# Return of Bison to Tribal Lands



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Happy story:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/bi...n-reservation/ar-BBqZNlv?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Dear Montana cattle barons. We native Americans and bison were here first. Go pound sand!


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Good news and good read. 

Some other Native American tribes already have bison herds, including our own Ute tribe. In fact, they donated some of the animals used to transplant bison to the Book Cliffs. (The majority came from the Henrys) Buff we now can draw tags for and hunt. 

Yes, some cattlemen also protested the Books transplant as well.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I love seeing this stuff. Maybe my kids or grandkids will get to live in a world where there are tens of thousands of wild bison or more roaming the country again.


----------



## Lonetree (Dec 4, 2010)

"The whole concept of 'wild' was decidedly European, one not shared by the original inhabitants of this continent. What we called 'wilderness' was to the Indian a homeland, 'abiding loveliness' in Salish or Piegan. The land was not something to be feared or conquered, and 'wildlife' were neither wild nor alien; they were relatives." 
― Doug Pea****, Grizzly Years: In Search of the American Wilderness


----------



## paddlehead (May 30, 2014)

I think they should do this with the "surplus" buffalo in Yellowstone. Ship them to new areas to establish herds, rather than ship them to a slaughter house. Either establish new herds, or issue more hunting permits. Leave it to the USFWS to find ways to spend money to reduce a herd size, rather than sell tags and generate revenue.

Same thing with the Yellowstone elk. Instead of selling tags at a premium to hunt a Yellowstone elk to reduce numbers they spend tens of millions on wolves to reduce numbers........


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

paddlehead said:


> I think they should do this with the "surplus" buffalo in Yellowstone. Ship them to new areas to establish herds, rather than ship them to a slaughter house. Either establish new herds, or issue more hunting permits. Leave it to the USFWS to find ways to spend money to reduce a herd size, rather than sell tags and generate revenue.
> 
> Same thing with the Yellowstone elk. Instead of selling tags at a premium to hunt a Yellowstone elk to reduce numbers they spend tens of millions on wolves to reduce numbers........


The issue is the fear of Brucellosis and the Yellowstone herd. I think around 50% of the bison have the disease and the worry is that they will infect cattle.

I think they should test them before killing them and place the unaffected into existing herds of buffs to boost the population.


----------



## paddlehead (May 30, 2014)

The brucellosis thing is for sure a factor. They can test for it easily, and keep the healthy ones without a doubt. None the less, they average about 1000 head every year that get hauled off to a slaughter house. There would be a line of people a mile long willing to pay $1000 a tag to get to shoot a buffalo. $1000 x 1000 tags = $1,000,000. Pretty simple math. That does not include revenue through food and lodging and guiding....... I would bet you could sell them for $2000 or $3000 and still have a mile long wait list........ So why is this not an option?

In all seriousness though, lets get some more herds established!!!!!


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there has been a case proven of bison to cattle brucellosis transmission. But I still agree with the ridiculousness of the slaughter. At least Montana has agreed to allow more bison to roam off park year round now.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

johnnycake said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there has been a case proven of bison to cattle brucellosis transmission. But I still agree with the ridiculousness of the slaughter. At least Montana has agreed to allow more bison to roam off park year round now.


I believe you are correct. I also find it ironic that the Yellowstone Bison are believed likely to have contracted the disease from cattle grazed inside the park decades ago.

Cattle gave the bison Brucellosis. Even given the low likelihood of bison to cattle transmission, let's not give the bison a chance to inhabit their native range land for fear that they may give it back.(Sarcasm)


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Catherder said:


> Good news and good read.
> 
> Some other Native American tribes already have bison herds, including our own Ute tribe. In fact, they donated some of the animals used to transplant bison to the Book Cliffs. (The majority came from the Henrys) Buff we now can draw tags for and hunt.
> 
> Yes, some cattlemen also protested the Books transplant as well.


How many cattle in the books have come down with brucellosis now that the bison have been back?

I think that the fears of transmission are largely overstated. However, herds of bison would definitely reduce the need and likely permits for large-scale grazing on public lands. I can see why they are opposed, but I'd wager it's more because of fear of losing grazing rights, not to losing cattle from brucellosis that is not easily transmissible.

I say put those iconic hump-backed buggers as many places as possible.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Kwalk3 said:


> How many cattle in the books have come down with brucellosis now that the bison have been back?


None, and it won't happen. The Henry's herd and the Ute bison herd are both certified brucellosis free. Any Utah bison transplants would likely be from our own stock to keep it that way.

A few more comments.

1. RE" Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there has been a case proven of bison to cattle brucellosis transmission. "

Not necessarily. It has been proven to take place in the lab and probably in the wild.

Flagg DE. A case history of a brucellosis outbreak in a brucellosis free state which originated in bison. Proceedings of the US Animal Health Association. 1983;87:171-2.
Davis DS, Templeton JW, Ficht TA, Williams JD, Kopek JD, Adams LG. Brucella abortus in captive bison. I. Serology, bacteriology, pathogenesis, and transmission to cattle. J Wildl Dis. 1990;26:360-71 . DOIPubMed

Based on the close phylogenetic relationship between bison and domestic cattle, it is reasonable to assume that some transmission does occur. However, grazing and cattle management practices often an minimize the risk of exposure. 

2. There is actually some thought that elk are a greater threat to giving cattle brucellosis than bison. This is due to the commingling of elk with cattle at critical times of the year when brucellosis is most likely to be spread. 

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/19/12/13-0167_article

3. Brucellosis IS a big deal to agriculture. A great deal of money and effort are spent to keep states brucellosis free and when an outbreak occurs and this status is lost, then the cattle industry in that state loses a lot of money and has greater difficulty moving their stock across state lines. It affects all cattle producers in the state, not just a few that do free range.

That said, this is as much a battle over grass usage and control as it is over brucellosis. Cattlemen dislike bison because they take up AUM's from them on public lands, bison plow through fencing like it is nothing and are destructive, and as usual, they probably see free range bison as a threat to their way of life. (Sound familiar?) While I recognize that buff would not be a good fit everywhere, I love to see stuff like what was in the original article and what the DWR did on the Books. I would love to see another herd or two established here. (I have no idea where) It might even help me draw the buff tag I hope to get someday.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Catherder said:


> None, and it won't happen. The Henry's herd and the Ute bison herd are both certified brucellosis free. Any Utah bison transplants would likely be from our own stock to keep it that way.
> 
> A few more comments.
> 
> ...


There has not been a documented case that can be fully attributed to bison. However there is an easy test. Put half a dozen infected bison on a sealed off plot of grazing land with half a dozen cows that do not have brucellosis. Let them graze together for 24 months testing the cattle every 3 months. After 24 months if no infection it is reasonably safe to assume that transmission does not occur.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

LostLouisianian said:


> Put half a dozen infected bison on a sealed off plot of grazing land with half a dozen cows that do not have brucellosis. Let them graze together for 24 months testing the cattle every 3 months. After 24 months if no infection it is reasonably safe to assume that transmission does not occur.


They have done this and transmission has occurred. I put up 2 citations that listed as much. Sorry.

However, as I also explained, it is far from all of the story on reintroduction of free range bison and at least in Utah, our disease free bison stocks eliminate brucellosis as an issue on potential transplants.


----------



## Idratherbehunting (Jul 17, 2013)

I just finished Steven Rinella's book, American Buffalo last night. Really interesting read.

I'd love to see more buffalo introduced in different locations. I can understand the concern with brucellosis, but I'd love to see them use those that are brucellosis free as seed stock elsewhere. 

As far as hunting in Yellowstone, that's never going to happen. With today's political climate surrounding hunting, I just don't think it would ever fly, although it may be a legitimate option to help fund the poorly funded National Parks. That would probably be the only way you'd sell it to the public.


----------



## paddlehead (May 30, 2014)

I really doubt hunting will ever be allowed in Yellowstone. But since these buffalo are being removed from the area if/when they leave the park boundaries because of the risks associated with livestock, why then are not wolves treated the same way? They pose an equal or greater risk to BOTH livestock AND game herds. All of the buffalo hunts being conducted currently occur OUTSIDE park boundaries, do the same for wolves. 

"What is good for the goose is good for the gander."


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

paddlehead said:


> ........................................why then are not wolves treated the same way? They pose an equal or greater risk to BOTH livestock AND game herds. All of the buffalo hunts being conducted currently occur OUTSIDE park boundaries, do the same for wolves.
> 
> .........................


They already hunt wolves in Montana and Idaho. 50% of the YNP border is Idaho and Montana. We hunted wolves in Wyoming for a while. (sold thousands of wolf licenses, mostly to non-residents from Utah) Then the Feds shut us (WY) down because we weren't smart enough to write an acceptable wolf management plan, a plan similar to what Idaho and Montana had approved, a plan that the Feds and the court system would uphold.

There's only 325 wolves in WY last I knew. I think we killed like 60 to 70 one year. There's more wolves in Wisconsin than Wyoming for crying out loud. muchadoaboutnothing

.


----------



## MuscleWhitefish (Jan 13, 2015)

Idratherbehunting said:


> I just finished Steven Rinella's book, American Buffalo last night. Really interesting read.
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> Great Book


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Thing with the bison, is humans are the only predator to them. Wolves take a few, but not many. Bears take a few, but not many. Only humans can effectively prey on bison. And that goes back to pre-european influence. The native tribes followed the herds, killed many, ran entire herds off of cliffs, trapped them with fire, and killed them with numerous variations of pointy sticks. Herds in YNP lack natural predation. And until the only real bison predator is allowed to prey on them, this is the only solution to balance habitat capacity with herd numbers.


----------

