OCR Text |
Show Mon-ganie einieffis THIS AMOUNTED to 664 miles and 60.5 hours of time spent in Davis County on these types of calls. Calls were received re-ceived January thru December 1980 from Clinton to North Salt Lake. Skunks seemed to be the main problem with 21 calls being received. In some situations situa-tions efforts ere made to trap offending animals and this involves in-volves a great expense and time deducted from game species spe-cies management. Normally however the Division has tried to gel complainants to handle the situation themselves due to a lack of funding and manpower. manpow-er. This entails discussing (he problem and offering suggestions sugges-tions to relieve the problem. INJURED GILLS created 13 calls in which . in most instances, inst-ances, a (rip was made to pick up the bird. Injured hawks were close behind with 12 calls. From there on quiet a divergence of nongame calls were received as follows: nuisance nui-sance porcupine 8. beaver 6. snake 4. racoon 4. bat 3. squirrel squir-rel 2. coyote 2. fox 2. muskrat 2. magpie 2. cougar (a game animal) I . bobcat I . and flicker 1. Most of these situations resulted re-sulted from the resident either having the animal get into the dw elling, do some sort of damage dam-age to vegetation or property to the extent that it couldnt he tolerated, or from a concern of not knowing how to get the animal out and avoid being bitten. LOCAL ANIMAL control departments for each city in the county are established only for domesticated animals but some have been willing to assist the Division of Wildlife Resources in wildlile calls because be-cause of the Division s lack ot personnel and time. W hen local loc-al agencies are not able to deal with a wildlife problem it al-avsfallsbackonthe al-avsfallsbackonthe Division of Wildlife Resources and often assumes a top prionlv because of the great concern expressed on the part ot callers. cal-lers. This means time taken from law enforcement, habitat management, man-agement, game counts, public talks at schools and other meetings, and other programs get hurt in the process. IT IS hoped thai everyone will take advantage of this opportunity to help contribute to the statewide management of nongame w ildlife and therefor there-for help be an answer to the problem. For more information informa-tion contact; Allan B. Hash. Davis County Conservation officer 376-1036. summer home development are some examples of direct population demands on habitat. habi-tat. If the 1 1 percent or more inflation factor is thrown in for the last two years the outlook for future maintenance of existing ex-isting Utah wildlife becomes quite bleak. ALL OF the above mentioned men-tioned impacts on the state s wildlife point for the need of a more intensely, well managed program to insure that this wildlife remains available for the states future residents to enjoy, regardless of the way they are used. The hunter and fishermen simply cannot be expected to financially support the funding for all the state's wildlife programs prog-rams when many benefits are acrued to other users which do not pay. PHOTOGRAPHERS, hikers, hik-ers, campers, picnickers, boaters, boa-ters, and scenic drivers all benefit be-nefit from the wildlife resource which the state has at the present. pre-sent. This is one reason why people continue to move into the state, especially along the Have you ever wondered who to call in the case of a nuisance skunk, an injured gull, or an injured hawk? What about magpies eating your fruit or a rattlesnake in the front yard? MOST OF these type of phone calls and requests for assistance assist-ance find their way to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources which is the state agency responsible re-sponsible for the wildlife in the state. The outfit used to be called the Fish and Game Department Depart-ment and under that name was concerned only with the management man-agement of game and fish sought by hunters and fisherman. IN 1971 the agency changed its name to the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and by legislative decree was now concerned with the management manage-ment of all the wildlife in the state of Utah. Since the principal source of funding for wildlife programs has always been obtained from the sale of hunting and fishing licenses, this new responsibil- wasatch front. Here there is quick and easy access to the country which helps to break up the busied work week. THE 1980 Legislature saw the need for added funding for nongame wildlife in the state and passed S.B. 15 enabling the people of Utah to make direct contributions to non-game non-game management through a checkoff program on the Utah state income tax form. These contributions are tax deductible and will be earmarked ear-marked specifically for the management of nongame wildlife wild-life species. DAVIS COUNTY has contributed con-tributed its share to a demand on license dollars spent in (he management of nongame. This has come mainly in the form of nuisance animal call responses to residents. The local conservation officer to the county personally personal-ly received 84 complaints about ab-out nongame wildlife in which 44 trips were made in attempts to relieve callers of various situations. ity of wider management brought a new need for more funds on which to operate with. THIS NEED has not de-minished de-minished but actually has increased in-creased due to new and growing grow-ing developmental pressures on wildlife habitat throughout the state which support all kinds of wildlife. Examples of increased demands to existing wildlife populations come in the form of MX, coal development, develop-ment, oil and tar sands development, de-velopment, CUP project, development de-velopment of power plants throughout the state, in addition addi-tion to a tremendous population popula-tion growth occurring from both residents as well as movement move-ment of people into the state. This population growth has increased urbanization and wildlife usage both consumptive consump-tive and non consumptive and with it has come increased threats and demands to existing ex-isting wildlife populations. SNOWMOBILING, off road vehicle abuse to the environment, environ-ment, pollution, winter range encroachment, back packing, camping, sight seeing, and |