Alaska Should Transplant Sheep Again?

WCB

WKR
Joined
Jun 12, 2019
Messages
3,638
Just throwing a wild right hand out there and hope it lands...but IMO unless it is a stocking herd behind fence, efforts should first be put into growing already established populations. I don't think spending the time and money to but a small number of sheep into a new are is any sort of plan until already established, although maybe hurting, populations are reinforced.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2024
Messages
35
Here in Utah we have a few hundred desert and rocky mountain bighorn sheep in nurseries, and some of our herds are only here because we can start and supplement them from the nursery herds. I'd imagine that if ADFG can get their hands on 30-40 sheep from populations that are doing better it would be a great long-term play. A bunch of sheep in a high fence area with no predators and an artificially high lamb survival rate could provide a lot of sheep to support struggling populations. But are there enough on state-owned land for ADFG to be able to remove those sheep without hurting the population?

Also, what does Canada do differently with their thinhorns than Alaska? Anything good that Alaska could adopt?
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
2,058
Location
Eagle River, AK
Easy way to improve sheep habitat is Fire. More grasses and forbs grow after a fire and it kills the woody brush. That’s a super easy one if areas that could use a burn.

Many outfitters in British Columbia run huge salt licks on their concessions. Lambing in these area have been observed to have significantly higher survival rates, that’s on top of higher fertility rates in the ewes. So more lambs AND more of them surviving.

The big argument against it is that it could increase the transmission of disease. This has not been observed or proven though in areas that it occurs.



None of this would cost the State Any money at all! That’s the frustrating part. Private sector - the outfitters, WSF, individuals would all donate time and effort to light a fire and let it burn, and stock mineral supplements easy.

All that has to happen is for the laws to change to make it legal.

Does Alaska have a voter proposition option to change or make state law? The anti hunters use it to stop hunting, Can it be used to help in Alaska?
 

Atigun

FNG
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Messages
25
Alaska is not losing sheep numbers due to a lack of suitable habitat, disease, over hunting or anything of the sorts. Transplanted sheep will also suffer from deep snowpacks, late springs, and predation. Deep snowpacks and late springs in recent years have crushed our population numbers. This has happened in the past and will happen again in the future. Run traplines, hunt wolves, and hope for an early spring.
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2017
Messages
2,058
Location
Eagle River, AK
Alaska is not losing sheep numbers due to a lack of suitable habitat, disease, over hunting or anything of the sorts. Transplanted sheep will also suffer from deep snowpacks, late springs, and predation. Deep snowpacks and late springs in recent years have crushed our population numbers. This has happened in the past and will happen again in the future. Run traplines, hunt wolves, and hope for an early spring.
This is the fatalist approach I already addressed. Of course the weather is an issue that can't be changed!

The proactive solution is to DO something to counter act the negative weather events. Some weather events could reduce a population below a viable number, where recovery is impossible- thus the restocking idea.

Increased lamb survival and ewe fertility will also help a population rebound from an adverse weather event in a fraction of the time "normal" recovery would take if it even happens at all! (see the restocking and viable population argument)

When has the Western Brooks recovered? how long will we wait for it to recover on it own?
 
OP
Kisaralik

Kisaralik

FNG
Joined
Mar 5, 2024
Messages
19
Here in Utah we have a few hundred desert and rocky mountain bighorn sheep in nurseries, and some of our herds are only here because we can start and supplement them from the nursery herds. I'd imagine that if ADFG can get their hands on 30-40 sheep from populations that are doing better it would be a great long-term play. A bunch of sheep in a high fence area with no predators and an artificially high lamb survival rate could provide a lot of sheep to support struggling populations. But are there enough on state-owned land for ADFG to be able to remove those sheep without hurting the population?

Also, what does Canada do differently with their thinhorns than Alaska? Anything good that Alaska could adopt?
I think getting a high fence 'nursery' approval would be a bigger achievement than just a transplant in AK. We essentially have nurseries if you consider no hunting zones like sheep mt in Chickaloon, haha. Definitely agree that solid predator mitigation would benefit a seeding population.

There's OTC/HT areas that have historically lower sheep populations that still create opportunities for a handful of FC rams a year. I'm talking a couple hundred sheep. From what I've read, sheep populations below carrying capacity generally grow at a rate of about 11-18% a year. If you seeded just 20 sheep with a 15% pop growth rate it would take near a decade to have 100ish sheep in mountains that previously never had any (in ideal circumstances).

This isn't a cure-all solution for our currently low sheep numbers, realistically it has nothing to do with our current sheep numbers. It would be banking for future hunting opportunities - esp if sheep numbers stay low and the state moves towards draws. This would add a couple new draw areas or at the very least spread some hunters out just a bit more.
 

Redmammut

FNG
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
16
You sound like you're educated in this area. What are the different tiers of management that game are managed under, and what point do you think dall sheep would be escalated to intensive management? I'm also curious what range specific information we would be looking for if you could elaborate on that.
I'm only educated enough to know I'm not an expert.

Alaska does have a Tiered management system but it pertains more to hunter allocation of subsistence populations than it does to species management. Its like supply/demand bean counting of animals. https://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=huntlicense.tier

Intensive Management refers to an act by the State Legislature in 1994 that directed ADFG and the BOG to identify certain species relied upon for consumption (moose, deer, and caribou), create a sort of quota for each population, and take steps to manage them for elevated abundance. I would think including sheep would free up some money (5 dollars of your hunting license goes to IM activities) and direct the department to take actions. BUT managers and much of the hunting public don't really think of sheep as a food species. here is the act. and here is the adfg info page.

On range spcific information: I was watching an adfg presentation and one of the lead sheep researchers (Dr. pointed out that population drivers in each mountain range seems to be different. so like in the central Chugach, lamb recruitment and survival is the primary limiting factor. Where as in the Wrangells, predation is the dominant limitation. Or as was alluded to by the OP, heavy wet coastal snow in Kodiak. So you have to identify what's wrong before you spend a bunch of money and effort to harrass and abduct animals and move them across state.

It's an endeavor worth exploring. I fly a lot, and I always marvel at HOW MUCH potentially good habitat is out there, and its just devoid of sheep.
 
Joined
May 2, 2022
Messages
56
Location
Alaska
It's an endeavor worth exploring. I fly a lot, and I always marvel at HOW MUCH potentially good habitat is out there, and its just devoid of sheep.
Thanks for sharing this, awesome stuff. I'm amazed at the amount of data and research available and how it's used.
 

Bambistew

WKR
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
417
Location
Alaska
I like you're guys enthusiasm. Also like your optimism that the wealthy sheep hunter foundation will do anything... They've had the AK chapter for 7ish years now. Name 3 things they've done to improve sheep hunting and population numbers. I know there are members on here, I'd love to hear about all the successful things.

Where do you get sheep from to stock these new areas? There are a few areas that could likely hold sheep that currently don't. There really isn't a population in the state that is doing well. At best the north Wrangells and eastern Brooks are holding on, but not building. I suppose you could argue that taking a few hundred wouldn't hurt an already hurting population. Many herds are down 30-50% from just 3 years ago. We have half as many sheep today as we had 12-14 years ago. The populations are down in the parks as well as the state/federal lands. Before the bad winter in 2011/12 there was an estimated 44k sheep in AK. I would be surprised if there is 24K now. I'd bet there isn't 3000 sheep in the Chugach, Talkeetnas and Kenia mountains combined. The Chugach had nearly 3000 sheep in the late 90s, Kenia had similar in the 80s and early 90s.

I hunted the western Brooks in 2010, we saw a lot of sheep (over 400) and I took a great ram. My neighbor hunted it in the 80s before it was closed and did well. That area has never been great for sheep survival, its too close to the coast and gets ice storms and has always been cyclical. The sheep were never a staple for subsistence because the population fluctuated so much, from I could gather. That area is also experiencing one of the largest changes in climate of any were in the world. Those 1:100 and 1:200 rain storms in the summer/fall are happening 1:5 -1:10 years now.

There are natural mineral licks in many of the higher sheep density areas. ADFG has maps with known mineral licks. I'm not sure its on line, but I've seen the maps. They have done many of their population studies based on sheep coming to those licks. I do like the idea of supplementing them, but doubt the population increase would be worth the risk of disease transmission. Disease is a huge deal, and its not just M. Ovi. Moving sheep from one area to another, can move disease with it. The introduced herd could inadvertently bring in a pathogen not previously there. They rarely augment herds in the L48 anymore because of this as well.

Just because they bounced back once doesn't' mean they will again. Using 2 data points (brooks range x2, and AK range 1x) and stating it as fact and all will be ok, is not good science. ADFG is quite optimistic that they'll come back, I'm not. The weather has changed a lot since the last major population cycle, as well as predator numbers (less trapping and poisoning) the addition of coyotes and booming golden eagle population. Lots of variables.

Sheep are not included in intensive management so the state can't hunt predators to help restore their population. You'd need to change that by legislation. However with all the other populations down like moose and caribou, if intensive predator management is done for them, it will help the sheep.

You can dream all you want and pretend that how its done in the lessor 48 will somehow work here, but its different.
 

S-3 ranch

WKR
Joined
Jan 18, 2022
Messages
1,133
Location
Texas / Hillcounrty
Imo the Alaska wildlife department is negligent in protecting the ecosystem of Alaska from the fishery’s to the sheep population and everything else in between, subsistence hunting and fishing in the future should be severely restricted , predator hunting increased, some areas closed till natural recruitment rebounds, they/ the state wildlife service needs a revamped policy
 

Redmammut

FNG
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
16
Sheep are not included in intensive management so the state can't hunt predators to help restore their population. You'd need to change that by legislation. However with all the other populations down like moose and caribou, if intensive predator management is done for them, it will help the sheep.

I think it would be as simple as a Board of Game proposal directing them to identify sheep an important resource for consumption. see AS 16.05.255 e. At least that how I interpret the original legislation.

The deadline for proposals is may 1 for the statewide cycle. which is when they take up IM regs. BTW.

 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,225
Location
NY
When we talk about sheep restoration I can’t help but notice a glaring deficiency.
It seems like all our information and analysis is sources from the organizations that either directly fundraise for the mission or from organizations and agencies befit from the fundraising.

Seems to me if we really going to look at how affected this all has really been we some unbiased analysis.
 

MBN

FNG
Joined
Nov 25, 2022
Messages
84
Location
AK
Imo the Alaska wildlife department is negligent in protecting the ecosystem of Alaska from the fishery’s to the sheep population and everything else in between, subsistence hunting and fishing in the future should be severely restricted , predator hunting increased, some areas closed till natural recruitment rebounds, they/ the state wildlife service needs a revamped policy
Curious what you mean by subsistence hunting and fishing be severely restricted. Which ones/areas? Agree with the predator hunting part, besides time and good weather there isn't a lot else that will change anything. I also don't think we are at the point of needing to transplant sheep for them to recover.
 

z987k

WKR
Joined
Sep 9, 2020
Messages
1,821
Location
AK
Drop minerals and blast wolves, coyotes and eagles. Or just let us do it.
Idk if there's a specific law that says that carelessly leaving your steak seasoning behind after camping in the mountains isn't ok.
You can blast wolves and coyotes. Not enough people do.
 

Bambistew

WKR
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
417
Location
Alaska
Imo the Alaska wildlife department is negligent in protecting the ecosystem of Alaska from the fishery’s to the sheep population and everything else in between, subsistence hunting and fishing in the future should be severely restricted , predator hunting increased, some areas closed till natural recruitment rebounds, they/ the state wildlife service needs a revamped policy
Protecting the ecosystem? ADFG manages wildlife, DEC manages the ecosystems. As far as I know the ecosystems are more or less the same as they were before statehood.

The state isn't ruining the fishing, commercial fishing is ruining the fishing.

Subsistence is managed by the feds, and they are locking shit down left and right. I hate to see what it looks like in 10 years. They control 50% of the hunting in AK and are closing it left and right to non-locals.

Some areas have been closed due to low recruitment for years. The Kenia, is closed, a swath of the Brooks is closed, a big part of the interior is closed, major reductions of draw tags (less than 1/3 of what we had 12 years ago)

What policy would you like to see changed? Closing sheep hunting to save a few rams isn't going to resurrect our sheep population. If that was true the populations would be booming in the NP yet they are also depressed.

It's almost like the weather is the controlling factor.

I think it would be as simple as a Board of Game proposal directing them to identify sheep an important resource for consumption. see AS 16.05.255 e. At least that how I interpret the original legislation.

The deadline for proposals is may 1 for the statewide cycle. which is when they take up IM regs. BTW.

The board can not change statute. The only animals considered for intensive management are moose and caribou and it's based on subsistence needs. Sheep would need to be added to that list before they can authorize predator management (which the BOG can do under certain triggers). Sheep are not a primary source of subsistence for 99% of the residents, so getting them added to the list would require a separate reason.
 

Bambistew

WKR
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
417
Location
Alaska
When we talk about sheep restoration I can’t help but notice a glaring deficiency.
It seems like all our information and analysis is sources from the organizations that either directly fundraise for the mission or from organizations and agencies befit from the fundraising.

Seems to me if we really going to look at how affected this all has really been we some unbiased analysis.
Are you alluding to the Wealthy Sheephunter Foundation? If so don't worry too much they haven't done anything in Alaska to benifit sheep. They are first in line for a handout though and really like those attaboys when they sell a tag to some rich phuck.

Still waiting on those 3 things they've accomplished in AK.
 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,225
Location
NY
Are you alluding to the Wealthy Sheephunter Foundation? If so don't worry too much they haven't done anything in Alaska to benifit sheep. They are first in line for a handout though and really like those attaboys when they sell a tag to some rich phuck.

Still waiting on those 3 things they've accomplished in AK.

I don’t feel like it just limited to Alaska.
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Messages
88
Location
AK
Still waiting on those 3 things they've accomplished in AK.
I agree, I cannot name a thing they've accomplished. They say they have more money than they've ever had, but I don't see that being spent anywhere other than the loads of YETI branded products they buy for their banquets. Pretty sad.
 

Bambistew

WKR
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
417
Location
Alaska
I agree, I cannot name a thing they've accomplished. They say they have more money than they've ever had, but I don't see that being spent anywhere other than the loads of YETI branded products they buy for their banquets. Pretty sad.
They have spent money on research, I believe to pay their staff biologist, who has no say in management... but its "helping" sheep. Keeping sheep on the mountain!
 
Top