Cited by 41Rangeland and Wildlife ManagementWildlife Ecology and ConservationEcology and biodiversity studies

Bison limit ecosystem recovery in northern Yellowstone

Open access
Beschta, Robert L., Ripple, William J., Kauffman, J. Boone, Painter, Luke E.·2020·Food Webs

Abstract

American bison (Bison bison) numbers in northern Yellowstone National Park increased during the last two decades, while those of elk (Cervus canadensis) decreased. We undertook this study to assess the potential effects of bison on woody vegetation and channel morphology in the park's northern ungulate winter range. Based on differences in the number of elk and bison, body mass, and the amount of time each utilizes the northern range, foraging pressure from bison began to exceed that of elk in 2007 and is currently ~10 times greater than that of elk. In the Lamar Valley study area, stand structure data (i.e., tree frequency by diameter class) for aspen (Populus tremuloides) and cottonwood (P. spp.) indicated that the growth of seedling/sprouts of these species into tall saplings and trees has been extensively suppressed by bison herbivory. For streams that crossed the valley floor, woody riparian vegetation was absent along their banks and channels were relatively wide and deep, conditions sustained by high levels of bison use. Overall, our findings indicated that the elevated numbers of bison, via herbivory, trampling, and tree bark effects, are limiting the structure, composition, and distribution of woody plant communities in the Lamar Valley, affecting the character of the valley's stream and river channels, and, in turn, influencing habitat and food-web support for terrestrial and aquatic wildlife species. The conservation success of bison recovery now may be adversely affecting another conservation goal, the restoration and maintenance of woody riparian vegetation and riparian ecosystems.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fooweb.2020.e00142

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Bison numbers increased more than fourfold between 2004 and 2015.

    “Bison numbers increased more than fourfold between 2004 and 2015, and their ecosystem effects have similarly increased,”

    From Bison alter the northern Yellowstone ecosystem by breaking aspen saplings (2023) · cites this paper as Beschta et al., 2020

  • Beschta et al. (2020) reported that 97% of mature lodgepole pine trees in their study area in Lamar Valley had been killed by bark removal.

    “In the Lamar Valley of northern YNP, Beschta et al. (2020) reported that 97% of mature lodgepole pine trees in their study area had been killed by bark removal.”

    From Bison alter the northern Yellowstone ecosystem by breaking aspen saplings (2023) · cites this paper as Beschta et al. (2020)

  • Bison on the northern range increased from less than 1000 in the early 2000s to approximately 4000 animals in recent years despite annual culling.

    “Bison on the northern range have increased from less than 1000 in the early 2000s to approximately 4000 animals in recent years (Figure 3) despite annual culling in winter as bison migrated outside the park boundary (Beschta et al., 2020; Geremia, 2022; Mosley & Mundinger, 2018; Plumb et al., 2009).”

    From Bison alter the northern Yellowstone ecosystem by breaking aspen saplings (2023) · cites this paper as Beschta et al., 2020

  • Consumptive effects of bison can be significant where bison are present in high densities year after year, as in northern Yellowstone.

    “These consumptive effects can be significant where bison are present in high densities year after year, as in northern Yellowstone (Beschta et al., 2020; Painter & Ripple, 2012; Rose & Cooper, 2016).”

    From Bison alter the northern Yellowstone ecosystem by breaking aspen saplings (2023) · cites this paper as Beschta et al., 2020

  • Only recently, as elk have decreased and bison increased, have bison emerged as an important factor affecting the dynamics of these woody plants.

    “Only recently, as elk have decreased and bison increased, have bison emerged as an important factor affecting the dynamics of these woody plants (Beschta et al., 2020; Painter & Ripple, 2012; Ripple et al., 2010; Rose & Cooper, 2016).”

    From Bison alter the northern Yellowstone ecosystem by breaking aspen saplings (2023) · cites this paper as Beschta et al., 2020

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 77 · Cited by 41

Authors
Beschta, R. L., Ripple, W. J., Kauffman, J. B., & Painter, L. E.
Affiliations
Oregon State University (US)
Corresponding author
Beschta, Robert L.
Venue
Food Webs
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
23
Pages
e00142
ISSN
2352-2496 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3006099799
Cited by
41
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4
FWCI
3.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Food Webs (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Ecosystem Restoration Research Fund
  • National Science Foundation (1754221)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Ecology and biodiversity studies
Keywords
American bison, bison, elk, ungulate herbivory, woody vegetation, aspen, cottonwood, riparian vegetation, stream channel morphology, Yellowstone National Park, ecological restoration, trampling, bark damage, wintering range

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review