# Bighorn Sheep (Stansbury)



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

I thought all of the Stansbury sheep were dead. I guess not. I saw these photos on a Tooele page I follow. The girl took them today.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

You didn't hear the news?
There was a story that ran in the Tooele paper about a month ago.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

Looks like the DWR transplanted 47 California Bighorns back in January. Good to see sheep back out there.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Roughly half came from A.I. and the other half from the Newfies.


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

Thats awesome! My brother and I joined MW on his 2015 tag one trip out. It was a great time watching those sheep on that mountain. If I wasn't 12 years in on OIL moose and pushing my mid 40s I would switch for sheep in a heart beat. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Fowlmouth said:


> Looks like the DWR transplanted 47 California Bighorns back in January. Good to see sheep back out there.


Bingo!

Sure hope they last more than eight years this time around.


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

ridgetop said:


> Bingo!
> 
> Sure hope they last more than eight years this time around.


Time to implement Johnnys plan with a quickness:

- Require all domestic sheep, goats, and camelids to be tested for M. ovi bacteria, destroy any animals that test positive, require double-layer fencing for all privately owned domestics within 25 miles of bighorn sheep habitat.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

3arabians said:


> Time to implement Johnnys plan with a quickness:
> 
> - Require all domestic sheep, goats, and camelids to be tested for M. ovi bacteria, destroy any animals that test positive, require double-layer fencing for all privately owned domestics within 25 miles of bighorn sheep habitat.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


Seriously though. M.ovi has now been found in some Alaska Dall sheep and goats hunted last fall. Not sure where it came from for the 13 sheep and 6 goats, but most were in very accessible areas that people have been known to use pack goats or llamas.

Not much data on how it affects thin horns, but we'll see. The goats interestingly tested positive for antibodies and not the bacteria itself. Even more interesting is that the sheep in that area have become all but nonexistent over the past 20 years, and the few sheep left have had really poor lambing rates and survival. Pretty interesting coincidence that sounds depressingly similar to what happens with bighorns and M.ovi


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Yeah, that is exactly what happens to bighorns. Even if they survive the outbreak, they have dismal lambing rates afyerwards. So llamas carry the same bacteria as domestic sheep? I had no idea.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

MWScott72 said:


> Yeah, that is exactly what happens to bighorns. Even if they survive the outbreak, they have dismal lambing rates afyerwards. So llamas carry the same bacteria as domestic sheep? I had no idea.


llamas and alpacas are shown to be carriers, but there is very limited study on transmission to wild sheep from camelids. The study I recall seeing had 1 llama in the test group and it did infect the bighorn which died, but 1 data point is pretty slim/meaningless in statistics. But it was still a 100% fatality rate, so there are a number of calls for banning camelids in the same areas that domestic sheep/goats are banned. Horses, cattle, and even elk can also carry it but there has been a good bit of research done on their ability to transmit it to wild sheep, which shows very low probability of transmission (IIRC it was under ~5%, compared to 100% with domestic sheep/goats).


----------



## OriginalOscar (Sep 5, 2016)

3arabians said:


> Time to implement Johnnys plan with a quickness:
> 
> - Require all domestic sheep, goats, and camelids to be tested for M. ovi bacteria, destroy any animals that test positive, require double-layer fencing for all privately owned domestics within 25 miles of bighorn sheep habitat.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


DWR wasting money transplanting bighorns near domestic stock. We've seen this disaster multiple times.

Can't tell folks on private land to test and/or build stronger.

We should encourage something different. Aoudad?


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

OriginalOscar said:


> DWR wasting money transplanting bighorns near domestic stock. We've seen this disaster multiple times.
> 
> Can't tell folks on private land to test and/or build stronger.
> 
> We should encourage something different. Aoudad?


#freezingcoldtakes

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Fowlmouth said:


> Looks like the DWR transplanted 47 California Bighorns back in January. Good to see sheep back out there.


Why is the DWR wasting money on BHS that are so close to domestic livestock? That's like throwing money into a fire and expecting it not to burn.


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

MadHunter said:


> Why is the DWR wasting money on BHS that are so close to domestic livestock? That's like throwing money into a fire and expecting it not to burn.


Exactly how close are they to domestic livestock? As I understand it, there aren't any sheep grazing allotments close to where the bighorns are.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

MadHunter said:


> Why is the DWR wasting money on BHS that are so close to domestic livestock? That's like throwing money into a fire and expecting it not to burn.


Well, Mike, Kade and I am grateful that they did.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

ridgetop said:


> Well, Mike, Kade and I am grateful that they did.


I honestly can't even believe that hunters are advocating in favor of hobby sheep ranchers over BigHorns.

Big Horn Sheep are one of the most iconic western species and don't inhabit but a fraction of their historic range.

I think we should be doing far more to minimize the conflict between domestic and wild sheep, but I think bighorns should be a much higher priority than they are in a lot of places.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Kwalk3 said:


> I honestly can't even believe that hunters are advocating in favor of hobby sheep ranchers over BigHorns.
> 
> Big Horn Sheep are one of the most iconic western species and don't inhabit but a fraction of their historic range.
> 
> I think we should be doing far more to minimize the conflict between domestic and wild sheep, but I think bighorns should be a much higher priority than they are in a lot of places.


What? Am I missing something here?


----------



## OriginalOscar (Sep 5, 2016)

Kwalk3 said:


> I honestly can't even believe that hunters are advocating in favor of hobby sheep ranchers over BigHorns.
> 
> Big Horn Sheep are one of the most iconic western species and don't inhabit but a fraction of their historic range.
> 
> I think we should be doing far more to minimize the conflict between domestic and wild sheep, but I think bighorns should be a much higher priority than they are in a lot of places.


It's called private landowner rights to raise livestock.

#newyorkdogooder #realworld


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

ridgetop said:


> What? Am I missing something here?


I was agreeing with you.

I was responding to Oscar and madhunter suggesting that bighorns aren't worth putting back in the stansburys or others because we can't ask sheep owners to control their stock.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

OriginalOscar said:


> It's called private landowner rights to raise livestock.
> 
> #newyorkdogooder #realworld


Hey Oscar. I've spent 32 years in Utah and exactly a few months in NY. But keep making the do-gooder claim and acting as if where I live while my wife attends grad school somehow clouds my judgment on an issue.

FYI where I live in NY is rural and politically conservative, not that its even remotely relevant.

Private landowners have right to raise livestock, and I'm not contesting that. They also should be held responsible for the livestock and adding measures to ensure their livestock don't have a deleterious effect on an important public resource isn't that crazy.

There are ways to mitigate risk without trampling on an individual's rights.

It appears you value someone's right to have domestic stock run amok above ensuring that Bighorns are preserved. That's a peculiar stance for a hunter to have.

I seem to recall a conversation about Sage Grouse where you said something to the effect of us needing to be ok with some things going extinct. You can keep advocating for partisan talking points, and private landowner sheep husbandry, and I'll try and support those who support wildlife conservation first.

Maybe doing good ain't all that bad after all....

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## katorade (Sep 23, 2007)

Hopefully this group of sheep can make it!

Great memories with some great guys on that mountain.

Hopefully Mike doesn't mind me posting this picture I took of him, taking a picture of his ram.









Me and some sheep and my dads Ram


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

This picture was taken on the West side of the Stansbury range by a rifle deer hunter in 2015, just as the die off was about to begin. If there was any time to support a poaching, I wished that hunter would have put those two animals down right then and there after he took that photo.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

This picture was taken on opening day of the muzzy hunt in 2015 on the Eastern slopes of the Stansbury's in 2015. This ram was killed the next day with permission from the DWR. It has been rumored that a guy in Grantsville was raising a couple of them and one escaped.
If someone's livestock escapes their property and goes out in the highway and kills someone, then that livestock owner is held responsible. The same should be true if someone's livestock ends up killing hundreds of Bighorns. They should be held responsible.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Kwalk3 said:


> I was agreeing with you.
> 
> I was responding to Oscar and madhunter suggesting that bighorns aren't worth putting back in the stansburys or others because we can't ask sheep owners to control their stock.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


It's just a question of economics and viability. I'd love to see more BHS in more places I do think it's worth it. 
The issue is there is disease there. BHS are not cheap to transplant. Why keep putting them where the disease is?


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

Clarq said:


> Exactly how close are they to domestic livestock? As I understand it, there aren't any sheep grazing allotments close to where the bighorns are.


I do not know how close they are as I am not familiar with the area. I am just asking as a general question. If domestic livestock disease exists, they must be close if they are getting infected.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

MadHunter said:


> I do not know how close they are as I am not familiar with the area. I am just asking as a general question. If domestic livestock disease exists, they must be close if they are getting infected.


By all measures, I don't believe that interaction with domestics was believed to be in issue in this area then.

Based on the photos that ridgetop posted, it is largely believed that someone in town was raising a few domestic sheep and didn't do enough to keep them contained. Those few sheep were seen wandering the mountains near/with the Bighorn herd before the massive die-off. Kind of a freak case of an irresponsible private citizen not taking care of their animals.

No sheep grazing or other risk factors were known to exist in the area. They don't just plant sheep willy-nilly. They do extensive amounts of research before transplants are attempted. The herd did really well for 8 years in the same area.

Sorry for lumping you in with Oscar. I misinterpreted what you were saying. It seems you just want to make sure the investment isn't squandered if there's known contact with domestic herds. I think that's reasonable.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

I for one am excited that the DWR is putting sheep back on that mountain range. There is no doubt that wild sheep are susceptible to disease much like the native Americans were/are. You can't truly experience how special bighorns are until you have spent significant time interacting and observing them.

I wish that rogue sheep that likely caused the 2015/2016 die off would have showed during my 2015 hunt. So sad that the whole herd got wiped out because of it. To my knowledge, there are no sheep allotments close to the sheep habitat, and that's the way it should be. If a domestic sheep gets in there again, those responsible should be held responsible. Of course this puts the onus on the DWR to make sure the public is educated and aware of the issue and potential fines for violations.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

OriginalOscar said:


> Can't tell folks on private land to test and/or build stronger.


Ummmm, yes we can.



OriginalOscar said:


> It's called private landowner rights to raise livestock.


How far do those rights go? Does the "right" exist to utilize and damage public resources in the process?

And all those saying that the owner of the sheep should be accountable...why? Personal accountability should not be a part of our society! The government needs to stay the heck out of our lives, until we make a mistake, and then we expect them to bear the cost of that mistake. Right? Isn't that how it should be? <insert sarcasm emoji here>


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Vanilla said:


> Ummmm, yes we can.
> 
> How far do those rights go? Does the "right" exist to utilize and damage public resources in the process?
> 
> And all those saying that the owner of the sheep should be accountable...why? Personal accountability should not be a part of our society! The government needs to stay the heck out of our lives, until we make a mistake, and then we expect them to bear the cost of that mistake. Right? Isn't that how it should be? <insert sarcasm emoji here>


Love the sarcasm Vanilla. Government is truly the answer. The fact that are national leaders passed a 1.3 trillion spending bill that brings back large-scale deficits...WONDERFUL!! It really shows, in giving out money that the country doesn't have, just how generous they really are. Arrrgh, Ughhh, Blahhh!!! -O,-O|*O|*

Now back to the question at hand. The private landowners rights stop at his property boundary. And if he's raising domestic sheep anywhere near bighorns, he'd better have a **** good border fence required and inspected regularly to ensure that nothing gets in or out. And if something were to penetrate it, he should get fined out of existence. End of story.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Nice photos Kade. Brings back good memories!


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

ridgetop said:


> This picture was taken on opening day of the muzzy hunt in 2015 on the Eastern slopes of the Stansbury's in 2015. This ram was killed the next day with permission from the DWR. It has been rumored that a guy in Grantsville was raising a couple of them and one escaped.
> If someone's livestock escapes their property and goes out in the highway and kills someone, then that livestock owner is held responsible. The same should be true if someone's livestock ends up killing hundreds of Bighorns. They should be held responsible.


Don't worry, I got him. And I'll get any others I run across in sheep habitat ;-)


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

sheepassassin said:


> Don't worry, I got him. And I'll get any others I run across in sheep habitat ;-)


Didn't you use your muzzleloader? I remember that photo.


----------



## sheepassassin (Mar 23, 2018)

Fowlmouth said:


> Didn't you use your muzzleloader? I remember that photo.


Sure did. 163 yards. Tipped over in his tracks. The whole time while
On the phone to the biologist. The morning started off as a deer hunt. Quickly turned into a sheep hunt. Good thing too, I had a 30"+ 2x2 in velvet tempting me when I spotted him. Actually the deer saw him first. Couldn't figure out what he kept staring it. I was convinced it was another hunter until
He came out of the trees


----------



## OriginalOscar (Sep 5, 2016)

Kwalk3 said:


> Private landowners have right to raise livestock, and I'm not contesting that. They also should be held responsible for the livestock and adding measures to ensure their livestock don't have a deleterious effect on an important public resource isn't that crazy.
> 
> There are ways to mitigate risk without trampling on an individual's rights.
> 
> ...


Utah has 3.1M residents and growing. The DWR has done a good job retiring sheep grazing allotments in numerous areas and bighorns have done well in many areas around Utah. As a taxpayer it makes zero sense to keep putting bighorns into areas where they have high probability of contacting livestock and dying off.

I stand by the Sage Grouse comment. Some species are just fragile and the modern world does not offer them the future of their past. Bighorns fall into that category. We will have them in the future but the goal to reestablish or introduce them into every area with habitat is naive.

Do you really think a farmer who has a sheep get lose should be liable for the loss of bighorns? Typical Do Gooder Progressive outlook who feel the government should regulate and enforce their views upon others.

Here's a couple ideas to pursue while you are in NY. #reintroducewolvestonewyork #reintroduceelktonewyork #mysideofthemountain


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

There are plenty of sheep that still graze in Grantsville and Rush Valley but the good thing is most all sheep are very social and want to stay together. They rarely wander off alone. One problem area I see with the Stansburys, Is the reservation. I don't think the state can do anything about what's being raised on the reservation.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

OriginalOscar said:


> Do you really think a farmer who has a sheep get lose should be liable for the loss of bighorns? Typical Do Gooder Progressive outlook who feel the government should regulate and enforce their views upon others.


I guess I'll ask the question in the alternative. Do you really think that a farmer that has sheep get loose should NOT be liable for the damage to public resources? If not, who should be? Typical welfare addict feeling entitled to the government and tax payer resources to fund their ability to enforce their views upon others.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

OriginalOscar said:


> Utah has 3.1M residents and growing. The DWR has done a good job retiring sheep grazing allotments in numerous areas and bighorns have done well in many areas around Utah. As a taxpayer it makes zero sense to keep putting bighorns into areas where they have high probability of contacting livestock and dying off.
> 
> I stand by the Sage Grouse comment. Some species are just fragile and the modern world does not offer them the future of their past. Bighorns fall into that category. We will have them in the future but the goal to reestablish or introduce them into every area with habitat is naive.
> 
> ...


Not sure what you're getting at with the my side of the mountain stuff, but elk would be great in NY. Until then, there's a thriving herd a few hours away in PA.

Utah has always been and always will be home to me. I'll still gladly pay for a Nonresident license and hunt and fish there every year while I'm away. I'm glad the state is looking for places to establish sheep.

Your view of conservation is one that I'm glad most don't share. I'm glad there are those that see wildlife, including sensitive species like bighorns and sage grouse as a valuable public resource and don't just throw up their hands and say "oh well!"

I'm a far cry from a progressive, and perhaps you shouldn't try to pigeonhole anyone who sees things differently from your fatalistic viewpoint as a dogooder. I'm not sure that's quite the clever insult you think it is.

Looking forward to being back in Utah for work and some fly fishing in a week and a half. Maybe I'll head out to the stansburys, where I went on my only deer hunts as a kid, and hope to catch a glimpse of those bighorns. That would be pretty cool.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mtnrunner260 (Feb 15, 2010)

Sheep reintroductions are not funded with tax payer dollars while the many programs within the farm bill that provide financial assistance to farmers and ranchers are. 
I'm all for the farm bill but just an interesting point of clarification.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

Original Oscars comment:

I stand by the Sage Grouse comment. Some species are just fragile and the modern world does not offer them the future of their past. Bighorns fall into that category. We will have them in the future but the goal to reestablish or introduce them into every area with habitat is..[/QUOTE]

Sage Grose aren't any more fragile than the pressure that humans exert on them. Habitat loss and fragmentation are very real drivers of their decline. Who is causing that?

We shouldn"t be giving up an any species because recovery is "too hard", or they are "too fragile", or it is "too expensive". All of these excuses are just cover for humans to exploit our natural resources for short term profit over long term stability and diversity. What a selfish mindset.


----------



## 3arabians (Dec 9, 2014)

sheepassassin said:


> Sure did. 163 yards. Tipped over in his tracks. The whole time while
> On the phone to the biologist. The morning started off as a deer hunt. Quickly turned into a sheep hunt. Good thing too, I had a 30"+ 2x2 in velvet tempting me when I spotted him. Actually the deer saw him first. Couldn't figure out what he kept staring it. I was convinced it was another hunter until
> He came out of the trees


Thats pretty badass! Did you get to keep the sheep?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

mtnrunner260 said:


> Sheep reintroductions are not funded with tax payer dollars while the many programs within the farm bill that provide financial assistance to farmers and ranchers are.
> I'm all for the farm bill but just an interesting point of clarification.


Let's not confuse the political rhetoric with actual facts, now. That would be a tragedy! (A solid clarification, though.)

#totp


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Bighorns and that mountain range are a beautiful thing. Good job Dwr


----------

