HomeNewsSportsMoreWeatherAnnouncementsClassifiedsMy Trib.ComMy CityJobsHomesCars
Advanced Search
 

Group: Trim elk, bison numbers


Story Tools

Print this story

E-mail this story

Rate this story

Text Size

Share This Story:
del.icio.usdiggNewsVine




trib.popular


BILLINGS, Mont. -- A cattle producers' group on Monday called for federal agencies to reduce bison and elk numbers around Yellowstone National Park, as part of efforts to eradicate the livestock disease brucellosis.

A Yellowstone official rejected the proposal. And a spokeswoman for Wyoming Gov. David Freudenthal suggested it would invite federal meddling in an issue best addressed at the state level.

Brucellosis still lingers in Yellowstone's wildlife after being nearly eliminated elsewhere in the country over the past several decades.

The disease causes pregnant cows to abort their calves. It originally was introduced to Yellowstone through livestock brought in by early European settlers.

How to clean up tainted elk and bison populations has so far eluded state and federal officials -- raising complaints from ranchers who say they must pay the price for the failure to control the disease.

That was underscored by two recent infections in Wyoming's Sublette County and Pray, Mont., both of which are in the greater Yellowstone area.

Both ranches face the likelihood their herds will be slaughtered as a protective measure. And hundreds of cattle on neighboring ranches remain under quarantine while investigators look for the sources of the infections.

To guard against future transmissions, the California-based U.S. Cattlemen's Association said Monday that the federal government should reduce Yellowstone's elk and bison populations to keep the animals separated from domestic livestock.

"The federal government needs to look at what numbers of animals they could sustain there in the park without them leaving and mingling with livestock," said the group's president, Jon Wooster. "They need a plan to get those numbers in line with forage (in the park) and keep the disease from spreading any farther than it already has."

Yellowstone spokesman Al Nash dismissed Wooster's assertion that bison and elk overgraze inside the park. He said the animals' winter migrations to lower elevations, where they are more likely to meet with cattle, are part of their natural patterns.

"There is no population issue inside Yellowstone National Park. These animals do not leave the park because it is overgrazed," Nash said.

In Wyoming, Freudenthal spokeswoman Cara Eastwood said managing elk and bison is the responsibility of the state -- not the federal agencies mentioned by the cattlemen's association.

"This is an issue that is best managed locally by ranchers and officials on the ground, rather than from 2,000 miles away in Washington, D.C.," Eastwood said.

Yellowstone's bison already are aggressively managed. Hunting and a federal-state capture and slaughter program killed 1,600 of the animals last winter. About 2,100 of the animals remain.

But Dennis MacDonald, past president of the cattlemen's Montana branch, said the bison program has not reduced the threat from elk.

He said reducing elk numbers through expanded public hunting would give his industry room to operate -- until a brucellosis vaccine can be developed to eradicate the disease from wildlife.

"It's a much more difficult problem to solve," MacDonald said of brucellosis in elk. "I love to see the elk. They are one of the most magnificent animals in the world, but we need to get a handle on this disease."


Previous   Next
He'll now serve 18-month prison term for stream bed alteration   'On the Road' revisited

Article Rating

Current Rating: 0 of 0 votes!Rate File:

Reader Comments

There are 6 comment(s)

Comments to this story.

LaramieResident wrote on Jun 24, 2008 8:19 AM:

" You have to be kidding me! Ranchers are the biggest welfare recipients on the planet, and they just keep asking for more. They have already slaughtered nearly half of the bison in Yellowstone. These animals leave Yellowstone when the snow gets too deep, and food isn't readily available. I doubt there are many animals that stay in Yellowstone year round. Maybe you could keep your cattle off of public lands? You can harass the elk and bison off of your private property, if you wish. Why do Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming pander to such a minority of people in our states? It is time for Wyoming, at least, to put the people of Wyoming (the majority) ahead of a few wealthy ranchers. "

Dewd wrote on Jun 24, 2008 12:35 PM:

" Well , the Big Hats and their talking mustaches got this exactly backwards... it's the imported alien exotic Cattle that need to relocate, not the native Wildlife. We won't miss them when they go , either... "

Richard Garrett wrote on Jun 24, 2008 4:23 PM:

" If cattle are at risk they should be either vaccinated or moved. The US Cattleman's Assoc., which seems to have little regard or expertise for Wyoming wildlife or its management, should stay in California. And, to my knowledge, there has yet to be a documented case of brucellosis being transmitted from bison to cattle. "

wyoslick wrote on Jun 25, 2008 4:23 AM:

" Dewd – Are you proposing land management based on “first come, first served”? If so, where does that leave us palefaces? "

Ann wrote on Jun 25, 2008 9:20 AM:

" It would be a lot less costly to remove all the cattle from the neighboring areas.
There are fewer cattle involved than wildlife. Get rid of the cattle. EASY and CHEAP. Do land swaps with these ranchers. get the cattle away from the wildlife, not the other way around. When will people learn it's easierr to manage what you control. LIKE the CATTLE "

NRDC Josh wrote on Jun 25, 2008 10:44 AM:

" This year saw the highest rate of buffalo slaughter since we nearly eradicated the species in the 19th century. State and federal wildlife officials already cut the Yellowstone buffalo numbers by more than half this winter... What, short of "no buffalo" would make the Cattleman's Association happy? "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
(optional)
   
Please note: We provide our story commenting feature in order to solicit feedback, debate and discussion on topics of local interest. Please keep in mind that civility is a necessary component of productive conversation. All blatantly inflammatory or otherwise inappropriate comments (i.e. vulgarity, marketing, etc.) are subject to rejection and/or removal. Comments will appear if and when they are approved. Thanks for reading, and thanks for participating.