Cow elk restricted LEH

[kebes]

I didn't want to open up a new thread for this but I also didn't want to hijack someone else's. I get that the elevation restricted hunts for cow elk are to hit the non-migratory herds but wouldn't it be possible to have a few cow tags for higher elevations? Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I could help me out on this. Why not have a few tags for cows that aren't elevation restricted?

Sorry....I'm referring to region 4.

[GoatGuy]

It would certainly be possible however there is severe resistance from some hunters and outfitters.

[6616]

I didn't want to open up a new thread for this but I also didn't want to hijack someone else's. I get that the elevation restricted hunts for cow elk are to hit the non-migratory herds but wouldn't it be possible to have a few cow tags for higher elevations? Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I could help me out on this. Why not have a few tags for cows that aren't elevation restricted?

Sorry....I'm referring to region 4.

I beleive there are lots of potential opportunities if the management objective was to maximize opportunites and utilize the full potential and sustainable harvest levels of the current elk populations: cow elk LEH in upper elevations, even a cow GOS for a short period, a 3pt bull season for a two or three weeks, etc.

However, until there's risk to the herds from over-ppopulation, which may be closer than we think, these types of objectives remain social objectives and like GG says they are not supported well by the Region 4 hunters and guides for some reason. The effort is currently to reduce the non-migratory component as you stated.

They finally loosened the reins on White Tailed Deer harvest, maybe elk will follow in a year or two? Hopefully mild winters will continue since we may have a considerable number of elk stockpiled (at or above carrying capacity) right now and a real bad winter could result in serious losses.

[hunter1947]

Reason is if they target cow elk above the 11 hundred mark we would be taking cows that aren't a pest to farmers fields and might have an effect on the cow to bull ratio in the hi elevation area..

[6616]

The 2008 elk survey report stated bull/cow ratios are on average around 29 bulls per 100 cows in the Ek MUs. Shooting cows out of the high elevation migratory herds would improve bull/cow ratios, but the bull/cow ratio is currently considered satisfactory and is not a management concern.

[GoatGuy]

The 2008 elk survey report stated bull/cow ratios are on average around 29 bulls per 100 cows in the Ek MUs. Shooting cows out of the high elevation migratory herds would improve bull/cow ratios, but the bull/cow ratio is currently considered satisfactory and is not a management concern.

Well above satisfactory. Satisfactory would be somewhere around 15:100 in my eyes.

[sawmill]

The 2008 elk survey report stated bull/cow ratios are on average around 29 bulls per 100 cows in the Ek MUs. Shooting cows out of the high elevation migratory herds would improve bull/cow ratios, but the bull/cow ratio is currently considered satisfactory and is not a management concern.
And what Victoria "expert "did that pearl come from?
The herds around Kimberley have at most 10 bulls per 100 and they are mostly spikes,3`s 4`s.Of course I could be wrong,I only live here and see 200+ elk any morning I care to drive around and look.3 seperate herds by the way,non migratory.I call bull shit.

[6616]

And what Victoria "expert "did that pearl come from?
The herds around Kimberley have at most 10 bulls per 100 and they are mostly spikes,3`s 4`s.Of course I could be wrong,I only live here and see 200+ elk any morning I care to drive around and look.3 seperate herds by the way,non migratory.I call bull shit.

The report was generated locally by the Cranbrook office staff of F&W following the 2008 inventory flights. I could send you a copy, but I cannot provide a link, I don't even know if it's on-line.

29 bulls per 100 cows was the average, some areas were less, some areas were more, 4-26 was the lowest.

[hunter1947]

The 2008 elk survey report stated bull/cow ratios are on average around 29 bulls per 100 cows in the Ek MUs. Shooting cows out of the high elevation migratory herds would improve bull/cow ratios, but the bull/cow ratio is currently considered satisfactory and is not a management concern.


???? Andy why would you think that ???? ,your saying that the ratio cow to bull is 29 to 100 if they target cow elk in the hi elevation I would think it would upset the ratio.

In a few years if they target the cows hi up there could be a 70% cow to 40% bull ratio..

[6616]

???? Andy why would you think that ???? ,your saying that the ratio cow to bull is 29 to 100 if they target cow elk in the hi elevation I would think it would upset the ratio.

In a few years if they target the cows hi up there could be a 70% cow to 40% bull ratio..

I'm not saying the ratio is 29 bulls per 100 cows, I'm just stating what Tara's report says. On the other hand I don't see any reason to disbelieve her.

Not sure what you're saying re bull/cow ratios. Seems to me it's obvious that if you shoot cows the tendency would be for the bull component to increase, is this a bad thing, like "out of whack"...? Is there such a thing as too many bulls?

In unhunted herds in the National Parks the bull/cow ratio is usually around 50 bulls per 100 cows, so would you call that "out of whack"?

[hunter1947]

I'm not saying the ratio is 29 bulls per 100 cows, I'm just stating what Tara's report says. On the other hand I don't see any reason to disbelieve her.

Not sure what you're saying re bull/cow ratios. Seems to me it's obvious that if you shoot cows the tendency would be for the bull component to increase, is this a bad thing, like "out of whack"...? Is there such a thing as too many bulls?

In unhunted herds in the National Parks the bull/cow ratio is usually around 50 bulls per 100 cows, so would you call that "out of whack"?

Andy 30 or more bulls to 100 cows would be a bull ratio out of whack and in order to keep the bulls to a 20% to 100% cow the elk management should have a short GOS for bulls to keep to this number.

An elk biologist 20 years ago from Montana told me that a well balanced bull to cow ratio is 20 bulls to 100 cows.

What I am saying is they do open up a cow elk season in region 4 in the hi elevation it will have a devastating effect on the cow numbers ,I say if they think that thee are to many cows out there then do it by a giving out more LEH this way they can control the numbers that would be targeted.

What this thread is all about is why don't the elk management hand out more LEH tags for cow elk in region 4 in the hi elevation my opinion is NO the cow ratio is at a good percentage number so why target them ,if elk management want to do something then reduce the percentage of bulls from 30% bulls to cows to 20% bulls to cows.

Lets face it a strong herd bull can take on over 30 cows in the rut period..

[6616]

Andy 30 or more bulls to 100 cows would be a bull ratio out of whack and in order to keep the bulls to a 20% to 100% cow the elk management should have a short GOS for bulls to keep to this number.

An elk biologist 20 years ago from Montana told me that a well balanced bull to cow ratio is 20 bulls to 100 cows.

What I am saying is they do open up a cow elk season in region 4 in the hi elevation it will have a devastating effect on the cow numbers ,I say if they think that thee are to many cows out there then do it by a giving out more LEH this way they can control the numbers that would be targeted.

What this thread is all about is why don't the elk management hand out more LEH tags for cow elk in region 4 in the hi elevation my opinion is NO the cow ratio is at a good percentage number so why target them ,if elk management want to do something then reduce the percentage of bulls from 30% bulls to cows to 20% bulls to cows.

Lets face it a strong herd bull can take on over 30 cows in the rut period..

I do not believe 20 bulls per 100 cows is considered as a biological optimum bull/cow ratio for elk by anyone, or that ratios above that, or below that (as long as they do not drop below 10/100 cows) would be considered as "out of whack" by any biologists.

Natural unhunted herds stabilize at 50 to 60 bulls per 100 cows. BC manages elk for a minimum ratio of 20 bulls per 100 cows, but on the other hand Washington State manages for a 12 to 15 bulls per 100 cows post hunting season with 10% as a minimum. In Utah where all hunts are LEH and a very restricted trophy management regime exists, post season ratios are well above 40 bulls per 100 cows. I don't think the managers in any of these juridictions would consider their bull/cow ratios as being out of whack as long as they're within the management objective guidelines of their specific management strategies.

These variations have little or no biological impacts since productivity and reproduction does not change over the range from 10 to 60 bulls per 100 cows. These different target ratios are mostly related to the established management/hunting objectives in different jurisdictions that range between pure trophy management (Utah), to pure maximum sustained yield (Washington), to somewhere in between (BC).

Regarding cow harvests of the migratory herds, I actually tend to agree with you that if it is ever considered it should probably be done by LEH, but I also don't think a very short GOS would create an absolute disaster either. The key thing is how many cows one kills and to keep that number within a sustainable level. Elevation is only part of the equation. Timing is also important. After about mid-October migratory elk can be killed at low elevations when all elk, migratory and non-migratory, are all together on the winter ranges with no way of indentifying one from the other.

At some point in time under the current conditions cow elk from the migratory herds will have to be targeted in modest numbers, and it's got nothing to do with bull/cow ratios, it's merely going to be a required population control measure. Right now with zero cow harvest from migratory herds those populations are probably continuing to expand and may soon be over-populated in regards to range carrying capacity.

I believe the cow harvest from the low elevation non-migratory herds is sufficient at the current time. F&W feels that segement of the population is stabilizing. LEHs were cut back this year in anticipation of the potential harvest of a short under 1100 meter GOS that is being proposed.

[GoatGuy]

Andy 30 or more bulls to 100 cows would be a bull ratio out of whack and in order to keep the bulls to a 20% to 100% cow the elk management should have a short GOS for bulls to keep to this number.

An elk biologist 20 years ago from Montana told me that a well balanced bull to cow ratio is 20 bulls to 100 cows.

What I am saying is they do open up a cow elk season in region 4 in the hi elevation it will have a devastating effect on the cow numbers ,I say if they think that thee are to many cows out there then do it by a giving out more LEH this way they can control the numbers that would be targeted.

What this thread is all about is why don't the elk management hand out more LEH tags for cow elk in region 4 in the hi elevation my opinion is NO the cow ratio is at a good percentage number so why target them ,if elk management want to do something then reduce the percentage of bulls from 30% bulls to cows to 20% bulls to cows.

Lets face it a strong herd bull can take on over 30 cows in the rut period..

The reason you would harvest cows or calves is to keep the herd productive and/or to reduce it.

Less than 10 bull:100 cows would start to raise flags in terms of conservation anything above that is A OK. Whether the bull to cow is 50:100 or 20:100 really makes no 'difference' to the elk only to the hunter.

From a hunters standpoint all it means is there's the possibility to harvest more bulls from the population which creates more opportunity and puts more meat in the freezer without impacting the elk population.

[hunter1947]

I do not believe 20 bulls per 100 cows is considered as a biological optimum bull/cow ratio for elk by anyone, or that ratios above that, or below that (as long as they do not drop below 10/100 cows) would be considered as "out of whack" by any biologists.

Natural unhunted herds stabilize at 50 to 60 bulls per 100 cows. BC manages elk for a minimum ratio of 20 bulls per 100 cows, but on the other hand Washington State manages for a 12 to 15 bulls per 100 cows post hunting season with 10% as a minimum. In Utah where all hunts are LEH and a very restricted trophy management regime exists, post season ratios are well above 40 bulls per 100 cows. I don't think the managers in any of these juridictions would consider their bull/cow ratios as being out of whack as long as they're within the management objective guidelines of their specific management strategies.

These variations have little or no biological impacts since productivity and reproduction does not change over the range from 10 to 60 bulls per 100 cows. These different target ratios are mostly related to the established management/hunting objectives in different jurisdictions that range between pure trophy management (Utah), to pure maximum sustained yield (Washington), to somewhere in between (BC).

Regarding cow harvests of the migratory herds, I actually tend to agree with you that if it is ever considered it should probably be done by LEH, but I also don't think a very short GOS would create an absolute disaster either. The key thing is how many cows one kills and to keep that number within a sustainable level. Elevation is only part of the equation. Timing is also important. After about mid-October migratory elk can be killed at low elevations when all elk, migratory and non-migratory, are all together on the winter ranges with no way of indentifying one from the other.

At some point in time under the current conditions cow elk from the migratory herds will have to be targeted in modest numbers, and it's got nothing to do with bull/cow ratios, it's merely going to be a required population control measure. Right now with zero cow harvest from migratory herds those populations are probably continuing to expand and may soon be over-populated in regards to range carrying capacity.

I believe the cow harvest from the low elevation non-migratory herds is sufficient at the current time. F&W feels that segement of the population is stabilizing. LEHs were cut back this year in anticipation of the potential harvest of a short under 1100 meter GOS that is being proposed.

You have your opinion I have mine I say 50 bulls to 100 cows is way to many bulls.
Like I said in my previos post a good herd bull will take on up to 30 or more cows in the rut period so 20 to 25 bulls to 100 cows will work just fine the way I see it http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif..

[j270wsm]

What I dont understand is they doubled the size of the cow elk zone in 4-23 but cut the tags back from 107 to 49 tags, what is the purpose of that? The new zone includes the bow only zone which is well over the 1100m mark.

In my opinion F*** the farmers, there cattle over graze alot of the winter range that the elk depend on

[6616]

What I dont understand is they doubled the size of the cow elk zone in 4-23 but cut the tags back from 107 to 49 tags, what is the purpose of that? The new zone includes the bow only zone which is well over the 1100m mark.

In my opinion F*** the farmers, there cattle over graze alot of the winter range that the elk depend on

I don't think the x-zone expansion in the EV is considered an agriculture zone, but more a population control area. MOE deemed the elk population is too high and the winter ranges are being over-used. The LEH numbers were reduced in anticipation of a cow elk GOS in the x-zone as near as I can figure.

[6616]

You have your opinion I have mine I say 50 bulls to 100 cows is way to many bulls.
Like I said in my previos post a good herd bull will take on up to 30 or more cows in the rut period so 20 to 25 bulls to 100 cows will work just fine the way I see it http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif..

I don't think it's even possible to get the bull/cow ratio up to 50 per 100 cows in a hunted area unless the hunting was a very restrictive LEH similar to what has existed in the WK.

However, I don't think 30 to 35 bulls per hundred cows would have any negative impacts, but that also would be very difficult without restricting the current bull harvest.

Shooting cows is a population control measure only, not an attempt to adjust bull/cow ratios. If one tried to increase the bull cow ratios even a small amount by shooting cows it would take a very large number of cows to be shot (probably an unsustainable number).

Adjusting bull/cow ratios can normally only be accomplished by manipulating bull harvests.

[hunter1947]

Andy this thread was not about bulls to cow ratio it was about giving out more cow elk LEH in the hi elevation and my thought on that was NO.

In region 4 If there is 50 bulls to 100 cow ratio then the elk wildlife management should have a GOS for 3 point or better bull elk for a two week period so hunters can put some meat in there freezers.

I am darn sure that it don't take more then 10 breeding bulls to serve 100 cows this leaves 40 bulls from 50 out there that do very little breeding and in most cases no breeding.
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif

[hunter1947]

Regarding the count on elk anywhere in BC.

I don't believe that they who do an elk count throughout the BC Provence can do an accurate on elk when they do it.

What about all the elk that hold up in the timber when this count is taking place ?????.

I'm betting that they don't count for 20% of all elk when they do there count in any region.

One place that would not be an accurate count would be Vancouver Island Elk way to treed forests..

[GoatGuy]

Regarding the count on elk anywhere in BC.

I don't believe that they who do an elk count throughout the BC Provence can do an accurate on elk when they do it.

What about all the elk that hold up in the timber when this count is taking place ?????.

I'm betting that they don't count for 20% of all elk when they do there count in any region.

One place to do an accurate count would be Vancouver Island Elk..

There's a couple different methods to estimate the entire population.

There's plenty of work that has been done in this field. You can use collared animals to get an idea of sightability and a few other methods.

In any case it's done and it works.

[6616]

In region 4 If there is 50 bulls to 100 cow ratio then the elk wildlife management should have a GOS for 3 point or better bull elk for a two week period so hunters can put some meat in there freezers.

I am darn sure that it don't take more then 10 breeding bulls to serve 100 cows this leaves 40 bulls from 50 out there that do very little breeding and in most cases no breeding.
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif

There are not 50 bulls per 100 cows in the East Kootenay (I didn't say there was) and the fact is there never will be,,,,, but if there ever is, I agree the season should then be very long and liberal.

I also agree, 10 bulls per hundred cows is a sufficient sperm supply and reproduction would not be compromised, and that's been proven by research. However, I don't think that's a socially acceptable number for hunters or hunter success ratios, and I don't think biologists believe it's good enough to maintain herd age and social structure.

On the cow elk question, I don't rule out the possibility that at some time in the near future we may need to harvest cows from the migratory population to control density in relation to carrying capacity.

The inventory survey methods are reasonably accurate and are sufficiently accurate to base management decisions on. You are correct, they don't count every single animal, but the sightability indexes take different types of cover, snow depth, and many things into consideration and have been developed through many years of continued refinement and research, and are utilized through very strict protocols. The end result is not an exact number but is an estimate with a confidence interval of usually + or - 90% accuracy or better. I don't think we'll really be able to practically get much better than that under field conditions.

There is very accurate infra-red technology available for wildlife inventory use, but it counts all large mammals and it's pretty much useless for counting a single species where there's more than one species sharing the survey area.

I'm sure that over time survey methods will improve even more, but for the present "we have what we have" so that's what biologists will use to base management decisions on, and they will do allright as long as they maintain a 90% confidence interval. The biggest management issue isn't that the surveys aren't accurate enough, it's that there's not enough money for surveying wildlife populations at adequate intervals, or even at all in many cases.

[hunter1947]

There's a couple different methods to estimate the entire population.

There's plenty of work that has been done in this field. You can use collared animals to get an idea of sightability and a few other methods.

In any case it's done and it works.


Yes you are right Goat Guy but will the elk management ever do this funds ???.

[hunter1947]

What I would like to see is that the biologist put tracking collars on 100 adult cows in the hi elevation and lets see how many cows give birth to a calf in the spring ????.

[6616]

What I would like to see is that the biologist put tracking collars on 100 adult cows in the hi elevation and lets see how many cows give birth to a calf in the spring ????.

A bunch of cow elk have been collared in the EK in recent years. They are captured during the winter months with baited corral traps when they are concentrated on the winter range as that is the only feasible place and time of year to do this. So there's no guarantee how many are from the migratory or high elevation herds. Estimated cost for collars, capture and affixing of collars, and follow-up tracking can be as high as $5000.00 per animal. Capturing cows on the high elevation summer range to ensure the entire sample is from migratory herds would require helicopters and net guns, very much more expensive. Don't you think that flying the winter ranges in March or February and determining the calf/cow ratio is good enough data since spring recruitment is really the key piece of info?

[GoatGuy]

Yes you are right Goat Guy but will the elk management ever do this funds ???.

They did it two years ago when they flew it.

They had a bunch of cows collared to see what they were doing in terms of migrating.

[hunter1947]

They did it two years ago when they flew it.

They had a bunch of cows collared to see what they were doing in terms of migrating.


Ok Goat Guy but what about the out come on giving birth ,do you or someone else have a number of births on new borons from the cows that where collard from this experiment ???.

[hunter1947]

A bunch of cow elk have been collared in the EK in recent years. They are captured during the winter months with baited corral traps when they are concentrated on the winter range as that is the only feasible place and time of year to do this. So there's no guarantee how many are from the migratory or high elevation herds. Estimated cost for collars, capture and affixing of collars, and follow-up tracking can be as high as $5000.00 per animal. Capturing cows on the high elevation summer range to ensure the entire sample is from migratory herds would require helicopters and net guns, very much more expensive. Don't you think that flying the winter ranges in March or February and determining the calf/cow ratio is good enough data since spring recruitment is really the key piece of info?


Yes I agree Andy as long as the management can get a number count on calf births and get a high percentage number count http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif..

[6616]

Ok Goat Guy but what about the out come on giving birth ,do you or someone else have a number of births on the cows that where collard from this experiment ???.

Does birth rate data really matter at the current time when calf/cow ratios and recuitiment rates are so high?

If recruitment was low, that information would then be important to determine if conception rates were part of the cause of low recruitment rates, but recruitment rates are currently up in the 28 to 30 per 100 cows area. That's actually too high and means the herd probably will continue to expand.

Of the 80 cows that were collared in 2007 and 2008 Tara did have a pretty rough idea which ones had calves, but if they recorded that data I don't have it. They probably didn't make a point of recording it in detail because it's largely inconsequential when we are enjoying such high recruitment rates.

[6616]

Yes I agree Andy as long as the management can get a number count on calf births and get a high percentage number count http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif..

Back in the late 90's MOE attempted to determine conception rates by having successful cow hunters submit the reproductive tract, and the outcome of that effort indicated a conception rate of around 80 to 83 percent.

Since yearling cows don't breed and only about 60% to 65% of 2 1/2 year old cows breed successfully, 80% conception is considered normal. In the National Parks conception rates are actually lower (75% to 80%) due to low herd productivity because they're often at, near, or over carrying capacity much of the time.

I believe that in the past when recruitment rates were low, it was never determined to be caused by low conception rates. Even when bull ratios were down around 15/100 cows, 80% of the cows were carrying a calf fetus. There are overwintering losses due to re-absorption during especially hard winters, but it's been pretty much agreed that the main cause of low recruitment during that era was losses to predators.

[hunter1947]

I will let all members in on a story I will tell about elk hunting in the low elevation..

Around 15 years ago my hunting partner that has lived in Cranbrook all his life his name is Dallas Hills.

he was in a truck accident and his leg had to have a steel pin put into it he could not walk that good that fall so we targeted the low elevation elk.

He got permission from this farmer to hunt there alfalfa fields where the elk where damaging his crops.

My friend did shot a nice big 6x7 and long story short the farmer claimed it for himself ,I will post this story of this elk that we lost in open chat on a new thread latter..

Anyways what this post is all about is regarding low elevation elk and hi elevation elk..

We started out our hunt for a bull elk on this farmers field we scouted out in the daytime where there main exit was out of the farmers field there where a handful of trails they where using.

So we picked the most well used runway to ambush these elk ,we got there at just breaking daylight and no elk to be found in these fields ????.

So we waited for about an hour then I decided to go up the trail after them after 2 hours of walking I never did get close to the elk herd.

We decided to go in to set up one hour before day light we got there the time we wanted to and sat there waiting till daylight still no elk ????.

That day we talked about this and figured the elk must be heading up out of the field earlier so we got there two hours before daylight and where set up ,within 10 min we could hear the heard coming there was elk talking all around us passing by us within a few meters we waited till shooting light and then went after them.

My friend could not go after them so I said I would after 3 hours of walking up hill I never did catch up with this herd.

We decided to head up well above this elk herd that was traveling up the mountains from Ha Ha creek road on up into the Baker mt ridge area.

We got well above the low elevation area for elk one hour before shooting light just a few minuets had past when we heard a few bulls bugle just below us and we heard the cows talking here they come but was still to dark to do any shooting http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon9.gif.

The herd had gone by us in the dark with the herd bull bugling his head off as they continued up the mountain.

After 6 days of trying to figure these elk out we gave up and hunted elk in the hi elevation area in a different place.

What this story is about is that these elk are low elevation elk BUT they are hi elevation elk during most of the daylight hours.

I would think that the elk management would no about this low to hi travel pattern ???.

What I think is happening in many low elevation areas during the winter months when the elk are below the 11 hundred meter mark is.

A percentage of these wintering elk will stay low and feed all year long in the low elevation and this will happen year after year the elk filter down to winter range and a percentage that where hi elevation elk will become low elevation feeding elk.

There will be a hi percentage of the winter range elk that will head back up into the hi elevation for the spring summer months and stay.

What I am trying to say if this makes sense every year that hi elevation elk come down to winter a small percentage of them that where hi elevation elk will not go back up and live in the hi elevation area and this will happen year after year.

Thats why I said NO to hunting the hi elevation cow elk herds there are enough cows and bulls each year that will be a low elevation animal that once where a hi elevation animal the Seniors and Juniors can target these low elevation elk..

This is my opinion on why there should not be a LEH or open season for cow elk in the hi elevation http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif ..

[6616]

What you say is true Wayne. In the telemetry study they are finding a certain percentage of elk that are homesteader elk, a certain percentage that are fully migratory elk, and a third component of elk that move back and forth between summer and winter ranges frequently all year long. This is more possible today due to the lack of logging in the Trench tributaries and a large number of elk spend their summers fairly close to the Trench instead of moving far away into the upper reaches of the tributaries like they used to.

Also it is becoming somewhat of a concern that no matter how many homesteader elk are harvested their numbers are not declining as fast as expected, possibly suggesting there may be a high rate of immigration of elk into the homesteader populations from from the migratory herds.

That does not change the fact that we need to consider overall population density in comparison to winter range carrying capacity, but the fact is we may already be shooting a good number of migratory cow elk inadvertently due to the suspected above immigration.

Note the above immigration factor is not proven yet by the telemetry study but is highly suspected.

Unfortunatelly, if the above does prove out to be true the heavy low elevation harvest of cow elk is not going to help the ag-land depredation issue much until the whole elk population is reduced, but since the overall population is deemed to be at or near carrying capacity this might not be such a bad thing for the long-term future of the elk herd.