Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com Jim's Eclectic World: April 2008


Welcome to
The
Magic of Yellowstone
A little bit of
Wonderland


Jim's Eclectic World

My Photo
Name:
Location: Bozeman, MT, United States

Hi, my name is Jim Macdonald, and I have an odd assortment of interests. In no particular order, I love Yellowstone, I am an anti-authoritarian activist and organizer, and I have a background in philosophy, having taught at the college level. My blog has a lot more links to my writing and my other Web sites. In Jim's Eclectic World, I try to give a holistic view of my many interests. Often, all three passions show themselves interweaving in the very same blog. Anyhow, I think it's a little different. But, that's me. I'm not so much out there, but taken together, I'm a little unusual.

(or other places to find my writings from the mundane to the supermundane)
  • The Magic of Yellowstone
  • A sample of Jim's writings
  • Buffalo Allies of Bozeman
  • June 2005
  • July 2005
  • August 2005
  • September 2005
  • October 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • July 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • March 2008
  • April 2008
  • May 2008
  • June 2008
  • August 2008
  • October 2008
  • December 2008
  • January 2009
  • February 2009
  • July 2009
  • September 2009
  • April 2010
  • May 2010
  • November 2011
  • February 2012
  • March 2012
  • October 2012
  • November 2012
  • March 2013
  • April 2013
  • May 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2015
  • September 2015
  • April 2017
  • Powered by Blogger

    Subscribe to
    Posts [Atom]

    FeedWind

    Monday, April 28, 2008

    A delightful trip into the park

    I had a need to go into Yellowstone on Saturday, and so I did - this time by myself. I'm not going to share much here except a fraction of the photos from Saturday. It's not even worthy of mention in the Yellowstone Newspaper, which according to my own standards, I only post stories when they express some unique point of view. These are just pictures that I took.

    If you are curious, however, I have still been writing. Check out this discussion on ethics that I've participated in over at Ralph Maughan's site.

    Click on the pictures, and they should get somewhat larger; I reduced them somewhat to save bandwidth.



    self-shot at the Lower Falls



    Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone



    Lower Falls



    Upper Falls



    Big ice at the Upper Falls



    Pearl Geyser at Norris Geyser Basin



    Ledge Geyser - check out that weird snow



    Blue Star Spring (near Old Faithful)



    Old Faithful



    Bison and calves in the Firehole geyser region

    Thursday, April 24, 2008

    Buffalo Allies of Bozeman is born; mission adopted

    I am very excited to be part of this effort. Last night, our new buffalo group had two exciting developments that will help us move forward - we came up with a name and adopted a mission statement! Check it out. For the short term, (the listserve name and address will change), sign up to keep involved by sending a blank email to bab-announce-subscribe@lists.riseup.net.

    ***

    At tonight’s meeting, local Bozeman activists, focusing on the Yellowstone buffalo situation have adopted a name and a mission.

    We are now the Buffalo Allies of Bozeman.

    Here is our mission adopted tonight.

    Buffalo Allies of Bozeman is a grassroots, consensus-based organization in the Bozeman, Montana area focused on:

    - stopping the slaughter and hazing of Yellowstone’s wild buffalo herds;

    - promoting the expansion of free-roaming buffalo outside of Yellowstone National Park;

    - conserving the natural habitat of the buffalo herds;

    - allying with and giving solidarity to groups working on related missions; and,

    - supporting a diversity of strategies and tactics to achieve the previous tenets of our mission.

    Sunday, April 20, 2008

    Why buffalo and why not the CUT deal? Against utilitarianism

    Anyone actively engaged in a cause will surely be asked at some point whether they might be doing something else better with their time? For me in particular, I have been asked why I was in the anti-war movement when there are people starving in the streets of Washington, DC, as one example. More recently, I have been asked why I have been involved with promoting the cause of the buffalo in and around Yellowstone when surely there are other things that are more seriously wrong in the world. This sentiment has been expressed to me in comments to one of my recent essays, and its sentiments are urged in the closing chapter of a popular Yellowstone fly fishing Web site.

    The question, then, is whether what we care about is as serious or as important as something else we might otherwise be doing?

    Along those same lines, in terms of the buffalo issue itself, we see success as a line we can make progress towards one step a time. Just last week, the Governor of Montana - Brian Schweitzer -and the Superintendent of Yellowstone National Park - Suzanne Lewis - alongside the Church Universal & Triumphant (CUT), as well as allied mainstream environmental groups (National Wildlife Federation, National Parks Conservation Association, Montana Wildlife Federation, and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition), announced a deal where in exchange for $2.8 million, CUT would sell their cattle and lease grazing rights to 25 (and in later years 100 buffalo) for part of the year to Yellowstone's buffalo population (which has been shrunk dramatically from 4,700 to less than 2,300 over the course of the winter). Those buffalo would be tested for brucellosis, fitted with vaginal transmitters, and then forced back into the park after a certain date. A spokesperson for the Greater Yellowstone Coalition has called this an imperfect but "good step."

    Is this a good step, or is there something else we might be doing? It's the same question. As an advocate for buffalo but a critic of the deal announced last week, how can I answer that I should be acting on behalf of Yellowstone buffalo but reject that we should be taking this route?

    This essay aims to answer both. The common thread that clarifies how we should look at this is a rejection of basing our ethical decisions on utilitarianism, or the belief that we should always "act for the greatest good for the greatest number."

    On the face of it, one cannot easily reject doing the greatest good for the greatest number. Doing good should be good, and the more good, the better. The problem, of course, is that it's a truism. What is good, what makes it great, and how can one know how to make the good better, for the greatest number of what? To reduce our decisions in life to this maxim tells us absolutely nothing about what we should be doing, how we could figure that out, or for whom we should be acting.

    Is the greatest good common sense? Do we know what the good entails? For the classical utilitarians like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, the greatest good was to be grasped by the happiness principle. By "happiness," Bentham and Mill took it to be the same as pleasure. Yet, we haven't really moved further. Pleasure is either so broad as to be meaningless or so specific that there's no way of knowing whether maximizing it is good.

    The problem with identifying our actions simply with the "greatest good for the greatest number" is that we can have no idea what that means except in specific contexts where good is defined. If we are playing baseball, the batter's greatest good is not making an out, for instance. Yet, life is not baseball. What is the rulebook or definition of "the good"? In the end, utilitarianism doesn't take us any further toward the basic ethical question. What is good, and what is it should I be doing? How will I know that what I do is good?

    A lot of people are very sure they have a sense of what is more or less serious, more or less good. We hear all the time that those who gave their life (or killed in war) for a greater cause have done something more noble than those who have received the supposed benefits of their action. We hear that great leaders - let's say Abraham Lincoln - who achieve great ends for a great number of people have lived better or more meaningful lives than those who simply live in a world provided as a consequence of those actions. We might get a whiff of Aristotle in the suggestion that that which is nearest the cause is greater than that which is merely a consequence of it. However, most won't resort to Aristotle; they will simply resort to what they take as common sense. For some, people mean more than animals. Americans mean more than Iraqis. The citizen means more than the foreigner. It used to be men meant more than women and whites meant more than blacks, and civilized meant more than uncivilized. The king meant more than his people. All of these things at some point or other were common sense notions of good. John Locke, for his part, would have argued that the property owner meant more than the property he owned, and so the slave owner meant more than the slave. And, let's be bold here, there are people who work on the buffalo who will argue that the wild animal means more than the domesticated animal - that is, the buffalo means more than the cow. However, others who support livestock interests will say just the opposite.

    In truth, very few people argue why their supposedly common sense notions of good mean what they do. They just will be quick to point fingers when they are sure that what you believe in is worth something less than something else. It is very easy to say that something is more serious; there will always be a group who will listen. It's not easy at all to justify it, and it adds nothing to promote a calculus of greatest good for the greatest number when no one can figure out what that means.

    So, what is the good? Can we figure out what a greatest good is? I know that there had better be some answer for it or else there is no room for any of us to stand in criticism of the choices of others. We could let the "Judge not lest ye be judged" stand as that. Yet, as actors in this world, we must pass a judgment of sorts, or we would be paralyzed into inaction, which is actually not even possible. Even those who do not seem to move inject an influence on the world by their very inactivity.

    One of the few things I have come to realize about ethics - but a profoundly important intuition - is that we must be consistent. Meaning of all kinds depends upon consistency. That is, we must not do things which are grounded in contradiction. The good, if it means anything at all, cannot be identical with the bad. While this limitation on acting seems a trifling thing that hardly limits action at all, in fact contradiction has been at the fore of so many actions.

    For instance, positing that one should act for the greatest good for the greatest number but failing to provide any meaning that would allow the maxim as serving as the basis for action is contradictory. It cannot be done because it is meaningless, and one cannot be called to do that which one cannot make sense.

    However, more seriously, insisting that there are greater and lesser types of beings is one of the contradictions on which human society has been based. It is one thing to say that most humans will in fact favor those of their own kind, which is simply an observation. It's another thing altogether to say that they should, and that society should be constructed by the different beings that humans tend to value. People tend to value their dogs and cats but not as much as their boys and girls, and so some say we should generalize that tendency and make a social and ethical hierarchy based on that. Yes, ranchers value their cows for the livelihood they bring to them, their family and their loved ones, but is that a reason for banishing buffalo behind the borders of Yellowstone National Park? Yes, wildlife lovers value free moving wildlife, but is that a reason to uproot people and their way of life? We do not know that the cow is more sacred than the buffalo or vice versa. We cannot pretend to construct values based on those we perceive to be greater than others. We do not have any idea what the greatest good for the greatest number is. We don't know who is greatest; we wouldn't know how to construct the world for them if we did.

    Yet, knowing that there is something contradictory in our social constructs, we know right off that this is not something we should be doing. It may not tell us exactly what we should be doing, but we do have very clearly knowledge of some of the injustice in the world.

    But, having knowledge of injustice does not tell us what injustice is more unjust. One contradiction is the same as any other, in terms of being contradictory. There are not "more blatant" contradictions. Anyone who says that does not understand what a contradiction is. And, while some contradictions may affect more of certain kinds of beings (like World War II killed at least 50 million people, or the Holocaust killed 6 million Jews, or the genocide of American Indians wiped at least 95% of indigenous Indians from the earth), identifying the quantity of a particular kind affected with the level of injustice stills falls prey to the trap of prejudicing one kind of being over another.

    As Martin Luther King Jr. once said in his "Letter from Birmingham City Jail," an "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." This is not simply a quaint statement; it's because logically, it follows. In logic, one contradiction implies the truth of every other. That is, one contradiction holding true destroys the very fabric of truth, and this can be described very easily in logic. In a world where any injustice is tolerated as permissible, all others follow.

    Yet, injustice is everywhere. Humans are finite. There is no way for them to be everywhere and fight everything. Every human will make choices about the injustices they will speak out against. So, while every injustice is connected, each being who can recognize injustice must necessarily choose particular injustices to combat. Our only guide are our emotions and experience, none of which are subject to judgment. We will roam as we are inclined to move. Where we are moved, where we recognize injustice, the good thing is to take action against it. Whatever that means, it means at the very least that we must be consistent and fight inconsistency.

    So, why the buffalo? Why is the buffalo a cause for justice, but the cause of the livestock owners who are protecting their investment not a cause for justice? If wild buffalo is not necessarily any better than the domesticated cow, why choose one over the other? First of all, no one should be taking action on those utilitarian terms. A better reason for standing for the buffalo is that there has never been a good reason to stop them from moving outside of Yellowstone National Park. The reason they have been denied their movement has been because the livestock industry has historically enforced the notion that the land is better used for agriculture than it is for allowing wild animals to move, especially those animals that directly compete for grazing lands. That is, our current situation does not arise from asserting the greater good of buffalo over public lands but from directly the opposite - the assumption that buffalo are a detriment to the greater good. That being contradictory, an affront on reason, an arrogant assertion of ownership over land for a particular purpose, standing for the buffalo is a direct rebellion against the mindset that put them caged into Yellowstone National Park in the first place. Their being stuck there was a product of injustice; their still being stuck there is a product of the very same injustice.

    I am drawn to the buffalo for no better reason than life has put them in my way in the Yellowstone that I adore. There's no good or bad in that; it's an emotive response. However, the defense of the buffalo is a defense against an arbitrary boundary, an assertion of a greater good where there isn't. What happens after those boundaries are down, what happens after the rationale disappears is anyone's guess, but the decimation on the basis of a contradiction will be gone.

    Likewise, when the environmental groups who have sold out the buffalo alongside the state and federal government promote this as a good step for the buffalo, we must be critical. On what basis is this a good step? It can only mean, if I am right, that this is a good step toward eradicating the unjust boundaries that have created this mess. However, it is not. Twenty-five buffalo will not have more land to roam because they will still be under the arbitrary control of the government, not allowed to stay, and not necessarily allowed to come back. The basic parameters of control remain; only the terms of the boundaries have changed. This only replaces one injustice with another, and so the grounds for fighting it have not changed one bit. It's not a greater good for some number; it's the same injustice faced by us all.

    The only way to justify the notion that this is a "good step" is to suggest that this moves the process along in such a way that it will make it more politically reasonable in the future for more buffalo habitat to be accepted. It is as if the buffalo must prove themselves here before they will be allowed. It's the sort of argument that black male suffrage advocates argued against woman suffrage advocates, who told the latter that it's the "black man"'s turn when voting rights were a hot issue after the Civil War. Of course, putting aside that it took women another 50 years to get voting rights, the argument is incoherent. There is nothing for buffalo to prove. They are the victims of an arbitrary assessment of value. And, the only way to call this a "good step" is to make the very same arbitrary assessment of value. It's another inconsistent claim to know what the greatest good is and what the steps are for getting there.

    We take steps, we make progress, we move forward, but we do so only when the terms are defined. Whether we are talking about ethics at large or the deal this past week with the buffalo in particular, we do not have a defined good with which we can make the proper measurements.

    Until someone can show why advocating for the buffalo is a contradiction, I will continue to do so. From looking at their behavior, we can call to mind a lot. They have values, they protect their loved ones, they have favored foods and favored lands. However, when has a buffalo ever constructed a social and an ethical system based on their movements? They act without pretense of a greatest good for a greatest number. They simply act, and we discern their values and preferences based on how they act. We, however, live in a society based on arbitrary values, and we act based on assumed notions of greater and lesser, which is backwards. Those values are contradictory, and that we know is wrong. The buffalo, among so many other beings, are caught in this injustice. For a lot of autobiographical reasons, I am drawn to this injustice, but I don't pretend that it is the most important thing we should be doing. All working on injustice are working on the same thing.

    So, to the extent we can, let's fight against injustice together. And, for those of us drawn to the buffalo, let's be fervent in taking action against what doesn't allow them to roam. That, among other things, means rejecting this deal and all those groups who are trying to make it happen.

    ***disclaimer: I'm now in a new buffalo advocacy group in Bozeman, Montana (as yet unnamed); this essay is my own and does not necessarily represent the views of the group.***

    Thursday, April 17, 2008

    1,436 to 2,300 Yellowstone buffalo left

    Today, the National Park Service and the state of Montana made some major announcements about the buffalo slaughter in Yellowstone National Park. One of the announcements that they made was that the slaughter for the season is over on both boundaries, though hazing operations will continue.

    In light of that, Buffalo Field Campaign (BFC) put out their weekly report, in which they said that the National Park Service has claimed that there are now only 1,436 buffalo alive. According to an email correspondence with BFC, they are now claiming that the number is 2,300 and that they miscalculated the number. So, the number of dead is not clear, but over half have died and perhaps more than two-thirds (down from 4,700). Winter in Yellowstone is not over; we expect a major storm this weekend. What will be the final census?

    For public information, I wanted to share the IBMP report regarding bison. Here is the pdf version of that report.

    ***

    YELLOWSTONE BISON POPULATION MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

    This report summarizes management activities associated with implementation of the Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Bison Management Plan for the State of Montana and Yellowstone National Park for the time period 1 September 2007 through 31 August 2008. The reporting period for this summary is 1 April through 15 April 2008.

    PARKWIDE DISTRIBUTION:

    In the interior some mixed groups, totaling ~230, moving around Hayden Valley, the Lakeshore and in Pelican Valley. There are approximately 540 bison in the Geyser Basins. There are approximately 58 bison out of the park, west of Hwy 191 and on Hwy 191 itself. There are approximately 88 bison between 191 and Cougar Meadows inside the park. On the Northern Range bison are primarily utilizing Blacktail and Hellroaring slope with limited, but increasing use of Little America. There are now roughly 170 bison on Blacktail Deer Plateau. There has been some movement east from Gardiner to Blacktail with 3 radio collared bison, but movement has continued to the North, including two radio collared bison from Swan Lake. There are approximately 350 bison in the Gardiner basin, including ~135 in the Eagle Creek area.

    HAZING OPERATIONS:

    Hazing operations that occur near the North and West Boundaries are primarily conducted and reported by the YNP Division of Resource Management and Visitor Protection and MT Department of Livestock, respectively.
    North Boundary Area: 15 hazing events were reported this period.

    * Once again hazing has occurred daily. Many of the hazing reports have not been filed yet because the officers in charge are working overtime every day with hazing and capture operations. The days that hazing occurred are still listed and information regarding those days will be included when information becomes available. Thank you for your patience and understanding.

    Every day from 1 April through 15 April: information regarding the hazing conducted on these days will be reported when available.

    West Boundary Area: 0 hazing events were reported this period.

    CAPTURE OPERATIONS:

    Capture operations that occur near the North and West Boundaries are primarily conducted and reported by the YNP Division of Resource Management and Visitor Protection and MT Department of Livestock, respectively.

    North Boundary Area: 281 bison were reported captured this reporting period

    Adding the numbers below comes to an estimated total of 1619 bison captured.

    Working backwards using numbers of bison shipped, held, sent to quarantine, etc. comes up with 1645 bison captured and is probably a more accurate estimate for total bison captured at Stephens Creek Capture Facility.

    8 Feb: 54 bison captured 18 March: 35 bison captured

    10 Feb: 42 bison captured 19 March: 4 bison captured

    11 Feb: 4 bison captured 21 March: 120 bison captured

    12 Feb: 44 bison captured 22 March: 95 bison captured

    15 Feb: 31 bison captured 25 March: 61 bison captured

    18 Feb: 100 bison captured 28 March: 35 bison captured

    20 Feb: 15 bison captured 29 March: 33 bison captured

    25 Feb: 190 bison captured 30 March: 23 bison captured

    26 Feb: 18 bison captured 1 April: 119 bison captured

    27 Feb: 19 bison captured 4 April: 40 bison captured

    28 Feb: 123 bison captured 9 April: 120 bison captured

    2 March: 12 bison captured 13 April: 2 bison captured

    6 March: 106 bison captured

    7 March: 87 bison captured

    8 March: 76 bison captured

    10 March: 11 bison captured

    *10 April: 15 bison escaped from the Stephen’s Creek Capture Facility during a sorting procedure due to improper gate closure/latch failure.

    West Boundary Area: 39 bison were reported captured this reporting period

    26 Feb: 30 bison captured

    4 March: 51 bison captured

    5 March: 13 bison captured

    11 March: 13 bison captured

    8 April: 34 bison captured (Horse Butte)

    9 April: 5 bison captured (Duck Ck)

    Bison Transported to Slaughter

    Boundary

    Bison to Slaughter this reporting period

    Total to Slaughter (Sept 1 – pres)

    West

    39

    146

    North

    263

    1276

    Total

    302

    1422

    Stephen’s Creek Stephen’s Creek cont. Horse Butte

    11 Feb: 37 shipped 25 March: 20 shipped 27 Feb: 30 shipped

    12 Feb: 30 shipped 26 March: 22 shipped 5 March: 38 shipped

    13 Feb: 16 shipped 27 March: 16 shipped 6 March: 26 shipped

    14 Feb: 44 shipped 28 March: 16 shipped 12 March: 13 shipped

    15 Feb: 17 shipped 31 March: 20 shipped 9 April: 17 shipped

    19 Feb: 31 shipped 1 April: 13 shipped 10 April: 22 shipped

    20 Feb: 55 shipped 2 April: 34 shipped

    21 Feb: 60 shipped 3 April: 20 shipped

    26 Feb: 48 shipped 4 April: 37 shipped

    27 Feb: 69 shipped 7 April: 15 shipped

    28 Feb: 68 shipped 8 April: 45 shipped

    3 March: 69 shipped 9 April: 40 shipped

    4 March: 14 shipped 11 April: 18 shipped

    5 March: 62 shipped 14 April: 21 shipped

    11 March: 59 shipped 15 April: 20 shipped

    13 March: 61 shipped

    14 March: 25 shipped

    17 March: 57 shipped

    18 March: 62 shipped

    20 March: 21 shipped

    21 March: 14 shipped

    Bison Transported to Quarantine:

    Boundary

    Bison to Quarantine this reporting period

    Total to Quarantine (Sept 1 – pres)

    West

    0

    0

    North

    38

    112

    19 March: 37 transported

    25 March: 14 transported

    26 March: 12 transported

    27 March: 11 transported

    1 April: 6 transported

    3 April: 15 transported

    7 April: 4 transported

    8 April: 9 transported

    14 April: 4 transported

    Capture Pen Mortalities:

    Boundary

    Capture Pen Mortality this reporting period

    Total Pen Mortality this operating season

    (Sept 1 – pres)

    West

    0

    0

    North

    4

    7

    13 April: 3 newborn calves died from natural causes (they were born on the 9th and 10th)

    14 April: 1 adult cow (mother to one of the calves listed above) died from natural causes

    Other Information:

    Newborn Calves held at Stephens Creek: 1

    Seropositive Pregnant Cows held at Stephens Creek: 18

    Radio Collared Cows not tested but held at Stephens Creek: 26

    Total Bison being held at Stephens Creek for spring release: 238

    INTERAGENCY BISON MANAGEMENT PLAN SHOOTING OPERATIONS:

    Boundary

    Bison Shot this reporting period

    Total Shot this operating season

    West

    0

    0

    North

    6

    6

    11 April: 5 bulls shot near Carbella fishing access, west of Yankee Jim Canyon

    11 April: 1 bull shot near milepost 5 on Hwy 89

    HUNTER HARVEST:

    The numbers are from reports by FWP wardens/biologists, hunters, NPS employees and BFC.

    Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Bison Hunt (Nov 15 – Feb 15)

    Boundary

    FWP Hunter Take this reporting period

    Total FWP Hunter Take this operating season (Nov 15 – pres)

    West

    0

    50

    North

    0

    13

    Total

    0

    63

    Native American Tribal Treaty Right Bison Hunts

    Boundary

    Nez Perce Hunter Take this reporting period

    Total Nez Perce Hunter Take this operating season

    (Jan 26 – Mar 3?)

    Confederated Salish and Kootenai Hunter Take this reporting period

    Total Confederated Salish and Kootenai Hunter Take this operating season (Nov 15 – Jan 31)

    West

    0

    19

    0

    38

    North

    0

    45

    0

    1

    Total

    0

    64

    0

    39


    2007

    West

    September

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2007

    North

    September

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2007

    West

    October

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2007

    North

    October

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2007

    West

    November

    1-14

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2007

    North

    November

    1-14

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2007

    West

    November 15-30

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    10

    2007

    North

    November 15-30

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    1

    2007

    West

    December 1-15

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    4

    2007

    North

    December 1-15

    1

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    4

    2007

    West

    December 16-31

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    14

    2007

    North

    December 16-31

    1

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    3

    2008

    West

    January

    1-15

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    26

    2008

    North

    January

    1-15

    1

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    1

    Table continued on next page.

    Year

    Boundary

    Month

    Hazing Events

    Mngmt Shootings

    Total Captured

    Captured &Tested

    Slaughtered & Not Tested

    Slaughtered & Tested Positive

    Slaughtered & Tested Negative

    Released/Held & Tested Negative

    Released & Not Tested

    Vaccinated

    Quarantine

    Capture/Pen Mortality

    Hunter Take

    Year

    Boundary

    Month

    Hazing Events

    Mngmt Shootings

    Total Captured

    Captured &Tested

    Slaughtered & Not Tested

    Slaughtered & Tested Positive

    Slaughtered & Tested Negative

    Released/Held & Tested Negative

    Released & Not Tested

    Vaccinated

    Quarantine

    Capture/Pen Mortality

    Hunter Take

    2008

    West

    January

    16-31

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    23

    2008

    North

    January

    16-31

    2

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    3

    2008

    West

    February

    1-13

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    16

    2008

    North

    February

    1-13

    7

    0

    144

    18

    82

    0

    1**

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    7

    2008

    West

    February

    14-29

    0

    0

    30

    0

    30

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    9

    2008

    North

    February

    14-29

    5

    0

    496

    0

    375

    0

    17**

    0

    0

    0

    0

    1`

    39^

    2008

    West

    March

    1-14

    0

    0

    77

    0

    77

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    5

    2008

    North

    March

    1-14

    13

    0

    292

    0

    290

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2***

    1

    2008

    West

    March

    15-31

    1

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2008

    North

    March

    15-31

    18

    0

    406

    201

    187

    61

    0

    66

    0

    0

    74

    0

    0

    2008

    West

    April

    1-15

    0

    0

    39

    0

    39

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    2008

    North

    April

    1-15

    15

    6

    281

    321

    126

    137

    0

    127

    0

    24

    38

    4*

    0

    Summary

    64

    6

    1765

    540

    1206

    198

    18

    193

    0

    24

    112

    7

    166

    ** Seronegative calves, 17 were held for several days pending transport to the Quarantine facility. Due to permit issues the study could not accept the calves and they were shipped to slaughter.

    ^ Includes 2 bison that were shot inside YNP on 2/29/08 by members of the Nez Perce Tribe. The bison carcasses were confiscated.

    ` Represents calf that suffered a broken leg due to a collision with a snowmobile on Swan Lake.

    ***Represents 1 cow bison that came into the capture pen with a broken leg or hip, cause unknown.

    *Includes 3 newborn calves that died 4 and 3 days after birth, and 1 of the mothers that died the day after from natural causes.