Search

Estimating animal abundance and density are fundamental goals of many wildlife monitoring programs. Camera trapping has become an increasingly popular tool to achieve these monitoring goals due to recent advances in modeling approaches and the capacity to simultaneously collect data on multiple species. However, estimating the density of unmarked populations continues to be problematic due to the difficulty in implementing complex modeling approaches, low precision of estimates, and absence of rigor in testing of model assumptions and their influence on results. Here, we describe a novel approach that uses still image camera traps to estimate animal density without the need for individual identification, based on the time spent in front of the camera (TIFC). Using results from a large‐scale multispecies monitoring program with nearly 3000 cameras deployed over 6 years in Alberta, Canada, we provide a reproducible methodology to estimate parameters and we test key assumptions of the TIFC model. We compare moose (Alces alces) density estimates from aerial surveys and TIFC, including incorporating correction factors for known TIFC assumption violations. The resulting corrected TIFC density estimates are comparable to aerial density estimates. We discuss the limitations of the TIFC method and areas needing further investigation, including the need for long‐term monitoring of assumption violations and the number of cameras necessary to provide precise estimates. Despite the challenges of assumption violations and high measurement error, cameras and the TIFC method can provide useful alternative or complementary animal density estimates for multispecies monitoring when compared to traditional monitoring methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Canada's federal recovery strategy for boreal woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) classifies areas burned by forest fire as disturbed habitat. This assignment of fire as a disturbance has potential economic and social implications across Canada, and influences plans and actions to achieve caribou conservation and recovery. Previous researchers have reported caribou avoid burned habitat, but these studies did not typically consider unburned residual patches within fire perimeters. Additionally, the implications of burned habitat on individual caribou survival is unclear. We examined resource selection by boreal woodland caribou of burns, and unburned residual patches, using global positioning system (GPS) locations for 201 caribou across 6 caribou populations in Alberta, Canada. We also examined if burned habitat affected the survival of adult female caribou. Caribou avoided burns and unburned residual patches. Increased use of burned habitats, however, did not lower the survival of adult caribou. Collectively, these results provide evidence to support current assertions that burns, and the embedded unburned residual patches are not preferred caribou habitat and increase our understanding of the implications of forest fire for caribou vital rates. Our investigation offers important information about the role of forest fire in caribou ecology and enhances the identification of disturbed habitat under recovery strategy guidelines to effectively address caribou population declines. © 2021 The Wildlife Society. : Woodland caribou in Alberta, Canada avoid burned habitat including unburned residual patches; however, there was no relationship between burned habitat use and adult female survival. This suggests fire disturbance is not a key influence of caribou population persistence, and we recommend reevaluation of the current approach listed in the federal boreal caribou recovery strategy that includes anthropogenic and fire disturbance in a cumulative assessment of disturbed habitat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding how landscape change influences the distribution and densities of species, and the consequences of these changes, is a central question in modern ecology. The distribution of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) is expanding across North America, and in some areas, this pattern has led to an increase in predators and consequently higher predation rates on woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou)—an alternate prey species that is declining across western Canada. Understanding the factors influencing deer distribution has therefore become important for effective conservation of caribou in Canada. Changing climate and anthropogenic landscape alteration are hypothesized to facilitate white‐tailed deer expansion. Yet, climate and habitat alteration are spatiotemporally correlated, making these factors difficult to isolate. Our study evaluates the relative effects of snow conditions and human‐modified habitat (habitat alteration) across space on white‐tailed deer presence and relative density. We modeled deer response to snow depth and anthropogenic habitat alteration across a large latitudinal gradient (49° to 60°) in Alberta, Canada, using motion‐sensitive camera data collected in winter and spring from 2015 to 2019. Deer distribution in winter and spring were best explained by models including both snow depth and habitat alteration. Sites with shallower snow had higher deer presence regardless of latitude. Increased habitat alteration increased deer presence in the northern portion of the study area only. Winter deer density was best explained by snow depth only, whereas spring density was best explained by both habitat alteration and the previous winter's snow depth. Our results suggest that limiting future habitat alteration or restoring habitat can alter deer distribution, thereby potentially slowing or reversing expansion, but that climate plays a significant role beyond what managers can influence. © 2020 The Wildlife Society. In Alberta, Canada, sites monitored using motion‐sensitive cameras between 2015 and 2019 were more likely to have deer present with shallower snow and increased habitat alteration. At sites where deer were present, density was higher in areas with lower snow in winter but with greater habitat alteration in spring. Our results suggest that restoring habitat and limiting future habitat alteration can partially control deer distribution but that climate plays a significant role beyond what managers can influence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the study of Hebblewhite and colleagues, according to which life of mountain caribous are critically endangered at Banff National Park (BNP) in Alberta, Canada and their extinction from the area is also speculated. It questions the responsibility of national parks which are supposed to protect threatened species and safeguard them for future generations. It discusses three reasons which stated to compare the work of national parks with the provincial land in British Columbia and Alberta. It includes the ignorant behavior of stakeholders and managers, lack of political consensus for caribou conservation, and consensus among researchers related to predator-prey interactions.

Identifying conservation units below the species level is becoming increasingly important, particularly when limited resources necessitate prioritization for conservation among such units. This problem is exemplified with caribou, a mammal with a circum-Arctic distribution that is exposed to a broad spectrum of ecological conditions, but is also declining in many parts of its range. We used microsatellite markers to evaluate the suitability of existing intra-specific taxonomic designations to act as population units for conservation and contrasted this with landscape features that were independent of taxonomy. We also quantified the relationship between genetic differentiation and subpopulation size, a factor that has been under-represented in landscape genetic research. Our data set included three subspecies and three ecotypes of caribou that varied in population size by five orders of magnitude. Our results indicated that genetic structure did not correspond to existing taxonomic designation, particularly at the level of ecotype. Instead, we found that major valleys and population size were the strongest factors associated with substructure. There was a negative exponential relationship between population size and F(ST) between pairs of adjacent subpopulations, suggesting that genetic drift was the mechanism causing the structure among the smallest subpopulations. A genetic assignment test revealed that movement among subpopulations was a fraction of the level needed to stabilize smaller subpopulations, indicating little chance for demographic rescue. Such results may be broadly applicable to landscape genetic studies, because population size and corresponding rates of drift have the potential to confound interpretations of landscape effects on population structure., (© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)