Rat poison killed the mountain lion known as P-34

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/we-killed-the-mountain-lion-known-as-p-34-and-rat-poison-was-the-weapon/ar-CCfxJN?ocid=spartandhp

Martha Groves4 hrs ago

Encounters between rats and mountain lions generally have predictable outcomes. The prey dies so that the predator can live.

But as civilization continues to push into landscapes once populated mainly by non-human species, the balance has shifted. People use highly toxic poisons to kill rats, then the low-on-the-food chain rodents take the apex-predator big cats down with them.

On Tuesday, this upending of the natural order gave Southern California activists another poster animal for their movement, as the National Park Service confirmed that the once-photogenic mountain lion known as P-34 died of exposure to rat poisons.

A necropsy of the puma, whose carcass had been found by a trail runner in Point Mugu State Park on Sept. 30, validated the initial suspicions of biologists who found blood running freely inside the dead female.

Rat poisons, or rodenticides, are designed to kill rodents by thinning their blood and preventing clotting. They lead to uncontrollable bleeding.

In addition to proving deadly for their intended targets, these poisons can wreak havoc as they work their way up the food chain. A mountain lion might devour a ground squirrel that consumed the bait or an animal such as a coyote that had eaten another animal that had the bait in its system.

“This is the latest indication that local wildlife continues to be exposed to these rodent poisons,” said Seth Riley, a wildlife ecologist who has led a long-term study of mountain lions in the park service’s Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.

Scientists said Tuesday that evidence was mounting that California’s July 2014 ban on retail sales of certain highly toxic rat poisons – called second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides – has not produced the far-reaching benefits that researchers had hoped.

“I thought there would be more improvement than I’m actually seeing,” said Stella McMillin, senior environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. “We’re still seeing non-target exposure at pretty high levels.”

Although consumers may no longer buy these “super toxins” off the shelf, farmers and licensed pest-control companies regularly use them. Bait boxes have become ubiquitous accessories outside restaurants, hotels and grocery stores.

Interested in the stories shaping California? Sign up for the free Essential California newsletter >>

Moreover, other rat poisons that consumers are still allowed to use are increasingly showing up in wildlife, said Jonathan Evans, environmental health legal director with the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit advocacy group in Oakland.

Wildlife deaths continue to demonstrate the “need to ban these products from the market,” he said. He and other activists have met with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation to point out loopholes in the ban.

“We continue to call on state regulators to ban these poisons to protect California’s most iconic and imperiled wildlife,” Evans said. Consumers and businesses, he added, must consider using other rodent-control methods that “do not involve killing predators that are part of the solution.”

P-34, who was not quite 2 years old, showed evidence of exposure to five compounds, “an impressive number,” Riley said.

Last December, P-34 made news when she was discovered lounging under a trailer in a Newbury Park mobile home community. A resident photographed the lion ambling along the top of a wall in her backyard.

P-34’s was the first puma death conclusively linked to rat poisons since 2004, when scientists confirmed that two siblings died because of exposure to the toxic chemicals. Those lions, P-3 and P-4, spent most of their time in the Simi Hills, north of the 101 Freeway.

In 2012, a hiker in Point Mugu State Park found the carcass of a female lion known as P-25. The cause of death was never determined, but toxicity from rat poisons was strongly suspected, given that she showed no sign of disease or having fought with another lion.

P-34’s sibling, the male P-32, was struck and killed by a motorist in August while attempting to cross Interstate 5 near Castaic.

P-32, who was about 21 months old, was the only male mountain lion known to have dispersed out of the Santa Monica Mountains and wander north into other habitat areas. He had managed to cross the 101 Freeway, State Route 23, Highway 118 and Highway 126.

Park service researchers have documented the presence of rodenticide compounds in 12 of 13 mountain lions they have tested, including a 3-month-old kitten.

Scores of bobcats, coyotes and other animals are known to have died from internal bleeding likely caused by the toxins.

In 2014, P-22, the Griffith Park mountain lion, famously developed a case of mange that biologists said was probably caused by exposure to rat poisons. A park service biologist applied a topical treatment and injected Vitamin K to offset the effects. Recent images of P-22 indicate that he remains mange-free.

More Cougars Fair Game? Groups Protest WA Hunting Quota

http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2015-09-28/animal-welfare/more-cougars-fair-game-groups-protest-wa-hunting-quota/a48310-1

Public News Service – WA | September 2015

September 28, 2015OLYMPIA, Wash. – Gov. Jay Inslee is being asked to intervene in a dispute between the state Fish and Wildlife Commission and eight groups advocating for Washington’s cougar population. The commission decided this spring to increase the percentage of cougars that can be hunted in some areas. The groups contend that defies the state’s own research about balancing the cougar population to minimize conflict with people and livestock.

Bob McCoy, a Washington volunteer with the Mountain Lion Foundation, explains cougars stake out wide-ranging territories and killing more of them creates conflict among the remaining males, and leaves cougar kittens without mothers. “It’s increasing the hunting to a point that it will end up with a younger population of cats,” McCoy says. “They’re the ones that are usually looking for territories, so they’re the ones we suspect are most likely to be causing problems.” The groups say the state spent about $5 million and more than a decade on research that found a hunting quota of 12 to 16 percent satisfies hunters without doing permanent damage to the cougar population. The Fish and Wildlife Commission has raised the quota to 17 to 21 percent, primarily in northeastern Washington. The groups say the commission got pressure from ranchers concerned about predators.

The ranchers aren’t allowed under Washington law to kill wolves, but Tim Coleman, director of the Kettle Range Conservation Group, says that shouldn’t be a justification for killing more cougars. “The two predators will keep each other in check, and we know that from experience, and we also know that their habitat is based on prey availability,” says Coleman. “Nature achieves a balance between the two species. But what the commission’s plan is, is unnatural.” The groups also contend the hunting quotas were increased without sufficient chance for public comment. The governor has about a month to rule on the appeal. Chris Thomas, Public News Service – WA – See more at: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2015-09-28/animal-welfare/more-cougars-fair-game-groups-protest-wa-hunting-quota/a48310-1#sthash.xZ508T69.dpuf

World’s Largest Wildlife Corridor to Be Built in California

James William Gibson, Earth Island Journal | September 27, 2015

Earlier this month an obscure Los Angeles area regional public lands agency—the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority—announced the first stages of a five-year plan to build one of the largest wildlife corridors in the world. The goal is to create a natural looking bridge that will allow a small cougar population in the Santa Monica Mountain National Recreation Area the chance to escape north into much larger public lands, while at the same time allowing northern mountain lions the chance to move south and help out the badly inbred and lethally infighting Santa Monica cougars.

Although a young female from the Santa Monica Mountains, P33, did successfully cross Highway 101 in March this year, her escape north is a rare event. Photo credit: Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area
Although a young female from the Santa Monica Mountains, P33, did successfully cross Highway 101 in March this year, her escape north is a rare event. Photo credit: Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area

The proposed bridge will leap over Highway 101, an eight-lane, east-west freeway in LA’s northern suburbs that sees 175,000 car trips a day. The bridge will be built at Liberty Canyon in the suburb of Agoura and when completed will be 200 feet-long and 165 feet-wide. It will be landscaped to blend in with the brushy hills and sound walls along the edge of the bridge will “mitigate traffic noise and block light in order to make the crossing more conducive to wildlife,” says the project study report. The bridge will extend beyond the 101, reaching over an access road south of the highway, necessitating the construction of a tunnel. Estimated cost of the entire project: about $57 million.

Despite the report’s dull bureaucratic language—mountain lion sex is blandly described as “the exchange of genetic material”—at its heart the proposed Liberty Canyon wildlife corridor represents an astonishing effort to reverse decades of suburban sprawl and fragmentation of the region’s surviving open spaces.

The campaign’s iconic poster boy is the famous “Hollywood lion,” also known by its wildlife ID number, “P22.” In 2012, P22 crossed two major freeways and migrated roughly 40 miles from the Santa Monica Mountains along the coast to Los Angeles’s 4300-acre Griffith Park on the city’s eastside. There he took up residence, feeding on the park’s mule deer and soon became a national celebrity of sorts.

More: http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/27/worlds-largest-wildlife-corridor-california/

Cougar Advocates File Appeal to Reverse Undemocratic, Arbitrary Quota Increase by Wildlife Commission

http://www.humanesociety.org/news/press_releases/2015/09/cougar-advocates-file-appeal-wa-gov-091815.html

In response to dramatic increases in cougar hunting quotas, eight organizations and a wildlife research scientist have submitted an administrative appeal to Gov. Jay Inslee to return cougar hunting quotas to scientifically justifiable levels. The petitioners include The Humane Society of the United States, Center for Biological Diversity, Mountain Lion Foundation, Wolf Haven International, The Cougar Fund, The Lands Council, Predator Defense, Kettle Range Conservation Group and Gary Koehler, Ph.D., a former research scientist with the WA Dept. of Fish and Game.

At their April meeting, in a two-minute exchange and without prior notice to the public, members of the state’s Fish and Wildlife Commission voted to raise the cougar quota by 50 to 100 percent in areas of Washington also inhabited by wolves.

On June 30, the parties filed a formal petition asking the Commission to reverse its controversial decision. On Aug. 21, the Commission voted 7 to 1 to keep its decision in place, ignoring public outcry and a 13 year Washington-based scientific study that cost taxpayers approximately $5 million dollars. The study shows such quotas will harm cougar populations and increase mortality of cougar mothers and their dependent cougar kittens.

Washington-based cougar studies also show that killing cougars may exacerbate conflicts with people and livestock and does nothing to prevent future cougar attacks or make people safer. Furthermore, a 2010 poll of Washingtonians found that more than 90 percent of residents appreciate and value cougars.

Dan Paul, Washington state director for The HSUS, said: “Washingtonians care deeply about cougars and the role that these iconic animals play in maintaining healthy wild lands in our state. We urge Governor Inslee to reverse this misguided and arbitrary decision that is biologically unsound, has wasted millions of tax dollars and left stakeholders out of the public rulemaking process.”

In 1996, Washington voters approved I-655 with 63 percent of the statewide vote, to protect cougars and other wildlife species from inhumane and unsporting methods of trophy hunting. This expansion of cougar killing is contrary to the wishes of Washington voters for cougar protections.

Gov. Inslee has 45 days to respond to the filing.

Washington: Urge Gov. Inslee to Protect Cougars

https://secure.humanesociety.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=7042&autologin=true&s_src=sh_fb

<!–
Replace this text and uncomment out to include a photo caption –>

Last spring, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission increased cougar-hunting quotas from 50 to 100 percent in areas where wolves also reside. These hugely-increased quotas will allow trophy hunters to devastate Washington cougars. Even worse, the Commission changed Washington’s wildlife policy without giving the public any notice of this change or an opportunity to comment.

The Humane Society of the United States and our conservation colleagues asked the Commission to reverse their unscientific course of action that will harm cougars, but they ignored us. Now, we need you to join us in our formal appeal to Gov. Jay Inslee to protect Washington’s iconic cougars from over-persecution by trophy hunters.

TAKE ACTION
Please call Gov. Inslee’s office today at 360-902-4111 and ask him to reverse this harmful decision made by the Fish and Wildlife Commission.

After making your call (please do not skip that crucial step!), fill in and submit the form below to send a follow-up message. Legislators receive a lot of email; be sure to edit your message so it stands out.

Share to Facebook Twitter

Biostitution: World’s oldest professions

11077925_428471050656229_1994090549220577260_n

http://foranimals.org/worlds-oldest-professions/

As the June meeting of the New Mexico Game Commission approaches, the so-called wildlife biologists of Game and Fish have modified their proposal on cougar trapping. Facing widespread opposition from editorials and letters in the Santa Fe New Mexican and Albuquerque Journal, culminating in a rally at the state capitol, they dropped their proposal to set cougar traps on public land. The new proposal would allow unrestricted cougar trapping on private land, while increasing other forms of cougar hunting on public land.

The career game managers who fancy themselves “biologists,” continue to serve the interests of ranchers and trappers, while ignoring the need to protect wildlife populations. The department’s original proposal had nothing to do with biology or any other science, as it was dropped in the face of public opposition. The current proposal is hardly better. And they continue to kill cougars while the proposal is up for discussion. Last week they killed a cougar in a Raton neighborhood for allegedly attacking a puppy, and they continue to set out cougar traps in Los Alamos.

Nothing has changed in the year since Scott Bidegain was forced to resign his position as Game Commission Chair after promoting an illegal cougar hunt. As a member of the New Mexico Cattle Growers Association Board of Directors, Bidegain personified the close connection between the livestock industry and the Game Commission.

For that matter, nothing has changed since the Game Commission was first set up in 1921, about the time President Warren Harding appointed NM rancher and former US Senator Albert Fall as Secretary of the Interior. Fall made a career out of opening up public lands to the oil industry in the notorious Teapot Dome Scandal.

With the support of hunting and livestock interests, New Mexico established a Game Commission to maintain populations of huntable wildlife in accord with the principles of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has aptly summed up the model as follows:

Man has hunted since he walked the Earth. Every early culture relied on hunting for survival. Through hunting, man forged a connection with the land and learned quickly that stewardship of the land went hand-in-hand with maintaining wildlife – and their own way of life.

In the first half of the 20th century, leaders like Theodore Roosevelt and Aldo Leopold shaped a set of ideals that came to be known as the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. They articulated the philosophy that all wildlife belong to all of us.

It is useless in any case to look to science to set public policy. In a Wildlife Society article titled An Inadequate Construct, Dr. Michael P. Nelson challenges the tenet of the North American Model which “asserts that Science is the Proper Tool for Discharge of Wildlife Policy.” Nelson states: “This is mistaken for equating a desire for policies informed by science with science discharging or determining, by itself, what policies ought to be adopted—a serious, but very common, error in ethical reasoning. Scientific facts about nature cannot, by themselves, determine how we ought to relate to nature or which policies are most appropriate.”

By making a career out of serving their political masters, New Mexico’s professional game managers have combined the world’s two oldest professions. To borrow a term popularized by Sea Shepherd Captain Paul Watson, the game managers are aptly described as biostitutes.

The current drought, exacerbated by anthropogenic climate change, is likely to continue for decades, threatening wildlife habitat. All wildlife is threatened, including species not officially recognized as endangered. It is time for the State of New Mexico to repeal outdated laws which view predators as threats to livestock. It is time to abolish the Game Commission.

Cougar in Bend did not need to be killed

http://www.bendbulletin.com/opinion/3056576-151/letter-cougar-in-bend-did-not-need-to#

Letter: Cougar in Bend did not need to be killed

<!– returnByline =

–><!– byline4 =

–>By George Wuerthner / <!– –>

Published Apr 11, 2015 at 12:02AM

<!– zz22

The recent killing of yet another cougar in Bend represents a tragic and unnecessary death of an animal that was just minding its own business and posed no threat to anyone.

The hype surrounding the killing lacks ecological perspective. Recent research in predator ecology suggests that killing animals like cougars (or wolves, coyotes and bears) only increases conflicts with humans. Though this information is widely known in ecological circles, apparently the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife hasn’t read any new science in decades because they continue to foster the myth that indiscriminate killing of predators will reduce conflicts. Here’s what ODFW doesn’t tell you:

First, all predators are social animals. When their social relationships are disrupted by hunting and trapping, it creates “social chaos.” For instance, in a study done in Washington state found that as the cougar population declined due to hunting, the number of reported conflicts went up. There is a good reason for this observation.

In cougar society a dominant male controls the territory overlapping two to five female cougars. The dominant male kills young teenage male cougars that enter its territory. But when hunters kill the dominant male, they unleash a free-for-all of young “teenagers” vying for that territory. You may suddenly have two to four young males occupying the same geographical area as formerly occupied by one older male.

Furthermore, teenage cougars, like human male teenagers, are more reckless, bolder and less skillful hunters. This means they are far more likely to prey on livestock and/or enter the backyard of a house to capture a dog or cat.

A similar disruption of social bonds occurs when a female cougar is killed. Unlike deer or elk that produce young in the spring, female cougars produce a litter of kittens at any time of year. That means a female killed even in the winter months may have dependent kittens. Since cougars are not fully able to hunt on their own until they are 15 to 16 months old, orphaned kittens are also more likely to kill easy prey like livestock or pets.

Cougars also will fill any void if the habitat is good. Killing a cougar on Pilot Butte means that another cougar is likely already moving into the same territory. The new cougar may be less experienced than the cougar killed. In any event, killing does not solve the issue.

The threat posed by cougars is infinitely small. Since 1890 there has only been 24 documented fatal cougar attacks in all of North America! The so-called threat posed by the cougar on Pilot Butte was almost nonexistent. By contrast, every year in the US there are 30 to 40 fatal attacks by domestic dogs, and millions of nonlethal attacks. In other words, the dogs that are regularly taken up the Pilot Butte trails pose a greater threat to people than any cougar, yet most of us do not give the dogs a thought.

A more humane approach to the cougar presence would have been to close the park temporarily and allow the cougar to scamper off. Or alternatively to sedate, capture and move it out of town.

But the real problem is the ongoing cougar killing championed by the ODFW that ignores good science and feeds public fears. Indiscriminate killing by hunters and trappers is the ultimate source of predator conflicts in Oregon. In California, where cougar hunting has been banned for decades, there are far fewer conflicts with livestock and humans, despite the fact that California has more cattle, far more people and the highest cougar populations in the West.

— George Wuerthner is a former biologist with the Bureau of Land Management. He lives in Bend.

–><!–

The recent killing of yet another cougar in Bend represents a tragic and unnecessary death of an animal that was just minding its own business and posed no threat to anyone.

The hype surrounding the killing lacks ecological perspective. Recent research in predator ecology suggests that killing animals like cougars (or wolves, coyotes and bears) only increases conflicts with humans. Though this information is widely known in ecological circles, apparently the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife hasn’t read any new science in decades because they continue to foster the myth that indiscriminate killing of predators will reduce conflicts. Here’s what ODFW doesn’t tell you:

First, all predators are social animals. When their social relationships are disrupted by hunting and trapping, it creates “social chaos.” For instance, in a study done in Washington state found that as the cougar population declined due to hunting, the number of reported conflicts went up. There is a good reason for this observation.

In cougar society a dominant male controls the territory overlapping two to five female cougars. The dominant male kills young teenage male cougars that enter its territory. But when hunters kill the dominant male, they unleash a free-for-all of young “teenagers” vying for that territory. You may suddenly have two to four young males occupying the same geographical area as formerly occupied by one older male.

Furthermore, teenage cougars, like human male teenagers, are more reckless, bolder and less skillful hunters. This means they are far more likely to prey on livestock and/or enter the backyard of a house to capture a dog or cat.

A similar disruption of social bonds occurs when a female cougar is killed. Unlike deer or elk that produce young in the spring, female cougars produce a litter of kittens at any time of year. That means a female killed even in the winter months may have dependent kittens. Since cougars are not fully able to hunt on their own until they are 15 to 16 months old, orphaned kittens are also more likely to kill easy prey like livestock or pets.

Cougars also will fill any void if the habitat is good. Killing a cougar on Pilot Butte means that another cougar is likely already moving into the same territory. The new cougar may be less experienced than the cougar killed. In any event, killing does not solve the issue.

The threat posed by cougars is infinitely small. Since 1890 there has only been 24 documented fatal cougar attacks in all of North America! The so-called threat posed by the cougar on Pilot Butte was almost nonexistent. By contrast, every year in the US there are 30 to 40 fatal attacks by domestic dogs, and millions of nonlethal attacks. In other words, the dogs that are regularly taken up the Pilot Butte trails pose a greater threat to people than any cougar, yet most of us do not give the dogs a thought.

A more humane approach to the cougar presence would have been to close the park temporarily and allow the cougar to scamper off. Or alternatively to sedate, capture and move it out of town.

But the real problem is the ongoing cougar killing championed by the ODFW that ignores good science and feeds public fears. Indiscriminate killing by hunters and trappers is the ultimate source of predator conflicts in Oregon. In California, where cougar hunting has been banned for decades, there are far fewer conflicts with livestock and humans, despite the fact that California has more cattle, far more people and the highest cougar populations in the West.

— George Wuerthner is a former biologist with the Bureau of Land Management. He lives in Bend.

–>

The recent killing of yet another cougar in Bend represents a tragic and unnecessary death of an animal that was just minding its own business and posed no threat to anyone.

The hype surrounding the killing lacks ecological perspective. Recent research in predator ecology suggests that killing animals like cougars (or wolves, coyotes and bears) only increases conflicts with humans. Though this information is widely known in ecological circles, apparently the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife hasn’t read any new science in decades because they continue to foster the myth that indiscriminate killing of predators will reduce conflicts. Here’s what ODFW doesn’t tell you:

First, all predators are social animals. When their social relationships are disrupted by hunting and trapping, it creates “social chaos.” For instance, in a study done in Washington state found that as the cougar population declined due to hunting, the number of reported conflicts went up. There is a good reason for this observation.

In cougar society a dominant male controls the territory overlapping two to five female cougars. The dominant male kills young teenage male cougars that enter its territory. But when hunters kill the dominant male, they unleash a free-for-all of young “teenagers” vying for that territory. You may suddenly have two to four young males occupying the same geographical area as formerly occupied by one older male.

Furthermore, teenage cougars, like human male teenagers, are more reckless, bolder and less skillful hunters. This means they are far more likely to prey on livestock and/or enter the backyard of a house to capture a dog or cat.

A similar disruption of social bonds occurs when a female cougar is killed. Unlike deer or elk that produce young in the spring, female cougars produce a litter of kittens at any time of year. That means a female killed even in the winter months may have dependent kittens. Since cougars are not fully able to hunt on their own until they are 15 to 16 months old, orphaned kittens are also more likely to kill easy prey like livestock or pets.

Cougars also will fill any void if the habitat is good. Killing a cougar on Pilot Butte means that another cougar is likely already moving into the same territory. The new cougar may be less experienced than the cougar killed. In any event, killing does not solve the issue.

The threat posed by cougars is infinitely small. Since 1890 there has only been 24 documented fatal cougar attacks in all of North America! The so-called threat posed by the cougar on Pilot Butte was almost nonexistent. By contrast, every year in the US there are 30 to 40 fatal attacks by domestic dogs, and millions of nonlethal attacks. In other words, the dogs that are regularly taken up the Pilot Butte trails pose a greater threat to people than any cougar, yet most of us do not give the dogs a thought.

A more humane approach to the cougar presence would have been to close the park temporarily and allow the cougar to scamper off. Or alternatively to sedate, capture and move it out of town.

But the real problem is the ongoing cougar killing championed by the ODFW that ignores good science and feeds public fears. Indiscriminate killing by hunters and trappers is the ultimate source of predator conflicts in Oregon. In California, where cougar hunting has been banned for decades, there are far fewer conflicts with livestock and humans, despite the fact that California has more cattle, far more people and the highest cougar populations in the West.

— George Wuerthner is a former biologist with the Bureau of Land Management. He lives in Bend.

Wildlife group condemns Bend police cougar kill

File photo

Cougar spotted in early 2010 in Squaw Creek Canyon area near Sisters

ByFrom KTVZ.COM news sources

Published On: Mar 30 2015 10:18:55 AM CDT

 

EUGENE, Ore. – A Eugene-based wildlife advocacy group on Monday condemned the actions of Bend police for shooting and killing a cougar near the summit of Pilot Butte over the weekend.

Here’s the rest of the statement from Predator Defense, in full. (Also note this incident is the topic of our new KTVZ.COM Poll, which you can find halfway down the right side of our home page.):

Predator Defense condemns the actions of the Bend police for killing a cougar at Pilot Butte State Park this weekend.

There was no incident between the animal and the public.   The cougar did not approach or threaten anyone.  There were other options available but instead the police chose to shoot the cougar.

“Once again, authorities grossly overreacted – there was no need to kill this animal,” said Brooks Fahy, executive director of Predator Defense.  “What was needed was a calm, humane and logical approach, not a bullet.”

“Closing the trails at the park was the smart thing to do, and that is all that was needed.  Given space and time the cougar would have moved on, the incident would have been simply and safely resolved.  Hazing the cougar is another option to negatively associate town visits.”

“The people of Bend and all Oregonians should be outraged at this extreme reaction.  This animal posed no threat, even according to state’s bear and cougar public safety law.  He did not have to die.” Fahy said.

Cougars are elusive and secretive, and they rarely pose any threat to people.  There has never been a documented cougar attack on a person in Oregon’s history.

More cougars are killed today than ever before in Oregon’s history – compare the current approximate annual mortality of 500 to the 200 average in the early ‘90s.

“Oregon’s cougar management is solely focused on increasing cougar mortality and they’ve succeeded, but that may not be the best strategy for safety and preventing conflict”, said George Wuerthner, Bend resident and nationally known ecologist and wildlife biologist.

“Ironically, hammering the cougar population may well be causing increased conflicts between people and cougars,” he said.

“That’s exactly the results reported in published peer reviewed field research from Washington State Carnivore Laboratory: areas with heavily hunted cougar populations typically have more young male cats, the age group most often found close to people and livestock, creating conflicts.”

Oregon’s policy of always responding to cougar and bear presence by killing the animal and justifying that by saying it is the only safe outcome is simply untrue.

This practice is not followed in other states such as California and Washington where animals are relocated or given space and time to move off on their own.

The argument that relocating the animal creates disruption with animals in the area is groundless because the ‘relocation’ is simply returning the animal to the perimeter of town where he came from.

The group also has a video “press kit” online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsJCeROdEqI&sns=em

Source: http://m.ktvz.com/news/Wildlife-group-condemns-Bend-police-cougar-kill/32086606

 

Florida Power & Light Co: Don’t build a power plant in prime panther habitat!

Florida Power & Light Co. is planning a huge new power plant on thousands of acres of rural land south of Lake Okeechobee in Hendry County – but this land is prime habitat for the endangered Florida panther. Although they once roamed the entire southeast of the country, there are now only 100 to 160 Florida panthers remaining.

We can’t let Florida Power & Light Co. destroy this land that is critical to the panthers’ survival – sign the petition today urging them not to build a power plant in panther habitat!

The Florida panther is one of the most at-risk mammals in the country and has been listed on the Endangered Species Act since 1973. This vulnerable animal is protected by Florida state law, yet Florida Light & Power Co. is moving ahead with plans for their massive new plant.

The plant would fragment and destroy the panther habitat just north of the Seminole Tribe’s Big Cypress Reservation. Plus, it could use as much as 22 million gallons of water a day, threatening water availability.

It’s up to us to send Florida Power & Light Co. the message that building this plant will be bad for business. Let’s act now to demand that they protect the panthers’ habitat and preserve its natural environment for future generations.

 

Activist, author of vicious letter to Daley, gets 27 months

[All I can say is whoever ran over the mother sea lion and stole her pup better get at least 27 months…!]

http://politics.suntimes.com/article/chicago/activist-author-vicious-letter-daley-gets-27-months/wed-04302014-1233pm

Mumbling a pathetic apology in federal court Wednesday, round-shouldered botanist Rich Hyerczyk could not have looked less dangerous.

But for nearly a decade, the lanky 54-year-old Southwest Side lichen expert hid a dark obsession.

He was a self-styled vigilante, who avenged the deaths of wild animals and U.S. soldiers by writing 90 anonymous letters in which he threatened to murder politicians, rape police officers’ wives and kidnap children.

Wednesday, what U.S. District Judge Gary Feinerman called his “unbelievably cold-blooded” crimes finally caught up with him, when he was sentenced to 27 months in prison.

Though Feinerman said there was “no evidence” that Hyerczyk ever followed through on his threats, a home next door to former Mayor Richard M. Daley’s lakefront retreat was torched in 2008, just three days after Hyerczyk sent Daley a letter vowing he’d “BURN down the Daley house in Michigan” as revenge for Chicago Police shooting a wild cougar caught roaming through Roscoe Village.

Outside court on Wednesday, Hyerczyk acknowledged for the first time that the “coincidence” of the unsolved suspected arson looked bad.

“But I wasn’t there,” he said, holding two pointed fingers to his head in a Boy Scout-style oath of honesty.

“I swear to God — that wasn’t me.”

Hyerczyk hoped to get probation. But his guilty plea earlier this year showed that despite his mild-mannered appearance, his job at a La Grange Park molding company and his  background that included teaching at the Field Museum, the Morton Arboretum, and the Chicago Botanic Garden, he had a hair-trigger temper.

If someone cut him off in the street, he’d follow them home, then mail death threats to their house.

When events in the Middle East upset him, he threatened to kill a Muslim girl in Bridgeview.

And when political issues closer to home rankled, he threatened to murder Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his wife, and wrote racist letters to U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush and Ald. Leslie Hairston, who he vowed to ambush with a knife in a City Hall bathroom.

Some of his vilest threats came after police shot the wild cougar in April 2008. He warned police should “Prepare to DIE like the Cougar you killed,” threatening a sniper would kill “pigs” at the annual St. Jude Memorial March.

In another letter, he mocked Daley’s son Kevin, who died of spina bifida, writing “F—  your dead son.”

Feinerman read aloud from the letters Wednesday, telling Hyerczyk he “should have realized … ‘I need help,’” long before federal authorities nabbed him in January.

Hyerczyk’s mental health problems — including an obsessive personality — were no excuse, he said.

“It was not my duty to act as a vigilante,” Hyerczyk admitted. “I would not want what I did to happen to me.”

In addition to the prison time, he was also fined $10,000 and ordered to stay away from children. Investigators found evidence he’d searched for child porn on his computer, prosecutors said.