Here's why elk ranches should be illegal in every state

[mtmiller]

...thought you weren't going to say mean things.

Just asking. Probably pretty close.

 

[elkfarmer]

beagles........... right

ah, let me ask you this Rossi 22, why is it that wood ducks don't breed with mallards. red foxes don't breed with gray's. moose don't breed with elk. black bears don't breed with grizzlies. why is that? man i think they could. i think all of our native game is in trouble. oh man, the sky is falling, the sky is falling.


hey, you guys know what you get when you cross a remington and a mossburg?


an ITHACA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Tom]

Sense of humor is a good thing. Ok, Ithaca, you think after 10,000 years we would have a pure breed. My quote from that Columbia wildlife study in Oregon points out we can have mixtures in the wild too. That's more like what the situation is, as I understand it. After 10,000 years, taking that view, we have "pure breed" mule deer, blacktail deer, whitetail deer, coues deer, etc. However, they are free to interbreed and in fact do and we don't worry about it. So, why worry about Rocky Mountain elk and European elk interbreeding a little, that's my question? That cow in Idaho has not even escaped, its not clear its got any red stag genes of any consequence. Even if it did, it would be way less of a problem of interbreeding between mule deer and whitetail deer that occurs all over the place in the wild.

Here's another study of interest. From 1973 in Tennesee by Nichols and Murray. "In Tennesee, indigenous whitetails were permitted to breed with imported Columbian blacktails (Nichols and Murray 1973). All possible combinations, including double hybrids, produced viable offspring." from Wallmo, editor, p5, Mule and Black-tailed Deer of North America, 1981, Univ. of Nebraska Press.

Not only do those deer interbreed, their offspring are viable. Yet, we don't worry about "pure breed" mule deer or "pure breed" whitetail being lost. Why should we worry about it for elk, are they genetically sensitive and inferior or something? Seems like they could survive some red stag interbreeding, they have for 10,000 years.

I think a "pure breed" elk is more like just an elk, unless you got papers, like you do for your dog example. The record books just draw boundaries for things like Desert mule deer versus Rocky Mountain mule deer and whitetail deer versus coues deer and grizzly versus brown bear, etc. Right? There's nothing like "pure bred" papers on a dog breed with the lineage spelled out, at least, not yet.

Maybe there's going to be some genetic profile, but it sure hasn't been posted about. What's the difference in the Canada test and the Colorado test on that cow, its relevent to that question of genetic profiles? It may exist someday, but it doesn't exist now, that I know of. Here's an article that gives more info. on the recent test.
http://www.newwest.net/index.php/to...ase_free_and_genetically_pure_almost/C85/L41/

It says 2 of 3 recent triplicate samples on the same elk were positive. So, now the elk was legally imported to Idaho as "pure elk" based on tests done then, plus, another test is negative. Sounds like a testing problem more than anything else, at this point. Certainly not something to merit calling Rammell a criminal.

You all have the "boogy man" gene in you up there. Or else, the "sky is falling" gene or something like that! haha That's what the "pure elk gene" is like, it seems to me.

 

[TheTone]

beagles........... right

ah, let me ask you this Rossi 22, why is it that wood ducks don't breed with mallards. red foxes don't breed with gray's. moose don't breed with elk. black bears don't breed with grizzlies. why is that? man i think they could. i think all of our native game is in trouble. oh man, the sky is falling, the sky is falling.


hey, you guys know what you get when you cross a remington and a mossburg?


an ITHACA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Elkfarmer, if you don't understand the basics of species and why some can and can't reproduce naturally maybe you aren't the best one in the world to be pen raising elk.

 

[BigHornRam]

Let's see if we can break the 100 post mark......here goes!

So the majority here are not too keen on crossing Rocky Mountain Elk with European deer. Count me as one of the majority. Any thoughts on embryonic stem cell cloning? How about federally funded purchase of embryo's for research? Seems like even more of a manipulation of nature to me that could lead to an even bigger can of worms being openned. If oppose what Tom thinks is reasonable, you would no doubt have to oppose cloning of human embryos, right?

 

[noharleyyet]

Let's see if we can break the 100 post mark......here goes!

So the majority here are not too keen on crossing Rocky Mountain Elk with European deer. Count me as one of the majority. Any thoughts on embryonic stem cell cloning? How about federally funded purchase of embryo's for research? Seems like even more of a manipulation of nature to me that could lead to an even bigger can of worms being openned. If oppose what Tom thinks is reasonable, you would no doubt have to oppose cloning of human embryos, right?

Translation: How about another Bush bash?

 

[JB]

If oppose what Tom thinks is reasonable, you would no doubt have to oppose cloning of human embryos, right?

why? i dont see the connection????
is there a danger of these clones escaping and cross breeding with human's possiby retarded ?

 

[Nemont]

I am sure glad Montana had the foresight to end game farming. Even though I am not a big Gov. Schweitzer fan I did like his comments: He told the AP that “In Montana, we said it’s a bad idea to pen up a bunch of elk, feed them oats and have fat bankers from New York City shoot them while they’ve got their heads in a grain bucket.”

Here is what is consider "elk hunting" on one Colorado "ranch". Not only is it not hunting it is putting wild elk at risk.
www.bullsandbucks.net

Our hunts will be on approximate 175 acres. It is very thick and will be very difficult to get the animals. I think most will wish it was smaller. It is very hilly and tough walking. We have a web site that shows 2-3 shots of the country fenced. My partner also has guided and leased property to hunt

Tom, I can't believe anyone wants to risk the genetic purety of not only Idaho's elk herd but those in Montana and Wyoming as well.

Nemont

 

[Tom]

Nemont, do you think the "genetic purity" of Montana's mule deer or whitetail herd is at any sizeable risk? Did you follow that example? Buzz never saw any crosses of them in 27 years of hunting them, but I found a study with 1/3 of the oberved deer showing crossing characteristics. Nobody seems to think they are at risk, do you?

 

[Washington Hunter]

Tom, whatever the affect of mule deer and whitetail deer interbreeding is, really doesn't matter because it is not something we humans are responsible for. Mule deer and whitetail deer have been here on this continent for many thousands of years. Red deer have not. Why should a few individuals be allowed to mess with nature, so that they may make a profit? This is not Texas we're talking about here. This has the potential to negatively affect the public's wildlife, on public and private land.

 

[BigHornRam]

"Why should a few individuals be allowed to mess with nature, so that they may make a profit?"

Right on W. H.. At least the game farmers aren't trying to hit up the federal government to finance their industry though.

 

[noharleyyet]

Tom, whatever the affect of mule deer and whitetail deer interbreeding is, really doesn't matter because it is not something we humans are responsible for. Mule deer and whitetail deer have been here on this continent for many thousands of years. Red deer have not. Why should a few individuals be allowed to mess with nature, so that they may make a profit? This is not Texas we're talking about here. This has the potential to negatively affect the public's wildlife, on public and private land.

Check Nemont's post WH, Colorado's not Texas either. Where there's demand, there will be supply, an economic reality that is not state specific. BTW, isn't this thread about a problem in IDAHO? Tom's argument, however misguided, doesn't rate territorial condemnation.

 

[Tom]

Everytime we pull the trigger we mess with nature, its not just a few. Some get a cheap elk tag, some don't, but that's another discussion. I don't know any documentation for a reason elk and red deer should not interbreed, they do it in New Zealand in the wild, I've read. Maybe there's some data from there relevent to that question. I just found this.
***************************
Phylogeny of Wapiti, Red Deer, Sika Deer, and Other North American Cervids as Determined from Mitochondrial DNA
Authors: Polziehn R.O.; Strobeck C.

Source: Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, Volume 10, Number 2, October 1998, pp. 249-258(10)

Publisher: Academic Press

Abstract:

Red deer (Cervus elaphus) are divided into three subspecific groups; the first group includes seven subspecies from Europe and northern Africa, the second group includes seven subspecies from central Asia, and the third group includes nine subspecies from eastern Asia, Siberia, and North America. Recognition of the North American wapiti as a species has been denied on the basis of morphological similarity with red deer and the circumpolar distribution of C. elaphus. Sika deer (C. nippon), which are distributed in much of the same range, also share phenotypic and genotypic similarities with the red deer. A comparison of sequences from the control region of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from North American and Siberian wapiti, European red deer, and Asian sika deer was used to construct a phylogenetic relationship among these cervids and other cervids found within North America, including white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), black-tailed deer (O. hemionus columbianus), moose (Alces alces), and caribou (Rangifer tarandus). The mtDNA sequence divergence between wapiti and red deer was 5.60%, between wapiti and sika deer 5.19%, and between sika deer and red deer 5.02%, suggesting that the subspecies status of North American wapiti needs to be reviewed. The mtDNA sequence divergence between white-tailed deer and black-tailed deer was 7.82% and is consistant with earlier mtDNA studies in Odocoileus. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.

Language: English

Document Type: Research article

Affiliations: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2E9, Canada:
******************************
I guess this means wapiti and red deer are geneitcally different, but not as different as whitetail and blacktail, also, they're more different than sika and red deer, depending on how variable those numbers in the abstract are?

The interaction has the potential to beneficially impact the public and private elk also. According to the idea of "survival of the fitest" and Origin of the Species, isn't the benefit expected? Each animal would pick up some genes to help them be better fit, less inbreeding, stuff like that. I sure don't expect much trouble based on anything I've read, especially given the mule deer/whitetail interaction for years and years.

 

[Bambistew]

Speaking of CO game farms, I read in a mag the other day that it is second to TX and not by many when it comes to high fence opperations. PA was third if I remember right, followed by ID. Something like 500 game farms in CO, and 600 some in TX. I tried to find the magazine last night but coudln't find it to quote specifics. I was really surpised to see that there wasn't more farms in TX.

I don't think anyone has any business 'farming' native species such as elk or whitetail deer. It has been linked time after time to CWD, and the trasportation across thousands of miles. That right there sould be reason enough to ban them all together.

 

[Tom]

Bambistew, I think that's the way they control the disease spread, keeping track of those animals. Its harder to control in the wild and it has jumped hundreds of miles there too, I think. There's no explanation I've heard, for it popping up in New Mexico, except its there in the wild. I've read about a few CWD cases there. Plus, it seems to matter where the places are and how they are run. There is not one CWD cases in Texas yet, for example, yet, they've had these high fence places since the 40s. They started them here with healthy offspring of previously quaranteened animals that lived in zoo like conditions, that might have been a big factor to prevent a lot of diseases from spreading.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Tom's argument, however misguided, doesn't rate territorial condemnation.

NHY, sorry, I will try to leave Texas out of it from now on. I really have nothing against Texas, or the people who live there, it's just that many Texans seem to have the same attitude regarding public land and public wildlife as Tom does. Texans are usually the ones arguing for privatization of public land. I don't know why that is, it just is, and I've not seen it so much on this board as I have on others. I am SURE Texas is a fine state; if it wasn't we probably would have let Mexico keep it. I will have to visit someday, and maybe even shoot a whitetail or three. hump

 

[Nemont]

Nemont, do you think the "genetic purity" of Montana's mule deer or whitetail herd is at any sizeable risk? Did you follow that example? Buzz never saw any crosses of them in 27 years of hunting them, but I found a study with 1/3 of the oberved deer showing crossing characteristics. Nobody seems to think they are at risk, do you?

Tom,
WT/MD interbreeding is not nearly the same thing as a non native (after 10,000 years onfnot being here they are then non native) interbreeding with wild elk. I know your attitude is that it is no big deal because they both can be hunted but that is not the issue here. Elk farmers should not be allowed to raise elk that have the potential to infect, interbreed and contaminate wild elk herds.

Of course I am concerned about that hybridization. That is even a more powerful arguement against elk farms. If there are these kinds of genetic challenges out in the wild, why in the hell would we want to add another on purpose?



This is from your own TPWD
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_bk_w7000_0303.pdf

Mule Deer and White-tailed Deer
Interactions
The expanding range of white-tailed deer into historic desert
mule deer range is a management concern of some land
managers in Texas. A question often asked by landowners and
hunters is “Are white-tailed deer driving out the mule deer?”
White-tailed deer do not physically “drive out” mule deer from
an area; however, in some areas mule deer numbers are
declining while white-tailed deer numbers are increasing,
giving the appearance that the mule deer are being physically
displaced. What actually is occurring in these habitats is a
gradual change in the vegetation that favors white-tailed deer.
In areas where the height and density of brush is increasing,
the habitat is becoming more suitable for white-tailed deer
and less desirable for mule deer. Research indicates that mule
deer in Texas prefer a brush canopy cover of 40 percent or
less, while white-tailed deer numbers increase dramatically in
areas with a brush canopy exceeding 50 percent (Wiggers and
Beasom 1984). The greatest white-tailed deer numbers were
found in areas that consisted of about two-thirds brush cover.
When the two species occupy the same area, they often are
segregated — mule deer preferring the high, rougher canyons
and open hillsides and white-tailed deer occupying the brushy
draws and lowlands.

Where mule deer and white-tailed deer coexist, interbreeding
does occur. The long-term effects are unknown, and for most
areas, the extent of hybridization is not known. The highest
incidence of hybridization in the Trans-Pecos occurs in the
eastern part of the region where high populations of mule
deer and white-tailed deer coexist. It has been estimated that
up to 15 percent of deer may be hybrids where both species
occupy the same range (Stubblefield 1985). DNA sequencing
techniques were used to determine the extent of hybridization
in the Panhandle (Donley County) where the ranges of both
species overlap. Results indicated a hybridization frequency of
8 percent (F. Bryant pers. comm.).

Antler characteristics, tail coloration and ear length are not
reliable in recognizing hybrids. Hybrids can be identified by the
length of the metatarsal gland that is located on the outside of
the rear leg between the hock and the hoof. It typically will
measure about 3/4 inch long in whitetails and about 4 inches
long in mule deer (Fig. 7). The metatarsal gland of hybrids is
intermediate in length, measuring about 2 inches long. It has
been theorized that occurrences of hybridization are initiated by
white-tailed bucks, but interbreeding also can occur between
mule deer bucks and white-tailed does. Hybrids appear to have
at least a limited degree of fertility (Stubblefield 1985).

Hybridization is a concern to managers who see it as a threat
to their mule deer herd. Habitat management is the most
effective, long-term means for maintaining the integrity of the
mule deer population. Habitat enhancement practices that
reduce the amount of brush cover to 40 percent or less may
improve the value of habitat for mule deer and discourage the
encroachment of white-tailed deer. Liberal harvest of whitetailed
deer through legal means is an additional management
option that can help favor a mule deer herd where both
species coexist.

 

[Tom]

Nemont, Great, you found some more references showing there is mule deer/whitetail hybridization. I've observed it out in west Texas, the main thing I've noticed is whitetails with forked horns or big ears like mule deer. Since its the mule deer moving east, its more like them threatening whitetails than the other way around. Most places I hunt out there want more mule deer, since there are a lot more whitetail around. We get a mule deer doe and buck tag on our liscense every year, but no rancher I've known lets us use the doe tag.

The reference you found gives 8% and 15% hybrids as two numbers. Doesn't that mean the rest are still pure breds, assuming there is such a thing? That's my main thought, we still have pure bred mule deer and whitetail deer after all these years of them hybridizing. So, I'm thinking, how could a few possible future red deer escapes be much of a threat to elk? It just does not seem like much of a threat.

There are other thoughts too, but I'll just try repeating that main one at the moment. I guess another one I should repeat here is this. There was a reference I gave in an earlier post that said red stags were native in North America at one time, but they were killed out by humans. If that's really true, heck, I'd rather reintroduce them than reintroduce the wolves that have been reintroduced.

 

[Nemont]

You know lions and elephanst used to natives of North America as well. We should introduce them

Do you ever reread your own posts Tom?

I can't help you as you are coming at this issue from a WAY out there position. Hope the powers that be understand what is stake and don't seek you input.

Nemont

 

[Big Fin]

Funny to follow this arguement. When MT was trying to pass legislation with regards to game farms, I attended most meetings and testified at hearings, asking the state to make these operators pay all the costs related to the risks they are shifting to the citizens of the state.

I specifically asked if the legislators would pass a law, forcing the operators to provide a bond or get insurance that would indemnify the state for any damages incurred by disease, escape, etc. I felt the state should not bear the cost of these risks, just so a few people could satisfy the market for lazy ass blowhards who want to shoot a pet.

The counter arguement provided by the industry experts was that such requirement would make their operations economically infeasible, as the insurance would be prohibitively expensive.

Why would it be so expensive? Because the best risk analysts in the world - insurance companies who make a living analyzing, covering, and transferring risk - would not be willing to assume all the risk currently borne by the state (via lack of required bonding/insurance) without compensation. For them to assume this risk, they would require premiums equal to the potential liability with consideration of the likelihood of the potential liability becoming reality.

So those who say game farming has no risk, go try get insurance to protect me and the other citizens of the state. This insurance is available, but the cost would force you to charge a price that no one would pay. A true cost of doing business that you currently are shifting to the state

Lets face it, the risks associated with game farming cannot be insured and remain profitable, so the game farmers lobby their legislators to keep regulations low and allow the state and surrounding states take on those risks. I call this business welfare.

Welfare given to the biggest pissin' and moaning group of "supposedly" anti-government folks I have ever dealt with. How ironic that these people who claim to be such self-sufficient rebels need the government to cover their parasitic asses and protect them from the true costs of operations. These fakes don't have the 'nads to pay their own way!