Oregon Cattlemen’s Association wants to shoot wolves on sight-
Wolves: Ranchers deserve to protect their property. By Bill Moore, guest opinion. Oregonian. Oregon Cattlemen’s Association
The howls over wolves. By The Oregonian Editorial Board
– – – –
Why the Cattle Association is worried about sheep is hard to say. As usual they fail to mention that the 23 lost lambs will be paid for. This “oversight” serves to make the financial loss appear much larger than it will be. Bill Moore also didn’t mention that the Oregon State wolf plan was adopted after much deliberation by a panel that included ranchers.
Once again for the sake of comparison. In Oregon, annual sheep and lamb losses to predators in the most recent NASS annual report were
Coyotes = 5,700
Cougar = 1,200
Dogs = 700
Eagles = 200
Bears = 100
Print Friendly
Ralph Maughan
Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is past President of the Western Watersheds Project.
…”marauder intent on maiming or killing.”
Gotta love this rhetoric. I didn’t wolves just went around and bullied other animals and stole their lunch money.
Real quick news on wolves, Wyoming F&G and USFWS have confirmed at least two wolves now living the Bighorn Mountains:
http://www.gillettenewsrecord.com/articles/2009/04/09/news/today/news05.txt
Good news. They might have a chance in the Bighorns.
Ranchers need to realize that loss of animals is the cost of doing business. We live in a free market system so it seems simple to me if you are losing too much money charge more for your product. If you can’t compete with other producers get out of the business. Sheep are the dumbest animal on the planet and die if you look at them cross eyed.
Personally I think it would be nice if the ranchers who grazed on public land raised buffalo. They are not as hard on the land as cattle, they are lower maintenance, and they can fend off predators much better than cattle or sheep. Food for thought.
I agree to an extent. Buffalo, if not artificially subsidized with food in a commercial motivation, are more sustainable on much of the land. However, they were not native to much of Oregon in the same high numbers as with cattle in present day. Keeping any ungulate at high levels on land that cannot sustain it is ecologically unsound. Buffalo may be an appropriate species to graze in many areas but the Oregon ecosystem did not evolve in the presence of large ungulates like buffalo.
Buffalo do use the land much differently than cattle and are much better at defending themselves and their calves. In places like Wyoming, where you seem to hail, they would be a much better choice ecologically speaking than cattle.
Ken, I agree with what you say about not keeping them in unnatural numbers. I wasn’t sure what their status was in Oregon as far as being native or not.