Article re: grizzly predation on elk calves in Yellowstone (and possible cause)

[Clovis]

Interesting article about increased grizzly predation on elk calves in Greater Yellowstone because of declining cutthroat numbers due to introduction of lake trout.
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencen...ies-lose-impor.html?ref=em#.UZP255rHQUQ.email

 

[tstowater]

I'm sorry that I am so skeptical, but I don't buy that B.S. Plain and simple, grizz likes them little elk and as grizz numbers have grown and decimated the moose, the grizz are more focused on the elk calves. Between the wolves and the bears, the elk and moose are in big trouble. Query whether this is the start of a cover-up to keep grizz from being delisted???

 

[Shrek]

The BS meter is off the scale on this story. I'm going with the bears ate all the cutthroat trout too. A couple of years ago I read a story about how the poor grizzly bears where all going to starve to death because some moth was in decline. Maybe it was the bears causing the moth decline not the other way around. I am starting to think that most wildlife biologist are quacks. Down here in florida it's manatees that aren't in the river I saw them in every morning for over ten years and panthers that don't exist outside of the everglades except for the one that was shot in Georgia and the two someone I know may have shot in his pig pen or the one I saw hunting in grady county Georgia. I believe the endangered species act has become a stalking horse for all kinds of political agendas.

 

[Ray]

I take it that the cuts spawn in the spring like bows, so the bears are in the area when calves are dropping?

Are(we're) there enough spawning cuts to draw a bear population in? That would be thousands of fish available to be eaten to sustain the bears and still spawn to create a viable cut population. Does the history of jelly stone bears support bears gathering in mass to feed on cuts, or was it just opportunistic behavior of a few bears?

Bears love veal and they always have.

But wait the model says its new behavior!

 

[Shrek]

Is that the round black modeling computer you shake and then look in the window and read what it says ?

 

[JP7]

It's some ground breaking research for sure (sarcasm). I'm glad they jacked up my tuition at UW to help find out such mind blowing facts. Grizzlies have always liked to eat elk calves in the spring. I wouldn't be surprised if it is a way of someone trying to keep the grizz from being delisted.

 

[123 4/8 P&Y]

The petards infiltrated the G&F departments a while back. I think WY is padding the elk harvest numbers to make the wolves appear less destructive.

 

[123 4/8 P&Y]

Is that the round black modeling computer you shake and then look in the window and read what it says ?

Yea then they crack it open and drink the blue juice inside.

 

[Shrek]

Or a pet project to kill every fish in Yellowstone lake and restock it with only native fish. I'm sure there is millions of taxpayer's dollars about to be flushed down the toilet to do something about those invasive lake trout.
So if it's the bears killing all the elk because of the lack of cutthroats then why are elk numbers plumeting where there are wolves but not fish dependent grizzly bears ? I'm betting the wolves and bears are just wiping out the elk and moose because thats what wolves and bears do and the trout have nothing to do with it. But that theory doesn't secure research grants like the lake trout ate the cutthroat trout so the bears had to eat the elk.

 

[JP7]

Daveinjax, that is very true. They love to waste tax payer dollars about 3 times as rapid as they come in. University of Wyoming has been involved in a few of these "ground breaking" research projects that tell us stuff we already no. Maybe they are pushing to get the wolves listed again

 

[Shrek]

So , when the elk and the moose and the deer all become endangered species and the wolves and the grizzly bears are still endangered what then ? Take truckloads of cattle out to the wilderness to feed the bears and wolves and pen up all the elk and deer and moose and start a rescue breeding program behind a high fence. I'm sure that we could spend billlions to manage the crisis.

 

[Mike7]

Ya, it would seem that this is an oversimplification at best, and lie at worst. All the studies that I have previously seen from SE Wash and Northern/Central Idaho (particularly those occuring in the absence of the politics that wolves bring into the equation), all showed two big factors that affect elk herds...and those are decreased calf survival and decreased cow survival. Of course bears have always affected calf survival, but wolves are newer to the game and affect both cows and calves. I don't think this article has anything to do with Grizzlie bears from a political standpoint, but instead my skeptical self believes that this is in part an attempt to find wolves blameless so that there is a greater push for safe non-hunting zones around national parks, which will allow wolves to roam freely amongst towns, farms, and any wintering areas that are adjacent to national parks and so considered part of that park ecosystem. How can wolves be blamed if they're just doing their thing, while those darn adaptable bears and humans just muck everything up?

In areas without Grizzlies or wolves, calf survival can still be below objectives at <30% survival (e.g. Southeastern WA), but in nearby areas with wolves it is much less than that (e.g. Northern, Idaho). In SE Wash Cow survival was found to be affected adversely by loss of feeding habitat through fire/logging suppression, but in Northern Idaho cow survival in some areas with logging still plummeted in the face of growing wolf numbers. Hmmm? I saw in one estimate that about 80% of calf mortality in SE Wash was from predators (i.e. black bears and lions). But there were two factors which ameliorated this mortality, and they were improved cover habitat and shooting of more bears and lions through hunting.

So my simple mind deduces that if one truly wants to increase game animals or prevent decline, then that person would need to first promote a combination of good feeding habitat and sheltering/escape habitat, which is appropriately distributed to avoid concentrations of prey animals; and second, one would need some predator control...of all predators if necessary. Wouldn't it seem logical that the same positive effects on calf survival rates would be seen with controls as needed on the ecosystem's dominant predators (grizzlies and wolves), just as was seen with lions & black bears in other areas? ...Or I guess the other option would be to just use tax payer dollars to raise fish & drop a few thousand trout out of a helicopter into the streamside meadow over the course of a few weeks and see how the elk calves fair?

 

[tstowater]

DIJ, I was rating your responses a few minutes ago. I still think the "round black modeling computer" is the best. Actually, any or all of the comments here could be accurate if we were able to get to the truth of the matter. No matter what the deal is, the elk and moose are suffering, period. Unless something is done, the comment about putting them in a pen to recover may be quite accurate. When I was hunting lions on the Henry's last year, the damage to the mule deer from the lions is quite apparent. When you start tallying the deer killed to support a lion or a coyote or a bear, the numbers become staggering. If the real agenda of the antis in the G&F departments is to remove hunting opportunites for us, it seems to be working.

 

[2ski]

I went to a presentation at REI a few months ago given by the Greater Yellowstone Coalition about lake trout in Yellowstone. First of all, the article states that lakers spawn a depths that grizzlies can't get to. Not true. In fact, they have a fishing tournament at Flathead Lake every fall and spring for almost two months. The spring tourney harvests the most fish as the fish come in shallow to spawn. I have been told that the most fun you could have fishing for lake trout is to stand on SHORE and cast for them when they are spawning. Brought up in that REI presentation was that on microchiped fish, they found that something like 20% of the fish where spawning in an area that was no more than an acre, if I remember correctly but a surprisingly small area, in no deeper than knee deep water. Now, this was off the shore of an island in the middle of the lake I doubt a bear could swim too, but there should be similar places they are spawning along the shores of the lake. They were using that information to net the fish and suck up the eggs with a glorified vacuum. While it takes money, I think that's a far cheaper method than could be used to lesson the lake trout impact in the lake.

As far as the bears eating spawning fish, I have seen many old pictures that have tons of people lined up on Fishing Bridge fishing for cuts, so I believe that the bears did depend on them for spring meals, but at the same time, the bear population has thrived the last 5-10 years. They aren't suffering and they're finding food elsewhere.

 

[2ski]

I should say, lake trout have been around in the lake for quite a number of years. Wolves have really taken hold the last decade or so. Grizzlies were on the uptick with lake trout in the lake and elk numbers high. Elk numbers have really plummeted in the last decade...what's the change here?

 

[Ray]

Hey what about that article in Nat Geo a few years ago that was blaming beavers for massive habitat change in the park, and thus causing elk issues? What does their model ball say about that?

 

[Shrek]

Shake shake shake....it is decidedly so

 

[tstowater]

My 14 year old son was telling me last night that one of his teacher claimed that there are only about 8 documented wolf-livestock kills. I would really like to know where the H**L that uninformed person (who is a teacher) got that B.S. Nice to know that these are the people teaching our kids that the grizz and wolves are cuddly creatures and are "misunderstood" Dave, your turn....

BTW, my son knows better, but most have no clue.

 

[Matt Cashell]

I will play Devil's Advocate a little bit:

Perhaps there is no pro-wolf/anti-hunter agenda to the study. Maybe their "modeling" is reliable and grizzlies are increasingly targeting elk calves. From the synopsis above it sounds like the authors of the study are saying that wolf predation AND increased grizzly predation are combining to add to the decline.

It certainly seems reasonable that lake trout are wiping out cutthroat numbers. We have seen that already at Flathead Lake in MT. It also makes sense that grizzlies wouldn't target spawning lake trout because regardless of how shallow the water is, Lake Trout typically spawn in the lake itself, and can't be "cornered" or ambushed as easily as they can in tributary streams like those the cutthroats spawn in.

We as hunters have our own agenda, and that is increased ungulate populations for increased human hunter opportunity. It seems this study could be usefull to us. It clearly points to a reduction in BOTH wolf and grizzly numbers as being beneficial to elk numbers.

Bring on that grizzly season!

 

[Jason Snyder]

I'm going to agree with Matt on this one. Not everything is a conspiracy, and in reading the article I think there are some very valid points brought up. We are talking about cutts in a feeder stream that may be five feet wide, versus lakers in a lake with no way of efficiently trapping them. How often do you see coastal griz out in the saltwater sloughs trying to catch fish? Or, do they take them when they are in the streams and more vulnerable.

I don't see it as a justification or a defense of wolves. Rather, I see it as posing some very valid questions. Other studies have already been done that show grizzlies are a very efficient predator of elk calves. Reference the Absoraka Elk Ecology Project that WY Game and Fish did in cooperation with the Park Service and Forest Service. There is some really interesting stuff in there.

On tributary cited in this study had over 5000 cutts in it, now it has 500. That certainly seems to me like a pretty drastic decrease in food source.

How can you say this is an effort to keep the grizzlies from being delisted? If anything, it just reinforces that maybe they are much more adaptable than previously thought, and this study undercuts previous claims that grizzlies will become endangered again because of potential losses in food sources (whitebark pine, moths, and now cutts).