Well, they are fairly liberal with bear tags, so I'm not sure bears are to blame.
"In one study in Idaho, black bears took about 60 to 70 percent of the elk calves in the first couple of weeks," Toman said. "So it's really important from that standpoint to get all of the calves on the ground in synchronicity, and get it over with quickly. The bears can only eat so much."
Yes. Prey species "flood the market" when a population gives birth together in a short period of time. Predators become satiated, and the remaining neonates survive to start following their mothers.
So, it's important that a large proportion of the population is bred in the same short period of time. The argument is that if there is not enough mature bulls in the population, that breeding can be more spread out, and a larger number of females will not be bred until second estrus. Consequently birth will be spread out. This is what they thought was happening in NM in the 60's, and why NM ultimately reduced licenses dramatically. When NM tried to reduce licenses by 10-20%, the success rates for hunters went up a lot, and they killed as many elk with less hunters as they were before. To get a significant decrease in harvest, there needs to be a BIG decrease in licenses. That would be really tough to do in most western states today. The political fallout would probably be too much.
In Colorado, there has been some small studies on black bears and what they are eating at that time, and very little elk parts were found in black bear poop. A lot of fawn parts were found though......
