Interagency team unveils wide range of options for elk, bison




JACKSON, Wyo. (AP) - A federal and state team has unveiled a wide range of options for managing elk and bison on the National Elk Refuge and Grand Teton National Park.


The options will be studied in detail, with a draft environmental impact statement released in February 2003.




"We wanted to make sure we captured the whole range of what things the interest groups and public had to say," said Don DeLong, EIS planning team leader.




The options include ending or altering the supplemental feeding program on the refuge, allowing bison hunting, ending hunting altogether and restoring wildlife habitat.




The study stems from a lawsuit by the Fund for Animals that challenged bison hunting as a management tool.




"It will be a better, more thought-out plan," DeLong said.




On elk management, the options include setting no population targets, allowing elk numbers to fluctuate, determining the maximum population by the capacity of the refuge and increasing the winter population maximum to 8,000 to 8,5000 elk.




On bison management, options include maintaining the population of 650 bison and allowing to up 1,000 bison by 2005, having no population target, maintain a population of 350 to 400 bison and maintaining a population of 200 to 250 bison.




On winter feeding of elk and bison on the refuge, options include continuing feeding at current levels, ending all feeding, increasing feeding or feeding only in emergencies and trying to rely on natural forage.




On curbing diseases among elk and bison, options include doing nothing, reducing elk concentrations and vaccinating for brucellosis if a vaccine is proven safe and effective.




On hunting, options include maintaining the status quo by allowing elk hunting on the northern two-thirds of the refuge and on the eastern side of the park but not allowing bison hunting. Other alternatives would end hunting or allow bison hunting.




Options for habitat management include continuing to use flood irrigation, fertilizing and prescribed burning to improvement habitat. Alternatives include using varying degrees of sprinkler irrigation and not managing habitat.




The restoration of historic migration routes and the use of contraceptives in wildlife also will be examined, DeLong said.




A final environmental impact statement is expected in April 2004.




The team includes representatives from the Forest Service, National Park Service, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Bureau of Land Management and Fish and Wildlife Service.