Sporting Classics Digital

November/December 2016

Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/742011

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 115 of 221

112 • S P O R T I N G C L A S S I C S Hudson Bay coastline have been completely and irrevocably denuded. A scientist at Ducks Unlimited tersely summed up the reason for the increase with a single word: nitrogen. He was referring to the fertilizer used in modern agriculture along the snow goose's traditional flyways: more land in agriculture; more fertilizer being used on that land to create more and better crops; greatly increased food sources for the geese—all of which lead to greatly increased survival rates. In the case of the mule deer, man's influence artificially increased their numbers by eradicating or greatly reducing the numbers of predators. At the same time, cattle and sheep were introduced into mule deer territory and supplanted venison as a primary protein source, even as hunting became more and more recreational rather than a matter of survival. The presence of the great herds of Now consider that in many Eastern and Midwestern states, current whitetail numbers are estimated at 75 to 100 deer per square mile, and numbers as high as 400 per square mile exist in some areas. To put that in perspective, I will quote archaeologist Thomas Neumann's insightful statement that, "[abnormally high] populations [are] a symptom of an extraordinarily disrupted ecosystem." N othing and no one, in all of history, has disrupted ecosystems around the planet the way man has. The overabundance of whitetails in so many areas is proof of that, but if you doubt it, another good example is the snow goose, a species that has increased in such tremendous numbers—more than 300 percent since the 1970s—that their traditional breeding grounds along the where elk herds have been greatly reduced (Yellowstone National Park is a good example), but neither whitetails nor mule deer have received the same amount of publicity. Yet when elk numbers drop, either by being predated or because they move to areas like the Schuett Ranch where they feel safe, wolves then turn their attention to deer. However, it would be disingenuous to lay the blame for the mule deer decline on wolves; mule deer numbers were dropping long before wolves were reintroduced in the mid-1990s. It would be more accurate to lay the blame on man. Consider again Meriwether Lewis' observation about game being "very scarce and shy." Consider again Ernest Thompson Seton's widely accepted estimate of 10 to 20 deer per square mile in ideal habitat in pre-European America. So why are mule deer declining now? The increase in predators—wolves, mountain lions, and coyotes—is part of it. But more importantly, add to that loss of habitat due to farming, urban sprawl, subdivisions, fences, and interstate highways that bisect winter ranges, migratory routes, and transitional areas. " "

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Sporting Classics Digital - November/December 2016