pee Lea b OuN: webs Uoelcle KcDeAN 35 
5. The system cannot be used to conirol diseases such as rabies. Fox 
is particularly susceptible to this disease and where outbreaks occur, hu- 
mans, pets, and livestock may be exposed before the infection is checked. 
Fox populations will be rapidly reduced during such an outbreak whether 
control efforts are undertaken or not. 
6. There is no proof that the bountying of predators has increased the 
abundance of game animals over an extended period of time. Studies 
have shown that rabbit and pheasant populations fluctuate independently 
of the number of fox bountied. Often, such fluctuations are dependent on 
habitat quality and quantity and on weather conditions, but politicians 
usually blame large declines on predators. Such a situation occurred in the 
early 1960s in South Dakota. When the state’s $14 million pheasant hunting 
income was cut by $10 million, Governor Archie Gubrud said the state 
was “declaring war on foxes, the chief cause of the decline in pheasants.” 
While farmers generally agreed with him, biologists blamed the decline 
on other environmental factors. 
7. When predator conirol is intensively applied, the prey population 
may be seriously damaged. The classic example is that of the Kaibab deer 
herd of Arizona. In the Grand Canyon National Game Preserve, predators 
were systematically eliminated. In 25 years, 781 mountain lions, 5,000 
coyotes, and the entire wolf population were eradicated. The deer popula- 
tion climbed from 4,000 in 1906 to 100,000 in 1924. In 1925, deer died by 
thousands and by 1940 the population dropped to only 10,000. Decreased 
mortality of diseased, crippled, and otherwise weakened deer plus the high 
survival rate of newborn fawns soon led to the decline of the herd as the 
population destroyed its own range. Unfortunately, the effect of reduced 
predator pressure is somewhat obscured by the lack of deer hunting during 
the same period. 
8. The bounty system is a shotgun approach which does not provide 
specific predator conirol where or when it is needed. Specific instances 
where control of an individual animal is necessary are so infrequent that 
the use of the bounty system cannot be justified for such purposes. At 
the same time, the system cannot take into consideration the special or 
local values of predatory animals. Thus, the bounty system has needlessly 
destroyed extremely large numbers of birds and fur-bearing animals in 
the United States. For additional examples of problems of the bounty sys- 
tem, refer to Durward Allen’s “Our Wildlife Legacy.” 
IN RECENT YEARS, the general public has become more aware of 
the faults in the system and of the increasing importance of predators. The 
public, along with conservation groups, are pressuring legislative bodies 
to eliminate bounties and pass laws protecting and preserving the remains 
of a national heritage and resource. Certainly, the recent Presidential order 
banning the poisoning of predators on all federal land is a step in the right 
direction. In the next few years, perhaps bounties and predator control 
programs can be eliminated entirely, but progress is slow, and some animal 
and bird species are nearing extinction. Bounties, along with pesticides, 
human encroachment, and ignorance, are rapidly destroying the last of 
this resource. Our job as conservationists should be to push for complete 
protection of predators where circumstances warrant. However, the elimina- 
tion of bounties does not mean automatic protection. Education of the 
public to develop some stewardship over our natural resources is an 
absolute necessity and all of us had better get on with the job of 
education. 
