Re: Water vole restoration

An oh, so familiar story.........

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3274

COMMENTARY

The Poisoner's Tale:
What I Learned from Prairie Dogs

By Corey Hayashi

In the summer of 2001, I worked for Boulder County Parks and Open
Space as a wildlife technician on a prairie dog habitat project. I was
desperate for a job and wanted to do something to improve the
environment. Emotionally, it was difficult to relocate and exterminate
black-tailed prairie dogs. Listening to these poor animals die was
depressing, and some friends made me feel worse. I did not want to
talk about my job when I got home and I only kept working there to
make enough money to pay rent and buy food. Even though I hated this
job, it gave me an insider’s perspective on the different cultural
beliefs about prairie dogs and the surrounding landscape. It made me
revalue my environmental ethics and overall morals as a human being.

My job required me to observe, map and monitor prairie dog coteries
and record other prairie species in the field sites, such as
black-footed ferrets, burrowing owls, red-tail hawks and other birds
of prey. My position included relocating prairie dogs to other areas
owned by Boulder County. The ones we put down were gassed with carbon
dioxide, frozen and sent to raptor or black-footed ferret
rehabilitation centers for use as food.

We were instructed to do this for four reasons. One is urban
development and landscape change in Colorado. Boulder County is
nestled in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, a border zone of
prairie land and mountainous terrain. The location is popular because
it is close to the big city of Denver, yet has a rural setting with
many outdoor activities and a history of farming and agriculture.
Within Boulder County lies the University of Colorado and large tech
companies, such as Hewlett Packard. Unfortunately, the popularity
brings more development of malls, shopping centers and houses that
overtake these prairie lands, pushing out the predators of prairie
dogs (while the small animals themselves are left to multiply in
fragmented zones).

Another problem prairie dogs face is negative publicity. Many farmers
and ranchers continue to view these rodents as “pests,” despite lack
of scientific data proving their harm (see "Open Season on 'Varmints"
). A third reason is that many people in Boulder County don’t like
prairie dogs because of the fear of catching infectious diseases. In
1999, a Colorado resident caught bubonic plague from the fleas on
prairie dogs. In one of our sites, teachers wanted us to get rid of
prairie dogs near an elementary school "for the safety of children’s
health." Lastly, a Colorado law passed in 2000 limits relocation of
prairie dogs to other counties without permission from the host
county. Since many see the animals as pests, this prevents Boulder
County from relocating them to other rural, sparsely populated
regions.

In 1999, Boulder County created a prairie dog task force and set up
designated management areas. Prairie Dog Habitat Conservation Areas
(HCA) are protected sites where the animals may live without human
disturbance. While I worked for the county there were six such areas
totaling 4,580 acres, and we placed approximately 50 prairie dogs in
these sites. Multiple Objective Areas (MOA) allow prairie dogs to
coexist with other landscape uses but they may not be the highest
management priority and may be removed. No-Prairie Dog Areas (NPD) are
slated for immediate prairie dog removal, and generally have
unsuitable ecological conditions or existing agricultural uses. We
captured on average 20 prairie dogs a day on 141 of these sites and
put them down.

These NPD sites were large plots, making it strenuous to locate, trap
and carry prairie dogs on days when the temperature rose above100
degrees. Luckily, we worked in small groups, and we often had long
conversations on environmental and animal ethics, questioning whether
our actions were environmentally sound. Constant debates on what gave
us the right to take and exterminate an animal that had done no harm
to humans often arose. With the emotional stress building and having
made enough money to support myself for the rest of the summer, I quit
the job. Looking back, it was the most difficult job I’ve ever had.
But, I would do it again because it gave me an insightful perspective
on wildlife management, and cultural and environmental conflicts.

Natural History of Prairie Dogs

Before Euro-Americans moved into the western parts of the United
States, prairie dogs lived east of the Rocky Mountains, as far north
as the great plains of Canada, and as far south as Mexico. At the turn
of the century, there were about five billion prairie dogs inhabiting
100 million acres of short and mixed grass prairie land. Today their
habitat range has shrunk 99 percent and fewer than 700,000 prairie
dogs remain because of disease, cultural beliefs, drought, sprawl,
cultivation, grazing and recreational shooting.

There are five species of prairie dogs: the black-tailed prairie dog
(C ludovicianus), which became a candidate for the endangered species
act in 1999 but was rejected in 2004, white-tailed prairie dog (C.
leucurus), Utah prairie dog (C. gunnisoni) which is threatened,
Gunnison prairie dog (C. gunnisoni), and the endangered Mexican
prairie dog (C. mexicanus). These rodents are social animals
constantly “kissing and hugging” to communicate. They live in coteries
usually composed of one male, several females and offspring and within
each coterie lies burrowing holes that can be 15 feet deep and more
than a hundred feet long.

Scientists believe these animals are keystone species because they
have a large overall effect on ecosystem structure, and are linked to
health of at least 208 vertebrate species and numerous invertebrate
species. Some of these species are endangered such as the burrowing
owl and black-footed ferret, while others such as the mountain plover,
ferruginous hawk and swift fox are candidates for the endangered
species list.

Prairie dogs are important to grasslands because their burrowing and
grazing affects the rates of nitrogen and phosphorous cycling, leading
to healthier plants. Prairie dogs clip vegetation, stimulating
constant and healthy re-growth during the growing season. According to
DM Roemer and SC Forrest in Environmental Management (1996), younger
vegetation is higher in nutritional qualities than mature growth, and
it attracts large herbivores such as cattle, bison and pronghorn.

Different Attitudes, Different Beliefs

Despite these important ecological roles, prairie dogs continue to be
exterminated. I see this issue as part of the dominant Western
paradigm, in which we alter our natural landscape and try to live
separate from nature. The environment and animals are viewed in a
utilitarian fashion. However, there are other stakeholders involved in
the prairie dog debate, complicating the dialogue:

Farmers feel that prairie dogs eat crops, decreasing agricultural
productivity and economic values. Some say prairie dog burrows cause
property damage and make it difficult to plant new crops. Many farmers
label the rodents pests and exterminate them on their private
property.
Ranchers often believe the burrowing holes break cattle and horse
legs, despite a lack of evidence, and claim the animals are
competitors to livestock.
Animal Rights Activists strongly support relocation of prairie dogs
rather than extermination. They argue that it is inhumane to kill
prairie dogs and that these animals deserve to live. They often
question the authority of wildlife management programs and procedures.
Environmentalists value prairie dogs as a keystone species. They
understand saving prairie dogs will save our prairie lands and that
humans should not disrupt the predator and prey relationships. They
also argue for less development and protection of the natural
landscape. Their position is often—along with animal rights
activists—to keep prairie dogs on all properties, both public and
private.
Developers argue that there is an overpopulation of prairie dogs
already. They feel that prairie dogs intrude into development and view
them as pests. Their position is often to exterminate prairie dogs on
developing property.
The General Public tends to be more concerned with saving money than
with the fate of prairie dogs. Overall, they regard health issues as
their main concern and fear an outbreak of the bubonic plague. Their
position is mixed, with some wanting to keep prairie dogs and others
wanting to exterminate them.
American Indians have strong religious and cultural ties with prairie
dogs. They argue prairie dogs are part of their cultural heritage and
are necessary for the prairie ecosystem. Their position is to keep
prairie dogs on natural lands, and some tribes have created holistic
management plans on their tribal lands based on their beliefs.
The Japanese have been shipping prairie dogs to their home country for
keeping as pets. They view these animals as a status symbol of western
exoticism.

Each stakeholder is trying to persuade Boulder County Parks and Open
Space and other management programs to make the best decision.
Clearly, there are cultural differences in environmental ethics, and
the fate of prairie dogs depends on these questions.

Today, 91 percent of western ranchers feel they should not have to
accept agricultural and livestock loses because of prairie dogs, while
97 percent of western ranchers favor controlling them. Since so many
view the rodents in a negative light, most habitat programs use
extermination practices to remove them. Even though the methods of
extermination vary (poisoning, gassing, shooting or vacuuming), the
results are the same.

Under state law in South Dakota prairie dogs are pests. I was paid by
Boulder County to relocate prairie dogs, yet citizens were killing
them on private and county-owned property elsewhere in the state. In
2002, Colorado started a $600,000 pilot program that used lottery
money to provide financial incentives to landowners who conserve
prairie dogs. However, most Colorado ranchers were unwilling to
participate in the program, largely because of cultural beliefs.

Most scientists agree that we spend more money than needed killing
prairie dogs when these funds should be going towards environmental
education. Places like the Denver Zoological Foundation and the
Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative have daylong educational
workshops on prairie dog conservation. Independent ranchers such as
the Tranel family in Butte, Montana, have successfully raised cattle
with prairie dogs. Ned Tranel, Jr. says the cattle on his 77,000 acres
are attracted to prairie dog colonies because of the fertile grasses
and species diversity.

Good Pets?

Keith Crew, a resident near Badlands National Park in South Dakota,
has raised rare albino prairie dogs since 1966 and sells them as pets.
Most of the buyers have come from Japan. In recent years, thousands of
prairie dogs have been shipped to the Asian nation. The animals are
prized there because they are small, not too loud, and social animals.

On the Internet, there are pet prairie dog sites from all over the
world with pictures sent from proud owners. There are prairie dog pet
chat sites and online stores. One pet prairie dog distribution company
sells white prairie dog pups for $500 each. Black-tailed prairie dog
pups sell for $150 each. The cost of the kennel, airfare and delivery
totals $185.

While tax-payers in the United States are paying thousands of dollars
to exterminate these animals, in Tokyo, an albino prairie dog fetches
$3,000. A palomino sells for $1,000 and the black-tailed sells for
$300. Boulder County paid me $12 an hour to exterminate roughly 20
black-tailed prairie dogs each day. If we instead sold 20 prairie dogs
a day, taxpayers would not only save money, but also hypothetically, a
$6,000 profit would return from sales of pet prairie dogs to Japan.
This money could be put into environmental education programs or used
to protect open space. Perhaps, if rural westerners come to see
prairie dogs as having value they'll stop poisoning and shooting them.

Another solution is to compel the government to list black-tailed
prairie dogs as an endangered species (it was removed from candidate
status in 2004). If that happens, it will become illegal to kill
prairie dogs on public and private property. People will be forced to
live with prairie dogs, and the existing prairie ecosystem will regain
its balance. It will also slow the rate of urban development.

Westerners need to rethink their environmental ethics. Environmental
education needs to become more mainstream, because many ecosystems are
diminishing. While one culture views prairie dogs as pests, another
sees them as a keystone species, and another views them as cute pets.
Understanding each society’s beliefs, history and cultural foundations
will hopefully guide us in a successful approach to protect the
prairie ecosystem and direct development to become more
environmentally sustainable.

Corey Hayashi is a doctorate student in environmental anthropology at
Indiana University. He is currently in the Brazilian Amazon studying
agroforestry systems used by a community of Japanese who migrated
there in the 1920s. This article was abbreviated from a longer
version.

For more on prairie dogs, check out E's July/August 2004 issue,
www.emagazine.com/?toc&issue=69.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to E/The Environmental Magazine!

"As I was walkin' - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!"
Woody Guthrie

Re: Water vole restoration

The Poisoner's Tale: What I Learned from Prairie Dogs