DOCSLIB.ORG

Solving Montana's Moose Mysteries

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Solving Montana's Moose Mysteries SOLVING MONTANA’S MOOSE MYSTERIES FWP researchers search for answers to help conserve these popular big game animals in the face of rising temperatures, shrinking habitat, and more predators. BY TOM DICKSON DONALD M. JONES 12 | SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2019 | FWP.MT.GOV/MTOUTDOORS MONTANA OUTDOORS | 13 each year, compared to 25,000 elk and 95,000 mule deer and white-tailed deer. Moose managers have long been frus- In winter, the Big Hole valley looks like a trated by the scant information, especially re- garding population sizes and trends, which vast white lake lapping against the Pioneer help them determine hunting harvest quotas. “It’s a major dilemma,” says Ryan Rauscher, Mountains to the east and the Beaverhead FWP wildlife biologist in Conrad, whose Mountains to the west. The 15-mile-wide expanse of work area includes moose range along the Rocky Mountain Front. “If a moose popula- snow sits atop a mix of sagebrush prairie, pasture, tion is trending down and we overharvest by hayfields, and willow swamp. Within this broad valley issuing too many licenses, we could set re- covery back for years.” and surrounding forests resides one of the state’s At the same time, if managers don’t know largest moose populations. that a population is growing and could sustain additional harvest, they must be On a frigid February morning, the tem- and possessing a noble snout, moose are cautious and issue fewer licenses than if they perature hovering around -20 F., Montana one of western Montana’s most popular had more accurate data. “That means Fish, Wildlife & Parks wildlife research biol- wildlife species. Tourist shops sell sweat- denying some hunters a hunt of a lifetime,” ogist Nick DeCesare and I are driving across shirts, mugs, and postcards adorned with says Rauscher. the valley near Wisdom searching for a cow images of this largest member of the deer The need for information grew in the moose he has radio-collared. Two miles out family. “Landowners, hunters, residents, mid-1990s, as hunters and others started of town, he parks his pickup along a frozen nonresidents—you name it—I’ve found that reporting fewer moose in parts of western county road. After picking up a strong signal almost everyone loves moose,” says Jesse Montana. Hunter success rates began with his radio receiver, we wade through Newby, an FWP wildlife research technician declining too, as did annual harvest. The hot, knee-deep snow in pursuit. working with DeCesare. dry years of the early 2000s raised “There,” DeCesare says a few minutes Despite the popularity of Alces alces, Mon- concerns further. Moose require cool, wet later, pointing to two distant dark shapes. A tana wildlife managers lack information about climates and can overheat in summer cow moose sporting a bright white collar the species’ diet, movements, pregnancy rates, temperatures above 60 degrees. Large and her calf pause against a stand of wil- and other basic “vital rates.” FWP lacked mammals that need Alaskan weather were lows. Then they amble off, long legs carrying funds to study a species that generates rela- enduring Arizona-like conditions. them easily through the deep drifts. Trudg- tively little hunting license revenue. Only British Columbia, Maine, Vermont, ing after the pair, DeCesare gathers a hand- about 300 moose are harvested in Montana Wyo- ming, and other provinces and states ful of the cow’s fresh thumb-sized droppings to be tested for progesterone, indicating pregnancy. DeCesare, who earned his doctorate in wildlife biology at the University of Mon- tana, makes his way back to his truck. He mentions that he’s been following this par- ticular moose for six years, watching her raise calves to young adulthood as part of a study he’s doing with other research scien- tists. “It’s great getting all this broad popu- lation-wide data that will eventually be S; DONALD M. JONES used to manage moose,” he says. “But it’s also pretty neat that we get to intimately OUTDOOR OFFICE know these individual moose year after FWP wildlife research biologist Nick DeCesare, who runs the 10- MONTANA OUTDOOR MONTANA year. They’re such cool animals.” year moose study, logs data after gathering droppings from a cow moose in the Big Hole WELL-LOVED valley. Chemical analysis will determine if Few would disagree. Nearly as large as a she’s pregnant. Later surveys will monitor horse, graceful and stately in movement, whether the cow gives birth, and how well the calf (or calves, if twins) survives (right). LEFT TO RIGHT: TOM DICKSON/ TOM RIGHT: LEFT TO 14 | SEPTEMBER–OCTOBER 2019 | FWP.MT.GOV/MTOUTDOORS MONTANA OUTDOORS | 15 FACTORS AFFECTING also were reporting moose declines (though if so, whether to single calves or twins. The clude Safari Club International, The Nature VARIABLES MOOSE POPULATIONS in some parts of North America, including researchers check a few months later to Conservancy, and dozens of local landown- northeastern Montana, numbers were in- monitor calf survival, then fly again the fol- ers, as well as other wildlife agencies in the INFLUENCES FACTORS AFFECTING POPULATION POPULATION TREND creasing). A population in Minnesota, one of lowing March to see if the young are still United States and Canada studying moose the largest in the lower 48 states, crashed alive and thus have been “recruited” into and sharing results. Successful moose HUNTER HARVEST NUTRITIONAL CONDITION from roughly 4,000 in the mid-1980s to the population. “The first year is critical,” hunters also assist by sending in blood sam- almost zero in the mid-2000s. “We started Newby says. “That’s when calves are most ples and measuring rump fat to provide addi- PREDATION to wonder: Is there a continent-wide trend vulnerable to predators, disease, and mal- tional data. ADULT FEMALE SURVIVAL that Montana is a part of?” says Justin Gude, nutrition. If they make it through their first FORAGE & HABITAT or head of FWP’s wildlife research program. MAJOR FINDINGS ADULT FEMALE FECUNDITY Meanwhile, wolf and other large carni- Now on year seven of the study, researchers PARASITES & DISEASE vore numbers were increasing. And logging, have already learned much about Montana’s which opens forests to sunlight that gener- moose. Perhaps most significantly, none of HEAT STRESS & SNOW CALF SURVIVAL ates more willows and other shrubs that the three studied populations appears in dire moose prefer, had declined for decades. straits. “We didn’t know what we’d find, so The main factors that determine whether a moose population increases or decreases: survival of adult females (which produce young and thus drive a population), Were these factors driving moose numbers that’s definitely good news,” DeCesare says. cow moose pregnancy rates (fecundity), and calf survival. Driving fecundity and calf survival is the animals’ health (nutritional condition), which is influenced by down? What about parasites—winter ticks, The main discovery in the Big Hole is that habitat, disease, and stress; other influences are hunter harvest and predation. FWP researchers are monitoring and measuring all these influences and factors. brain worms, arterial worms, and liver many adult moose are being killed by three- flukes—to which moose are particularly vul- inch-long parasites transmitted from horse- nerable? “With so many possible factors, it flies. These arterial ormsw congregate in the 1.00 was impossible to figure out the right course arteries at the base of the animal’s head and Population growth rates: 2013–2018 +4% +8% +12% +16% +20% of action for managing moose,” says Gude. apparently restrict blood flow to the brain. This chart shows the two main factors affecting “We needed answers.” Researchers found Big Hole pregnancy moose populations: cow survival rates and rates 0.95 -4% MOOSE MONITORING Nick DeCesare with rates and calf survival comparable to the of calf recruitment (survival to age one). The dark +3% a cow moose tranquilized from a dart fired line in the middle indicates a stable population. 10 YEARS, 3 AREAS other areas, but that hasn’t fully offset the -8% STABLE POPULATION +11% from a helicopter. After drawing blood Populations above the line are growing, and the one 0.90 Since 2013, FWP research scientists have decline in adult cow numbers. The result has samples and taking body measurements, below the line is shrinking slightly. Note that even worked to answer these and other moose he attaches a collar fitted with a radio been a slight annual population decline of though calf survival in the Cabinet-Salish is relatively -12% management questions with an unprece- transmitter. Transmitters on 162 moose 3 percent over the past six years. “The two low, the population is still increasing at 3% per year .085 -3% dented 10-year study. Its two primary goals tracked in the three study areas (below) drivers of moose populations are adult due to the high cow survival. allow scientists to locate individual animals -16% are (1) understand the relative importance of female mortality and calf survival,” Newby On the Front, both rates are and see which habitats they use and how high, leading to an 11% adult cow survival, cow pregnancy, calf sur- explains. “And of the two, cow mortality is 0.80 well they survive from year to year. annual population growth. survival female Adult -20% vival, and other factors driving moose popu- the biggest factor. That’s why the Big Hole lation ups and downs; and (2) find a cost- population is struggling a bit.” n Cabinet-Salish Moose Population Ecology Study Areas 0.75 effective way to monitor moose numbers in Researchers’ most important finding in n Big Hole Valley 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 .040 0.50 the future.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Distribution and Population Characteristics of Mule Deer Along
    Distribution and population characteristics of mule deer along the East Front, northcentral Montana by Wayne Frederick Kasworm A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fish and Wildlife Management Montana State University © Copyright by Wayne Frederick Kasworm (1981) Abstract: This study was conducted from June 1979 to September 1980 on the Rocky Mountain East Front of northcentral Montana. It was the first phase of a 2 part investigation designed to provide quantitative baseline information on mule deer seasonal distribution, movements, population status and trend, and habitat usage on a representative portion of the East Front subject to oil and gas development. Areas used by deer during average and severe winters remained relatively constant during the last 3 years. Deer displayed a high degree of fidelity to seasonal ranges. On this basis, 6 essentially independent populations were delineated by winter range origin. Movement to summer home ranges appeared rapid and direct via distinct migration corridors. Summer distribution indicated that 3 subpopulations could be delineated for each winter range. Mean summer home range size for females was larger in 1979 (7.2 km^2) than 1980 (2.7 km^2). Fall transitional ranges were identified. The pattern of transitional range use appeared to concentrate deer from 1 of the 3 subpopulations during hunting season. Age distribution of a sample of 69 deer indicated an adult population structure of 26% males and 74% females. Poor representation of the 1 1/2, 2 1/2, and 6 1/2-year-old age-classes was noted.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area Expansion
    Land Protection Plan Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area Expansion February 2011 Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge Complex 922 Bootlegger Trail Great Falls, Montana 59404-6133 406 / 727 7400 http://www.fws.gov/bentonlake and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 6, Division of Refuge Planning P. O. Box 25486 DFC Denver, Colorado 80225 303 / 236 4378 303 / 236 4792 fax http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/planning/lpp.htm CITATION U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Land Protection Plan, Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area. Lakewood, Colorado: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region. 70p. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service policy, a land protection plan has been prepared to analyze the effects of expanding the Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area in western Montana. ■ The Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Area Expansion Land Protection Plan describes the priorities for acquiring up to an additional 125,000 acres in conservation easements within an expanded project boundary of 918,600 acres. Note: Information contained in the maps within this document is approximate and does not represent a legal survey. Ownership information may not be complete Contents Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................................. iii 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Habitat Selection by Moose and Elk in the Besa-Prophet Area of Northern British Columbia
    ALCES VOL. 44, 2008 GILLINGHAM AND PARKER – HABITAT SELECTION BY MOOSE AND ELK DIFFERENTIAL HABITAT SELECTION BY MOOSE AND ELK IN THE BESA-PROPHET AREA OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA Michael P. Gillingham and Katherine L. Parker Natural Resources and Environmental Studies Institute, University of Northern British Columbia, 3333 University Way, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada V2N 4Z9, email: [email protected] ABSTRACT: Elk (Cervus elaphus) populations are increasing in the Besa-Prophet area of northern British Columbia, coinciding with the use of prescribed burns to increase quality of habitat for ungu- lates. Moose (Alces alces) and elk are now the 2 large-biomass species in this multi-ungulate, multi- predator system. Using global positioning satellite (GPS) collars on 14 female moose and 13 female elk, remote-sensing imagery of vegetation, and assessments of predation risk for wolves (Canis lupus) and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), we examined habitat use and selection. Seasonal ranges were typi- cally smallest for moose during calving and for elk during winter and late winter. Both species used largest ranges in summer. Moose and elk moved to lower elevations from winter to late winter, but subsequent calving strategies differed. During calving, moose moved to lowest elevations of the year, whereas elk moved back to higher elevations. Moose generally selected for mid-elevations and against steep slopes; for Stunted spruce habitat in late winter; for Pine-spruce in summer; and for Subalpine during fall and winter. Most recorded moose locations were in Pine-spruce during late winter, calv- ing, and summer, and in Subalpine during fall and winter.
    [Show full text]
  • BISON Workshop Slides
    Bison Workshop Implicit, parallel, fully-coupled nuclear fuel performance analysis Computational Mechanics and Materials Department Idaho National Laboratory Table of ContentsI Bison Overview . 4 Getting Started with Bison . 19 Git...........................................................20 Building Bison . 28 Cloning to a New Machine . 30 Contributing to Bison. .31 External Users. .35 Thermomechanics Basics . 37 Heat Conduction . 40 Solid Mechanics . 55 Contact . 66 Fuels Specific Models . 80 Example Problem . 89 Mesh Generation. .132 Running Bison . 147 Postprocessing. .159 Best Practices and Solver Options (Advanced Topic) . 224 Adding a New Material Model to Bison . 239 2 / 277 Table of ContentsII Adding a Regression Test to bison/test . 261 Additional Information . 273 References . 276 3 / 277 Bison Overview Bison Team Members • Rich Williamson • Al Casagranda – [email protected] – [email protected] • Steve Novascone • Stephanie Pitts – [email protected] – [email protected] • Jason Hales • Adam Zabriskie – [email protected] – [email protected] • Ben Spencer • Wenfeng Liu – [email protected] – [email protected] • Giovanni Pastore • Ahn Mai – [email protected] – [email protected] • Danielle Petersen • Jack Galloway – [email protected] – [email protected] • Russell Gardner • Christopher Matthews – [email protected] – [email protected] • Kyle Gamble – [email protected] 5 / 277 Fuel Behavior: Introduction At beginning of life, a fuel element is quite simple... Michel et al., Eng. Frac. Mech., 75, 3581 (2008) Olander, p. 323 (1978) =) Fuel Fracture Fission Gas but irradiation brings about substantial complexity... Olander, p. 584 (1978) Bentejac et al., PCI Seminar (2004) Multidimensional Contact and Stress Corrosion Deformation Cracking Cladding Nakajima et al., Nuc.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Western Wyoming: a Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and Educators
    USDA United States Department of Agriculture Research Natural Areas on Forest Service National Forest System Lands Rocky Mountain Research Station in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, General Technical Report RMRS-CTR-69 Utah, and Western Wyoming: February 2001 A Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and E'ducators Angela G. Evenden Melinda Moeur J. Stephen Shelly Shannon F. Kimball Charles A. Wellner Abstract Evenden, Angela G.; Moeur, Melinda; Shelly, J. Stephen; Kimball, Shannon F.; Wellner, Charles A. 2001. Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Western Wyoming: A Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and Educators. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-69. Ogden, UT: U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 84 p. This guidebook is intended to familiarize land resource managers, scientists, educators, and others with Research Natural Areas (RNAs) managed by the USDA Forest Service in the Northern Rocky Mountains and lntermountain West. This guidebook facilitates broader recognitionand use of these valuable natural areas by describing the RNA network, past and current research and monitoring, management, and how to use RNAs. About The Authors Angela G. Evenden is biological inventory and monitoring project leader with the National Park Service -NorthernColorado Plateau Network in Moab, UT. She was formerly the Natural Areas Program Manager for the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Northern Region and lntermountain Region of the USDA Forest Service. Melinda Moeur is Research Forester with the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain ResearchStation in Moscow, ID, and one of four Research Natural Areas Coordinators from the Rocky Mountain Research Station. J. Stephen Shelly is Regional Botanist and Research Natural Areas Coordinator with the USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Headquarters Office in Missoula, MT.
    [Show full text]
  • Horned Animals
    Horned Animals In This Issue In this issue of Wild Wonders you will discover the differences between horns and antlers, learn about the different animals in Alaska who have horns, compare and contrast their adaptations, and discover how humans use horns to make useful and decorative items. Horns and antlers are available from local ADF&G offices or the ARLIS library for teachers to borrow. Learn more online at: alaska.gov/go/HVNC Contents Horns or Antlers! What’s the Difference? 2 Traditional Uses of Horns 3 Bison and Muskoxen 4-5 Dall’s Sheep and Mountain Goats 6-7 Test Your Knowledge 8 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, 2018 Issue 8 1 Sometimes people use the terms horns and antlers in the wrong manner. They may say “moose horns” when they mean moose antlers! “What’s the difference?” they may ask. Let’s take a closer look and find out how antlers and horns are different from each other. After you read the information below, try to match the animals with the correct description. Horns Antlers • Made out of bone and covered with a • Made out of bone. keratin layer (the same material as our • Grow and fall off every year. fingernails and hair). • Are grown only by male members of the • Are permanent - they do not fall off every Cervid family (hoofed animals such as year like antlers do. deer), except for female caribou who also • Both male and female members in the grow antlers! Bovid family (cloven-hoofed animals such • Usually branched.
    [Show full text]
  • Denudation History and Internal Structure of the Front Range and Wet Mountains, Colorado, Based on Apatite-Fission-Track Thermoc
    NEW MEXICO BUREAU OF GEOLOGY & MINERAL RESOURCES, BULLETIN 160, 2004 41 Denudation history and internal structure of the Front Range and Wet Mountains, Colorado, based on apatite­fission­track thermochronology 1 2 1Department of Earth and Environmental Science, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, NM 87801Shari A. Kelley and Charles E. Chapin 2New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, NM 87801 Abstract An apatite fission­track (AFT) partial annealing zone (PAZ) that developed during Late Cretaceous time provides a structural datum for addressing questions concerning the timing and magnitude of denudation, as well as the structural style of Laramide deformation, in the Front Range and Wet Mountains of Colorado. AFT cooling ages are also used to estimate the magnitude and sense of dis­ placement across faults and to differentiate between exhumation and fault­generated topography. AFT ages at low elevationX along the eastern margin of the southern Front Range between Golden and Colorado Springs are from 100 to 270 Ma, and the mean track lengths are short (10–12.5 µm). Old AFT ages (> 100 Ma) are also found along the western margin of the Front Range along the Elkhorn thrust fault. In contrast AFT ages of 45–75 Ma and relatively long mean track lengths (12.5–14 µm) are common in the interior of the range. The AFT ages generally decrease across northwest­trending faults toward the center of the range. The base of a fossil PAZ, which separates AFT cooling ages of 45– 70 Ma at low elevations from AFT ages > 100 Ma at higher elevations, is exposed on the south side of Pikes Peak, on Mt.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Bison in Alaska
    THE AMERICAN BISON IN ALASKA THE AMERICAN BISON IN ALASKA Game Division March 1980 ~~!"·e· ·nw ,-·-· '(' INDEX Page No. 1 cr~:;'~;:,\L I ··~''l·'O'K'\L\TTO:J. Tk·:;criptiun . , • 1 Lif<.: History .• . 1 Novcme:nts and :food Habits . 2 HISTO:~Y or BISO:J IN ALASKA .• • 2 Prehistoric to A.D. 1500. • 3 A.D. 1500 to Present. • 3 Transplants • • . .. 3 BISON ,\.'m AGRICl:LTURE IN ALASK.-'1.. • 4 Conflicts at Delta... , • • 4 The Keys ta Successful Operation of the Delta Junction Bi:;on Runge • . 5 DELT;\ JU!\CTION BISON RANGE .. • • . 6 Delta Land Management Plan. • . 6 Present Status...•• 7 Bison Range Development Plans • . 7 DO~~STICATIO~ Or BISON . 8 BISU:j AND OUTrlOOR RECREATIOi'l 9 Hunting . • • •••• 9 Plw Lot;r::Iphy and Viewing 10 AHF \S IN ALA:;KA SUITABLE FOR BISON TR.fu'\SPLANTS 10 11 13 The ,\ncri c1n bL~on (Bison bison) is one of the largest and most distinctive an1n..·'ells · found in North America. A full-gro\-.'11 bull stands 5 to 6 feet at the shnul.1 r, is 9 to 9 1/2 feet long and can weigh more than 2,000 pounds. Full-grown cows are smaller, but have been known to weigh over 1 300 pounds. A bison's head and forequarters are so massive that they s~c~ out of proportion to their smaller hind parts. Bison have a hump formed by a gradual lengthening of the back, or dorsal vertebrae, begin­ ning just ahead of the hips and reaching its maximum height above the front shoulder.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of the Rocky Mountain Foreland Basin: Combined Structural
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2007 DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FORELAND BASIN: COMBINED STRUCTURAL, MINERALOGICAL, AND GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIN EVOLUTION, ROCKY MOUNTAIN THRUST FRONT, NORTHWEST MONTANA Emily Geraghty Ward The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Ward, Emily Geraghty, "DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FORELAND BASIN: COMBINED STRUCTURAL, MINERALOGICAL, AND GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIN EVOLUTION, ROCKY MOUNTAIN THRUST FRONT, NORTHWEST MONTANA" (2007). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 1234. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/1234 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN FORELAND BASIN: COMBINED STRUCTURAL, MINERALOGICAL, AND GEOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIN EVOLUTION ROCKY MOUNTAIN THRUST FRONT, NORTHWEST MONTANA By Emily M. Geraghty Ward B.A., Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA, 1999 M.S., Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 2002 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Geology The University of Montana Missoula, MT Spring 2007 Approved by: Dr. David A. Strobel, Dean Graduate School James W. Sears, Chair Department of Geosciences Julia A. Baldwin Department of Geosciences Marc S. Hendrix Department of Geosciences Steven D.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology and Hydrology, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado
    Bibliography and Index of Geology and Hydrology, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado By FELICIE CHRONIC and JOHN CHRONIC GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1306 Bibliographic citations for more than 1,800 indexed reports, theses, and open-file releases concerning one of the Nation's most rapidly growing areas UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1974 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 74-600045 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D. C. 20402- Price $1.15 (paper cover) Stock Number 2401-02545 PREFACE This bibliography is intended for persons wishing geological information about the Front Range Urban Corridor. It was compiled at the University of Colorado, funded by the U.S. Geological Survey, and is based primarily on references in the Petroleum Research Microfilm Library of the Rocky Mountain Region. Extensive use was made also of U.S. Geological Survey and American Geological Institute bibliographies, as well as those of the Colorado Geological Survey. Most of the material listed was published or completed before July 1, 1972; references to some later articles, as well as to a few which were not found in the first search, are appended at the end of the alphabetical listing. This bibliography may include more references than some users feel are warranted, but the authors felt that the greatest value to the user would result from a comprehensive rather than a selective listing. Hence, we decided to include the most significant synthesizing articles and books in order to give a broad picture of the geology of the Front Range Urban Corridor, and to include also some articles which deal with geology of areas adjacent to, and probably pertinent to, the corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • Moose Alces Americanus
    Wyoming Species Account Moose Alces americanus REGULATORY STATUS USFWS: No special status USFS R2: No special status USFS R4: No special status Wyoming BLM: No special status State of Wyoming: Big Game Animal (see regulations) CONSERVATION RANKS USFWS: No special status WGFD: NSS4 (Bc), Tier II WYNDD: G5, S4 Wyoming Contribution: LOW IUCN: Least Concern STATUS AND RANK COMMENTS Moose (Alces americanus) is classified as a big game animal in Wyoming by W.S. § 23-1-101 1. Harvest is regulated by Chapter 8 of Wyoming Game and Fish Commission Regulations 2. NATURAL HISTORY Taxonomy: Bradley et al. (2014), following Boyeskorov (1999), has recognized North American/Siberian Moose as A. americanus, separate from European Moose (A. alces) based on chromosome differences 3, 4. Bowyer et al. (2000) cautions against using chromosome numbers to designate speciation in large mammals 5. Molecular 6 and morphological 7 evidence supports a single species. The International Union for Conservation of Nature recognizes two separate species but acknowledges this is not a settled matter 8. George Shiras III first described this unique mountain race of Moose during his explorations in Yellowstone National Park, from 1908 to 1910 9. In honor of Shiras, Dr. Edward W. Nelson named the Yellowstone or Wyoming Moose A. alces shirasi 10. That original subspecies designation is now recognized as A. americanus shirasi, Shiras Moose, which is the only recognized subspecies of Moose in Wyoming and surrounding states. Three other recognized subspecies occur in distant portions of North America, with an additional 4 subspecies in Eurasia 6, 11. Description: Moose is the largest big game animal in Wyoming and the largest member of the cervid family.
    [Show full text]
  • Home-Range and Habitat Selection by Adult Cougars in Southern California
    HOME-RANGE AND HABITAT SELECTION BY ADULT COUGARS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BRETT G. DICKSON,1,2School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA PAUL BEIER, School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA Abstract:Understanding the impact of habitat fragmentation, roads, and other anthropogenic influences on cougars (Puma concolor) requires quantitative assessment of habitat selection at multiple scales. We calculated annu- al and multiyear home ranges using a fixed-kernel (FK) estimator of home range for 13adult female and 2adult male radiotagged cougars that were monitored October 1986through December 1992in the Santa Ana Mountain Range of southern California, USA. Using compositional analysis, we assessed diurnal use of vegetation types and areas near roads at 2orders of selection (second- and third-order; Johnson 1980). Mean annual and multiyear 85% FK home ranges for males were larger than those reported by previous studies in California. Mean wet-season 85% FK home ranges were significantly larger than those of the dry season. At both scales of selection and across sea- sons, cougars preferred riparian habitats and avoided human-dominated habitats. Grasslands were the most avoid- ed natural vegetation type at both scales of selection. Although cougar home ranges tended to be located away from high- and low-speed 2-lane paved roads (second-order avoidance), cougars did not avoid roads within their home range, especially when roads were in preferred riparian areas. Protection of habitat mosaics that include unroaded riparian areas is critical to the conservation of this cougar population. JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 6640):1235–1245 Key words:California, compositional analysis, cougar, fixed-kernel home range, habitat selection, home range, Puma concolor, riparian, roads, scale, vegetation.
    [Show full text]