Predators, Not Drought, Impact Numbers?

[Nemont]

I thought most would like to offer up an opinion on a study such as this. Not saying I support it's conclusions just interesting.
To me a 602 acre enclosure doesn't seem big enough to coduct such a study but I am no biologist.

Predators, Not Drought, Impact Fawns
Email Sent By Don Peay on April 19th, 2004

The study below details an Arizona Game and Fish study. In this past year, one of the worst droughts in 1,000 years, there were 100 fawns per 100 does inside a predator proof enclosure. Outside, in the real world, the statewide average was 18 fawns per 100 does.

AZ Game and Fish admits perhaps some of their theories about drought and predators are wrong. Well, sportsmen have known that for the past 25 years

Compete Report

 

[Ten Bears]

Interesting read.

 

[1_pointer]

Maybe Mr. Peay is wanting more justification for spending $200K of Utah Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife monies on predator control.

I'd have to say 602ac and only 15 animals captured would have me nervous about extrapolating to too big of an area.

 

[Calif. Hunter]

The article stated that the study was not completed, or at least that was what I got from it. But a scientific study would require the elimination of all but one variable, would it not? It would "seem" as though they have only eliminated predation - but is migration a factor in fawn mortality or fetal survival?

I dunno - my brother says I am just a redneck bubba....

[ 04-20-2004, 16:24: Message edited by: Calif. Hunter ]

 

[ELKCHSR]

Good find, thanks for the info, will keep it in the back burner for further reference...

 

[BuzzH]

Nemont, heres another angle on this issue:

BACKGROUND:

After a few years of declining fawn survival, the Fish and Wildlife
wanted to institute coyote control on the refuge to protect antelope fawns
that were being killed by coyotes. Lawsuits from environmentalists delayed
coyote control. Today the highest fawn survival ever recorded have been
documented--all without coyote control--demonstrating how a few years data
can't be used to dictate wildlife policies. All wildlife numbers vary from
year to year--but most studies are at most a few years long.


Subject: [RN] FWD: Hart Mt. Pronghorn fawns Press Release


> Subject:
> Hart Mt. Pronghorn fawns Press Release
> Date:
> Mon, 30 Jul 2001 11:49:41 -0700 (PDT)
> From:
> Joy Belsky <[email protected]>
> To:
> [email protected]
>
> For immediate release, July 26, 2001:
> Joy Belsky, Oregon Natural Desert Association, Portland, 503-228-9720
> Brooks Fahy, Predator Defense Institute, Eugene, OR, 541-937-4261
>
> 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
>
> Ph: 503/228-9720 (503 is part of local number and must be dialed)
> Fax: 503/228-9720 (please call first)
> [email protected]
> www.onda.org

 

[Wapiti Slayer]

Coyote removal benefits antelope





CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) -- The population of pronghorn antelope increases when coyotes are removed, according to preliminary results from a study to see why antelope were not recovering quickly from harsh winters.

The study was done over a four-year period on a herd of antelope in Carbon County where most coyotes had been removed. The study was conducted by a University of Wyoming student at the request of the Wyoming Animal Damage Management Board.

Officials caution that the data is not necessarily conclusive because of the small size of the herd studied.

Project coordinator Rod Merrill of Rawlins said the short-term removal of coyotes in the targeted areas was proposed after several harsh winters led to sluggish population growth among antelope.

He said the study shows that coyote predation was the major factor limiting the rebound of antelope populations in the larger Baggs Antelope Herd Unit.

Besides antelope, landowners in one study area reported increases in the number of sage grouse, mule deer and sand hill cranes.

AP-WS-03-29-04 1112EST

E-MAIL THIS STORY

 

[BuzzH]

Sure makes you wonder what study to believe?

 

[Wapiti Slayer]

Originally posted by BuzzH:
Sure makes you wonder what study to believe?

Ithaca will lead us to the truth!

 

[Ithaca 37]

Here's what it boils down to: Remove predators or give the fawns better cover to hide in. Where the hell can a fawn hide if the habitat is overgrazed and a coyote can spot them a mile away? Droughts have about the same effect on the cover as overgrazing. Plus, droughts affect the nutritional benefit of the cover.

In the long run, it's a lot easier to remove the cattle and improve the habitat than try to control the coyote population and the weather. I'm not talking about just these two studies. There have been plenty of studies done in many areas. They all reach the same conclusion. Better cover=better fawn survival. How ya gonna get better cover? Hope for rain and keep the cows out. Predator control sounds like an easy fix, but it's not.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Well said Ithaca. I also have to wonder how poaching affects antelope in some areas, especially when they're already dealing with the drought, overgrazing by cattle, and lots of coyotes. Seems I'm always hearing how ranchers encourage hunters to shoot as many antelope as they can, whether it's season or not. Apparently, to many ranchers, antelope are nothing but a pest, and they'd like to have them eliminated. I know they're not all like that, but I've heard it enough to make me think ranchers and their ranch hands very likely shoot antelope year round. It could be that coyotes are taking the blame while the real problem is people.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Poachers are predators...

 

[ELKCHSR]

This is all a lot of good info, thanks guy's...

Good reading on both sides of the fence...

 

[Nemont]

I don't know which kills more predators or drought but I do know what winter does to them.



PICS

Nemont