# Bighorn killed by mountain lion



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Here is a picture of a 7 year old ram that sauve300 and myself helped transplant onto the Stansbury Range that was killed 2 days ago by a 2 year old male lion.

Click on it to view a larger image.

[attachment=0:2uy8fkya]Mortality-2.JPG[/attachment:2uy8fkya]


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

That can't have been killed by a cougar. They only kill the sick and weak animals. I know 'cause they said so on the cartoons.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Funny stuff Loke. When the collar gave off the signal that it was dead, a couple of BYU guys and a SFW lion hunter hiked up and quickly located the ram, the lion was STILL there only a few yards away from the kill. They tried to catch him to put a collar on for the 3 strike and out policy for sheep killing lions. He got away, but they'll get him in the next few days. With the lambing season just around the corner, this is a major concern. I personally carried this ram to the test station along with sauve300 and a few others. I also released this 7 year old ram onto the mountain. He was killed less than a mile from where he was released in January.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Was this ram transplanted this year?


----------



## Guns and Flies (Nov 7, 2007)

Put lions on the same list as coyotes, KILL EM ALL!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Loke said:


> Was this ram transplanted this year?


Yes, he was released on the Stansbury Range less than 3 months ago, back in January of 2008. I am trying to find some pix of this ram in the transport trailer before he was released. Suave, you have any?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I think there is a picture of him on Suave's avatar.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

How do I make his avatar bigger? That way I can verify if one of those 2 rams is the 'victim' ram or not.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

mighty expensive kitty food :x


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

You can make the avatar bigger. But it will be very pixelated and hard to decipher.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Longgun said:


> mighty expensive kitty food :x


Bad thing is, they can't kill this lion until he has killed THREE sheep. With lambing season just days away, how many will he get now that he has acquired a taste for mutton? I think instead of heading for Wyoming to roll a wolf or two, I am going to get the spotting scope and see if I can 'observe' Morris the cat near the sheep. Then I could call Mr Bateman so he can get a tracking collar on em. It cost around $40,000 to transplant 50 sheep back in January. Add the lost 'revenue' from tag sales and you are correct, expensive kitty food for sure. :evil:



> You can make the avatar bigger. But it will be very pixelated and hard to decipher.


I'll just get suave300 to send me a bigger version of it. Eric, you reading this? :wink:


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

Pro your posting pictures!!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Bad thing is, they can't kill this lion until he has killed THREE sheep. quote]
> 
> Pro,
> It's too bad I'm out of town on business, I would go observe him with you. I never was very good in the math department, but I'm a good shot and can dig holes with the best of them. :mrgreen:
> ...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

weatherby25 said:


> Pro your posting pictures!!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:


Not quite, I had tree do it for me. I don't even know how. It took tree 20 minutes to walk me through just getting the picture sent to him. I also did NOT take the picture, so I am using a loophole. :mrgreen: I have observed this ram several times since he was released in my backyard, so I got caught up in the 'moment'. It wasn't PICTURES, it was A picture, just to clarify. :wink: I may even post a few pix of callofthewild's monster bull elk he puts an arrow through this fall. 8)


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> weatherby25 said:
> 
> 
> > Pro your posting pictures!!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
> ...


WOW that is all I can say. I never thought it was possable.


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

Does the DWR give human poachers the same 3 strike rule?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

redleg said:


> Does the DWR give human poachers the same 3 strike rule?


They should, that is a good idea. :twisted:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

jahan said:


> redleg said:
> 
> 
> > Does the DWR give human poachers the same 3 strike rule?
> ...


+1


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

I think poachers should only have one strike and then someone takes then out to the woodshed.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> I think poachers should only have one strike and then someone takes then out to the woodshed.


Should that apply to those who poach woofies and kitties, too?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> I think poachers should only have one strike and then someone takes then out to the woodshed.


Hey yote, we don't want to hear what you want to do to them in the wood shed. We don't need this thread going to the Gut Pile. :shock: :wink:


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Hey yote, we don't want to hear what you want to do to them in the wood shed. We don't need this thread going to the Gut Pile.


Hahaha no worries I wasnt talking about what your thinking :lol: :lol:


----------



## Tatyana (Sep 14, 2007)

That's a pretty gruesome picture. Hopefully, something can be done about the lion.


----------



## silentstalker (Feb 19, 2008)

Pro,

Did the DWR do any "pre Transplant" kitty removal to give the sheep a better chance at survival? I hope they can get that cat caught so he can quickly be proven to have used up his last 2 strikes. Keep us posted.

Chad


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

silentstalker said:


> Pro,
> 
> Did the DWR do any "pre Transplant" kitty removal to give the sheep a better chance at survival? I hope they can get that cat caught so he can quickly be proven to have used up his last 2 strikes. Keep us posted.
> 
> Chad


The first transplant took place in 2006, ONE mature tom quickly killed 3 ewes and was laid to rest. The one 2 days ago is the first lion kill since.

FatBass, I am feeling 'nice' today, so I won't go down that road today. Check back later. 8) :mrgreen:


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> FatBass, I am feeling 'nice' today, so I won't go down that road today. Check back later. 8) :mrgreen:


You must have read about Northslope's misadventure with his dog yesterday. That will give everyone a "nice" day.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Loke said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > FatBass, I am feeling 'nice' today, so I won't go down that road today. Check back later. 8) :mrgreen:
> ...


That and the confirmed killing of at least 4 wolves in Wyoming today! -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- -()/- *OOO*


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

fatbass said:


> Things for pro to do today (by Mrs. proutdoors):
> 
> 1) Take out the trash
> 2) Learn how to post pics on the UWN forum
> ...


1) That is what kids are for, papa doesn't do 'skirt work'  
2) I just had tree do it, I still have no clue how to post pix on the UWN forum
3) That kitty has just spent 8 lives and will spend his last shortly


----------



## inbowrange (Sep 11, 2007)

So PRO does that mean he killed another one?


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

I have a solution for the predation problem. All we need to do is drop a few woofies off out there to eat the kitties. Then the sheep will be safe. :shock: //dog// *OOO* 


(Here is my prediction of what PRO will reply)
-#&#*!- **O** O*-- _O\ /**|**\ O-|-O -oOo- O|* :twisted: :evil:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

fatbass said:


> I admire you guys that make the time to reintroduce sheep but isn't it a certainty that some will fall to predators?


Yes it is, but it still stinks when a older ram gets taken out. The DWR was considering giving one or two tags out in 2009, now I doubt it will happen until 2010. There were only 2 rams 7+ years old, and now one was "kitty chow". We also try and keep predation low while the herds are being established. Otherwise the battle is even harder than otherwise. Just as it is reality that X number of deer will be hit by vehicles, it still stinks seeing a big buck on the side of the road, at least it does for me. I LOVE finding old bucks/bulls/rams that have made it through several winters and hunting seasons and then passed away from 'natural' causes, but I don't enjoy finding lion kills, road kill, starvation, and poached animals in the woods. But, that is just me.



> So PRO does that mean he killed another one?


Not that I know of, but we feel sure it is only a matter of time, especially with lambing season days away. I haven't heard of a lion killing one sheep and then never doing it again. Bad thing is, if this cat finds lambs before we can get collars on them it will be hard to verify when/who did the killing.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

What, no comment?


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

Sorry guys, I haven't been able to get on here for a few days. I wish I could have posted the picture for you earlier. Here is the bigger picture of those two rams in my avatar. It is definately one of them. You can see the brown ear tag they have which is the same color as the one killed.


----------



## Old Fudd (Nov 24, 2007)

Sept. 1968 That Mountain Range is where I saw my first lions, Hunting with a bow. 3 of them watched me for over a half hour, I was armed with a 45lb re-curve.Couldn't carry a firearm back then.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Loke said:


> What, no comment?


Sorry, I missed your post before. As long as the first wolves are dropped of in your backyard to keep you safe, it's a deal. :mrgreen:

suave300, I have a couple more pictures of those two rams in your avatar. They are the only two with brown tags that were released on the Stansbury Range, so it is one of the two. I think it is the one of the right. I'll ask what the tags had on so we know for sure. I'm going for a horse ride Saturday to check out a few springs for guzzler locations with the BYU grad student over the Stansbury herd.


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

PRO, are you going riding in the morning or evening?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

suave300 said:


> PRO, are you going riding in the morning or evening?


Olsen is supposed to call me later today, which works better for you?


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

I am working until 5:00 p.m.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

It's a 1 1/2 hour ride in, and 1 1/2 hour ride out. Awful steep country to come out in the dark. You'll get to get up there when we put the guzzlers in I assure you. 8)


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

The same lion has killed ANOTHER ram. This one was a 2 year old ram killed by the SAME 2 year old tom. The policy for harvesting a lion is 3 sheep killed in a 365 day period, or 2 within 90 days. This cat is being chased by the best lion hunter in the biz as I type. Bye bye kitty! The biologists said this lion has been right with the same herd of rams since they released him after putting a tracking collar on him. This ram was also released in January.


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

:twisted: 
SMOKE THAT *****!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

chet said:


> :twisted:
> SMOKE THAT kitten!


He is now deceased! I'll get tree to post some pix of the dead ram, and of the serial killer when I get them downloaded.


----------



## utfireman (Sep 7, 2007)

It's to bad that the deer on that mountain range are not as valuable as the sheep are!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

utfireman said:


> It's to bad that the deer on that mountain range are not as valuable as the sheep are!


I'm sure if someone spent $40,000 to transplant 100 head of deer on 'that' mountain range, they would be as 'valuable'. :idea:


----------



## Desert Mutt (Sep 13, 2007)

Hey pro when was the first sheep transplanted on the stansberrys? I saw some while chukar hunting back in december and it was a pretty good number of sheep. How many more were released in january and were did they come from?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Desert Mutt, the first transplant was in January 2006. We did another in January 2008. The 1st transplant was mostly ewes and lambs, I believe the number was around 50 head. The release this year was 35 sheep with all but 10 being rams, with 3 7+ year old rams. All of these sheep were captured and relocated from Antelope Island. The origin of the sheep herd on the island happened in 1999 when they were transplanted out of California. One of the rams released this last January on the Newfoundland range was a lamb brought in from California. He now has a ear tag from then and one from this year along with a fancy collar. There are now around 110 sheep on the Stansburys not counting the new lambs that should be hitting the ground in the next few weeks.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Nice pictures by the way. The second one is less than a mile from the release point of all these sheep.


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

Pro, that is awesome! I didnt think they'd be doing as well as they are.
How big of an impact do you think coyotes have on the fawns?
Too bad we cant figure out a way to collar them in the whomb huh?
They can disappear before we knew they even existed!!!!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

The lamb recruitment is very high for sheep with this herd. I believe the lamb/ewe ratio for last year was 65/100. Compared to the very low lamb/ewe ratios on many other sheep herds and this herd is doing better than expected. Coyotes haven't seemed to have much of an impact so far.


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> The same lion has killed ANOTHER ram. This one was a 2 year old ram killed by the SAME 2 year old tom. The policy for harvesting a lion is 3 sheep killed in a 365 day period, *or 2 within 90 days.* This cat is being chased by the best lion hunter in the biz as I type. Bye bye kitty! The biologists said this lion has been right with the same herd of rams since they released him after putting a tracking collar on him. This ram was also released in January.


NICE, NICE, NICE. Two is definately better than three! I'm just glad that he did it within that 90 day period. I will look forward for the pic of him dead.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

suave300 said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > The same lion has killed ANOTHER ram. This one was a 2 year old ram killed by the SAME 2 year old tom. The policy for harvesting a lion is 3 sheep killed in a 365 day period, *or 2 within 90 days.* This cat is being chased by the best lion hunter in the biz as I type. Bye bye kitty! The biologists said this lion has been right with the same herd of rams since they released him after putting a tracking collar on him. This ram was also released in January.
> ...


I'll forward the pictures to tree as soon as I get them.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Get er dun.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Get er *dun*.


My favorite horse coloration, how did you know?


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Hey PRO and DM here are the official stats on the Stansbury sheep.
Antelope Island sheep originated from Kamtoops BC in 1997 with 23 sheep.
Then the transplants to Stansbury began with 12 in 2005, Then 44 in 2006,
and finaly 36 in 2008.
Next place for the California big horns to reintroduced will be on the Fillmore,oak creek range.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > Get er *dun*.
> ...


I'm partial to grullos and paints.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Hey PRO and DM here are the official stats on the Stansbury sheep.
> Antelope Island sheep originated from Kamtoops BC in 1997 with 23 sheep.
> Then the transplants to Stansbury began with 12 in 2005, Then 44 in 2006,
> and finaly 36 in 2008.
> Next place for the California big horns to reintroduced will be on the Fillmore,oak creek range.


Thanks for the stats. The DWR told me in January they can transplant about 30-40 sheep a year off Antelope Island each year due to high lamb recruitment.

FYI Chet, the coyotes are plentiful on the island and the biologists say they have no/little impact on the sheep. When we were out there we saw several coyotes out in the open each day. I asked if the division was concerned about them impacting sheep numbers and they, to a person, said no.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Pro, whats the scoop on this kitty?


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> This cat is being chased by the best lion hunter in the biz as I type.
> 
> 
> > That doesn't narrow it down at all for me......it could be any houndsman in the state if you ask them. I've yet to meet a hound dogger that claimed he was only second best! :mrgreen:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Longgun said:


> Pro, whats the scoop on this kitty?


All 9 lives are GONE!!!!

He isn't making the claim of him being the best in the biz, I am saying he is.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

*-band-* ....sweet!


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

I recall seeing high numbers of song dogs on the island. That is such an awesome resource we have, to be able to supply stock for transplants without having to 'trade' with other governments.
I truley beleive that the present is in fact "the good ole days" and that the balance has never been better!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

chet said:


> I recall seeing high numbers of song dogs on the island. That is such an awesome resource we have, to be able to supply stock for transplants without having to 'trade' with other governments.
> I truley beleive that the present is in fact "the good ole days" and that the balance has never been better!


Amen. They are doing all kinds of research out there that will have direct benefits to wildlife throughout the state. They will be burning more of the island this summer and then planting different plants to see which respond best and which ones are most beneficial to wildlife. They also have several studies on animals there. They will be putting a bunch of sharptails out there in hopes of using them as transplant material like these sheep. The also have grad students doing research out there. One kid goes around picking up coyote scat and then analyzing it to see what they eat out there. He said his wife isn't to happy that his freezer at home is full of sip lock bags full of scat. :mrgreen:


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

chet said:


> That is such an awesome resource we have, to be able to supply stock for transplants without having to 'trade' with other governments.


Amen to that. Antelope Island is an amazing resource. I wasn't aware of that fact until the transplant, being able to talk to DWR and sportsman alike at that time. Truly an AWESOME resource.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

yes sir it is a special place...just be D*** happy disney (back in the day) didnt get it to put his little playland on!


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Picture? Kitten? We are waiting...................................


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

EPEK said:


> Picture? Kitten? We are waiting...................................


Me to. I'll check and see what the hold up is. :?


----------



## Cold Track (Sep 11, 2007)

The guy chasing the cat isn't the best, but his brother and brother's boy that are helping him are right up there.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Cold Track said:


> The guy chasing the cat isn't the best, but his brother and brother's boy that are helping him are right up there.


Are they the second best?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Mr Bateman is as good a houndsman as anyone out there. I stand by my claim. He has been chasing lions since before I was born, and I am OLD.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I just got this e-mail this morning from the biologist on the Stansbury's:


> Currently, we have a very dangerous situation on the Stansbury
> Mountains. On Monday, a herd of 100+ domestic sheep were moved into Timpie
> Valley in close proximity (<0.5 mile) to bighorn sheep. The domestic sheep
> are on private land, but there are no fences that separate private and
> ...


If anyone has info to help this dangerous situation to the bighorn sheep, please let me know!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I think the cat hunter should protect himself from rabid domestic sheep by dispatching every last one. :mrgreen:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I just got this e-mail this morning from the biologist on the Stansbury's:
> 
> 
> > Currently, we have a very dangerous situation on the Stansbury
> ...


I am new to the whole big horn stuff. So why is this bad? Is it because they will eat up there resources or some type of disease issues? Thanks in advance for answering my questions, this is interesting to me.


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

If the sheep are killed on site, does the threat remain?

I wonder who's sheep they are, and I'd like to read that agreement. I thought it was all taken care of....... :evil:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Jahan, domestic sheep are fatal to bighorn sheep. Every effort is made to keep the two miles apart. In fact there are several places in Utah that has the perfect terrain for bighorns, but they have domestic sheep grazing permits on them, so bighorns will NOT be introduced until the domestic sheep have been removed. Domestic sheep pass diseases to the bighorns that is very deadly to the entire herd. The fact that the two or only .5 miles apart is scary big time!

Chet, either these sheep are there illegally, or the Division missed this 'loophole', which could lead to the demise of this herd of 110+ bighorns.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I just received this e-mail from Don Peay:



> Friends in the hunting world,
> 
> Over the past month, more than 8 Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep have died along the foothills of Provo, due to the pneumonia pasturella virus. The deadly disease, is Most likely caused by contact with domestic sheep or goats. There is no permits for sheep or goats on the forest lands, but via stray animals, deliberate releases, or whatever reason, a bighorn herd has been destroyed.
> 
> ...


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

I have hundreds of "mutton" loads worked up for the .243, let me know if my services could become useful!!! I'm only five minutes away! 
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:


----------



## blackbear (Oct 18, 2007)

My Lord!!

A rancher putting public land, resources & wildlife at risk? Impossible. Never happens. Treehuggers introduced cronic wasting disease & democrats are the ones poaching in the backcountry for food & predator control. 

Betcha its Obamas sheep.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

blackbear said:


> My Lord!!
> 
> A rancher putting public land, resources & wildlife at risk? Impossible. Never happens. Treehuggers introduced cronic wasting disease & democrats are the ones poaching in the backcountry for food & predator control.
> 
> Betcha its Obamas sheep.


 :roll:


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> blackbear said:
> 
> 
> > My Lord!!
> ...


 :roll: +1


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

That is really frustrating and ticks me off that someone let those domestic sheep loose on land that has been leased though the state to keep them off of it. I am not financially envolved, but am deffinately emotionally envolved because of the transplant that PRO and I helped with. I just hope we can get this fixed ASAP, as I don't want it to turn into the Provo shamble. FRUSTRATING!!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I am just getting back from seeing firsthand these domestic sheep. There is around 200 ewes, most have twin lambs at their side, and then there are several buck sheep. There are concerned sportsmen, including the fine gentleman who first reported the ILLEGAL presence of these maggots, that are spending every day from dawn to dusk keeping the maggots below the road until the DWR can get the maggots rounded up and relocated. The owner of these maggots is Muntz, and he is NOT allowed to have sheep on this land, even though he owns the land due to a WRITTEN agreement made with FNAWS. His lame ass excuse is the land he normally puts the sheep up by Chalk Creek is snowed in and he nowhere to put them, so he just dropped them off w/o notice. The DWR hopes to have a place to relocate the sheep to by Wed., I sure hope so. While I was talking with the two sportsmen keeping the maggots below the road, we spotted 20+ bighorns less than 1/2 mile away. If just ONE bighorn gets infected the whole herd is in serious danger.

I also found out the lion is still running loose and they are still trying to get the SOB. The maggots are just west of the Limeplant located N/W of Grantsville for those who would like to help out.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

Any way to relocate the lion in amongst the maggots?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Loke said:


> Any way to relocate the lion in amongst the maggots?


I'm working on it! :evil:


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

So how much did the FNAWS pay this guy to not put his sheep there?


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

Loke said:


> Any way to relocate the lion in amongst the maggots?


That got a very *FINE* belly laugh out of me. Thank you. If only we could do that!!!


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

PRO, what can we do to help out???????


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Maggot hunting would be beneficial. :?:


----------



## Kevin D (Sep 15, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I also found out the lion is still running loose and they are still trying to get the SOB.


YIKES!! Sounds like you might have to call up the second best hound dogger in the state of Utah to give him a hand! 

Just kidding Pro, I've known Mr. Bateman and his brother for going on 25 years now, and I have nothing but positive things to say about them. Nonetheless, the best houndsman in the state is is most likely someone neither you or I have ever heard of. It'll be some snot-nosed kid with no job and no responsibilities that hunts about everyday of the year......and trust me, there's a bunch of them hound dog bums around the state. They may not have the name, but they'll have the dogs. :wink:


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

how did the report that it was dead come about then? 

...or is there two cats working this herd??


----------



## MudInBlood (Apr 10, 2008)

It was never killed. Someone jumped the gun thinking it was killed.


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Sounds like a sneaky lion,O snap he is just doing what he was born to do, hide and eat meat....
I for one am cheering for the lion!!!!!!


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> Sounds like a sneaky lion,O snap he is just doing what he was born to do, hide and eat meat....
> I for one am cheering for the lion!!!!!!


 :shock: o-||


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

jahan said:


> gunrunner said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like a sneaky lion,O snap he is just doing what he was born to do, hide and eat meat....
> ...


"_O snap_"?..... *\-\*


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Nice one Long gun. Let's see we have a mountain range with a lion living there. He spends his days out searching for food and trying to survive. Then out of the blue someone drops off some sheep on his mountain. MY HELL OF COURSE HE IS GOING TO EAT THEM. He's a mountain lion. Now a farmer brings his sheep to the mountain, and i'll be damned the lion eats those as well. I don't know about you guys but we had better hunt this lion down and kill it ASAP. I mean he is only doing what lions are suppose to do. It is survival of the fittest and the lion is above the precious bighorn on the food chain..
Note to self, let's kill all the lions so that we can transplant sheep in areas that are easy to hunt and that way we won't have to work at it.....I forgot the DWR spent 40 grand on those sheep, so that makes it what $800 per sheep? We could always do as Mr. Peay stated and shoot those farmers sheep on sight(now that's a class act right there boys) and then pay him the $50 they are worth...This is beyond pathetic and to think it is best for the animals is completely out in left field....
Take your best shot!!!!!!


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

thankyou! --\O 

where'd ya say that cat went _(O)_


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> Nice one Long gun. Let's see we have a mountain range with a lion living there. He spends his days out searching for food and trying to survive. Then out of the blue someone drops off some sheep on his mountain. MY HELL OF COURSE HE IS GOING TO EAT THEM. He's a mountain lion. Now a farmer brings his sheep to the mountain, and i'll be damned the lion eats those as well. I don't know about you guys but we had better hunt this lion down and kill it ASAP. I mean he is only doing what lions are suppose to do. It is survival of the fittest and the lion is above the precious bighorn on the food chain..
> Note to self, let's kill all the lions so that we can transplant sheep in areas that are easy to hunt and that way we won't have to work at it.....I forgot the DWR spent 40 grand on those sheep, so that makes it what $800 per sheep? We could always do as Mr. Peay stated and shoot those farmers sheep on sight(now that's a class act right there boys) and then pay him the $50 they are worth...This is beyond pathetic and to think it is best for the animals is completely out in left field....
> Take your best shot!!!!!!


I'll take a shot. :twisted: 
No one has suggested to eradicate the lions, but when a herd of bighorns is being established on a new range it is crucial that the animals get help getting up to numbers that can sustain occasional lion kills. The lion that has killed these two rams is 2 years old, we put the first sheep out there BEFORE he was ever born. It is likely he recently was pushed out from momma, and the dominate male chased him to explore new territory. As others like Chet have mentioned, the deer numbers are repressed on this range due in part to lion predation. So, keeping the lion numbers in check helps more than just the big horns.

If it is indeed "survival of the fittest", the lion will lose since man is ABOVE the precious lion on the food chain. _(O)_ It was $40,000 for this latest transplant, the total cost is well in the 6 figures for the big horn RE-INTRODUCTION on the Stansbury range.

So, what do you think should be done when a livestock owner blatantly breaks a WRITTEN agreement and puts the wild sheep at risk? You seem to think you have the answers, so please 'enlighten' me/others.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> No one has suggested to eradicate the lions, but when a herd of bighorns is being established on a new range it is crucial that the animals get help getting up to numbers that can sustain occasional lion kills. The lion that has killed these two rams is 2 years old, we put the first sheep out there BEFORE he was ever born. It is likely he recently was pushed out from momma, and the dominate male chased him to explore new territory. As others like Chet have mentioned, the deer numbers are repressed on this range due in part to lion predation. So, keeping the lion numbers in check helps more than just the big horns.
> 
> If it is indeed "survival of the fittest", the lion will lose since man is ABOVE the precious lion on the food chain. _(O)_ It was $40,000 for this latest transplant, the total cost is well in the 6 figures for the big horn RE-INTRODUCTION on the Stansbury range.
> 
> So, what do you think should be done when a livestock owner blatantly breaks a WRITTEN agreement and puts the wild sheep at risk? You seem to think you have the answers, so please 'enlighten' me/others.


I checked the limiting factors for this unit and noticed that predation is among the problems limiting deer...HOWEVER, so is habitat--specifically summer range, highway mortality, crop depradation, and illegal harvest.

The problem, as I see it, with the idea that it is ok to kill the lion because they are helping limit the population of deer is that the sheep are also going to limit the population of deer because they will be competing for some of the same available habitat.

The livestock owner who blatantly broke a written agreement should be forced to remove his livestock with the consequences of a fine. If he doesn't, the state should move them for him and at his cost. But Don Peay's solution of just going out and shooting the sheep is definitely not right...and, what about the rancher and the amount of money he stands to lose because he cannot run sheep on his property? Shouldn't some kind of deal be worked out where both can benefit? I am sure the DWR has some property somewhere that the sheep could be moved to where the rancher wouldn't stand to lose his livestock...

Personally, I think all the money would have been much better spent finding solutions to crop depredation, poor summer range for deer, and illegal harvest. That way we don't have to justify our actions of killing a mountain lion.

My question is this: do we need to kill every lion that happens to kill a bighorn now on the Stansbury? How long do we need to kill lions that do feed on bighorns up there? At what point do we say they can survive on their own without our help?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> I checked the limiting factors for this unit and noticed that predation is among the problems limiting deer...HOWEVER, so is habitat--specifically summer range, highway mortality, crop depradation, and illegal harvest.
> 
> The problem, as I see it, with the idea that it is ok to kill the lion because they are helping limit the population of deer is that the sheep are also going to limit the population of deer because they will be competing for some of the same available habitat.
> 
> ...


1)I clearly stated that predation was PART of, not the only, cause of low deer numbers. Check and see what I wrote before commenting please.

2)The sheep are NOT limiting deer numbers because grazing permits used by this very sheep herder were BOUGHT and the number is LESS than the number of domestic sheep that were on this range all summer.

3)The herd of maggots will be relocated as soon as a 'suitable' location is located. It WILL be at the livestock owners expense, but how do you recoup the losses if the wild sheep are infected and there is a huge die off? Don Peay did NOT suggest shooting 200+ sheep, again read the WHOLE comment in context, it helps clarify issues. This landowner was well compensated for giving up grazing his sheep on this land, no one 'forced' him to this agreement that he signed and is legally bound to comply with.

4)So, you are saying big horn sheep have no place in Utah? Is that truly looking out for 'all' hunters, or just you? We kill mountain lions every year, even in places without the presence of big horns, to assert that is the 'only' reason for killing a lion is ridiculous. There are specific criteria on lion harvest in sheep country, criteria that was passed through the proper channels.

5)No, we don't "need" to kill every lion that happens to kill a bighorn on the Stansbury, in fact there is a female with two little sheep eaters that killed a ewe in February, and she was collared and is still breathing. Talk about hyperbole on your part.

6)The bighorn sheep population will be closely monitored by the DWR and when they deem the herd 'stable', the 'rules' will be modified. Kind of like your friendly wolf program. That date will be obtained quicker if we keep self serving livestock owners from putting the herd in dire straits! :idea:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

I agree with most of what Wyoming2Utah said. I am going to play devils advocate here so bear with me. So just because they have spent lots of money on getting the sheep planted, why is it okay to kill off all of their predators? At what point do the sheep sustain themselves? It seems like if the sheep are that sensitive then maybe they shouldn't be placed where there is a good chance of being in contact with either people or domestic sheep. What about wolves for example, lots of money has been spent to get their population up, why is it alright to kill them?

I could come up with rebuttals to all of these questions, but I am just curious of what all you guys have to say. Like I said I am just playing devils advocate here. :twisted:

As far as the domesticated sheep go, if there was an agreement, the sheep owner should be fined. I don't agree with the just shooting them like Don suggested, but I can sympathize with his stance at the same time.
*
Edit: I see some of these questions were answered by Pro above.*


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I know I said earlier that the lion had been dispatched, which was later proven false. But, I just got an e-mail straight from Anis Aoude. He informed me that the "offending cougar" (his words) was snared and killed. This is per info from Kevin Bunnell. Thanks to all who helped remove this lion from the living!


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

jahan said:


> why is it alright to kill them? [/b]


for the same reason that yotes/skunks/foxs/feral cat/raccoons....chubs/perch/carp are controlled to...CREATE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE HUNTERS/FISHERMEN.

for that matter why do you think the fishy-bios use Tiger Musky...they're sterile and easly controlled.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Longgun said:


> jahan said:
> 
> 
> > why is it alright to kill them? [/b]
> ...


Thanks, that is a very honest answer.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

The Big Horn sheep are re-introductions where ever they found. When the pioneers arrived, the most abundant large game animal was the Big Horn sheep. Their population was decimated by the introduction of the domestic sheep and the diseases that they carry. From a moral stand point, if we want to have a stable population of these native animals, we need to provide an environment where they can multiply to the point that their reproductive capabilities can compensate for the predation. Since humans are part of nature, and has limited the amount of territory where these animals can exist, we, as the top predator in the food chain, are obligated to manage all species for the betterment of all species. That means that we need to manage the predators, as well as the prey species. The fact that the prey species are hunted by sportsmen, and provide funding for the procurement of habitat for all species, makes them a bit more valuable to the ecosystem than the predators that don't provide that source of revenue.


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

Good post Loke!


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

So you are telling me that because the lion was born after the sheep had been transplanted that does not give him any right to be a lion? Doesn't matter when he was born, he is still a lion and being forced out of his range by the dominat male is what forced him to go kill and eat the sheep. Right? So why kill him for being a lion doing what lions do?
That is my question through this whole lost drawn out post. Why kill the lion for being a lion?
You've stated in your post that they(dwr) was considering a tag for this herd and now that will most likely not happen for another year, true? Was this your pupose in transplanting the sheep there to begin with? So you could be the one with a chance to shoot one? What is difference between you and the lion? Either way one got killed? I have no problem with shooting sheep, but fair chase is fair chase, whether it be a lion or a hunter with a gun. Let the lion, be a lion in a lions true habitat... 
As for the rancher, if he is in the wrong then by all means make him move the sheep at his cost. But was this a for sure thing that he had been compensated for not using his land for his sheep? 
As for the comment by Mr. Peay, I did take it in context and he basically said if you sheep domestic sheep anywhere that there are/could be bighorns then go ahead and shoot them, what the hell he has done it at least twice...What a piece of work.
One other question is there any photos of the second sheep killed by the same lion? Or was that just an excuse to kill another lion? Just a question(this one could hurt)


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> ....said if you sheep domestic sheep anywhere...


was that a direct quote?


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

o-||


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

meant to say " if you see any domestic sheep"......
That's all you got?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> So you are telling me that because the lion was born after the sheep had been transplanted that does not give him any right to be a lion? Doesn't matter when he was born, he is still a lion and being forced out of his range by the dominat male is what forced him to go kill and eat the sheep. Right? So why kill him for being a lion doing what lions do?


You're right, the age of the lion matters not, I was making a point however. Bighorn sheep once roamed this range, and were wiped out, as mentioned by Loke by domestic sheep. Once the herd as been established and taken off 'protected' status and viewed as a 'normal' big game animal the same rules will apply. Until then, in order to re-establish the herd, the lion population will be closely watched and monitored per the bighorn sheep management plan.



> That is my question through this whole lost drawn out post. Why kill the lion for being a lion?
> You've stated in your post that they(dwr) was considering a tag for this herd and now that will most likely not happen for another year, true? Was this your pupose in transplanting the sheep there to begin with? So you could be the one with a chance to shoot one? What is difference between you and the lion? Either way one got killed? I have no problem with shooting sheep, but fair chase is fair chase, whether it be a lion or a hunter with a gun. Let the lion, be a lion in a lions true habitat...


The lion was killed because if left to do 'what comes natural' he would have seriously affected the bighorn sheep herd BEFORE it has had a chance to become a stable herd. Lions is the area are NOT unstable, in fact as a deer hunter I believe there are too many lions, little lone the sheep issue.There were MANY reasons for transplanting the sheep, one was for hunting, one was for viewing. The odds of me EVER drawing a tag for this unit in my lifetime is worse than me winning the powerball lottery. This IS bighorn sheep traditional habitat, and I enjoy being able to within 20 minutes of leaving my house see several bighorn sheep. They are one of what I consider 'true' symbols of the west. I never saw bighorns growing up, all my kids have seen them several times. That is what motivates me. Having a lucky few hunters enjoy hunting this awesome animal is icing on the cake to me.



> As for the rancher, if he is in the wrong then by all means make him move the sheep at his cost. But was this a for sure thing that he had been compensated for not using his land for his sheep?


Yes, it IS for sure he has been compensated. There are signed papers with his signature on them.



> As for the comment by Mr. Peay, I did take it in context and he basically said if you sheep domestic sheep anywhere that there are/could be bighorns then go ahead and shoot them, what the hell he has done it at least twice...What a piece of work.


He said no such thing. In fact, it has been made very clear to NOT shoot any of the maggots on the Stansbury range. Piece of work indeed, he has done more for wildlife in Utah than you could ever hope to.



> One other question is there any photos of the second sheep killed by the same lion? Or was that just an excuse to kill another lion? Just a question(this one could hurt)


Now who is being a "piece of work"? :roll: Are you accusing the DWR,/BYU students/and multiple sportsmen of fabricating this? If so, why would they bother 'staging' the first sheep kill? Would that not be easier to eradicate the lions if that was the intent? Get real. :?


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

It was a question, I saw the photos of the first kill, but none of the second one, It was a simple question. I agree it was a bad comment, I am sure there is a lot of work invovled in studying and watching the sheep herd. Just never saw pictures of the second kill so relax.
And the letter or memo posted earlier stated something to the effect that it was ok to shoot domestic sheep and that he, Mr. Peay, had done it himself. Never said it was the stansbury herd.
I agree seeing wild sheep in a sight, but so is seeing a lion in the wild.
I grew up a big game hunter, but I think the tide has turned most people want an easy hunt.
A big horn hunt on the stansbury island would have to be one of, if not the most easy wild bighorn hunts ever. I mean it gets no better than hunting bighorn with the sounds of ak-47's beeing shot on one end of the island. I have no problem with the sheep being on the island for viewing, but let the predators keep them in check.
I applaude your efforts for working with the biologist and the BYU students on this adventure, but providing a stable herd to hunt it is not...Big game hunting has gotten to easy these days. I mean there are some great hunts that take a whole lot of work to harvest a true trophy, but sheep hunt on the stansbury's is not one of them.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

LMFAO! It is the Stansbury MOUNTAIN range, NOT the island! :roll: :rotfl: The range is well over 20 miles long. Funny stuff right there. Nuff said about your posts!


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

My bad, Never meant to say island, still makes for a sporty bighorn hunt right buddy?


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

And he has done more for wildlife than I could ever hope for? 
That must be, because you know me...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> My bad, Never meant to say island, still makes for a sporty bighorn hunt right buddy?


As sporting as a LE elk hunt in September with a rifle. _(O)_ Have you ever been in the Stansbury range? I am guessing no, as there is a lot of wilderness area, and NO roads near where the sheep hang out during the summer/fall. Maybe you should get a little bit informed on a subject BEFORE making absurd comments. Just a thought!

The fact you seem to know so little about big game is evidence enough to draw a conclusion into what you have/haven't done for wildlife.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

o-||


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

You don't know me or anything about me. If you want to make this personal go ahead.
I have seen your precious sheep herd personally. Humped into the range and there they where, right above the chukars. So I do know the range, probably not as well as you but I do.
Let's see the last big game hunt I was on was this past year. Had A friend who had not shot a rifle in 10+ years, had to borrow a rifle. Leave his house at 12:30 pm. and by 4:30 have a cow elk down. One hell of a tough hunt.
I may not be the big game hunter that you are but that was never my point....
So make all the assumtions you want, you just keep pimping your herd and killing cats and we'll see you on the mountain, unless your atv won't get you there.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

:shock: 
.









.








<<--O/ 
.

O*--









.


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Now that's funny.
It's just a friendly discussion on the internet.
RELAX!!!!!! 8)


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> meant to say " if you see any domestic sheep"......
> That's all you got?


deleted:

i was merely asking for a bit of clarification....honest :roll:


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Ok
Sharp brush? ouch that hurt... :wink:


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

good gawd...did you get your unsuccessful note already :shock: :wink:


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Nope not yet,
Just thought it was funny. Haven't heard that one in a long time. It was a good one.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

well consider it ressurected then for ya :wink:


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

anyone have a spare boat, i wanna go maggot hunting


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

For the record the Stansbury mountain range is wicked. Some places over 11000ft. And is steep. steep steep. Most of the range is perfect Big Horn Sheep territory. I say thanks for planting them there. I hope to see some this fall.


----------



## jhunter (Dec 14, 2007)

Some of the guys that I hunt with have often laughed about the idea of getting blunts and influencing those maggots on where to be. We thought it would be even funnier to make a video series called the blunt truth. At least the idea is funny anyway.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

jhunter said:


> Some of the guys that I hunt with have often laughed about the idea of getting blunts and influencing those maggots on where to be. We thought it would be even funnier to make a video series called the blunt truth. At least the idea is funny anyway.


 o-||


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

jhunter said:


> Some of the guys that I hunt with have often laughed about the idea of getting blunts and influencing those maggots on where to be. We thought it would be even funnier to make a video series called the blunt truth. At least the idea is funny anyway.


I see NOTHING funny about abusing animals, maggots or not.

gunrunner, you seem like an internet troll, so I will pass on continuing down this path with you. I'll gladly do a hike with you anytime, no atv needed on my part.


----------



## jhunter (Dec 14, 2007)

wow ok


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Internet troll? Come on now. It was just a difference of opinion, don't get mad and take your ball and go home. :roll: 
Pro I will say this I admire the passion you have for the sheep, more sportsmen need that type of dedication. I say good for you and keep up the good work. I'm glad my children will be able to see bighorn sheep in thier natural habitat.
My whole point in all of this is I totally understand your work and dedication, the work you have put in to get the herd established on this range and to have a lion mess with the "overall" plan sucks. But he was just being a lion.
I guess I just disagree on the "overall" or "big picture" plan. Doesn't make my views right or wrong nor does it yours. We can agree to disagree. You like your sheep and I like my lions, why can't they all just get along?  
I guess if somebody wants to have a sheep hunt on the stansbury that is thier choice so good for them.
Again thanks for your dedication and now tell me about the sharptails and where they plan to plant them at.  
I would gladly take a hike anytime.
On a serious note, do the cattle have any effect on the sheep herds? ie diseases or what not? Cause those cows can sure tear up the country side.....
PS> Now you guys can stop sending me PM's, it was just a friendly discussion.


----------



## suave300 (Sep 11, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> On a serious note, do the cattle have any effect on the sheep herds? ie diseases or what not?


No they don't carry the diseases that affect Bighorn. Just sheep and goats.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Fair enough gunrunner. I got caught up in the moment, we are good. I have no problem with a lion being a "lion", but when a sheep herd is trying to be established it is critical that predation is minimized by ALL predators, lions and humans included. If the lions are 'smart' they will leave the sheep alone for a few years and then they will be 'allowed' to munch in one or two without receiving a death sentence. 8) That what the sheep and lions will "get along. :wink: 

Let's take a hike on the Stansburys and see some of God's prettiest country mostly untouched by human hands.

I'll ask where the projected sharpie transplants will take place and when. Just don't mess with 'my' sheep. :evil: :mrgreen:

Cattle pose no known risks for disease to the bighorns. They can, when allowed to, make a mess to habitat.


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Cool I'll will leave "your" sheep to you, but tell them to quit eating the cheat grass that "my" chukars love so much..... 8) 
By the way that range is way to rough and ugly to be chasing chukars on, been there, did that, not again. I think the dogs might run the other way if I unloaded them at the bottom of those mountains again, but there are chukars, **** did I just hot spot?
Pro you know the range, so how many lions/ sheep do you guess there are on the stansburys? 
Just to clarify, Pro and I are good this is just for my info don't want anymore mean nasty PM"S..


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

There is around 110 sheep, pre-lambing season count. I am unsure of the number of lions, I would guess it is higher than the division says, but lower than what many hunters say is there. I know the grad students from BYU have been tracking 4 in the sheep areas, not including the one just snared and dispatched. If those 4 lions aren't eating sheep, they must be eating deer. Neither scenario is ideal in my view. As for habitat, there was a major fire on the northeast end of the range. They have dropped straw mulch bales on a good portion of the burnt areas, so hopefully some good feed for the critters will be sprouting up shortly. 

You are correct, with so many nearby areas that hold as many/more chukars, why would you be making your dogs run that terrain for a bird? I can give you more productive areas not far away that are much easier to traverse. I haven't seen as many birds on the east side where the maggots/bighorns are at as on the Skull Valley side, but I am sure they are there. 

I went for a horse ride a 1 1/2 weeks ago and saw some incredible country. We have located several different springs, and later this year we will be putting in a couple of guzzlers, which will help keep the sheep higher and away from human/maggot interaction.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> PS> Now you guys can stop sending me PM's, it was just a friendly discussion.


over what? your "that all ya got" statement.

pro, 
when those guzzlers do get the green light , id love to lend a hand if at all possible.


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> *I see NOTHING funny about abusing animals, maggots or not.*
> 
> gunrunner, you seem like an internet troll, so I will pass on continuing down this path with you. I'll gladly do a hike with you anytime, no atv needed on my part.


That statement alone brought it up to 100%.. 8)

Thank you !! 

ps...I'd rather use an atv...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

.45 said:


> That statement alone brought it up to *100%*.. 8)
> 
> Thank you !!


 -()/-


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Longgun said:


> gunrunner said:
> 
> 
> > PS> Now you guys can stop sending me PM's, it was just a friendly discussion.
> ...


Mr Longun,
Let it go it was obvisouly not directed at you


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> 1)I clearly stated that predation was PART of, not the only, cause of low deer numbers. Check and see what I wrote before commenting please.
> 
> 2)The sheep are NOT limiting deer numbers because grazing permits used by this very sheep herder were BOUGHT and the number is LESS than the number of domestic sheep that were on this range all summer.
> 
> ...


1) I never said otherwise...I simply stated the fact that it was only a part. You are the one that used the idea that predation was one of the limiting factors as an excuse to kill the lion.

2) Sheep will continue limiting deer numbers because they will continue to compete for the same food source as deer will...if the range isn't good enough to meet the objectives for one big game animal, how will adding another help? Had the DWR used the money to keep sheep off the land, it could have allowed the range/habitat a chance to recover to the point where it could allow objectives for both animals to be met. As it is now, we are replacing sheep with sheep in the hopes that we can have more sheep...

3) This is part of what I don't understand about this reintroduction...the Stansabury unit is comprised of a lot of private ground. In fact, about 40% of the deer's winter and summer ranges are private. Also, the Stansbury has a good number of private landowners to go along with that land...wasn't the Division asking for trouble in transplanting these animals into a region with so little public land? I would also be concerned about the amount of public land available to be hunted in the future and the ability of the public to access that land...honest questions. I don't know the unit personally.

4) I never said and never implied that we shouldn't have bighorn sheep or that we shouldn't be introducing them to their native ranges. I asserted that killing a lion because it ate a transplanted animal is stupid. You made the assertion that the lion was killed just because it ate some transplanted sheep. At what point is the line drawn? Why, if we knew that this reintroduction were going to take place, didn't the DWR issue a bunch of lion tags and allow hunters the chance at the animals. Why didn't the DWR put an extensive predator control program into place on this unit if they were worried about predation on transplanted animals?

Also, what makes you think these reintroductions are done just for hunters as you imply?

5) So, how do we choose which animals should be shot/killed and which shouldn't? Again, where is the line drawn? IF that female and her cubs begin killing transplanted animals on a regular basis, would they be killed? At what point do the sheep need to make it in on their own without us protecting them?

6) But, of course, like any population numbers by the DWR, they aren't accurate...right? :roll: You know what else is kind of like the "friendly wolf program"? Your sheep program...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> :wink: 1) I never said otherwise...I simply stated the fact that it was only a part. You are the one that used the idea that predation was one of the limiting factors as an excuse to kill the lion.


Part of the Deer Management Plan calls for the monitoring and REMOVAL of predators where/when warranted. It is also part of the Bighorn Management Plan. I apparently was mistaken thinking you were for following the Management Plans endorsed by the DWR and approved by the Wildlife Board. My bad.



> 2) Sheep will continue limiting deer numbers because they will continue to compete for the same food source as deer will...if the range isn't good enough to meet the objectives for one big game animal, how will adding another help? Had the DWR used the money to keep sheep off the land, it could have allowed the range/habitat a chance to recover to the point where it could allow objectives for both animals to be met. As it is now, we are replacing sheep with sheep in the hopes that we can have more sheep...


With the removal of the domestic sheep, and the INCREASE in habitat restoration projects, there is, according the the local DWR biologist Tom Becker amble feed for BOTH.



> 3) This is part of what I don't understand about this reintroduction...the Stansabury unit is comprised of a lot of private ground. In fact, about 40% of the deer's winter and summer ranges are private. Also, the Stansbury has a good number of private landowners to go along with that land...wasn't the Division asking for trouble in transplanting these animals into a region with so little public land? I would also be concerned about the amount of public land available to be hunted in the future and the ability of the public to access that land...honest questions. I don't know the unit personally.


This is false in so many ways. I think you are mistaking the Stansbury Range with Stansbury Island. The Stansbury Range has included in it one of the biggest chunks of Wilderness Area in Utah. What private land is on the unit is on the lower country and the southern part of the range, shockingly the bighorns are up high and on the northern end. The conflict with the current rancher is because his domestic sheep would venture onto PUBLIC land if there were not volunteer sportsmen keeping them low, since the herder that is supposed to keep them on private land until they are relocated is too busy sleeping in his sheep camp.



> 4) I never said and never implied that we shouldn't have bighorn sheep or that we shouldn't be introducing them to their native ranges.* I asserted that killing a lion because it ate a transplanted animal is stupid.* You made the assertion that the lion was killed just because it ate some transplanted sheep. At what point is the line drawn? Why, if we knew that this reintroduction were going to take place, didn't the DWR issue a bunch of lion tags and allow hunters the chance at the animals. Why didn't the DWR put an extensive predator control program into place on this unit if they were worried about predation on transplanted animals?


Stupid? So, now *you* are saying the DWR and Wildlife Board are stupid, wow!



> Also, what makes you think these reintroductions are done just for hunters as you imply?


I never claimed these reintroductions are done *just* for hunters. In fact, I believe I have been quite clear that there are MULTIPLE reasons for them. It just so happens that the hunters fund the bulk of the transplants.



> 5) So, how do we choose which animals should be shot/killed and which shouldn't? Again, where is the line drawn? IF that female and her cubs begin killing transplanted animals on a regular basis, would they be killed? At what point do the sheep need to make it in on their own without us protecting them?


Yes, if that female kills 2 sheep in a 90 day period or 3 in a 365 day period she will be removed from the living. Again, there are specific criteria on when these sheep herds are deemed self-sustaining. This is determined by the VERY folks you on other issues hold in very high regard as 'experts'.



> 6) But, of course, like any population numbers by the DWR, they aren't accurate...right? :roll: You know what else is kind of like the "friendly wolf program"? Your sheep program..


Funny you should comment on this. The sheep are counted and tracked by grad-biology students AND the DWR/sportsmen groups. Since all the sheep that were transplanted have radio collars on them, it is fairly easy to track/monitor them, and to get ACCURATE counts, not trend data and computer models of a percentage of the herd.

Last I checked sheep don't eat other game animals, nor do they 'expand' their range and start new packs. They also don't eat/harass livestock. The local sheep owner was paid MORE than he was getting from running the maggots on PUBLIC land. The differences are MANY. Nice try again. :roll:


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gunrunner said:


> Longgun said:
> 
> 
> > gunrunner said:
> ...


Mr Gunrunner _aka_ "sharp" you get scared away or what??


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

"Sharp brush" here, I don't get scared just sitting back taking it all in. 8) 
I still like my lions to act like lions and Pro just wants his sheep to be sheep. O|* I want them to live in perfect harmony, but those sheep can't seem to stay out of the way of them lions doing what lions do.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

> I never said and never implied that we shouldn't have bighorn sheep or that we shouldn't be introducing them to their native ranges. I asserted that killing a lion because it ate a transplanted animal is stupid. You made the assertion that the lion was killed just because it ate some transplanted sheep. At what point is the line drawn? *Why, if we knew that this reintroduction were going to take place, didn't the DWR issue a bunch of lion tags and allow hunters the chance at the animals. Why didn't the DWR put an extensive predator control program into place on this unit if they were worried about predation on transplanted animals?*


The division claimed there weren't enough lions to be a factor, and when sportsmen objected a few lions were removed. Yet, within weeks of the first release a male lion killed 3 sheep and was taken out. The female that now has two young uns, has been in the area since the first release, and only recently killed a sheep, putting her on the radar as a potential 'trouble' lion.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gun...sure have em ALL! can you train your kitties to eat their new smiling counter parts!?!?

..."perfect harmony"....didnt someone write a cute little girly song about that.


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Now you wouldn't be talking about the smiling sisters to my chessie would you? 
We don't even want to bring those fury creatures into this.....Cause the wolf is here to stay! -()/- -()/>- -~|-


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Part of the Deer Management Plan calls for the monitoring and REMOVAL of predators where/when warranted. It is also part of the Bighorn Management Plan. I apparently was mistaken thinking you were for following the Management Plans endorsed by the DWR and approved by the Wildlife Board. My bad.
> 
> With the removal of the domestic sheep, and the INCREASE in habitat restoration projects, there is, according the the local DWR biologist Tom Becker amble feed for BOTH.
> 
> ...


1) Now that's a stretch...you are using the deer and bighorn management plans to justify the killing of this lion? Also, it is funny that you will quote management plans when you think they support your agenda but argue tooth and nail against them when they don't. Are these management plans as poorly written as the WMP?

2) There is enough habitat for both right now? Then, why does the unit range trend study show that one of the limiting factors for this unit is summer range? Won't both, then, be competing for the same habitat? Shouldn't we be trying to reach the objective for one species before we start adding more? It doesn't make sense to me...

3) No, I don't think I am mistaking units or areas...I am talking about the Oquirrh-Stansbury unit. According to this units deer herd unit management plan, 38% or 64,1777 acres of the total summer range and 39% or 108,703 acres of the total winter range is private property. At the same time, only 29% or 48,386 acres of the total summer range and 7% or 20,269 acres are found on the winter range.

It doesn't surprise me at all that the Division is having difficulty with a private landowner in an area with so many private landowners. I find it strange that in regards to deer the unit management plan states: "Excessive habitat utilization will be addressed. Because of the large amount of private land on this unit, its' location and the number of owners, public access for deer hunting will continue to be a problem. Formation of the Heaston East CWMU may help in this regard on the North Oquirrh Mountains." My question is if private landowners are going to be the prime beneficiaries of this transplant and how much the public will actually benefit, if at all.

4) I don't think you have been clear on why the transplants were made...maybe I missed it, but I don't remember reading anything that states that these sheep will benefit anyone but hunters. Also, regardless of who funds the transplants, they are looked at as public property and not private property. In other words, they do not belong specifically to hunters.

5) I do hold these people in high regards as experts...but that doesn't mean I always agree with their actions. Somehow, I don't see the sense in killing lions just because they are preying on transplanted animals. It makes much more sense to me to put extensive predator control programs in place before such a transplant; such programs would allow lion hunters more opportunity for kills and would take place over the course of several years to assure predator numbers are down. Such a program would also assure that any subsequent transplant would have higher success.

6) What about the new animals that are born within the herd or population...will they be radio-collared?

7) The similarities between the programs are numerous...but, it is your assertion that bugs me most. You assert that the wolf program is bad because predators feed on big game animals which, in turn, may decrease hunting opportunity. ON the other hand, you are all for the reintroduction of native bighorns because of the added hunting opportunity it may bring in the future. What bugs me is that this transplant is not about restoring animals to their native habitat for you but about your future hunting opportunity. IN a previous post, you asked if my beliefs were truly looking out for all hunters or just for me. Isn't your desire to increase bighorn sheep hunting opportunity looking out for just your desires and at the expense of lion hunters?

The other thing that bugs me is that you are 100% against restoring wolves to their native ranges; you are against this idea because they threaten--and logically so--hunter opportunity. Yet, is that desire looking out for what the general public wants or what they will benefit from?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

> 1) Now that's a stretch...you are using the deer and bighorn management plans to justify the killing of this lion? Also, it is funny that you will quote management plans when you think they support your agenda but argue tooth and nail against them when they don't. Are these management plans as poorly written as the WMP?


How is that a stretch? Should we not follow the management plans? The problem with the WMP is it is too vague and hard to enforce with your fellow 'wolf lover' groups. I do NOT foresee lawsuits against hunting bighorns that go all the way to the Supreme Court. Big difference.



> 2) There is enough habitat for both right now? Then, why does the unit range trend study show that one of the limiting factors for this unit is summer range? Won't both, then, be competing for the same habitat? Shouldn't we be trying to reach the objective for one species before we start adding more? It doesn't make sense to me...
> 
> 3) No, I don't think I am mistaking units or areas...I am talking about the Oquirrh-Stansbury unit. According to this units deer herd unit management plan, 38% or 64,1777 acres of the total summer range and 39% or 108,703 acres of the total winter range is private property. At the same time, only 29% or 48,386 acres of the total summer range and 7% or 20,269 acres are found on the winter range.


This is where your _ignorance_ shines through. I doubt you have set eye on the area the sheep are dwelling, let alone put any boot leather on it. You are pulling the data from the WHOLE unit, which comprises TWO mountain ranges that are as different as night and day. The Oquirrhs is mostly owned by Kenecott and has lots of private land on it. The Stansbury range is mostly wilderness and roadless. It usually helps to have a little idea about the subject when trying to project your 'expertise'. I also wonder about how much you know about bighorn sheep and the areas they reside in primarily, it is NOT exactly 'deer country'. And, using your type of 'logic', the sheep are there NOW, so we must deal with that reality and not worry about what should/shouldn't have been done pre-bighorn days. Let me help you out a bit, the area the bighorns dwell is the far northern end of the Stansbury Range, which is nowhere near the Oquirrh part of the unit. It is rough, cliff area that is fit for sheep and goats and little else besides lions. The 'experts' you hold in high regard deemed this IDEAL bighorn sheep country. In fact, this herd is out-performing most other herds in Utah for lamb survival rates and survival rates in general. The homework was done by the DWR and the conservation groups that ponied up the money for the project.



> It doesn't surprise me at all that the Division is having difficulty with a private landowner in an area with so many private landowners. I find it strange that in regards to deer the unit management plan states: "Excessive habitat utilization will be addressed. Because of the large amount of private land on this unit, its' location and the number of owners, public access for deer hunting will continue to be a problem. Formation of the Heaston East CWMU may help in this regard on the North Oquirrh Mountains." My question is if private landowners are going to be the prime beneficiaries of this transplant and how much the public will actually benefit, if at all.


This landowner was approached several years BEFORE the first transplant took place, he WILLINGLY agreed to the terms of removing ALL domestic sheep from the area permanently. Just because he chose out of arrogance/ignorance to disregard the agreement HE signed, does NOT imply there are many landowner conflicts for the bighorns. In fact, this is the only conflict to date, and is 100% the landowners cause. I do not believe, nor did I claim that, private landowners would/will be the "prime beneficiaries" of the transplants. I have no idea where/how you even came up with that. :?



> 4) I don't think you have been clear on why the transplants were made...maybe I missed it, but I don't remember reading anything that states that these sheep will benefit anyone but hunters. *Also, regardless of who funds the transplants, they are looked at as public property and not private property. In other words, they do not belong specifically to hunters.*


Thanks Mr Obvious. :roll: I NEVER implied anything different. You are killing me.



> 5) I do hold these people in high regards as experts...but that doesn't mean I always agree with their actions. Somehow, I don't see the sense in killing lions just because they are preying on transplanted animals. It makes much more sense to me to put extensive predator control programs in place before such a transplant; such programs would allow lion hunters more opportunity for kills and would take place over the course of several years to assure predator numbers are down. Such a program would also assure that any subsequent transplant would have higher success.


Again, the division deemed this area "lion free" BEFORE the sheep were released. And, the lion tags that have been issued for that range are usually filled in areas much easier to access and that are less dangerous for the dogs. So, issuing tags for that range would have little effect on the lions in the sheep area.



> 6) What about the new animals that are born within the herd or population...will they be radio-collared?


The grad students/DWR make every attempt to do so. Those that don't get collared now may in the future if warranted.



> 7) The similarities between the programs are numerous...but, it is your assertion that bugs me most. You assert that the wolf program is bad because predators feed on big game animals which, in turn, may decrease hunting opportunity. ON the other hand, you are all for the reintroduction of native bighorns because of the added hunting opportunity it may bring in the future. What bugs me is that this transplant is not about restoring animals to their native habitat for you but about your future hunting opportunity. IN a previous post, you asked if my beliefs were truly looking out for all hunters or just for me. Isn't your desire to increase bighorn sheep hunting opportunity looking out for just your desires and at the expense of lion hunters?


I do NOT assert the wolf program is bad, I flat out say it is bad. Bad for wildlife, bad for livestock, bad for economies, bad for precedence. I am for the transplants for multiple reasons, who are you to say what they are? Hunting opportunity is a MAJOR one, why is that bad? There are bighorns all over the state now, many people who will never hunt them get to enjoy them, again how is that bad? Wolves are KILLERS, like it or not! Sheep are NOT. I will likely NEVER draw a bighorn sheep tag in my life.



> The other thing that bugs me is that you are 100% against restoring wolves to their native ranges; you are against this idea because they threaten--and logically so--hunter opportunity. Yet, is that desire looking out for what the general public wants or what they will benefit from?


I say 100% yes. Very few Utahan care one way or the other on wolves. But, livestock loses, wildlife loses WILL have direct NEGATIVE impacts on ALL Utah residents economically, whether they are aware of that or not because of the biased slant spun by the media.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

gun, :shock: you actually have a chessie _AND_ it howls at the moon i take it!?

do you keep the 2x4 (be good stick) propped in the corner of the kennel too?

w2u, with all this MORE OPPR-o-TUNITY for the hunter talk HOW IN THE WORLD ARE WOLVES A GOOD THING! *\-\*


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

I'd love to hear what PRO mutters under his breath while he reads this stuff


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Loke said:


> I'd love to hear what PRO mutters under his breath while he reads this stuff


lets nap' em' both and lock em' in a horse trailer! /**|**\


----------



## gunrunner (Feb 1, 2008)

Longgun said:


> gun, :shock: you actually have a chessie _AND_ it howls at the moon i take it!?
> 
> do you keep the 2x4 (be good stick) propped in the corner of the kennel too?
> 
> ...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Good news, the maggots are now gone. Now we'll just hold our breath and hope none of the bigs where infected.


----------



## Tatyana (Sep 14, 2007)

> Good news, the maggots are now gone. Now we'll just hold our breath and hope none of the bigs where infected.


 -*|*-


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

pro, whats the gestation term for the disease in question? is there a specific time of year that its active??


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Longgun said:


> pro, whats the gestation term for the disease in question? is there a specific time of year that its active??


If any of the sheep were infected, it 'should' show up in the next 30 days. If the herd is infected, it can take up to 20 years to get rid of. I don't think time of year has much to do with much, but I will ask.

Loke, my wife won't allow me to read some of the stuff while the kids are around due to the muttering and obscenities. :twisted: :wink:


----------



## chet (Sep 7, 2007)

Like most other diseases, it's worse in winter and worse on lambs and elderly sheep.
It is basically pnumonia (sp)

cross your fingers and say your prayers!

thanks for the updates pro!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> How is that a stretch? Should we not follow the management plans? The problem with the WMP is it is too vague and hard to enforce with your fellow 'wolf lover' groups. I do NOT foresee lawsuits against hunting bighorns that go all the way to the Supreme Court. Big difference.
> 
> This is where your _ignorance_ shines through. I doubt you have set eye on the area the sheep are dwelling, let alone put any boot leather on it. You are pulling the data from the WHOLE unit, which comprises TWO mountain ranges that are as different as night and day. The Oquirrhs is mostly owned by Kenecott and has lots of private land on it. The Stansbury range is mostly wilderness and roadless. It usually helps to have a little idea about the subject when trying to project your 'expertise'. I also wonder about how much you know about bighorn sheep and the areas they reside in primarily, it is NOT exactly 'deer country'. And, using your type of 'logic', the sheep are there NOW, so we must deal with that reality and not worry about what should/shouldn't have been done pre-bighorn days. Let me help you out a bit, the area the bighorns dwell is the far northern end of the Stansbury Range, which is nowhere near the Oquirrh part of the unit. It is rough, cliff area that is fit for sheep and goats and little else besides lions. The 'experts' you hold in high regard deemed this IDEAL bighorn sheep country. In fact, this herd is out-performing most other herds in Utah for lamb survival rates and survival rates in general. The homework was done by the DWR and the conservation groups that ponied up the money for the project.
> 
> ...


1) It is a stretch because you are trying to use the deer and bighorn management plans to justify killing a single lion. Also, it kills me that you are so adamantly against the WMP when the same exact kind of people wrote it and designed it that designed the other management plans in this state...and, wasn't your bed buddy Don also a major part of that process? Wasn't it not until after the plan was written and published that he came forward against it? What changed? The Wolf Management Plan is just as viable and good as any other plan we have in this state...

As for the lawsuits...heck, we would have lawsuits over wolves regardless of what was written in the WMP.

2) Now that's funny...remember, I asked an "honest" question because I admittedly said that I didn't know the unit. Why are you getting so bent out of shape when I pose honest questions? All I did was do a little research on the unit which shows how much private land exists...I projected absolutely no expertise in posing those questions. The funny thing is that the information I have states that the "Access is limited in the west, where the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation is adjacent to the wilderness." And, according to the Forest Service, "Private property is located throughout the Stansbury Mountains. Most of the private land adjacent to the National Forest is posted..." So, who should I believe?

3) I never implied that there were many problems with landowners. What I did imply is that the potential for problems with landowners is much higher when there are numerous landowners and lots of private land. Also, I never claimed that you did say private landowners would be the prime beneficiaries...again, I posed a question: if so much private land exists and the sheep are difficult to access because of that private land, who stands to benefit?

4) Sorry, if I misunderstood your comments, but it sounded very much like you were implying that hunters should be the ones who benefit most because you made sure to comment on where the money came from to help transplant them.

5) So, the Division killed a lion that had probably--according to you--been kicked out of its normal territory from its mother because it was old enough to make it on its own. The lion, then, moved to a different location and killed a transplanted sheep. Is it not reasonable to think that had the Division had extensive predator control programs in place that that lion would have been killed by a hunter last season? Or, is it also not possible if more tags had been issued in the past that this lions mother would have been dead before this lion was even birthed into the wild?

6) That's funny...I have seen economic impact studies done projecting the impact wolves would have on Utah. I also have read the WMP and have seen what kind of steps have been taken to assure that wolf numbers will not and cannot get too high in Utah. I have read polls showing what the public in Utah thinks about wolves and what their opinion is on having them in Utah...and, quite frankly, everything I have read disagrees with what you are saying. Your opinion is exactly opposite of the experts...

7) Oh come on, Pro, you are blaming people's opinions on the media? You are talking about Utah...according to research done by Utah State University: "La Vine conducted a survey... of Utah residents and public land-grazing permittees regarding their attitudes toward wolves. The survey was statistically weighted in order to overrepresent rural residents. According to this survey, the Utah public in general held fairly positive attitudes toward gray wolves (Figure 1). Southern rural residents had the most negative perceptions of wolves, whereas metropolitan residents had the most positive perceptions. Northern rural residents had intermediate attitudes. A study of Colorado residents found responses similar to La Vine's (Pate et al., 1996)... 
Although a majority of Utah residents held either positive or neutral attitudes toward 
wolves, those that held permits to graze cattle and sheep on public lands in the state 
(permittees) expressed negative attitudes toward wolves (64% disliked or strongly 
disliked). In contrast, big-game hunters were rather evenly divided. Permittees and 
hunters were more informed about wolves than the general public, although the majority 
of respondents scored highly on a variety of wolf-related knowledge questions. These 
differences highlight the difficulties that policy makers and managers are likely to 
encounter."


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

The domestic sheep were relocated to the west side of the Oquirrh's were there is no water, so the DWR/livestock owner are hauling water to the sheep. They will be there until May 10th at least. I was told last night that the DH's can help and get credit for their DH hours. Anyone interested can call the DWR or shoot me a PM and I'll get you setup. Thanks!


----------



## archery (Sep 7, 2007)

Hey Pro, just a heads up. it is said that while wrestling pigs, one must at some point realize that the pig enjoys it.

so it likely isn't worth the effort to change the bullheaded.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

sssshhhhhh....hes having a ball!

EDIT:

sorry, forgot to specify this O|* type of ball...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

W2U, I am tired of this back and forth, and I am sure so are most others on this site. So, I will end this 'tennis' match with you.

Here is the bottom line for ME. The DWR/SFW/FNAWS and many others did a ton of ground work LONG before releasing bighorns on this range. They looked at habitat, available winter/summer range, predators, public access, etc.. As a group it was deemed this area is 'ideal' bighorn sheep country. The process then moved to acquiring grazing permits, making agreements with affected landowners, getting the lion population to an 'acceptable' level, and so on. Then in 2004 the first group of bigs were released comprised mostly of lambs and ewes. Two transplants have taken place since then, with the latest being January 2008. The lamb survival rate for this herd is well above the average for the state. Ewe and ram survival rates have been very good as well. The DWR, and the groups who have invested time, blood, sweat, tears, and money are very happy with the progress this herd has made in a very short time frame. The domestic sheep that were there for 7 days posed a serious threat to undoing all that had been accomplished, so there was a high level of anxiety, and there still is some until we are confident the herd is 'safe'. The two lion kills in the last month put a hurt on the ram population, which will possibly set the herd back 1-2 years on having 'huntable' numbers.

If some wanna be biologist relying on data published that addresses the whole unit, and not the specific area the sheep inhabit, which is NORTH of the reservation, so be it. I thank all those who have helped get this herd where it is, and for *increasing* opportunity for hunters, non-hunters, photographers, etc., to enjoy this animal in an area that pre-2004 was not available to the PUBLIC. This herd is doing as well/better than most bighorn herds in Utah. I call that a success story and proof that the decision to put them were they did was wise and well researched.

I will HATE the wolf plan as long as it has loop holes that allow 'educated' idiots to 'use' the legal system to ignore common sense and reason. And to insult Don and imply he is my "bed buddy" shows how weak ones stance on the issue is!


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

I know I've done this before, but I think it's still funny. Does this remind you of any two forum members????? :mrgreen:

http://www.snotr.com/video/141


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I will HATE the wolf plan as long as it has loop holes that allow 'educated' idiots to 'use' the legal system to ignore common sense and reason. And to insult Don and imply he is my "bed buddy" shows how weak ones stance on the issue is!


How amazingly ironic is this: you congratulate all the work done on the bighorn sheep including the research and all the effort done before the transplants and yet bash the same work and research done in preparation of wolves...

...the funniest thing about your remarks, though, is the belief that "educated idiots" can use the legal system and courts because of the wolf plan. Do you honestly think that any plan--regardless of who or how it is written--will stop lawsuits? In this great country of ours, people can file lawsuits--and win--when Mcdonald's serves coffee that is too hot. Do you really think that a WMP could have been written to stop lawsuits?

Just out of curiosity, have you ever disagreed with Don Peay on wildlife issues?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Just out of curiosity, have you ever disagreed with Don Peay on wildlife issues?


Yes! Next question please. :roll:


----------



## Donttreadonme (Sep 11, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> How amazingly ironic is this: you congratulate all the work done on the bighorn sheep including the research and all the effort done before the transplants and yet bash the same work and research done in preparation of wolves...


It is because some see the transplanting/re-introduction of sheep as increased hunting opportunity. For someone like Pro, that is also seen as another opportunity to exploit...., excuse me, guide hunters on another species. The wolf is only seen as a detriment to our huntable animal herds. Which by the way I agree with. I have loathed the idea of wolf introduction since it was initially proposed. But that is not what this thread is about so I will leave it right there.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

donttreadonme said:


> It is because some see the transplanting/re-introduction of sheep as increased hunting opportunity. For someone like Pro, that is also seen as another opportunity to exploit...., excuse me, guide hunters on another species.


Bingo, this sheep herd will bring MORE opportunity to MANY hunters, wolves with DECREASE opportunity to MANY hunters.

For the record, I have NEVER guided, or even entertained the idea of guiding, for bighorns. Thanks for the suggestion, I'll have to give that some thought. 8)


----------



## Donttreadonme (Sep 11, 2007)

Don't take it personal Pro, I just wanted to see if I could get your goat.



did it work?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

donttreadonme said:


> Don't take it personal Pro, I just wanted to see if I could get your goat.
> 
> did it work?


Nope, in fact it gave me food for thought. I have a few clients who are wishing to hunt sheep. This may be a possible answer w/o referring them to other outfitters. Thank you! -()/>-


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Bingo, this sheep herd will bring MORE opportunity to MANY hunters, wolves with DECREASE opportunity to MANY hunters.


That is purely speculative opinion...if the wolves are managed according to the WMP, I don't think this is true at all.

But, wouldn't wolves also add diversity to the hunting opportunity? The fishing crowd loves diversity and would love to add walleye to our fisheries even though they may "eat" trout and hurt the trout fishing opportunity. Wouldn't a huntable population of wolves add diversity?


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> But, wouldn't wolves also add diversity to the hunting opportunity? The fishing crowd loves diversity and would love to add walleye to our fisheries even though they may "eat" trout and hurt the trout fishing opportunity. Wouldn't a huntable population of wolves add diversity?


that bucket may hold just a bit more water IF elk/deer/sheep/goats bred like a trout....a "couple" at a time. walleye (unlike woofs) get out of hand you can drop a rotenone bomb and start over. woofs get out of hand for a couple seasons and we get to sit back and wait another 10 years...while "they" decide if theres to many on the freakin mountain!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Longgun said:


> wyoming2utah said:
> 
> 
> > But, wouldn't wolves also add diversity to the hunting opportunity? The fishing crowd loves diversity and would love to add walleye to our fisheries even though they may "eat" trout and hurt the trout fishing opportunity. Wouldn't a huntable population of wolves add diversity?
> ...


Actually, getting rid of walleyes would be much more difficult than getting rid of wolves. Once walleye exist within the system there really isn't anything the DWR could do. But, with wolves, we can always shoot them. IF walleye are added to a trout system in Utah, you can say bye-bye to the trout, but if you add wolves to Utah that doesn't mean the end to big game.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Actually, getting rid of walleyes would be much more difficult than getting rid of wolves. Once walleye exist within the system there really isn't anything the DWR could do. But, with wolves, we can always shoot them. IF walleye are added to a trout system in Utah, you can say bye-bye to the trout, but if you add wolves to Utah that doesn't mean the end to big game.


Comparing walleyes to wolves. Talk about a stretch. What would the time frame be for a trout population to 'rebound' vs a elk population? Is there groups such as "Friends of Walleyes" out there saying removing a single walleye is MURDER? Are there groups of walleye lovers spending MILLIONS of dollars 'defending' walleye expansion projects? Wolves and walleye, the new rallying cry of pinheads everywhere. :?


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Actually, getting rid of walleyes would be much more difficult than getting rid of wolves. Once walleye exist within the system there really isn't anything the DWR could do. But, with wolves, we can always shoot them. _*IF* walleye are added to a trout system in Utah, you can say bye-bye to the trout_, but if you add wolves to Utah that doesn't mean the end to big game.


uh..so....for an example as per you, the Provo River is what exactly?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Comparing walleyes to wolves. Talk about a stretch. What would the time frame be for a trout population to 'rebound' vs a elk population? Is there groups such as "Friends of Walleyes" out there saying removing a single walleye is MURDER? Are there groups of walleye lovers spending MILLIONS of dollars 'defending' walleye expansion projects? Wolves and walleye, the new rallying cry of pinheads everywhere. :?


The trout population would NEVER rebound...that's the big difference. The only way that the trout population could rebound is if the walleyes were completely eliminated and in most places that is not possible. Also, we have groups spending MILLIONS of dollars protecting and trying to preserve native trout populations all over the...this is exactly like the wolf situation.

The difference between the wolf situation and the walleye situation is that in one case--the wolves--sportsmen want the predator out and in the other case--walleye--sportsmen want the predator in. Conservationists look at the situation a little differently, though. They tend to look at it from a native species viewpoint--reintroduce the native species and keep the nonnative species out.

This is all besides the point, though, my question still stands: wouldn't wolves add diversity to hunting opportunity?


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> That is purely speculative opinion...if the wolves are managed according to the WMP, I don't think this is true at all.
> 
> But, wouldn't wolves also add diversity to the hunting opportunity?* The fishing crowd loves diversity and would love to add walleye to our fisheries even though they may "eat" trout and hurt the trout fishing opportunity*. Wouldn't a huntable population of wolves add diversity?


Excuse me ? :shock:............ Yeah, I guess I could like rattlesnakes in my garden too !! _(O)_

Purely speculative opinion....mind you.


----------



## smokin577 (Apr 21, 2008)

Your right wolves would add to the list of hunting options, Idaho is going to be starting up there season soon. I am not sure why cause the I mean the wolf needed to be brought back it is native is it not? Really when you look at it this could maybe do every one some good. The wolf gets to come back, the big game herds get more money from federal,state, and Independant(SFW,SCI) sources due all the damage they do, then we get a new permit to put in for and pray we get like every year with every thing else.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

smokin577 said:


> _The wolf gets to come back, the big game herds get more money from federal,state, and Independant(SFW,SCI) sources due all the damage they do_,* then we get a new permit to put in for and pray we get like every year with every thing else*.


it never left...it was hangin out up north howlin with an "eh" at the end.

_know any cattlemen/ranchers you could run that by??_ let us know how the recovery go's O*--

*uh.....NO!* issue MORE TAGS OF THE ONES WE HAVE NOW...


----------



## smokin577 (Apr 21, 2008)

Your right we need more ranchers their might help save the big game or lessen the burden and with them having to get back what the wolves damage the goverment is sure to start our LE wolf season sooner. J/K

I am not a porponent for the wolf, why they are being brought back I will never know. But for right now they are protected and until they have gotten in to the swing of things and have proven as they did before they are a very effective killers and breeders we are stuck. Hopefully with a good amount of luck some how some one will see that as the packs move in and grow thier range we will need management for them. As you pointed longgun ranchers and cattlemen as well hunts will all suffer the same damages, but until the MAN says open season we are supposed to just be spectators to the majestic wolf and the what comes with them.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

oh hell i know we have no choice but how far that ball rolls downhill and continues to stink things up is what im getting at...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Here I thought the objective was to INCREASE opportunity, now I see it is to 'diversify' opportunity at the expense of DECREASED overall opportunity. Thanks W2U for the clarification. :roll:


----------

