Barbary for Bighorn in 34????

Ltsheets

Very Active Member
Messages
1,126
So I was on my late season elk hunt in 34 this weekend and ended up talking to a local a little big about Barbary in that area. He told me that the game and fish was planning on wiping out the Barbary in the OTC areas using helicopters in order to clean them out for introducing Bighorns to the area. This strikes me as quite odd. As much as I'd like more opportunities for drawing Bighorn, I think if this is true, I think wiping out a heard of a couple thousand or so Barbary for a few Bighorn is quite wrong...regardless of whether or not the Barbary are native or not. This just doesn't make since to me on many levels. I would think the Barbary would bring in more money than Bighorn even if it's not as sexy of a hunt. I was hoping someone on here could shed some light on what's going on and whether or not this rumor is true.
 
Can't confirm methodology of removal, but have also heard straight from the horses mouth that what the local said is true.

The Beast is Dead, Long Live the Beast.

-The Nuge
 
If that's true, I gotta wonder what benefits they see of doing this. It's not like Bighorn are endangered or anything and having a new heard would probably only gain a tag or 2 each year I would think. Doesn't make sense to me at all.
 
I get that but how long was it OTC? I would think that if the location of those sheep becomes public knowledge enough, that hunters could make a big dent in the population but maybe I'm wrong. I just don't think I agree with killing them all in order to introduce bighorn. Am I missing something?

>That was the reasoning in making
>the west side of 34
>otc for barbs.
 
I agree. It seems to me that there has to be somewhere bighorn can be added without having to "exterminate" so many barbary.

>Sometimes I wonder about the brains
>in our game and fish
>department...
 
Steep nasty country.i bet there leaning towards the helicopter because hunters ain't committing to getting the sheep shot fast enough. Probably a limit on funding to re introduce big horns so thru are biting at the bit. I think G@F needs to put more effort into the Muleys and put a hold on the Big horns.Seems the plan to introduce barbs is back firing on them... The Lions are gonna have a field day on the big horns. Don't forget that. Lions love them self bighorn loins. Seems they have a uphill battle ahead of them.
 
Bighorn transplants into the Sacramento Mountains (along with the Guadalupes) were not looked on favorably in the 2003 state bighorn management plan because of both Barbary and domestic sheep populations in those ranges. What has changed since then? Not much. If anything, there are probably more Barbary in the Sacramentos now than there were 10 years ago, and there's still a lot of domestic sheep in the area. Neither are conducive to healthy bighorn popoulations.

The NMDGF certainly wants to keep the numbers of Barbary down in the west side of 34 so that the sheep aren't moving even further west on to the WSMR (Which happens. I was told years ago by the WSMR wildlife biologist that Barbary are "eliminated" from the range whenever seen in order to prevent interaction with the desert bighorns). The west side of 34 is a sort of "buffer zone" between the Barbary populations in the Guadalupes (that the NMDGF is resigned to managing, since they cannot be realistically extirpated) and the desert bighorns on the WSMR. It may not have anything to do with potential bighorn reintroduction in 34.
 
I was told helicopters would be used the same way they use them for pigs, but that's just local intel. I might have to do a spring barb hunt in the western part of 34 if there really are that many there right now.
 
I also heard the rumor, but until now couldn't bring it up as I was told in confidence.

Since this info is out there now, I say we holler to the Game Commission.

I personally don't think a handful of bighorn tags (if the herd every gets that big) at nearly zero chance of drawing is worth giving up an opportunity for most of the average Joe's to hunt Barbs.

BUT if the powers that be insist that the Barbs must be killed, why not let hunters have UNLIMITED tags? If someone wants to buy (revenue for G&F) 10-tags, let them. At least there is revenue and the meat is used, rather than PAYING G&F to shoot them and let them rot.

Pathetic.

Carl
 
LTsheets, let me ask you a question; what about removing the Barbary sheep from the west side of 34 bothers you? Is it how they are shooting them from the air? If you don't like that than did you know that's how Alaska G&F removes wolves in Alaska? Maybe im a little bias, ?I am a huge fan of having as many bighorn sheep as possible? but I don't see were the problem is.
 
The only issue I have with Bighorn is how difficult it is for them to maintain sustainable numbers. They are not as resilient as barbary sheep or Ibex. They seem to need a lot of baby sitting, and that costs money. From what I understand is that the Barbary sheep will interfere with Bighorn breeding and that is partly why they cannot coexist in the same area. I guess my feeling is that if the Barbary are doing fine there, than why not leave them there and pick another spot for the Bighorn? This suggestion may get a lot of negative feedback, so please keep in mind it is just a thought. Have they thought about trying to reintroduce bighorn back into the Sandias and perhaps one day having an archery bighorn hunt? I say archery cause from what I understand its an archery only unit. Given what a low success rate that type of hunt would have it could allow a good amount of tags to be issued, which means more people get the opportunity to hold a big horn tag just once in their lifetime. I know at one time there used to be bighorn in that area but I am not sure at which point they went away.
 
Bingo 82:

Barbary are one of very few species in NM that are thriving right now. In areas that don't seem to interfere with native species (elk/deer). Why pick an area to wipe them out?

Whoever thinks that Bighorn can be successfully located in the west side of 34 must be on crack. Barbs will continually push north into the area. Lions are plentiful and will constantly plague the Bighorns in that area. Gonna take a LOT of babysitting to keep them from being wiped out. Wait...maybe that's why the push to get them there. Paid to babysit and study.

I concur that Sandias would be prime area to reestablish BH.

And again, EVEN IF the decision is to kill off all the Barbs, why not make OTC unlimited tags and let hunters do it for a few years instead of sharpshooters after only 1-year of encouraging hunters with the OTC designation: increase hunter opportunity & put the meat to use?

Carl
 
I do agree that the Sandias would be perfect; however, I would hate to see the Barbary in western 34 move into the white sands area. Like I said before I'm bias and love bighorns. And making it a unlimited hunt would be perfect, but I still think it's okay to keep them from moving into the white sands at all costs!
 
>I agree. It seems to me
>that there has to be
>somewhere bighorn can be added
>without having to "exterminate" so
>many barbary.
>
>>Sometimes I wonder about the brains
>>in our game and fish
>>department...


The thing is that the Barbary carry many diseases that Bighorn Sheep are not immune to and if the Bighorns come in contact they almost certainly die every time. This is the reason why in the Desert Bighorn areas, barbary sheep are a shoot on sight animal.

Either way the Barbary should not be exterminated, the NMDGF is more concerned with making money, than creating solid management plans for elk, deer, or any of the other native species. If any extra money should be put into a species it should be deer. In the 1960s we had over 300,000 deer in the state and as of 2012 we only have between 80,000-90,000 and they are still on the decline.
 
The west portion of 34 already is OTC. Apparently us OTC hunters are not doing a good enough job of wiping them out. But unless G&F is serious about eliminating the lions too, it's just going to be big waste of our resources to put BHS on that range. Count me as another that would rather have the barbarys. And while were at it, let the oryx and ibex expand too...

And based on what I've observed of the local BHS, archery would still be a pretty darn easy hunt. Those things let you walk right up to them.
 
There are Barbary's on White Sands already (there has been for years). I remember reading some of the reports from the mountain lion study many years ago where they talked about killing Barbary's while trapping lions. I saw a couple Barbary's out by Mockingbird Gap about 20 years ago while coyote hunting. I also know a guy that killed one in the malpais. He had seen others while quail hunting. The plan is to kill the Barbary's out of the escarpment on the west side of the Sacramentos to reintroduce desert bighorns; it has nothing to do with the sheep on WSMR. I would rather have Barbary's that I can hunt OTC, than Bighorns that I will never draw a tag for.
 
I would be shocked if they reintroduced BH to the Sandias. Not a good idea. It's been tried already, and didn't work out too well. There's just too much human encroachment. Plus, the sheep tended to move down on to the Sandia Pueblo, where they were, ah, "harvested" by the locals.
 
Ltsheets,

Another example where sportsmen are reacting to the commissions and departments decisions, not the departments fault. no one is providing feedback so the commission can consider. That being said , the Problem even then is the majority never speaks up until its to late to make a difference.

Public comment on this was back in March and 10 people commented. Later the department had several town meetings here in Las Cruces around 20-25 people attended. Almost everyone there covered these points, but just not enough people to make a difference.

NMDGF recovery plan Online states initially they were going to introduce them to the San Andres Mountains on WSMR in 2011, however changed the location. In my opinion this transplant location was poorly selected for many reasons. Obviously it's great habitat, but other then that you would assume reinforcing the current populations would be more logical then a new introduction when considering so many unknowns. That's not even considering the lost hunting opportunity overall for the licenses of a few bighorn sheep licenses that won't be issued for 5 to 10 yrs or maybe never if the population doesn't sustain itself.

The department will do lion control without a doubt, but there are others that won't be controlled like EAGLES which do prey on lamb, cause they can't . You still have other predators like bobcats, they have been documented in killing yearling sheep.

You will always have Barbary competing for important escape habitat and resources. You also have the possibility of deer and sheep competition for winter ranges or range overlapping which can be a factor especially in these drought conditions.

In regards to the rumor, I seriously doubt the department will be culling barbs out of a helicopter. The department just wants to manage the barb population in that intoduction area so bighorns have a fighting chance. The biggest problem in disease transmission. You have barbs, livestock and not to mention domestic sheep and goat ranches 30 miles east of the Sac's. Rams will travel that in no time. The chances for scabies, pneumonia , blue tongue or any of the other million things they are susceptible too would seem this location not favorable. If the department wanted to cull barbs completely they would have to get commission approval and I haven't seen any proposals to cull barbs from the sacs other then attempting to reduce numbers by OTC hunting.
 
So why can't we put as much effort into some of our other animals as much as BHS? Is it really just the money?
 
They are doing the same thing where my FIL lives down in Texas to reintroduce BHS.

There are not many DBHS left, any efforts to add to their population and range is for the better of the species as a whole. To the comment about how easy they are to hunt, they receive very little hunting pressure making them not as wary as some other critters. Putting a non native in front of a native animal doesn't make any sense. Barbary were never native to the north american continent, and aren't even endangered in their own country. Cool animals no doubt and I can't wait to hunt them someday, but not at the expense of wild sheep.
 
I don't know if they're introducing DBHS or RMBHS. I would see the reasoning more if they wanted to introduce another population of DBHS, but if it's for rockies...I really disagree with that being a good enough reason to try and get rid of all those Barbs.
 
I just find it amazing that animals like wolves and big horns need sooo much help to stay alive.... I mean its one thing to help manage and conserve these animals. But when we have to provie so much I think maybe mother nature has its own way of determining what stays around... Survival of the fit.


That same token some of the animals in this state don't get a millionth of the effort it takes to support the wolf and big horns... Just sad.

Why don't we have "opportunity" hunts on big horns, as they do for mule deer? Why? We would wipe their asses out. So why should we do it to an indigenous animal as the muley?

We go from a large to over populated amount of cows to slaughtering the suckers... Can we not figure out a middle grown for all the animals?


Just not right, practical or any form of management! JMO
 
>They are doing the same thing
>where my FIL lives down
>in Texas to reintroduce BHS.
>
>
>There are not many DBHS left,
>any efforts to add to
>their population and range is
>for the better of the
>species as a whole. To
>the comment about how easy
>they are to hunt, they
>receive very little hunting pressure
>making them not as wary
>as some other critters. Putting
>a non native in front
>of a native animal doesn't
>make any sense. Barbary were
>never native to the north
>american continent, and aren't even
>endangered in their own country.
>Cool animals no doubt and
>I can't wait to hunt
>them someday, but not at
>the expense of wild sheep.
>


You really have no idea WTF you're talking about.
 
>>They are doing the same thing
>>where my FIL lives down
>>in Texas to reintroduce BHS.
>>
>>
>>There are not many DBHS left,
>>any efforts to add to
>>their population and range is
>>for the better of the
>>species as a whole. To
>>the comment about how easy
>>they are to hunt, they
>>receive very little hunting pressure
>>making them not as wary
>>as some other critters. Putting
>>a non native in front
>>of a native animal doesn't
>>make any sense. Barbary were
>>never native to the north
>>american continent, and aren't even
>>endangered in their own country.
>>Cool animals no doubt and
>>I can't wait to hunt
>>them someday, but not at
>>the expense of wild sheep.
>>
>
>
>You really have no idea WTF
>you're talking about.

Humor me then and tell me where I am wrong..
 

New Mexico Guides & Outfitters

H & A Outfitters

Private and public land hunts since 1992 for elk, mule deer, sheep, pronghorn, black Bear & lion hunts.

505 Outfitters

Public and private land big game hunts. Rifle, muzzleloader and archery hunts available. Free Draw Application Service!

Sierra Blanca Outfitters

Offering a wide array of hunt opportunities and putting clients in prime position to bag a trophy.

Urge 2 Hunt

Hunts in New Mexico on private ranches and remote public land in the top units. Elk vouchers available.

Mangas Outfitters

Landowner tags available! Hunt big bulls and bucks. Any season and multiple hunt units to choose from.

Back
Top Bottom