On December 11, the U.S. National Park Service released the Final Elk and Vegetative Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP) in Colorado, reports the Wildlife Management Institute.

The plan outlines five different management alternatives designed to address RMNP's burgeoning elk population and declining native vegetation. Along with a "no-action" alternative, the plan lists four "action" alternatives that incorporate, "adaptive management and monitoring to determine the level and intensity of management actions." These alternatives are the result of seven years of research and four years of extensive planning by RMNP and U.S. National Park Service staff.

Under the plan's third and "preferred" alternative, park officials would utilize a number of management techniques aimed at reversing the ecological damage caused by the park's overpopulated elk herd. Specifically, Alternative 3 could rely on "lethal reduction" of as many as 200 elk per year to reduce the population from 1,700 to 2,200 animals to, "the high end of the natural range of variation, between 1,600 and 2,100 elk." While park staff would administrate the culling, the plan approves the use of "authorized agents" from other federal agencies, volunteers and private contractors.

Due to the minimal implementation of lethal reduction in Alternative 3, the plan concedes that additional measures will be required. These include the use of a birth-control agent (Gonacon) on 120 cow elk, fence construction around select aspen and willow stands, and adverse conditioning by means of rubber bullets and firecrackers to keep elk away from certain areas. Interestingly, the preferred alternative also lists a provision for the, "adaptive use of wolves as a management tool."

Projected cost for Alternative 3 would reach $2.1 million in the program's first year, followed by an annual budget of more than $200,000. Over the course of the program's suggested 20-year life span, park officials could spend $6 million implementing the plan.

Concern about the number of elk in RMNP first arose around 1930 due to the failing conditions of the herd's winter range as a result of overbrowsing. Because of this, elk populations were controlled from 1944 to 1968. Since then, a lack of natural predators and the loss of migration corridors have enabled a dramatic increase in elk numbers. The resulting overabundant herds have decimated the park's aspen and willow patches that provide crucial habitat to them and many other wildlife species.

The park's elk management plan has already drawn criticism from the wildlife management community. According to a press release issued by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) on December 13, the Colorado Wildlife Commission (Commission) and CDOW stated that park officials should rely on qualified volunteers and not sharpshooters to control RMNP's overabundant elk. In addition, CDOW and the Commission oppose the use of birth control and wolves to manage elk numbers.

In an effort to, "develop a viable alternative to using federal tax dollars to fund government sharpshooters," the Commission adopted a resolution in July 2006 that supports the use of qualified volunteers as the most viable method of managing elk numbers in RMNP. Congressman Mark Udall and Senator Wayne Allard mirrored the Commission's view in March 2007 when they introduced federal legislation that would authorize the U.S. National Park Service to use licensed hunters as "qualified individuals" in elk-reduction efforts within RMNP boundaries. In a statement issued on December 11, Representative Udall supported the park's decision to include "qualified volunteers" in the final elk management plan but was doubtful of the park's commitment to using them: "I'm concerned the Park Service might give a higher priority to using people from other federal or state agencies. I think if qualified sportsmen or sportswomen are willing to volunteer, they should be first in line."

Commission Chair Tom Burke is similarly skeptical of the park's commitment to follow through with appropriate implementation of the final elk management plan. "If you read Alternative 3, it merely lists all of the options that park officials could use to manage elk numbers. It fails to define what they are actually going to do." Burke said the Commission will continue to support the use of qualified volunteers to manage elk numbers in RMNP and to oppose other methods that are inappropriate: "The North American model of wildlife management has always relied on America's hunters to manage big game populations. We think that should apply to the elk in Rocky Mountain National Park as well."

The U.S. National Park Service will execute a record of decision no sooner than 30 days following the release of the final plan/EIS. To view the final plan/EIS for RMNP, go to http//:www.nps.gov/romo/parkmgmt/elkvegetation.htm.