Dear editor:

I recently read the article titled "Migrating wildlife need lots of space between houses, research shows," (they sometimes require a mile or more) by Christine Peterson from High Country News. The article states, “One study outlined how mule deer hurried through rural housing developments, not stopping for much-needed breaks to rest and eat, while another showed how migrating mule deer avoid densely packed houses.”

Mule deer come straight to my house. They love the plants I water and they bed down. They come regularly. There are no other houses within a mile to bother them, yet they prefer my house to the surrounding range.

Also, the mule deer living in the City of Cody have no problem with densely packed houses. 

I think of mule deer as opportunistic animals. I have never noticed them bothered by houses, people, cows, horses or dogs. Apparently, I’m wrong because, “Without the science, we’re not going to get anywhere.”

Farther down Christine Peterson writes, “Both she and Randall acknowledged that not all landowners in the West, a place where many people consider property rights sacred, will follow the guidance.” (She is Bettina Cameron, president and co-founder of Eagle Mountain Nature and Wildlife Alliance. Randall is Jill Randall, Wyoming Game and Fish Department’s big game migration coordinator). 

Wolf and grizzly populations are increasing as the big game populations decrease, all due to Game and Fish policies. I rarely saw elk in the fields when I was a kid in the 60-70s. I never saw elk circling and acting scared. Now, I hear the number of wolf tags is being reduced, also Game and Fish policy (Get rid of hunting?).

Why didn’t the article suggest dismantling towns and cities? It only pointed out the “property rights” people should be affected by this new science (for now).

Margaret Lohman

Cody