Wolves, Willows, and Water: A Retrospective on the Yellowstone Northern Range

Abstract

The reintroduction of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) to Yellowstone National Park in 1995 and 1996 represents one of the most significant and scrutinized conservation actions of the twentieth century. In the subsequent decades, a compelling narrative emerged in both popular media and scientific literature: the return of the apex predator triggered a "trophic cascade," a top-down ecological restructuring where wolf predation on elk (Cervus canadensis) released riparian vegetation—specifically aspen (Populus tremuloides) and willow (Salix spp.)—from decades of suppression, thereby restoring stream hydrology and facilitating the return of the beaver (Castor canadensis). This report provides an exhaustive, multi-disciplinary review of this hypothesis, synthesizing over thirty years of biological, distinct hydrological, and climatic data. While evidence confirms that wolves have fundamentally altered the Northern Yellowstone ecosystem through predation and behavioral mediation, the concept of a clean, linear trophic cascade is complicated by confounding variables. These include the legacy effects of long-term human harvest, the compensatory mortality caused by a recovering guild of bears and cougars, the rise of the bison (Bison bison) as a dominant grazer, and the overriding constraints of stream incision and climate change. This analysis argues that while wolves effectively ended the era of elk hyper-abundance, the restoration of the "green world" is spatially heterogeneous and heavily constrained by bottom-up physical processes that predation alone cannot reverse.

1. Introduction: The Green World Hypothesis and the Yellowstone Experiment

1.1 The Theoretical Framework

The concept of the trophic cascade is rooted in the foundational ecological theory known as the "Green World Hypothesis" (HSS), proposed by Hairston, Smith, and Slobodkin in 1960. They posited that the earth is green—covered in vegetation—because herbivores are kept in check by predators, preventing them from consuming all available plant biomass. When apex predators are removed, herbivores are released from top-down regulation, leading to population explosions and the subsequent degradation of plant communities—a phenomenon often termed "trophic downgrading."

Yellowstone National Park (YNP), particularly its northern winter range, served as the unintended testing ground for the inverse of this hypothesis. Following the extirpation of the gray wolf by the 1920s as part of federal predator control programs, the park’s primary large herbivore, the Rocky Mountain elk, experienced a release from predation pressure.¹ For the next seven decades, managers and biologists wrestled with the "elk problem." Without wolves, and with the suppression of human hunting within park boundaries, elk numbers on the northern range swelled. By the mid-1990s, the herd was estimated at over 19,000 individuals.²

1.2 The Landscape of Suppression

The ecological consequences of this herbivore abundance were profound. Dendrochronological (tree-ring) studies and historical photographs indicated that the recruitment of woody deciduous plants—specifically quaking aspen and various willow species—essentially ceased on the northern range beginning in the 1920s and 1930s.³ While mature trees persisted, saplings were systematically browsed to the ground by elk during the winter months, preventing them from reaching maturity. This "recruitment failure" led to a gradual senescence of aspen stands and the disappearance of tall willow communities along riparian corridors.

The loss of woody vegetation had cascading effects. Willows provide critical root strength to stream banks; without them, channels became unstable. Beaver, which rely on willow and aspen for food and dam-building materials, were largely extirpated from the northern range by the 1950s due to competitive exclusion by elk.⁵ The resulting ecosystem was described by some researchers as a "grazing lawn," simplified in structure and lacking the biodiversity associated with complex riparian thickets.

1.3 The Restoration and the Narrative

The reintroduction of 41 wolves from Canada and Montana into Yellowstone between 1995 and 1997 was designed to restore the integrity of the ecosystem. The subsequent decades saw the elk population crash and signs of vegetation regrowth appear. This sequence of events fueled the popular "trophic cascade" narrative: wolves ate the elk, the elk stopped eating the trees, the trees grew back, and the beavers returned to fix the rivers.

However, as we approach the 30-year mark of this experiment, the scientific reality has proven far more intricate. The restoration of Yellowstone is not a simple story of top-down control but a complex interplay of predation, human intervention, hydrology, and climate. This report dissects these layers to provide a nuanced understanding of what wolves did—and did not—change in Yellowstone.

2. Dynamics of the Northern Yellowstone Elk Herd (1995–2024)

2.1 The Precipitous Decline

The most immediate and quantifiable impact of wolf reintroduction was the reduction of the northern Yellowstone elk herd. From a peak of approximately 19,045 elk in 1994, the population declined steadily, reaching a low of 3,915 in 2013—a reduction of nearly 80%.⁷ Since 2013, the population has stabilized and shown a slight increasing trend, oscillating between 4,000 and 6,000 individuals, suggesting a new equilibrium has been reached.⁹

While it is tempting to attribute this entire decline to wolf predation, a forensic accounting of elk mortality reveals a "multi-causal" driver involving human harvest, other predators, and environmental stress.

2.2 The Hidden Hand: Human Harvest (The Gardiner Late Hunt)

A critical, often overlooked variable in the trophic cascade narrative is the role of human hunting. Prior to and during the early years of wolf reintroduction, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) managed the elk population with the objective of reducing what was perceived as an overabundance. The primary tool for this was the "Gardiner Late Hunt," a special harvest season targeting antlerless elk (females and calves) that migrated out of the park into the Centennial Valley and Gardiner basin during winter.⁸

During the critical transition period of 1995–2005, when the wolf population was growing exponentially, human hunters were simultaneously removing record numbers of elk.

• In the late 1990s and early 2000s, hunters harvested between 2,000 and 3,000 elk annually from the northern herd.⁸

• For example, in 1997, 2000, and 2003, the human harvest of adult female elk exceeded the number of elk killed by wolves.⁸

This creates a confounding variable: the rapid decline of the elk herd was driven by additive mortality—wolves were killing elk at the same time humans were removing thousands of reproductive females. Management agencies were slow to adjust quotas in response to the new predator on the landscape. It was not until the mid-2000s, when the herd had already dropped below the objective of 3,000–5,000 animals, that the late hunt was severely restricted and eventually canceled in 2010.⁸ Thus, the initial "shock" to the elk population was a joint venture between Canis lupus and Homo sapiens.

2.3 The Resurgent Predator Guild: Bears and Cougars

Wolves are not the only carnivores in Yellowstone. Their reintroduction coincided with the recovery of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) and cougar (Puma concolor) populations, creating a formidable predator guild.

Research into neonatal (newborn) elk calf survival has highlighted that bears, not wolves, are often the primary driver of summer mortality.

• Studies by Barber-Meyer et al. found that bears accounted for up to 58-60% of elk calf mortality in the first weeks of life.¹⁰

• In contrast, wolves accounted for approximately 14-17% of calf mortality during the same period.¹²

Cougars, which act as ambush predators in the rocky, structured terrain of the northern range, also exert significant pressure, particularly on adult elk. The combined pressure of this guild creates a "predator trap" or a high-mortality environment that prevents the elk population from rebounding to pre-1995 levels, even after human hunting was curtailed.¹³ The wolves act as the primary winter predator, culling vulnerable individuals in deep snow, while bears act as the primary summer predator, limiting recruitment by killing calves. This seasonal hand-off ensures that elk face consistent predation pressure year-round.

2.4 Demographic Shifts

The predation pressure has altered the demographic structure of the elk herd. Wolves select for vulnerable individuals—the old, the young, and the sick. Consequently, the average age of the elk population has shifted. The proportion of "prime-age" females (who have the highest reproductive value) in the population has remained relatively robust because wolves struggle to kill healthy adults.¹⁵ However, the overall recruitment (the number of calves surviving to adulthood) has dropped significantly compared to the pre-wolf era, largely due to the aforementioned bear predation and the physiological costs of winter survival in a predator-rich environment.¹⁴

3. The Landscape of Fear: Behavioral Mediation of Herbivory

3.1 The Theory of Risk Effects

Central to the trophic cascade hypothesis is the concept of "behavioral mediation," often popularized as the "Landscape of Fear." This theory posits that the mere presence of predators causes prey to alter their behavior to avoid risk. In the context of Yellowstone, it was hypothesized that elk, fearful of wolves, would avoid high-risk areas such as riparian corridors (riverbanks) where terrain traps and deep snow make escape difficult. By spending less time in these areas, elk would inadvertently reduce their browsing pressure on aspen and willow, allowing these plants to recover even if the total number of elk remained high.¹⁶

3.2 Testing the Landscape of Fear

While visually compelling, the Landscape of Fear hypothesis has faced rigorous testing and scrutiny. Detailed GPS telemetry studies by MacNulty, Kohl, and others have revealed a more nuanced reality that challenges the simplicity of the avoidance theory.

Philopatry and Site Fidelity:

Elk are highly philopatric, meaning they exhibit strong fidelity to specific home ranges and migration routes. Research has shown that adult female elk rarely abandoned their traditional winter ranges following wolf reintroduction. The drive to secure high-quality forage in the harsh Yellowstone winter often overrides the risk of predation. Abandoning a known, food-rich riparian area for a safer but food-poor upland slope could result in starvation—a certain death compared to the probabilistic risk of predation.15

Temporal vs. Spatial Avoidance:

Elk response to wolves appears to be more temporal than spatial. Studies examining "diel" (24-hour) activity patterns show that elk may use risky riparian areas during times of day when wolves are less active (e.g., midday) and move to safer ground at dawn and dusk when wolves are hunting.18 While this reflects a behavioral adaptation, it does not necessarily result in a reduction of total browsing pressure. An elk can consume a significant amount of willow in a few hours of intensive midday feeding.

Physiological Stress Indicators:

If elk were living in a constant state of fear, one would expect to see chronic physiological stress. However, studies measuring cortisol levels (stress hormones) and pregnancy rates in Yellowstone elk have generally not found evidence of chronic stress induced by predation risk.19 This suggests that elk have adapted to the presence of wolves not by living in terror, but by adopting reactive defense strategies (grouping, vigilance) rather than costly proactive avoidance strategies that would compromise their body condition.

3.3 Implications for Vegetation

The weakness of the spatial "Landscape of Fear" effect implies that vegetation recovery cannot be attributed solely to elk being scared out of river bottoms. If elk are still present in riparian zones—even if their schedule has changed—they are still eating. Therefore, any recovery in vegetation is likely driven more by the numerical reduction of elk (density-mediated effects) rather than the behavioral redistribution of elk (trait-mediated effects).¹⁵

4. The Vegetation Response: Aspen, Willow, and the Trophic Cascade Debate

4.1 The Aspen Recruitment Debate

The status of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) is the most contentious battlefield in the trophic cascade debate. Aspen reproduce primarily through suckering (root sprouting), and for decades, these suckers failed to grow into mature trees due to elk browsing.

The Pro-Cascade Findings (Ripple, Beschta, Painter):

Researchers advocating for the cascade have documented significant increases in aspen height in the years following wolf reintroduction. In studies focusing on the "tallest five" saplings per stand or specific transects in the eastern Lamar Valley, they found that young aspen had breached the "browse line"—the height of approximately 200 centimeters, above which elk can no longer nip the terminal bud.3

• By 2012, Painter et al. reported that in the eastern sector of the northern range, where elk density declines were most pronounced, significant recruitment of aspen saplings into the tree class was occurring.²²

• They argued this recovery was correlated with reduced elk densities and was consistent with a trophic release.²³

The Skeptical Findings (Kauffman, Winnie):

Conversely, Kauffman et al. employed a random sampling design across the entire northern range to assess the landscape-level response. Their findings painted a different picture:

• In the majority of randomly sampled stands, aspen were not recovering to the tree stage.

• Browsing rates on saplings remained high enough to suppress growth, even in areas designated as "high risk" for elk.⁴

• Kauffman used experimental exclosures (fences) to prove that while aspen could grow if fully protected, the reduction in elk browsing caused by wolves was insufficient in many areas to allow escape.

• They concluded that the "fear" effect was negligible and that elk density, while lower, was still high enough to suppress aspen in preferred foraging patches.⁴

Synthesis:

The discrepancy likely arises from spatial heterogeneity. Aspen recovery is not uniform. It is occurring in "patches"—specifically in the eastern northern range and high-elevation sites where elk densities are lowest. However, in the core winter range and western sectors, aspen remain suppressed. The cascade is real, but it is patchy rather than pervasive.

4.2 The Willow-Water Connection

Willow (Salix spp.) recovery tells an even more complex story, one that introduces the critical role of hydrology. Like aspen, willow was suppressed by elk. Following wolf reintroduction, willow height and cover increased in some areas, particularly along Slough Creek and parts of the Lamar River.²⁵

However, researchers Marshall, Hobbs, and Cooper identified a fundamental "bottom-up" constraint: water.

• The Mechanism: Willows are obligate phreatophytes; they require their roots to be in contact with the water table. In the decades of elk overabundance, the loss of willow led to the loss of beavers. Without beaver dams, stream flow velocities increased, causing channels to erode vertically (incise).

• Incision and Water Tables: As streams cut deeper (incised), the water table in the adjacent floodplain dropped, disconnecting from the root zone of the willows.²⁷

• The Experiment: In a landmark factorial experiment, researchers manipulated both browsing (fencing) and water levels. They found that willows protected from elk but deprived of high water tables (simulating incised streams) grew an average of only 106 cm and stagnated. In contrast, willows with access to elevated water tables grew to 147 cm and gained significant biomass.²⁷

This reveals an "Alternative Stable State." Even if wolves remove the elk, the willows in incised channels cannot recover because the physical environment (hydrology) has been degraded. The biological trigger (predation) cannot fix the physical problem (incision) without the mechanical intervention of beavers—who cannot return until the willow recovers. This "hydrologic trap" significantly dampens the strength of the trophic cascade.²⁷

5. The Missing Engineer: The Beaver Conundrum

The beaver is the linchpin of the riparian ecosystem. Historical surveys from the early 1920s documented frequent beaver activity on the northern range.⁵ By the 1950s, beavers were effectively extirpated, a loss attributed to the competitive exclusion by elk, which consumed the willow biomass beavers require for food and dam construction.

The trophic cascade hypothesis predicts that as wolves reduce elk and willow recovers, beavers should naturally recolonize the landscape, initiating a positive feedback loop of dam building and hydrologic restoration.

• Current Status: Beaver populations have increased since wolf reintroduction. Surveys in the late 1990s and 2000s showed a rise from near zero to approximately 121 colonies park-wide by 2024.⁶

• The Constraint: However, the recovery is largely restricted to areas where willow habitat remained intact or where stream gradients were favorable. On the severely incised streams of the northern range, beavers have failed to re-establish in high numbers because the habitat is too degraded to support the initial colonization.

Without beavers to build dams and raise the water table, the incised streams remain incised, and the willows remain water-stressed. This highlights the limits of top-down control: wolves can kill elk, but they cannot build dams. The restoration of the beaver is likely a multi-decadal process that may require active restoration (e.g., Beaver Dam Analogs) to bridge the gap.²⁹

6. The Rise of the Bison: A Secondary Cascade?

As the elk population plummeted in the 2000s, another native ungulate began a meteoric rise. The bison population on the northern range expanded from approximately 500 animals in 1997 to over 5,000 by 2024.⁷

6.1 Competitive Release and Niche Filling

The decline of elk reduced interspecific competition for forage, potentially facilitating the bison expansion. Unlike elk, which migrate out of the park in winter, many bison remain on the northern range year-round. While bison are primarily grazers (eating grass), they are also capable of browsing woody vegetation, especially in winter.

6.2 The New Browser on the Block

Recent research has documented a "secondary cascade" or "compensatory herbivory." In the Lamar Valley, where elk numbers are low, large herds of bison now congregate.

• Impact on Vegetation: Studies by Beschta, Ripple, and Painter have observed bison browsing on young aspen and willow. Crucially, bison are large enough to physically break aspen saplings that have grown above the 200 cm "elk browse line," effectively resetting the recruitment clock.³¹

• Interaction with Wolves: Bison are formidable prey. While wolves do hunt bison, the risk is significantly higher than hunting elk. Consequently, bison do not exhibit the same "landscape of fear" avoidance of riparian flats. They loaf and forage in these areas with relative impunity, exerting significant trampling and browsing pressure.³²

This dynamic suggests that the ecosystem may be shifting from an elk-dominated state to a bison-dominated state. If bison simply replace the grazing/browsing pressure of elk, the predicted recovery of riparian vegetation may be stalled or reversed, illustrating the complexity of managing a multi-ungulate system.³³

Table 1: Comparative Biomass and Impact of Elk vs. Bison on Northern Range

Feature	Elk (Pre-1995)	Bison (2024)	Ecological Implication
Population	~19,000	~5,000	Bison individual mass is ~3-4x that of elk.
Primary Forage	Grass/Browse (Mixed)	Grass (Grazer)	Bison focus on grass but break woody stems.
Predation Risk	High (Wolves/Bear/Cat)	Moderate/Low	Bison occupy riparian zones with less fear.
Migration	Migratory (Exit Park)	Partial/Resident	Year-round pressure on Northern Range.
Impact Type	Intensive Browsing	Bulk Grazing & Trampling	Shift from browsing suppression to physical breakage.

7. The Abiotic Context: Climate and Drought

The biological drama of wolves and elk has played out against a backdrop of climatic flux. The period immediately following wolf reintroduction (1995–2005) coincided with a significant climatic shift.

7.1 The Influence of Drought

Dendroclimatological data (PDSI) indicates that the early 20th century—when the elk herd grew—was a "markedly wet" period compared to the long-term average.³⁴ In contrast, the post-reintroduction era, particularly the early 2000s, was characterized by severe drought.

• Hydrologic Drought: Reduced precipitation and snowpack lowered groundwater levels, exacerbating the stress on willows already suffering from stream incision.³⁶

• Vegetation Stress: The poor condition of vegetation in the early 2000s was likely driven as much by water stress as by herbivory.

7.2 Snowpack and Predation

Climate trends show a decline in spring snowpack and an earlier melt-off.³⁷ Snow depth is a critical variable in predator-prey dynamics; deep snow makes elk vulnerable to wolves. A trend toward lower snowpack could theoretically reduce wolf hunting efficiency, buffering the elk population. However, the severe winters that do occur (like the winter of 1996/1997) can cause massive winterkill events that accelerate population declines independently of predation.

Disentangling the "wolf effect" from the "drought effect" is difficult, but it is clear that climate modulates the strength of the trophic cascade. A willow attempting to regrow in a drought year faces a double penalty: lack of water and continued browsing.

8. Conclusion: A Cascade of Complexity

Did reintroducing wolves to Yellowstone cause an ecological cascade? The answer is a qualified "yes," but not the linear, clean narrative often presented.

1. Predation is Real: Wolves, in concert with human hunters and bears, ended the era of elk overabundance. The reduction of the elk herd from 19,000 to 4,000 is the most significant ecological change in the park’s recent history.

2. Vegetation Response is Patchy: Aspen and willow have recovered in specific areas (eastern sector, high water tables) but remain suppressed in others due to hydrology and bison herbivory.

3. Physical Constraints Matter: The "Green World" hypothesis meets the "Brown World" reality of geomorphology. Incised streams and low water tables create physical barriers that biological forces (wolves) cannot overcome alone.

4. The System Adapts: The rise of bison illustrates nature's abhorrence of a vacuum. As elk declined, a new dominant herbivore emerged, creating new feedback loops.

Yellowstone today is not a returned replica of the pre-European landscape. It is a novel ecosystem, shaped by the return of ancient predators but constrained by modern realities of climate change, human land use, and altered hydrology. The wolf is not a magic wand, but a powerful keystone in a chaotic, dynamic, and ever-changing arch.

Works cited

1. The Challenge of Understanding Northern Yellowstone Elk Dynamics after Wolf Reintroduction - Utah State University, accessed January 6, 2026, https://qanr.usu.edu/wild/labs/macnulty-lab/files/macnulty-et-al-2016a.pdf

2. Yellowstone's Northern Range - NPS History, accessed January 6, 2026, https://npshistory.com/publications/yell/newspaper/northern-range.pdf

3. After long-term decline, are aspen recovering in northern Yellowstone? - Oregon State University, accessed January 6, 2026, https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/Painter_2014FEM.pdf

4. Are wolves saving Yellowstone's aspen? A landscape-level test of a behaviorally mediated trophic cascade - Regulations.gov, accessed January 6, 2026, https://downloads.regulations.gov/APHIS-2021-0055-0130/attachment_1.pdf

5. The History and Current Status and Distribution of Beavers in Yellowstone National Park, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269551986_The_History_and_Current_Status_and_Distribution_of_Beavers_in_Yellowstone_National_Park

6. Beaver - Yellowstone National Park (U.S. National Park Service), accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/beaver.htm

7. The Restoration of Yellowstone Bison - Gardiner, Montana, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.visitgardinermt.com/images/RestorationYellowstoneBison_2025_RED.pdf

8. Gardiner elk hunt falls victim to wolves - By Jay Kohn - Posted: Feb 18, 2010 11:00 PM, accessed January 6, 2026, https://archive.legmt.gov/content/Committees/Interim/2009_2010/Environmental_Quality_Council/Minutes/eqc03052010_ex23.pdf

9. Montana 2024 Elk Counts, accessed January 6, 2026, https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content/assets/fwp/conservation/wildlife-reports/elk/2024/elk2024_20241113.pdf

10. Yellowstone elk calf mortality following wolf restorations: Bears remain top summer predators | U.S. Geological Survey - USGS.gov, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.usgs.gov/publications/yellowstone-elk-calf-mortality-following-wolf-restorations-bears-remain-top-summer

11. Monitoring and Assessment of Wolf-Ungulate Interactions and Population Trends within the Greater Yellowstone Area, Southwestern - Montana FWP, accessed January 6, 2026, https://fwp.mt.gov/binaries/content/assets/fwp/conservation/wildlife-reports/wolf/w-u_final_report_final_web.pdf

12. "Elk Calf Survival and Mortality Following Wolf Restoration to Yellows" by S. M. Barber-Meyer, L. David Mech et al. - UNL Digital Commons, accessed January 6, 2026, https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsnpwrc/396/

13. 2024 Wolf, Cougar and Elk Project Report - National Park Service, accessed January 6, 2026, http://home.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/upload/2024-YELL-Wolf-Cougar-and-Elk-Report.pdf

14. Northern Yellowstone Elk: Resiliance & Adaptation to Changes in Management Policies and the Ecosystem - National Park Service, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/upload/ELK-BOOK-FOR-WEB_accessible.pdf

15. Yellowstone Elk Don't Budge for Wolves say Scientists - Utah State University, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.usu.edu/today/story/yellowstone-elk-dont-budge-for-wolves-say-scientists

16. Sampling bias exaggerates a textbook example of a trophic cascade - PubMed Central, accessed January 6, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9298920/

17. Riparian vegetation recovery in Yellowstone: The first two decades after wolf reintroduction - Global Trophic Cascades Program, accessed January 6, 2026, https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/Beschta_Ripple2016.pdf

18. Diel predator activity drives a dynamic landscape of fear - USGS.gov, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.usgs.gov/publications/diel-predator-activity-drives-a-dynamic-landscape-fear

19. Diel predator activity drives a dynamic landscape of fear - bioRxiv, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/221440v1.full-text

20. Weak spatiotemporal response of prey to predation risk in a freely interacting system - PMC, accessed January 6, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7003944/

21. Recovering aspen follow changing elk dynamics in Yellowstone: evidence of a trophic cascade? - PubMed, accessed January 6, 2026, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26236910/

22. Recovering aspen follow changing elk dynamics in Yellowstone: evidence of a trophic cascade? - Oregon State University, accessed January 6, 2026, https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/Painter_2015Eco.pdf

23. aspen, elk and wolves in yellowstone: are aspen recovering since the return of - University of Wyoming Open Journals, accessed January 6, 2026, https://journals.uwyo.edu/index.php/uwnpsrc/article/download/3947/3947

24. Are wolves saving Yellowstone's aspen trees from elk? - Ecological Society of America, accessed January 6, 2026, https://esa.org/blog/2010/09/01/are-wolves-saving-yellowstones-aspen-trees-from-elk/

25. The strength of the Yellowstone trophic cascade after wolf reintroduction - Conservation Biology Institute, accessed January 6, 2026, https://consbio.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/1-s2.0-S2351989425000290-main.pdf

26. Trophic cascades from wolves to alders in Yellowstone, accessed January 6, 2026, https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/Ripple_alder2015.pdf

27. Water tables constrain height recovery of willow on Yellowstone's northern range - PubMed, accessed January 6, 2026, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18372557/

28. WATER TABLES CONSTRAIN HEIGHT RECOVERY OF WILLOW ON YELLOWSTONE'S NORTHERN RANGE - Mountain Scholar, accessed January 6, 2026, https://mountainscholar.org/bitstreams/cbef06f0-899e-4e39-9480-c8d23a4eed2d/download

29. Yellowstone Ecosystem Needs Wolves and Willows, Elk and...Beavers? | NSF, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.nsf.gov/news/yellowstone-ecosystem-needs-wolves-willows-elk

30. Bison Ecology - Yellowstone - National Park Service, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/bison.htm

31. Bison alter the northern Yellowstone ecosystem by breaking aspen saplings - PMC, accessed January 6, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10464599/

32. Bison in northern Yellowstone proving to be too much of a good thing | Newsroom, accessed January 6, 2026, https://news.oregonstate.edu/news/bison-northern-yellowstone-proving-be-too-much-good-thing

33. Wolves Might Have Saved Yellowstone's Aspen From Elk, But Now Bison Are Eating It, accessed January 6, 2026, https://cowboystatedaily.com/2025/08/09/wolves-might-have-saved-yellowstones-aspen-from-elk-but-now-bison-are-eating-it/

34. Annual precipitation in the Yellowstone National Park region since AD 1173 - USGS.gov, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.usgs.gov/publications/annual-precipitation-yellowstone-national-park-region-ad-1173-0

35. Annual Precipitation in the Yellowstone National Park Region Since AD 1173 | Request PDF, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222555393_Annual_Precipitation_in_the_Yellowstone_National_Park_Region_Since_AD_1173

36. GREATER YELLOWSTONE CLIMATE ASSESSMENT - University of Wyoming, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.uwyo.edu/research/_files/centers_and_institutes/wyact/docs/gyca-2021-report.pdf

37. 3 | Historical Climate and Water Trends in the GYA, accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.gyclimate.org/ch3

38. Temporal Variation in Wolf Predation Dynamics (U.S. National Park Service), accessed January 6, 2026, https://www.nps.gov/articles/temporal-variation-in-wolf-predation-dynamics.htm

39. 2024 Wolf, Cougar and Elk Project Report - NPS History, accessed January 6, 2026, https://npshistory.com/publications/yell/ycr/wolf-reports/2024.pdf

40. Trophic cascades from wolves to grizzly bears or changing abundance of bears and alternate foods? - USGS Publications Warehouse, accessed January 6, 2026, https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70143510

41. Interactions among herbivory, climate, topography and plant age shape riparian willow dynamics in northern Yellowstone National - Colorado State University, accessed January 6, 2026, https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2017/02/2014MarshallCooperHobbsJEcology.pdf

42. Relationships between groundwater use, water table, and recovery of willow on Yellowstone's northern range - Colorado State University, accessed January 6, 2026, https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/davidcooper/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2017/02/JohnstonCooperHobbs2011.pdf

43. Bison limit ecosystem recovery in northern Yellowstone - Global Trophic Cascades Program, accessed January 6, 2026, https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/default/files/Beschta2020_FoodWebs_0.pdf