Drill Baby Drill . . .

T

TFinalshot

Guest
LAST EDITED ON Oct-29-10 AT 08:51AM (MST)[p]Seems as though the Pinedale area and it's deer are feeling the negative impacts of something . . . . dont yet know what it is, but it might be related to drilling and gas. . .

Read the story here in todays news:

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_fa6d49fa-a7b6-5335-82bf-8cc7d217ea69.html


www.tonybynum.com

"Roadless areas, in general, represent some of the best fish and wildlife habitat on public lands. The bad news is that there is nothing positive about a road where fish and wildlife habitat are concerned -- absolutely nothing." (B&C Professor, Jack Ward Thomas, Fair Chase, Fall 2005, p.10).
 
what about preadtors. from my personal experence out in the methane feilds they brought more deer in then before all the drilling. when they collect the methane there is lots of water and and they create feilds and use that water for the feilds.

im from wyoming and in all the oil patches and gas feilds that is where i see the big bucks....


" EVIL KENVIL IS GOING TO TRY TO SET A RECORD BY JUMPING OVER A 1000 OBAMA SUPPORTERS WITH A CAT D9"

lets see what you think about hope now
 
Tony, thanks for sharing that article. Those deer migrate out of where I want to hunt next year so maybe I'll have to try somewhere else.
 
There's no doubt there are a lot of things to consider when trying to figure out what's changing deer numbers. Some of the areas i hunt have seen little to know man made change beyond what's in the air for 100's of years and the deer populations have been up and down. . . there are lots of explanations for this and I'm pretty sure that there's no single thing that we can blame for it - the system is much to complex.

The reason for pointing out the wyoming example is because of it's relatively formally well intact mule deer heard and all the thinking and money that's now gone into keeping track of the deer and the development. I'm sure if one looks hard enough and long enough you could find just about any logical reason for the changes in deer numbers, but dont though the baby out with the bath water.

The study and it's findings are important to understand or at least be aware of, they might provide some interesting and useful information that we can use to help improve or our mule deer herd conditions, or in the very least we can consider what what they have learned and use that information to help us make better decisions on the local level.



www.tonybynum.com

"Roadless areas, in general, represent some of the best fish and wildlife habitat on public lands. The bad news is that there is nothing positive about a road where fish and wildlife habitat are concerned -- absolutely nothing." (B&C Professor, Jack Ward Thomas, Fair Chase, Fall 2005, p.10).
 
Anyone who DOESN'T think oil exploration cuts deer numbers and size is off their rocker. You cannot criss-cross good habitat with roads without negative results. One oil road becomes one hundred after the atv parade moves in. Not anti oil....but let's not kid ourselves here...it comes at a great cost BESIDES your pocketbook.
 
Not to mention what they're doing to Sage grouse numbers.

Anyone who doesn't think oil and gas rigs are having a negitive impact on all wildlife is a fool.
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-10 AT 04:55PM (MST)[p]Hmmm . . . that's taking things a bit far shotgun. It might help if you qualify that a bit . . . I an take you to places where the biggest of the big live and they are big and do well living in, on, around, behind, over the top of, you name it, oil, gas, and mining rigs . . . better be a little more careful with your position. . .

I'm not saying i like O/G or that i like destroying native habitat, but your statement can be undone with a dozen examples . . .

Just as i can show you places that once had huge bucks now they have none to few and NO oil/gas/roads/ and have the very best habitat available . . .

Tony

www.tonybynum.com

"Roadless areas, in general, represent some of the best fish and wildlife habitat on public lands. The bad news is that there is nothing positive about a road where fish and wildlife habitat are concerned -- absolutely nothing." (B&C Professor, Jack Ward Thomas, Fair Chase, Fall 2005, p.10).
 
you said it tfinal. there are countless things that impact herds. they always find way to make it polictcal and they spend millions of dollars wasting our money and never solving the problem.

everyone has there opioion thats the great thing about being an american but i want to put mine out there on what i have seen. like i said in my first post recycleing the water has done great things. they mostly grow alfalfa and the deer antelope and the grouse all moved in. all for the great food they are planting...i have seen badlands turned into some really green land.. some parts there releaseing fish into th ponds at the oil feilds.......

" EVIL KENVIL IS GOING TO TRY TO SET A RECORD BY JUMPING OVER A 1000 OBAMA SUPPORTERS WITH A CAT D9"

lets see what you think about hope now
 
There are valid points on both sides of the issue. But there is definitely going to be an impact on wildlife when oil and gas development moves in. Maybe not for some species. I have reviewed some of the research on the Mesa and I am convinced development has had an impact to mule deer and sage grouse. Perhaps weather or other factors compound that impact some years. Tell an elk it likes living in a oil field. And some individual animals will be more tolerable than others.

Coal bed methane ponds have actually been good and bad. The ponds raise west nile virus carrying mosquitos that kill sage grouse. In some cases it has a negative reaction with soil chemistry too.

Fortunately there are some great companies that work towards minimizing their impacts and help enhance wildlife. thats the way it should be, in my eyes.
 
I live in Pinedale and the numbers of deer that winter on the mesa are way down, and the decline does coinside with all the drilling activity, I don't think that explains all of the decine though. Intense hunting pressure on the summer areas (sept 15), lots of highway mortality and mild dry winter weather are other things I notice, and Im sure there are other things going on. I believe it really is a lot more complicated than we imagine.
 
I have been hunting the same area in Colorado for the last 20 years. The quality of hunting seems to depend on how many coyotes I shoot. I hammered the coyotes the last five years, five years ago I shot 75 coyotes in three months, four years ago I shot about 30 the next two years I shot less than 10 and last year I shot one all with the same amount of time in the field. Last year we shot 3 bucks all small 5x5's, if you look at the October 23 post you will see the deer we shot this year. I am not sure about drilling affecting deer populations but coyotes are a huge problem. Saw a few while hunting this year so I will be back up there to do some population control. I found 3 dead bucks from last year all coyote kills and all shooter bucks.
 
Hey Dirtygrass.... You guys just need some wolves. They'll keep those pesky coyotes in check.

And I agree with your assessment of the coyotes wreaking havok on ungulates in Colorado. Keep them in check and you guys will have good numbers. The unfortunate fact though..... Is that the wolves are coming to your area soon too. The wolf lovers won't stop until we have breeding packs ranging from Canada to New Mexico. And that's a fact. Hunting as we know it is going to keep sliding downhill.
 
I also hunt a large ranch in eastern Colorado that has a horrible coyote problem. The difference is there are a ton of cows which the coyotes eat instead of the deer. When the rachers start bitching the DOW flys around in a plane and shoot the coyotes with shotguns. I have never found a coyote killed deer out there. I go down every year during calving season and shoot coyotes, our one day record is 23 dogs.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom