WingNews logo WingNews
top | item 41729252

US man jailed for cloning giant sheep for trophy hunting

36 points| ucha | 1 year ago |bbc.com

30 comments

order

kenmacd|1 year ago

I read the article, but I'm still not sure what part was illegal, and why. It says that part of the law is 'prevent the creation of hybrids', and the sentence was to 'deter anyone else from trying to "change the genetic makeup of the creatures"'... but isn't that way every animal breeder does?

I get the importation of body parts of endangered animals being illegal. If it's just a sentence for that then I get it. But then why is it written that he was jailed for cloning the sheep.

pavel_lishin|1 year ago

> Arthur “Jack” Schubarth, 81, illegally imported body parts of Marco Polo argali sheep

> The sheep, native to the mountains of the Pamir region of Central Asia, are protected by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites).

> They are prohibited in Montana to protect native sheep from disease - as well as to prevent the creation of hybrids.

It sounds like he broke two laws - one about importation of animal parts, and one for having a living animal that's prohibited in Montana.

> But then why is it written that he was jailed for cloning the sheep.

Because it's a catchy headline.

squidgedcricket|1 year ago

> “In pursuit of this scheme, Schubarth violated international law and the Lacey Act, both of which protect the viability and health of native populations of animals. ...

> The Lacey Act prohibits interstate trade in wildlife that has been taken, possessed, transported or sold in violation of federal or state law. The Lacey Act also prohibits the interstate sale of wildlife that has been falsely labeled. The Act is one of the most powerful tools the United States has to combat wildlife trafficking and prevent ecological invasion by injurious wildlife."

Laws aside, I think the largest potential harm is introducing a potentially invasive species that could harm local ecosystem.

sumo89|1 year ago

The saddest part is if you image search "Marco Polo argali" it's a wall of hunters posing with dead ones and right in the first paragraph on wikipedia is "Their conservation status is "near threatened" and efforts have been made to protect their numbers and keep them from being hunted"

kenmacd|1 year ago

It's an interesting question as to if what this man did was helpful or harmful to those conservation efforts.

It's at least possible that someone who would otherwise have hunted one just to have the 'wall art' might have hunted a hybrid instead. Also from a purely genetic standpoint it increased the number of copies of that genetic code.

givemeethekeys|1 year ago

He was congratulated for cloning, but punished for bringing in the animal illegally.

mbfg|1 year ago

To me the real infraction was the potential for causing disease in the native population. The rest, while morally dubious, doesn't feel like it's illegal.

astroid|1 year ago

He very clearly conspired to actively break the most serious wildlife protection law available, in a conspiracy that spanned over 10 years, in a position which he absolutely would have known he was breaking those laws.

He surreptitiously and illegally imported parts of an endangered animal breaking both domestic and international laws (again, knowingly).

All of this was done secretly, down to forging Veterinary Certificates and other documents meant to pass them off as 'legal, domestic' breeds.

He then went on to purposefully create hybrids that he knew were illegal and invasive in his state, he knew was violating the highest wildlife law in the land (who have more authority than pretty much any police department or agency) --- all of this, with the sole purpose of growing large unique hybrids to sell to game preserves which are closed (no chance of escape) for big game trophey hunters.

I couldn't write a better villain backstory if I tried. This guy deserves to have the book thrown at him, along with everyone he conspired with.

Did you even read the article? Or are you just reading the comments? All of this is so abundantly clear I find it impossible anyone could read it and say 'that doesn't FEEL illegal, just morally dubious'.

He for sure KNEW it was illegal given his industry, forgeries, and other attempts to conceal his actions.

worthless-trash|1 year ago

I'm even confused about hunting sheep. Modern domestic sheep are not much of a challenge.

rtkwe|1 year ago

These are wild sheep not the domesticated sheep check out the picture at the beginning of the article. The difficulty is in finding them most of the time and getting close enough to shoot them ethically. A failed hunt is basically a long back country hiking vacation, a successful one isn't much different it just includes a shoot, some basic butchery, and a hike back out with even more weight.

15155|1 year ago

A domestic sheep isn't a challenge because they are located in places conducive to domestication.

A wild bighorn sheep lives remotely and is highly skittish.

autoexec|1 year ago

Very few animals are any kind of challenge against modern firearms.

high_na_euv|1 year ago

>District Court Judge Brian Morris said he struggled to come up with a sentence, but had to deter anyone else from trying to "change the genetic makeup of the creatures" on the planet.

Whatever the judge is feeling today, huh?

alex7734|1 year ago

I don't know what you did wrong, but don't worry, I can be very creative

nozzlegear|1 year ago

If someone breaks the law, but the judge can't find fitting a sentence, is it justice for them to not be sentenced at all? Change the crime to something like robbery, extortion, murder, etc.

(This is just a rhetorical question.)

olddustytrail|1 year ago

That's literally the opposite of what the judge said. How did you translate "I struggled to find the correct solution" to "I just went with whatever"?

pavel_lishin|1 year ago

My experience with jury duty this week has reinforced the fact that judges are humans, just like the rest of us, for better or for worse.