Mdc Killed An Elk

[ozark trout fisher]

So what will happen when the Elk decide to migrate. Pecks is nowhere near the size of the National Elk Refuge.! Is MDC just going ot kil them off? If that is the case ten why was this project undertaken?

Only two solutions I see possible... Allow the animals to roam without killing them or HIGH FENCE the park and make it a zoo. If they are going to enforce shooting ( problem andimals ) then shoot them all now and be done with it.

One misconception that needs to be cleared up: the elk are not being limited to Peck Ranch, so you don't need to worry about them being confined to a 20,000 acre conservation area. The elk restoration zone is no less than 346 square miles, or well over 200,000 acres...an area approximately ten times larger than Peck Ranch. Some elk are going to range out of there, but despite not being a biologist, that seems like enough room for a decent elk population to thrive. Just look at a map of the area around Peck Ranch...The VAST majority of the land around it is either tied up in other massive conservation areas like Rocky Creek, or federal land contained in Mark Twain National Forest or Ozark National Scenic Riverways. Some elk will wander onto private land and there will be some complaints and bumps along the road, but I don't personally foresee a widespread problem. I wish we could see them introduced into the entire Ozark region, but until that day comes I am glad to see them being reintroduced somewhere in the state. Something is better than nothing.

I don't want to be rude Feathers and Fins, but I do think I'll ask again whether you've been to that area. If you have, you wouldn't be calling it a zoo, and if you haven't you should at least visit it before you pass judgement. If this can work anywhere in Missouri or Arkansas, it should work there. And we have already seen positive results in Arkansas.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I'm still lost as to why elk are an exception.

Yes, these elk are tagged- just like MDC tags whitetails, turkey, smallmouth, largemouth, paddlefish, sturgeon, ducks, geese, doves, and other critters. I'm not sure how that makes them anyone's pet. MDC's job is to manage wildlife populations. To manage wildlife populations, they need data. To acquire data, they need tags. Tags are expensive, but far less costly than hiring agents or technicians to track and monitor elk 24/7. Folks are already whining about the cost of the reintroduction program, how do well do you think hiring more people would go over?

The collars look silly, but it's no different than any other tag MDC uses on wildlife, and collects volumes of valuable information on these animals. Would it have been better to blindly release elk, with no means of collecting data on where they are, what habitat they're using, or whether they're even alive and healthy? IMO complaining about collars is a pretty lame reason for poo-pooing the entire program, like saying we shouldn't bother managing stream smallmouth because those reward tags clash with their color scheme.

Folks can see elk in parks and zoos, just as folks can see ducks and geese in county parks, whitetails and turkey in Grant's Farm, smallmouth bass in the tank at Bass Pro. Should we therefore ignore their wild populations? Not bother worrying about their interactions with people and the health of their ecosystems? If a fenced elk in St. Louis county has the same value as an unfenced elk in Carter County, why wouldn't a smallmouth in a tank have the same value as a smallmouth in the Meramec? And if those two are equivalent, why bother managing to benefit wild smallmouth?

And sure, elk roam. Deer roam. Turkeys roam. Bobcats roam. Squirrels roam. Smallmouth, walleye, sauger, paddlefish, sturgeon, suckers, catfish- they all roam. Doves roam. Ducks roam. Geese roam. Songbirds roam. Hawks, eagles, ospreys...heck, box turtles roam. It's not just elk. And we find ways of managing these species, so why not elk? No one here is getting their panties in a wad over raccoons trapped in attics or skunks trapped under stoops- or flocks of geese shot because they landed on a tarmac. These animals are killed solely because they wound up in areas they weren't wanted- just as this elk did. It's not a novel concept.

Spot on post OB. All of your post on this subject have been. Some just can't understand logic though. I applaud your valiant effort.

[ness]

Just look at these majestic beauties:

Almost brings tears to my eyes seeing them roaming free, like they did before the white man came and jacked it all up.

It occurs to me that those collars look a lot like the Invisible Fence collars I have on my dogs. I wonder how much it would cost to get a few souped-up collars and string a wire around Peck?

[Outside Bend]

The collars on these elk are on every single one of them. MDC doesn't tag every single smallie, bobcat, whitetail, or whatever. Every single one of these PET ELK are being radio collared and tracked and will have to be, presumably for as long as they continue with this thing. And they will want to roam but they don't want them to?? Guess thats why they need to keep tabs and each and every one of them, because they are a massive creature and could cause issues with landowners.

They won't be tagging every elk in the state. They've tagged every animal up till now, in order to collect some baseline data. They'll keep a few animals tagged to monitor herd health, but no, not every animal in the established population will have a goofy yellow collar.

Look, I love elk. They look cool in Colorado or Wyoming, or Montana. Roaming around those peaks and bugling and it gets me all fuzzy and warm. But out there, they don't have to keep tabs and each and everyone of them, do they? Because they got more room to spread out in places like RMNP, or on these massive mountains and dense forests. Peck is pretty big, but it ain't Montana big. This is just a silly fantasy project.

Missouri isn't Colorado or Wyoming or Montana. Those states are large, so they can manage large herds of elk. We're small, so we're managing a small herd of elk. The habitat's different too- elk movements out west are motivated in large part by food availability, migrating from high elevation summer ranges to low-elevation winter range. That roaming behavior tends to break down when elk are introduced into places where food is abundant- Kentucky or Pennsylvania, for example.

[Outside Bend]

]Elk Migration

The National Elk Refuge

In the high country, deep November snows cause elk to migrate to their winter range on the National Elk Refuge, In strings of 200 or more, thousands of elk arrive, some after traveling more than 65 miles from southern Yellowstone National Park and surrounding national forests.Settlement and development eliminated nearly three-fourths of the elk's natural winter range. The 23,000-acre National Elk Refuge was established in 1912 to protect the remaining winter habitat.

Throughout the year, several different national and state agencies manage the herd and its habitat. The elk (properly called watiti) leave the Refuge in April when winter snows began to melt. Calves are born in late May and June as the elk migrate to their summer ranges.

The winter herd on the National Elk Refuge exceeds 7,500 animals. About one-half of these elk summer in Grand Teton National Park. The elk are not confined; the Refuge fence protects them from the road.

Emphasis added.

When the elevation of Carter County reaches 7000+ feet and they have 10-12+ feet of snowpack, we're going to have significantly larger problems than where the elk are going.

[Smallmouth Addict]

So let me get this straight...elk roam. Yep. They aren't going to be doing much roaming to get away from wolves in MO. The reason they'll roam in MO is to find better food. Given that 99% of the open ground in and around the Current River country is pasture, and 99.9% of the pasture is fescue, which is basically worthless for most wildlife and not all that appealing to elk, they might not be very attracted to it, but if they get tired of browsing the woodlands they may start looking for some practically non-existent cropland.

Which is why MDC is trying to appease the landowners and keep them in the wild, public lands. It seems like the biggest complaint among those here, who don't have a stake in the game in the form of land ownership in the area, is all the money they spent. I get that. I'd like to see money spent on other things. But geez, give this a chance to work. It ain't like it's irreversible. If elk suddenly begin to cause a lot of problems, it would be pretty easy to turn the locals loose to wipe them out. Then, yes, the money would have been wasted. But in the meantime, I think it's worth a shot. Elk seem to be doing okay in Arkansas without too many problems.

[Smallmouth Addict]

I think bottom line is that they can't be kept on "wild public property" Key word "kept" that simple. Lived most of life in Elk, Bear, Moose and Cougar country. Hey I'm all for this but IT WILL not work with the given precedent.

[jdmidwest]

The reason Private Landowners are against them is they are 1000 lb eating and moving machines. A poor little whitetail that averages 150 lbs or a turkey that is only 17 lbs will not over graze private property or tear down fences. Those little whitetails will stretch out a barb wire fence when they crawl thru or jump it. A turkey will worry itself silly on a woven wire fence looking for a hole. A elk will just tear it down and keep going. The deer will not usually kill the occupants of a vehicle traveling 55 mph like a big ole elk. I assume, doing the weight to eating ration math, they must consume 10x the browse that a whitetail will. I have seen too many whitetails decimate an alfalfa hay field from over grazing. And, they did not cost approx 30k each to reintroduce.

I think they are great majestic animals. They taste great, would rather eat a thousand pounds of elk before one whitetail backstrap. But are they really worth it?

[ColdWaterFshr]

Free the bison!!

[Outside Bend]

The reason Private Landowners are against them is they are 1000 lb eating and moving machines. A poor little whitetail that averages 150 lbs or a turkey that is only 17 lbs will not over graze private property or tear down fences. Those little whitetails will stretch out a barb wire fence when they crawl thru or jump it. A turkey will worry itself silly on a woven wire fence looking for a hole. A elk will just tear it down and keep going. The deer will not usually kill the occupants of a vehicle traveling 55 mph like a big ole elk. I assume, doing the weight to eating ration math, they must consume 10x the browse that a whitetail will. I have seen too many whitetails decimate an alfalfa hay field from over grazing. And, they did not cost approx 30k each to reintroduce.

I think they are great majestic animals. They taste great, would rather eat a thousand pounds of elk before one whitetail backstrap. But are they really worth it?

First you say a poor lil whitetail or deer will not overgraze an area, then you say you've seen whitetail decimate an alfalfa field from overgrazing. Which is it?

Many private landowners are already growing 1000 lb eating and moving machines-cattle. There's more than four million cattle in this state, going through fences pretty regularly, yet the problem is 400 elk which may someday go through a fence. The reality is a private landowner is far more likely to see damage from their own livestock than from introduced elk- it's a logical fallacy, using a small number of dramatic events to try and outweigh the statistical evidence. Making a mountain out of a molehill, as it were.