September 21, 2011 Livestock Weekly, Texas Sheep Producers Are Challenged By Enviros Over Bighorn Issue By Colleen Schreiber MCCALL, Idaho Sheep belonging to the Soulen family have been grazing allotments on the Payette National Forest since the early 1930s, when Harry Soulen first started in the sheep business. Today Soulen Livestock runs 8000 ewes and 800 head of crossbred cows on about 150,000 acres consisting of a combination of public and private leases as well as 50,000 acres of deeded land. The family s livelihood has been challenged plenty of times over the years, the most recent being the wolves and of late bighorn sheep. They ve learned to manage the wolf problem, though they still lose far too many lambs to wolf depredation, but the bighorn issue they ve been dealing with intensively this last year or two could put them completely out of the business in a few short years. Margaret Soulen Hinson, currently serving as the American Sheep Industry Association president, has been fighting this battle not only on her own home territory but across the nation, representing all sheep producers grazing on public lands in the West. In July 2010 the Forest Service announced the elimination of 70 percent of the domestic sheep grazing allotments on the Payette National Forest in Idaho because of possible pneumonia-like disease transmission from domestic sheep to bighorns that were reintroduced into the Hells Canyon portion of the forest in 1997. Never mind the fact that at the time of the reintroduction, the various federal agencies, bighorn advocates and domestic sheep operators signed an agreement holding the domestic sheep operators harmless should disease transmission occur. Unlike the rugged, remote landscape that it typically calls home, the bighorn does not seem to be a particularly rugged, hardy animal. Rather, it is a species in which population die-offs have long been occurring. In Idaho alone, bighorn experts say the population has declined by roughly half since the 1980s. Rocky Mountain bighorns, however, are not on the endangered species list, either at the state level or the federal level. Furthermore, there is no definitive proof that it is strictly domestic sheep that are causing the die-offs, or more specifically, that there is true disease transmission between domestic sheep and bighorns in natural range conditions. In fact, some of the documented die-offs have occurred when domestic sheep were nowhere near. Hinson argues that even if all the domestic sheep were removed from bighorn habitat there would still be bighorn die-offs.
It is a complicated issue, but as so often happens with so many issues in the West, particularly those issues pertaining to grazing on public lands, it is the environmental activist groups largely driving the debate. Joe Hinson, Margaret s husband and a forester by trade, says the bighorn issue really dates back to the early 1970s with the implementation of the National Forest Management Act. Hinson was a lobbyist for the timber industry during the time the law was being developed, so he well understands the intricacy of the law. At the time, the timber industry was facing all kinds of controversy over clear-cutting and logging on the national forests, particularly those in the West, Hinson explains. The result was that clear-cutting was outlawed in the eastern forest lands, and the timber industry was fearful that clear-cutting would be outlawed in the West, as well. Thus, there was a nationwide movement to put together a reorganizational act for the national forests. Within the National Forest Management Act, Hinson says, was a comprehensive plan to recognize all uses within each national forest. One of the provisions of the regulations, not the law but the regulations that guided the planning process, was a requirement that each national forest should maintain a minimum viable population of all the vertebrate species that existed there, explains Hinson. It was called the minimal viable rule. The first time it caused trouble was on the West Coast during the spotted owl wars. In fact, the first limitations to logging were because of the minimal viable rule, not because of the Endangered Species Act. The minimal viable rule is what triggered the lawsuits. Hinson goes on to explain that the livestock industry had not been affected at all by this ruling until it came time to revise the comprehensive plan for the Payette National Forest, as was mandated by the Act. This was in 2005. After the Payette plan was completed, several activist groups, including the Wilderness Society, the Nez Perce Tribe, Hells Canyon Preservation Council, and the Center for Biological Diversity, appealed the part of the plan that spoke to livestock grazing related to domestic sheep. They argued to the regional forester that when the Payette made its decision they ignored the minimum viability rule, because by continuing to allow domestic sheep to graze, they perpetuated the potential for disease transmission to bighorn sheep in Hell s Canyon in the Payette, Hinson explains. And, because of this possible transmission, they couldn t guarantee they could maintain a minimal viable population of bighorns. At the time of the rewrite, Margaret reminds, the Forest Service was relying on the 1997 letter drafted to Idaho Wool Growers and signed off by Idaho Fish and Game and the supervisor who manages the Hells Canyon Recreation Area, the BLM, Oregon Fish and Game, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, and others as justification for allowing domestic sheep grazing on the Payette.
The essence of the 1997 letter, Margaret reiterates, said that we recognize that by transplanting bighorns into the Hells Canyon there is potential for disease transmission with domestic sheep, and we will hold the domestic sheep producers harmless if such transmission occurs. Well, the letter didn t hold up. The environmentalists continued to push the issue until the Forest Service started anew on the Payette portion of the plan that affected domestic sheep grazing. What came out of the second analyses essentially was that all 15 or so of the sheep allotments on the Payette were rated as high, medium and low risk based on proximity to existing bighorn populations based on habitat models. As a result of that decision, in 2010 Soulen Livestock was forced to cut their 10,000- head permit to 8000 head. Running the dodge gate this year was one of the hardest things I ever had to do, to cut those sheep out to sell to someone else, says an emotional Phil Soulen, Margaret s 82 year-old father, who has been in the business all his life. They were good sheep, but we had to do it. The Soulen outfit was actually one of the lucky ones. The Payette decision has already forced one sheep operator to sell out, and two others in addition to the Soulens have faced significant cuts on their allotments as well. In all, 13,000 sheep were removed from the Payette in 2010. In 2012 the plan is to cut the Soulen permit by another 2000, and over the course of two years their numbers would be trimmed down to about 4000 head total. These cuts are expected to come despite the fact that the Forest Service notes that alternative 7P, the plan on the table, would be sufficient to maintain a viable population of bighorns even without phasing in the additional allotment closures planned for the next two years. Telemetry work, some of which has been ongoing now for well over a decade, clearly shows that the prime bighorn habitat in the Payette is largely on the western side in Upper Hell s Canyon. This same telemetry work indicates that these bighorns remain within their core home range 95 percent of the time, and when they do wander outside that range, they typically only wonder 350 meters (approximately 1000 feet). Scientists have only documented forays (movement outside of known home range) 4.6 percent of the time, and 4.4 percent of those forays were by rams. The Soulen sheep allotments are all on the eastern side of the Payette, well away from the documented core herd home range of the Hell s Canyon herd where some of the documented die-offs have occurred. In all the years since the telemetry work first began, only one documented bighorn has traversed the country to the eastern portion of the Payette. That ram was unfortunately snared in a wolf trap on the Soulens Josephine allotment north of McCall. That one animal has caused more problems, says Joe. That one animal was a complete and total outlier, but yet that one animal drove all these models on where the bighorns might be at different times of the year. Before then, no one had ever reported a bighorn on the allotments on the east side of the Payette, he reminds.
This summer, for the first time, those grazing the remaining sheep allotments on the Payette were required to have herders record a GPS location of the domestic sheep herd each morning. That information is gathered from the herders on a weekly basis and turned in to the Forest Service. They will use this information in conjunction with the telemetry work. Margaret is hopeful this will further their case. The more we can show that we don t have bighorns in the area, the better off we re going to be, she says. Recording the GPS coordinates has really been a minor thing for the herders, but following the arbitrary boundaries that the Forest Service implemented on where they can and can t graze on particular allotments has been much more difficult. It s also much more difficult now on some of the allotments to get a band to water. It s been a little bit tougher this year for all the herders because they have so much to deal with, remarks Cesar Ayllon, the family s foreman. No water, don t go here, can t go there. Dr. Don Knowles, a world-renowned infectious disease scientist who heads up USDA s Agricultural Research Service s animal disease research unit in Pullman, Washington, is doing some groundbreaking research on the bighorn. It is common knowledge that the pasteurella organism lives within domestic sheep. In fact, it lives within most mammals, including bighorns. What triggers the pasteurella organism to drop into the lungs and cause pneumonia is part of the mystery. To address the disease transmission issue, Knowles and his team have conducted tests whereby they ve penned domestic sheep within 30 feet of bighorns. Before doing so, though, scientists placed a green fluorescent tag on the pasteurella organism in the domestic sheep. Ninety days later there was no transmission. Those same animals were next held fence to fence and 60 days later there was transmission but still no disease. It wasn t until after the domestic sheep were commingled with the bighorns that the bighorns began to die. That tells me that it takes extended contact for disease to occur, comments Margaret. The research showed that disease required commingling for a minimum of 48 hours, and this was after transmission already occurred. It also tells me there is a way to manage the population on the range, she continues. We have herders and livestock protection dogs with our sheep all the time. If our herders see a bighorn coming close, it would seem feasible and likely that they could manage to keep it away from the domestic sheep.
Knowles and his team at Washington State have also developed an experimental vaccine that looks promising. Scientists vaccinated four bighorns for pasteurella. The toxin was then blown up the nasal cavity of the vaccinated animals. The four that were vaccinated lived while four others that were not vaccinated died. Despite these results, environmentalists continue to argue that bighorns can t develop immunity so there s no sense in inoculating them. The Hinsons contend that it s not uncommon for environmentalists to ignore peer-reviewed science. For these groups it s not about the bighorns; it s about controlling the agencies; it s about imposing their will upon others; it s about raising money, Margaret insists. The Forest Service is very risk averse because they re always afraid of being sued by the environmental groups, Joe adds. Thus, objectivity is the first casualty in these discussions. Environmental groups such as Western Watershed and the Wilderness Society intend to force the hand of the Forest Service to use the Payette model on all public lands where domestic sheep are grazing potential bighorn habitat. The repercussion that such a decision would have on the domestic sheep industry as a whole is one of Margaret s greatest concerns. Forty-eight percent of the domestic sheep in this country spend some time grazing federal lands, and 42 percent of the sheep AUMs on the forest are within bighorn habitat, Margaret notes. That equates to about 23 percent of the domestic sheep production in this country. If the Payette model is expanded across the West, it will impact the entire infrastructure of our industry. It will affect the woolen mills and the lamb packers; it will impact the rural communities and the people who live in those rural communities. It will mean the loss of thousands of jobs across the country. ASI recently enlisted the help of Congressman Mike Simpson, R-Idaho. Simpson, who is Chairman of the House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, attached a rider to the Interior Appropriations bill, H.R. 2584. The rider includes language preventing the Forest Service from applying the grazing rules that eliminate domestic sheep grazing on the Payette National Forest to other forests for five years while the Forest Service and the USDA complete needed research on the impact that domestic sheep have on wild sheep. Additionally, the language discusses the need to continue development of a vaccine to protect bighorn sheep populations from respiratory disease. Basically, the Simpson language buys us five years time to get the research done, Margaret says. We won t lose any more ground on the Payette from where we are today if we get the language passed. If we don t win this, more allotments will close next year. We have to win this one, she concludes.