# Response to Tony Dean's comments about Spring Snow Seaon



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Snow goose effort showing success
By George Vandel......Wildlife biologist for SD Game Fish and Parks
My Voice
Published: April 10, 2007
As a hunter and a wildlife biologist, I read Tony Dean's commentary on hunting spring snow geese with great interest. I appreciate Tony's dedication to the ethics of hunting. But I was disappointed to read how he trivialized the issue of snow goose-population reduction efforts. Fish and wildlife agencies, both state and federal, are responsible for management of the public's wildlife. Snow goose management is just one aspect, and we take that responsibility very seriously.

The waterfowl management community has long recognized a critical problem with too many mid-continent snow geese. In fact, South Dakota, along with other states and Canadian provinces in the central flyway, has taken a leadership role in this effort. We annually fund and assist with intensive arctic-nesting geese research and monitoring efforts.

Our data indicate that the conservation order is working. It has slowed the rate of growth of these snow goose populations from about 5 percent per year before the action to about 1 percent per year since the additional harvest tools were allowed. When looking at solutions to the burgeoning snow goose populations, it became readily apparent that drastic measures would be required to reduce snow goose numbers.

Snow goose numbers have to come more in line with what their arctic breeding habitat will support. If using hunters with unplugged shotguns, electronic calls, liberal bag limits and expanded seasons does not work, then truly extreme methods to reduce the snow goose population might be required. Additional methods probably would require some rather unpleasant and very costly programs to kill snow geese on the wintering grounds.

The alternative is nature will step in and cause the snow goose population to collapse, probably taking several other arctic species along with it. Controlling the number of nesting geese directly on their arctic breeding grounds is logistically impossible. The arctic is simply too vast and far too dangerous a place for any large-scale reduction effort. That is why we focused our primary efforts to reduce snow goose populations during their migration and on wintering areas by using hunters.

Using hunters is by far the most efficient and cost-effective way to undertake this task. Hunters also told us they were deeply concerned about the problem, and they wanted to be part of the solution.

In South Dakota we have chosen to allow hunters to use most of these tools, but not all, provided in the snow goose conservation order. For example, we have maintained a daily limit of 20 snow geese per day during the spring instead of opting for an unlimited daily harvest. By doing so, we maintain respect for the resource, and the limit is consistent with our fall snow goose limits. We know that few hunters actually achieve a limit of 20 geese per day.

New federal regulations allow states to use many of these same methods for resident Canada geese in August or September. We do not intend to use them in South Dakota. We have several Canada goose programs currently in place, including depredation assistance to landowners, September Canada goose seasons in most eastern South Dakota counties and a permit for state Department of Game, Fish and Parks staff to destroy eggs and nests on a few selected areas. These programs have been successful and allow all of us to enjoy a healthy local Canada goose population while minimizing their negative effects on our citizens. I also must point out that our hunters benefit from these additional geese, and they pay for these programs, as they should.

I couldn't agree more with Tony's assertion that snow geese are a spectacular trophy game bird. I certainly would hope that none of our state Department of Game, Fish and Parks staff publicly refer to snow geese by any of the derogatory terms, as described in Tony's article. If they are, I certainly would like to know who and will visit with them about it.

Finally, I must take issue with Tony's assumption that our additional management tools for taking snow geese have resulted in greater "unethical" behavior. As with any hunting season, some spring snow goose hunters have been issued citations for rule violations. According to our law enforcement staff, we have not observed any trends that would lead us to believe that the conservation order for snow geese in the spring has modified hunter behavior during fall seasons. The vast majority of South Dakota hunters, including goose hunters, abide by the rules and take great pride in being ethical hunters.

Rather than criticizing hunters, we should be expressing our gratitude for their stepping up and helping to solve a critical resource management issue. Hunters, please accept my thanks for a job well done.

For those who wish to see some factual information on the snow goose subject, please visit our Web site: http://www.sdgfp.info/


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Kind of telling Tony in a nice way that he is full of crap.


----------



## Triple B (Mar 9, 2004)

tony dean is an idiot IMO


----------



## verg (Aug 21, 2006)

Triple B said:


> tony dean is an idiot IMO


agreed


----------



## Chris Benson (Apr 3, 2004)

Another problem we face is a large population of the mid-continent snow geese is they nest In Waspuck National Park. This park is located in Northern Manitoba on the shores of Hudson Bay. This is federal refuge and no hunting is allowed with in it's borders. It is in this location is where alot of the snow goose research is done.


----------



## Phil The Thrill (Oct 21, 2005)

Ditto


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

KEN W said:


> Snow goose effort showing success
> By George Vandel......Wildlife biologist for SD Game Fish and Parks
> 
> Our data indicate that the conservation order is working. It has slowed the rate of growth of these snow goose populations from about 5 percent per year before the action to about 1 percent per year since the additional harvest tools were allowed. When looking at solutions to the burgeoning snow goose populations, it became readily apparent that drastic measures would be required to reduce snow goose numbers.
> ...


I'm not sure I would say the conservation order is working. The rate of increase has slowed from about 5% to about 1%. This just means the population continues to increase, just more slowly.

The facts are that the population needs to be reduced from it's current level of about 2.25 million, to what the arctic nesting grounds will support, 1.0 - 1.5 million birds.

In the interest of being fair and balanced here is the article by Tony Dean. I personally would agree with it as it seems the Conservation order and it's Spring hunting are just delaying what Mother Nature will eventually do herself. But then, that's only my opinion, after reading both articles.

Snow geese winning 'conservation' battle
By Tony Dean
For the Argus Leader
Published: March 28, 2007

I might have been the first outdoor writer in the nation to question the wisdom of the spring snow geese season - something I did on the pages of Minnesota Outdoor News shortly after the season was announced by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for the spring of 1999.

I believed then, and now, that some of the provisions of the "conservation order," were at odds with the ethical underpinnings of waterfowling.

First, the term, "conservation order" is word spin, right up there with "Clear Skies," and "Healthy Forests."

I objected to the use of electronic calls, removing the plugs from shotguns and extremely liberal and sometimes, no limits on snow geese. My initial story suggested that once we allowed the use of long-banned electronic calls, we'd be opening floodgates from which there would be no retreat.

Sure enough, some states are now looking at their use on Canada goose seasons that would begin as early as August. How long until duck hunters will be trading their heirloom, artistically crafted Frankie Heidelbauer Mallard Toller calls for Jonny Stewart electronic calls?

How ironic that electronic calls worked well the first year, but most hunters now tell me snow geese ignore them. Based on my observations, most hunters today employ sneak tactics, jumping birds in fields and gunning them down as they fly away.

The use of unplugged shotguns may be the biggest ethical blunder. I've hunted snow geese for about 35 years, mostly over decoys, and I cannot remember when I could have fired a fourth, fifth or sixth shot with birds still within effective range. The inevitable result of extra shots is needlessly crippled geese. As hunters, we have an obligation to kill birds as humanely as possible.

I have also tired of some waterfowl biologists referring to snow geese as "sky carp" or "tundra maggots."

Truth is, this bird, more than any other waterfowl, defines trophy status. It's a goose that prospers in spite of everything waterfowl managers do to reduce flock size.

I am also beginning to hear evidence that many snow geese are leaving the denuded areas and pioneering into new breeding areas.

I admit I don't know the ultimate answer on how to deal with this species. But every biologist I've consulted tells me that you cannot reduce the flock size unless you figure out how to kill more breeding age adults.

That's where the snow geese are winning. The young, juvenile birds are gullible, always the first to go, while the average age of the survivors increases.

So, in spite of electronic calls, liberal or no limits and unplugged shotguns, the older but wiser birds continue to breed.

Sadly, progress has come at the expense of waterfowl hunting tradition.


----------



## USSapper (Sep 26, 2005)

> I am also beginning to hear evidence that many snow geese are leaving the denuded areas and pioneering into new breeding areas.


Well no kidding Tony, the birds are totally destroying there current breeding areas and have to find new areas to breed which consequently will be destroyed sooner than later.

I do however agree with some of his points in there


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I don't agree with most of his statements.....especially that the geese are winning the war if the average age of the survivor's is increasing.That means we are winning not the geese.We are keeping the population from getting any larger and eventually all those old birds will die.

Also I see nothing wrong with e-callers,and unplugged shotguns.Most of the time you can't get 5 shots off anyway.

Before the Conservation season began......in the mid 90's the USFW did a study of fat reserves on them when they migrated through ND.I personally know biologists who participated in this study and shot geese here using ecallers in the spring.I sat on the road and watched.The birds had excellent fat reserves.They use these to get through the first part of the nesting season and eat very little on the tundra.

The Biologists who did the study told me the best way to bring down the population is not necessarily from shooting them,but from harassing them to the point where they get little to eat....thereby either starving on the nesting ground or producing less eggs.That is why I've never said anything about jump shooters.....since they keep the birds on the move,which is exactly what the USFW wants.

Here is where ethics comes in....even though Tony Dean and others don't like the methods used during the spring season....that's not the point. It is the best way to win this battle other than more drastic methods.....plus the object is to kill as many as possible.Sorry if this goes against someone's idea of what they don't like.But I like the alternative a whole lot less.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

I for one can only get four 3" shells in my benelli w/o the plug.

If we have reduced the population increase from 5% a year to 1% a year, it is working, it is delaying the crash untill we can a) figure out other ways to control the population, or b) allow a crash in older breeding birds who will eventually die off due to age or other natural reasons.

At any rate, there is going to come a day when we will no longer have a spring season, and when fall limits will be seriously reduced, either mother nature will have her way, or we will have an old bird die-off.

Humans have caused this problem through our agricultural practices in the midwest. Healthier, better fed birds mean more make it through the winter, and more breed succesfully. So it makes sense that we should take responsibility for it as well and figure out a solution. I personally dont think hunting in the case of snow geese is going to be the solution, but it is definatly buying us time.

But I could be wrong.


----------



## Mr. Lee (Oct 12, 2002)

Thanks for posting that up Ken.

Tony Dean is a typical Liberal. Always complaining about something......but has no other solution.


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

KEN W said:


> I don't agree with most of his statements.....especially that the geese are winning the war if the average age of the survivor's is increasing.That means we are winning not the geese.We are keeping the population from getting any larger and eventually all those old birds will die.


Man, don't ever let a few facts get in the way of making your point.

If you don't agree with his statements, do you believe the statement by George Vandel, "Our data indicate that the conservation order is working. It has slowed the *rate of growth* of these snow goose populations from about 5% per year to about 1% per year....

That would still be a net gain and I bet some of those old geese die every year.


----------



## Triple B (Mar 9, 2004)

i think what ken was getting at is that there will be a huge age gap eventually, if we harvest more juvies in the long run we will see the effects of our efforts. with a huge adult population that is aging and will eventually die, if we can curb the number of new breeders then in a sense it is working, it may just take a few years to see this. its kind of like the baby boomer situation we humans face in our populations.


----------



## krsportsman (Feb 1, 2006)

With us harvesting a lot of juvenile birds this process will take several years becasue there will be less juveniles to replace those breeding adults when natural mortality does occur for those older adults. We are not going to see results over night and I think a guy like Tony Dean would understand this concept! If we asess the population lets say in 20 years those older adults will be gone and with us taking a good percentage of juveniles out of the population there will be a definite decline. This conserversation order is working and I think Tony Dean needs to re-evalaluate the biology behind the this management plan.


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

krsportsman said:


> With us harvesting a lot of juvenile birds this process will take several years becasue there will be less juveniles to replace those breeding adults when natural mortality does occur for those older adults. We are not going to see results over night and I think a guy like Tony Dean would understand this concept! If we asess the population lets say in 20 years those older adults will be gone and with us taking a good percentage of juveniles out of the population there will be a definite decline. This conserversation order is working and I think Tony Dean needs to re-evalaluate the biology behind the this management plan.


I think what Tony Dean is saying is that we may not have 20 years. This is part of a letter written by National Audubon Society President, John Flicker in 1997. It's not just the snow geese that will be hurt, but a great deal of other species as well. With hunting not making a dent in decreasing the population after 10 years it probably means more drastic measure are necessary.

"At our recent meeting [Sept.] in Tucson, the NAS Board of Directors approved unanimously a resolution to protect wildlife habitat and ecosystems in the subarctic currently under threat from damage by burgeoning populations of lesser snow goose. Specifically the Board voted to support the science-based recommendations of the Arctic Goose Task Force to reduce the mid-continent population of the lesser snow goose through expanded hunting. Audubon's concern in this situation is in line with our mission to protect birds, wildlife, and their habitat, using the best tools available.

As a result of land-use practices in the south-central U.S., the snow goose population that winters in that area is exploding. The immense flocks of geese then migrate north each spring, eating virtually all the plants in their Arctic breeding grounds and causing widespread devastation to habitat that otherwise would be mostly pristine tundra west of Hudson Bay in Canada.

Ironically, the problem [...] is one of our own making. Efforts to protect and enhance populations of waterfowl have worked too well for snow geese. The mid-continent population (breeding west of Hudson Bay, and wintering on the southern Great Plains and western Gulf Coast) has grown by almost 300% since the 1960s, and is now estimated at over three million. Land-use and wildlife-management practices have led to unnatural survival levels for snow geese on their U.S. wintering grounds. Their burgeoning numbers are now in the process of destroying their own Arctic breeding habitat.

The snow goose population nesting west of Hudson Bay, Canada, has reached incredible densities (sometimes with as many as 3,000 nests packed into one square kilometer of tundra). The geese are now eating everything in sight. Because they grub out plants by the roots, large numbers of them can literally destroy the tundra. To quote Robert F. Rockwell, Kenneth F. Abraham, and Robert L. Jeffries (Winter, 1997, issue of the Living Bird Quarterly), 'Scientists are concerned that the increasing numbers of geese may soon lead to an ecological catastrophe as these voracious feeders turn the delicate arctic habitat they inhabit into a barren wasteland.'

If we do nothing about the situation, the geese will spread across much of the Arctic, devastating huge areas of tundra, and then millions of them will suffer malnourishment, disease, and starvation, leading to a population crash. But by that time, they will have destroyed the habitat for many other species. Studies show that once degraded, this habitat will take decades, at least, to recover. Populations of many other bird species will be hurt by the resulting loss of habitat. These are among the tundra and marsh species that are likely to suffer local starvation and population decline because of the current habitat destruction:

* northern pintail
* green-winged teal
* oldsquaw
* yellow rail
* semipalmated plover
* American golden-plover
* semipalmated sandpiper
* least sandpiper
* dunlin
* stilt sandpiper
* red-necked phalarope
* parasitic jaeger
* Arctic tern
* short-eared owl
* American pipit
* Savannah sparrow
* American tree sparrow
* Lapland longspur
* hoary redpoll

Also possibly affected will be many other bird species such as short-billed dowitcher, Hudsonian godwit, and Smith's longspur, as well as many tundra plants, butterflies, and other organisms.

The problem is urgent. Long-term solutions may involve changes in land-use practices in the southern and central U.S., but more immediate steps are essential. Audubon thus endorses the recommendations of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group, an international team of scientists studying the problem.

The Board resolution commits the NAS to work closely with federal, state and Canadian agencies to define the most effective mix of short- and long-term solutions to the snow goose population problem. By acting now, we hope to reduce the loss of critical habitat and to protect the many bird species and other wildlife that depend on this habitat.


----------



## redlabel (Mar 7, 2002)

Check out this site and make sure to check out the images of degradation.

http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/pae/es_map/articles/article_40.mhtml


----------



## pineapple (Apr 25, 2006)

I think that the 35 years Tony has been hunting snow geese over decoys mainly consisted of rags and some sick homemade shells or socks. He probably can't shoot a fourth, fifth, or sixth shot because he shoots and over and under!!!
Just go eat some Pugsley's premium sandwiches.


----------



## cbas (Apr 3, 2007)

I was out Monday and found two fields with geese. One with uncultivated barley and the other had been left fallow last year. Most of the section that had been left fallow was now down to the bare dirt. Every single piece of vegetation was gone. They are now working on whats left of the fallow section and the barley. While I was there I watched them move in on the canadas and ducks feeding in the barley and push them off.

Needless to say the owner gave me permission to set up on his property.

I say shoot 'em in the face and eat 'em.

More the better...

(but don't hunt for the sake of killing - conservation and food is the way to go)


----------



## tb (Jul 26, 2002)

pineapple said:


> Just go eat some Pugsley's premium sandwiches.


I'm sure that's what he's best at.
:beer: :beer:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Triple B said:


> i think what ken was getting at is that there will be a huge age gap eventually, if we harvest more juvies in the long run we will see the effects of our efforts. with a huge adult population that is aging and will eventually die, if we can curb the number of new breeders then in a sense it is working, it may just take a few years to see this. its kind of like the baby boomer situation we humans face in our populations.


Exactly....we are winning.

This is kind of like ND.....an ageing population with smaller numbers of youth in our schools each year.The population has stayed pretty much the same,but it is getting older.Eventually ND will have a lot less people if this trend continues.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Management of a species is not a single prong approach. This is only one of many possible ways we can manage this species and it seems to help the overall situation. Ehtics? There are always a few of these "bozos" out in the field. But they should not be the reason why we should scratch this season or any other season. In my opinion the spring snow goose season was one of the most innovative ideas to come around in a long time and I'm sure they will continue to have it as long as it effective and necessary. I do respect SDAK's attempts to keep it from being a slaughter because a slaughter of geese can lead to wanton waste in my opinion. We see this on occasion where people have too many birds and do not respect the resource.


----------



## Trapperjack (Feb 25, 2007)

KEN W said:


> I don't agree with most of his statements.....especially that the geese are winning the war if the average age of the survivor's is increasing.That means we are winning not the geese.We are keeping the population from getting any larger and eventually all those old birds will die.


Ken,

You have it backwards. If the band recoveries show that the flock is getting older by no means is this a good thing for a reduction in the population. An age gap is not being created when this happens it just means the birds on average are living longer, producing more young, and destroying the habitat longer. Not to mention that older birds are much more dificult to hunt. On the other hand if the average age started dropping we would be seeing on average younger birds which we all now are much easier to decoy, they also don't have as many years to reproduce and to destroy the tundra.

To think these old birds will just start dropping dead is pretty hysterical!


----------



## averyghg (Oct 16, 2006)

look for the snack with the lumberjack!

one of my fav's from tony


----------



## ALLSTAR55 (Apr 3, 2006)

It looks like global warming will inundate the tundra before the snow geese have a chance to eat anyway.


----------



## goosebusters (Jan 12, 2006)

Trapperjack said:


> To think these old birds will just start dropping dead is pretty hysterical!


If we could just find a way to milk the teets of snow geese we could all live forever!!! :withstupid:


----------

