So what happened in the Frank and the Selway Buzz? Was it all the people, cats, and four-wheelers? Those places should be full of elk and deer with all the fires they have and or the last 15 years. What happened in North Idaho where it’s to brushy and steep to have four-wheelers or long shots with bow or rifle. Have you hunted in any of these places?
With all these tech advancements the bull elk harvest percentages should be way up in Idaho... but they are not.
Wolves are not a problem in all of Idaho forests, but people should start recognizing that in some areas they are a huge problem.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think that's a fair question and I'll give you some answers.
What many don't think about is WHAT caused elk numbers in the Selway and the Frank like what we experienced in the 1950's-perhaps the early 1980's. I would argue that elk were already on a pretty steep decline by the mid-80's in much of the Selway, Lochsa, North Idaho, and Western Montana.
So, about 8 million acres burned in 1910 and 1919, most all of the upper Lochsa, Selway and also North Idaho burned in those years (albeit most in 1910).
The way that forest succession works, is not immediate, it takes a number of years to reach potential and be aware that many acres when they regenerate are not that great for wildlife. Certainly some areas are spectacular. At any rate the elk in the burn area of 1910 that you're talking about enjoyed a couple things starting in the late 30's. Most people that would have tended to hunt in the late 30's-mid 1940's, were off hunting, but just not in the elk woods of North Idaho and Western Montana, both of my grandfathers included. Forest succession was hitting the "sweet spot" about that time and there wasn't much hunting pressure. A perfect storm to grow and build elk populations. Again, I would argue, elk populations that we aren't likely to see again, unless that perfect storm of conditions were to happen again. Not likely due to a bunch of factors.
So, IMO, what we experienced within the boundaries of the great burn area of Montana and Idaho, while completely natural, was pretty unique for the reasons I already mentioned. I believe it expressed itself as a once every 100+ year event. Pretty rare bird to essentially have 2 fires burn 8 million acres within a 9 year span.
As to whats going on in the Frank with the burns? Well, again, we don't live in the same world we did 100 years ago. For starters, most of the Frank has burned relatively recently, from a forest succession standpoint. Many of the burns, in particular the larger ones in the Frank, are 20 years old or even more recent. I believe we're 20-30 years away from the best available habitat conditions in the Frank for elk. Maybe longer due to changes in plant communities (think cheatgrass) and also, even though the flat earthers will deny it and scream BS, climate change. Plants and forest succession are my deal...what I do everyday. I see changes in plant community types, lack of regen in areas that were previously forested, that I wouldn't expect.
The other thing that is so different is the fact we aren't fighting a world war where hunting was certainly not any kind of priority. Elk are not enjoying any kind of unfettered population gains like they did then. We are still aggressively hunting them with better equipment, more leisure time, hunting remotely, than ever before...you and I and many others on this board are perfect examples of that. We're damn good at what we do and there really aren't many places that are too far away, too remote to reach. The new generation of elk hunters are just flat damn tough, way tougher than me and better equipped.
For those reasons, its unrealistic to expect the same outcome from the more recent fires in the Frank and the LACK of fire in large portions of Western Montana and North Idaho. You aren't comparing the same thing, not even close.
Of course, no denying that adding wolves to the equation, and the steep decline in mountain lion harvest (and also harvesting the WRONG lions), elk are getting whammied and their populations very well could remain flat or have very slow growth due to all those things I mentioned in this post and the previous one as well.
What wears me out is blaming one thing for the flat or very slowly increasing elk numbers...again, those blaming it solely on wolves are living in fantasyland. The science shows the same thing as per the OP.
