BHA Wild Sheep Policy Statement

[WyoWoody]

The other thing that drives me is the incredible support that our user group has been getting from the scientific community (including experts in wildlife disease epidemiology and camelid experts). AASRP for example and their recent policy statement. It is not the hunters or hunting groups that the pack llama user group needs to convince. It's the regulators that we need to convince. We are having incredible success with that. So the only reason I am spending a very small amount of my time on this forum (relative to the amount of time I spend with the scientists and regulators) is to encourage fellow hunters to use some critical thinking skills. Also to reveal issues with the WSF BHA pack llama prohibition/restriction proposals that they may not be aware of. Sheep hunting is turning into a sport for the elite and the wealthy. That is not a good thing. Just look at history of what happened in Europe, for example. Why do you suppose that is continuing to happen here right now in the US? Where I live there is some remaining opportunity to hunt sheep with an over-the-counter tag. But I have seen a huge erosion of that opportunity over the years even though (according to ADF&G) there are fewer sheep hunters than there used to be. If you are a man of simple means are you somehow unwittingly contributing toward the trend of turning sheep hunting into a sport for the wealthy? Always remember that the sheep are a public asset. Who is it that is continually trying to gain a greater share of those assets and why? Does it have anything to do with money? If so, who is getting that money? Again, fellow hunters, BHA leadership, and WSF leadership are not who I need to convince on the pack llama disease issue. Of course I don't want disease introduced to wild sheep and I don't know of any sheep hunters that use horses that would want to either.

Exactly. I wish some truly interested people here would read the actual science and scientific research we have posted in this thread. The ASSRP position statement. The WAFWA-Wild Sheep Working Group 2016 which addresses spatial and temporal separation and taxa specie threats. And a whole lot more based on recent EIS's and management plans on this issue. I love all wildlife including wild sheep. I don't care for special interest groups who spread misinformation, knowingly or not, that harm everyone. I believe the BHA does not understand this micro issue with which they were influenced by another group of special interest to post a negative policy position on it recently.

 

[WyoWoody]

That's not exactly what I said.


Herds that have been previously exposed to Movi but have somewhat recovered can suffer a die-off if exposed to a different strain of Movi. Check out the attached peer-reviewed paper.

Also in CASSIRER
(Pg 3, last paragraph column 1 and top of column 2) “Many Mycoplasma spp. are host-specific, and the host range of M. ovipneumoniae is considered to be limited to Caprinae (Nicholas et al. 2008). Respiratory disease following infection with M. ovipneumoniae also has been reported in captive Dall’s sheep and other wild Caprinae, including mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus), and muskox (Ovibosmoschatus; Black et al. 1988, Handeland et al. 2014, Wolff et al. 2014).”

“A host-specific pathogen commonly carried by domestic sheep and goats is consistent with the high mortality observed in captive bighorn sheep when commingled with domestic sheep but not when commingled with non Caprinae livestock including cattle, horses, and llamas (Foreyt 1992,Foreyt and Lagerquist 1996, Besser et al. 2012a).

 

[Oak]

Also in CASSIRER
(Pg 3, last paragraph column 1 and top of column 2) “Many Mycoplasma spp. are host-specific, and the host range of M. ovipneumoniae is considered to be limited to Caprinae (Nicholas et al. 2008). Respiratory disease following infection with M. ovipneumoniae also has been reported in captive Dall’s sheep and other wild Caprinae, including mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus), and muskox (Ovibosmoschatus; Black et al. 1988, Handeland et al. 2014, Wolff et al. 2014).”

“A host-specific pathogen commonly carried by domestic sheep and goats is consistent with the high mortality observed in captive bighorn sheep when commingled with domestic sheep but not when commingled with non Caprinae livestock including cattle, horses, and llamas (Foreyt 1992,Foreyt and Lagerquist 1996, Besser et al. 2012a).

That paragraph is specifically about Movi, a host-specific pathogen commonly carried by domestic sheep and goats. In other words, the results of comingling studies (high mortality when comingled with DS and goats and not cattle, horses, and llamas) are consistent with a host-specific pathogen. High-mortality disease events are not the only potential concerns for wild sheep. @mtmiller post some pics of your scabby sheep.

 

[WyoWoody]

Garde, E., Kutz, S., Schwantje, H., Veitch, A., Jenkins, E., & Elkin, B. (2009). Examining the risk of
disease transmission between wild Dall's sheep and mountain goats, and introduced
domestic sheep, goats, and llamas in the northwest territories.

Byers, S. R., Snekvik, K. R., Righter, D. J., Evermann, J. F., Bradway, D. S., Parish, S. M., &
Barrington, G. M. (2009). Disseminated bovine viral diarrhea virus in a persistently
infected alpaca (vicugna pacos) cria. J Vet Diagn Invest, 21(1), 145-148.

Crossley, B. M., Mock, R. E., Callison, S. A., & Hietala, S. K. (2012). Identification and
characterization of a novel alpaca respiratory coronavirus most closely related to the
human coronavirus 229e. Viruses, 4(12), 3689-3700.

Lee, L. C., Scarratt, W. K., Buehring, G. C., & Saunders, G. K. (2012). Bovine leukemia virus
infection in a juvenile alpaca with multicentric lymphoma. The Canadian Veterinary
Journal, 53(3), 283-286.

van Amstel, S., & Kennedy, M. (2010). Bovine viral diarrhea infections in new world camelids—a
review. Small Ruminant Research, 91(2–3), 121-126.

Broughan, J. M., Downs, S. H., Crawshaw, T. R., Upton, P. A., Brewer, J., & Clifton-Hadley, R. S.
(2013). Mycobacterium bovis infections in domesticated non-bovine mammalian
species. Part 1: Review of epidemiology and laboratory submissions in Great Britain
2004-2010. Veterinary Journal, 198(2), 339-345.

I frankly don't have the bandwidth to continue to argue about whether we know everything or not about camelid diseases and their potential impacts on wild sheep populations. I contend that we don't, and I also stated earlier that any potential risk could probably be ameliorated by something as simple as a health certification program for llamas being used in occupied wild sheep habitat.

Here are some American scientists:
The American Association of Small Ruminant Practitioners (AASRP), over 1000 veterinarians strong, has issued the following policy statement on any proposed bans of camelids based upon the threat of disease to wild sheep on public land:

There exists concern that the entry of camelid pack animals (llamas, alpacas) onto public lands poses a potential risk of disease to resident endangered or threatened ungulate populations including Boreal Caribou, Northern Mountain Caribou, Central Mountain Caribou, Southern Mountain Caribou, Bighorn Sheep, Mountain Goat, Dall’s Sheep, Stone’s Sheep and Roosevelt Elk. The diseases of concern by National Parks and wildlife managers include: Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae, Mannheimia haemolytica, Mycobacterium avium paratuberculosis, Mycobacterium bovis, Pasteurella spp., contagious ecthyma, bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV), and bluetongue virus. Transmission of pathogens from cattle and sheep to wild ungulates under natural conditions has been well documented in the literature. Examples include respiratory disease and fatal pneumonia following contact between domestic and bighorn sheep (Schommer & Woolever, 2008), M. bovis from cattle to elk in Riding Mountain National Park (Garde et al., 2009), and BVDV from cattle to deer (Passler & Walz, 2010). However, there have been no peer-reviewed publications documenting pathogen transmission from camelids to wild ungulates or to domestic sheep and goats for the pathogens of concern. The American Association of Small Ruminant Practitioners is opposed to banning camelid pack animals on public lands until there is scientific justification for this action.
Revised February 2020

Since there is no such risk assessment as zero: If healthy pack llamas need a health certificate for passage to traverse their historical public land, then horses, dogs, and humans would also need a health certificate (dare we mention any bovid or reindeer). I only would request that the Wild Sheep Foundation does not get to propose the protocols for the testing, because I've seen those for the Goat packing industry.....and as one prominent scientist told me when he/she saw those....."impossible, don't agree to that!"

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I only would request that the Wild Sheep Foundation does not get to propose the protocols for the testing, because I've seen those for the Goat packing industry.....and as one prominent scientist told me when he/she saw those....."impossible, don't agree to that!"

Link please, this has been dropped a couple times on this and other threads and the only thing I can find is language that says domestic herds should be tested.

 

[WyoWoody]

Link please, this has been dropped a couple times on this and other threads and the only thing I can find is language that says domestic herds should be tested.

If you are referring to domestic goats used for packing to be tested, yes to finalize an agreement ( really not a mutual agreement) between the Shoshone National Forest and the Goat packing industry to allow pack goats anywhere outside core sheep habitat (because they were banned almost everywhere in the Wind River Range with their new Forest Plan). Now, this is for a very limited area outside core sheep habitat, and the proposed testing protocol and health certificate make it almost impossible and cost prohibited. This protocol was drafted by a well known WSF and BOD participant and approved. Other well known sheep scientists called it BS and completely out of line, in particular because it's not in sheep habitat.
So, a health certificate is relative to the details required. And camelids do not pose any more of a risk to wild sheep health than horses, cattle, humans or dogs, and probably less. If you go down the road of health certs, the devil is in the details, and should not be applied arbitrarily or at all, for species with no scientific link to all herd die off pathogen transfer.

 

[WyoWoody]

That paragraph is specifically about Movi, a host-specific pathogen commonly carried by domestic sheep and goats. In other words, the results of comingling studies (high mortality when comingled with DS and goats and not cattle, horses, and llamas) are consistent with a host-specific pathogen. High-mortality disease events are not the only potential concerns for wild sheep. @mtmiller post some pics of your scabby sheep.

I'm glad to see you post that the high mortality disease events in wild sheep are typically not related to species outside the caprids.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

the proposed testing protocol and health certificate make it almost impossible and cost prohibited.

You mentioned Shoshone so I looked into it.

Here is the FS management plan.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd566629.pdf

In order to obtain a permit for pack goat use on the Shoshone National Forest, the requester must present documentation of veterinary health inspection and disease testing of all pack goats before entering Shoshone National Forest lands. The permit will require pack goat handlers to be in possession of a health and disease testing certificate for each pack goat while on the Shoshone National Forest. Inspection and testing protocol will be based on best available science and could change as new science becomes available. Testing requirements will be identified.

Looks like the biggest identified hurdle is hesitancy not the process itself.

However, some pack goat users have stated that “the restrictive nature of these best management practices will act as a deterrent for those users not willing to submit to the extensive preparation and implementation of these practices” (Jennings 2011). This indicates that some pack goat users will perceive mitigation measures as restrictive and difficult to implement, and that if they deter some users, others may simply choose not to comply.

I was curious what the current protocol was so I went to the website. It's a PCR test + a health inspection. The test and inspection are good for a year, but you have to apply for a permit for each trip.

I have contacted a western slope CO vet that my family uses and asked about the cost of goat testing, no idea if this is high or low, just what this vet would charge.
$90 for the test
$12 for the collection
$48 for a health certificate
$30 to mail in all the test (done collectively not per animal)

So $1530 for 10 goats, and this is good for one year.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd690005.pdf

Pack Goat Disease Testing & Health Inspection Protocol​

Disease Testing Requirements: Pack goat users must have each pack goat that they plan to use on the Shoshone National Forest tested for Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae (M. ovi.) using the M. ovi. PCR test. Samples for testing must be collected by a USDA-accredited veterinarian. For help locating a USDA-accredited veterinarian in your area, go to: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/nvap/ct_locate_av


Samples must be analyzed by a laboratory accredited by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians (AAVLD). A list of AAVLD-accredited labs is available on-line at: https://www.aavld.org/list-of-accredited-labs. When applying for a permit for pack goat use on the Shoshone National Forest, pack goat owners must provide a certificate for each pack goat from the accredited lab showing negative M. ovi PCR test results. Test results for each pack goat must correspond to the animal’s individually identifiable number or mark, and will be valid for the remainder of that calendar year.

Veterinary Health Inspection Requirements: Pack goat users must have each pack goat inspected by a USDA-accredited veterinarian. Inspections are to assess and document the overall health of each pack goat, and specifically to look for clinical symptoms of conditions such as Keratojunctivitis (pink eye), contagious ecthymia (sore moth), Johne’s disease, caseous lymphadenitis, caprine arthritis encephalitis (CAE), and ovine progressive pneumonia (OPP) that may be transmitted to wild bighorn sheep. Results of health inspections will be recorded by the veterinarian conducting the inspection on the Health Passport form, and presented at the time of applying for a permit to use pack goats on the Shoshone National Forest. Permits for pack goat use will not be issued to applicants whose animals had health concerns noted on inspection forms.

Link special order showing closure area + area were the above protocol is required.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd644796.pdf

 

[WyoWoody]

You mentioned Shoshone so I looked into it.

Here is the FS management plan.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd566629.pdf

In order to obtain a permit for pack goat use on the Shoshone National Forest, the requester must present documentation of veterinary health inspection and disease testing of all pack goats before entering Shoshone National Forest lands. The permit will require pack goat handlers to be in possession of a health and disease testing certificate for each pack goat while on the Shoshone National Forest. Inspection and testing protocol will be based on best available science and could change as new science becomes available. Testing requirements will be identified.

Looks like the biggest identified hurdle is hesitancy not the process itself.

However, some pack goat users have stated that “the restrictive nature of these best management practices will act as a deterrent for those users not willing to submit to the extensive preparation and implementation of these practices” (Jennings 2011). This indicates that some pack goat users will perceive mitigation measures as restrictive and difficult to implement, and that if they deter some users, others may simply choose not to comply.

I was curious what the current protocol was so I went to the website. It's a PCR test + a health inspection. The test and inspection are good for a year, but you have to apply for a permit for each trip.

I have contacted a western slope CO vet that my family uses and asked about the cost of goat testing, no idea if this is high or low, just what this vet would charge.
$90 for the test
$12 for the collection
$48 for a health certificate
$30 to mail in all the test (done collectively not per animal)

So $1530 for 10 goats, and this is good for one year.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd690005.pdf

Pack Goat Disease Testing & Health Inspection Protocol​

Disease Testing Requirements: Pack goat users must have each pack goat that they plan to use on the Shoshone National Forest tested for Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae (M. ovi.) using the M. ovi. PCR test. Samples for testing must be collected by a USDA-accredited veterinarian. For help locating a USDA-accredited veterinarian in your area, go to: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/nvap/ct_locate_av


Samples must be analyzed by a laboratory accredited by the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians (AAVLD). A list of AAVLD-accredited labs is available on-line at: https://www.aavld.org/list-of-accredited-labs. When applying for a permit for pack goat use on the Shoshone National Forest, pack goat owners must provide a certificate for each pack goat from the accredited lab showing negative M. ovi PCR test results. Test results for each pack goat must correspond to the animal’s individually identifiable number or mark, and will be valid for the remainder of that calendar year.

Veterinary Health Inspection Requirements: Pack goat users must have each pack goat inspected by a USDA-accredited veterinarian. Inspections are to assess and document the overall health of each pack goat, and specifically to look for clinical symptoms of conditions such as Keratojunctivitis (pink eye), contagious ecthymia (sore moth), Johne’s disease, caseous lymphadenitis, caprine arthritis encephalitis (CAE), and ovine progressive pneumonia (OPP) that may be transmitted to wild bighorn sheep. Results of health inspections will be recorded by the veterinarian conducting the inspection on the Health Passport form, and presented at the time of applying for a permit to use pack goats on the Shoshone National Forest. Permits for pack goat use will not be issued to applicants whose animals had health concerns noted on inspection forms.

Link special order showing closure area + area were the above protocol is required.

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd644796.pdf

I believe you just validated exactly what I said. Just an FYI, the data, and anything you posted there for the SNF I'm keenly aware of, because I was involved with much of it. That's why I posted it.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I believe you just validated exactly what I said. Just an FYI, the data, and anything you posted there for the SNF I'm keenly aware of, because I was involved with much of it. That's why I posted it.

I posted the facts, people should be allowed to determine for themselves “unreasonable”.

As per llamas, I assume that one does the health certificate for their llamas annually anyway?

Either way if applied to llamas someone like BigFin, assuming 3 llamas, would pay an extra $300- $450 a year, using my vet.

 

[WyoWoody]

I posted the facts, people should be allowed to determine for themselves “unreasonable”.

As per llamas, I assume that one does the health certificate for their llamas annually anyway?

Either way if applied to llamas someone like BigFin, assuming 3 llamas, would pay an extra $300- $450 a year, using my vet.

If you assume the following: There would be a health certificate required for pack llamas and horses (for the most part on public lands). There currently is not, using the same protocol for goats.

No, people do not get health certificates of this nature annually for llamas or horses. Most do however, have an annual vaccine program, and if they cross state boundaries they typically need a general health certificate (vet look-over), depending up the state ($30-$50, or more with standard TB test if required) Yes, I would expect to pay at a minimum $150 per animal for that level of testing. Don't forget the time needed to receive that level of test also. Schedule the vet ranch call, send blood to labs, and in some cases only good for 30 days. Many people I know have lost their right to use their pack goats almost everywhere in west in prime federal lands, and a health certificate will do you no good. These people have been devastated from their loss that many have used for decades.

Again, the $100 to $150 dollar/animal, in the case to the SNF pack goat protocol, does not allow them to go in most areas of pristine habitat anyway, where BHS may roam.

I'm pretty sure people will continue to not tolerate false and propagandized science from conservation non-profits to justify the arbitrary application of llama bans or cost prohibitive testing for pack llamas for their historical way of access on federal lands. And most of the agencies are making good progress in recognizing this through their land management plans, thank goodness.

But every once in a while, we'll find where an unknowing non-profit will state a policy position that shocks us with the regurgitated misinformation (this BHA thread). We know who the messenger is. And we are forced to address it directly with their BOD and membership.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

If you assume the following: There would be a health certificate required for pack llamas and horses (for the most part on public lands). There currently is not, using the same protocol for goats.

No, people do not get health certificates of this nature annually for llamas or horses. Most do however, have an annual vaccine program, and if they cross state boundaries they typically need a general health certificate (vet look-over), depending up the state ($30-$50, or more with standard TB test if required) Yes, I would expect to pay at a minimum $150 per animal for that level of testing. Don't forget the time needed to receive that level of test also. Schedule the vet ranch call, send blood to labs, and in some cases only good for 30 days. Many people I know have lost their right to use their pack goats almost everywhere in west in prime federal lands, and a health certificate will do you no good. These people have been devastated from their loss that many have used for decades.

Again, the $100 to $150 dollar/animal, in the case to the SNF pack goat protocol, does not allow them to go in most areas of pristine habitat anyway, where BHS may roam.

I'm pretty sure people will continue to not tolerate false and propagandized science from conservation non-profits to justify the arbitrary application of llama bans or cost prohibitive testing for pack llamas for their historical way of access on federal lands. And most of the agencies are making good progress in recognizing this through their land management plans, thank goodness.

But every once in a while, we'll find where an unknowing non-profit will state a policy position that shocks us with the regurgitated misinformation (this BHA thread). We know who the messenger is. And we are forced to address it directly with their BOD and membership.

Am I the only one who can't figure out who the "messenger" is, and what are the groups or people in the background? Some sort of unseen forces have been alluded to a few times in this thread. What are they? I don't know how we're all supposed to understand that off the top. If that information is not appropriate for a public forum for some reason then maybe just say that.

 

[TheJason]

Am I the only one who can't figure out who the "messenger" is, and what are the groups or people in the background? Some sort of unseen forces have been alluded to a few times in this thread. What are they? I don't know how we're all supposed to understand that off the top. If that information is not appropriate for a public forum for some reason then maybe just say that.

Think Mordor.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Think Mordor.

I can’t hunt Alaska or the area of WY in question without a guide so the shutdown of llamas seems like quite the flex...

 

[Deleted member 16014]

Think Mordor.

WYOGA, MOGA, or as @Schaaf calls it FOGA?

 

[Cick1000]

The messenger is called the 2020 Wild Sheep Foundation Vision Statement as posted on the WSF website. No secret. You all know that. You all must be bored to tears. Nothing better to do than pick on little old ladies in fur coats. Mordor for you guys is Hell's Angels on horseback.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The messenger is called the 2020 Wild Sheep Foundation Vision Statement as posted on the WSF website. No secret. You all know that. You all must be bored to tears. Nothing better to do than pick on little old ladies in fur coats. Mordor for you guys is Hell's Angels on horseback.

 

[TheJason]

WYOGA, MOGA, or as @Schaaf calls it FOGA?

Honestly I have no idea. I’m bored enough to pick on old ladies in fur coats while I read cryptic remarks that I have absolutely no idea what the hell anyone is getting at.

I know Kurt Alt personally. Have for many years. I’m sure if anyone called him, he’d be more than willing to explain the stance of the WSF. I’ve no idea why BHA is taking the same stance.

I do know some people struggle with explaining their position without coming across like a real putz. Whatever works.

What the hell is the relevance of Hells Angels on horseback?

 

[Cick1000]

Still skirting the horse issue. Afraid to go there.

 

[ScottP]

That paragraph is specifically about Movi, a host-specific pathogen commonly carried by domestic sheep and goats. In other words, the results of comingling studies (high mortality when comingled with DS and goats and not cattle, horses, and llamas) are consistent with a host-specific pathogen. High-mortality disease events are not the only potential concerns for wild sheep. @mtmiller post some pics of your scabby sheep.

Here ya go. Hells canyon, 2020.