Gardiner, MT. Given the frequent stories of wildlife killing and hate that emanate from the Gardiner, Montana area, the latest find of 2 to 4 bison carcasses north of Yellowstone Park is raising worry about more illegal and legal wildlife killing in the area and/or the spread of domestic or wildlife disease.

The bison were found in areas frequented by people, not in any remote backcountry.

The area recently had an unpleasant incident of wolf killing following the placement of domestic sheep almost next to the Park that wildlife supporters said was deliberately done to cause controversy or provoke a wolf attack.  Non-park wolves were soon credited with attacking the sheep.

For years the area has been scene of Yellowstone Park wildlife poaching, bison slaughters, heated controversy over elk numbers (too high or too low), Yellowstone Park wildlife migration routes, and what some see as excessive wolf hunting so as to decimate the population of Park wolves.

The winter just past also saw the first evidence of controversy over a growing Native American bison hunt that left a large number of bison entrails (8000 pounds) that would attract grizzly bears.  They were cleaned up by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.

The complete story on the recent find of bison carcasses is by Eve Byron of the Independent Record (here reproduced in the Missoulian).

Please put  your news, links and comments below in comments.  Here is the link to the thread being retired (May 1, 2013).

May 2013. Hayden Valley grizzly family. Photo courtesy and copyright Tim Zaspel

Our recent story on chronic wasting disease (CWD) in Wisconsin now has a followup in the treasured Greater Yellowstone country. In both places, wildlife managers and politicians continue to take a heedless attitude toward the always fatal elk, deer and moose disease,  and fail to take action. States like Wyoming have massive winter elk feeding programs that dangerously concentrate the elk, inviting CWD to take hold. Other states like Idaho, have numerous elk farms and elk shooting ranches similar to those that have spread the disease into many states and provinces of Canada.

The Greater Yellowstone Coalition just issued a map and news release about CWD’s relentless spread to the northwest across Wyoming.

- – - – - -

CWD is a degenerative disease of the central nervous system and brain, and can infect elk, deer and moose. It is always fatal and there is no cure. The same disease can infect all these species and is transmissible from one species to another. Experts say that artificially concentrating herds by winter feeding increases the risk of such diseases, and recommend that deer and elk not be artificially fed or baited during winter in order to keep them spread out as much as possible.

For more information on the map depicting CWD areas and Greater Yellowstone Coalition’s efforts to phase out the artificial elk feeding areas and transition to healthier, free ranging wildlife, see http://www.greateryellowstone.org/elkrefuge

For a generation now lake trout (mackinaw) have greatly reduced the formerly hugely abundant Yellowstone cutthroat trout in Yellowstone Lake and in its tributary streams. This decline was made worse by the emergence of whirling disease, a parasite carried by people who don’t clean their waders (and other things that have been in infested bodies of water).

These adverse changes were human caused. The Lake trout was probably a deliberate introduction of a totally useless fish to any bird, mammal, or amphibian in Yellowstone Park. Lake trout eat the cutthroat upon which many species depended. Lake trout do not come to the surface. They eat other fish, die and become nothing more than sediment.

Many park grizzly and black bears heavily used the runs of spawning cutthroat. The cutthroat gone, and bears being both hunger and clever, looked for other sources of food. Yellowstone Park grizzlies became among the most carnivorous of all non-salmon eating bear species. One thing Park bears learned was to key on on elk calves and elk. In addition, bears quickly noticed that wolves provided easy access to elk. It was generally easier for a grizzly to take over a wolf-killed elk from the pack than to chase down and kill an adult elk on their own.

A number of Park elk herds have declined since a few years after wolves were reintroduced. Those people who are not capable of understanding any multi-step argument, have simply said, “Wolves eat elk. Elk numbers are down. Wolves caused the decline since nothing else in Yellowstone has changed.

The person who is even minimally observant and visits regularly knows that many things have changed since the wolves were reintroduced. There has been nearly continuous drought, which is most likely the new and adverse climate. The vital whitebark pine nuts grizzlies eat in autumn have declined greatly too because of fire, drought, and the spread of exotic whitebark pine blister rust.

A recent meta-study of 20 studies of bear diet and elk populations (from 1985 to 2012) gives evidence that the Lake trout invasion led indirectly to elk population decline as the grizzly bears began to seek out elk calves.

Back in about 1980 a fishing guide, I read, praised the Yellowstone cutthroat trout. It also said the hottest place in hell should be reserved for any person who introduced lake trout, and later this pernicious introduction happened. If the person or people who did this are now are dead, many folks will certainly hope they are currently being well roasted.

Here is a link to the study. Trout invasion behind park’s elk decline. Newscom.au.

A final note, almost all of the “hits” that grizzly bear food sources have taken inside Yellowstone Park came directly or indirectly from human activities — lake trout, whirling disease, whitebark pine blister rust.

Helena, MT. Montana’s new legislature, elected in 2012, was a hotbed of anti-bison activity. Ten or so bills to hurt the bison in one way or another were introduced and a number passed and were sent to Montana’s new governor Steve Bullock.

Governor Bullock has saved the limited number of free roaming bison, and maybe bison as something other than livestock, with his veto pen. This week he vetoed the last two bills that would harm the bison, SB 256 and SB 305.

It is difficult to understand why the majority party of legislature is so hostile to the bison except it seems to have become a partisan issue as over the years all the standard anti-bison arguments have been knocked down by management and regulatory changes made by the U.S. agency APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service)  and Montana Department of Livestock and by scientific studies.

The Wildlife News has, over the years generally argued that anti-bison sentiment is basically a cultural response from the state’s cattle ranchers now angry that anyone would dare challenge their cultural hegemony — it has little to do with a threat of brucellosis spreading, bison knocking down fences, chasing people, etc.  The trouble with cultural animosity is that science, economics, compromise cannot calm “a party with a chip on their shoulder.”

Those who want rational bison management and a degree of free roaming bison in the state outside of the limited boundary of Yellowstone National Park should contact the governor and thank him. governor@mt.gov

- – - -

Below are his full veto messages of the Governor-

SB256

May 6, 2013

The Honorable Linda McCulloch
Secretary of State
State Capitol

Helena, MT 59620

Dear Secretary McCulloch:

In accordance with the power vested in me as Governor by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Montana, I hereby veto Senate Bill 256 (SB 256), “AN ACT MAKING THE DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PARKS LIABLE FOR DAMAGE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY BY CERTAIN WILD BUFFALO AND BISON; REQUIRING AN ESTIMATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY DAMAGE AND COSTS FOR WHICH THE DEPARTMENT WOULD BE LIABLE IF A WILD BUFFALO OR BISON PROPOSED FOR RELEASE OR TRANSPLANTATION ESCAPES; PROVIDING AN APPROPRIATION; AMENDING SECTION 87-1-216, MCA; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.”

SB 256 would impose liability on the State of Montana for any damage to private property that results from wild buffalo and bison that have been transplanted or released. This would be the first time that, absent malfeasance, such a liability would be imposed on the State for the impacts of wild animals, even transplanted ones. The bill does not define what constitutes damage to private property, and sets the stage for litigation and potentially significant liability claims. For example, under SB 256, the State could be liable for the grass lost to grazing. In addition, as stated in the fiscal note, after fiscal year 2015 the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) would be forced to divert license funds to pay for any damages, jeopardizing more than $18 million in federal funds.

SB 256 would set an unacceptable precedent. If applied to other species, this rationale would practically preclude any wildlife restoration efforts, regardless of the benefits. If this precedent had existed 100 years ago, Montana’s world-class wildlife heritage would not exist today. Just as troubling is the idea that the State should pay for damage to property resulting from the actions of any wild animal, whether that would be wild bison eating grass in Eastern Montana, mule deer eating tulips in Helena, or a moose getting in the way of a vehicle in the Swan Valley. As recognized long ago, landowners in Montana fully understand that wildlife are practically part of the land itself:

“Montana is one ofthe few areas in the nation where wild game abounds. It is regarded as one of the greatest of the state’s natural resources, as well as the chief attraction for visitors. Wild game existed here long before the coming of man. One who acquires property in Montana does so with notice and knowledge of the presence of wild game and presumably is cognizant of its natural habits. Wild game does not possess the power to distinguish between fructus naturales and fructus industriales, and cannot like domestic animals be controlled through an owner. Accordingly, a property owner in this state must recognize the fact that there may be some injury to property or inconvenience from wild game for which there is no recourse.” State of Montana v. Rathbone, 110 MT 225, 242 (1940).

Finally, it is worth noting that existing statute in 87-1-216, MCA, already directs FWP to develop and adopt, with full public participation, a specific management plan prior to any restoration effort on private or public land in Montana. This statute explicitly provides that FWP may be liable for damage to private property resulting from its failure to comply with the statute.

I am committed to improving the relationship between the sportsmen and women, FWP, and landowners of this state, and am grateful to the many landowners who provide vital habitat for our great wildlife herds. Their actions benefit all of us who are fortunate to live here. We must do more to work together, but SB 256 is not the answer.

For these reasons, I veto SB 256.

Sincerely,

STEVE BULLOCK

Governor

____________________________________

SB 305

May 6,2013

The Honorable Linda McCulloch
Secretary of State  
State Capitol
Helena, MT 59620  

Dear Secretary McCulloch:  

In accordance with the power vested in me as Governor by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Montana, I hereby veto Senate Bill 305 (SB 305), “AN ACT REVISING THE DEFINITION OF WILD BUFFALO AND WILD BISON; AND AMENDING SECTIONS 81-1-101, 87-2-101, AND   87-6-101, MCA.”  

SB 305 changes the definition of wild buffalo and wild bison to require that the animal “has never been owned,” by a wide range of entities, “except for the state or a state agency.” Current law is that a wild buffalo or wild bison “has not been reduced to captivity and is not owned by a person.” Fish and wildlife in Montana are not actually “owned” by anyone, but are held by the state in trust for the benefit of the people of Montana. Under existing statutes the state is given broad management responsibilities for wild buffalo and wild bison, requiring the Departments of Livestock and the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks to exercise authority over the animals, including disease control, hunting, and possible relocation both within and without the state.

To effectively manage wild buffalo and wild bison in Montana, the state needs to rely on various partners including the federal government and the tribal nations. SB 305 precludes any meaningful role for these entities and severely limits the ability of the state to meet its obligations to the public under the law. For these reasons, I veto SB 305.  

STEVE BULLOCK

Governor  

Residents of the desert areas of Arizona, California, Utah and New Mexico generally become aware that they could get a nasty fungal disease called coccidioidomycosis (kok-sid-e-oy-doh-my-KOH-sis). 99% of the cases come from these 4 states.  It is informally called Valley Fever, which is easier to pronounce.

The fungal spores live in arid land soil where they are no threat, but they like lungs too as a good alternative when farming, construction or livestock break up the natural desert crust exposing the spores to the wind.  Since 1990 about 3000 have died from the disease nationwide with about half coming from California. Unfortunately in the last 4-5 years the incidence of disease has taken a sharp turn upward. It has gone up 16% a year in Arizona and 13% a year in California.

The reason for the increase is not known, but the sudden growth corresponds to the opening up the desert to wind and solar farms which significantly destroy the natural surface of the desert.  Many of the new cases are in populated parts of California where the Santa Ana wind storms blow in dust from the desert.  In addition to solar farms that scape huge areas of the desert bare, the continuing growth of off-road vehicle use, and mining might contribute to more pathogenic dust in the air.  In some recent years, desert wildfires, a growing problem, might have contributed to mobilization of the spores into the wind.

The symptoms are usually much like asthma, the flu or pneumonia.  Coccidioidomycosis is often misdiagnosed or missed altogether, especially in people who have merely visited the endemic areas. Valley fever can also cause the body to become covered with skin lesions and can infect the eyes, leading to blinding.

Livestock and wildlife too becomes infected.

The disease can be cured by treatment with systemic anti-fungal drugs. This treatment is dangerous and painful.

A rising number of articles are appearing alerting the public to danger. Here is a good one because it has pictures and points fingers. Valley Fever Epidemic Linked To Desert Solar Construction; Heightens Concerns Over Risks From Large-Scale Wind And Solar Projects. East County Magazine.

- – - – - -

5-13-13. More on Valley Fever. We should add that the news about the spread of Coccidioidomycosis is going viral.

“Is climate change fueling an epidemic? Outbreaks of valley fever have been attributed in part to climbing temperatures in California and Arizona.” Salon Magazine.  By Tara Loahn.

They should add that efforts to retard climate change by mass disturbance of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts for solar farms and wind farms is also fueling the epidemic.

Valley Fever Throws Baseball a Curve. Scientific American. By Brian Bienkowski and The Daily Climate
 

Using Basic Principles of Wildlife Management to Evaluate the Prospects for a Public Wolf Harvest in Michigan