Stances on Bison?

[Straight Arrow]

There's a lot of legitimate concern about what happens when there are wild bison. Brucellosis is the biggest one that I've heard along with a sincere concern about interbreeding between bison and cows, destroying a lineage that a producer has spent a lot of time, money and energy developing. Destruction of crops ranks right up there as well as human safety.

I would argue that those "legitimate" concerns are not borne out by factual data, historical context, or reality. Example: The search for widespread or even anecdotal instance of wild bison transmitting brucellosis to domestic cattle is ongoing but futile so far. (If I'm misinformed, please correct me.)
Interbreeding? Please show the evidence of that propensity.
Destruction of crops is not a likely scenario as evidenced by the large herds of bison on the landscape in crop producing areas. 'Guess it's in the definition of "wild" but even then it's difficult to find "wild" habitat without fences limiting movement.
Human safety is the one legitimate issue, but then applies to many wildlife species, most of which we want to remain wild. Some would say wildlife human safety conflict is an important element of "Darwinism".

Elk brucellosis transmission ... well that's another issue for a separate thread.

 

[Hammsolo]

Montana needs free roaming bison. FWP is doing so well the way things are now. mtmuley

Why isn’t there an emoji for a burn?

 

[Ben Lamb]

I would argue that those "legitimate" concerns are not borne out by factual data, historical context, or reality. Example: The search for widespread or even anecdotal instance of wild bison transmitting brucellosis to domestic cattle is ongoing but futile so far. (If I'm misinformed, please correct me.)
Interbreeding? Please show the evidence of that propensity.
Destruction of crops is not a likely scenario as evidenced by the large herds of bison on the landscape in crop producing areas. 'Guess it's in the definition of "wild" but even then it's difficult to find "wild" habitat without fences limiting movement.
Human safety is the one legitimate issue, but then applies to many wildlife species, most of which we want to remain wild. Some would say wildlife human safety conflict is an important element of "Darwinism".

Elk brucellosis transmission ... well that's another issue for a separate thread.

There are no known documented cases of wild bison transmitting brucellosis to livestock. This is true. It's a testament to the wisdom of the IBMP in their approach of spatial & temporal separation of bison and livestock. Remove those management actions and you increase the possibility exponentially as bison who are infected at a fairly high rate intermingle with livestock during parturition and putting livestock in close proximity to discarded fetuses & afterbirths and I bet you'd see a case of transmission. Animals contract brucellosis by licking the afterbirth or licking an aborted fetus. They also usually only abort once before becoming largely immune to it, IIRC. The brucellosis issue is major economic issue though. Losing Brucellosis Free status means massive costs to producers in terms of testing, removal and lost markets as other states will refuse MT beef over the lost status. It's absolutely a legitimate concern from livestock producers and if we continue to ignore that with the downplaying of the issue relative to transmission, then we do a disservice to the other trustees of wildlife in this regard.

Where are there large herds of bison in cropland that aren't fenced in and restricted? I'm not aware of any. The cross breeding may or may not be real, but it's a legitimate concern from producers who have their herd health to consider, especially when they've worked on the genetics. Waving the hand and dismissing it dismisses not only the political issue, but their very real concerns about the future of their herds.

Smacking an elk with your F150 and smacking a bison with one is a lot different. We see the difference a few times a year around West Yellowstone.

Spatial separation of bison from livestock is the law of the land in MT. That separation can be achieved primarily through large enough landscapes for appropriately scaled herds to be in, or it means bison-proof fencing. Translocation statutes specifically call for separation and give landowners the right to disallow bison on their property. That law also states that FWP is liable for damages caused by translocated bison. Here's the policy for MT: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0870/chapter_0010/part_0020/section_0160/0870-0010-0020-0160.html

 

[Hammsolo]

Never mind. mtmuley

I think he’s referring to how some get pissed at having to pay some landowners for cow elk hunts.

 

[Hammsolo]

Guess we know who isn’t a visionary pioneer.

Not that it matters anyway, the MT legislature views bison on about the same love as prairie dogs. Sounds like Idaho is similar.

I guess we may also know who is afraid of change and the unknown. Risk versus Reward

 

[Straight Arrow]

There are no known documented cases of wild bison transmitting brucellosis to livestock. This is true. It's a testament to the wisdom of the IBMP in their approach of spatial & temporal separation of bison and livestock. Remove those management actions and you increase the possibility exponentially as bison who are infected at a fairly high rate intermingle with livestock during parturition and putting livestock in close proximity to discarded fetuses & afterbirths and I bet you'd see a case of transmission. Animals contract brucellosis by licking the afterbirth or licking an aborted fetus. They also usually only abort once before becoming largely immune to it, IIRC. The brucellosis issue is major economic issue though. Losing Brucellosis Free status means massive costs to producers in terms of testing, removal and lost markets as other states will refuse MT beef over the lost status. It's absolutely a legitimate concern from livestock producers and if we continue to ignore that with the downplaying of the issue relative to transmission, then we do a disservice to the other trustees of wildlife in this regard.

Where are there large herds of bison in cropland that aren't fenced in and restricted? I'm not aware of any. The cross breeding may or may not be real, but it's a legitimate concern from producers who have their herd health to consider, especially when they've worked on the genetics. Waving the hand and dismissing it dismisses not only the political issue, but their very real concerns about the future of their herds.

Smacking an elk with your F150 and smacking a bison with one is a lot different. We see the difference a few times a year around West Yellowstone.

Spatial separation of bison from livestock is the law of the land in MT. That separation can be achieved primarily through large enough landscapes for appropriately scaled herds to be in, or it means bison-proof fencing. Translocation statutes specifically call for separation and give landowners the right to disallow bison on their property. That law also states that FWP is liable for damages caused by translocated bison. Here's the policy for MT: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0870/chapter_0010/part_0020/section_0160/0870-0010-0020-0160.html

QED. Thank-you.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Not quite. When you use a data set that doesn't comport with the proposed action, it's not a variable you can use with any legitimacy.

If, the statement was "under the current form of prescriptive management employed by the IBMP, there have been no known cases of transmission of brucellosis to livestock," then that's a factual statement that doesn't imply that no transmission can occur. The conservation community likes to imply that this isn't going to happen, but fail to acknowledge that the prescriptions within the IBMP won't be the same as the state efforts to restore a bison herd somewhere. It's an unfair argument.

It's like me saying that there are no known cases of bears eating people in the Brooklyn zoo, therefore no bear will eat a person.

It also does conservation zero good to tell people with these concerns that they're full of chit rather than try to work with them to show them where the safeguards are, and be very specific about what is on the table regarding the actual policies and laws for bison translocation, and what is political theater on all sides.

 

[kwyeewyk]

My understanding is that truly wild bison are much less likely to respect a fence than ones that have been in a domestic setting for many generations with selection towards more docile and "well behaved" individuals. There's a reason the fencing at the bison range looks like it does.

Brucellosis is certainly political, but hard to know the threat level because of the ongoing efforts to prevent transmission. Pretty big deal for an entire western state to lose its ability to export beef.

Again, interbreeding is difficult to assess due to lack of substantial wild bison herds to provide data. But not a big leap to assume a wild bull bison would be a big problem, potentially injuring domestic bulls fighting as well.

I do think it's a lot of politics, but they are certainly a species that can be problematic in the wrong setting. I do think there is a little more room on the landscape for them than they have now.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Brucellosis is certainly political, but hard to know the threat level because of the ongoing efforts to prevent transmission. Pretty big deal for an entire western state to lose its ability to export beef.

There are solutions on brucellosis outside of eliminating the disease. The current UM&R & CFR are from the 1930's, when undulant fever was a real issue as many folks weren't drinking pastuerized milk and the disease was being transmitted to humans. That's where the zero tolerance issue came in. Compounding that was putting B. Abortus on the select bioterrorism agent lists post 9-11, which led to more difficulties in conducting research on vaccine development.

The reality is Brucellosis isn't a life-threatening issue to livestock, wildlife or people in 2021. It's a regulatory morass from almost a century ago that disregards reality in 2021. There's a lot of common ground between conservationists and livestock producers on removing B. Abortus from the select agent list, and downgrading the issue on the APHIS side.

 

[JLS]

There are solutions on brucellosis outside of eliminating the disease. The current UM&R & CFR are from the 1930's, when undulant fever was a real issue as many folks weren't drinking pastuerized milk and the disease was being transmitted to humans. That's where the zero tolerance issue came in. Compounding that was putting B. Abortus on the select bioterrorism agent lists post 9-11, which led to more difficulties in conducting research on vaccine development.

The reality is Brucellosis isn't a life-threatening issue to livestock, wildlife or people in 2021. It's a regulatory morass from almost a century ago that disregards reality in 2021. There's a lot of common ground between conservationists and livestock producers on removing B. Abortus from the select agent list, and downgrading the issue on the APHIS side.

Absolutely. We are viewing 2021 through a 1920’s filter.

The irony of it all is brucellosis came from cattle to bison and elk, now bison are views as vermin for carrying it.

 

[buffybr]

... but the reality is that bison are not jumping fences regularly and are not causing problems for neighbors of the Flying D or other bison ranches ... fact! ...

Any species being restored to historical range is not hampered by "modern society" not allowing it, although you are right, it wouldn't be widely accepted. It's due to a greater factor of the proliferation of pavement, subdivisions, ranchettes, residential and commercial developments constituting the growing constant hardscape of "historical range"...

No, the fact is that occasionally buffalo do get off the Flying D onto neighbor's property which cause a problem with that neighbor. That's how I got my buffalo. I had heard of one of these cases so I went to Rob Arnaud's office in Gallatin Gateway, and asked to be put on a roster for one on those buffalo. They told me that it wasn't very often when a bull ventures onto a neighbor's property, but they did have a culling operation where they offered discounted hunts for problem bulls or old bulls that were not high trophy quality. So I shot one of them and although he may have worn a few inches of his horn tips off, he is still a great trophy to me.

What I meant by "modern society" is all of the factors that you listed: "pavement, subdivisions, ranchettes, residential and commercial developments constituting the growing constant hardscape" that were not in existence 150+ years ago when the great herds of buffalo roamed freely over the western plains.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Absolutely. We are viewing 2021 through a 1920’s filter.

The irony of it all is brucellosis came from cattle to bison and elk, now bison are views as vermin for carrying it.

I often wonder how many times various interests oversubscribe the worst traits of others rather than try to see the issue from the opposing perspective.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Destruction of crops ranks right up there as well as human safety.

@mtmuley , in his usual loquacious style, is providing the counter balance to those who want to see bison someplace, but aren't concerning themselves with the other side of the coin. It's the biggest piece of the translocation puzzle.

I find the resistance to bison interesting when compared to feral horses... even more to feral cows, I just googled "feral cows [state]" and came 6 examples.

The NM case is notable as there was rancher resistance to lethally removing them.


Feral Cows Gila, NM

Forest Service rethinks plan to shoot feral cows - Silvercity Daily Press

A plan to employ aerial gunners to cull an estimated 250 unbranded feral cattle in the Wilderness District of the Gila National Forest is on hold. At their regular meeting, Grant Soil and Water Conservation District supervisors discussed the controversial plan, which ranchers first heard about...

www.scdailypress.com

Feral Cows, CA

Feral cattle terrorize hikers and devour native plants in a California national monument

Sand to Snow National Monument is a quiet place — its mountainous high desert and cascading streams a draw for those seeking panoramic views, tranquillity and solitude.

www.latimes.com

Feral Cows, AZ

Feds round up feral cattle along the Verde River after habitat damage complaints

Environmental groups say grazing cattle damage fragile riparian habitat and have pressured the Forest Service to remove animals that don't belong.

www.azcentral.com

AK

Feds still trying to decide fate of Alaska island's feral cattle

Federal wildlife managers are still trying to determine the fate of feral cattle that have long gone without caretakers on an uninhabited island, descendants of cattle first brought there in the late 1880s to provide meat for whaling crews and fox traders.

www.adn.com

GA

feral cattle – Life Traces of the Georgia Coast

www.georgialifetraces.com

HI

Hawaiian wild cattle - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[JLS]

I think he’s referring to how some get pissed at having to pay some landowners for cow elk hunts.

Apples to oranges as to whether you agree with it versus is it legal. My only point was the landowner tolerance for wildlife tends to increase in conjunction with the money made off of wildlife.

 

[44hunter45]

I find the resistance to bison interesting when compared to feral horses... even more to feral cows, I just googled "feral cows [state]" and came 6 examples.

The NM case is notable as there was rancher resistance to lethally removing them.


Feral Cows Gila, NM

Forest Service rethinks plan to shoot feral cows - Silvercity Daily Press

A plan to employ aerial gunners to cull an estimated 250 unbranded feral cattle in the Wilderness District of the Gila National Forest is on hold. At their regular meeting, Grant Soil and Water Conservation District supervisors discussed the controversial plan, which ranchers first heard about...

www.scdailypress.com

Feral Cows, CA

Feral cattle terrorize hikers and devour native plants in a California national monument

Sand to Snow National Monument is a quiet place — its mountainous high desert and cascading streams a draw for those seeking panoramic views, tranquillity and solitude.

www.latimes.com

Feral Cows, AZ

Feds round up feral cattle along the Verde River after habitat damage complaints

Environmental groups say grazing cattle damage fragile riparian habitat and have pressured the Forest Service to remove animals that don't belong.

www.azcentral.com

AK

Feds still trying to decide fate of Alaska island's feral cattle

Federal wildlife managers are still trying to determine the fate of feral cattle that have long gone without caretakers on an uninhabited island, descendants of cattle first brought there in the late 1880s to provide meat for whaling crews and fox traders.

www.adn.com

GA

feral cattle – Life Traces of the Georgia Coast

www.georgialifetraces.com

HI

Hawaiian wild cattle - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

We could learn from New Zealand on feral critters. Too much good protein going to waste.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I find the resistance to bison interesting when compared to feral horses... even more to feral cows, I just googled "feral cows [state]" and came 6 examples.

The NM case is notable as there was rancher resistance to lethally removing them.

Part of the difference is location. No feral horses around CMR and anglos don't get any say on Reservation lands. I think you hear livestock producers complaining mightily about feral horses when they're impacting their bottom line, but they're a known entity with programs in place to round them up, etc. Nobody but feral horse advocates are happy with the situation as it sits now, but the main populations are not really in cropland or developed ag lands.

Bison as wildlife outside of a heavily managed park setting aren't really a known anything.

It was the same with wolves and grizz. Grizz never used to garner as much emotion as wolves in a lot of places in the west because grizz never were fully extirpated and people found value in their existence, regardless of their lifestyle or employment. Reintroducing wolves played to the greatest fears of folks who would have to deal with them, and unscrupulous politicians and power brokers seized on that in an effort to solidify power.

Same with Bison.

 

[mtmiller]

The irony of it all is brucellosis came from cattle to bison and elk, now bison are views as vermin for carrying it.

I also chuckle about where it originated. That APR thing is in Phillips Co, correct?

 

[ThunderNocked]

It is a goal of almost every hunter in Alaska I think. The several Bison draws we have here have the highest entries every year of any draw in the state I believe. We have two herds - 4-5 draws and 100ish permits given out.
I dream of it - and I'll put in for it almost every year.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I think my preferred stance for Bison would be a nice hike, short belly crawl, and then rising to my knees for a 30 yard archery shot.

Concerning the politics of bison management in MT, I think that ranching economics is going to help the APR implement their vision for bison in Phillips Co.

All of UPOM’s “save the cowboy”, rhetoric isn’t going to deny the hard economic reality of trying to compete in a global market with marginal production ability.

Those folks complaining that the APR is making it impossible for ranchers to compete for the ranches that come on the market fail to acknowledge that without APR as a buyer, those sellers wouldn’t be able to get full price for their property.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Part of the difference is location. No feral horses around CMR and anglos don't get any say on Reservation lands. I think you hear livestock producers complaining mightily about feral horses when they're impacting their bottom line, but they're a known entity with programs in place to round them up, etc. Nobody but feral horse advocates are happy with the situation as it sits now, but the main populations are not really in cropland or developed ag lands.

Bison as wildlife outside of a heavily managed park setting aren't really a known anything.

It was the same with wolves and grizz. Grizz never used to garner as much emotion as wolves in a lot of places in the west because grizz never were fully extirpated and people found value in their existence, regardless of their lifestyle or employment. Reintroducing wolves played to the greatest fears of folks who would have to deal with them, and unscrupulous politicians and power brokers seized on that in an effort to solidify power.

Same with Bison.

I don't disagree.

I think in many situations facts are facts so long as they support one's preferred narrative, and then they are lies if they don't.

To @Hammsolo's original question, my stance is that it would be great to have free ranging herds in areas that can biologically support them and where they don't create a ton of conflicts.

I don't think we will ever see free ranging herds of millions across the plains, but considering the articles I posted above I think that you could easily add a ton of small herds across the west. Maybe as many as 10-20k. If a herd of 300 cows can run around, there is no reason in my mind that they shouldn't be replaced with bison. Can one really argue those cows, couldn't just as easily down fences, contract brucellosis from elk and then transmit them to other herds?