Could someone explain why there is still domestic sheep grazing on public lands in the US in areas historically inhabited by wild sheep, or share a link on this subject? Here are my assumptions on the issue - please correct my misunderstandings.
1. Domestic sheep grazing on public lands provides a minuscule benefit, if any benefit at all, to the US economy, local economies, or provide good jobs to American families.
2. The price if allotments for domestic sheep grazing on public lands do not come anywhere close covering the economic losses incurred by domestic sheep grazing, namely habitat degradation and economic loss due to suppression of wild sheep population numbers.
3. Millions of Americans would like to see many more wild sheep on the landscape in areas historically inhabited by wild sheep. Primary interests include sightseeing, hunting, and biological diversity.
4. The number of Americans desiring domestic sheep grazing on public lands historically inhabited by wild sheep to continue or expand is outnumbered by the persons in #3 above by a factor of 100,000:1, or some similarly ratio.
5. State domestic sheep growers association chapters maintain a powerful control over state legislative bodies, perpetuating a small industry for the benefit a very small number of individuals, at the expense of tens of millions of lost dollars to the statecaused by the absence of wild sheep that could be on the landscape.
What would it take for one western state to:
1. Conduct a study on the economic benefit of putting x100 times more wild sheep on the landscape in their state.
2. Increase the price of domestic sheep grazing allotments on public lands to offset the economic losses incurred by such allotments (effectively ending domestic sheep grazing in these areas).
3. Financially incentivize sheep growers on adjacent private lands within historic wild sheep habitat to phase out their sheep, and/or implement required robust disease testing and immunization for all domestic head in those areas.
www.wyofile.com
