A Critical Analysis of Wildlife Conservation in Oregon
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF LARRY MARING RYMON for theDOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Name) (Degree) in GENERAL SCIENCEpresentedon'ifitn (Major) ate) Title:A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION IN OREGON Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy R. J. Mcis This analysis is the study of Oregon's wildlife resources from the period prior to white settlement up to the present time,including critical projections, based on present trends and expected conditions for both human and wildlife populations in the state up tothe year 2010. Prior to white settlement Oregon was apparently part of a well balanced ecosystem. The fertile, moist valley regions were areas where an abundance of wildlife was found.Elk, deer, bear, antelope and their associated predators occupied these favorable sites.The Oregon Indian lived harmoniously within this environment. He con- ducted himself as a "prudent predator" and generally sought game which was most easily available.These animals were abundant enough to withstand the hunting pressure exerted by the limited Indian population.The only major deliberate control the Indian extended over his environment was burning.Indians ignited large areas to enhance the harvest of wildplants and animals.One of these areas was the Willamette Valley, parts of which were apparently main- tained in a condition of fire climax or disclimax long prior to the arrival of white settlers. White pioneers arriving in Oregon in the 1840's settled first in locations where the best agricultural land and available moisture was found.These areas coincided with prime game habitat and the immediate effect of settlement was the displacement of wildlife from their traditional ranges to areas of inferior fertility and moisture. The pattern of development of white civilization had a severe impact on wildlife populations from the late 1800's to the early 1900's. Drainage and reclamation projects coupled with prolonged drought periods drastically reduced waterfowl populations.Excessive killing of game for the meat, hide and feather value further reduced wildlife populations when market hunting reached its peak between 1870 and 1900.Predator and rodent cool efforts were directed toward improving agricultural conditions but often resulted in upsetting pre- vious balances among several forms of wildlife. After 1893 wildlife management evolved through periods of pro- tection, stocking, refuges, and systematic management. The Oregon State Game Commission and the United States Bureau of Biological Survey attempted to work cooperatively with several state and federal agencies in the 1920's and 1930's in an effort to restore depleted wildlife populations.The Taylor Grazing Act helped prevent further mismanagement of rangeland.The Migratory Bird Stamp Act allowed funds for waterfowl habitat purchases.Other legislation such as the Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid to Wildlife Restoration Act is further testimony of Federal Programs which have provided the means for wildlife restoration since the 1930's.The general development of cooperative wildlife research units in the United States together with the formation of Oregon State University's Department of Fisheries and Wildlife were important steps in the movement toward more scientific wildlife management during the 1930's.Several important wildlife management programs were developed in Oregon and success- ful wildlife restoration programs have continued up to the present time. Although wildlife populations have been largely restored through systematic management, they are again being lost.The next losses will be from severe competition with man for living space and resources.Based on demographic projections and current trends, it appears that the burgeoning human population will eventually cause the annihilation of many wildlife species.Upset watersheds, wide- spread pollution, increased competition for natural resources, and competition for living space between man and wildlife are unpleasant but real prospects for Oregon's future. A Critical Analysis of Wildlife Conservation in Oregon by Larry Maring Rymon A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 1969 APPROVED: Redacted for Privacy Assistant Professor of Hist of Science(1 in arge of major Redacted for Privacy Chairman of Department of Generacience Redacted for Privacy Dean of Graduate School Date thesis is presented 10/vtu,c 0(09 Typed by Gwendolyn Hansen for Larry Maring Rymon ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I wish to express my appreciation to all of the people who assisted, encouraged and advised me in the preparation of this manu- script. A most sincere and personal thank you is due Dr. Robert J. Morris for his editorial treatment and critique of this historical approach to a wildlife problem.His professional skill and personal encouragement made this work possible. The Oregon State Game Commission was most cooperative in assisting me during my employment with them and later.That organization deserves much credit for providing me with the training and background data which was of so much importance in this study. Thanks are also due to the library staff at Oregon State Univer- sity, The Oregon Historical Society, and the staffs of lending libraries for their kind cooperation in assisting me in my search for background information to support the historical aspects of this analysis. Personal interviews, letters, manuscripts, and information not otherwise available were provided by:0. V. Deming, Prof. R. E. Dimick, Mrs. V. Einarsen, Dr. I. N. Gabrielson, J. Hill, R. Long, J. Richardson, J. Scharff, Governor C. Sprague, A. Walker, and Mrs. H. Wire. In Memoriam: Mr, Clark Walsh, former Assistant Game Director of the Oregon State Game Commission was most helpfulin reading portions of this manuscript and in giving helpful information concerning the historical perspectives herein.His recent death is deeply regretted, TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 Chapter I.OREGON PRIOR TO WHITE SETTLEMENT 3 General Geography 3 Native Flora and Fauna of the Regions 6 The Willamette Valley Region 7 The Coast Range Region 11 Coastal Mountains 16 The Siskiyou Mountains Region 19 The Cascade Range Region 21 The Great Basin Region 28 The Owyhee Region 32 The Blue and Wallowa Mountains Region 35 The Columbia and Deschutes Plateau Region 40 II.EARLY HUMAN POPULATION 46 The Indian Population 46 Indian Hunting and Fishing 54 An Analysis of the Indians Influence on Wildlife Conservation 59 Fire 63 Summary of Pre-White Era 68 III. THE WHITE MAN'S INFLUENCE 73 Maritime Fur Trade 73 Continental Fur Trade 74 Pioneer Settlement 78 Market Hunting 97 Summary 109 IV. EARLY LEGISLATION AND WILDLIFE PROTECTION 112 Early Wildlife Protectors 112 State and Federal Interaction 116 Stocking and Enforcement 121 Conservation and Federal Influence 126 Chapter Page Finley and Federal Refuges 137 Market Hunting at Malheur 144 Killing at Three Arch Rocks 146 Conflicting Interests 148 Summary of the Period 154 V.WILLIAM L. FINLEY AND GOVERNMENTAGENCIES 156 Early Activity of the Bureau of Biological Survey 160 The Forest Services Increasing Responsibility 177 The Game Commissions Restoration Efforts 179 VI.THE EMERGENCE OF SCIENTIFICMANAGEMENT 193 Land Acquisition Through New Funds 193 The Malheur Purchase 195 Multiple Use 198 Biological Research and New Problems 200 The Deer Crisis 201 Oregon State University and Wildlife Management 208 The Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit 211 New Training and New Technique 214 Politics and Legislation 216 The Taylor Grazing Act and Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge 221 Federal Aid and New Projects 226 Summary of Modern Management Techniques 234 VII.OREGON'S WILDLIFE: BIG GAME AND PREDATORS 236 Big Game 236 Oregon Bison 237 Bighorn Sheep 240 Antelope 243 Mountain Goat 249 Rocky Mountain Elk 251 Roosevelt Elk 253 White-tailed Deer 256 Mule Deer 259 Columbian Black-tailed Deer 264 Moos e 267 Predators 268 Wolf 268 Black Bear 270 Grizzly Bear 272 Chapter Page Cougar 273 Bobcat and Lynx 276 Coyote 277 Foxes 280 Steller's Sea Lion 282 Harbor Seal 284 VIII.OREGON'S WILDLIFE: BIRDS, FURBEARERS AND NON-GAME ANIMALS 286 Native Upland Game Birds 286 Sage Grouse 287 Columbian Sharp-tailed Grouse 289 Valley Quail 290 Mountain Quail 291 Forest Grouse 292 Pigeons and Doves 294 Introduced Game Birds 296 Turkeys 296 Hungarian Partridge 298 Ring-necked Pheasant 298 Bobwhite Quail 302 Chukar Partridge 304 Other Exotic Game Birds 306 Waterfowl 308 Condor 317 Native Furbearers 319 Sea Otter 319 Beaver 322 Mink 324 Muskrat 325 Otter 326 Fisher 327 Marten 328 Wolverine 329 Introduced Furbearers 330 Opossum 330 Nutria 332 A Summary of Furbearers 334 Non-Game Mammals 335 Summary of Management Techniques 339 IX. TRENDS AND ANALYSIS 243 Human Population Z43 Forests Z48 Chapter Page Water 362 Industry 366 Agriculture 368 Analysis 372 Human Population vs. Wildlife 372 Big Game 373 Upland Game Birds 379 Waterfowl 383 Furbearers and Non-game Animals 388 Summary of Oregon's Wildlife Situation 391 BIBLIOGRAPHY 401 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1.Oregon Indian population estimates in 1839 and 1851. 51 2.Animals eaten and not eaten by Klamath Indians. 55 3.Statement of market sales of game for the season of 1896. 98 4.Deer and elk harvest data 1933-1967. 206 5.Deer population trends. 261 6.Summary of special deer seasons. 262 7.Numbers of bounties paid by Oregon State Game Commission (1913-1961). 275 8.Trapping reports. 281 9.Summary of upland game seasons 1951-1967. 288 10.Waterfowl found in Oregon. 309 11.Waterfowl kill by years 1950-1967. 316 12.The National and State Wildlife refuges ix; Oregon which benefit waterfowl. 318 13.Major forest fires in Oregon's history. 353 14.Oregon lumber production. 358 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1,Geographical Regions of the State 4 2,Tribal Distribution of Oregon Indians 48 3.Caricature of E. H. Harriman 132 4,Lower Klamath Lake Executive Order 139 5.Malheur Lake Executive Order 140 6.Population Curve 344 7.Hunting Demand and Yield 399 FOREWORD .