Jaguar Conservation Team Update 3-11-08

March 17, 2008

Attached is a copy of the minutes Judy took at the Jaguar Conservation Team (JAGCT) meeting, March 13th. There are several items we think are note worthy. Some items are informational only, others we recommend action be taken.

1) Signatory Agencies: Two years ago we were able to get the Conservation Team Working Group (JAGWG) realigned so controversial issues can now be voted upon. Up until that time all decisions were made by consensus, usually Terry Johnson’s consensus. Since Terry limited NRCD participation to only two representatives from each of the two states, we would strongly encourage counties to request Signatory Status on the MOU and delegate a representative to attend the Jaguar Conservation Team meetings. These meetings take place 4 times a year.

If your county is not a signatory on the MOU, you believe it is important that sound science be used in jaguar conservation in the U.S., and you can make the time to attend the meetings, encourage your County Commissioners to sign on to the MOU and ask they appoint you as their representative.

Requests to become a signatory agency should be mailed to: Arizona Game and Fish Department; 5000 W Carefree Hwy; Phoenix, AZ 85086 – Attention Terry Johnson. Any questions can be directed to Terry Johnson, Arizona Game and Fish Dept. - TJohnson@azgfd.com

2) Emil McCain’s Report: Emil heads up the Jaguar Detection Project in Arizona. His report, published in the American Society of Mammalogy, is full of holes. It has been creatively written to strongly suggest many jaguars may be residing in the U.S. borderlands but have yet to be discovered. The best available science and historical sightings of jaguars in the U.S. has been tweaked to support this hypothesis. The report also claims there may be a breeding population residing here.

These claims are necessary to secure funding to continue his “research”. We would encourage everyone to request a copy of this article/report. You can send your request to: Emil at: emilmccain@gmail.com .

3) Recovery Plan: Tony Povolitis, Sierra Institute, had his students write a “research paper” entitled “Jaguar Habitat in Southern Arizona and New Mexico; A Report to the Habitat Committee of the Jaguar Conservation Team”, in June of 2000. The objective of this report was to recommend establishing an experimental release area so jaguars could be studied in the U.S. The report proposed the study area should be in the Central Arizona/New Mexico Mountains (also know as the Sky Islands).

The report also recommended jaguars should be obtained from a wild source, or raised in captivity, then released into the “study area”. The JAGCT accepted this report by consensus. The Scientific Advisory Group (JAGSAG) was not in favor of a captive breeding program and/or capturing jaguars from other areas for various reasons and so stated in their response to this report in October of 2000.

To our knowledge, no one, including the JAGSAG and the state game and fish departments, are in favor of a captive breeding/reintroduction/recovery plan. However, this does not stop the Center for Biological Diversity from suing in an effort to get such a recovery plan while trying to find a "friendly" federal judge to rule in their favor. The articles being published in the mainstream press certainly support this effort. It matters not that the science is being manipulated to support their concept of a recovery plan.

A recent news release from the Defender of Wildlife states they too have “filed a notice of intent to sue in Washington D.C. district court to compel the Bush administration to create a recovery plan for jaguars in the Southwest”. The push is certainly on to force U.S. Fish and Wildlife to develop a plan.

4) New Committees: Terry is “reconstituting” the committees. The new committees are: Depredation, Education, Habitat, Monitoring, Outreach and Research. If you have experience, training or an interest in any of these areas, please let Terry know which committee you can serve on, ASAP. TJohnson@azgfd.com We have only 30 days to get common sense, reasonable, intelligent individuals on some of these committees.

5) The Endangered Species Act/Wildlands Project: During the JAGCT meeting, Ron White, Sierra NRCD, asked by what authority the JAGCT continues to operate. In summary, Terry explained it was by virtue of the Endangered Species Act. No one needs to explain the ESA or the impact it is having on private landowners and small, rural counties. Neither do we have to explain how the “Wildlands Project: Plotting a North American Wilderness Recovery Strategy”, as published by the Cenozoic Society, 1992, has to do with this agenda.

It is worth noting, however, that Tony Povolitis had the maps for jaguar habitat in the U.S. already developed when the JAGCT first met in Douglas, Arizona in April of 1997. According to the Wildlands Project, page 31, Tony promoted the concept of using the U.N.’s Man and the Biosphere Program as a “potent means of protecting relatively intact bioregions”.

The narrator of this section -“Editor’s Introduction to the Wildlands Proposals” - John Davis, goes on to recommend “Wildland advocates need to work to gain on- the ground protection for on - paper Reserves”. Mr. Davis continues his commentary by stating: “Until people on this overdeveloped continent adopt ecologically benign ways, local control will often mean locally – sanctioned abuse of local resources…. International control and more private reserves under the control of NGOs such as the Nature Conservancy are other options to consider.”

Mr. Davis asks a very poignant question as he discusses the deliberate airing of controversial issues (in the media we presume) when he asks: “How radical – and biologically honest – dare we be, given that many people will choose their own economic well-being over the survival of a species? Should we favor ‘local control’ of resources, in the spirit of bioregionalism, or lean toward state or federal control, in the spirit of the Wilderness Act of 1964?” No where does he discuss the virtues of private property, or the right of U.S. citizens to retain these intrinsic American values.

Although Terry is frustrated with all the lawsuits that draw funding away from recovering the jaguar, he does not openly oppose the Wildlands Project, or its “science – conservation biology”. Regardless of which initiative prevails – a state led initiative or a federally led initiatives – the results may be the same if we are not vigilante to ensure sound science and common sense prevail.

We would like to thank everyone that attends the JAGCT meetings. We appreciate your time and hope you realize by helping us, you’re helping yourselves. If we don’t stay on top of this jaguar conservation effort it could turn into the same scenario we are witnessing with the Mexico Wolf “experimental population” reintroduction scheme. The jaguar is, after all, just another of the Wildland Project’s charismatic, umbrella species.

We still have a copy of the jaguar map Michael and his associates would like to see “repopulated” with jaguars. It is an extensive area and takes in several Arizona counties and many counties in New Mexico. If you’d like to review it, let us know.

People always want to know how long the JAGCT will continue to meet. We’ve already been meeting for 11 years. Many of the original ranchers and landowners have dropped out, but not our friends the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Institute, Defenders of Wildlife and Sky Island Alliance. They have a prize in mind, a jaguar preserve that includes parts of southern Arizona, lots of New Mexico and a big portion of northern Mexico. Are we going to be as single-minded and tenacious?

In conclusion, if we don’t hang together, we’ll all hang separately! We need your involvement!!

Respectfully,

Sue Krentz and Judy Keeler