Chat
Charlie, you (and everyone) make good, sensible points. However, I really don't think it's just about "politics and money."
As a former Federal employee, that dealt with complex resource issues, I regularly converse with experts in the field of Land Use Planning, including wildlife biologists, ecologists, and other specialists. I have had a difficult time convincing any of them that pack goats are not a risk. Of course I have a very high emotional stake in my argument, but still...
They all have a strong belief that bighorn sheep teeter in a precarious balance and that any little thing could tip their status from "Sensitive" to a "Threatened & Endangered" species. We can try to argue ad nauseam about the minuscule (according to which research you believe) chance that one of our pack goats might infect a wild sheep. But "beliefs" are often stronger than science. To many specialists, Bighorn sheep are not just a valuable game species; they represent a native animal, a symbol of a population that is declining, like the buffalo and the wild salmon. One only needs to look at the decline of the native salmon population in the west, and all the policy & regulations that have (so far) been a huge waste of tax dollars in bringing back their levels. We all know what the real reason is for the decline in salmon numbers, but none of our useless "band-aids" have addressed it. I consider this a similar situation. So if the Forest Service can apply a cheap & easy "fix" by prohibiting a handful of pack goats in wild sheep habitat, that is what they are going to try to do.
Perhaps education will help. We almost need a "Marketing Director" to spread the good word about pack goats, once you begin your fundraising campaign.
P.S. With regard to Shoshone--I may be wrong about this, but I have heard that John M. is NOT on "our side" of this issue. He may not be the best person to invite to our "party." Please correct me if I am wrong--Saph
As a former Federal employee, that dealt with complex resource issues, I regularly converse with experts in the field of Land Use Planning, including wildlife biologists, ecologists, and other specialists. I have had a difficult time convincing any of them that pack goats are not a risk. Of course I have a very high emotional stake in my argument, but still...
They all have a strong belief that bighorn sheep teeter in a precarious balance and that any little thing could tip their status from "Sensitive" to a "Threatened & Endangered" species. We can try to argue ad nauseam about the minuscule (according to which research you believe) chance that one of our pack goats might infect a wild sheep. But "beliefs" are often stronger than science. To many specialists, Bighorn sheep are not just a valuable game species; they represent a native animal, a symbol of a population that is declining, like the buffalo and the wild salmon. One only needs to look at the decline of the native salmon population in the west, and all the policy & regulations that have (so far) been a huge waste of tax dollars in bringing back their levels. We all know what the real reason is for the decline in salmon numbers, but none of our useless "band-aids" have addressed it. I consider this a similar situation. So if the Forest Service can apply a cheap & easy "fix" by prohibiting a handful of pack goats in wild sheep habitat, that is what they are going to try to do.
Perhaps education will help. We almost need a "Marketing Director" to spread the good word about pack goats, once you begin your fundraising campaign.
P.S. With regard to Shoshone--I may be wrong about this, but I have heard that John M. is NOT on "our side" of this issue. He may not be the best person to invite to our "party." Please correct me if I am wrong--Saph