Reducing predators has slight effect on deer

[Ithaca 37]

The Associated Press
Edition Date: 07-09-2004
An extensive study of the effects of coyotes and cougars on Idaho's mule deer population shows managing predators has an effect on the deer herds, state Department of Fish and Game officials say.

But their research indicates there are other significant factors in deer survival, including habitat lost to development and range fires, weather and elk herds moving into deer territory.

"We can improve an individual deer's chance of survival, but from a population standpoint, we see relatively small gains," state big-game manager Brad Compton said Thursday.

Fish and Game conducted the six-year study in eight game units stretching from Pocatello to Twin Falls. Nearly 1,700 coyotes and 150 mountain lions were removed in four of the units, while the predators were not disturbed in the other four.

The fawn and adult survival rates improved in units where the predators were removed, but overall, the effect was relatively small.

Idaho's mule deer population stands at about 300,000. While that is considered a healthy number, it is about half of the numbers in the 1960s.

When factors such as drought or hard winters decrease local big-game populations, and other prey like rabbits and mice are scarce, the effect of predators on deer is greater. Human efforts to check coyotes and lions also have a larger impact.

Mule deer populations in some parts of Idaho are not meeting the expectations of Fish and Game or hunters. The department is trying to address the problem. Its effort includes appropriate predator management, habitat management focusing on the farm ground idled under the federal Conservation Reserve program and maintaining winter range and aspen stands.

This spring, the department and sportsmen planted 56,000 shrub seedlings as critical food for wintering deer.

 

[feclnogn]

If you want good deer hunting ya need to let the sheep ranchers in. The best deer hunting in NM as far a quantity goes is in the units that have a bunch of sheep ranchers. One of the ranches my dad guides on has ZERO coyotes and there are deer everywhere. This ranch is not what one would call prime deer habitat. It has about 2 trees over 12,000 acres and is basically rocks and bunch grass with some cactus thrown in. They have a super agressive predator managment program, trapping, poisoning and shooting on site. I have been there several times and never seen a coyote or sign of a coyote.

 

[A-con]

Interesting, I would have thought that many predators to have a greater impact.
Did they remove them by relocation a few miles. or remove them with a bullet ?
Was it A one time removel, or did they maintain low predator numbers ?

 

[Ithaca 37]

I wish the newspaper article had more details and if I can ever find the full report I'll post it.

 

[JoseCuervo]

I am pretty sure that it was "lethal", as there have been programs on the Clearwater aimed at killing more Lions and Bears. In the upper Snake, we had the incident where the guy from Montana (without a license) shot a 'Yote with the F&G Commissoner standing next to him, and had his ticket torn up. It was part of a $300k contract to trap yotes.

 

[Delw]

Ithaca, thats an interesting article.

I know here in AZ the predator population vs deer ,antelope and bighorn sheep is different in different units of the state.
There makes no sence to it but it happens

We have a tremendous amount of lions in certain parts of our state, one of them is within 15 mins of phoenix. While the deer population is great the bighorn sheep are being taken down as fast as the can reproduce.

We have some units where the couse deer and javilina are extreamly thick but yet the lions seems to take the couse deer before the pigs, then there are units where the lions take the pigs before the deer.

As far as coyotes, seems the only thing that gets hurt is the antelope population, Coyotes really hammer on these animals in every unit that has them.

Delw

 

[Tom]

USFWS says you need to get 50-70% of the predators to help the deer much. feclnogn is right one. Sheep ranchers get the predators big time, because the predators get their sheep.

People don't realize the damage done by coyotes alone. Its not much overall, but where there are a bunch of coyotes, its bad. I've seen a pack of coyotes around cattle during calving time. Some distract, while others go in for the food and drag it to cover, then they all eat.

 

[BuzzH]

Delw,

Predators are a funny thing. One of my high school teachers did an extensive study of lions in Idaho with Maurice Honocker. They found some interesting things about how lions select prey. For example, they found one little 80 pound female that fed almost exclusively on elk, even though deer were much more abundant. Why???? Who knows?

One of Montanas unlimited sheep units also had a problem with a cat or two that killed lots of bighorn sheep, enough to force the unit to be closed down to hunting.

I dont buy into the kill all the predators BS. I think if predators are having an impact its because of several other factors. More than likely the vulnerability of ungulutes to predators has more to do with not enough good habitat than too many total predators.

Predator/prey relationships have evolved for thousands of years. Indiscriminate killing of predators is piss poor game management.

 

[Tom]

Buzz, are you for banning trapping of predators then?

The predators get sheep big time, that costs us money. What about livestock management?

Do you want to ban trapping of predators on public land?

Also, one lousy study in Idaho or Montana about one lousy predator is not all there is to predator wildlife management in Idaho, in Montana and especiall not every where else.

Some places might be different? Are they?
In Texas, the state gives people wildlife managment tax breaks, and one of the management practices that counts is predator control.

Simple things like raccoons and skunks eating up quail and turkey eggs. You say ban the trapping of raccoons and skunks?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Originally posted by Tom:
What about livestock management?

I agree with you, we need to start trapping/shooting livestock as a management tool.


I have never seen a study that said you can remove coyotes. I have always thought if you remove the 'yotes, the next year their litters are twice as big. There is nothing more resilient than a coyote.

We would be far better off to work on habitat.

 

[Tom]

You have to keep removing them. Each year.

Its like hunting deer, we shoot some every year.

Its good management.

 

[JoseCuervo]

You are right, you have to keep removing cows every year. How many do you typically shoot in a year?

Do you use feeders or mineral blocks to get them in close?

It seems like good management. Are you allowed to shoot the cows and calves, or just the Bulls and steers?

 

[BuzzH]

Tom,

You need to read my post more closely.

I'm not against trapping or hunting predators at all. I do and have done quite a bit of it.

What I'm against though, is uneducated six-fingered banjo pickers, "killin' all dem predturs".

I have nothing against eliminating or selectively killing predators that are having a real impact on prey. For instance, with the lions killing the sheep in unit 301 in Montana and having enough of an impact to close the unit down. The MTFWP recommended SELECTING the lions that were killing those bighorns and killing them. I have no problem with that. It makes sense. What wouldnt make sense is for MT to make a blanket statement that "lions kill big-game, lets kill all the lions". Dumb idea.

Also, I knew and hunted with a USFWS government hunter, Bud McCauley. He killed nearly 10K coyotes in his career, and he told me this, "you kill one coyote, ten come to his funeral". He stated what elkgunner just said, the more you kill, the more they reproduce. He also explained to me that the best way to deal with coyotes that prey on livestock is to kill the offending coyotes, and not just indiscrimately kill every coyote. Same with bears, lions, etc. The later part of his career, he started selecting the offending predators. He said it was better for a couple reasons: 1. It was more cost effective and less time consuming than trying to kill ALL the predators 2. It left the predators there that werent doing any harm (and in some cases actually helped ranchers--reducing rodent problems, etc.) 3. Kept the over-all predator numbers DOWN, because of competition.

I believed Bud, as anyone that spent 40 years as a Government hunter certainly understands predators better than I do.

I have no problem with people hunting predators, in particular if they arent too lazy to sell the fur.

 

[Delw]

Buzz,

Have you heard about the problem with the sheep and lions in the saguaro, canyon and apache lake area? Just asked cause I know you have some friends down here and have been in taht area yourself.

Thats wierd that the lions go after the sheep like they do, cause that area has a high population of couse and muleys, whats also weird is the sheep hang around the lake edges and there are people everywhere.

Delw

 

[Tom]

Nobody said kill all the predators either. Did that guy use traps Buzz, you didn't mention that?

New Mexico has some people trying to ban traps on public land. I wrote to support it, not ban it.

We need more letters like that or it will be banned. They vote on it, the game commission there, in Sept.

 

[Delw]

Tom here in AZ they banned most traps as well.

the people who wanted them banned where hikers and hunting dog owners claiming the dogs suffered.


Delw

 

[Tom]

other comments from the newspaper like summary:
"Human efforts to check coyotes and lions also have a larger impact.

"Mule deer populations in some parts of Idaho are not meeting the expectations of Fish and Game or hunters. The department is trying to address the problem. Its effort includes appropriate predator management"

The news summary is not a good one, without the details. There are big effects of predator control also.

There's a hunting dog owner in New Mexico that is in the New Mexico fur trappers association and he is the one I found out about it from in New Mexico.

He doesn't want trapping banned and he makes a living with his dogs.

What's been the effect in Arizona? Any data?

Here's a banner trapping web site and apparently Arizona is one of first to lead in this banning of trapping.
http://www.bancrueltraps.com/Need/StatewideTrappingBans.htm

Less hikers getting hurt? Less dogs suffering?

More rabies? More predators attacking pets? Less quail and turkey and deer and elk?
Have you heard of any data on that type of thing yet?

I think they should increase the training for trappers and not ban it, something like that would be good for all people, animals, etc.

Bruce Buckshot Hemming is also the author of "Buckshot Modern Trappers Guide For X-treme Safety, Survival, Profit and Pleasure" Available direct through Buckshot Trapping Supplies, amazon.com, b&n.com. For wholesale for your store you can contact the publisher Quiet Wheel books direct at 1-800-838-8854.

[ 07-12-2004, 17:06: Message edited by: Tom ]