What extinction in Idaho looks like: Last caribou captured, ending conservation program

[Sytes]

Northwoods Labs,

I've added my links below for your questioned review. My recent post has the shared links as well.

The information shared is directly from various state sources, scientific peer reviewed studies, etc.

Yours? I am always open to learn more. You have established sources, such as Wisconsin's DNR, etc?

I am sure as heck rooting for an elk recovery, no doubt. It's a challenge for certain! Especially considering the intelligent and adapting adjustments of the wolves tactics as shared within quotes from the sources referenced below.
Included are the various quotes that establish the 175 transplants from Michigan and Kentucky, etc. Take into account this has been ongoing since 1995 and Wisconsin now has some 250-300 elk... It's been a struggle!

An attempt to bring elk back to the state occurred in the 1930s, but failed.

Wolf predation, on the other hand, has increased significantly. During the first eight years elk were present in the Clam Lake area, we only had three verified wolf predation cases. During the last six to seven years we've lost 46 elk to wolves."

Stowell says they have also seen a shift in how wolves are targeting elk. From 2003 to 2008, elk mortality from wolves was 80 percent male and 20 percent female elk, and the males were mostly older calves or young bulls.

"Now it seems the wolves have developed skills in testing and picking out vulnerable calves and cows and are apparently leaving the bulls alone," said Stowell. He reports that during the past two years, 10 of the 19 elk killed by wolves have been female and six of those were of breeding age.

In May of 2009, for example, three cows were killed by wolves, all with a 92 percent likelihood of being pregnant. That summer three calves – all one to two months old – and two yearlings and a 16- to 17-year-old cow were killed by wolves. The trend is especially troubling for biologists who value cows based on their potential for producing calves and increasing the herd.

During February 1995, 25 elk were trapped, held in a quarantine facility while undergoing disease testing and transported to the Clam Lake release site.

Those first few years, with enthusiastic support from thousands of volunteers and benefactors, saw such success that Anderson, in a 1998 research report predicted that “at the current rate of growth, the herd could number approximately 500 in 11 years.”

That optimism has been tempered by a kind of “one step forward, two steps back” reality. Prior to calving, the herd in the spring of 2010 was 131 animals, a far cry from Anderson’s prediction.

In 2014, the department entered into an agreement with the state of Kentucky to import, quarantine and release as many as 150 wild elk over a period of up to 5 years.

One final year of translocation is expected to occur in 2019, and all elk are again slated to be released in the Flambeau River State Forest within the Clam Lake elk range.

As of March 2018, the Clam Lake elk herd was estimated to be approximately 185 individuals, with approximately 45 calves expected to be born in spring. This population has grown slowly, but steadily, since reintroduction in 1995.

https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/wildlifehabitat/elk.html

Clam Lake, WI Elk Herd | The Elk Capital of Wisconsin

Clam Lake, Wisconsin elk herd information including current elk status and history of the Wisconsin elk reintroduction project in Northern Wisconsin.

clamlakewi.com

https://www.wisconsinlife.org/story...-shepherding-comeback-of-wisconsins-elk-herd/

A herd in the balance -- Wisconsin Natural Resources magazine -- December 2010

The future of Wisconsin's elk herd rests with its ability to withstand threats like increased predation and continued vehicle collisions. Managers hope to help tip the scales in the elks' favor. By Kathryn A. Kahler. December 2010 Wisconsin Natural Resources magazine.

dnr.wi.gov

Clam Lake... 200 (25 from MI 1995),
Black River... 73 (Kentucky)
Flambeau River... 31 (Kentucky)

Edits to get the links to show correctly and grammar. Cheers. Interesting reading, to say the least.

 

[JLS]

Maybe you should put down the keyboard and go wolf hunting?

 

[Sytes]

Care to join?

 

[Mtnhunter1]

Sytes,,,, Over time, I have read your posts regarding wolves, wolves in R1 , wolves in Montana, wolves in the US and the wolf effect on wildlife populations. I will go out on the limb, or mountain top, and say that I agree with you 100%! Keep pecking on your keyboard Sir, as I have enjoyed your research and provided web-links.

Now on to the original post about the caribou extinction in the lower 48; My experience with these caribou is in Montana only.

I grew up poking around the areas that these caribou wandered. The caribou were almost unknown to most of the folks that lived in NW Montana. I was a young kid when I had my first sighting of the Montana caribou in the early 70’s. My Dad had to stop the truck in late May to allow a herd of 22 caribou cross the Two Chuck road up the NF of the Flathead. We were trying to retrieve our wall tent elk camp that was abandoned due to a snow storm the previous fall. I viewed caribou, in this area along with the Ten Lakes area just to the west, several times through the late 70’s into the early 80’s. My last viewing of these lower 48 caribou was early May of 85 while I was spring bear hunting the NW Peaks area up the Yaak. I saw three caribou cows in the Ten Lakes area in late November of 83. I was in that area looking for a mule deer buck. All the rest of the sightings were in the spring while shed/bear hunting or just wandering around the high country on the concrete hard snow pack. I always thought that the caribou spent most of their time to the Canadian north and then drifted south into Montana during the winter.

While it is sad that the wildlife agencies had to finally throw in the towel on the protection of these southern roaming caribou, it is not unexpected. Yes, the folks can blame the demise of these caribou on the human factors, such as; road access into the back country, logging, climate change, etc. etc. I’m sure that all these items have had their effects on these caribou. But if you listen to the folks that actually have studied these caribou, and read their reports, you will find that predation is the number one cause of their demise! The caribou tragedy is the first “Hooved Mammal” species demise to draw the public’s attention but it should not be the last. The elk herds that shared these areas with the caribou are all but gone! The moose can now only be found in the extreme southern ends of those same areas and they are far and few between. The deer numbers are falling and falling fast all over these NW areas. Predation is the leading cause of this wildlife numbers crash. I wish that Region One’s MTFWPs would open their eyes and actually do their job. Closing or extremely limiting the hunting seasons in these areas is warranted RIGHT NOW! Although adjusting the hunting would probably have little effect on the elk, deer and moose herds, it might force awareness and possibly a change in how Montana manages the big game herds, on our PUBLIC LANDS, in today’s predator rich environment.

My thoughts,,,,,,MTNHUNTER1

 

[Northwoods Labs]

Sytes,,,, Over time, I have read your posts regarding wolves, wolves in R1 , wolves in Montana, wolves in the US and the wolf effect on wildlife populations. I will go out on the limb, or mountain top, and say that I agree with you 100%! Keep pecking on your keyboard Sir, as I have enjoyed your research and provided web-links.

Now on to the original post about the caribou extinction in the lower 48; My experience with these caribou is in Montana only.

I grew up poking around the areas that these caribou wandered. The caribou were almost unknown to most of the folks that lived in NW Montana. I was a young kid when I had my first sighting of the Montana caribou in the early 70’s. My Dad had to stop the truck in late May to allow a herd of 22 caribou cross the Two Chuck road up the NF of the Flathead. We were trying to retrieve our wall tent elk camp that was abandoned due to a snow storm the previous fall. I viewed caribou, in this area along with the Ten Lakes area just to the west, several times through the late 70’s into the early 80’s. My last viewing of these lower 48 caribou was early May of 85 while I was spring bear hunting the NW Peaks area up the Yaak. I saw three caribou cows in the Ten Lakes area in late November of 83. I was in that area looking for a mule deer buck. All the rest of the sightings were in the spring while shed/bear hunting or just wandering around the high country on the concrete hard snow pack. I always thought that the caribou spent most of their time to the Canadian north and then drifted south into Montana during the winter.

While it is sad that the wildlife agencies had to finally throw in the towel on the protection of these southern roaming caribou, it is not unexpected. Yes, the folks can blame the demise of these caribou on the human factors, such as; road access into the back country, logging, climate change, etc. etc. I’m sure that all these items have had their effects on these caribou. But if you listen to the folks that actually have studied these caribou, and read their reports, you will find that predation is the number one cause of their demise! The caribou tragedy is the first “Hooved Mammal” species demise to draw the public’s attention but it should not be the last. The elk herds that shared these areas with the caribou are all but gone! The moose can now only be found in the extreme southern ends of those same areas and they are far and few between. The deer numbers are falling and falling fast all over these NW areas. Predation is the leading cause of this wildlife numbers crash. I wish that Region One’s MTFWPs would open their eyes and actually do their job. Closing or extremely limiting the hunting seasons in these areas is warranted RIGHT NOW! Although adjusting the hunting would probably have little effect on the elk, deer and moose herds, it might force awareness and possibly a change in how Montana manages the big game herds, on our PUBLIC LANDS, in today’s predator rich environment.

My thoughts,,,,,,MTNHUNTER1

If predation is the number one factor above all others then why didn't predators causes these hooved animals to go extinct pre-European settlement?

 

[Northwoods Labs]

yea Sytes, habitat had nothing to do with anything in Wisconsin. It was all the woofs.

 

[JLS]

This sad state of affairs just goes to show how easy it is to completely upend an ecosystem via seemingly benign alteration.

Predation pushed them over the cliff, but for hell’s sake, let’s get real. Anytime you have consider a rearing pen as an alternative, and you’re excited about a calf count of two dozen, the handwriting on the freaking wall.

This isn’t a wolf reintroduction issue. The damage was unknowingly done decades ago.

 

[JLS]

Care to join?

Love to, but I don’t have time or the budget right now. Maybe Toby can smoke one with his minivan for me

 

[theat]

I spent a few summers flying around the US-Canada border in Washington, Idaho and Montana. Getting a birds eye view of the area was quite eye opening on how much of those mountains, that the caribou used to call home, have been very heavily logged. Driving around on forest roads really doesn't let you fully realize how many roads and logged over areas are really out there. The US side had tons of logging done back 20-30+ years ago that is easily seen from the air. The Canadian side has been very heavily logged over the last 10 years. The image below is a screen shot from Google Earth of Canada just north of the Yaak area in Montana. As you can see it has been very heavily logged. The majority of the Canadian side of the border where this herd lived looks like this. The US side is similar but with much more regen growth in the old units. The caribou in this area have been in decline since long before wolves were reintroduced into the lower 48. After seeing how fragmented and commercially exploited this area has been, I have a very strong suspicion that loss of suitable habitat is the primary cause of the the failure of this herd that depends on high elevation old growth forests for survival. I am sure that wolves have certainly played a small part in this, just as they and any other large predator have impacts on prey species, but I have a feeling that they are just the final (and small) nail in this herds coffin.

 

[375H&H]

Keep in mind those clear cuts, at least on the Washington side, produced the best mule deer, elk, moose, and bear hunting that region has ever seen. Now that the logging has been declining so has the hunting. Is there still game there? Of course. But nothing like decades ago when those cuts were fresh and the huckleberries and new growth were abundant.

 

[JLS]

Keep in mind those clear cuts, at least on the Washington side, produced the best mule deer, elk, moose, and bear hunting that region has ever seen. Now that the logging has been declining so has the hunting. Is there still game there? Of course. But nothing like decades ago when those cuts were fresh and the huckleberries and new growth were abundant.

That is entirely true, but it was at the direct expense of the caribou. Not many free lunches in this world.

 

[Nameless Range]

So different things are to blame, some more than others. The more interesting and pertinent question is:

If we were to seriously undertake the task of rectifying the extirpation of the caribou, how would we go about it? Would it be possible?

 

[375H&H]

That is entirely true, but it was at the direct expense of the caribou. Not many free lunches in this world.

Maybe, maybe not. That area was never core caribou habitat but fringe habitat of their range.

The flip side of your point is that protecting the caribou (and not logging) would have been at the direct expense of mule deer, elk, moose, black bear, grizzly bear, and hunting opportunities for all of those and more (grouse, lions, etc).

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

So different things are to blame, some more than others. The more interesting and pertinent question is:

If we were to seriously undertake the task of rectifying the extirpation of the caribou, how would we go about it? Would it be possible?

My basic understanding of the issue would make me think it is something like this, understanding that I am just making a wild guess, and I doubt it would be realistically possible:

1. Designate a big chunk of high elevation old growth timber with a lower elevation buffer of old growth.
2. reclaim / close all the roads
3. no timber harvest; understanding that it will make this area a bad place for deer/elk/moose; which should draw out a good chunk of the predator population.
4. Aggressively control lions to ensure that they don't habituate to killing caribou, and as I understand it unless deer/elk/moose butt up against primary (read high, old timber) wolves aren't likely to spend time up in the caribou's zone
5. Find a herd in BC that is capable of giving up some animals....

 

[Scott85]

So different things are to blame, some more than others. The more interesting and pertinent question is:

If we were to seriously undertake the task of rectifying the extirpation of the caribou, how would we go about it? Would it be possible?

I try to stay out of these treads as a general rule but I can't help answer your question.

Reduce the world's population by 80% leaving only people of this forum, their families and a few others. Humans screw up everything we touch and we never learn from our past transgressions.

 

[Sytes]

Would be great to read from those that were on the front line. As mentioned, various factors play part.

In my opinion, those factors are key within various phases (simplified perspective).
For instance, large population able to offset predation.

*Habitat, such as the reduced lichen was a key role in the population drop. Habitat caused by human "clear cut" logging and natural (choose your position) climate change.

*Once the population reduced, the lichen supply/demand for Caribou came in line.

*Predation became the primary reduction - towards expatriation.

Predators must be a focus to reduce far before the population exceeds the lichen availability.

Here is a research report for Washington State completed 2017.

https://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01852/wdfw01852.pdf

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), a subspecies of caribou, occur across the boreal regions
of North America and are comprised of eight recognized populations. The southern mountain
caribou population consists of 17 subpopulations, or herds, with the South Selkirk subpopulation
being one of these. This subpopulation occurs in the southern Selkirk Mountains of southeastern
British Columbia, northeastern Washington (in Pend Oreille County), and northern Idaho, and is the
only caribou herd that ranges into the contiguous U.S.
Southern mountain caribou are distinguishable from other populations of woodland caribou by their
inhabitation of mountainous areas with deep snow accumulations and their winter diet of primarily
arboreal lichens. These caribou prefer large areas of late successional conifer forests throughout the
year and migrate seasonally to different elevations and forest types to seek food and suitable calving
sites.
Overall abundance of southern mountain caribou has declined 45% since the late 1980s and was
estimated at 1,544 animals during 2008-2014. Eleven of the 17 subpopulations show declining
trends, nine hold fewer than 50 animals, and two have been extirpated since 2003. The South
Selkirk subpopulation was considered abundant and possibly numbered in the hundreds in the late
1800s, but decreased to an estimated 25-100 caribou between 1925 and the mid-1980s. Numbers
ranged between 33 and 51 animals from 1991 to 2009 despite being supplemented with 103 caribou
in two separate multi-year translocations in the late 1980s and 1990s. Most recently, the
subpopulation declined rapidly from 46 to 12 caribou between 2009 and 2016. The percent of
calves in the subpopulation during late winter surveys averaged 9.9% per year from 2004 to 2016,
which is below the estimated 12-15% needed to maintain a stable population with high adult
survival. Additionally, the South Selkirk subpopulation is isolated from neighboring subpopulations,
with probably no immigration occurring in recent decades.
Predation is considered the most immediate threat to the South Selkirk subpopulation. Although
robust caribou populations are able to withstand some level of natural predation, any amount of
predation on the now very small South Selkirk subpopulation is likely to greatly affect its future
sustainability. In addition, past conversion of old-growth forests to earlier successional stages has
brought higher densities of deer, moose, and elk and their predators (i.e., wolves, cougars, and bears)
into closer proximity to herd members, resulting in greater predation risk to caribou. Other threats
to the subpopulation are highway collisions, human disturbance associated mostly with winter
backcountry recreation, small population size coupled with isolation, and climate change.
The small size and ongoing decline of the South Selkirk subpopulation has increased its risk of
extirpation. It is therefore recommended that woodland caribou remain a state endangered species
in Washington.

 

[Irrelevant]

The flip side of your point is that protecting the caribou (and not logging) would have been at the direct expense of mule deer, elk, moose, black bear, grizzly bear, and hunting opportunities for all of those and more (grouse, lions, etc).

Sure, I don't think anyone is disputing that, but there's significantly more than 1600 of each of those in existence.

 

[JLS]

Maybe, maybe not. That area was never core caribou habitat but fringe habitat of their range.

The flip side of your point is that protecting the caribou (and not logging) would have been at the direct expense of mule deer, elk, moose, black bear, grizzly bear, and hunting opportunities for all of those and more (grouse, lions, etc).

The fringe aspect is debatable. What isn't debatable is the affect logging and road development have had on how mountain caribou fit into an altered ecosystem.

To your second point, I'm not arguing that. Hence, my comment on free lunches.

 

[JLS]

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/84874765.pdf

Results suggested that the decline of this herd was largely driven by a shift in predatorprey dynamics following forest harvest. Further exacerbating the decline were the cumulative effects of disturbance in the Telkwa Range. Roads, recreation, and forestry influenced the distribution of the Telkwa caribou herd, ultimately affecting habitat availability and the ability of caribou to successfully manage predation risk.

 

[BrentD]

Predators must be a focus to reduce far before the population exceeds the lichen availability.

Sell me on this a little. If predation is reduced then is it not inevitable that populations will exceed lichen availability?

Exactly what would regulate caribou and prevent them from overrunning their food supply? This is an odd statement - at least without quite a bit more context.