MT Wilderness Association piece on domestic sheep grazing

[MTGomer]

Interesting article by MWA about public land grazing of domestic sheep in the Gravellies and Greenhorns.
These sheep supply Duckworth with their wool. Duckworth markets it as Montana grown, and it’s retailed at Schnees.

A Little Wool Goes a Long Way

wildmontana.org

 

[shoots-straight]

No mention of the conflict with Native Big Horn Sheep.

 

[Schaaf]

I fail to see the benefit of trying to build a relationship with someone that is the sole reason the Bighorn population is struggling or non existent in the Gravellys and Greenhorns.

 

[BigHornRam]

I see no benefit in making an enemy out of the Helle's.

 

[Irrelevant]

I wrote them (Duckworth) an email and asked about the potential for conflicts and if they were mitigating for BHS conflicts in anyway. I never got a response

 

[BigHornRam]

If you are looking for an article that dives into the conflict between wild sheep and domestics, here's a good one.

Bighorn sheep herds inter-mingling in southwestern Montana

A state biologist says bighorn sheep from a southwestern Montana herd has joined another herd on the other side of the Madison Range, traversing miles of sheep-free territory.

www.spokesman.com

"When Helle first heard about the Greenhorn reintroduction, he was opposed. He said he worried it could invite litigation against his operation and his federal grazing leases, which are just one piece of the ranch’s 100,000-acre grazing system.
But he also believed he might be able to work with FWP and conservationists to find ways to protect both domestic and wild – like keeping them separate.
“We can argue about the science all day long. But we can come together and say right now, ‘I think separation is a good thing,’ ” Helle said. “We don’t have a problem with bighorn sheep.”
They worked it out, and, in 2003 and 2004, FWP moved a total of 69 sheep into the range.
In Helle’s eyes, it’s gone well. He’s been in regular contact with the FWP area biologist, and he was happy to see the state offer a hunting tag for the herd this year."

 

[Schaaf]

Does Helle believe the science that says domestic sheep transmit pneumonia to native sheep?

Is that the science he’s saying could be argued all day long?

 

[Carnage2011]

Helle’s were very involved in the sheep transplant to the Greenhorns, and the WSF supported them when Hockett filed his lawsuit. I’m not a big fan of domestic sheep on public land, but this situation was different. Helle’s have been really solid and supportive of the Greenhorn herd.

The bighorns haven’t expanded anywhere remotely close to where the domestic sheep are grazing. There is literally a 10-12 mile buffer between them. The only area that they get close is when Helle’s gather their sheep and move them through the notch. At that point they are within 3 miles of the small band that has taken up residence in Snowslide.

I see no reason to make an enemy out of someone that has worked with the FWP and WSF. The struggles of the greenhorn sheep hasn’t been due to the domestic sheep.

 

[Carnage2011]

Does Helle believe the science that says domestic sheep transmit pneumonia to native sheep?

Is that the science he’s saying could be argued all day long?

John knows that domestic sheep transmit the disease to natives. His questions come from how close the sheep can be to each other.

 

[BigHornRam]

Here's another good article on the subject.

Study looks at why Montana's bighorn sheep are still plagued by die-offs

Considering the steep, rocky terrain they occupy, bighorn sheep seem to be a delicate species.

helenair.com

 

[Schaaf]

Thanks BHR and Carnage. I’ll take a look.

 

[Irrelevant]

There is literally a 10-12 mile buffer between them.

That's an afternoon jaunt for a wandering ram.

 

[theat]

I used to spend a good bit of time hunting in the Snowcrests and Gravellys. On several occasions I saw bighorn sheep in the Ledford Creek area of the northern Snowcrests. One of those times was in early summer while the herders were moving their flock off of the Robb-Ledford WMA and onto the higher elevation forest service lands. The domestic herd went by very close to a small group of bighorn ewes and lambs that were at the creek getting a drink. I was surprised to find out that FWP allows domestic sheep grazing on a WILDLIFE Management Area that was paid for with hunter dollars (Habitat Montana) in an area with wild sheep when they damn well know that it could lead to the decimation of the wild sheep. Interesting side note: This WMA was the first purchase that the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation ever made.

Back in 2009 FWP had their grazing plan on this WMA up for review. Despite overwhelming public support for eliminating domestic sheep use of the area, FWP decided to continue to allow them onto the WMA. To me it just seems completely to go against the purpose of FWP and WMA's to continue to put the commercial use of these areas above the wildlife that were supposedly the reason for our money to be spent on purchasing this land. Sad, especially wit the current state of bighorn herds all over the west.

 

[theat]

Helle’s were very involved in the sheep transplant to the Greenhorns, and the WSF supported them when Hockett filed his lawsuit. I’m not a big fan of domestic sheep on public land, but this situation was different. Helle’s have been really solid and supportive of the Greenhorn herd.

The bighorns haven’t expanded anywhere remotely close to where the domestic sheep are grazing. There is literally a 10-12 mile buffer between them. The only area that they get close is when Helle’s gather their sheep and move them through the notch. At that point they are within 3 miles of the small band that has taken up residence in Snowslide.

I see no reason to make an enemy out of someone that has worked with the FWP and WSF. The struggles of the greenhorn sheep hasn’t been due to the domestic sheep.

During the two winters about 10-12 years ago when FWP extended the general season in much of region 3 through december, I made several elk hunting trips to that area. During those trips I saw wild sheep numerous times on the bench just above the Ruby River Road somewhere between Greenhorn and Ice Creeks. I have also seen domestic sheep in that same spot, but I can't remember if that was at the same time as the wild sheep. Some pathogens can survive in the soil/foliage for many years.

FWP has killed sheep from the Greenhorn herd several times when they were approaching areas with domestic sheep including the Robb-Ledford WMA.

 

[Carnage2011]

During the two winters about 10-12 years ago when FWP extended the general season in much of region 3 through december, I made several elk hunting trips to that area. During those trips I saw wild sheep numerous times on the bench just above the Ruby River Road somewhere between Greenhorn and Ice Creeks. I have also seen domestic sheep in that same spot, but I can't remember if that was at the same time as the wild sheep. Some pathogens can survive in the soil/foliage for many years.

FWP has killed sheep from the Greenhorn herd several times when they were approaching areas with domestic sheep including the Robb-Ledford WMA.

Your observation of domestic between greenhorn and ice creek would have to be on private land. Either on Ted Turners which I highly doubt, or on McDonald’s who are outfitters in the area and I’ve never seen them with sheep in my life. The grazing that takes place in the gravellies is basically from Maverick basin to Coal Creek. I can’t speak to what the public land allotments were 12 years ago, but that would be a strange place to have domestic sheep. The public land there is steep, timbered, and would be tough to keep track of 10,000 sheep. The stuff on the bench is private.

You are correct about some of the sheep in the Robb/Ledford. That’s the area I was referring too regarding Helle’s trailing their sheep through.

 

[Carnage2011]

That's an afternoon jaunt for a wandering ram.

I don’t disagree. Is it safe for me to assume you haven’t spent any time where these sheep are? There hasn’t been a confirmed sheep sighting or a reported sheep sighting in the south end of the west gravellies yet. The snowcrest have a couple rams, but the gravelly bighorns pretty much end at Timber Creek.

 

[Carnage2011]

I used to spend a good bit of time hunting in the Snowcrests and Gravellys. On several occasions I saw bighorn sheep in the Ledford Creek area of the northern Snowcrests. One of those times was in early summer while the herders were moving their flock off of the Robb-Ledford WMA and onto the higher elevation forest service lands. The domestic herd went by very close to a small group of bighorn ewes and lambs that were at the creek getting a drink. I was surprised to find out that FWP allows domestic sheep grazing on a WILDLIFE Management Area that was paid for with hunter dollars (Habitat Montana) in an area with wild sheep when they damn well know that it could lead to the decimation of the wild sheep. Interesting side note: This WMA was the first purchase that the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation ever made.

Back in 2009 FWP had their grazing plan on this WMA up for review. Despite overwhelming public support for eliminating domestic sheep use of the area, FWP decided to continue to allow them onto the WMA. To me it just seems completely to go against the purpose of FWP and WMA's to continue to put the commercial use of these areas above the wildlife that were supposedly the reason for our money to be spent on purchasing this land. Sad, especially wit the current state of bighorn herds all over the west.

I agree with you 100% on this post. I’ve personally asked John about this area and the way he explains it is that this was part of the agreement. They would be allowed access to continue trailing though there and grazing as they go. I don’t agree with that practice in any way, shape or form...

Like I said, I’m not a fan of domestic sheep on public land in 99% of cases. I just have a ton of knowledge regarding this one and feel like Helle’s were supportive of the reintroduction of the greenhorn herd even though they knew it would inevitably end up in court.

 

[theat]

I agree with you 100% on this post. I’ve personally asked John about this area and the way he explains it is that this was part of the agreement. They would be allowed access to continue trailing though there and grazing as they go. I don’t agree with that practice in any way, shape or form...

Like I said, I’m not a fan of domestic sheep on public land in 99% of cases. I just have a ton of knowledge regarding this one and feel like Helle’s were supportive of the reintroduction of the greenhorn herd even though they knew it would inevitably end up in court.

Yeah, the Helle's were relatively supportive of the reintroduction with many caveats to make it acceptable to them. In my opinion, FWP should not have made that deal with all the compromises. Better to not have that reintroduction occur at all than one with the agreements made that will never allow this wild herd or any herd in those three mountain ranges to succeed in the long term. Until a political solution happens to retire domestic sheep grazing allotments from native bighorn sheep habitation (or allow non sheep grazers such as FNAWS and WSF bid on those leases), wild sheep will continue to suffer so that a few ranchers can graze their disease infested animals on public lands for well below average AUM at the expense of wildlife, habitat, hunters, and of course the American tax payer that heavily subsidizes these activities on public lands.

Not aiming this at you at all, but I find it funny and sad when I hear people defending domestic sheep grazing on public lands by saying things like "they have been doing it there forever, it is a historic use of the area, part of the long term culture of the area etc etc). I'm pretty sure that the wild sheep, that lived there for thousands of years before anyone from the ranchers heritage or culture even knew North America even existed, might feel that they have a slightly better claim to that designation.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Yeah, the Helle's were relatively supportive of the reintroduction with many caveats to make it acceptable to them. In my opinion, FWP should not have made that deal with all the compromises. Better to not have that reintroduction occur at all than one with the agreements made that will never allow this wild herd or any herd in those three mountain ranges to succeed in the long term. Until a political solution happens to retire domestic sheep grazing allotments from native bighorn sheep habitation (or allow non sheep grazers such as FNAWS and WSF bid on those leases), wild sheep will continue to suffer so that a few ranchers can graze their disease infested animals on public lands for well below average AUM at the expense of wildlife, habitat, hunters, and of course the American tax payer that heavily subsidizes these activities on public lands.

Not aiming this at you at all, but I find it funny and sad when I hear people defending domestic sheep grazing on public lands by saying things like "they have been doing it there forever, it is a historic use of the area, part of the long term culture of the area etc etc). I'm pretty sure that the wild sheep, that lived there for thousands of years before anyone from the ranchers heritage or culture even knew North America even existed, might feel that they have a slightly better claim to that designation.

So essentially you are making the same argument and are taking the same stance that orgs like the Sierra Club make for wolves.

No compromise, to hell with the impacts on locals they should just have to deal.

 

[Carnage2011]

Yeah, the Helle's were relatively supportive of the reintroduction with many caveats to make it acceptable to them. In my opinion, FWP should not have made that deal with all the compromises. Better to not have that reintroduction occur at all than one with the agreements made that will never allow this wild herd or any herd in those three mountain ranges to succeed in the long term. Until a political solution happens to retire domestic sheep grazing allotments from native bighorn sheep habitation (or allow non sheep grazers such as FNAWS and WSF bid on those leases), wild sheep will continue to suffer so that a few ranchers can graze their disease infested animals on public lands for well below average AUM at the expense of wildlife, habitat, hunters, and of course the American tax payer that heavily subsidizes these activities on public lands.

Not aiming this at you at all, but I find it funny and sad when I hear people defending domestic sheep grazing on public lands by saying things like "they have been doing it there forever, it is a historic use of the area, part of the long term culture of the area etc etc). I'm pretty sure that the wild sheep, that lived there for thousands of years before anyone from the ranchers heritage or culture even knew North America even existed, might feel that they have a slightly better claim to that designation.

I agree with 99% of this. I do think there were too many “agreements” made with Helle’s and it’s hurt the area of the snowcrest. I don’t believe the Gravellies are suffering from the domestic grazing though.