Non-native species introduction?

[1_pointer]

What are your feelings for the introduction of a non-native big game species to your state?

My reason for asking is that Mtn Goats were introduced to UT and there is no evidence that Mtn Goats ever inhabited UT.

 

[BuzzH]

I think its fine if the species is at least native to N.A.

But, it should be limited to situations, like goats, where they wont get out of control and force something else out.

Its a touchy subject for sure.

Last I checked you cant have too many goats or sheep on the wall.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Did you know Mouflon were turned loose in western CO about 40 years ago? They didn't last.

I'm a little surprised goats weren't native to UT. I don't think there's any harm. If there is it would be easy to get rid of them all.

 

[BuzzH]

All you'd have to do is a hire a guide!

 

[Oak]

That's a pretty tough call. It seems like there's always unforseen problems when a non-native species is introduced into an ecosystem. I think it needs to be seriously analyzed on a case by case basis before being done. But, as the others said, goats and sheep up high may be less of a threat, and could probably be controlled fairly easily if a problem arose. Also, those animals wouldn't be competing with grass for cows, so it should be an easier sell to the ranchers.

Oak

 

[1_pointer]

What about endemic plants of low populations in the alpine areas? My advisor who went to the meetings years ago said that only one botanist brought this up!

Buzz- I agree, I plan on putting a few goats and sheep on my walls!

 

[Tom]

Aoudads are becoming a problem here, as I understand it. They're in the wild and smart. In trying to control them, the legislature made it legal to shoot them from the air also. I hope they don't get out of control. It sure provides a lot of interesting hunting though.

I know one high fence ranch with aoudads, axis and fallow. Hunters would go there after $750 aoudads and not be able to get one. They would end up getting a $1000 axis or fallow instead, because it was often easier. The owner finally had to put the aoudads on special for $150 to get their population down, so the axis and fallow could make a comeback. He'll probably have to do it again in a few years.

We have over 50 introduced species here with a population of about 220,000 total, many of them free ranging. Plus, about 1.2 million wild hogs, not counted. We have a healthy population of whitetail also, about 4 million. There is potential conflict of the species, but things seem to be going well.

One of the conflicts is that axis deer are about 60% grass and 40% browse where whitetail are mostly browse. The axis can switch to the whitetail food in hard times for grasses. We have open season all year on them to control them though. Plus, the high fence people have even more specific control over species and feed availability within the area they manage. That helps them manage the conflicts with native species a lot in their area.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 03-17-2003 10:15: Message edited by: Tom ]</font>

 

[Lostagain]

I think there are way too many unforseen problems from introducing/reintroducing species into an area.

One quick example=== Californians introed into Colorado, look at all their problems now.

 

[MarlandS]

I know you guys are talking about big game animals more than anything, but when I think of introduced species I think of the Ringneck Pheasant, that seems to have been a smashing success without harming native species or has there been problems west of the Mississippi that I haven't heard of?

 

[Ithaca 37]

No problems with them, chukars, huns or Himilayan snow partridge that I know of.

 

[MarlandS]

While that may be true in some regions in the last 50 years or so, attempts to introduce pheasants started in the 1730's I doubt there were many native species disappearing due to habitat loss back then. The first successful introductions were in the 1880's.

Also , pheasant have been blamed for the decline of the Prairie Chicken
http://www.yolo.com/audubon/PHEASANT.HTML

 

[Elkhunter]

I don't think any species that is not native should be introduced to an area.

 

[tmsander]

I would prefer not to hunt any big game animal in areas it is not native to. For me, it takes away part of the wishy washy mistique of the hunt.

 

[Washington Hunter]

Pheasants took the place of native birds that were wiped out due to destruction of their habitat. Pheasants are able to do well in habitat the other birds could not survive in. At least pheasants provide us with a bird to hunt. Without them I suppose there would be a lot of good bird dogs that would be out of a job. Chukars, of course, live where nothing else ever lived anyway, so no problem there either.

 

[dgibson]

I'm no biological expert, but from my observations there are a lot more examples of bad things happening than good when foreign species are introduced; or at least undesirable things. English sparrows, the disease that killed the American chestnut, the various parasitic or predatorial fishes from overseas, Australian rabbits, etc. There are now more oryx in Texas than in Africa (I think it's oryx, anyway)--what would happen if they spread out of their ranches? The issue of introducing an American species somewhere else in America where it's never been isn't quite so pat, but it still doesn't seem to be a good idea.