THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM AMERICAN BIG GAME HUNTING FORUMS


Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Battle of the Bighorns
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
Bighorn Sheep Transplants

Interesting to see that Montana residents are mad that the Fish, Wildlife, and Parks there transplanted a bunch of Montana bighorn sheep to neighboring states to supplement their existing bighorn herds or to start new ones. I know in the past Wyoming has supplied antelope, moose and elk to several states that now enjoy tremendous success with these animals. What do you all think about this??

MG
 
Posts: 1029 | Registered: 29 January 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of IdahoVandal
posted Hide Post
I think its a good idea. In some respects its like "spreading your money around". If one population begins to decline for an unknown reason the others are there as a bank. I think this especially important for BHS as they seem very susceptible to disease.

We have a bunch of them in captivity here at our Veterinary Medicine School, they are interesting to watch in the afternoons-- very active critters.

IV


minus 300 posts from my total
(for all the times I should have just kept my mouth shut......)
 
Posts: 844 | Location: Moscow, Idaho | Registered: 24 March 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I can see how I would be pissed if I was a Montana resident. Saying that they have to wait before transplanting them to another area in Montana sounds like typical bureaucratic bullshit to me.

FWS folks often try hard to do the right thing, but like lots of businesses, they are ultimately managed by politicians, which we know is a recipe for screw ups. Also, just like in any business, there are idiots in the organization, so given a small group control in an issue like this doesn't work well either a lot of the time.

Lastly, I wonder what are the facts of how big a herd can be and actually be more susceptable
to disease/die-off???
 
Posts: 3563 | Location: GA, USA | Registered: 02 August 2004Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
It's a good idea, get some gentetic diversity. I can sympathize with the hunters of the state that loses the 200 sheep. But like MG said there are wildlfie trades almost every year.

In some sheep areas, we have them to, the number of ewes to rams is so excessive that there are actually ewes that go unbred. So what does the G&F here do? They open the sheep area to licenses for any sheep. Rams, ewes, or lambs. A ram can only breed so many ewes,(what a life)so a ewe who doesn't produce isn't adding to that particular herd, or flock, or what ever they call a group of wild sheep. Some ewes have been found to not produce offsring more than twice in their life time. Better to give some of them away so that they can have a better ram to ewe ratio. Versus a ewe that is baron.
 
Posts: 10478 | Location: N.W. Wyoming | Registered: 22 February 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of KC Carlin
posted Hide Post
If it wasn't for transplants, States like Oregon wouldn't have any sheep. Our first transplant was in 1971. Today there are 4000 sheep in Oregon, with 80+ lucky hunters getting a tag each year.
We have since been the host state for many transplants the latest being North Dakota.
Now some people don't like it, but if Oregon sheep have a major die off due to pneumonia in the future guess who we will be calling for some help. Wink
About 30 years ago there was a transplant of elk out of north eastern Oregon. The trade was wild turkeys. People still bitch and moan about losing elk for turkeys. The funny thing is that those same folks have some pretty good turkey hunting these days.
 
Posts: 295 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 24 June 2006Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia