PHOENIX - Crippling cuts could be coming to the system of National Wildlife Refuges if Congress fails to prevent the country from going over the so-called "fiscal cliff" at year's end, according to a new report. Already operating on what's been called a "shoestring budget," the refuge system faces a further cut of nearly 10 percent if sequestration happens.
Eight of the nation's 560 refuges are in Arizona, including the third-largest, Cabeza Prieta, along the Mexican border.
Desirée Sorenson-Groves, vice president of the National Wildlife Refuge Association, a member of the coalition which issued the report, says the system operated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is severely underfunded.
"The managers of these National Wildlife Refuges, I liken them to the 'MacGyvers' of wildlife management. They make do on duct tape and chewing gum, and they figure out a way to get things done."
Sorenson-Groves says the nation's wildlife refuges attract 45 million visitors a year and generate more than $4 billion for local economies.
"People go there for hunting, fishing, wildlife watching. But when they're there, they're going to go to restaurants, they get gas, they may stay overnight. People come from around the world only to go birding."
Sorenson-Groves says the automatic cuts also threaten volunteers who perform 20 percent of all the work in the refuge system, from pulling invasive weeds to doing bird counts, building boardwalks, or cleaning up after storms like Hurricane Sandy.
"There is a strong possibility that Fish and Wildlife Service would have to curtail a lot of those efforts, because they would have to divert staff that right now oversee volunteers, and they would have to put them on doing other things."
She says cuts to the refuge system could even affect border security in places like Arizona's Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, which runs for 56 miles along the border with Mexico.
"Those are places where the federal wildlife law enforcement officers work very closely with Border Patrol. And in some cases, you're going to see dramatic loss of law enforcement from the refuge side."
Sorenson-Groves says the automatic budget cuts threaten both wildlife and local economies. She represents a coalition of 22 wildlife, sporting and conservation groups ranging from the National Rifle Association to Defenders of Wildlife, which are calling for full funding of the refuge system.
The report, "Fiscal Cliff Dwellers: America's Wildlife Refuges on the Edge," is at www.fundrefuges.org.
get more stories like this via email
After years of trying and failing, Indiana lawmakers have put bobcats in the crosshairs.
The decision forces the Indiana Department of Natural Resources to create the hunting season framework and ignited fierce debate among lawmakers, wildlife advocates and hunters regarding the necessity and ethics of targeting Indiana's only native wild cat species.
Samantha Chapman, Indiana state director for The Humane Society of the United States, argued the bobcat population is still in the process of recovering in Indiana.
"Throughout the committee process, it was very clear that the hunter and trapping lobby had a lot to do with this bill," Chapman asserted. "Folks have even mentioned wanting to eat bobcats, which to me seems absolutely preposterous."
Chapman stressed experts need scientific data before targeting the wild cats. Proponents claim they are having issues with disappearing cottontail rabbits and said the bobcat population is getting out of control, especially in southern Indiana.
Sen. Scott Baldwin, R-Noblesville, authored the bill. He said the DNR has many people with varying opinions, and they sometimes need to be nudged.
Ernie Nichols, a member of the Indiana State Trappers Association, encouraged lawmakers to eat bobcat meat.
"First off, tastes great. I don't know if you've ever had a chance to eat it but it's delicious," Nichols stated. "Second off, on the state DNR website from calendar year '22 to '23 there has been a 118% increase in confirmed bobcat sightings."
Opponents claim hunters want to take the cats for the fur or a trophy and argued wildlife belongs to all Hoosiers and should be held in public trust. The DNR has remained neutral throughout the contentious debate and is tasked with creating the new season to hunt and trap bobcats, possibly as soon as July 2025.
get more stories like this via email
A Utah wildlife expert considers wild animal poaching to be a significant problem in the Beehive State, following several incidents of game animals being killed and then left to waste.
According to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, four deer were killed in the Woodland Hills area of Utah County late last year. The heads were removed from each deer, and the carcasses were left. More recently, the division discovered a cow elk and 18 geese dead in Emery County.
Capt. Chad Bettridge, law enforcement officer for the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, said the hunters responsible for these killings could be charged with a felony.
"Three very different circumstances and potentially even more than that," Bettridge noted. "We are not 100% sure that all the deer in Utah County were tied together, but they were in such a location and were similar in circumstance that it does kind of feel like they were maybe done by the same people, or at least related."
Bettridge encouraged anyone with information which could be useful to contact the division by using their law enforcement app. It allows you to send text messages, photos and GPS locations of any situation you think might be illegal. You can also use their 'turn in a poacher hotline,' at 800-662-3337.
Bettridge pointed out in the past five years, the number of animals killed illegally has ranged between 1,000 and 1,400. He added Utah is a big state, and as he put it, the agency does not have "an incredible amount of officers" to cover the vast landscape. When they're fully staffed, there are about 50 officers in the field to investigate reports of animal killings.
"For example, the cow elk in Emery County, that cow elk was shot during a time that it could have been a legal season for cow elk," Bettridge recounted. "However, only a small amount of the meat was taken from the carcass and everything else was left to waste, which makes it illegal, even if you had a license to legally kill that elk."
Bettridge acknowledged the majority of hunters and fishermen are doing the right thing, but said there are bad actors out there. He added the division depends on the public to help by reaching out if they come across something potentially illegal and in need of a closer look.
get more stories like this via email
A federal court ruling that limits wolf trapping and snaring in Idaho could aid recovery of grizzly bears in the region.
U.S. Judge Candy Dale ruled that the state needs to cut back on wolf trapping and snaring because of its impact on grizzly bears, which are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
Jeff Abrams, wildlife program associate with the Idaho Conservation League, said a bill passed in Idaho in 2021 expanded trapping and snaring of wolves and likely led to the judge's decision.
"The decision plainly concludes that there's no way to set a trap or a snare in a way that will only capture a wolf," said Abrams, "and state incentives for this activity make the problem even worse."
Under the ruling, wolf trapping season will close between March 1 and November 30 in eastern and northern Idaho.
In response to the decision, Idaho Fish and Game Director Jim Fredericks said the state has expanded wolf snaring cautiously and the agency is considering its legal options.
While grizzlies have made a comeback in parts of Idaho, Abrams said they've been absent in the central section of the state, known as the Bitterroot.
"That recovery zone does not have bears in it right now," said Abrams, "and this ruling very much impacted our ability to begin to work to restore bears in that habitat."
Abrams said he believes lawmakers have been single minded in the their approach to wolf management, expanding it too far.
"The right to trap is guaranteed in Idaho but not if it might impact or harm protected wildlife species," said Abrams. "It also risks the goodwill of a lot of Idahoans that generally support the idea of trapping."
Disclosure: Idaho Conservation League contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Environment, Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email