American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign
American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign
American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Table 8.1 (continued)<br />
Country/<br />
State<br />
Province<br />
and protection of the Janos-Hildago bison herd is an example of<br />
this rising conservation interest. <strong>Bison</strong> in this specific population are<br />
protected by endangered species status under federal law. All other<br />
bison in Mexico are privately owned and maintained on fenced<br />
private property.<br />
Animal<br />
Classification<br />
Wildlife Domestic<br />
Mexico Yes Yes<br />
Tribal<br />
and First<br />
Nations<br />
Yes Yes<br />
Over 93% of the bison in North America are privately owned and<br />
managed for commercial production (Chapter 7). <strong>Bison</strong> can be kept<br />
as domestic livestock in all of the U.S. These bison are privately<br />
owned and typically managed for meat production or breeding. In<br />
Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, where bison are regulated as<br />
livestock, individuals in the private sector may own bison. In British<br />
Columbia, bison may be produced commercially, but a game-<br />
farming license is required. Commercial herds owned by individuals,<br />
corporations, or NGOs are managed independently, subject to<br />
market forces, and regulations governing animal health and trade.<br />
In the Yukon and Northwest Territories, existing policy prevents the<br />
establishment of plains bison ranches or their introduction into the<br />
wild. There is no unified conservation effort or regulatory framework<br />
that encourages or facilitates conservation of commercial bison as<br />
wildlife at national, state or provincial levels. The “laundering” of wild<br />
animals through captive-breeding operations and farms has not been<br />
detected in Canada or the U.S<br />
Protected and/or<br />
Wildlife Status<br />
Appeared as<br />
extirpated in 1994;<br />
In 2002 red-list<br />
Janos bison<br />
were listed as<br />
endangered.<br />
Varies by tribe or<br />
First Nation; Most<br />
tribes with strong<br />
cultural histories<br />
protect bison for<br />
tribal use; The<br />
Intertribal <strong>Bison</strong><br />
Cooperative has 57<br />
member tribes that<br />
are actively pursuing<br />
bison management<br />
for cultural and<br />
commercial<br />
interests.<br />
Long Term<br />
Conservation<br />
Goal<br />
Not officially,<br />
however nongovernmental<br />
conservation is<br />
emerging and<br />
proposing a<br />
long-term vision<br />
for conservation<br />
preserves.<br />
Yes, depending<br />
upon tribal<br />
conservation<br />
programmes;<br />
Some tribes<br />
are developing<br />
advanced game<br />
codes and<br />
sophisticated<br />
species restoration<br />
and management<br />
plans.<br />
Key Statutes or<br />
Policies Affecting<br />
Conservation<br />
Secretaria de<br />
Desarrollo Social,<br />
1994-NOM-059-<br />
ECOL-1994.<br />
Secretaria de Medio<br />
Ambiente y Recursos<br />
Naturales-NOM-059-<br />
ECOL-2001.<br />
Varies but generally<br />
determined by Tribal<br />
Council and managed<br />
by Tribal Fish and<br />
Game Commissions;<br />
Intertribal <strong>Bison</strong><br />
Cooperative was<br />
formed to encourage<br />
the restoration of<br />
bison; Cultural<br />
consideration is<br />
primary driver for<br />
legal and policy<br />
considerations by<br />
each tribe.<br />
8.3.2 Disease status<br />
Proposals<br />
for<br />
Restoration<br />
Yes,<br />
Developing<br />
a National<br />
Recovery<br />
Plan.<br />
Major Legislative<br />
and/or Policy<br />
Obstacles<br />
Agriculture conflicts;<br />
Lack of suitable<br />
habitats: Small<br />
properties available;<br />
Economic and market<br />
obstacles; Lack of<br />
public interest: A<br />
developing wildlife<br />
conservation<br />
programme; Varied<br />
status of the<br />
Janos bison at the<br />
international border<br />
with New Mexico<br />
Early in the history of bison restoration, diseases were not considered<br />
very important and restoration efforts proceeded with limited concern<br />
for the transfer of pathogens. As a result of significant failures to<br />
guard against disease transfer and control during translocation, bison<br />
restoration projects today have to overcome some historic baggage.<br />
With the development of an extensive and aggressive domestic<br />
animal disease control programme in North America during the mid<br />
to late 1900s, the implications of diseases to wildlife restoration<br />
has increased (Friend 2006). Furthermore, with the successful<br />
restoration of many wildlife species, and the subsequent increase in<br />
their distribution, these same diseases are now very important to the<br />
wildlife community (Wobeser 1994). Finally, increased globalisation<br />
and the high mobility of society are increasing the likelihood of<br />
pathogen transfer across continents, thereby increasing the vigilance<br />
of disease control programmes (Friend 2006). As a result, efforts<br />
to conduct bison restoration will have to consider the significance<br />
of diseases in restoration projects. For a comprehensive review of<br />
diseases significant to bison conservation, the reader should refer<br />
to Chapter 5 of this document. Unfortunately, disease issues often<br />
trump conservation interests, especially when the conservation<br />
actions are likely to come in direct conflict with powerful agricultural<br />
industries. This will necessitate the careful selection of source<br />
<strong>American</strong> <strong>Bison</strong>: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010 73<br />
Yes<br />
Variability of<br />
tribal government<br />
structure and<br />
function; Agriculture<br />
conflicts; Variable<br />
wildlife conservation<br />
and management<br />
infrastructure.