Yellowstone's wild bison slain in record numbers
BILLINGS, Mont. — Hunters killed more wild bison migrating from Yellowstone National Park this season than they have in decades, with the numbers driven by strong participation from American Indians who harvest the animals under long-standing treaty rights.
Roughly 250 bison have been killed since last fall after leaving Yellowstone for low-elevation winter range in Montana.
Combined with a mild winter, that means there's unlikely to be a repeat this year of the colossal slaughters that have killed thousands of bison in the last two decades in the name of disease control.
Fewer bison leave the park when the weather is mild, and wildlife officials said the largest harvest since 1989 is relieving some of the pressures posed by a burgeoning population. The park had more than 4,200 animals at the season's start.
Still, hunting carries its own challenges, beyond criticism from animal rights advocates.
After scores of gut piles from harvested bison recently were found outside the park's northern boundary near the town of Gardiner, wildlife officials said they removed 8,000 pounds of bison waste and one carcass. That was done out of worry the remains could attract hungry grizzly bears now emerging from their winter dens, posing a safety risk to nearby residents.
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.
- 12 missing after flooding in Texas sweeps away vacation home
- Doctors, hospitals get more time to convert to electronic health records
- Obama gets state, local allies for key initiatives
- EPA expected to expand protection of streams, wetlands
- Rescuers find stranded woman in California desert, too late for husband
- Children tossed, injured, from bounce house sent airborne by waterspout in Florida
- Ohio’s largest road project to cost 3 times its estimate
- BP credited with gulf tourism boom
- Biden reassures Iraq: U.S. backs your forces in fight against Islamic State
- Wife, brother accused in man’s hatchet killing
- Senate committee backs vets’ rights to marijuana