Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Montana FWP slaughters bighorn sheep on public land to "protect" domestics

In yet another example of our hidebound State administration�s blind adherence to the past, FWP killed seven bighorn sheep yesterday (as far as we know, if not it�s imminent). These are sheep that were re-introduced into the Greenhorn Mountains south of Alder the last two winters; 29 in February 2003, and another 39 this past winter. And yes, winter must be past as I got my first sunburn last week. This bighorn situation burns me, too!
For those who aren�t familiar with the area; the Greenhorns are sort of a bridge between the northern ends of the Gravelly and Snowcrest ranges, all of which could be tremendous bighorn habitat. The problem is that two domestic sheep producers summer their bands in the Gravellies (on public land), and to get the woolies there they trail them across the Robb-Ledford Wildlife Management Area, which lies along the west slope of the Snowcrest. These seven bighorns were four to five miles away from the sheep trail, on primarily State and BLM land. FNAWS spent approximately $5000 in two failed attempts to capture and relocate them. Both sheep producers have kill permits, and are authorized to shoot bighorns in proximity to their domestics. Four to five miles does not strike me as proximity, some of the bighorns are radio collared so their whereabouts are easily monitored, and what flabbergasts me even more is that our top local FWP brass is fine with this. Some of the lower echelon biologists aren�t, and that�s the only way we found out about this travesty.
Allow me to clarify that I have no problem with these producers killing bighorns on private land. Fine; machine gun �em if they want. But the Robb-Ledford WMA was purchased with sportsmen�s dollars to provide habitat for WILDLIFE, and to preclude bighorn sheep from there because domestics are seasonally trailed across it (and my understanding is that they take their sweet time about it, too, because God knows you don�t want to hurry sheep!), well, that is just flat WRONG. I dropped in on Pat Flowers, our local FWP head this morning, to get his side of this. He says they�re bound by the Environmental Assessment for the reintroduction, as well as a Memorandum of Understanding that preclude those sheep setting foot outside the Greenhorns. Both those agreements totally protect the interests of the domestic sheep producers, at the expense of native wildlife on our PUBLICLY owned lands. It�s the same exact situation as the Interagency Bison Management Plan, which stops Yellowstone bison from migrating into Montana in some misguided effort to protect nearly non-existent cattle in the area from those feckid diseased bison. Never mind that everything from elk to magpies carry brucellosis, too, and that there has never been a confirmed case of bison-cattle disease transmission, noooo� we have these agreements that are written in stone, yea verily, handed down from on high. God forbid we should embrace bison and bighorns as assets, actual revenue-producing assets to Montana. No sirree, it�s more important to protect the Church Universal�s suddenly acquired cows, even though we (all of us) already paid �em $13 million in conservation easements, allegedly to protect wildlife habitat. </end sarcasm>
I understand the current political realities, and that FWP is operating in what could be considered a hostile regime (until November!). And what�s worse, most of us local sportsmen that are involved in this issue voted for �em! There�s a substantial number of disenfranchised Republican sportsmen in Montana that are mad as hell, and before the next election we plan to make sure the public is made aware of what�s gone on under the Martz administration (and this is just the tip of it).
Vote. Early & often. It�s a Montana tradition ;-) That, and call the FWP brass and our politicians & let �em know this kind of thing cannot continue. I�ll post the numbers if there�s interest, & it�s OK with Mr. Rick.

Are the bighorns shot outside of the management area to prevent them from getting a disease from the domestics and transfering it to the whole herd?

Not in this case. Although, in some convoluted sense that is why the kill permits are issued, but the rationale is more to protect the permittees than the bighorns.
Domestic sheep are death on bighorns. There's numerous diseases that a bighorn exposed to domestics can and will carry back to the rest. But my understanding is that is only the case with rams. Rams will breed domestics. Rare, but it happens. Ewes just don't go looking to mingle with domestics. These bighorns they shot were ewes. A buddy of mine went to a meeting of the powers that be about this issue yesterday. The emphasis was that these are not just plain old sheep, but the finest Rambouillets that decades of closely supervised sheep couplings can produce, and they don't want any bighorn rams fooling around their flocks. I kid you not!
The only way the permittees would sign off on the EA and MOU, is that bighorns would not be allowed anywhere near their domestics. Not vice versa.

Rimrock--as someone who will never draw a bighorn tag if I live 20,000 years, that strikes me as insanity. One thing I've never noticed a shortage of in Montana is domestic sheep---way too many in fact.

Yes, it is insanity. The logic behind this is so hairball that I was thinking that my previous explanation about the kill permits had to be mistaken, but I just called to verify it, and yes, that is exactly the case.

When was the WMA purchased? Was disclosure made that re-introduction of the bighorns might cause problems to ongoing domestic grazing?

Bill -how about talking with the Chronicle to have them run some press on this issue?

"GET TO THE HILL"

Dogz

By the way I think this stufff is total BS-just another case of the land gods getting their way! They have to be the most pampered and babied bunch of business people out there.


(on a another note my bruin presentation in Helena went well-let me now if you ever need me to do it for your Boze group)

Sounds like a double-edged sword and the bighorns get both sides. That sucks.



Reason I asked about the diseases, is I know of the opposite set-up near a bighorm re-intro here in UT. There's a line in the sand and any domestics over that line are supposed to be shot. However, another heard just had a ram walk across the salt flats to take up residence in another range which has domestic sheep grazing. I hope they catch him before he gets back to the rest of the herd! This population isn't to huntable levels, but is isolated enough that I think it could be a possibility in the near future.



We (humans) have had certain sheep living in such close quarters for so long that they've built of resistance to many diseases that the wild one's don't. It's just a shame that a couple of loose domestics can wipe out a whole herd of the 'better' ones.

I can get an exact answer if you'd like, but I'm going to take a WAG and say the WMA is about twenty years old. So it way pre-dates the bighorn re-introduction. Disclosure was most definitely made to the the sheepmen prior to the reintro. In fact, nothing happens around there without their approval. That is why the MOU is so stringent about no bighorns anywhere near the domestics. But killing ewes four to five miles away? That's a little extreme, don't you think?
Mark; oh, yes.... watch for this in the news. In fact, it looks like AP is going to pick it up. The feces is going to hit the whirling blades on this deal....

Sheep MUST migrate to provide genetic diversity, which wards off desease. In Arizona, they traquilize and move sheep with helicopters to achieve what nature would do without urban sprawl and interstate highways. Most of the deseases that wipe out big horns are introduced by domestics. We have lost many sheep over the last few years to precisely that. Its a sad day for the winter thaw to expose two dozen dead big horns. But this happens year after year, on public land in Jackson Hole. I will congradulate y'all on having a conservation-related topic or two from time to time.

Let me get this straight, if the Bighorns leave their specified are they're shot on sight. If wolves leave their reintroduction area, all is well. Am I missing something here?????? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />