Pot Growers Killing Rare Fishers on Public Lands (Study)

Study shows that illicit rodenticide use poisoning elusive carnivore on public and community lands

WCS and partners identify potential conservation threat

BOZEMAN (July 13, 2012) –A new study from the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), the Integral Ecology Research Center, the University of California Davis and other partners shows that imperiled fisher populations are being poisoned by the use of anticoagulant rodenticides (AR) on public and community forest lands in California–likely those used illegally by marijuana growers.

The researchers looked at two distinct fisher populations: one occurring on tribal, private, and public lands in northwestern California and another within the Sierra National Forest in central California. Results of necropsies showed that of 58 fishers tested, 46 of the animals (79 percent) were exposed to one or more of the toxic ARs, and four had died directly from AR toxicity.

Fishers are likely exposed to AR when eating animals that have ingested it prior. They may also be drawn to it by bacon, cheese and peanut butter “flavorizers” that manufacturers add to attract rodents. Distribution of the poisoned fishers indicated widespread contamination of fisher range in California.

Members of the weasel family, fishers were once widely distributed throughout North America’s west coast but have incurred significant population decline and extirpation from portions of their former range. Populations inhabiting Washington, Oregon, and California have been designated a Distinct Population Segment (DPS) and declared a candidate for listing under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Study co-author and WCS Scientist Sean Matthews said, “Fishers play a vital role in the forests of the Sierra Nevada mountains and the Pacific northwest. With a body the size of a house cat and the disposition of their larger cousin, the wolverine, fishers keep forest rodent populations in check and are one of the only predators with the tenacity to regularly prey on porcupines. As fisher populations declined, they took refuge in the last remaining portions of mature forest in the Sierra Nevada and coastal mountains. Now a new threat has emerged in these remaining refuges.”

According to the authors, it is unlikely the fishers were exposed to AR used legally at or near agricultural or residential areas as these settings are not suitable habitat. Nor did animals tracked by telemetry collars during the study venture into those environments. Instead, the exposure points were likely encountered where AR is used illicitly as part of illegal marijuana cultivation in remote areas that overlap with fisher habitat. The study cites multiple examples of confiscation of marijuana plants and discovery of associated AR use in the region and notes that in 2008 alone, more than 3.6 million marijuana plants were removed from federal and state public lands in California, including state and national parks.

Sub-lethal effects that may also contribute to premature fisher death were discussed and include the compromise of the animal’s blood clotting and recovery abilities, decrease of its resilience to environmental stressors, and abandonment of dependent young due to direct mortality of adults killed by AR. During the study, the first documentation of a neonatal milk transfer of AR in fishers was recorded as a deceased six-week old kit was tested and found to have AR in its system. (Kits are dependent on mother’s milk until ten weeks of age.)

Matthews said, “The findings in this paper could signal a looming conservation threat for other species as well as fishers. As we discuss in the study, depletion of rodent prey populations upon which fishers and other animals feed, along with the anticoagulant poisoning threat might affect the Sierra Nevada red fox, wolverine, California spotted owls and other rare carnivores that inhabit the region.”

In their conclusion, the authors consider heightened awareness in removing AR when marijuana grow sites are dismantled and further regulation restricting the use of AR to only pest management professionals.

Study: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0040163
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zws1dXNwRkI&feature=youtu.be

The study, Anticoagulant Rodenticides on our Public and Community Lands: Spatial Distribution of Exposure and Poisoning of a Rare Forest Carnivore, appears in the July 13, 2012 edition of the online journal PLoS ONE.

Co-authors of the study include: Sean M. Matthews of the Wildlife Conservation Society; Mourad W. Gabriel of the Integral Ecology Research Center and the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory at the University of California, Davis (UC-Davis); Greta Wengert of Integral Ecology Research Center; Benjamin N. Sacks of Veterinary Genetics Laboratory at UC-Davis; Leslie W. Woods and Robert Poppenga of the California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory System at UC-Davis; Rick A. Sweitzer and Reginald H. Barrett of the Sierra Nevada Adaptive Management Project at the University of California at Berkeley (UC-Berkeley); Craig Thompson and Kathryn Purcell of the Pacific Southwest Research Station—Sierra Nevada Research Center, United States Forest Service; J. Mark Higley of the Wildlife Department, Hoopa Tribal Forestry; Stefan M. Keller of the Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology at UC-Davis; and Deanna L. Clifford of the Wildlife Investigations Laboratory of the California Department of Fish and Game.

5 thoughts on “Pot Growers Killing Rare Fishers on Public Lands (Study)”

    • “The ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by Earthjustice on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity.”

      Soooo, is the CBD now “outsourcing” their legal issues? Or, is this a new way of “spreading the wealth”??

      Reply
      • Looks a little fisher, don’t it? Maybe CBD made some kind of technical agreement not to do this type of filling, and then hired Earthjustice as a surrogate? I’m sure there’s a logical explanation somewhere. That CBD! Dedicated to keeping their own lawyers busy by putting honest people out of work — at least that’s what their track record seems to indicate.

        Reply
        • Here we go again….

          “I’m sure there’s a logical explanation somewhere”….

          But instead of doing a little work to find that “logical explanation” (Hmm…A phone call to CBD (520) 623.5252) a few people on this blog will continue to just post wild speculation, unsupported allegations of misconduct and unsubstantiated rumors.

          Reply
  1. Fuels projects in the Sierra Nevada keep a general amount of canopy cover to accommodate fishers. It is a self-imposed protection, just like their voluntary owl measures that have been in place for a full twenty years now. Those fisher protections might also be close to twenty years, as well. Still some groups continue to look for new places to move their goalposts to. If truly destructive clearcutting and highgrading didn’t kill off all those species in the last millennium, what makes people think that today’s modern logging practices and projects will “endanger” these species?

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Matthew Koehler Cancel reply