Elk vs. Wolves

[Carnage2011]

Idaho Fish and Game data

1995 elk population : 112,333
2017 elk population : 116,800

1995 elk harvest : 22,400
2017 elk harvest : 22,751

1995 wolf reintroduction
2020 wolf population 1,500+

Deciding what information to provide others matters. Elk behavior has been affected, population in some units have been affected negatively, big picture looks good with some of the highest numbers of elk harvested in state history in recent years. 2020 elk population was estimated to be at 120,000 so the statewide elk population appears to be growing as well.

Idaho wolf populations remains stable between 2019 and 2020 despite higher mortality

The 2020 estimate was 1,556 wolves, 10 fewer than the 2019 estimate of 1,566. The estimates are made in August at a time of the year when the wolf population is near its annual maximum.

idfg.idaho.gov

I’m not very well versed in Idaho, but in MT we see similar statistics used and they aren’t exactly indicative of wolf impacts on elk.

Montana’s elk population is higher now than it was at wolf introduction, but that’s not apples to apples. Since then the elk numbers in regions 1,2, and part of 3 have dramatically decreased but units 4,5,6,and 7 have exploded. I’m not saying wolves are the only reason numbers have dropped in 1,2, and 3 (that’s a combo of wolves, bears, and liberal season dates) but wolves definitely have an impact. Region 1 has a shitload of predators and it’s elk/deer are struggling because of that.

I’m not sure what your experience is in MT, but for reference, regions1,2,3 are mostly public and 4,5,6,7 are more open country private land units typically.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

I’m not very well versed in Idaho, but in MT we see similar statistics used and they aren’t exactly indicative of wolf impacts on elk.

Yes, there is a heck of a lot more nuance than numbers would tell.

 

[silasd]

This thread has convinced me that state wildlife biologist keep a secret better than any other human. So I’m pretty convinced Bigfoot also exists. Just sayin.

Ya know, I've never seen you or Bigfoot, let alone in the same room... So how do we know you're not Bigfoot?

 

[SAJ-99]

Ya know, I've never seen you or Bigfoot, let alone in the same room... So how do we know you're not Bigfoot?

That is one of the more reasonable ideas on this thread.

 

[Hydrophilic]

I’m not very well versed in Idaho, but in MT we see similar statistics used and they aren’t exactly indicative of wolf impacts on elk.

Montana’s elk population is higher now than it was at wolf introduction, but that’s not apples to apples. Since then the elk numbers in regions 1,2, and part of 3 have dramatically decreased but units 4,5,6,and 7 have exploded. I’m not saying wolves are the only reason numbers have dropped in 1,2, and 3 (that’s a combo of wolves, bears, and liberal season dates) but wolves definitely have an impact. Region 1 has a shitload of predators and it’s elk/deer are struggling because of that.

I’m not sure what your experience is in MT, but for reference, regions1,2,3 are mostly public and 4,5,6,7 are more open country private land units typically.

Thank you for your response, Carnage.
I certainly do not think it's apples to apples. I can think of a couple Idaho units off the top of my head where the elk population has definitely been impacted, and I mentioned that in my earlier post. The point I am making is plenty of elk opportunity exists in a state with ~60% federal land, some of the highest statewide elk harvests in state history, a near all time high state elk population, and an established population of wolves for the last 25 years or so. I call that a big success from multiple perspectives. It's a good time to be an elk hunter, especially a hunter willing to break their rigid hunting routines and adjust to changing elk behavior.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Years ago when it was pushed into other states, I wonder if we all as hunters stood together saying no it would of mattered. Now years and states later it is "your turn" to have it done in your state. It is worse than you think it will be. The good old days are gone.

The Wyoming Farm Bureau tried to do this, and went to court. They got creamed. The Federal Government is the last stop for critters, & the Endangered Species Act is the overriding law of the land.

ID & MT knew this, and crafted solid plans. Wyoming threw a temper tantrum and stalled delisting for everyone until 2012, and themselves until 2017.

How you set up your program now is more important than litigating the past decisions that got you where you are.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Yes, there is a heck of a lot more nuance than numbers would tell.

I'd like to see a map of development from 1980 to 2021 in terms of exurban & rural sprawl. Loss of winter range is massive in some important areas of the state. Those "subdivision" elk were eating down there years before the 5 acre horse ghettos came along.

 

[Panda Bear]

To help explain your question about wolves and increasing elk numbers, you have to look at it from a different angle. Wolves didn’t cause elk populations to increase. Correlation is not causation...just because two things happened at the same time doesn’t mean one necessarily caused the other. (That is equally true for elk declines and wolves too BTW). There are many other variables at the same time that are also influencing elk populations. Habitat quality, weather, state elk management, land use patterns, conservation efforts are all working on that elk population at the same time the wolves are. If most of those variables are favorable, there’s no reason the population shouldn’t grow even with concurrent predation. Ungulates (and all prey species) did evolve with heavy predation pressure, after all.

Its an oversimplified explanation, but if you are seeing wolves actually having significant impacts on an elk population, I would argue that likely means something else is out of whack, and you’ve got a bigger problem than wolves. But wolves tend to be the scapegoat because it’s easy and people like to have a bad guy.

As I posted earlier on this thread, I agree with the above

AND, following the advice of Mr Martin, I will quit typing

G'day

 

[WapitiBob]

This Wolf ran a calf Elk past me and killed it about 100 yards away (2020 OR archery Elk season). Picked it out of a herd with several Bulls going nuts. Both the Elk and the Wolves were still there two days later. That's not to say wolves aren't a problem but we have no effective control for any big game predator.

 

[Hydrophilic]

I'd like to see a map of development from 1980 to 2021 in terms of exurban & rural sprawl. Loss of winter range is massive in some important areas of the state. Those "subdivision" elk were eating down there years before the 5 acre horse ghettos came along.

There are ways to do that, although I'm not sure you'd really want to see the results!

How to go 'back in time' in Google Earth using its historical imagery feature, and see locations many years in the past

You can use Google Earth's historical imagery tool to essentially go back in time, and see what different locations on Earth looked like years ago.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Panda Bear]

There are many ecological benefits to having intact predator/prey dynamics. Predation is an extremely important variable in wildlife ecology. As much as we (humans) like to claim that we have replaced large predators, we simply haven't come close. Predation helps regulate a lot of variables in the natural world and impacts game populations, positively and negatively, in ways that humans are incapable of. Are there consequences of having large predators on the landscape? Yes, absolutely, but if there are suitable habitat and locations capable of supporting wolves, then I am all for it.

I live and hunt in the epicenter of wolf and grizzly bear populations in Wyoming. I, personally, find a lot of value in knowing that there are still places in the world, some in my backyard, that are still relatively intact (biologically). Have wolves affected elk populations in my area? Yes, they behave differently. Has it affected their numbers? No, not particularly, I have no problem finding and killing elk. In fact, we can kill 3 elk a year here. I literally laugh in the face of people who tell me that wolves will, or have, killed all the elk.

I also realize, that this is largely my personal opinion, and that there are many others who do and don't share the same opinion of wolves. But, I do think there is some opportunity for some middle ground and that the extreme opinions on either side of the wolf debate shouldn't dictate the conversation.

To help explain your question about wolves and increasing elk numbers, you have to look at it from a different angle. Wolves didn’t cause elk populations to increase. Correlation is not causation...just because two things happened at the same time doesn’t mean one necessarily caused the other. (That is equally true for elk declines and wolves too BTW). There are many other variables at the same time that are also influencing elk populations. Habitat quality, weather, state elk management, land use patterns, conservation efforts are all working on that elk population at the same time the wolves are. If most of those variables are favorable, there’s no reason the population shouldn’t grow even with concurrent predation. Ungulates (and all prey species) did evolve with heavy predation pressure, after all.

Its an oversimplified explanation, but if you are seeing wolves actually having significant impacts on an elk population, I would argue that likely means something else is out of whack, and you’ve got a bigger problem than wolves. But wolves tend to be the scapegoat because it’s easy and people like to have a bad guy.

Several have asked me about Elk in the far North, but Mr. Martin, ask Mr Lamb and I to quit typing So with apologizes to Mr Martin, and as previously mentioned, the above posts best represent my feelings in regards to, "Wolves"-"Wolfs vs Elk"-"How Elk respond to Wolfs"

Let me give you a reverse scenario and at the same time attempt to further my argument that our Government either has no idea what they are doing and/or make their decisions based only on satisfying the largest number of voters.

In the 1950's approx. 50 Elk were "introduced" into The Yukon Territory, for the express purpose of " providing new hunting opportunities for local hunters so as to help increase numbers of Caribou and Moose numbers" The herd did not grow and therefore instead of abandoning the project they brought in another 120 Elk in the 1980's. 60 years after Elk were introduced the herd has grown from the 170 animals that were brought in to a whopping 250.

The 250 Elk in the far North seem to prefer the fields where the farmers grow their crops, but the farmers, "IF" they are lucky can get a permit to harvest one per year. So the Government has ask the farmers to report losses and the Govt gives them some compensation for crop losses. However if the Elk persist in living in a farmers fields, the farmer will not be allowed to shoot more than one a year. Instead they will hire hunters to come to the farm to shoot them.

You dislike wolf introduction. We dislike Elk introduction. But our Governments know best.

 

[Mallardsx2]

The scenario I predict is as follows:

The Elk will have to choose.

What is more dangerous, people on the public land or wolves on the private land where they have found refuge from the hoards of hunters for so many years.

I suspect those herds that you drive by and look at on private land "always wishing you could hunt there" wont be acting like that for much longer. The wolves dont recognize private boundaries and will likely run them down in the open. Which will force their "refuge staging areas" and effect their travel patterns and behavior greatly..


My prediction:

I predict a lot of the elk will choose refuge off of those private land fields and move back onto the public in the timber. Which, for a while, may actually make the hunting better. That is, until the wolf population booms and they continue to kill more and more elk.

However, long term effects will be the elk population crashing from Wolves and Hunters combined efforts to kill them.

Either way, when you add wolves into the equation things get complicated for the people who hunt elk.

You guys who like to shoot cows for meat better hunt cows while you can because cow tags in 15 years will be a thing of the past. They will have to eliminate the cow tags to keep the populations at "objective levels".

Personally, I hope ALL the wolf packs get hit by cars trying to cross roads in Colorado....however unlikely that may be...

Wolves will likely switch gears from difficult prey and just eat a ton of the mountain maggots that the GOVT continues to allow grazing the tops of the mountains off every summer....leaving nothing for the elk and deer but mountain maggot turds....Once those are gone they will turn to the elk hard core. Apex predators will kill the low hanging fruit first. Almost always.

Wolves kill 120 sheep at ranch near Dillon

HELENA - While the debate about how many wolves are enough to ensure a healthy population will again come to a head in a federal courtroom Monday, a Dillon-area ranch

missoulian.com

USDA confirms 13 sheep killed by pack of wolves in Wood Co.

Waking up in the morning only to discover that the majority of your livestock was killed overnight is a farmer's worst nightmare. Unfortunately, that was the harsh reality for a farmer in Wood County on Monday.

www.wsaw.com

 

[Ben Lamb]

@Panda Bear,

Keep typing. Your perspective is unique, and I find tremendous value in it.

 

[BuzzH]

I’m not very well versed in Idaho, but in MT we see similar statistics used and they aren’t exactly indicative of wolf impacts on elk.

Montana’s elk population is higher now than it was at wolf introduction, but that’s not apples to apples. Since then the elk numbers in regions 1,2, and part of 3 have dramatically decreased but units 4,5,6,and 7 have exploded. I’m not saying wolves are the only reason numbers have dropped in 1,2, and 3 (that’s a combo of wolves, bears, and liberal season dates) but wolves definitely have an impact. Region 1 has a shitload of predators and it’s elk/deer are struggling because of that.

I’m not sure what your experience is in MT, but for reference, regions1,2,3 are mostly public and 4,5,6,7 are more open country private land units typically.

Why leave out lions...they have more impact than bears and wolves.

 

[Carnage2011]

Why leave out lions...they have more impact than bears and wolves.

Mainly because it didn’t cross my mind. No reason other than that.

 

[BuzzH]

Mainly because it didn’t cross my mind. No reason other than that.

Just checking since the ID and MT lion predation studies on elk seem to always get "lost" in wolf discussions.

 

[Carnage2011]

Just checking since the ID and MT lion predation studies on elk seem to always get "lost" in wolf discussions.

I figured that’s what you were getting at.

 

[Hydrophilic]

Why leave out lions...they have more impact than bears and wolves.

Predators are a true impact but the amount of attention and anxiety they receive on a broad scale is amusing considering other impacts.

I don’t see regular threads titled “mule deer vs invasive weeds” for example. To date, I have not talked to a game biologist who is aware of successful large scale grassland restorations. These invasives such as cheatgrass and medusahead, which mule deer cannot utilize, are spreading at thousands of acres per day on federal lands, in some areas up to 15% a year, displacing native forage. Full blown deer killers. Is that not more terrifying than predators?

Managing the Spread of Invasive Weeds : USDA ARS

 

[Ben Lamb]

Predators are a true impact but the amount of attention and anxiety they receive on a broad scale is amusing considering other impacts.

I don’t see regular threads titled “mule deer vs invasive weeds” for example. To date, I have not talked to a game biologist who is aware of successful large scale grassland restorations. These invasives such as cheatgrass and medusahead, which mule deer cannot utilize, are spreading at thousands of acres per day, in some areas up to 15% a year, displacing native forage. Full blown deer killers. Is that not more terrifying than predators?

Managing the Spread of Invasive Weeds : USDA ARS

A-freaking-men.

The loss of habitat to non-native invasive grasses is the biggest threat to ungulates we face today across massive expanses of public land, but yeah, let's get our drawers in a knot over a few wolves taking some elk.

Same guys who like to post about "saving some fawns" after shooting coyotes are the guys spreading seed from their dirty trucks.

 

[Sytes]

ADD an apex predator to the established list of predators and it will alter the ungulate landscape. Pretty simple.