East Mojave Mule Deer Research Project

Kelley M. Stewart, Assistant Professor, University of Nevada Reno

Vernon C. Bleich, Adjunct Professor, University of Nevada Reno

Debra J. Hughson, National Park Service

Neal Darby, National Park Service

California Deer Association

A mule deer doe released after capture. (Kelley Stewart)

Water is thought to be an resource for wildlife species in desert ecosystems. If water is limiting, then provision of water must increase survival or reproduction for individuals in areas with free standing water available all year. State and federal agencies in the western United States have used water developments as a component of management of wildlife habitats in arid and desert regions since the 1940s.

Considerable effort, from state agencies and sportsmen’s organizations, is focused on providing water in areas where it is believed to be limited and may benefit populations of wildlife. With increases in urbanization and demand for water by human populations, many springs that once were available for wildlife have run dry and no longer provide free standing water. For example, some springs near Las Vegas, Nevada that had provided water for populations of wildlife, have not done so for the last 10+ years.

Water developments are likely becoming more important for sustaining populations of wildlife in arid regions of the western United States. There is controversy associated with water developments. Some people claim that they do not benefit wildlife or are detrimental to populations of wildlife by concentrating animals and providing opportunities for predators.

Mule deer occur throughout Western North America and require relatively large areas for viable populations, especially in desert ecosystems where resources such as food and water are scarce and widely distributed. Certainly the distribution, abundance, and seasonal availability of water affect the distribution of mule deer across the landscape.

Mule deer are an important game species for sportsmen and have aesthetic value for those who enjoy observing wildlife. Mule deer also are good indicator species of changes in habitat quality and ecosystem health, which is in part why we selected mule deer for the species to study with this project.

Cattle have been grazed in the Mojave Desert for more than 100 years, and ranchers used a system of wells to provide water for livestock. Many of those artificial sources of water were present in the Preserve when it was created in 1994. From 1998 to 2002, grazing allotments in MojaveNational Preserve were purchased, retired and donated to the National Park Service. When those allotments were retired, numerous water sources for livestock were deactivated within the Preserve.

Many of those water sources had been available to native wildlife for periods in excess of a century. Loss of those water sources generated controversy among sportsmen’s and environmental organizations about how loss of those wells affected populations of wildlife.

In 2004, Safari Club International(SCI), in cooperation with California Department of Fish and Game (DFG), Quail Unlimited, California DeerAssociation, Mule Deer Foundation,Desert Wildlife Unlimited, and the Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, proposed to reactivate 12 retired wells to provide water for mule deer and other species of wildlife. The National Park Service (NPS) undertook an environmental assessment to address whether to grant the permit to retrofit those wells. The result of the environmental assessment was for a science-based research project to determine the existence and extent of benefit for artificial water sources for mule deer and other species of wildlife.

The University of Nevada Reno answered the call for proposals for the research project. In cooperation with NPS, SCI, and DFG, we designed an experiment to address the effects of provision of water for mule deer and other wildlife. We reactivated six wells and included several developed springs in an area designed to have permanent water available to compare with another area where the wells were kept off. We will compare areas with and without permanent sources of water and examine movement patterns, reproduction, body condition, and food availability in each of those experimental areas. We also included a ‘control area’ that will be monitored, but remain unchanged throughout the study.

The study has a 10-year duration, years 1 to 5 will include the comparison of areas with and without permanent sources of water, and those that have water available all year. During phase 2 of the project, years 6 to 10, we will turn on the wells in the area without permanent water and will compare effects on the mule deer herd before and after water was made available. With this study we hope to answer the question of whether provision of water in Mojave Preserve is beneficial to mule deer populations and provide both the National Park Service and California DFG with information regarding the value of continuing to provide artificial sources of water in the Preserve and other arid regions of the West.

Many western states spend many hours and dollars providing water for wildlife, and management agencies from several states are interested in the results of this project. Indeed, the Nevada Department of Wildlife felt that this research was relevant to its needs and provided funding for a portion of the project. Support also has been received from California Deer Association and the Golden Gate Chapter of SCI.

The first 5-year portion of the study began in 2008. Six wells were turned on in the “water available” study areas during September and October. The movements and reproduction of mule deer in those two study areas and the ‘control’ area will be compared. During January of 2008 and 2009, we captured mule deer with a netgun fired from a helicopter. Netguns are an effective way to catch mule deer, and in Mojave National Preserve the “gunner” has his work cut out for him when trying to catch deer while avoiding cactus and Joshua trees.

Using the helicopter, deer were brought back to base camp where we collected data and placed radio collars on them. The radio collars are used to determine movement patterns and use of water sources in the Preserve. We are using GPS-type collars in Mojave Preserve. Those collars obtain highly accurate locations of mule deer about 7 times a day, so we have very detailed data on movements of deer in the Preserve. The only drawback is that the collars store all of the locations on the collar, known as store-on-board collars, so we have to get the collar back at the end of the year to have access to that data.

Collars are programmed to drop off the deer at a specified time and then they transmit a signal so technicians are able to go out into the Preserve and find the collars. We have just recently obtained the collars from last year, and next winter we will locate the collars that we placed in January to examine movements of deer in relation to the recently reactivated water sites.

We have a remote camera located at each water site that is monitored with this study and several sites in the nonwatered area. Some of the cameras were purchased by NPS for their ongoing camera study, which we have incorporated into this project. Several of the cameras were purchased by SCI, and are currently in use on the Preserve for this study.

The cameras record use of our treatment areas by mule deer so we can use them throughout the year to identify our deer at the water sites. The cameras also record use of the wells by other species of wildlife, such as many species of birds, including hawks and owls, and several small mammals and reptiles. Another criticism of water developments is that they only benefit ‘game’ species, although to date many non-game species have been photographed using these water sources.

We examined captured deer for physical condition and pregnancy using ultrasound technology. Using ultrasound we are able to measure the amount of fat on several areas of the body, which is a good index to how good or poor condition the animal is in. Using ultrasound we also determined if females were pregnant and if they were carrying twins or single fetuses. We are able to get accurate measurements of fetuses to determine health of the offspring and determine the stage of gestation, similar to human women visiting the doctor for ultrasound during pregnancy. By determining physical condition and numbers of offspring we are able to assess the health of the mule deer herds in the different study areas.

In January 2008, we captured 18 mule deer: 15 does, 2 bucks, and a yearling doe. We captured 6 deer in the control area, 7 in the study area that will have water provided, and 5 in the no-permanent-water study area. Since the experiment had not yet been set up — water sources were turned on later in the year — we used the initial data to obtain an overall idea of demography. We checked for the pregnancy of those females and 94% (15 of the 16 females, including the yearling) were pregnant. Of those 15 females, 73% were carrying twins. Twinning is an excellent indicator of overall quality of the habitat and health of the population.

During January 2009, we captured 30 does, and 1 juvenile (born spring 2008). Several of those deer were recaptured from last year to remove old radio collars. We captured 27 new individuals, 9 does were captured in the control area, 10 in the watered area, and 8 does in the area without permanent sources of water. We tested 28 of those deer for pregnancy, and 93% of those females (26 of 28) were pregnant, but only 14% were carrying twins. We suspect that because 2008 was a very dry autumn compared with 2007, fewer sources of food were available for deer as they entered the breeding season, and possibly resulted in a lower twinning rate. We need to examine more years of data following future captures to determine the relationship between water developments, precipitation, and availability of food to understand those effects of pregnancy rates, twinning rates, and condition of deer in this population.

Since data on deer in 2008 were collected before the experiment was fully set up, we cannot compare the different study areas yet. We are looking forward to examining differences among deer in the different study areas next winter.

University of Nevada Reno is primarily a place of learning and one of the attributes of this study is that students receive training on handling of wildlife, collection of data, and design of experiments. We are currently training a Master’s level graduate student on this project, and several undergraduates have accompanied us on our captures to gain experience handling wild deer in a field setting.

This project is the result of years of effort by concerned sportsmen’s groups to restore historical water sources to areas from which they had been removed. Safari Club International, California Deer Association, and the Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep have led this effort.

The project is necessary because restoration of historical water sources as described in the environmental assessment approved for that action must be fully evaluated in terms of the Grateful Nation responses of mule deer to the provision of water.

Deer Hunt Zone (D-17), in which the study area is located, produces on average the largest trophies (as determined by proportions of 3-point, 4-point, and 5-or-more-point bucks) of all zones in California. Hunter success is not the highest in California, but trophy quality is outstanding and the zone sells out on an annual basis. Restoration of water sources in the study area has important implications for conservation of mule deer, and maintaining high-quality recreational hunting in that area.

Finally, collaboration is the key to any successful venture and this project has evolved into a huge collaborative effort. Collaborators include state agencies: University of Nevada Reno, California Department of Fish and Game, Nevada Department of Wildlife; a federal agency: National Park Service; and Conservation Organizations: Safari Club International, Golden Gate Chapter Safari Club International, and California Deer Association.

Needles man up for conservation award

San Bernardino Sun

Cliff McDonald, a tenacious Needles hunter-conservationist who almost single handedly beat back the National Park Service's attempt to remove all man-made water sources from the Mojave National Preserve, has been named one of four finalists for the Budweiser Conservationist of the Year award.

The award carries a $50,000 prize and just being a finalist means McDonald will win at least $5,000 to further his efforts.

Besides battling former Park Superintendent Mary Martin over the shutting down of over 100 water sources used by wildlife in the preserve, and eventually winning, McDonald has now been at the forefront of organizing manpower, equipment and money to refurbish and restore the water sources that were shut down and those that were degrading. It was also at his prodding that the Park Service agreed to study the importance and impact of these water sources of wildlife, focusing the study on desert mule deer.

"Thanks to Cliff's persistence and quality volunteer service, the National Park Service has not only withdrawn its resistance but has gradually become a participant and supporter of the effort to provide these important water sources," said Anna Siedman of Safari Club International. "In the East Mojave, Cliff is wildlife's greatest champion."

It was also announced this week that McDonald won the Californian of the Year Award given by the Outdoor Writers Association of California (OWAC) for his efforts in the Mojave.

Jerry Springer, a long-time California writer and hunter who runs the online magazine WesternHunter.com from his Fresno home, nominated McDonald for the OWAC award.

"This all started in the fall of 2002 when it became obvious to Cliff that something bad was going on in the Preserve," Springer said. "He saw empty water tanks and started asking questions and found out that the staff of the Preserve was allowing over 100 water sources to go dry.

"That's when McDonald started his one-man campaign of letter writing, testifying at numerous meetings and informing wildlife organizations, in his attempt to save the wildlife of the Preserve."

When McDonald first started his restoration efforts, it was just him and a couple of buddies from Needles filling gamebird guzzlers with water or making sure desert springs had pools of water where wildlife could drink.

Today, McDonald's e-mail list of helpers is over 400 individuals long, and he's pulled together groups and individuals to create a diverse coalition.

He's managed to have Quail Unlimited, California Deer Association, Safari Club, and Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep volunteers working together on "McDonald projects," as they've come to be called.

There was and really is no name for McDonald's "group." In fact, the group is doing a major work project this weekend at Camp Cady, a state wildlife area east of Barstow.

Since McDonald started the effort, the group has repaired and refurbished 52 guzzlers and six springs, contributed more than 3,200 hours of labor, and raised more than $22,000 worth of equipment and materials for these efforts.

The list for this coming year of work is already long, targeting 40 guzzlers for repairs on and off the Preserve. There are also plans hatching for the installation of new water sources for wildlife.

Five grand will be a big help toward that work. But $50,000 would be enormous. McDonald will turn either amount into about 10 times their value in on-the-ground effort. You can count on that.

The public votes on the four finalists on the Budweiser Web site, determining who gets the $50,000. While the site wasn't set up to accept votes yet or the process delineated, I'll keep you posted on when the voting opens.

Water For Wildlife Guzzler Repair
Mojave National Preserve
December 2007



This video is about Water For Wildlife, a group of volunteers who maintain the water guzzlers in the Mojave NP in CA. This repair was on the B-18 guzzler near Goffs CA.

The work involves prepping the pad, the big flat part that catches the rain first. Chippers are used to clean off the old sealant and then Quickcrete concrete bonding adhesive is applied to the cracks. 2 coats or Merlex are then applied over 24 hours to seal the pad so the water all runs down into the underground water tank. The tank is also cleaned out and tortoise nets are installed so the tortoises can get out of the tank.

These water guzzlers are vital to the desert wildlife like the deer, bobcat, coyote, cougar, quail, bighorn sheep and desert tortoise.

Great food was served by the group and a raffle was held Saturday night to raise money for supplies to maintain the guzzlers.

Temps were in the low 40s at night and 60s during the day.

Huge thanks go out to CDA (California Deer Association), QU (Quail Unimited) SCBS (Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep), SCI (Safari Club International), Bass Pro, DFG, BLM, PCOC (Predator Caller of Orange Co.), CA FNAWS and other groups that supplied gear, volunteers or other help.

We need more volunteers and it's a great campout in the desert.

For more info on Water For Wildlife please contact Cliff McDonald at 760-326-2935.

Watering holes get new look

By JIM MATTHEWS
Press-Enterprise

Mojave Preserve management, wildlife scientists, environmentalists and sporting groups are actually coming together over the issue of water in the Mojave National Preserve. The result is going to be good things for wildlife.

All of these different groups have been embroiled in a battle over the deactivation of more than 130 different water sources connected to the former cattle operations on the preserve. All of those water sources also supported a vast network of desert wildlife.

Wildlife and hunting groups were outraged the National Park Service violated its management plan and promises made during the drafting of this plan to study the impact shutting off these water sources would have on wildlife before the valves were turned off.

Wildlife biologists who have seen species expand their ranges and populations when water was added to desert mountain ranges said the losses caused by the former park superintendent's demand the water be shut off were likely very significant. But because the promised research on the preserve was never done, no one could actually put numbers on wildlife losses or measure the decrease in range and habitat usage.

Cliff McDonald, a Needles hunter and wildlife activist, and the Safari Club led a drive to restore just 12 of the original wells on the preserve for wildlife use. The preserve staff prepared an environmental assessment that would have allowed that to occur, but everyone involved agreed there was inadequate, comprehensive scientific data to support adding or removing the water.

Lawsuits were threatened on both sides of the debate, and then the park superintendent left. In an amazing transformation, people started talking again, wanting to work together and solve obvious problems, get answers to honest questions and move forward.

The Park Service has proposed a comprehensive study to look at "added water" in the desert and its effect and importance. And professional wildlife biologists from all over the West are enthused about the research because it would involve before and after measurements and data gathering. The research project and the well reactivation have been rolled together. Sort of.

"It's not that the 12 wells idea is dead," said Larry Whalon, chief of resources for the preserve. "But we're not going to hold ourselves to those 12 locations."

The research will determine the best places to put water and then measure the effects once the water is in.

For the first time, we'll really know with scientific certainty the effect adding water has on desert environments and wildlife populations in those environments.

"This has the potential to demonstrate the importance -- or lack thereof -- of water sources on this type in desert ecosystems," said Dr. Vern Bleich, Department of Fish and Game bighorn sheep biologist.

Desert water 'guzzlers' may return to preserve

Environmentalists may attempt to block plan

By HOWARD DECKER Staff Writer
Desert Dispatch

MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE -- The on-again, off-again plan to convert wells in the preserve to wildlife watering devices, called "guzzlers," is on again.

The move is a surprise to Chad Offutt of the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). With the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), PEER sued the National Park Service (NPS), which oversees the preserve, in March of last year to stop the expansion of the guzzlers in the preserve. The groups contend the artificial watering harms native wildlife and violates Park Service policy.

The lawsuit alleges that guzzlers are "known to adversely affect desert tortoise by attracting predators such as ravens, and by acting as death traps for tortoises that approach the guzzlers to drink."

In September of 2004, the preserve had announced the guzzlers would be installed, according to Danette Woo, environmental compliance specialist at the preserve.

According to Offutt, the National Park Service reversed itself and rescinded the approval of the preserve guzzlers in April, 2005.

On June, 27, 2005, the National Park Service held a public scoping meeting in Barstow saying the preserve "has begun the development of the park's Environmental Assessment (EA) to convert wells into guzzlers," according to a preserve press release. The draft Environmental Assessment was due to be completed on Sept. 1, 2005.

Then, the guzzlers program was back on again. On April 27, 2006, the preserve sent out a press release stating the preserve "approves science-based alternative on managing water for wildlife." According to PEER, their lawsuit could be revived.

Under this plan, the wells will be converted into guzzlers to carry out research on the need for additional water sources for wildlife over a broad area in the preserve, and to determine if additional guzzlers are needed, said Woo.

Jeff Ruch, executive director of PEER, said that after the two groups filed suit against the guzzlers in the preserve, the preserve management withdrew the proposal to install guzzlers and the lawsuit was dismissed.

"I don't think they (the pre- serve) has done anything to prepare a proper environmental document or to cancel the guzzler program," he said, "and I think they are vulnerable to the same lawsuit again."

Ruch said that his group believes the preserve did not complete a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and needs to do so. Many topics have not been addressed that should be, he said, including the possibility that the guzzlers will increase the population of predators that kill desert tortoises, a threatened species that is found in the preserve.

An EA is a concise public document that a federal agency prepares under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to provide sufficient evidence and analysis to determine whether the proposed agency action would require preparation of an EIS or a finding of no significant impact.

An Environmental Impact Statement is a document required of federal agencies by the National Environmental Policy Act for major projects or legislative proposals significantly affecting the environment. A tool for decision-making, it describes the positive and negative effects of the undertaking and cites alternative actions, according to Entrix, an environmental consultant firm.

"We fully expected a full EIS," Ruch said, adding that by declaring a "no significant impact" decision, it seems to mean the preserve will not do any more study of the problem before installing the guzzlers.

The lack of a full EIS "doesn't appear to make sense in light of all the questions" people have about the wisdom of installing guzzlers, he said.

The California Department of Fish and Game (CF&G) originally proposed to convert the 12 wells to wildlife waterers and the NPS undertook an environmental assessment of the matter in November of last year.

Out of several proposed ways to manage the water, the NPS selected a science-based alternative and decided this plan would have no significant impact on the environment in the preserve, Woo said.

There are over 130 springs and seeps across the preserve and the NPS recently initiated a long-term monitoring project to deter mine how rainfall patterns affect the availability of water for wildlife, by surveying them during the driest part of the year, Woo said.

Over 75 percent of the sources had water during the last survey and there are six existing large-game guzzlers in the preserve, principally used by desert bighorn sheep and 119 small game guzzlers principally used by quail, chukar and other small wildlife, Woo said. There are also several dozen currently operating water units used in cattle ranching, she said.

According to the environmental assessment, installing guzzlers has a potential to lower the groundwater table.

The document states there is a potential dependence on the new guzzlers by wildlife populations and a potential for increases in wildlife population, plus potential negative impacts from increase foraging and trampling as wildlife populations and guzzler use increases.

There is potential for increased hunting activities and wildlife viewing activities, according to the document, which also states there may be more visitor encounters with wildlife.

According to the Guns Magazine June 2005 edition, a hunting club, Safari Club International (SCI), and the CF&G received permission from the persevere and the U. S. Department of the Interior to "convert four ranching well developments into wildlife guzzlers for mule deer" on preserve land.

The magazine identified wells as Eagle, Watson, Caruthers and Lecyr and said that the group has been working on restoring guzzlers in the preserve for "several years."

Woo said Friday that SCI is not directly involved in any of the planning the installation of guzzlers but is working with CF&G to provide some funding and volunteers for the program.

SCI states on its web site it is "serious about protecting hunting freedoms" and "in many ways, SCI is first in legislation, litigation and international advocacy for hunting."

Their web site has an appeal to "all interested parties" to provide NPS "with information about the need for these wells and that reactivation will not pose a detrimental impact to the resources of the preserve."

It goes on to say "SCI has informed the court that it will take whatever action necessary to prevent delays in providing water sources that could hard the preserve's wildlife."

"It's a harsh life out there for wildlife," said Bill Perreck who has worked to install guzzlers in the past but is not now affiliated with any group. He said there has been a long-term drought in the High Desert until the last couple of years and he believes many types of desert creatures were in danger from the lack of water.

The idea of desert guzzlers pretty much started in 1964, he said, for Bighorn Sheep.

"It's a good thing they did, to keep the sheep from completely disappearing," Perreck said.

Mojave National Preserve gets new boss

ENVIRONMENT: A decision about wildlife watering holes awaits the superintendent.

By JENNIFER BOWLES
The Press-Enterprise

Dennis Schramm, a 28-year veteran of the National Park Service, will return to his old stomping grounds at the Mojave National Preserve as its superintendent.

Schramm, 53, returns in February to the 1.6 million-acre park in eastern San Bernardino County -- known for its sand dunes, volcanic cinder cones and lava flows, Joshua trees and towering mountains. He worked there for seven years as an assistant manager until 2002.

In announcing the selection last week, Jonathan Jarvis, the park service's regional director, said Schramm has extensive experience as a biologist and manager in the Mojave Desert and that his leadership in the 1990s in crafting the preserve's management plan demonstrated strong leadership skills.

Schramm replaces Mary Martin, who transferred to Lassen Volcanic National Park in Northern California.

Among Schramm's first decisions will be whether to approve a controversial plan to turn 12 groundwater wells left over from a cattle grazing operation into wildlife guzzlers to help mule deer flourish for hunting.

The proposal is available for public comment until Jan. 31.

The three options are to abandon the project, allow it to go forward or conduct further studies to assess whether the guzzlers, artificial water sources, are needed.

"It's really a matter of taking that information (from the public) and seeing whether or not it makes sense to allow something to happen," Schramm said about the proposal in a telephone interview from Washington, D.C., where he works at the park service's national planning office.

The California Department of Fish and Game and hunters with Safari Club International are pushing for the artificial water sources. Environmentalist says they're a bad crutch for plants and animals that already have adapted to an arid landscape.

In addition, the guzzlers will promote mule deer, a non-native species, said Daniel Patterson, desert ecologist with the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group in Joshua Tree.

"You're just messing with the whole web of life out there," he said.

A lawsuit from Patterson's group filed this year prompted the National Park Service to back off from approving the guzzlers until an environmental assessment was completed. The lawsuit alleged that the federal agency, under orders from a Bush administration official -- Paul Hoffman, deputy assistant secretary of Interior for fish, wildlife and parks -- violated environmental laws by approving the man-made watering holes.

During his tenure, Schramm said, he would like to draw more attention to the preserve, sandwiched between the better-known Joshua Tree and Death Valley national parks, and to expose more young children to the desert environment.

"They're involved with too many video games," he said. But children "are important for the future of the parks, so it helps if they know they have a connection to the land."

The park's new visitors' center at the Kelso Depot, a railroad station built more than 80 years ago and refurbished, will help in promoting the park, Schramm said.

But the preserve also has threats, he said, including a proposed airport for cargo and charter flights six miles from the preserve's border in Nevada.

In addition, the preserve is dotted with hundreds of old mines, mostly gold mines, where the precious metal was leached from the ore with cyanide in large, open pits.

"We have no active mines," he said, "but we have a lot of cleanup issues."

Wildlife Guzzlers

The Mojave National Preserve is seeking public comment on a proposal to convert ranching wells into wildlife guzzlers:

Deadline: Jan. 31

By e-Mail: MOJA_Superintendent@nps.gov

By letter: Superintendent, Mojave National Preserve, 2701 Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311

To get the report: www.nps.gov/moja

Hunters fight for desert 'guzzlers'

By Chuck Mueller, Staff Writer
San Bernardino Sun

BARSTOW - A simmering battle over desert water tanks once used by range cattle is pitting hunting and wildlife groups against environmentalists.

Hunters of big and small game in the Mojave National Preserve claim it is vital to retain artificial watering sites in a 600,000-acre area in Lanfair Valley, near Needles, but two environmental groups say the water holes actually will harm wildlife.

Scores of hunters, wildlife advocates and conservationists gathered here Monday to include their views in an environmental assessment being prepared by the National Park Service.

"The assessment will outline our proposal to convert 12 former ranch wells into guzzlers over a three-year period," said Larry Whalon, the preserve's chief of resources.

Comments will be accepted on the plan until Oct. 31 at the preserve's headquarters at 2701 Barstow Road, in Barstow.

Hunters want to turn the wells into artificial water sites called "wildlife drinkers" or "guzzlers" to provide water for the preserve's mule deer, bighorn sheep and game birds. But environmentalists claim the park's exising 133 guzzlers are sufficient.

A decision by the Park Service to convert the former wells into artificial watering sites prompted a lawsuit by two environmental groups in March.

The Center for Biological Diversity and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility went to court to block the plan, claiming it would harm wildlife and violated Park Service policy.

The two groups contend the additional drinkers or guzzlers would dry up natural springs and wetlands, attract predatory ravens, and sustain non-native burros.

The Park Service reversed course, and blocked conversion of the ranch wells until environmental issues are reviewed.

"Congress allows carefully-managed hunting in the preserve, but this proposal to uncap the ranch wells is a game farm concept ... (and) an attempt to manipulate the web of life," said Daniel Patterson, desert ecologist with the Tucson, Ariz.-based Center for Biological Diversity.

"Bighorn sheep have lived in the east Mojave a lot longer than artificial water sites. They have survived because of natural springs and riparian areas, and we would like to focus on the restoration of springs and streams."

Ken Schwartz, spokesman for the 50,000-member Safari Club International, said artificial water sources provide water for a wide variety of animals and birds, not just game creatures.

"This issue is about conservation, and protecting wildlife," he said. "It's not just an issue of game animals. Some of these water sources are known to provide water for as many as 90 desert animals. Of those, only 10 or 12 were allowed to be hunted."

Lifelong hunter Cliff McDonald of Needles said the water sites are vital for all wildlife in the 1.6-million-acre national preserve. "There are about 113 guzzlers for small animals in the east Mojave but none for large animals," he said.

"In a 20-square-mile area in Lanfair Valley, there is no year-round water (for big game)."

Wells in the east Mojave were capped off four to five years ago when land was transferred from private ranchers to the national preserve.

"All of the casings still exist at the 12 ranch wells, and we want to recap them," said Needles City Councilman Pat Murch. "This will provide a guaranteed water source for wildlife. It's not a hunters' issue, it's a wildlife issue."

Andrew Pauli state wildlife biologist from Apple Valley, said various volunteer groups ranging from Quail Unlimited to the Society for Conservation of Bighorn Sheep assist the California Fish and Game Department in well maintenance.

But well closings are compounding the problem to sustain desert wildlife. "About 125 water sources, many fed by pipes from a major well, have been shut off the past five years," Pauli said.

Park service water proposal draws interest

By KELLY DONOVAN/Staff Writer
Desert Dispatch [Barstow, CA]

BARSTOW -- An estimated 75 people from all over the region gathered in Barstow Monday evening to give their input on the controversial topic of artificial watering sources in the Mojave National Preserve.

The National Park Service's meeting at the Holiday Inn Express & Suites was part of the public scoping process for a proposal to bring former ranchers' well systems back online.

Hunters and environmentalists generally disagree on the artificial water issue.

The 12 wells would furnish water that would be accessible to a variety of animals, most likely via wildlife drinkers, Larry Whalon, chief of resources for the Mojave National Preserve, said.

Hunting groups have been pushing for the preserve to restore the water that the ranchers' wells had provided until the ranchers moved in recent years and removed their well equipment.

However, attendees said the push to restore the well systems isn't just about providing water for game to benefit hunters.

"It's for the preservation of the wildlife that's out there," said Walt Zielinski, a 71-year-old Apple Valley resident who attended the meeting.

Ken Schwartz, Safari Club International's state governmental affairs and communications manager, said his group and the other supporters of the water proposal want to help more than just game animals.

Animals that can't even be hunted will benefit from restored water sources, he said.

The Park Service initially was going to convert some former well systems into guzzlers, but the agency faced opposition from environmental groups and backed off on the plan this spring.

Environmental groups fault artificial water sources for attracting ravens, a predator of the desert tortoise, and they blame guzzlers for the deaths of tortoises due to the reptiles getting trapped in them.

Last year, the Park Service cleaned more than 30 guzzlers in the preserve and discovered in them the remains or shells of 13 tortoises.

The Center for Biological Diversity and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility filed a lawsuit in March asking that the guzzler proposal be reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act.

In early April, the Park Service rescinded its prior approval of the guzzler plan and agreed to move ahead with environmental review of the artificial water source issue.

Unlike guzzlers -- watering holes that animals must walk into -- wildlife drinkers are raised off the ground and wouldn't pose a threat to desert tortoises, Whalon said.

Still, Daniel Patterson, desert ecologist for the Center for Biological Diversity, didn't attend the meeting but said in a phone interview Monday that his group doesn't want the preserve run like a game farm.

"We support hunting on the preserve, but it needs to be managed consistently with the values of a national preserve," he said. "This isn't an issue of water versus no water. It's about using these agricultural wells that are supposed to stay off."

Patterson said his group would like to see a preserve-wide environmental impact statement addressing water, with an emphasis on the restoration of natural springs.

He also said there's an abundance of water in the preserve now, and he'd like to see the Park Service catch up on its maintenance backlog of existing guzzlers before moving ahead with any additional artificial watering sources.

One hunter who attended the meeting, 61-year-old Ray Osgood of San Diego County, said he's strongly in favor of getting the wells back online, and prefers wildlife drinkers over guzzlers.

Many birds can access drinkers better than they can guzzlers, he said.

Hunters' and sportsmen's groups represented at the meeting included Safari Club International, Quail Unlimited, Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep and the California Deer Association.

Safari Club International supports the restoration of the 12 wells, Schwartz said.

"Those animals have relied on (the wells) for over 100 years," Schwartz said. "They've come to know that's where they can go to get a drink. When that's taken away, it's a shock to their system."

The Park Service is preparing an environmental assessment document for the proposal, and a draft of the document will be available by Sept. 1.

Kippy Poulson, a 61-year-old Needles resident who supports the restoration of the well systems, couldn't attend Monday's meeting but said in a phone interview that she's hoping the Park Service will install wildlife drinkers.

The drinkers Poulson would like to see draw from an underground storage system, and they would benefit wildlife like bighorn sheep, deer, foxes and quail.

Response to "Water Fight in the Mojave"

Attention:
Letters to the Los Angeles Times editor
For the Record editor

Julie Cart's story, "Water Fight in the Mojave," in Friday's California section is a classic example of how The Times only gets half the story and only half right. It is filled with incorrect and mis-information reported without a lick of attribution.

The first mistake is the assumption that the "needs of game animals" are somehow at odds with the needs of "federally protected wildlife," and that hunters' interests are somehow different than other conservationists. It seems to me that hunters are interested in diverse healthy wildlife populations and show that by funding massive programs around the world that benefit all wildlife, not just hunted species. Good management of resources and wild systems benefits all wildlife in that system.

Then we come to the first error of fact: "...man-made water holes draw predators that prey on the threatened California desert tortoise." There has never been a single definitive study that shows this is true, and obviously no one who wanted to be quoted saying this was the case. There has been speculation by some biologists this happens, but that speculation is without any correlative science, and certainly without definitive work. In fact, most of the science would tend to suggest that additional water sources would tend to distribute predators at more places, lessening the likelihood that a tortoise would be potential prey.

Then the next paragraph has the next glaring error of fact: "...reverse a long-standing water policy in the 1.6-million-acre Mojave National Preserve." There is no policy. It is not stated in the Mojave's management plan. It is not in NEPA or even CEQA. In fact, by agreeing to the permanent capping of wells with the National Park Service Foundation, and moving ahead with those plans, the National Park Service violated its own management plan for the Preserve and NEPA. Both the plan and NEPA require that the NPS evaluate the impacts the removal of water -- in this case over 125 cattle watering sources -- would have on the preserve's wildlife BEFORE the water was removed. The NPS did NOT do that. It did no baseline surveys on wildlife populations around this man-made water and completed no study on impacts water removal would have, good or bad. There was only speculation that it would be a good thing. The NPS was in violation of the law and its own policy when it encouraged the removal of the cattle watering sources in the first place. This has probably led to a dramatic decline in dozens and dozens of different wildlife species, not just hunted species, on the preserve. But it was only the hunter-conservation groups like Safari Club who were concerned about this and immediately filed a protest. If the Times had bothered to ask Center for Biological Diversity lawyers about this, they would have told the papers' reporters that the NPS was in violation for allowing the removal of the wells, pipelines, and stock tanks in the first place before meeting the requirements of NEPA and its own management plan. Safari Club was trying to get the preserve staff to restore only 12 wells out of 125 water sources removed, and trying to do this quickly without a lawsuit to cut wildlife losses.

The next error in fact is about the claim by the 57 scientists who contend that because of groundwater pumping 90 percent of the preserves springs and seeps had been diminished on the preserve. There is no scientific documentation this is true. Only speculation by these 57 scientists. It is just as likely, if we can speculate, that groundwater pumping for human developments in Needles and Newberry Springs, drought, or global warming was the cause for any historic change, and not the modest pumping that supplied cattle (and wildlife) with water. In fact, it is speculative there has been a 90 percent change at all. This is NOT documented by science, it is their seat-of-the-pants belief. Show me the science.

These same scientists bemoan the added water as a huge detriment to wildlife. There are thousands of scientists in all of the Western states who will tell you the opposite, that water added in deserts is a huge boon to all wildlife. They have good science and examples to back up their beliefs, however, not speculation. One of the best examples of how added water has benefited wildlife is -- ironically -- on the Mojave National Preserve. The work was done before it was preserve, of course. The Old Dad Peak/Kelso Mountains complex on the far Western edge of the preserve historically held only a few wandering bighorn sheep. Never more than a dozen according to surveys done through the middle part of the last century. The Department of Fish and Game, working with the Bureau of Land Management, and one of those onerous hunter-conservation groups, the Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep, put in several man-made water sources. They did this, by the way, before hunting of bighorn sheep was allowed in the state. Today, it is the largest herd of desert bighorns in the state, numbering over 200 animals. This once threatened species (just like the desert tortoise) was brought back by the addition of water. By hunters before there was hunting for sheep. Amazing, huh?.

Now come the big factual errors in the story:

1) There is no direct evidence that capping any wells has rejuvenated the preserves natural water sites. This is speculation. And the statement is made without attribution in the story. We could speculate that the wetter seasons this year and last year are responsible for any increase in spring flow over the short term, too. And in fact, that has far more credibility.

2) There is no evidence of a deer herd increase. The NPS did no population surveys before the water was removed and none after the water was removed. They were supposed to do this before removing the 125 water sources, but they didn't. The "increase" is interpolated from the Department of Fish and Game's deer harvest figures over the past several hunting seasons. Survey hunters and they will all tell you they are seeing fewer deer in fewer places, but that they have become more successful because the deer have fewer places to water. Like any smart predator, hunters are focusing their efforts around those remaining water sources and killing more deer.

3) Of the 133 small game guzzlers and six big game guzzlers, over 3/4s are out of desert tortoise habitat. Of the 1/4 that are in desert tortoise habitat, tortoise remains have been found in 1/3 of those. That is a far smaller number than quoted in the LA Times story, which makes them all sound like death traps. Also, the implication that because remains are found in a guzzler that the guzzler is somehow the reason for the tortoises death is, at best, speculative. Correlation is not causation. Department of Fish and Game research, actual science, suggests very few of the tortoises in guzzlers died as a result of the guzzler. Just as DFG research suggests that tortoise shells found with bullet holes were almost never killed by those bullets. The shells were shot postmortem, long after the tortoises were dead. But there are "scientists" that continue to insist that shooting is a major cause of tortoise deaths. This is a lie.

4) There is no scientific evidence that water sources attract more ravens, increasing desert tortoise deaths. None. In fact, other scientists speculate that the more water sources you have, the less impacts predators have on wildlife. The problem is that there are about 100 times more ravens now than there were just 25 years ago. That is attributed to desert communities that provide food (garbage) in great quantities. Ravens also eat baby tortoises, and 100 times more eat 100 times more babies. You do the math. A lot of scientists believe ravens are the crux of the tortoise decline. Bulldozing all desert communities from Barstow to Yucca Valley to Lancaster would probably alleviate the raven increase.

Most of the 21-page complaint talks about the supposed impacts of man-made water on desert tortoises. The reality is that all 12 of the wells proposed for retrofitting are above the elevations inhabited by tortoises on the preserve. Isn't this whole argument is moot? Why didn't the Times reporter, ask this question?

The NPS staff could indeed suggest that it needs to remove all of the cattle water and the guzzlers on the preserve because this is "unnatural manipulation" of the habitat -- and that is not their charge. But the staff IS required by law and their own preserve policy to document the impacts water removal would have on the preserve's existing wildlife resources. They did not do that -- and that was ILLEGAL.

Conversely, the NPS is ALSO required to protect and enhance the cultural heritage on the preserve. Cattle ranching and guzzlers have been a huge part of the preserve for 100 years or more, and the historic windmills and cattle troughs are wonderful symbols of that history. The fact that they also help wildlife is a bonus. Yet, the NPS wants to rip them all out. Couldn't the NPS recognize the wildlife benefits and direct visitors to these cultural heritage sites to see desert wildlife? The small game guzzlers are ideal places to watch wildlife in the spring and summer, when there is no hunting on the preserve, and many of us believe the guzzlers should be preserved for their historic AND wildlife values. The NPS staff has never considered that a valid argument.

The impact removing 125-plus water sources has had on preserve wildlife is profound. The cultural loss is significant. It is more than quail and deer and hunters that have suffered.

Instead of portraying Paul Hoffman as another of the Bush-administration bad guy who's trying to destroy American's wildlife heritage, the reality the LA Times couldn't or refused to see is that Hoffman is trying to compensate for a NPS staff that hates the fact that hunting is allowed in the Mojave Preserve and was willing to violate the law and destroy wildlife to try to make the preserve less appealing to hunters. Hoffman was trying to avert a Safari Club lawsuit and protect desert wildlife. And he's the villain?

I realize this is far too long for you to run as a letter, but I hope you will at least research and correct the factual errors.

Sincerely,

Jim Matthews
San Bernardino, Calif.

Water Fight in the Mojave

U.S. Sides With Hunters, Who Clash With Naturalists on Well Issue

By Julie Cart, Staff Writer
Los Angeles Times

A quarrel over waterholes in the Mojave is pitting hunters against naturalists, the needs of game animals against those of federally protected wildlife, and is resurrecting decade-old differences over the purpose of a national preserve.

Until recently, the dispute has been limited to mule deer and bighorn sheep hunters who favor the creation of more desert water sources and conservationists who argue that man-made waterholes draw predators that prey on the threatened California desert tortoise.

Now, a high-ranking official in the U.S. Department of the Interior has intervened on behalf of hunters and demanded the uncapping of 12 plugged wells, an action that would reverse a long-standing water policy in the 1.6-million-acre Mojave National Preserve. That, in turn, prompted a lawsuit this week by two environmental groups that say the order is illegal.

Ever since the preserve was created 11 years ago, the National Park Service, which manages it, has been working to buy out a handful of cattle ranches scattered through the preserve and cap wells that supplied water to livestock. Some of the buyout agreements, which were financed by the nonprofit National Park Foundation, called for the permanent capping of all ranch wells.

Earlier this year, Deputy Assistant Interior Secretary Paul Hoffman, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, ordered the Park Service to allow the California Department of Fish and Game to reopen ranch wells and convert them to wildlife watering sites, known as guzzlers.

Hoffman issued the order over the written objections of Mojave Preserve Supt. Mary Martin.

The issue of man-made water supplies is especially important to hunters of mule deer, bighorn sheep, rabbits and quail. When the preserve was created in 1994, Congress directed that hunting be allowed.

However, in 2002 a group of 57 biologists, hydrologists and archeologists from around the country sent a letter to Hoffman asking for the removal of all guzzlers in the preserve.

The group said removal of artificial water sources was consistent with the principles of "conservation biology and park policy and law," and with Park Service management policies that prohibit "artificial manipulation of habitat to increase numbers of a harvested species above its natural range in population levels."

In addition, the scientists wrote that because of decades of groundwater pumping, 90% of the preserve's natural springs and seeps had been adversely affected.

This week, the Center for Biological Diversity and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility sued to prevent the first four wells from being uncapped and converted to water sites for wildlife. The lawsuit alleges that new guzzlers would be illegal, that well retrofitting requires environmental analysis, and that the watering devices have been shown to be harmful to other wildlife.

Hugh Vickery, an Interior Department spokesman, would not comment on ongoing litigation. Martin would not comment either.

Park Service hydrologists contend that the 30 or so ranch wells, some of which had been in operation for 100 years, siphoned water from a desert aquifer and compromised natural springs and seeps elsewhere in the Mojave.

Capping the wells, they say, has rejuvenated the preserve's natural water sites, and removing cattle from the desert has promoted regrowth of native plants. Park Service officials say both outcomes have helped sustain wildlife, including deer and sheep.

Park Service biologists say there is no need for more water sources, pointing out that one population of mule deer has increased slightly every year since the ranch wells were shut down.

Separate from the ranch wells, the Mojave Preserve maintains about 133 guzzler water stations for small game and six for large game. Some are designed to trap rainfall and surface water into cisterns, and others pump groundwater into concrete-lined depressions.

Conservationists and biologists say guzzlers attract ravens that prey on the desert tortoise. Preserve officials say tortoise remains have been found in nearly one-third of the preserve's guzzlers. Scientists surmise that tortoises either fall in and drown or are left in the water by predators.

Safari Club International, a hunting organization, and other groups have been pushing to reopen several wells. They met with Hoffman, Martin and representatives of the state Department of Fish and Game last August in Ontario.

Soon after the meeting, Fish and Game presented a plan to reopen 12 wells over three years. Martin balked, and a few months later Hoffman ordered her to allow Fish and Game to proceed with its plan.

State Fish and Game managers argue that wildlife in the preserve has become accustomed to the man-made water sources and that taking any water away would harm animals and ultimately reduce herd size.

"Our wildlife biologists who work out in the desert believe the water enhancement projects are necessary," said Mike Haynie, a deputy regional manager for the department.

The project will cost about $40,000, according to the state agency. Its proposal says volunteers will build and maintain the pumps, pipelines and submerged tanks that support the guzzlers.

"It's common sense," said Pat Murch, a resident of Needles who said he has hunted in the Mojave all his life. "Our concern is that all of a sudden you go turn [wells] off and that's going to affect the wildlife. We are simply asking the Park Service to use common sense.

"Under an agreement with the Department of Fish and Game, local hunting groups provide volunteers to maintain the water devices. However, a survey conducted by preserve staff last year found more than half of the guzzlers in a state of disrepair and 15% no longer functioning.

Ken Schwartz, a spokesman for Safari Club International, said that because roads are prohibited in much of the preserve, volunteers have difficulty getting to some guzzlers. But, according to the preserve's survey, 93% of the guzzlers are within one mile of a road.

Guzzlers for Mule Deer in Mojave National Preserve

By Keith Lair, Staff Writer
San Gabriel Valley Tribune - West Covina, CA

Safari Club International received permission from the Department of Fish and Game, Mojave National Preserve and the U.S. Department of Interior to convert four ranching well developments into wildlife guzzlers for mule deer on preserve land.
It is one of the few times the preserve has allowed an organization to improve guzzlers.

The four wells in question are the Eagle, Watson, Caruthers and Lecyr. According to the preserve, the wells must be converted in this order and work must be completed by the end of 2005.

The decision stems from a ground-breaking meeting orchestrated by SCI that was held in Ontario. At that meeting, members of the Mojave National Preserve, the DFG, the DOI and SCI discussed the issues in question and reached a consensus on how to restore necessary water sources to preserve wildlife.

"This extraordinary accomplishment would not have been possible without the support of SCI chapters and members in California, and the SCI Governmental Affairs and Wildlife Conservation staff in Washington, D.C.,' Executive Director Tom Riley said. "This effort proves that SCI, when called upon, will lead the way to help promote conservation worldwide.'

For volunteer information, contact Andy Pauli at (760) 240-1372 or project coordinator Cliff McDonald at (760) 326-2935.

Donation checks for the project should be made payable to Safari Club International Foundation and mailed to Safari Club International Foundation, c/o California Mojave Desert Wells Restoration Project, 4800 W. Gates Pass Road, Tucson, AZ., 85745.

SCI Facilitates National Park Service and California Department of Fish & Game Meeting

Tucson, Ariz., Aug. 17, 2004 - Safari Club International (SCI) organized a collaborative meeting between the National Park Service (NPS) and the California Department of Fish & Game (DFG) to discuss the important issue of maintaining water sources that are of critical importance for several species of wildlife in the Mojave National Preserve (Preserve).

“After several years of efforts by SCI on behalf of concerned California sportsmen, SCI was pleased to organize a meeting of this magnitude and be able to put the issue of water for Mojave wildlife closer to reality,” said John R. Monson, SCI president. “Bringing the policy makers together and making decisions to facilitate the reinstatement of traditional water sources to the Mojave by organizations like SCI is a win-win for wildlife. We feel the meeting was very productive and we are looking forward to solid results. SCI has taken the lead on this mission through the work of Dennis Anderson, SCI vice president and California legislative coordinator, and we hope to see a completed MOU between the parties no later September 15, 2004.”

"The Department of the Interior and the National Park Service have recently demonstrated the desire to work cooperatively with the California Department of Fish and Game on wildlife management on the Mojave National Preserve,” said Paul Hoffman deputy assistant secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. “Working together to maintain water for wildlife in a desert environment is consistent with Secretary Norton's 4Cs -- cooperation, consultation and communication, all in the service of conservation. Moreover, the California Desert Protection Act clearly gives DFG jurisdiction over wildlife management on the Preserve. We will all work together to ensure that wildlife benefits and park resources are not impaired as a result of any of these activities."

The groundbreaking meeting was held August 10, 2004, when SCI invited key officials from the two agencies together at the DFG offices in Ontario, California and then moderated the meeting to enable NPS and DFG to discuss and overcome the obstacles they had encountered in the effort to maintain wildlife water development systems throughout the Preserve. In this meeting, the following innovative points were agreed upon:

1) DFG and NPS will work together on creating a water guzzler management procedural manual. This list will contain the locations of all guzzlers and will identify those that exist in wilderness and non-wilderness areas of the Preserve. In addition, the manual will designate those guzzlers that lie inside and outside of designated desert tortoise habitat. For each category of guzzler, the manual will establish guidelines for access to and ongoing maintenance and restoration of the water sources. The manual will help officials and private groups save valuable time and resources that they intend to devote to insuring continued availability of necessary water sources for the wildlife of the Preserve.

2) DFG will immediately submit a proposal to the NPS to restore at least 12 big game guzzlers or wells in the eastern part of the Preserve, near the Lanfair Valley area. These wells were removed by ranchers who sold their ranches and grazing allotments to the Preserve, leaving the area devoid of much of the water that wildlife has relied upon for decades to survive. The NPS agreed to review the proposal without delay.

3) This collaboration to prepare guidelines will not prevent work from continuing in the interim period nor will it prohibit the volunteer efforts of organizations like SCI.

At this time, SCI welcomes input from other organizations and individuals throughout the region who, like SCI, seek to assist in the effort to maintain water for wildlife within the Mojave National Preserve. If there are any questions, please contact Ken Schwartz in SCI’s Washington, D.C. office at kschwartz@sci-dc.org.

Safari Club International is the leader in protecting the freedom to hunt and in promoting wildlife conservation worldwide. This chapter driven, nonprofit association is a tireless advocate for the world’s 45 million sportsmen and sportswomen, who, through legal hunting, annually drive more than $1.7 billion in funding to conserve all wild species. For more information, call 520-620-1220 or visit www.scifirstforhunters.org.

Contact:
Rick Parsons
202-543-8733
rparsons@sci-dc.org