Wild Sheep relocation being opposed

If this is old news, my apologies for posting it here. First I have read of the controversy. Never thought I would see the wool growers Associations using the Wilderness Act as a tool for making their cause for domestic sheep.

https://www.gohunt.com/read/news/bl...ghorns-violates-the-wilderness-act#gs.qOuByro

Their interpretation of the Wilderness Act is flawed. Rangers have the discretion to allow motorized use for specific reasons, including wildlife management.

Sounds like a "red herring" being submitted by the wool growers assn. They can sound very high minded and pro conservation while letting trespass sheep do the dirty work of eliminating the bighorns. Great plan. GJ

I read about this a couple of weeks ago. Obviously there is a process for permitting helicopter use in designated wilderness (Minimum Requirements Decision Guide, MRDG). This is simply a case of ASI not agreeing with the work being performed with the helicopter. They are taking a page from the playbook of the Missoula-based group Wilderness Watch, which has recently opposed helicopter capture and collaring of bighorns in wilderness, going as far as referring to collars as "temporary installations."

A side note: If not for the name of the website, it would often be difficult to determine whether articles that appear on goHunt are pro- or anti-hunting. The worst seem to be those produced by Kristen A. Schmitt, who at best presents as a non-hunter who does not understand the issues she writes about. I find it curious.