DOCSLIB.ORG

Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Technical Review 12-05 December 2012 1 Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-05 - December 2012 Citation Demarais, S., L. Cornicelli, R. Kahn, E. Merrill, C. Miller, J. M. Peek, W. F. Porter, and G. A. Sargeant. 2012. Ungulate management in national parks of the United States and Canada. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-05. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Series Edited by Theodore A. Bookhout Copy Edit and Design Terra Rentz (AWB®), Managing Editor, The Wildlife Society Jessica Johnson, Associate Editor, The Wildlife Society Maja Smith, Graphic Designer, MajaDesign, Inc. Cover Images Front cover, clockwise from upper left: 1) Bull moose browsing on subalpine fir near Soda Butte Creek in Yellowstone National Park. Credit: Jim Peaco, National Park Service; 2) Bison in Stephens Creek pen in Yellowstone National Park. The Bison herds in Yellowstone are actively managed to maintain containment within park boundaries. Credit: Jim Peaco, National Park Service; 3) Bighorn sheep ram in Lamar Valley, Yellowstone National Park. Credit: Jim Peaco, National Park Service; 4) Biologists in Great Smokey Mountains National Park use non-lethal means, such as the use of a paintball gun depicted in this photo, to move elk from undesirable areas. Credit: Joseph Yarkovich; 5) National Park Service biologists Joe Yarkovich and Kim Delozier (now retired) working up an elk in Great Smokey Mountains National Park. Credit: Joseph Yarkovich; 6) Fencing protects willow (Salix spp.) and aspen (Populus spp.) from overgrazing by elk (Cervus elaphus) in Rocky Mountain National Park. Exclusion fences allow localized timber regeneration, but are only a temporary fix without long-term reduction of elk numbers. Credit National Park Service. This report is copyrighted by TWS, but individuals are granted permission to make single copies for noncommercial purposes. To view or download a PDF of this report, or to order hard copies, go to: wildlife.org/publications/technical-reviews. ISBN: 978-0-9830402-4-8 Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada i ii Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Technical Review Committee on Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Steve Demarais (Chair, CWB®) Craig Miller Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Human Dimensions Research Program Aquaculture Illinois Natural History Survey Mississippi State University Prairie Research Institute P.O. Box 9690 University of Illinois Mississippi State, MS 39762 USA Champaign, IL 61820 USA Lou Cornicelli James M. Peek (CWB®) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources 500 Lafayette Rd. University of Idaho St. Paul, MN 55155 USA Moscow, ID 83844 USA Rick Kahn William F. Porter (CWB®) Biological Resource Management Division Department of Fisheries and Wildlife National Park Service 13 Natural Resources Building 1201 Oakridge Dr. Suite 200 Michigan State University Fort Collins, CO 80525 USA East Lansing, MI 48824 USA ® Evelyn Merrill (CWB ) Glen A. Sargeant Department of Biological Sciences Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center University of Alberta U.S. Geological Survey Edmonton, AB T6G 2E9 CA 8711 37th Street SE Jamestown, ND 58401 USA The Wildlife Society 5410 Grosvenor Lane Bethesda, MD 20814 P: 301.897.9770 F: 301.530.2471 www.wildlife.org Promoting Excellence in Wildlife Stewardship through Science and Education Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada iii iv Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Table of Contents Foreword vi Acknowledgements vii Executive Summary viii Purpose of National Parks 1 Ungulates in Park Management Goals and Objectives 7 Ungulate Conservation 7 Conservation of Ecological Communities 10 Disease and Parasite Management 14 Visitor Experiences 15 Conflicts with Other Agencies/Land Uses 16 Ungulate Population Management Objectives 19 Eradication 19 Regulation at Low Density 19 Regulation at High Density 20 Alternatives to Ungulate Density 20 Management Alternatives 21 No Action 21 Animal Removal 22 Fertility Control 29 Predator Management 32 Redistribution 33 Criteria for Selection of Management Strategies 35 Enabling Legislation, Historical Context, and Naturalness 35 Cost 35 Animal Welfare 36 Allowable Land Use 36 Population Viability and Genetic Diversity 37 Depredation 37 Findings 38 Literature Cited 39 Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada v Foreword residents of The Wildlife Society (TWS) P occasionally appoint ad hoc committees to study and report on selected conservation issues. The resulting technical review presents technical information and the views of the appointed committee members, but not necessarily the views of their employers. This Technical Review focuses on management of ungulates in national parks of Canada and the United States. The review is copyrighted by TWS, but individuals are granted permission to make single copies for noncommercial purposes. All technical reviews are available in digital format on the TWS web page, www.wildlife.org, and additional copies may be requested from: The Wildlife Society 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 200 Bethesda, MD 20814 Phone: (301) 897-9770 Fax: (301) 530-2471 [email protected] www.wildlife.org Bighorn sheep at Canyonlands National Park. Credit: Neal Herbert, National Park Service. vi Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada Acknowledgments Pronghorn antelope in Yellowstone National Park. Credit: JR Douglass, National Park Service. his report represents significant efforts for publication in October 2012 by then- President T by committed wildlife professionals serving the Paul Krausman. membership of The Wildlife Society. We acknowledge the support of TWS presidents in office during We received exceptional cooperation from people in preparation of this report, including Presidents Bruce various state, provincial, and national agencies across Leopold and Paul Krausman and Past Presidents Tom Canada and the United States. People within these Ryder, Tom Franklin, and Dan Svedarsky. Members agencies responded with requested information, and of The Wildlife Society Council Gary White and, we specifically thank J. Powers with the National Park especially, John McDonald provided comments and Service. We especially appreciate E. Leslie, K. Leong, support. The Wildlife Society support staff, especially M. Foley, and B. Frost with the National Park Service, Christine Carmichael and Terra Rentz, provided J. Whittington and M. Bradley with Parks Canada, encouragement, invaluable suggestions, and edits. Mark Sherfy with the U.S. Geological Survey, and This review was approved for development September Bruce Stillings with the North Dakota Game and Fish 2009 by sitting President Bruce Leopold and approved Department for their critical reviews of the final draft. Ungulate Management in National Parks of the United States and Canada vii Executive Summary nabling legislation—that which gives Removals of ungulates from national parks have E appropriate officials the authority been controversial, and much of the debate has to implement or enforce the law—impacts revolved around methods of removal. Disease management of ungulates in national parks of issues limit the use of translocations as temporary Canada and the United States (U.S.). The initial solutions to abundance problems. Most ungulate focus of such legislation in both countries centered removals from U.S. national parks have been on preserving natural and culturally significant accomplished by shooting. Public involvement in areas for posterity. Although this objective remains shooting has been controversial and limited by primary, philosophies and practices have changed. A National Park Service (NPS) policies that do not Canadian vision for ungulate management emerged allow hunting of native wildlife in national parks per during the latter half of the 20th century to protect se. Costs of shooting programs depend on costs and maintain or restore the ecological integrity of of administration, payments to shooters, logistical representative samples of the country’s 39 distinct challenges, methods of carcass disposal, and landscapes, and to include provisions for traditional the degree of supervision by park management. hunting and fishing practices representative of past Shooting programs modeled after public hunting cultural impacts on the environment. The current programs (i.e., volunteers pay a modest fee, are ungulate management approach in the U.S. relies not directly supervised, and retain carcasses for on natural (ecological) processes, as long as normal personal use) have been successful in the few conditions are promoted and there is no impairment instances where attempted. of natural resources. Emphasizing natural processes as the basis has been a challenge because Removal management can be successful only where ecosystem dynamics are complex and management a superintendent is interested in building a program is multi-jurisdictional. Additionally, natural based on science, is able to garner the resources regulation typically will not prevent ungulates to do the planning, and is willing to take political from reaching and sustaining densities that are risks to achieve management goals. Fertility control incompatible with preservation or restoration
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stopover Ecology of a Migratory Ungulate
    Journal of Animal Ecology 2011, 80, 1078–1087 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01845.x Stopover ecology of a migratory ungulate Hall Sawyer1,2* and Matthew J. Kauffman3 1Department of Zoology and Physiology, Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82071, USA; 2Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc., 200 South 2nd St., Laramie, WY 82070, USA; and 3Department of Zoology and Physiology, United States Geological Survey, Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA Summary 1. Birds that migrate long distances use stopover sites to optimize fuel loads and complete migra- tion as quickly as possible. Stopover use has been predicted to facilitate a time-minimization strat- egy in land migrants as well, but empirical tests have been lacking, and alternative migration strategies have not been considered. 2. We used fine-scale movement data to evaluate the ecological role of stopovers in migratory mule deer Odocoileus hemionus – a land migrant whose fitness is strongly influenced by energy intake rather than migration speed. 3. Although deer could easily complete migrations (range 18–144 km) in several days, they took an average of 3 weeks and spent 95% of that time in a series of stopover sites that had higher for- age quality than movement corridors. Forage quality of stopovers increased with elevation and distance from winter range. Mule deer use of stopovers corresponded with a narrow phenological range, such that deer occupied stopovers 44 days prior to peak green-up, when forage quality was presumed to be highest. Mule deer used one stopover for every 5Æ3 and 6Æ7 km travelled during spring and autumn migrations, respectively, and used the same stopovers in consecutive years.
    [Show full text]
  • Boselaphus Tragocamelus</I>
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2008 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) David M. Leslie Jr. U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Leslie, David M. Jr., "Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae)" (2008). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 723. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/723 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. MAMMALIAN SPECIES 813:1–16 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) DAVID M. LESLIE,JR. United States Geological Survey, Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078-3051, USA; [email protected] Abstract: Boselaphus tragocamelus (Pallas, 1766) is a bovid commonly called the nilgai or blue bull and is Asia’s largest antelope. A sexually dimorphic ungulate of large stature and unique coloration, it is the only species in the genus Boselaphus. It is endemic to peninsular India and small parts of Pakistan and Nepal, has been extirpated from Bangladesh, and has been introduced in the United States (Texas), Mexico, South Africa, and Italy. It prefers open grassland and savannas and locally is a significant agricultural pest in India. It is not of special conservation concern and is well represented in zoos and private collections throughout the world. DOI: 10.1644/813.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Sanderson Et Al., the Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild
    Articles The Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild ERICW. SANDERSON,MALANDING JAITEH, MARC A. LEVY,KENT H. REDFORD, ANTOINETTEV. WANNEBO,AND GILLIANWOOLMER n Genesis,God blesses humanbeings and bids us to take dominion over the fish in the sea,the birdsin the air, THE HUMANFOOTPRINT IS A GLOBAL and other We are entreatedto be fruitful every living thing. MAPOF HUMANINFLUENCE ON THE and multiply,to fill the earth,and subdueit (Gen. 1:28).The bad news, and the good news, is that we have almost suc- LANDSURFACE, WHICH SUGGESTSTHAT ceeded. Thereis little debatein scientificcircles about the impor- HUMANBEINGS ARE STEWARDS OF tance of human influenceon ecosystems.According to sci- WE LIKEIT OR NOT entists'reports, we appropriateover 40%of the net primary NATURE,WHETHER productivity(the greenmaterial) produced on Eartheach year (Vitouseket al. 1986,Rojstaczer et al.2001). We consume 35% thislack of appreciationmay be dueto scientists'propensity of the productivityof the oceanicshelf (Pauly and Christensen to expressthemselves in termslike "appropriation of net pri- 1995), and we use 60% of freshwaterrun-off (Postel et al. maryproductivity" or "exponentialpopulation growth," ab- 1996). The unprecedentedescalation in both human popu- stractionsthat require some training to understand.It may lation and consumption in the 20th centuryhas resultedin be dueto historicalassumptions about and habits inherited environmentalcrises never before encountered in the history fromtimes when human beings, as a group,had dramatically of humankindand the world (McNeill2000). E. O. Wilson less influenceon the biosphere.Now the individualdeci- (2002) claims it would now take four Earthsto meet the consumptiondemands of the currenthuman population,if Eric Sanderson(e-mail: [email protected])is associatedirector, and every human consumed at the level of the averageUS in- W.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Continental Divide Goat 2009...12
    WMU 402 Goat Survey – ACA/ASRD D‐AUS Report July 2009 By Alberta Conservation Association And Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife July, 2009 Blairmore, Alberta PERMISSION TO QUOTE This report contains preliminary information and interpretations and may be subject to future revision. To prevent the issuance of misleading information, persons wishing to quote from this report, to cite it in bibliographies or to use it in any other form must first obtain permission from the Executive Director of the Wildlife Management Branch, Fish and Wildlife Division and / or its regional representatives within the Southern Rockies Area. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The 2009 WMU 402 goat survey was navigated by Greg Hale (FW), while Mike Jokinen (ACA), Jon Jorgenson (FW) and Rob Watt (Parks Canada‐Waterton) participated as observers. The aircraft was chartered from Bighorn Helicopters with Greg Goodison as the pilot. ABSTRACT An aerial survey to monitor the status of the mountain goat population in Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) 402 was conducted on July 11th, 12th and 15th, 2009. Survey objectives included the collection of herd distribution, herd composition and total goat numbers. All mountain complexes associated with the WMU 402 goat survey received detailed aerial coverage during the survey. The WMU 402 survey area is the northern portion of Goat Management Area (GMA)–A, and currently does not have a designated goat hunting area. A total of 186 mountain goats (119 adults, 44 kids and 23 yearlings) were observed during the survey. Kid and yearling ratios per 100 adults were 37 and 19 respectively. Sixty nine goats were observed on the Alberta side of the Continental Divide while 41 goats were observed in British Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • Elk on Yellowstone's Northern Range: Science, Management, and Controversy, 1900- 1980
    Elk on Yellowstone's Northern Range: Science, Management, and Controversy, 1900- 1980 by James Pritchard Revised Aug. 29. 1994 Not for Quotation James Pritchard 1207 N.Hyland Ave. Ames, IA 50014 515-292-9145 From its inception in 1872, Yellowstone National Park protected elk against hunters, but in the early 1930s scientists and managers began to think that too many elk damaged vegetation on the range and initiated efforts to control the number of elk. especially the herd which roamed the northern reaches of the Park in the drainages of the Lamar and Yellowstone Rivers. In 1934 Yellowstone rangers began shooting the elk of the northern herd to directly control their numbers. In 1967, after years of controversy, Yellowstone stopped using direct reduction, and shortly thereafter, ceased live-trapping and shipment of elk as well. For the historian, that policy shift stimulates the formation of several questions. Why did Yellowstone initiate this change in wildlife management policy? In what ways did science inform this decision, and how did management imperatives shape the opportunities for science? Why did Yellowstone's policy on range management and ungulates differ from that on the public lands of the Gallatin National Forest just to the north? This paper seeks to demonstrate that management strategies of for ungulate management were shaped by biologists and managers who conceived of Yellowstone as an exemplar and preserve of nature. The officials who regulated the elk hunt in iMontana had a very different set of priorities. The perceptions of urban visitors as well as elk hunters regarding nature and the purpose of Yellowstone also had an important influence in the form of political pressure on management decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report of the Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project
    Credits for cover photographs: Brian Wolitski Main cover photograph Anonymous Lake Louise visitor Grizzly bear family group on footbridge Cedar Mueller Bear #56 against fence Cover design Rob Storeshaw, Parks Canada, Calgary, Alberta Document design, layout and formatting: KH Communications, Canmore, Alberta Suggested means of citing this document Herrero, Stephen (editor). 2005. Biology, demography, ecology and management of grizzly bears in and around Banff National Park and Kananaskis Country: The final report of the Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project. Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Suggested means of citing chapters or sections of this document S. Stevens, and M. Gibeau. 2005. Research methods regarding capture, handling and telemetry. Pages 17 — 19 in S. Herrero, editor. Biology, demography, ecology and management of grizzly bears in and around Banff National Park and Kananaskis Country: The final report of the Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project. Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. BIOLOGY, DEMOGRAPHY, ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF GRIZZLY BEARS IN AND AROUND BANFF NATIONAL PARK AND KANANASKIS COUNTRY Final Report of the Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project 2005 Edited by Stephen Herrero Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project, Environmental Sciences Program, Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. ii DEDICATION To everyone who cares about grizzly bears and wildlife and the ecological systems and processes that support them. To the graduate students who were the core researchers: Bryon Benn, Mike Gibeau, John Kansas, Cedar Mueller, Karen Oldershaw, Saundi Stevens, and Jen Theberge. To the funding supporters who had the vision and faith that our research would be worthwhile.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecology of Large Herbivores Native to the Coastal Lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa
    The ecology of large herbivores native to the coastal lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the Western Cape, South Africa by Frans Gustav Theodor Radloff Dissertation presented for the degree of Doctor of Science (Botany) at Stellenbosh University Promoter: Prof. L. Mucina Co-Promoter: Prof. W. J. Bond December 2008 DECLARATION By submitting this dissertation electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the owner of the copyright thereof (unless to the extent explicitly otherwise stated) and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: 24 November 2008 Copyright © 2008 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved ii ABSTRACT The south-western Cape is a unique region of southern Africa with regards to generally low soil nutrient status, winter rainfall and unusually species-rich temperate vegetation. This region supported a diverse large herbivore (> 20 kg) assemblage at the time of permanent European settlement (1652). The lowlands to the west and east of the Kogelberg supported populations of African elephant, black rhino, hippopotamus, eland, Cape mountain and plain zebra, ostrich, red hartebeest, and grey rhebuck. The eastern lowlands also supported three additional ruminant grazer species - the African buffalo, bontebok, and blue antelope. The fate of these herbivores changed rapidly after European settlement. Today the few remaining species are restricted to a few reserves scattered across the lowlands. This is, however, changing with a rapid growth in the wildlife industry that is accompanied by the reintroduction of wild animals into endangered and fragmented lowland areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting the Crown: a Century of Resource Management in Glacier National Park
    Protecting the Crown A Century of Resource Management in Glacier National Park Rocky Mountains Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (RM-CESU) RM-CESU Cooperative Agreement H2380040001 (WASO) RM-CESU Task Agreement J1434080053 Theodore Catton, Principal Investigator University of Montana Department of History Missoula, Montana 59812 Diane Krahe, Researcher University of Montana Department of History Missoula, Montana 59812 Deirdre K. Shaw NPS Key Official and Curator Glacier National Park West Glacier, Montana 59936 June 2011 Table of Contents List of Maps and Photographs v Introduction: Protecting the Crown 1 Chapter 1: A Homeland and a Frontier 5 Chapter 2: A Reservoir of Nature 23 Chapter 3: A Complete Sanctuary 57 Chapter 4: A Vignette of Primitive America 103 Chapter 5: A Sustainable Ecosystem 179 Conclusion: Preserving Different Natures 245 Bibliography 249 Index 261 List of Maps and Photographs MAPS Glacier National Park 22 Threats to Glacier National Park 168 PHOTOGRAPHS Cover - hikers going to Grinnell Glacier, 1930s, HPC 001581 Introduction – Three buses on Going-to-the-Sun Road, 1937, GNPA 11829 1 1.1 Two Cultural Legacies – McDonald family, GNPA 64 5 1.2 Indian Use and Occupancy – unidentified couple by lake, GNPA 24 7 1.3 Scientific Exploration – George B. Grinnell, Web 12 1.4 New Forms of Resource Use – group with stringer of fish, GNPA 551 14 2.1 A Foundation in Law – ranger at check station, GNPA 2874 23 2.2 An Emphasis on Law Enforcement – two park employees on hotel porch, 1915 HPC 001037 25 2.3 Stocking the Park – men with dead mountain lions, GNPA 9199 31 2.4 Balancing Preservation and Use – road-building contractors, 1924, GNPA 304 40 2.5 Forest Protection – Half Moon Fire, 1929, GNPA 11818 45 2.6 Properties on Lake McDonald – cabin in Apgar, Web 54 3.1 A Background of Construction – gas shovel, GTSR, 1937, GNPA 11647 57 3.2 Wildlife Studies in the 1930s – George M.
    [Show full text]
  • Mountain Goats in the Kicking Horse Canyon, Trans Canada Highway
    Mountain Goats in the Kicking Horse Canyon, Trans Canada Highway Prepared for: Ministry of Transportation & Highways Cache Creek to Rockies Program #200 - 546 Yates Street Victoria BC VSW 1KS Prepared by: Kim G.Poole and AndrewB. D. Walker Timberland Consultants Ltd. Fish and Wildlife Division P.O. Box 171 (2620 Granite Rd.) Nelson, BC V1L 5P9 Tele: (250) 825-4063 e-mail: [email protected] September 2000 TIMBERLAND 4 CONSULTANTS .. Kicking Horse Canyon mountain goats 11 Executive summary Upgrades to portions of the Trans Canada Highway (TCH; Highway 1) are being conducted which will include reconstruction of two bridges and their approaches in the Kicking Horse Canyon east of Golden, B.C. Improvements and upgrades to this section of the TCH are required to improve the efficiency and safety of vehicular travel. The objectives of this study were to identify potential impacts to mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus) use of and access to the bluffs adjacent to the two bridges; to assess these impacts; and to recommend potential mitigation required to bridge and approach design and construction that will minimize impacts to the goats. Bluffs adjacent to these bridges were reported to contain mineral licks, which are seasonally of high importance to resident goat populations. In addition, we present recommendations for revegetation of surplus material disposal sites for forage values of various recommended species. The existing alignment of the TCH crosses from the north side of the canyon to the south side at the Yoho Bridge (5-Mile Bridge; segment 990, km 9.5). The highway recrosses back to the north side 4.6 km further up the canyon at the Park Bridge (10-Mile Bridge; segment990, km 14.1).
    [Show full text]
  • Ungulate and Human Risk Perception in Shared Environments
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2020 Ungulate and human risk perception in shared environments Benjamin Johnson Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Recommended Citation Johnson, Benjamin, "Ungulate and human risk perception in shared environments" (2020). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 17960. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/17960 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ungulate and human risk perception in shared environments by Benjamin J. Johnson A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Program of Study Committee: Robert Klaver, Co-major Professor Cassandra Nuñez, Co-major Professor Amy Toth Dara Wald The student author, whose presentation of the scholarship herein was approved by the program of study committee, is solely responsible for the content of this thesis. The Graduate College will ensure this thesis is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2020 Copyright © Benjamin J. Johnson, 2020. All rights
    [Show full text]
  • Hooves and Herds Lesson Plan
    Hooves and Herds 6-8 grade Themes: Rut (breeding) in ungulates (hoofed mammals) Location: Materials: The lesson can be taught in the classroom or a hybrid of in WDFW PowerPoints: Introduction to Ungulates in Washington, the classroom and on WDFW public lands. We encourage Rut in Washington Ungulates, Ungulate comparison sheet, teachers and parents to take students in the field so they WDFW career profile can look for signs of rut in ungulates (hoofed animals) and experience the ecosystems where ungulates call home. Vocabulary: If your group size is over 30 people, you must apply for a Biological fitness: How successful an individual is at group permit. To do this, please e-mail or call your WDFW reproducing relative to others in the population. regional customer service representative. Bovid: An ungulate with permanent keratin horns. All males have horns and, in many species, females also have horns. Check out other WDFW public lands rules and parking Examples are cows, sheep, and goats. information. Cervid: An ungulate with antlers that fall off and regrow every Remote learning modification: Lesson can be taught over year. Antlers are almost exclusively found on males (exception Zoom or Google Classrooms. is caribou). Examples include deer, elk, and moose. Harem: A group of breeding females associated with one breeding male. Standards: Herd: A large group of animals, especially hoofed mammals, NGSS that live, feed, or migrate. MS-LS1-4 Mammal: Animals that are warm blooded, females have Use argument based on empirical evidence and scientific mammary glands that produce milk for feeding their young, reasoning to support an explanation for how characteristic three bones in the middle ear, fur or hair (in at least one stage animal behaviors and specialized plant structures affect the of their life), and most give live birth.
    [Show full text]
  • Asia-Pacific's Ecological Footprint
    ASIA-PACIFIC 2005 The Ecological Footprint and Natural Wealth ountries in Asia and the Pacific have made a firm nor extended worldwide without causing additional consumed like an average American or European?” We commitment to sustainable development. We want life-threatening damage to the global environment have only one planet, yet all people want, and have the Ca better quality of life for all, while safeguarding the and increasing social inequity. right to, fulfilling lives. The challenge for high income Earth’s capacity to support life in all its diversity and This report is a call for action, not just for the policy countries is to radically reduce footprint while maintaining respecting the limits of the planet’s natural resources. How community, but for the scientific and business com- quality of life. For lasting improvements in their quality of can we achieve this in the face of growing populations and munities as well. It echoes what the Millennium Ecosystem life, lower income countries are facing the complementary changing consumption patterns, both within the region Assessment found: that the health of natural systems has challenge of finding new paths to development that can and the world? a profound impact on our quality of life, but 60 percent of provide best living conditions without liquidating their As a first step to answering this question, we need to the ecosystem services that support life on Earth are being ecological wealth. know where we are today. How does the Asia-Pacific degraded or used unsustainably. This report provides a The Asia-Pacific region is in a unique position to shape region’s current demand for ecological resources compare frank assessment of what is at stake for Asia and the the development model for the whole world in the coming to the region’s (and the planet’s) supply? How does it Pacific and for the rest of the world.
    [Show full text]