George Smith, SAM: Where Have All The Deer Gone?

George Smith, Executive Director for the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine, in his article in the Kennebec Journal, asks, “Where have the deer gone?” Smith reflects that this is only the second time in 30 years he hasn’t “gotten his deer” during the regular firearms season and believes it to be his first that he never saw a deer. He asks again, “Where have the deer gone?”

Smith actually answers his own question……….well, sort of!

In central Maine, the last two severe winters have taken a terrible toll on whitetails, exacerbated by coyote predation.

In the North Woods, the situation is much worse. Gerry Lavigne, the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife’s retired deer biologist, fears that deer have been “extirpated” in some areas of northern Maine.

Up in the north country, tough winters made even tougher by the loss of wintering habitat, and predation by coyotes and bears, have left deer on the edge of elimination, if not gone forever.

A great deal of research has proven that coyotes and bears feast on deer fawns and Maine has record numbers of those predators.

All these things are true but the bigger question than “where have the deer gone”, is what is the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife doing about it? It appears they are sitting waiting for a few mild back to back winters to roll around again so they can boast of the success of their deer management plan to increase deer numbers for hunters. Short of what seems a faux effort by a Baldacci Deer Task Force and a few feeble efforts to save deer wintering habits, most of MDIFW’s efforts seem to be more focused on appeasing the wildlife watchers and doing what it can to modify any descent from the socialites who seem to carry the power through lawsuits backed by out of state money.

Some of us would even feel a tad bit better if MDIFW would just do a few simple little things that would help even a tiny bit. It is wrong for MDIFW to continue to fall back on bad winters as the reason for a drastically reduced deer herd. Maine is Maine and will always be Maine. We sit on the northern fringe of whitetail deer range. We’ve always had “bad” winters and it is certain we’ll have more.

You have your head in the sand if you think coyotes are not a problem. I have hunted from the same hunting camp in Western Maine for 35 years. During that time, on occasion we would hear a coyote or two howling during the night or yipping and yapping probably running rabbits or something looking for a meal. This year the howling was ongoing and not coming from only one location. They were all around us.

And what was the in-the-field consensus from a week of hunting by 6 experienced hunters? Not one deer was taken and two hunters caught a glimpse of what they thought might have been a “jumped” deer.

More on predators in a moment.

Smith points out what many of us who hunt in Maine have heard before. Gerry Lavigne is afraid that in some regions of Northern Maine deer may be gone forever, wiped out, extirpated and the reason can’t all be laid on bad winters.

Predators kill deer. We can argue how much that occurs but the truth is it happens. Coyotes kill deer, bear kill deer, bobcats kill deer, etc. etc. If there are wolves and mountain lions around, rest assured they’ll take down as many deer as they need too to survive.

If bears contribute to deer kills, has the MDIFW offered anything like extending the bear season in order to reduce bear populations down to minimum levels in areas where deer are feared extirpated?

Moose compete with deer in many aspects for food, etc. Maine has ample moose, particularly in the north. Has MDIFW offered a more extensive plan to reduce moose populations in the north to ease the pressure and help save an exterminated deer population?

Has the deer season been shortened? Has the number of “Any-Deer” permits been reduced statewide or have they been reduced only in certain areas and increased in others in hopes of salvaging license revenues? Is this what’s best to save a dying deer population?

Has the MDIFW began a process to bring back snaring and other methods to get rid of coyotes in winter deer yard areas? Are we to wait until whitetail deer are extinct and then place them on the threatened or protected list of the Endangered Species Act? Isn’t it the responsibility of MDIFW to make sure what is happening doesn’t happen? Who controls MDIFW? Is it the license holders being taken care of or is MDIFW more interested in not making negative social waves? It’s time to make a legal case for protecting all wildlife species not just a handful targeted by environmentalists. This is another reason Maine needs a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to hunt, fish and trap, with a requirement that MDIFW manage game accordingly, but that’s a whole other discussion.

In Alaska, predators threaten game animals like moose, caribou, etc. They do what they have to do to make sure these game animals thrive and it is controversial but it is also their legal duty to do it.

In the latest issue of “The Outdoorsman”, Dr. Valerius Geist wrote at length about predators and how that a lack of proper management was destroying game populations as well as basic ecosystems. His contention is that predators have to be managed in small numbers. The myth that Mother Nature can do this is not what responsible wildlife management is. People who espouse to this theory do not have an understanding of what happens when predators are allowed to grow and run in numbers unchecked.

Dr. Geist suggests managing predators in a way that preserves the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.

All wildlife conservation policies should aim to sustain native, unadulterated genetic stocks in environments that support the continuation of adaptive processes. Wildlife conservation policies also need to engender tolerance, acceptance, and public support; without this, wildlife cannot thrive.

History teaches that political support accrues to species that are either used by a large segment of the population, or revered as an icon. In North America, wolves maintained at very low levels do not pose a threat to livestock, pets, or humans; moreover, they become romantic icons.

At high densities, however, wolves may severely reduce or destroy wildlife populations. This has been demonstrated by the Japanese experience and other historic accounts, by rigorous studies, and by my personal experience. Large predators in North America kill more game than do hunters by an order of magnitude. I’ve come to understand that unregulated predator populations threaten the very institution of public ownership of wildlife.

Wildlife in North America has a long history as a treasured resource that generates substantial wealth and employment. It has been vigorously defended by its owners, the citizens of the U.S. and Canada.

As the public’s interest in wildlife diminishes, I see conditions developing for the transfer of wildlife resources and habitats to private ownership. Already in some states and provinces we’re seeing the privatization of deer and other big game. In the future, the public may have no more say over private bears and wolves than it has currently over private deer.

Our goals must aim to maintain genetically pure stocks of predators in native landscapes, sustain game abundance for public use, and provide for public safety. We need a comprehensive policy for carnivore conservation. The ideal policy will be a prescription for diverse and abundant game populations, viable populations of native predators, and high levels of hunter participation.

This approach would safeguard the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation by insuring that a large fraction of the population is actively engaged in the policies, politics, and pastimes that enable a secure future for wildlife.

In managing wildlife, one is reminded of the French proverb that says, to have a beautiful park, one needs a very sharp axe and a heart of stone!

Dr. Geist also talks about “zoning” in which we work to provide an area where large predators are allowed to be predators but keep them away from areas where they cause trouble.

We need to take seriously the matter of zoning, determining where large predators will and won’t be conserved. This is an old, but important, conception most recently realized in the Wyoming wolf management scheme. More fundamentally, we need to discuss the whole matter of so-called ecosystem rehabilitation.

During this process of re-establishing regional biodiversity there are three major steps, the return of herbivores, followed by the return of carnivores, followed by the return of parasites and diseases dependent on the preceding processes.

We have experienced the heady return of large herbivores and game as well as the biodiversity clinging to their coattails. Do we really need the diseases and parasites potentially dangerous to public health and agriculture? If not, then zoning is the answer.

We have to take seriously means and ways of coexistence where we can very fruitfully look to history. If we can agree on zoning for large predators, then we can take advantage of the lessons of history—North American history in particular: where there has been a high ratio of prey to predators, wolves are shy, avoid humans and are the very image of romantically idealized wolves.

As long as there is an abundance of prey surrounding wolves, they stick to such and avoid humans and their livestock. As long as there is a buffer of game and livestock between wolves and humans, they do not target humans as alternative prey.

Obviously this is not a feasible method in all locations but cannot we modify it? Maine trappers used this method, albeit perhaps by default, until the environmentalists got their way and snaring of coyotes was outlawed. It is my understanding the most effective way to snare coyotes was in winter, surrounding deer wintering yards. This “zoning” effort did two things. It protected some of the deer in their winter habitat and reduced coyote populations.

We hear so much that it is nearly impossible to control predator populations like the coyote. Fact or fiction, as long as we continue to look at the big picture with a lack of focus on important “zones”, nothing will get accomplished.

Wildlife managers tell us the best available science for wildlife management is to manage in smaller, more manageable wildlife districts or zones. This is the same approach we need to take for managing large predators. I might even suggest that within each of Maine’s Wildlife Management Districts, MDIFW begin mapping out predator-free zones. These will be areas where large predators, that are destroying our deer populations are strictly controlled……whatever it takes and there is scientific evidence to support such an effort. It will have to be an ongoing commitment and not something we do on occasion.

The truth is Maine has to do something, even if it’s small and appears insignificant. Yes, we would like to get the biggest bang for our buck but at this rate there will be no “bucks” – both literal. Sitting by offering excuses with a continuation of blaming winter isn’t going to get the job done.

I hope we have not given up on trying to save and manage deer in Northern Maine and other areas where the obstacles seem difficult.

Tom Remington

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Related Articles

• So Why Not “Predator Free Zones” In Maine? (3)
• A Warning To Outdoor Users About Echinococcus, From Worms (23)
• Maine Guide Recalls Coyotes’ Destruction Of Deer. Calls For Action (9)
• Maine Hunters Are Mad And Justly So……..For Many Reasons (19)
• Maine’s Deer Harvest Dismal. Harsh Winter To Blame But What About Predation? (10)
• Sportsman’s Alliance Of Maine Director Smith Says Moose Management Going In Wrong Direction (2)
• Idaho Considers The Use Of Trapping To Control Wolves……BUT!! (7)