Too many Elk?

[BuckSmasher]

Ryan Hatfield's editorial in the latest issue of "The Western Hunter" is, Seeking a Better Balance: Can Overwhelming Elk Recovery be too Much of a Good Thing?

His argument is that where forage is limited in the winter, and elk and deer compete, and the deer always lose. He also argues that the dramatic rise in elk populations in the past 50 years has had a significant impact on the corresponding drop in muley numbers.

He argues that to provide more opportunity we should manage for more deer and less elk. He states, " The fact is that we can put probably three times the deer on the mountain than we can elk."

I have an opinion on the subject as well as some questions. What do y'all think?

 

[Dunndm]

I could be wrong but it’s the problem they are having in certain parts of AZ. It’ll be a hunters opinion if they like hunting elk or Muleys more. Personally? I haven’t elk hunted so when I do go I’m sure I’ll like it more cause my chances are higher of harvesting an elk. But when I want to go muley hunting I probably won’t be as happy about it haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Buckshotaz]

I don't know about this, it looks good on paper when you say the number of mule deer are dropping because of too many elk, but you can't blame the deer decline in areas where there are no elk? We all have seen the number of mule deer declining over the last 30 years and have seen articles addressing this issue, some say it is because of development of habitat, but mule deer are declining where no development has happened and no elk are there.

 

[DenverCountryBoy]

I'm sure there is some overlap, but with elk being grazers and deer being browsers isn't most of their diet different, non-competing forage?

 

[Idaho_Potato]

Ryan Hatfield's editorial in the latest issue of "The Western Hunter" is, Seeking a Better Balance: Can Overwhelming Elk Recovery be too Much of a Good Thing?

His argument is that where forage is limited in the winter, and elk and deer compete, and the deer always lose. He also argues that the dramatic rise in elk populations in the past 50 years has had a significant impact on the corresponding drop in muley numbers.

He argues that to provide more opportunity we should manage for more deer and less elk. He states, " The fact is that we can put probably three times the deer on the mountain than we can elk."

I have an opinion on the subject as well as some questions. What do y'all think?

"He also argues that the dramatic rise in elk populations in the past 50 years has had a significant impact on the corresponding drop in muley numbers. "

I'm a statistician at my day job. Humans can't help but assign meaning to random variation and/or association. Does Round-Up cause cancer? Hell no - that horse has been beaten to death 10 times over with science. But that doesn't stop a jury of below-average intelligence Californians from proclaiming it's true.

Just because Ryan Hatfield argues that two random variables have a causal association doesn't mean it's true. Leave that to scientists.

 

[elkduds]

Loss of winter range to development is the most significant limiting factor on big game herd size and health. Every other stressor is greatly magnified on shrinking winter range: increased predation, increased competition for scarce food resources, increasing communicable illnesses such as CWD. Blaming elk for outcompeting deer on the remaining winter range is a smokescreen: the result of the problem, not the cause of the problem. Correlation does not equal causation.

 

[DenverCountryBoy]

"He also argues that the dramatic rise in elk populations in the past 50 years has had a significant impact on the corresponding drop in muley numbers. "

I'm a statistician at my day job. Humans can't help but assign meaning to random variation and/or association. Does Round-Up cause cancer? Hell no - that horse has been beaten to death 10 times over with science. But that doesn't stop a jury of below-average intelligence Californians from proclaiming it's true.

Just because Ryan Hatfield argues that two random variables have a causal association doesn't mean it's true. Leave that to scientists.

Everything is found to cause cancer in California. Maybe it is the pool of test subjects they are sampling.

 

[MichaelO]

Leopold argued many years ago that human intervention in favor of the ungulate species could negatively harm the delicate balance of the ecosystem.I would highly recommend taking the time to read “A Sand County Almanac” if one is even moderately interested the pursuit of game animals.

Cliff notes version:
It’s nice to have some states managing for “trophy” quality but it doesn’t do a damn bit of good if the correct number of animals are not removed from the unit to maintain the forage. If it’s too deep in a wilderness for man to do enough culling then that’s where wolves and other predators come into play as a ecosystem management tool.

 

[ilikeshootin]

Here is an interesting study worth reading.


https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/science-update-13.pdf

 

[Tenstrike]

Idaho_potato, read this, I think they're science based. Plus it explains both sides, Clinton and Trump both supported Monsanto, largely because Monsanto makes billions of dollars a year.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/does-roundup-cause-cancer#1

 

[Mike 338]

"He also argues that the dramatic rise in elk populations in the past 50 years has had a significant impact on the corresponding drop in muley numbers. "

I'm a statistician at my day job. Humans can't help but assign meaning to random variation and/or association. Does Round-Up cause cancer? Hell no - that horse has been beaten to death 10 times over with science. But that doesn't stop a jury of below-average intelligence Californians from proclaiming it's true.

Just because Ryan Hatfield argues that two random variables have a causal association doesn't mean it's true. Leave that to scientists.

Rotten meat gives rise to flies.

The old "I notice two things at the same time, ergo, cause and effect".

 

[Mike 338]

I'm pretty sure the incredible mule deer decline is due largely to I-phone sales.

 

[Idaho_Potato]

I'm pretty sure the incredible mule deer decline is due largely to I-phone sales.

That or global warming. Or organic food sales. Or the decline in the vaccination rate. Pick your poison.

 

[WCS]

I grew up in Saskatchewan, and my uncle was one of the provincial biologists. As someone who was always interested in mule deer, he explained that our reduced mule deer herd was largely due to the abundance of cropland in Saskatchewan. He elaborated that mule deer in Saskatchewan favoured unbroken pasture land where native browse species were still present. Being in the biology world myself, there are a number of studies that have been done that show that other members of the deer family do not compete well with elk. They have perhaps the most adaptable rumen of the entire deer family. They will modify the dimensions of their rumen to a greater extent through the different seasons and being an intermediate ruminant are able to both browse and graze. In my study areas where I was studying moose diet and physiology, anytime a herd of elk moved in the moose in my area kept their distance.

 

[Idaho_Potato]

I grew up in Saskatchewan, and my uncle was one of the provincial biologists. As someone who was always interested in mule deer, he explained that our reduced mule deer herd was largely due to the abundance of cropland in Saskatchewan. He elaborated that mule deer in Saskatchewan favoured unbroken pasture land where native browse species were still present. Being in the biology world myself, there are a number of studies that have been done that show that other members of the deer family do not compete well with elk. They have perhaps the most adaptable rumen of the entire deer family. They will modify the dimensions of their rumen to a greater extent through the different seasons and being an intermediate ruminant are able to both browse and graze. In my study areas where I was studying moose diet and physiology, anytime a herd of elk moved in the moose in my area kept their distance.

I really hope they can figure out what's going on with the moose population in north Idaho. I hope it's not the wolves because that will just dump some gasoline on this dumpster fire of a wolf situation.

 

[ahlgringo]

Leopoldo argued many years ago that human intervention in favor of the ungulate species could negatively harm the delicate balance of the ecosystem.I would highly recommend taking the time to read “A Sand County Almanac” if one is even moderately interested the pursuit of game animals.

Cliff notes version:
It’s nice to have some states managing for “trophy” quality but it doesn’t do a damn bit of good if the correct number of animals are not removed from the unit to maintain the forage. If it’s too deep in a wilderness for man to do enough culling then that’s where wolves and other predators come into play as a ecosystem management tool.

Totally agree A Sand County Almanac is a great read- but the guys name is Aldo Leopold


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GreenOne]

This kind of thing has nothing to do with management of the animal. It has to do with value of the resource. It is like that all over the country whether it is elk or deer or fish. As much as we like to think game management isn’t political the head honcho is always chosen by the governor of the state.
Now predator management is a different ball game all together and that’s not what I am getting at in this post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WCS]

I really hope they can figure out what's going on with the moose population in north Idaho. I hope it's not the wolves because that will just dump some gasoline on this dumpster fire of a wolf situation.

While blaming wolves is probably the easy and expedient answer, I've learned that nothing with moose is that easy. The moose population in Saskatchewan and Alberta has now expanded into the farmland regions of the provinces, which having a growing moose population is not the norm for almost all of North America at the moment. Not enough room on this forum to type all of the factors that can contribute to a huge decline in a moose population.

 

[Phaseolus]

Sidenote: IARC lists roundup as a class 2 probable carcinogen. A quick look at class 2 probable carcinogens includes aloe vera, broccoli, and coffee amongst others nasty compounds. Tenstrikes link also claims Monsanto co-developed agent orange. Agent orange was first used by the British in Malaysia in 1948 and is a 50-50 mix of 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D, neither of which were developed by Monsanto. Just the facts.

 

[BuckSmasher]

"He also argues that the dramatic rise in elk populations in the past 50 years has had a significant impact on the corresponding drop in muley numbers. "

I'm a statistician at my day job. Humans can't help but assign meaning to random variation and/or association. Does Round-Up cause cancer? Hell no - that horse has been beaten to death 10 times over with science. But that doesn't stop a jury of below-average intelligence Californians from proclaiming it's true.

Just because Ryan Hatfield argues that two random variables have a causal association doesn't mean it's true. Leave that to scientists.

This is my question/observation. Anecdotal evidence isn't science.

Also, I disagree with his premise. I like most of his stuff, so this is no knock against him. I have a different opinion, I would rather maximize elk on the landscape. They are bigger, tastier, and more fun to hunt. If deer opportunity is what you are shooting for there are probably as many Whitetails in North America as there ever have been. Here in Texas, where I live, you can come hunt wild hogs 24/7 365 without a bag limit, no restrictions on legal means. Plenty of 'opportunity' in the US to get out and hunt a big game animal. No reason to cut back elk to favor mule deer populations IMO if your goal is to increase hunter opportunity. I don't want opportunity to hunt "A" big game animal I want opportunity to hunt elk. If all I cared about was hunting deer I wouldn't leave Texas.