Ad
Columnists View from the Center Bear Smart The Travel Troubleshooter Dear Abby Student Aide Of Sound Mind Others Say Powerful solutions You are What You Eat Out Standing in the Fields What's up in Durango Skies Watch Yore Topknot Local First RE-4 Education Update MECC Cares for kids

Agency’s politics override responsibility

Separating domestic and bighorn sheep ranges is a better way.
John Mumma

Majestic state animals are being killed for domestic sheep! It’s sad, but true. And, it doesn’t need to happen anymore.

In a series of moves by several parties over the past few weeks, wild bighorn sheep have been killed because they were subjected to contact by domestic sheep (Herald, Nov. 30).

Wild sheep have been exposed to the many diseases of domestic sheep ever since the first one was grazed in the mountains and native habitats of wild sheep over the past 150 years or so. Wild sheep have no resistance to the many viruses and diseases that are carried by domestic sheep. If the exposed wild sheep were to come back into contact with other wild sheep, they too would be subjected to a die off. It’s an altogether too frequent tragedy! Die-offs have been documented over many years all across the western United States where both kinds of sheep graze. This typically happens on federally managed lands.

Mounting tensions between user groups have continued and considerable research has been conducted. As a result, the Bureau of Land Management and United States Forest Service have tried to develop an agreement with the wool industry that will continue to allow for domestic sheep grazing. Unfortunately, all of these attempts clearly fall down on the side of domestic sheep. Where there is historic wild sheep range, the decision should be in favor of the wild sheep. Simply put, they have no place else to go, whereas domestic sheep have millions of acres of other public and private lands to graze.

A few years back, the Colorado Department of Agriculture and the Colorado Parks and Wildlife signed an agreement that outlined what actions are to be undertaken when conflicts are expected. In this case, exposure of wild sheep to domestic sheep, the wild sheep end up the loser.

This agreement is nothing more than a political compromise that eventually has a negative consequence for wild sheep! What’s even more objectionable is that the Colorado Constitution mandates that the wildlife of the state belongs to all the residents of the state. The state wildlife agency has trust responsibilities on behalf of all residents of the state. In short, they are to be the guardians of our wildlife. This is a long held trust that the Colorado Division of Wildlife takes seriously, except when politics rears up its ugly head and trumps the biologists.

If, however, the Forest Service or the BLM were to remove all domestic sheep from the areas where there is historic bighorn sheep habitat, then problems like these would be eliminated. This can be accomplished without removing all domestic sheep from the federal ranges, which is often used as an excuse to continue the status quo.

Unfortunately, the Forest Service and BLM have chosen to “play with fire” by allowing the two habitats to overlap and have allowed for nearly meaningless mitigation measures. Historic poor herding practices and even illegal trespass have contributed to the downfall of the mitigation measures.

The federal land managing agencies like the Forest Service and BLM have the authority to regulate where and when domestic livestock is allowed to graze. The Weminuche Wilderness and the north end of Missionary Ridge and headwaters of the Florida River drainage are areas where the overlap has been allowed and even encouraged by the Forest Service. An elaborate Environmental Impact Statement outlines many alternatives, and consequences to the bighorns are discussed. Even with the obvious consequences, the agencies propose to continue the long held preference by “playing with fire” and to expose the wild sheep to disease.

The Forest Service does have an opportunity to make sound resource decisions for the Weminuche Wilderness when they release the final decision for management. Just recently, the Payette National Forest in Idaho won a convincing legal decision concerning wild sheep and domestics. It found scientific consensus that there is a risk that the intermingling would result in deadly disease. The San Juan National Forest should do everything possible to avoid this scenario and the future killing of wild bighorn sheep.

John W. Mumma is a retired director of the Colorado Division of Wildlife, (now Colorado Parks and Wildlife) and retired Director of Range Management at the U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Reach him at jmmumma@msn.com.



Reader Comments