.gif){kind=small}
Fauna Series No. 2
Part II
Fauna of the National Parks
of the United States
PART II
REPORT UPON WINTER RANGE OF THE
NORTHERN YELLOWSTONE ELK HERD AND
A SUGGESTED PROGRAM FOR ITS RESTORATION
Submitted to the Director of the National Park Service, February 28, 1934
It is felt that the following pictures portray the precarious status of the Yellowstone elk winter range far more adequately and briefly than would a written description of these conditions. Therefore no written account of the range is submitted in this report.
It may be said, however, that the recent acquisition of some 7,000 acres of additional winter range near Gardiner will not alleviate materially the present situation because much of that territory comes to the park in an already overgrazed condition. It has been the sustenance of domestic stock for many years prior to its acquisition by the park.
NEXT> Photo Collection
The range condition portrayed in these pictures is not a merely transient one nor is it of purely recent occurrence. The pictures have been secured in Yellowstone National Park by members of the Wildlife Division over a period of 4 years. The range was in deplorable condition when we first saw it, and its deterioration has been progressing steadily since then. It is noticeably worse now than it was in 1929.
Something must be done to establish a safe relationship between the number of elk and the available forage before another winter is encountered and further damage done. In considering a program to accomplish this purpose there are two particularly significant points to consider.
First, there is more certainty for the perpetuation of the elk herd if it is composed of 6,000 healthy animals on a good range than if it numbers 12,000 starving animals whose resistance to cold and disease is gone.
Second, a herd of elk reduced to the carrying capacity of the range. will mean that three other important game species of this park can be saved and a fourth reintroduced. These are Rocky Mountain bighorn, Rocky Mountain mule deer, American pronghorn, and plains white-tailed deer, respectively. Many others, including bison and beaver, will be greatly benefited.
All observers who have been studying this problem are agreed that the northern elk herd is hovering on the brink of disaster. The first hard winter will bring hideous starvation and wastage. The longer the hard winter is deferred, the greater will be the catastrophe. Mild winters mean that less forage is produced, that the elk utilize it to greater extent, and that larger calf crops are produced.
There is little justification for our depriving the elk of their winter range, concentrating them for three-fourths of the year on what would normally be their spring and fall range, and then permitting the herd to increase until that range is exhausted, with starvation inevitable in the end. It would be an inhuman thing to do in the face of our knowledge of the incontrovertible facts.
There are but two approaches to a solution of this problem.
One is to acquire more winter range. Every effort should be made to do this as soon as possible. The only ultimate solution of this problem is to provide adequate and suitable winter range. But even this will not bring immediate relief, because most of the territory which might come into the park as winter range is already overgrazed. It would take several years of reduced grazing pressure to restore the land to its normal productivity.
The other method is to reduce the size of the herd. It is the only way which will be immediately applicable and effective to save the range, the elk, and the other animals.
Therefore, it is proposed that a plan to reduce the northern elk herd be adopted now, so that all will be in readiness to act this coming winter.
It is suggested that 3,000 elk be taken, each winter, until the herd can be supported by the range. Of course, the number could be modified after the first year either to decrease or increase the number removed according to the results that were being obtained. At the rate indicated here, it would take 3 or 4 years or more to bring the herd to proper proportions, since there is an estimated yearly increase at present in the neighborhood of 2,000.
There are two ways to accomplish this, and they are discussed here in the order of attention which they should receive:
1. Increase hunting adjacent to the park with the objective of disposing by this means of as large a proportion as possible of the number set for reduction each year.
2. Slaughter and distribute to the Indians the balance between what the hunters take and the total number it is desired to weed out.
Montana is aware that the National Park Service is favorable to a larger kill. The plan is to secure an understanding with the State that the season will be closed when the kill reaches the desired total. This now is possible. But there are obstacles. The legislature there will not meet again to make any changes in the game laws effective before 1936. It then should be possible to increase the take by raising the bag limit, lengthening the season, further developing the system of open and closed periods so as to encourage the elk to come out of the park, advertising of the hunting, etc.
However, even this will not accomplish the results desired. In mild winters the elk simply do not come out in sufficient numbers.
Until the problem is solved permanently, Yellowstone must be prepared each season to slaughter elk as it does buffalo. Preparation, of course, would have to be made in advance and the work undertaken before the season becomes so advanced that the animals are too poor to be fit for consumption. January would be the month.
There is nothing in this proposed program that is not feasible. Its essence is (1) to decide each fall how many elk should be taken from the herd, (2) to notify the game commission of Montana so it may plan to get as many of this number as possible for the hunters, (3) to perfect the plan for killing and distributing as many elk as are left in the year's allotment when the hunters are through.
In closing this report, these things should be emphasized:
1. Yellowstone is our greatest big game refuge.
2. The most important game herds in that park depend upon the narrow strip of land between the Yellowstone Plateau and the north boundary of the park.
3. The prolonged abuse of this strip of land by the elk is the one great danger to the existence of the elk themselves and the other species as well.
4. This danger can be averted at present only by reducing the elk to about half their present number.
5. This cannot be accomplished unless hunting is supplemented by regulation of numbers within the park.
Top
Last Modified: Tues, Feb 1 2000 07:08:48 pm PDT
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/fauna2/fauna3b1.htm
.gif){kind=small}