This comment was written by Will Staats, who lives in Victoria, Vermont. He is a professional wildlife biologist who has worked on wildlife conservation for almost 40 years for both the Department of Fish and Wildlife in Vermont and the Department of Fish and Wildlife of New Hampshire. He is a lifelong forester-hunter-trap.
The current distrust of the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife, which promotes certain wildlife advocacy groups, is eerily similar to the narrative of climate change and now the Covid pandemic. The facts are disputed; the motives behind science are being questioned.
In an effort to advance their agenda, these groups are pulling out their “experts” to disprove biologists. As employees in the department support certain management methodologies, including hunting and trapping, their expertise is repeatedly questioned.
Like the debate over vaccines and masks, these tactics do not help to improve conversations and have pushed factions further into their corners. Yet, while so much energy has been invested to discredit professional biologists, we are missing out on the opportunity to address the real threats to our wilderness.
As a professional wildlife biologist, it hurts me to see the current distrust of science in our state regarding wildlife management issues. Throughout my career, I have relied on science to guide my decision making. At the same time, I was always aware of the social implications when making management decisions. However, what I would never do is manipulate science to achieve my personal plan.
The men and women of Vermont Fish & Wildlife have dedicated their lives to protecting and managing Vermont’s wildlife and habitats. As a long-term civil servant, I feel their pain. It often seemed that no matter what decision was made about our wildlife resources, no one was completely happy. For some it was too much of one species; too little for others.
What has always been disturbing is how one interest group would try to twist and manipulate the data to get the answer they want.
Public opinions are often presented as facts because of what they observed in their own backyard. If they personally have never seen the risks, there must be few or none. Or coyotes are everywhere because they’ve seen two in the last month.
But that is not the way science works and how we understand wildlife ecosystems. We use science, not thinking, to bring us to a conclusion. Biologists from Vermont Fish & Wildlife need to look at a much broader picture. They are familiar with facts that the rest of the public does not have or is not trained to interpret correctly.
It is a dynamic process in which they always learn, always adapting to the many variables that make up natural systems and revising their management models and strategies accordingly. But be sure that their decisions are always based on science.
Does politics go into decision-making? Of course! Every biologist I know condemns when good science is overpowered by politics. Witness what is currently happening in Vermont regarding the laws against trapping and hunters. As Senator McCormack often stated when he advocated for them, initiatives to end this practice have nothing to do with science.
The real driver of why these groups continue to challenge science is because certain management strategies supported by our department are not in line with their personal belief system. Since they do not believe in certain hunting methodologies, or often in hunting in general, they conclude that biologists and the science they rely on are certainly not right. They then look for a way to discredit professionals and continue to use wrong reasoning to support their opinion. If we didn’t trust our own biologists, then who would we trust?
Science tells us that in Vermont, wild animals that are currently being hunted and captured are thriving and that their population is not endangered by these procedures. Wild animals - including deer, bears, coyotes, beavers and other species - can sustain the annual harvest of hunters and hunters.
But our department also recognizes that there is a social capacity, which is defined by the number of animals in the landscape that we as humans will tolerate. This is naturally different for each of us and is influenced by factors including our economic status, the way we earn a living and where we live.
Biologists have the difficult task of managing wildlife populations to achieve a healthy balance between ecological and social capacity.
At Vermont, we trusted science to guide us in decisions and policies to address pandemics and climate change. Why then would we change course and ignore science when it comes to managing our wildlife?
Vermont residents should ignore horny rhetoric, social media posts, and false science, and instead listen to department professionals who have dedicated their lives to protecting our wildlife.
We all share the common goal of Vermont, which has rich and well-managed wildlife populations. If we really want to protect our wildlife, we need to focus on what science tells us is the biggest threat to our wildlife population.
Let’s support the great work that our department has done in protecting the last wild places and habitats that wildlife needs to survive here in our country. We owe so much to the future residents of Vermont and to the wild animals that cannot speak for themselves.
Did you know that VTDigger is a non-profit organization?
Our journalism is made possible by donations from members. If you appreciate what we do, please contribute and help make this vital resource available to all.