Pronghorn populations rebound on refuge

[Ithaca 37]

I'd say the best way to settle this debate is to ban cattle in a few more places and see what happens.

There's no doubt that banning the cattle has been a very big factor in bringing back the antelope. No overgrazing=better cover for fawns to hide in.

"With antelope numbers at an all-time high, the refuge once more finds itself at the center of a high-stakes debate, between environmentalists who want to kick cattle off all federal land and ranchers desperate to stop them.

Environmental groups say banning cattle played a critical role in restoring a healthy population, while ranchers dismiss the role of the cattle ban and instead point to the end of a seven-year drought......"

http://www.idahostatesman.com/Features/IdahoOutdoors/story.asp?ID=46475&S=

 

[1_pointer]

Hmmm...seems a bit more complicated than just the removal of cattle. The precip happened to be higher without the cows and the burning that took place is great for the pronghorn also. With the limited info in the article I do not feel I could draw any conclusions other than lower livestock numbers, more precipitation, and burning over-mature sagebrush is good for pronghorns.

 

[Ten Bears]

I agree with 1-P. This statement says a lot.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The two are also aware that the antelope population could plummet as quickly as it shot up. Despite changes in the ecosystem, jackrabbit and sage grouse populations have increased recently, which could foreshadow a rise in coyote numbers.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

[cjcj]

No doubt that cattle [overgrazing] play a major role in the decline of antelope, our herd is the worst i can ever remember but drought, coyote, are as bad or worse of a problem, Ithaca you seem to blame the cattle ranchers for a lot of stuff! do you think they are more of a blame than drought, or coyotes?

 

[Ten Bears]

After reading the article again (I'm often blamed for having poor reading skills here), I would say thatin this case, the drought, and rabbit/grouse populations are the real triggers. The underlying fact is coyotes are the baseline culprit. Time will tell, these short term things have too many variables.

 

[Michaelr]

I can tell you for fact that the single biggest reason for the huge decline of antelope numbers in the area of our families ranch was the Idaho Department Of Fish and Game bowing to pressure from Large farms that were crying that the antelope were eating all their crops.
They raised the number of permits, especially doe fawn and now where there used to be 100 head you will see 10.

 

[Ithaca 37]

cj, Grazing is the biggest problem we can do anything about. You're not going to change the weather, there's always gonna be fires, there's always gonna be coyotes. Remove the cattle and the grass will be taller and more abundant and the fawns will be able to hide better.

 

[GatoMan]

Let the coyote come back to rule its roost again and see what impact that has. Its been long known fact about coyote problems on hart mnt refuge, they use to publish the fact findings from F&G in the regulations...at one time I rember the survival rate of fawns were around 10% from coyote predatation. Wildlife services stepped in and pretty much had full-time guy on the refugee wiping out the coyote pop.....Theres another equation in the picture that was;nt mentioned in the article, always nice how they leave things out to try and glorify something else that they want to target...LOL. Since I moved out of the state I don't get to see what they have published lately on fawn mortality rate in the refuge but I am betting the war on coyote did more impact on the herds growth then taking cows out of there. Lets quit the ADC program and see what type of impact the herds have in another 5 yrs,with all there grass they have now.

 

[Ithaca 37]

"GRAZING MAY HAVE TO GO TO SAVE PRONGHORN: The Arizona Wildlife
Federation is prepared to do whatever it takes to save the Anderson
Mesa pronghorn antelope herd from extinction, "even if that means
restricting cattle operations in ways that reduce or eliminate the
economic viability of grazing" says the AZ Daily Sun 7/17. The herd,
which numbered over a thousand in 1990, has dropped to barely over
200 last year. The group, which has already appealed one grazing plan
for the mesa and is pursuing others to protect the fawn's spring and
summer feeding range, is "prepared to go to court" if the USFS
doesn't the kind of grazing restrictions needed."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RangeTree/message/113#GRAZING%20MAY%20HAVE%20TO%20GO%20TO%20SAVE

 

[1_pointer]

Oregon and AZ are a stretch to assume same causality. Deseret Land and Livestock in UT where my MS research was conducted increased the number of cattle, elk, pronghorn, moose with about a drop from 4000 to 3000 head of mule deer. This was because of range improvements. The cattle nor the wildlife were not the sole focus, but each is used to benefit the other.

FWIW, often the limiting factor with sagegrouse is the availability of forbs early in the spring before chicks can successfully digest sagebrush. Insects associated with herbaceous growth are the main component of their diet.

I will state now, that not having proper knowledge of either area that livestock could be a problem when managed improperly. However, proper livestock management on Anderson Mesa is one of the management strategies that they are attempting to help out the pronghorns.

 

[BuzzH]

Heres another article about Hart Mountain in Oregon....seems to kind of blow Gatomans theory out of the water?

I know coyotes kill antelope fawns, but I dont think they are a major problem. Theres more coyotes running around now in all antelope country, just about everywhere, then there was in the 70's and 80's when coyotes were worth shooting. Despite that, antelope pops. seem good in MT, WY, etc. If the coyote theory was valid, I'd think there would be a drastic decline in MT and WY for sure, as you cant hardly drive 5 miles down a highway without seeing a coyote or two.

I'd guess that having good habitat, which means not mowed down to 2 inch stubble, would provide better cover for fawns, during the first few weeks when they're more vulnerable.

Anyway, heres the article I came across:

> Another Bumper Crop of Pronghorn Fawns on Hart Mountain Refuge
> Third year of high fawn survival proves that coyote control was never
needed
>
> PORTLAND, OR: Pronghorn antelope fawns can be seen in large numbers
> on Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge. The Refuge's mid-July
> aerial count of pronghorns show that fawn survival and total
> pronghorn numbers are at record high levels for the third year in a
> row, in spite of no coyote control. Pronghorn fawn survival is at its
> highest level in 25 years, and total pronghorn numbers are at their
> fourth highest level since systematic counts were started in 1955.
>
> The total number of pronghorn on the refuge in 2001 is 1617; the
> average number of pronghorn on the refuge from 1955 - 1991 was 617.
> Cattle were removed in 1991.
>
> The number of surviving fawns in 2001 was 66 fawns/100 does
> (pronghorn does produce twins each spring); the average number of
> fawns surviving from 1971 - 1991 was 32 fawns/100 does.
>
> The refuge is continuing to delay the release of their new Pronghorn
> Management Plan, which was due in August, 1999. According to refuge
> managers, their Plan was to call for coyote control to protect
> pronghorn fawns. The delay might be due to three years of high
> pronghorn fawn counts on Hart Mt., showing that the killing of
> coyotes is unnecessary to protect fawns.
>
> From 1995-1999, Hart Mountain NAR tried to institute coyote control
> on the refuge, blaming one year of low fawn survivorship on coyote
> predation. Research on the refuge showed that the low number of
> pronghorn fawns in 1995 was related to severe weather conditions and
> poor diet quality. In spite of these results, the refuge continued to
> call for coyote control, which was stopped by lawsuits by ONDA and
> PDI.
>
> "This year's high fawn survival and dramatic increase in pronghorns
> confirm that there was never any reason for the refuge to kill
> coyotes. If refuge managers had carried out their plans to kill
> coyotes, they would now be claiming that the recent high numbers of
> fawns were due to coyote control. By not killing the coyotes, we now
> have important data on natural pronghorn survival" said Dr. Joy
> Belsky, Staff Ecologist, Oregon Natural Desert Association.
>
> Bill Marlett, Executive Director of the Oregon Natural Desert
> Association, added "The high pronghorn numbers show that the removal
> of cattle may have been the best thing that could have happened to
> pronghorn at Hart Mt. Refuge".
>
> Brooks Fahy, Executive Director of the Predator Defense Institute,
> stated "These numbers bear out what we've been saying for the last
> four years. Population fluctuation is natural, and the main
> controlling factors in pronghorn populations, as in all wildlife
> populations, is weather and habitat".
>
>
> Hart Mountain-Sheldon Refuge Complex phone number = 541-947-3315
> Joy Belsky, Ph.D.
> Staff Ecologist
> Oregon Natural Desert Association
> 732 SW 3rd Avenue, Suite 407
> Portland, OR 97204
>

 

[Ten Bears]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Population fluctuation is natural, and the main
> controlling factors in pronghorn populations, as in all wildlife
> populations, is weather and habitat <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Research on the refuge showed that the low number of
> pronghorn fawns in 1995 was related to severe weather conditions and
> poor diet quality. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> refuge managers say that over 150 years the ecosystem changed from high grasses and plush streambeds to ankle-high sagebrush.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Antelope habitat.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> They point to a seven-year drought that ended in 1994 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, since you quoted this I assume you agree: "controlling factors in pronghorn populations, as in all wildlife
> populations, is weather and habitat"

If habitat is a primary controlling factor the next question is; "Is the habitat better if cattle are removed?"

You all know the answer to that, even if you won't admit it.

Remember, 60% of all BLM is in poor condition due to grazing.

 

[cjcj]

Ithaca you are correct [we can`t control the weather] but it IMO is possible to somewhat control coyote populations, bounty, helicopter shooting, thing`s like that , and no doubt that overgrazing is a problem. As a certified " street bioligist" i have seen many areas where on one side of a fence where ther was almost NO grass and vegetation, this is where they were grazing, then on the other side the grass was 12-18 inches [no grazing.

 

[Ithaca 37]

cjcj, I'm glad you're watching both sides of the fences. It's always good to be comparing them.

I've always wondered why some group of ranchers or other coyote haters hasn't offered to pay a bounty on coyotes. Even $10 per coyote would stimulate some hunting. Why do you suppose some of the big talkin' coyote blamers don't start putting their money where their mouth is?

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, we have hashed the grazing issue before. I agree that keys for a stable or healthy population are weather and habitat, but I will not concede that these are the only issues at work here. As I demonstrated before, there are areas were grazing has been used to improve habitat as well.

Good habitat for one species of wildlife does not mean good habitat for species of wildlife.

 

[BuzzH]

Ten bears, I agree, that in some cases grazing can improve habitat...

The trouble is, grazing is much more likely(on public lands at least), to damage wildlife habitat than help it.

Thats readily apparent when 60% of BLM lands are overgrazed.

I dont know of ANY wildlife that benefits from poor habitat thats been over-grazed.

 

[cjcj]

I kill every coyote i have a chance to kill[including with my truck] they are everywhere, they are running around in scottdale eating cat`s and dog`s and have attacked kids, in my opinion you can`t kill enough of them , so Ithaca if you want to label me a coyote hater [your term] than you are 100% right! you make it sound like a bad thing to hate them.

 

[Ithaca 37]

cjcj, I really don't think it's rational to hate coyotes or any other animal. They're just doing whatever is instinctive. A tree farmer who lets me hunt on his farm loves them because they eat the mice that kill his seedlings. He doesn't want any coyotes killed on his land.

I usually don't kill coyotes or anything else I'm not going to eat. In fact, I hope every coyote I let go eats some welfare rancher's calves and lambs every year.

I really enjoy watching coyotes, foxes, bobcats, badgers, mink, weasels and other predators hunt. There's a lot to learn from them. Since I'm a predator myself I really can't object very much to others.

And since so many people claim to hate wolves, I don't think I'll shoot any wolves in Idaho. I'd rather let them live and aggravate the welfare ranchers. I have spent a fair amount of time trying to get one in Canada when I was hunting up there. Couldn't ever find one when I wanted one, though.

 

[BuzzH]

cjcj, your last post explains a lot to me.

For one, you seem desperate, hating an animal? Thats really strange.

Secondly, you arent addressing the real problem by killing all coyotes. My guess is the coyotes in Scottsdale are pretty safe, I doubt you're pinging bullets through subdivisions, and I bet your truck approach isnt that affective.

Finally, you dont know crap about coyotes. Indiscrimate killing is a piss poor approach, and does not work. Ask any of the old goverment hunters how well it worked.

I was fortunate to know and befriend a retired government hunter in White Sulphur Springs Montana. He knew his stuff on killing predators, in fact, he killed somewhere between 7-8 thousand coyotes in his career with the USFWS.

Anyway, he felt the mass killing, like you described above, was the wrong approach. He thought it was better to target the problem predators and take them.

Another thing he said about coyotes in regard to how they respond to hunting, Bud told me, "you shoot one coyote, ten come to his funeral."

He also told me it was an absolute excercise in futility trying to wipe out or control the over-all coyote population, they respond with bigger litters, and learn to adapt to everything from poison, to aerial gunning, to traps, etc.

So, basically your approach, which may make you feel better, may in fact be having no effect or even not helping the situation.

I dont have anything against killing coyotes, but I dont hunt them until the hides are able to be sold. I certainly dont hate them for being coyotes. Quite the opposite in fact, they are extremely wary and tough to hunt. Deer, elk, and antelope arent even half as hard to hunt or half as smart.