Public lands wildlife loses to ranchers again

Oak

Expert
Joined
Dec 23, 2000
Messages
16,062
Location
Colorado
http://www.idahostatesman.com/outdoors/story/296240.html

February 15, 2008

F&G will move or kill bighorns to keep them from mixing with sheep

Interim strategy to prevent domestic herds from passing disease to wild ones has woolgrowers' support but draws fire from sportsmen, Nez Perce and environmentalists.

Wild bighorn sheep that wander too close to domestic sheep would be moved or killed under a plan approved Thursday by the Idaho Fish and Game Commission.

This temporary strategy is aimed at preventing the spread of disease from domestic to wild sheep. Domestic sheep that wander into these buffer zones also would be moved out.

But sportsmen, the Nez Perce Tribe and environmentalists criticized the plan for putting domestic sheep operations ahead of the restoration of struggling bighorn sheep populations.

"Whenever there is a domestic conflict, it's the wild animal that suffers," said Craig Gehrke, Idaho regional director for the Wilderness Society.
Fish and Game routinely moves bighorn sheep to prevent contact with domestic sheep, which research suggests pass deadly diseases to the bighorns.

"I don't see this as a change of policy," said Dale Towiell, Fish and Game's bighorn sheep program leader. "This may be even more effective at allowing us to work with ranchers to keep them apart."

The strategy comes in response to U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill, who ordered in 2007 that ranchers move their sheep off of five allotments on the Payette National Forest in Hells Canyon to protect bighorns. In November, Winmill ordered ranchers to keep their sheep off of another allotment on the Nez Perce Forest for the same reason.

The U.S. Forest Service also issued draft plans requiring ranchers to keep their sheep away from bighorn-occupied range.

These decisions sparked the Cassia County Commission to ask Gov. Butch Otter to relocate bighorn sheep in the South Hills near Twin Falls because of the threat of lawsuits against sheep ranchers there over the same issue.

The Idaho Woolgrowers Association had suggested that if the issue weren't resolved, the sheep ranchers would introduce a bill to the Legislature that would have limited future bighorn reintroductions and would have given ranchers more say in bighorn management.

Otter called the state agencies together and told them to come up with a plan by Friday. Fish and Game Director Cal Groen said this interim strategy meets the deadline.

The working group will continue to develop a permanent strategy.
Woolgrowers Executive Director Stan Boyd said he was pleased with plan and Fish and Game's efforts to work with the ranchers. But he wasn't prepared to give up the potential for legislation if the strategy doesn't help ranchers.

"I just don't want to make any commitment," Boyd said. "Let's see how the Forest Service deals with this."

The Nez Perce Tribe criticized the decision because it challenges the Forest Service's orders for ranchers to move their sheep out of the bighorn range in Hells Canyon.

The Forest Service drafted the plan to keep domestic sheep from grazing in bighorn territory after a 2006 scientific report concluded that domestic sheep transmit diseases, including pneumonia, that kill large portions of the bighorn herds. Ranchers say the research is inconclusive, but environmentalists and the Nez Perce hoped the restrictions would boost bighorn populations.

"The tribe believes that the (Forest Service's) interim actions reducing domestic sheep grazing in or adjacent to occupied bighorn sheep habitat is a prudent first step toward resolving this issue," said Samuel Penney, chairman of the Nez Perce Tribe.

The Foundation for North American Wild Sheep and the Idaho Sportsman's Caucus Advisory Council each expressed unprecedented support for the tribe's position.

The state owns and controls the wildlife, but the Forest Service controls the habitat. The Forest Service is required to protect habitat throughout its forests for viable populations of wildlife. Payette National Forest Supervisor Suzanne Rainville said her staff will take into consideration Fish and Game's strategy as officials meet with ranchers to decide the final rules for how they graze their sheep this year.
 
What are possible solutions to these problems?

I am interested in workable solutions, do either of you two truly have one...?

Oak- Is there such a thing for any controversial topic on public lands? I'm guessing there's more than one view of 'acceptable solution' in regards to oil and gas development in CO...

Jose- Yep, but check the bolded portion above...
 
One solution is to mandate a change of grazing lease to say only cattle may graze. That way the wild sheep don't contract the disease. With all the synthetic materials replacing wool, coupled with the price wool gets I'm surprised there still there... Who need field maggots anyway?
 
Changing the kind of livestock is probably the most sensible and possible solutions. This is what has been done in No. UT for sheep introductions on BLM lands. However, trying to 'mandate' it could be tough if the permittee does not want to run cattle. NEPA allows the permittee the same protest/appeal process as any other group... Unless there was compelling data supporting the conversion I think it could be pretty tough to force through.

You are right in that there are many fewer sheep ranchers due to the profits availble from wool and mutton. However, many are finding that they can supplement their income by doing contract grazing for hazardous fuels reduction and weed control. Many a new sheep and especially goat operations are looking at this type of arrangement. Camp Williams a DOD installation near SLC spends around $400K on contract goat grazing for both weed and fuels management...

Any other ideas??

PS- As an aside, the BLM does not lease grazing... ;)
 
Yeti GOBOX Collection

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,579
Messages
2,025,742
Members
36,237
Latest member
SCOOTER848
Back
Top