SNP CWD Plan Comment Period Extended-Meeting In Front Royal Tonight

Due to a glitch in communications I was not aware that the period for commenting on Shenandoah National Park's CWD Management Plan had been extended until this morning.  A public meeting will be held this evening  at the Warren County Community Center, 538 Villa Avenue in Front Royal, Va. Read about it in the Shenandoah National Park News release below:

This also extends the time for public comment until January 30, 2015.  The additional public meeting was scheduled and the comment period extended to address concerns by several landowners who own land adjacent to the park about the proposed CWD plan.

Shenandoah National Park Holds Additional Public Meeting and Reopens Comment Period for ChronicWasting Disease Management Plan 

 Date: January 7, 2015 In response to a request from several park neighbors, Shenandoah National Park will hold an additional public meeting on the park's proposed Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) response plan.The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 22, 2015, at the Warren County Community Center, 538 Villa Avenue.Dr. Jenny Powers, National Park Service Wildlife Veterinarian and CWD expert, will make a presentation on the history and biology of the disease.Jim Schaberl, Shenandoah National Park Chief of Natural and Cultural Resources, will present the park's proposed plan.Park Superintendent Jim Northup will be available to answer questions. Experts from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries will also be available to answer questions on CWD actions outside the park. Following the meeting, the park will reopen the comment period for eight days.

Shenandoah National Park management is proposing to amend the approved 2013Chronic Wasting Disease Detection/Assessment Plan, Shenandoah National Park to include response actions necessary to address chronic wasting disease (CWD) within five miles of or within the park. Although CWD has not been detected in the park, it has been documented approximately 12 miles from the park's northern boundary. The spread of the disease into the park appears imminent, and park staff has determined that a plan for managing the disease is needed. CWD is a serious, non-native disease which threatens deer populations, related natural resources, and visitor experiences at Shenandoah National Park. The proposed plan amendment calls for the lethal removal of deer within specific developed areas of Shenandoah National Park to reduce the likelihood of CWD establishment and decrease the disease's progression within the park.

The draft amendment/EA for this project has been prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A series of public meetings on this topic were held in November, and the public was given an opportunity to comment during a 30-day comment period which ended on December 10, 2014.With the addition of another meeting the public will now be able to comment again on the draft plan from January 22 until January 30, 2015.The draft plan is available for review and comment online at http:parkplanning.nps.gov/shencwd.Comments may also be sent to: Superintendent, Shenandoah National Park, Attn: CWD Response Amendment/EA, 3655 US Highway, 211 East, Luray, VA 22835.

For more information about Chronic Wasting Disease, please visit  http:wwww.nps.gov/shen/naturescience/cwd.htm.

Shenandoah National Park -The Assault On The Whitetail Continues

When I first heard of the CWD study at Shenandoah National Park back in 2012, the first thought that entered my mind was that this was just the preliminary step toward a drastic herd reduction in the park. As it turns out it seems my worst fears are going to be more than realized, but for some time park officials seemed to  divert attention away from what they really intended to do and to downplay the severity of it.

In a News Release dated December 5, 2013  SNP officials announced that their  staff had completed a planning process for a Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) Detection and Assessment Plan.  This followed the park  receiving a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) decision. The purpose of the CWD plan at that point was to establish a framework in which SNP officials could determine whether CWD was present in the deer population within the park and if was found to determine the number of infected animals and their location in the park.  This would all come together in a   management plan to deal with CWD in the park and to co-operate with the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries in detecting the disease, etc.

The news release went on to list four options for the detection and/or assessment of CWD within the park.,
 1. Opportunistic sampling (mostly testing road-killed deer)
 2. Targeted surveillance(looking for and sampling sick/emaciated deer)
 3. Enhanced live-testing (live-sampling healthy appearing)
  4. Lethal removal

At this point the lethal removal option appeared to be downplayed as the third paragraph of the news letter states, "Sampling will occur in areas of the park within 30 miles of a known CWD case. If needed to achieve a statistically valid sample size for the detection or assessment of CWD, the park may lethally sample up to 150 deer over a three year period for detection or approximately 70 over a two year period to determine prevalence and distribution. The park will only lethally remove deer for sample after exhausting all other non-lethal sampling methods (e.g., enhanced opportunistic (mostly road-kill), enhanced live-testing, and hunter-harvest/road-kill testing by the VDGIF within the surveillance area).The park will primarily sample and remove deer near the closest developed areas (e.g. Dickey Ridge, Mathews Arm, Skyland,and Big Meadows). Deer will be sampled from developed areas because these areas have higher deer densities and are, therefore, at greater risk of CWD introduction and spread .Lethal removal sampling would occur during periods of low visitation."

Pay special attention to this sentence from the paragraph above, "The park will only lethally remove deer for sample after exhausting all other non-lethal sampling methods".  If someone read this in a positive frame of mind, it tended to relieve their concerns as it gave the impression that lethal removal was extremely unlikely to happen or be minor in nature if it did,  but if we jump forward to late 2014 and read the SNP  CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE DETECTION AND ASSESSMENT PLAN AMENDMENT of October 2014 it becomes clear that they did employ lethal sampling methods on park deer or at least they certainly seem to say that they did.

If one goes to page 21 and looks  under the heading, "Impacts of plan with addition of proposed response actions" they state, "As previously analyzed (NPS 2012a), the current detection and assessment actions have some adverse impacts on visitor use and experience when visitors are unable to access certain areas of the park because area closures are required for safety reasons during lethal removal for sampling". They go on to point out on page 22 that "The addition of the proposed response actions may require additional area closures to conduct density reductions but these are not expected to noticeably change the level of impact on visitors beyond what was previously analyzed for detection and assessment actions, alone." Even if one reads the document quite closely there are times that you are not sure if they are writing about something that has already happened or if they are stating that something that is to happen in the future will result in little difference in visitor experience, over something that has already been planned for the future, but not yet implemented--it is that vague. .

The conclusion on page 23 does a good job of summing it up; however, and seems to leave little doubt that that they have already removed deer by lethal means when beginning with the second sentence they say "The adverse impacts of area closures for density reductions would not be noticeably different than what visitors currently experience when areas are closed for lethal removals for detection and assessment. Closures for density reductions may be somewhat longer or at different times of the year, but the overall adverse impacts would not change from existing, either individually or cumulatively".

Concerning negative impacts, the conclusion states, "The main difference as a result of adding response actions is decreased opportunities for visitors to regularly view and photograph deer in favored locations such as Big Meadows. Deer would still be present but in smaller numbers, on a less regular basis, and may be less tolerant of human presence. This would probably reduce the enjoyment of visitors who come to the park specifically to see deer in Big Meadows and other favorite viewing areas.  It goes on to justify the herd reductions by pointing out that, "This would not reduce the overall visitor experience of the park because deer densities in these areas would be more similar to natural deer densities that occur throughout the park, which is in keeping with the natural conditions and experience that the park was established to conserve and promote."

The conclusion sections ends with, " Public outreach and information may promote greater understanding of the need for the response actions, alleviating some of the adverse impacts".

 Thoughts  From Blog Readers

 Wildlife biologist, Kirk, commented on my last post, . " If your interest is in the conservation of the whitetail herd, let's agree that the current density of WT's on NPS property from Shenandoah to Gettysburg is somewhere between 20 and 50 TIMES the threshold for "high likelihood" of transfer of CWD as it's practiced in much tougher, sparse terrain out west. Not 20%. 2000%! And that number is likely pretty low.
I'm not arguing this as a hunter (Lord knows that hunting on NPS ground is a debacle at best), but as an actual wildlife biologist. Photography is important. Visitors (and fee payers) are important. But there's absolutely nothing in anyone's action plan to reasonably react to a 50% or 80% herd die off."

(I assume from this that he is meaning that  a 50% or 80% mortality rate from CWD is possible  rather than the lower rates usually reported  in states like Colorado are because of the much higher deer density in SNP.)

Kirk goes on to say, "There's no "non harsh" way through this, is what I'm proposing. Thanks for bringing up the issue, I hadn't heard about this, and I'm well versed in NPS' typical aversion to lethal management of anything, even exotic 30 foot long pythons."

Kirk  also made a follow-up comment-" Also keep in mind that all of these actions occur in context of multiple, often competing, management plans for the NPS units. NPS has been burned badly in court numerous times for not aggressively acting to take precautions to preserve designated habitats and species from "forsseable" threats. Whitetails are at a high density on NPS lands, we all agree on that, and guess what, they don't eat the invasive plants."

A Virginia wildlife photographer, Larry W. Brown, who is very familiar with SNP said, "To state that this is a bad situation for the SNP whitetails would be a major understatement. The ignorance of the SNP wildlife management officials to continue on with these herd reduction plans makes no sense whatsoever. There have been 7 known cases of CWD in that county since 2009, so if CWD was as bad as they make it out to be, wouldn't the deer populations in that area have already suffered? And have already spread into SNP? Since 2002, over 7,600 deer in Virginia have been tested for CWD. The Va DGIF has diagnosed ONLY 7 positive cases of CWD in Virginia. The statistics speak for themselves.

Another Virginia wildlife photographer, Jim Fields, who I first met on A Sunday summer  morning in Big Meadows back in the film photography day,s  chimed in with a very relevant comment, " SNP is using CWD as a scare tactic to convince the unknowing public that an 80% cull is needed in Big meadows. If CWD was a valid concern the parks efforts would focused at the North Entrance of the Park nearer to the CWD positive specimens. As Larry mentioned Virginia does not have mass numbers of deer killing over from CWD. There has only been 7 CWD positive deer found to date and none of these were in SNP.

As you know in the Amended plan there is no mention of herd management with consideration given to keeping genetically strong specimens or proper buck to doe ratios to produce quality bucks, does, and fawns for future generations. This is purely a kill plan to eliminate mass deer numbers specifically in Big Meadows.

Additionally If you visit SNP you will find no information regarding this subject displayed for the public at any of the park facilities. I purposely went in the Byrd visitor center yesterday I was handed a copy of the press release from behind the counter only after I inquired about the deer reduction in BM. There was no copies of the amended plan available at the center."

Another wildlife enthusiast,  Kaleen, said, " The Shenandoah National Park situation is heartbreaking. I have been going to the park for over 40 years and have loved and photographed the deer and other animals all that time. The park's plan is insane and illogical. There is not enough evidence to support such drastic action, and the only way to completely prevent this disease in the future would be to eliminate all the deer, which the current park plan would almost do. The park has ruined wildlife photography, to say nothing of the suffering, evident in photos, of the collared deer. The poor deer do not stand a chance, and this planned nighttime shooting will lead to poor shots and injured and suffering deer. The whole plan is senseless and will do nothing to prevent the disease from ever reaching the park, which is not likely anyway. The park officials seem to have lost their minds. They should take a lesson from Pennsylvania's game management."

My Thoughts

When we sift to the bottom of all of this it boils down to the fact that they are willing to sacrifice 80% of the deer herd at the popular whitetail areas such as Big Meadows because, according to Larry Brown , 7 deer have tested positive for CWD in the State of Virginia and this is confirmed by The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Website.

Remember they intend to Shoot 80% of the Big Meadows herd because of  SEVEN (7) positive deer in the entire state of Virginia, although it does appear that they need to find a positive deer within the 5 mile trigger distance from the park or within the park itself to begin the 80% reduction. According to a chart on page 8 this means the removal of 130-150 deer from the Big Meadows area to match the populations density of surrounding areas, yet  already  reports are surfacing of experienced outdoors people seeing only a few deer in the Big Meadows Area. Does this mean that a substantial number of deer have already been removed from the Big Meadows area to provide the samples needed for lethal CWD testing if enough specimens were not available from non-lethal methods?

Of course the fear is that CWD will spread and become established resulting in a permanent herd reduction if nothing is done, but even the most optimistic official in my experience will not contend that CWD response plans as implemented by any conservation or federal agency has any chance of stopping the disease--only in slowing the spread of it. 

Remember-To slow the spread of the disease down they plan to shoot up to 80% or the herd to prevent a loss that in a worst case scenario MAY reach 80% of the herd, but would more likely top around 30% and this is assuming that the disease becomes widely established in the park, which is by no means a given.

It is always easy to criticize, but much harder to be responsible for a plan of action, so it is fair to ask what would you do if you were in charge of the situation?

 If I were responsible for the management of the SNP whitetail herd I would manage the herd much as it was before the inception of the CWD study of 2012.  Only visibly sick or injured animals would be removed from the herd and there would be no preemptive shooting.  Expenditure of funds and efforts would be geared toward finding a cure for the disease if possible. It may be that this is something like the gypsy moth was with the oak forests and it will run its' course regardless of efforts applied to stopping it.

As it stands,  The SNP plan is currently being implemented and future amendments will likely meet with approval.  At this writing it appears that the outstanding whitetail viewing and photography  at SNP are over for my lifetime and perhaps for all time although it is to be hoped that at some point in the future responsible people will shake their head at the way war was declared on the whitetail deer in the name of saving them from CWD.

A special  thanks to those who submitted comments  on the November 12th post "Herd Reduction Looms For Shenandoah National Park Whitetails, which are featured in today's post.

Originally Published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill.

Herd Reduction Looms For Shenandoah National Park Whitetails

Future Uncertain For Whitetail Deer

It seems there is no good news these days if ones' primary interest is big game photography--especially whitetail deer photography.  Here in Pennsylvania there have been several cases of CWD and three DMAs (Disease Managment Areas) have been established.    So far the Pennsylvania Game Commission has been fairly conservative in dealing with the disease. On the other hand,  The National Park Service is planning to launch a severe response to the disease once  certain triggering thresholds are met.

We first reported on this in the October 26, 2012 post: "Shenandoah Whitetails Under Assault"  At that time the Park had fitted  a large number of deer with ear tags and/or radio collars and were conducting a whitetail deer study geared to charting deer movements.  In conjunction with this a certain number of deer were to be live tested for CWD. Almost overnight they destroyed the world class whitetail photography at Big Meadows which until that time was one of the best areas to observe and photograph whitetail deer in the United States. 

Mature Buck at SNP 2011

 Last week  fellow retired PGC employee Billie Cromwell traveled to SNP to photograph the deer and returned home after two discouraging days.  He called me to ask if I had been there and advised me to cancel any plans I had to visit the park this fall. I had already decided to avoid the park this year due to my disappointing summer trip this year so this meant no change in plans, but it did re-in-force my sense of discouragement about the situation at the Park.  Billie reported that he saw only a handful of deer in the Big Meadows Area.  Places where they were once seen in plenty now were either empty or there was only a deer or two.  He did report seeing a buck or two that was collared last year, but now were wearing none. Soon after talking to Billie, well known Virginia wildlife photographer, Larry W. Brown, contacted me to tell me that the assault on the whitetails of Shenandoah was not over.

Following the links that he sent me, I found that on November 10, the Park released its' CWD Response Plan Amendment/Environmental Assessment plan , which amends the 2013 CWD Detection and Assessment Plan.  To read about CWD and an overview of the  amended plan click Here.http://www.nps.gov/shen/naturescience/cwd.htm

To read the plan in its' entirety or to comment-Click Here: http://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=274&projectID=32501&documentID=62248

While the original 2013 plan allows lethal sampling of deer to detect CWD, the proposed amendment allows deer population reduction by lethal means in front country areas of the park to manage the disease.  This would attempt to bring the herd at areas such as Big Meadows in line with  deer numbers in back country areas of the park and in areas outside the park in an attempt to minimize disease transmission.

Big Meadows is listed as the area in the park with the highest deer density/square mile.  Under this amendment 77-81% of the deer would be removed to equal the density of surrounding areas.

If the proposed plan is approved, it will be implemented when two or more positive CWD cases are found within 5 miles of the park boundary or if detected inside the park.  According to the news release this could happen fairly soon (1-3) years or it could be many years away, but it is expected to happen sooner or later.

Also of importance to photographers is that there will be no protection for the mature bucks and all adult deer will be targeted equally.  When it comes to killing deer for CWD testing, the bucks will receive priority in targeting as bucks 2 years of age or older are more likely to have CWD and as they roam over a wider range are supposedly more likely to spread the disease.

Mature Bucks To Be Targeted

Herd reduction will most likely be done at night, from November-March. Specific nighttime area closures may be necessary from November - March in the Central District of the Park so that deer way be shot at areas such as Skyland and Big Meadows.

Public comments may be made either online or by mail.
Comments should be posted online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/shencwd
Or, send to: Superintendent, Shenandoah National Park, Attn: CWD Response Amendment/EA, 3655 US Highway, 211 East, Luray, VA 22835. 

Public Meetings
Public meetings are scheduled on November 17 (Crozet Public Library, 2020 Library Avenue, Crozet, VA), November 18 (Elkton Community Center, 20593 Blue and Gold Dr, Elkton, VA). All meetings start at 7:00 PM. 

Look for more commentary on this and the situation in the Pennsylvania Elk Range within the near future.  

Originally published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill.

HSUS Investigates Shenandoah Nation Park Whitetail Collars-Calls For Photos

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) is requesting that photographers send them recent photos of deer showing damage from the collars that are being used in the CWD study at SNP.  This will be somewhat difficult as most whitetail photographers do not travel to the park in winter and those that did are less inclined to do so since the study began, but I assume that photos taken during the past fall are wanted.

First a bit of history for first time readers and a re-fresher for  those who have been following the problem. In late August or early September of 2012, we learned about the CWD study at Shenandoah National Park from well known Virginia wildlife photographer, Larry W. Brown.  As a result of the study, most of the mature whitetail bucks in the Big Meadows area were fitted with radio collars.  This was initially discussed in the October 26, 2012 post, " Shenandoah Whitetails Under Assault" and followed up by Shenandoah Whitetails Under Assault Part II", on October 30, 2012. This post featured photos of  several collared bucks, which were taken by retired PGC Maintenance Supervisor Billie G. Cromwell. For those who want more background, I recommend that you read past posts and follow the links to material by Larry W. Brown and others.

Mature Buck With Collar Big Meadows Campground: 2012 Photo by Billie G. Cromwell

Fast forward to this year. After a mid-November trip to SNP, Billie Cromwell shared some of his photos that illustrated just how these collars negatively impact the deer.  This was discussed in the post of November 21, 2013, "Whitetail Photography at Shenandoah National Park-Destroyed For Now"  This post featured  the above photo and several of the buck in 2013, which showed  damage to the neck from the collar.

H2 in 2013: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

As a result of reading the series of posts, fellow photographer, Dan Gomola contacted the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) seeking a remedy to the situation. On December 5, 2013 Dan received a reply to his inquiry from Laura J. Simon a Wildlife Ecologist with the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) thanking him for alerting the HSUS to the situation and promising to look into the matter.

Dan received a report from Ms.Simon on January 10, 2014, which is posted below.

Subject: RE: Shenandoah National Park deer

Hi Dan,

Sorry not to get back to you sooner on this situation!
On behalf of HSUS, I lodged a written complaint with the SNP
Superintendant's office about the deer being harmed by problematic
radio-collars. I spoke today to Jim Schaberl, who is the Chief of Natural
and Cultural Resources -- and the person overseeing the radio-telemetry
study.

He said that some of the deer already had their radio collars fixed in
November and early December, but he also asked me to give him a list of all
problematic collars reported so he could check up on them. I gave him H-2,
F-2, V-7, C-7 and Y-7 (please let me know if there are any more). He thought
H-2 was from the Fall of 2012 and assured me it had been addressed
immediately at that time.

Mr. Schaberl also said that they were disappointed in the collars, that this
design had worked well for mule deer in a prior study done with the US
Geologic Survey, and based on that recommendation the NPS had ordered them
for the SNP study. He said the collars had performed well the first year,
but now some were turning out to be problematic --- they expand, but it
seems the area where they expand is not covered well, there's nothing
underneath, and that is what creates the rubbing and soring problems.
Overall, Mr. Schaberl seemed genuinely concerned about the problems caused
by these collars and anxious to fix them.

What would help is if you could post to the PA Photographers website, and
ask people to please send us and the SNP any recent photos ---- and of the
ones that have already been posted, it would be good to know the dates. It
would also be important to find out if these 5 deer are the only ones seen
with ill-fitting collars: H-2, F-2, V-7, C-7 and Y-7.

Thank you again for flagging this situation -- I will give you another update early next week.

Cheers,

Laura J. Simon

Wildlife Ecologist

Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)

lsimon@humanesociety.org

I assume that photos are to be e-mailed to the humane society at the above address .

Shenandoah National Park's contact information as listed on their website is shown below, but upon opening the e-mail link I see no option to attach photos.

By Mail Shenandoah National Park 3655 Hwy 211 East Luray, VA 22835  By E-mail Shenandoah National Park

Originally published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill

Whitetail Photography at Shenandoah National Park-Destroyed For Now!

"Old Rutter Before He Became H 2" in 2012: Canon 7D-300mm f2.8 L IS-ISO 400-1/1600sec f 5.0

Ever since my first visit during the autumn of 1998 I have traveled to Shenandoah National Park in Virginia to observe and photograph the whitetail deer especially during summer and autumn.  As time passed I went more and more often and felt reasonably safe in assuming that regardless of what befell whitetail deer in all of my other favorite spots that the deer of Shenandoah would be there.  I must confess that having worked for the Pennsylvania Game Commission most of my adult life, and therefore being very aware of deer management issues, that a bit of concern did exist in the back of my mind that the National Park Service could also fall victim to the malaise that has effected so many agencies and pursue herd reduction strategies to an unacceptable extent.  This concern was further heightened by the increasing prevalence of  CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease), nevertheless I was shocked when the NPS, suddenly and without warning to the public, collared and/or ear tagged most of the bucks and many of the does at the prime whitetail spots such as Big Meadows and Skyland.  The collaring was an integral part of a CWD and mature whitetail buck movement study.   Public meetings were also held to determine if herd reduction would take place at the spots of major deer concentration within the park either immediately or when CWD was detected  within a certain distance of the park.  Much of this subject has been covered here before, but I will remind readers that well known Virginia wildlife photographers Larry W. Brown and Jim Fields have done an excellent job of bringing this matter to our attention and keeping us updated on it.  For those who have not read it yet I would recommend that they read CWD The Truth by Numbers  by Larry W. Brown.  This well researched article contains a wealth of information on the subject.

The buck shown in today's first photo was a large mature buck that was a favorite with the whitetail photographers at Big Meadows.  Many feared he was missing when he was not seen for a time after the collaring was done, but he was eventually photographed with  a large collar numbered H2.  I only went to SNP once during the rut of 2012 and was so disgusted that I left after only 1/2 day there.  Well known Pennsylvania photographer Billie G. Cromwell did stay for some time and was able to photograph the buck after he was collared.

"Old Rutter" 2012: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

I did intend to make a few day trips to the park this year to personally check the situation out, but after reading reports from Larry W. Brown that the whitetail photography was terrible at Big Meadows I did not go.  With advancing age I find that the 300+ mile round trips are not  as appealing as they used to be, especially when there is not great likelihood of getting exceptional whitetail photos.  Billie Cromwell did spend a few days in SNP last week and was gracious enough to share a few of his photos with us.  He did photograph "Old Rutter".  This once magnificent animal was now suffering from the effects of advancing age with his rack declining in size.  It is possible that the marked decline in rack size was triggered by the trauma of being tranquilized and fitted with radio collar, but as mentioned he does seem to be an old animal.

"Old Rutter" 2013: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

"Old Rutter" 2013: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

This is not the worst part of the story; however.  Many have pointed out that these collars do not fit the animals well and may cause significant hair loss and skin damage. Such is the case in this situation.  I cropped the photos above severely so that the problem areas are easier to analyze and they are shown below.  These photos were taken with a 5D MK III and 300mm f 2.8 lens, but the animal was too far away to get fine detail and sharpness at this degree of enlargement. Note the collar is out of place and in front of the ear on one side, while the hair is missing over a wide area under the collar and the skin appears to be damaged with at least some sores present.

"Old Rutter" 2013: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

"Old Rutter" 2013: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

It amazes me that is legal and acceptable for the NPS to inflict this kind of damage and distress on an animal, yet had Billie walked close enough to the buck to get detailed close-ups of the damaged area it is likely, had he been observed doing so by enforcement personnel, that we would have been warned to not approach so closely as it could cause the animal undue stress and it is even possible he would be arrested.

Billie reports that there were a 4-5 does using the meadow on a fairly regular basis and he saw a few small bucks in the woods around and going to the campground.  The situation was so bad that it did not even seem like Big Meadows.  He did encounter one buck in the woods along the drive south of Big Meadows that did not have a collar and give him a photo opportunity.

Deformed 13 Point: Photo Courtesy of Billie G. Cromwell

Whitetail viewing and photography should recover in time if the herd is not reduced, but considering the numbers of whitetails seen this fall, many are wondering if the herd reduction has not already secretly taken place.  There are very few things that can impact the visibility of park deer.  One and would be a lack of food on top of the mountain, but in years with a poor mast crop, deer are usually concentrated around the open areas such as Big Meadows and so sightings should be higher.  A heavy mast crop could keep sightings in the meadow down, but they should be seen in plenty elsewhere along the drive. As I have not been there this fall, I do not know what the mast crop is like, although it is very poor in our area. Whatever the case one cannot recommend that a serious whitetail photographer visit SNP at this time.

Again I wish to extend a special thanks to Billie Cromwell for most of today's photos and to Larry W. Brown for this efforts in educating the public as to the truth about CWD and the situation at SNP.

Originally published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard C. Hill.

Deer Photography and Herd Reduction Update

Full Moon At Dawn- August 21st: Panasonic  GH3-Canon 500mm F4 IS-ISO 400-1/160sec. f ?

 It seems that everyone was posting full moon photos recently, so above is my version of the moon, which I captured as I was waiting by the edge of a large expanse of crop fields for enough light to film whitetail deer on the morning of August 21st .

Since the whitetail photography at Shenandoah National Park has been ruined because most  bucks in the Big Meadows area are wearing huge numbered  collars due to the deer study, I have had to do most of my deer photography close to home this summer.  One can see some decent bucks, but they are usually at very long range and are quite shy.  It is possible to see a buck on occasion that compares favorably with the large mature bucks at SNP, but it is rare and then there is a big difference between seeing them and being able to successfully photograph them. Most regular readers of this blog are aware that I usually concentrate on video with the Pennsylvania bucks because of the ability of certain video cameras to film them at very long range.  I do sometimes try some stills with my current favorite long range video rig, which is the Panasonic GH3 and the Canon 500mm F4 IS.  The Panasonic is not as good of a still camera as the Canon 5D MK III, but this is outweighed for long range shooting by the 2X crop factor of the GH3's micro four thirds sensor (M4/3), which gives the 500mm a 35mm equivalent focal length of 1000mm.  In addition the photo below is severely cropped and it is doubtful that it would print well at 8x12 or 8x10, but it is good for smaller sizes and for internet posting.

 Long Range Pennsylvania Bucks  (250 yards):Panasonic  GH3-Canon 500mm F4 IS-ISO 200-1/25sec. f ?

At this time it is not clear if there will ever be world class whitetail photography at SNP again as the specter of herd reduction looms on the horizon.  Herd reduction has already taken place at Gettysburg and Valley Forge Military Parks in Pennsylvania and is now planned for Antietam, Manassas, and Monocacy Battlefields in Maryland.

Whitetails Viewed As Problem By National Park Service: Canon 5D MK III-Canon 70-200mm IS II-ISO 1600-1/250 sec. f 3.2

 Here are some good links for further reading about this.

 First is a post by Larry W. Brown on Flickr with a photo featuring some superb Photoshop work by Jim Fields, What's Next Shenandoah? Birds?  Before anyone gets too excited Larry and Jim are not really complaining about the birds in Shenandoah National Park, they are just using this mechanism to point out the absurdity of the NPS proposals for whitetail deer management.

Next is a post by Steve Ferendo on his Natural World"Through My Camera" blog, "Mature Whitetail Bucks Should Not Be Shot Just To Reduce Herd Numbers"  The post features photos of mature bucks on the Monocacy Battlefield.  Mr Ferendo is concerned that these bucks will be shot as well as the does in the looming herd reduction.

Last is a link to an article on Herald Mail.com, "Sharpshooters eyed to thin deer at Antietam National Battlefield",which gives a brief description of the herd reduction planned for these battlefields. 

It certainly isn't a good time to be a serious whitetail deer photographer.  Until now the National Parks were the one place that  anyone could go to observe and photograph mature whitetail bucks, but with the ascendency of the population reduction faction in the NPS it s very possible that these days area over.

Originally published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill.

Whitetail Photographers--Avoid Shenandoah National Park!

As I write this post, I originally planned to be in a motel room in Virginia, savoring the memories of a day s afield photographing  the whitetails of Shenandoah National Park and anticipating another full day and Friday morning doing likewise.  Instead I find myself  at home in Pennsylvania, sitting at the computer and pondering how easily whitetail photography at Shenandoah National Park was destroyed.

Let's face it--I knew conditions were less than ideal at the park based on information received from many sources such as Larry Brown, Billie Cromwell, Jim Fields, and Todd Mann, along with my own experience from a brief morning visit in late October.  I did not realize: however, that things were as bad as they turned out to be.

My brother Coy and I left for SNP in the early morning hours and saw not one whitetail as we drove from the Thornton Gap Entrance to Big Meadows before dawn.  Shortly after dawn we found this superb buck at the Tanner's Ridge overlook.  This did not seem all that bad as the tags could easily be removed with Photoshop, but unfortunately this proved to be the best encounter of the day.

Buck 91--One of the few that has only ear tags

Most of the does that we sighted had either ear tags or collars.  We did see one mature buck without a collar or tags, but he was shy and we did not get good photographs.  I think this buck is a bit too wild for the tagging team to dart him, but in hopes of protecting him, I will not reveal where he was sighted.  With the exception of this buck--every buck that we saw from medium size to mature rack bucks were fitted with the ridiculously large numbered collars.

Buck With Damaged Collar that is damaging the hair on the neck.

In late morning we saw a group walking toward the Visitor Center carrying equipment, with a least two of the party wearing uniforms and we realized too late to take photographs that this was most likely the deer tagging crew returning from a mornings' work in the field.  We talked to Billie Cromwell in the early afternoon and he said that every mature buck that he had seen had a collar, including a large 12 point that was collar free just two weeks ago.  We did see some yearling bucks that were not collared or tagged, but it seems likely that this is because they are concentrating on mature deer--likely in hopes of studying the movement patterns of mature bucks in particular.

Another Victim

I could perhaps understand it if a modest percentage of the bucks and does in the Big Meadows area were marked for study, but it appears that the vast majority of the animals are so marked and that the tagging crew is still at work trying to process those that have escaped so far.

We originally planned to stay for 2 1/2 days, but this was so frustrating that I called the motel where we planned to stay and cancelled our reservations--telling the owner why we were doing so.  The management was aware of the situation at the park, was very understanding, and did not penalize us for cancelling on such short notice. This was one of the few bright spots of the day.  In the future, I may visit the park on rare occasion to observe the effects of the study, but my frequent trips to SNP are over--at least until the study has run its' course.

While this is distressing for the photographer/wildlife watcher, the worst aspect of the situation is the undue stress and discomfort that this places on the deer.  The negative aspects of this study could perhaps be justified if it would significantly benefit the well-being of the deer or combat the spread of CWD, but at this point many are not convinced that it will do so.  With that being said, even if the study proved to be fully justified and extremely necessary, there seems no reason to use such a large sample size, which negatively impacts both the animals and the wildlife viewing/photography experience at Shenandoah National Park.

If you have not already done so, be sure to check out the links in previous poss to other writing on this issue by Larry W. Brown, and Todd Mann.  Also be sure to check Country Captures for Coy's take on this situation.  If his post is not up already--it should be soon.

Originally published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill.

Twilight Buck and More Thoughts on SNP Whitetail Management

Pennsylvania Buck At Twilight: Canon 5D MK III -Canon 500mmf4-ISO 6400 1/40sec. f4

The rut is picking up here in southcentral Pennsylvania, but many of the bucks are seen either very early or extremely late.  These conditions put the low light capability of the MK III to the test.  Even the larger bucks in our area cannot ordinarily compete with those in Shenandoah National Park when it comes to antler mass and they are definitely a lot harder to see.  With that being said, it is possible that I will be spending less time than ever in Shenandoah National Park since many of the bucks at Big Meadows have been fitted with radio collars.

My last two posts have dealt with this in depth and Todd Mann, another wildlife photographer from Pennsylvania recently wrote an excellent post about the situation titled, "Deer contraception, politics, and the future of deer in the US".  Be sure to visit Todd's blog and read this timely article.

Originally published at Pennsylvania Wildlife Photographer by Willard Hill.

Shenandoah Bucks

Buck On The Skyline: Canon 7D-500mm F4

Billie Cromwell and I were at Shenandoah National Park from dawn on Monday November 9th, through mid-morning on November 11th. Overall it was a somewhat disappointing trip. Whitetail activity was good on Monday, but most of the bucks were small.

We did see a large eight-point on Monday evening. There was a large herd of does in Big Meadows along with some smaller bucks. Suddenly the large eight-point pictured below came running across the drive from the nearby woodland and into the meadow. This is the same animal that was photographed by my brother Coy of Country Captures in 2007. One of the photos from that session was featured for the month of December in the Pennsylvania Game Commission 2008 Calendar. The animal was a ten-point in 2007, but while only an eight-point now, he has retained his antler mass.

Canon 7D: 100-400mm F5.6 L

Canon 7D: 70--200mm F2.8 L

While the buck was in the meadow most of the time, the best still photos were taken while he was in or near a small island of reverting meadow between the meadow proper and the main parking lot.