Read this:  Using NDOW's own data, it proves that predator control works.  However, the current Wildlife Commission and NDOW believe predator control does NOT work.  They have been dumbing down on steroids when it comes to predator control.

Click here to download the Muley Crazy article.

 

Published in Syndicated Articles

Reprinted from the Elko Daily Free Press

By Cliff and Bertha Gardner

Dear Mr. Ken Mayer: With sadness we read your letter printed in the Nov. 23 issue of the Elko Daily Free Press. Most of what you had to say was untrue.

The most blatant of all, however, was your claim that critics have yet to produce evidence indicating lack of effective predator control is the controlling factor limiting mule deer production throughout Nevada.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. The amount of historical and scientific data demonstrating the positive effects of predator control practices that is available to you and others is voluminous, even in face of the fact that you and others of your ilk have been doing all you can to suppress such information for years now.

What is lacking on your part is your unwillingness to acknowledge the truth. You want the world to believe that man’s influence upon the world is bad — that ranching is bad, that grazing is bad, that roads and power lines are bad, that free enterprise is bad, and private land ownership is bad.

Governmental officials have been suppressing and hiding information from the public for many years now. They don’t want the public to know the truth concerning the importance of livestock grazing and predator control.

On Oct. 6, 2010, the Board of County Commissioners for Elko County sent a copy of Rural Heritage Preservation Project, “Finding of Facts Document” to your agency asking that you address each issue raised within the document so as to determine if past actions taken by the various resource management agencies might be responsible for downtrends in wildlife numbers. Instead of answering the challenge, you sidestepped the issue.

On Dec. 3, the Elko Commission submitted a second letter to your department asking that you respond to their request. Again you avoided answering the County’s request.

In the August 2011 issue of Nevada Rancher, I issued you a challenge asking that you produce data supportive of the positions you have taken in the past regarding wildlife management. I received no response. And so on Sept. 23, while making a presentation before the State Wildlife Commission, I again asked that you or other officials respond to requests made. Again we received no response.

While passing yourself off as experts and by spreading untruths you have been able to snow the public into believing you are protecting the environment when in fact you have been pursuing an agenda detrimental to every value the people hold dear. Deer, sage grouse, songbirds and pygmy rabbits have not declined because of modern human activity. Deer, sage grouse, songbirds and pygmy rabbits have been declining in number because of agency actions that have been put in place over the years.

Four times you have been challenged — four times you have sidestepped the issue. Today we challenge you again. Before you or others working for government go forward with plans for the protection or preservation of sage grouse which might end in causing further harm to every value we hold dear, we demand that the following steps be taken.

First, we demand that a study be undertaken for the purpose of determining sage grouse status and production on private lands owned by the Sorensen family near Secret Valley, as compared to that on lands now owned and controlled by the Bureau of Land Management, midway up the Mary’s River drainage, which have not been grazed for more than 15 years. If this is done, perhaps it will reveal the truth regarding the issue at hand. Is it those working within the private sector whose management practices are hurting sage grouse — or is it those working within the various resources management agencies?

Second, we demand that a large study area (roughly the size of Area 7 and Area 10) be set aside here in Nevada where livestock grazing and predator control practices similar to those which were carried on in the 1940s, ’50s, and ’60s be conducted for a period of 20 or more years for the purpose of determining the true effects of grazing and predator control practices on sage grouse, mule deer and other wildlife.

Third, we demand that a study be completed so as to determine amounts of yearly production and nutritional value of black sage growth or regrowth, on plants that are grazed by domestic sheep on a regular basis, as compared to black sage plants that are left ungrazed from year to year. Should it be found that winter ranges which are grazed routinely produce a much higher percentage of highly nutritious feeds each year than ranges which are left ungrazed from year to year, it may offer an explanation, why it was that sage grouse did so well when great numbers of domestic sheep were being grazed in the past.

Fourth, we demand that officials working for the Nevada Department of Wildlife, the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, answer and address each question that is presented in the Rural Heritage Preservation Project, Findings of Facts document which has been presented to them, before any new plan, rule, policy or regulation is put in place or implemented for the protection and preservation of sage grouse in the State of Nevada. It now appears that actions of the past have been based on false assumptions. If such is the case, new policy needs to be formulated mirroring those practices that were in place during the first half of the 1900s.

Fifth, we demand that officials working for the Nevada Department of Wildlife make data available showing the total number of mule deer buck tags which were issued within the State of Nevada for each year, beginning in 1945 through 2010; the total number of mule deer doe tags that were issued within the State of Nevada for each year beginning in 1945 through 2010; the total number of mule deer bucks that were harvested each year beginning in 1945 through 2010; and the total number of mule deer does that were harvested each year beginning in 1945 through 2010. For too long now, such data has been hidden from the public. It’s time we know the truth.

Sixth, we demand that before any new plan for the preservation and protection of sage grouse be implemented, such practices as will be proposed by persons working for the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management be first implemented and carried out on the Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge, the Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge, and Hart Mountain Wildlife Refuge, so that their effectiveness can be determined. Should such practices work on refuge lands, then and only then should they be implemented on other lands found throughout the West.

We look forward to your response.

Cliff and Bertha Gardner

Ruby Valley

Published in Online Articles
Sunday, 16 December 2012 14:34

Predator Control Provides Quick Results

Reprinted from the Elko Daily Free Press -

By Charlie Howell:

Editor: I was a Wildlife Commissioner for three years appointed by Gov. Gibbons with the express direction to explore our declining deer herds and try to rectify the situation. What I found was other states had similar declines and did major studies to try and reverse the problem.

The present NDOW management has been obsessed with the word “environment” so as to be held blameless. Well, guess what! Predators are part of the “environment” and the only part that we can control directly with immediate results.

The most compelling study as stated by one of NDOW’s own biologists is the 3-Bar study in Arizona where they built a predator-proof enclosure of over 600 acres and spent decades studying the results. After many years their biologists concluded the only significant difference outside the enclosure was predators and the fawn survival inside the enclosure was many times higher than outside. Why it took them so long to admit the obvious is probably because they went to the same schools as the biologists at NDOW.

While on the Commission we also benefited from testimony of many longtime residents and ranchers of the county’s most affected and their observations also fell on deaf ears at NDOW. I personally hunted deer for the first time in Elko county in 1960 and can attest to the large numbers in those years.

It’s to bad Ken Mayer didn’t move back to California when Gov. Gibbons fired him.

Charlie Howell

Las Vegas

Published in Online Articles
Friday, 02 November 2012 14:43

Nevada's Deer Herds Doomed?

Are you as tired as I am with the political bureaucrats
and messed up agencies that continue to
squander and mismanage our resources? Take a
look at page 23. Cecil Fredi, like many of us
today, is also sick and tired of the way our state
agencies are becoming more crooked each day.
My rage about all of this has been going for a
while now, but when a good friend sent in a copy
of the Sacramento newspaper with a multiple
page read about predators in Nevada, I was blown
away! The contents of the article claimed that
despite killing predators in Nevada for many years
the mule deer populations are still dwindling. So,
those dumb brainiacs came to the conclusion that
predators are not the reason for the decline. In
fact, the article stated that all those cute little critters
were killed in vain. Oh yes they did! They
said that millions of coyotes should have never
been killed as “coyotes do not eat mule deer.”
What the hell is this world coming to.

Hunters Alert!'s very own Cecil Fredi recently had an article published in the September/October 2012 issue of MuleyCrazy magazine (www.muleycrazy.com).  Here is the publisher's introduction to the article, which is available below:

Are you as tired as I am with the political bureaucrats and messed up agencies that continue to squander and mismanage our resources? Take alook at page 23. Cecil Fredi, like many of us today, is also sick and tired of the way our state agencies are becoming more crooked each day.My rage about all of this has been going for awhile now, but when a good friend sent in a copy of the Sacramento newspaper with a multiple page read about predators in Nevada, I was blown away! The contents of the article claimed that despite killing predators in Nevada for many years the mule deer populations are still dwindling. So,those dumb brainiacs came to the conclusion that predators are not the reason for the decline. In fact, the article stated that all those cute little critters were killed in vain. Oh yes they did! They said that millions of coyotes should have never been killed as “coyotes do not eat mule deer.” What the hell is this world coming to...

- Ryan Hatch, Publisher, MuleyCrazy Magazine

Click here to download the article:  Nevada's Deer Herds Doomed? by Cecil Fredi

Published in Online Articles

Findings of the Mule Deer Restoration Committee of the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners

Passed unanimously on 18 November 2010

Nevada’s Failing Mule Deer Population

 

Preface:

Nevada statutes mandate that the Board of Wildlife Commissioners establish policies and adopt regulations necessary to the preservation, protection, management, and restoration of deer in Nevada. 

The Mule Deer Restoration Committee has reviewed at length the relevant scientific documentation on mule deer populations in Nevada and the west, including all publications it could find produced by the Nevada Department of Wildlife.  The committee has reviewed at length all input on mule deer management provided by CABMWs to the Wildlife Commission and this committee, and has included the input in these findings where appropriate.  After much consideration this Committee is presenting the following recommendations based on the best science available.  If followed, these recommendations will go far in restoring the deer population and the range to prime conditions throughout the State of Nevada.

Published in 2010 Online News
Monday, 19 April 2010 06:03

Declining Deer Herds Spark Debate

Declining western deer herds have biologists, sportsman groups and environmentalists clashing over whether mountain lions and coyotes are largely to blame and should pay with their lives.

On one side are those who believe the number of deer predators should be reduced through targeted hunting programs. Others say factors such as the loss of natural habitat and wildfires are the issue.

Published in 2010 Online News
Wednesday, 01 March 2006 00:00

Editorial 2006 Spring

If there is any hope at all for Nevada sportsmen, it is the November election and the 2007 legislative session. The mess sportsmen have been handed by the last two governors and their appointments to the Wildlife Commission can be overcome. To achieve this, it will take sportsmen to get involved. This will not require any of your money, only a few minutes of your time.

 

In order to make the necessary changes, we need to elect a governor who is a hunter. The last year sportsmen in Nevada had a governor who hunted was in 1979. In reality, hunters have been neglected for over 25 years! Unlike our current governor, Jim Gibbons will not lie to the sportsmen. He wants our deer brought back, again unlike our current governor, Kenny Guinn who has done nothing about this for eight years.

Published in HA Newsletter 30
Tuesday, 01 July 2008 00:00

Sage Grouse Myths

Excerpts from Range Magazine

Summer, 2008

 

Environmental activists and many agency biologists are working relentlessly to make the sage grouse the spotted owl of the Intermountain West. If they succeed in getting sage grouse listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), they will likely effect sweeping change over traditional land use in the West. That is their goal. Ironically, this “sage grouse conservation effort” is based on the fraudulent claim that many millions of these birds inhabited the sagebrush country of the West prior to European contact but this claim is without factual basis.

 

Published in HA Newsletter 33

A rebuttal to Dave Rice’s article which appeared in the Reno Gazette Journal, January 25, 2008

 

I read with interest your article in the Reno Gazette Journal, January 25, 2008, concerning Nevada's declining deer population.

I do not know whom the NDOW expert, Biologist Mike Cox is, but he is a long way from knowing or telling the "real story" of what went on during the big deer years in Nevada. If he thinks that the main reason for the decline of Nevada deer herds is the overall condition of habitat, he either does not know what he is talking about or he is creating "smoke and mirrors” for NDOW.

I ran the operational Predatory Animal Control program throughout the State of Nevada for the U. S Fish & Wildlife Program, during the 1970s and 80s, as the Assistant State Supervisor.  I believe I have on-the-ground and in-the-air understanding of what went on during the big deer years in Nevada.  There were three full-time Government Mountain Lion Hunters employed year-around hunting lions.  Coyote and mountain lion numbers were kept under control.  Deer tags, for Nevada hunters, were unlimited in number and were available for over-the-counter purchase at hunting-license dealers statewide.

In 1972, a big change occurred in the Animal Damage Control business throughout the west.  President Richard Nixon banned the use of toxicants in the government control program by executive order.  (He was soliciting the environmental vote that was just starting to emerge.)   With the loss of toxicants and nothing to replace it with but a few trappers, coyote numbers began to rise dramatically. Throughout the state of Nevada, deer numbers fell to 96,000 by 1976. Predation upon livestock by predators was a serious problem. In the late 70s, political pressure by the livestock industry and their representatives in Washington, D.C. brought about a dramatic increase in the Federal budget for Animal Damage Control.

The federal government began to appropriate large sums of money in order to prove that coyote numbers could be controlled by what they liked to call "non-toxic methods.”  This program increased use of aircraft, both fixed -wing and rotor-wing, to shoot coyotes from the air and additional trappers on the ground to replace the controversial use of toxicants.  (This was meant to look good to the environmentalist.)

At that time, there was a large, domestic range-sheep industry, operating throughout the state of Nevada.  Domestic sheep acted as a "buffer species" to deer for predatory animals.  Predators, largely, lived on domestic sheep, which were much easier to kill than mule deer.  The Ruby Mountains, in Elko County for example, had over 50,000 domestic sheep that summered on this mountain range in the 1970s.

In the early1980s, wild-animal longhair fur prices went sky high and private trappers were out in force. There were large numbers of coyotes and bobcats harvested by private trappers since fur prices were at an all time high.  Gas was around $1.25 a gallon. Coyote varmint callers were out in force.  All of the private trapping and shooting plus the concentrated government effort to control predator numbers began to pay off.  By the year 1988, the mule deer population responded to these concentrated predator-control efforts and mule deer numbers statewide were quoted by NDOW at 240,000.  NDOW was busy patting themselves on the back for what a masterful deer management program they had in place throughout the state of Nevada.  They credited the quota system for deer tags, which was put in place in 1976, and favorable weather conditions, relatively mild winters during that period, for the large increase in deer numbers, but never once did they mention the dramatic decrease in predator population numbers brought about by private hunters and trappers and the federal government program.

Now then we move forward in time, the range sheep industry began to disappear due to labor problems, government regulations, land use changes by public land administrators, imports, etc. Therefore, control efforts in and around range sheep herds decreased.  Cattle numbers began to decline.  Longhair fur prices fell, gas prices went up, vehicle prices went up, predator hunting declined, and soon predator population numbers began to come back.  Today the Nevada landscape is filled up with coyotes, bobcats, and mountain lions with some prowling the alleys of towns and cities.  Predators have a "free-roll" statewide.

So what do you think has happened to our deer population?  It has steadily gone down-hill with the decrease in predator control efforts and will continue to do so unless there is a dramatic decrease in predatory animal population numbers. NDOW has blamed the mule deer decline on overgrazing by livestock, poor habitat, too many fires, too cold, too wet, too dry, not enough snow, too much snow, etc. They are in denial when it comes to the overall effect that predators have on our mule deer and upland game bird population numbers in the State of Nevada.

In 2007, NDOW reported, there were 114,000 mule deer in the State of Nevada. Looks to me like we are almost out of deer. I wonder, what are the coyote, bobcat, and mountain lion numbers statewide in 2008???

I would solicit your printing this in your column

Thank you,

James "Mike" Laughlin

Supervisory Wildlife Biologist (Retired)

Bachelor of Science Degree- Wildlife Biology- Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona

 

Ed. Note: Of course, the Reno Gazette-Journal did not print the rebuttal.

Published in HA Newsletter 33

Reprinted from the Sparks Tribune

For 15 years in a row, here in the Tribune, I have written an annual column on the status of Nevada’s deer herd and, remarkably, the numbers have barely moved, with the herd remaining at rock-bottom levels: a little more than 100,000 animals. By comparison, we reached a peak in 1988, when 250,000 deer roamed the state.

 

That’s the bad news. But hope is on the horizon – at least the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) is making major strides to, within its rather limited constraints, do something about it.

Published in HA Newsletter 33
«StartPrev12345678910NextEnd»
Page 1 of 10

Search Articles

Login Form



Donate to the Website

donate_without_paypal_account
Look for this section on the paypal donation page to donate even without a paypal account.  Just click on continue where it says "Don't have a PayPal account?"

Donations help to pay for web hosting and management of Hunters Alert! keeping this content online and up to date.

*All donations are annonymous unless you would like to be announced as a donor.

Copyright © 2017 Hunters Alert! - Keeping the sportsman informed.. All Rights Reserved.
Site developed and kept in honor by a digital media professional.