Llamas in Alaska

https://packllamas.org

Thoughts?

Makes me kinda disappointed in the WSF.

sschultz said:

Makes me kinda disappointed in the WSF.

Click to expand...

How dare an organization dedicated to the conservation of wild sheep, oppose bringing in domestic animals that can wipeout entire sheep herds. Its only fair that AK dall sheep see the same plight with disease as lower 48 bighorns.

Good idea.

MTGomer said:

How dare an organization dedicated to the conservation of wild sheep, oppose bringing in domestic animals that can wipeout entire sheep herds. Its only fair that AK dall sheep see the same plight with disease as lower 48 bighorns.

Click to expand...

Many studies and closed pen tests have failed to find any case where llamas transmitted disease to bighorns. With no evidence to support a ban it feels like some ulterior motive is behind this.

Fair and balanced article on this topic.

http://mtstandard.com/lifestyles/re...cle_ac4b0d3b-ddb6-5efb-bf05-3ea76680fd25.html

Article on pack goats in Wyoming being restricted in core native herd locations. No mention about area being core grizzly location though, and not the best place to take your pack goat.

http://trib.com/lifestyles/recreati...cle_3f994d3d-7334-5b27-a318-38f8a660eeba.html

For the 8 llama owners in the state that may possibly take them hunting in sheep country. Too bad, pick up a back pack or find a horse... Pack goats are illegal to use for hunting, but I see idiots with them in the summer using them in sheep country.

Its amazing that such a small group of people can hold the entire state and future generations hostage. Same goes for the domestic sheep/goat pest owners. Sad. I wish that wild sheep transmitted a disease to domestics that would kill them all off. A guy can dream...

Good and as you said a balanced article BigHornRam.

Here's my take, and in the interests of full disclosure, I do own pack llamas and I am not a biologist.

In the article Kevin Hurley (WSF) states that research showing that llamas pose no risk to wild sheep can't be relied on because it was performed in the 90's. They claim to have based their position largely upon the risk assessment done by British Colombia. However, WSF was pushing for the ban even before the risk assessment was published. Hurley claims that he wants to see recent research in a peer reviewed scientific journal, apparently he hasn't tried very hard to find any because I've found several. Kevin Hurley's comments are also disingenuous when you consider the information I have below.

For example:

Bighorn sheep pneumonia: Sorting out the cause of a polymicrobial
disease
Thomas E. Besser a,∗, E. Frances Cassirer b, Margaret A. Highlanda,c, Peregrine Wolff d, Anne
Justice-Allene, Kristin Mansfieldf
, Margaret A. Davis g, William Foreyt a

This was published in 2013 in Preventative Veterinary Medicine. Here are some excerpts:

"As reported above, in recent years since reliable diagnostic
tools have been available, we have not identified any
bighorn sheep pneumonia outbreak in which M. ovipneumoniae
was not detected in a high proportion of affected
animals."

For some time there has been question over which bacterial strains lead to bighorn pneumonia. Some strains that were identified in the past have been ruled out by Dr. Thomas Besser's research because they have been found in healthy sheep also. However in recent years he has firmly identified the M. ovipneumoniae has been present in all dieoffs and recent pen experiments have shown this bacteria to be the cause of bighorn pneumonia dieoffs.
and

"As a result, domestic sheep, domestic goats, and mouflon
are plausible biologic sources of this agent, whereas
other ungulates, including domestic cattle, horses, llamas
and wild Cervidae, are not."

Since llamas do not carry M. Ovipneumoniae, no further experiments are warranted.

WSF should know all of this, they help fund Dr. Besser's research at Washington State University.

Still reading thru the techie talk but no science of transmission yet the ban stands?

I have yet to see anything resembling a study that defines any level of transmission whatsoever (besides common parasites) from llamas to any other species other than alpacas (which is understandable)

The precedent will be all that matters as most people will never read the over view let alone the "fine print". While it only effects a few in AK the political pressure will mount in the lower 48 to "do something". And picking on a small oddball minority is always a popular "something"

I'd bet the dominoes start to fall on this because of the human nature, not the nature of the animals. See bambistew above for the "I don't use 'em screw you view"

Once again the Guides who are afraid that resident hunters will be able to hunt in their areas are leading the charge. Shame on the WSF.

Dr. Besser has been on the forefront of this research for years and WSF helps fund his research. For Kevin Hurley to say he is unaware of any recent research is at best a severe lapse in intelligence and at worst a blatant lie. Given the proof provided by this research I can think of no other reason why WSF would be pushing this ban than that it probably affects many outfitters and members of their organization that do not want competition in areas that traditionally require pack stock to hunt effectively.

idelkslayer said:

Dr. Besser has been on the forefront of this research for years and WSF helps fund his research. For Kevin Hurley to say he is unaware of any recent research is at best a severe lapse in intelligence and at worst a blatant lie. Given the proof provided by this research I can think of no other reason why WSF would be pushing this ban than that it probably affects many outfitters and members of their organization that do not want competition in areas that traditionally require pack stock to hunt effectively.

Click to expand...

Think what you want, I can guarantee Kevin's only concern is for wild sheep. I will likely see Kevin and Kurt in Bozeman tomorrow, and will talk with about this.

sschultz said:

Once again the Guides who are afraid that resident hunters will be able to hunt in their areas are leading the charge. Shame on the WSF.

Click to expand...

Thats just some made up bullshit in that paper, just like the part around page 34 or 35 I believe it was that questions whether its a good idea to capture, collar and transplant Wild sheep (its been a major reason why their population has increased 3x in 50 years.) The paper is full of unfounded wild ass accusations, being peddled all over social media by some guy that owns a business that rents llamas in Wyoming to take into wild sheep habitat. ironically, that would be the outfitting industry ( of a different sort) supporting llama usage.

If guides aren't using llamas either, how is the resident hunter at a disadvantage without them?

A supercub ride (~$350/hr) is way cheaper than owning, feeding and equipping livestock year round.

The same mindset supporting llama usage also believes in keeping the experiment station on the MT/ID border open, maintaining domestic allotments in the Weminuche Wilderness, etc.

LLamas always looked like grizzly snacks to me anyway. Who the hell would want one of the ornery things, they can barely carry any weight.


I know Kevin Hurley, and have no doubt that his best interest is with wild sheep, not the outfitting industry. I'll likely see him and ask him tonight.

idelkslayer said:

Dr. Besser has been on the forefront of this research for years and WSF helps fund his research. For Kevin Hurley to say he is unaware of any recent research is at best a severe lapse in intelligence and at worst a blatant lie. Given the proof provided by this research I can think of no other reason why WSF would be pushing this ban than that it probably affects many outfitters and members of their organization that do not want competition in areas that traditionally require pack stock to hunt effectively.

Click to expand...

Name 5 outfitters that use pack stock sheep hunting in Alaska..........


I'll save you the time.. there are two or three that do it regularly and another couple that use them here and there, or bring one over from moose camp. Sheep hunts in AK are mostly flying or walking.

MTGomer said:

Thats just some made up bullshit in that paper, just like the part around page 34 or 35 I believe it was that questions whether its a good idea to capture, collar and transplant Wild sheep (its been a major reason why their population has increased 3x in 50 years.) The paper is full of unfounded wild ass accusations, being peddled all over social media by some guy that owns a business that rents llamas in Wyoming to take into wild sheep habitat. ironically, that would be the outfitting industry ( of a different sort) supporting llama usage.

Click to expand...

So someone who has a dog in the fight is somehow disqualified??

A supercub ride (~$350/hr) is way cheaper than owning, feeding and equipping livestock year round.

I agree so you should be able to use them too, but good luck getting your supercub to cross a creek.

The same mindset supporting llama usage also believes in keeping the experiment station on the MT/ID border open, maintaining domestic allotments in the Weminuche Wilderness, etc.

So you like a straw dog model? Seems to me the only reason llamas are being banned is cause some genius decided to lump them in with goats and domestic sheep. Could anyone prove that horses pose ZERO RISK if they had been included?

LLamas always looked like grizzly snacks to me anyway. Who the hell would want one of the ornery things, they can barely carry any weight.

glad we agree you should not use them...

Why does the study show goats may transmit, sheep DO transmit, and other than being in the title llamas are only in the conclusion We need to ban all three??? Just being thorough?

MTGomer said:

Name 5 outfitters that use pack stock sheep hunting in Alaska..........

I'll save you the time.. there are two or three that do it regularly and another couple that use them here and there, or bring one over from moose camp. Sheep hunts in AK are mostly flying or walking.

Click to expand...

Horse hunts are 20% of the total guided NR hunters. There are 3 "big" outfits that take maybe 5-6 rams each.

That said, I don't see llamas being any sort of competition, due to the distance from the highway, and rivers to cross to get to the same areas the horse guides are in. Some horses make a one way trip.

I think its pretty funny to think they are out to eliminate their competition. The only competition they'd be up against are fellow resident foot hunters.

I know of zero people that hunt sheep with llamas here. Not to say there hasn't been one or two. The stats list 5-7 resident hunters a year using pack stock for sheep. I know 2 of those guys, and another 2-3 are packed in by one of 2 packers in the state. Horses are basically non-existent for sheep hunting, or hunting in general here.

This isn't just about Alaska. WSF stated that their purpose is to eliminate llama usage in ALL sheep range. That would include many of the places that I currently hunt deer and elk and where I hope to one day hunt sheep. It is safe to say that the majority of outfitters in the lower 48 who hunt sheep do it on horseback. A llama ban in Alaska may not be a big deal up there and have a very small impact but it is the foot in the door that other states will look to for a precedent. The only issue I have with it is that we constantly push for science based management of our wildlife and in this case, WSF, BC and possibly Alaska are considering banning llamas not because there is science to support it but because llamas look kind of like domestic sheep with long necks. If the science says no threat, then why impose a ban?

idelkslayer said:

This isn't just about Alaska. WSF stated that their purpose is to eliminate llama usage in ALL sheep range. That would include many of the places that I currently hunt deer and elk and where I hope to one day hunt sheep. It is safe to say that the majority of outfitters in the lower 48 who hunt sheep do it on horseback. A llama ban in Alaska may not be a big deal up there and have a very small impact but it is the foot in the door that other states will look to for a precedent. The only issue I have with it is that we constantly push for science based management of our wildlife and in this case, WSF, BC and possibly Alaska are considering banning llamas not because there is science to support it but because llamas look kind of like domestic sheep with long necks. If the science says no threat, then why impose a ban?

Click to expand...

Bingo, While it sucks for all three of the llama owners in the effected area, it is being opposed-mostly- because of the precedent it sets. This could end up making the "ban lead shot for waterfowl nationwide" look like a well thought out study/plan by comparison. Any time you have a magical ZERO RISK as the only standard that must be met, the end game has already been decided.

There will be legal challenges, should the AK-BLM Eastern Interior units not reverse their scientifically unsupported elimination of pack llamas based upon disease risk to wild sheep in their jurisdictions. Or any other federal or state jurisdiction in the US that claims the same unsupported arbitrary application. It is precedence setting, it platforms false legitimacy for a public agency that serves all of us, it causes financial losses, and sows deep division amongst all wildlife supporters and public land users.
There are over 5,000 llama owners in the US. There are commercial operators using this pack animal in every western state on federal land (AK used to have a few). Some of them over 40 historical years.
It’s irrelevant if you don’t use llamas in AK. It’s irrelevant if there are only 2 people who hunt sheep in AK with llamas. It’s irrelevant if you want to pretend you think llamas are grizzly bait. I guess you’ve never had a bunch of llamas around your tent when a grizzly bear does come to say hello?
What is relevant, and extremely sad, is organizations like the Wild Sheep Foundation and the Wildlife Society that have unwisely chosen to partake in the promotion to eliminate an established user group like llama trekkers, who quite frankly, before this, supported the Wild Sheep Foundation. All in the name of pseudoscience (paid for in part by the WSF) that llamas pose a threat of disease transfer to wild sheep, or any other wildlife.
If you want to go down the path of zero risk, then you, horses, cattle, and everything else will need to be honored for the same “precautionary principle” application (actually more so).
This time Kevin Hurley (and a couple of others) has gone too far. There are actual scientists who are ready to have a talk with him about this. To suggest the wild sheep is “above” everything else we humans covet on our public wild places as supreme priority, then it has evolved into a special interest sheep hunting management philosophy that has lost its way for this mutually coveted public asset.