What? Wolves Help Preserve Yellowstone Streams

spm

Well-known member
Messages
4,214
Reaction score
1,184
Location
Mid-Missouri
Good article, Silver.
For the story of the wolf repatriation to Yellowstone; American Wolf by Nate Blakeslee.

Thanks,
steve
 

el jefe

Well-known member
Messages
5,207
Reaction score
5,900
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Wow, that's a bit of a stretch from reintroducing wolves to increased canopy cover in Yellowstone. There are oodles of factors that can affect stream canopy cover besides elk grazing on them, such as weather patterns, snowpack, etc., that would seem to have a much greater and direct impact on those kinds of things. That seemed like a wolf support article rather than a scientific treatise.

And how great is the control of the elk population by the wolves, anyway? Is it a 10% reduction in the herd? 20%? How many wolves are in Yellowstone? I didn't think it was too many, and that's a pretty big elk population for a handful of wolves to cause a decline in the elk population significant enough to be the proximal cause of increased canopy of the streamside willows.
 

Meadowlark

Well-known member
Messages
138
Reaction score
3
Location
East Texas
I didn't find any mention of river otters....wolves eat 'em...otters eat trout and tear up stream banks.
 

scoutm

Well-known member
Messages
1,052
Reaction score
41
Location
Tucson, AZ
I watch a documentary on the changes in the elk herd in YNP and the conclusion was wolves had very little impact on the number of Elk in the park. The study this particular documentary followed concluded that believe it or not it was the Lake Trout that had the greatest impact on the Elk herd.

The study showed that grizzly bears shifted their feeding away from fish to Elk calves. Due to the significant reduction in Cutthroats population brought on by the introduction of Lake trout. The article below discusses some of this.

Non-native Lake Trout Induce Cascading Changes in the Yellowstone Lake (U.S. National Park Service)
 

weiliwen

Well-known member
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
384
Location
Lincolnshire, Illinois
As I understood it, the main contribution of the wolves was not the reduction of the elk numbers, but keeping them on the move so they didn't have a chance to graze the riverine foliage to the ground. Those rivers tend to be out on the plains, and therefore easy for the elk to be seen and chased; as a result, they've been pushed into the hills or other less attractive areas.
 

rangerrich99

Well-known member
Messages
1,581
Reaction score
175
Location
Anthem, AZ
I first saw this story (or one very similar) about three or four years ago. Pretty sure National Geographic did a whole episode on it. Might be called, "Yellowstone."

Anyway, the gist was that the introduction of the wolves didn't have a huge impact on the numbers of elk, and bison, but it did move them off the riparian areas. To wit, they had video of pre-wolf elk/bison herds essentially settled in like herds of cattle right on the banks of the rivers, munching away in what looked like fields or pastures. Basically no trees/brush at all along the rivers. But a few years after the wolves were introduced, the same exact banks on the same rivers were unrecognizable. Essentially the banks were covered in trees and brush. It was pretty astonishing.

As a hunter and a fisherman, I remember the main thing I got out of it was that the wolves weren't having a huge impact on elk/bison numbers, as some feared they might.

Anyway, it's a really good show (the cinematography is spectacular, of course), if you get a chance you should watch it.

Also, if I ever get a chance to go back to Yellowstone, I think it's pretty awe-inspiring to think that I might get a chance to hear and see wolves in their natural habitat, something that wasn't possible when I was there as a kid.

Peace.
 

gutterpunk

Well-known member
Messages
331
Reaction score
16
I'm a little confused as to why this is coming up now because these conclusions were made a long time ago and is accepted science. I thought htere was just some updates on existing research.

But yes, Weiliwan is correct. It's not a numbers game but where they congregate due (er, dont) due to a lack of security. And, there are currently about 11 breeding packs in Yellowstone...more than 100 animals.
 

Unknownflyman

Well-known member
Messages
4,393
Reaction score
3,116
Location
The North
Where I deer hunt there are packs of wolves, a pack of 12 surrounding and in the area and land I hunt. Historically they have always been there and I see sign every year. Two weeks ago on opening deer hunting I had a great big one come through, so cool to see. First one seen in six years, very shy and smart.

If anything the wolves seem to keep the deer population stable in our area. It’s always been great hunting, last year and this year bonus deer tags were offered.

The reason why I say stable is because winter kills the most deer, the wolves pick off the weak and unfortunate, more food for the survivors.

A seriously bad winter can knock down deer populations for a number of years, it’s worse if overpopulated I think.

The big myth is that they eat everything till it’s gone, it’s just not true.

I do get a chuckle out of people in the west and their 100 wolves. I think we have around 4000 probably more.

Would there be more deer if the wolves were gone? Maybe on the short term doubtful on the long term because they are supposed to be there.

You get guys yelling about wolves in far northern Minnesota which never was good deer habitat, it’s moose and caribou habit and I believe the DNR isn’t artificially propping up the deer herd anymore in moose country.
 

100954

Well-known member
Messages
370
Reaction score
169
Location
Fargo/Bozeman
Regarding the modest to minimal impact of wolves on the elk population, talk to hunting outfitters in Montana. People whose livelyhood depends on the success of their clients, and you’ll get a far different opinion.
 

gutterpunk

Well-known member
Messages
331
Reaction score
16
I do get a chuckle out of people in the west and their 100 wolves. I think we have around 4000 probably more.
I'm with you on wolves. But to clarify, 100 are just in the park. There are closer to 1000 in Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, more than 500 central in Idaho, and now breeding pairs are growing in WA and OR. So we have a couple thousand animals--albeit over a large landscape.
 

al_a

Well-known member
Messages
753
Reaction score
410
Regarding the modest to minimal impact of wolves on the elk population, talk to hunting outfitters in Montana. People whose livelyhood depends on the success of their clients, and you’ll get a far different opinion.
There are other factors at work in the decline of elk populations in Montana...because they have declined even in parts of the state that have few if any wolves. The wolves have had an impact, no doubt, but it's as much in changing the habits of the elk and the locations they frequent as in absolute numbers. The spread of grizzlies has also impacted the elk, as grizzlies are efficient predators of elk calves in the spring.
 

gutterpunk

Well-known member
Messages
331
Reaction score
16
Regarding the modest to minimal impact of wolves on the elk population, talk to hunting outfitters in Montana. People whose livelyhood depends on the success of their clients, and you’ll get a far different opinion.
I know many, and they don't share this opinion. In fact, (scientifically and anecdotally) elk hunting is best in some places where wolf populations are robust. Some units NW outside the park to the Idaho border are the kinds of place where you pass up big bulls everyday until you find the best one late in the season.

(And, for the record, while i hate the killing of wolves, I supported the successful legislation to delist them--mostly in Montana because they had a good management plan--a hugely controversial issue in the conservation community. I thought it was the right thing to politically and not detrimental biologically. (Some of my clients disagreed.)
 

littledavid123

Well-known member
Messages
3,314
Reaction score
82
Location
Arkansas
I watch a documentary on the changes in the elk herd in YNP and the conclusion was wolves had very little impact on the number of Elk in the park. The study this particular documentary followed concluded that believe it or not it was the Lake Trout that had the greatest impact on the Elk herd.

The study showed that grizzly bears shifted their feeding away from fish to Elk calves. Due to the significant reduction in Cutthroats population brought on by the introduction of Lake trout. The article below discusses some of this.

Non-native Lake Trout Induce Cascading Changes in the Yellowstone Lake (U.S. National Park Service)
Thanks for the reminder, I too remember reading that article. Proof once more that a story written by a scientist doesn't make it true.

Dave
 

bumble54

Well-known member
Messages
811
Reaction score
314
Location
Sheffield UK
I know little or nothing about wolves barring watching numerous documentaries on the fascinating wildlife on the American continent.
In reference to introductions, or indeed re-introductions, what many forget in their enthusiasm to return the world to some mythological "golden age" is that the environment has changed, mainly due to mankind's activities, but even without interference nature is in constant flux. Yellowstone will disappear eventually, as humans we think in the short term, by which I mean a few hundreds of years but nature operates on a totally different timescale.
Here in the UK the Red Kite has been the subject of a re-introduction program, no doubt at great expense, artificially bred, artificially reared, and artificially fed to maintain their population. The simple fact is that, without our constant maintenance of the Red Kite, it would die out because the world has changed and there would be little to sustain their population, there were just a few million people in the UK when they last roamed the skies over this land, now there are close to 70 million people.
Now we have Beavers, there is talk of re-introducing Lynx and Wolves, maybe even Brown Bears. It's a crazy idea that doesn't take account of the reality of the situation.

PS. met a chap yesterday as I walked through the Oak wood who was complaining about all the leaves on the pathways, he said someone should do something about it before someone slipped and hurt themselves on the slippery leaves, can people really be so detached from nature?, it's autumn(fall) for heavens sake. Thank the lord for pastimes that keep some of us rooted firmly in the natural world.
 

boisker

Well-known member
Messages
949
Reaction score
737
Location
Devon, UK
Not sure your Red Kite analogy is that great Bumble.... they went extinct in England and Scotland predominantly from being shot, trapped, poisoned and treated as Vermin by landowners... then the last few were pretty much screwed due to their rarity and egg collecting. To put the timescale into context in relation to the USA, there was a bounty on the head of killed Kites in the 1600’s, so around the time of the first British colonies being settled in the US... amazing the Kite lasted so long in England.
They prey a huge amount on rabbits and are scavengers, so they have plenty of food. Reintroductions in England did take place, as the chick survival rates in the Welsh mountains were lower than in the lowlands. Once introduced they have been spreading their range naturally... we have them in Devon now where there have been no reintroductions and numbers are slowly increasing.
As for reintroductions of wolves in the U.K... ‘they’ve’ been talking about it for 20 plus years, but it is still very much a discussion on the fringe of conservation and very, very unlikely.... obviously it makes a good news/magazine item.. so people get the impression it’s high on the agenda.
 

JDR

Well-known member
Messages
1,005
Reaction score
230
Location
Asheville, NC
Given the predicament we find ourselves in with the natural world, and looking at the solutions from largely the same entities that once caused the problems, I think we are asking the wrong question.

The real question is: Are we really as smart as we think we are?
 

boisker

Well-known member
Messages
949
Reaction score
737
Location
Devon, UK
Regarding the modest to minimal impact of wolves on the elk population, talk to hunting outfitters in Montana. People whose livelyhood depends on the success of their clients, and you’ll get a far different opinion.

Too many wolves or too many hunters?
 
Top