by Harold Erland
After 14 years of research, observation and study of elk in the Snoqualmie Valley, I will set my findings to print in order to better document, explain and understand the elk in the Snoqualmie Valley.
Because of hospitable conditions, the presence of elk in prehistoric times west of the Cascades is assumed by most authors. However, Gustafson (1972) has argued as well for a similarly common presence of elk in the Columbia Basin east of the Cascades: Elk bones, along with those of deer (Odocoileus spp.) and pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana), are among the most common faunal remains found in archeological sites throughout the Columbia Basin. The fragmentary, and often fire-charred, remains of this species testify to the fact that elk were a major source of food for people living in this arid region. Elk bones are common in all cultural sediments throughout the last 10,000 years, even in the most arid parts of the Columbia Basin (Paul Schullery 2004)
The tribes of this area subsisted chiefly on roots, berries, fish and meat. The chief tribal differences, in regard to food, were the proportion of seafood to meat. For instance, the Nisqually who lived on the Sound had large quantities of clams, while those of the interior only secured them occasionally through trading camas and dried meat for seafood. The Snohomish lived principally on seafood and, in contrast to the Snuqualmi (a historic spelling for the Snoqualmie tribe), did little hunting. The Snuqualmi were the best hunters of the Puget Sound tribes and went far into the mountains on snowshoes in pursuit of game. There was much trading in food as well as in other things between the Snohomish and the Snuqualmi. The Skagit carried this even further. They were also good hunters and after drying large quantities of meat, they would load it on canoes and travel down the Sound, trading their stores of meat for other supplies. (Haeberlin and Gunther 1930) (Paul Schullery 2004)
Clinton Hart Merriam (see bibliography) named the elk of the Olympic Mountains, Roosevelt Elk, after his friend Theodore Roosevelt. By 1897, Merriam, believed that elk were entirely gone from the Cascades. The collections of elk material made by the U.S. Biological Survey in Washington state in the late 1890s–at least those that found their way to the National Museum–contain specimens only from the Olympic Peninsula. It was presumably this collecting work upon which Merriam based his belief (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1983). (Paul Schullery 2004)
What is abundantly clear in the research, is that elk and deer were present but not abundant during the 1800s. (Paul Scullery 2004) (Gibbs 1855) (Johnson 1845). It is speculated that during the 1700s and maybe earlier, for centuries, there were no large numbers of elk in the area. Also, because of diseases brought to the area by whites in the 1800s that severely depleted the Native American populations, it would not have been possible for them to have had any kind of major effect of over hunting elk populations. (Paul Scullery 2004)(Gibbs 1855) (Johnson 1845).
Historical impacts of wildlife diseases may have influenced wildlife numbers, but there is no documentation or indication this may have occurred. Wildlife diseases brought in by the emergence of domestic livestock in the late 1800 did not seem to have presented a problem for deer or elk. There is, in fact, evidence that they have an effect on bighorn sheep. Interaction with domestic sheep and goats may be linked to bighorn sheep populations developing pneumonia. Pneumonia in bighorn sheep is often fatal and can affect all age groups within a herd. Preliminary disease mortality estimates range from 50-80% of individuals within affected herds. Infectious disease was an important driver of historic declines and extirpations of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) in North America and continues to impede population restoration and management. Domestic sheep have long been linked to pneumonia outbreaks in bighorn sheep and this association has now been confirmed in 13 captive commingling experiments. (USGS Bulletin)
Bringing Elk back to Washington
The first transplants back to Washington that might have affected the Snoqualmie Valley were in 1912 when there were two transplants made to Western Washington one in Snohomish County of 60 elk and one of 46 elk in Skagit County all from Gardner, Montana. Both of these transplants failed and by 1939 all of these elk were extinct, mostly due to poaching.
In 1912, 44 elk were transplanted in North Bend and 40 in Enumclaw. Some of the Enumclaw elk survived to become the nucleus of the Mount Rainier elk herd (Thomas, J. W. and Toweill, D. E. 1982) . In 1913 the county game warden obtained 39 Rocky Mountain elk from Yellowstone National Park. The elk arrived in railroad cars, and were released in the Snoqualmie Valley as a feature of the National Elks Convention, hosted that year in Seattle. The population quickly increased, and soon began causing extensive crop damage to local farmers. (Meadowbrook Farm Preservation Association, no date). By 1944, all these elk had been killed except for 7 which were shipped to Nooksack to begin the establishment of that herd.
In 1913, 50 elk were shipped in from Montana to Yakima County and released on the Naches River near the present day feeding ground at the Oak Creek feeding station and by 1939 the population had risen to 3000 elk.
In 1915, another 45 elk were transplanted from Montana to Kittitas County and driven to the area near Vantage where, by 1939, had increased to 350 head of elk. This report lists 4 elk transplanted to Snoqualmie Island in 1923 and says it was added to 6 elk that were already there.
In 1932 there were 30 elk transplanted in Pierce County, north of Mount Rainier National Park, near Grass Valley, near Enumclaw. These previously listed plantings are from State of Washington Department of Game, Washington Elk Report 1939.
Other transplants include, Elk transplanted north of Mount Rainier National Park, near Grass Mountain in 1912 (Paul Schullery 2004), but I can’t find any numbers of elk for that introduction. Also, there is information of elk being brought into Ellensburg around 1933 and herded to Robinson Canyon just east of Ellensburg where elk are still fed in the winter, today. This was handed down through an old, famous cowboy from Ellensburg who did the herding. He is famous as he was well known in the County and was often deputized to hunt down criminals who took off into the hills around Ellensburg. He, also, had never ridden in a motor vehicle even unto his death in the 1950s when his casket was transported to the cemetery via horse and wagon.
I enter this last introduction to illustrate that the actual numbers of elk brought to Washington is sketchy and that the actual numbers of elk relocated into the state is really an unknown. The means by which they ended up in the Snoqualmie Valley is not for certain. They could have come from the Yakima plantings at either Robinson Canyon or Naches from the east or from plantings on the north side of Mount Rainier.
But here is what I know and what has been observed by other longtime residents of the Valley. Elk were known to be in the Cedar River Watershed in the 1940s and 50s.
In the late 50s and early 60s elk were harvested in Hansen Creek of the South Fork of the Snoqualmie River next to the Cedar and were starting to show up in the Edgewick area east of North Bend.
Elk stayed in the Cedar River drainage as it is protected as a pristine watershed by the City of Seattle with Seattle owning about half of the watershed and the U. S. Forest Service owning the other half. Logging had been taking place during this time and there were plenty of clearcuts providing ample forage for the elk with no pressure from humans by hunting.
By the late seventies and early eighties there were believed to be about 700 head of elk in the water shed and they had expanded north out of the Cedar and into the South Fork and Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River. Estimates to the South Fork are unclear but certainly there were, at least, a few hundred based on sightings and harvests of elk. It was believed that there were about 300 head in the Middle Fork and Pratt River drainages where logging clearcuts provided ample forage.
Major Impacts of the mid 80’s
During the mid 1980s two major events in the area drastically changed the elk populations and range. The first major event was that the City of Seattle exchanged land with the U. S Forest Service to become sole owners of the Cedar River water shed. Once this happened, the City of Seattle stopped logging in the watershed to allow it to return to a pristine watershed. Unfortunately, that is not quite how it works. Since it was managed forest for logging, all of those planted clearcuts, after a few years, became void of suitable habitat for elk and other wildlife. The second major event was the controversy over the Northern Spotted owl. Which slowed logging and eventually stopped logging in the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie River when it was listed as endangered in 1988 by the Washington Fish and Wildlife commission and threatened in 1990 under the Endangered species Act.
Then came the year 2000
2000 is the year that 80 head of elk turned up in my yard in the lower reaches of the Middle Fork and piqued my interest in the elk. Why, all of a sudden, were they here? I had never seen more than one or two down this low. This is when I started researching this herd of elk.
The elk were here because of the events of the mid 80s which are documented in the paragraphs above. In the mid 80s, the logging in the Middle Fork of the Snoqualmie and the Cedar River watersheds stopped. By 2000, trees planted in the mid 80s had grown as tall as 18 feet and provided a solid blockage of light to the ground and thus any available forage for elk or other forest animals was no longer produced.
I do not know if these elk came from the Middle Fork or the Cedar River. They hung around the area where I live in the vicinity of the Mount Si Trail, for a few days, and then were gone. The following week a large group of elk was reportedly seen on 428th Ave SE at the Holly Farm. They hung around there for about a week and then were gone and a few days later they showed up at Meadowbrook Farm Park. It is a 460 acre park between North Bend and Snoqualmie and use to be the home of two or more dairy farms. This area is in the flood way and can never be developed and makes a good home, with lots of grass and cover for these elk. It is, also, connected to the eastern side of the valley by Three Forks Park, a wetland area where the Middle, North and South Forks of the Snoqualmie River merge and add and additional amount of habitat to bring the total to about 2000 acres.
The elk have stayed put and can be seen most evenings in these fields. Like most wildlife populations, given good forage, cover, water and safety, the herd had expanded from its initial 80 members and now is represented by about 450 animals, annually, throughout the entire upper Snoqualmie Valley. That 450 number seems to be the carrying capacity for this Valley and when the herd grows numbers leave. Because of this herd, elk have emigrated to the Lower Snoqualmie River Valley and even up into the Skykomish River Valley.
How do we know that the elk that are in the lower Valley are from our herd?
We determined this because elk that we collared ended up in the Skykomish River Valley. A collared elk had a calf at Carnation Farms and was killed by a hay moving machine but the following year she had another calf that lived to maturity. There are currently about 144 head of elk at Carnation Farms. These elk may or may not remain there as this area is being removed from game preserve status. We, also, have about 200 to 300 other elk that inhabit other areas in the lower Snoqualmie Valley, with some going all the way to Monroe along State Highway 203 and east along State Highway 2, to Sultan and beyond. There are sone spreading out to the west of Fall City toward Redmond and on Tiger Mountain.
Enough to do Census Work
How did we arrive at the information in the preceding paragraph? In February of 2008, I noticed an article requesting people who saw elk in the Snoqualmie Valley to call a number for the Department of Wildlife and report the sightings. This request by WDFW piqued my interest, so that same week I called the Department and located the person in charge of this request. He was the King County biologist for the Washington Department of Wildlife (Russell Link) and he asked if I would like to help and I said sure. I give him the credit and a sincere thanks for getting me involved.
The state was looking into the elk because of multiple complaints of property damage. It was explained to me that these elk had no economic value to the Department of Wildlife and one of the options to fix the problem waw to eliminate the complaints, by eliminating the elk from the Snoqualmie Valley. I had other thoughts and conveyed the ideas to Russle Link that we could try education and he was good with that.
First step in the education was to have some community meetings and convey the problems to the community. We had community meetings and out of those meetings the Upper Snoqualmie Valley Elk Management Group was formed and thus began my 12 year study of elk in the Snoqualmie Valley.
In March of 2009 we collared our first elk with the help of David Vales and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and with them, an additional 8 elk. The goal in the collaring was to obtain enough collared ek to do (capture and resight, White, G., Shenk, T) census work to determine the size of the herd. To do this we felt we needed 30 to 40 collared elk. In all, we collared 85 elk. In this collaring process, we used VHF collars on many of the elk but on many more we used GPS collars which allowed us to gain home range data as well as doing census work.
During 6 years of our censusing, 2012 through 2017, our herd averaged about 450 elk (see totals below), give or take 50 (see appendix A thru E for census results).
2012. 448, Appendix A; 2013. 498, Appendix B; 2014. 427, Appendix C; 2015. 511, Appendix D; 2016. 453, Appendix D; 2017. 444, Appendix E.
It looks like those estimates still hold today. Predators (bear on calves and cougar on any) take some each year and some die of natural causes, but because this is more of a suburban herd, the biggest losses are from hunting and vehicle collisions. Vehicle Collisions average about 25 known elk mortalities per year (Appendix J). Hunting takes an average of 50 out each year according to statistics from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Appendix F-1 and F-2).
Home Ranges
The home ranges of separate groups vary to a large degree. Some are very large and some are quite small and everything in between. The home range of EMG048, collared on Meadowbrook Farm, covered most of the Snoqualmie Valley from Mount Si on the east to I-90 on the West to North Bend on south to the main Snoqualmie river on the north. What some of those h0me Rangers look like can be seen on Appendix H-1, H-2 and H-3. EMG048 home range can be seen on Appendix H-4
Property Damage
The major complaints for property damage were coming from three private property owners. We met with the property owners and helped work out solutions to their problems and they were happy with the results. In all cases it involved fencing the properties to keep the elk out. One was a commercial location and with the aid of Master Hunters and purchase of fencing, the farm was fenced. As of this time, 14 years after my first involvement with the property damage, elk problem, I am not aware of any ongoing problems with the elk relating to property damage. In fact, Elk have now become a part of the community and a source of pride of the Snoqualmie Valley. In fact, elk now bring tourists and those tourists to the Snoqualmie Valley are an economic benefit to our communities.
Looking forward, it looks like the Snoqualmie Valley and its elk have bright future together. The total numbers could change depending on reduction of habitat due to building growth in the Valley. However, the Elk of the Meadowbrook Farm and Three Forks Park look to have a permanent future in the Snoqualmie Valley on their approximate 2000 acres of open space. I hope everyone enjoys this wonderful resource we have.
Appendix A
All of the 2012 Sighting Data Included
Mark-Resight Population Estimation for Closed Populations
2012 Total
Number of sighting occasions: 12
Marked Marked Unmarked Lin.-Pet. 95% Confidence
Occ. Available Seen Seen Estimate Interval
—- ——— ——- ——– ——— —————-
1 34 8 154 632.9 303.7 – 962.0
2 34 11 116 372.3 215.7 – 528.9
3 34 16 215 476.6 324.3 – 629.0
4 34 16 141 324.3 222.5 – 426.1
5 34 14 83 227.7 149.7 – 305.6
6 34 9 180 664.0 340.7 – 987.3
7 35 15 151 374.8 248.2 – 501.3
8 35 10 96 349.2 192.8 – 505.6
9 36 14 156 420.8 268.6 – 573.0
10 36 8 103 459.4 221.4 – 697.5
11 36 10 138 500.2 271.4 – 728.9
12 36 12 134 417.4 248.9 – 585.9
Minimum number known alive is 249
Population Estimate: 448 95% Confidence Interval: 399 – 511
Results with 4/2/2012 and 4/11/2012 data excluded by Chauvenet’s Criterion
Mark-Resight Population Estimation for Closed Populations
2012 TotalCorr
Number of sighting occasions: 10
Marked Marked Unmarked Lin.-Pet. 95% Confidence
Occ. Available Seen Seen Estimate Interval
—- ——— ——- ——– ——— —————-
1 34 11 116 372.3 215.7 – 528.9
2 34 16 215 476.6 324.3 – 629.0
3 34 16 141 324.3 222.5 – 426.1
4 34 14 83 227.7 149.7 – 305.6
5 35 15 151 374.8 248.2 – 501.3
6 35 10 96 349.2 192.8 – 505.6
7 36 14 156 420.8 268.6 – 573.0
8 36 8 103 459.4 221.4 – 697.5
9 36 10 138 500.2 271.4 – 728.9
10 36 12 134 417.4 248.9 – 585.9
Minimum number known alive is 249
Population Estimate: 412 95% Confidence Interval: 366 – 472
Appendix B
Mark-Resight Population Estimation for Closed Populations
2013 M Total Data
Number of sighting occasions: 12
Marked Marked Unmarked Lin.-Pet. 95% Confidence
Occ. Available Seen Seen Estimate Interval
—- ——— ——- ——– ——— —————-
1 33 4 45 339.0 100.6 – 577.4
2 33 8 169 671.4 323.2 – 1019.7
3 34 15 166 397.1 264.0 – 530.3
4 34 14 198 496.0 318.5 – 673.5
5 35 18 243 495.4 351.4 – 639.4
6 35 13 184 508.1 314.0 – 702.3
7 35 8 148 627.0 299.7 – 954.3
8 35 14 179 464.6 297.2 – 632.0
9 35 18 182 379.8 270.7 – 489.0
10 35 10 94 342.6 189.3 – 495.9
11 35 7 147 696.5 305.1 – 1087.9
12 35 14 158 414.2 265.7 – 562.7
Minimum number known alive is 278
Population Estimate: 498 95% Confidence Interval: 443 – 567
Appendix C
Mark-Resight Population Estimation for Closed Populations
2014 Calculations Final Chau 4/15 Rejected
Number of sighting occasions: 11
Marked Marked Unmarked Lin.-Pet. 95% Confidence
Occ. Available Seen Seen Estimate Interval
—- ——— ——- ——– ——— —————-
1 36 15 141 362.1 238.8 – 485.3
2 36 15 176 443.0 290.8 – 595.2
3 36 12 146 451.5 268.6 – 634.5
4 36 21 254 463.2 347.3 – 579.1
5 37 13 189 550.0 336.2 – 763.8
6 37 15 137 362.4 238.0 – 486.7
7 37 23 213 374.3 289.6 – 458.9
8 40 21 147 314.0 232.2 – 395.7
9 39 11 139 502.3 282.7 – 722.0
10 40 8 66 340.7 165.2 – 516.2
11 40 10 83 349.4 190.0 – 508.7
Minimum number known alive is 290
Population Estimate: 427 95% Confidence Interval: 386 – 477
Appendix D
2015
Here are the results:
Description Minimum Number Known Alive Population Estimate 95% Confidence Interval
Using All The Data 294 548 485-629
without 3/30 294 536 470-621
w/o 3/30&3/31 294 530 464-615
w/o 3/30,3/31&4/1 257 479 416-562
w/o 4/1 Chauvenet 269 511 449-591 This is the one plotted on the history graph
I examined the data, and we are able to reject the data taken on 4/1 according to the Chauvenet Criterion. I have attached a history graph using the data corrected by the Chauvenet Criterion for each year.
Phil
Appendix E
Mark-Resight Population Estimation for Closed Populations
2017 Apr08a
3/27 Data removed using Chauvenet Criterion
Number of sighting occasions: 11
Marked Marked Unmarked Lin.-Pet. 95% Confidence
Occ. Available Seen Seen Estimate Interval
—- ——— ——- ——– ——— —————-
1 23 7 196 611.0 291.0 – 931.0
2 23 8 107 308.3 162.8 – 453.9
3 23 12 252 488.2 319.0 – 657.4
4 23 12 170 336.8 221.4 – 452.3
5 23 7 117 374.0 180.5 – 567.5
6 23 8 133 377.7 198.1 – 557.2
7 23 11 220 463.0 289.3 – 636.7
8 23 10 196 450.6 267.6 – 633.6
9 23 8 175 489.7 255.2 – 724.1
10 23 11 203 429.0 268.4 – 589.6
11 23 15 197 318.5 234.2 – 402.8
Minimum number known alive is 275
Population Estimate: 444 95% Confidence Interval: 392 – 511
Appendix F
F-1
Snoqualmie GMU 460 Elk Harvest Data
2013
| Method | Antlerless Harvest | Antlered Harvest | Total Harvest |
| TOTALS | 0 | 55 | 55 |
| Archery | 0 | 5 | 5 |
| Modern Firearms | 0 | 41 | 41 |
| Multiple Weapons | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Muzzleloader | 0 | 7 | 7 |
2014
| Method | Antlerless Harvest | Antlered Harvest | Total Harvest |
| TOTALS | 25 | 24 | 49 |
| Archery | 10 | 8 | 18 |
| Modern Firearms | 0 | 7 | 7 |
| Multiple Weapons | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Muzzleloader | 14 | 8 | 22 |
2015
| od | Antlerless Harvest | Antlered Harvest | Total Harvest |
| TOTALS | 10 | 23 | 33 |
| Archery | 6 | 8 | 14 |
| Modern Firearms | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Multiple Weapons | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Muzzleloader | 4 | 7 | 11 |
F-2
2016
| Method | Antlerless Harvest | Antlered Harvest | Total Harvest |
| TOTALS | 20 | 44 | 64 |
| Archery | 14 | 18 | 32 |
| Modern Firearms | 0 | 14 | 14 |
| Multiple Weapons | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| Muzzleloader | 6 | 8 | 14 |
2017
| Method | Antlerless Harvest | Antlered Harvest | Total Harvest |
| TOTALS | 12 | 39 | 51 |
| Archery | 7 | 16 | 23 |
| Modern Firearms | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| Multiple Weapons | 2 | 11 | 13 |
| Muzzleloader | 3 | 4 | 7 |
Appendix G
G-1
EMG021, Addy
Along I-90, Exit 31 to Exit 32
EMG031, Gayle
North of I90 Exit 32 to Exit 34
G-2
EMG068, Elmo
Wilderness Rim to I90 to Meadowbrook Farm
EMG037, Barbara
Northeast of Snoqualmie and Old Weyerhaeuser Mill Site
EMG065, Uno
G-3
East of Snoqualmie, Mostly East of the Snoqualmie River
EMG084, Carnation
West and North of Chinook Bend on Carnation Farms Property
G-4
EMG048, Twix
Home Range
Appendix H
Appendix I
Bibliography
Paul Schullery, 2004, Preface to the 2004 WEB Edition, A History of Native Elk in Mount Rainier National Park, National Park Service,
Haeberlin, H., and Gunther, E. 1942. The Indians of Puget Sound. University of Washington Press. Seattle.
Gustafson, C. 1973. Faunal Remains from the Marmes Rockshelter and Related Archeological Sites in the Columbia Basin. Ph.D. Thesis. Washington State University.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Mammals in the USNM from Washington. printout.
Gibbs, G. 1855. Report of Mr. George Gibbs to Captain McClellan on the Indian tribes of the Territory of Washington. In Stevens, Narrative and Final Report of explorations for a route near the forty-seventh and forty-ninth parallels of north latitude, from St. Paul to Puget Sound. 419-466. U.S. War Dept. Thomas Ford. Washington.
Johnson, R. 1845. account of a trip over Naches Pass In Wilkes, The United States Exploring Expedition, 1838-1842. 418-429, 468-470. Lea and Blanchard. Philadelphia.
USGS Bulletin, Diseases of Terestrial Wildlife. By Frances Cassirer, Kezia R. Manlove, Emily S. Almberg, Pauline Kamath, Mike Cox, Peregrine L. Wolff, Annette Roug, Justin M. Shannon, Rusty Robinson, Richard B. Harris, Ben J. Gonzales, Raina K. Plowright, Peter J. Hudson, Paul C. Cross, Andrew Dobson, Thomas E. Besser at Ecosystems Mission Area, Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center
Meadowbrook Farm Preservation Association, Meadowbrook Farm Park, Elk History, no date.
Thomas, J.W., and Toweill, D.E. 1982. Elk of North America, Ecology and Management. Stackpole Books. Harrisburg.
White G, Shenk, T, 2011, Population Estimation with Radio-Marked Animals
Clinton Hart Merriam (December 5, 1855 – March 19, 1942) was an American zoologist, mammalogist, ornithologist, entomologist, ecologist, ethnographer, geographer, naturalist and physician. He was commonly known as the ‘father of mammalogy’, a branch of zoology referring to the study of mammals. He was a friend of Theodore Roosevelt and the namer of many species of birds and mammals. Some bearing his name like Merriam’s wild turkeys and many others with different names like the Roosevelt elk named after Theodore Roosevelt. By 1897, Merriam, believed that elk were entirely gone from the Cascades. The collections of elk material made by the U.S. Biological Survey in Washington state in the late 1890s–at least those that found their way to the National Museum–contain specimens only from the Olympic Peninsula. It was presumably this collecting work upon which Merriam based his belief (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1983). (Paul Schullery 2004)