UT's Energy, Environment and Resources Center Presents 

Smoky Mountain

Resource Issues in Great Smoky Mountains National Park 

 SIGHTLINE

SPRING/SUMMER 2003
Vol. 4 No. 1

RAMPING DOWN

SITE LOCATOR MAPFOR GSMNP STORIES

HUMAN INTERACTION Elkmont in the Balance

WILDLIFE

INVASIONS

WATER

AIR

 ***

Editor: David Brill; Assistant Editor: Constance Griffith; Writers: Kris Christen, Lisa Byerley Gary, Elise LeQuire, Dennis McCarthy, and Becky Nichols. Graphic Designer: Lisa Byerley Gary.

SIGHTLINE is published on behalf of
Great Smoky Mountains National Park
by the
Energy, Environment and Resources Center (EERC)
at the
University of Tennessee.

EERC conducts research designed to promote real-world solutions to problems in the fields of energy, environment, technology, and economic development.

For additional information, write EERC, 311 Conference Center Building, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-4134, call 865-974-4251, or visit our Web site at http://eerc.ra.utk.edu.

SIGHTLINE is sponsored by:

and

Smokies’ Elk Population tops 50

Now, nearly three years into a five-year reintroduction project, the Park Service suspects that the elk is home to stay.

Nearly three years after a release of elk in the Cataloochee area of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP), the animals are faring better than expected, and public visitation to the area has soared.

The Park’s elk population now stands at 56, following the release of 25 elk in 2001 and 27 in 2002, according to Kim DeLozier, a supervisory wildlife biologist stationed in the Park. And Park researchers are getting ready to welcome a bumper crop of calves, with as many as 12 to 15 likely to be born during this year’s calving period from late May through July.

A third release had been planned for this year, but with mortality rates lower than expected and a current shortage of elk at the Park’s two main sources—namely Elk Island National Park in Alberta, Canada, and Land Between The Lakes National Recreation Area in western Kentucky—the Park opted to forgo a release this year, DeLozier says. However, "there’s a chance, pending approval, we may bring in more animals next year, depending on the mortality and course of reproduction this year," he says.

The elk reintroduction project is halfway through a five-year experimentation phase, and DeLozier attributes much of its success to the tremendous support received from the public. "One of the biggest lessons we’ve learned is that this isn’t really an elk project, it’s more of a people project," he says.

Consider, for instance, that the project’s price tag stands at around $1.1 million, with all of the funds coming from private donors—namely the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Friends of Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and Great Smoky Mountains Association—and not the federal government. "That’s a notable factor here," DeLozier says.

Moreover, because of strong opposition from the local farming community to the failed red wolf reintroduction project, Park officials informed this community from the outset, making farmers part of the project.

"We knew they would have the most concerns about bringing such a large animal back into the Park because of potential impacts to cattle operations and other farming activities, so we went directly to the local and state farm bureaus and livestock associations and met with them one-on-one, spelling out what we were planning to do," DeLozier says.

The result: good working relationships and more public buy-in because the community is kept apprised of the project’s status. And, as a result of all the excitement over the project, visitation to the Cataloochee area has nearly doubled since the elk were brought in DeLozier says.

The project’s success is also due in no small part to extensive feasibility studies conducted before any of the elk releases took place (see "Return of the Elk" in the Fall/Winter 2000 issue of Sightline).

"There’s always a risk—when you undertake such a restoration project—in not knowing exactly how things will work out; in this case, it has been more than 125 years since elk were last in the Smokies," says John Mechler, senior development officer with the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. All of this initial work helped the Park Service evaluate whether or not to proceed. To date, problems with the reintroduction project have been minimal.

Both of the elk releases have occurred in the Cataloochee Basin area on the North Carolina side of GSMNP where the Park Service maintains a three-acre acclimation pen. The elk are placed in the pen for two to three months where they are fed and watered and given a chance to become more accustomed to their new surroundings. Following that period, the doors are opened, and the elk are free to roam at will as they become comfortable with their new home.

So far, "we’ve had 95 percent survival of our adults, and 50 percent survival of our newborn calves," DeLozier says. Although the calf survival rate is a little on the low end, the fact that the elk are reproducing at all so early in the program is a good sign.

"For a lot of these reintroduction projects, reproduction is extremely low or nonexistent during the first two years, most likely because of the stress involved in moving these animals such a long distance," DeLozier notes, adding that Elk Island, the source of part of the Park’s herd, is roughly 2,500 miles from GSMNP.

Even so, losing 50 percent is high compared with other established elk studies out West, says Jennifer Murrow Dobey, a graduate student at the University of Tennessee who is conducting research for the elk reintroduction project as part of her Ph.D. work. Of the 16 calves born over the last two years, seven have survived; those that didn’t survive died mainly as a result of predation by coyotes and black bears.

"At least that’s what we think," Dobey says. "They could’ve died from natural causes, and then a coyote or bear found them. It’s hard to tell because they’re so little, and often, by the time we get to them, there’s just not that much left of them."

Of the adults that died, a couple succumbed to brain worm, which is a common parasite in the Southeast. "It’s very detrimental to caribou, moose, and mule deer, and Kentucky loses around 4 to 5 percent of its [elk] population every year because of brain worm," DeLozier says. The other adult losses involved females that died shortly after they were released from the acclimation pen. Those animals were emaciated and apparently weren’t eating properly, probably due to stress-related factors, according to DeLozier.

Although a few elk have wandered outside the Park onto neighboring farms, most have stayed within or near the Cataloochee Basin, which extends from the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Cherokee Reservation boundary line over to private property on the eastern side of the Park, according to DeLozier. If deemed necessary, the wayward wanderers are typically captured and brought back to the Park.

One of the big research questions is whether or not the animals will disperse further throughout the Park as time goes by. The elk are all equipped with radio collars, so "we keep up with them every day," Dobey says. "We basically follow them around, watching where they go, what they eat, and what they do."

Over time, the likelihood increases that they’ll venture into other areas, and "it’s something we’re hoping to see, because that’s part of determining whether or not they’re going to be able to make it here permanently," she adds.

Another major part of the experimentation phase involves an extensive vegetation monitoring survey. Although it’s still too early to tell what long-term impacts, if any, the elk are likely to have on Park vegetation, early results show that they’re feeding on white pine seedlings, which is a big plus because a lot of Park areas are being taken over by white pine, DeLozier says.

Some 60 vegetation exclosures have been placed in different habitat types throughout the Cataloochee area. During the project’s fifth year, the park service plans to conduct comprehensive vegetation surveys within the exclosures, where elk have been kept out, as well as outside the exclosures, to see if they can detect any differences.

"We’re trying to find out if they’re going to do damage, and if they do, whether that’s acceptable," Dobey says. She points out that the Park is missing the large herbivores of the past, which had helped maintain the Park’s grassy balds. "Elk serve a purpose; we just have to make sure that the Park hasn’t changed so much that they no longer fit into the equation." 

The elk tend to feed in small openings on all kinds of grasses and succulent new green growth on trees and plants. "They’re not very selective," Dobey notes.

"They don’t find one thing that they like and decimate it like white-tailed deer tend to do; they eat a little bit of everything, really." And for now, they’re saving the Park some money by naturally maintaining the open meadows of the Cataloochee area, which the Park Service previously had to mow and clear by mechanical means.

To borrow the words of a famous commentator, only time will tell "the rest of the story." Dobey is due to file a final report in late 2005 in which she will describe her findings and offer recommendations. "At that point, we’ll look at those recommendations and make a decision about the future of elk in the Smokies," DeLozier says.

For more information, contact Kim DeLozier, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, 107 Park Headquarters Road, Gatlinburg, TN 37738, or call 865-436-1248.