Link to article on Idaho Country Free Press
The iconic Clearwater elk populations and hunting are a thing of the past. The current dismal conditions began in the mid-1990s. The 1996/97 winter was an above-average snow year, which coincided with the introduction of wolves in Idaho. The winter conditions were so severe that Idaho Fish and Game (IDFG) estimated 50-50% of elk populations in the majority of the game units succumbed to the winter conditions. Unfortunately, population and hunting conditions have declined since then.
To document the current conditions, harvest data from the five-year average for the period from 1992-96 are compared to the past five-year averages, 2020-24 in the table below. There are 16 game management units in the Clearwater region in six management zones. All zones, except the Hells Canyon Zone, offer over-the-counter hunting opportunities. However, there are tag quotas on some zones.
Excluding the Hells Canyon Zone, the harvest declined an average of 46%. Excluding the Palouse Zone, the decline averaged 64%. At the game management unit level, the decline in harvest for nine of the over-the-counter units is 71%. For all zones except Hells Canyon shows that the bull harvest has declined by 55%, the cow harvest has increased by 375%, the total harvest has declined by 45%, the number of hunters has declined by 41%, and the number of days hunted has declined by 46%. A chart showing this data can be found online at idahocountyfreepress.com
The significance of the decline in hunter days lies in the economic impact on businesses that profit from elk hunting. In 2008, Senator Gary Schroder, Moscow, asked the IDFG to calculate the monetary value of an elk hunter day. IDFG set the value at $127.40. The loss is quite staggering: $12,300,259 during the 2024 hunting season.
So, what has happened on the ground since the 1996/97 winter? There has been a Clearwater Elk Initiative, a Clearwater Elk Restoration Committee, an Elk Summit sponsored by Senator Crapo, and the Clearwater Basin Collaborative Committee, also created by Senator Crapo. In addition, the USFS has produced forest management plans, IDFG has embedded biologists within the USFS, and IDFG has sued the USFS. Research projects have come and gone, and a presidential executive order mandated that federal agencies manage habitat to allow state management agencies to achieve their population goals. The results are a sad example of “overthinking” how to correct the situation.
It is a well-known fact that the excellent elk habitats in the region are a result of large wildfires (1910, 1919,1934), and logging. Recognizing the impact of fire on the habitat, IDFG embarked on a 10-year prescribed fire research project (1965-1975) in the Clearwater drainage. This study evaluated the pros and cons of spring versus fall prescribed fire, as well as the vegetative response to these treatments. It was also designed to integrate forest and wildlife management. Despite the efforts mentioned above, little progress is being made on the ground in light of the approved NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) documents. For example, in October 1999, the Big Game Habitat Restoration on a Watershed Scale Project (64FR 55226) was approved. This project was designed to treat 156,000 acres in the Clearwater Forest. To date, very few of the proposed treatment acres have been treated.
What’s the solution? In my opinion, the IDFG, state and national legislators, and the public must demand that meaningful management activities be initiated. The documented issues responsible for the current elk populations and hunting conditions are a lack of habitat and predation. The habitat issue must be addressed before any meaningful predator control measures can be implemented. The wealth of data the USFS and IDFG currently possess does not warrant additional research or studies – on-the-ground action; logging and prescribed burns, is the solution.
Mike Schlegel is a retired IDFG Wildlife Biologist, avid hunter, award-winning archer and Grangeville resident.