Call to Action Item

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRD/NRR—2016/1367 ON THE COVER Bison on Antelope Flats in Grand Teton National Park Photography by: National Park Service Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRD/NRR—2016/1367

Amanda Hardy and Glenn Plumb

National Park Service Biological Resources Division 1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 200 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525

December 2016

U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public.

The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision- making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations.

All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the in- tended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.

This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government.

This report is available from the Biological Resources Division website: (http://www.nature. nps.gov/biology/) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www. nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). To receive this report in a format optimized for screen readers, please email [email protected].

Please cite this publication as:

Hardy, A. and G. Plumb. 2016. Call to action item #26 - back home on the range. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRD/NRR—2016/1367. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

NPS 999/135640, December 2016 ii Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Contents Page

Appendices . . . . . �� iv Abstract . . . . . �� v Introduction . . . . . ��1 Our Shared Call to Action-Bison Management and Stewardship in the 21st Century . . . . . ��2 DOI Bison Conservation Initiative . . . . . ��4 Tribal Bison Cooperation . . . . . ��6 State Cooperation . . . . . ��8 Bison Scholarship and Science . . . . . ��10 Bison Cultural Resource Stewardship: Going Beyond the Symbol . . . . . ��12 Engagement, Education, and Outreach . . . . . ��13 International Conservation Cooperation: Continental-scale Species Restoration . . . . . ��15 Other Key Collaborations and Engagements . . . . . ��16 Park Bison Conservation Highlights . . . . . ��18 Badlands National Park . . . . . ��18 Chickasaw National Recreation Area . . . . . ��18 Glacier National Park . . . . . ��19 Grand Canyon National Park . . . . . ��20 Grand Teton National Park . . . . . ��21 Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve . . . . . ��22 Tallgrass National Prairie Preserve . . . . . ��23 Theodore Roosevelt National Park . . . . . ��23 Wind Cave National Park . . . . . ��24 Wrangell St. Elias National Park and Preserve . . . . . ��25 Yellowstone National Park . . . . . ��26 Looking Forward . . . . . ��28 Literature Cited . . . . . ��30

National Park Service iii Appendices Page

Appendix A: Department of Interior Bison Conservation Herds . . . . . ��31 Appendix B: Map of Department of Interior Bison Conservation Herds (Credit: Wildlife Conservation Society) . . . . . ��32 Appendix C: Bison Research in National Parks 2011-2016 . . . . . ��33 Appendix D: Bison Science and Scholarship References (2011-2016) Relevant to NPS Bison Stewardship and the Call to Action . . . . . ��34

iv Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Appendices Abstract

Page In August 2011 the National Park Service report summarizes activities undertaken (NPS) issued “A Call to Action,” to help between 2011-2016 that the NPS and col- guide the NPS and partners into its second laborating partners pursued to improve co- century of preserving and protecting our ordinated management of the species and to natural and cultural heritage. Call to Ac- inspire innovative and unique approaches to tion Item #26 “Back Home on the Range” bring wild bison “back home on the range” commits the NPS to restoring and sustaining to benefit grassland ecosystems, traditional three wild bison populations in collaboration cultures, thriving economies and healthy with partners. Since then, the NPS has been lives – and to share the inspiring conserva- reexamining current bison conservation tion success story of the recovery of bison initiatives and partnerships and is reimaging for the enjoyment, education, and inspira- new ways to integrate science and develop tion of this and future generations. shared stewardship opportunities that will be needed to achieve this Call to Action. This

National Park Service v

American plains bison. NPS Photo.

Introduction With the (by Elaine F. Leslie) ing as wild,” ranging freely across only 1.5% responsibility of their historic distribution and habitat. of managing The iconic American plains bison (Bison bi- 9,700 bison son bison), represented on the National Park The DOI has responsibility for approximate- in 11 herds, Service (NPS) arrowhead and the Depart- ly one-third of all bison managed for conser- the NPS is ment of the Interior (DOI) seal, is a symbol vation in North America with ~12,000 bison a key player of strength, resilience, and hope. Prior to in 19 herds on 4.6 million acres in 14 states in advancing European settlement, bison thrived across (Appendix A, Table 1; Appendix B, Figure bison the largest original distribution of any native 1). Most of these herds have less than 1,000 large herbivore in North America, ranging individuals, raising valid concerns about the conservation from desert grasslands in northern Mexico genetic integrity and overall viability of these efforts... to interior Alaska. Since humans first oc- herds. Most herds are fenced and subjected cupied the continent 12,000 years ago, bison to selective culling (mortality). Many herds have influentially shaped cultures, diets, also show some evidence of cattle gene traditions, and economies, ultimately having introgression from early 19th century cross- a profound influence on human history in breeding with domestic cattle. Despite these North America. With the onset of European constraints, the DOI bison herds are an irre- settlement, bison populations were reduced placeable resource for the long-term recov- from an estimated 60 to 80 million down to a ery of North American plains bison (Dratch mere 1,000 animals. These surviving animals and Gogan 2010, NPS 2014a). were saved from extinction and established several protected founding populations that With the responsibility of managing 9,700 put the species on a path of recovery and bison in 11 herds, the NPS is a key player in conservation. advancing bison conservation efforts from saving the species to cooperatively managing While the recovery of bison is considered bison with the goal of ecological restoration to be a wildlife conservation success story, where wild bison range widely to benefit notably carrying the distinction as the first ecosystems and people. The NPS “Call to conservation success story in North Amer- Action” of 2011, in its vision for the agency’s ica, substantial work remains to restore the second century of service, established an species to its ecological and cultural role on ambitious commitment to bison conserva- appropriate landscapes within its historical tion based on science, aiming to build long- range (Gates et al. 2010, NPS 2014a). Today, term capacity within NPS and through part- most bison (~300,000) are privately owned nership networks, so that bison conservation and raised as livestock for a thriving bison ultimately generates value-added economy, meat industry, while only about 31,000 bison improves human and environmental health, (including both plains and their northern and supports Tribal historical and cultural brethren, wood bison [Bison bison athabas- values associated with wild bison (NPS cae]) are stewarded for species and ecologi- 2011). This report highlights the progress cal conservation goals; of these 31,000 bison, toward achieving this Call to Action. less than half are considered to be “function-

National Park Service 1 Our Shared Call to Action-Bison Management and Stewardship in the 21st Century

(by Elaine F. Leslie) wild character of bison biologically and socially more broadly across the United States. National Park Service Call to Action #26: The goal was to identify and restore bison as Return the American bison, one of the nation’s a semi-free-roaming wildlife component of iconic species, to our country’s landscape. To grass and shrub land ecosystems and en- achieve this we will restore and sustain three hance community values and economies: wild bison populations across the central and The Call to Action-Home on the Range-cre- western United States in collaboration with ated space for continued dialogue and action tribes, private landowners, and other public across multiple Departments, jurisdictions, land management agencies. and partners. This alone can be considered In 2007, an appointed team of subject matter a success of the action. But we are far from experts from the Departments of the Inte- finished. In the San Luis Valley in south- rior (DOI), Agriculture, and Defense joined central Colorado, the NPS is in the process together in an unprecedented joint venture of an elk and bison planning effort for Great to develop a framework for managing bison Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve. The as well as an effort to institutionalize fed- NPS must continue discussions with various eral bison management and stewardship in state, federal and private entities about the perpetuity across broader landscapes. In concept of semi- free-roaming bison in the 2008, DOI published such a strategy (DOI park and, if feasible, on a larger scale. There 2008) that articulated a basis for improved are opportunities here to do exactly what bison management but also laid out the path parks were envisioned to become in regards forward to strengthen existing and build to conservation and restoration of species. new partnerships with a myriad of bison- Approximately 100 miles to the southeast, interested parties that included: States, the Vermejo Park Ranch, owned by Ted Native American tribes, private landowners, Turner, supports a large privately-owned conservationists, agricultural partners, and bison herd. The lands between these two others interested in bison conservation and herds are a mixture of Forest Service, Bureau restoration efforts. The strategy was based of Land Management, state lands, and sever- upon the best science available in order to al very large private ranches, some of which restore them to their ecological and cultural exist primarily for conservation purposes. role on appropriate landscapes and has This large landscape could be linked via vari- persisted through multiple Administrations ous forms of conservation agreements and to date and continues to be a priority as we, corridors and could support a large, semi- the American public, forges ahead into a new free-roaming bison herd to complement the 2017 Administration. already robust elk and deer populations in In 2011, a group of National Park Service this area. This area is unique due to the large (NPS) managers convened to identify ways private in-holding (a result of being part of in which the NPS could celebrate its 100th Spanish land grants in the 18th and 19th cen- anniversary while simultaneously supporting tury) and the fact that many of these ranches worthwhile long- term investments in our are held for conservation rather than for natural and cultural resources, and in our agricultural purposes. However, the area im- shared American values. This was our agen- mediately west of the Sangre de Cristo range, cy’s “Call to Action” (NPS 2011). In light on the floor of the San Luis Valley, supports of a well-developed DOI bison stewardship a thriving agricultural economy and any strategy, and since historically bison thrived discussions of semi-free-roaming bison must across large landscapes, most notably what include the concerns of these stakehold- is now Yellowstone National Park, an action ers. A shared vision between federal, state, was defined and articulated to conserve the affiliated tribes and private entities could

2 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range expand habitat for bison and also add to the cies, Tribes, nongovernment organizations, cultural, economic and social aspects of the and community-based partnerships. These Return the local communities, resulting in a globally entities operate at multiple spatial scales and American recognized tourism destination similar to the share common commitments to the land- bison, one of Greater Yellowstone Area. scape and communities of the region. Bison the nation’s restoration is now well underway, connect- In the land of the Oglala Sioux, the extensive iconic ing these efforts and fostering a regional species, to White River watershed includes lands man- community defined by a shared vision for a our country’s aged by the Pine Ridge Reservation, Bad- shared landscape. lands National Park, Buffalo Gap National landscape. Grasslands, The Nature Conservancy, and The measure of success for this action item other state and private lands, wherein small was ultimately restoration of semi-free- isolated bison herds already exist under roaming bison herds. These efforts and DOI, tribal, and private management. This more defined our Call to Action, but more landscape is characterized by low human importantly outline our continued Call to density, limited spillover tourism from the Action. The NPS must continue to build the Black Hills, and a tragic history of conflict capacity to prevent unnecessary disruption between the Oglala Sioux and the United of and the restoration of corridors; promote States. A joint venture partnership among the landscape connectivity necessary to the tribal, state, DOI, and private entities— allow wildlife to move as necessary to meet anchored between Pine Ridge Reservation biological needs, adjust to shifts in habitats and Badlands National Park—continue to and range, and adapt to climate change. participate in discussions regarding enlarged NPS must minimize and mitigate activities habitats for healthy semi-free-roaming wild- expected to negatively impact habitat and life, resulting in substantial restoration of corridors that directly and indirectly affect tribal society values and economies. park lands and resources on a national and international basis. And further north in Alberta and Montana, the area known as the Crown of the Conti- NPS conservation plans and objectives nent (CoC) represents the historical range of (design, management, and recovery) should plains bison where native cultures have tradi- continue to provide for the maintenance, tionally depended upon bison for sustenance recovery, or restoration of species interac- and hold deep cultural and spiritual connections in as many places as feasible, both tions to bison. The majestic Glacier-Water- within the historic range of highly interac- ton Parks in northern Montana and southern tive species such as bison or in other sites Alberta form the world’s first International where the consideration of climate change Peace Park, a Biosphere Reserve and since and other factors are appropriate. We must 1995, and a World Heritage Site. This is a all consider the restoration of bison on the multi-jurisdictional area and one of the few landscape as a critical link and lifeline to our places where grizzly bears and wolves still shared Natural Heritage Legacy. We have ac- move into the grasslands and Great Plains. knowledged the ecological and cultural role But the missing historical link is bison, which of bison on the American landscape, but we are no longer playing the ecological func- must continue to implement specific actions tions needed to maintain this ecosystem, to better manage and integrate bison popula- nor are they roaming adjacent tribal lands tion conservation strategies throughout this west of these parks where the people of the country, throughout this century. It is what Blackfoot Confederacy are also working to our National Mammal and we deserve. restore bison to their diets, culture, economies and traditions. The future of the CoC is being shaped by over 100 government agen-

National Park Service 3 DOI Bison Conservation Initiative

(by Glenn Plumb) landscapes large enough to cultivate the full interplay between bison and the surrounding Since the late 19th century, the Depart- ecology, which would also help promote bio- ment of the Interior (DOI) has served as the logical diversity of other plant and wildlife primary national conservation steward of species. North American plains bison (Bison bison bison). At that time, the species – whose The guiding principles of the DOI Bison population was once estimated at upwards Conservation Initiative are: of 40 million – neared extinction. However, through the efforts of private individuals ■■ DOI will base management of its and organizations, American Indian tribes, bison herds on the best science states and the U.S. Government, the spe- available, seeking to restore them to cies was saved from extinction, including their ecological and cultural role on at places like Yellowstone National Park, appropriate landscapes. where the last wild, free-roaming bison herd ■■ DOI will apply adaptive manage- in the United States was protected. Over ment principals to our bison conser- the course of the 20th century, DOI’s bison vation efforts management focused on stabilizing the bison ■■ DOI will seek to develop genetic population and protecting and promoting its tests to identify and develop bison remaining genetic diversity. Overall this goal herds with high levels of bison ge- has been successful. For example, the Yel- netic diversity. lowstone bison population has rebounded and regained its place as a key species in the ■■ DOI will seek to develop new tests Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. But while and techniques to diagnose, prevent, the species is no longer threatened by extinc- and control diseases in bison that tion, in most cases bison managed on DOI may impact domestic livestock or lands play only a limited ecological role on other bison herds. the landscape, save for a few locations such ■■ DOI will work with interested par- as Yellowstone National Park. Fenced herds, ties, including States, Tribes, land- which constitute the majority of DOI bison owners, and conservationists, to holdings, face limitations for scaling up to- discuss advantages and concerns as- wards the long-term conservation of the full sociated with specific actions, guided array of bison ecological processes. by Executive Order #13352 - Facili- tation of Cooperative Conservation. Recognizing these limitations, DOI chartered the Bison Conservation Initiative This framework for managing bison by the in 2008 (DOI 2008) which set the goal of DOI bureaus articulates a basis for improved restoring bison herds to their ecological management of the species and provides a and cultural role on appropriate landscapes foundation to strengthen existing and build within the species’ historical range. The Bi- new partnerships with States, Native Ameri- son Conservation Initiative aimed to achieve can tribes, landowners, agricultural interests, improved conservation management of the conservationists and others interested in species by strengthening existing and build- bison. In appropriate areas, the presence of ing new partnerships with States, Native bison in adequate numbers may help sup- American tribes, landowners, agricultural port the restoration or maintenance of other interests, conservationists and others inter- native species and habitats. This in turn ested in bison. In other words, to achieve would provide inspiration or enjoyment to ecological restoration of bison across large diverse elements of our society. As demon- landscapes, we cannot rely solely on DOI strated convincingly at Yellowstone National lands. Instead, we need to build partnerships Park, observing bison ranging freely over the with other landowners to weave together landscape holds a major attraction for the American public. Any bison conservation

4 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Bison sunset, NPS Photo.

initiative will only be realized by working in- in many instances is tied to bison; with tegrally with States, which have management conservation groups dedicated to bison and responsibility for most of the bison within other wildlife conservation; with the Gov- their boundaries; with agricultural interests, ernments of Canada and Mexico and with both landowners and those with public land other interested parties. leases; with Native Americans, whose culture

National Park Service 5 Tribal Bison Cooperation

(by Amanda Hardy) for cooperative bison management efforts underway for bison on the North Rim of the The American bison, or buffalo, is intricately park and beyond to the Kaibab plateau. woven into the culture, religion, history, economy and way of life of many Ameri- These engagements strengthen the relation- can Indian nations. For Indian nations that ship between NPS, ITBC and American historically depended on buffalo, the return Indian nations and offer important op- of buffalo to their lands is key to revitalizing portunities for NPS to integrate American their traditional diet and spiritual culture. Indian peoples’ concerns and interests in the The NPS is committed to collaborating with restoration of bison into park bison man- Native American tribal nations to honor agement and interpretive outreach. Going their treaty rights and cultural customs and forward, the NPS will actively continue to to support their efforts to restore, manage, look for ways to integrate tribal ecologi- protect and conserve buffalo on tribal lands. cal knowledge, practices and concerns into To this end, NPS consults and coordinates bison management in and beyond parks, in with the InterTribal Buffalo Council (ITBC), alignment with a 2016 Department of the In- a federally-chartered and supported Indian terior’s (DOI) Secretarial Order encouraging Organization that facilitates and coordi- cooperative management between DOI land nates the transfer of surplus buffalo from managers and federally-recognized tribes. national parks to 63 member tribes in 19 Operationally, ITBC and NPS are working to states. (ITBC 2016). The ITBC is commit- improve communication and coordination ted to reestablishing buffalo herds on Indian of information and logistical planning annu- lands and providing education, outreach and ally. Ultimately, NPS would like to see ITBC technical assistance to its membership tribes as a primary colleague and partner in assist- to develop sound management plans to en- ing with NPS bison management activities able successful and self-sufficient tribal bison for the conservation of bison overall. programs that promotes cultural enhancement, spiritual revitalization, ecological While collaborative partnerships between restoration and economic development. NPS and Tribes will continue to be important to bison conservation, the NPS Since ITBC’s inception in 1990, the col- acknowledges and honors an empower- laborative efforts of ITBC and NPS have ing movement of Indian nations that have resulted in the transfer of more than 6,800 joined together to create native solidarity for live bison from parks to at least 32 tribes a new Treaty amongst their people. In 2014, and 5 Indian schools. The ITBC has worked the first Buffalo Treaty meeting occurred with Yellowstone National Park to enable amongst the Blackfeet Nation, Blood Tribe, Tribes with historic ties to the Yellowstone Siksika Nation, Piikani Nation, The Assini- region to exercise their treaty hunting rights boine and Gros Ventre Tribes of Fort Belnap of bison that leave the park; further, ITBC Indian Reservation, The Assiniboine and helps distribute Yellowstone bison that are Sioux Tribes of Fort Peck Indian Reserva- captured, harvested and processed, bring- tion, the Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the ing healthy meat to Tribes for school lunches Confederated Salish and Koothenai Indian and tribal members. The ITBC supported Reservation, Tsuu T’Ina Nation gathered to- NPS’s Environmental Assessment for a gether to sign The Buffalo Treaty in Brown- bison quarantine program with a preferred ing, Montana. This historic event was held in alternative to use the Fort Peck Quarantine camp over several days and featured ceremo- facility for Yellowstone buffalo. In Grand nies and traditions to honor bringing bison Canyon National Park, the ITBC entered back to their ways of life. At this meeting, a into a Memorandum of Understanding with Buffalo Treaty was signed amongst the tribes NPS to serve as a cooperating partner in the stating the collective intention environmental assessment planning process

6 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range “to recognize BUFFALO as a wild free- and Banff National Park prepare to rein- ranging animal and as an important part of troduce bison to a remote park valley in the the ecological system; to provide a safe space spring of 2017, Treaty members celebrated and environment across our historic home- this return of buffalo at their ceremonies. lands, on both sides of the United States and Additionally, First Nations issued a resolu- the Canadian border, so together WE can tion to the province of Alberta asking that have our brother, the BUFFALO, lead us in bison be redesignated legally as wildlife nurturing our land, plants and other animals rather than livestock. This first formal, to once again realize THE BUFFALO WAYS specific ask by First Nations Treaty members for our future generations.” underscores this movement’s potential to unify and amplify American Indians voices In 2015, for the first year anniversary of the to influentially advance bison conservation Treaty, these 12 nations/tribes gathered again initiatives. The NPS recognizes and respects in Fort Peck for a week of Buffalo celebra- the intent of the Buffalo Treaty, commends tions and exchanging information, expand- the efforts success in raising the profile of ing the Treaty to include the Stoney Nakoda American Indian bison restoration interests, Chiniki Nation, Bearspaw Nation and and looks forward to collaboratively devel- Wesley Nation and the Samson Cree Nation. oping innovative partnerships with Treaty The second year anniversary Buffalo Treaty tribes, ITBC and other Native American meeting and ceremony occurred in Banff people to bring wide-ranging bison back the in 2016, in coordination with the American lives and landscapes spanning Indian Coun- Bison Society meeting, and was expanded to try and beyond. include a total 20 total signatory Tribes and First Nations (of Canada). As Parks Canada

National Park Service 7 State Cooperation

(by Rick Kahn) as well as by Native American tribes exercis- ing their treaty rights, but these removals of There is no species of native North Ameri- bison do not adequately reduce the herd to can “big game” that has such an ambiguous population management targets. The pres- status as that of bison. While all 50 states ence of brucellosis in this herd and implica- legally recognize domestic, privately owned tions to domestic livestock make the co- bison herds, husbanded as livestock for meat management of this herd atypical, and the production, only 10 of the 20 states within NPS is obliged to invest substantial resources the historic range of the plains bison regard to manage the largest wide-ranging herd bison as wildlife that could be subject to of plains bison in North America. Further management by state wildlife or park author- south in the Greater Yellowstone region, bi- ities while the other half do not classify bison son that occupy Grand Teton National Park as wildlife and have no legal authority over and the National Elk Refuge are managed by them. Of the 10 states that have authority the Fish and Wildlife Service in cooperation to manage bison as wildlife only five (Mon- with Wyoming Game and Fish Department. tana, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona and Alaska) However, similar to Yellowstone bison, this manage free- or wide-ranging herds of bison herd is also subject to brucellosis and thus and it could be argued that only Utah, Alaska is not managed consistent with how other and potentially Arizona have management shared big game herds are managed, such as programs for maintaining wild, free-ranging elk, mule deer and pronghorn antelope. bison herds. In contrast, all western states classify elk as wildlife and an increasing In Alaska, the Copper River and Chitina number of Midwest and Eastern states have River bison herds occupy Wrangell St. Elias reintroduced elk and have developed elk Preserve lands and are managed as wildlife management programs. by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG). While NPS biologists assist with The NPS “Call to Action-Back Home on the field population estimates and research ef- Range” set out to establish free-ranging, co- forts for these herds, the ADFG administers managed wild bison herds. Currently, six of a drawing for a limited number of bison eleven NPS bison herds (and 13 of 19 DOI hunting permits annually; for the 2015-2016 herds) are fenced and thus are not managed season, more than 3,100 resident and non- as free-ranging wildlife or cooperatively resident hunters submitted applications for a with state wildlife agencies, but five NPS total of 34 bison permits that were issued for bison herds that range in and beyond park the Chitina and Copper herds, a testament boundaries and are managed in cooperation to the hunting communities’ interests in with state agencies. This includes two bison the relatively rare opportunity to hunt wild herds in the Greater Yellowstone region, one bison. herd on the Kaibab plateau and North Rim of the Grand Canyon, and two small herds Bison in and near the Grand Canyon Na- on Wrangell St. Elias Preserve lands. Beyond tional Park may provide an opportunity for NPS purview, only two other DOI bison cooperative management between state and herds are managed cooperatively as free- federal agencies. A state owned bison herd ranging wildlife by the Bureau of Land Man- that originally resided in House Rock Valley agement and Utah Department of Wildlife shifted to areas on the Kaibab Plateau and Resources in the remote Henry Mountains into the adjacent Grand Canyon National and Book Cliffs regions of Utah. Park over the past 20years. The Park is pres- ently developing an Environmental Assess- Bison that migrate out of Yellowstone ment with Arizona Game and Fish Depart- National Park to the north and west into ment and the US Forest Service to determine Montana are hunted under programs jointly if and how a free-ranging bison herd could managed by Montana Department of Live- be co-managed by the various entities. It is stock and Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks,

8 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Large Hayden Herd of Bison in Yellowstone, NPS Photo.

anticipated that this herd can be managed ing conversations with the state of Colorado primarily with public hunting administered about bison in and potentially around Great by Arizona Game and Fish, but the National Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve. Park Service is also considering implement- The planning effort at Great Sand Dunes is ing a suite of tools (e.g., capture/removal, expected to be completed in 2017 and it is trained volunteer sharpshooters) on the anticipated that there could be additional North Rim of the park in order to effectively conversations about the status of bison in the reduce the population, which currently is es- San Luis Valley (where Great Sand Dunes is timated to be two to three times larger than located) continuing pending the outcome of the established management target size. the Environmental Impact Statement planning process. During the 2011 to 2016 time period NPS staff engaged wildlife managers at the As- Looking forward, the NPS aims to strength- sociation of Fish and Wildlife Agencies en relationships with state agencies, as well (AFWA) and Western Association (WAF- as tribes and other stakeholders, to advance WA) in conversations on the potential for our call to action. Ultimately, state wildlife co-management of bison herds. With the management agencies and policies are key to exception of the Grand Canyon situation cooperatively managing free-ranging bison and ongoing Yellowstone management there in shared stewardship models where bison are no additional planning scenarios taking move across multiple jurisdictions similar to place at this time. However, there are ongo- how other wildlife species are managed.

National Park Service 9 Bison Scholarship and Science

(by Amanda Hardy) graphics and genetics over 200 years given how a herd is affected by specific manage- The NPS is committed to integrating rigor- ment activities, environmental variability, ous science to inform long-term strategies catastrophic impacts, range expansion or and partnerships in order to restore the contraction and other factors. This modeling ecological and cultural roles of bison on ap- tool allows managers to explore how differ- propriate landscapes within their historical ent management strategies can be aimed to range. While bison are no longer threatened achieve specific meta-population goals col- by extinction, most bison conservation laboratively identified by the three agencies, herds in North America have less than 1,000 including: individuals, are confined by fences, and are subjected to selective culling (mortal- ■■ High probability (99%) of survival at ity). Many herds also show some evidence each herd’s management goal after of cattle gene introgression from early 19th 200 years. century cross-breeding with domestic cattle ■■ Maintain existing genetic diversity (Dratch and Gogan 2010, NPS 2014a). These within meta-population and main- conservation constraints underscore the tain or improve genetic diversity importance of informed, coordinated man- within each herd. agement of bison conservation herds across North America. ■■ Develop redundancy in genetic distribution so loss of any one herd About one-third of all bison stewarded for does not substantially decrease conservation in North America are man- meta-population genetic diversity aged by three agencies in the Department ■■ Promote natural selection and of the Interior (DOI). Recognizing the minimize artificial selection as pos- relative importance of this stewardship sible when managing culling strate- role and responsibility, the NPS initiated gies and transfers of bison between an effort working with the US Fish and herds. Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to collaboratively Outcomes from these PVA modeling exer- develop 21st century, science-based bison cises will be used to guide the development management strategies, including possible of consistent, coherent and coordinated cooperative approaches to optimally man- bison management strategies for NPS, DOI age approximately 12,000 bison in 19 bison and other bison conservation partners and herds as one or more meta-populations. This stakeholder in the larger context of con- effort is responsive to recommendations by tinental species recovery efforts. Further, Dratch and Gogan (2010) that suggest NPS the project establishes a current baseline of bison resources should be managed towards standardized data that enables managers to species conservation objectives through the monitor and adaptively manage bison within development of meta-population structure and between herds to meet herd and meta- and strategic interchange with other satellite population management goals in the future. herds. This project ultimately provides the scientific foundation that can address biological, The project compiles standardized, compre- ecological and genetic considerations that hensive scientific baseline data of the current will need to be assessed in pursuit of the state of these 19 bison herds for population Call to Action to reestablish bison as a free- viability analyses (PVA) modeling of the ranging keystone herbivore when and where long-term viability of bison herds under it may be suitable—with respect to individual current or potential future management agency missions and objectives. Results will scenarios. The PVA is a quantitative tool help parks realize NPS policy and mission that iteratively simulates future herd demo- and to improve communication and enhance

10 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range shared stewardship between Tribal, inter- calizations, climate change effects on bison, agency, and nongovernment bison conserva- nutrient cycling, and decreasing potential for tion partnerships. transmission of Brucella abortus. Over the same five year period, at least 82 bison schol- More generally, much of the rigorous science arly contributions (Appendix D) relevant to and scholarship influencing bison conserva- NPS bison stewardship and species conser- tion initiatives across North America today vation efforts were produced. Many of these has been generated in national parks or in projects have been presented on at several collaboration with NPS natural and cultural professional meetings such as the 2013 and resource scientists and managers. From 2011 2016 American Bison Society meetings, in to 2016, NPS issued 18 research permits special sessions at the Society for Conserva- to study bison in eight parks (Appendix C, tion Biology, and at other local, regional, Table 2). These projects investigated a di- national and international venues. verse range of topics including bison grazing ecology and songbird reproductive success, bison movements, herd health, genetics, archeology and prehistoric bison distribu- tions, visitor education and outreach, vo-

National Park Service 11 Bison Cultural Resource Stewardship: Going Beyond the Symbol

1906 Buffalo Herd, States. The National Parks are important to Photo by Christian J. all Americans as symbols of the nation, and Puck. the National Park Service has a responsibility to ensure that the narratives at these sites are informed by up-to-date scholarship that is inclusive and incorporates issues of race, ethnicity, gender, and power. Since 1917, the (by Glenn Plumb) bison has served as an official symbol of the Department of the Interior, and since 1952 The National Park Service (NPS) strives to for the NPS. Indeed, the bison represents a foster transformative experiences that help complex environmental and cultural history people find meaning and make sense of seen as painful rather than prideful for some. issues that reflect the breadth of the coun- As part of “Co-Creating Narratives in Public try’s natural and cultural resources and its Spaces,” BRD hosted a public webinar on peoples. National Parks promote active en- August 27, 2014 entitled “The Bison: Going gagement and memorable experiences that Beyond the Symbol” (http://new.livestream. provide opportunities to attract and engage com/usinterior/events/3250946) to bring to- new audiences, leverage existing and new gether many experts and dedicated bison ad- partners, and consistently meet or exceed vocates, from within and outside the NPS to audience expectations for learning and visi- unpack the symbol of the bison, discuss the tor experiences. The NPS is committed to changing relationship between people and connecting all Americans to their collective bison, and explore how new collaborations heritage resources in a manner that reso- are working to heal the wounds of the past. nates with their lives, legacies, and dreams, This topic was selected to kick-off public en- and tells the stories that make up America’s gagement as the bison is integral to the sym- diverse national identity. By engaging with bolism of the NPS, and yet it also represents the diversity of the peoples whose histories a complex history of environmental devasta- make up the nation’s collective past, the NPS tion and Native American subjugation. In increases the relevance of parks, monu- discussion to plan the webinar, it was noted ments, battlefields, memorials, and historic that the story of bison is really about “people trails to today’s visitors and helps to broaden and bison, people and bison, people and audiences who attend NPS programs and bison;” the need to not only look backward events. Expanding the narratives of the NPS at the relationship between people and bison helps visitors make connections with the but to look forward to the next 100 years of people, events, and places that the NPS com- what people and bison might do; that the re- memorates and preserves. lationship between people and bison is much older from a native perspective and the story In support of the NPS efforts to achieve is more about people(s) and bison, as groups relevance in its second century, the National of people have varying relationships with Park Service and The George Washington bison; and that bison represent a difficult University cohosted a two-day public event conversation often resulting in a binary view entitled “Co-Creating Narratives in Public of winners and losers. Ultimately, the webi- Spaces” in 2014 as a forum for NPS adminis- nar was designed to stimulate conversation trators and interpreters, academics, museum about bison and to start having some difficult professionals, anthropologists, public histo- conversations. The webinar was attended by rians, and practitioners of history to discuss over 200 viewers during the live broadcast, how the NPS can best define and commu- and to date there have been over 800 views nicate the complex and challenging narra- of the webinar. tives that comprise the history of the United

12 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Grand Teton National Park Bison with cowbird, NPS Photo.

Engagement, Education, and Outreach

(by Amanda Hardy) claims that proliferated through the media that spring. At the national level, in coopera- Education and outreach is essential for tion with parks, the NPS Biological Resourc- achieving the ambitious Call to Action to re- es Division and the NPS Office of Education store free-ranging bison on large landscapes, and Outreach are developing a bison subject where appropriate, as wildlife. Ten national page for virtual visitors to NPS web pages parks with bison are on the front lines of and social media outlets. Additionally, NPS is engaging the public with messages about the reaching out to other DOI agencies manag- wild nature of bison and how to safely view ing bison to coordinate communications and enjoy bison via park newspapers provid- and messaging about bison stewardship at ed at entrance gates and through interpretive the Department level as may be appropriate presentations in parks to understand, value across all three bison-managing agencies. and support science-based bison stewardship. These parks provide additional infor- The NPS’s Centennial Year of 2016 was a mation about bison on individual park web particularly notable year for bison outreach. pages and via social media outlets. Context- To connect people in and beyond parks to specific messaging is thoughtfully crafted a trove of stories and teachings about bison by parks to apprise a range of stakeholders history, science, culture, and conservation about specific issues and considerations the NPS Biological Resources Division cre- that NPS is committed to addressing in the ated the “Bison Bellows” on-line essay series ongoing recovery of this magnificent species celebrating “all things bison.” Launched in of wildlife. Parks also deliver strategic mes- anticipation of the NPS Centennial on Na- saging clarifying misconstrued information tional Bison Day in November of 2015, these about bison management issues that may be unique feature stories were posted weekly proliferated by the media, special interest for a year, highlighting the history and lead- groups and individuals on social media. For ers of bison conservation, the 19 DOI bison example, in 2016, Yellowstone National Park conservation herds, and myriad topics rang- published exemplary corrective outreach en- ing from Native American cultural connec- titled, “Myths about Bison Management” on tions to bison to iconic symbolism, ecology, their webpage to address specific, incorrect genetics, management, and even the fasci-

National Park Service 13 nating microcosm of bison feces. The essays meetings. Attendees were introduced to the blended a science communications approach Bison Story Map project (bisonstory.wcs. with storytelling techniques to appeal to and org), a multimedia platform blending text, engage a variety of audiences in understand- images and interactive maps into a rich col- ing the role bison play in our ecosystems, lection of stories focused on bison; feedback economies and culture and society. The 52 from ABS participants suggested expand- Bison Bellows essays were posted on the Bio- ing the project to an online crowd sourcing logical Resources Division webpage (http:// format to allow the public to contribute their www.nature.nps.gov/biology/bisonbellow/ photos and stories, similar to the National bisonbellow.cfm); as of November 2016, this Park Memories Story Map project. In the link had been clicked on than 4,200 times. premier of the inspiring and beautiful Bellows were further amplified over NPS so- video entitled, “Wild Bison: The Long Trail cial media, reaching more than 36,000 virtual Back” (https://vimeo.com/album/4148325/ visitors, generating over 430 “likes” and 53 video/182897465), the NPS vision of “bison shares on Facebook and Twitter made more back on the range” was boldly and elo- than 93,000 impressions, 2,500 engagements, quently presented in step with other bison 340 likes and 230 retweets. conservationists seeking the same goal of establishing wide-ranging bison on large, wild In 2013 and 2016, the NPS sponsored and landscapes. And with support from NPS, supported the American Bison Society WCS brought professional videographers (ABS) meetings, where hundreds of bison and a group of youth together at the 2016 managers, producers, advocates, philan- ABS meeting to shoot and edit a video over thropists, and artists came together to share the course of the meeting; the final video, experiences and strategies for the ecological “What Bison Means to Me,” (https://vimeo. restoration of bison. Themes of these meet- com/193608629) presented viewpoints of ings included, “Shared Stewardship: Models meeting participants from various back- of Bison Restoration in North America” and grounds about their connections to bison. “The Social and Cultural Dimensions of Bison Ecological Restoration,” focusing on Going forward, education and outreach in challenges and opportunities for collaborat- support of the Back Home on the Range Call ing more effectively and integrating human to Action will need to better understand and dimensions issues into bison restoration ef- integrate the human dimensions of bison forts. The dialogue at these meetings reached restoration. As the only wild ungulate in beyond the relatively well-developed body of North America that has not been restored ecological and biological sciences to dig into across significant portions of their historic complex social, political and public engage- range, it is evident that contemporary society ment issues that need to be considered as does not yet embrace bison as native wildlife contemporary bison conservation goals that can be managed similar to other large shift from saving the species to reestablish- ungulates. Social science efforts to identify ing wide-ranging bison herds that can fulfill underlying values, beliefs, and attitudes relat- their ecological role in grassland ecosystems ed to restoring bison as free-ranging wildlife at landscape scales. will be key to crafting socially-responsive outreach that increases tolerance and ap- Several outreach products developed with preciation of free-ranging wild bison on the the support and cooperation of NPS, the few remaining large intact landscapes where Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and such restoration has the potential to succeed. other partners were debuted at the ABS

14 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range International Conservation Cooperation: Continental- scale Species Restoration

(by Glenn Plumb) Conservation Guidelines published by the IUCN NA Bison Species Specialist Group The Species of Common Conservation (2010) and ongoing IUCN Red List as- Concern Working Table (SCCCWT), of sessment (2014-15); the US Department of the Trilateral Committee for Wildlife and Interior Bison Report (2014); the Yellow- Ecosystem Conservation and Management stone bison brucellosis quarantine feasibil- (Trilateral) is a forum to examine recent ad- ity study and Environmental, Assessment vances in bison conservation across historic (2010-2015); the NPS Call-to-Action for wild range in Canada, Mexico and United States bison restoration (2011-2016); collaboration (www.trilat.org). Each nation has achieved amongst NPS, TNC and Mexican partners notable advances within the past five years, for restoration of the Janos-Hildago bison yet there is need for enhanced international herd at the Janos Biosphere Reserve (ongo- cooperation and collaboration for conserva- ing); the American Bison Society meeting tion of wild and ranging bison at the conti- on shared stewardship (2013); the new nental scale, including improved conserva- Northern Tribes Buffalo Treaty (2014); and tion according to biological principles and COSEWIC review and listing decisions for ensuring the evolutionary capacity of various plains and down-listing for wood bison; and bison populations and preserving the genetic US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau diversity of bison. During 2015 and 2016, of Land Management in Alaska collabora- the SCCCWT hosted discussions about tion with the Alaska Department of Fish and potential collaborations between the three Game and other stakeholders to develop nations for effective continental scale bison a plan for reintroducing an experimental conservation within the Trilateral crosscut- non-essential population of wood bison into ting application “Landscape and Seascape western Alaska. Conservation Including Connectivity and Area Based Conservation Partnerships.” Following upon the 2015 presentation Participants in these discussions included described above, the 2015 SCCC Working the IUCN North American Bison Species Table discussed the opportunities and chal- Specialist Group, CONANP, Yukon Depart- lenges for continental bison conservation, ment of Environment, National Park Service, and agreed for the Tri-Lateral Bison Team COSEWIC Terrestrial Mammal Committee, to develop a draft Letter of Intent (LOI) Parks Canada, InterTribal Buffalo Council, for additional discussion towards potential The Nature Conservancy, and US Fish and recommendation to be signed by Canada, Wildlife Service. Mexico and United States to develop formal and informal cooperation for conservation At the 2015 SCCC Working Table, a team activities and outcomes towards compre- from Canada, Mexico and United States hensive conservation of the North American presented on recent advances in science and bison genome across continental scales and stewardship have identified opportunities jurisdictions. At present, the Tri-Lateral Bi- and challenges for conservation of wild and son Team is preparing a draft LOI for further ranging bison on large landscapes across consideration by the 2017 SCCC Working North American historic range. These Table. include a comprehensive Status Review and

National Park Service 15 Other Key Collaborations and Engagements

(by Amanda Hardy) ambitious goal of ecological restoration of bison as wildlife on large landscapes The NPS Biological Resources Division (Sanderson et al. 2008). As the concept and collaborates with the Wildlife Conservation campaign of bison ecological restoration Society (WCS) to generate and integrate expanded, WCS and ABS has catalyzed a science, outreach, and help garner innova- substantial amount of science, convened and tive partnerships that support the Back facilitated critical discussions and collabora- Home on the Range Call to Action and the tions, and developed outreach to support Department of the Interior’s Bison Con- bison conservation initiatives, ultimately servation Initiative. WCS is a science-based playing an important role in building capac- nongovernmental (NGO) international ity in numerous institutions and sectors that conservation organization with the mission are coming together to further bison conser- to save wildlife and wild places using science, vation initiatives. conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature. In recent years, NPS engaged WCS’s Bison Conservation Program staff expertise in a WCS has, in various institutional forms, Task Agreement through the Rocky Moun- supported the conservation of bison and tain Cooperative Ecosystems Study Unit. other wildlife conservation issues for more The purpose of this agreement was to have than 100 years. Originally named the New WCS facilitate and convene, as an indepen- York Zoological Society (NYZS), in 1895 the dent and trusted partner, the DOI agencies NYZS established the Bronx Zoo, a site that (including NPS, the US Fish and Wildlife would soon become an important refuge that Service and Bureau of Land Management) helped prevent the extinction of bison. In and state collaborators to discuss and syn- 1905, NYZS Director William T. Hornaday thesize information and quantitative tools with the support of U.S. President Theodore to assess possible meta-population manage- Roosevelt, Canadian Governor Earl Gray, ment approaches for managing the 19 DOI and other notable and influential people es- bison herds, per recommendations offered tablished the American Bison Society (ABS) by Dratch and Gogan (2010; see the previous with a mission dedicated to “preservation section, “Bison Science and Scholarship” for and increase of the American Bison.” With more detail). This partnership is also bring- this clear directive and philanthropic sup- ing these stakeholders together to consider port, the ABS helped gather some of the last opportunities to establish new, wide-ranging remaining bison, shipped them to the Bronx bison herds in line with the Call to Action’s Zoo, and raised them in captivity to help aims. Further, the Task Agreement with save the species. The ABS then shipped bison WCS has enabled NPS to sponsor and sup- to the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge in port the ABS meetings and to build outreach Oklahoma in 1907 (the first animal reintro- capacity to raise the profile of bison as a spe- duction in North America), the National cies of conservation interest. Bison Range in Montana in 1909, and Fort Niobrara National Wildlife Refuge in Ne- In developing outreach that promotes bison braska in 1913. In that same year, ABS sent as an important iconic animal in our history bison to establish the Wind Cave National and contemporary culture, WCS is credited Park bison herd in South Dakota. In 1935, with creating the “Vote Bison” campaign and the ABS disbanded, having achieved their bringing together a diverse group of interests mission of saving bison from extinction and in the Vote Bison Coalition, comprised of a securing the reestablishment of bison in the diverse group of bison advocacy organiza- field. tions ranging from zoos to restaurants, the InterTribal Buffalo Council, the National In 2005, the ABS was reestablished by WCS Bison Association, and the Wildlife Conser- to revitalize a commitment to move bison vation Society. The Vote Bison campaign and recovery efforts toward a larger and more coalition worked together on Capitol Hill to

16 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range develop legislative language, secure spon- legislators that co-sponsored the bill, includ- sors, garner support for and eventually pass ing Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota the National Bison Legacy Act to designate and Representative William Lacy Clay of bison as our national mammal. In May 2016, Missouri. Additionally, NPS held a com- President Obama signed the National Bison memorative event in Wind Cave National Legacy Act into law, designating bison as our Park on National Bison Day in November national mammal. The NPS celebrated this 2016. historic designation at events in Washington DC praising the Vote Bison Coalition and the

National Park Service 17 Park Bison Conservation Highlights

Badlands National Park been radio collared, yielding locational data (by Eddie Childers ) that can be analyzed to determine bison grazing preferences. Vegetation plots are Badlands National Park is one of the most currently being established for analysis based recent parks to participate in bison res- on this locational data and 15 additional bi- toration, having reintroduced 52 bison to son will be collared during the 2017 roundup the park in 1963. As of 2016, the current to increase the sample size for the study. The population of the herd is 980 animals based study will analyze bison behavior and move- on aerial surveys. In an effort to attain a ment data with information on resource management goal of 500-700 bison, the availability in order to fully integrate bison herd is culled opportunistically in round up and vegetation management. operations; through a partnership with the Intertribal Buffalo Council and the Ogalala Chickasaw National Recreation Souix Tribe, Badlands National Park distrib- Area uted 1,121 bison to 8 Native American tribes (by Noel Osborn) throughout the United States between 2011- 2016 via roundups and partnerships with the Chickasaw National Recreation Area main- InterTribal Buffalo Council. tains a small (6-12) herd of bison that is managed as an interpretive exhibit represent- In 2014, Badlands National Park applied for ing the heritage of vast herds of bison that a Centennial Challenge project to expand historically roamed the Oklahoma prairies. bison range by more than 22,000 acres in the The bison have been an important part of North Unit of the Park. In 2016, a Bison Re- the cultural landscape and visitor experience source Stewardship Plan and Environmen- since 1920, when three animals were brought tal Assessment was completed to explore to Chickasaw National Recreation Area, options for the range expansion, which will then known as Platt National Park, from the open up grazing opportunities for bison in Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Ref- areas not grazed by bison since the late 1800s uge. Since 1934, the bison herd has been in This effort will enable the NPS to protect the the historic Buffalo Pasture in the Platt Na- genetic integrity and health of the conserva- tional Park National Historic Landmark. The tion bison herd in the North Unit, support bison are one of the main visitor attractions the ecological health of the mixed-grass throughout the year. A “Bison Viewpoint” prairie ecosystem, and provide appropri- highway pullout provides an easily–acces- ate visitor opportunities to view the herd sible area for public viewing. The 1.9-mile and understand its ecological and cultural Buffalo Pasture Trail along the pasture’s importance. This project is a priority in the perimeter is popular among visitors and is Midwest Region and contributing partners one of the park’s most-used exercise trails. including the National Park Foundation and The Friends of the Park have raised funds to World Wildlife Fund are providing matching assist with managing the herd. Recent efforts funds of $225,000 and $250,000, respectively, have resulted in new hay rings made by local for 38.3 miles of fencing needed to complete high school students and the installation of a the bison range expansion. Road pullouts bison wayside exhibit. and interpretive signs are also planned as part of this project to provide viewing op- The 84-acre Buffalo Pasture is enclosed by portunities for more than million visitors a fence and includes hardwood forest and that drive the Loop Road annually. mixed-grass prairie habitat. Free-ranging white-tailed deer occasionally occupy the Since September 2015, Badlands National pasture, and birds, turkey, and small mam- Park has been working with USGS Re- mals are found within the enclosure. The searchers investigating bison movement and bison feed on native prairie vegetation with grazing preferences throughout the present supplemental feed of native-grass hay and range. Thus far, 24 adult female bison have protein cubes. Water is supplied from a

18 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range small pond and a water trough. Chickasaw In 2010–2013, an interagency project was National Recreation Area obtains all bison initiated to assess whether cultural artifacts stock from the Wichita Mountains National or paleoecological items were being exposed Wildlife Refuge. The Chickasaw National as ice fields in the park shrank due to climate Recreation Area herd is occasionally culled change. While no cultural artifacts were to keep it within carrying capacity, and discovered, several natural specimens were excess bison are given to local tribes. The recovered. In one instance, the skull of a bull installation of a new corral in 2016 greatly bison was found melting out of an ice patch facilitated comprehensive health monitoring. near Otokomi Lake. This skull was carbon- Recent veterinarian visits included branding dated to 967± years BP. and treatment for parasites. Genetic testing revealed no evidence of domestic cattle gene In late July 2015, the Reynolds Fire ignited introgression. and burned in the St. Mary Valley, on the east side of Glacier National Park. After Encroachment of woody vegetation and the fire, employees documented at least 14 pasture degradation due to overgrazing has individual sites associated with bison (in the severely impaired the grazing capacity for form of bison bones and/or skulls), further the bison herd. The park plans to rehabilitate reinforcing the case for historic presence of the Buffalo Pasture by removing 20 acres of these animals in the park. woody vegetation and re-seeding with native grasses and forbs. In addition, the park No bison-specific research was conducted plans to expand rangeland by 60 acres by in Glacier National Park from 2011 to 2016. enclosing two areas near the Buffalo Pasture. However, the Glacier National Park Con- The additional bison enclosures will require servancy is committed to fundraising for an the construction of about 12,500 feet of tall initiative that would collect baseline data game fence and the clearing of 23 acres of and conduct natural resource inventory and invasive eastern red cedar trees (Juniperus monitoring activities as bison return to park virginiana) and other woody vegetation. The lands and rekindle the interrelationship park will institute rotational grazing between between bison and grasslands that has been pastures to prevent over-grazing and to en- missing for over 100 years. With staff from hance ecological restoration. the University of Montana, park staff have discussed the possibility of hiring a student Glacier National Park intern from either the Blackfeet Community College and/or the Salish Kootenai College. (by Mark Biel) This intern would monitor various indica- Of all the megafauna species that inhabited tors of range and ecological health, and assist Glacier National Park’s landscape when with other natural resource projects. Lewis and Clark passed through the area In recent years, park staff have met with on their way to the Pacific Ocean in 1806, representatives of various organizations and American bison and pronghorn antelope agencies about the possible return of bison (Antilocapra americana) are the only species to the local landscape. In June 2012, the currently missing. Historic and archeological Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) re- evidence shows that bison used the park’s quested a meeting to update park staff on the east-side lands (i.e., east of the Continental Iinnii Initiative with the Blackfeet Tribe. The Divide) at least seasonally. There is evidence park has met with the Blackfeet and WCS of prehistoric bison kill sites in at least six multiple times since 2012 to share informa- drainages on the east side of the park. These tion, insights, goals, and future visons of kill sites occurred where communal hunting what bison on the landscape could look like. strategies were employed to drive bison into These meetings culminated with a meeting traps (either constructed corrals, wetland on Blackfeet reservation lands in April 2016, features, or snow drifts), where they were when park staff observed the newly arrived then slaughtered. In 2015, a bison skeleton wild bison from Elk Island National Park in was found eroding from a cut bank in the Canada. Belly River drainage of the park.

National Park Service 19 The park has had preliminary, information- of Grand Canyon National Park; and have sharing discussions with Montana Fish, been managed by the Arizona Game and Wildlife and Parks staff about the return Fish Department since 1950 in the House of bison to tribal lands. Glacier National Rock Wildlife Area (HRWA) on the Kaibab Park’s superintendent has met with his National Forest through an interagency Parks Canada counterpart (Waterton Lakes agreement with the US Forest Service. National Park). Both parks have committed Between the late 1990’s and 2000, fires in to working with tribes and First Nations on the area created opportunities for the bison the concept of re-establishing a free-ranging, herd to move out of HRWA, on to the Kai- transboundary bison herd. bab Plateau, and subsequently into Grand Canyon National Park. Over the past eight Glacier’s cultural resources staff continues years bison have not returned to HRWA to work with both the Blackfeet and Confed- and most now spend a majority of their time erated Salish and Kootenai tribes to better inside Grand Canyon National Park, with understand the cultural significance of bison many not leaving the park at all. To begin to in their respective cultures, and to interpret address the issues associated with bison in that significance for park visitors. To date, Grand Canyon National Park, the Park has park interpretive staff have developed two been developing an Environmental Assess- interpretive talks/presentations on the role ment (EA). The primary purpose of this EA of bison on the landscape and their impor- is to collaborate with partners to quickly tance to native cultures. These presentations reduce the bison population density in the have been given multiple times and reached near-term so it is consistent with being at thousands of park visitors. the southwest edge of historic bison range. In the past, Glacier’s managers have cau- Action is needed now because most bison tiously supported the return of bison to spend a majority of their time inside the the Front Range. Current concerns about park. The bison population continues to bringing bison back onto the park landscape increase, and biologists estimate there are include spread of invasive vegetation, con- currently between 400 and 600 bison on tainment of the herd (or not), genetic source the Kaibab Plateau, to a higher density than and integrity of the bison, identification of likely would have occurred at the edge of a reasonable number of individual bison, their historic range. appropriate mechanisms of control, compe- Given the current bison distribution, abun- tition with cattle, and increased impacts to dance and density, and the expected growth park resources if cattle and bison are allowed of the population if left unmanaged, the to use the same areas. Currently, the park National Park Service is concerned about and NPS are supportive of returning natural potential increased impacts on other park areas of Glacier to a preexisting condition, resources, such as water, vegetation, soils, with the caveat that bison should be part of and archeological sites, and values, such as a transboundary wild and free-roaming herd visitor experience and wilderness character. not subject to competition from livestock. Therefore, as a first step toward achieving a Replacing livestock with bison on the Front population level that is more reflective of the Range would restore the natural condition numbers one would expect at the southwest of predator/prey interactions and likely edge of the bison’s range, the National Park benefit the integrity of the park’s grassland Service is proposing to implement a suite of ecosystem. management tools (e.g., capture/removal, sharpshooting, and localized fencing of park Grand Canyon National Park resources), on the North Rim of the park in (by Greg Holm ) collaboration with state and federal partners, to reduce the bison population to approxi- In the early 1900s, a herd of bison were mately 80 to 200 animals. The park would introduced onto the Grand Canyon Game then implement monitoring and may de- Preserve as part of the Grand Canyon For- velop an adaptive management plan in col- est Reserve, that predated establishment laboration with federal partners to improve

20 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range understanding, reduce uncertainties, and the Jackson bison herd was estimated at 666 inform any next steps needed to manage the individuals. The herd occurs in multiple bison population at appropriate levels into small and large groups that are unfenced the future. and free to move across the local landscape. Most of the herd resides in Grand Teton Na- Unfortunately, not a lot of pre-bison infor- tional Park in spring, summer, and fall and mation regarding vegetation condition and a few individuals use the adjacent national other important resources within Grand forest. In winter, the bulk of the herd moves Canyon National Park exists, so assessing to the National Elk Refuge where they utilize potential current impacts is problematic. supplemental feed, although a small num- However, work done in 2011 and repeated ber of individuals typically winter on native in 2014 attempted to asses bison impacts to winter range in the park. vegetation associated with springs, seeps and ponds. Other work that occurred in 2014 Feeding of bison unintentionally resulted in included an experimental capture, reloca- significant population growth and unnatu- tion and release operation during which 19 ral crowding of bison on the National Elk bison were removed from the population Refuge in winter which contributes to an in- and taken back to HRWA. There was also a creased risk for potentially major outbreaks vegetation rapid assessment project carried of exotic diseases, as demonstrated by the out in conjunction with Northern Arizona high level of brucellosis found in the bison University students. Grand Canyon National herd. It also resulted in unusually low winter Park staff spent time mapping bison wallows, mortality, damage to and loss of habitat due assessing archeological and cultural impacts, to browsing of willow, cottonwood, and and trying to estimate bison numbers and bi- aspen stands and thereby reducing availabil- son mortality (natural and hunting off park). ity of these habitats to other wildlife. Several In addition GPS collars were placed on 3 studies to better understand the ecology of bison cows during 2016 to better understand bison in Jackson Hole have been undertaken movements. These types of activities will over the years. These include: a radio-telem- continue to occur in 2017 with a renewed etry study to examine seasonal distribution emphasis on determining bison reproductive and migration patterns; a study of interac- rates and demographics, creating a more ro- tions between bison and elk on the National bust population estimate, examining move- Elk Refuge; a scientific review regarding ments and distribution via GPS collared genetic management and an evaluation of bison, especially as related to use of recently fertility control as a possible management burned areas, and examining the genetics of technique; a study of bison calving ecol- the current population. ogy and reproduction and demography of brucellosis infected bison; and an assessment Grand Teton National Park of the Jackson bison population relative to (by Sarah Dewey) demographic and genetic concerns.

The conservation of bison in the Jackson Current management of bison in Grand Hole area, including in portions of Grand Teton National Park and on the National Elk Teton National Park and the National Elk Refuge is guided by the 2007 Bison and Elk Refuge is a success story. Although native Management Plan developed by the Na- to the area, bison were absent from Jackson tional Park Service and US Fish and Wildlife Hole from the mid-1800s until 1948 when Service in cooperation with several other 20 animals from Yellowstone were intro- federal and state agencies and substantial duced to the Jackson Hole Wildlife Park near input from local governments, tribal govern- Moran. The herd remained small until 1980, ments and organizations, nongovernmental when it discovered supplemental feedlines organizations, and numerous other stake- on the National Elk Refuge. Subsequently, holders and the public. The plan calls for the herd underwent significant population the park and refuge to maintain a genetically growth, reaching a peak at just over 1,000 in- viable population of approximately 500 dividuals in 2007. As of mid-February 2016, bison. The Wyoming Game and Fish De-

National Park Service 21 partment adopted this figure as their popula- 1999 by TNC and is managed for conservation objective for the Jackson bison herd in tion goals of natural age and sex ratios. It has 2008. Hunting of bison occurs outside of been free-roaming across 48,000 acres of Grand Teton National Park on the National greasewood/rabbitbrush rangeland within Elk Refuge and national forest and is used as the fenced portion of the Medano Ranch a tool to achieve the desired population size. from that time and managed with annual The plan also allowed for Tribal members to roundups and removals at a current pre- remove a small number of bison on the Na- breeding population target of 1600. Bison tional Elk Refuge for ceremonial purposes. removed from this population are distribut- Members of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe ed to other conservation herds managed by have conducted ceremonial hunts several TNC and other private conservation organi- times since 2008. zations, or culled for production.

The agencies continue to work cooperatively Genetics for this bison herd have been to achieve goals outlined in the plan related evaluated for about 8 years by TNC. TNC to habitat conservation, sustainable popula- goals are to eliminate bovine mitochondrial tions, numbers of elk and bison, and disease DNA (mtDNA) from the herd by reduc- management. In particular, efforts are un- ing the level over time while maintaining derway to restore formerly cultivated lands genetic variability in the population. Each to native plant communities in Grand Teton year individual bison are rounded up and National Park. To date, almost one-third of tail hair samples are taken by either TNC or the 4,500 acres identified for restoration is scientists at USGS for genetic analyses. All under active treatment and approximately individuals receive a microchip to identify 130 acres is considered fully restored. The them. In subsequent roundups, females with refuge, park, and cooperating agencies are cattle mtDNA are removed from the popu- currently working on a step-down plan for lation (because only females pass-on cattle bison and elk management that will develop mtDNA). Currently, mtDNA in the popula- a structured framework for reducing reliance tion is less than 1% (2015 results showed 10 on supplemental winter feeding. of 1028 samples contained bovine mtDNA). Testing for bovine nuclear DNA (passed-on The Jackson bison herd is of special im- from males) was conducted in 2008 only; at portance as one of the last remnants of the that time 12.5% of samples contained bovine extensive wild herd that once roamed much nDNA (however removal of individuals with of North America. Because there are few op- cattle nuclear DNA is not recommended as portunities to view bison in the wild, pho- this can reduce the overall genetic variabil- tographing and watching bison is a popular ity of the herd). Genetic diversity analyses activity for valley visitors. conducted in 2009 indicated the population contains relatively high levels of genetic Great Sand Dunes National Park diversity, which is consistent with the history and Preserve of population establishment. The herd does (by Kate Schoenecker) not appear to harbor unique genetic diversity at substantial levels and the population The San Luis Valley (SLV), including Great appears to be formed from a mixture of 3 Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, was or more source bison herds. Major genomic identified in the DOI Bison Conservation contributions were identified from herds at Initiative as one of the landscapes in North Wind Cave National Park, the National Bi- America that could support a new conserva- son Range, and Wichita Mountains National tion herd of bison, potentially co-managed Wildlife Refuge. The apparent Wind Cave jointly by federal, state and NGO partners National Park genomic contribution may be in a shared stewardship model. Bison in the due to mixture with Custer State Park bison. Great Sand Dunes ecosystem are currently owned and managed by The Nature Conser- Scientific research was conducted jointly by vancy (TNC) on the jointly-owned Medano NPS and USGS from 2004 to 2009 on the Ranch. The herd was originally purchased in elk and bison herds of SLV to determine

22 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range carrying capacity, general ecology, and their as they roam the preserve, creating habitat impact on the ecosystem. Some research variability favoring higher biodiversity. These continues on bison and elk habitat interac- disturbances are key for improving and tions, as well as monitoring bison weight sustaining processes that influence ecologi- change with climate change in this semi-arid cal health of the tallgrass prairie ecosystem. ecosystem. Results of all studies will contin- Bison on the preserve also provide visitors ue to inform resource managers and provide with opportunities to learn about the rich a foundation for management of bison, elk, cultural history that weaves people and bison and other ungulates in SLV. together into an ethnographic tapestry ex- tending across much of North America prior Resource managers at Great Sand Dunes to the European western expansion move- National Park and Preserve have been using ment in the 1800s. science and consultation to develop several potential Alternatives concerning bison for Bison were restored to Tallgrass National consideration by the public in an Environ- Prairie Preserve in 2009, originating with 13 mental Impact Statement for elk and bison bison from Wind Cave National Park. Wind management at the Park and Preserve. Once Cave bison were chosen as the parent herd alternatives are approved internally, they for the Preserve because of their high levels will be released to the public for input and of genetic variation and heterozygosity, ab- comment. Consultation will also need to sence of cattle genes, and disease free status. continue with stakeholders, especially local Since then, through breeding and additional native tribes and many local government introductions from Wind Cave, the Tallgrass leaders, who are supportive and enthusiastic Prairie herd has grown to nearly 100 animals. about a possible federal herd of bison in the The Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve herd San Luis Valley. increases Wind Cave’s effective population size of bison. In accordance with the Depart- Tallgrass National Prairie Preserve ment of Interior Bison Conservation Initia- (by Kristen Hase) tive, managers recommend that conservation herds need approximately 1,000 individuals Tallgrass Prairie National Reserve plays an to maintain genetic diversity. However, with important role in preserving a high qual- today’s increasingly fragmented landscape, it ity remnant of tallgrass prairie natural and is extremely difficult to have 1,000 individu- cultural resources, helps preserve the genetic als in every herd. Therefore, smaller satellite integrity of the bison, and provides a home herds can contribute to these larger conser- to unique tallgrass biodiversity. Bison at Tall- vation herds. To accomplish this goal, Wind grass National Preserve are part of a unique Cave National Park represents a large source public-private partnership between the herd with healthy genetic characteristics National Park Service and The Nature Con- that helps establish new bison herds in other servancy (TNC). Together, NPS and TNC states, Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve co-manage about 11,000 acres with a shared being one of these satellite herds. TNC also vision to preserve and enhance a nationally has other preserves with Wind Cave bison significant remnant of the tallgrass prairie that also serve as satellite populations. In the ecosystem and the processes that sustain it; future, more bison may come from Wind preserve and interpret cultural resources Cave National Park to help maintain the and the heritage of the property; and offer genetic integrity of Tallgrass Prairie National opportunities for education, inspiration, Preserve bison. and enjoyment through public access to its geological, ecological, scenic, and historical Theodore Roosevelt National Park features (National Park Service 2000). (by Blake McCann)

The reintroduction of bison, after a century- Bison herds are maintained in the South and and-a half absence, is helping NPS and TNC North Units of Theodore Roosevelt National achieve this vision. Bison are a native key- Park. No bison management operations were stone herbivore that graze and disturb soil conducted at the park during 2011-2012.

National Park Service 23 However, during 2013-2016, bison manage- Wind Cave National Park ment at Theodore Roosevelt National Park (by Dan Roddy, Greg Schroeder) has transitioned from traditional numeric management in closed populations towards The Wind Cave National Park bison herd strategies that incorporate more holistic was established in 1913 when the New views of bison conservation across DOI and York Zoological Society (today, the Wildlife at the national level. Conservation Society) shipped 14 bison to the park by rail from the Bronx Zoo in New In 2013, the South Unit herd had grown to York City. These bison descended from one approximately 500 individuals, and a small of the last remaining herds that was captured bison roundup was conducted, during which in the west for the purposes of protecting 158 animals (nearly all that were handled) and recovering the species from extinction. were culled. This small operation was fol- An additional six bison were brought in lowed by a park-wide roundup in 2014 that from Yellowstone National Park in 1916. The resulted in culling of 407 bison of all ages existence of the current bison herd is a result and sexes. Most animals from both round- of these 20 founder animals and no other ups were distributed to Tribal partners. bison have been reintroduced to Wind Cave National Park since 1916. In 2015, the park became engaged in two bison research projects: 1) “Creating Visitor Wind Cave National Park maintains their Education on Conservation of the American bison herd at 350-500 bison. This popula- Bison”, and 2) “NPS 21st Century Bison tion management target is driven by the Conservation Management”. Both projects fact the park is fenced and forage must be utilize molecular techniques to understand available for bison, elk, pronghorn, mule bison conservation in context of past, cur- deer and black-tailed prairie dogs as well as rent, and future species genetic adaptability. maintaining the health and vigor of the plant It is our hope that these research initiatives community. From 2011 – 2016 Wind Cave will inform best practices for future steward- National Park completed two bison capture ship of the species at the park and across operations to meet this population manage- DOI herds. ment objective. Bison removed during these operations were provided to The Nature In 2016, the park and other Midwest NPS Conservancy (TNC) facilitated through units were provided new and continuing a 2013 Memorandum of Understanding regional and WASO funding to support (MOU) with the purpose of establishing a bison management. This allocation allowed Conservation Herd of Wind Cave National Theodore Roosevelt National Park manage- Park lineage bison managed for conservation ment to shift from a 4-5 year roundup plan on certain TNC lands. By establishing this for each unit to annual roundups, alternating satellite herd of Wind Cave bison, this effort between units. This increased frequency of contributes to the long term conservation of roundups will allow the park to cull fewer bison and the security of Wind Cave bison and younger animals (i.e., yearlings and population genetics should a catastrophic two-year-olds) to maintain genetic diversity event wipe out one or the other herd. In among the older ranks of the herd. In 2016, addition to being free of cattle introgression, the park conducted a roundup in the North both Wind Cave and Yellowstone National Unit, during which 70 yearling and two-year- Park herds have high levels of unique genetic old animals were culled. Hair samples col- variation relative to other federal bison pop- lected at the North Unit roundup and biopsy ulations (Halbert 2003). As such, these two samples collected during FY16 in the South populations in particular should be given Unit were transferred to collaborators in conservation priority and be maintained in support of the bison conservation research isolation from bison populations with evi- initiatives described above. dence of domestic cattle introgression. TNC agreed to steward bison from Wind Cave Na- tional Park as a satellite herd that would not be augmented by bison from other popula-

24 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range tions. In a similar effort, in 2015 Wind Cave Junction, Alaska from the National Bison National Park entered into another MOU Range in Montana in 1928. In 1950, 17 bison with the Arizona Game and Fish Department were moved from the Delta Junction herd to for bison conservation management efforts Nabesna where they eventually settled some in the House Rock Wildlife Area, the Kaibab distance away along the Copper, Dadina and Plateau and Grand Canyon National Park. Chetaslina River drainages. These animals Wind Cave National Park bison will be pro- are now referred to as the Copper River vided to Arizona during Wind Cave’s next herd. The herd’s current range includes use capture operation in October 2017. of the floodplain and bluffs along the Cop- per River during winter and spring. Bison These activities fit into the Midwest Region move to higher elevations along the Dadina (MWR) of the NPS vision for bison conser- and Chetaslina Rivers during summer, taking vation. Parks of the MWR will collaborate advantage of elevational green up. In 1962, with partners and stakeholders to conserve a second group of 35 bison were moved the genetic integrity of bison, manage bison from the Delta herd to May Creek, between as wildlife with minimal intervention by the Nizina and Chitina Rivers. Currently, managers, and expand bison herds, includ- the Chitina River herd ranges throughout ing across land ownership boundaries, so riparian and upland habitat along a 40-mile that bison will once again be an ecological section of the upper Chitina River. Each force and cultural resource on the Great herd maintains a separate range. Wood Plains. The purpose of this approach is to bison (Bison bison athabascae) were extir- address these larger objectives through pated in Alaska approximately 200 years ago. thoughtful and coordinated management Range maps based on archeological records among MWR parks and to look forward and oral and written history indicate wood towards improving management to enhance bison may have occurred in what is now conservation objectives for bison within and the northwest portion of Wrangell-St. Elias beyond the MWR. In 2014 and 2015, in step National Park and Preserve. A single wood with the MWR bison management vision of bison has recently been observed in this area working with partners, Wind Cave Na- on several occasions and is presumed to have tional Park distributed 103 and 75 live bison, come from Yukon, Canada. respectively, to The Nature Conservancy preserves in 5 states. In total, since the park Wrangell-St. Elias bison are managed as first began transferring live bison to other wildlife by the State of Alaska, Alaska De- stakeholders in 1987, Wind Cave National partment of Fish and Game. State manage- Park has distributed 1,763 bison to 30 Tribes ment objectives for the Copper River and (1407 or 80%), one Lakota University (20 or Chitina River herds are to maintain the herd 1.1 %), four State Parks (16 or 1%), six con- at a minimum of 60 and 50 overwintering servation groups (296 or 16.8%), one Coun- adults, respectively, by controlling the num- try/Mexico - conservation (23 or 1.3%) and ber of bison taken by hunters. Aerial surveys one female yearling to Grand Teton National to estimate the minimum population size of Park. The Wind Cave National Park bison each herd are conducted in June following herd is and will continue to be an important the spring calving period. The 2015 mini- herd for achieving species recovery goals for mum population size of the Copper River conserving or improving genetic integrity of herd was 151 adults and 30 calves while the other bison conservation herds across North Chitina River herd numbered 52 adults and 5 America. calves. Both herds are currently above management objectives. In addition to popula- Wrangell St. Elias National Park tion monitoring and harvest management, and Preserve Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Pre- (by Judy Putera) serve personnel are currently working with state biologists to obtain genetic samples Plains bison (Bison bison bison) in Wrangell- from harvested animals and also through St. Elias National Park and Preserve (WRST) biopsy darting operations. originated from animals relocated to Delta

National Park Service 25 Bison harvest is administered by a state to simplify management. Thus, many scien- drawing permit and is open to both Alaska tists consider Yellowstone to be the only eco- residents and non-residents. Because this logically and genetically viable population of is a state administered hunt, harvest regula- plains bison within their original range. tions apply to Wrangell-St. Elias Preserve lands. Lands owned by Ahtna, Inc., an Yellowstone bison are managed pursuant Alaska Native Regional Corporation, also to an interagency plan implemented by a occur within the boundary of Wrangell-St. diverse coalition of federal, state, and tribal Elias National Park and Preserve. Bison agencies, with substantial public involvement on Ahtna lands are managed by the state and oversight. Recent adjustments to this under the same regulations as WRST pre- plan have increased tolerance for bison on serve lands. The opportunity to harvest a habitat in Montana, including year-round bison in Wrangell-St. Elias National Park in some places, which allows bison move- and Preserve is highly sought after as 3,167 ments across a larger landscape. Public and applications were received for the 2015-16 tribal treaty hunting in Montana have been season with only 32 permits allocated, 2 of incorporated into management to facilitate which were issued for the smaller Chitina the federal trust responsibility with Native River herd. Alaska residents are allowed to American tribes and regulate the abundance harvest one bison every ten regulatory years and distribution of bison within established and non-residents one bison per lifetime. conservation areas in Montana. The Nation- Generally, 30% to 50% of permittees that al Park Service has let bison numbers and hunt harvest a bison each year. Ahtna has migrations into Montana increase to support a role in bison harvest as most bison in the public and tribal hunting, while working Copper River herd are on Ahtna land during with the State to reduce and resolve conflicts the hunting season. Hunters may obtain a with human safety and property damage. To special bison land use permit from Ahtna al- date, no cases of brucellosis transmission lowing access their lands to harvest a bison. from Yellowstone bison to cattle have been This is one of two land use permits for Ahtna detected, in part, because cooperative man- lands which are otherwise not open to hunt- agement successfully limits bison mingling ing by non-shareholders. with cattle. Yellowstone bison have special significance Yellowstone National Park to many Native American tribes because (by PJ White) they are the last living link to the indigenous herds of bison which once roamed across The conservation of Yellowstone bison has North America and provided sustenance been successful, with a restored population to tribes for centuries. Tribal involvement of about 25 bison in 1902 to approximately in the management of Yellowstone bison 5,500 in 2016. These bison are managed as has increased substantially in recent years wildlife in multiple, large herds that migrate through consultations and partnerships and disperse across an extensive, unfenced regarding bison abundance and distribution, landscape. Yellowstone bison retain one of habitat enhancement, implementation of the highest levels of genetic diversity in any hunts and culls, quarantine, and distribution conservation population of plains bison, of animals and meat. Currently, four tribes with recent analyses indicating a healthy, exercise their rights, pursuant to treaties with genetically diverse population with no evi- the federal government, to hunt bison on dence of cattle introgression. These bison open and unclaimed lands in southwestern are subject to a full suite of native ungulates Montana. Also, the National Park Service and predators, other natural selection factors has agreements with a tribal organization (such as predation and competition for food and several tribes to provide them with bison and mates), and substantial environmental for shipment to meat processing facilities variability. As a result, they have adaptive and subsequent distribution of meat, hides, capabilities that are continually honed com- and horns to their members. In recent years, pared to bison kept in fenced pastures with brucellosis-free bison completing quarantine no predators and the removal of older bulls

26 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range in Montana have been transferred to tribal Peck Assiniboine and Sioux tribes have de- lands in northern Montana to develop new veloped a quarantine facility for Yellowstone conservation and cultural herds from the bison on tribal lands, with the larger purpose Yellowstone lineage while retaining their of restoring wild, brucellosis-free bison to adaptive capabilities. In addition, the Fort public and tribal lands.

National Park Service 27 Bison face, NPS Photo.

Looking Forward

(by Allison Mitchell and Glenn Plumb) fully operate. Currently large herds of wild bison (>4,000 bison) in these conditions can For millennia, bison were a driving eco- only be seen in Wood Buffalo National Park logical force in North American grasslands. (Canada) and Yellowstone National Park. Their grazing patterns created successional vegetation, influenced natural fire regimes The second recovery of bison will occur by and provided habitat for grassland insects, establishing large ecologically-functioning, birds, and small mammals. Bison served as free-ranging bison populations on land- a keystone species that engineered prairie scapes within their historic range where they ecosystems for over 10,000 years. are managed as wildlife, interacting with ecological processes and coexisting with hu- In the 1800s, fewer than 1,000 bison re- mans that recognize them as wildlife, similar mained in the wild. Today, around 300,000 to other wildlife species that are influenced bison exist in North America. Most (~90%) by predation and managed by hunting (e.g., of these bison are privately owned and man- wild deer, elk, etc.). In 2006, The American aged as livestock. While these bison con- Bison Society identified ten principles to tribute to the overall recovery of the species guide ecological restoration of bison, as and have important economic, cultural and follows: nutritional values, many ranched bison herds are not exposed to conditions that shaped ■■ PRINCIPLE 1: Restore and support their ancestors’ wild nature. human-bison relationships through equitable application of cultural, Far fewer bison alive today are managed for environmental, nutritional, hunting, conservation and ecological restoration in and economic means. settings that allow them to naturally retain qualities that rival their prehistoric wild pre- ■■ PRINCIPLE 2: Recognize bison as decessors’ characteristics. About 31,000 bi- wildlife in every jurisdiction across son are managed mostly on public lands for their historic range. conservation purposes; of these bison, less ■■ PRINCIPLE 3: Create and strength- than 15,000 are fully wild, roaming freely on en shared stewardship of bison that large landscapes where natural selection can incorporates public, private, non-

28 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range government organizations and tribal ■■ PRINCIPLE 10: Ecological restora- herds. tion requires both effective messages ■■ PRINCIPLE 4: Achieve the public and effective messengers that can and political support for ecological influence all stakeholders. restoration of bison as native wildlife These principles depend upon human in- across their range. novation, creativeness and willingness to ■■ PRINCIPLE 5: Acknowledge and move beyond just saving representatives of empower Tribes and First Nations this species on small, intensively managed to use their unique perspectives, landscapes. Thoughtful, informed and coor- roles and legal authority in helping dinated management of these smaller con- to achieve the ecological restoration servation herds are important to the overall of bison. recovery of the species, but we can also work together to implement new inventive ■■ PRINCIPLE 6: Wild Bison have an conservation practices in order to establish innate right to exist in a wild state in new free-ranging bison herds across multi- viable populations distributed across jurisdictional landscapes that will allow them their historical range. to be “wild by nature” as well. ■■ PRINCIPLE 7: Ensure the integrity of the bison genome with sufficient Restoring wild bison will require “shared diversity to enable bison adaptation stewardship” among diverse stakeholders over centuries. including federal and state agencies, tribes and First Nations, non-government organi- ■■ PRINCIPLE 8: Ensure that large zations, ranchers, hunters and private land landscapes that are currently intact owners. Collaboration will be key to setting a or that can be restored are avail- course for the next 100 years so our succes- able for ecological restoration so sors can look back and consider this initia- that bison can express their role as a tive as pivotal to ecological restoration of this keystone species. majestic species and the grassland ecosys- ■■ PRINCIPLE 9: Restore wild bison tems they co-evolved with over millennia. herds to numbers that will allow The future of wild bison depends on us. natural selection to operate through their behavior and ecology.

National Park Service 29 Literature Cited

Department of the Interior (DOI). 2008. Bison Conservation Initiative. Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks US. Department of the Interior Washington DC. 11pp.

Dratch, P.A. & P.J.P. Gogan. 2010. DOI bison conservation genetics workshop report and recommendations. NPS Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRMD/NRR— 2010/257. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Gates, C.C., C.H. Freese, P.J.P Gogan & M. Kotzman. 2010. American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010. Editors, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Halbert, N.D. and J. D. Derr. 2008. Patterns of genetic variation in US federal bison herds. Molecular Ecology 17:4963-4977.

Halbert, N.D. 2003. The utilization of genetic markers to resolve modern management issues in historic bison populations: implications for species conservation. PhD thesis, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.

Hedrick, P.H. 2009. Conservation genetics and North American Bison (Bison bison). Journal of Heredity 100(4):411-420.

Intertribal Buffalo Council [ITBC]. 2016. 2015-2016 Interagency Buffalo Council Annual Report. Rapid City, South Dakota. 60 pp. Accessed December 14, 2016 http:// itbcbuffalo.com/itbc_main_files/itbc_annual_report.pdf

National Park Service. 2011. A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship

Sanderson, E.W., K.H. Redford, B. Weber, K. Aune, D. Baldes, J. Berger, D. Carter, C. Curtain, J.N. Derr, S. Dobrott, E. Fearn, C. Fleener, S. Forrest, C. Gerlach, C.C. Gates, J.E. Gross, P. Gogan, S. Grassel, J.A. Hilty, M. Jensen, K. Kunkel, D. Lammers, R. List, K. Minkowski, T. Olson, C. Pague, P.B. Robertson, and B. Stephenson. 2008. The ecological future of the North American Bison: conceiving long-term, large-scale conservation of wildlife. Conservation Biology 22(2): 252-266.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 2008. Bison Conservation Initiative. Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 2014. DOI bison report: Looking forward. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRMD/NRR Fort Collins, CO.

White, P.J., R.L. Wallen, D.E. Hallec, and J.A. Jarrett, editors. 2015. Yellowstone bison: conserving an American icon in modern society. Yellowstone Center for Resources, Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming.

30 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Appendix A: Department of Interior Bison Conservation Herds

Table 1. Individual bison herds managed on Department of Interior (DOI) lands. The National Park Service (NPS) manages approximately 10,000 bison in ten herds; half of these herds are managed in cooperation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Arizona Game and Fish (AZGF), Alaska Fish and Game (AKFG) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC). The FWS manages approximately 2,340 bison in seven refuge herds, collaboratively managing one herd with the NPS. The Bureau of Land Manage- ment (BLM) cooperates with the Utah Department of Wildlife (UDWR) to manage approximately 775 bison in two herds. Approx. Herd Size Approx. Area Size DOI Bison Herd State Managing Agency Fenced or Ranging (2016) (ac) Book Cliffs UT BLM / UDWR Ranging 450 1,400,000

Henry Mountains UT BLM/UDWR Ranging 325 300,000

Fort Niobrara National NE FWS Fenced 350 17,000 Wildlife Refuge National Bison Range MT FWS Fenced 380 19,000

Neal Smith National IA FWS Fenced 70 700 Wildlife Refuge Rocky Mtn. Arsenal Na- CO FWS Fenced 75 12,000 tional Wildlife Refuge Sullys Hill National ND FWS Fenced 25 540 Game Preserve Wichita Mountains Na- OK FWS Fenced 640 59,000 tional Wildlife Refuge Grand Teton Nat’l Park WY NPS / FWS Ranging 800 360,000 / Nat’l Elk Refuge Badlands National Park SD NPS Fenced 650 64,000

Chickasaw National OK NPS Fenced 10 80 Recreation Area Grand Canyon National AZ NPS / AZGF Ranging 600 23,000 Park / House Rock Tallgrass Prairie Na- KS NPS / TNC Fenced 20 1,100 tional Preserve Theodore Roosevelt ND NPS Fenced 500 71,000 National Park* Wind Cave National SD NPS Fenced 450 28,000 Park Wrangell-St. Elias AK NPS / AKFG Ranging 210 100,000 National Park and Preserve*

Yellowstone National MT WY NPS Ranging 4,900 2,200,000 Park

Great Sand Dunes Nat’l CO TNC / NPS Fenced 2,000 50,000 Park and Preserve

*jurisdiction has two geographically separated bison herds.

National Park Service 31 Appendix B: Map of Department of Interior Bison Conservation Herds (Credit: Wildlife Conservation Society)

32 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Appendix C: Bison Research in National Parks 2011- 2016

Table 2. NPS research permits related to bison issued 2011-2016.

NPS Unit* Study Title Badlands National Park Grazing Resources for Integrated Conservation of Bison and Native Prairie at Badlands National Park, South Dakota

Badlands National Park Production Management Practices to Optimize OST Bison Herd Health through Nutrition, Behavior, and Genetic integrity

Badlands National Park, Theodore Roosevelt National Park Evaluating genetic augmentation of bison herds at Theodore Roosevelt National Park

Badlands National Park, Theodore Roosevelt National Park, Comparison of bison performance metrics across US bison herds to evaluate the role of Wind Cave National Park climate and grassland management in the ecology of bison.

Colorado National Monument Assessment of Degradation from [Historic] Bison Grazing in the Colorado National Monument

Grand Canyon National Park Ecological Impacts of Bison and Implications for Cross-Jurisdictional Management in the Grand Canyon Region

Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Bison ecological research and management in an arid ecosystem

Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site Creating Visitor Education on Conservation of the American Bison

Theodore Roosevelt National Park, Wind Cave National Park The influence of hunting on the rate and quality of bellows by bison bulls during the rut

Wind Cave National Park Wind Cave National Park modern and fossil bison skeletal comparison: observing bison body size change through time in response to climate change

Wind Cave National Park Quatenary fossil remains from Persistence Cave

Yellowstone National Park The Influence Bison Exhibit in Nutrient Cycling Processes on the Yellowstone Landscape

Yellowstone National Park Spatial Dynamics of the Central Yellowstone Bison Herd: Integration and Visualization of Large Spatial Databases

Yellowstone National Park Investigating the Effects of Bison Grazing on the Abundance and Reproductive Success of Grassland Songbirds

National Park Service 33 Appendix D: Bison Science and Scholarship References (2011-2016) Relevant to NPS Bison Stewardship and the Call to Action

Adams, S. M., and A. R. Dood. 2011. Background information on issues of concern for Montana: Plains bison ecology, management, and conservation. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks [MFWP], Bozeman, Montana.

Allred, B.W., S.D. Fuhlendorf, and R.G. Hamilton. 2011. The role of herbivores in Great Plains conservation: comparative ecology of bison and cattle. Ecosphere 2(3): 1-17.

Ashton I.W., and Davis CJ. 2016. Plant community composition and structure monitoring for Badlands National Park: 2011-2015 summary report. Natural Resource Report. NPS/ NGPN/NRR—2016/1244. National Park Service. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Aune, K. 2016. The Iinnii Initiative: A BioCultural Approach to Restoring the American Bison. Presentation in the “New Frontiers in North American Bison Conservation: Exploring the Human Dimensions” session, Society for Conservation Biology North America Meeting, July 2016, Madison, Wisconsin.

Aune, K., J. C. Rhyan, R. Russell, T. J. Roffe, and B. Corso. 2012. Environmental persistence of Brucella abortus in the Greater Yellowstone Area. Journal of Wildlife Management 76:253-261.

Bates, B., and K. Hersey. 2016. Lessons learned from bison restoration in Utah on western rangelands. Rangelands 38(5):256-265.

Bird, E., R. Magnan, R. Smith, and D. Jorgensen. 2016. Lessons of relationships between Fort Peck Tribal Members and their recently returned Buffalo relatives. Presentation in the “New Frontiers in North American Bison Conservation: Exploring the Human Dimensions” session, Society for Conservation Biology North America Meeting, July 2016, Madison, Wisconsin.

Buhnerkempe, M.G., N. Burch, S. Hamilton, K.M. Byrne, E. Childers, K.A. Holfelder, L.N. McManus, M.I. Pyne, G. Schroeder, and P.F. Doherty, Jr.. 2011. The utility of transient sensitivity for wildlife management and conservation: Bison as a case study.

Canfield, J., E. Carlson, R. Clarke, K. Lawrence, T. McDonald, A. Patterson, S. Sheppard, and R. Wallen. 2012. Annual report, Interagency Bison Management Plan, 1 August 2010-31 October 2011. Available at http://ibmp.info/.

Carlson, K., and L. Bement. 2013. Organization of bison hunting at the Pleistocene/ Holocene transition on the plains of North America. Quaternary International 297: 93-99.

Coraci, V., C. Valle, B. Tobin, J. Reeder, and G. Holm. 2015. “Impacts of Bison on the North Rim of Grand Canyon National Park.” Poster Session at the Geological Society of America Conference.

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada [COSEWIC]. 2013. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Plains Bison Bison bison bison and the Wood Bison Bison bison athabascae in Canada. COSEWIC. Ottawa, Canada. 109 pp.

Cross, P. C., E. J. Maichak, A. Brennan, B. M. Scurlock, J. Henningsen, and G. Luikart. 2013. An ecological perspective on Brucella abortus in the western United States. Revue Scientifique et Technique Office International des Epizooties 32:79-87.

34 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Department of the Interior. 2014. DOI bison report: Looking forward. Natural Resource Report. NPS/NPS/BRMD/NRR—2014/821. National Park Service. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Derr, J.N., P.W. Hedrick, N.D. Halbert, L. Plough, L.K. Dobson, J. King, C. Duncan, D.L. Hunter, N.D. Cohen, and D. Hedgecock. 2012. Phenotypic effects of cattle mitochondrial DNA in American Bison. Conservation Biology 26(6): 1130-1136.

Derr, J., N. Halbert, and T. Swannack. 2011. Development of a genetic based conservation management program for the Wind Cave National Park bison herd. Internal report on file at Wind Cave National Park headquarters, Hot Springs, South Dakota.

Douglas, K.C., N.D. Halbert, C. Kolenda, C. Childers, D.L. Hunter, and J.N. Derr. 2011. Complete mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis of Bison bison and bison-cattle hybrids: Function and Phylogeny. Mitochondrion, 11:166-175.

Ebinger M. R., P. Cross, R. Wallen, P. J. White, and J. Treanor. 2011. Simulating sterilization, vaccination, and test-and-remove as brucellosis control measures in bison. Ecological Applications 21:2944-2959.

Forgacs, D., R. Wallen, L. Dobson, and J. Derr. 2016. Mitochondrial Haplotype Diversity in Yellowstone National Park Bison. Presentation in the “Conservation Genetics” session, Society for Conservation Biology North America Meeting, July 2016, Madison, Wisconsin.

Frank, D. A., R. L. Wallen, and P. J. White. 2013. Assessing the effects of climate change and wolf restoration on grassland processes. Pp 195–205 in P. J. White, R. A. Garrott, and G. E. Plumb eds. Yellowstone’s wildlife in transition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Frey, R., R. Clarke, M. McCollum, P. Nol, K. Johnson, B. Thompson, J. Ramsey, N. Anderson, and J. Rhyan. 2013. Evaluation of bison (Bison bison) semen from Yellowstone National Park, Montana, USA bulls for Brucella abortus shedding. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 49:714-717.

Garvoille, R. 2016. American icons in metropolitan grasslands: understanding the connections between people, place and bison conservation along Colorado’s Front Range. Presentation in the “New Frontiers in North American Bison Conservation: Exploring the Human Dimensions” session, Society for Conservation Biology North America Meeting, July 2016, Madison, Wisconsin.

Gates, C.C. 2014. What is a wild bison? A case study of plains bison conservation in Canada. In: Wild Cattle of the World, M.Melletti, ed. Pp 373-384. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom. 477 pp.

Gates, C. C., and L. Broberg. 2011. Yellowstone bison: The science and management of a migratory wildlife population. University of Montana Press, Missoula, Montana.

Geremia, C., R. Wallen, and P. J. White. 2014a. Population dynamics and adaptive management of Yellowstone bison. National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming. Available at http://ibmp.info/.

Geremia, C., P. J. White, J. A. Hoeting, R. L. Wallen, F. G. R. Watson, D. Blanton, and N. T. Hobbs. 2014b. Integrating population- and individual-level information in a movement model of Yellowstone bison. Ecological Applications 24:346-362.

National Park Service 35 Geremia, C., P. J. White, R. Wallen, and D. Blanton. 2013. Managing the abundance of Yellowstone bison, winter 2014. National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming. Available at http://ibmp.info/.

Geremia, C., P. J. White, R. L. Wallen, F. G. R. Watson, J. J. Treanor, J. Borkowski, C. S. Potter, and R. L. Crabtree. 2011. Predicting bison migration out of Yellowstone National Park using Bayesian models. PLoS ONE 6:e16848.

Gogan, P. J. P., R. E. Russell, E. M. Olexa, and K. M. Podruzny. 2013. Pregnancy rates in central Yellowstone bison. Journal of Wildlife Management 77:1271-1279.

Halbert, N. D., P. J. P. Gogan, P. W. Hedrick, J. M. Wahl, and J. N. Derr. 2012. Genetic population substructure in bison at Yellowstone National Park. Journal of Heredity 103:360-370.

Huffer, D. J. 2013 A Spatial Analysis and Zooarchaeological Interpretation of Archaeological Bison Remains in the Southwest and the Wildlife Management Implications for the House Rock Valley Bison Herd in Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. School of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Ivanov, A. V., K. M. Salmakov, S. C. Olsen, and G. E. Plumb. 2011. A live vaccine from Brucella abortus strain 82 for control of cattle brucellosis in the Russian Federation. Animal Health Research Reviews 12:113-131.

Kohl, M. T., P. R. Krausman, K. Kunkel, and D. M. Williams. 2013. Bison versus cattle: Are they ecologically synonymous? Rangeland Ecology & Management 66:721-731.

Koons, D.N., P. Terletzky, P.B. Adler, M.L. Wolfe, D. Ranglack, F.P. Howe, K. Hersey, W. Paskett, and J.T. du Toit. 2012. Climate and density-dependent drivers of recruitment in plains bison. Journal of Mammalogy 93:475-481.

Koons, D.N., F. Colchero, K. Hersey, and O. Gimenez. 2015. Disentangling the effects of climate, density dependence and harvest on the populations dynamics of North Americas most iconic large herbivore. Journal of Ecological Applications 25:956-967.

Licht, D., D. Roddy, and B. Muenchau. In prep. One hundred years of bison conservation at Wind Cave National Park. Natural Resource Report NPS/WICA/NRR—201X/XXX. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Coloroado.

Licht D.S. 2014. Bison (Bison bison) restoration and management options on the south unit and adjacent range units of Badlands National Park in South Dakota: A technical evaluation. Natural Resource Report. NPS/BADL/NRR—2014/881. National Park Service. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Licht D.S. 2014. Restoration of bison (Bison bison) to Agate Fossil Beds National Monument: A feasibility study. Natural Resource Report. NPS/BADL/NRR—2014/883. National Park Service. Fort Collins, Colorado.

Licht. D.S. 2016. Bison weights from national parks in the Northern Great Plains. Rangelands 38(3):138-144.

Metcalf, P., and E. Metcalf. 2016. Stories from the front lines: Resident experiences living with bison and perspectives on their management in two Yellowstone gateway communities. Presentation in the “New Frontiers in North American Bison Conservation: Exploring the Human Dimensions” session, Society for Conservation Biology North America Meeting, July 2016, Madison, Wisconsin.

36 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range Mooring, M.S., and M.C.T. Penedo. 2014. Behavioral versus genetic measures of fitness in bison bulls (Bison bison). Journal of Mammalogy 95(5):913-924.

National Park Service [NPS]. 2015. Bison Management Activities within Grand Canyon National Park. 2014 Annual Report. February 10, 2015.

NPS. 2014. DOI bison report: Looking forward. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/ BRMD/NRR—2014/821. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

NPS. 2014. A comprehensive review of ungulate management by the National Park Service: Second century challenges, opportunities, and coherence. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRMD/NRR—2014/898. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

NPS. 2014. Cultural Resources Bison Effects Monitoring Fiscal Year 2014 Report, Grand Canyon National Park. Project Number GRCA-2015-B and Archeological Report Number 2015-02-GRCA February 2015.

Olsen, S. C., and C. S. Johnson. 2012. Efficacy of dart or booster vaccination with strain RB51 in protecting bison against experimental Brucella abortus challenge. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology 19:886-890.

Painter, L.E., and W.J. Ripple. 2012. Effects of bison on willow and cottonwood in northern Yellowstone National Park. Forest Ecology and Management 264:150-58.

Pérez-Figueroa, A., R. L. Wallen, T. Antao, J. A. Coombs, M. K. Schwartz, P. J. White, and G. Luikart. 2012. Conserving genomic variability in large mammals: Effect of population fluctuations and variance in male reproductive success on variability in Yellowstone bison. Biological Conservation 150:159-166.

Plumb, G. E., M. Sturm, C. McMullen, G. Holm, C. Lutch, C. Keckler, A. Gatto, A. Munig, and R. Wallen. 2016. Grand Canyon bison nativity, genetics, and ecology: Looking forward. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/BRD/NRR—2016/1226. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. 28 pp.

Plumb, G.E., P.J. White, and K. Aune. 2014. American bison Bison bison (Linneaus, 1758). In: Wild Cattle of the World (M.Melletti, ed.) Pp 83-114. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom. 477 pp.

Ranglack, D.H., S. Surham, and J.T. du Toit. 2015. Competition on the range: science vs perception in a bison-cattle conflict in the western USA. Journal of Applied Ecology 52:467-474.

Ranglack, D.H., L.K. Dobson, J.T. du Toit, and J. Derr. 2015. Genetic analysis of the Henry Mountains bison herd. PLoS ONE, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144239.

Redford, K., K. Aune, and G.E. Plumb. 2016. Hope Is A Bison. Conservation Biology. Volume 30, No. 4, 689–691.

Reimondo, E. L. 2012 Ecological Impacts and Management Implications of Introduced Bison in the Grand Canyon Region. Unpublished Master’s thesis, School of Earth Sciences and Environmental Sustainability, Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University.

Reimondo, E., T. Sisk, and T. Theimer. 2015. Effects of introduced bison on wetlands of the Kaibab Plateau, Arizona. The Colorado Plateau VI: Science and Management at the Landscape Scale, 120.

National Park Service 37 Rhyan, J. C., P. Nol, C. Quance, A. Gertonson, J. Belfrage, L. Harris, K. Straka, and S. Robbe- Austerman. 2013. Transmission of brucellosis from elk to cattle and bison, Greater Yellowstone Area, USA, 2002-2012. Emerging Infectious Diseases 19:1992-1995.

Ripple, W.J., and R.L. Beschta. 2011. Trophic cascades in Yellowstone: the first 15 years after wolf reintroduction. Biological Conservation doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2011.11.005

Ripple, W.J., L.E. Painter, R.L. Beschta, and C.C. Gates. 2011. Wolves, elk, bison, and secondary trophic cascades in Yellowstone National Park. The Open Ecology Journal 3:31-37.

Schoenecker, K.A., 2012, Ecology of bison, elk, and vegetation in an arid ecosystem: Fort Collins, Colo., Colorado State University, Ph.D. dissertation, 104 pp.

Schumaker, B. 2013. Risks of Brucella abortus spillover in the Greater Yellowstone Area. Revue Scientifique et Technique Office International des Epizooties 32:71-77.

Schumaker, B. A., D. E. Peck, and M. E. Kauffman. 2012. Brucellosis in the Greater Yellowstone Area: Disease management at the wildlife-livestock interface. Human- Wildlife Interactions 6:48-63.

Sigaud, M., J.A. Merkle, S.G. Cherry, J.M. Fryxell, A. Berdahl, and D. Fortin. 2016. Collective decision-making promotes fitness loss in a fusion-fission society. Ecology Letters doi:10.1111/ele.12698.

Sturm, M., and G. Holm. 2015. Alternative modelling report in support of Grand Canyon National Park’s bison management planning. Unpublished report on file at NPS Intermountain Regional Office, Denver, Colorado.

Treanor, J. J. 2012. The biology and management of brucellosis in Yellowstone bison. Dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky.

Treanor, J. J. 2013. Integrating ecology with management to control wildlife brucellosis. Revue Scientifique et Technique Office International des Epizooties 32:239-244.

Treanor, J. J. , C. Geremia, P. H. Crowley, J. J. Cox, P. J. White, R. L. Wallen, and D. W. Blanton. 2011. Estimating probabilities of active brucellosis infection in Yellowstone bison through quantitative serology and tissue culture. Journal of Applied Ecology 48:1324-1332.

Treanor, J. J., P. J. White, and R. L. Wallen. 2013. Balancing bison conservation and risk management of the non-native disease brucellosis. Pages 226-235 in P. J. White, R. A. Garrott, and G. E. Plumb. Yellowstone’s wildlife in transition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Uhrig, S. R., P. Nol, M. McCollum, M. Salman, and J. Rhyan. 2013. Evaluation of transmission of Brucella abortus strain 19 in bison by intravaginal, intrauterine, and intraconjunctival inoculation. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 49:522-526.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal Plant Health Inspection Service. 2012. Evaluation of GonaCon™, an immunocontraceptive vaccine, as a means of decreasing transmission of Brucella abortus in bison in the Greater Yellowstone Area. Environmental assessment, May 2012. Veterinary Services, Fort Collins, Colorado.

U.S. Department of the Interior [USDI]. 2014. DOI bison report: Looking forward. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRSS/ BRMD/NRR—2014/821. Fort Collins, Colorado.

38 Call to Action Item #26 - Back Home on the Range USDI, NPS. 2011. A call to action: Preparing for a second century of stewardship and engagement. Washington, D.C.

USDI, NPS. 2014. Remote vaccination program to reduce the prevalence of brucellosis in Yellowstone bison, final environmental impact statement. National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming.

USDI, NPS and MFWP. 2013. Brucellosis science panel review workshop panelist’s report. Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming.

Wallen, R. L., F. M. Gardipee, G. Luikart, and P. J. White. 2013. Population substructure in Yellowstone bison. Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming.

White, P. J., R. Wallen, and J. Treanor. 2014. Monitoring and research on bison and brucellosis. National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, Wyoming. Available at http://ibmp.info/.

White, P. J., G. E. Plumb, R. L. Wallen, and L. M. Baril. 2013. Migration and dispersal: Key processes for conserving national parks. Pages 164-178 in P. J. White, R. A. Garrott, and G. E. Plumb. Yellowstone’s wildlife in transition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

White, P.J., and R.L. Wallen. 2012. Yellowstone bison – should we preserve artificial population substructure or rely on ecological processes? Journal of Heredity Advances, Letter to the Editor, August 23.

White, P. J., R. L. Wallen, C. Geremia, J. J. Treanor, and D. W. Blanton. 2011. Management of Yellowstone bison and brucellosis transmission risk — implications for conservation and restoration. Biological Conservation 144:1322-1334.

Wismer, M. F. Lanoë, J. Ballanger, and J Mabry. 2016. Archaic bison of the Southwest: Recent explorations at the Cave Creek Midden Site, southeastern Arizona, U.S.A. Presentation at the 39th Annual Conference for Ethnobiology, March 2016, University of Arizona, Tuscon, Arizona.

Zeigenfuss, L.C., and K.A. Schoenecker. 2015. Development of a grazing monitoring program for Great Sand Dunes National Park: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 2015-1136. 44 pp.

National Park Service 39

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated Island Communities.

NPS 999/135640, December 2016 National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Stewardship and Science 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 150 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 www.nature.nps.gov

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA™