I think this is headed for a political disaster. This is only the start of he said she said I told you so. WATCH OUT!!
posted 2/15/04
Elk grounds linked to disease
By BECKY BOHRER
Associated Press
WEST YELLOWSTONE - In Montana, the thought of allowing bison that can carry brucellosis near cattle prompts calls for action, often lethal: Bison entering the state from Yellowstone National Park can be shipped to slaughter.
But in neighboring Wyoming, where elk are suspected of spreading the same disease to cattle, there is virtually no call for such a deadly action to elk, many of which feast in winter on feedgrounds that critics say help perpetuate the disease problem.
While bison and elk both carry the disease, the animals are seen - and dealt with - in very different ways by wildlife managers and others who all have the common goal of eradicating brucellosis from the greater Yellowstone area within years.
They're managed differently in part because of biological differences, particularly in habits while birthing, when there is risk of spreading brucellosis to other animals.
But there are other factors as well - place, politics, public sentiment - that weigh heavily on management decisions.
"If this were easy, we'd have had it resolved long ago," Yellowstone National Park wildlife biologist Rick Wallen said.
Instead, state and federal agencies are working under specific plans for wildlife management designed for their own jurisdictions and for their particular circumstances.
In Montana, bison that leave Yellowstone and can't be herded back are captured and tested for brucellosis under a joint state-federal plan. The idea is to minimize the chances of transmitting the disease to cattle, which can cause them to abort. Bison testing positive for brucellosis are sent to slaughter.
When it comes to elk in Montana, brucellosis hasn't proven much of a problem, said Keith Aune, research chief for the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. He credits that to managing elk for a target population over the landscape and not artificially concentrating them through use of such things as feedgrounds.
However, in Wyoming, elk are a bigger concern for wildlife and livestock managers. Elk are suspected of spreading brucellosis to cattle there, resulting in trade sanctions by other states and jeopardizing Wyoming's brucellosis-free status.
A major issue is the feedgrounds. To help keep the animals away from farmers' haystacks and cattle in winter, feedgrounds are set out in areas - from the National Elk Refuge near Jackson to nearly two dozen others that are state-run and state-funded in the western part of Wyoming.
Some experts and critics say the feedgrounds help promote the disease's spread among the gathered elk. The brucellosis prevalence rate among feedground elk in Wyoming, officials say, is far higher than it is among elk in Montana.
Tom Thorne, a wildlife disease consultant for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, said there would probably be only a "minor brucellosis problem" if there weren't feedgrounds.
However, "feedgrounds are probably the best tool Wyoming has for confronting brucellosis in elk because they keep elk from cattle and give us an opportunity to vaccinate elk," he said.
But so far, officials say, there haven't been loud calls for getting rid of the feedgrounds and there are no immediate plans to do so.
Feedgrounds help give wildlife managers access to elk for vaccination for brucellosis. Some hunters say they also help ensure good elk numbers.
"It's a two-edge sword," Wyoming state veterinarian Jim Logan said.
Wyoming's elk-management plan includes giving some of the animals a brucellosis vaccine that Thorne said was once preferred for cattle. Its effectiveness in elk is not very high, though.
"We don't have a good vaccine," Logan said. "But it is a tool."
On the National Elk Refuge, where about 700 bison and 6,500 elk feed in winter, efforts are made to spread the animals out as much as possible, refuge biologist Bruce Smith said. He noted that those efforts have been effective in cutting the rate of brucellosis among elk. The refuge and Grand Teton National Park also are looking at wildlife management options, he said.
But some conservationists question whether the agencies are making any headway at all in moving toward their goal of eradicating brucellosis from the greater Yellowstone area by 2010.
D.J. Schubert, a wildlife biologist with the Fund for Animals, said not recognizing feedgrounds in Wyoming as a major problem is "laughable."
Ted Fellman, a spokesman for the Buffalo Field Campaign, an activist group that tries to protect bison from Montana's slaughter program, said it's ridiculous to think brucellosis can be wiped out.
He said the focus should be on better managing cattle. Bison defenders say there has not been a documented case of bison transmitting brucellosis to cattle in the wild.
"They're going to be wasting tax dollars for decades," he said of the agencies, "and they're going to be a failure."
Schubert added, "In my opinion, there is not a bright future for Yellowstone wildlife right now. I think we will see a lot of dead animals, litigation and legislation."
Tom Toman, director of conservation at the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, said mention of a state losing its brucellosis-free status for cattle makes the issue political.
"If someone wasn't worried about it jumping across to livestock, it probably wouldn't be an issue at all," he said.
Brucellosis is a big issue for Boulder, Wyo.-area rancher Joel Bousman, whose neighbor had cattle that were destroyed because brucellosis was found. Bousman's own cattle are under quarantine.
Bousman, who said he suspects elk of being responsible for the infection, said he'd like to see a stronger response to elk, perhaps some kind of test-and-slaughter program.
Gregg Arthur, Wyoming's deputy Game and Fish Department director, said that's been proposed and rejected before. Not only was it deemed nearly impossible from a logistical standpoint, but it also was seen as socially and politically unacceptable, he said.
However, he noted that Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal plans to name a task force to "look at all we've been doing to see if we should be doing something differently."
As far as bison, Montana state veterinarian Tom Linfield said he sees no immediate changes in the management strategy, despite sharp criticism the plan continues to draw from conservationists.
Many state and federal officials involved in the issue say that given their agencies' mandates and local pressures, eradicating brucellosis any time soon is probably unlikely.
"Until there are other management plans with a high level of success in reducing transmission, it is probably not time to commit to eradication in the bison population at Yellowstone National Park," said Wallen, Yellowstone's wildlife biologist.
Jim Knight, a wildlife specialist with Montana State University in Bozeman, believes agencies "keep implementing things that seem like delaying tactics."
"This is probably one of the few wildlife issues I've come across that is solvable," Knight said. "But for political and social reasons, we're not solving it."
posted 2/15/04
Elk grounds linked to disease
By BECKY BOHRER
Associated Press
WEST YELLOWSTONE - In Montana, the thought of allowing bison that can carry brucellosis near cattle prompts calls for action, often lethal: Bison entering the state from Yellowstone National Park can be shipped to slaughter.
But in neighboring Wyoming, where elk are suspected of spreading the same disease to cattle, there is virtually no call for such a deadly action to elk, many of which feast in winter on feedgrounds that critics say help perpetuate the disease problem.
While bison and elk both carry the disease, the animals are seen - and dealt with - in very different ways by wildlife managers and others who all have the common goal of eradicating brucellosis from the greater Yellowstone area within years.
They're managed differently in part because of biological differences, particularly in habits while birthing, when there is risk of spreading brucellosis to other animals.
But there are other factors as well - place, politics, public sentiment - that weigh heavily on management decisions.
"If this were easy, we'd have had it resolved long ago," Yellowstone National Park wildlife biologist Rick Wallen said.
Instead, state and federal agencies are working under specific plans for wildlife management designed for their own jurisdictions and for their particular circumstances.
In Montana, bison that leave Yellowstone and can't be herded back are captured and tested for brucellosis under a joint state-federal plan. The idea is to minimize the chances of transmitting the disease to cattle, which can cause them to abort. Bison testing positive for brucellosis are sent to slaughter.
When it comes to elk in Montana, brucellosis hasn't proven much of a problem, said Keith Aune, research chief for the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. He credits that to managing elk for a target population over the landscape and not artificially concentrating them through use of such things as feedgrounds.
However, in Wyoming, elk are a bigger concern for wildlife and livestock managers. Elk are suspected of spreading brucellosis to cattle there, resulting in trade sanctions by other states and jeopardizing Wyoming's brucellosis-free status.
A major issue is the feedgrounds. To help keep the animals away from farmers' haystacks and cattle in winter, feedgrounds are set out in areas - from the National Elk Refuge near Jackson to nearly two dozen others that are state-run and state-funded in the western part of Wyoming.
Some experts and critics say the feedgrounds help promote the disease's spread among the gathered elk. The brucellosis prevalence rate among feedground elk in Wyoming, officials say, is far higher than it is among elk in Montana.
Tom Thorne, a wildlife disease consultant for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, said there would probably be only a "minor brucellosis problem" if there weren't feedgrounds.
However, "feedgrounds are probably the best tool Wyoming has for confronting brucellosis in elk because they keep elk from cattle and give us an opportunity to vaccinate elk," he said.
But so far, officials say, there haven't been loud calls for getting rid of the feedgrounds and there are no immediate plans to do so.
Feedgrounds help give wildlife managers access to elk for vaccination for brucellosis. Some hunters say they also help ensure good elk numbers.
"It's a two-edge sword," Wyoming state veterinarian Jim Logan said.
Wyoming's elk-management plan includes giving some of the animals a brucellosis vaccine that Thorne said was once preferred for cattle. Its effectiveness in elk is not very high, though.
"We don't have a good vaccine," Logan said. "But it is a tool."
On the National Elk Refuge, where about 700 bison and 6,500 elk feed in winter, efforts are made to spread the animals out as much as possible, refuge biologist Bruce Smith said. He noted that those efforts have been effective in cutting the rate of brucellosis among elk. The refuge and Grand Teton National Park also are looking at wildlife management options, he said.
But some conservationists question whether the agencies are making any headway at all in moving toward their goal of eradicating brucellosis from the greater Yellowstone area by 2010.
D.J. Schubert, a wildlife biologist with the Fund for Animals, said not recognizing feedgrounds in Wyoming as a major problem is "laughable."
Ted Fellman, a spokesman for the Buffalo Field Campaign, an activist group that tries to protect bison from Montana's slaughter program, said it's ridiculous to think brucellosis can be wiped out.
He said the focus should be on better managing cattle. Bison defenders say there has not been a documented case of bison transmitting brucellosis to cattle in the wild.
"They're going to be wasting tax dollars for decades," he said of the agencies, "and they're going to be a failure."
Schubert added, "In my opinion, there is not a bright future for Yellowstone wildlife right now. I think we will see a lot of dead animals, litigation and legislation."
Tom Toman, director of conservation at the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, said mention of a state losing its brucellosis-free status for cattle makes the issue political.
"If someone wasn't worried about it jumping across to livestock, it probably wouldn't be an issue at all," he said.
Brucellosis is a big issue for Boulder, Wyo.-area rancher Joel Bousman, whose neighbor had cattle that were destroyed because brucellosis was found. Bousman's own cattle are under quarantine.
Bousman, who said he suspects elk of being responsible for the infection, said he'd like to see a stronger response to elk, perhaps some kind of test-and-slaughter program.
Gregg Arthur, Wyoming's deputy Game and Fish Department director, said that's been proposed and rejected before. Not only was it deemed nearly impossible from a logistical standpoint, but it also was seen as socially and politically unacceptable, he said.
However, he noted that Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal plans to name a task force to "look at all we've been doing to see if we should be doing something differently."
As far as bison, Montana state veterinarian Tom Linfield said he sees no immediate changes in the management strategy, despite sharp criticism the plan continues to draw from conservationists.
Many state and federal officials involved in the issue say that given their agencies' mandates and local pressures, eradicating brucellosis any time soon is probably unlikely.
"Until there are other management plans with a high level of success in reducing transmission, it is probably not time to commit to eradication in the bison population at Yellowstone National Park," said Wallen, Yellowstone's wildlife biologist.
Jim Knight, a wildlife specialist with Montana State University in Bozeman, believes agencies "keep implementing things that seem like delaying tactics."
"This is probably one of the few wildlife issues I've come across that is solvable," Knight said. "But for political and social reasons, we're not solving it."
