Question of the Month
October 2011
What effect have Wolves had on Yellowstone Elk?
We have been doing Yellowstone Photo Tours for over twenty years, beginning our first fall tours in 1989 right after the devastating Yellowstone Fires. In the 'old days' elk were abundant, and virtually every meadow had a herd of elk. Back then, our photo tours were heavily centered upon photographing elk.
Then, in 1995 and 1996 wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone, to restore this park to its natural state, or as close as that is possible in today's world. Wolves once lived in Yellowstone, but the last one, officially, was killed in 1924. In '95 and '96 a total of 31 wolves were released, and they did well. Ten years later their numbers had increased ten to twelve times the original number that were introduced.
With this, the Park had a management plan, and 15 different wolf experts predicted or computer modeled various outcomes. Looking at the various studies, the conclusion was that there might be a reduction in elk by as much as 20%. One study believed the wolves would have no impact, preying only upon sick or injured elk that would have died anyway. Others believed that with fewer elk, there would be healthier elk and, again, the population would not decrease. The worse case scenario warned of a 50% reduction, as the predation would be added to that from grizzly bears and mountain lions.
No one took into account the effect of stress, or risk, that the wolves might have upon the elk.
In the Northern herd, the population we most frequently encountered on our tours, the elk population declined by 60%! Other herds in and around the park had declines that were similar, or as little as 37%. I remember reading a pamphlet a few years ago that accounted for the elk decline to drought, over-hunting, and grizzly bear predation upon baby elk. In that pamphlet wolves were not to blame -- everything else was.
In 1988 I asked a Park Ranger what his thoughts were on the decline of the elk. He looked at me like I was stupid for asking the question, and dryly explained that the wolves had made the difference. That was a refreshing admission to what I always thought was a contradiction of 'party lines.' Recently, I picked up a great reference book, 'Knowing Yellowstone: Science in America's First National Park' edited by Jerry Johnson. In it, in Chapter Five, Scott Creel of the Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, authors a study, 'Interactions Between Wolves and Elk in the Yellowstone Ecosystem.' I bought the book just for that chapter, and this Question of the Month's data is based on Creel's work. The conclusions of his study verify the feelings of that Park Ranger I spoke with, and my own conclusions.
Scott Creel's research explored an area that the pre-introduction studies and computer models failed to take into account, and that was the effect of stress or, as Creel calls it, Risk Effects. While the entire chapter is filled with interesting information. For example, bull elk by the end of the Fall rut have fat stores that are approximately the same amount as cow elk have at the end of the winter season. The stress of the rut depletes bull elk of their fat reserves, so they enter the taxing winter season in as bad a shape as cow elk are in at the very end of the winter season. Consequently, bull elk do not respond to wolf threats as severely as cow elk do, merely because they are more concerned with keeping enough energy to survive. They eat more, ignore wolves more, and are killed frequently by wolves, more often "than would be expected by chance."
Cow elk, in contrast, do respond to the presence of wolves. They bunch up into tight herds and they retreat into forests where their feeding is compromised. In winter, this results" in an increase in the rate of body mass loss"or, in other words, the elk lose weight and get thinner. More importantly, Creel discovered that their hormonal levels changed, and a steroid hormone, Progesterone, an indicator of pregnancy, was reduced. The conclusion, based upon scat analysis (which contained the hormone) was" progesterone levels were dramatically lower in (elk) populations with high wolf-elk ratios" and he concluded that "calf production declines rather strongly as predation pressure increases."
Thus, wolves not only killed elk in far greater numbers than anticipated, they also were directly related to other behavioral changes that included the birth rate of the surviving elk. The two, combined, contributed to the much greater (almost three times the expected decline) decline of elk than the predicted average of 20%.
Creel's research certainly validated my suspicions although until I read his study I did not know the reason why. So, how do I feel about Yellowstone's wolves?
Well, I can understand why elk hunting outfitters are not, for the most part, wolf fans. I can understand the pro-hunting legislation that has listed wolves as game animals in Wyoming. I can see the validity to their self interests.
Mule deer have become more common in the years since the wolf reintroduction, while coyotes have become less, as wolves kill coyotes. Coyotes kill red foxes, and with less coyotes, there are now more red foxes.
As a biologist and naturalist, I can also understand why it was and is important to have wolves in Yellowstone, if for no other reason than the simple fact that they once did live here and do belong here. One could argue correctly that there were probably too many elk in Yellowstone, and although they may not have been in danger of over-populating the park to the point of a population crash, their grazing had impacted upon the ecology of Yellowstone. Elk proof fences, erected in Lamar valley, have shown how these barren sage brush hillsides can, if left unmolested, become stands and forests of aspen and other deciduous plants. Field studies now show that once relatively barren riparian habitats now have new plant growth, and that the average age of aspens -- at one time not long ago there were virtually no young trees -- has lowered, as new growth is now appearing and surviving the munching jaws of elk.
Animals rare or absent from the park are returning, as transient animals are finding that a once inhospitable environment is now offering food and shelter not available prior to the wolf introduction. Song birds, small mammals, beaver, and others are reappearing again in areas that should indeed have these species. So the park is becoming more diverse, more natural, I suppose, and the wolf has made this difference. This is a good thing.
For us, leading Photo Tours to Yellowstone, we've learned to adapt and our tours, once dominated so much by wildlife photography, and particularly elk photography, has now broadened to include the whole spectrum of subject matter that Yellowstone has to offer. This has been a good thing for us, and for our participants in seeing and enjoying this great park.
I'm sure I'll find much more of interest in 'Knowing Yellowstone' but the question of the wolf-elk dynamics always comes up when we do our photo tours. To learn more, and to read Chapter Five for yourself, here's the book's details: ISBN 978-1-58979-522-8, an imprint of The Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group, www.rlpgtrade.com, and distributed by the National Book Network. I bought my copy through the Yellowstone Association (www.YellowstoneAssociation.org), $19.95.
.
Questions of the Month
What Gear is Essential?
How Easy is NIK's HDR Program to use?
What is the most endangered big cat to photograph?
Why did we drop our NANPA membership?
What is the best $69 you can spend in photography?
More Questions about Pumas in Pennsylvania
Are the Latest Fast CF Cards worth the Expense?
How does the 7D hold up in a recent shoot?
Which is the better camera, the Mark IV or the 7D?
Are there Mountain Lions (Pumas, Cougars) in Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic States?
Why is bat photography so difficult?
What do I think of the Canon 1D Mark IV?
Why do I advocate manual exposure so avidly?
Where can I find Depth of Field reference charts?
What is the Keboko backpack? Is it the New Best Pack?
Is there a correct position for the upright on a Wimberley actionhead?
How, Who, and Why? The story behind our new web site.
Archived Questions of the Month
Most of my original Questions of the Month for the last several
years are available through this link. The 'look' is from my
original web site, although if I ever have enough time I might
redo these pages to match the new web site But that's not
a high priority.
.
Question of the Month
October 2011
What effect have Wolves had on Yellowstone Elk?
We have been doing Yellowstone Photo Tours for over twenty years, beginning our first fall tours in 1989 right after the devastating Yellowstone Fires. In the 'old days' elk were abundant, and virtually every meadow had a herd of elk. Back then, our photo tours were heavily centered upon photographing elk.
Then, in 1995 and 1996 wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone, to restore this park to its natural state, or as close as that is possible in today's world. Wolves once lived in Yellowstone, but the last one, officially, was killed in 1924. In '95 and '96 a total of 31 wolves were released, and they did well. Ten years later their numbers had increased ten to twelve times the original number that were introduced.
With this, the Park had a management plan, and 15 different wolf experts predicted or computer modeled various outcomes. Looking at the various studies, the conclusion was that there might be a reduction in elk by as much as 20%. One study believed the wolves would have no impact, preying only upon sick or injured elk that would have died anyway. Others believed that with fewer elk, there would be healthier elk and, again, the population would not decrease. The worse case scenario warned of a 50% reduction, as the predation would be added to that from grizzly bears and mountain lions.
No one took into account the effect of stress, or risk, that the wolves might have upon the elk.
In the Northern herd, the population we most frequently encountered on our tours, the elk population declined by 60%! Other herds in and around the park had declines that were similar, or as little as 37%. I remember reading a pamphlet a few years ago that accounted for the elk decline to drought, over-hunting, and grizzly bear predation upon baby elk. In that pamphlet wolves were not to blame -- everything else was.
In 1988 I asked a Park Ranger what his thoughts were on the decline of the elk. He looked at me like I was stupid for asking the question, and dryly explained that the wolves had made the difference. That was a refreshing admission to what I always thought was a contradiction of 'party lines.' Recently, I picked up a great reference book, 'Knowing Yellowstone: Science in America's First National Park' edited by Jerry Johnson. In it, in Chapter Five, Scott Creel of the Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, authors a study, 'Interactions Between Wolves and Elk in the Yellowstone Ecosystem.' I bought the book just for that chapter, and this Question of the Month's data is based on Creel's work. The conclusions of his study verify the feelings of that Park Ranger I spoke with, and my own conclusions.
Scott Creel's research explored an area that the pre-introduction studies and computer models failed to take into account, and that was the effect of stress or, as Creel calls it, Risk Effects. While the entire chapter is filled with interesting information. For example, bull elk by the end of the Fall rut have fat stores that are approximately the same amount as cow elk have at the end of the winter season. The stress of the rut depletes bull elk of their fat reserves, so they enter the taxing winter season in as bad a shape as cow elk are in at the very end of the winter season. Consequently, bull elk do not respond to wolf threats as severely as cow elk do, merely because they are more concerned with keeping enough energy to survive. They eat more, ignore wolves more, and are killed frequently by wolves, more often "than would be expected by chance."
Cow elk, in contrast, do respond to the presence of wolves. They bunch up into tight herds and they retreat into forests where their feeding is compromised. In winter, this results" in an increase in the rate of body mass loss"or, in other words, the elk lose weight and get thinner. More importantly, Creel discovered that their hormonal levels changed, and a steroid hormone, Progesterone, an indicator of pregnancy, was reduced. The conclusion, based upon scat analysis (which contained the hormone) was" progesterone levels were dramatically lower in (elk) populations with high wolf-elk ratios" and he concluded that "calf production declines rather strongly as predation pressure increases."
Thus, wolves not only killed elk in far greater numbers than anticipated, they also were directly related to other behavioral changes that included the birth rate of the surviving elk. The two, combined, contributed to the much greater (almost three times the expected decline) decline of elk than the predicted average of 20%.
Creel's research certainly validated my suspicions although until I read his study I did not know the reason why. So, how do I feel about Yellowstone's wolves?
Well, I can understand why elk hunting outfitters are not, for the most part, wolf fans. I can understand the pro-hunting legislation that has listed wolves as game animals in Wyoming. I can see the validity to their self interests.
Mule deer have become more common in the years since the wolf reintroduction, while coyotes have become less, as wolves kill coyotes. Coyotes kill red foxes, and with less coyotes, there are now more red foxes.
As a biologist and naturalist, I can also understand why it was and is important to have wolves in Yellowstone, if for no other reason than the simple fact that they once did live here and do belong here. One could argue correctly that there were probably too many elk in Yellowstone, and although they may not have been in danger of over-populating the park to the point of a population crash, their grazing had impacted upon the ecology of Yellowstone. Elk proof fences, erected in Lamar valley, have shown how these barren sage brush hillsides can, if left unmolested, become stands and forests of aspen and other deciduous plants. Field studies now show that once relatively barren riparian habitats now have new plant growth, and that the average age of aspens -- at one time not long ago there were virtually no young trees -- has lowered, as new growth is now appearing and surviving the munching jaws of elk.
Animals rare or absent from the park are returning, as transient animals are finding that a once inhospitable environment is now offering food and shelter not available prior to the wolf introduction. Song birds, small mammals, beaver, and others are reappearing again in areas that should indeed have these species. So the park is becoming more diverse, more natural, I suppose, and the wolf has made this difference. This is a good thing.
For us, leading Photo Tours to Yellowstone, we've learned to adapt and our tours, once dominated so much by wildlife photography, and particularly elk photography, has now broadened to include the whole spectrum of subject matter that Yellowstone has to offer. This has been a good thing for us, and for our participants in seeing and enjoying this great park.
I'm sure I'll find much more of interest in 'Knowing Yellowstone' but the question of the wolf-elk dynamics always comes up when we do our photo tours. To learn more, and to read Chapter Five for yourself, here's the book's details: ISBN 978-1-58979-522-8, an imprint of The Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group, www.rlpgtrade.com, and distributed by the National Book Network. I bought my copy through the Yellowstone Association (www.YellowstoneAssociation.org), $19.95.
.
Questions of the Month
What Gear is Essential?
How Easy is NIK's HDR Program to use?
What is the most endangered big cat to photograph?
Why did we drop our NANPA membership?
What is the best $69 you can spend in photography?
More Questions about Pumas in Pennsylvania
Are the Latest Fast CF Cards worth the Expense?
How does the 7D hold up in a recent shoot?
Which is the better camera, the Mark IV or the 7D?
Are there Mountain Lions (Pumas, Cougars) in Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic States?
Why is bat photography so difficult?
What do I think of the Canon 1D Mark IV?
Why do I advocate manual exposure so avidly?
Where can I find Depth of Field reference charts?
What is the Keboko backpack? Is it the New Best Pack?
Is there a correct position for the upright on a Wimberley actionhead?
How, Who, and Why? The story behind our new web site.
Archived Questions of the Month
Most of my original Questions of the Month for the last several
years are available through this link. The 'look' is from my
original web site, although if I ever have enough time I might
redo these pages to match the new web site But that's not
a high priority.
.
Question of the Month
October 2011
What effect have Wolves had on Yellowstone Elk?
We have been doing Yellowstone Photo Tours for over twenty years, beginning our first fall tours in 1989 right after the devastating Yellowstone Fires. In the 'old days' elk were abundant, and virtually every meadow had a herd of elk. Back then, our photo tours were heavily centered upon photographing elk.
Then, in 1995 and 1996 wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone, to restore this park to its natural state, or as close as that is possible in today's world. Wolves once lived in Yellowstone, but the last one, officially, was killed in 1924. In '95 and '96 a total of 31 wolves were released, and they did well. Ten years later their numbers had increased ten to twelve times the original number that were introduced.
With this, the Park had a management plan, and 15 different wolf experts predicted or computer modeled various outcomes. Looking at the various studies, the conclusion was that there might be a reduction in elk by as much as 20%. One study believed the wolves would have no impact, preying only upon sick or injured elk that would have died anyway. Others believed that with fewer elk, there would be healthier elk and, again, the population would not decrease. The worse case scenario warned of a 50% reduction, as the predation would be added to that from grizzly bears and mountain lions.
No one took into account the effect of stress, or risk, that the wolves might have upon the elk.
In the Northern herd, the population we most frequently encountered on our tours, the elk population declined by 60%! Other herds in and around the park had declines that were similar, or as little as 37%. I remember reading a pamphlet a few years ago that accounted for the elk decline to drought, over-hunting, and grizzly bear predation upon baby elk. In that pamphlet wolves were not to blame -- everything else was.
In 1988 I asked a Park Ranger what his thoughts were on the decline of the elk. He looked at me like I was stupid for asking the question, and dryly explained that the wolves had made the difference. That was a refreshing admission to what I always thought was a contradiction of 'party lines.' Recently, I picked up a great reference book, 'Knowing Yellowstone: Science in America's First National Park' edited by Jerry Johnson. In it, in Chapter Five, Scott Creel of the Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, authors a study, 'Interactions Between Wolves and Elk in the Yellowstone Ecosystem.' I bought the book just for that chapter, and this Question of the Month's data is based on Creel's work. The conclusions of his study verify the feelings of that Park Ranger I spoke with, and my own conclusions.
Scott Creel's research explored an area that the pre-introduction studies and computer models failed to take into account, and that was the effect of stress or, as Creel calls it, Risk Effects. While the entire chapter is filled with interesting information. For example, bull elk by the end of the Fall rut have fat stores that are approximately the same amount as cow elk have at the end of the winter season. The stress of the rut depletes bull elk of their fat reserves, so they enter the taxing winter season in as bad a shape as cow elk are in at the very end of the winter season. Consequently, bull elk do not respond to wolf threats as severely as cow elk do, merely because they are more concerned with keeping enough energy to survive. They eat more, ignore wolves more, and are killed frequently by wolves, more often "than would be expected by chance."
Cow elk, in contrast, do respond to the presence of wolves. They bunch up into tight herds and they retreat into forests where their feeding is compromised. In winter, this results" in an increase in the rate of body mass loss"or, in other words, the elk lose weight and get thinner. More importantly, Creel discovered that their hormonal levels changed, and a steroid hormone, Progesterone, an indicator of pregnancy, was reduced. The conclusion, based upon scat analysis (which contained the hormone) was" progesterone levels were dramatically lower in (elk) populations with high wolf-elk ratios" and he concluded that "calf production declines rather strongly as predation pressure increases."
Thus, wolves not only killed elk in far greater numbers than anticipated, they also were directly related to other behavioral changes that included the birth rate of the surviving elk. The two, combined, contributed to the much greater (almost three times the expected decline) decline of elk than the predicted average of 20%.
Creel's research certainly validated my suspicions although until I read his study I did not know the reason why. So, how do I feel about Yellowstone's wolves?
Well, I can understand why elk hunting outfitters are not, for the most part, wolf fans. I can understand the pro-hunting legislation that has listed wolves as game animals in Wyoming. I can see the validity to their self interests.
Mule deer have become more common in the years since the wolf reintroduction, while coyotes have become less, as wolves kill coyotes. Coyotes kill red foxes, and with less coyotes, there are now more red foxes.
As a biologist and naturalist, I can also understand why it was and is important to have wolves in Yellowstone, if for no other reason than the simple fact that they once did live here and do belong here. One could argue correctly that there were probably too many elk in Yellowstone, and although they may not have been in danger of over-populating the park to the point of a population crash, their grazing had impacted upon the ecology of Yellowstone. Elk proof fences, erected in Lamar valley, have shown how these barren sage brush hillsides can, if left unmolested, become stands and forests of aspen and other deciduous plants. Field studies now show that once relatively barren riparian habitats now have new plant growth, and that the average age of aspens -- at one time not long ago there were virtually no young trees -- has lowered, as new growth is now appearing and surviving the munching jaws of elk.
Animals rare or absent from the park are returning, as transient animals are finding that a once inhospitable environment is now offering food and shelter not available prior to the wolf introduction. Song birds, small mammals, beaver, and others are reappearing again in areas that should indeed have these species. So the park is becoming more diverse, more natural, I suppose, and the wolf has made this difference. This is a good thing.
For us, leading Photo Tours to Yellowstone, we've learned to adapt and our tours, once dominated so much by wildlife photography, and particularly elk photography, has now broadened to include the whole spectrum of subject matter that Yellowstone has to offer. This has been a good thing for us, and for our participants in seeing and enjoying this great park.
I'm sure I'll find much more of interest in 'Knowing Yellowstone' but the question of the wolf-elk dynamics always comes up when we do our photo tours. To learn more, and to read Chapter Five for yourself, here's the book's details: ISBN 978-1-58979-522-8, an imprint of The Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group, www.rlpgtrade.com, and distributed by the National Book Network. I bought my copy through the Yellowstone Association (www.YellowstoneAssociation.org), $19.95.
.
Questions of the Month
What Gear is Essential?
How Easy is NIK's HDR Program to use?
What is the most endangered big cat to photograph?
Why did we drop our NANPA membership?
What is the best $69 you can spend in photography?
More Questions about Pumas in Pennsylvania
Are the Latest Fast CF Cards worth the Expense?
How does the 7D hold up in a recent shoot?
Which is the better camera, the Mark IV or the 7D?
Are there Mountain Lions (Pumas, Cougars) in Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic States?
Why is bat photography so difficult?
What do I think of the Canon 1D Mark IV?
Why do I advocate manual exposure so avidly?
Where can I find Depth of Field reference charts?
What is the Keboko backpack? Is it the New Best Pack?
Is there a correct position for the upright on a Wimberley actionhead?
How, Who, and Why? The story behind our new web site.
Archived Questions of the Month
Most of my original Questions of the Month for the last several
years are available through this link. The 'look' is from my
original web site, although if I ever have enough time I might
redo these pages to match the new web site But that's not
a high priority.
.
Question of the Month
October 2011
What effect have Wolves had on Yellowstone Elk?
We have been doing Yellowstone Photo Tours for over twenty years, beginning our first fall tours in 1989 right after the devastating Yellowstone Fires. In the 'old days' elk were abundant, and virtually every meadow had a herd of elk. Back then, our photo tours were heavily centered upon photographing elk.
Then, in 1995 and 1996 wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone, to restore this park to its natural state, or as close as that is possible in today's world. Wolves once lived in Yellowstone, but the last one, officially, was killed in 1924. In '95 and '96 a total of 31 wolves were released, and they did well. Ten years later their numbers had increased ten to twelve times the original number that were introduced.
With this, the Park had a management plan, and 15 different wolf experts predicted or computer modeled various outcomes. Looking at the various studies, the conclusion was that there might be a reduction in elk by as much as 20%. One study believed the wolves would have no impact, preying only upon sick or injured elk that would have died anyway. Others believed that with fewer elk, there would be healthier elk and, again, the population would not decrease. The worse case scenario warned of a 50% reduction, as the predation would be added to that from grizzly bears and mountain lions.
No one took into account the effect of stress, or risk, that the wolves might have upon the elk.
In the Northern herd, the population we most frequently encountered on our tours, the elk population declined by 60%! Other herds in and around the park had declines that were similar, or as little as 37%. I remember reading a pamphlet a few years ago that accounted for the elk decline to drought, over-hunting, and grizzly bear predation upon baby elk. In that pamphlet wolves were not to blame -- everything else was.
In 1988 I asked a Park Ranger what his thoughts were on the decline of the elk. He looked at me like I was stupid for asking the question, and dryly explained that the wolves had made the difference. That was a refreshing admission to what I always thought was a contradiction of 'party lines.' Recently, I picked up a great reference book, 'Knowing Yellowstone: Science in America's First National Park' edited by Jerry Johnson. In it, in Chapter Five, Scott Creel of the Department of Ecology, Montana State University, Bozeman, authors a study, 'Interactions Between Wolves and Elk in the Yellowstone Ecosystem.' I bought the book just for that chapter, and this Question of the Month's data is based on Creel's work. The conclusions of his study verify the feelings of that Park Ranger I spoke with, and my own conclusions.
Scott Creel's research explored an area that the pre-introduction studies and computer models failed to take into account, and that was the effect of stress or, as Creel calls it, Risk Effects. While the entire chapter is filled with interesting information. For example, bull elk by the end of the Fall rut have fat stores that are approximately the same amount as cow elk have at the end of the winter season. The stress of the rut depletes bull elk of their fat reserves, so they enter the taxing winter season in as bad a shape as cow elk are in at the very end of the winter season. Consequently, bull elk do not respond to wolf threats as severely as cow elk do, merely because they are more concerned with keeping enough energy to survive. They eat more, ignore wolves more, and are killed frequently by wolves, more often "than would be expected by chance."
Cow elk, in contrast, do respond to the presence of wolves. They bunch up into tight herds and they retreat into forests where their feeding is compromised. In winter, this results" in an increase in the rate of body mass loss"or, in other words, the elk lose weight and get thinner. More importantly, Creel discovered that their hormonal levels changed, and a steroid hormone, Progesterone, an indicator of pregnancy, was reduced. The conclusion, based upon scat analysis (which contained the hormone) was" progesterone levels were dramatically lower in (elk) populations with high wolf-elk ratios" and he concluded that "calf production declines rather strongly as predation pressure increases."
Thus, wolves not only killed elk in far greater numbers than anticipated, they also were directly related to other behavioral changes that included the birth rate of the surviving elk. The two, combined, contributed to the much greater (almost three times the expected decline) decline of elk than the predicted average of 20%.
Creel's research certainly validated my suspicions although until I read his study I did not know the reason why. So, how do I feel about Yellowstone's wolves?
Well, I can understand why elk hunting outfitters are not, for the most part, wolf fans. I can understand the pro-hunting legislation that has listed wolves as game animals in Wyoming. I can see the validity to their self interests.
Mule deer have become more common in the years since the wolf reintroduction, while coyotes have become less, as wolves kill coyotes. Coyotes kill red foxes, and with less coyotes, there are now more red foxes.
As a biologist and naturalist, I can also understand why it was and is important to have wolves in Yellowstone, if for no other reason than the simple fact that they once did live here and do belong here. One could argue correctly that there were probably too many elk in Yellowstone, and although they may not have been in danger of over-populating the park to the point of a population crash, their grazing had impacted upon the ecology of Yellowstone. Elk proof fences, erected in Lamar valley, have shown how these barren sage brush hillsides can, if left unmolested, become stands and forests of aspen and other deciduous plants. Field studies now show that once relatively barren riparian habitats now have new plant growth, and that the average age of aspens -- at one time not long ago there were virtually no young trees -- has lowered, as new growth is now appearing and surviving the munching jaws of elk.
Animals rare or absent from the park are returning, as transient animals are finding that a once inhospitable environment is now offering food and shelter not available prior to the wolf introduction. Song birds, small mammals, beaver, and others are reappearing again in areas that should indeed have these species. So the park is becoming more diverse, more natural, I suppose, and the wolf has made this difference. This is a good thing.
For us, leading Photo Tours to Yellowstone, we've learned to adapt and our tours, once dominated so much by wildlife photography, and particularly elk photography, has now broadened to include the whole spectrum of subject matter that Yellowstone has to offer. This has been a good thing for us, and for our participants in seeing and enjoying this great park.
I'm sure I'll find much more of interest in 'Knowing Yellowstone' but the question of the wolf-elk dynamics always comes up when we do our photo tours. To learn more, and to read Chapter Five for yourself, here's the book's details: ISBN 978-1-58979-522-8, an imprint of The Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group, www.rlpgtrade.com, and distributed by the National Book Network. I bought my copy through the Yellowstone Association (www.YellowstoneAssociation.org), $19.95.
.
Questions of the Month
What Gear is Essential?
How Easy is NIK's HDR Program to use?
What is the most endangered big cat to photograph?
Why did we drop our NANPA membership?
What is the best $69 you can spend in photography?
More Questions about Pumas in Pennsylvania
Are the Latest Fast CF Cards worth the Expense?
How does the 7D hold up in a recent shoot?
Which is the better camera, the Mark IV or the 7D?
Are there Mountain Lions (Pumas, Cougars) in Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic States?
Why is bat photography so difficult?
What do I think of the Canon 1D Mark IV?
Why do I advocate manual exposure so avidly?
Where can I find Depth of Field reference charts?
What is the Keboko backpack? Is it the New Best Pack?
Is there a correct position for the upright on a Wimberley actionhead?
How, Who, and Why? The story behind our new web site.
Archived Questions of the Month
Most of my original Questions of the Month for the last several
years are available through this link. The 'look' is from my
original web site, although if I ever have enough time I might
redo these pages to match the new web site But that's not
a high priority.
.
