Ep. 899: Jim Heffelfinger, The Deer Preacher

This is an iHeart Podcast. Guaranteed human. Moultrie's cellular trail cameras help you locate, pattern, and harvest your target buck. They're built for deer hunting. Edge 4 Solar comes with a fully integrated solar panel built in, delivering true set-and-forget power. It features the largest integrated solar panel in its class. Receive images straight to your phone and monitor battery life from the Moultrie app so you avoid spooking deer and only need to go to your hunting spot when it's time to hunt. Check out Moultrie at Moultrie.com. Onyx Hunt is full of great features. I always say it's my favorite app. I use the thing on a daily basis. Here's a new feature I'm very excited about. Onyx Hunt's location sharing puts your whole group on one live map so you can look and tell where everyone is. And if at night it gets dark. And someone's not back yet. You don't got to guess what happened to them or where they are. You can just look and tell where they are. It has implications for safety, coordination. I can't even list all the ways in which this is helpful. You opt in. And then when you guys are done, the data goes away. It's not stored. Keep the folks in your deer camp on the same page with location sharing from Onyx Hunt. You need credit to buy, well, pretty much any big thing. So how do you get started? Easy. The one page. OnePay Builder Card. It's simple and smart. OnePay is the banking app trusted by millions of Americans. And the OnePay Builder Card is an easy way to build credit. Just use it to make everyday purchases, build your credit history, and then you can work up to the big milestones. Buying a new car or a new house. Or hell, maybe something I'm always thinking about, which is another boat. Those moments start with small, consistent steps with the OnePay Builder Card. Download the OnePay app. Or visit OnePay.com for banking that gives you more for what matters. OnePay is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services provided by Coastal Community Bank or Lead Bank. Members FDIC. Builder Card results may vary and aren't guaranteed. Learn more about banking through OnePay at OnePay.com slash podcast. This is the Meat Eater Podcast coming at you shirtless, severely bug-bitten, and in my case, underwear-less. You can't predict anything. Presented by First Light, creating proven, versatile hunting apparel from merino base layers to technical outerwear for every hunt. First Light. Go farther, stay longer. This is going to embarrass you, Jim, but you know how I'm going to introduce this? I can't imagine. I'm going to say, joined today by the smartest man in the woods. Don't say that. By the smartest man in the woods, Jim Heffelfinger. You're lying right off the bat. You're lying. Okay, how about this? Joined today by the most well-informed man in the woods. Okay. Jim Heffelfinger. Thank you for coming in. It's great to be here. Yeah. If listeners of the show know that rarely does an episode go by. Okay. When someone doesn't say Heffelfinger was telling me, or Heffelfinger wrote in to explain, or Heffelfinger is mad about blank. That's right. Because he, like I said, he's the smartest, most well-informed man in the woods. And when we're talking about stuff, he likes to tell us where we hit and where we miss. And Jim comes on. You've been on, I don't know how many times. This is maybe your third or fourth time. I think this is my fifth. Fifth time. For the regular podcast, yeah. And what we do is we work up a bunch of things that we're going to talk about, and we agree on what we're going to cover. And we're going to cover a bunch of those. Today, we're going to talk about, um, we're going to talk about Jim's thoughts and current research on a thing that we've brought up in the past is like, if you eat wild game, he is the lead going to get you. Is the lead going to kill you? We're going to talk about this thing that pops up now and then that, um, if that, that the argument that. By having more predators. On the landscape, we would see a decline in chronic wasting disease. We're going to talk about that. We're going to talk about a thing you might see pop up in the news now. And then trophic cascades, particularly in the context of when wolves came back to Yellowstone national park, people came up with all these sort of fantastical ideas about the trophic cascades that occurred in the park. Thanks to wolves. We're going to talk about Javelina getting their due. Um, we're going to talk about some ungulate stuff. But the first thing. We're going to talk about is, um, the Ron Pola buck. Now, first I want to clarify a thing I, and I grew up near where I grew up south of Mitch, but, but my father had, my father had met him, had known him and handled some of the deer he'd killed in the past. He used to measure bucks for like commemorative bucks in Michigan. And somehow I had in my head, I, I, for years have said Ron Paula, but, um, that's a, that's a lure Rappala. Yeah. It's Cass and Ross, Cass and Paul is, um, Ron Pola. We're working on a project. Jordan Sellers, uh, who you might know from blood trails is working on a podcast about, um, we're doing a series along, along the way to the series that I've been talking about for a million years on the Ron Pola buck. And for those of you that just tune in for the first time, I'll try to keep it brief, but officially. Well, officially the biggest buck ever killed by the hands of man was killed by in Canada by a guy named Milo Hanson. But shortly after that buck was killed a buck that would have beat Milo Hanson's buck to become the all time world record. Typical white tail was arrowed by a guy named Mitch Ron Pola and then withdrawn from consideration. So we're doing a mystery series on is the buck real or not? Which side are you on? Right. And so I've been, we've been wanting to interview, um, we've been wanting to interview half a finger about this buck. Cause you have, you spend a lot of time on antlers and antler growth and deer and everything. And one of the questions I want to ask you about, and this will be included in the series, but just to kick it around is one of the things that people point out is that where this buck got killed in Northern lower peninsula, Michigan is a place that does not make big bucks. They don't have, they don't make Boone and Crockett, but like God does not make Boone and Crockett bucks. They don't make Boone and Crockett bucks. They don't, they don't make Boone and Crockett bucks. what do you make of something like that yeah i've i've heard that and i'm not an expert on on the whole uh mitch from paula buck i i remember when it came out around the midwest i grew up in wisconsin so it's right next door and and and remember all the chatter about that never paid much attention to it came back to it more recently and helped jordan out with the um with that series and i just from a basic standpoint of can a monster buck like that come out of nowhere and and i i think it can okay you know it's a matter of it's a matter of likelihood um always when you're when you're thinking about that sort of thing but i've seen cases in sonora and the desert southwest where you get you get a drought condition where all of the antlers are a little stunted that year from nutritional restrictions and then out of nowhere there's this giant desert mule deer and you just wonder how did he do that antlers are secondary sex characteristics they they only get the extra nutrition after the body gets what it needs and then it can throw off some some extra nutrition to antler growth and so when they're nutritionally stressed they don't throw that out and sometimes you'll get a buck that who knows why but found some good nutrition or has some kind of genetics that is able to better deal with kind of the environment and you can get a monster out of nowhere that that's not a reason to discount it okay when you're talking about this case another thing we're looking into in this series and it was it's an observation that another whitetail freak had made and and i can't remember the number but but this this whitetail enthusiast was saying that one problem with the round pole of buck it's too perfect and i can't remember the number but let's just say i don't remember let's just say at 190 inches let's say 190 inch whitetail he's like once a deer gets that big go find me an example of a perfectly symmetrical buck that's that big that doesn't have kickers but they're there i mean Examples are there. I looked at the, because it was Michigan, I looked at the Michigan state records and the number two and the number seven buck in the Michigan state records is actually, this was not Michigan state records. It was a Boone and Crockett records, but only from Michigan. Okay. So the Boone and Crockett records from Michigan, number two in Michigan, number seven in Michigan are in the 180, 190 Boone and Crockett range. And one has one inch and five ace deductions. And the other one has two inch and change deductions. So you can get these bucks in that range that are almost perfectly symmetrical. Again, it's not a reason to discount the buck just because it's symmetrical. Yeah. So what's your gut on the whole thing? I, for a while, thought he probably just wants his privacy. He doesn't want the fame. But having the world record shot with an arrow, that's a tough thing to overcome, that he would tell everybody about it, show people in the back of his truck, talk to some media. And then within a day or two, shut up for three decades. There's something strange. And one thing, I don't know if you want any spoiler alerts, but one thing I talked to Jordan about was the way the bases, the pedicles, they come out at an unusually wide angle. So you can have wide bucks where the antlers come straight out. You see those in South Texas all the time. But those pedicles really seem to come out like on the side of the head, kind of odd to me. And one of them actually in the photo. And there's not many photos. One of them actually looks a little like a little different orientation than the other one. And I wondered aloud to Jordan whether in past years something could have happened to that skull and cracked it a little and healed it and made those pedicles orient a little more. Now, if he had done something with the skull and cracked it, those antler tines wouldn't be straight up. They would be out because he bent it out. But they're not. They're straight up in that buck. But if that something happened to that skull. That skull in the past that widened those pedicles out, cracked it and rehealed, which there's cases of that. And then subsequent antlers, the tines would grow straight up no matter what the orientation was. Let me interrupt. Will you pull up and put on this screen up here a shot of the round pole of the buck? So I've just wondered, and this is all speculation because we don't know. There isn't any evidence that it's a legitimate buck. And there's no evidence that it's not a legitimate buck. So we're all speculating. It's just all speculation. So as long as we're speculating. Those pedicles, if that skull was damaged somehow and the pedicles were wider and then subsequent antler development made those tines go straight up, it would account for that. I mean, it's a theory, but it would account for kind of the unusually wide pedicles coming out of that skull. And I find it strange that he talked to the media for a day. He showed people the buck. It was apparently solid antlers. Other people saw it in the back. Yeah, there's a lot to the solidness of it. Are you able to do that or no? Go on. So then I wonder, why was he talking to the media and talking to everyone and then got home and skinned the buck and shut up for three days? There it is. Now, when I look at the deer's left pedicle, right when you're looking at it, but the deer's left side, it looks like that base is coming out a little lower to me. It could be the angle of the camera. It could be anything. But it comes out kind of in the back of the eye. It's like the eyes lined up with it, where on the other side, the eyes below the pedicle. I was looking at that asymmetry in that and wondering if something didn't happen to the skull. There's even kind of a divot in the middle of that skull. I wonder if something didn't happen and then it regrew normal antlers, but would account for that wide width. It's funny that he showed everybody. He talked to the local media and then got home and skinned it and shut up for three decades. Why was that? And then when they went back to measure it. Why? I mean, you're familiar. You're familiar. You're familiar. You're familiar with all the like wild theories. Yep. Yeah. One of the wild theories being, and I've sat on both sides of this thing and I, and I don't want to do too much. Like we're, we're really, we're doing a lot on this. Okay. But one of the wild theories is people have looked at the ears, the, the, the difference between the way the ears lay, the difference between the positioning of the eyes. You can see it all here. We got it pulled up. Um, coloration issues, right? And a theory, a theory is that he skinned that head back and put that rack on. He had made that rack and he installed that rack on that buck. Yeah. I don't, I don't think he could have fabricated. He doesn't, there's no evidence he has any experience in doing any of that sort of thing. And, and he, he's shot a lot of big bucks. So it wasn't unusual that he would shoot a big buck. So I'm, I'm leaning more towards that. It possibly being a legal harvest, but maybe not eligible. And he knew that. And so he would rather just be quiet and, and, and have it be a mystery. Not eligible because the skull plate was cracked? Possibly. That's a, that's a theory. But he came home and then, you know, he was somewhat of a taxidermist. And when they came to measure the buck, he had it almost fully mounted on a shoulder mount. Yeah. He had the cape on it. He had the, if you look at the pictures of them actually measuring it that day, the skull plate's covered by fur. And he left. Apparently he left the back open. There's no photo of the back that I've seen. He left the back open so that they could inspect the skull plate. But from the photo that I look at, the whole skull plate's covered. They could only, I would guess, see the back of the skull plate. So how would they be able to evaluate if something was funny with that, that middle suture where the bones come together? That would be covered from what I see in the photos. It would be covered. Yeah. Well, stay tuned, folks. It's going to be good, man. I'm excited. I'm excited about it. I'm excited about the project. Adding to theories is all I'm doing. No, that's great. It's great. Keep them coming. And then again, we've done people like, we've called out looking for people that have any kind of information. And of course, that offer always stands. Let's jump to the next thing now, man. Are hunters all going to die from lead poisoning? I don't think they have been lead poisoning. I mean, you don't ever hear in the medical profession about one of the dangers of lead exposure is eating game meat shot with lead ammunition. The medical profession. The medical profession doesn't seem to know about this, apparently. But all of the bird enthusiasts are all concerned about hunters' health and what they're feeding their children. Yeah. Let me set this up a little bit. You probably remember when this happened. It was some years ago. Scattered around on the internet, all these photos where they were doing like x-rays of deer carcasses that had been shot by rifles. Okay. And you look at these carcasses and you see that those bullet fragments really scatter and travel around. They do. And so you'd see, you know, let's say it's an x-ray of a deer's rib cage, scapula, and you can see the area where the bullet hit. But then you'd see all these little bright spots and they're metallic fragments that were, I guess, they could get in the vascular system and move a little bit. They kind of explode outward and move a little bit. And that, among other things, really got people talking about. The impacts of lead consumption. Because as you know, there's all this stuff about child development and like you hear about like whatever kids eat and lead paint, lead pipes, leaching water into lead. And California is very staunch position on, you know, all the lead warnings. You can't buy anything that doesn't come with some lead warning for California. You buy a lead headed jig and it's got a warning about how the lead headed jig is going to kill you. So there's definitely like an alarm. A sense of alarm about consumption of lead. But it carried over into this idea that there's all this lead contamination out there in game meat. And you even now will see instances where a state might say we're no longer accepting venison donations because of the risk of lead. It's well documented that, well, maybe you'll counter this, but it's well documented that raptors, the most commonly cited example being California condors, can get lead poisoning from eating game meat killed by lead bullets. That seems to be scientifically accepted. Yep. And so it jumped to, well, it must be bad for us too. Right. Yep. Let's let me ask you like a series of questions. Okay. What's your take on your personal take, the scientific understanding of like raptors. Okay. Yep. Do raptors. Is it accepted? In your mind, is it accepted that raptors die from lead exposure from eating hunter killed deer carcasses? Yep. At the individual level, lead can be really, really toxic to raptors. They have a different, and birds in general, they have a different digestive system. And so raptors are very susceptible. They can get even a small fragment of lead when they're feeding on an animal that was a carcass left in the field or an animal that was wounded, a quail that was hit with lead shot. Okay. And then it wasn't retrieved. If they get a little bit of lead in them, it can make them sick and it certainly can kill them. So at the individual level, it's very dangerous. The problem is when you scale this up and say, is this really a conservation issue that should force hunters to switch to a non-lead ammunition? And you look at the data that we have available, there is a population level effect of accidental secondary lead ingestion by raptors from ammunition. But what I encourage people to look at is not just the fact that there's a population level effect, but what is the magnitude of that effect? Is it a serious issue from the population level? And when you look at research that's been done, there are seven Northeastern states. They looked at eagles ingestion. They did some modeling and they determined that using lead ammunition on the landscape dampened the bald eagle population growth rate by four to 6%. So bald eagles all over the country are just rocketing up. They're doing really good. record numbers, trajectories going up. up, their models showed that that trajectory upward would be dampened 4% to 6% if we use lead ammunition in those seven northeastern states. So I encourage people to think, is that a serious conservation concern that everybody in those seven northeastern states should switch the kind of ammo they use so that bald eagles can increase 4% to 6% faster than they already are? Golden eagles, it was less than 1% effect. Another research, another completely different project in the West looked and found that golden eagle population growth rate was dampened by 0.8%, so less than 1% effect on golden eagle population growth rate. And so when you look in Europe, they did studies on 22 different raptor species. If you average the effect on 22 different raptor species in Europe, which had just announced a ban in Europe on lead ammunition. Oh, is that right? Just yesterday, I saw that. Like an E. You ban? I don't think it's, I don't know. That's what I asked. I actually asked, is this EU or what? And I don't know. I didn't get the answer. But in 22 different raptor species in Europe, the average effect on the population was that it increased using lead ammunition on the landscape for big game hunting, increased mortality rates by a half a percent using lead. So if you, if you banned all lead in Europe, the mortality rates would be a half a percent lower for 22 raptor species. So to me, I'm wondering where, where is this giant conservation concern that everybody would need to change ammo? So that's a long, that's a long answer to the individual question, but I think it's important. It's lethal to individuals. It's, it's, it's the number one thing that's inhibiting condor recovery, condor endangered species. So every mortality counts and they're very susceptible to lead poisoning. So it's a serious issue within condor range. Arizona has a, a voluntary program. We're hunters can voluntarily switch to non-lead ammunition or take their gut piles out of the field completely. So they're not leaving anything for the condors. And that has been adopted by 88 to 91% of the hunters in Arizona. So it's very successful voluntary program compared to other States like California that just have a top-down draconian ban on lead ammo. Yeah. The fall hunting season is finally upon us. I love this time of year. Me and my kids got trips coming up for pronghorn deer, more deer, cow elk. We got all kinds of stuff coming up. We're about ready to trade out summer sleeping bags for cold weather down, pack up a food bin and a cooler, and we'll throw in a couple of Mountain Dews for a little reward and boost after those long mountain marches. There's nothing better. It's my favorite time of year to spend time with my family. Born in the foothills of Tennessee, Mountain Dew was made for a damn good time outdoors. The bold taste, you know, and love has proud American roots dating back to 1948. Mark your best fall memories with the crisp, refreshing citrus kick of Mountain Dew. From hanging out around the bonfire to just hopping into your friend's truck and cruising the woods, get out there and enjoy the outdoors of Mountain Dew, an American original, tasting great since 48. Look for Mountain Dew in stores near you. I travel quite a bit. And when I'm home, it's very easy to stay on a rigid food routine and eat the right kinds of food at the right time. But when you're on the road, it's hard to stay in your routine and like diet can really start to fall apart. I've seen it. And that's why I like. Now, AG1 is already the standard for daily foundational nutrition. AG1 Pro is what's next. It's built for people who don't want to stop there. Creatine, CAHMB, advanced gut lining support on top of everything AG1 Next Gen already delivers. You can get it in travel packs. One travel pack, 10 to 12 ounces of cold water every morning. If you're already taking creatine separately, AG1 Pro simplifies your stack. One thing. In the morning, covers more than your current routine might for less than a dollar more per serving. AG1 Pro supports protein synthesis, helps reduce protein breakdown, and supports muscle recovery and consistent training performance. Visit drinkag1.com slash meat eater and get an AG1 Pro Yeti shaker in your AG1 Pro welcome kit. Again, that's drinkag1.com slash. That's drinkag1.com slash meat eater. Grab yours now. This episode is sponsored in part by BetterHelp. Now, if you've thought about trying therapy with BetterHelp, insurance options may now be available nationwide with an average copay for eligible members of just 23 bucks per session. Hey, you might not know this. You probably don't know this, but World Mental Health Day is October 10. But your brain does not wait around for October 10. You got to take care of your mental health at all times. And therapy isn't just for big life choices. It can be a place to talk through small but important things like a work situation, taking up too much mental real estate, a relationship dynamic you can't quite name, or simply the sense that something feels off. If you've been waiting to start therapy, BetterHelp works with more than 125 health plan networks and eligible members have an average copay of just $23 per session with insurance. If you don't have insurance, you don't have a plan. If you don't have insurance or live outside the U.S., you can still get 10% off your first month. Go visit BetterHelp.com slash MeatEater to explore your payment options. That's BetterHelp, H-E-L-P dot com slash MeatEater. If you got something weighing on your mind, taking a toll on you, don't be afraid to reach out. BetterHelp.com slash MeatEater. So, but I hear that. Is that. Explain to me the idea that like. Lead going through a condor's digestive tract is different than lead going through a human being's digestive tract. Yeah. Is it something to do with the pH? It's pH with the acidic digestive tract and it's also the. They don't have just a stomach like we do. They have other organs that the lead pellets and the meat that they eat sit in there a long time to dissolve in that acidic environment. And it's the length of time that that metallic lead sits in there. So, I hope we talked. We talked about different kinds of lead. That's an important part. Okay. So, what is. Are you aware of cases, and I feel like I've read these, but I can't remember what happened, where they'd go in and look at people that have been consuming game meat their whole life and then go try to see like, well, how much this person. How much lead is in this person's system? Yes. There's been several studies like that. And it started in North Dakota in 2007, a dermatologist who happened to be on the board of directors of a major. A major. Raptor organization. He went into a food bank in North Dakota, grabbed 93 packages, x-rayed them, and about half of those had lead fragments in there. So, he sounded the alarm, and people have questioned the motives, being on the board of directors for a Raptor organization. But he sounded the alarm, and so the Department of Health in North Dakota tested blood samples for North Dakota people all over the state. They had 736 samples, I think, and they found that those that said they hunted had twice the lead level. And that spread like wildfire. Everybody picked that up and said hunters are poisoning themselves. They have twice the lead level. What wasn't reported was that level of hunters, twice the lead level, was about the national average of lead for everybody at that time. It was 1.27 micrograms per deciliter, and the national average was 1.25 at the time. And so, it was twice the level of non-hunters, but it was still below any level that any medical science has shown lead problems in humans. And in fact, the reality was that those that didn't hunt, because it's probably sparsely populated in North Dakota, the ones that didn't hunt had below average lead levels, because the hunters had about the national average lead levels. There's been that study. I think one of the most important studies on human effects of eating game meat with lead comes from First Nations up in Ontario, where they looked at people during the waterfall season. These communities were eating a lot of ducks killed with lead shot. So, they tested lead. They tested lead levels before the waterfall season. They tested them after the waterfall season. They found that people that hunted ducks had a higher blood lead level at the end of the duck season, because they were eating a lot of ducks. And so, they were getting lead pretty frequently in their diet. But what they found out in that study was that those that were sitting at the supper table eating the same meals, but didn't go out on the hunt, had normal, they did not have an increase in blood lead levels. So, it was. There was something about actually being on the hunt that seemed to increase the lead level, not eating the meals, because other people were eating the same meals at the same table. What does that mean? That the primers in shot shells and in pistol rounds and rifle rounds, the primers. And here's where we're getting into the different kinds of lead. The primers have a different kind of lead that's highly absorbable. It's an organic lead compound in the primers of cartridges. And that lead compound. That lead compound can be absorbed through the skin, it can be absorbed through your lung tissue by breathing it. These organic lead compounds that are used in strengthening plastics, clutch shoes and brake shoes, and all kinds of different products, waterproofing products, they use these organic lead compounds because it improves the product in some way. But that organic lead compound is different than the metallic, the inorganic metallic lead. And so, those compounds. Those compounds can be absorbed through the skin. If you get them in your digestive tract, you eat something with it on there, that goes right into your bloodstream. metallic lead like what might be in a quail a number eight pellet or a little fragment of bullet that ends up in your burger that's metallic lead that goes through the human digestive system 24 to 48 hours and and passes through so quickly it doesn't have time to dissolve it's not sitting in there and dissolving and so that metallic lead occasionally hunters don't get lead in their system very often but very occasionally lead coming through the system and and then leaving the system is not going to elevate blood lead levels like an organic compound lead compound and so handling shotgun shells breathing the gun smoke that has some aerosolized primer residue picking up your shot shells i shoot pistols competitively and i'm concerned about when i pick up all my pistol brass to reload it i'm careful not to touch my face because i know that that has primer lead primer residue but i'll hold lead bullets reloading all day long that metallic lead's not going to come through my skin but that primer residue with organic lead compounds can so when you have these people talk about lead is obviously a toxin they're talking about these organic lead compounds that were in leaded paint organic lead compounds that were in leaded gasoline all of that stuff that causes these human health issues was a different form of lead you don't have doctors talking about eating game meat shot with lead ammunition as being a problem because if you take a look at the FDA the EPA the American Academy of Pediatricians you look on their websites they have page after page of things that you should be careful of so you don't increase your lead exposure what kind of ways you can increase your lead exposure none of those websites say anything about eating game meat shot with lead ammunition it's just not an issue in the medical profession with one exception the CDC had added one sentence a couple years ago that said if you're breast feeding you may want to limit your eating of game meat shot with lead ammunition so so why is it that the entire medical profession is not warning people about this but there's a lot of bird groups that are warning people about it because it's it's the ulterior it's their ulterior motive just to try to save bird mortalities but i think we should talk about bird mortalities and and not try to use this red herring to as a hammer to try to get laws changed and i've seen in Maryland New Jersey the full court press to ban lead ammunition statewide in some of these states is this human health aspect which is not really an issue yeah they're thinking about one thing and talking about a different thing yeah yeah exactly they they know that human health and children and lead poisoning will resonate with people and they're getting laws passed with misinformation like that yeah man it wouldn't be hard to find dudes that just shoot all the time but never eat game meat it'd be interesting to look at their lead yeah well use me for an example if you look at a bar chart of of different studies have been done with people that eat a lot of game meat with lead and and and the more they like there was an um an Inuit community that ate sea ducks shot with lead it was a different study than the other one and and they asked people how often they eat sea ducks so how often they might be exposed to lead shot and it wasn't until you got to the people who ate sea ducks daily or almost daily that their levels were up to a point where a doctor 10 micrograms per deciliter where a doctor normally says where are you getting this lead exposure from if you had to eat sea ducks almost daily for that my lead levels are higher than that from my pistol shooting from breathing that smoke that has some of the primer aerosolized in it from handling um shells mine was at 18 at one point and it's been at 12 micrograms per deciliter CDC used 10 for the safe level they don't do that anymore but mine was at 18 12 and then I started religiously my hands after a pistol match and washing my hands really good after I reloaded and handle all that and it came right down to five and six oh you kidding me that's where my lead exposure was obviously coming from and throughout all that high lead blood levels when I was at 18 our family has been using nothing but copper bullets since 2009 so I had these high blood lead levels I've been using nothing but copper ammo um at that time for 15 years yeah so it's not the lead fragments and we eat game meat all the time but it's shot with copper copper bullets and then I'm over here reloading getting my lead exposure so when they survey hunters versus non-hunters those hunters are they're making fishing sinkers they're reloading they're shooting they're doing a lot of other things that are exposing them to the real dangerous sources of lead and the game meat eating is probably not registering that at all there's some very rare exceptions if you eat if you eat game meat every day and you shoot lead and you're you've got burger burgers is more of an issue burgers can have 20 around 20-25 percent of the packages might have one lead fragment in it according to some studies um and and whole cuts like steaks and roasts it's only two or three percent have even one lead fragment so burger is more of an issue if you're eating burger like daily if you think you might be getting uh lead fragments more days than not and there there was a one guy in New Zealand that was eating meat shot with lead every day and he had super high levels so there's there's extreme cases of individuals like that that you see another strange case um is everybody has an appendix unless they've had it taken out and that's like a blind sack in the digestive system and if you're a quail hunter and you've you're eating a lot of birds dove and quail number eight shot there's been cases where a couple number eight pellets have dropped into that blind appendix and then been trapped in there well it may stay in there for years and then if it's in there for years then it's going to start um and then it's going to start um absorbing some of that metallic lead just because of the length of exposure gunshot victims have been shown too especially for some reason if it's near a joint maybe it's a lymphatic system or something a gunshot victim where they leave a lead bullet in can have dangerously high blood level levels in future years so if it's metallic lead passing through your system in a day or two is not an issue if it's metallic lead that stays in your system a long time it can be man when we were kids we we had the stuff to pour our own split shot you know and we go down to the gun range sift the berms out get the shot out melt it separate the garbage from the lead pour the lead into the molds making sinkers no respirators or nothing just doing it right in the garage and then you spend all day with those sinkers packed in your lip like a chaw I always kind of wanted to get my lead test but I've never gotten to test yeah um yeah I always encourage competitive shooters a lot of them aren't aware of it to get it tested because if you're not being careful like I started to washing my hands um it can be an issue but but the the whole um issue of eating game meat when you look at packages like commercially produced um commercially ground venison burger has a higher level people that grind it themselves they keep all those bloody scraps out of their burger pile you know they're they're more careful about what you're putting in the burger pile personally and so the the number of fragments and personally ground venison is a lot lower is that right if you do the math on how many meals of venison a family has a family of four has and what percentage of those packages might have one fragment that only one person at the table gets and you do the math on it it's like someone might get a fragment once a month I did the math for Arizona using some data that we had and and maybe once a month you get an occasional fragment that passes through your system so if you look at the reality and and the science that's there it's not an issue but politicians are not looking at any of that they're not interested in that someone tells them that hunters are poisoning their kids and they feel like they got to do something yeah exactly get into trouble with with laws that don't make sense yeah uh okay CWD and predators yeah this is another example of people in my mind this is another example of people thinking one thing and talking about another okay mm-hmm mm-hmm so you will have I'm going to color this I'm going to color this heavily with personal opinion okay and you can walk it back if you if you choose predator advocates of which I sort of count myself as one but I like I I like I like living on a predator environment I like having the animals all the native wildlife present I get excited when I see mountain lions I get excited when I see wolves I get a kick out of seeing coyotes bobcats I'm not like an anti-predator guy but I also am a predator management advocate and um I trap we hunt predators we we use fur products okay so I have a nuanced relationship with predators but I noticed that people that have a view that know that are absolutist that like predators should not be managed predators should not be killed predators shouldn't be hunted um they probably never think for a minute about CWD oftentimes because most of them are not educated on wildlife issues they don't follow wildlife issues they're like they're like predator saviors first and foremost yeah and they divorce their love for predators from any conversation about wildlife management about issues of biodiversity they are pro predator and that's it it seems like that group that group of people is all of a sudden now interested in chronic wasting disease why because they're now saying oh you know how I always felt that no one should hurt a predator well check this out this is why if there was more predators on the they'd take care of chronic wasting disease and we wouldn't have any chronic wasting disease because everybody who's seen never cry wolf knows that they always pick the sick animal and eat it therefore we shouldn't have any predator management any predator control because i all of a sudden care a ton about cwd and i would like these predators to eliminate cwd right right so that's that's what that's so that's exactly what happened people are laser focused on their favorite toothy animal and they're always hungry for and always promoting any notion of little information that might indicate that that these things are are renovating whole ecosystems they're changing the course of rivers they're managing cwd for us they're curbing climate change they're just generally saving the planet i mean if they if they can latch on to a piece of information that supports that kind of idea they run with it and there's and there's a ton of reporters in big cities that have no exposure to wildlife that that don't really understand hunting culture don't really understand wildlife management at all and they're and they're very eager to grab those kind of stories and say yeah predators are great the predators are just going to manage the ecosystem and oh it's an urban journalist's wet dream dude yeah to see that pop up you know and that's what happens like that's what happens when you're a predator you're a predator you're a predator spreads like wildfire well what what happened was a number of years ago quite a few years ago people doing research found out that mountain lions were killing a disproportionate number of cwd positive mule deer more so disproportionate from healthy mule sure yeah and so that which i have zero problem believing like of course exactly makes sense yeah especially in the later stages of cwd animals just are unaware even in the earlier stages there's probably cues that predators pick that we don't even notice but animals a little less thrifty a little less able to get away like mountain lions hiding in the bushes and charge as a group of mule deer if you've got the cwd animal might be a little slower in detecting that flash of fur coming out of the brush and so there's a lot of reasons why they can be disproportionately if he's 10 less observant yeah and it's going to come out and so people found that these uh urban writers and and carnivore cheerleaders grabbed onto this and and just they ran with it and so they're going to come out and they're going to come out and so you heard this everywhere and that was just the first little bit of information and then later on but in that within that and i don't have the time to do this but someone that studies the media it would have been interesting to go look and say how interested has this person been in cwd mm-hmm yeah or are they historically interested in cwd or are they just interested today because they just saw this yep that and so that bit of information like started spreading like wildfire and everybody started thinking about hey and they're just making bold statements about not only like mountain lions are going to control cwd and mule deer but carnivores are going to control cwd in all the whole the whole deer family and so that chugged along and then people started people started doing some research on that to look into it a little further because that was a number of years ago and there was some modeling that was done and if you build a population model and you say okay we're going to keep everything consistent except we're going to keep everything consistent and we're going to keep everything consistent and we're going to have mountain lions kill cwd positive mule deer at a higher rate well guess what happens they're going to control cwd it's just a mathematical certainty if you just build a simple model there's some people that build a built a real complex model and took a lot of things into consideration they they ran a whole bunch of different modeling scenarios some of the scenarios they varied um whether where the predators killed cwd positive animals at a higher rate or at a one-to-one rate with healthy animals and they were able to do a lot of things with healthy animals the other things they varied in the model is like as cwd progressed in an individual deer or elk um does as soon as it gets infected with cwd do predators start preying right away at the beginning of the phase of of infection or does it ramp up and they pray a lot more higher predation when the animal gets sicker and sicker and they could model that into the model and they did that they varied that and they varied the overall level of of predation on the animals and they ran these they ran thousands and thousands of these models and scenarios and it wasn't to see if if carnivores were were controlling cwd but it was to look at under what conditions would they possibly control cwd and the paper the research can i can i i just i just want to explain a thing real quick that that's why i make sure people are getting when you're when you're talking about this is is um imagine that okay imagine you have a whitetail deer and he's he's it's a terrible winter and he's starving to death and he's depleted but he gets killed by a coyote but he's probably doomed anyway what do you call that right yeah is that winter kill right or is that predation yeah do you follow me so so i get the point you're making is is um as they get like as an infected animal gets near death does it wind up being that almost like um that almost that the predation event would almost be a symptom right like a symptom of the disease being being predated yep there's there's they call it proximate and alternate causes of mortality some of the more recent research is actually assigning probabilities to the different causes of mortality okay like that was and and through modeling that was like 75 percent mountain lion predation 25 cwd they're actually starting to do things like that but but that's true when you get to the later stages the animal's probably going to die in the next six months from cwd anyway because they only last two years once they get infected and so when an animal takes it out that's somewhat compensatory between those two mortality sources but but they they did a model that varied all these different things some of the model outputs and the and the research paper will say predators can control cwd that would be the results but then you read the paper itself and those scenarios where predators did control cwd and kept it at a low level the the deer and elk populations were cut in half and so that may not be an ideal situation for people that like robust deer and elk populations you know maybe that's not a great thing um to to have that situation they had other modeling scenarios where predators actually eradicated or almost eradicated the cwd in that population but the deer and elk population they were gone in in 30 years they were gone like nowhere deer and elk so they controlled cwd because there's no deer and elk left in the model runs this is in when you run a model when you run a model right right so so and so models are valuable you know they say all models are wrong some are valuable and they say that because models are valuable because you can look at different relationships of different scenarios and and the the first result they got from that modeling was um in that predators could control cwd in a population but under certain conditions but those conditions weren't operating in yellowstone and what that was was predators in the model that showed that if predators preyed on prime age animals primarily and primarily on infected prime age animals they could control cwd but predators aren't in yellowstone wolves and mountain lions are preying on young and they're preying on old individuals they're preying on the wrong classes of animals to actually control cwd so they in their in their report in their in their paper they will say cwd but in people will quote that people will cite that and say see they can but you read the paper and they say but they're killing the wrong classes of animals to do it and so you have to that's nuance that you have to all take into account but people don't they'll grab what nugget they want and they'll cite it and you have to go to that paper which most people don't do and and read the the entire paper like they can eradicate cwd but that means there's no deer and elk left so is that valuable yeah the fall hunting season is finally upon us i love this time of year me and my kids got trips coming up for pronghorn deer more deer cow elk we got all kind of stuff coming up we're about ready to trade out summer sleeping bags for cold weather down pack up a food bin and a cooler and we'll throw in a couple mountain dews for a little reward and boost after those long mountain marches there's nothing better it's my favorite time of year to spend time with my family born in the foothills of tennessee mountain dew it was made for a damn good time out in the fall hunting season the bold taste you know and love has proud american roots dating back to 1948 mark your best fall memories with the crisp refreshing citrus kick of mountain dew from hanging out around the bonfire to just hopping into your friend's truck and cruising the woods get out there and enjoy the outdoors of mountain dew an american original tasting great since 48 look for mountain dew in stores near you warning this product contains nicotine nicotine is an addictive chemical black butter and nicotine is an addictive chemical black butter and nicotine is an addictive Black Buffalo products are intended for adults aged 21 and older who are consumers of nicotine or tobacco. Now, you know how long it takes to build something that actually holds up. Well, Black Buffalo spent 20,000 hours on it, 20,000 hours working alongside American farmers growing and barn curing leafy greens to mimic the taste and texture of real dip without the tobacco leaf or stem. That's not a shortcut. That's a commitment. They started this thing in 2015 right here in America, and they got it right. In wintergreen, mint, and straight. The taste you already know in long cut and pouches. It dips like the real thing because they refuse to settle for less. Check out your local gas station or convenience store. Chances are it's already on a shelf near you. Or head to blackbuffalo.com and use code MEAT for 30% off your first order. Black Buffalo Tobacco Alternative. It's everything you love about dip, nothing you don't. If you spend a lot of time outdoors, you got dogs, you got kids, you know how hard it is to keep the floor of your rig clean. A thing we do in our little fleet of vehicles that I have in my household, if you go look, open the door on any one of them, they all got weather tech. We get a car, we throw the mats out and put in weather tech. Because that way, when there's a mess, it's like your kid's fault, your dog's fault, it's the weather's fault, doesn't matter. You take them suckers out and hose them off and you're back to being good as new. I'm telling you, if you got a vehicle, put weather tech in there, you're going to be happy you did it. And check this out. American-made floor liners and cargo liners, okay? They laugh in the face of all weather. Go take a look for yourself today at weathertech.com. Do you feel, whatever the models reveal, I mean, do you feel that it's helped? Like, would you argue, like, let's say you were a man, you were a state agency manager and you were tasked with, or you're like the CWB. You're the CWD czar for a state agency. You're the CWD guy. And like a lever you can pull is how many coyotes are on the landscape. And you're looking at all the things you have available to you. Would you go and be like, one of the things I'm going to do is I'm going to turn up that, I'm going to turn up the coyote dial. I'm going to turn up the lion dial as part of my management strategy. Yeah, no, because there isn't any evidence that shows that making those, pulling those levers will improve CWD. I'm interested in population level effects, not whether mountain lions kill, disproportionately kill positive animals. I'm looking at big picture. Having carnivores on the landscape, does that make a difference from having maybe a also robust, healthy population of carnivores, but sustainably hunted, a small percentage of the population, or compared to having no carnivores. There isn't any evidence. Yet that shows at a population level that, that changing the management or limiting the harvest of, of coyotes and wolves and mountain lions is going to change the CWD trajectory. Yeah. Where do you sit on CWD these days? It's such a constantly evolving thing. My own opinions, my own fears morph and mature and, you know, all the time. Where are you at? Like just in a very general way, where are you at? I'm not solidly. I'm on one side or the other. What I think about is, is, and we've talked about it before. I think 40, 50 years of people in the Rocky mountain States eating CWD positive venison. And they've done a lot of studies to see if there's an increase in Khrushchev Yakov disease or any other variant that might be related to that in nothing. They've done intensive research, nothing, no evidence that it's crossed over into humans at all. But when I talk to my wildlife, my disease expert friends, they say, you know, mad cow, this disease created a variant that went into humans in England. And so, yes, we have this decades and decades of proof that it doesn't cross into humans, but it would only take once. And so that's why they, CDC and most of the disease experts will recommend not eating animals, you know, are CWD positive. And so I'm, I'm, I'm not on one side or the other. It gives me great comfort to know that we've tested this and it's not crossing a human barrier. Yeah. I know I've always known I ate a boatload of it without knowing it. And now I ate it, not knowing it, but I found out after the fact. Um, so now I've, now I've a hundred percent. No, I've eaten infected me, but I didn't lose any sleep. And in fact, a buddy of mine was there too. I think I told him, I don't know if I told you this. I'm at my buddy's house. I'm with a buddy of mine. I take a buddy of mine to another buddy's house. This is a, this is a doctor lawyer couple. Okay. And I got a buddy of mine. We go there and he, the, the lawyer of the couple says to his doctor wife, not to me, but to his doctor wife says, heads up. I haven't gotten the results back on this deer. Like he discloses to her. She doesn't do anything. She just eats. So we're all eating it. Eat a pile of it. While later he calls me, he's like, man, I got, I just called you to tell you that I got the results back. And it was. You know, it was in fact, it was, and so I was like, I'm going to call my buddy now and tell my buddy, but I kind of forgot, not kind of, I forgot, forgot one day, months go by and this dude calls me and no, it was text me. And I don't know why it's even on his mind, but he says, have you knowingly eaten CWD positive meat? And I said, I forgot to tell you, we both have, not only that I have, not only have I, and I expect him. If I phone to ring, no call. So I was like, okay, he's not alarmed. He's not alarmed by it either. Yeah. I think, I think it has, I mean, it's an individual choice, obviously, but it might have a lot to do with how much venison you have in the freezer. And I go to Texas and I'll kill three or four deer just as a shopping trip to fill the freezer full of venison. It's a little harder to get a deer in, in Arizona. And there has been some CWD positive cases near where we harvest those and we haven't been getting them tested. Maybe that tells you something. I haven't been getting them tested at all. Now it's different too, I think. One thing that worries me is when you look at Kuru, which is another form of this kind of disease, TSC disease, like scrapie and sheep, CWD and deer, Creutzfeldt-Jakobs and humans. There's another human form called Kuru that was found in some tribes in Papua New Guinea. Papua New Guinea, yeah. They're eating the brains of their elders as a cultural thing. And they were getting these infectious prions because they were eating brains. They were infecting themselves with this cannibal, cannibalism. Uh, action. And so some of the anthropologists then figured that out and a disease expert, they got them to stop doing that. And, and then Kuru went away. But if you read the scientific papers, there were Kuru cases that were like 30 and 40 years after the person ate the, their meal of Kuru, that, that worries me a little bit. So it's your choice whether you want to feed your kids. I mean, I'm not too worried about it, but if I had kids around the table, that's a, that's a different, different equation. It's too late for mine. Man, they're brought up on deer meat last night. We ate quite a pile of it. Uh, okay. Nevermind the health, human health, population level. Then we're going to move on population level impacts on deer. Yeah, definitely. You think you documented all over now? That's not, not in question. Hasn't been in question for a while. Big buck impacts. You think? Yeah. One thing that was interesting is one of the studies in, um, in table Mesa, Colorado, um, which I should talk about more, but one of the results they said in there. They had, um, I had about 43% of the deer had CWD and they were studying them a couple of times through a couple of decades. And, and after probably 20 years of fairly high prevalence rates, like 25 to 40%, they couldn't in, in all of the 64 deer, I think they captured, they not one of them was over five years old. They couldn't find a buck over five years old. And I thought they didn't even talk about that much, but that's a symptom of what happens when an animal doesn't live. more than two years after they've been infected and they're getting infected early you're not going to have an older age structure uh saskatchewan's got some game management units that are 70 positive for cw and when you reach that level and you've got animals dying after two years you you you have to affect the population there's no way you couldn't yeah got it got it you know it gave me a lot of uh hope if that's the right word this idea that yeah that you're gonna have that animals get infected they're always gonna die within a couple years the precinct you won't have old bucks you're not gonna have six-year-old bucks seven-year-old bucks but earlier we mentioned the hansen buck yeah right and four years old yeah that was saskatchewan but they only get four years old right and biggest buck ever killed was four yeah it's amazing well yeah another thing about the another study that was done in colorado the table mesa study area um done by a number of people in 2005 they went in there and they studied prevalence rates of cwd what percent had cwd they looked at predation rates on the deer population they looked at causes of mortality how the deer were dying and studied it a couple years and they said throughout this period cwd was going up and up and there was a heavy predation on mule deer mountain lions on mule deer not only heavy predation but almost predation on mule deer not only heavy predation but almost four cwd positive deer were were preyed upon for every one healthy deer by mountain lions so there's a differential predation on cwd sick animals a heavy predation overall and throughout all cwd levels kept going up and up and up and so they concluded in 2008 when they published they concluded even with a heavy predation by mountain lions there's still the mountain lions are not able to control cwd but then 13 years later some of those same people came back into the same population and they were able to control cwd and they were able to control cwd and they were able to control cwd and collected the same kind of information and they found that after 13 more years now mountain lions were killing four and a half infected deer for every one healthy deer so still high predation, differential predation on CWD positive animals. And the CWD, the percent that had CWD went from 28% to from 38% to 42. So CWD still increased with that heavy predation for 13 more years. But their conclusion in that paper was, we think among other things, predators might be assisting in controlling CWD. And so people can cite that paper, but the reason they said that maybe it would have been even worse. That's exactly it. So that was like, it's still with, with, with lions killing four and a half sick deer to every healthy deer CWD still increased, but they hold out that will, maybe it would be even worse. It would have been, that was their speculation even worse. So I think, you know, an alternate, an alternate conclusion would be even in that condition, they still weren't able to manage CWD. It still went up. Now the people doing that research, some of them are friends of mine. They're good. They're solid researchers. That was just their conclusion. And, you know, we don't all agree sometimes when we look at the same data and I'm not willing to take that speculative step and say, yeah, they were probably controlling CWD because it probably would have been higher. It's too many probabilities. Yeah. Let's move on to another one. Another, another subject, if you follow wildlife, follow wildlife, news, wildlife, politics, conservation news, you, you know, the, the, the trophic cascade thing. Okay. So wolves are returned to, uh, to release sites. You got Yellowstone national park, Frank church, 97, 96, somewhere in there. Um, and then a while later outcomes like that, they have transformed riparian ecosystems. And now like the rivers are, they have returned. The beavers are back. There's willows everywhere. You know, there was a, unbeknownst to us, it was a sick landscape that is now healthy. All thanks to a hand, this handful of wolves that are, that are running around. Um, people are doing Ted. It's the perfect, right? Ted talk thing. It's very inspiring. And then over time you see pieces of research coming out that sort of have this, well, maybe it's not that tidy. Maybe that's not quite, quite right. The last one of these I read was the authors that the trophic cascade theory relied on some work done by some willow, some people doing research on willows. And even the people that did the research that is cited in the trophic cascade thing part started saying, you kind of got our numbers wrong. I'll correct that a little bit, please. That's what you're here for. Yep. So first of all, trophic cascades, if people don't understand that it's basically a trophic level is like the grass is one trophic level. The grass eaters, the herbivores are another trophic level. And then the predators are another trophic level. And the idea is you can, you can take the predators away or you can add predators. And if you add predators, there's less grass eaters. And so there's more grass. So it causes this, this cascading effect through these trophic levels. That's what trophic cascade is. And so, and so we, so we brought wolves back in Yellowstone and 95, 96, 97 wolves were released. I think a total of, 41 wolves were released. And then just a couple, just about, so 97 in 98 already, there was a couple of researchers from the Pacific Northwest that were in there measuring the tallest aspens. In retrospect, there's been a lot of scientific papers showing that their methodology was, was biased, not, they weren't trying to be biased, but it just was not randomly distributed sampling. It wasn't very good sampling, but regardless, they measured the tallest Aspen in, a bunch of these Aspen stands. And this is just, they, they started in 98. So it was a year after the third wave of release of wolves came in and they published in 2001. And they said in that publication, 2001, Aspens are recovering in the riparian areas. And it's probably, we're probably seeing the beginning of wolves triggering a trophic cascade. So they didn't have any data on that. They just measured some tallest Aspens, which wasn't a very good method of measuring Aspens anyway. And they made this, this, this comment. And once again, the media picked it up and it was a wonderful story. Wolves were coming back and brought, brought wolves back to Yellowstone. And now the stream side vegetation, the Aspens were recovering and doing great. And that spread like wildfire for a number of years. And then the first paper I saw with Matt Kaufman, remember you had Matt Kaufman on the podcast with Monteith. Matt Kaufman went and did some research in the 2000s. He published in 2010 with some people he said, and, and they, they did a very good scientifically robust measuring of Aspen throughout the park in a more robust way than, than the original. Can I wedge in here that just, just to make the connection. The idea was that elk ungulates were over, like we're, we're over grazing. And so now that there's more predation on the landscape, more animal predation on the landscape, it was giving it was giving a break to the vegetation regime from elk grazing. Therefore the it's coming back and recovering. I need to clarify something. I should have started with that. There's two different kinds of trophic cascades that people have talked about in Yellowstone. One is the one is the, the density mediated trophic cascade. And that just means there's fewer elk. So there's more vegetation. That's just a real simple kind of relationship. And so people will say, look, we brought wolves back. There's fewer elk. We had 19,000 elk in Yellowstone two years before the wolves came. They started declining before the wolves were released. Actually for two years, we had 19,000 elk two years before the wolves were released. And that dropped to a low of 4,000. So 19,000 to 4,000, you're definitely going to have more vegetation growing in Yellowstone. So that's the density mediated. That just means there's fewer elk. But the problem is people want to give wolves all the credit for that. But at the same time, we had a little handful of wolves at that time, but we have grizzly bear populations increased to the extent that their predation on, on elk calves was three times what it was prior, prior to that earlier. It increased three times. Mountain lion population doubled in Yellowstone. Fires burned 36% of Yellowstone in 1988. That had huge effect on, on the ecology of that. We had one of the worst droughts during that time, shortly after wolves were released. We had one of the most severe winters at that time. And then we were hunting cow elk off the park in Montana to help try to manage the Yellowstone population. And we, we kept cow elk tags too long and too high. And so hunters contributed to that population decline because all this stuff was happening at once. And the people managing the elk tags didn't, didn't really, at the time didn't know that all this stuff was going to affect the population. So we, you're bursting the bubble of everyone that just wants to blame wolves. Right. And so you hear, I mean, wolves are precipitating this, this trophic cascade. So that's the first one. I think we, we can, we can dismiss that. Wolves did not cause that decline of 19,000 to 3000. All those factors did. So we can't give wolves credit for trophic cascades because of density reductions in elk. So then they very quickly switched to the, the behaviorally mediated trophic cascade, which means that elk like to hang out, they like to go out, they like to go to the park, they like to go to the zoo, they like to hang out along the streams and wolves were hunting along the streams and they were scaring the elk out away from the streams. And so that stream side vegetation could respond because the elk were scaring them out of there. They call that the landscape of fear. But that first study that kind of talked about that, which was, was actually part of the 2001 study. First study that talked about that didn't mention the fact other researchers have later that, you know, if you're comparing Aspen that grow along the stream and Aspen that grow on the drier uplands, the Aspen along the stream are going to grow a lot more than the uplands. And that wasn't ever mentioned in the original discussion of that. But other people like Kaufman came, came by later in 2010, not only did he measure the Aspen in a more randomly and more scientifically robust way throughout the park, but he took the last 10 years of locations of where a wolf killed an elk and took all those spots. And he mapped the landscape of fear. He mapped for the first time, because people talking about the landscape of fear were using other metrics that weren't very direct. But Kaufman mapped kill locations and then related that to close to stream, not close to stream, other effects and actually had a map of very risky places for wolves to be and not risky ways, places for wolves. For elk to be. For elk to be, right. Because of wolf predation. And, and, and there was, when they did the analysis of high risk areas and low risk areas for, for elk to be preyed on by wolves, they found no difference in Aspen regeneration in riskier areas versus areas that weren't risky. And so he published that paper in 2010. That was the first one I saw that said, hold the boat, you know, Aspen, the title was Aspens are not recovering in Yellowstone because they weren't. And at the time there was a 60% reduction in the Yellowstone elk population, and still there was no evidence of Aspens recovering. And so that really, that was the first one I saw and I think it is. Yeah, but that wasn't the trophic cas, the trophic cascade heyday came after that. Yes. And, and the trophic cascade heyday where the, where everybody was talking about it, they were all talking about this behaviorally mediated. They're all talking about, Wolves are redistributing elk away from some of these areas and then those those streamside vegetations recovering. And then another researcher, Thomas Hobbs, came in and he focused on willows, not aspen. And he measured willows and where they grew and where the wolves were. And his conclusion was wolves, aspen are recovering, but wolves have nothing to do with with the willow recovery. The interesting thing is you hear there's the YouTube video that's got 44 million views now about how wolves are restoring the Yellowstone. Ecosystem and changing the course of rivers, changing the hydrology and bringing the beavers back was one of the things that was peak trophic. Yes, that and but the biologists brought the beavers back, not the wolves. Biologists released beavers and seven drainages in the Gallatin National Forest right on the edge of Yellowstone, about 130 beavers. And those beavers then dammed up the tributaries, changed the hydrology, made habitat for willows to now return. So beavers probably should get more credit than wolves for trophic cascades. And in Yellowstone, because of their changes in hydrology, but beavers don't have the big public relations campaign that wolves do. We got all kind of stuff coming up. We're about ready to trade out summer sleeping bags for cold weather down, pack up a food bin and a cooler. And we'll throw in a couple of Mountain Dews for a little reward and boost after those long mountain marches. The bold taste you know and love has proud American roots dating back to 1948. Warning, this product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical. Black Buffalo products are intended for adults aged 21 and older who are consumers of nicotine or tobacco. Well, Black Buffalo spent 20,000 hours on it. 20,000 hours working alongside American farmers, growing and barn curing leafy greens. To mimic the taste and texture of real dip without the tobacco leaf or stem. That's a commitment. Chances are it's already on. On a shelf near you or head to blackbuffalo.com and use code MEAT for 30% off your first order. We get a car. Throw the mats out and put in weather tech. You take them suckers out and hose them off, and you're back to being good as new. I'm telling you, if you got a vehicle, put weather tech in there. You're going to be happy you did it. And check this out. American-made floor liners and cargo liners. Okay? Another funny thing that I made the same point earlier. And this is about public perception. This is a comment about public perception about media and not a comment about wildlife. But the people that were so happy, it's cynical to point this out, but the people that were suddenly so happy about willow regeneration. If you studied the media, I would ask you, can you go find me situations in the past where they were expressing their concern? Can you go find me situations in the past where they were expressing their concern? That was a problem. But it was the discovery day for them. Yep. Yep. And it's interesting that the first two people that published that paper in 2001, they've been on a campaign to convince everyone that wolves have been the drivers or the triggers of a major trophic cascade. They published a paper almost every year in the last 25 years talking about wolves initiating a trophic cascade. And they're unrelenting, even with all of this mounting. And they're unrelenting body of scientific evidence that shows that that's really not true, that the story is not like that at all. Because it doesn't suffice. It somehow doesn't suffice just to be like, they're cool to have around. Right. It's cool to see them. They're cool to have around. They're like, I need something more. We have to justify them on the landscape. And we don't need to justify large predators on the landscape. They were part of the native fauna. We recovered almost all of the native other animals. And we've got a couple more. And they happen to be carnivores to finish up. Yeah. I think it's like the best word I can think of it. I don't mean to give it like a religious aspect. But the best word I can think of it is I think of it like it's a sin. I think it's immoral or whatever to eliminate, to intentionally eliminate native wildlife. I think of as like a sin against God and man. You know, I mean, it's like, I don't think it's right. Yeah. That's what I think. It's like, it's human. It's, it's hubris, you know, to be like, oh, there's this thing that's lived here. It's always lived here. But I'm deciding that I, that it needs to go away. I'm just like, we can't be making that decision. Yeah. David Meech, L. David Meech is, is the leading wolf guy really in the world. He's been researching wolves for more than six decades, researching wolves for more than six decades. And he came and taught, gave a talk at the University of Arizona one time. I picked him up at the airport. We were at breakfast and he. He said something to me and he said it later in his talk. He said that the people that think returning, this is the, like the largest wolf advocate. Well, maybe not a wolf advocate, largest wolf scientist in the world. He says, people think that returning wolves to Yellowstone created the situation where it brought back the birds and the bees and the butterflies. He said, that's more religion than it is science. But he was quick to add that those people that say that bringing wolves back is going to decimate all of our big game herds in the state. He said, that's more religion. And then it is science. The truth is really in, in the middle. They're not going to be destructive and they're not saints. And he wrote another paper that said that, that, and you've probably heard, heard this before, but that wolves are neither saints nor sinners, except to people who make them. So, you know, people want to make them out to be saints and sinners and they're not, you know, they, within that they have an impact, they have an impact. They sure. And certainly in locally, they can. They can have an impact and we can manage that we should be able to manage, um, that impact, but the, the two that have been publishing trophic cascade papers almost every year, I think they have 25 papers I've read, um, since that 2001, um, they just published one last year and in the abstract, it says that wolves triggered the strongest trophic cascade in the world. This is just last year. They, they're still saying this. And that was followed by a rebuttal this year. By some Yellowstone researchers, people are making their living researching the Yellowstone ecosystem as a rebuttal. And the title of the, um, the, the rebuttal was flawed analysis invalidates the idea of a strong trophic cascade in Yellowstone. I mean, that's a heavy hit title. That's like, that's as clear as you can possibly make it. And, and I think you in an email once said, uh, let's talk about this latest, um, um, there's some kind of new. Uh, article that said that the trophy cascade stuff is, um, doesn't have scientific support, but this has been happening since Kauffman wrote that paper in 2010. I mean, this is 16 years. People have been saying things aren't happening. Like the media is telling you it's happening and they're using good, solid science, but nobody wants to hear that story. I mean, the original story is so beautiful. I know it's not true and it makes me feel warm and fuzzy. And so there's just no getting rid of that. I constantly see on social media. How wolves have, have changed the ecosystem in Yellowstone. And then once in a while, someone publishes a paper that says, you know, a lot of that's not true that, that the science just doesn't support that. And I've been seeing that for 15 years, but nobody, people are still telling the original story. You know, there's no getting out in front of that. It's too late. It's like a freight train that left as a writer who like, like as a writer that deals in history and wildlife issues and other things, I will sometimes hear a thing. a thing. I'll hear a thing. and I'll get really excited because it's going to be great for the thing I'm writing. Okay. And I'm like, that is great. But then when I look into it and I learned that it's not true, I feel a disappointment. I do. Yeah. I've, I've been there before too. Like this is really going to support what I'm writing. And then I'm like, really? That's a lie. Or that's like, you know, this thing that everyone knows is now I know is not true. Yeah. And I'm disappointed. Yeah. Okay. Because I wanted the truth to be other than it was. I will say to wildlife researchers, which I have many friends that do that, that they're in that line of work and they'll be talking about something they're doing. And I'll say, what do you hope happens? Yeah. Right. And they're like, I can't do that. What do you mean? What do I hope happens? But I'm like, cause you're a human being. Yeah. There's gotta be like, let's just be honest. There's gotta be some thing. I'm not saying you'd bend the truth, right? You're a person. You're a person of integrity, but in, in your head, there's gotta be, I hope that this, something happens. It would be like of note, right? Cause you're, you're only human. And so the question I would ask is if you look at the people that started from year one, trophy cascades, trophy cascades, would they have had it in them? Would they have had it in them to publish a piece that said, turns out there isn't one. A lot of scientists do that. And that's just a matter of being a good scientist. Because you're right. Every single scientist has bias, has things that they, they would love if, if the results were this, cause that would be, that would be great. Especially if it's going to make big news. I mean, that's, yeah, that's how people get tenure and that's how they get promotions in the university setting is to make a lot of big splashes in the news. And that's what drives a lot of people in academia, unfortunately, but everybody has a bias, but a good scientist curbs that and packs it away and just lets the, the results speak for themselves. Yeah. And in scientific papers, a lot of times you'll see here's our study area, here's our methods, here's our results. And then when you get to the last discussion section, there's some leeway to discuss what you think the results mean. So the results are the results, but the discussion section, there's a lot of leeway for researchers to weave their personal biases in and interpret the results for you, how they see it. That's what you have to be careful of is these, and that's where people peel quotes out of the discussion section that are just speculation and attribute it to that peer review. You'd scientific paper, but it's not something they researched. It's not something in the results, not something they found. It's something they think, which is not really science. Let's jump to have Alina's. This, this is something that some people might be like, why are they, why does this matter? But it matters. Exactly. It matters to me. Everyone knows like you have the Boone and Crockett record books. Okay. Um, how, how was it an oversight? How was it? You, you couldn't shoot, like you couldn't get a record book. Have Alina. Yeah. I found this out the hard way many years ago. I got, um, a big have Alina. Okay. I shot a big have Alina and people were pointing out like, damn, that's a huge have Alina. That's a huge have Alina. And I go and look and I had no idea. I had no idea. I'd never entered anything before, but I go and look, I'm like, what is not in here. But then I found, like safari club had it and it was like, and admit the hit though, whatever the minimums for safari club, but I was like, how could, how could this noble little, uh, this, this noble little desert creature not be in the Boone and Crockett record books. Good question. Arizona has had a Arizona record books since 1971. It's had have Alina in there, but I thought the same thing probably 20 years ago. And I was good friends with Buck Buckner, who is the, uh, the vice president for North American records for Boone and Crockett at the time. And, and I asked him, why is, why is have Alina not in there? And he just said, I, you know, I don't know. There's no one's kind of made a run for it. No one's made a, um, a proposal for it. And I started a file and I had a file, have Alina Boone and Crockett early in my career that I'm going to do. This is going to be my project. I'm going to get, I'm going to get them in Boone and Crockett and then had a family and got busy. And the file folder went farther and farther back into my file. What was in the, okay. What was the, what were you putting in your folder? Some of the Arizona or like the Arizona records that we've got a big data set of Arizona records, like the help inform what the minimum might be. Um, and then, and then copies of what the Boone and Crockett needs in order to establish a new category and those sorts of things. So I've just starting to have a file and think about that. And then I, and then I just, it just got away from me. I never got back to it. And then Nicole Tappman from New Mexico called me just a couple of years ago. And she said, would you write a letter of support from your agency? That was one thing that was required to get them a new category because she said, I'd like to see if we can get Boone and Crockett, to accept Havilina and she's on the records committee and I'm on the records committee now too. And I said, write a letter. I said, I will clear my calendar next week. Let's do this. Let's. And so we got, um, two people from Texas, two people from Mexico, Nicole's from New Mexico and me from Arizona. And we put together a proposal that talked about how these populations are scientifically managed by these state agencies. Um, they have a long history of records in some states, um, how popular they were. We've got 58, 300,000 Havilina hunters every year in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas harvesting 33,000 Havilina. This is a significant big game animal. I mean, some, some people in Boone to Crockett initially said, is that even a big game animal? Yeah, it's a big game. It's a big game animal. It's got hooves. What other hooved big game animal do you mount with this mouth open is big, ferocious roar. I mean, they're cool. They're cool animals and they're really popular in the Southwest. They're really popular for non-residents to come down. So we put together this, this really robust proposal. You can call them in. I mean, I could name stuff. I could name reasons all day long. Why it's a big name. They're they're cool. And, and they're, they're not invasive like feral hogs. They have two young a year, um, once a year, not like feral hogs, or they have a litter of 10 twice a year, or they'll have a litter of eight and only 10 survive. That's a joke among the feral hog people. Um, so we went to the proposal and we went to a records book committee meeting. And we said, here's, you know, we were talking about biases earlier. I'm biased for heavily. Well, yeah, but did you have, cause you got a couple of hogs that you thought should be in there? No, actually no. That's you didn't have a toe. You wanted to enlist 30 years of hunting, have Alina and all the skulls I've measured that I cleaned. I don't have any that make the book. So I don't have that. I got a book or I need to go dig that sucker out. Yeah, you should. And actually this year entering in the Boone to Crockett is free. There's been a benefactor that will cover all entry fees for all species until the end of December. So, if you've got a head lane around that you haven't got into the, the books, this is the year to do it. Cause it's free for you. It's just, you're not in there. No. So you're just doing this out of the goodness of your heart. Love have Alina. And I think, especially in Mexico, our Mexican colleagues have are really have more at stake or of giving the have Alina a little more respect as a big game animal. I think that's a big thing. Sometimes they're not given that kind of respect. No, I even hear man, like people, I like, you know, people, people that I count as friends, man, I'll hear people really denigrate. I'm right. And like, you know, talk about all the, you know, whatever we shot a couple and left them laying or something. I hate that kind of stuff, man. Yep. So we went to the records committee and we said, this was before we did that proposal. And we said, we, we argued our case, why have lean ought to be part. And some people are like, Hmm, then we got to add alligators and now we got to add, but there's reasons why some of these other species aren't ready to make the book. And so we said, what's the logic there? Like there's some other animals that aren't in the book that are still harvested. That was what they were thinking. Like, what about you were setting up that you were setting up a, you were setting up a set of parameters that other things would be that would other things would reach. Nope. Just have Elena, just focus on have Elena. But some people in Boone to Crockett said, well, if we do have Elena, then we're going to get pressured to do all these other animals. It's going to cascade, but it's not, there's, there's not any other animals that are right for inclusion. It'd be a trophy cascade. Did you get that joke? That is a good one. That was a good one. So we, we asked the records committee, we're not asking you to decide now, but let us come back with a proposal. We came back with a proposal. They were pretty impressed. The proposal was pretty extensive and covered everything. And, and they had some board meetings. They talked about it. They agreed to include it, but they didn't have the minimum entry yet, but we have over, we have hundreds of have Elena skulls that have been measured in the state record books and SCI to use as a baseline. For what should the minimum be? And so we use those, those records, Roy grace from Pope and young club did a whole bunch of legwork on analyzing the, that those data. And then Boone Crockett club then made the decision, what the minimum would be in the minimum for Boone Crockett for, and then Pope and young followed suit right after that, because there's a close relationship between two clubs. So Pope and young accepted them, which is great because they're perfect for, for archery. And so Pope and young then decided they, they approved them, decided, decided on a minimum Pope and young. Minimum is 13 and 14 sixteenths. And then Boone Crockett minimum is 14 and five 16. And it's length and width. It's simply just like bears and lions. It's length and width. No kind of toss or anything. Nope. They want to make it simple on measures. I already know how to do that measurement. They have the equipment minimum for Boone Crockett. Yeah. You'll have to remember that and go back and measure it. I'm going to measure tonight. So they're going home to Crockett is, 14 and five sixteenths, man. Fourteen, five, sixteen. I wish my wife was more handy at that kind of thing. I mean, she just would. If I called her right now and told her, go measure it. Go measure that, yeah. But it's not going to go over great. She's going to tell me a bunch of stuff she's doing. But they have to use what's called a boss square that they use, I think, for musk ox, I think. But it's a square. It's a steel square because the back of the javelina skull has a Y. Yeah. So you can't, it's not measured in the bottom of that Y. It's measured absolute total length. So you have to have something square across the back and square across the front. And then the width is just the zygomatic arches here. All right. Yeah. So I'm pretty excited that that now gets the respect that it's always deserved. That's great. I was going to ask you about status of black-tailed deer and mule deer, but let me ask you about status of javelinas. Yeah. You don't really hear about this ever. No, you don't. It's just like, are javelinas just sort of always there at the same time? You never hear about. That it's a great year, it's a bad year, ups and downs. Are they just sort of like just. They are very stable overall. And part of it is they're so adapted to their desert. They're eating a lot of prickly pear, which not like forbs are coming and going and wet year and dry year. I see. Prickly pear is always there. They eat a lot of root tubers. Yeah. So some of those plants are more abundant with rainfall, but they're still there. They're pretty drought resistant little critters. Very, very drought resistant. Just kind of chug along. They do a pretty good job of chugging along and not having these. Violent swings up and down. Yeah. Got it. Born in the foothills of Tennessee. Mountain Dew was made for a damn good time outdoors. From hanging out around the bonfire to just hopping into your friend's truck and cruising the woods. Get out there and enjoy the outdoors of Mountain Dew, an American original. Tasting great since 48. Warning. This product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an. Addictive chemical. 20,000 hours working alongside American farmers growing and barn curing leafy greens to mimic the taste and texture of real dip without the tobacco. Leaf or stem. That's a commitment. They started this thing in 2015 right here in America, and they got it right in wintergreen, mint and straight. Chances are it's already on a shelf near you or head to blackbuffalo.com. And use code meat for 30% off your first order. It's everything you love about dip. Nothing you don't. A thing we do in our in our little fleet of vehicles that have in my household. If you go look, open the door on any one of them. They all got weather tech. We get a car. We throw the mats out and put in weather tech. That way, when there's a mess, it's like your kids. It's fault. Your dog's fault. It's the weather's fault. Doesn't matter. And check this out. American made floor liners and cargo liner. OK, they laugh in the face of all weather. Go take a look for yourself today at weather tech dot com. So with that, let's talk about black tail here and mule deer. Is there a reason to be? Let's let's start with mule deer. Is there any reason to be not pessimistic about the future of mule deer? Yeah, absolutely. I'm I'm not pessimistic at all. Really? Yeah. Tell me more. I feel like it's like always bad. Well, I hope you feel better by the time you leave. Then it is always bad news. And some of the bad news comes from just a desire to advocate for mule deer, which I'm 100% on board with. There's a lot of stresses affecting mule deer in the West, but mule deer. I chair a mule deer working group, which is for the last 20 years, I've been the chairman of this group that's sponsored by the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. It's 24 Western wildlife agencies in Western North America, provinces and states. And we have one mule deer or black tail deer expert from each of those 24 jurisdictions. And that's the mule deer working group committee. So it's the West leading mule deer experts. And every year we put together for the 11th year now this year, status of mule deer and black tail deer in North America. And you can't just write one paragraph about how mule deer and black tail deer are doing because they're doing differently all over and for different reasons. And so we take a page or two for each jurisdiction. So you can read about Saskatchewan, you can read about Arizona, you can read about Montana, written by the mule deer expert in that state. And then we do some summary stuff at the beginning of that. And that gives you a snapshot of how deer populations are doing. And half of the mule deer populations are stable or increasing right now. Some of the Rocky Mountain states had a bad winter of 2023 and then they're recovering from that. Southwestern states, New Mexico, Arizona are suffering from multi-year drought. But we had we had to decline in the 1990s, several declines in mule deer through time. And the latest one was in 1990. And that's when the mule deer working group was established. You mean decline, holistic decline? West wide decline. OK, yeah. And that's happened a couple of times. And when you when you look at it in retrospect, when it happened in the 90s, we were like, what's happening to mule deer? Something is affecting mule deer everywhere. That's what it seemed like because it seemed to be declining everywhere. When you look back now at the history, it's obvious that when you have really wet years in the desert southwest, that means a lot of rain, a lot of forbs in the winter, really nutritious and deer do really well. Reproduction rates go up. But that same wet winter in the Rocky. Mountains might be heavy snowpack and a harsh winter in the Rocky Mountains. So the same kind of a wet year can make deer population in the Rocky Mountains states decline and increase in the southwest. That's interesting that that same weather pattern can do something different. There's good one place and bad another place. So you have these different things happening in different regions of their range all the time. And then periodically, every couple of decades, they synchronize just by chance. Really, they synchronize where you might have a harsh winter. And you've also have a drought in the southwest and deer population decline. And so looking back, it looks like just once in a while, all those regional differences synchronize and everybody says, oh, my God, there's a there's a deer decline in the west. And that happened in the 90s. And then populations recovered from that decline. And probably no state or province would say not many of them would say they have all the mule deer they want. They're all below population objective. But there's no west wide mule deer decline like you see. Some people talking about right now, like it's going down Arizona after the 1990s declined because the drought had 15 years of steady growth, population growth up. And it's just the last six years or so drought that has caused that to hook down. What what made what made the mule deer glory days? Yeah. Good question. That was whether you call that that was like the late 60s, late 70s, whatever. Sometime a long time ago was the mule deer glory days. Yeah. Was that that everything aligned and lifted instead of everything aligned and declined? There was a lot of other things going on at the time. You know, our deer population, like everything else, 1800s or early 1920s declined just because overexploitation and no management. Then from the 20s to 60s, west wide deer population generally increased. And during that period, we had now restrictions on harvest, not killing does in some places or limiting the killing of does limiting the harvest. We had 1080 predator poison and predator. Predator control everywhere, dropping poison baits everywhere, reduce the predation pressure. We had some wet years in there, all that. And then there was a lot of logging going on. So we're removing the overstory. Shrubs are coming up. Forbes are growing great for mule deer. So all of that stuff combined was happening from the 20s or 30s and then into the 50s and early 60s. So 50s and 60s was like the heyday of mule deer. We had a lot of mule deer, but that was the result. Of conditions and activities that we will never repeat. We can't go back and do that. We're not going to do that wholesale logging. We're not going to drop 1080 baits, one every square mile across the west. We're not going to do those things. So looking at mule deer populations in the 50s and 60s is not the benchmark to compare today's mule deer. That was an unusual bubble because of all those things happening. And then in the 70s, we had a mule deer decline coming off of that bubble. And we even had there was a symposium in Utah in 1970. 1976 that was about Mueller decline in the West and it was a whole symposium concerned about this decline in the 70s then we got rainfall generally in the 80s was was a pretty lush year and deer populations throughout the west increased in the 80s and then if you remember late 80s 1988 is when yellowstone burned there was barges running aground in the mississippi river because it was so low we had a really really bad drought throughout a lot of the west that precipitated this late 80s 1990s decline that that initiated the mule deer working group at that time and so we've gone through these swings for different reasons and we've we've recovered a lot from that 1990s decline and now more than half of the the jurisdictions are are stable or increasing some of them are certainly declining all of them below objective but all below objective i'd say all of them i don't know if you'd find many mule deer biologists that say we don't want any more mule deer we've got enough you know the habitat's full you know we're still we still need deer herds almost everywhere even though i think colorado half of the the units i read from from that biologist um are at population objective so there's there's places where they are but but we're we're not in dire straits there's no west wide mule deer decline um right now we're we're chugging along in weather conditions whether it's drought or harsh winters is causing these annual fluctuations against a backdrop of long-term habitat change you know the west looks a little bit different now than it did in 1950 as far as urban development urban sprawl communities roads all that stuff we're not going back to the 1950s so we should not be saying well deer populations are such and such lower than the 1950s i understand it's not fair it's not fair um to do that but i'm i'm as long as we keep working on on preserving migration corridors improving habitat on a large scale and we're not going to large scales i i think the the future of mule deer is is is bright we're going to keep chugging along with good mule deer herds if we keep paying attention and doing everything we can if if every area is below objective what do you think of uh what do you think if someone says and and before i say this i'll recognize you're arguing for like a nuanced approach where you have 24 different regions and every region has its own story and various factors but let's say i come to you and say generally should it be that we're not killing female mule deer anymore we shouldn't be killing doe mule deer and see that's on a unit by unit basis there's some areas like like if half of the units in colorado are at population objective then that's the case where you you need to maintain that population at that in that population objective range so i would not i would not outlaw doe hunting throughout the west in arizona when populations got really low then then doe hunts were removed and so it and you see in units even within a single state certain units will have doe harvest and other units won't and that's the biologist doing what they do and managing those populations based on where they are in relation to objectives and where where they need to be got it so i wouldn't broad brush and say we shouldn't be killing females it depends on the area uh what about black tail deer black tail deer are harder to survey they're doing they're doing pellet counts historically they yeah they do um they're looking for genetics yeah right and they'll use dogs they'll use sniffing dogs to find pellets and they'll record all that they collect in alaska they've done a lot of pellet collecting where they they do genetics and they look at how many individual minimum number of individual deer they have per square mile based on genetic fingerprints got it so they're hard to they're hard to uh um to monitor they're very susceptible especially southeast alaska very susceptible to heavy snow winters you get those islands prince of whale all those islands you get a heavy heavy snow winter and you can lose 50 60 percent of the black population but then in the years after that they come roaring back once it once the population's down there's a lot of food for the remaining animals those populations bounce right back so they they they dip and they grow based on mostly on weather conditions but then again i said weather conditions in the forefront in the background is long-term habitat changes and one of the things in in sitka blacktail range is the the logging that was done in the past that has now all grown up into second growth really thick not very easily marketed for anything commercially so we've got it's called stem exclusion or stand exclusion where the sunlight's not reaching the ground to make forbs and shrubs that the deer eat sure it's just blocking out the light so you have all the secondary growth that needs to be cut but other than maybe cutting it and making wood pellets you know is a possibility someone needs to commercialize something to get in there and open up some of that but it doesn't mean that that the old old growth forests in southeast alaska need to be logged the old growth forest is really important for the same reason those big old trees they they stop the snowfall and in heavy snowfall events the deer have that have to have that mature old growth forest to go in and move around and feed a little bit until the snow melts enough that they can go back out into the clear cuts and some of the places with more food and then they can go back out into the forest so the old growth forest is really important and then that stem exclusion is keeping that habitat from having more food than it could have if it was if it was managed better so that stuff's going on in the background of you know these of these annual blacktail fluctuations you know those clear cuts they're they're so good for 10 years or whatever in that country they're so good for deer for 10 years and then they're so terrible for them and they're so bad for them and they're so bad for them for deer yeah when they grow 30 or 40 for 40 when there's a new one you're like oh it's cool now but man then it's just gonna suck yeah and and even if they leave if they go in and leave a lot of slash and and horizontal logs it becomes an issue of deer not being able to move around as well either in some of those clear cuts yeah it's just total obstacle course yeah um so chairmanship of the western association of fish and wildlife agencies mule deer working group yeah how long you been doing that 28 years i was one of the original i'm the only remaining original member that was approved by the western directors in 1997 our first meeting was in 98 in jackson wyoming about eight years later the chairman retired and passed the torch to me so i've been chairman for 20 years and if you go on to see what we've been up to for 20 years or 28 years uh we've got a website mule deer working group.com it's just all one word mule deer working group and you see a lot of publications on there and what we put out there is a lot of publications on there and what we put out there is like we established we established seven ecoregions in north america that were related to mule deer management and mule deer ecology and we we produce habitat guidelines for each one of those seven ecoregions so a practitioner on the ground a blm biologist in the southwest deserts can pull out the southwest deserts habitat guidelines and read about what deer need to thrive in the southwest deserts or the coastal rainforests we've done that we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce the northwest deserts habitat guidelines and the northwest deserts habitat guidelines we produce the northwest deserts habitat guidelines and we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce other documents about disease concerns translocating wildlife we produce other documents Well, your director says that you're going to do things that are consistent with what mule deer need and black-tailed deer need. And we're revamping that now. But we've got a guidance document on if you're monitoring mule deer populations, here's some of the metrics you should monitor. And here's some advantages and disadvantages of monitoring them different ways, kind of for biologists. We did something on movements and migration barriers to a movement. And that website has all of these documents as a PDF. And a lot of the mule deer working group members then contributed to our latest mule deer book, that big one that you have, the black one that you have. There's 82 chapters in each, 82 co-authors, 23 chapters. And each chapter is written by the national expert for that particular topic with a team of writers. It's all the latest mule deer and black-tailed deer information. And the mule deer working group had us and a lot of our friends. That are working on mule deer work on that book. Yeah, if you want to be the guy in your circle that knows the most about mule deer or black-tailed, you should get that book and memorize it. It's got to beat everybody. It's comprehensive, for sure. So this is a funny one. You recently went to New Zealand to speak about cervid conservation. But there, I mean, I feel like they spend more energy trying to get rid of wildlife. Absolutely. They spend more energy trying to get rid of, not wildlife, but more energy trying to get rid of hooved animals. There's no one talks in New Zealand about conservation of hooved animals. I know, it's like gloves off, as it should be. Yeah, like they helicopter gun them, you know what I mean? It's like they're not trying to make robust populations for hunters to be able to go out and do. This meeting, it happens every four years somewhere around the world. So it's been in China, been in Peru, in the Czech Republic. I helped organize the one in 2018. That's this part of Colorado. We had it in the U.S. And this year, it rotated. It was in Croatia four years ago, in New Zealand this time. And I got to go to the Colorado one because I helped organize it, and it was in a neighboring state. they're the my department's not going to send me to china and to peru and so i didn't think i was going to be able to go to the new zealand one and they asked me it's called the international deer biology congress and they asked me to be a keynote speaker with with the expenses paid so i was able to finally get to an international version of that and i went there and i talked about how we manage deer and elk all cervids in north america amid the mosaic of blm land forest land private land national park service land and you have biologists for all those different agencies and and around that and then you have funding all these different funding sources for conservation and among this mess that we have in north america we somehow have this beautiful well-functioning system that works um really really well so that was my keynote address um in in new zealand at that at that talk but it was interesting because that conference sponsored by the new zealanders um that conference the the title the theme of that conference was your deer here and it was about new zealand didn't have any deer it was all of our deer that were in new zealand it just said our deer your deer here and um and so there was talks about trying to rally they're they're poisoning brush-tailed possums they're poisoning white tails in some areas with um poison are they trying to control them yeah it's um it's like when you go there you don't need you don't need a hunting license on on public land it's just poisoning white tails they're poisoning which makes me feel kind of strange but they're talking about endangered plants and trying to save what eco what native ecosystem they had they had they had three those reports between one and three mammals that were native to new zealand and they were bats yeah and there was one bat that was there and there was another i think the other ones were fossils of bat species so they had no mammals basically no predators at all and they had they had nine different species of moa these nine foot the largest one with nine foot flightless birds running around the island polynesians got there i think 800 years ago and it only took them about 100 years ago 100 years to wipe out all of the the moas on the island and the only thing big you imagine you're on an island and you've got nine foot chickens running around i mean they they use them they ate it that had to have been egg harvest too man yeah oh i bet yeah because that's like tough to do so there was eight or nine different species of cervids that were brought to new zealand from different places in the world and they still have most of them there's i was surprised to hear at the meeting they brought moose um a hundred years ago teddy roosevelt was involved in some of the training locations they brought moose and i was surprised to hear some people talking about maybe there being a couple moose still i've heard that there's rumors of that it seems kind of like bigfoot their version of bigfoot is what it seems like there's never any proof um but there's there's reports well like it's got to be and i hunted there you know and the sense i got from the the guys in that community is uh the same when i get when i'm hanging out with hawaiians is uh they've built the whole culture and lifestyle around big game hunting yeah right and so a lot of the people it's it's funny because you get this idea here that um you know you get this idea here that that you know like like whatever the tree huggers want to save the deer you know or something but it just seems like the tree huggers want them the tree huggers want the deer dead dude we have a we have a representative on the mule deer working group from hawaii and that's because in 1961 they brought some colombian blacktail from oregon and put them on kauai the island of kauai and they're still there and they're hunted and the locals that like the deer hunt like them so they're not eradicating them but like the we had a meeting in hawaii once and i asked the hawaiian representative for the mule deer working group i said do you finally get to go to a meeting because we're here in hawaii and he said no i've got an endangered plant meeting i got to be at he said honestly we're we're not looking to conserve and increase our deer he said like like there's 50 different species in their diet and almost all of them are endangered plant species so we don't want more we don't want more it's an interesting different perspective one of the conversations that sticks me most wasn't new zealand but it was in hawaii was around the same issue is i was talking to a native hawaiian okay um like an ancestral hawaiian or like an ethnic i don't know what you call it like a hawaiian not a guy that lives in hawaii but a native hawaiian and you know historically the idea is that when the polynesians when the polynesians arrived in hawaii sometime around 1100 years ago they brought they brought this menagerie of things with them including pigs right the pigs have been there a long time and he was sharing with me he goes how can i be native i am native but the pigs that my people brought in the got to go in the same canoe they got to go but i'm native wow and his take was he didn't want his take was he didn't need outsiders you know he didn't need howlies coming and telling him what animals belong on the island yeah that's such an important part of their culture it's not just like an animal whether it needs to be there or not it's part of the culture yeah part of them it was just so offensive to him yeah yeah this conversation that like oh no no you're native mad respect but your pigs no yeah gotta go get them out of here yep um did you hunt new zealand that's my last question yeah i have uh yeah i have a friend pete caldwell i met a few years prior to that and he said he knew about the new zealand deer meeting he said if you get to that meeting he said let's go out and do something fun and um so the meeting was over and my son levi and i and and pete took us out along with another guy pa uh ellen from uh sweden big swedish guy we went out and and um we did a little blitzkrieg about two days of of hunting staying out there staying in one of the old hunting shacks that was um more than 100 years old probably and we shot red deer and we shot tar we shot brush-tailed possum shot i got a european hair european rabbit which excites jack rabbit jim be able to get some european european hairs um almost got a feral house cat but i couldn't couldn't get my sights fast enough david pete was with me and he's like he's like come here come here come here get in position get in position and like what what what is it what's over there it's a cat hurry up he was like really excited about getting a cat on it slunk away yeah it's like a way before i could that would have been interesting grip and grin oh a sun shot of wallaby wallabies are hated i mean they're yeah yeah they're cute my wife says you're not shooting a wallaby and i didn't but um levi didn't have yeah but they're on the extermination list oh yeah big time big time there the browse line when we were up in those mountains the browse line was just tremendous like everything gone from from three and a half feet down just like dirt everything eaten with tars up there and and the wallabies pete didn't even want us shooting at a wallaby because he was afraid we'd miss he wanted to make sure that that thing hit the ground oh really it was in a new area that it was a really nice area and they're starting to pioneer into that area and so like every pioneer needs to go he was adamant about it kidding me yeah well i had fun there man hunting there but the reason i couldn't get into it for like i couldn't get into like to consider going back or anything is that the the non-native aspect of it yeah that it's not it's it's not like a heritage thing yeah it's like a giant they came in on a boat there's not like a human hunting heritage there it was just it was it was hunting without hunting without cultural history hunting without conservation wildlife history and it just like i had fun but there was just something gone and another thing that really struck me is the the the the the no predators on the landscape yeah right there was something about it now i don't want to hack like like you know i mean this isn't meant to disparage dudes in new zealand just an observation from a guy far away that doesn't matter but i just there's certain things that were missing that i didn't know meant so much to me yeah and sheep raising is such a huge part of new zealand culture sheep raising so you can imagine how interested they are bringing a complement of predators over to control yeah that's not going to happen whenever i'm in hawaii i always think like some parts of hawaii the dry side like kona you know i'm always like dude if you turn the rattlesnake out here he'd love it not that i would do that but you know you think about like there's certain predators who just love new zealand yep but it's not going to happen well jim heffelfinger thanks for joining man i enjoyed it always enjoy coming back appreciate all your work on behalf of um american wildlife and then also just the effort you take as a as a as a scientist the effort you take as a as a scientist the effort you take to come and talk to just joe blow outdoor people joe blow hunters and anglers and and try to help them ask the right questions understand what they're reading um i think that see through the noise and follow wildlife and be like a concerned be a concerned resource user yeah i've written a lot of magazine articles and i've i i enjoy and i think i've honed the skill of taking complex scientific stuff and just explaining it so that i can be a resource user yeah i've written a lot of that anybody can understand it um and i think that's valuable so i'm driven by the desire to provide reliable unbiased information and let people just learn from that no well Until next time, thank you. Yeah, thanks. A thing we do in our little fleet of vehicles that I have in my household, if you go look, open the door on any one of them, they all got WeatherTech. We get a car, we throw the mats out and put in WeatherTech because that way when there's a mess, it's like your kid's fault, your dog's fault, it's the weather's fault, it doesn't matter. I'm telling you, if you got a vehicle, put WeatherTech in there. And check this out, American-made floor liners and cargo liners. Go take a look for yourself today. at WeatherTech.com There are a few days every year when big bucks are most likely to get gotten. And knowing that exact time stacks the odds in your favor when you're targeting a big buck. OnX Hunts, Whitetail Insights, tells you what phase of the rut you're in and what tactics actually work for that phase. While the Deer Movement Forecast tells you when deer are most likely to be on their feet. Together, they tell you when to be in the tree, and when to go to your kid's game instead. Get the most out of every sit with OnX Hunt. Listen, we're all trying to save up for something. I got buddies saving up to buy their new house. I got people eyeing a new boat. I know buddies that are trying to switch out trucks and get an upgrade in their truck. Whatever. People are always saving up for stuff. In reality, though, we see that it can be hard to actually save money. But that's what's great about the OnePay app. It makes saving money easy. First, you earn 3%. Cash back on up to $150 in monthly spending. You choose categories, okay? Like Walmart, gas, or dining. And then get rewarded when you spend in those categories. So, you're rewarded for what you're already buying. And with high-yield savings, your money keeps growing. Download the OnePay app or visit OnePay.com for banking. That gives you more for what matters. Cash back is earned as points. Go to OnePay.com forward slash rewards dash terms for redemption options and additional details. Guaranteed human.