1. Legal and Ecological Implications of the Bobcat Trapping Ban: Impacts Upon Numerous State and Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species

2. Introduction Bobcats fulfill a valuable role in the ecosystem. But bobcats significantly influence numerous species of fauna. Consideration of a trapping ban did not consider ripple effects upon other species – especially threatened, endangered and special status species of concern. California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 2

3. Fish and Game Commission Decision-Making Commission Mandate “State Law requires the Commission to consider credible science over opinions or conjecture. Fish and Game Code Sec. 703.3 states, ‘It is the policy of the state that the department and commission use ecosystem-based management informed by credible science in all resource management decisions to the extent feasible.’ ” California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 3

4. CA Endangered Species Act Mandates Upon The FGC 2053. The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that state agencies should not approve projects as proposed which would jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species..... if there are reasonable and prudent alternatives available consistent with conserving the species... which would prevent jeopardy. 2055. The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that all state agencies, boards, and commissions shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species and shall utilize their authority in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter. 2061. "Conserve," "conserving," and "conservation" mean to use, and the use of, all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this chapter are no longer necessary. California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 4

5. Species of Concern California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 5

6. Pacific Fisher Ecological Implications 70-90% of fisher mortality is from predation. 1 60% killed by bobcats …twice as many as by all other predators. 2, 3 1. CDFW, Fisher Status Review Report, May 12, 2015 2. Wengert, G. Trends in Fisher Predation in California. 2011 3. Spencer, W., et al. Southern Sierra Nevada fisher conservation assessment. 2015 Bobcat leaving fisher den hole in tree Predation is the largest cause of fisher mortality, and bobcats are the # 1 source of fisher predation. 1,2 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 6

7. Pacific Fisher Ecological Implications, cont’d Bobcats prey predominantly on female fishers. “Mostly female fishers killed by bobcats.” 1, 2 “Killing females results in death of 2-4 kits.” 3 Bobcat, dead female fisher 1. Wengert, G. Trends in Fisher Predation in California. 2011. 2. Wengert, G. Ecology of intraguild predation on fishers (Martes pennanti) in California. 2013. 3. Sweitzer, R. and Barrett, R. SNAMP Fisher Study: Sources of Mortality. 2009 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 7

8. Humboldt Marten Ecological Implications Bobcats are the # 1 predator of martens. 1 “44% of marten predation due to bobcats” in one study. 2 “All 9 marten mortalities from bobcats” in second study. 3 Bobcats killed mostly females with young. 4 “Predation of martens, primarily by bobcats…..[the] limiting factor for marten population distribution and persistence.” 5 Bobcat photographed in marten den tree  CDFW Report to FGC - Evaluation of Petition to List the Humboldt Marten as Endangered Under CESA, October 13, 2015, citing Stone, 2010.  USFWS, 2015  USFWS, 2015  Slauson et al. (2009b)  Slauson et al., 2014; Bailey, Oregon State University, 2014. California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 8

9. San Joaquin Kit Fox Ecological Implications Predators are # 1 cause of death for SJ kit fox. 1 SJ kit fox deaths “78% killed by predators”. 2 “Bobcat predation on SJ kit foxes” # 2 cause. 3 “12 kit fox skulls in one active bobcat den.” 4  Benedict, Forbes, 1973  Berry, Harris 1987  Standley, Berry, O’Farrell, Kato 1992  Benedict, Forbes 1973 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 9

10. Kangaroo Rats Ecological Implications Table 1 - Bobcat Diet 1 Food Items- Occurrence Mammals 100% Rabbits 60.0% Kangaroo Rats20.0%* Woodrats 10.0% Grasshopper Mice05.0% Pocket Mice05.0% BirdsTr.0% ___________________________________________________________ **K-Rats #2 Most Common Prey** 1. Ellis, Schemnitz, 1958 6 T&E Listed Species Fresno Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis) Giant Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys ingens) Morro Bay Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys heermanni morroensis) Stephens' Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys stephensi) Tipton Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides) San Bernardino Merriam's Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) Bobcat with kangaroo rat California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 10

11. Desert Tortoise Ecological Implications “Carnivores, especially coyotes and bobcats prey on tortoises.” 1 Even “Large tortoises may be eaten by... bobcats.” 2 1. San Diego Zoo, 2012 2. San Diego Zoo, 1982-2012 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 11

12. Endangered CA Bighorn Sheep Ecological Implications Threat to Several Races of CA Bighorn Sheep CDFW Helicopter Photos Threat to Young and Female Bighorn Sheep Bobcat Kills CA Bighorn Ewe “Bobcats threaten Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep survival.” – USDA, APHIS 2000 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 12

13. Greater Sage Grouse Ecological Implications “...documented sage-grouse predators [i.e., bobcats…]” – ZB Lockyear, et al. 2013 Predator-Attacked Sage Grouse? California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 13

14. How many more special status species which are highly-susceptible to bobcat predation, must be put at risk? California clapper rail Burrowing owl Least tern and western snowy plover Salt marsh harvest mouse California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 14

15. Trapping Implications Bobcat live cage trapping is the most effective means of mitigating this main impediment to T&E species recovery. 1 Trapping is the only viable means to control bobcat populations, accounted for 73% of all bobcat take. 2 Trapping does not harm other wildlife populations. Trapping of bobcats is selective by sex, males only taken (females and young released alive unharmed.) Annual trapping records quickly monitor bobcat population trends. CDFW’s main accepted method. 2 1. Wengert, G. Trends in Fisher Predation in California. 2011 ////// 2. Garcia J. Bobcat Harvest Assessment 2014-2015. 2015 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 15

16. Trapping Implications Three main trapping options: CDFW staff trappers – un-budgeted taxpayer $$, staff? USDA APHIS – uses taxpayer $$, scarce staff allocated PRIVATE TRAPPERS – little, if any, use of taxpayer $$, no government trapping staff needed, PLUS trappers pay license fees into state coffers, PLUS trappers are main eyes and ears in the field to report poaching to wardens reducing the number of DFW wardens needed to patrol, PLUS private trappers make biggest impact by trapping all over the state daily for an entire season. California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 16

17. Request to Commission Reinstate bobcat live-cage trapping seasons in California In light of this new, significant scientific biological information regarding major adverse bobcat predation impacts which jeopardize the continued existence of numerous threatened and endangered species and species of special concern. Trapping is the most effective tool available to CDFW and the Commission to control bobcat populations in order to protect these imperiled species and aid their recovery. California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 17

18. Works Cited Wengert, G. Trends in Fisher Predation in California. 2011. Wengert, G. Ecology of intraguild predation on fishers (Martes pennanti) in California. 2013. Sweitzer, R. and Barrett, R. SNAMP Fisher Study: Sources of Mortality. 2009 Halsey, S. Modeling predator habitat to enhance reintroduction planning. ​ 2015. Spencer, W., et al. Southern Sierra Nevada fisher conservation assessment. 2015 CDFW Status Review Report Pacific Fisher, May 12, 2015 CDFW Petition Evaluation Humboldt Marten, Oct. 13, 2015 CDFW, Garcia J. Bobcat Harvest Assessment 2014-2015. 2015 USFWS, Predation on Humboldt marten 2015 USFWS, Pacific fisher assessment, 2015 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 18

19. Works Cited, cont’d Benedict, Forbes, San Joaquin Kit Fox, 1973 Berry, Harris, San Joaquin Kit Fox, 1987 Standley, Berry, O’Farrell, Kato, San Joaquin Kit Fox, 1992 Stone, Humboldt marten predation in Oregon, 2010 Slauson, Humboldt marten predation study, 2014 Bailey, Oregon State University, Humboldt marten study, 2014 Ellis, Schemnitz, Food items in bobcat stomachs collected in OK, 1958 Lockyear, ZB et al., Sage grouse nest predators in NW Nevada, 2013 USDA APHIS, FONSI predator damage management to protect endangered Sierra Nevada bighorn, 2000 San Diego Zoo, Desert tortoise study, 2012 California Trappers Association April 14, 2016 19