The moose is normally a reclusive animal. You are most likely to see one in the streams, marshes, and willow thickets along the road between Mammoth Hot Springs and Norris. Moose may also be observed in the Fishing Bridge/Yellowstone Lake area, the Lamar Valley meadows, Hayden Valley, and along the east entrance road. Occasionally, they can be observed feeding or resting while partially submerged in water.

Yellowstone visitors should remember to never approach a moose. Though sluggish in appearance, they are fast. A cow moose protecting its young can be a very dangerous animal.

If you plan to visit Yellowstone National Park this year, keep an eye out for moose in the areas listed above. If you do observe a moose, remember to keep a safe distance between you and the animal. Never approach any wild animal as your personal safety and the welfare of the animal may be threatened.

YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK (YNET) -- Last winter Yellowstone made national and international headlines over the killing of some 1100 bison in the midst of the brucellosis scare.  Brucellosis is a disease which is common among Yellowstone's bison and which Western ranchers fear can be transmitted to domestic cattle.  The killings are continuing again this winter, as 11 bison who have strayed out of Yellowstone have already been killed by the Montana Department of Livestock.

Ms Rvandal's article is extremely insightful in regards to the bison and brucellosis controversy, and the Chronicle has given us permission to reprint it herein:

"Eradicating Brucellosis is Feasible"

from the Bozeman Chronicle
by Virginia Rvandal

Healthy Yellowstone bison have lived with the disease, brucellosis, for more than 80 years. These bison have never transmitted the disease to cattle the stated concern of the cattle industry. Dr. Paul Nicoletti, a veterinarian and one of the world's foremost experts on brucellosis, claims there is no scientific basis or the livestock industry's insistence on drastic and costly actions to reduce the already minimal risk of transmission of the disease from bison to cattle. Notwithstanding Dr. Nicoletti's assessment that ''Perhaps few situations in life are risk free, but this one seems near,'' 1,084 Yellowstone bison were killed last winter on the insistence of the livestock industry, supposedly to reduce the risk to their cattle.

If brucellosis were anything like the ''mad cow'' disease, this drastic action might have been justified. But the effect brucellosis has on beef cattle is minimal, typically causing some cows to abort, after which most tend to birth normally. Since cows routinely abort for many reasons, this loss is not deemed of great consequence by most ranchers. The significant costs result not from the biological consequences of the disease, but from the measures required to comply with state and federal brucellosis eradication programs.

It is perplexing that the livestock industry is opposed to mandatory vaccination of cattle against the disease even though a vaccine is available and has been widely and successfully used in Wyoming by ranchers who graze cattle alongside infected bison inside Grand Teton National Park. The industry claims it would be unfair for ranchers to incur the $6 per cow cost to vaccinate their cattle (only females are vaccinated, and only once in their life). Instead, the livestock industry's answer is to kill bison, most of which do not have the disease. Thus, today's taxpayer pays to kill bison that former taxpayers paid to bring back from the brink of extinction.

For every three bison in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem, there are 100 elk. The far more numerous elk also have brucellosis and, unlike bison, elk have, according to legal decisions, transmitted the disease to cattle. Yet, Montana's Department of Livestock (DOL) has never suggested using taxpayer monies to kill all elk that leave Yellowstone. This would, of course, be unpopular with hunters and with the state, which earns significant revenue from elk. After all, the disease is only the pretext for killing bison, it's not the real issue.

In spite of its position that the risk is ''extremely serious,'' the DOL has never called for a risk assessment. Such a study was done in bordering Grand Teton National Park. A higher percent of Grand Teton bison have been exposed to brucellosis (70 percent compared to about 50 percent in Yellowstone), cattle actually graze inside that park, and there are more cattle with which the bison could come into contact with there. Nevertheless, according to the study, an outbreak could be expected only once every 27 years in the Grand Teton area if simple precautions are taken. This risk is anything but alarming. Indeed, even a much greater risk would still be very manageable. The risk posed by Yellowstone bison is clearly minimal. More importantly, after 60 years of experience with the disease, the sophistication exists to deal with isolated outbreaks if and when they occur.

The DOL wants us to believe otherwise. Why?

Bison are being killed on the insistence of the livestock industry not because they have brucellosis although that is the stated concern but because they are perceived as a threat. The livestock industry feels threatened these days, not only by dropping cattle prices. Bison represent the pre cattle (and perhaps the post cattle) West. They are the symbol of the environmental movement and the emblem of the equally unpopular (in the eyes of many stock growers) federal Department of the Interior. Yellowstone bison are ''owned'' by the federal government, the same entity that is blamed for hardships resulting from restrictions on livestock grazing, predator control, water rights, and, more recently, for reintroducing the wolf.

But bison present more than a symbolic threat. The cattle industry perceives a serious threat in the vision of buffalo repopulating the plains, a vision some Native American and environmental groups are actively working toward. And, ironically, even bison ranching is seen as a threat to the cattle ranching industry. This is not so surprising when one recalls that as recently as 75 years ago the cattle/sheep wars were still raging in the West, during which time 53,000 sheep were killed by cattlemen who considered them a threat.

The killing of Yellowstone bison by the Montana DOL is, in large part, a form of retaliation and a manifestation of hostility by the Western livestock industry toward the federal government and the environmental movement. The livestock industry is engaged in the ''War of the West,'' and this is the ''Battle of Brucellosis.'' It's not about the disease, it's about bison, and about grass, and about feeling threatened. The disease is merely a convenient excuse to kill bison.

Get rid of brucellosis in livestock. And, if it is cost effective and if it can be done in a reasonable way, eliminate it from wildlife as well. At present, the least sophisticated and most costly approach to managing the disease is the one in place. Better ways of dealing with the disease in the Yellowstone area include mandatory vaccination of bison and cattle; restricting cattle grazing on public lands adjacent to Yellowstone during times of the year when the disease could, in theory, be transmitted; purchasing additional critical winter range bordering the park so that bison would not be forced to move onto private lands in search of forage during severe winters; establishing a compensation fund as a safety net for local ranchers in the highly unlikely but possible event of an outbreak of the disease; establishing target populations outside the park (not inside) and maintaining this target by distributing ''surplus'' live bison to tribes and others who are trying to build their herds, and by opening a hunting season for bison in certain areas.

Eradicating brucellosis in livestock is feasible. Eradicating the disease in wildlife is more difficult, maybe impossible, but worth trying to do if we adopt a reasonable time frame (15 20 years) and a cost effective and environmentally sensitive approach. The big question is can we get rid of the real reason behind the battle of brucellosis. Fear and hate aren't so easy to eradicate. We certainly won't get rid of them by using state tax monies to further spread these infectious diseases. It's time for the DOL to welcome science and reason back into their fold and leave spite and hate behind.