Most hunters and outdoor sportsmen rely on wildlife science when it comes to issues that affect their sport. We all know how politics can ruin good science. So who do we believe when more than one supposed scientific group claims their science is better than the other?
In Washington state, the governor has allowed for some cattle ranchers to graze their cattle on public lands near the Blue Mountains of Eastern Washington. Environmental groups such as the Western Watersheds Project oppose the grazing saying it’s destroying the wildlife lands and endangering salmon and steelhead spawning beds.
The agreement, which is being presented as a pilot program, was worked out between the governor and the Washington Cattlemen’s Association, under the approval of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Here’s what Seattlepi.com reports about the science behind the agreement.
Gregoire administration officials said the project, which is overseen by Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists, has the potential to help ranchers and improve the quality of wildlife lands. They emphasized that it is a pilot project that would be fully evaluated before it could become standard practice.
Fish and Wildlife officials and the Cattlemen’s Association say spring grazing is beneficial for the elk and deer that forage in the Asotin Creek Wildlife Area.
With long-term exclusion of livestock, “native grass plants, flora and fauna essentially start to kill themselves from the inside out,” Cattlemen’s Executive Vice President Jack Field said. “You get that real tall, dense and thick, dried forage and on a bluebunch wheatgrass plant, as it gets tall, they get really rank or ‘wolfy’ where the deer or elk don’t want to eat (it). They want to look for the fresh regrowth that’s going to be more tender and more palatable.”
The environmentalists say that reasoning is “preposterous”.
“That grazing plan is based on fantasy and the assumption that no one would ever go out and look and see what’s really going on,” said Katie Fite, biodiversity director of the Western Watersheds Project, an environmental group that has fought cattle grazing on public lands throughout the West and is preparing a lawsuit against Washington state alleging violations of the federal Endangered Species Act.
“The science overwhelmingly shows the damage that is done by wildlife grazing,” she said. “What’s happening in Washington state isn’t based on science, it’s based on political favoritism and myths of the livestock industry.”
The outcome of the policy is “the permanent loss of habitat for sage grouse, potential recovery ground for (endangered) pygmy rabbit, migratory birds like the sage sparrow and sage thrasher that are declining across their range,” Fite said.
It appears that within the Fish and Wildlife Department there are differing scientific opinions as to the effects the grazing will have.
In a February e-mail, district wildlife biologist Pat Fowler said the district team “is very concerned about the lack of clearly defined and scientifically supported goals/objectives, and strategies in the current plan.”
The main goal of the Smoothing Iron Unit Grazing Plan is to “improve the condition of wildlife habitat for elk, as well as mule deer, mountain quail, grouse and various upland species.”
In the e-mail, Fowler said: The district team is “having difficulty in understanding how listed grazing strategies achieve the goals of the plan.
“Grazing during the peak of elk calving, and summer and fall grazing prescriptions probably pose the greatest problem for providing benefits to wildlife,” he said.
Sponsors of the grazing agreement urge others to give the plan a chance, saying it’s a pilot program that needs a chance to work.
So here we have three or more different views about one project, all claiming to be based on science. Who’s right? Are they all right? Are they all wrong? One group claims the governor is playing favorites. We know the history of environmental groups who are more interested in protecting animals than food sources or hunting opportunities. How does this play a role in the “scientific” discussions?
This is what we as outdoor sportsmen are faced with on a regular basis. We need to be more vigilant and learn more about wildlife management and get involved in the process.
Tom Remington
