By Doug Rose

In recent years, the small north Olympic Peninsula community of Sequim has embraced the area's Roosevelt elk as its unofficial symbol. The community has erected a large metal statue of a bull elk on the outskirts of town. Travelers also see yellow "Elk Crossing" signs that were funded by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and that flash warning lights when elk are in the vicinity of the road. After an absence of many years, elk are now a common sight in the fields and foothills near town, and most residents enjoy sharing the Dungeness River Valley with some of its original inhabitants.

But not everyone has been enthusiastic about the return of the 600- to 1,000-pound ungulates.

A handful of vocal residents complain vociferously about the damage elk do to crops, lawns and ornamental vegetation. They point to increased vehicle/elk collisions, and some even claim elk have harmed the drain fields of their septic systems. Other disgruntled residents simply consider them a nuisance, insisting they are intimidating, attracted poachers and leave unseemly droppings and odors.

Although the citizens who dislike elk are a small minority, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's legal obligation is to respond to complaints about wildlife. In 1995, it attempted to herd the elk back into the foothills. When that failed, the department used helicopters, volunteer herders and tranquilizer guns to capture 17 elk. They were transported by truck to the nearby Dosewallips Valley, where elk numbers were declining. The operation cost more than $20,000, and its only tangible outcome is that Dosewallips Valley residents now complain about elk.

Game management agencies in Washington and Oregon now spend a large and increasing percentage of time and budgets addressing the complaints of landowners who report being irritated by wildlife.

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's game program manager, Tom Thornton, estimates the agency responds to between 1,500 and 2,000 damage complaints annually about elk and deer. "We have plenty of complaints and damage hunts," he said. "We have a fringe of the Willamette Valley where damage is always an issue, and also around Roseburg."

"It takes a lot of our people's time," said the WDFW's George Tsukamoto. "A lot of the staff time is assigned to damage control."

Olympic Peninsula residents who coddled and protected elk herds in the early 1990's are now saying, "Enough!" Photo by Doug Rose

The original Roosevelt and Rocky Mountain elk populations in Washington were extirpated or driven to unsustainably low numbers by the late 1880s, and animals from Montana and Wyoming were released in a number of locations. Less well known, however, is the fact that farmers and ranchers raised concerns over elk damage to crops, range, haystacks and fences within a decade of their re-introduction to the Cascade Mountains in 1912. By the late 1940s, rural landowners in virtually every part of the elk's range issued complaints about elk.

Over the decades, wildlife managers have employed two different but parallel approaches to "problem" elk: attempt to keep the animals away from human activities, and control their numbers through hunting.

Lethal control became an official policy in 1931, when County Game Commissions were granted authority to declare elk "predatory" and have them killed to protect property. After its creation in 1933, the Washington State Game Department began establishing long seasons, combined with a focus on culling cow elk populations in areas where it wanted to prevent elk expansion. Between 1950 and 1952, about 212 antlerless elk were harvested in Washington for every 100 bulls. In the foothills west of the Yakima River, where much of the strongest anti-elk sentiment existed, the agency authorized large cow kills in 1938, 1943, 1949-51, 1966-70, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1982 and 1994.

At the same time that it worked to reduce elk numbers in selected areas, the state also undertook measures to control elk movements and behavior. Perhaps the most unusual was the creation of "elk fences" to keep animals away from crops and fences. The Game Department purchased the original parcels of what would ultimately become the Oak Creek Wildlife Area in Yakima County in 1939, and during the 1940s it built the first 10 miles of elk fence. Between 1943 and 1979, the agency also built a 27-mile-long elk fence in the Blue Mountains. These fences have been relatively successful, although elk do get through them and maintenance has not been funded adequately.

Elk management west of the Cascade Mountains has focused on other tactics. These have included hazing the animals with weapons and cracker shells, herding them with humans or helicopters, and trapping and transferring elk, as in Sequim. Last year, the WDFW proposed to transfer elk from the Mount St. Helens area to the upper Nooksak Valley, and there are also plans to move elk from the Chehalis area to the Green River Valley.

However, trapping and transfer are expensive and difficult to coordinate, and hazing the animals is seldom effective. "In western Washington, hazing or harassing elk with cracker shells and other noisy devices has not been effective because elk quickly get conditioned to the disturbance," the WDFW wrote in its 2002 South Rainier Elk Herd Plan.

How To Target 'Problem' Elk Although this year's deadline for elk permit applications passed long ago in Oregon and Washington, hunters may find opportunity this year by seeking areas where wildlife managers aim to reduce elk populations.   The odds of killing an animal in these areas vary widely. Access may be difficult in areas with elk living near population centers; firearms restrictions may apply; and areas with sparse elk populations have long seasons merely to prevent elk expansion.   Washington's Kiona Unit is open to any elk for modern firearms hunters Oct. 25-Nov. 2 and Nov. 22-Dec. 31. Hunters over 65 years of age may take any elk from Jan. 1-10 in Lewis and Thurston counties' Hanaford Elk Area. Bowhunters enjoy a Nov. 20-Jan. 31 antlerless hunt in the Yakima herd's Nile Elk Area. Three-point or antlerless bow seasons run Nov. 19-Dec. 15 in the North Sound, Mossyrock, Skookumchuck, Fall River units and Bear River Long Island and Chehalis Valley Elk Area. Any elk is legal in the Issaquah, Battle Ground, Deschutes and Grayback units.   Blackpowder hunters can try the Cheny, Roosevelt, Harrington, Steptoe and Amota units; the Yakima herds' Clemon Elk Area, or a Nov. 19-Dec. 15 season in the Issaquah, Battle Ground, Washougal, Deschutes and Long Beach GMUs, while Advanced Hunter Education grads go antlerless in the Fairview (3911) and Old Naches elk areas, from August through February.   The only opportunities outside of the regular season for modern firearms hunters in Oregon are in the Columbia Basin Unit and in the Biggs Unit east of the John Day River, Oct. 29-Nov. 23. Archers can hunt antlerless elk Nov. 22-Dec. 7 in western Oregon's Alsea, McKenzie, Stott Mountain, and portions of the Indigo and Santiam units.   The best approach is to apply next spring for permit hunts with large numbers of cow tags, including the Lewis and Clark, Astoria, Tillamook, Trask, Alsea, Maury, Ochoco, Grizzly, Heppner, Ukiah, Desolation, Malheur, Silvies and High Desert units. -- Doug Rose

More than 400 antlerless permits were issued in the Yakima herd's Manastash and Umtanum units in 2003, and upwards of 500 cow permits were available in the Blue Mountains. In western Washington, liberal cow hunting opportunity was available in the Raymond, upper Chehalis, and in southwest Washington's Lewis River, Siouxan, North Minot and Williams Creek game management units.

A thorny elk conflict has developed over the Rattlesnake Mountains herd, a sub-population of the Yakima herd that colonized the Department of Energy's Arid Lands Ecology Unit (Hanford) in the 1970s. Access and hunting are prohibited at Hanford, and by the late 1990s the herd had grown to 800 animals. They also began to feed in adjacent private crops and vineyards.

"The irony is that when the population was small the landowners liked the elk and didn't want hunting," said Lee Stream, WDFW Region 3 wildlife biologist. Now the farmers want the elk numbers reduced but do not readily grant access to hunters. "It's a dilemma. We've been pressing real hard to get access to the Arid Land Ecology Area." The department also trapped and transferred 155 elk from the herd in 1999.

Not surprisingly, the most contentious area of elk management in Washington concerns the steps the department takes - hotspot hunts, kill permits or cash payments - when other approaches fail to mollify angry landowners. For most hunters, hotspot hunts are the least offensive because they target problem animals when they are causing trouble. The participants are licensed elk hunters selected by the WDFW. However, the legislature requires the department to grant "kill permits" to landowners under emergency situations, which allows they and their relatives to take animals on their property without a hunting license. The WDFW also financially compensates landowners for losses to crops.

In addition, Rocky Mountain elk were introduced in a number of locations in the early 1900s. The elk responded to these measures, and by 1922 they had increased their numbers dramatically in the Blue and Wallowa mountains and in northwest Oregon's Clatsop and Tillamook counties.

No sooner had elk reappeared than agricultural interests began to complain about them. Largely in response to damage issues, hunting resumed in eastern Oregon in 1933 and along the coast in 1938. The elk continued to expand both their populations and range, however, and complaints grew.

Agencies, Groups & Organizations The following government agencies, organizations and groups may be of assistance in helping you obtain a permit to hunt "problem" elk.   State Agencies Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2501 SW First Ave., P.O. Box 59, Portland OR 97207-0059; 503-229-5463; www.dfw.state.or.us.   Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capital Way N., Olympia WA 98501-1091; 360-902-2200; www.wa.gov/wdfw.   Conservation Organizations Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, 2291 West Broadway, P.O. Box 8249, Missoula MT 59807-8249.   Oregon Hunters Association, P.O. Box 1706, Medford OR 97501; 541-772-7313.   Landowner Group Landowners Co-Op (access to private land in WA, OR and ID), 1632 Cedar Ave., Lewiston, ID 83501; 208-798-0840. -- Doug Rose

A cow season was authorized in eastern Oregon in 1941, and tag sales more than doubled. Either-sex hunts in response to damage concerns were also implemented in southeast Oregon in 1943 and on the northwest coast in 1949. Within Clatsop County alone, hunters killed 1,630 antlerless elk in 1950 and 1954.

By the late 1960s, large-scale trapping and transfers of Roosevelt elk began. This was primarily done to expand elk distribution in western Oregon, but it was also used to remove troublesome animals. Complaints about elk remained relatively stable during the 1970s, averaging 143 annually, more than half of which originated in western Oregon. The numbers climbed to an average of 191 between 1979 and 1985, again largely in coastal areas. Then a series of severe winters on the east side of the state resulted in an increase from around 80 complaints annually to 162 in 1986 and 145 in 1989.

In 1987, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission officially adopted a "Wildlife Damage Policy." It includes the following components: advice on potential corrective actions to prevent damage; provides repellents to owners; hazing offending animals; providing barriers (haystack panels, stacked fences, etc.); allowing winter feeding; Green Forage Program (planting diversionary crops); and wildlife removal by hunting, trapping and transplanting, and kill permits.

In 1992 the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife determined that conflicts between elk and private landowners was its most contentious issue, thanks to testimony given during a series of statewide meetings and questionnaires in preparation of its Elk Management Plan. While 56 percent of respondents opposed any program that would allocate elk tags to landowners, the department pointed out that up to 50 percent of the elk in northeast Oregon spent all of their time on private land. The current Landowner Preference Permits, which grant antlerless tags to property owners who have experienced damage, are an attempt to alleviate elk damage and encourage landowners to allow elk to remain on their holdings.

"They can give antlerless tags to anyone they choose," said Tom Thornton, the ODFW's game program manager. "They can only give a portion of the tags they receive to non-family members and they can't sell the tags, but they can charge access fees so the permits do have some value to the landowner in a roundabout way. It's relatively common, especially in eastern Oregon, where ranches are bigger. They can also guarantee a person a tag."

Despite all of this effort, elk damage complaints continue to increase in Oregon. "District wildlife biologists spend a lot of time responding to big-game damage complaints, especially in western Oregon where people live in rural settings at a much higher density than eastern Oregon," the ODFW said in its 1995 report, Agricultural Damage Program. Complaints are increasingly about non-traditional crops - ornamental vegetation and golf courses - rather than haystacks and orchards.

"We've seen quite an increase in nurseries and wineries in western Oregon," Thornton said. "There has also been conversion from agriculture to residential use."

To date, Oregon has resisted direct compensation to landowners for damage to crops or property. Officials say such payments do not alleviate the problem and often must be paid annually. The ODFW also believes that payments create conflicts between landowners and the agency over the amount to be compensated, that they reduce funds that could be directed toward other wildlife programs, and they increase deteriorating relations between hunters and landowners.

"A newcomer in elk country is usually thrilled by the animals when they first look at the property," said a veteran biologist who asked not to be identified. "They like seeing the elk for a year or two after they move in. But then the lawn they planted grows and shrubs grow up, and the elk begin to eat them. The elk also tear up the yard and leave droppings. Now the landowner doesn't feel as favorably toward elk. They start calling us and telling us to 'move' them. Eventually, some of them want us to shoot the elk."