Comments open on draft EA for bighorn sheep in Little Belts

  • Thread starter Deleted member 20812
  • Start date
I also made comments supporting the reintroduction of Bighorn Sheep into the Little Belts.

JLS, thank you for the link.
 
If the habitat is high quality, why hasn't the existing herd grown? I'm seriously just asking, im no biologist.
 
If the habitat is high quality, why hasn't the existing herd grown? I'm seriously just asking, im no biologist.
Bighorn sheep are very slow to colonize new areas. It's a long ways from HD482 to the area they currently are. Odds are, a small band migrated together. With two rams and one ewe, it's easy to do the math and see this is a long term proposition that will suffer greatly from lack of genetic diversity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the habitat is high quality, why hasn't the existing herd grown? I'm seriously just asking, im no biologist.

When you have very small numbers to start, it only takes a little mortality to limit the growth curve, so predators or hard winters can keep it in check. Add some extra animals and they can overcome it and start to grow.
 
My one concern with this proposal (which I strongly support) is that it's not THAT far for sheep to disperse into Deep Creek and the Smith River drainages. There are two large sheep producers on the Smith, which unfortunately will hinder any long term genetic connectivity between bighorn sheep in the Holter Lake/Beartooth area with this herd. I can see one of these producers voicing strong opposition to this proposal, but hopefully I'm wrong. The other is a wonderful wildlife advocate and will likely support the reintroduction.

Here are a few pictures from the area where the current animals reside. The Judith watershed and Dry Fork of Belt Creek has some fantastic bighorn habitat in it.

November Photos 017.jpg

November Photos 008.jpg

November Photos 035.jpg
 
Lack of genetic connectivity to larger meta populations of sheep typically results in stagnant populations.
The good news is there are several parts of the Little Belts that can sustain a viable sheep population. Sounds like the wool growers are supportive of this, which is great news.

Get those comments in.
 
Thanks for the link. The Little Belts are a special place with so much possibility. I've always thought them an understated mountain range. It's exciting to think of expanding Bighorns in them. Comment sent.
 
My one concern with this proposal (which I strongly support) is that it's not THAT far for sheep to disperse into Deep Creek and the Smith River drainages. There are two large sheep producers on the Smith, which unfortunately will hinder any long term genetic connectivity between bighorn sheep in the Holter Lake/Beartooth area with this herd. I can see one of these producers voicing strong opposition to this proposal, but hopefully I'm wrong. The other is a wonderful wildlife advocate and will likely support the reintroduction.

Here are a few pictures from the area where the current animals reside. The Judith watershed and Dry Fork of Belt Creek has some fantastic bighorn habitat in it.

View attachment 146103

View attachment 146104

View attachment 146105
That's a beautiful area and I want to go back some day. Killed my first muledeer very near there.
 
Supporting comments are in. I see so much good sheep habitat devoid of sheep that it's good to see us moving toward more herds in the state.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,103
Messages
1,947,130
Members
35,028
Latest member
Sea Rover
Back
Top