Elk Management Strategies and Profitability of Beef Cattle Ranches

Abstract

Computer simulation was used to determine the effects of wild elk (Cervus elaphus) on available forage, cattle herd size, and ranch gross margin in southwestern Montana beef cow-calf production systems. Data collected from 5 southwestern Montana ranches were used to develop input parameters for bio-economic models of elk forage harvest and beef production. Input parameters described ranch resources, animal inventories, and animal management. Cattle herd size ranged from 241 to 1147 head. Elk numbers varied by season within ranch and ranged from 49 to 421 head. Ranches were simulated as currently managed with elk present and with 10, 20, 30, and 100% of the elk removed. Simulated management scenarios were replicated 10 times. Data from each ranch were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance. Cattle herd size, gross margin, and available forage significantly (P < 0.05) increased when all elk were removed; however, the magnitude of these effects differed among ranches. Removal of all elk permitted cattle herd size to increase from 7 to 32% across ranches. Annual costs of elk on the 5 ranches (i.e.

The kangaroo conundrum: home range studies and implications for land management

“…Encroachment of wildlife onto agricultural land is an issue of world‐wide importance both in developed and developing countries. It can have implications not only for farm and plantation productivity (Haule, Johnsen & Maganga 2002; Torstenson, Tess & Knight 2002; Horsley, Stout & DeCalesta 2003) but also for biodiversity conservation (Noss & Cooperrider 1994; Maestas, Knight & Gilger 2003; Lindenmayer & Hobbs 2004). In countries where hunting may provide a profitable source of income, there may be benefits arising from managing grazing land for both domestic livestock and wildlife, for example grazing cattle to enhance forage for elk Cervus elaphus L. and deer Odocoileus spp.…”

Changes in Elk Resource Selection and Distributions Associated With a Late‐Season Elk Hunt

“…Refuge effects may also aggregate animals in high densities, enhancing potential risk of disease transmission. Further, if refuges are privately owned lands, changes in selection associated with hunting risk may alter elk impacts on plant communities, increase conflicts between elk and livestock producers, and lead to public perceptions of elk overabundance (Irby et al 1996, Torstenson et al 2002, Fortin et al 2005, Gude et al 2006. Predation risk may influence resource selection because animals may accept reductions in forage quality or quantity to reduce risk, and these tradeoffs may result in altered animal distributions (Abramsky et al 1996(Abramsky et al , 2002Anderson et al 2005;White et al 2009b).…”

Evaluation of calving seasons and marketing strategies in Northern Great Plains beef enterprises: I. Cow-calf systems

“…For each replication of each management system, the model predicted the number of cows that could be managed on the ranch, as constrained by the amount of grazeable forage. Hence, herd size was a response variable for each simulation (Tess and Kolstad, 2000b;Torstenson et al, 2002). Contingent on the amount required, hay was purchased or sold at market value to maintain a constant inventory.…”

“…Due to the stochastic nature of the MSU Beef Model (Tess and Kolstad, 2000a), it is possible to statistically compare simulated systems (Julien and Tess, 2002;Torstenson et al, 2002). However, the model used to simulate postweaning performance in the companion paper (Reisenauer Leesburg et al, 2007) was deterministic, which did not permit any statistical analyses of the data.…”