Yellowstone's Northern Range - Greater Yellowstone Science ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE NORTHERN RANGE 92 activity (95 percent) occurs in confined escape terrain (steep cliffs) or areas within 1,000 feet of that terrain confirms observations of others (Figure 7.12) (Oldemeyer et al. 1971, Van Dyke et al. 1983). Elk or bison are rarely found in the kind of escape telTain defined by Smith (1991). Interspecific diet data, then, has limited usefulness in interpreting competition unless the terrain that the diet items were obtained from in has been factored into the equation. RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS: BIGHORN SHEEP Even with previous studies of Yellowstone's bighorns, and with information made available from other populations in the west, we lack basic information on bighorn sheep: 1) the seasonal movements and habitat use of wild sheep, factors limiting their population growth, and interchange with other sheep populations in the Gallatin Absaroka-Beartooth Mountains; 2) as docile as bighorns appear to the public in the park, we still have no definitive data on the effects of people, trails, and roads on their well-being; and finally 3) it is vital that we determine the effects of introduced domestic cattle and sheep diseases tlley are frequently exposed to on their winter and summer ranges to determine if that factor is significant in the well-being of the bighorn sheep. A new study beginning in 1997 will contribute to our understanding of the first two items (L. Irby, Montana State Univ., pers. commun.) WHITE-TAILED DEER Many observers have used Skinner's (1929) repOlt of a decline in white-tailed deer numbers to suggest that the white-tailed deer were a casualty of elk overpopulation (Chase 1986, Wagner et al. 1995a). Historical records, however, suggest that Skinner'S reported population of 100 white-tailed deer on the northern range around 1890 was a short-term increase in the presence of that species (Houston 1982). Schullery and Whittlesey (1992), in their analysis of 168 pre-1882 accounts of Yellowstone National Park-area wildlife, found ten statements about the presence (unspecified location) of white-tailed deer (in the entire park and surrounding area), but only one actual sighting of white-tailed deer in the park, and concluded that white-tailed deer appeared "not to have been common in the park area during the period we studied." Murie (1940), Barmore (1980), and Houston (1982) agreed that the park was "the extreme upper limit of marginal winter range" for white-tailed deer. Houston (1982), noting that this increase in white-tailed deer presence in and near the park around 1900 occurred "in the presence of very high elk numbers" and in a human-altered habitat, thought it "unlikely that interspecific competition with elk for food was the primary cause of the decline" in their numbers. He suggested that "a combination of land clearing, livestock grazing, and human predation outside the park," along with "fire suppression and artificial concentrations of elk in the boundary area of the park," caused the disappearance of this small group. Others have noted that white-tailed deer increased around the turn of the century when hay was being set out for elk and other ungulates. For these reasons, it does not seem that past alarms raised about a "decline" in white-tailed deer in the park were either accurate or justified. Finally it must be noted that white-tailed deer are not absent from the park. Rare animal sighting reports collated by the park in the 1980s and 1990s continue to show this species as an uncommon resident of the northern range and an occasional inhabitant throughout the remainder of the park. It is interesting that the does are frequently accompanied by fawns. RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS: WHITE-TAILED DEER It is recommended the park continue to monitor white-tailed deer as it has for many years using the "Rare Animal Observation Monitoring System." Given the low numbers of the species in the park, yet the robust popUlations in other parts of the greater Yellowstone ecosystem, especially its
ELK AND OTHER SPECIES 93 lowlands and farmland peJiphery, it would seem expensive and somewhat futile to study this animal within the park when it is so abundant elsewhere in greater Yellowstone, and because the park is likely marginal white-tailed deer habitat. MOUNTAIN GOATS Mountain goats do not appear in the paleontological, archeological, or historical records of Yellowstone National Park. Recognizing even the incompleteness of the paleontological and archeological records, and the spottiness of the historical record, it still seems unlikely thaf goats lived in the present park area for several thousand years (Laundre 1990). Goats were introduced in Montana north of Yellowstone National Park between 1947 and 1959, and in the Absaroka-Beartootll Mountain area between 1942 and 1958, by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (Laundre 1990). The state of Idaho Department of Fish and Garne introduced goats near Swan Valley between 1969 and 1971 (Laundre 1990). Animals from the Montana populations have thrived and now are conunon north of the park boundary in the North Absaroka and Beartooth Ranges and Gallatin Mountains (Laundre 1990, Varley 1996), and since the 1980s have colonized in Yellowstone Park in tilose adjacent drainages. A population now appears established in Yellowstone's Pebble and Slough Creek drainages and perhaps Sepulcher Mountain as well (Varley 1996). The Absaroka and Gallatin mountains seem to be the only areas that will likely SUppOlt substantial, long-term populations in the park (Laundre 1990), but the Absaroka Range, which forms the Wyoming-Yellowstone boundmy east of tile park appears to be good habitat as well (Varley 1996.) While goats are not a major element of the Yellowstone National Park fauna, there is cause for concern over their imminent increase. Houston et aJ. (1991) noted that goats colonizing Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks "may eventually pose problems to park managers that could prove embarrassingly similar to those experienced at Olympic [National] Park." Exotic goats in Olympic have seriously degraded rare, endemic alpine plants found nowhere else on the continent. While there are no known unique alpine flora in Yellowstone, the alpine area is relatively unstudied, and concerns over potential competition between goats and sheep remain. Goats are spectacular mammals with many romantic associations among the public; problems with exotic goats in Olympic National Park have been vastly complicated by the animal's public popularity (Houston et aJ. 1991). It would be well to deal with this situation before the animals become well enough established to have a large constituency among park wildlife-watchers, for whom the sight of goat may be a higher value than the National Park Service's legislative mandates to prevent the spread of exotic species. RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS: MOUNTAIN GOATS In reviewing the Olympic National Park plight between exotic mountain goats and rare native alpine plant species, the obvious omission from the Yellowstone database is the lack of a serious inventory of alpine plants that may be affected by goats; either by the consumption of those plants or by their wallowing in tilem. In addition, studies of potential competition between bighorn sheep, mountain goats, elk (or other herbivores) on winter ranges are necessary. BEAVER Next to the elk and other ungUlates, the animal most often spoken of in relation to the reported overgrazing of the northern range has been the beaver. Interpretations of beaver history in Yellowstone National Park have been employed to argue that the park's northern range is overpopulated and overgrazed by elk, that aspen have declined unnaturally, and that other misfortunes have befallen tl,e park (Kay 1990, Wagner et a1. 1995a). No detailed analysis has been published of the historical and scientific record of beaver on the northem range, however, so it is impOltant to
Page 1:
YELLOW"STONE'S NORTHERN RANGE COMPL
Page 4 and 5:
.. •.
Page 6 and 7:
Suggested citation: Yellowstone Nat
Page 8 and 9:
c=J Northern Winter Range _ Boundar
Page 10 and 11:
Aspen, willows, and biodiversity ..
Page 12 and 13:
vii
Page 14 and 15:
THE NORTHERN RANGE xii range criter
Page 16 and 17:
L ~I , }! \,.'1. J 4 f ; " IF , , 1
Page 18 and 19:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 2 Figure 1.1. Ph
Page 20 and 21:
THE NORTHERN RANGE tion. There was
Page 22 and 23:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 6 Figure 1.6. Gr
Page 24 and 25:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 8 Figure 1.8. El
Page 26 and 27:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 10 unpopular or
Page 28 and 29:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 12 earlier Yello
Page 30 and 31:
, ! ~ , I~ " 1 \, • .' '-, , \, ,
Page 32 and 33:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 16 Northern rang
Page 34 and 35:
Figure 2.3. Sum ot rotal annual riv
Page 36 and 37:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 20 Figure 2.4 Tr
Page 38 and 39:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 22 dendrochronol
Page 40 and 41:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 24 Figure 2.7. A
Page 42 and 43:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 26 et al. (1991)
Page 44 and 45:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 28 earlier time,
Page 46 and 47:
.', P (/ i0~ , • 9 ~ § , , ~ , i
Page 48 and 49:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 32 systems-range
Page 50 and 51:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 34 indicates the
Page 52 and 53:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 36 Data were gat
Page 54 and 55:
THE NORTHERN RANGE 38 grazed and un
Page 56 and 57:
THE NORTHERN RANGE showed that graz
Page 58 and 59: , ~ , • V , '. ~ ;' t ~ " ~ .' .~
Page 60 and 61: Figure 4.1. Northern range, showing
Page 62 and 63: Figure 4.2. Willow distribution in
Page 64 and 65: THE NORTHERN RANGE 48 Figure 4.4. I
Page 66 and 67: THE NORTHERN RANGE 50 public lands,
Page 68 and 69: THE NORTIlERN RANGE 52 Figure 4.5.
Page 70 and 71: THE NORTHERN RANGE 54 able uncertai
Page 72 and 73: THE NORTHERN RANGE 56 to confirm an
Page 74: THE NORTHERN RANGE 58 RESEARCH RECO
Page 77 and 78: SOIL, EROSION, SEDIMENTS, AND WATER
Page 79 and 80: SOIL, EROSION, SEDIMENTS, AND WATER
Page 81 and 82: ated with ungulate winter ranges. T
Page 83 and 84: ELK POPULATION ISSUES IS YELLOWSTON
Page 85 and 86: ange grazing issue, Yellowstone man
Page 87 and 88: ELK POPULATION ISSUES 71 ... Other
Page 89 and 90: ELK POPULATION ISSUES 73 1996d), so
Page 91 and 92: ELK POPULATION ISSUES 75 the northe
Page 93 and 94: ELK POPULATION ISSUES 77 It has evo
Page 96 and 97: 4 , ~ 1 v " 'It , \ J~ ~""~ .:,~ ",
Page 98 and 99: THE NORTHERN RANGE 82 Competition t
Page 100 and 101: Figure 7.3. Bison winter range. Sin
Page 102 and 103: THE NORTHERN RANGE Figure 7.7. Envi
Page 104 and 105: THE NORTHERN RANGE 88 not aware of
Page 106 and 107: THE NORTHERN RANGE 90 tion size, an
Page 110 and 111: THE NORTHERN RANGE 94 pursue the su
Page 112 and 113: THE NORTHERN RANGE 96 factors were
Page 114 and 115: THE NORTHERN RANGE Figure 7.13. Num
Page 116 and 117: , .. , , " , ! I ." ~, ~ " ,.\ ,•
Page 118 and 119: THE NORTHERN RANGE 102 complex set
Page 120 and 121: THE NORTHERN RANGE 104 practically
Page 122 and 123: THE NORTHERN RANGE 106 appear suppr
Page 124 and 125: AppendixA. Conferences, Meetings, a
Page 126 and 127: lJO Year Estimate Comment Source 19
Page 128 and 129: lJ2 , Estimated # of Elk Year Date
Page 130 and 131: lJ4 Winter Total Count 1967-68 397
Page 132 and 133: 116 Year Date of Count Parkwide Par
Page 134 and 135: 118 Counts and estimates of mule de
Page 136 and 137: 120 Northern Yellowstone winter ran
Page 138 and 139: 122 Population estimates and reduct
Page 140 and 141: 124 Actual count Inside Outside Est
Page 142 and 143: Pronghorn counted during spring sur
Page 144 and 145: 128 Year 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1
Page 146 and 147: Ground and aerial counts of bighorn
Page 148 and 149: REFERENCE LIST NOTES ON THIS REFERE
Page 150 and 151: Pages 199-210 in Carbyn, L.N., S.H.
Page 152 and 153: Yellowstone National Park. Technica
Page 154 and 155: mammal mortality in the 1988 Yellow
Page 156 and 157: National Park. International Journa
Page 158 and 159:
Mehus, C.A. 1995. Influences ofbraw
Page 160 and 161:
__ , and __ . 1996a. Preburn root b
Page 162 and 163:
Pages 127-138 in F.J. Singer, ed. E
Page 164 and 165:
some northern Yellowstone elk. M.S.
Page 166:
I I I I I
show all

Yellowstone's Northern Range - Greater Yellowstone Science ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?