Mountain Goat and Sheep Areas Disease Buffer

Home , Mountain goat

Mountain Goat (Oreamnos americanus) and Sheep (Ovis canadensis) Areas Disease Buffer Science support document Government of Alberta wildlife sensitivity feature layer

Background Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) and Mountain Goats (Oreamnos americanus) are some of the rarest hoofed mammals on the North American continent. These wild sheep and goat are an iconic symbol of Alberta, and bighorn sheep have special status as the designated provincial mammal. Both species are highly valued by Indigenous Peoples, Albertans and non-residents for hunting and wildlife viewing. Bighorn sheep in Alberta also are important as a source of disease-free transplant animals to support the recovery of wild bighorn herds throughout North America.

Bighorn sheep and mountain goats are habitat specialists and are limited to areas with suitable escape terrain and forage within the western Rocky Mountains. With unique survival needs and behavioural patterns, bighorn sheep and mountain goats are limited in their ability to adapt to habitat changes and respond to disease threats (Wiedmann and Sargeant 2014).

Disease risks are a significant concern for wildlife managers in maintaining healthy bighorn sheep and mountain goat populations. The most significant health risk to bighorn sheep in North America is occurrence of respiratory diseases (e.g. pneumonia). Mycoplasma ovipneumoniae (M. ovi) bacteria is associated with most pneumonia outbreaks in bighorns. Domestic sheep and domestic goats are known carriers of M. ovi. A large body of scientific evidence, as well as direct observations, show a higher likelihood of respiratory disease outbreak when bighorn sheep comingle with domestic sheep and goats (Besser et al. 2012, 2017; Cassirer et al. 2018; George et al. 2008; Manlove et al. 2019; Miller et al. 2011; Schommer et al. 2008; Wehausen et al. 2011). Most, but not all, pneumonia die-offs in wild sheep occurred after known or suspected contact with domestic sheep or goats. Large- scale bighorn sheep die-offs have followed a single encounter with an infected domestic sheep or goat (George et al. 2008; Besser et al. 2014).

Pneumonia die-offs of bighorn sheep herds have occurred in Alberta, with the most recent event in 2000 in south- western Alberta. Herds generally take at least 5-10 years to recover following a die-off because individual and herd health, and lamb survival, often remain poor long after the event is over.

Respiratory disease has been less well studied in mountain goats than bighorn sheep. M. ovi has been detected in mountain goats (Cotton 2018), and Garde et al. (2005) report that there are potentially a number of important pathogens of domesticSuperseded sheep and domestic goats that pose a real and significant disease risk for mountain goats. Given this, they strongly recommend implementing stratetgies to reduce risk of disease transmission.

There are no vaccines at this time to prevent respiratory diseases nor treatments to cure infected - bighorn sheep or mountain goats (Raghavan et al. 2017). Culling is presently the only effective control to prevent disease outbreaks from spreading. It may be necessary to cull entire bighorn sheep and mountan goat herds to prevent further risk of disease transmission.

Desired outcomes

These guidelines serve the primary purpose of:

1. Minimize or reduce adverse effects of land use activities on bighorn sheep and mountain goat population health.

2. Reduce or eliminate potential contact between wild and domestic sheep and goats.

Digital layers available A. Mountain Goat and Sheep Areas Disease Buffer

Methods The current Mountain Goat and Sheep Zone wildlife sensitivity feature layer, and bighorn sheep winter ranges in Jasper and Waterton National Parks, were buffered by 32 km.

Rationale Maintaining physical separation of bighorn sheep and mountain goats from domestic sheep and goats is critical to minimizing the risk of disease transmission and thus the potential for a dieoff of bighorn sheep (Schommer and Woolever 2001; WAWFA 2012; Howard 2013) and mountain goats (Garde et al. 2005).

Bighorn sheep of both sexes may undergo long distances exploratory movements (forays) outside their typical home ranges, as well as seasonal migrations or breeding movemernts (refs). Published studies have reported distances ranging from 20-70 km (Smith 1954, Festa-Bianchet 1986, Krausman and Shackleton 2000, DeCesare and Pletscher 2006, Dibb 2007). On rare occasions, male bighorn sheep have moved more than 90 km (Stelfox 1978). Mountain goats at Caw Ridge, AB emigrated 12-35 km (Smith et al. 1999).

Species specific conditions Master schedule of standards and conditions Conditions if within Mountain Goat and Sheep Areas Disease Buffer (and Mountain Goat and Sheep Zone) :

 Disposition Holder must not use domestic sheep or domestic goats for any purpose, including but not limited to vegetation management or weed control.

Condition applies to following disposition types:

 ALL (M) exceptSuperseded GRL and FGL

Relevant legislation/policy

The above conditions align with both the Wildlife Act (45(3)) and Forest Reserve Regulation (16(1)) which prevent a privately owned animal (including livestock) from threatening the health of wildlife. Privately owned animals that pose a threat, such as being or suspected of being diseased, are prohibited from the Forest Reserve and if present elsewhere, may be destroyed or captured.

Frequency of maintenance, reviews and updates Updates to this layer will be made as new scientific information becomes available. This Wildlife Sensitivity Layer will undergo a broader review and update every five years. It is vital to maintain this buffer distance be maintained to reduce the risk of disease transmission to bighorn sheep and mountain goats from domestic sheep and goats. Should an outbreak occur, the effects could be catastrophic for wild populations.

References

 Cotten, S. 2018. Respiratory Pathogen “Movi” Documented in Additional Species in Alaska is Also Implicated in Alaska Caribou Death – Alaska Department of Fish and Game Press Release (Accessed online 07/16/18 from: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=pressreleases.pr&release=2018_06_15)  DeCesare, N. J., and D. H. Pletscher. 2006. Movements, connectivity, and resource selection of Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Journal of Mammalogy 87:531–538.  Dibb, A.D. 2007. Spatial Analysis of Bighorn Sheep Movement in the Radium Hot Springs Area, British Columbia: Modelling and Management. MSc. Thesis. University of Calgary.  Festa-Bianchet, M. 1986. Site fidelity and seasonal range use by bighorn rams. Canadian Journal of Zoology 64:2126–2132.  Garde, E.; Kutz, S.; Schwantje, H.; Veitch, A.; Jenkins, E.; Elkin, B. 2005. Examining the risk of disease transmission between wild Dall’s sheep and mountain goats and introduced domestic sheep, goats and llamas in the Northwest Territories. The Northwest Territories Agricultural and Policy Framework and Environment and Natural Resources Government of the Northwest Territories, Canada. 139 p  Krausman, P.R. and D.M. Shackleton. 2000. Bighorn Sheep. Chapter 25 in Demarais, S. and P.R. Krausman, eds., Ecology and Management of Large Mammals in North America. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.  Smith, D.R. 1954. The Bighorn Sheep in Idaho: Its Status, Life History and Management. Wildlife Bulletin No. 1, State of Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, ID.  Smith, K.G., A. Gonzalez, S.D. Côté and M. Festa-Bianchet. 1999. Caw Ridge mountain goat study: progress report, October 1999. Unpublished Report. Alberta Environment, Natural Resources Service, Edson. 13 p.  Wiedmann, B.P. and G.A. Sargeant. 2014. Ecotypic variation in recruitment of reintroduced bighorn sheep: Implications for Supersededtranslocation Journal of Wildlife Management 78(3): 394-401.