Bighorn Sheep

March 21 Bighorn Sheep Update

Posted - Charles Miles

A new project update was released on 3/21/2014 (update page) – I thought the two most interesting details were:

  • The assertion that the Mountain Lion killed in early March “was responsible for preying on 3 other sheep”
  • The report ending statement that “This reintroduction effort has been designed around an adaptive management approach—meaning that instead of sticking to an initial plan no matter what happens, ongoing analysis of events and conditions will inform future management actions. It may be that under some circumstances, relatively few sheep losses will be cause for ending the effort; it may also be that under different circumstances, relatively high losses in the first or second year will not jeopardize successful restoration or be cause for ending the project” – this sentiment has been asserted several times, but the strong statements that the next release of sheep will go forward seems at least slightly at odds with this stated flexibility…

Bighorn Sheep Project Funding

Updated - Posted - Charles Miles

Arizona Daily Star – Bighorn reintroduction funded by hunting interests – This article breaks down the funding for the Bighorn Reintroduction and some of the connections between project managers and funding sources. Funding sources listed in the article:

The article presents opinions from people who see a conflict between the claim that hunting is not the primary reason for the reintroduction and the large portion of the funding coming from hunting advocacy groups and opinions from supporters of the groups/project who feel that there is not a conflict.

March 7 Bighorn Project Status Update

Updated - Posted - Charles Miles

Project Status Update: February 3 – February 16, 2014 – Habitat improvements due to fires in the Santa Catalina Mountains have been talked about as an important advantage for the Bighorn Sheep when compared to the habitat during their population decline and eventual extirpation. This update has the first notes I have seen on this project acknowledging what seems true from hiking in the range – that important sections of the Big Horn Sheep Management Area have not experienced a major fire in quite sometime and that some areas have grown back aggressively after the fires:

Several reports following the Bullock and Aspen fires suggested they had helped to remove the brushy component and opened up the habitat so that sheep would be able to better elude predation. For instance, one study indicated that 24% of the available sheep habitat had burned and that habitats would be more suitable for sheep post-fire than they were in the early 1990s. Although the Bullock and Aspen fires in 2002 and 2003 helped to open some of the landscape, as time passes, natural fuels are once again beginning to accumulate in some areas where past fire intensity may have been low. In addition, there is a large area of sheep habitat that has not burned in several years, and biologists believe this area would benefit from the reintroduction of fire.

Arizona bighorn project criticized for deaths: An article about the project with a few pro/con quotes – perhaps the most interesting point is not about this particular reintroduction but the suggestion that without translocation efforts Bighorns would be well below current population levels.