Current Issues, News, and Actions to Take

[NAU Wildlife Society Admin]

There are many important issues out there surrounding wildlife, from the Endangered Species Act to private property owner rights, from new popualtions studies to new managemt tecniques, from hunter rights to animal rights and everything inbetween.....
If we can cross boundaries and assumptions and finally sit down and talk openly with each other, amazing things could potentially happen to benifit ourselves and especially wildlife. So please start a new thread her, or join an exisitng one if you have any news, debates or ideas about the plight and victories of wildlife and those of us who work for them.

[Whiskey Jack]

Probably one of the main things going on regionally right now in regards to wildlife managment is the decision to kill 4 or more mountain lions in Sabino Canyon down by Tucson. The rational behind this revolves around public safety issues and more frequent sightings, but unfortunetly I think that most of it revolves around what took place in California by the one lion when it sadly killed someone and mauled someone else.
To me there are a couple of things that I immeadiatly think about when faced with these decisions. First of all there are no gray areas in regards to predators and views on them tend to be pretty extreme. So many myths and misunderstandings surround them while their role in the ecosystems goes unnoticed, and only a few of the graphic encounters between humans and predators shape the opinions of the majority.
The other thing I think about is the wild. We leave our world and enter the wild and the rules change. Though every predator I have ever encountered has been completly frightened of me and humans in general, there still exists a remote possibility that a tragedy will happen. Clearly the majority of the time nothing happens thankfully, but we jump to conclusions and choose to erradicate before considering other options such as relocation or an increase in public safety education.
What do you guys think? Have you ever had a predator encounter? Do you think predators should be managed this way or is there a better way?

__________________

If you'd like to make comments about this one way or the other and help shape this decison and similar ones in the future you can contact Gov. Napolitano, 602.542.4331, Sen. McCain, 520.670.6334, Rep. Kolbe, 520.881.3558 and Rep. Grijalva, 520.622.6788. And for more info contact the U.S. Forest Service and Arizona Game and Fish Dept.

[Whiskey Jack]

The governer, who was against this hunt (as was the majority of the public opinion it seems) brought up an interesting point though, she asked who Game and Fish answers to? The majorty of the people have expressed their opinion, yet nothing (that I have seen) was done to acknowledge it. (*edit: I just read that they have suspended the decsion for 5 more days, so it looks like there is an acknowledgment )
Times are changing, their was once a time when folks would not have cared if a predator hunt was taking place, especially if the remote chance that someone could get hurt existed, yet now there is a movement to keep the wild wild, instead of tame it or shape it to our liking. If times change, shouldn't agenicies and policies change too?

In defense of many of the people who work for agencies like Game and Fish, USDA or Fish and Wildlife, there are MANY progressive and innovative programs out there that exist to manage wildlife, and many wonderful people who are challanging traditional agency roles. I am not sure who is in charge of this particular decision with the Mountain Lions, but the lack of listening to voices against this hunt and using that to finalize a plan is something I do not understand.
Anyone care to enlighten me?

[Whiskey Jack]

I cleaned up the mess of postings that I made above because I was recieving information on all sides and some of it was wrong.
So here is something I recieved from Game and Fish if youy all are interested. (I had to break it up into 2 parts because it was so long.

__________________________

Questions and answers about Sabino Canyon lions

You have no doubt read media reports related to plans by the Arizona Game and Fish Department to capture and transport some dangerous mountain lions out of Sabino Canyon in Tucson, Ariz., and place them in a rehabilitation facility.

As a subscriber to the department's newsletters, we thought you would be interested in receiving information and answers to some of the questions being asked about the operation.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department's decision to remove the mountain lions was based on one overriding factor: public safety.

You'll find information below, as well as on the department's Web site, azgfd.com.

Why did the Game and Fish Department decide to airlift the lions when at first it said that non-lethal removal was not practical?
The department's chief concern is public safety and our goal was, and is, to get the threatening lions out of the area as quickly as possible. Conducting the airlift is NOT the best choice: it's risky to both human beings and lions, and it's costly and difficult. The department opted for the airlift out of respect for legislators and those on the governor's staff who asked the agency to find another option, and as a way to address public concerns about the lions. We are trying to accommodate these desires while still discharging our public safety responsibilities.

The debate over whether there was or was not adequate public input should occur-but now is not the time. Now is the time to act in the interest of public safety.

Our goal is to remove dangerous predators from Sabino Canyon, as quickly as possible, so that the risk to the public will decrease and so that residents and businesses near the canyon can resume normal activities.

The department has received numerous reports of lion behavior in Sabino Canyon that is not normal behavior for these animals.

The Governor's Office says it has seen no evidence of stalking behavior. How do you respond?
Stalking behavior has been reported in Sabino Canyon, and the experience of lion experts in our agency and other state wildlife agencies documents that certain behaviors that have been observed in the Sabino Canyon mountain lions are associated with a high likelihood of attacks on humans. These behaviors include lions that are unyielding to humans at distances of fewer than 50 yards, daylight active lions, and, recently, a mountain lion that was daylight active in proximity to a schoolyard.

What has the agency done to educate the public as a prevention measure? What has the department done to limit wildlife feeding, especially in mountain lion habitat areas?
The Arizona Game and Fish Department has delivered, and continues to deliver, educational materials and programs to residents statewide. While many people enjoy observing wildlife, providing food for many species creates an imbalance between predator and prey. In the case of Sabino Canyon, some local residents fed javelina, deer and rabbits; the higher-than-normal population of these animals provides a rich environment for cougars, drawing them closer to people and residences.

The department has been working with municipalities and counties statewide to craft laws designed to discourage the feeding of wildlife a crime. In the past year, we have held talks with Coconino County and the city of Scottsdale. In February 2003, the department sent a letter to the city of Tucson and to Pima County, requesting a cooperative effort to craft wildlife feeding ordinances.

As the boundaries between people and wildlife continue to become blurred through urban expansion, conflicts between humans and wildlife will increase. It is the belief of the Game and Fish Department that laws prohibiting wildlife feeding will provide additional tools for working with citizens to protect wildlife.

What actions have been taken to educate the public about mountain lions and how to avoid interactions? From bears to mountain lions, the Arizona Game and Fish Department has many educational programs. This May, Gov. Napolitano declared Bear Aware Month at the request of the department. For mountain lions, the department has tips posted on the web-azgfd.com-and has printed materials which it has made available by mail, in person and through distribution at public events and meetings statewide.

As a result of concerns expressed by the governor, the department will host a workshop this spring to discuss strategies for minimizing future human-wildlife conflicts.

What is the Game and Fish Department doing to find out better information about these animals, such as statewide census and demographic information?

Arizona Game and Fish biologists and researchers are working to obtain more detailed information on many wildlife species, including predators such as lions. Current information indicates that mountain lions occupy about 62,000 square miles of habitat across the state with a population of more than 2,500.

For mountain lions, the Arizona Game and Fish Department's long-range strategic plan-Wildlife 2006-reflects a commitment to collecting data on the lions to index population trends and characteristics while working to increase public awareness of the animals.

Continued in next post......

[Whiskey Jack]

Game and Fish Mountain Lion Statement Part II:

Does Game and Fish use criteria to identify problem wildlife?
In a detailed action plan approved by the Arizona Game and Fish Department in 2002 for managing interaction between mountain lions and humans, the department's system of identifying and categorizing issues with mountain lions was established. Reports are broken into four categories:

Sighting: a visual observation of a lion or a report of lion tracks or other sign.

Encounter: an unexpected direct, neutral meeting between a human and a lion without incident.

Incident: an interaction between a human and a lion in which the human must take an action to make the lion back down, or the lion exhibits aggressive or abnormal behavior such as daylight activity, unusual interest in humans or failure to yield.

Attack: when a human is chased, suffers bodily injury or is killed by a mountain lion.

Department responses are based on the number of reports, severity and other factors which might have contributed to the interaction. The department's policy is to direct all efforts at the individual lion deemed to be dangerous or a potential threat to public safety. Mountain lions will be destroyed "if they attack a human or when they are judged to be a substantial threat to public safety." In the case of the lions in Sabino Canyon, information collected by field staff indicates that as few as two and as many as four cougars have demonstrated abnormal behavior and pose a serious threat to public safety.

What actions have been taken since the initial sighting in May 2003 to limit or reduce the perceived threat from the lions?
The department has actively tried to track the Sabino Canyon lions sinceMay. Lions are difficult to track and the number of visitors to Sabino Canyon severely complicated efforts to locate them. Escalating sightings and reports of abnormal behavior prompted the U.S. Forest Service to close the canyon, which will make tracking easier for the department.

Since the first documented sightings in mid-May 2003, department officers have worked with the U.S. Forest Service, which manages Sabino Canyon, and Pima County authorities to educate visitors and residents near the canyon about the potential threat from mountain lions and how that threat can be reduced. Signs in the recreation area warn hikers of the presence of lions and education efforts focused on wildlife feeding have been targeted toward residents.

If the last documented mountain lion report was Feb. 15, why did the Arizona Game and Fish Department and the U.S. Forest Service wait until early March to take action?
It is incorrect that the "last . report was Feb.15." The Feb. 15 end date was contained in a document supplied by the U.S. Forest Service, not the Arizona Game and Fish Department; the department has documented sightings beyond that date. Because the governor had requested that the department provide her with the U.S. Forest Service document, that is what she was provided. She was also provided with additional sighting data from the department.

The Arizona Game and Fish Department has provided the governor's staff, state lawmakers and the public with a chronology of the sightings it has logged, and there have been more than 40 since July. All the sightings contained in the Game and Fish Department chronology are considered credible sightings. Sightings that the department deemed not credible were not included on the list.

The last credible sighting of a mountain lion was March 18 outside EspereroCanyon Middle School.

Efforts to remove the lions from Sabino Canyon began well before March and have been ongoing for months. Mountain lions are elusive predators and trackers encountered difficulty in locating them. The decision to close the canyon was made by the U.S. Forest Service.

What alternatives did Game and Fish consider? Why were the other alternatives abandoned?
Mountain lion experts examined a list of possible actions to address the problem lions in the canyon. Unfortunately, strategies which are appropriate with other wildlife, such as relocation or human reconditioning, have not proven to be successful with mountain lions. Research indicates that adult mountain lions do not thrive in captivity, and there are few opportunities for rehabilitation placements. In this case, a suitable rehabilitation facility was identified this week with the assistance of animal-protection organizations in Arizona.

Nonetheless, the plan to locate, tranquillize and airlift out of the canyon remains a difficult, costly and dangerous operation for both the lions and Department staff. Because of the opportunity to place these lions in a rehabilitation center, however, Department staff and the Game and Fish Commission supported efforts to relocate the lions. Our first priority is reduce the risk to public safety.


Why didn't the Game and Fish Department assemble a team of mountain lion experts to consider the appropriate action relative to these lions?
The Arizona Game and Fish Department has biologists who specialize in mountain lions, and operates under a wildlife management best practices approach. Our protocols and actions are consistent with established protocols for management of these animals and with policies of wildlife management agencies throughout the U.S.

Additionally, the Arizona Game and Fish Department regularly shares and receives data, information and counsel on mountain lions and other species with wildlife management agencies through the U.S., North America and the world. The Arizona Game and Fish Department is a member of both the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

How does Game and Fish know which of the lions are actually guilty of abnormal or aggressive behavior?
The department's mountain lion management plan dictates that problem lion management efforts will be directed at individual lions deemed dangerous or posing a potential threat to public safety. Game and Fish Department field officers believe that as many as four lions are exhibiting abnormal behavior. As each lion is removed, the threat to public safety will decrease as additional territory becomes available for those remaining; lions which are most active will be located first.
END

__________________________

I think its great that the department is trying to answer some of these tough questions because a lot of other agencies would simply ignore them. And I also admire them for always acting in regards to public safety. But as I said before, times are changing and we all have to adjust no matter what.
If airlifting and other non-lethal measures are too expensive but they are what the public wants then there should be a way for the people to vote on having the state fund more of these measures. Policy isn't my forte though, so perhaps I am wrong.

[Whiskey Jack]

Well, there is damn good news out there in the wildlife world right now. Just in case you didn't hear yet, there are 2 new sets of parents in town. The California Condors have a baby at the Grand Canyon and at the Vermillion Cliffs. This is a great sign of not only the worthwhileness of Captive Breeding and Reintroduction Programs, but also that the Condors are one more step closer to stabilizing their population.
I am going to smoke a cigar for the new babies. Smoke em if you got em!

[eaglewoman]

OH YA BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MMMMMmmmmmmmMMMMMmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's good to hear my friend!

[shapeshifter]

Hi, everyone,
I recently saw a sad news. The recovery of Grand Canyon endangered fish was a "failure". I don't know why they have to quote failure, but it sounds like it's hopeless, literally... grieving...

[Whiskey Jack]

Today I met a guy working for the Center of Biological Diversity who was trying to get folks to send letters to the governor about the Mexican Wold Project. Just thought I'd pass along some of the info for those interested.
As you all probably know the Mexican Wolf population is still in a state of limbo. There are a lot of good sighns, but so many are still dying by getting shot and ran over by cars that its hard to see the good when the bad is so startling and frequent. Some folks (including me) feel that to help its population we might need to rethink a couple of ideas, like getting rid of the Boundary Rule, which basically says that any Wolf found outside of this arbitrary boundary must be captured and brought back to the Wolf Recovery areas only. This leads to not only the Wolf becoming more desensitized to humans due to frequent handling, but also, when the Wolf tries to return to the spot it originally was before it got captured again, the mortaility risks sky rocket because it will cover a long distance to get back there quickly. Recently an entire pack was captured and relocated and when they tried to get back 1 got shot and 3 were hit by cars (don't quote me on that, but I believe those are fairly accurate figures.). It's hard to be a wild animal and be subjegated to these restrictions and constant recapturing, in contrast its hard to be a rancher and be subjegated to wolves having no boundaries.
There is also another option on the table of adding more Mexican Wolf Recovery Areas in Arizona and New Mexico, which would increase its range but they would still be confined to these boundaries. Either way, its apparent something needs to take place to aid the populations and recovery goals.
So if you's like to write a letter to Janet Napolitano, for or against these ideas, her address is:

The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Governor of Arizona
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007

Catch you all on Saturday! Crow

[Kitfox]

Yeah, I talked to that guy too. It seems like a pretty good cause to me. For those of you who are lazy like me and don't want to get out a pen, paper, and write a letter. You can also email the good Govenor. To email her go to this website:

www.governor.state.az.us/global/contact.htm

[Stinger]

Hey y'all,
Yeah I met him today too, if I remember correctly his name is Chris and he is actually part of our club! I was speaking with him this morning and mentioned that I was an "officer" for the Society and he said he would like to come talk to us sometime, so hopefully he and I can coordinate that!

[Whiskey Jack]

LAST RARE SEA TURTLE DIES IN NORTHERN MEXICO

Just some quick bad news (I swear I'll put good news on here one day!!!! )
The lone survivor of 52 Olive Ridley sea turtle eggs found near Guaymas, Mexico died this week despite efforts by fishermen, conservationists, and the Mexican government to protect it. The endangered Olive Ridley sea turtle rarely nests as far north as the northern Gulf of California, so the discovery of 52 eggs in August set off an around-the-clock effort to protect them from predators and human disturbance. Though an immediate loss for the species, the effort reaffirmed the importance of sea turtle preservation in Mexico.

[Kitfox]

That's so sad. =( Thanks for letting us know about that. What efforts are being provided to ensure the survival of the remainder of the species? I know it's an important issue. Isn't every species of sea turtle endangered?

[Whiskey Jack]

Sorry I it took so long to get back to you man......
The main reason for its declie is because on the Mexican Pacific Coast of the states of Jalisco, Michoacan, Guerrero and Oaxaca, there were large scale exploitation for meat, eggs and leather, thus reducing the once large populations to dangerously low levels. In June of 1990, Mexico declared total protection for this species as well as the other species of sea turtles inhabiting Mexican waters (which has been the most effective solution to its survival), but there is still a trade on the black market. Mexico has recently opened the Mexican Turtle Center at Mazunte, Oaxaca, near the site of a former turtle slaughter house. Hopefully, some of the same individuals who formerly killed turtles will be able to earn a living by protecting them and educating visitors about them. The bad news is that despite Mexican initiatives to protect the olive ridley, this same population is still exploited in the black market in Mexico and harvested as it feeds along the Pacific coasts of Nicaragua and Ecuador.
And for the most part, yes, all sea turtles are at least threatend, but because it involves the sea (international waters and all the damn different laws, or lack thereof, associated with each area) only a few populations of each species might be classified as endangered. The open water is defenitly one of the most confusing aspects to deal with in regards to protecting a species.

[Kitfox]

Thanks! You're always overflowing with information. ^_^ That's too bad about the turtles, they've always been one of my favorite sea critters. I wish people would just learn to respect animals - and I think that's the main reason they don't, especially in third world countries. That is, they haven't learned about animals, or been exposed to animals as children and learned to love them.

Personally I think there should be less organizations trying to pass laws and things to force people to care for animals, and more organiations trying to teach people about animals so that they'll eventually want to protect them. I think that would be more productive in the long run, cause a government and its laws are only as good as the people within it.