Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire National Park Svc. to Hire 5 "Elk Reduction Workers".

Heads up! 5 vacancies in Medora, ND (Theodore Roosevelt National Park) for mass culling of elk.

Seems like the feds have it backwards. They should turn this over to the NDDFG who could establish bag limits, schedule hunts (archery, rifle, muzzie)and sell tags. I thought management of the wildlife of a state was the responsibility of that state. Especially after the preservationist policies of the NPS have gotten this population so far out of balance.

My guess is the rabidly anti-hunting NPS wants to make this elk-killing business appear as distasteful as possible, to appease their tree-hugging and PETA constituency. Heaven forbid that they might actually generate some revenue from tax paying, law abiding, ethical and competent hunters, who might even take their families along.


http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=100060420&JobTitle=Elk+Reduction+Worker&rad_units=miles&brd=3876&pp=25&tm=0&sort=rv,-dtex&jbf574=IN10&jbf785=&vw=b&re=134&FedEmp=Y&FedPub=Y&caller=advanced.aspx&AVSDM=2011-06-09+00:03:00

forepaw

I have read......maybe not here but on the net about a ton of interest in the elk reduction hunts. The position you link to is not for the mass culling of elk, it is to lead a team of 4 volunteer hunters in a effort to reduce the elk population in the park. The "elk reduction" hunts have been going on for a few years......typical of the Feds, they have some strange requirements for the hunters. You can go to the Teddy Roosevelt web site to see those.

Permanent, PART TIME jobs, btw in a area that probably has the capability to have the most extreme weather in the lower 48.

If it were not in ND, hell I might even apply........not!!!

From the job listing, "PHYSICAL DEMANDS: At least 75% of the work will be field work and should be considered extremely physically strenuous in nature. Reduction activities will involve long hours of hiking on very uneven and steep terrain while carrying up to 50 pounds of equipment and 65 pound elk quarters."

Of course only during the best of the winter.....October until January would you work!!

There was an elk reduction hunt in the Theodore Roosevelt Park, last fall/winter. The response from sportsman was very good. I have only seen/heard the news from tv and radio but it all seemed to work out well. I am going from memory but the hunter got to keep part of the meat along with a helper, and part of each elk was donated to a food shelter.

From what I remember this was the first collaboration between the National Park Service and a state wildlive agency.

It was a news type thing, but I did not ever hear of any negative things that came out of it.

All they needed to do was have a special permit hunt. They would have made money on the deal. But no anything to kill hunting. They used to do this in Yellowstone but now oh that's illegal.

Your'e right on the North Dakota hunt. It went very well and was considered a success by all agencies involved.It is a National Park so any U.S. resident was able to apply. A simple shooting test was part of the required things to do. EXTREME weather by the way is 100 plus above for 6 months or so. LOL ED K

Leave it to the Feds to create another expense!

Last fall was the 1st year this program was implemented in TRNP. I participated in the last week of the event. My team leader for the week was the gentleman in charge of running the entire program. He's a very dedicated DIY hunter and can pack elk like a damned old mule. He worked his arse off that entire time and made sure everyone else in the program did the same. 406 elk were removed from the park last fall/winter. I removed 2 myself. The program is cows only at this point. 1 bull calf/yearling was killed and one spike, the other 404 were all cows.

Forepaw, you're misinformed.

5 team leaders take groups of up to 4 "volunteer sharpshooters". The team leaders give you the yea/nay on which critter to shoot and when. You are a volunteer employee of the park for the week you're there. Some of the decisions on when/where to shoot had to do with whether or not you could be seen from a road. IMO they did their level best to keep this entire program from becoming a media circus. It was about as "clean" as one could expect a volunteer manned culling operation to be.

The shooting test certainly isn't difficult but it's fair. 3 out of 5 shots into an 8" circle from a field position. Bipods are OK if you're going to leave them on. Shooting sticks, prone, take your pick. Almost every week there was someone who couldn't pass the test and was sent home.

All ammo had to be non-lead as they donated 2k-4k lbs of meat each week of the program. Believe what you will about lead contamination in meat, the idea was to not have to waste any, thus the lead free mandate. The lead free mandate also caused some folks to not pass the shooting test as they'd show up with several boxes of ammo they'd never shot before and just expect things to work. Most of us know it doesn't always work that way.

No one is allowed to take a 1st shot much over 250yds regardless their proficiency, caliber, bullet, etc. Necessary follow-up shots are a different story.

At the end of the upcoming culling this fall/winter, the gentleman in charge of the program will publish much of the data they're collecting. Included in that data is: Caliber, bullet, bullet weight, Range, # of shots required. I mentioned that they oughta sell that data back to the ammo/bullet manufacturers, he says they can't as it's a matter of public info. Other samples taken for study: Fecal, spleen, blood, muscle, liver, and brainstem. Our party also packed back 3 fetal calves for a vet from Rocky Mt Nat'l park who is supposedly the elk expert for the entire Nat'l park system as she was in attendance that week. She was in the field with a team daily as well and while she didn't shoot, she did attend the proficiency testing. Our testing day was -5F with a 10-15MPH wind standing out on the lone prairie with narry a windbreak.

They'd contracted with 2 "packers", gentlemen from nearby to pack out elk that were killed too far from vehicles and would've impeded further culling efforts by a group. When they knew they were far enough in to call in packers, they made every attempt to lay down several animals to make it worth it for everyone. Depending on terrain and snow conditions, 1.5-2mi was about the cut-off for calling in packers.

The largest cost associated with this program are labor costs.

I didn't meet any park employees that made me think they were against this program or wanted to de-rail it via the anti-hunters, not even a little bit. The local Law Enforcement officer for the park was also attached to the program to make certain any anti-hunters who did show up were kept away from the volunteers and the job they had to do.

What would Teddy have done?

On keeping the meat issue. If you shot an elk, you could keep 1 elk, meat only, hides, heads, etc were left afield due to the extra work to pack them out, your job was to kill elk. All that left the field was the quarters, backstraps, tenderloins, and study samples. Any subsequent animals you killed were donated. If you shot 2 and someone in your party shot none, that person went home with none, had to kill your own to keep one.

It should be like any other hunt you keep what you want no wastage. Hide and head included.

It's not a hunt, it's a cull. You're not a hunter, you're a NPS volunteer employee.

IMO leaving the heads/hides in the field was all about image as they didn't want ANYTHING to appear as a trophy to fuel an "Anti" debate. I too believe that leaving the hides in the field was wasteful.

horse1, thanks for the write-up, nothing like getting the info. "straight from the horse's mouth" as it were.

We had a similar situation in Rocky Mountain NP, and the gubmint hired and paid "sharpshooters" to do the culling, at huge expense. Your description sounds much more cost-effective, and donating the meat is a great thing. If done right, culling generates way more meat than an individual can handle or process.

Ideally, these cull hunts would be done by "average joe" hunters, just like a "regular" hunt. But it does make sense to have more control over what goes on in a place where hunting is not normally allowed and is subsequently "under the microscope" from all the various anti- organizations who are just looking for things to rile up the general public with respect to hunting and hunters. These people are looking for any opening they can to end hunting as we know it, and that's not something we can ignore unfortunately.

Sounds like they went out of their way to prevent that kind of circus, and did it with a lot of volunteer time and effort, donating a big pile of meat in the process. I can't find fault with that, and good on all you volunteers, especially your team leaders, sounds like a lot of time and effort was expended to "do it right."

Only because the NP services made it that. We're talking simple game management. The parks people have to micro manage the [bleep] out of something simple. Big government screwing up life again.

I don't disagree with you at all.

This is a pilot program, using volunteers/avg. Joes vs. hiring out the culling duties.

At one point it was considered to use paid sharpshooters, helicopters, and leaving 1/2 of the animals in the field to rot while collecting the other half for donation. We've made large strides. IMO having been not only involved, but involved with the guy who's running the show, it's a GIANT step in the right direction as compared to previous policy. I'd be OK with hauling the hides out and donating them to charity as well just so they didn't rot away out in the field. Perhaps some day we'll get there. For now, IMO, using volunteers and team leaders is a hell of a lot better than helicopters and wasting half the critters.

horse1,

Thanks for the update, and I certainly stand corrected as you have BTDT which I have not, and can see that you spent a fair amount of effort in making this a successful operation.

Still, I have to wonder why the partnership with ND fish and game was not more visible, and also had they allowed this to be managed as a drawing depredation hunt, whether or not it might have allowed more citizen participation with less bureaucracy (and cost). I believe the concerns about a media circus had unsupervised hunting been allowed may be overstated but I can appreciate the sensitivity of this to the NP people, especially if this is a pilot project.

Damage hunts are common throughout the mountain west, and a 3-hr. mandatory indoctrination would not be a huge burden on either the agencies or the hunters. I expect that will be considered as the program evolves.

Shooting proficiency testing, non-lead ammo, donated meat, pack animals on standby, all good things!

Thanks again.

forepaw

ND g&f was involved, heavily. They threatened 0 cooperation w/NPS 'til the end of time should they go the helicopter route. There's a ton of co-op between them as there's lots of hunting, ranching, and research going on all around the park.

IMO, this was shoved down the throats of the NPS folks in DC. For all his faults, our senator Conrad buffaloed the NPS from his seat on the senate budget committee.

G&F involvement was very visible here within ND. Local media was all over NPS like ugly on an ape too.

At which distance please?

200yds.

Anyone looking for a elk hunting pack oughta consider the Eberlestock J107 Dragonfly. The 5 team leaders were all issued these packs and to my knowledge the only failure/problem was that on the very last day our team leader broke his buckle crossing a fence about 50yds from the truck. Other than that they packed out parts of 300+ elk on 5 packs without an issue.