He nailed it, I think we struggled here at home with out the predator problems due to the revenue influence upon ODF&W.
Good read, seems like whats taking place today in game management.We’re continuing to see an alarming trend in Western wildlife management. I am calling it the “Predator Death Spiral.” The underlying cause of this phenomina is when a wildlife agency attempts to hide or “pad” their big game population estimates when over predation begins to take hold. This in turn creates a downward spiral that cannot easily be avoided, and is often not even noticed until the state hits both a financial and PR rock bottom. Idaho was the first state to hit the wall with the “Spiral” followed by Montana and now Wyoming has begun to slip into the Spiral’s grip. The wolf situation has caused these three Western states to slide down the jagged slope of diminishing herds, shrinking revenues and bad PR among their customers and financial lifeline…out-of-state hunters.
He nailed it, I think we struggled here at home with out the predator problems due to the revenue influence upon ODF&W.
Mr. FerrisI would read these two pieces in conjunction with the above:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12044/abstract
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1538&context=icwdm_usdanwrc
The predation equation is a complicated one and not something that lends itself to anecdotal observations or cursory analyses.
I think the primer is important because it reviews for folks what is known about what drives populations up and what knocks them down. There are a lot of factors at work and hunters need to be vigilant and aware because the results of all of them look the same and they can also be the result of multiple factors. Clearly the general thinking here is that predators are the single factor and that is simply not true.Mr. Ferris
I read the second reference, but only the summary of the first one. The complete text of first article is not viewable without jumping through some hoops. But in paragraph 2 of the first article's summary, a statement was made that cougars are "unrelated" to the baseline mortality of the prey species. I'd like to know their foundation for making that statement.
The second article seemed like more of a generalized primer on methods for evaluating predator-prey relationships. While informative, their thrust was directed at the scientific perspectives. But where do us humans fall into broad scheme when making predator/prey management decisions? Do we come in last?
Thank you sir
T
For me it's as simple as this;
I'm not ashamed that I'm the top predator in the food chain.
That's great that the experience is better for you knowing that lots of wolves and cougars are somewhere in the woods around you, but wolves and cougars don't pay the DFW's bills. They create them, along with reducing the amount of sellable product (elk tags, deer tags, moose tags, etc.) the DFW's do have.
While I certainly have a significant appreciation for scientific data, I'm also a strong believer in two points;
1.) There is no such thing as unbiased science
2.) More often than not the simplest answer is the right answer.
I've hunted at least one of ID-MT-WY every year for over 20 years(since before re-introduction), and most years it was two of those states. 95% of those hunts were near ground zero or within 50 miles of it. I just don't need a study to tell me what my eyes have seen and what my friends that live there have witnessed.
Anyone with a little common sense can figure out why there's so much information floating around about why it's not the wolves fault...
The perplexing thing about this whole deal is how the DFW's couldn't see this would eventually cut their own funding throat? Then again, this is America in the 21st century. The agencies want what they want, and they're gonna get it right now, regardless of what it costs. Besides, someone else will pay for it, right?
More often than not the simplest answer...
Yeah, says me. This is a forum where people state their opinions, and that's mine.You left the track on number 2, says who you?
Sometimes true. Sometimes complex problems aren't as complex as people like you make them out to be.Seldom if ever, do complex problems have simple answers that fit on a bumper sticker.
Mr. Ferris:................
The analysis in the first article involved looking at 2746 adult female elk in 45 populations spread across the West under a variety of weather, predator and harvest conditions. From looking at this many female elk under these varying conditions they were able to tease out the relative impacts of the factors...................
Here is a link to the first article Bob posted.Mr. Ferris:
Thank you for the additional detail on the elk mortality article. While I was unable to read the actual article (partly my fault), their conclusion about cougar seems, at the least, illogical.
T
What a bunch of B.S. So you were looking at a cat, and shot at a deer? B.S. Your a bino hunter. Your a "hunter" that I would bet hasn't pulled the trigger on so much as a sage rat in 10 years. Please don't pretend to be one of us with a concience. Your one of them that's been handed a paycheck justifying the mantra... humans are evil.I think the primer is important because it reviews for folks what is known about what drives populations up and what knocks them down. There are a lot of factors at work and hunters need to be vigilant and aware because the results of all of them look the same and they can also be the result of multiple factors. Clearly the general thinking here is that predators are the single factor and that is simply not true.
The analysis in the first article involved looking at 2746 adult female elk in 45 populations spread across the West under a variety of weather, predator and harvest conditions. From looking at this many female elk under these varying conditions they were able to tease out the relative impacts of the factors.
As to who has priority on these animals? That is a complicated question and probably a series of questions. For me it is simple, I am a hunter who believes that the hunting experience is enhanced by the presence of a multitude of species not just the species that I may be targeting. I suspect there are even times that I might miss a shot because I was so engrossed in watching some other critter carry on their business. Allowing for the presence of the full-spectrum of native wildlife helps that experience happen. Is the cost of that significant? The answer to that is: No.
Here is a link to the first article Bob posted.
http://www.umt.edu/mcwru/personnel/MikeMitchell/PDF Mitchell/JAPPLE_Brodie_ElkSurvival_2013.pdf
"Predator death spiral" sounds pretty hysterical to me. The deer, elk, and predators managed to work it out for millions of years before humans came along. If folks put half the effort into conserving habitat from over-grazing by livestock, oil and gas development, road building, etc... that they put into whining about critters they see as competition to filling a tag, our herds would be in a heck of a lot better shape. :twocents: