Interesting reading; perhaps I have some bias due to some other interactions with the place.
Interesting reading; perhaps I have some bias due to some other interactions with the place.
Idelkhntr makes a good point about the predators. Here in southern NV there are thousands of ravens.
Whenever I go hunting for anything I always see ravens everywhere. We all know what an impact these
birds have on baby quail, baby chukars, rabits, and the tree hugger's precious desert tortise.
Yet we can't do anything about the raven problem because they are protected.
Whenever I go hunting for anything I always see ravens everywhere. We all know what an impact these
birds have on baby quail, baby chukars, rabits, and the tree hugger's precious desert tortise.
Yet we can't do anything about the raven problem because they are protected.
Ravens increase as habitat is disturbed. It is, at best, a short term solution.
BTW - I like Desert Tortoise. It tastes like spotted owl.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
mtmiller....our birds here in South Valley County are not thriving, but they are fairly steady in number, and this year have made a marked increase in number....we have had an excellent hatch, and no noticeable west nile die off....
the same thing south of Terry on the Powder River, excellent hatch.....however for the last 10-12 years I have been hunting that country birds have been steady to declining....but this year, marked increase in number.....
the same thing south of Terry on the Powder River, excellent hatch.....however for the last 10-12 years I have been hunting that country birds have been steady to declining....but this year, marked increase in number.....
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
"Fairly steady" is not the number I have been told for any part of Valley. I am interested in the increase male counts you are referring to in 2014 as well.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
Where did I ever refer to "male counts"??? Never. The number of young is up exponentially, saw 3 flocks today....3 hens and about 24 young ones.....and I was not out in the core sagie habitat today.
Maybe you should talk w/ the Glasgow Biologist(I already have) and one thing we both agree on, sage grouse here in Valley Co. have been steady in number the last few years....with a marked increase this year. Even former biologist(now working for BLM) will tell you the same, sage grouse here have been doing well enough(that they do not need listed).
did you check out the link I posted above?
Maybe you should talk w/ the Glasgow Biologist(I already have) and one thing we both agree on, sage grouse here in Valley Co. have been steady in number the last few years....with a marked increase this year. Even former biologist(now working for BLM) will tell you the same, sage grouse here have been doing well enough(that they do not need listed).
did you check out the link I posted above?
Eric, sage-grouse trends are based on male attendance counts on leks. Glad you saw 3 broods today. Not sure that proves "fairly steady", but your science.
As for talking with FWP biologist...I do. Are you referring to Mark, Scott, Drew or Pat? They told you "sage-grouse here have been doing well enough (that they don't need to be listed). I don't disagree with that. I do disagree when you throw out that sage-grouse are "fairly steady in number, and this year have made a marked increase in number". Give me the lek counts for 2014...or '13 or '12 and compare with 10 year average.
To be honest, no, I didn't open your link.
As for talking with FWP biologist...I do. Are you referring to Mark, Scott, Drew or Pat? They told you "sage-grouse here have been doing well enough (that they don't need to be listed). I don't disagree with that. I do disagree when you throw out that sage-grouse are "fairly steady in number, and this year have made a marked increase in number". Give me the lek counts for 2014...or '13 or '12 and compare with 10 year average.
To be honest, no, I didn't open your link.
Brought to you by the same people who denied a link between smoking and lung cancer.
Pretty trustworthy source.
Eric, you seem like a nice guy, but you also seem like you'll fall for anything so long as it reinforces your world view.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
mtmiller...I can get those counts for you, if you need them. In talking w/ Pat whilst he was FWP he always maintained that our numbers were pretty consistent, holding their own w/ no alarming decrease or huge increase in number. My own lying eyes tell me this year numbers of young are way up...which most folks can figure out on there own, the mature birds will not have an increase, not until next year, assuming a good winter survival of this years hatch.
Ben,
you can prove those out there saying so called "hunter/angler" groups taking "green money" are those who said smoking and lung cancer have no connection? if those on that link did, then just type into search engine "green decoys"....I bet this is a right wing conspiracy to discredit those groups....but what if it is a deeper conspiracy? what if they are trying to "discredit and expose" those groups for what they really are.
Ben,
you can prove those out there saying so called "hunter/angler" groups taking "green money" are those who said smoking and lung cancer have no connection? if those on that link did, then just type into search engine "green decoys"....I bet this is a right wing conspiracy to discredit those groups....but what if it is a deeper conspiracy? what if they are trying to "discredit and expose" those groups for what they really are.
Eric, the group who put this hit piece together works for big oil & in the past has been an advocate for big tobacco. It's not that hard to find the information out. If that's the kind of person you think is looking out for the best interests of wildlife & the average American then I have some prime real estate in Nevada where you can run 30 aum per acre.
http://www.bermanexposed.org/center-for-consumer-freedom
If you rely on liars and whores for your information, don't be surprised when it turns out to be false.
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
Ben,
I do not think any hunter/angler group should be taking money from the "greenies". I still have a problem w/ the Defenders of Wildlife footing the bill for transporting buffalo to Ft. Peck.
I do not think any hunter/angler group should be taking money from the "greenies". I still have a problem w/ the Defenders of Wildlife footing the bill for transporting buffalo to Ft. Peck.
jryoung
Well-known member
Stand up and make your voice heard, attend a Rendezvous, stop by the Missoula office.
http://www.backcountryhunters.org/index.php/donate
Eric, sounds good. Please get me the 2014 counts and trends.
How long should I wait on this?
Last edited:
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
waiting on a call from drew right now.
Eric,
Judge those organizations by what they fight for. That's the only measure that matters.
If you are going to judge then be consistent and shun SFW, BGF, SCI, NRA for taking money from big oil (which the other groups do as well) and then fighting against wildlife conservation in tour name.
This is a distraction designed to pull attention away from this:
http://politicalsportsman.blogspot.com/2012/02/absence-makes-heart-grow-fonder.html
Melissa Simpson, the lobbyist for SCI came from the oil industry after they tried to design a strategy to reduce the influence that TRCP was having in restoring balance to land use planning.
Then there's this:
http://grist.org/list/why-big-oil-is-giving-piles-of-money-to-the-nra/
So, in the grand scheme of things, if you're worried about groups getting grants to support work to make sure wildlife & hunters have a voice in public land decisions while giving a pass to other groups who steal public dollars (sfw, bgf) or advocate for positions that would screw over public land hunters, maybe you should recalibrate your ethical meter.
Research helps move discussion of energy impacts on wildlife, scientist says
July 26, 2014 3:00 pm • By CHRISTINE PETERSON Star-Tribune staff writer
(0) Comments
About 15 years ago, gas development started growing in a section of southwest Wyoming called the Pinedale Anticline.
It was high altitude sage-brush country: dry and windy in the summers windy, harsh and cold in the winters. The conditions made for prime mule deer habitat.
The region had another valuable resource in what would turn out to be one of the largest gas reserves in the country. The wells drilled along the western base of the Wind River Mountains ultimately earned the state hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue while creating a bevy of new jobs.
The Jonah and Pinedale fields remain two of the most productive in the country today, even as natural gas plays in the eastern U.S. and Texas expand.
But where the state profited, mule deer struggled.
In 12 years, the numbers of deer wintering on the Anticline dropped 42 percent, according to Hall Sawyer, a researcher for Western EcoSystems Technology Inc., who started studying the deer herds in 1998 with the University of Wyoming.
The deer migrate from their winter range through four different mountain ranges, distributing throughout the western half of the state, he said.
Industry, land management and wildlife officials all point to varying reasons for the decline, from harsh winters to highway deaths to energy development. Many agree it’s a combination of multiple factors.
Consistent research has helped remove some of the unknowns, said Sawyer. And it’s research paid for largely by companies involved in the work.
“When we started that work 15 years ago it was questionable if deer avoided well pads,” Sawyer said. “No one really knew. We’ve clearly shown they do… Now the question is to what degree does that effect the number of deer?”
Studying impacts of energy development on wildlife isn’t necessarily a new thing. Research on how deer and pronghorn respond to coal mine reclamation dates to the 1980s. But application of the research has been more recent, said Scott Gamo, a staff terrestrial biologist for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. He credits the increase in awareness with a potential listing of sage grouse on the endangered species list, something that could dramatically change industry across the state.
In recent years, some companies have agreed to, and implemented, changes to help mule deer in the Pinedale Anticline area. One is using a liquid gathering system to pipe liquid byproducts away instead of using tankers, which decreases disturbances in the area. Directional drilling has reduced activity on the surface, Sawyer said.
While the Pinedale region is Wyoming’s most striking example of energy development intersecting with wildlife, it’s not the only one.
Below are a handful of other sources of controversy in Wyoming’s recent history where wildlife and energy have collided.
http://trib.com/business/energy/res...cle_7836749e-e4f5-5d82-ac29-ae02cbadac84.html
July 26, 2014 3:00 pm • By CHRISTINE PETERSON Star-Tribune staff writer
(0) Comments
About 15 years ago, gas development started growing in a section of southwest Wyoming called the Pinedale Anticline.
It was high altitude sage-brush country: dry and windy in the summers windy, harsh and cold in the winters. The conditions made for prime mule deer habitat.
The region had another valuable resource in what would turn out to be one of the largest gas reserves in the country. The wells drilled along the western base of the Wind River Mountains ultimately earned the state hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue while creating a bevy of new jobs.
The Jonah and Pinedale fields remain two of the most productive in the country today, even as natural gas plays in the eastern U.S. and Texas expand.
But where the state profited, mule deer struggled.
In 12 years, the numbers of deer wintering on the Anticline dropped 42 percent, according to Hall Sawyer, a researcher for Western EcoSystems Technology Inc., who started studying the deer herds in 1998 with the University of Wyoming.
The deer migrate from their winter range through four different mountain ranges, distributing throughout the western half of the state, he said.
Industry, land management and wildlife officials all point to varying reasons for the decline, from harsh winters to highway deaths to energy development. Many agree it’s a combination of multiple factors.
Consistent research has helped remove some of the unknowns, said Sawyer. And it’s research paid for largely by companies involved in the work.
“When we started that work 15 years ago it was questionable if deer avoided well pads,” Sawyer said. “No one really knew. We’ve clearly shown they do… Now the question is to what degree does that effect the number of deer?”
Studying impacts of energy development on wildlife isn’t necessarily a new thing. Research on how deer and pronghorn respond to coal mine reclamation dates to the 1980s. But application of the research has been more recent, said Scott Gamo, a staff terrestrial biologist for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. He credits the increase in awareness with a potential listing of sage grouse on the endangered species list, something that could dramatically change industry across the state.
In recent years, some companies have agreed to, and implemented, changes to help mule deer in the Pinedale Anticline area. One is using a liquid gathering system to pipe liquid byproducts away instead of using tankers, which decreases disturbances in the area. Directional drilling has reduced activity on the surface, Sawyer said.
While the Pinedale region is Wyoming’s most striking example of energy development intersecting with wildlife, it’s not the only one.
Below are a handful of other sources of controversy in Wyoming’s recent history where wildlife and energy have collided.
http://trib.com/business/energy/res...cle_7836749e-e4f5-5d82-ac29-ae02cbadac84.html
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,885
Ben, my ethical meter is working just fine. Thanks for thinking of me though.
The biggest impact on wildlife that I have seen by O&G production here in the east is the number of people poaching and hunting. The wells seem to not bother the deer nearly as much as does a .300 magnum.
The biggest impact on wildlife that I have seen by O&G production here in the east is the number of people poaching and hunting. The wells seem to not bother the deer nearly as much as does a .300 magnum.
