-ground habitat conditions. Vegetative mapping and evaluation of nutritional values of forage species work began in the spring of 2002. The results may indicate needs to improve, enhance or protect mule deer habitat in some areas, or simply change harvest management to reduce mortality on herds that are less than stable.

Other possible factors in mule deer declines are also being explored in this multi-faceted research project. The collared deer are monitored weekly to track movements, determine habitat preferences, calculate population densities, measure herd boundaries and home range sizes, and learn rates, patterns, and causes of death. Surveys are also being conducted to measure deer numbers, age and sex composition. The information is needed to learn more about population regulatory mechanisms and landscape-level habitat relationships.

Some of the data collected is being used to evaluate the effectiveness of the traditional “density-dependent” model of mule deer harvest management. Harvest rates are dependent on the density of the deer population, which is dependent on available habitat. The density dependent management model assumes that hunting harvest does not add to overall deer mortality, but that as hunting harvest increases, natural mortality decreases. This model was developed from white-tailed deer population studies and may not be appropriate for managing mule deer. With a better understanding of mule deer population dynamics, WDFW should be able to more carefully manage Washington’s mule deer through hunting restrictions and habitat protection.

More mule deer does will be equipped for monitoring as the study continues. That process starts with capturing the animals using a helicopter net-gunning crew that slings the netted deer to a site for processing by WDFW and volunteer crews. The deer are weighed and measured, and blood and fecal samples are collected for laboratory assessments of disease exposure, trace element levels, DNA and parasite loads. They are examined manually and through ultrasonography to determine body condition, pregnancy, and fetus size and number. The deer are equipped with radio telemetry or GIS collars. Prior to release, the deer receive shots of long-acting penicillin and a selenium-vitamin E compound to help mitigate the stresses of capture and handling.

Starting in the winter of 2002-03, a number of six-month-old mule deer fawns in each site will also be radio tagged to assess survival and dispersal.

Researchers from WSU’s Large Carnivore Laboratory are also investigating the relationships between mule deer, white-tailed deer, and mountain lions as part of this project.

Deer monitoring is conducted by graduate students from the University of Washington, Washington State University, Central Washington University, and University of Idaho. Volunteers from the Inland Northwest Wildlife Council and Asotin County Sportsmen Association are also helping capture and monitor the deer.

This project is truly an inter-agency one and would not be possible without the support and involvement of many cooperating entities, including the Bonneville Power Administration, Colville Confederated Tribes, Spokane Tribe, Kalispel Tribe, Chelan County Public Utility District, U.S. Forest Service’s Colville and Okanogan National Forests, the Bureau of Land Management, Washington Department of Transportation, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Northwest Okanogan Sports Council, Inland Empire Chapter of the Safari Club International, and the Mule Deer Foundation.

———————

PULLMAN, Wash. — Is poor nutrition contributing to a decrease in the number of mule deer in the Pacific Northwest? That is a question researchers at Washington State University are working to answer using deer hand-raised on the Pullman campus.

Lisa Shipley, associate professor in natural resources and a scientist in the WSU Agricultural Research Center, is part of a team led by wildlife biologist Woody Myers of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife working to determine why the number of mule deer in the state has steadily declined over the past 20 years. She says the captive herd makes it easier to determine exactly what’s going on in the wild.

“There are too many variables in the field,” she said. “The importance of captive animals is that you can isolate and remove different variables to determine exactly how nutrition affects reproduction.”

Shipley, along with graduate student Troy Tollefson, have hand-raised approximately 30 mule deer does, two bucks and numerous fawns, so they are able to work with the animals more easily. They feed each doe one of three diets ­ high, medium or low nutrition ­ based on fiber and protein content.

“We try to mimic the conditions in the field as closely as possible,” said Shipley. “Some years in some locations, there is plenty of water and lots of yummy vegetation for the deer to eat. In other years ­ drought years ­ there isn’t as much.”

The research team carefully monitors the differences in the does. They measure body weight and devised a way to measure body fat as well. They take milk samples and study nursing patterns. They also keep track of the size and growth of the fawns.

While still in the process of analyzing the data gathered over the past three years, Shipley says nutrition does appear to play a pivotal role in the number of fawns born.

“It looks like we’ve got fewer twins among the does on the lowest nutrition diet,” she said. “And the thinnest does haven’t given birth yet, and may not at all. Although, it also appears that even at about 5 percent body fat they can still reproduce.”

By DAVE BUCHANAN
The Daily Sentinel

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

GUNNISON — You smell the deer before you see them. Tucked up in the big rocks, flopped among the riparian downfall of cottonwoods and willows, or simply lying on an open slope, legs sprawled like a marionette whose strings had been cut.

These are the remains of the deer that died around the Gunnison Basin during the past winter, an unpleasant but totally natural extension of what happens when Mother Nature takes a hand in managing wildlife populations.

No one will ever know exactly how many of deer and elk died this winter in the vast basin. The elk likely fared as elk always do in winter: They get by. Elk are big enough to survive a rough snow year, although there is some mortality every winter.

…“Only two things kill an elk — a bullet or a bumper.”

Deer, however, are the pawns in this life-and-death chess game. Fragile, thin-skinned, not big enough or strong enough to plow through deep snow and with a frustrating tendency to gather in small groups in isolated places.

The Colorado Division of Wildlife estimated there were 20,000 mule deer in the Gunnison Basin going into the winter. By the end of the feeding program, the DOW estimated 9,400 were receiving a daily ration of feed.

The fate of the rest? That’s part of why DOW terrestrial biologist Scott Wait, DOW seasonal biologist Leslie Spicer, and a curious reporter are hiking the steep hills west of Gunnison looking for deer carcasses.

Our efforts, and those of several similar teams of monitors, is to offer some statistical data about winter mortality, an effort to indicate how many deer perished in what was reported as the snowiest winter the basin has seen since record-keeping began in 1915-16.

The surveys were relatively simple. Half-mile squares were plotted with Global Positioning System accuracy on topographic maps. Each day during the weeklong survey, teams of at least two people would walk one or more plots, counting all the deer they could see along a series of compass-line transects that covered the square.

Walk a half mile, move a quarter-mile, walk a half-mile back, repeat.

Monitors counted only the carcasses seen from the transect line. While some carcasses might have been missed, it’s surprising what you can see (and smell) when looking for a dead deer.

That initial transect was at the Beaver Creek State Wildlife Area, which was expected to have the highest carcass count of all transects. Of the 131 feeding sites around the area, Beaver Creek was the busiest, feeding an estimated 450 deer per day at the height of the program.

Normal winter deer mortality is about 15-18 percent, according to the DOW. Given the severity of the past winter, you might expect deaths to hover around the high end of the estimate.

We hadn’t reached the GPS starting point when we found (smelled) the first carcass.

“It’s out of the transect so we can’t count it,” Wait said. “I think we’ll find others.”

Sometimes the carcass would be up in the rocks, and Wait surmised the deer died huddled next to sun-warmed boulders or while scraping for forage revealed by melting snow. Sometimes the bodies were scattered on an open slope, simply toppled over where death overtook them.

Most of the carcasses were found near the creek, where steep slopes fell into a creek bottom jammed with jackstrawed trees and leg-trapping willows. Any winter-weakened deer that somehow fell or slipped into the jam of logs would have little chance of escape. It was in those tight quarters we found most of the 89 carcasses we counted on the transect.

That’s nearly 20 percent of the deer reportedly being fed, high but not way outside the estimate. And given the conditions, not surprising, either.

“Deer will use willows and trees for thermal cover and some of these probably were looking for some relief when they got down here,” Spicer said. “But you can see how the willows were bent over from the weight of the snow, so there probably wasn’t much shelter down here.”

There were a lot of fawns, which was expected, but few mature bucks, which runs counter to the theory that older bucks, stressed by rut and running nearly on empty, are among the first to die in a tough winter.

Other counters may have found more buck carcasses but those results aren’t yet available.

The other three surveys in which I participated, two along the deer-rich slopes of Cochetopa Creek east of Gunnison and the last in the Hartman Rocks area south of town, turned up very few carcasses. On the Cochetopa, one of those surveys had four carcasses, the other had three.

At Hartman Rocks, also a feeding site, there were four deer carcasses and one pronghorn carcass.

The final tally won’t be exact, since exactitude is a rarity in wildlife management anyway. But it may help biologists better understand the health of the deer herds and equally important, the health of the land.

No one yet is drawing any conclusions. But it’s likely thousands of deer survived the winter thanks to the efforts of the DOW and the diligent volunteers who went out for 130 straight days to toss down bags of feed. Also, thousands more deer survived by finding south-facing slopes where snow cover was lighter.

But many deer died, and in response to local outcry, the Colorado Wildlife Commission drastically reduced doe hunting licenses for this fall in the Gunnison Basin.

It’s hard to imagine that there is any debate over the right of the people to defend themselves, even against government, if neccessary. The right to bear arms has now been officially interpreted as being an individual right.
———————————————-

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
Thursday, Jun 26, 2008

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court’s 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by “the historical narrative” both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home,” Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington’s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”

He said such evidence “is nowhere to be found.”

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, “In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas.”

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. “I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom,” said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday’s outcome.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. “I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it,” she said.

The capital’s gun law was among the nation’s strictest.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller’s favor and struck down Washington’s handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday’s ruling should “cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.”

In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority “are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country” and believe the Constitution “leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns.”

The law adopted by Washington’s city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court’s consideration of Washington’s restrictions.

The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290

.

The June issue of American Hunter posted two side-by-side stories of predator attacks on people. One happened in Utah on Jun 17, 2007 and the other happened in Arizona, in March 2007. 

The Utah attack involved a black bear that killed an eleven year-old boy. There have been other bear attacks in the same general area, and Utah is believed to be importing trouble bears from Yellowstone. In this case the boy’s mother is suing the forest service for $2m and the Utah DWR for $550k. The mother says it is a wrongful death case because the bear was reported in the morning of the same day and nothing was done about it.

.

.

.

The Arizona case involved a 10 year-old boy who was attacked by a mountain lion when the family stopped for lunch. As the cougar approached, the mother yelled at the kids to stay still, so while the boy was still, the cougar chomped on the boy’s leg. The grandmother wasn’t slow in grabbing a pistol and in shooting the lion which died a few feet away.

 .

Now that predators are given higher priority than people, these types of encounters are becoming more common.

Trophy wolf hunting set for Oct. 1
Posted: Wednesday, May 28th, 2008
BY: Joy Ufford

G&F sets limit at 25 wolves for 4 hunt areas

A total “harvest quota” of 25 trophy-game gray wolves, in a hunting season suggested to open Oct. 1 this year in northwest Wyoming, is a new element in this year’s Wyoming Game and Fish (G&F) annual release of proposed hunting season changes.

“The structure of the season will be an Area Harvest Quota Limitation, in which the season for each wolf hunt area will close when the harvest quota for that area has been reached,” said G&F spokesman Eric Keszler. “The proposal will establish wolf seasons and harvest quotas in four hunt areas in the Trophy Game Area of northwest Wyoming.”

A harvest quota is defined in the new regulation draft as “the total number of gray wolves for a single hunt area that may be legally taken by licensed hunters during any single gray wolf hunting season within the area where gray wolves are classified as trophy game animals.”

General licenses will cost $15 for Wyoming hunters, $150 for nonresident hunters.

Four hunt areas

The four new hunt areas are drawn from the designated trophy-game area with exceptions for national park lands. (See Wyoming Game and Fish map.)

The Green River and Gros Ventre Hunt Areas each have a harvest quota of five animals taken with an Oct. 1 opening date and closing on Nov. 30 and Nov. 15, respectively, or when the quotas are reached. The Sunlight (five wolves) and Francs Peak (10 wolves) Hunt Areas would also open Oct. 1 and run through Nov. 30 or until the quotas are filled.

The Gros Ventre Hunt Area (HA 3) begins at the junction of Highway 26/287 with Union Pass Road then follows south along Forest Service Road 600 and the Bridger-Teton National Forest boundary to Highway 189/191 where it follows the highway northwest through Bondurant to Hoback Junction, up to Highway 22 in Jackson and along Highway 22 through Wilson to the Idaho line and zigzags around Grand Teton Park and John D. Memorial Parkway. It excludes all lands within Teton Park and the National Elk Refuge.

The Green River Hunt Area (HA 4) begins where Highway 26/287 crosses the west boundary of the Wind River Reservation, south to the Continental Divide then southeast along the Divide to go west along the Middle Fork of Boulder Creek to the BTNF boundary and northwesterly to Union Pass Road.

The Sunlight Hunt Area (HA 1) begins at the junction of Highway 120 at the Montana state line, runs south to the intersection with Highway 14/16/20 in Cody, then west to Yellowstone and along the park boundary to the state line and back to Highway 120.

The Francs Peak Hunt Area (HA 2) begins at the intersection of Highway 120 and Highway 14/16/20 in Cody, runs south along the highway to the Greybull River, southwest along the river to the Shoshone national Forest, south along that boundary to the Wind River Reservation and west and south to where it meets Highway 26/287, then to the east boundary of the John D. Memorial Parkway and up along Yellowstone’s east boundary to meet back at highway 120 in Cody.

Draft rules

Draft regulations state a hunter must confirm whether or not a hunt area’s quota is met before hunting there. Only legal firearms and archery equipment can be used; it is illegal to use radio-tracking equipment to take a trophy wolf, the new regulations say.

The bag and possession limit for licensed hunters will be one wolf during the calendar year and that can be any gray wolf in the applicable hunt area.

Hunters must report taking a trophy wolf within 24 hours by calling (866) 373-5805 any time of day or night. They also must retain the skull and unfrozen pelt, with visible evidence of sex attached naturally, and present them to a district game warden, district wildlife biologist or G&F personnel at a regional office within five days for collection of biological samples. Radio-tracking devices such as electronic collars or ear tags must be surrendered to the G&F as well.

Conservative start

G&F Wildlife Assistant Chief Bill Rudd said last week the proposed wolf hunting season and harvest quota are “an extremely conservative approach to wolf hunting in Wyoming.”

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (FWS) Wolf Recovery Coordinator Ed Bangs, who led the recovery project to the gray wolf’s March delisting, agreed this week.

“I think the WGFD recommendation of 25 tags as a start is a good one,” he said.

Bangs said he expects most prospective Wyoming wolf hunters will buy tags to go along with another big-game hunt.

“Most hunters won’t ever hunt for wolves but take them while hunting something else,” he said. “Same thing here – it will be elk and deer hunters that harvest wolves during the fall big game season.”

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission met last week and chose to allow higher hunting quotas to take Idaho’s wolf population back to its 2005 population level.

Bangs said, “…In Idaho the (Fish and Game) Commission ignored the IDFG recommendations and passed the maximum wolf kill under wolf-hater pressure, to get the wolf population down to the lowest level in their management plan (but still 518 wolves) – so we’ll see how good (G&F) is at ‘wolf’ politics.”

The IFGC set a wolf population goal of 518 wolves and adopted seasons, limits and rules for this year.

The Idaho Wolf Population Management Plan, approved in early March, calls for managing wolves at a population level of between 2005-2007 levels (518 to 732) wolves for the first five years after delisting. With an annual estimated growth rate of 20 to 30 percent, Idaho’s population could exceed 1,000 wolves before the state’s new hunting seasons open, Sept. 15 and Oct. 1. Idaho hunt areas will be open through Dec. 31 with possible season extensions if quotas aren’t met.

In Wyoming wolves are increasing at about 24 percent annually, said Rudd.

“Wolves… in Wyoming and can sustain much higher harvest than we are proposing through hunting,” he said. “Removing some wolves through controlled hunting can also help prevent wolf-livestock conflicts in some cases.”

More information

The proposed wolf hunting season, hunt areas and regulations are included in G&F’s “Chapter 47: Gray Wolf Hunting Seasons.” To see proposed wolf hunting seasons and associated information, visit http://gf.state.wy.us/services/education/wolves/index.asp.

A public comment period on this proposal as well as other G&F hunting issues is open through 5 p.m. on July 3. The G&F Commission will take actions on the proposed trophy wolf season and other hunting issues when it meets in Dubois, July 30-Aug. 1.

Public meetings are planned across Wyoming but mainly in the western part of the state for discussion and comments on the wolf season and other 2008 hunting issues including mountain lion seasons, furbearing and trapping seasons, taxidermy regulation and issuance of licenses, special points and interstate game tags.

G&F will hold the Pinedale meeting June 10 at 7 p.m., at the Pinedale Library. On June 11, a meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the Antler Inn. Other meetings are set for Green River (June 9), Laramie (June 9), Lander (June 10), Sheridan (June 11), Cody (June 12) and Casper (June 12).

Copies of all regulation changes and seasons can be viewed at the public meetings or by contacting the Casper Game and Fish office at (307) 473-3400. All comments must be in writing and must be submitted at the public meetings or mailed to: Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Wildlife Division, ATTN: Regulations, 3030 Energy Lane, Casper, WY 82604.

The Arizona Deer Association is organizing an effort to prevent further wolf expansion in the state of Arizona. Please lend your support.

—————————————–

The wolf people, including groups like the Humane Society of the United States, PETA, the Sierra Club, and Defenders of Wildlife, want to do away with Elk and Deer hunting, want to expand the wolf population in Arizona to include all Elk and Deer habitat across the central part of the state as well as north of the Grand Canyon.  The maps they are using overlay, almost perfectly, all the Elk and Deer habitat in the state.  These groups will stop at nothing and have authored many articles without telling the whole story and consequences of expanding the wolf recovery range.  Look how long it took Montana, Wyoming and Idaho to begin hunting wolves and now they are back in court spending millions of dollars fighting the wolf people that want the hunting to stop, even though, from the beginning it was always part of the recovery plan.  We don’t need this in Arizona. 

Please take a few minutes and protect our Elk and Deer hunting here in Arizona.  

Send an email to mexwolf@azgfd.gov or mail it to Mexican Wolf Project, Attn: Terry Johnson, 5000 W. Carefree Highway, Phoenix, AZ. 85086.

We have until June 25^th to comment.

Points to include in your comments:

• • Sportsmen have paid to bring back wildlife, including elk and bighorn sheep to the State and want to maintain them.
  • The current drought situation has kept our elk, deer and cattle herds low and in many cases dwindling and any expansion of the wolf population or wolf recovery area could decimate them.
  • Protection of our hunting heritage is extremely important for the continuation of Arizona’s wildlife management programs.
  • The current wolf program has failed to meet its objectives.  To expand it will only compound the problem.
  • I would not like to see any expansion of the current wolf population.