Yellowstone Bison Controversy

Yellowstone Bison Controversy



March 2007 - The fate of the 
Yellowstone bison herd took center stage at a House committee 
hearing on Tuesday, with emotions running high over a 
controversial management plan that allows federal and state 
officials to kill bison in order to protect cattle from the 
disease brucellosis. 
House Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall said the plan 
allows the needless slaugter of "an American icon." 
"The slaughter of bison is not required in order to manage the 
threat of disease. Slaughter is not management," Rahall said. 
"It is an approach from a bygone era and has no place in a 
time of rapid scientific and economic progress." 
Rahall noted that an attempt by Democrats in 2004 to impose a 
moratorium on the killing of captured bison failed by a narrow 
margin. 
"That vote was a harbinger of what will come, that the status 
quo is no longer sufficient," Rahall said. 
Representative Dennis Rehberg, a Montana Republican, defended 
the plan, saying it "was not something that was just thrown 
together to slaughter our bison." 
Millions of people come to Yellowstone National Park annually 
to see the park's bison and its famous geysers. 
The plan, agreed to in 2000, was the product of a lawsuit by 
the state of Montana. State officials and cattle interests 
remain worried about the migration of the bison herd in the 
winter, when some wander out of the park in search of food. 
This migration puts the bison, some of which carry 
brucellosis, near a few hundred cattle that graze on national 
forest land adjacent to the park. Brucellosis is a bacterial 
disease that can cause spontaneous abortion and stillborn 
calfs. 
The plan allows federal and state officials to try and haze 
the bison back into the park - bison that cannot be moved back 
are captured and tested for brucellosis and those that test 
positive are slaughtered. 
But if the population of bison within the park exceeds 3,000, 
the Park Service can slaughter the bison without testing for 
the disease. The current herd size is about 3,600 bison. 
Although only two bison were slaughtered this winter under the 
plan, federal and state officials killed 1,003 last winter. 
Federal agencies currently spend some $2.4 million annually to 
implement the plan. 
That money is being wasted, said Montana Governor Brian 
Schweitzer, who said the current plan "ensures it is only a 
matter of time before [Montana] loses our brucellosis-free 
status." 
Schweitzer noted that buying out grazing leases on the lands 
would cost less than $10 million. 
"It would be much cheaper to take the long goal and look for a 
permanent solution," said Schweitzer, a Democrat. "The federal 
government is just throwing a bunch of money away." 
But negotiations with the owners of grazing permits has been 
difficult. Schweitzer said his state is continuing to 
negotiate with Grand Teton Ranch, which owns grazing rights on 
some 5,000 acres north of the park. 
The federal government spent $13 million in the late 1990s to 
purchase the land, but allowed the owner to retain the grazing 
rights. 
The National Park Service sometimes uses helicopters to try 
and haze bison back into the park. 
The Montana governor also suggested that the federal 
government give his state more flexibility with regards to its 
brucellosis-free status. 
Currently if two herds turn up positive for the disease, the 
entire state would lose its status - that would cost Montana 
hundreds of millions of dollars annually, Schweitzer said. 
"They are placing the two million head of cattle in Montana at 
risk of losing their brucellosis-free status over about 700 
head of cattle that occupy this space some short periods 
during the year," he said. 
Schweitzer proposed creating a buffer zone 30 to 50 miles 
north of the park, where all cattle would be tested for the 
disease. If there were positive tests, the state would still 
not lose its status, he said. 
But the federal official in charge of the program rejected 
that idea. 
"There is really no point changing the program that has been 
so effective for so many years," said John Clifford, deputy 
administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service. 
Representative Rob Bishop, a Utah Republican, said the issue 
of bison leaving the park "is being used by some as a pretext 
to expand the park, acquire additional federal lands for 
habitat or control the already limited private property of the 
West." 
Federal officials should more actively manage the bison herd, 
Rehberg said, calling for vaccinations and arguing that the 
winter migration is because of overgrazing in the park. 
"Don't let diseased herds walk around the park," Rehberg said. 
"Where do we find the philosophy that allows the opportunity 
for your diseased herd to overgraze our park?" 
Millions of bison once roamed the nation's Great Plains. 

But others said that rounding up and vaccinating the herd was 
impractical, noting that there is not an effective vaccine for 
bison. 
"It is much more practical to vaccinate cattle," said Tim 
Stevens, Yellowstone Project Manager for the National Parks 
Conservation Association. 
The migration of some bison out of the park during winter is 
natural, according to Yellowstone National Park Superintendent 
Suzanne Lewis. 
"They are doing what they have done for centuries," Lewis told 
the committee. "It is not because the park is overgrazed. It 
is because it is winter and the ground is covered with snow." 
Mike Soukup, associate director of the National Park Service 
added that maintaining the free-roaming herd is of "greater 
value" than making the herd brucellosis free. 
That view drew a sharp rebuke from Bishop, who said "simple 
logic tells us" that a brucellosis-free herd should be the 
highest priority. 
"And when you say that is not the highest priority there is 
something that is deeply wrong with the National Park 
Service," Bishop said. 
Representative Raul Grivalva, an Arizona Democrat, disagreed. 
"Effective disease control and free roaming bison are not 
mutually exclusive," according to Grijalva, who said the bison 
slaughter "must stop." 
The issue is also clouded by a dispute about the extent of the 
risk to cattle from bison that carry brucellosis, which is 
transferred by the consumption of afterbirth from a mothering 
animal that is infected. 
"The transfer of this disease from bison to cattle has never 
happened in the wild," Rahall said. "Never." 
Clifford acknowledged the point, but said a transfer has 
happened in captive bison "which would not act any differently 
than captive bison." 
Brucellosis can only be transmitted by calving females. 
Conservationists note the bison policy is inconsistent, as elk 
can carry brucellosis and there are documented cases of 
transmission from elk to cattle. 
Elk, which far outnumber bison and are permitted to range 
beyond the park, were responsible for both Idaho and Wyoming 
losing their brucellosis-free status in recent years. 
A popular target for hunters, elk have "a stronger 
constituency" than bison, said Wayne Pacelle, president of the 
Humane Society of the United States. 
Pacelle said the current plan ignores the special value of the 
Yellowstone herd, which is descended from the 23 wild bison 
that survived the mass eradication of the 19th century and is 
considered the largest remaining single population of 
genetically pure bison. 
"This is a special population of animals," Pacelle said, "… 
[but] they are treated like shaggy members of a disposed 
cattle herd that are encroaching on adjacent and occupied 
cattle ranches." 
"The whole rationale here is brucellosis," Pacelle added. 
"This whole thing has been an exaggeration, it is a canard. 
This is a land use issue and it is concern about bison 
extending their range." 
Pacelle and other conservationists at the hearing expressed 
support for both the buyout and for the concept of a buffer 
zone, and urged lawmakers to find a solution to the management 
issue. 
"If history continues on its present course, the Yellowstone 
herd will become just another intensively managed, 
domesticated herd," said Josh Osher of the Buffalo Field 
Campaign. 





 

---