< Back

Ungulates. The Stephens Creek capture facility occupies 13 acres of critical pronghorn winter range, and has had adverse impacts on the antelope population through displacement, disturbance, and blocked movements. Observations from capture operations during winter 1996–97 showed pronghorn avoided using habitat in the capture facility area, and some pronghorn may have been confused by the wing fences when fleeing from predators. The capture facility at Stephens Creek would continue to exist in all alternatives except alternative 2 (in the short term only in alternatives 3 and 7), and would have a moderate to major adverse impact on the pronghorn population. In steps 2 and 3 of the modified preferred alternative, wildlife in the vicinity may experience a minor beneficial impact and pronghorn may experience a moderate to major benefit from a reduction in the use of the Stephens Creek capture facility. Other capture facilities, such as those in West Yellowstone and planned for different locations within the park in alternatives 5 and 6, could have minor adverse impacts on wildlife through displacement and disturbance.

Acquisition of additional wildlife winter range in the Gardiner Valley, which has occurred since the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, is a part of alternatives 2, 3, 7, and the modified preferred alternative. This acquisition will make more winter habitat available to elk, mule deer, bighorn sheep, and particularly pronghorn. Although pronghorn and other ungulates have historically used the acquired area, a minor benefit to most ungulates and a moderate to major beneficial impact on pronghorn would occur from discontinuing a hunt on private lands focused on displacing pronghorn from agricultural land in the area.

Occasional hazing operations associated with all alternatives would be expected to have minor impacts on elk, mule deer, bighorn sheep, and other ungulates through disturbance and temporary displacement. In alternatives where snowmobile use would be displaced outside the park (alternatives 2, 5, and 6), impacts on ungulates outside the park could be more intense than they are now. This is because snowmobiles would be restricted to trails inside the park, but allowed to travel off trails in many areas of adjacent public lands.

Elk, pronghorn, deer, bighorn sheep, and moose would not likely be affected through competition for forage or space with bison, as each has an ecological niche that differs from bison through food choices, occupied habitat, or tolerance of snow depth. Therefore, increases or decreases in the bison population size would not be expected to affect any other large ungulates.

Predators and Scavengers. Hazing activities directed at moving bison into capture facilities or inside the SMA boundary could disturb and displace predator and scavenger species, including black bear, mountain lion, coyote, fox, wolverine, bobcat, lynx, and a variety of smaller mammalian and avian carnivores and scavengers using those areas. Hazing should be infrequent, however, and displacement and stress would be local and temporary and would have only minor effects on those populations. Changes in the bison population size and resulting availability of carrion would not affect predators and scavengers except during the parkwide capture and slaughter phases of alternatives 5 and 6, when reductions would be severe enough to cause a moderate impact. Displaced snowmobile use associated with alternatives 2, 5, and 6 might affect some of these species more severely than at present, as this activity is restricted to trails inside the park and might not be if it was displaced outside the park. Impacts on some species could be moderate.