Loading Events

« All Events

  • This event has passed.

Comment deadline to SDGFP on draft Mountain Lion Action Plan

August 16, 2024 @ 10:00 pm - 10:59 pm

August 16th is the written comment deadline for SDGFP on  their draft Mountain Lion Action Plan, however the Commission will make the decision on it at their Sept 5-6th Commission meeting. There are other later opportunities for written & oral comments associated with that meeting.

See also  our calendar’s notice of July 10th-11th and September Commission meetings Sept 5th-6th for more details – click on the event notices on those dates. We include action alerts in meeting notices  – https://phas-wsd.org/events-alerts/

Mountain Lion Action Plan

South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks (GFP) is seeking comments on a draft Mountain Lion Action Plan.

At the July Commission meeting they reviewed a draft Mountain Lion Action Plan, which was to be put out for public comment.  Info at this link https://gfp.sd.gov/management-plans/. To view  draft Mountain Lion Action Plan: https://phas-wsd.org/wp-content/uploads/MtLion-ActionPlangfp.July_2024_Commission_Book-3.pdf   

“The draft Mountain Lion Action plan, 2024-2028, is a document that will be used by GFP to guide mountain lion management in South Dakota through identified management objectives and measurable strategies to meet those management objectives. All individuals interested in mountain lion management in South Dakota may provide suggestions and comments on the action plan by August 16, 2024.”

Written comments on the plan can be sent to 523 E. Capitol Ave., Pierre, S.D. 57501, or submitted online. https://gfp.sd.gov/forms/positions/

 

Here is a copy of the letter that PHAS sent in on August 16th on the draft Action Plan: https://phas-wsd.org/wp-content/uploads/PHAS-Comments-on-the-Mountain-Lion-Action-Plan-.pdf

Here is a copy of the letter that PHAS sent on Sept 1st on the draft Action Plan: https://phas-wsd.org/wp-content/uploads/gfp.PHAS_.2nd-Letter-Mt-Lion-Action-Plan.pdf

Here is a copy of a set of handouts that PHAS gave the Commission during public testimony on the draft Action Plans: https://phas-wsd.org/wp-content/uploads/cover-letter_ActionPlans6.pdf

Go to Sept 1st event notice to see all comments received by Commission

GFP says comments must be received by the deadline (8/16/24) and include your full name and city of residence.

We suggest there is actually a second & later deadline of Sept 1st, which is the deadline to send written comments to the Commission before the Commission meeting, at which they will make decisions on the Action Plan.

The important part is the strategies and objectives on the last few pages (pages 10-11).

We may have an informal meeting to discuss this plan and bobcat season before Sept 5th.  Contact Nancy if interested in attending: nhilshat@rapidnet.com, 605-787-6466.

TALKING POINTS

We thank the staff and the C0mmission for deciding not to expand hound hunting of lions to the Black Hills Fire Protection District outside of Custer State Park, but we fear that the hound hunters will continue to relentlessly push for this.

However,  we always

  1. Object to the 365 day – year round hunting season on the Statewide/Prairie Unit – which is all of SD that is outside of the Black Hills Fire Protection District (BHFPD).
  2. We object to hound hunting of lions on Custer State Park and the Statewide/Prairie Unit.

Viable Populations on Reservations

SD GFP does not manage for viable populations outside of the BHFPD. We believe that SDGFP should managed for viable populations of mountain lions at least on the Pine Ridge and Rosebud Reservations, as both tribes manage for viable populations and due to historic Allotment Acts, reservation properties in SD can be checker boarded with mixed tribal and Caucasian ownership. GFP has jurisdiction over properties with Caucasian ownership.

GFP should provide for connectivity corridors between the Black  Hills with Reservation properties, as small populations need immigrant lions to refresh population genetics.

GFP should have a goal to cooperate with tribal governments to estimate populations of mt. lions within the checker board of tribal/state jurisdictions on Reservations.

Pro-Hunting Bias

We suggest folks read Goal 2 on the 11th page. We object to this goal in the Plan at the eleventh page: “Objective 2: Manage mountain lion populations for both maximum and quality recreational hunting opportunities, considering all social and biological inputs.”  

The word “maximum” should be dropped and/or the entire sentence rewritten. We suggest this clause  makes human recreation dominant over ecology.  It does not adequately balance the ecological benefits of mountain lions, an apex predator and keystone species with benefits of  human recreation. SD has an endangered species act and thus the legislature does not wish for populations of any native species to become extirpated.

Wildlife watchers exceed hunters in USFWS studies and a “harvested” lion or it’s tracks are not available for watching. Wildlife watchers exceed hunters in USFWS study that counts wildlife associated recreators nationwide at-home and away from home.  ( Visit: https://digitalmedia.fws.gov/digital/collection/document/id/2321/  and go to Table 2 on page 48  & Table 6 on page 51).

SD is in the West North Central area, which has 16,677,887 persons, who are 16 years or older. 9% of these folks (or 1,518,281 persons) hunted. 58% of these folks (or 9,744.740 persons)  wildlife watched.  Some people did both.  Of the wildlife watchers  – 4,624,145 wildlife watched away from home (28% of all persons)  & 9,664,190 wildlife watched around home (58% of all persons). Some people did both.

The locally generated statistics the SDGFP uses for number of wildlife watchers vs. hunters in SD, does not count wildlife watchers at home, while it counts hunters at home – thus it is unfairly biased/inadequate (Link to the Southwick study: SD-Fish-Wildlife-Boating-Economics-Southwick-6-30-22.pdf) This 2017 study at page 25, table 29 shows 173,825 wildlife watchers (residents – 89,277 persons & non-resident  -84,548 persons). All are only watching away from home. At page 8, table 1 the study shows 103,619  resident hunters & 112,174 non-resident hunters or 215,793 total hunters.  It does not delete at home hunting.

So the USFWS finds the number of hunters are only 15% of the number of wildlife watchers  but the 2017 Southwick study found wildlife watchers are just 80% of the hunters.  USFWS is only counting the west north central region’s people and Southwick is counting SD residents and non-residents. Southwick does not count at home wildlife watchers, but USFWS does and in so doing more than doubles the wildlife watchers.

Various studies show over-hunting of lions creates more mt. lion v. human/livestock  conflicts. See You-tube video – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_ZD-PAKhSo

Hunting Regulation Complexity

We also object to this clause: “minimize regulation complexity”. The Department  in past has used the goal of simple hunting regulations to oppose changes to regulations designed to address animal cruelty issues. We assume they could also

use this goal of simplicity to oppose  changes needed for ecological reasons, as maximizing hunting is “king”

OLDER MT LION PLAN

There is also an older Mountain Lion Management Plan from 2019 that will more detail on mt. lions for reference: https://gfp.sd.gov/UserDocs/docs/LionPlan_FINAL_2019.pdf

Details

Date:
August 16, 2024
Time:
10:00 pm - 10:59 pm
Scroll to Top