1/06/10 GONE SOFT

Wednesday, 8:30 AM, 17 degrees, wind W, changeable. The channel looks like it is skimming over with ice, it is hard to tell. The sky is mostly filled with ominous black storm clouds and the barometer predicts snow.
Every winter I wage an unsuccessful war with squirrels raiding the bird feeder. I don’t begrudge them the sunflower seeds, but they actually sit in the feeder and keep the birds away. I suppose I could erect different types of feeders and squirrel barriers, but the squirrels merely see these as challenges to be overcome, and they invariably do so.
In my consternation I came up with the idea of putting a large dish of seeds on the porch floor for the squirrels, assuming they would eat from the convenient dish and stay out of the feeder. As a result, I have a squirrel in both feeder and bowl. I am sure that if I put out a second bowl I will soon have three squirrels, and so on, and still no birds.
Of course I cold find the old pellet gun in the bottom drawer of my dresser, and settle things Old West style, but squirrels are difficult to skin and I won’t shoot anything I am not going to eat. So I find myself impaled on the horns of a self-imposed moral dilemma, while the squirrels have their way with both me and the birds.
I think there are philosophical and practical lessons to be learned from this scenario that are applicable to everything from terrorism to taxes, but I will resist the temptation to go there. One thing is for sure; if you go soft you are going to get pushed around.

1/05/10 REACHING THE LIMITS OF RATIONALIZATION

Tuesday, 9:00 AM. 16 degrees, wind W, brisk. The sky is blue and the channel has been again blown free of ice, which has ended up on the Madeline Island shore or out to sea. It is a nippy but nice morning, the fresh snow glinting crystalline in the rising sun.
I have started the task of cleaning the office/library, which has degraded into a disorganized mess. The clutter has to go, so I can begin drawing landscape plans for spring work. It is a nagging enterprise. I have always theorized that a clean desk is evidence of an uncreative mind, but even that rationalization has its physical limits.

1/04/10 PARAPHRASING HAMLET

Monday, 8:30 AM. 10 degrees, wind W, calm. Ice is again forming on the channel, which is intermittently obscured by lake smoke. There are a few snow flakes falling, but the sky is clear except in the east. The barometer predicts snow, but presently it is a clear, crisp winter day.
The ferry now has to break a skim coat of ice on its first run of the morning. We will likely get some snow if it warms up for a few days and then be visited by the arctic air coming down from Canada. It has been in the –20’s and colder west of the lake. If we don’t get a storm with high winds and strong lake currents and surges, the channel should freeze over in a week or ten days. But for now, to paraphrase Hamlet, “to freeze or not to freeze, that is the question.”

1/03/09 CRYING WOLF

Sunday, 9:00 AM. 8 degrees, wind W, calm to light. There are broad bands of ice forming across the channel, the sky is overcast and the barometer predicts partly cloudy skies. For the first time in days, it is not snowing.
I have been thinking again about the probable role of wolves in the depletion of the northern Wisconsin deer herd, and have to note that even if the wolf population in the state was 1000, and if each wolf killed 15 deer annually, it would only be 15,000 deer, a small percentage of even the diminished deer herd.
I also reread yet again Aldo Leopold’s short but elegant essay on wolves, Thinking Like A Mountain, probably the briefest (three pages), most logical and most poetic ecological treatise ever written. He explains the role of the wolf pack in maintaining the health of the deer herd, the ecological damage done by an overpopulation of deer, and the esthetics of wolves. Although we should be objective about wolves, and not anthropomorphic, they probably are not an overwhelming factor in the numbers of deer, and overall are beneficial to the deer herd and the health of the ecosystem. And who would not thrill to the cry of the wolf on some moonlit wilderness night?
My favorite book regarding wolves is Farley Mowat’s Never Cry Wolf. He is a Canadian author of immense talent who is one of my favorite writers, and a major figure in wolf ecology. Never Cry Wolf is insightful, poignant, and wildly funny. He comes to the same conclusions as Leopold. I highly recommend it and his other books as well.

1/02/10 FIREWOOD AND BOOKS

Saturday, 8:45 AM. –3 degrees, up several degrees from its low. Wind W, calm. Several inches of new snow has fallen, and it continues to fall very lightly. The lake smoke has been heavy but is dissipating. The sky is mostly cloudy and the barometer predicts more of the same.
Our proximity to the open waters of Lake Superior saves us from even colder temperatures (it is currently -12 degrees in Ashland, were the Bay is frozen over), and it will continue to moderate Bayfield’s weather as long as the channel and the Apostle Islands remain ice-free.
Moderated or not, it is still plenty cold, Lucky doing his three-legged hop on our walks (I am sure he would never tolerate doggie “booties”). Keeping the fireplace going almost constantly over the last few days has used up a wood box full of firewood a day, and I will now go back to lighting the fire only in the evenings, or else the wood supply will soon be depleted. The fireplace is less efficient than a stove but welcome nonetheless, and I have always considered a cheery hearth as one of the necessities of winter survival, along with books. I have enough books in my library to last me many winters. Firewood is quite another matter.

1/01/10 REFLECTIONS ON THE WISCONSIN DEER SEASON: PART III

New Year’s Day, 9:15 AM. 10.5 degrees, wind W, calm. The channel is calm, with no lake smoke rising. The sky is overcast but the barometer predicts sunny skies.
We know that the goal of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources has been for some time the significant reduction of the state deer herd. They have been eminently successful in doing so, particularly in the northern, forested part of the state. What might the rationale be for this goal? There are several, some obvious some perhaps not so obvious.
A good reason to keep deer numbers in check has been the threat of chronic wasting disease, a problem in the southern counties of the state. One theory in the spread of the disease is that overcrowding and sharing of food sources spreads the disease, and caution would dictate that even if the proof of those factors is not incontrovertible that populations should be controlled through specific policies in the south. But that does not translate into herd reduction for that reason in the less-dense herd counties of the north. Rather, the stated (often not very loudly by the agency) case for herd reduction in the north is the impact of deer browsing on forest seedling reproduction. This is both an economic and an ecologic argument, as browsing of tree seedlings has an economic impact on forest timber and pulp wood production, and there are potentially huge amounts of money involved. Fewer deer equals more wood equals more dollars. The ecologic aspects are several at least, in that over browsing reduces the diversity of species in the forest and may thereby affect forest health, and severe over browsing can cause erosion and effect soil and water quality. I have not heard the DNR make much of a case for ecological degradation at present. That pretty much leaves forest products profits as the basis for herd reduction, but that argument ignores the fact that deer hunting, and deer viewing by tourists, also has an enormous economic impact on the state economy, and deer hunting licenses and fees are a big part of DNR revenue. In order to understand policy, the economics and politics of the money trail needs to be sorted out.
There is another, almost cryptic, issue which may affect environmental policies, and that is the role of the environmental lobby, much of which is anti-hunting and truly believes that people should not be part of the “balance of nature.” Such attitudes impact predator reintroduction and control, as in the case of wolves, bears and other large carnivores. It is as though we have gone from societal wolf phobia, “the only good wolf is a dead wolf,” to “there is no such thing as a bad wolf.”
There is a general misconception that nature, left to its own devices, is perpetually “in balance,” and although that may be true in the long run, the balance is very crude, with great population swings of predator and prey species, and the overabundances of some species followed by population crashes and scarcities, or extinctions of others. The havoc of nature in the raw usually results in human intervention, imperfect as it ma y be.
So, where does all this leave hunters and other interested parties, and the deer herd, and the DNR? First, it leaves hunters and others frustrated and probably very angry and ready to take it out on the DNR and its management practices. It leaves the deer herd obviously very depleted, and possibly in danger of a crash if the trend continues (twenty percent decline followed by a thirty percent decline followed by…). It leaves the DNR with a very bad public relations situation at best and a hunter revolt at worst.
What can and should be done about the situation? Obviously the DNR needs to review its statistical analysis of deer and predator populations, because they don’t seem to have many of the numbers right, and without reasonably accurate population estimates rational policies cannot be set (go to the DNR web site and ferret out their statistical data and see if you have much faith in it). Predator-prey relationships need to be analyzed realistically without “nature knows best” politically correct attitudes. Hunting pressure needs to be reduced, particularly on does, with fewer special seasons and probably a buck only season until population numbers stabilize. Deer baiting should probably be discontinued, as it seems to upset the natural movement of browsing deer. Finally, the DNR and the state legislature should remind themselves that hunters vote.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!

12/31/09 REFLECTIONS ON THE WISCONSIN DEER SEASON: PART II

Thursday, 9:00 AM. 13 degrees, wind W, light. The channel is obscured by lake smoke, and light snow is falling with a current accumulation of 2”. The sky is overcast and the barometer predicts partly cloudy skies.
There are of course many environmental factors that can affect wildlife populations. Snow depth is a strong factor in deer survival, deep snow keeping deer “yarded up” in heavy cover, limiting access to browse and thereby causing starvation and limiting fawn production. It also makes deer more susceptible to predation. Bad weather when fawns are born or are very young limits reproductive success. Overpopulation of any species can damage and limit food supply and increase disease (overpopulation has been a possible factor in chronic wasting disease, which has been limited to the southern portion of the state to this point). Interspecific competition for food can be a factor, but is not in the case of Wisconsin deer, which currently have little competition for their food sources from other animals. Snow depths in recent years seem little changed from the usual in the northern portion of the state, and recent spring weather, although cool, does not seem to have been extreme.
That pretty much leaves predation as the suspect in the decline in the northern deer herd. The 2009 statewide deer season harvest, according to the recent DNR figures, is the lowest in twenty-seven years, and was particularly low in the northern portion of the state. The decline has been rapid, a thirty- percent decline from 2008, which was itself a twenty-percent decline from 2007. Which predators might be most suspect in such a rapid decline? There are quite a few. Since the reintroduction of the timber wolf a few years ago the Wisconsin wolf pack has increased exponentially, the DNR estimating there are now 700 wolves in Wisconsin (given the inability of the DNR to accurately predict the decline of the deer herd, one might wonder at its accuracy in estimating the size of the wolf population, which one might suspect may be even larger than estimated). It is estimated a mature wolf will kill about fifteen adult deer per year, a considerable predatory factor. Less appreciated is the fact that an adult black bear will take on average four fawns a year, and the Wisconsin bear population according to the DNR is approximately 36,000. Bayfield County has the highest population of black bears in the state as evidenced by its annual bear season kill of over 300 animals. One amateur trail camera outside a local bear den allegedly recorded a sow bringing fourteen fawns to its cubs this spring, although this is hearsay. Then there are bobcats, which can bring down an adult deer, as well as coyotes. Coyotes may or may not kill a lot of deer, although they certainly harass them. During the 2008 season I seldom saw deer tracks in the snow that were not covered with coyote tracks. This year, amazingly, I heard no coyotes howling at sunset, and prior years they were absolutely raucous, and I saw few tracks in the snow. Since wolves kill and drive out coyotes in their territories, I am wondering if locally we have had a big increase in the wolf population, although I personally did not see any while hunting. And, although the DNR denies it, there have been a number of pretty creditable reports of cougars in the area again this year.
But, of course, the main predator of deer in Wisconsin is man, and hunting seasons have proliferated to the point where it seems the deer seldom get a chance to rest or recover. The archery season starts early, then there is a youth hunt, the regular gun deer season, a muzzle loader season, and a late doe season. The recent deer seasons have concentrated on the taking of does to reduce herd reproduction, with virtually unlimited doe tags available in many management units. The goal of the DNR has been to drastically reduce the size of the Wisconsin deer herd, and it seems they have been quite successful. Next I will offer some probable reasons for this, and attempt to analyze the current situation.