NE"" MEXICO COUGARS UNm-ER FIRE! "We are simply askirig that the Department implement a defensible recovery plan based on the best available science in order to bring back bighorn sheep. Persecuting predators like cougars will not save New Mexico's bighorn. Deliberate and serious recovery efforts will," said Lisa Jennings, Executive Director, APNM. "Cougars and bighorn sheep have historically coexisted. By examining and altering other limiting factors such as habitat degrada tion and disease transmission from domestic livestock,. we can ensure the continued abundant presence of both these species in our state,"
ANIMAL PROTECTION OF NEW MEXICO, INC. Non-Profit Org. U.S. Postage URGENT ACTION ALERT! PAID Albuquerque, N.M. Permit No. 1130 Animal Protection ''If hi ew Mexico, Inc. P.O. Box 11395 Albuquerque, NM 87192-0395
Return Service Requested
www.APNM.org WILDLIFE IN JEOPARDY: New Mexico's Faulty Cougar Policies At JUly's New Mexico Game Commission meeting, all six in three Wilderness Study Commissioners present (Commissioner Emery was absent) voted Areas NVSA's). to approve a controversial cougar killing program promoted by the Department: of Game and Fish (Department) in order to While there is no question ostensibly protect New Mexico's endangered bighorn sheep that the state's bighorn pop population. The approved regulations will allow for the killing of ulations are in dire straits, up to 34 cougars per year, for five years, in fOUf bighorn sheep killing cougars is unHkely to territories, whether or not cougars have killed bighorn sheep. In solve the problem of dwin essence, any cougar in bighorn sheep territory is a dead cougar. dling bighorn populations. Instead, APNM has been This indefensible plan will begin on October 1 in areas around stressing that the following the Sierra Ladrone Mountains, the Manzano Mountains, the Big be done: and little Hatchet Mountains, and the Peloncillo Mountains. The develop and implement a comprehensive Department has not stipulated what specific bighorn sheep recovelY plan; methods will be used to kill the cougars, but "Politically-based decisions evaluate the impact on bighorn sheep of says that a combination of "sport harvest", grazing, human encroachment, fire suppres which scapegoat a natural sion, etc. and restore damaged areas; houndsmen and trappers will be used. The predator instead of address implement a more aggressive bighom sheep Department says it intends to evaluate the ing decades of habitat mis captive breeding plan; effectiveness of its cougar-killing program on since a decision to kill cougars has already increasing the bighorn population after five management are neither been made, the least the Department could do years, but hasn't shown that it will properly defensible nor effective, and is to use the flexibility intended in the cougar zone management plan to safeguard cougar monitor cougar populations do 50. to will surely drive these wild populations by adding another refuge zone sheep even closer to the and reducing quotas in other areas. To add insult to inlury, the planned killing brink of extinction:' will take place without the proper environ Certain Commissioners have actually said in mental analysis to determine the effect of - Lisa Jennings public meetings that they are not interested the killing program on cougar populations. in more research, they just want to see Currently, no one can say whether the state's cougar population results. These kinds of outrageous statements underscore the is stable, increasing or decreasing. In addition, the killing will be need for a wildlife policy-making body which understands the taking place in at least one Wilderness Area (an area "where the complexity of wildlife management and is willing to tackle prob earth and its community of life are untrammeled by mC!'n''), and lems at their roots.
WHAT TO DO: 1:'11. Write to Governor Johnson and let Write the New Mexico Game Commissioners and let them know you ~ him know that both the Department 1 disapprove of their decision to implement yet another ill-advised cougar and the Commission continue to pro killing program. Write them at: mote wildlife decisions not based in sound
William (Bill) Brininstool, Stephen Doerr Represents District 4: sdence and which don't address the root Chainnan 2106 Aspen Santa Fe, Taos, Colfax, causes of problems. Ask him to help reform P.O. Drawer A Portales, NM 88130 Union, Mora, Harding, the process by which wildlife decisions are Jal, NM 88252 (w) 359-1289; Quay, San Miguel, made in New Mexico. Here are some talking (w) 395-2010; (h) 356-6700; Guadalupe and Torrance points: (h) 225-2870; (faxl 359-1898 counties (faxl 395-2914 Statewide (at large) e New Mexico should have a Wildlife Commission, Represents District 1: representative Steve Padilla not a Game Commission, since most wildlife is Curry, DeBaca, Roosevelt, 1641 Speakman SE not even being protected under current state Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, Bud Hettinga Albuquerque, NM 87123 laws; Eddy and Lea counties P.O. Box 2409 (h) 298-0901; e a wildlife commission should consist mostly of Las Cruces, NM 88004 (fax) 298-1901 trained biologists and ecologists, not lay people; Gail Jean Crame~' (w) 524-3551; Statewide (at large) 405 San Paula (laxl 526-0835 representative • the Department and Commission are not using Fannington, NM 87401 Represents District 2: recommendations from preeminent institutions (w) 599-G34Q..school Catron, Socorro, Grant, Steven Emery