The Curious Case of Idaho’s Disappearing Deer & Elk

lukew

Administrator
Jul 1, 2019
242
260
39610
By: Jordan Breshears
Wolves, these amazing predators claim headlines, article content, and conversation points often enough that it becomes overwhelming and even a point of contention for some. What started back in 1995 when 31 wolves were arguably “reintroduced” into Yellowstone National Park. Has turned into quite the wildlife conundrum, especially on the big game front. Ultimately what we thought we knew, what we were told would happen and the current statistics don’t match up. Not even close! Many of us knew that the reintroduction was a slippery slope and would likely have less than desirable consequences. But none of us knew what the following 25-30 years would bring. Elk herds in many places are a small fraction of what they once were, moose in certain regions are on the brink of no return and deer numbers are dismal. For those of us living in the woods from August through December, the impacts are more than obvious, the hunting and outdoor experience has changed and much of it can be attributed to the ripple effects of wolves and their impressive yet disastrous predation effects. I don’t have enough space in this article to tackle the negative impacts wolves have had on wildlife in the West. So let’s grab some highlights and get to the meat and potatoes of what we can do about it!

In 1995 15 wolves were introduced into Idaho. The recovery goal was 150 wolves with a maximum sustainability number of 500 wolves. Fast forward to 1998/99 and the goal was reached, yet state management was delayed for 13 more years due to political issues and wolf numbers climbed out of control. Now in 2021 IDFG estimates 1543 wolves statewide and left unmanaged, wolf populations grow 40% annually, Wow talk about over objective! It’s not just ungulates that are experiencing issues, for example, a mature mountain lion that kills one deer per week is an easy target for wolves. The wolves chase away the cat and the cat kills another deer. This continues to happen and in some instances pushes the cat into suburban areas where they make pets their prey. Additionally; hound hunters are experiencing more and more interaction with wolves, many hounds are being killed by wolves each year and many houndsmen are leaving the sport and or changing where they hunt. Thus, leaving predators like bears and cougars to abound and cause their own damage to ungulates. Overwhelmed yet? How about the fact that wolves have pushed deer and elk down onto private lands in such a way that it has changed hunting in many areas altogether? Deer and elk already seek private land for shelter, but now they have gone to another level and in some cases don’t return to the mountains at all. This creates notable issues for public land hunters and also costs thousands of dollars in crop damages due to habitat change. We are only hitting the highlights here folks, it gets worse.

Is there hope? Absolutely! A group of sportsmen have come to the table and made solutions. Back in 2011 the Foundation for Wildlife Management otherwise known as F4WM was created as a 501c3 non-profit with a mission to promote ungulate population recovery in areas impacted by wolves. Their mission has gone from “who is F4WM?” To be embraced by sportsmen and women around the globe and be adopted by Idaho Fish and Game as well as Montana Fish and Wildlife and Parks. All in an effort to preserve ungulates by better managing wolves.

F4WM and its members have helped remove nearly 1,500 wolves since they opened their doors. Not only does this greatly reduce the impact on ungulates by saving roughly 200,000 elk, deer, and moose that would have otherwise been consumed by these k-9s. This effort also greatly reduces taxpayer costs. IDFG averages costs of roughly 9k per wolf and they don’t have the funding to tackle the problem head-on. F4WM however, has spent an average of $835 per wolf. All of which is funded by membership and sportsmen donations.

What is F4WM and how does it work? Glad you asked! Aside from what has been mentioned; F4WM is a member-based organization that promotes ungulate recovery by reimbursing hunters and trappers up to $1,000 for any legal wolf harvested in Idaho and Montana. (Wyoming may soon join the list as well) and you get to keep the pelt! Membership cost is only $40 per year, which is a drop in the bucket for the sake of conservation. Join up, speak up at Fish and Game meetings, and consider a new hunting season to help conserve our current hunting season! For more information and details please visit https://www.foundationforwildlifemanagement.org/

*Sidebar:

  • Idaho’s average pack size is 6 wolves with a litter size of 7 pups.
  • 30% of the alpha males breed more than one female which often leads to more than one litter per pack
  • Each adult wolf consumes roughly 20 big game animals per year!
  • In 2019 there were 1541 wolves counted and we saw a record harvest of 586 wolves. Yet the 2020 count was still 1556 wolves!
  • Less than 1% of hunters will harvest a wolf and less than 1/16th of those will harvest a wolf purposefully. (Hunting wolves specifically)
  • Trappers have a 30% success rate, proving much more effective than traditional hunting methods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuskyMusky

mallardsx2

Veteran member
Jul 8, 2015
3,819
3,016
And I quote:

"Apex predators are THE litmus test for how we're doing securing habitat, practicing conservation, and keeping large ecosystems intact. Those animals simply would not exist otherwise.

I don't want to hunt in place where wolves, grizzlies, lions, black bears, lynx, bobcats, fisher, wolverine, marten, otters, etc. don't exist...I'll go a step further and say I wouldn't even care to live in such a place either. If we get the point where those animals fail to exist, we've failed and we've failed big.

Also, the lack of knowledge about predator/prey relationships is severely lacking by those screaming the loudest about "the wolves ate all the elk". They aren't even the leading predator on elk, deer, or anything else (see Bitterroot study, ID statewide study), etc. I doubt most people realize that on average, wolves rarely live much beyond 3 years in the Rockies, its a tough life out here. "
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hilltop

Rich M

Very Active Member
Oct 16, 2012
758
566
I'm not big on having too many alpha predators - the generations before us had more common sense that wasn't cloudy with fantasy-isms from watching Disney as kids and learning that animals are just people in little fur coats from the liberal teachers. Wolves, big bears, etc. were killed off for a reason.
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
953
Another real gem of an article...heavy on everything but facts.

Lion mortality is the leading cause of elk calf mortality in the Bitterroot:

Calf survival was largely driven by mountain lion predation, indicating that management actions aimed at reducing mountain lions densities may result in higher calf survival, thus increasing population growth rates. Overall, the annual rate of predation-caused mortality for elk calves was 0.28 (95% CI = 0.22, 0.35), and mountain lion caused mortality (CIF = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.14, 0.27) dominated over wolf caused mortality (CIF = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.07) and black bear caused mortality (CIF = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.02, 0.10).

Actual research found here, funded in part by 2 groups in Montana that I'm a life member of.


Idaho study here:


Calf mortality, 14% by lions, 3% by wolves in 2015/16.
Calf mortality, 16% by lions, 6% by wolves in 2017.

Seems the wolves aren't really eating all the elk.

If we believe the numbers posted in the article, that each adult wolf eats 20 ungulates a year (actual research would point to this being a high end number, many say 12-15). Each adult lion kills 52 a year, that number has been studied and very close to reality. Idaho estimates 2500-4000 lions depending on the various sources...lets use low end of 2500.

1556x20=31,120 ungulates a year, high end from wolves.

2500x52=130,000 ungulates a year.

I would much rather have a pack of 10 wolves in my hunting area than 10 adult lions. This is confirmed with an area my family has been hunting in NW Montana since the 1940's. Lions were absolutely ripping the whitetails and elk, pack of wolves have moved in the last 5-6 years and the cats are disappearing. That's been a great thing for the whitetail deer and elk hunting in my area, the wolves are very likely killing off pretty good numbers of lions.



Best thing to ever happen to my families hunting areas in Montana was wolves moving in. The wolves manage lion populations which absolutely are the leading predator for ungulates in the areas I hunt. The Montana Houndsmen Association cried to the MTFWP and the lion quotas were slashed by 90% in the area I hunt in NW Montana, deer and elk numbers tanked shortly after.

What I've observed on the ground verifies what these studies are pointing out.

Lions impact ungulate populations wayyyyyyyy more then wolves, and those are the facts.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,798
2,170
Eastern Nebraska
Another real gem of an article...heavy on everything but facts.

Lion mortality is the leading cause of elk calf mortality in the Bitterroot:

Calf survival was largely driven by mountain lion predation, indicating that management actions aimed at reducing mountain lions densities may result in higher calf survival, thus increasing population growth rates. Overall, the annual rate of predation-caused mortality for elk calves was 0.28 (95% CI = 0.22, 0.35), and mountain lion caused mortality (CIF = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.14, 0.27) dominated over wolf caused mortality (CIF = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.07) and black bear caused mortality (CIF = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.02, 0.10).

Actual research found here, funded in part by 2 groups in Montana that I'm a life member of.


Idaho study here:


Calf mortality, 14% by lions, 3% by wolves in 2015/16.
Calf mortality, 16% by lions, 6% by wolves in 2017.

Seems the wolves aren't really eating all the elk.

If we believe the numbers posted in the article, that each adult wolf eats 20 ungulates a year (actual research would point to this being a high end number, many say 12-15). Each adult lion kills 52 a year, that number has been studied and very close to reality. Idaho estimates 2500-4000 lions depending on the various sources...lets use low end of 2500.

1556x20=31,120 ungulates a year, high end from wolves.

2500x52=130,000 ungulates a year.

I would much rather have a pack of 10 wolves in my hunting area than 10 adult lions. This is confirmed with an area my family has been hunting in NW Montana since the 1940's. Lions were absolutely ripping the whitetails and elk, pack of wolves have moved in the last 5-6 years and the cats are disappearing. That's been a great thing for the whitetail deer and elk hunting in my area, the wolves are very likely killing off pretty good numbers of lions.



Best thing to ever happen to my families hunting areas in Montana was wolves moving in. The wolves manage lion populations which absolutely are the leading predator for ungulates in the areas I hunt. The Montana Houndsmen Association cried to the MTFWP and the lion quotas were slashed by 90% in the area I hunt in NW Montana, deer and elk numbers tanked shortly after.

What I've observed on the ground verifies what these studies are pointing out.

Lions impact ungulate populations wayyyyyyyy more then wolves, and those are the facts.
The links were Interesting reading. Our group has noticed a shift in elk behavior over the past 20 years in some areas we hunt. This may explain some of that. I do think more studies have to be done by non biased groups, on stable herds, before hard conclusions should be drawn, as was noted in one of the articles... or before calling out someone with a differing opinion.
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
953
The links were Interesting reading. Our group has noticed a shift in elk behavior over the past 20 years in some areas we hunt. This may explain some of that. I do think more studies have to be done by non biased groups, on stable herds, before hard conclusions should be drawn, as was noted in one of the articles... or before calling out someone with a differing opinion.
Yeah, the last groups I would trust from the Bitterroot study funded by the following groups and I don't find them biased.

This project was funded with revenue from the sale of Montana hunting and fishing licenses, as well as matching funds from Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration grant to the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. Funding was also provided by Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association, Montana Bowhunters Association, Hellgate Hunters and Anglers, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International Foundation, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Foundation, Western Montana Chapter of the Safari Club, the Shikar-Safari Club International Foundation, the Pope and Young Club, OnXMaps, McIntire-Stennis Foundation (USDA), NASA Grant # NNX11AO47G, the U. S. Forest Service, the MPG Ranch, and private donations from individuals in the community. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation EPSCoR program under Grant # EPS-1101342 within the Montana Institute

I know many of the people involved in that study on a personal level and have known some for over 25 years. One person in particular, probably knows more about lions than anyone alive on planet earth. He has been involved in lion research for over 35 years and is a trusted source by anyone involved in lion management.

Having opinions is fine, but facts would be a nice "touch" when trying to get readers to believe your opinions....just sayin'.
 

Hilltop

Veteran member
Feb 25, 2014
3,798
2,170
Eastern Nebraska
Yeah, the last groups I would trust from the Bitterroot study funded by the following groups and I don't find them biased.

This project was funded with revenue from the sale of Montana hunting and fishing licenses, as well as matching funds from Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration grant to the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. Funding was also provided by Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association, Montana Bowhunters Association, Hellgate Hunters and Anglers, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International Foundation, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Foundation, Western Montana Chapter of the Safari Club, the Shikar-Safari Club International Foundation, the Pope and Young Club, OnXMaps, McIntire-Stennis Foundation (USDA), NASA Grant # NNX11AO47G, the U. S. Forest Service, the MPG Ranch, and private donations from individuals in the community. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation EPSCoR program under Grant # EPS-1101342 within the Montana Institute

I know many of the people involved in that study on a personal level and have known some for over 25 years. One person in particular, probably knows more about lions than anyone alive on planet earth. He has been involved in lion research for over 35 years and is a trusted source by anyone involved in lion management.

Having opinions is fine, but facts would be a nice "touch" when trying to get readers to believe your opinions....just sayin'.
With support like that, there shouldn't be any problem conducting future studies, in an area with a stable population, to prove the theory correct. It makes a lot of sense but the 30% reduction in the elk herd can also explain some of the impact to the lion population, as the article pointed out, so it is challenging to draw definite conclusions. Any idea when future studies will happen or will this be enough to fuel further wolf introductions?
 

kidoggy

Veteran member
Apr 23, 2016
9,651
10,434
56
idaho
And I quote:

"Apex predators are THE litmus test for how we're doing securing habitat, practicing conservation, and keeping large ecosystems intact. Those animals simply would not exist otherwise.

I don't want to hunt in place where wolves, grizzlies, lions, black bears, lynx, bobcats, fisher, wolverine, marten, otters, etc. don't exist...I'll go a step further and say I wouldn't even care to live in such a place either. If we get the point where those animals fail to exist, we've failed and we've failed big.

Also, the lack of knowledge about predator/prey relationships is severely lacking by those screaming the loudest about "the wolves ate all the elk". They aren't even the leading predator on elk, deer, or anything else (see Bitterroot study, ID statewide study), etc. I doubt most people realize that on average, wolves rarely live much beyond 3 years in the Rockies, its a tough life out here. "
sounds like a buzz quote.
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
953
With support like that, there shouldn't be any problem conducting future studies, in an area with a stable population, to prove the theory correct. It makes a lot of sense but the 30% reduction in the elk herd can also explain some of the impact to the lion population, as the article pointed out, so it is challenging to draw definite conclusions. Any idea when future studies will happen or will this be enough to fuel further wolf introductions?
You do realize what the hypothesis was for the Bitterroot study right?
 

BuzzH

Very Active Member
Apr 15, 2015
910
953
As to moose mortality and declining populations, not a ID, MT, WY only thing...its happening across large portion of the WORLD at certain longitudes.

Winter ticks:




Brain worm:



Lower quality habitat and poor pregnancy rates with sublette moose, which have been declining wayyyy longer than when wolves hit the landscape:


I've also found 4 dead moose in SE Idaho, all in the summer, none of them even touched by predators when I found them. All victims of brain worm.

All wolves???


 

HuskyMusky

Veteran member
Nov 29, 2011
1,323
174
IL
A cheap lion and wolf tag option on every non-resident tag and resident tag would be a nice option.

at $10-25 a tag, every non-resident would buy it just about, just in case they had a chance at a wolf or lion.

at $250, every non-resident isn't going to be adding that option as a "just in case I see one"