Elk sightings trigger concerns of migration to Armstrong County
By Brigid Beatty
Published: Thursday, Aug. 29, 2013, 12:01 a.m.
Recent elk sightings in Armstrong County have had some people asking if herds might be migrating to the area from northern counties.
That's not likely, said John Bennett, a member of the Armstrong County Animal Response Team (ACART).
“I doubt they are migrating from Elk County,” he said.
Bill Altmeyer of Kittanning Township said he used to raise elk on his property 15 years ago and that someone in the area has probably been raising the animals and one or two have managed to get loose.
There have been several recent sightings of a female elk in Mahoning, and on Tuesday, another was spotted in Cowanshannock near Route 85 and Margaret Road. Wednesday, one was seen along Berdell Lane, which borders Cowanshannock and Kittanning Township.
“It was just standing there eating away at the soybeans,” Jo Ann Wingard said.
Although Wingard said the animal appeared to be calm and relaxed, Altmeyer said people should not attempt to approach elk.
“It could pose a danger,” he said, adding that both cows and bulls may try to charge onlookers.
State police in East Franklin said if people come across an elk, they should call 911 so a game commissioner can be dispatched to the scene.
Brigid Beatty is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Punxsutawney driver gets jail sentence for fatal crash
- Vandals strike Kittanning doctor’s memorial in picnic area
- Grove City man charged with passing counterfeit bills
- Ford City steps closer to stopping water plant fines
- Ford City must determine solution to pay off $21,000 in water supply fines
- Armstrong County School Board postpones selling delinquent real estate tax claims
- Teen arrested after third bomb threat at Ford City schools
- Cowanshannock American Legion loses building but keeps marching on