I renewed my subscription to the Southeastern Naturalist, so I could read a recent monograph that inventoried the mammal fauna of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. According to this paper, 68 species of mammals have been documented in the park, and 1 scientist predicts an additional 4 species might eventually be found there. I suspect this number is greatly exaggerated–many of the species are small animals not documented in the park since the initial survey when the park was established in the 1930’s. Those species not documented recently could very well be extirpated from the park. The flora of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park is impressive but don’t plan a trip and expect to see much wildlife. I visited the park once and saw just 1 squirrel and no other mammals besides lots of people. There are 24 species of insectivores and bats allegedly inhabiting the park. These species are difficult to see and enjoy. That leaves 44 species and of these only 5 are considered megafauna (animals weighing over 40 pounds). The “big 5” are white tailed deer, elk, black bear, wild boar, and coyote. The latter 2 are considered invasive, but I think of the coyote as a native species that is recolonizing former territory occupied during the Pleistocene.
There are probably more white tailed deer outside the park in the surrounding farmland. White tailed deer prefer forest edge habitat, and most of the park has succeeded to old growth. Elk were re-introduced here in 2001, but they inhabit a small area of the park difficult to access. The road leading to this spot is a dangerous single lane dirt path on the side of a mountain. Supposedly, the black bear population in the park is about 1600. During the summer black cherries (Prunus serotina) make up 25% of the bear’s diet. Garbage provides 8% of their diet here. The author of the below referenced monograph claims to have several photographs of cougars taken by park visitors circa 2003. These may be of captive cougars released by owners who no longer wanted to care for them. Cougars are normally secretive, and semi-tame cats may have been easier to photograph. I doubt there is a breeding population of cougars in the park, but I wouldn’t rule it out, and they may eventually recolonize the region, if they keep expanding their range from the west and south Florida.
Location of the Great Smoky Mountains Park. The diversity of megafauna species in this park is much lower now than it was in this region during the Pleistocene.
Strange as it may seem, wild black cherries make up to 25% of the black bear’s diet during mid to late summer in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
The below referenced monograph reports a population of 30 striped skunks inhabit the Cades Cove Campground of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. They den in drainage culverts. Avoid them or you will endure a stinky vacation.
A fluctuating population of endangered Indiana bats roosts in a cave in Cades Cove. Bats can be seen at dusk.
The variety and abundance of megafauna in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park is disappointing, but it was spectacular during the Pleistocene. The natural communities then were similar to those of today, but during cold glacials there probably were more spruce trees and grassy balds and in higher elevations there may have even been tundra-like environments. Here’s a list of large mammals (based on fossil evidence) that definitely inhabited the park region until ~11,000 BP or beyond.
Jefferson’s ground sloth
Harlan’s ground sloth
elk (probably not until 15,000 years BP)
Florida spectacled bear
giant short-faced bear
Here’s a list of additional megafauna species that likely inhabited the park but whose nearest fossil remains are a considerable distance away.
Columbian mammoth x woolly mammoth hybrids
gompothere (during warm climate cycles)
The Pleistocene Great Smoky Mountains hosted ~31 megafauna species compared to the present day total of 5. This is a >80% reduction. How sad.
“Mammals of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park: 2016 Revision”
Southeastern Naturalist 15 Monograph (8) 2016