DOCSLIB.ORG

Foods Eaten by the Rocky Mountain

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Foods Eaten by the Rocky Mountain were reported as trace amounts were excluded. Factors such as relative plant abundance in relation to consumption were considered in assigning plants to use categories when such information was Foods Eaten by the available. An average ranking for each species was then determined on the basis Rocky Mountain Elk of all studies where it was found to contribute at least 1% of the diet. The following terminology is used throughout this report. Highly valuable plant-one avidly sought by elk and ROLAND C. KUFELD which made up a major part of the diet in food habits studies where encountered, or Highlight: Forty-eight food habits studies were combined to determine what plants which was consumed far in excess of its are normally eaten by Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus canadensis nelsoni), and the rela- vegetative composition. These had an tive value of these plants from a manager’s viewpoint based on the response elk have average ranking of 2.25 to 3.00. Valuable exhibited toward them. Plant species are classified as highly valuable, valuable, or least plants-one sought and readily eaten but valuable on the basis of their contribution to the diet in food habits studies where to a lesser extent than highly valuable they were recorded. A total of 159 forbs, 59 grasses, and 95 shrubs are listed as elk plants. Such plants made up a moderate forage and categorized according to relative value. part of the diet in food habits studies where encountered. Valuable plants had an average ranking of 1.50 to 2.24. Least Knowledge of the relative forage value elk food habits, and studies meeting the valuable plant-one eaten by elk but which of plants eaten by elk is basic to elk range following criteria were incorporated: (1) usually made up a minor part of the diet surveys, and to planning and evaluation Data must be original and derived from a in studies where encountered, or which of habitat improvement programs. specific effort to collect food habits was consumed in a much smaller propor- Numerous elk food habits studies have information. References containing state- tion than it occurred on the range. Least ments of what elk eat based on general valuable plants had an average ranking of been conducted; however, individual knowledge, or those which summarized 1.00 to 1.49. These terms are used to studies are limited to a specific area, and previous food habits studies were ex- reflect the relative value of a plant’s relatively few plant species are found in cluded. (2) Data must be listed by species presence on elk range from a manager’s the diet compared to the number of eaten, and relative quantity consumed viewpoint because of the response elk plants eaten by elk throughout their must be expressed in terms which would have exhibited toward it. Value as used range. The amount of a particular species allow degree of use to be categorized. (3) here does not consider nutrient quality or consumed in one study may or may not Season of use must be shown. (4) Data the importance of a species in main- be indicative of its true value as elk must be listed separately for elk. Studies taining a certain desired stage of ecologi- forage. The purpose of this inquiry is to which referred to combined deer and elk cal succession. use or “game use” were excluded. (5) combine all food habits work to deter- Data were separated by the following Studies with a very limited sample (for mine which plants are eaten by elk, and seasons of use: Winter-December, Jan- example, only two or three stomachs) uary, February; Spring-March, April, their relative value as reflected by the were excluded. (6) Elk must have had May; Summer-June, July, August; Fall- degree to which they are normally free choice of available forage. This ex- September, October, November. sought. cluded some pen feeding studies. (7) Study animals must not be starving. Results Methods Forty-eight studies were incorporated in Seasonal Use of Major Forage Groups With one exception only studies which this summary. pertain to food habits of the Rocky Methods of data collection were as- Winter-Winter use is concentrated on Mountain elk (Cervus canadensis nelsoni) signed four categories: stomach analysis, either grasses or shrubs, depending on in the western U. S. and Canada were feeding observations on wild animals, forage availability. The following authors included. The exception study involving apparent use of plants, and pen feeding reported winter grass consumption on C. canadensis manitobensis (Blood, 1966) studies designed to determine preference. Montana’s predominately grass ranges as was incorporated because of its quality Studies of food habits differ widely in varying from 63 to lOO%, and averaging and because the plants eaten closely method of data collection and presenta- 84%: Casagranda and Janson (1957); tion; in number, relative abundance, avail- paralleled those consumed on elk ranges Constan (1967); Gordon (1968); Greer in Montana and Idaho. Studies of Rocky ability, and relative palatability of plant (1959); Greer et al. (1970); and Morris Mountain elk transplanted to areas out- species encountered; and in number of and Schwartz (1957). Winter shrub use side their normal range were excluded. animals using the study area. Thus, firm An extensive literature review was guidelines cannot be established for com- averaged 9% and forb use 8% in these made to assemble references concerning paring relative forage preference among studies. several food habits studies. In every DeNio (1938) reported 65% winter use study, however, some plants were con- of grasses, 15% shrubs, 2% forbs, and 5% The author is wildlife researcher. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins. ’ sumed more extensively than others. The mosses and lichens in Montana, northern The paper is a contribution of Federal Aid procedure used herein involved categori- Idaho, and northeastern Washington. to Wildlife Restoration Project W-l 0 1 -R. zing plants encountered in each study Winter grass consumption was as high as Acknowledgment is made to Mrs. Page according to whether they were used (1) Smith and to the Library Reference Service, 97% in Jasper Park, Alta. (Cowan, 1947). Fed. Aid in Fish and Wildl. Res., Denver, Colo., lightly (2) moderately or (3) heavily in for assistance in assembling elk food habits re- Shrubs comprised 95% of the winter diet ferences; and to Dr. Lee E. Yeager for reviewing relation to all species consumed in the the manuscript. particular reference. Plants which con- in New Mexico (Lang, 1958), 62% in Manuscript received May 19, 1972. tributed less than 1% of the diet or which Manitoba (Blood, 1966), and 82% in 106 JOURNAI _ OF RANGE MANAGEMENT 26(2), March 1973 Idaho of which 22% were conifers (Trout grasses, and 6% shrubs (Eustace, 1967; Schwartz, 1957; Peek 1963; Rouse, 1957, and Leege, 197 1). Boyd (1970) recorded Greer et al., 1970; Kirsch, 1963; Mackie, Rush, 1932). High grass use in fall was 57% shrub use in Colorado from Decem- 1970; Morris and Schwartz, 1957; Rouse, also found in Colorado by Boyd (1970), ber through April. In these studies grass 1958; Stevens, 1966). Rouse (1958) re- who recorded 92% grass consumed. In consumption averaged 22% and forbs corded 100% forbs in the summer diet. New Mexico, Burt and Gates (1959) were eaten in only two studies where Summer forage consumption in Colorado, found that grass comprised 84% of the maximum consumption was 10%. as reported by Nichols (1957), was 58% fall diet; however, Lang (1958), also in grasses, 41% forbs, and 1% shrubs. Boyd New Mexico, recorded 77% use of shrubs, Spting-Spring grass use on eight (1970), also in Colorado, recorded 78% 21% grasses, and 2% forbs. Shrub use was Montana studies remained high, averaging summer use of grasses, 12% forbs, and high in Manitoba and Idaho, where Blood 87% (Eustace, 1967; Greer et al., 1970; 10% shrubs. Studies where high summer (1955) and Young and Robinette (1939) Gordon, 1968; Kirsch, 1963; Mackie, shrub use were recorded were made by found 55 and 40% use of shrubs, 37 and 1970; Morris and Schwartz, 1957; Rouse, Young and Robinette (1939) in Idaho, 40% use of grasses and 8 and 20% forb 1957; and Stevens, 1966). Little infor- where use was 55% shrubs, 25% grasses, use, respectively. mation outside Montana was available on and 20% forbs; and by Blood (1966), in spring use of major forage classes except Manitoba, who noted 52% use of shrubs, Plant Species Value for Manitoba, where use of grasses, shr- 22% grasses, and 26% forbs. Plant species eaten by elk and their ubs, and forbs was 54, 37 and 9%, Fall-Primary use reverts to grasses in relative value rankings for each season are respectively, the fall in Montana where grass use listed by forbs in Table 1, grasses in Table Summer-Forbs became important for- averaged 73% in nine studies (Greer, 2, and shrubs in Table 3. Validity of these age during summer. The summer diet in 1959; Greer, 1960; Greer et al., 197.0; rankings increases with the number of Montana averaged 64% forbs, 30% Kirsch, 1963; Mackie, 1970; Morris and references on which a ranking is based. Table 1. Relative value of forb species eaten by Rocky Mountain elk. Forage value’ Plant name Winter Spring Summer Fall References’ Achilles 1.00 - 2 29,36 Achilles millefolium 1.33 - 3 1.00 - 4 1.00 - 2 9, 14, 17, 18,30,31,37,44 Actaea spicata 1.00 - 1 2.00 + 1 48 Agastache urticifolia 150+2 37,48 Agoseris glauca 1.50 + 4 2.33 * 6 7, 17,29,30,39,44 Alectoria fremontii 1.00 - 1 13 Allium textile 2.00 + 1 32 Angelica lyallii 1.00 - 1 1.00 - 1 48 Antennaria 1.00 - 3 1.00 - 2 1.00 - 1 1.00 -
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FINAL REPORT Pines Vs
    FINAL REPORT Pines vs. Oaks Revisited: Forest Type Conversion Due to High-severity Fire in Madrean Woodlands JFSP PROJECT ID: 15-1-07-22 December 2017 Andrew M. Barton University of Maine at Farmington Helen M. Poulos Wesleyan University Graeme P. Berlyn Yale University The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. ii Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................2 Background ......................................................................................................................................3 Materials and Methods .....................................................................................................................4 Study System .............................................................................................................................4 Climate and Fire Patterns in Southeastern Arizona ...................................................................6 Plot Sampling Design ................................................................................................................6 Plot
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Appendix C Botanical Resources Table of Contents Purpose Of This Appendix ............................................................................................................. Below Tables C-1. Federal and State Status, Current and Proposed Forest Service Status, and Global Distribution of the TEPCS Plant Species on the Sawtooth National Forest ........................... C-1 C-2. Habit, Lifeform, Population Trend, and Habitat Grouping of the TEPCS Plant Species for the Sawtooth National Forest ............................................................................... C-3 C-3. Rare Communities, Federal and State Status, Rarity Class, Threats, Trends, and Research Natural Area Distribution for the Sawtooth National Forest ................................... C-5 C-4. Plant Species of Cultural Importance for the Sawtooth National Forest ................................... C-6 PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX This appendix is designed to provide detailed information about habitat, lifeform, status, distribution, and habitat grouping for the Threatened, Proposed, Candidate, and Sensitive (current and proposed) plant species found on the Sawtooth National Forest. The detailed information is provided to enable managers to more efficiently direct the implementation of Botanical Resources goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines. Additionally, this appendix provides detailed information about the rare plant communities located on the Sawtooth National Forest and should provide additional support of Forest-wide objectives. Species of cultural
    [Show full text]
  • Common Wildflowers Found at Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve
    Useful books and websites Great Plains Flora Association. T.M. Barkley, editor. National Park Service Flora of the Great Plains. University Press of Kansas, 1986. U.S. Department of the Interior Haddock, Michael John. Wildflowers and Grasses of Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve Kansas: A Field Guide. University Press of Kansas, 2005. Strong City, Kansas Ladd, Doug. Tallgrass Prairie Wildflowers. Falcon Press Publishing, 1995. Common Wildflowers Found at Wooly verbena Snow-on-the-mountain Cardinal flower Maximilian sunflower Owensby, Clenton E. Kansas Prairie Wildflowers. KS Euphorbia marginata Lobelia cardinalis Helianthus maximilianii Verbena stricta Publishing, Inc. 2004. Blooms: June - September Blooms: June - October Blooms: August - September Blooms: August - September Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve Kansas Native Plants Society: www.kansasnativeplantsociety.org Kansas Wildflowers and Grasses: www.kswildflower.org Image Credits The images used in this brochure (unless otherwise noted) are credited to Mike Haddock, Agriculture Librarian Common sunflower Compass plant Round-head bush clover Broomweed and Chair of the Sciences Department at Kansas State Wild parsley Cream wild indigo Helianthus annuus Silphium laciniatum Lespedeza capitata Gutierrezia dracunculoides University Libraries and editor of the website Kansas Lomatium foeniculaceum Baptisia bracteata Blooms: July - September Blooms: August - September Blooms: August - October Blooms: March - April Blooms: April - May Blooms: July - September Wildflowers and Grasses at
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 CREATING A WILDLIFE FRIENDLY YARD ......................................................................2 With Plant Variety Comes Wildlife Diversity...............................................................2 Existing Yards....................................................................................................2 Native Plants ......................................................................................................3 Why Choose Organic Fertilizers?......................................................................3 Butterfly Gardens...............................................................................................3 Fall Flower Garden Maintenance.......................................................................3 Water Availability..............................................................................................4 Bird Feeders...................................................................................................................4 Provide Grit to Assist with Digestion ................................................................5 Unwelcome Visitors at Your Feeders? ..............................................................5 Attracting Hummingbirds ..................................................................................5 Cleaning Bird Feeders........................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Rosemount Greenway Restoration Plan Site Assessment Site N3
    Rosemount Greenway Restoration Plan Site Assessment Site N3 14th December, 2014 Submitted by : Group N3 (Cody Madaus, Megan Butler, Niluja Singh) This project was supported by the Resilient Communities Project (RCP), a program at the University of Minnesota that convenes the wide-ranging expertise of U of M faculty and students to address strategic local projects that advance community resilience and sustainability. RCP is a program of the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) and the Institute on the Environment. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA. Any reproduction, distribution, or derivative use of this work under this license must be accompanied by the following attribution: “Produced by the Resilient Communities Project at the University of Minnesota, 2014. Reproduced under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.” This publication may be available in alternate formats upon request. Resilient Communities Project University of Minnesota 330 HHHSPA 301—19th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Phone: (612) 625-7501 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.rcp.umn.edu The University of Minnesota is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, disability, public assistance status, veteran status, or sexual orientation. Table of Contents Part 1: Site Assessment………………………………………………………………………..1 Part 1.1 Greenway (Landscape) Assessment……………………………1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Vii Table of Contents
    CHAPTER VII TABLE OF CONTENTS VII. APPENDICES AND REFERENCES CITED........................................................................1 Appendix 1: Description of Vegetation Databases......................................................................1 Appendix 2: Suggested Stocking Levels......................................................................................8 Appendix 3: Known Plants of the Desolation Watershed.........................................................15 Literature Cited............................................................................................................................25 CHAPTER VII - APPENDICES & REFERENCES - DESOLATION ECOSYSTEM ANALYSIS i VII. APPENDICES AND REFERENCES CITED Appendix 1: Description of Vegetation Databases Vegetation data for the Desolation ecosystem analysis was stored in three different databases. This document serves as a data dictionary for the existing vegetation, historical vegetation, and potential natural vegetation databases, as described below: • Interpretation of aerial photography acquired in 1995, 1996, and 1997 was used to characterize existing (current) conditions. The 1996 and 1997 photography was obtained after cessation of the Bull and Summit wildfires in order to characterize post-fire conditions. The database name is: 97veg. • Interpretation of late-1930s and early-1940s photography was used to characterize historical conditions. The database name is: 39veg. • The potential natural vegetation was determined for each polygon in the analysis
    [Show full text]
  • Prescribed Burning for Elk in N Orthem Idaho
    Proceedings: 8th Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference 1968 Prescribed Burning For Elk in N orthem Idaho THOMAS A. LEEGE, RESEARCH BIOLOGIST Idaho Fish and Game Dept. Kamiah, Idaho kE majestic wapiti, otherwise known as the Rocky Mountain Elk (Cervus canadensis), has been identified with northern Idaho for the last 4 decades. Every year thousands of hunters from all parts of the United States swarm into the wild country of the St. Joe Clearwater River drainages. Places like Cool­ water Ridge, Magruder and Moose Creek are favorite hunting spots well known for their abundance of elk. However, it is now evident that elk numbers are slowly decreasing in many parts of the region. The reason for the decline is apparent when the history of the elk herds and the vegetation upon which they depend are closely exam­ ined. This paper will review some of these historical records and then report on prescribed burning studies now underway by Idaho Fish and Game personnel. The range rehabilitation program being developed by the Forest Service from these studies will hopefully halt the elk decline and maintain this valuable wildlife resource in northern Idaho. DESCRIPTION OF THE REGION The general area I will be referring to includes the territory to the north of the Salmon River and south of Coeur d'Alene Lake (Fig. 1). 235 THOMAS A. LEEGE It is sometimes called north-central Idaho and includes the St. Joe and Clearwater Rivers as the major drainages. This area is lightly populated, especially the eaStern two-thirds which is almost entirely publicly owned and managed by the United States Forest Service; specifically, the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Published Proceedings from the CWD Forum
    PROCEEDINGS Jackson Hole Chronic Wasting Disease Forum December 7, 2016 National Museum of Wildlife Art Jackson, Wyoming INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Chronic Wasting Disease forum was to highlight CWD research and management considerations, with the goal to share current science-based information with the general public and all organizations concerned with the long-term health of elk and deer populations in the Jackson Hole Area. ABSTRACTS *Names of presenters in bold text Wyoming Chronic Wasting Disease Surveillance Mary Wood, State Veterinarian, Wildlife Veterinary Research Services, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Laramie, Wyoming, USA Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) was first described in captive mule deer from Colorado and Wyoming in the 1970’s (Williams 1980). After the initial discovery and description of this disease, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD) began collaborative work with Dr. Elizabeth Williams in 1982 to investigate whether the disease was present in free-ranging populations (Williams 1992, Miller 2000). This was the beginning of a decades-long surveillance program to study the distribution and spread of this disease in free-ranging cervid populations. Between 1982 and 1997 a limited number of CWD samples were collected through local check stations near Laramie and Wheatland WY. WGFD surveillance began in earnest in 1997, with peak surveillance occurring between 2003 and 2011 when federal funding was available. Currently the WGFD Wildlife Health Laboratory tests between 1500 and 3500 samples for CWD each year with over 56,000 samples tested to date in Wyoming. Surveillance includes voluntary sample collection from hunter harvested animals as well as collection from road-killed animals and targeted animals showing signs consistent with CWD.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Angiosperm Pollen. 7. Nitrogen-Fixing Clade1
    Evolution of Angiosperm Pollen. 7. Nitrogen-Fixing Clade1 Authors: Jiang, Wei, He, Hua-Jie, Lu, Lu, Burgess, Kevin S., Wang, Hong, et. al. Source: Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 104(2) : 171-229 Published By: Missouri Botanical Garden Press URL: https://doi.org/10.3417/2019337 BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use. Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non - commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Annals-of-the-Missouri-Botanical-Garden on 01 Apr 2020 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use Access provided by Kunming Institute of Botany, CAS Volume 104 Annals Number 2 of the R 2019 Missouri Botanical Garden EVOLUTION OF ANGIOSPERM Wei Jiang,2,3,7 Hua-Jie He,4,7 Lu Lu,2,5 POLLEN. 7. NITROGEN-FIXING Kevin S. Burgess,6 Hong Wang,2* and 2,4 CLADE1 De-Zhu Li * ABSTRACT Nitrogen-fixing symbiosis in root nodules is known in only 10 families, which are distributed among a clade of four orders and delimited as the nitrogen-fixing clade.
    [Show full text]
  • CDLT Mountain Home & USFS-Boundry Butte Plant List
    CDLT Mountain Home Preserve- Boundary Butte Plant list CDLT Mountain Home & USFS-Boundry Butte Plant list Type Scientific Name Common Name Fern Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern Forb Achillea millefolium common yarrow Forb Agoseris heterophylla annual agoseris Forb Anemone oregana Oregon anemone Forb Antennaria racemosa raceme pussytoes Forb Boechera pauciflorus rockcress (Formerly Arabis) Forb Arnica cordifolia heart-leaf arnica Forb Balsamorhiza sagittata arrowleaf balsamroot Forb Brickellia oblongifolia Mojave brickellbush Forb Cacaliopsis nardosmia silvercrown (Formerly Luina) Forb Calochortus lyallii Lyall's mariposa lily Forb Camassia quamash common camas Forb Castilleja miniata scarlet Indian paintbrush Forb Claytonia lanceolata springbeauty Forb Collinsia parviflora small-flowered blue-eyed mary Forb Commandra umbellata bastard toadflax Forb Delphinium viridescens Wenatchee larkspur Forb Erythronium grandiflorum glacier lily Forb Erysimum species wallflower Forb Fragaria virginiana Virginia strawberry Forb Fritillaria affinis checker lily, chocolate lily Forb Fritillaria pudica yellow bells Forb Galium sp. bedstraw Forb Heuchera cylindrica roundleaf alumroot Forb Hydrophyllum capitatum ballhead waterleaf Forb Lathyrus pauciflorus few-flowered pea Forb Lithophragma parviflorum small-flowered woodland-star Forb Lithophragma glabrum bulbous woodland-star Forb Lithophragma tenellum slender woodland-star Forb Lomatium nudicaule barestem biscuitroot Forb Lomatium triternatum nineleaf biscuitroot Forb Lonicera ciliosa orange honeysuckle
    [Show full text]
  • Dotted Gayfeather Is a Good Addition to a Sunny Flower Garden Or a Prairie Planting for Its Long Lasting Purple Color in Late Summer and Early Fall
    Plant Fact Sheet depending on the time of year collected. Although DOTTED widely distributed over the prairies, gayfeather is not mentioned widely as a food source of native people. GAYFEATHER The Lakota pulverized the roots of gayfeather and ate them to improve appetite. For heart pains they Liatris punctata Hook. powdered the entire plant and made a tea. The Plant Symbol = LIPU Blackfeet boiled the gayfeather root and applied it to swellings. They made a tea for stomach aches, but Contributed by: USDA NRCS Plant Materials Center sometimes just ate the root raw instead. The Pawnee Manhattan, Kansas boiled the root and leaves together and fed the tea to children with diarrhea. The Omaha powdered the root and applied it as a poultice for external inflammation. They also made a tea from the plant to treat abdominal troubles. The roots were also used as a folk medicine for sore throats and as a treatment for rattle snake bite. Horticultural: Gayfeather plants are becoming more popular for ornamental uses, especially fresh floral arrangements and winter bouquets. The inflorescences make good long lasting cut flowers. If spikes are picked at their prime and allowed to dry out of the sun, they will retain their color and can be used in dried plant arrangements. Dotted gayfeather is a good addition to a sunny flower garden or a prairie planting for its long lasting purple color in late summer and early fall. This species also offers promise for roadside and rest stop beautification projects in the Great Plains region. Status Please consult the PLANTS Web site and your State Department of Natural Resources for this plant’s current status (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Elk: Wildlife Notebook Series
    Elk Elk (Cervus elaphus) are sometimes called “wapiti” in North America. Two subspecies of elk have been introduced to Alaska. Roosevelt elk (Cervus elaphus roosevelti) are larger, slightly darker in color, and have shorter, thicker antlers than the Rocky Mountain elk (Cervus elaphus nelsoni). In many European countries “elk” are actually what we know as moose (Alces alces). Fossil bones indicate that a subspecies of elk once existed in Interior Alaska during the Pleistocene period, but all of the elk currently in Alaska were introduced from the Pacific Northwest in the last century. The first successful translocation involved eight Roosevelt elk calves that were captured on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State in 1928 and moved to Afognak Island (near Kodiak) in 1929. These elk have successfully established themselves on both Afognak and Raspberry Islands. The second successful transplant occurred in 1987, when 33 Roosevelt elk and 17 Rocky Mountain elk were captured in Oregon and moved to Etolin Island (near Petersburg) in Southeast Alaska. These elk subsequently dispersed and established a second breeding population on neighboring Zarembo Island. General description: Elk are members of the deer family and share many physical traits with deer, moose, and caribou. They are much larger than deer and caribou, but not as large as the moose which occur in Alaska. Distinguishing features include a large yellowish rump patch, a grayish to brownish body, and dark brown legs and neck. Unlike some members of the deer family, both sexes have upper canine teeth. The males have antlers, which in prime bulls are very large, sweeping gracefully back over the shoulders with spikes pointing forward.
    [Show full text]