DOCSLIB.ORG

Lynx Habitat Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lynx Habitat Management Plan R E S O U R C E S Lynx Habitat Management Plan .......................................................... For DNR-Managed Lands .......................................................... April 2006 N A T U R A L WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Doug Sutherland - Commissioner of Public Lands Acknowledgements This Lynx Habitat Management Plan was drafted by Cheryl Quade and finalized by Teodora Minkova with additional and insightful input from Scott Fisher, Arne Johnson and Tim Vugteveen. Christina Kellum, James Poelstra, and Steve Myers provided cartographic support. The Implementation Monitoring Report was developed by Scott Fisher, Tony Flanagan, Guy Gifford, Jeff Pebworth, Cheryl Quade, Tim Vugteveen, and Paul Wik. Additional review was provided by Arne Johnson and Teodora Minkova. The Effectiveness Monitoring Report was drafted by Cheryl Quade and was finalized by Teodora Minkova. The data presented are the result of the dedicated and skillful efforts of: Robin Juliana (2002), Paul Wik (2002), Holiday Sloan (2001, 2000), Sue Harder (2000), Meagan Buck (1999), Brita Pyfer (1999), Nancy Bockino (1999), Rob Woeck (1999), Kelly Cruce (1998), John Maitland (1998), Allison Sirois (1997), Bradley Davis (1997), Ted Creviston (1997), Cheryl Quade (1997- 2001) and Northeast Region staff. A previous draft of the effectiveness monitoring report was greatly improved with the help of insightful reviews by Ethan Ellsworth, Scott Fisher, Karen Hodges, Camryn Lee, Matthias Leu, Teodora Minkova, Gary Roloff, and Derek Stinson. The technical editors of the entire document were Blanche Sobottke and Kyra Nourse. Cover photo credits (left to right clockwise): Jeff Heinlen, WDFW; © 2007 JupiterImages Corporation; Teodora Minkova, WDNR; Laura Romin and Larry Dalton, Wildlife Reflections Photography For additional copies please contact Teodora Minkova (360) 902-1175 Washington State Department of Natural Resources Land Management Division PO Box 47016 Olympia, WA 98504-7016 www.dnr.wa.gov Disabled persons needing this information in an alternate format, please call 711. Lynx Habitat Management Plan .......................................................... For DNR-Managed Lands .......................................................... April 2006 Prepared by Washington State Department of Natural Resources Land Management Division WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF Natural Resources Doug Sutherland - Commissioner of Public Lands Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................... 5 1.1 Conservation of Lynx in Washington............................................................................. 5 1.2 Changes to the 1996 Lynx Plan ...................................................................................... 6 1.3 Lynx Natural History ........................................................................................................ 8 Description of the species ..................................................................................................... 8 Foraging ................................................................................................................................ 8 Distribution ............................................................................................................................ 9 Habitat Relationships .......................................................................................................... 12 1.4 Conservation Issues ...................................................................................................... 13 Fur Harvest.......................................................................................................................... 13 Metapopulation dynamics ................................................................................................... 14 Habitat Management........................................................................................................... 14 2. LYNX HABITAT CLASSIFICATION .......................................................... 15 2.1 Open Areas ..................................................................................................................... 18 2.2 Lynx Habitat Matrix ........................................................................................................ 18 Temporary Non-Lynx Areas ................................................................................................ 18 Forested Habitat.................................................................................................................. 19 3. PLANNING APPROACH ........................................................................... 23 3.1 Assumptions................................................................................................................... 23 3.2 Planning Scales .............................................................................................................. 24 3.3 Desired Future Landscape Condition .......................................................................... 26 Modeling.............................................................................................................................. 26 4. LYNX HABITAT MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES........................................ 29 4.1 Ecoprovinces and Ecodivisions ................................................................................... 30 Ecoprovince Guidelines ..................................................................................................... 32 4.2 Lynx Management Zones............................................................................................... 41 Lynx Management Zone Guidelines ................................................................................... 41 4.3 Lynx Analysis Units ....................................................................................................... 43 Lynx Analysis Unit (LAU) Guidelines .................................................................................. 46 Lynx Habitat Management Plan – April 2006 1 Washington State Department of Natural Resources 4.4 Ecological Communities................................................................................................ 49 Ecological Community Guidelines....................................................................................... 50 5. MONITORING AND EVALUATION ........................................................... 61 5.1 Implementation Monitoring ........................................................................................... 61 Reporting of Forest Management Activities ........................................................................ 62 Field Verification of the Lynx Plan Implementation at Stand Level.....................................62 Reporting of Landscape Level Habitat conditions............................................................... 63 5.2 Effectiveness Monitoring............................................................................................... 63 Forage, Travel and Denning Habitat................................................................................... 63 Snowshoe Hare Habitat Use ............................................................................................. 64 Cooperative Research ........................................................................................................ 64 5.3 Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 65 APPENDIX 1 - IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING REPORT FOR THE PERIOD 1996-2004.......................................................................................................... 67 1. Implementation Planning................................................................................................. 67 1.1 Lynx Plan Training........................................................................................................ 67 1.2 Travel Route Identification ........................................................................................... 67 1.3 Denning Habitat Identification ...................................................................................... 68 1.4 Habitat Considerations in Timber Sales....................................................................... 68 1.5 Loomis State Forest Planning Activities....................................................................... 68 1.6 Negotiations with USFWS for “Take Avoidance” letter ................................................ 69 2. Forest Management Activities......................................................................................... 69 2.1 Timber Sales ................................................................................................................ 69 2.2 Other Silvicultural Activities.......................................................................................... 69 2.3 Road Construction and Management .......................................................................... 75 3. Field Verification of the Lynx Plan Implementation at Stand Level ............................ 77 4. Results from Implementation Monitoring at the Landscape Level ............................. 82 APPENDIX 2 - EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING REPORT: EVALUATING SNOWSHOE HARE USE OF NORTHEASTERN WASHINGTON FOREST TYPES 1997-2002 ............................................................................................. 85 1. Introduction......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MINNESOTA MUSTELIDS Young
    By Blane Klemek MINNESOTA MUSTELIDS Young Naturalists the Slinky,Stinky Weasel family ave you ever heard anyone call somebody a weasel? If you have, then you might think Hthat being called a weasel is bad. But weasels are good hunters, and they are cunning, curious, strong, and fierce. Weasels and their relatives are mammals. They belong to the order Carnivora (meat eaters) and the family Mustelidae, also known as the weasel family or mustelids. Mustela means weasel in Latin. With 65 species, mustelids are the largest family of carnivores in the world. Eight mustelid species currently make their homes in Minnesota: short-tailed weasel, long-tailed weasel, least weasel, mink, American marten, OTTERS BY DANIEL J. COX fisher, river otter, and American badger. Minnesota Conservation Volunteer May–June 2003 n e MARY CLAY, DEMBINSKY t PHOTO ASSOCIATES r mammals a WEASELS flexible m Here are two TOM AND PAT LEESON specialized mustelid feet. b One is for climb- ou can recognize a ing and the other for hort-tailed weasels (Mustela erminea), long- The long-tailed weasel d most mustelids g digging. Can you tell tailed weasels (M. frenata), and least weasels eats the most varied e food of all weasels. It by their tubelike r which is which? (M. nivalis) live throughout Minnesota. In also lives in the widest Ybodies and their short Stheir northern range, including Minnesota, weasels variety of habitats and legs. Some, such as badgers, hunting. Otters and minks turn white in winter. In autumn, white hairs begin climates across North are heavy and chunky. Some, are excellent swimmers that hunt to replace their brown summer coat.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Habits of Black Bears in Suburban Versus Rural Alabama
    Food Habits of Black Bears in Suburban versus Rural Alabama Laura Garland, Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn, AL 36849 Connor Ellis, 18832 #1 Gulf Boulevard Indian Shores, FL 33785 Todd Steury, Auburn University, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn, AL 36849 Abstract: Little is known about the food habits of black bears (Ursus americanus) in Alabama. A major concern is the amount of human influence in the diet of these bears as human and bear populations continue to expand in a finite landscape and bear-human interactions are increasing. To better understand dietary habits of bears, 135 scats were collected during late August to late November 2011–2014. Food items were classified into the cat- egories of fruit, nuts/seeds, insects, anthropogenic, animal hairs, fawn bones, and other. Plant items were classified down to the lowest possible taxon via visual and DNA analysis as this category composed the majority of scat volumes. Frequency of occurrence was calculated for each food item. The most commonly occurring foods included: Nyssa spp. (black gum, 25.2%), Poaceae family (grass, 24.5%), Quercus spp. (acorn, 22.4%), and Vitis spp. (muscadine grape, 8.4%). Despite the proximity of these bear populations to suburban locations, during our sampling period we found that their diet primarily comprised vegetation, not anthropogenic food; while 100% of scat samples contained vegetation, only 19.6% of scat samples contained corn and no other anthropogenic food sources were detected. Based on a Fisher’s exact test, dietary composition did not differ between bears living in subur- ban areas compared to bears occupying more rural areas (P = 0.3891).
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife; Threatened and Endangered Species
    2009 SNF Monitoring and Evaluation Report Wildlife; Threatened and Endangered Species Introduction The data described in this report outlines the history, actions, procedures, and direction that the Superior National Forest (aka the Forest or SNF) has implemented in support of the Gray Wolf Recovery Plan and Lynx Conservation Assessment and Strategy (LCAS). The Forest contributes towards the conservation and recovery of the two federally listed threatened and endangered species: Canada lynx and gray wolf, through habitat and access management practices, collaboration with other federal and state agencies, as well as researchers, tribal bands and non-governmental partners. Canada lynx On 24 March 2000, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated the Canada lynx a “Threatened” species in the lower 48 states. From 2004-2009 the main sources of information about Canada lynx for the SNF included the following: • Since 2003 the Canada lynx study has been investigating key questions needed to contribute to the recovery and conservation of Canada lynx in the Western Great Lakes. Study methods are described in detail in the annual study progress report available online at the following address: http://www.nrri.umn.edu/lynx/ . These methods have included collecting information on distribution, snow tracking lynx, tracking on the ground and in the air radio-collared lynx, studying habitat use, collecting and analyzing genetic samples (for example, from hair or scat) and conducting pellet counts of snowshoe hare (the primary prey). • In 2006 permanent snow tracking routes were established across the Forest. The main objective is to maintain a standardized, repeatable survey to monitor lynx population indices and trends.
    [Show full text]
  • Eurasian Lynx – Your Essential Brief
    Eurasian lynx – Your essential brief Background Q: Are lynx native to Britain? A: Based on archaeological evidence, the range of the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) included Britain until at least 1,300 years ago. It is difficult to be precise about when or why lynx became extinct here, but it was almost certainly related to human activity – deforestation removed their preferred habitat, and also that of their prey, thus reducing prey availability. These declines in prey species may have been exacerbated by human hunting. Q: Where do they live now? A: Across Europe, Scandinavia, Russia, northern China and Southeast Asia. The range used to include other areas of Western Europe, including Britain, where they are no longer present. Q: How many are there? A: There are thought to be around 50,000 in the world, of which 9,000 – 10,000 live in Europe. They are considered to be a species of least concern by the IUCN. Modern range of the Eurasian lynx Q: How big are they? A: Lynx are on average around 1m in length, 75cm tall and around 20kg, with the males being slightly larger than the females. They can live to 15 years old, but this is rare in the wild. Q: What do they eat? A: The preferred prey of the lynx are the smaller deer species, primarily the roe deer. Lynx may also prey upon other deer species, including chamois, sika deer, smaller red deer, muntjac and fallow deer. Q: Do they eat other things? A: Yes. Lynx prey on many other species when their preferred prey is scarce, including rabbits, hares, foxes, wildcats, squirrel, pine marten, domestic pets, sheep, goats and reared gamebirds.
    [Show full text]
  • FISHER Pekania Pennanti
    WILDLIFE IN CONNECTICUT WILDLIFE FACT SHEET FISHER Pekania pennanti Background J. FUSCO © PAUL In the nineteenth century, fishers became scarce due to forest logging, clearing for agriculture, and overexploitation. By the 1900s, fishers were considered extirpated from the state. Reforestation and changes in land-use practices have restored the suitability of the fisher’s habitat in part of its historic range, allowing a population to recolonize the northeastern section of the state. Fishers did not recolonize suitable habitat in northwestern Connecticut, since the region was isolated from a source population. Fishers were rare in western Massachusetts, and the developed and agricultural habitats of the Connecticut River Valley were a barrier to westward expansion by fishers in northeastern Connecticut. A project to reintroduce this native mammal into northwestern Connecticut was initiated by the Wildlife Division in 1988. Funds from reimbursement of trapping wild turkeys in Connecticut for release in Maine were used to purchase fishers caught by cooperating trappers in New Hampshire and Vermont. In what is termed a "soft release," fishers were penned and fed at the release site for a couple of weeks prior to being released. Through radio and snow tracking, biologists later found that the fishers that were released in northwestern Connecticut had high survival rates and successfully reproduced. As a result of this project, a viable, self-sustaining population of this native mammal is now established in western Connecticut. Fishers found throughout eastern Connecticut are a result of natural range expansion. In 2005, Connecticut instituted its first modern day regulated trapping season for fishers. Most northern states have regulated fisher trapping seasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Large Carnivores in Serbia
    Status of large carnivores in Serbia Duško Ćirović Faculty of Biology University of Belgrade, Belgrade Status and threats of large carnivores in Serbia LC have differend distribution, status and population trends Gray wolf Eurasian Linx Brown Bear (Canis lupus) (Lynx lynx ) (Ursus arctos) Distribution of Brown Bear in Serbia Carpathian Dinaric-Pindos East Balkan Population status of Brown Bear in Serbia Dinaric-Pindos: Distribution 10000 km2 N=100-120 Population increase Range expansion Carpathian East Balkan: Distribution 1400 km2 Dinaric-Pindos N= a few East Balkan Population trend: unknown Carpathian: Distribution 8200 km2 N=8±2 Population stable Legal status of Brown Bear in Serbia According Law on Protection of Nature and the Law on Game and Hunting brown bear in Serbia is strictly protected species. He is under the centralized jurisdiction of the Ministry of Environmental Protection Treats of Brown Bear in Serbia Intensive forestry practice and infrastructure development . Illegal killing Low acceptance due to fear for personal safety Distribution of Gray wolf in Serbia Carpathian Dinaric-Pindos East Balkan Population status of Gray wolf in Serbia Dinaric-Balkan: 2 Carpathian Distribution cca 43500 km N=800-900 Population - stabile/slight increasingly Dinaric Range - slight expansion Carpathian: Distribution 480 km2 (was) Population – a few Population status of Gray wolf in Serbia Carpathian population is still undefined Carpathian Peri-Carpathian Legal status of Gray wolf in Serbia According the Law on Game and Hunting the gray wolf in majority pars of its distribution (south from Sava and Danube rivers) is game species with closing season from April 15th to July 1st.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Fur Harvester Digest 3 SEASON DATES and BAG LIMITS
    2021 Michigan Fur Harvester Digest RAP (Report All Poaching): Call or Text (800) 292-7800 Michigan.gov/Trapping Table of Contents Furbearer Management ...................................................................3 Season Dates and Bag Limits ..........................................................4 License Types and Fees ....................................................................6 License Types and Fees by Age .......................................................6 Purchasing a License .......................................................................6 Apprentice & Youth Hunting .............................................................9 Fur Harvester License .....................................................................10 Kill Tags, Registration, and Incidental Catch .................................11 When and Where to Hunt/Trap ...................................................... 14 Hunting Hours and Zone Boundaries .............................................14 Hunting and Trapping on Public Land ............................................18 Safety Zones, Right-of-Ways, Waterways .......................................20 Hunting and Trapping on Private Land ...........................................20 Equipment and Fur Harvester Rules ............................................. 21 Use of Bait When Hunting and Trapping ........................................21 Hunting with Dogs ...........................................................................21 Equipment Regulations ...................................................................22
    [Show full text]
  • Black Bear Ecology Life Systems – Interactions Within Ecosystems a Guide for Grade 7 Teachers
    BEAR WISE Black Bear Ecology Life Systems – Interactions Within Ecosystems A Guide for Grade 7 Teachers Ministry of Natural Resources BEAR WISE Introduction Welcome to Black Bear Ecology, Life Systems – Interactions Within Ecosystems, a Guide for Grade 7 Teachers. With a focus on the fascinating world of black bears, this program provides teachers with a classroom ready resource. Linked to the current Science and Technology curriculum (Life Systems strand), the Black Bear Ecology Guide for teachers includes: I background readings on habitats, ecosystems and the species within; food chains and food webs; ecosystem change; black bear habitat needs and ecology and bear-human interactions; I unit at a glance; I four lesson plans and suggested activities; I resources including a glossary; list of books and web sites and information sheets about black bears. At the back of this booklet, you will find a compact disk. It includes in Portable Document Format (PDF) the English and French versions of this Grade 7 unit; the Grades 2 and 4 units; the information sheets and the Are You Bear Wise? eBook (2005). This program aims to generate awareness about black bears – their biological needs; their behaviour and how human action influences bears. It is an initiative of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. BEAR WISE Acknowledgements The Ministry of Natural Resources would like to thank the following people for their help in developing the Black Bear Ecology Education Program. This education program would not have been possible without their contributions
    [Show full text]
  • Lynx, Felis Lynx, Predation on Red Foxes, Vulpes Vulpes, Caribou
    Lynx, Fe/is lynx, predation on Red Foxes, Vulpes vulpes, Caribou, Rangifer tarandus, and Dall Sheep, Ovis dalli, in Alaska ROBERT 0. STEPHENSON, 1 DANIEL V. GRANGAARD,2 and JOHN BURCH3 1Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 1300 College Road, Fairbanks, Alaska, 99701 2Alaska Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 305, Tok, Alaska 99780 JNational Park Service, P.O. Box 9, Denali National Park, Alaska 99755 Stephenson, Robert 0., Daniel Y. Grangaard, and John Burch. 1991. Lynx, Fe/is lynx, predation on Red Foxes, Vulpes vulpes, Caribou, Rangifer tarandus, and Dall Sheep, Ovis dalli, in Alaska. Canadian Field-Naturalist 105(2): 255- 262. Observations of Canada Lynx (Fe/is lynx) predation on Red Foxes ( Vulpes vulpes) and medium-sized ungulates during winter are reviewed. Characteristics of I 3 successful attacks on Red Foxes and 16 cases of predation on Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) and Dall Sheep (Ovis dalli) suggest that Lynx are capable of killing even adults of these species, with foxes being killed most easily. The occurrence of Lynx predation on these relatively large prey appears to be greatest when Snowshoe Hares (Lepus americanus) are scarce. Key Words: Canada Lynx, Fe/is lynx, Red Fox, Vulpes vulpes, Caribou, Rangifer tarandus, Dall Sheep, Ovis dalli, predation, Alaska. Although the European Lynx (Felis lynx lynx) quently reach 25° C in summer and -10 to -40° C in regularly kills large prey (Haglund 1966; Pullianen winter. Snow depths are generally below 80 cm, 1981), the Canada Lynx (Felis lynx canadensis) and snow usually remains loosely packed except at relies largely on small game, primarily Snowshoe high elevations.
    [Show full text]
  • PICA Project Report (Action A2.2 & 2.3)
    PICA Project Report (Action A2.2 & 2.3) Investigation of Pallas’s cat activity patterns and temporal interactions with sympatric species Authors: Katarzyna Ruta, Gustaf Samelius, David Barclay, Emma Nygren PICA - “Conservation of the Pallas’s cat through capacity building, research, and global planning” 1. Introduction: 1.1 Activity patterns of wild felids: Activity patterns form a part of species’ adaptation to their environment (Beltran & Delibes, 1994) and are therefore a fundamental aspect of animal behaviour (Nielsen, 1983; Weller & Bennett, 2001). Felids are generally considered to be crepuscular and nocturnal in their activity (Kitchener, 1991), although they are well adapted to function in a wide range of light conditions (Sunquist & Sunquist, 2002). Numerous abiotic pressures and biotic interactions are known to shape the temporal behaviour of (cat-like) carnivores (Marinho et al., 2018), including changes in temperature (Beltran & Delibes, 1994; Podolski et al., 2013), light (Huck et al., 2017; Heurich et al., 2014) and season (Podolski et al., 2013; Manfredi et al., 2011), sex and reproductive status of the animal (Kolbe & Squires, 2007; Schmidt, 1999; Schmidt et al., 2009), predation risk (Caro, 2005; Farías et al., 2012) and human disturbance (Wolf & Ale, 2009; Ale & Brown, 2009). Owing to the dietary constraints of carnivores whose preys have their own well-defined circadian rhythms (Halle, 2000; Zielinski, 2000), the availability and vulnerability of prey is, however, considered as one of the main influences on predator temporal activity (Zielinski, 1988; Lodé, 1995). According to Optimal Foraging Theory, predators are expected to synchronize their daily activity with the activity of their most profitable prey, increasing the probability of encounters while reducing energy expenditure (MacArthur & Pianka, 1966; Monterroso et al., 2013; Emmons, 1987).
    [Show full text]
  • Estimating Sustainable Bycatch Rates for California Sea Lion Populations in the Gulf of California
    Contributed Paper Estimating Sustainable Bycatch Rates for California Sea Lion Populations in the Gulf of California JARED G. UNDERWOOD,∗‡ CLAUDIA J. HERNANDEZ CAMACHO,∗† DAVID AURIOLES-GAMBOA,† AND LEAH R. GERBER∗ ∗Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Science, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, College & University Drive, Tempe, AZ 85287-1501, U.S.A. †Centro Interdisciplinario de Ciencias Marinas-IPN, Av. IPN s/n Col. Playa Palo de Santa Rita, La Paz BCS 23096, Mexico´ Abstract: Commercial and subsistence fisheries pressure is increasing in the Gulf of California, Mexico. One consequence often associated with high levels of fishing pressure is an increase in bycatch of marine mammals and birds. Fisheries bycatch has contributed to declines in several pinniped species and may be affecting the California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) population in the Gulf of California. We used data on fisheries and sea lion entanglement in gill nets to estimate current fishing pressure and fishing rates under which viable sea lion populations could be sustained at 11 breeding sites in the Gulf of California. We used 3 models to estimate sustainable bycatch rates: a simple population-growth model, a demographic model, and an estimate of the potential biological removal. All models were based on life history and census data collected for sea lions in the Gulf of California. We estimated the current level of fishing pressure and the acceptable level of fishing required to maintain viable sea lion populations as the number of fishing days (1 fisher/boat setting and retrieving 1 day’s worth of nets) per year. Estimates of current fishing pressure ranged from 101 (0–405) fishing days around the Los Machos breeding site to 1887 (842–3140) around the Los Islotes rookery.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Avoid Incidental Take of American Marten
    How to Avoid Incidental Take Of American Marten While Trapping or Snaring Mink and other Furbearers. Jon Stone The purpose of this information is to reduce injury and mortality to the Endangered American Marten population caused by trapping mink and/or other furbearers. Marten are similar in appearance and habits to mink, and their ranges overlap with other furbearer species, and with each other. Therefore, it is important for trappers to know how to distinguish marten from mink, to recognize their preferred habitat types, and to avoid capturing or harvesting marten. Trappers must also learn what to do if a marten is caught incidentally. American marten Current Status Researchers speculate the current American marten (Martes americana) population on Cape Breton Island may be less than 50 animals. Consequently, in the summer of 2001, the marten population on Cape Breton Island was provincially listed as "endangered" under the Nova Scotia Endangered Species Act. Thought to be extirpated from the mainland, several marten re-introductions have been attempted. It seems these reintroductions have been successful, as there have been some very recent records of marten in southwest Nova Scotia. The status of the marten on the mainland is considered "data deficient," (meaning more research is required before giving it a designation). The harvesting of marten is not permitted in Nova Scotia. Time is of the Essence Small, localized populations, like the marten on Cape Breton Island, are vulnerable to local extinction. Factors such as inbreeding (a genetic effect), as well as habitat loss, accidental capture, starvation, and certain random events like disease, fire, and unusual weather events could eliminate the entire population.
    [Show full text]