Lobbying against a hobby: Disease keeps bighorn sheep at the edge

[katqanna]

Lobbying against a hobby: Disease keeps bighorn sheep at the edge

Article on the domestic sheep/goat disease pneumonia, that is decimating the Bighorn Sheep Populations.

Also, for those wanting more particulars, here are some collected resources on the subject I have accumulated over the last year.
Bighorn Sheep Research

 

[schmalts]

I don't get it. Where are all the wolf, bison, and other tree hugging groups on these problems? You think they would be all over this thing as well.

 

[Oak]

I don't get it. Where are all the wolf, bison, and other tree hugging groups on these problems? You think they would be all over this thing as well.

There isn't as much money in it, and the opposition (ranchers) are politically well-connected. They also don't have the ESA to work with.

 

[Big Fin]

There isn't as much money in it, and the opposition (ranchers) are politically well-connected. They also don't have the ESA to work with.

^^^What he said.

If there isn't any money in it, those other groups won't be there. Sheep are not a bovine, as are wolves. lynx, and grizzly. Those are all members of the bovine family - Cash cow.

 

[katqanna]

Schmalts, part of what goes on in conservation is marketing and I found this out majorly this late spring and early summer, when I called just about all the conservation groups in and around Gallatin Valley, letting them know what was going on with the elk situation. They are all, and have been on, one of my email lists, but none of them cared. One of them told me that there were lots of elk and they didnt see the problem. I replied back that the problem was USDA APHIS and DOL control over our wildlife, asked if they had a problem with the bison, which of course they did, cause that is monetarily fashionable. I explained that it was the same situation, through the disease of brucellosis, that what they have done with bison, they are beginning to do with elk. They simply did not care. It appears to not be marketable.

So I will be curious when the legislation tries to get control and elk slaughters, like the bison begin, and it is monetarily fashionable to send out emails begging people to send money to their conservation group, to fund their elk salvation efforts, how they are going to answer the question of, "Where the hell were you when this was first brought to your attention repeatedly?"

When I was with GWA, this domestic sheep disease vector was something of concern and we did speak out about it. I know they are still concerned with it. Nancy and I drove to Gardiner. I took my camera, documented where Hoppe had his sheep originally by the river, as well as where he moved them near his house on Jardine road. I went on the backside of public land and hiked to an overview to get a panoramic shot that overlooked Hoppes property, which showed the sheep and the close proximity to the wild bison there, less than a 1/4 of a mile. Those sheep not only naturally carry pneumonia that is lethal to Bighorns, but they also naturally carry Malignant Catarrhal Fever, which is lethal to bison (they dont have to come in contact, it is carried by aerosol up to three miles).

There are a number of livestock diseases that are dangerous to wildlife. I need to make time soon, but a repeated subject being brought up, is the association of livestock and the midges in riparian areas that cause EHD, which did so much damage to our deer populations this summer. Needs looking into.

While not monetarily fashionable for the "New Conservation", we need to find ways to get our wildlife protected from livestock. How is it the DOL can have 81-2-120 to manage our bison for brucellosis which is basically a non-issue, but hypocritically we dont have legislation to protect our wildlife on public lands from domestics? When our Bighorn sheep get wiped out from pneumonia, why dont the sheep ranchers or hobby farmers have to monetarily compensate wildlife for those losses, like they demand for wildlife predation?

 

[BBwheelgunner]

^^^What he said.

If there isn't any money in it, those other groups won't be there. Sheep are not a bovine, as are wolves. lynx, and grizzly. Those are all members of the bovine family - Cash cow.

LOL, I got hung up on this until I read to the end. I was questioning either A. your intelligence or B. your typing skills!

Thats funny stuff, but very true!

 

[Ben Lamb]

I don't get it. Where are all the wolf, bison, and other tree hugging groups on these problems? You think they would be all over this thing as well.

To be fair, those groups were standing shoulder to shoulder with hunters when we fought off the stupid transplanting bills during the session, they work to eliminate problematic grazing allotments, and they have been very helpful in changing to brucellosis regulations in favor of wildlife & livestock producers, establish & work with various citizen working groups and they lend their collective voices to issues that matter to hunters like land management planning, etc. by and large, the positions they take and fight for often times help hunters, whether we ant to admit it or not.

 

[katqanna]

To be fair, those groups were standing shoulder to shoulder with hunters when we fought off the stupid transplanting bills during the session,

Ben, I see two issues here, 1. there are "conservationists" that are also hunters, and though they may not be your dyed in the wool rod and gun club type of hunter, they advocate for conservation as the primary to get things done. I know hunters at Buffalo Field Campaign. Matt Skoglund with NRDC is a hunter. Lloyd Dorsey with the GYC is a hunter and used to be a rep for the Wyoming Wildlife Federation. As a result of this website I have met even more hunters, independent of the common hunters organizations, some of which took time to go to Helena during the legislative session and protest on behalf of wildlife without stating they were hunters.

Some view themselves as ethical, even naturalist hunters, a few as subsistence hunters. They generally dont have a voice for representation by hunting groups and some of them voice disagreement with sportsmen with atv's and such. As such, preferring the wild to be wild, being more naturalistic, and even viewing hunting as a very personal, not public, practice, you, and other "hunters" testified beside these quiet hunters, not even knowing some of them were hunters.

At one of the GWA meetings, about 6 months after I had been attending (I am not a quiet person, unless I am severely pissed off or getting the lay of the land, so I expressed opinions, asked questions, was a vocal participant), one of the members said something to the effect that not all the members were hunters. I looked at him questioning and asked who wasnt, because I was sure I had correctly cataloged their comments and they were all hunters. He said, "Well you arent." I asked what made him think I wasnt, that I hunted and fished. I am just not as vocal about it, or wasnt. But due to the threats I see to hunting, I feel the need to take something that is generally more private for me, and make it more public, to fight for our rights so we dont loose them and become another game ranching European model Texas.

Just because some conservationists didnt wear hunters orange to Helena, didnt make them non-hunters. And to pursue certain types wildlife advocacy or habitat conservation, some hunters have to identify more with the conservation organization to get it done. For example, what hunting group has been on the forefront of the bison issue, not playing politics, out in the field to protect them, loud and visible like a Teddy Roosevelt carrying a big stick, getting that field information out to the public to restore a wildlife species back to Montana?

The 2nd issue, is that not all conservation groups are alike, not even local chapters of larger organizations, and who adds their voice on certain issues in Helena, does not mean that it was not done to help advance a donating membership base. There is a disease within some of "conservation" and money is a part of it.