Jaguar in the Southwest

The endangered species tax

August 1, 2011
By admin

by Hugh Holub on Jul. 29, 2011, under endangered species act, politics

http://tucsoncitizen.com/view-from-baja-arizona/2011/07/29/the-endangered-species-tax/

The Endangered Species Act commits us to saving not only every species…but every sub-species and every distinct population segment of a species or a sub-species.
Sounds like a popular idea in concept.
But does anyone realize how much this is costing our economy?
We have in effect an Endangered Species tax in this country.
The Endangered Species Tax is expressed in two ways.
The first way is virtually every federal project that involves disturbing the environment has to go through an Endangered Species Act review.
US Fish and Wildlife gets a chance to extort money from other federal agencies in exchange for approving other federal project activity.
Take for example the $50 million US Fish and Wildlife got from Department of Homeland Security to study bats because the Border Patrol drives around federal lands and they might run over a protected lizard.
Or take the millions of dollars being transfered from the Central Arizona Project to restoire native fish in Arizona becvause in theory exotic fish from the CAP canals could swim up the Ssanta Cruz River and eat native fish.
Whatever Congress appropriates to to US Fish and Wildlife, that agency controls vastly more money through “inter-agency agreements” with other federal agencies where Fish and Wildlife extorted money from thos other agencies in exchange for allowing their projects to go forward.
Congress needs to dig into all the inter-agency agreements between US Fish and Wildlife and other federal agencies and find out just how munch money Fish and Wildlife really controls. I’ll bet that will surprise a lot of people.
And then Congress needs to stop US Fish and Wildlife from hijacking other federal agency funds.
The second Endangered Species Tax is the cost added to every project in the country that is added to get federal approval for that project.
These costs turn up in habitat protection plans and other mitigation measures that projects are subjected to by the federal government and environmental groups who sue to block these projects.
Want to build a solar energy project? You will probably have to fork over money to protect the desert tortoise.
Want to build a natural gas pipeline? You will have to fork over money to protect mice. El Paso Natural Gas got hit for $22 million to get approval to build a gas pipeline through Nevada.
Want to drill for oil or natural gas in West Texas? You will add millions to your cost to protect sage lizards.
I’ll bet that we have at least a 10 percent cost added to virtually every project in the country that disturbs land in some way because we have prioritized protecting darned never everything that grows or walks or crawls in this country.
Somwhere along the way people need to have a say as to how much money we’re going to divert from our economy to protect what.
If there is no genetic difference between the wolves that live in Montana or Michigan or eastern Arizona…why are we spending money to have wolves in eastern Arizona?
If there are lots of jaguars in Mexico and all the way to Brazil….why are we going to spend millions to have jaguars in southern Arizona?
If there are 27 sub-species of squirrels….why are we spending money to protect one sub-species on one mountain top in Arizona?
There are a lot of good questions that need to be asked about how the Endangered Species Act really works and how much money it is costing to protect plants and critters that may not even really be endangered at all.
The Endangered Species Act really is not about protecting plants and animals any more.
It has been twisted into a tool to block virtually any project that disturbs the land.
Radical environmental groups that really want to destroy the American economy have turned the ESA into their weapon of choice to strangle America.
And taxpayers are paying for killing the country.
We have been bamboozled into a costly guilt trip via the Endangered Species Act and our priorities are seriously skewed when on one hand we really want to secure our border and we have people fighting finishing the border fence because that will interfere with jaguar migration.
Let’s find out how much we are spending via federal inter-agency agreements and cost additions to projects in the country and see if we are really getting our money’s worth.
And of course radical environmentalists will argue money is no object in protecting endangered species.
That is your money and the more of it siphoned away to protect sage lizards in West Texas, the less you will have for Social Security and Medicare.

Jaguar Listing and Habitat Designation Based on Junk Science

October 15, 2010
By admin

by Jonathan DuHamel on Oct. 15, 2010, under General Science

Tucson Citizen
A Freedom of Information Act inquiry has revealed that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) decision to declare portions of Arizona and New Mexico as “Critical Habitat” for the jaguar has no basis in fact. USFWS based its decision on unsubstantiated anecdotal stories that did not meet the Endangered Species Act definition of minimum scientific standards. The inquiry also found possible collusion between an employee of the Arizona Fish and Game Department and the Center for Biological Diversity. The report of the inquiry was written by Biologist/Attorney Dennis Parker. Here is the press release:
“GROUPS CHARGE CORRUPTION, JUNK SCIENCE BEHIND EXPANDED JAGUAR PROTECTIONS IN ARIZONA & NEW MEXICO.”
In a recent letter to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) the Southern Arizona Cattlemen’s Protective Association (SACPA), the Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties, the Pima Natural Resources Conservation District (NRCD), the Whitewater Draw NRCD, and People for the West strongly urged the agency to reverse its decision that critical habitat is “prudent” for jaguars in Arizona and New Mexico. The letter shows that under the ESA, and based solely on the best science available, habitat “essential” to the jaguar’s existence does not exist in the United States. Furthermore, studies have proven that well managed livestock grazing poses no threat to jaguars or their habitat.
“The Department of Interior just announced a new policy favoring sound science over political misconduct,” said SACPA president Cindy Coping. “To honor their own policy the USFWS must reverse their unsound but politically fashionable decision that won’t help the jaguar and does threaten to destroy hundreds of rural jobs in two states.”
A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) inquiry revealed that the agency’s decision relied heavily on a 2005 conference presentation that lacked supporting data and fails to meet the ESA definition of minimum scientific standards.
Another public records search revealed that an employee of the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) authorized a $999.99 payment to the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) to create a jaguar habitat model for New Mexico. The CBD’s model was a substitute for, and produced conclusions far different from, the sound scientific conclusions already published by the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. The CBD had a then recent history of publishing maliciously false information about endangered species and livestock grazing. That charge, proven in court, was already a matter of widespread public knowledge when the AGFD employee engaged the CBD to produce a substitute habitat model for New Mexico.
“The payment itself, one cent below the level we understand requires Commission approval, raises serious questions about the AGFD employee’s intentions,” Coping said. “These issues involve authority and abuse of such, improper bias, conflict of interest, and the unprecedented extraterritorial extension of AGFD authority over the State of New Mexico,” wrote Dennis Parker, the wildlife biologist/attorney who authored the comments.” These facts alone warrant suspension of any critical habitat designation for the jaguar in the United States until this serious situation is fully investigated and explained,” he added. At least two of the supposed “verified” jaguars mentioned in the Arizona habitat models were likely not naturally occurring, but rather, animals of foreign origin captured and imported into the United States for the purpose of “guaranteed” hunting. At least 9 such imported jaguars were introduced into New Mexico in 1972 and 1973 alone, including at least one female that escaped. Recent journal published studies from Brazil prove that both the range and numbers of jaguars expanded where domestic livestock were introduced, due to the more dependable prey base. In fact, Brazilian cattle ranches support the highest densities and numbers of jaguars found anywhere. Moreover, both the historic and the recent record of transient jaguar occurrences in the Southwest indicate that modern, highly controlled livestock grazing poses no threat to the few jaguars that sometimes wander across the Mexican border onto neighboring Arizona and New Mexico ranchlands.

Kill rates and predation patterns of jaguars (Panthera onca) in the
southern Pantanal, Brazil (2010)
http://www2.allenpress.com/pdf/mamm-91-03-722-736.pdf

Predator -Prey Relationships and the Spatial Ecology of Jaguars in the Southern Pantanal, Brazil (2008)
http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1111&context=etd

All of the citizen organizations represented in the carefully documented letter sent to the USFWS care deeply about the management of landscapes in Arizona and New Mexico where ranching has been and continues to be the dominant land use keeping habitat largely intact and undeveloped for more than 300 years.
###

Read the full 15-page report here.
Some excerpts from the report:
“While one transient male jaguar, Macho B, did roam the borderlands of Arizona and Sonora for more than a decade until last year, his extensive travels prior to his death indicates he was having a difficult time surviving in this dry, rugged region. Moreover, his persistent presence in the borderlands was also artificially induced by the placement of female jaguar scent (in the form of scat of captive females in season) at camera locations on the United States side of the boundary with Mexico.”

“Finally, if Arizona and New Mexico actually qualified as critical habitat, or habitat “essential” to the existence of the jaguar as a species, then both common sense and objective science would necessarily demand that, at a minimum, female jaguars be shown to reside in those States. The facts conclusively show that they do not and that no female jaguar has been shown to occur in Arizona, even on a highly questionable and suspect basis, since 1963. The facts also reveal that no [wild] female jaguar has been verified to have occurred in New Mexico — ever.”

This is just one more example of why we should Repeal the Endangered Species Act.
This entry was posted on Friday, October 15th, 2010 at 7:35 am

Jaguars do some serious damage to cattle herds according to a new scientific study.

June 18, 2010
By admin

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0616/Jaguars-and-how-they-hunt-Scientists-equip-jaguars-with-GPS-collars

Jaguars and how they hunt: Scientists equip jaguars with GPS collars
Jaguars do some serious damage to cattle herds according to a new scientific study.
By Zoë Macintosh, LiveScience Staff Writer / June 16, 2010
Brazilian ranchers troubled by the tendency of jaguars to stealthily kill cattle may be justified in their fears, according to new research on the mysterious cats’ hunting patterns.
Jaguars in the Pantanal wetlands of central Brazil hunt native species, such as giant anteaters, more often than cows, scientists discovered. But when they do kill cattle, they do so at rates exceeding rancher estimates.
The results stand in sharp contrast to government and nonprofit groups’ beliefs in the over-exaggeration of cattle rancher losses, in a region where 95 percent of the ranches are privately owned and have been around for more than 200 years, the researchers say.
Documenting hunting and feeding of jaguars “is extremely difficult because of their nocturnal and secretive behavior,” the study scientists wrote in the June issue of the Journal of Mammalogy.
Objective, unbiased data was only possible through technology similar to that now used to track cougars, wolves and coyotes in North America.
Collared jaguars roam
Ten jaguars outfitted with collars that sent GPS signals of their whereabouts every two hours, produced a volume of data on their hunting paths and areas of concentrated use such as kill sites, dens and bed sites in the Pantanel – the world’s largest freshwater wetland. Every 21 days of data collection, a team of researchers visited a few of these areas in order to identify prey remains.
A total of 11,787 GPS locations collected from October 2001 to April 2004 resulted in 1,105 areas of high jaguar use. Prey remains were found and logged at more than 400 kill sites. Just over a third of the animals killed by jaguars were cattle, while the remaining 68 percent were native species, including caiman (a crocodilian), peccaries (piglike mammals), wild hogs, marsh deer and giant anteaters.
While a recent survey suggested ranchers estimated losing about 70 head of cattle annually out of 6,000 head, the study’s results for kill rates showed that during a dry year they usually lost about 390 head, and during a wet year, around 118 head.
Another landscape entirely
A major jaguar stronghold outside of the Amazonian rainforest, the Pantanal wetlands cover an area the size of Iowa frequently flooded in about 3 to 7 feet (1 to 2 meters) of water from rainfall.
“There are times literally in the field when you’re on horseback and the water is up to the horse’s belly,” researcher Eric Gese at Utah State University told Livescience.
The jaguars “don’t mind the water at all,” Gese said, but the study revealed the carnivores’ hunting choices are largely influenced by seasonal rainfall and water levels, as the ebb and flow of water determines their access to certain animals.
During the wet season, when cattle are scarce and cloistered among elevated plateaus, jaguars predominantly killed the numerous alligators in the area. In the dry season the pattern reversed and cattle killing peaked, as ranchers moved their cattle to the lower grounds to utilize the lush grasses exposed in the formerly flooded plains.
“As they spread the cattle out, they’re just exposed to more jaguars. And the jaguars, being the large carnivore as they are, take advantage of the availability of the animals,” Gese said.
Lots of cats
Other results of the landmark study, which also collected data on spatial ecology and some interactions, including the insight that jaguars were densely populated, with about 10 to 11 cats per square kilometer (0.4 square miles) in the area studied, and “surprisingly social.”
“We found that they actually encounter each other and spend more time together than we ever anticipated. That was a surprise. Not like prides of jaguars, nothing like that: we had males travelling together, and we didn’t know if they were brothers,” Gese said. “And the density of jaguars recorded in that area was greater than anything we encountered … that was astounding.”
“It was quite mind-blowing. So, there are a lot of cats there,” Gese added.
Recognizing that the ranchers have “a real problem,” yet the region’s livestock supports jaguars, Gese said his team of scientists was trying to work with officials to get them to figure out a compromise and accept some form of coexistence.
“How they deal with that is up to them. How they want to enact that. This is the first time that somebody has said, ‘Look there’s data! They lose a lot of cattle to jaguars,’” Gese said.

Wildlife group threatens suit against feds to protect jaguar

June 13, 2010
By admin

by Glen Creno – Jun. 13, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
A wildlife group is gearing up for a fight to force the federal government to better protect jaguars, although the big cats have virtually disappeared from the country.
The Center for Biological Diversity wants the Wildlife Services division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to stop the trapping, snaring and poisoning of nuisance predators that could result in the killing or endangering of jaguars and ocelots in the Southwest. Spokesman Michael Robinson said the group is concerned about anti-predator efforts in Arizona, New Mexico and possibly Texas.
“They’re not targeting jaguars, but if they’re setting up a snare for a mountain lion, there’s a chance a jaguar could end up in that snare,” he said.
A lawsuit could come as soon as mid-July. At the end of April, the conservation group gave the government 60 days’ notice of its intent to sue. William Clay, Wildlife Services’ deputy administrator, replied on May 14, saying Wildlife Services had “reviewed your comments and will take them into consideration.”
The lawsuit threat comes in the wake of the death of a jaguar in Arizona. The animal, known as Macho B, was caught in southern Arizona in February 2009 during a state Game and Fish Department effort to capture and track mountain lions and bears.
A tracking collar was placed on Macho B, but he was recaptured less than two weeks later after those monitoring him thought his behavior was unusual. He was diagnosed with a kidney ailment and euthanized.
Game and Fish believed it was an inadvertent capture. However, Emil McCain of Patagonia recently pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Tucson to unlawfully luring Macho B into a snare with jaguar scat.
McCain previously had been a subcontractor for a guide service hired by Game and Fish to help with research, said Bob Miles, an agency spokesman. Miles emphasized the man was never a Game and Fish employee.
Robinson said the center’s anticipated lawsuit was not strictly motivated by the Macho B episode, though the “tragic fate of Macho B is certainly a factor.” The lawsuit notice alleges that Wildlife Services and the federal Fish and Wildlife Service have failed to consult on activities that would affect both the jaguar and the ocelot.
It also argues that a more than 10-year-old biological opinion on how jaguars can be affected by predator-control programs is outdated and that new scientific information shows that they need better protection.
The conservation group has a separate lawsuit pending against Game and Fish in the Macho B case. It alleges that the agency did not have the valid permit allowing it to inadvertently capture a jaguar in the bear and mountain-lion study.
The agency disagrees, Miles said. He declined to discuss the case further but said the agency cares a great deal about jaguar conservation.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/06/13/20100613jaguar-lawsuit.html#ixzz0qkKE4fd4

Environmental Groups Net $91,000 on Jaguar Habitat Litigation

March 22, 2010
By admin

Here’s The Moos…. For Immediate Release / March 22, 2010
From the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association
P.O. Box 7517 / Albuquerque, New Mexico 87194

For further information, contact: Caren Cowan
505.247.0584 phone / nmcga@nmagriculture.org email

Environmental Groups Net $91,000 on Jaguar Habitat Litigation
The federal government paid a total of $91,000 to environmental groups as part of settlement agreements in two lawsuits filed regarding designation of critical habitat for the jaguar.
“The amount of money — our tax dollars — that has gone and continues to go to these groups is unbelievable,” said Bert Ancell, New Mexico Cattle Growers Association (NMCGA) President, Bell Ranch. “How the government can continue to make these agreements, knowing that money will be used to fund yet another lawsuit against the federal government, is beyond me.”
The Center for Biological Diversity received $53,000 and the Defenders of Wildlife received $38,000 in settlement of a case they filed in 2008 to force the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to designate critical habitat for the jaguar. The groups are pushing for the designation of 53 million acres of habitat in southern New Mexico and Arizona, for a species that is rarely seen north of the Mexican border.
Ancell is concerned about the impacts a critical habitat designation could have on natural resource users, including ranchers. “These designations are far-reaching, and could seriously impact ranching operations and rural economies in southern New Mexico and Arizona.”
“The cost of these lawsuits is staggering,” Ancell continued, “with no actual benefit to the species in question. These environmental groups file hundreds of lawsuits every year, forcing agencies to dedicate time, money and resources that could go to species benefit, instead it goes into the courtroom. Our tax dollars are used to defend the case, our tax dollars are used to settle the case and the environmental groups go out and file more lawsuits. None of this impacts the jaguar one way or the other – the species continues to do just fine in natural range — which does not include the southwestern United States. Jaguars need running water and a humid climate.”
Groups are able to ask for attorneys’ fees as part of the settlement of a lawsuit with the federal government under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) and other fee shifting statutes. EAJA was passed in the 1980s to ensure that private citizens’ and non-profits’ rights were protected. Today, however, well-funded environmental groups are using the legislation for profit, Ancell concluded.
The NMCGA has represented the beef industry in New Mexico and the West since 1914 and has members in all 33 of the state’s counties as well as some 14 other states. The Association participates in venues necessary to protect beef producers and private property rights including litigation, state and federal legislation and regulatory affairs.

-30-
Every Day is Earth Day For Cattlemen

Center For Biological Diversity’s latest proposal for Jaguar Critical Habitat.

March 14, 2010
By admin

Protect Jaguar Habitat in Southwest Forests and Deserts

Jaguar Critical Habitat proposal CBD

Be afraid be very afraid. But don’t let it stop you from acting.

Jaguars evolved in North America before moving south to colonize Central and South America thousands of years ago. Historically, they were reported from California to the Carolinas. But clearing of forests, draining of wetlands, and introduction of livestock — coupled with shooting, trapping, and poisoning — pushed jaguars out of the United States.

Critical habitat — the areas necessary for the species’ recovery — should be designated in the Sky Island mountain ranges of southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico, where jaguars have been seen and photographed in recent years. The areas between these isolated mountains should also be designated as critical habitat to ensure that jaguar travel is not impeded.

The Gila headwaters ecosystem in west-central New Mexico, along with the adjoining Mogollon Rim in Arizona, should also be designated as critical habitat. The last known female jaguar in the United States was killed in this area in 1963.

Please submit comments in support of the Center’s proposal to designate critical habitat for the endangered jaguar today — the deadline is Monday, March 15.
Suggested Language for letter
Please designate critical habitat for jaguars throughout the entirety of the Sky Islands and the Gila/Mogollon Rim regions of Arizona and New Mexico.

I also support critical habitat for jaguars in portions of other regions such as southeastern New Mexico, West Texas, and Southern California.

The Sky Islands ecosystem consists of isolated mountain ranges that have long been inhabited by jaguars. As recently as last March, jaguar “Macho B” was known to live and roam in the Pajarito, Atascosa, Tumacacori, and Baboquivari Mountains. Other jaguars have been confirmed in the Chiricahua, Peloncillo, and Animas Mountains. These and other sky islands, along with the desert lands between them, have been identified by the Jaguar Conservation Team as potential jaguar habitat, providing habitat for jaguar prey such as deer and javelina.

Please also designate the Gila National Forest in New Mexico and the Mogollon Rim in Arizona, along with adjoining lands, as critical habitat. These uplands with vast coniferous forests supporting deer, elk, and javelina were home to the last known female jaguar and possible jaguar reproduction up till the 1960s. The Gila and Mogollon Rim were also identified as potential jaguar habitat by the Jaguar Conservation Team.

Other undeveloped areas in southeastern New Mexico, West Texas, and Southern California should also be designated as critical habitat for jaguars.

Thank you for your consideration.

Docket # FWS-R2-ES-2009-0091

Judy Keeler and Sue Krentz take on Michael Robinson of the Center Biological Diversity over Jaguar Logic.

February 26, 2010
By admin

http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/262159460385opinionguestcolumns02-26-10.htm

Friday, February 26, 2010

Jaguars Must Have Recovery Plan

By Michael J. Robinson
Center for Biological Diversity
After many years of delay, a court ruling has established that the American jaguar will receive the legal and practical benefits of a recovery plan and critical habitat designation. The Endangered Species Act requires these measures to recover the jaguar and to conserve its ecosystems.
This decision follows the unanimous support of the American Society of Mammalogists, the world’s most prestigious scientific body studying mammals, at their 87th annual meeting which took place at the University of New Mexico in 2007. The society endorsed development of a recovery plan and designation of critical habitat, stating that “habitats for jaguars in the United States, including Arizona and New Mexico, are vital to the long-term resilience and survival of the species.”
Despite the jaguar’s popular image as a jungle icon, these spotted cats first evolved in the United States before colonizing Central and South America thousands of years ago. In historical times, they were reported in Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Ancient and more recent Indian rock-art and traditional stories from the Southeast, Midwest, Southwest and the Pacific coast also evoke and describe jaguars.
Jaguars disappeared from the United States through clearing of forests, draining of wetlands and introduction of livestock, coupled with shooting, trapping and poisoning. The last known female jaguar north of the border with Mexico was shot by a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sniper in 1963 in the Apache National Forest in Arizona — where Mexican gray wolves have since been reintroduced.
Almost always unobserved, tigres keep walking back across our border, sometimes apprehended in stirring trip-camera photos depicting robust, beautifully-patterned animals. This month, a newly identified jaguar, sex unknown, was photographed in Sonora just 30 miles south of Arizona.
The best known of those jaguars, Macho B, was euthanized in March after being caught in a snare set by the Arizona Game and Fish Department. The Interior Department reported last month that the snaring was “intentional” for jaguars and represented “criminal wrongdoing.”
Macho B’s untimely death was the final act for the Orwellianly-named “Jaguar Conservation Team,” some of whose principals may have been central to the still unfolding investigation into how this 13-year resident of southern Arizona ended up in an ultimately fatal snare.
Founded in 1997 by Arizona Game and Fish, the Jaguar Conservation Team was intended to demonstrate that a “stakeholder” model works better for wildlife than the traditional model of citizens and government adhering to the law — in this case the Endangered Species Act.
The heart of the team, officially comprising state, federal, and local government agencies, is the public lands livestock industry — the same industry for which the same set of government agencies had for many decades worked together to exterminate jaguars, wolves and other wildlife.
The conservation team opposed critical habitat designation, and for many years bent the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to its will by promising to voluntarily “coordinate protection of jaguar habitat.” But over the years the livestock industry successfully blocked habitat protection.
Though the team touted its “interagency cooperation,” the Department of Homeland Security rarely attended its meetings even as it constructed a jaguar-proof wall across much of the border. Jaguar reports often went uninvestigated.
The team also pledged to reduce “overutilization of jaguars for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes.” Yet other U.S. jaguars aside from Macho B are thought to be dead after being chased to Mexico by houndsmen.
Contrary to assertions, the state penalties for illegally killing a jaguar in New Mexico and Arizona are precisely the same as they have been for years; new laws that purportedly upgraded state penalties actually only apply if jaguars are removed from the federal endangered species list.
The Endangered Species Act provides the only real, on-the-ground protection for jaguars, and its record attests to even greater conservation effectiveness once critical habitat is designated. Species with their critical habitat protected have been shown to be twice as likely as those without to be making progress toward recovery. A recovery plan is a scientific road map to rescuing an endangered species and securing its long-term survival.
The Endangered Species Act can recover the jaguar and in so doing can help conserve the broader web of life. As the venerable American Society of Mammalogists put it, “ecosystems in the United States in which jaguars formerly occurred are not intact without the sustained presence of jaguars.”
Michael Robinson represents the Center for Biological Diversity in Silver City and is author of “Predatory Bureaucracy: The Extermination of Wolves and the Transformation of the West.”
________________________________________

http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/21215227opinion02-21-10.htm

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Lawsuits Don’t Help Animals

By Sue Krentz And Judy Keeler
Border Area Ranchers
On Feb. 18, 2009, biologists, conducting a cougar and bear study in southern Arizona, were excited when Macho B, a jaguar repeatedly photographed over a 13-year period, was found in one of their traps.
One of the highest research priorities of the Arizona/New Mexico Jaguar Conservation Team was to capture and radio-collar a jaguar wandering into the United States from Mexico in order to get detailed information on the animal’s habitat use and movement patterns.
Macho B, estimated to be about 15 years old, was fitted with a tracking collar and released back into the wild.
Biologists had to make the sad decision to euthanize the jaguar when, 10 days after his release, he began to show signs of weakening.
After his unfortunate demise, protests were staged, articles were written, and another lawsuit was filed by the Center for Biological Diversity.
Macho B’s death was a disappointment to everyone, but to say, in some media reports, the Team failed to include all stakeholders, failed to make progress on many of its goals, and failed to improve conservation of jaguars is disingenuous.
In an effort to involve all affected stakeholders, the Jaguar Conservation Team organized in March 1997. It was a revolutionary concept, meant to involve all interest groups, including the New Mexico and Arizona game and fish and state land departments; the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, National Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service. It also included several counties and an assortment of conservation organizations and ranchers.
When the jaguar was listed as endangered in the United States, little was known about jaguar biology, population trends, distribution, abundance, demographics or genetics.
The conservation team’s task was to develop a strategy to protect jaguars that might wander into the borderlands.
In October 1997, a voluntary Jaguar Scientific Advisory Group, consisting of wildlife biologists well known for their jaguar research, was enlisted to help provide the most current information and best available science.
After studying big cats for more than two decades, Alan Rabinowitz, a leading jaguar authority and an advisory group member, concluded there “was no area in the Southwestern United States that was critical for the survival of the jaguar … since the more open, dry habitats of the southwest are marginal for the jaguar in terms of water, cover and prey density.”
Most biologists agreed that, “if there had been a resident breeding population of jaguars in the U.S. in the recent past, it was probably a very small population, short-lived, and not viable.”
The conservation team learned the nearest core population of jaguars was at the confluence of three rivers in Mexico, about 135 miles south of Douglas, Ariz. The biologists believed this population was in imminent danger and struggling to survive.
In an effort to protect jaguars wandering into New Mexico and Arizona, legislation was passed in both states to comply with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ruling that the primary threat to jaguars in the United States was illegal killing. This legislation was supported by the state wildlife agencies and the ranching community.
In 2008, in an effort to protect jaguar habitat in Mexico, Fish and Wildlife provided a matching grant of $147,334.25 to the Northern Jaguar Project to purchase a 35,000-acre ranch in Mexico.
Regardless of these local efforts, a few radical conservation organizations seemed to have another agenda. It appeared their goal was to force critical habitat in the United States.
With the recent determination by Fish and Wildlife that critical habitat for jaguars is now prudent, the agency has no choice but appoint a federal recovery team, map “critical habitat” and develop a formal recovery plan which will include a regulatory framework that will force compliance upon the people who live and work in these areas.
No more hidden agendas! The plan behind the lawsuits, protests and media coverage is the Wildlands Network, a system of wildlife reserves with corridors running between.
The center’s lawsuits are not meant to protect jaguars, wolves, polar bears, bats or any other “endangered” species. These animals are just the surrogates to implement the “network.” The Endangered Species Act is their tool and the citizen’s lawsuit provision is the means by which radical “conservation” organizations will continue to hammer the economies of the small, rural communities that must live under their “rewilding” scheme.
The threats, extreme ultimatums and lawsuits do nothing to protect endangered species, or their habitat. The perpetual litigation benefits only a few radical organizations. It continues, however, to frustrate the small, rural communities that must live under their threats.
Sue Krentz and her husband Rob ranch in the Chiricahua Mountains in Southeast Arizona. Judy Keeler and her husband Murray ranch in the Peloncillo Mountains in Southwest New Mexico. Both were members of the Jaguar Conservation Team for 13 years.

New Jaguar Sighting Boosts AZ Wilderness Protection Efforts

February 26, 2010
By admin

February 25th, 2010
Public News Service (AZ)
Doug Ramsey
Thursday, February 25, 2010

TUCSON, Ariz. – Conservationists say a recent remote-camera photo of an endangered jaguar 30 miles south of the Mexico/Arizona border confirms the need for preserving more of Arizona’s remaining wild lands. Jaguars are known to roam from Argentina northward to Arizona and New Mexico.
Biologist Sergio Avila, northern Mexico conservation program coordinator with Tucson-based Sky Island Alliance, says the new sighting means this jaguar could easily be crossing into Arizona.
“A jaguar can move 30 miles in one day. That’s not a challenge. The challenge is to find open corridors and then get to habitat that’s protected and that these animals can occupy and thrive in.”
Sky Island Alliance supports a bill sponsored by Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva to secure wilderness protection for the Tumacacori Highlands south of Tucson. The primary opposition has come from area mining interests.
Avila says the most important factor in protecting jaguars is to protect their habitat on public lands.
“Wilderness designation is the most effective tool to protect habitat – not only for jaguars but for all the species that live within the habitat of a jaguar. And that would include their wild prey, such as deer or javelina.”
Avila says it is a misconception that conservationists are seeking to create large populations of jaguars in concentrated areas.
“The nature of the endangered jaguar is of an elusive, solitary animal with large territories.”
In a recent reversal of policy, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has committed to developing a recovery plan and “designated critical habitat” for the jaguar.

http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/12834-1

Mexican wolf Petition please sign here.

Northern wolf petition please sign.

Archives