Caribou Gear Tarp

BHA Wild Sheep Policy Statement

WyoWoody

New member
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
20
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.
I agree and certainly understand. The messengers that concern this thread would be the Wild Sheep Foundation (really just a few hard core loyalists) and it's poorly thought out agenda to get rid of what they call "domestics" that arbitrarily now include pack llamas in wild sheep habitat. I say agenda, because that's exactly what it is. They shifted to over drive with heavy funding in about 2014 with the formation of the Kevin and Janine Rinke Thinhorn Initiative. Their Thinhorn Sheep Initiative was/is a well funded group (WSF and affiliates, Canadian and US outfitters, and many others) to fund and lobby with one mission and goal, and I quote: "NO CONTACT IN THE NORTH" and "Legislation is a part of the Solution"....meaning get rid of domestic sheep on public land, then get rid of domestic goats, and more recently now to include llamas in the mix both legislatively and regulatory. Keep in mind cattle and horses are golden and too powerful to be included with the "Domestics". They have these meetings almost annually inviting land management people from all federal agencies, preaching their agenda, suggesting policy, and even have tried legislative actions to rid "Domestics" form our public land. The WSF has become a very large fund raising machine doling out millions for conservation. A little for some, millions for others, but everyone gets some. Most state agencies appreciate the funding for needed projects in their populations. I appreciate their funding for many of their wildlife conservation projects.

However, they failed miserably with the false premise and promotion to add pack llamas as a threat to wild sheep and wildlife and need to be regulated though land resource management plans in the US.

"Helen Schwantje: In BC, we are working to update a 2003 Camelid Risk Assessment; hopefully, this update will give us some resolution to the camelid question. *(the CCH-17 was not released yet, and she seemed to know the outcome?)*. Kevin Hurley: In AK, per BOG regulations, you cannot use pack goats or llamas for hunting *(Kevin was incorrect you can use llamas)*, but you can use them for non-hunting recreation *(incorrect again you can use them for hunting)*. WSF would like to see these domestic animals banned from THS range on all federal lands in AK year-round." (page 22, number 3)

WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION THINHORN SHEEP SUMMIT II SYNTHESIS & SUMMARY [6/6/2017] April 11–12, 2017


Kevin Hurly has been trying to get rid of pack llamas on public land since 2007. Helen Schwantje from BC is in the same camp and in BC they have destroyed the recreation of pack goats and some jurisdictions for pack llamas in Canada. She authored the three papers on this subject "Communicable Disease Risks to Wildlife From Camelids in British Columbia-2003", "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-2005", and the last glimmer of hope from the WSF, "RISK ASSESSMENT ON THE USE OF SOUTH AMERICAN CAMELIDS FOR BACK COUNTRY TREKKING IN BRITISH COLUMBIA-2017" (CCH-17)

All three studies overwhelmingly lost credibility from numerous expert scientists and the camelid veterinarians along with numerous agencies. The last paper (CCH-17), which is nothing more than an update of the 2003 and 2005 papers, with no new information, has been rejected by many state and federal agencies. None of it peer reviewed and only hypothetical science (for the camelids), as admitted by he author herself. It's not to be used as a land management tool to justify the arbitrary elimination or restriction of an established user group on federal land for over 40 years. It's quoted in this thread a few times. I cringe when people quote from it, because I know how and why it was developed.

All of this is well documented with opinion pieces, science, and agency decisions. The good and the bad at https://PackLlamas.org
 

Attachments

  • doc157_2017-06-06wsfthinhornsheepsummitiisynthesis-summary (1).pdf
    1.1 MB · Views: 0

WyoWoody

New member
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
20
page 4:
Goal #2: Separation
Ensure legislative or regulatory policies are in place to provide
effective temporal and spatial separation between thinhorn sheep
and domestic sheep or goats, in all U.S. and Canadian jurisdictions
with thinhorn sheep. In cooperation with WSF Chapters and
Affiliates and partner agencies or organizations, and based
on the WAFWA Wild Sheep Working Group 2012 document
“Recommendations for Domestic Sheep and Goat Management
in Wild Sheep Habitats,” WSF will help develop comprehensive
strategies to facilitate separation in jurisdictions with thinhorn
sheep. Develop/disseminate a “thinhorn sheep-specific” brochure
discussing implications of contact between domestic sheep and
goats and thinhorn sheep. Promote Movi-surveillance/sampling
protocol for domestic sheep and goats and thinhorn sheep, in all
four northern jurisdictions. Based on recommendations of the
September 2017 BC Camelid Risk Assessment, advocate for no
use of domestic sheep, goats, llamas, alpacas, etc. as pack animals
used in thinhorn sheep range for hunting, trekking, weed control,
or other purposes.

Page 6:
Goal #2: Separation
Ensure legislative or regulatory policies are in place to ensure
effective temporal and spatial separation between domestic sheep
and goats, infected bighorn sheep and/or mountain goats and
healthy bighorn sheep in all U.S., Canada and Mexico jurisdictions
with bighorn sheep. In cooperation with WSF Chapters and
Affiliates and partner agencies or organizations, and based
on the WAFWA Wild Sheep Working Group 2012 document
“Recommendations for Domestic Sheep and Goat Management
in Wild Sheep Habitats,” WSF will help develop comprehensive
strategies to facilitate separation within jurisdictions with bighorn
sheep. Based on recommendations of the September 2017 BC
Camelid Risk Assessment, advocate for no use of domestic sheep,
goats, llamas, alpacas, etc. as pack animals used in thinhorn sheep
range for hunting, trekking, weed control, or other purposes.


September 2017 BC Camelid Risk Assessment, their go to non peer reviewed document, dismissed by scientists, veterinarian experts, and multiple land management agencies, yet there it is!


We don't want the BHA, a defender of Public Land Owners parroting this non-science falsely promoted legislatively and regulatory agenda concerning pack llamas.
 

Attachments

  • doc38_consvisions2020_dec27_low (1).pdf
    2.3 MB · Views: 1
Last edited:

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
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?
"I do know some people struggle with explaining their position without coming across like a real putz. Whatever works."
Well at least you recognize that it does work. That could have something to do with understanding the issues and being honest. It also requires some degree of communication skills even if they are not always as good as you say they should be. So far NPS, BLM, and USFS have all reversed their positions on this issue where I hunt. So I still have access where it would have otherwise been denied if WSF had their way. www.alaskallamas.com has the details on the reversal of those agency proposals involving pack llamas if you want more information on that.
 

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
Also "Read the Commentary" at www.packllamas.org This is about the Wild Sheep Foundation and their role in the disease issue. As previously mentioned by another commenter, it is very puzzling why WSF endorses cattle as "safe" when they are the host reservoir for Johnes' disease not to mention a whole myriad of other bovid diseases. Wild sheep are bovids. So this seems very illogical with respect to the fundamentals of taxonomy and its role in disease epidemiology. Johnes' disease has historically devastated some wild sheep herds. It's more about politics with WSF and not so much about science.
 
Last edited:

mtmiller

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2001
Messages
10,229
Location
Montana
High-mortality disease events are not the only potential concerns for wild sheep. @mtmiller post some pics of your scabby sheep.
Here are a few. Didn't take many shots as not pretty pics.

Different stages.
51095368332_86853a82f7_5k.jpg


51095368612_1ae803c8cb_5k.jpg


51095818088_d35ae4edd1_5k.jpg


51095350984_c2a11a58f9_3k.jpg
 

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
If this is contagious ecthyma (orf):
  • Ecthyma occurs throughout Alaska wherever Dall sheep, muskox or mountain goats are found. This is per the following ADF&G link:

This disease is found throughout Alaska in areas where there is no livestock (which is most of the state) and there is no access with pack stock (which is also most of the state). The origin of this disease in wildlife in Alaska is unknown. It may have been naturally occurring in Alaska's wildlife populations since before human settlement.

According to recognized US camelid experts CE is rare in llamas. It is far more prevalent in humans. This is a zoonotic disease. Wild sheep can infect humans (i.e. direct contact by handling dead sheep). Humans can infect wild sheep (i. e. wildlife biologists sedating and handling wild sheep). WSF endorsed Canadian papers try to implicate llamas as spreading this disease to mountain goats in BC by citing circumstantial evidence (hunting guides unconfirmed siting of pack llamas in general area so must have been llamas that infected wild goats with CE in that area).
 

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
And of course those Wild Sheep Foundation endorsed Canadian papers weren't peer reviewed which again brings us right back to this.

 

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
So is it beginning to become clear why pack llama watchdogs have been able to completely reverse an impressive list of proposals by government agencies to restrict/prohibit pack llamas based on these bogus disease accusations? Meanwhile WSF and BHA still has their head stuck in the mud. They're going to run out of breath. They don't have a leg to stand on on their perceived pack llama disease issue.
 

WyoWoody

New member
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
20
If this is contagious ecthyma (orf):
  • Ecthyma occurs throughout Alaska wherever Dall sheep, muskox or mountain goats are found. This is per the following ADF&G link:

This disease is found throughout Alaska in areas where there is no livestock (which is most of the state) and there is no access with pack stock (which is also most of the state). The origin of this disease in wildlife in Alaska is unknown. It may have been naturally occurring in Alaska's wildlife populations since before human settlement.

According to recognized US camelid experts CE is rare in llamas. It is far more prevalent in humans. This is a zoonotic disease. Wild sheep can infect humans (i.e. direct contact by handling dead sheep). Humans can infect wild sheep (i. e. wildlife biologists sedating and handling wild sheep). WSF endorsed Canadian papers try to implicate llamas as spreading this disease to mountain goats in BC by citing circumstantial evidence (hunting guides unconfirmed siting of pack llamas in general area so must have been llamas that infected wild goats with CE in that area).
Yes it is amazing, how misinformation flows. The suggesting, through pictures of ORF on wild sheep, that camelids somehow are responsible is the pinnacle of how desperate they are. I remember when they tried to do it in BC, even got some traction in the press, only to be batted down by the scientists who know better.

They should stop spreading misinformation in this group. Zero credibility!
If this is contagious ecthyma (orf):
  • Ecthyma occurs throughout Alaska wherever Dall sheep, muskox or mountain goats are found. This is per the following ADF&G link:

This disease is found throughout Alaska in areas where there is no livestock (which is most of the state) and there is no access with pack stock (which is also most of the state). The origin of this disease in wildlife in Alaska is unknown. It may have been naturally occurring in Alaska's wildlife populations since before human settlement.

According to recognized US camelid experts CE is rare in llamas. It is far more prevalent in humans. This is a zoonotic disease. Wild sheep can infect humans (i.e. direct contact by handling dead sheep). Humans can infect wild sheep (i. e. wildlife biologists sedating and handling wild sheep). WSF endorsed Canadian papers try to implicate llamas as spreading this disease to mountain goats in BC by citing circumstantial evidence (hunting guides unconfirmed siting of pack llamas in general area so must have been llamas that infected wild goats with CE in that area).
 

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
Again, recent proposals by NPS, USFS, and BLM in Alaska to prohibit/restrict pack llamas based on a WSF endorsed (and now BHA endorsed) perceived pack llama disease threat have been reversed by pack llama watchdogs. See for more details:

www.alaskallamas.com
www.packllamas.org

Just thought I would throw that back into this thread again due to lots of complaints about not understanding some of my comments in this thread. That just might have to do with jumping into this conversation without reading from the beginning of the thread.
 

WyoWoody

New member
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
20
Here are a few. Didn't take many shots as not pretty pics.

Different stages.
51095368332_86853a82f7_5k.jpg


51095368612_1ae803c8cb_5k.jpg


51095818088_d35ae4edd1_5k.jpg


51095350984_c2a11a58f9_3k.jpg
Sore mouth (ORF) is principally found in sheep and goats. Other ruminants* that may on occasion develop sore mouth include musk oxen and gazelles.

* A ruminant is an even-toed, cloven-hoofed mammal belonging to the suborder Ruminantia that digests plant-based food using a four-chambered stomach. Aside from goats and sheep, this may include chevrotains, pronghorns, deer, giraffes

Llamas are not in the sub-order Ruminantia. They’re not in the family Bovidae

ORF is caused by the parapox virus.

Llamas didn’t cause that beautiful ram to develop ORF. It’s a false insinuation to the members here.
 

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32
At least the government agencies I dealt with weren't complete Neanderthals. I never felt like I had to put my presentations in a Youtube video so that they could follow along. WSF and BHA leadership realizes that the average US adult has only a 7th or 8th grade reading level and will never be able to figure out their camelid prohibition endorsements.
 
Last edited:

Cick1000

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2021
Messages
32

Quote from the above link:

"At least a modicum of scientific literacy is important for citizens. As the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry’s primer observed: “It is imperative that policy-makers, the media, and the general public are able to distinguish the facts from mere interpretations of a biased constituency. Decision-makers and those who inform them must be able to judge the quality of the science and reasoning that supports a position and must know whether a set of scientific findings is really meaningful to a decision.”

"However, even when the science is sound and the data are “meaningful,” politicians and government officials commonly ignore them, often in the cause of bureaucratic empire-building, advancing some ideological goal, or capitulating to activists."

I wonder if the above quote could apply to the WSF and BHA endorsed perceived pack llama disease threat? So far the WSF & BHA fan club has dismissed out of hand all of the following: 1) ADF&G official position on the pack llama perceived disease issue 2) AASRP policy statement (representing 1000 veterinarians) that disagrees with pack llama prohibitions proposed by government agencies 3) Reversal of US Chugach National Forest final forest plan by pack llama watch dogs 4) Reversal of AK-NPS proposal (annual compendiums) by pack llama watchdogs 5) Reversal of BLM Bering Sea Western Interior Resource Management Plan by pack llama watch dogs. The RMP had proposed to identify pack llamas as a disease threat. 6) Dr. Kutzler public testimony of record (ANWR hearing transcript) where she states that horses present a greater risk to Dall's sheep than llamas. Note that Dr. Kutzler, Department of Rangeland Sciences at Oregon State University has a PHD from Cornell.
 
Last edited:
Top