Politics almost won out over Science

[SMOKESTICK]

Here is the link:
http://trib.com/news/state-and-regi...cle_705a97b7-c204-52af-ab33-85e16c6b9e8b.html

Wyoming Game and Fish Commission keeps sage grouse hunting season

Wyoming Game and Fish Commission keeps sage grouse hunting season

By CHRISTINE PETERSON Star-Tribune staff writer trib.com | Thursday, April 26, 2012

Despite recent declines in sage grouse in northeast Wyoming, a three-day hunting season will continue this fall.

Dozens of people came to the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission meeting Wednesday protesting a proposal to close the sage grouse hunting season in northeast Wyoming. After hours of debate, largely from falconers and other groups, the commission ultimately voted to keep the season open.

Game and Fish biologists proposed closing the season because of declines in the population and because some members of the public worry hunting a species that could be placed on the endangered species list isn't a good idea, said Tom Christiansen, sage grouse program coordinator for Game and Fish.

The number of leks, or sage grouse breeding grounds, have declined from 249 in 2007 to 169 in 2011. In 2011, the number of males on the leks was at the lowest number it has been since 1995, said Tom Ryder, assistant chief of the wildlife division for Game and Fish.

In Ryder?s opinion sage grouse numbers in that area are dangerously low. One major outbreak of something like the West Nile virus could wipe out that segment of the population. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will look at sage grouse again in 2015, and changing hunting seasons is the only tool the Game and Fish Department has to help the population. However, the population has not been reduced to a minimum viable population. That means biologically, it can withstand some harvest, Ryder said.

A recent study by the University of Montana, commissioned by the Bureau of Reclamation in Montana and Wyoming, listed the West Nile virus and energy development as stressors on the population.

Commissioner Carrie Little believes predation by raptors and other predators is one of the main reasons for the decline.

About a dozen people spoke about the possible closure at the meeting and only Jim Magagna, president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, supported the change. If other groups such as the agriculture and energy industry have to make changes for sage grouse survival, hunters should also be willing to make consolations, he said.

Most others said the proposal to end hunting was based on politics and not biology.

?Predators are an issue, but habitat is a greater issue,? said Jill Morrison, a community organizer for the Powder River Basin Resource Council. ?If you don't have the habitat, you don't have the species.?

To sustain a viable population, the commission should focus not on changing the hunting season but on pressuring the Bureau of Land Management and area industry to reclaim sage grouse habitat, she said.

Kevin Hurley, conservation coordinator for the Wild Sheep Foundation, read a letter signed by 20 groups in the American Wildlife Conservation Partnership. The letter strongly opposed the closure, saying if it didn't benefit the bird biologically, it shouldn't be done.

Others worried the closure would set a precedent that seasons could be ended because of appearances instead of biology. Instead of closing the season, craft a solution that includes predator management and mosquito abatement, said Bob Wharff, executive director with the Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife-Wyoming.

Kenneth Sterner, president of the Wyoming Falconers Association, said the closure could create a domino effect, leading to shutting down other areas in the state. The number of birds killed by falconers is small.

Ultimately, only Commissioner Ed Mignery voted for the closure.

 

[PleaseDear]

Thanks for the update.

Robb

 

[Packout]

LAST EDITED ON Apr-28-12 AT 10:18PM (MST)[p]Based on the article, it looks like Politics won and Science lost.

SCIENCE---------------------
"Game and Fish biologists proposed closing the season because of declines in the population"

"changing hunting seasons is the only tool the Game and Fish Department has to help the population."

"The number of leks, or sage grouse breeding grounds, have declined from 249 in 2007 to 169 in 2011. In 2011, the number of males on the leks was at the lowest number it has been since 1995, said Tom Ryder, assistant chief of the wildlife division for Game and Fish. In Ryder?s opinion sage grouse numbers in that area are dangerously low. One major outbreak of something like the West Nile virus could wipe out that segment of the population."

POLITICS----------------------------------
"Dozens of people came to the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission meeting Wednesday protesting a proposal to close the sage grouse hunting season in northeast Wyoming. After hours of debate, largely from falconers and other groups, the commission ultimately voted to keep the season open."

--So the Fish and Game biologists recommend something. A politically appointed Board over-ruled them after a meeting full of lobbyists. Of course that is just based on the article above, as I have no other knowledge than what was written and posted by a person who lobbied for the hunting season.

 

[WapitiBob]

LAST EDITED ON Apr-28-12 AT 11:40PM (MST)[p]"However, the population has not been reduced to a minimum viable population. That means biologically, it can withstand some harvest, Ryder said."

Let's just hunt'em till they're damn near gone then worry about it. Seems to be working for Deer.
Close some areas for immediate relief while working on the long term solution.

 

[Califelkslayer]

I volunteer to do predator control. The predators are falcons and goshawks. maybe eagles too.

 

[TOPGUN]

Ditto what packout posted!

 

[Triple_BB]

Politics did win. At the spring meeting our local biologists, at least the real ones with some back ground on the matter, laid out the facts on why such drastic measures were needed. Bottom line, most of the reason why folks who wanted the season kept open did it for the oil and minerals industry. Energy and minerals development are one of the the main reasons the chickens are hurting up that way. You eliminate hunting and the next thing you know, the Feds are taking a closer look at things which might lead to limiting energy development. I don't have a preference either way, but just say'n...

 

[nontypical]

I'm betting we would see an increase in sage grouse if we started whacking ravens.Just my opinion.

 

[tx_packmule]

Politics with the win.

A lot of times ppl do themselves more harm than good.

 

[SMOKESTICK]

Politics DID NOT win this one. Had any of you been at the Commission meeting you would understand.

Sage grouse are cyclical and the population is doing just what it has been shown to do. It is in a downward trend and should start to rebound.

The oil & gas industry as well as livestock producers were behind this push. The truth was no one from the Department defended hunting nor the proven fact that hunting is compensatory to the population. Just because oil & gas and livestock producers felt like they were being heavily regulated and under the microscope doesn't change the fact that a three day season will kill very few birds. Fence strikes, birds drowning in stock tanks, etc happen 365 days a year, 24/7.

The science won out not the politics!

The real test will come from our G&F Commissioner's. We will see if they direct the Department to start focusing their attention on predator conflicts and managing mosquito's to address the spread of West Nile virus. If they do not take action, all they did was kick the ball down the field. Someone needs to expose the impacts federal protections of some species are causing. Several at the meeting discussed eagles, hawks, ravens, crows, kit fox, skunks, raccoons, etc. While no one attending the meeting which addressed the Commission wanted to see a hunting season for eagles, it was suggested that we remove man made raptor perches. There are studies being done to document impacts from ravens and crows; however, more needs to be done in order to fully understand the overall impacts of protecting some species at the peril of others.

 

[tx_packmule]

if biology came into play, they would have taken action on the things they can currently control while trying to find a way to address other problems.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON May-01-12 AT 02:03PM (MST)[p]tx_packmule---You know that and I know that, but this guy can twist anything he wants to try and win a debate. He always says everything he states in a debate are facts and we were not there or incorrect, etc. Cripes, all you have to do is read the two paragraphs below that I have C/Pd from the OP to see that the people (voters) argued against the G&F biologist recommendations to close the season. The G&F only got one vote on their side from the Commissioners to close it, so how can anyone say that science won when the majority of Commissioners didn't listen to the biologists, LOL!!!

"Dozens of people came to the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission meeting Wednesday protesting a proposal to close the sage grouse hunting season in northeast Wyoming. After hours of debate, largely from falconers and other groups, the commission ultimately voted to keep the season open.

Game and Fish biologists proposed closing the season because of declines in the population and because some members of the public worry hunting a species that could be placed on the endangered species list isn't a good idea, said Tom Christiansen, sage grouse program coordinator for Game and Fish."

PS: Gator and others are still waiting after 7-8 days for him to give an honest answer to questions asked of him on a thread in the General Forum. This guy is as smooth a talker as DP and probably graduated from a course run by DP to get his present job, LOL!

 

[huntin50]

Thanks for the info Bob. Keep up the fight.

 

[SMOKESTICK]

TOPGUN,

You are the one that is wrong, once again. All you need to do is read the whole article. You will find the following quote: "However, the population has not been reduced to a minimum viable population. That means biologically, it can withstand some harvest, Ryder said."

In truth, it is not fair as you do not have all of the facts, only a story from the local, liberal paper. The fact that 6 of the 7 Commissioner's ruled against the Department should speak enough.

Those that attended actually were pretty united in defending hunting as the closure of a 3 day season would make no difference at all. Has anyone else ever heard that hunting is compensatory? Perhaps someone can explain that to TOPGUN 30-06 as he refuses to believe anything I say.

It would seem that someone so ardently defending the North American Model of Wildlife Management would know how critical it is that we defend hunting. You see, without hunters purchasing licenses, how would our G&F Departments have the money to do their jobs. More importantly, why would a Department abandon that principle if it was not politically driven?

Now TOPGUN, don't get your panties in a wad. I have some family business to attend to so throw all the rocks you can. I have not had time to read all of your posts or the ones which you referred. Rest assured that once am I done I will graciously answer your questions, even though you do not seem to take the time to read my posts as you are too worried that about what next pearl of wisdom you will share with us.

 

[SMOKESTICK]

tx_packmule,

That was what I would have expected them to do; however, it appeared the easy solution was to give predators and mosquito's a pass and just close the hunting season. At the meeting, the Department even admitted that hunting has absolutely no impact. Zero! We asked them to allow the season but to address population level impacts from predation and West Nile Virus. If they nothing else but allow the season to continue than we will have gained nothing. If, in fact, they identify which predators are impacting the population and address standing water sources for mosquito larvae, we might even get old TOPGUN hisselve to see the light; however, he will not drink any Kool Aide.

 

[TOPGUN]

LAST EDITED ON May-01-12 AT 08:02PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON May-01-12 AT 06:52?PM (MST)

I saw the light when you stated in that other Forum thread that the NAM had nothing to do with fairness when talking about the high roller tags! Anything you say from now on will go in one ear and out the other when reading your posts that spout BS like that! Now you can go back on that other thread and answer the two questions Gator asked you to respond to about the wilderness restriction on NRs with a yes or no like he asked you to over a week ago. You made posts on other threads after that, so don't say you didn't have time on an important issue like that thread was discussing! As far as this thread goes, if the biologists recommended closing the season and a bunch of people went to the meeting and convinced the Commissioners to rule againt them, I sure have a problem with someone saying it wasn't politics that overruled science even with that Ryder statement. I'm obviously in the majority on this thread with that view, so go raise he** with somebody else!

 

[tx_packmule]

Worse case scenario is that they get put on the endangered species list. A few seasons trying to build a population back and laying off the trigger will probably be easier than trying to get them off the list. O&G expansion & beef prices makes those 2 a permanent fixture. Predators & mosquitos can get worked on; be glad y'all don't have to deal with the fireant army like our quail do. Even though we still have a season, it's not worth the crap shoot of trying to find a covey. Hope that doesn't happen to y'all up there.

 

[Packout]

Bob- I am not here to bash you, but I'd like to understand the issue a little better.

You come on a site to make a post titled "Politics ALMOST won out over science" and then include an article from a newspaper to back up your claim. Then when obvious quotes are highlighted from the article showing that "Science lost and Politics Won"- you then claim the article is "only a story from the local, liberal paper". How can the article be good enough to use to support your claim, yet just hours later the article should be suspect and disregarded?

Just a couple questions:
Did the Game and Fish biologist recommend closing the season?
Is the Board of Commissioners politically appointed?
Did the Board vote contrary to the biologist's recommendation?
If sage grouse are cyclical, should we not strive to protect them at their most vulnerable low trough in their cycle?

I think that TX has hit it on the head concerning the ESA. The WYGF was attempting to control the first, easiest thing they can-- hunting pressure. Is that not what hunters have asked for in regards to struggling deer? But when the G&F recommends it for struggling sage grouse it is wrong?

 

[TOPGUN]

Exactly packout and I'm waiting to hear the next spin on things!