Does Supplemental Feeding Of Elk Support Artificially High Numbers, Promote Disease?

Groups are suing to stop the supplemental feeding of elk at the National Elk Refuge in Jackson, Wyoming saying that by doing so it is promoting the growth and spread of diseases such as chronic wasting disease and brucellosis. Supporters of supplemental feeding say without it thousands of elk will die.

What’s interesting about this issue is that there are two separate and distinct reports each side is using to support their claims. According to the Billings Gazette and an Associated Press article, the five groups suing to stop the feeding say it’s not necessary.

Authors of the refuge plan relied heavily on studies by N. Thompson Hobbs, an ecology professor at Colorado State University, who concluded that the Jackson elk herd could sustain 9,300-11,000 animals without supplemental feeding.

The Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife say they have a study that shows if feeding is stopped half of the elk will die.

Feeding proponents with the group Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife point to a paper by retired biologist Garvice Roby, who spent 20 years studying Jackson Hole elk. Roby’s report concluded that ending supplemental feeding would cause at least a 57 percent reduction in current elk numbers, which last winter topped 12,000 animals.

So, which is it? Is this simply another case of statistics proving that statistics can prove anything or is one side right and the other wrong? Unfortunately, we may never know as it will be up to the courts to decide and those decisions aren’t always made using sound scientific evidence.

Tom Remington