Bismarck Tribune - North Dakota News - Forest Service wants to cut junipers to help sheep habitat

Forest Service wants to cut junipers to help sheep habitat

May 22, 2007 - 07:48:21 CDT

By JAMES MacPHERSON
Associated Press Writer

In a state known as the least-forested in the nation, the U.S. Forest Service wants to fell hundreds of juniper trees in North Dakota's Badlands to improve the habitat for transplanted bighorn sheep.

Biologists believe bighorn sheep need clear areas to protect their young from lurking predators. Area ranchers say earlier efforts to thin junipers from the Badlands have been a waste of taxpayers' money, and they have refused access to their land, forcing state foresters to haul equipment farther.

"I don't believe in them cutting down trees and I'm not going to make it any easier for them to do it," said Medora rancher Harold Hugelen, who along with his rancher neighbors has denied access to a state tree-thinning project the past two years. "If they want to do it, they have got to work for it."

Hugelen does not believe in reintroducing bighorns in the Badlands. Biologists say the bighorns are native to the state, but were wiped out by 1905 because of over-hunting and disease.

"I don't think we should change habitat for wildlife - if they can't survive, they can't survive," Hugelen said. "The next thing they'll want to do is level the Badlands because the hills will be too steep for the sheep."

About 200 juniper trees on state school land near Medora were cleared the past two years to open up lambing grounds for bighorn sheep along the Little Missouri River, said Brett Wiedmann, a biologist with the state Game and Fish Department.

Forest Service biologist Jeff Ingalls said the federal agency wants to begin cutting several hundred junipers this summer from a 100-acre parcel in the Little Missouri Grasslands in western North Dakota, about 30 miles south of Watford City.

Dave Pieper, a Forest Service supervisor in Bismarck, said the federal tree-thinning project would cost between $3,000 and $10,000, "depending on if we burn it or treat it mechanically (with chain saws)."

The Forest Service is taking public comment on its proposal until June 14. Ingalls said he expects little opposition, since the federal agency owns all the land surrounding the site and will not face the opposition to access that the state encountered earlier.

"The whole area is just choked out with junipers," Wiedmann said.

North Dakota has about 300 bighorn sheep - mostly in the Badlands in the western part of the state. Wiedmann said the animals were reintroduced in North Dakota in 1956 and have rebounded in recent years, after the die-off of about 150 bighorns in 1998.

Bighorn lambs are vulnerable to coyotes and mountain lions that hide in trees, Wiedmann said.

"In the junipers, they can just sneak up on the lambs," he said. "All we are trying to do is get a little balance back to the Badlands, and at least give the bighorns a fighting chance."

North Dakota is not known for trees.

"North Dakota is, in fact, the least forested state in the nation," Pieper said. "Less than 1 percent of our land base is made up of forest."

But trees aren't always beneficial to wildlife, Wiedmann said.

"In North Dakota, we're so ingrained that trees are good and planting trees is good - and that trees equal wildlife habitat," Wiedmann said. "But there are a lot of misconceptions of the role trees have on habitat."

News > State

Printer friendly version Forest Service wants to cut junipers to help sheep habitat

Comments

flycaster wrote on May 29, 2007 2:27 PM:

" I didn't realize that we had so many ecologists/biologists in the Bismarck area. From my experience working with the public on environmental issues, many people have knee jerk reactions and do not understand the issues. Not because they are stupid, but because they don't work or weren't educated in that field. By the way, George Bush isn't responsible for a lack of trees in North Dakota grasslands. You have to blame God for that. But you can always pray for more trees. Or just move to Minnesota if praying doesn't work. "

T wrote on May 29, 2007 9:50 AM:

" Remember--when you go to a government office, they are so overstaffed--they don't have enough to do. (But think they do--they could not make a living in the private sector) So they dream up projects like this to create more paperwork, then get even more employees to dream up more ridiculous projects to spend our tax money on--so goes the deficit. "

To: Look for it... wrote on May 29, 2007 7:59 AM:

" You basically say we shouldn't have an opinion about government decisions? Or that we shouldn't be concerned about our public lands and its treatment? No doubt, there will always be other problems to debate, but this one is here and now and the deadline for public comment is on two weeks away. Short of taking direct action such as on-the-spot protesting, as citizens we have limited means of voicing our own thoughts on matters of public interest. Besides writing snail-mail and the telephone we now have on-line forums such as this one that can have a more direct effect on decisions made for us. Isn't that one of the ultimate goals of a democracy? "

Look for it. wrote on May 24, 2007 4:35 PM:

" Look for a worthwhile cause to fight for. I can think of a million things more important right now than some trees or sheep. Think about it. "

deer hunter wrote on May 23, 2007 3:09 PM:

" I don't know much about Bighorn Sheep, but I would sure think mule deer would benefit from a tree thinning (especially with a burn). Anyone who has driven by the burned area near the Logging Camp Ranch during the morning or evening would testify to the fact that the deer are lousy in the lush green vegetation that grows in those areas. Honestly, I wonder how noticeable a cutting would be in the grand scheme of things. I might be wrong, but I'd imagine those oil field roads weren't constructed around every patch of trees. "

rancher wrote on May 23, 2007 10:16 AM:

" sweeet, coyotes that hide in trees with puma, staying away from a wolf no doubt.Goats are so agile that they could hide in a tree also. "

marke wrote on May 22, 2007 7:32 PM:

" Next time a fire is rampaging the countryside DON'T ask for help! All you tree huggers need to let "mother nature" take your house! "

History wrote on May 22, 2007 6:57 PM:

" The funny part of this whole thing is that the sheep they are managing for are not even the species of big horns that were native to North Dakota. This is just icing on the cake when it comes to the money the state and federal government has spent trying to introduce a non-native species into this area. While the Junipers are becoming invasive in the badlands it is nothing a good natural fire will not take care of in time. As some one that has spent years watching the bighorns it is ridiculous to think that bighorn would even lamb in an area that is not exposed where they can watch for predators. Sounds to me like it is another scapegoat for the USFS to try something new with taxpayer money "

Marke wrote on May 22, 2007 6:24 PM:

" Next time a fire is rampaging the countryside DON'T ask for help! All you tree huggers need to let "mother nature" take your house! "

former Bismarck resident wrote on May 22, 2007 6:02 PM:

" You've got to be kidding me....an agency is actually clear-cutting woodland in North Dakota. This must be one of those Bush Administration Department of Interior ideas again.....given there isn't much of a free standing forest in Texas either.....he wouldn't be the wiser. I happen to know from painful personal experience that it takes 30+ years to grow a tree to its mature stage. The old adage is appropriate here, i.e. ............in some circles stupidity abounds and flourishes. How disgusting! "

Wow wrote on May 22, 2007 5:31 PM:

" For a state without many trees, these posters all sound like expert foresters. I guess it's their vast experience with timber that makes so many of these guys such great wildlife biologists and foresters. Could be the "coffee shop" mentality of fixing the world's problems in 15 minutes, too. Although, SID raises a good question. Though I can see the wisdom in the USFS doing what they are in the Badlands, why can't there be this sort of consistency across the nation with regard to thinning the timber- especially for the economy's and widlife's sake? "

It Does Make Sense wrote on May 22, 2007 5:25 PM:

" Fire is what used to keep juniper numbers in check. Its suppression is what brings ecological imbalance. To "vonnie"... It's great to have cedars, but not too many. Lewis and Clark ate like czars on the prairie; they practically starved when they hit the forested Rockies. It's a matter of sunlight's influence on the ecosystem, making grasslands second only to oceans for diversity. The predatorial advantage is but one issue (and a valid one!). The other is that an overabundance of cedars choke out native grasses and other plants. I'm for a thinning operation but I like "puzzled's" thinking. It sure would be great to find a market for felled cedars, then, I suggest, run a controlled burn through those areas. It may bring in some fire-respondent forage such as aspens, which are more beneficial to a variety of fauna than juniper. Also, the revenue from harvested cedars could fund future thinning or sheep programs. And to Beesh... you'd better consult your Bible; specifically, the Book of Genesis, chapter 1, verse 28 and chapter 2, verse 15. In the absence of a God-sent element such as fire, man has, and is called to, "socially engineer" (strange term to use with regard to nature) to subdue (Hebrew, "kabosh", or in the modern vernacular, "kibosh"), dress and keep our environs healthy. This is 40+ years of forest experience talking. Trust me. Thinning the cedars and running a fire through this area will benefit the target area- animals and plants alike. "

way2go wrote on May 22, 2007 5:13 PM:

" Why not just have the Air Force do a practice mission and hit the spot with pinpoint precision and state-of-the-art juniper-busting munitions? "

Tree Hugger wrote on May 22, 2007 4:57 PM:

" I encourage anyone who is concerned about this to contact Mr. Dave Pieper with the forest service at 701-250-4443. Let the forest service know that we care about our environment! Trees provide much needed oxygen and shelter for other animals. There is plenty of open land in North Dakota for the Bighorn Sheep to lamb. Nature shows that they will find it. We do not need to help them by cutting down precious trees. "

ND Resident wrote on May 22, 2007 4:52 PM:

" Well, I called the number, and ended up leaving my comment on an answering machine. I hope that will count as my vote against this nonsense. I urge everyone to do the same. It may not do any good, but it probably can't hurt, either. Probably the closest thing we have in ND to anything resembling old growth forest. What would Theodore Roosevelt say? I would bet he would be against it. And without TR, these gov't jobs wouldn't even exist. Isn't that ironic? "

Mouth from the South wrote on May 22, 2007 4:09 PM:

" Absolutely against this stupidity. Bighorn Sheep survived for years without our help in the lambing out process. If man leaves well enough alone, nature will soon balance this out. SAVE THE TREES. This is treeless North Dakota, for heaven's sakes. We spend thousands to plant trees and now some darn agency wants to louse even this up. Too many trees in good old ND? Now that is a new one. "

Beesh wrote on May 22, 2007 3:58 PM:

" It is not good to social engineer nature's balance. If you remove the junipers to eliminate a hiding place for preditors you risk the whole area to erosion. "

puzzled wrote on May 22, 2007 2:26 PM:

" How can they even consider BURNING as an option? If it's that much of a forest, there must be tons of valuable wood to be extracted. Juniper (commonly called 'cedar' locally) fence posts have been known to last for as long as there have been fences here in NoDak. Not to mention that bigger logs can be sawn into lumber that makes nice "cedar chests" and jewelry boxes, etc. Burn up thousands of dollars worth of (extremely rare) ND lumber just to maybe make room for the bighorn sheep's lambs? Think about that for a second. Start a ND forest fire to create a potential bighorn lambing area? I doubt seriously that any bighorn ewes are going to want to go lamb out in a burnt out juniper stand. There isn't anything about this project that makes one tiny bit of sense. "

ND Hunter wrote on May 22, 2007 1:38 PM:

" I am an avid hunter and would love to see Big Horn Sheep prosper in ND, but I cannot support cutting trees on state land for this project. Junipers are native to western ND and take years to mature. Would it not make more sense to raise the young lambs in a controled inviroment until they are able to defend themselve from preditors. Cutting trees is no guaranty of safty from preditors, and if this experiment does not work the trees are still gone. Common sense says no to this practice. "

vonnie wrote on May 22, 2007 12:27 PM:

" We need all the trees that we can possibly grow in north dakota. It takes years to grow a juniper, and how long to raise a sheep? Big horn sheep survived without our help for many years, and there were just as many predators then, if not more. "

Save Our Trees wrote on May 22, 2007 11:20 AM:

" Forest Service office in Bismarck phone is 701-250-4443. Mail comments to: U.S. Forest Service, Supervisor, 240 W. Century Ave, Bismarck. "

Reader wrote on May 22, 2007 10:13 AM:

" This is one of the most rediculous items to come from a Federal Agency. They note that public comments are beint taken until June 14, but expect no opposition. That is probably because there is no mention of this project or links as to how to comment on any Forest Service website from National to Regional to State. Seems like a good way to push through stupid ideas. "

pj wrote on May 22, 2007 9:03 AM:

" "Forest Service Management".....what is this???? an oxymoron???? Plain moronic! for cripes sake.....let nature take care of the dumb sheep if they can't make it, they can't make it. This is tax money spending at its most moronic! "

SID wrote on May 22, 2007 8:36 AM:

" So you are saying that trees are bad when it serves your agenda...But on the other hand trees are good if it serves your agenda...How many birds and other woodland creatures are going to be affected by your sticking your nose in mother natures doings...Lets face it if these lambs are going to get caught and eaten by coyotes and mountain lions isn't that part of nature.....seems like a lot of taxpayer money wasted on some stupid program again.....But then again you could always catch these lambs and put them on the many protected sandbars on the missouri river with the piping plovers...... "

Edward wrote on May 22, 2007 8:12 AM:

" What predators? Pre 1905 I assume bighorn sheep survived because the Sioux, Crow, and Cheyenne took their chainsaws out annuallly to cut the junipers. Gaood thing the biologists do this or North Dakota would be overrun with trees in a decade. "

Regular reader wrote on May 22, 2007 8:08 AM:

" Clear-cutting in North Dakota? That is insane! I would appreciate if anyone can provide a precise location of this "forest", since it's public property, I will cheerfully go take a look at it for myself. Otherwise, it sounds so ridiculous that I would have to be entirely opposed to the project. "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.