Chat
Thank you all for helping me make my point. The science is lacking to directly connect any domestic goat with disease transfer capacity to BHS, let alone a more easily managed packgoat. However, if the public's perception is that a goat is biologically close enough to a BHS that there is a possibility of the sharing of bacteria between the two, then it may be folly for us to fight that uphill battle. Much of the literature I have read agrees that the science is weak in finding direct incidents of transfer between goats and BHS (at least by comparison to the domestic sheep transfer capacity) and the same literature often suggests that other animals like horses and cattle can be carriers of some strains of bacteria as well. The primary argument though, is that the BHS are ATTRACTED to domestic sheep and goats, which increases the risk. So lets say hypothetically that goats and horses both biologically posed the same level of risk to transfer if contact was made; the proponents of goat bans would argue that the risk is higher for the goat because the BHS is attracted to it and not to the horse, which increases the chance of exposure. This is the part of the argument we should be focusing on; whether or not BHS are attracted to packgoats when they are in the presence of their owner, and whether that attraction could be mitigated or deterred.
When it comes to the legal matter though, if you are hearing comments like the "one in a million chance" being too great, I hope you are informing Larry to bring that to NAPgA's attorney Mr. Irvine. Under NEPA governmental agencies aren't supposed to work on those kind of absolutes, and need to enact regulations that take into consideration not only the environmental impact but also the economical or social impacts as well. It should also be pointed out that there is probably a better than a 1 in a million chance that a BHS Ram on a foray would wander down onto private property and come into contact with a domestic sheep herd, and a far better that a million to one chance that a BHS would get hit by a car. But, neither of those instances can legally be mitigated by the forest plan because it would put an undo burden on the public at large, and the benefit to the BHS would be outweighed by other human concerns.
So, I hope everyone here is contributing to the legal fund so that we can afford to keep Mr. Irvine in this fight, because if the Shoshone disregards the Objections he just filed, then our next recourse is to fight the FS in open court for making their "arbitrary and capricious" regulations, and that will likely cost upwards of $100k in legal fees. (which we might be able to get back if we win and the judge finds that the error was egregious enough).
When it comes to the legal matter though, if you are hearing comments like the "one in a million chance" being too great, I hope you are informing Larry to bring that to NAPgA's attorney Mr. Irvine. Under NEPA governmental agencies aren't supposed to work on those kind of absolutes, and need to enact regulations that take into consideration not only the environmental impact but also the economical or social impacts as well. It should also be pointed out that there is probably a better than a 1 in a million chance that a BHS Ram on a foray would wander down onto private property and come into contact with a domestic sheep herd, and a far better that a million to one chance that a BHS would get hit by a car. But, neither of those instances can legally be mitigated by the forest plan because it would put an undo burden on the public at large, and the benefit to the BHS would be outweighed by other human concerns.
So, I hope everyone here is contributing to the legal fund so that we can afford to keep Mr. Irvine in this fight, because if the Shoshone disregards the Objections he just filed, then our next recourse is to fight the FS in open court for making their "arbitrary and capricious" regulations, and that will likely cost upwards of $100k in legal fees. (which we might be able to get back if we win and the judge finds that the error was egregious enough).