The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation in Wyoming: Understanding It, Preserving It, and Funding Its Future

Excerpt

In 2013, both the Wyoming Legislature and the public lambasted the
Wyoming Game and Fish Department (Department) for requesting license fee
increases to help fund the agency. They argued that hunters and anglers already
shouldered the bulk of the fiscal responsibility for managing wildlife, and a new fee
increase could discourage some from purchasing licenses. Ultimately, the funding
measure failed, but the debate brought to the forefront the risks and challenges of
relying exclusively on the funding model known as the North American Model of
Wildlife Conservation—an ideology developed over the past several generations
to manage and protect the future of all Wyoming’s wildlife…..Wyoming Law Review NAMWC Who Pays for Wildlife 2014

Authors:  David Willms and Anne Alexander

Trapping Incident Reports from TrailSafe

TrailSafe has assembled a database of reports made detailing the trapping of HUMANS and PETS.   In summary, the incident reports reflect:

–1 hiker caught in a snare trap at a popular local attraction

–3 incidents where people narrowly missed being trapped, including 1 small CHILD

–63 pet dogs & 9 cats trapped, plus 2 reported as near misses

–26 trappings or crippled animals sightings in urban/suburban areas

–6 reports of traps set on private property without the land owner’s permission

–12 pleas for trapping regulations without specific reports of injuries

–6 reports of wild animals maimed, trying to chew their way out of the traps, or dragging traps into peoples yards in urban/suburban areas

 

Follow this link for the detailed incident reports collected by TrailSafe.

Unintended victims

A key problem with any kind of trap is the lack of discrimination. For every intended victim (“target” animal) of the traps, there are 2 to 10 unintended victims: birds, porcupines, deer, cats, dogs and other animals are caught, maimed and killed in traps.  Even animals listed under the Endangered Species Act are caught and killed. In the industry, these unintended victims are referred to as “trash” animals.  Our wildlife agencies call them “non target” species.  There have also been cases where children were caught in these traps.  Worldwide, about 10 MILLION animals are trapped annually.

Within the first 30 minutes of capture, a trapped animal can tear her flesh, rip tendons, break bones, and even knock out teeth as she bites the trap to escape. Before Sweden banned leg hold traps their government carried out a trapping campaign against foxes. Of the 645 foxes that were trapped, 514 were considered seriously injured. The trapped foxes had struggled desperately to get free, and over 200 of them had knocked out teeth. Some of the foxes had even knocked out 18 teeth as they bit the trap trying to escape. Some animals will even bite off their own limbs in a desperate attempt to escape. The fact that an animal would severe her own limb shows how horrible the experience of being caught in a leg hold trap is. A study in Wheeler National Wildlife Refuge found that 27.6 percent of mink, 24 percent of raccoon, and 26 percent of trapped fox would actually bite their limbs off in hopes of surviving. In many cases the animals died from blood loss, infection, and inability to hunt with an amputated limb. This study was carried out over a 4 year period, and involved many trappers with varying degrees of skill. Therefore, these percentages are fairly indicative of what happens with the various species targeted by Nevada trappers. Another study, conducted in 1980, found that 37 percent of raccoons mutilated themselves when caught in a leg hold trap.

All but two of the U.S. states require traps to be checked in intervals shorter than Nevada’s 96 hours (some states require daily trap checking). Several U.S. states and 88 countries have banned the steel-jawed leg hold trap, which is notorious for its cruelty especially when trappers don’t visit their traps for days or weeks at a time. Many trappers now get around this ban by using other types of traps, including snare traps, conibear traps or leg hold traps with a thin layer of padding added. Once the trapper finds the captured animal, if the animal is still alive, the trapper will usually club or stomp the animal to death. Shooting is not as popular because the trapper would risk damaging the pelt.

Nevada’s fairy-tale wildlife management

Question: When does a state wildlife commission turn into a death commission? Answer: When it does what Nevada did last December. That’s when the Nevada Wildlife Commission approved a $212,000 raid on the state’s Heritage Fund, a reserve dedicated to wildlife conservation projects.

But instead of conservation, the Nevada Wildlife Commission redirected the Heritage Fund money to two fringe hunting groups, Hunter’s Alert and the Nevada Alliance 4 Wildlife. They, in turn, planned to funnel it to the federal Wildlife Services, the agency that specializes in killing some 1.5 million predators every year. Meanwhile, the state’s wildlife agency was told to stand down in its oversight duty concerning the expenditure to kill carnivores such as coyotes, ravens, mountain lions and badgers.

The situation is beyond controversial; it is nothing short of outrageous, though recently, federal wildlife officials say they won’t proceed with plans to kill lions and other carnivores unless there is full support in Nevada for the effort, reports the Reno Gazette-Journal.

Full support is not likely to happen soon. Cecil Fredi, the president of Hunter’s Alert, called the divisive situation over the decline of mule deer “a war.”

The hunter groups argue that if you kill the animals that kill mule deer and sage grouse, the population of prey animals will rebound. Studies, however, show that this doesn’t work, and in this case, Nevadans will be burdened with illegitimate expenditures to do something that’s bound to fail, while the real hardship will be to Nevada’s ecological systems.

The $212,000 allocation the state wildlife commission made from the Heritage Fund supplements an already sizable annual expenditure to kill lions and other predators. Nevada hunters are taxed $3 for each big game license they purchase to fund continued killing. The resultant annual budget is between $350,000 and $450,000. Additionally, the Nevada Department of Wildlife dedicates another $17,000-to-$25,000 to the cause, so that all together, the state’s wildlife department spends approximately $500,000 to kill native carnivores each year.

Tina Nappe, a former member of Nevada’s Wildlife Commission, blasted the commission in January, calling it “bloodthirsty for killing predators.” And a current commissioner, Mike McBeath, told the Reno Gazette-Journal that he was concerned that some of his fellow commissioners were trying to oust the state wildlife director because he opposed spending more money to kill predators.

The belief that killing carnivores will benefit deer was dismissed as early as 1941, by the hunter and conservationist Aldo Leopold in his essay, “Thinking Like a Mountain.” Wolves were seen then as evil and rapacious, and thus were exterminated throughout the continental United States. The consequences of doing this were dire. Leopold noticed that with the demise of the wolf came an over-abundance of deer and harm to the mountain. Deer were free to strip the mountain of vegetation. The mountain, now barren, could not support deer and other species. Then the deer died in droves.

In the decades since, a profusion of scientific studies has shown that native carnivores are essential to maintaining biological diversity and the healthy functioning of ecosystems. A recent study found that mountain lions in Utah’s Zion National Park modulate deer populations and prevent overgrazing in fragile riparian systems. The balance has led to more cottonwoods, rushes, cattails, wildflowers, amphibians, lizards and butterflies and deeper, colder stream channels for native fish.

Native carnivores can benefit sage grouse, too. Despite their persecution, coyotes play a keystone role in sagebrush grasslands by preying upon medium-sized carnivores like skunks, foxes and raccoons, as well as competitors with sage grouse, such as jackrabbits.

In Nevada, fairy-tale beliefs are driving wildlife management rather than the best available science, state taxpayers are expected to pay for it, and what’s worse, targeting carnivores just doesn’t work: Hunters will not see more mule deer if native carnivores are killed. Mule deer suffer most from loss of habitat, state experts say, as well as years of drought, over-hunting and a host of other problems. As for sage grouse, research shows that the animals are also harmed by loss of habitat as well as livestock grazing, off-road vehicle use, sprawl and other land uses — but hardly from predation.

Nevada wildlife officials need to wake up and remember their Aldo Leopold and embrace science. What sage grouse and mule deer need are lots of good quality habitat with connectivity between subpopulations — not predator control. It’s time to stop this war on wildlife.

Wendy Keefover-Ring is a contributor to Writers on the Range, a service of High Country News (hcn.org).

See the full story here.

Humans are wiping out species 1,000 x faster than nature can create new ones

Sometimes extinction happens naturally. Other times humans are to blame. Given the many millions of plant and animal species that have ever existed, it’s tough to know exactly how to assign responsibility. But new research indicates that we have an alarmingly large role.
Humans are wiping out species at least 1,000 times faster than nature is creating new species, according to a new study in Conservation Biology (paywall). And it’s getting much worse. In the future, plants and animal species will go extinct at 10,000 times the rate at which new species emerge, the researchers assert.
Looking at both fossils and genetic variation, the study found that nature snuffs out its own creations much more slowly than we’d realized—at a rate of only one species per every 10 million. Past estimates put the “normal background extinction rate”—the rate at which species would go extinct without human interference—at about 10 yearly extinctions for every 10 million species.
Since mankind hit the scene, however, more than 1,000 out of every 10 million species have been dying out each year.
“We’ve known for 20 years that current rates of species extinctions are exceptionally high,” said Stuart Pimm, one of the co-authors and president of the nonprofit organization SavingSpecies. “This new study comes up with a better estimate of the normal background rate—how fast species would go extinct were it not for human actions. It’s lower than we thought, meaning that the current extinction crisis is much worse by comparison.”
Here’s another way of thinking about it. Overall species’ diversity grows exponentially richer over time, as branches of news species diverge. The authors liken this to a person’s bank account. Think of your income as the number of new species, while your spending is those that go extinct. Every month when you get paid, your net worth jumps for a while, before spending whittles it down again. If your spending is constant, that monthly spike will rise over time as your salary increases—just as the number of new species should also rise over time. But the authors saw no such increase, implying that extinction is happening far too fast for the pace of new species creation to keep up.
Take birds, for instance. There are 10,000 species of birds, as Pimm explains in a blogpost. At nature’s rate of one extinction per 10 million species, the disappearance of a single bird species should therefore be a once-in-a-millennium event. However, since the year 1500, at least 140 birds have disappeared—including 13 species we only identified after they went extinct.

See original story.

Trapping Facts & Statistics

Total Trapping Licenses sold in the U.S. in 1997-98: 130,400

Top Five Species Trapped in the U.S. (1997-98) *

Raccoon … ~2,097,000
Muskrat … ~1,993,000
Nutria … ~398,000
Beaver … ~295,000
Opossum … ~234,000

Select List of Other Species Trapped in the U.S. (1997-98) *

Mink … ~164,000
Coyote … ~159,000
Red Fox … ~139,000
Otter … ~25,500
Gray Wolf … ~1,280

*Figures may include animals killed by means other than trapping due to poor record keeping by agencies and trappers.

Number of animals used to make an average length fur coat:
Badger 20 | Mink (Ranch) 60
Beaver 15 | Otter 14
Bobcat 15 | Rabbit 30
Chinchilla 100 | Raccoon 27
Coyote 16 | Red Fox 18
Ermine 125 | Sable 40
Lynx 11 | Silver Fox 11

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation in Wyoming: Understanding It, Preserving It, and Funding Its Future

Excerpt

In 2013, both the Wyoming Legislature and the public lambasted the
Wyoming Game and Fish Department (Department) for requesting license fee
increases to help fund the agency. They argued that hunters and anglers already
shouldered the bulk of the fiscal responsibility for managing wildlife, and a new fee
increase could discourage some from purchasing licenses. Ultimately, the funding
measure failed, but the debate brought to the forefront the risks and challenges of
relying exclusively on the funding model known as the North American Model of
Wildlife Conservation—an ideology developed over the past several generations
to manage and protect the future of all Wyoming’s wildlife…..Wyoming Law Review NAMWC Who Pays for Wildlife 2014

Authors:  David Willms and Anne Alexander

92% drop in bear conflict: Co-existence works!

There once was a problem in Yosemite National Park. Bears were getting into cars (more than 600 in 1997), turned over garbage bins and generally wreaked havoc. And then something incredible happened: it stopped. The San Jose Mercury News is reporting a 92 percent drop in bear conflict in the park after staff implemented co-existence strategies, primarily focused on changing humane behaviour.

“Reports of bears damaging property or injuring people in the park have fallen 92 percent – from 1,584 in 1998 to 120 last year,” wrote Paul Rogers for the Mercury News. “And the number of bears that park officials have had to kill because they pose safety problems has fallen from about 10 a year in the 1990s to one or two a year now.”

The Mercury News notes a few major steps that led from intentional feeding of bears to increase tourism, to the new, peaceful co-existence:

–Expanded the staff of rangers, biologists and volunteers working on bear issues from two to 20 with a $500,000 grant from Congress;
–Installed bear-proof food lockers for hikers and campers around the park – a total of about 4,000 (over half came from a non-profit);
–Education was ramped up, including forms that visitors must sign stating they understand it is illegal and dangerous to feed bears, videos about bear safety are played on loops at visitor’s centres, and rangers visit campgrounds at night to ensure safety measures are being followed; and,
–Invested in GPS collars for bears identified after causing trouble – the rangers are able to track their activity and employ hazing techniques if they approach campsites.

It wasn’t easy and surely wasn’t cheap. But Yosemite National Park worked with local non-profits, animal welfare groups and every level of government to get what they needed. And today, Yosemite isn’t just a vacation destination for tourists – it’s a paradise for bears, too.

Thank you FurBearerDefenders for this piece.