What Are They Talking About? Predators Have No Effect On Elk Populations!

This can’t be true! If you read or listen to what the lovers of predators have to say, these scavenging, murdering animals we call predators have no real affect on wild ungulate herds, other than what they believe to be selective harvesting of the weak and disabled and making the preyed upon become “more wild”. This is where we would insert the Disney theme song of “When you wish upon a star. Makes no difference who you are.” La, la, la, la…….

Okay, so I’m feeling a bit nasty and cynical this morning. And with that I’m taking a story and making an attempt to spin it into something bigger and more controversial than it really is but I do have a point to make.

The Charlotte Observer is reporting that finally the experimental elk herd in the Smoky Mountain National forest, near the Cataloochee Valley in North Carolina, is showing growth – something it hasn’t done since the elk were brought to this area back in 2001. At that time 52 elk were dropped off and the population has never really changed up until park authorities decided to capture about 10 bears and move them out of the area. Since that time, the number of elk has increased to around 86 and the bull to cow ratio has also changed significantly which should increase the chances of more cows giving birth to young elk.

The article clearly states that the reason for the growth is because most of the bears with a discerning appetite for baby elk have been moved.

What helped turn the static population around was the removal of black bears that were preying on the new-born calves, park spokesman Bob Miller said last week. As a result, calf survival rose in 2006 and 2007, lifting the 2005 population of 54 animals to at least 86.

So, there you have it. Proof that bears kill elk and have a negative effect on the herd. Ok, so it’s not quite that simple. Well, at least I’m willing to admit it.

I suppose I should also point out that park personnel indicated that the cow elk are learning to adapt to the habits of the predators.

In addition, Miller said, adult cows are getting smarter about coping with bears, moving away from locations bears frequent to more remote places to give birth in June and July.

It might be just as accurate to say that the adult cow elk are better adapting to their own habitat and learning where better calving areas would be. Let’s also not forget that the bear aren’t stupid. When they get hungry enough, they will also adapt and find the elk.

The point to all of this is that predators do have an impact on elk, moose and deer as examples. In this case when the elk were introduced, the numbers weren’t great enough to sustain and grow over the number of bears in the park. With man removed from the predator list within the park, the bear is top of the chain. Once the bear numbers were reduced, the elk have shown signs of growing in numbers. This is a clear indication, I would think, that management is necessary in order that to have a sustainable herd of elk, deer and moose, you have to make sure that the number of predators doesn’t get out of control.

Man has been the top dog in the food chain since the beginning of time and is still a necessary part in the balance of things. We have too many who think that man needs to be taken out of that chain and let Mother Nature take care of things. They fail to want to believe that man eating beast is part of Mother Nature’s plan. They also have lost sight of the fact that man has a right to protect themselves and their property.

I have no problem with predators. I do have a problem with allowing predators to grow unchecked while destroying game animals and private property. We have examples of this all around us and now some communities are scrambling around trying to figure out how to deal with it.

In other areas we have caring and concerned groups and individuals trying to find ways of increasing habitat for such animals as deer, moose and elk and at the same time demanding that predators be allowed to grow unchecked. It’s not an original statement to say that a habitat program is a waste of time without one that includes predator control.

With all of this said, I wonder what the future looks like for Great Smoky Mountain National Park? Time and money was spent in order to move the predator bears away from the elk herd. Officials say the bears returned but not until after the young elk had gotten bigger and better able to fend for themselves.

If the elk herd continues to grow, which is the intent of the park authorities, will it become a problem? Will there one day be too many elk? Too many bear? How long before more predator lovers will be insisting, like in Colorado, that the park will need to have wolves to make it “more natural”?

Only a matter of time.

Tom Remington