Citizen based monitoring and the charismatic megafauna of Wisconsin

1
Citizen based monitoring and the charismatic
megafauna of Wisconsin

• Timothy Van Deelen
• David MacFarland
• University of Wisconsin at Madison

ALLposters.com
2
Charismatic megafauna

• charismatic megafauna noun. Animals that have
  popular appeal and so can form the basis of
  conservation campaigns and fundraising drives.

3
ALLposters.com
4
White-tailed deer in Wisconsin
5
Early population influences

• Native American hunting
• Fur trade
• Logging
• Settlement
• Market hunting

6
Early 20th Century to now

• Increasing regulation
• Ecologically meaningful DMUs
• Mandatory harvest registration
• Variable quotas
• Sex-Age-Kill

7
Plastic food habits...
Survey of National Park Managers 98 species of
plants threaten by overabundant deer in
human-influenced landscapes (Miller et al. 1992)
8
Waller and Alverson 1997
9
University of Wisconsin-Madison Archives
This effect of too many deer on the ground flora
of the forest deserves special mention because it
is an elusive burglary of esthetic wealth, the
more dangerous because unintentional and
unseen - Leopold
10
Recent population trend
R. Rolley WI DNR
11
Sex-Age-Kill
12
Sex-Age-Kill
13
Wolves
14
Changes in Wisconsin Gray Wolf Population
1980-2006
15
2005 2006 Wolf Packs
16
Citizen wolf trackers
17
Black Bears
18
(No Transcript)
19
Large animal life table, r -0.10
x f(x) S(x) l(x) d(x) q(x) p(x)
age count temporal dist. cohort survival cohort mortality age sp. motality age sp. survival
f(x)/f(0) S(x)erx l(x) - l(x1) d(x)/l(x) 1-q(x)
0 1000 1.00 1.00 0.28 0.28 0.72
1 801 0.80 0.72 0.08 0.11 0.89
2 789 0.79 0.65 0.07 0.11 0.89
3 776 0.78 0.57 0.06 0.11 0.89
4 764 0.76 0.51 0.07 0.13 0.87
5 734 0.73 0.45 0.07 0.15 0.85
6 688 0.69 0.38 0.06 0.16 0.84
7 640 0.64 0.32 0.06 0.19 0.81
8 571 0.57 0.26 0.08 0.30 0.70
9 439 0.44 0.18 0.09 0.48 0.52
10 252 0.25 0.09 0.06 0.66 0.34
11 96 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.94 0.06
12 6 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.45
13 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
14 0 0 0 0 undefined undefined
Notation follows Caughley, 1977. Analysis of
vertebrate populations
20
The expanded life table
x l(x) p(x) m(x)
cohort survival age.sp survival age sp. birth rate
l(x1)/l(x) l(x)m(x) l(x)m(x)x
0 1.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.80 0.50 2.00 1.60 1.60
2 0.40 0.25 3.00 1.20 2.40
3 0.10 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.30
4 0.00 undefined 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.90
Generation time GSl(x)m(x)x/Sl(x)m(x) Net
reproductive rate Ro Sl(x)m(x) r ln(Ro)/G
Euler-Lotka equation Sl(x)m(x)exp(-rx) 1
21
(No Transcript)
22
CBM-Sponsored bear project(you want HOW much
tetracycline?)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
Citizen contributed rib samples
29
Petersen Population Estimate from Tetracycline
Marking
No. bears in pop. (N) No. samples
examined (n)
No. marked in pop. (M) No.
marked in sample (m)
Nest M (n/m)
30
Increasing management problem bears and
agriculture
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
Wisconsin moose
34
Wisconsin cougar
35
Next generation payoffs of Citizen-Based
MonitoringSome examples
36
Whats more effective baiting or T-zones?
T-zone
Baiting
Change in harvest
37
Does feeding increase the growth of the deer
population?
38
How large will the wolf population get?
39
How do wolves impact the growth of the deer
population?( 1 SE)
40
Where will bears conflict with farmers and how
soon?
41
Thank you.