Hunting and environmental groups disagree on best protection for Wind River deer corridor

A divide has emerged in the wildlife community over whether Wyoming should strengthen proposed protections for a migration corridor that carries mule deer from the lowlands of the Wind River Basin to the high elevations of the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem.

In July, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department announced it was seeking a lower level of protection by “identifying” the Upper Wind River Mule Deer Migration Corridor – a classification that, unlike “designating” the route, has no legal standing. “Designating” the route and not taking further action would be a first for the state agency, which has designated three mule deer migration corridors in the past and is pursuing designation of a pronghorn migration route despite opposition from industry groups.

Wildlife conservation groups have had mixed reactions to Game and Fish’s plans to seek less protection for the migratory Dubois mule deer herd.

Thousands of deer travel up to 90 miles along the east-west route, mostly on federal land, into the Shoshone and Bridger-Teton national forests. Because much of the affected federal land is already protected from development, Game and Fish argued that the additional provisions of a designation were unnecessary.

“It seemed clear to all of us that the threats and risks to the functionality of the corridor were simply not great enough to justify designation as a protected area,” said Jill Randall, big game migration coordinator for Game and Fish, at a public meeting in Dubois in early July.

There is considerable disagreement with this assessment, according to an analysis of nearly three dozen comments the agency received on its plans to identify, but not designate, the migration corridor.

Criticism from conservationists

Jennifer Lamb, who directs conservation programs at The Nature Conservancy, pointed out in a comment letter that part of the corridor’s route is classified as “suitable for oil and gas development” in the Shoshone National Forest Plan.

“While current activity in the forest does not currently suggest high risk, it is still important to consider this given the lifespan of forest plans and the frequent changes in oil and gas production in response to market forces,” Lamb wrote. “If the Department chooses to identify this corridor, it is critical that the WGFD closely monitor the changes occurring in this landscape over time and reconsider the designation as needed to maintain migration.”

Lamb recommended the use of the designation. “Once a route is disrupted and migration stops,” she wrote, “it is unlikely that it can ever be restored.”

Other groups and individuals sharing her views struck a similar tone, with the Wyoming Outdoor Council, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance and Jackson Hole Wildlife Foundation writing that “ideally” state wildlife managers would take the more protective action.

“It would be unfortunate and potentially detrimental to efforts to preserve the functionality of this migration if it were not prioritized for funding because it is an ‘identified’ rather than a ‘designated’ corridor,” the three groups said in their comment letter.

A rancher from the Wind River Basin argued for the designation on a similar basis. Without a designation, landowners could lose millions of dollars in Natural Resource Conservation Service grants, wrote Nick Wheeler, owner of Hat Butte Ranch, in an email.

“I believe it is essential that authorities take the strongest measures possible to protect our migration corridors,” Wheeler wrote. “In addition, potential bottlenecks, which represent the most critical part of the migration corridors, must be identified and protected.”

In a comment to the Jackson Hole News&Guide, Art Lawson, director of the Shoshone and Arapaho Fisheries and Game Commission, said, “Personally, I think we would like to see protections for migration.”

And support

However, other stakeholders support the state agency’s plans to designate only the Upper Wind River Mule Deer Migration Corridor.

Representatives of the Wyoming Wildlife Federation, the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, the Muley Fanatic Foundation and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers jointly wrote that designating the corridor would help protect mule deer by “raising awareness, sharing data and providing resources.”

“We commend the WGFD and the Commission for advancing corridor preservation despite increasing pressure from the federal government and encourage states to continue to preserve migration corridors,” the groups said in the letter.

In particular, the more hunting-leaning collective did not call on the state to “designate” the migration corridor – a departure from its environmentalist counterparts.

Josh Metten, a staff member at the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, said that from a strategic point of view, identification alone is a “good strategy” at this point.

“I don’t think we would oppose the designation of this corridor,” said Metten, TRCP’s field director in Wyoming. “This is progress. The designation is a net gain for this corridor. The designation is not the only tool in the toolbox to … ensure that this migration maintains connectivity.”

From Metten’s perspective, the interest groups supporting the planned mule deer migration corridor in the upper Wind River are largely in agreement.

“I am not against the efforts of other organizations to request the designation,” said Metten. “We all want the same thing: We want these corridors to be preserved.”