In her , Sharon O’Toole makes wild-eyed accusations that the Biodiversity Conservation Alliance is opposed to the agriculture industry and against her sheep in particular.
But the facts are clear — BCA is simply protecting the viability of native bighorn sheep, suing the U.S. Forest Service for failing its legal mandates. Under the Medicine Bow Forest Plan, viable populations of native wildlife must be maintained throughout the Forest.
O’Toole makes our case against the Forest Service quite well, stating, “The issue is the evidence of disease transmission from domestic sheep to bighorns. Many experts agree that separation of wild and domestic sheep is the best solution.” This is the bottom line.
But then O’Toole goes too far, calls BCA staff liars, claiming BCA never tried to negotiate a solution. These are the facts:
On December 9, 2011, I met with her husband, rancher Pat O’Toole, during the lunch break of the Wyoming Statewide Domestic Sheep/Bighorn Sheep Interaction Working Group workshop. We discussed the possibility that he would sell his sheep grazing allotments or switch his cattle and sheep allotments. His answer was an unequivocal “no.”
Prior efforts to negotiate, including a lunch meeting between BCA Director Erik Molvar and Pat O’Toole at an earlier Working Group meeting, were also good faith attempts by BCA to work out a swap of sheep and cattle grazing allotments to let O’Toole keep grazing his sheep — safely separated from wild bighorns. But they also met with intransigence — at no point could we interest the O’Tooles in a win-win solution.
In 2012, BCA faced the statute of limitations — a deadline to file this lawsuit. Our only other choice would be to shrug our shoulders and write off the Encampment River bighorns, with disease contracted from domestic sheep as the likely cause. It is not BCA’s style to roll over and allow preventable extinction to occur.
Our lawsuit is based on points of law and scientific facts.
Domestic sheep carry Pasteurella pathogens and transmit them to wild bighorn sheep resulting in an often-fatal case of a pneumonia-like disease.
As was stated in our press release, “Bighorn sheep are incredibly vulnerable to diseases carried by domestic sheep, so much so that a single contact between an infected woollie and a wild bighorn could end up wiping out an entire herd. The Forest Service needs to manage its grazing program to keep them separated at all times.” These truths are at the heart of our lawsuit.
Ms. O’Toole further claims, “BCA’s lawsuit seeks to eliminate the validity of such natural resource working groups.”
BCA has attended Bighorn Sheep Working Group meetings for years. Attending workshops is a form of validation. In its Final Report, the Working Group identifies Bighorn Non-Emphasis Areas, where domestic sheep are the priority. The Encampment area was never one of these.
O’Toole also claimed, “…environmental groups use bighorn sheep as a tool in their crusade against grazing…” Asserting that BCA has a crusade against grazing is ridiculous — only in rare occasions do grazing impacts rise to the critical level where BCA takes action to correct the situation. Our main focus areas over the years have been logging, oil and gas drilling, and Endangered Species recovery.
Ms. O’Toole states, “The real agenda is using the bighorn to remove domestic sheep production from the West” accusing BCA of collaborating to destroy the sheep ranching industry in the state of Idaho. Idaho? Really? She is simply fabricating this claim.
Finally, Ms. O’Toole claims, BCA is part of a “litigation cottage industry,” asserting that the real reason we file lawsuits is to fund our organization.
O’Toole is parroting the wingnut conspiracy theories of anti-environmental extremists. Time for a reality check.
BCA has received an average of $1,000 per year from fee recovery from litigation, out of a quarter-million-dollar annual budget. That’s some “litigation cottage industry.” The cost of filing lawsuits is far greater than this. Litigation is an expense, not a source of income, for conservation nonprofits.
The truth is that BCA is using science and exercising its legal options to protect Wyoming’s struggling wild bighorn sheep. And when you win a lawsuit against a federal agency, you don’t get millions in damages. You get the agency to obey the law. Now that’s a cause worth fighting for.
This lawsuit isn’t a story about environmentalists against ranchers. There is plenty of room for domestic sheep and bighorns on public lands. This story is about finding solutions to protect native bighorn sheep. Now that there’s a lawsuit, perhaps the O’Tooles will be more motivated to seek solutions. We’d be happy to reach a settlement.
Duane Short is the Wild Species program director for Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, a nonprofit conservation group dedicated to protecting wildlife and wild places in Wyoming and surrounding states.
EDITOR’S NOTE: This is an online-only column and has not been edited.
