# Can Utah support more bison?



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I enjoyed my Henry mountains cow tag immensely last year, and I gained a serious respect(and itch to somehow hunt wild bison again....) for these animals. Ever since it seems when I am some part of Utah I think to myself "This looks alot like the Henry range. Why not put bison here too?"
So I guess I would like to know what other people think. I love the recent introductions/bolstering done in the Book Cliffs and I think that there are many other places that could support a bison herd and expand opportunities for others to hunt these awesome animals. And with the moose population going down the toilet, it seems that more OIL opportunities should be a focus for the DWR.
What are some of the issues? Ranchers? Suitable range? Funds? Apathy? I am just very curious to see if other people have these types of thoughts.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Johnycake I am prepping for that same hunt right now. Headed down there this weekend. I am soliciting any advice/directions/ pointers/camp spots/you name it.

I am no biologists but I have little doubt that the state can support more bison. Having grown up outside of Yellowstone I know they can thrive in some very harsh environments. Heat and Cold. I say the more the better. I would think that the Uintas would hold some as well as the Wasatch and Northwest part of the state. Don't know about all of the issues but it would be cool to hear them from somebody that is really in the know and not just somebody that acts like they are.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

johnnycake said:


> I enjoyed my Henry mountains cow tag immensely last year, and I gained a serious respect(and itch to somehow hunt wild bison again....) for these animals. Ever since it seems when I am some part of Utah I think to myself "This looks alot like the Henry range. Why not put bison here too?"
> So I guess I would like to know what other people think. I love the recent introductions/bolstering done in the Book Cliffs and I think that there are many other places that could support a bison herd and expand opportunities for others to hunt these awesome animals. And with the moose population going down the toilet, it seems that more OIL opportunities should be a focus for the DWR.
> What are some of the issues? Ranchers? Suitable range? Funds? Apathy? I am just very curious to see if other people have these types of thoughts.


I also hope to draw a buff tag before I'm "done" and applaud the Book Cliffs introductions/bolstering. From what I understand, the target population of the Books herd is to be about 100 animals more than the Henrys herd.

From what I understand, Buff are fairly destructive to fencing and such that ranchers put up and apparently, agriculture/Farm bureau is not too pleased about enhanced Buff populations. I guess they were even complaining about the existing Wildhorse bench herd on the Books, even though the bulk of that herd migrated naturally from Ute lands. I foresee the Books herd growing to a nice size, but I'm skeptical that we'll see herds established elsewhere.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The cattlemen will never let it happen. Even on the Henry Mountains the agreement from what I have heard is 300 bison and no more, that is why they let out a lot of permits one year and very few the next. I have also heard but I'm not sure if it is true or not about the DOW buying up cattle grazing permits on the Henry Mountains when they become available to have fewer cattle on the range.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I have heard that the cattlemen are a main reason that they keep the herd objective around 300 or so. They do run several thousand cattle out there, and in my mind a cow eats pretty much what a bison would. How cool would it be to have a bison herd several thousand strong with a 5-10 year LE draw?


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

I'd rather see more buffs than grazing permits for cattlemen. As a cattleman's grandson, the cattlemen have every right to try to make their money running cattle. But, they do not have the right to tell the rest of us how we are going to manage our natural resources. 

There has to be a compromise here. Maybe we can change the CWMU rules so that cattlemen can offer a CWMU on their property for buffalo who stray over the line (I assume most cattlemen have fewer than 10k acres?). A tag or two would certainly offset fencing damage from buffalo and leave the cattleman with a little bit of money for his trouble.

There is no reason not to increase the buffalo herd.


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

I think Utah has some good areas that buffalo would do very well in. The question is if the road blocks, like cattleman and open areas for them to roam would hamper this.

I would love to see some buffs out on some west desert mountain ranges, like grouse creek for example. 

Wonder if UWC needs to follow up with this and find out what the DWR's official position is.


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Critter said:


> I have also heard but I'm not sure if it is true or not about the DOW buying up cattle grazing permits on the Henry Mountains when they become available to have fewer cattle on the range.


Did you hear this from UDWR people? I know of a few cons groups that have done this in the past and I wonder if they are fronting the money for the division?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

tallbuck said:


> Did you hear this from UDWR people? I know of a few cons groups that have done this in the past and I wonder if they are fronting the money for the division?


It has been a few years and to tell you the truth I can't remember who I heard it from.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Its all about brucellosis with the bison. It is a concern with them everywhere they are - including Yellowstone. And it is a HUGE deal in the border areas of YNP, where the bison leave the park and can interact with cattle. The Henry Mountain Herd has been tested many times over and is considered "brucellosis free." The Antelope Island does not have to co-exist with cattle. 

There are may places that bison could do very well in Utah. However, there is only so much forage to go around, and something would have to give, be it fewer elk, cattle, people, or whatever. In the Henry's, there is more to the grazing than DWR buying up grazing rights. Legally, DWR cannot buy up grazing rights. To have grazing rights, you must have base land, or a ranch somewhere, and DWR does not qualify. I believe it is the Grand Canyon Trust that now owns many of the grazing rights in the Henry Mountains. And that in itself has been subject of legal action.

There is more to the history in the Henry Mountains than that though. For nearly 25 years, several allotments were pretty much not used by the permit holder. A permit holder can go up to 5 years of not grazing, without loss of the lease. And with drought, fire, or other environmental conditions, that can be extended. Plus, if BLM does nothing to really enforce the non-use, like taking back the grazing lease after 5 years, then really that forage goes unused. In the case of the Henry Mountains, several allotments were in non-use for 25+ years. The BLM SHOULD have re-issued those permits, but didn't. Mostly because they just didn't get around to doing it. In the mean time, the bison herd grew and have been utilizing those allotment. Should BLM do what they are supposed to do, and re-issue those permits, then a rancher would have legal permit to use that forage for his cattle, and the bison would have to be removed. But for the Henry Mountains, the years of non-use was great for the bison. 

Now if we look at other ranges where bison could thrive - the La Sals, Stansbury, Wasatch, Oquirrh, Uinta Ranges - pretty much any mountain range in Utah really, and the question is, what grazing animal are we willing to swap out for bison? Which comes down to either elk, or cows. BLM and the Forest Service can allocate forage to wildlife in order to enhance the herds, but if they do, they must reduce the livestock grazing. And such a re-allocation from cattle to wildlife must happen with an amendment of the Forest Management Plan or BLM Resource Management Plan. And would receive huge opposition from groups like county commissioners and the Farm Bureau. 

So could bison do well in other ranges? Absolutely. Just something else would have to go. And that is a really tough sell in a state that thinks it is still an agricultural state.


----------



## tallbuck (Apr 30, 2009)

Well Said Gary Fish!

Are their certain mountains in the state or ranges that dont have cattle allotments?


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

off topic but with regards to the Henry's.......how is the upland bird population down there? Headed down there this weekend and was planning on taking along a shotgun or three.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> off topic but with regards to the Henry's.......how is the upland bird population down there? Headed down there this weekend and was planning on taking along a shotgun or three.


When I was there a couple of years ago the chucker population was great. I even ran into some huns on the west side.


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

"And would receive huge opposition from groups like county commissioners and the Farm Bureau. "

This is one of the main reasons why I left Farm Bureau. They were great with their predator control program, but when it came to the bison in the books and the stream access ruling sportsmen lost their voice. I for one was thrilled to hear that the Bookcliffs have a hunt able herd.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Thanks Gary, that was really informative.


----------



## SteepNDeep (Sep 11, 2007)

Put them on the Deep Creeks


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

As an animal, they strike me as absolutely incredible. They can survive in tundra, alpine, riparian, and desert climates. What else is that diverse? 
While in and ideal world (from my self-centered point of view) I would love to see cattle ranching gone in the state, since there are just much better places in and outside the US to do it at a better price. Barring that impossibility, I would be willing to sacrifice elk in a few places in order to have more bison.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

In all reality, if we want a wild bison herd, it will be at the expense of the cows, not the elk. As mentioned, brucellosis is the big deal there. And cross infection from bison to cattle, can make a whole herd of cattle, and even a state, lose its brucellosis free status, which can prohibit exporting the cattle out of state. It is a very big deal to the industry.Elk also carry it, but cross infection from elk to cattle is very rare. 

One other thing I see, is that there are more and more "pay to shoot" bison operations out there. Buying a bison to shoot is a viable option - with prices starting around $3,000. That is guided, guaranteed, bison shoot. So if you really want to shoot one, you can. 

Which really, to me, is what makes the Henry Mountain hunt so special - it is truly a wild herd, in a very wild place.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

So what you are saying Gary is that we just need to manufacture a brucellosis outbreak in cattle.....and we can shut down their industry thereby opening the door to bison, right! :mrgreen:8)


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Yea. Something like that. ;-)

More realistically, public land grazing will slowly fade away into the sunset. The economics just don't pay out. And as families grow up and move away because of limited economies of it, permits will, over time, go un-issued, and wildlife will eventually back fill that void.

The other side of the equation to consider, is that for the most part, cows are easy to control. A three strand barbed wire fence can keep them in an allotment. That same fence will not hold deer, elk, or bison. So using domesticated animals to utilize forage is much easier to deal with than the big wild creatures can can go over or through a fence that holds cows. I'm thinking if we had a bison herd in the Wasatch mountains. Sure, they'd love the summers in the canyons, but come winter, then what? Where would they go? The foothills of Sandy, Draper, Alpine? People think deer are a problem in the city. Can you imagine bison?


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I have thought of that in regards to the Wasatch....but then again, end of december last year there was plenty of sign of bison up at 10,000', so maybe they would stay higher on the Wasatch? My thoughts have been more about mountains away from major populations like the Uintah's, LaSals, Deep Creeks, etc.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

johnnycake said:


> So what you are saying Gary is that we just need to manufacture a brucellosis outbreak in cattle.....and we can shut down their industry thereby opening the door to bison, right! :mrgreen:8)


I'm pretty sure the above was tongue-in-cheek, but trust me, we don't want brucellosis here. (Besides cattle and game animals, it can affect people and as Gary said, devastate the cattle industry here)

With respect to new Bison introductions, if the bison being introduced are certified brucellosis free, (and the Henry's herd is and is retested regularly) they can be transplanted, as they were from the Henrys to the Books. However, we likely would not be able to import buff from out of state for this purpose. That could limit the scope of transplant programs.

Garyfish wrote "More realistically, public land grazing will slowly fade away into the sunset. The economics just don't pay out. And as families grow up and move away because of limited economies of it, permits will, over time, go un-issued, and wildlife will eventually back fill that void."

Gary, in your position, do you see this as something we are likely to see in our lifetimes? It seems to me that public grazing rights are as tenaciously held on to as water rights in some quarters. If you are right, it could be excellent news for fish and wildlife, but I fear that movement in that direction is likely to be glacial.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I don't know about in our lifetime or not. Grazing permits are different than water rights, in that they really cannot be bought or sold from one permittee to another. If a holder of a permit gives it up either voluntarily, or through non-compliance with the terms, then it goes out for bid for anyone else. The permit belongs to the BLM or Forest Service, and it is not a fungible asset that can be bought and sold like a water right.

The other thing is that a grazing permit must be used. Like I said, if a permit holder voluntarily chooses not to graze for five consecutive years, (environmental exemptions aside), then BLM is required to re-issue that permit to someone that will graze it. Though, they seldom do. 

Where I see public lands grazing slowly going away is mostly through attrition. There will always be some hobby ranchers that will hold on to their permits, or seek them out when they come available. But as was mentioned, there are a lot better, and cheaper places to feed cows. Anyone that has spent considerable time in Eastern Montana, or the Sand Hills of Nebraska, when compared to central and southern Utah, can attest to the quality of the grazing lands. Utah just doesn't, and can't, grow grass like some other places that are dominated by private lands. 

Like in the Henry Mountains though, we may see groups that are more wildlife and conservation oriented, make a play for grazing permits. But in that play, they still need to file grazing plans, and meet the terms of those plans to hold on to the permits. That could include only grazing a few cows once every five years, but still - until the terms of the Taylor Grazing Act are changed, that is still the law.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Catherder, you nailed it! Tongue in cheek, of course we don't want brucellosis!


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Dodger said:


> I'd rather see more buffs than grazing permits for cattlemen. As a cattleman's grandson, the cattlemen have every right to try to make their money running cattle. *But, they do not have the right to tell the rest of us how we are going to manage our natural resources.*


This is one of the single best stated comments I've ever read on this forum.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I can kind of agree with that in principle, but there are many things that lots of sportsmen don't know or consider. For example, many water features that have been developed in areas were developed by the livestock owner and grazing permit holder. He invested time, money, and resources to put water where there wasn't any, not only helping his livestock, but wildlife as well. Many areas would not support wildlife, except for these kind of improvements. The same goes with many access roads, some fire management, and some seeding in areas. Especially when public lands grazing was a much better economic venture, the permit holders did a lot to really enhance the lands, and that was a great wildlife benefit. Even much of the vegetation treatments happening all over central Utah in recent years, is being paid for with agricultural dollars. 

I'm not sure the grazing community should have dictatorial authority on what we do with our natural resources, but I certainly think they have a greater stake in the discussion than a city guy that spends a five day deer hunt with his camp trailer and cooler of beer.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

GaryFish said:


> I can kind of agree with that in principle, but there are many things that lots of sportsmen don't know or consider. For example, many water features that have been developed in areas were developed by the livestock owner and grazing permit holder. He invested time, money, and resources to put water where there wasn't any, not only helping his livestock, but wildlife as well. Many areas would not support wildlife, except for these kind of improvements. The same goes with many access roads, some fire management, and some seeding in areas. Especially when public lands grazing was a much better economic venture, the permit holders did a lot to really enhance the lands, and that was a great wildlife benefit. Even much of the vegetation treatments happening all over central Utah in recent years, is being paid for with agricultural dollars.
> 
> I'm not sure the grazing community should have dictatorial authority on what we do with our natural resources, but I certainly think they have a greater stake in the discussion than a city guy that spends a five day deer hunt with his camp trailer and cooler of beer.


Point taken and I don't want to put the cattlemen out of business. Far from it.

But, when they lease grazing rights from the federales or even improve the land, that doesn't entitle them to dictate what other uses are acceptable on that land. If they didn't put in those improvements, other interested parties would. Look at the guzzlers put in in the Newfies and other places. Interested parties would put in the improvements for wildlife (a benefit intended for everyone) where the cattlemen put in the improvements that help cattle and, tangentially, wildlife (a benefit intended for mostly themselves).

I'm not saying they don't have a stake in the discussion. They do and they should. But so does everyone else, including me who lives in a city and spend 5 days a year hunting deer in my camp trailer with my cooler of root beers (;-) ) and who wants more bison in Utah. That's because the land belongs to all of us. And, though we lease the grazing rights to a rancher, we do not lease the authority to tell the rest of us how we can use our land. 10 ranchers in the Henry Mountains shouldn't get to decide that only 300 bison get to be in the Henrys when 10,000 hunters in this state want more bison. If you want to run your cattle without having to listen to anyone else tell you how to do it, own the land you graze your cattle on. When you lease it from us, there are strings attached.

Hunters on a cost benefit scale contribute more to the environment than any other group. We spend the most as a group and benefit, singly and on the margin, the least.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Very good points Dodger. And my own opinion is that eventually, the Henry Mountains will be cattle free. It just really is too much of a pain to run cattle up there, and certainly not worth it financially. 

The one thing out there is that the law says that a rancher can purchase a permit to graze his livestock, and in so doing, directly impacts hunting opportunity. Some good, some bad, some just is. But until that is changed, it will always be a piece of the puzzle.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Good discussion.

As anyone who was closely involved with the stream access wars in the legislature can attest, the Farm Bureau is an extremely powerful entity in Utah politics. I don't suppose I can fault them for doing what they think is the bidding of their constituents. However, the question that we as an electorate need to ask is whether their power is commensurate with the population at large and more importantly, the portion of financial return agriculture brings into the States economy. (Particularly in comparison to the economic benefits derived from tourism/recreation.) If you feel they are too powerful, the only way to really change things is through political action and the ballot box. 

Sadly, Utah has shown too often that many folks will vote for the same old incumbents and the rest won't bother to vote at all. Organized involvement on Capitol hill is also something too many Utahns won't do either. 


Does anyone know the $$$ generated by the outdoor recreation/tourism industries vs agriculture?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I've considered that quite a bit Catherder. That is, does the Farm Bureau over-represent the scale of impact that agriculture has on our state? And the more I consider it, I think the answer is yes and no. As a state, agriculture in general is hardly a player anymore. But that is a function of 90% of the people living on the Wasatch Front/Back. Agriculture could go away and the SLOP (Salt Lake Ogden Provo) wouldn't flinch. But get south of the Payson-Dixon line, and all that changes. Agriculture in several forms is VERY important to little towns like Delta, Richfield, Panguitch, etc... It is the heart and soul of those towns. It drives the local economy there. Sure, tourism is an impact in those towns, but tourism money supports the gas-n-sip, a few hotels, and not much else. Agriculture drives much more of the local economy and is very important to them. 

The Farm Bureau is very effective in their efforts, and part of that is because the rural counties, per-capita, have greater representation than the urban counties. And that is fair enough I guess. I just know that many of our rural towns would be devastated if they lost even 30 local, production oriented jobs. Where in the SLOP, that is a fart in the wind.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

GaryFish said:


> But get south of the Payson-Dixon line, and all that changes. Agriculture in several forms is VERY important to little towns like Delta, Richfield, Panguitch, etc... It is the heart and soul of those towns. It drives the local economy there. Sure, tourism is an impact in those towns, but tourism money supports the gas-n-sip, a few hotels, and not much else. Agriculture drives much more of the local economy and is very important to them.
> 
> The Farm Bureau is very effective in their efforts, and part of that is because the rural counties, per-capita, have greater representation than the urban counties. And that is fair enough I guess. I just know that many of our rural towns would be devastated if they lost even 30 local, production oriented jobs. Where in the SLOP, that is a fart in the wind.


Yes, I agree with what you wrote. I married a Delta girl, so I have an intimate idea about agricultures role in local economies. And my hope is that Ag remains a viable part of our state. Even still, I wouldn't underestimate the effects of tourism/rec in rural Utah. Even Delta, which is more farming dominated than most rural areas, is filled with tourist type shops through town and touts Great Basin NP, Topaz mountain, trilobites, and other local attractions in their billboards, newspapers, and literature/brochures. IPP also is a huge driver out there.

IMO, the question isn't "why is the FB so powerful in Utah politics", but is "why is the outdoor recreation/tourism sector so *weak *in Utah politics?"


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I'm not sure they are so weak. They just focus on things other than hunting for the outdoor/tourism sector. Utah Travel Council is really about two segments of outdoor recreation - skiing, and mountain biking. And my own thought is that hunting more so than fishing, really doesn't have that big of an economic impact. Tags are capped. Numbers are limited, and all of the tags added together, don't equal the ski passes of a single day over the winter. And skiers spend far more than hunters do. Where hunters usually camp, bring their own food, and buy their equipment before they come, gas and a few groceries is pretty much it. Where skiers rent cars, get hotels, eat in restaurants, and then buy ski passes. Revenue generated from out-of-state hunting is literally, a blip compared to the ski industry. And in-state hunters already are buying groceries and the thought is, or at least among the Travel Council, is that if they weren't spending money on hunting in Utah, they'd be spending it on something else in Utah, and therefore, it isn't "new" money coming to the state. (Not sure I buy that argument.) 

But be it good, bad, or sideways, while hunting is vastly important to us, as an economic driver for outdoor related tourism, one hunting season is about the equivalent of one ski-day.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

GaryFish said:


> I'm not sure they are so weak. They just focus on things other than hunting for the outdoor/tourism sector. Utah Travel Council is really about two segments of outdoor recreation - skiing, and mountain biking. And my own thought is that hunting more so than fishing, really doesn't have that big of an economic impact. Tags are capped. Numbers are limited, and all of the tags added together, don't equal the ski passes of a single day over the winter. And skiers spend far more than hunters do. Where hunters usually camp, bring their own food, and buy their equipment before they come, gas and a few groceries is pretty much it. Where skiers rent cars, get hotels, eat in restaurants, and then buy ski passes. Revenue generated from out-of-state hunting is literally, a blip compared to the ski industry. And in-state hunters already are buying groceries and the thought is, or at least among the Travel Council, is that if they weren't spending money on hunting in Utah, they'd be spending it on something else in Utah, and therefore, it isn't "new" money coming to the state. (Not sure I buy that argument.)
> 
> But be it good, bad, or sideways, while hunting is vastly important to us, as an economic driver for outdoor related tourism, one hunting season is about the equivalent of one ski-day.


A few comments.

1. While I certainly agree with your assessment that hunting is small compared to skiing, I'm not sure I would underestimate the economic impact of hunting/fishing/mountain biking/climbing/hiking/backpacking/camping/OHV, etc,etc when pooled together. I bought 2 (overpriced ;-)) tanks of gas from the Antimony general store on this years deer hunt. I noticed that they were open extra hours during the hunt, so it seems to be important to them. Now, to tie it all back together(?) to the buff. The Farm Bureau may oppose buff introductions and grazing permit reg changes, but who is in favor? Hunters obviously. Also, fishermen. In almost every TU magazine I get, there is some snippet or more on the evils of irresponsible grazing practices and its effect on fisheries. Hikers, campers, OHVers, enviros? Many of these folks would love to see grazing practices change and would pay to see buff and other wildlife in a natural setting, not fenced in.

And I suppose that answers my question, at least in part, why recreationalists are so weak politically. We are too fragmented and cannot generally come together for common political goals like big AG can do.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I think you are right about the fragmentation Cat. And I think that if wild bison in Utah were more well known (lot of utahns who like the outdoors and enjoy going to Yellowstone for wildlife viewing don't know there are bison here besides on Antelope Island) that there would be an uptick in wildlife tourism.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

One problem with trying to view the bison in the Henry Mountains is that you will never know where they are located at. I hunted deer on them for 3 years during the early 80's before I saw my first one down there. People just don't realize just how big of a range that they have and how few animals there are to try and find. 

I also know of a couple of hunts that have been screwed up by tourist down there that wanted to take pictures of them and walked into the herd only to scatter them.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

I think about this every time I go out on Cedar Mtn (San Rafael). That mtn is under utilized in my opinion. There is a ton of land that has nothing on it but a few hundred head of cattle from time to time. I know a while ago they had a thriving elk herd out there which were all but eliminated due to protest from cattlemen. But from what I heard was the problem was the elk going into the fields during the winter.
I believe a herd of 200 or so bison would be awesome and would do amazing on that mountain. I know it won't happen because of the cattlemen but its just sad to go out there and see all that potential for any big game animal and not see anything but cattle and every 3 or 4 years a deer.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

Oh and my wife has a cow bison tag this year and we are stoked to go. Probably utilize Brett Guymon! ;-)


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

What can I say, Brett is a genius down there! How else can he help a guy get a bison in 4 hours and a cougar the next morning?!! (clearly luck had nothing to do with it....guy's got skill)


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

how good is the road from Notum to McMillan Springs for a 5th wheel?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> how good is the road from Notum to McMillan Springs for a 5th wheel?


I would stay down low with a 5th wheeler. That mountain can get 3' of snow in a heart beat. I have been there when it has done it over night.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Critter said:


> I would stay down low with a 5th wheeler. That mountain can get 3' of snow in a heart beat. I have been there when it has done it over night.


thanks


----------

