Do hunter's cause many of the problems debated here?

[1_pointer]

I've been thinking about this for a bit and wondered what the opinions here were. We complain about (insert a predator here) eating wildlife or that (insert a game animal here) populations are too high. Do we bring these things on ourselves by being too short-sighted? Sure, we'd all like to kill a (insert favorite trophy here), but if we call for management of that one animal we often can't/won't see the long term effects it could have. A good, yet old, example is the management of mule deer in Kaibab, Mogollon Rim area in the '30s and '40s. We called for more deer we got more deer but at the expense of predators and forage. A bad winter comes along and the herd is deccimated. Another, the elk herd in Yellowstone was something like 2X over carrying capacity, so the idea of bringing in predators comes about.

So, my question is, do you think hunter's as a segment of society are too often short sighted when comes to the management of game animals that we ignore what the long term consequences are?

 

[Ten Bears]

I think the short sightedness goes even beyond the animals themselves (predator/prey) to include the method of take, and access issues aswell.

 

[danr55]

I think your post brings up one of the arguing points that is popular in Arizona. Frequently when the ranchers start talking about thinning the elk herd or the hunters start whining about the wolf, or I start bitching about black footed ferrots and the reduced prairrie dog population, someone will bring up the idea that that is why we have educated professionals deciding game mangement issues and planning stratagies and not clowns like me or ranchers or hunters.

I believe that too frequently we complain about something and argue a point just to have something to argue about or we argue a point to win without considering the "what if's" of our argument.

So in a very few words, Yes I think we create some of our own debates.

Now, why is everyone so pissy about wolves being brought back?

 

[ELKCHSR]

!!!GREAT POSTS EVERY ONE!!!

 

[Ithaca 37]

Dan, "Now, why is everyone so pissy about wolves being brought back?"

It's a very emotional issue for some!

 

[dgibson]

I don't think it's so much short-sightedness as it is inability to predict and control. Witness my usual example of the deer herds in KY. When my dad was growing up, seeing a deer was a treat; there was no hunting season for a long time in some areas. The herd-expansion project began, and now we're to the point of popping in many areas--including some that were grossly unpopulated before. Perhaps the program was a little TOO successful. If KY biologists had any idea that the deer program would have been so successful so quickly they would have backed off a little. Could be the same with your mule deer: the program exceeded expectations. It's hard to force Mother Nature into a balance. It's also easy to look back now and say "they should have known."

 

[Lostagain]

Another of the problems is we have an USFS/BLM that is full of paid educated experts hired to do the best job they can. But we don't let them b/c of some IT/marvel that wants to whine about the law of 1856 that wasn't followed. 1P-~"70% of budget is for lawsuits"====

Sportsmen are just part of a problem of "want theirs now", there are more in that bunch too.

As for wolves, it took until about 1990 to get them to managable/nonissue numbers and now they have free rein everywhere.

 

[1_pointer]

Dg- Did hunter's ever complain or raise the issue of too many deer until is was a big problem?

Dan- What's your opinion on the bf ferret and pds?

 

[BigHornyRam]

Pointer,

How is it that hunters caused elk populations to get out of hand in Jellystone, when hunters are not allowed to hunt elk in Jellystone? If they don't leave the Park, they are of limits to hunters. A big problem is that hunters and wildlife managers have to spend too much of our time and resources defending hunting from the anti-hunters. I'll spend my time promoting the good aspects of hunting, not fretting over the problems some think hunting creates. You pointy headed folks are way to negative for me.

Paul

 

[dgibson]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Did hunter's ever complain or raise the issue of too many deer until is was a big problem?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The short answer is 'yes.' That's where the need for a crystal ball and/or politics set in. Some saw the directions things were going and started to ask for the brakes. The problems came when it was realized that some areas of the state were beginning to boom, but others were still in the hole. So, they went to the "zone" system, where some counties are evened-out management wise and others are still agressively managed. It's still that way today; we have our "zone 1" areas with does galore, but there are still some counties that are "zone 3" or even "zone 4." They are constantly running that balancing game, trying to reduce herds in the 1's without overdoing it, while trying to increase the population in the 4's without overdoing it.

Then there are the hunters that believe that the biologists don't know what they're doing, and there really aren't an excess of animals in the 1's and they're actually killing the herd all over again. You get into tunnel-vision politics where a guy sees fewer deer (or more) in his favorite spots and incorrectly assumes that to be the condition state-wide.

Hunters are like biologists, car salesmen, and bass fishermen: everyone has an opinion of what's best. The biologists are charged with managing the (insert favorite animal here) while dealing with politics from many fronts, not just hunters. Maybe you are enlightened and can tell what method will produce the perfect results every time, but I think you'll find that the "real deal" is more a game of hit-and-miss best guesses. In mathematics we called it "a series of successive approximations."

 

[1_pointer]

Paul- Where they pushing for lower herd numbers so that winter range outside the park wouldn't get hammered?

DG- I can't predict with 100% certainty as nature has a lot of stochasticity built in. However, I do believe that management should be carried out on a scale smaller than state wide. Was just wondering.

My main reason for bringing this up is that one of the biggest problems regarding management of anything is to opt for short term goals that do not help out long term goals. I feel in many ways hunters are bad about this. We (as a whole) care more about the size and/or number of deer we'll kill/see next year than 20 yrs from now. I believe we need to change that.

 

[dgibson]

I think the key to your problem is to have biologists and managers who do what they know to be best, rather than what the public-at-large wants. I know a thing or two about deer, and some know quite a bit. But they're still not living it like the wildlife biologists are. If they follow their knowledge and not politics, your problem is obviated.

"Stochasticity?" Really.

 

[Ten Bears]

I don't think there aren't any real long term goals, other then having a huntable (for game animals) population that would be reasonable. For recovery populations you might have a projected growth curve, but no concrete method to acheive the long term goals (stochasticity). You'll get there, but the method may be dynamic.

Stochasticity - was that word free, or did they charge you extra for it?

 

[ELKCHSR]

Thanks Ten..
I was wondering what that meant, I was almost ahold of my dictionary to see if it was in there...LOL..

 

[1_pointer]

Now you guys are starting to get my point (which I didn't convey all that clearly)! I think there has to be long term goals for resource management success. Sure there will be random (is that better) things we can't predict or control, but we can set the bounds on the system and let it operate within those bounds. As Ten said, the method/path may be dynamic. I too agree that the resource management should be the arena for the managers/biologists (I need a job!

), but public sentiment will always have to be considered and it should be. I think the key is to think long term and getting ALL interested parties involved in the planning process. Just the view from my classroom/easy chair!

 

[Ten Bears]

Get involved with the state natural resource folks in their planning as a volunteer, I have, and you get a good feel for how the planning process is being constructed, and what the goals are.

 

[1_pointer]

I will! I've been really suprised and disappointed at how much politics weighs on NR management. I'm even looking to get some experience this summer with a fed. agency. I hope by fall I'm not as cynical as my grandpa was!!!!

 

[BigHornyRam]

Pointer,

You have not been to the Gardiner area have you. Outside the park has decent grass even with the drought of late, and the range conditions improve proportionally to the distance away from the Park you go. Between Gardiner and Mammoth its pretty much dirt. I don't know any hunter that didn't think Yellowstone elk were overpopulated. But if they don't come out of the Park, what exactly can hunters do about it? Elk are smart and know where to go when hunting pressure is on. This is a problem when you have non hunting sanctuaries.

I'll take hunting, warts and all, over not hunting. How about you?

Paul

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 02-15-2003 10:59: Message edited by: Paul C ]</font>

 

[BuzzH]

While I've never been the shooter on the late Gardiner hunts, I'd say lack of effort by the "elk hunters" is paramount over elk not leaving the park, as the number one reason for lack of success.

I've helped several people kill elk near Gardiner, and every one of them came home with an elk. Many of those times were when there was very little snow in the low country, and everyone was bitching about the elk being in the park...funny, we found TONS of elk out of the park? Of course we actually got out of the truck and hiked a bit too.

What they should have said is, "we cant find one 200 yards from the Gardiner Airport."

 

[MULE]

Buzz quote: What they should have said is, "we cant find one 200 yards from the Gardiner Airport."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Who are you to say what someone should have said?

Your the boss??

Why should they say what you said they should have said?

Following me?

People say what they wish.

Your opinion is your own.