Huemul Hippocamelus Bisulcus in Central Chile Anthony Povilitis Life Net, HCR Route 3, Box 3845, Willcox, A285643, USA
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION ELSEVIER Biological Conservation 86 (1998) 97-104 Characteristics and conservation of a fragmented population of huemul Hippocamelus bisulcus in central Chile Anthony Povilitis Life Net, HCR Route 3, Box 3845, Willcox, A285643, USA Received 7 September 1997; received in revised form 9 September 1997; accepted 11 September 1997 Abstract The future of the endangered huemul deer in central Chile rests with efforts to recover a single surviving population located in the 3000 km 2 Nevados de Chill/m Motmtains-Polcura Valley area. Field survey data for 1975-1997 were used to assess size, spatial distribution, and trend of the population. In 1997, it was estimated at 60 individuals at 12 sites separated by an average cross-valley distance of 8.0 kin. Data suggested a 58% population decline over two decades. Huemul had disappeared from at least five sites, and evidence for recolonization of vacant habitat was weak. A habitat evaluation and assessment of threats to the huemul, such as poaching and population fragmentation, help provide a basis for conservation action. Proposed measures include protection of two habitat core areas each consisting of 8-11 primary sites, conservation of connecting habitat between sites and core areas, land management practices limiting livestock, logging, and development impacts, and, if necessary, population augmentation. For long- term conservation of the huemul, renewed connectivity between central Chilean and Patagonia populations is recommended. © 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Hippocamelus bisulcus; Endangered deer; Central Chile; Population fragmentation; Reserve design and management 1. Introduction Requiring broad areas of habitat, the huemul is con- sidered an 'umbrella species' (Noss and Cooperrider, The huemul is one of four species of large South 1994; Hunter, 1996) whose conservation lends protection American deer, all of which are at risk of extinction to other Andean wildlife (Parques Nacionales de (IUCN, 1990; US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994). Argentina, 1992). It is also a high profile 'flagship species' Because of poaching, habitat loss from forest clearing symbolizing the imperiled natural heritage of the south and human settlement, and livestock-related diseases, Andes and depicted with the threatened Andean condor huemul have vanished from the northern part of their Vultur gryphus on the Chilean coat-of-arms. historic range, except for a single population in central Huemul prefer steep, broken terrain with forest and Chile (Povilitis, 1983a; Parques Nacionales de Argen- shrub cover, and require access to lower elevations tina, 1992; Smith-Flueck and Flueck, 1995) (Fig. 1). where snow accumulation is light (Povilitis, 1979; Most huemul occur in Patagonia where they number Frid, 1994). Such topography characterizes the south ca. 1500 individuals. Andes, except for areas of dense lowland forest, open Huemul in central Chile were the focus of a major grasslands, and barren volcanic or glaciated terrain. The conservation campaign involving habitat acquisition, huemul'sselection of mountainous terrain appears to protection by wildlife guards, public education, and the have shaped its unique social organization, featuring creation of a regional recovery team (Aldridge, 1988; small group size and prolonged male-female pairing Espinosa, 1996). Geographically separate from other (Povilitis, 1983b, 1985; Montecinos, 1995). huemul, these animals may comprise a peripheral Because of human impacts, huemul populations population of special genetic and evolutionary impor- today are smaller, more subdivided, and more isolated tance (Lesica and Allendorf, 1995) in a distinct region of from one another than those of the past (Miller, 1980; Chile. Central Chile is of conservation priority as the Drouilly, 1983; Povilitis, 1983a). Consevationists have nation's center of biological diversity, human density, and responded by creating protected areas for small groups economic growth (Hoffman, 1993; Armesto et al., 1994). of huemul and by posting wildlife guards to prevent 0006-3207/98/$19.00 © 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved PII: S0006-3207(97)00161-4 98 A. Povilitis/Biological Conservation 86 (1998) 97-104 poaching or disturbance of huemul over broader areas. south (Fig. 2). The nearest known huemul population This approach may work if dispersing individuals occa- occurs 350kin to the south in Nahuel Huapi National sionally move between existing huemul groups and park, Argentina (Serret, 1992). where local extinction, if it occurs, is balanced by reco- Between 1975 and 1997, 85 field surveys were con- Ionization. Conversely, where huemul groups become ducted in late spring or summer to evaluate huemul entirely disjunct and dispersal does not occur, efforts to population distribution, trends, and size in the Nevados protect limited habitat areas will not be adequate, and area. Surveys covered 30 distinct areas of mountain more extensive habitat protection and restoration will terrain which were identified by topography and vege- be needed. tation (Povilitis, 1979) as potential huemul sites. Thir- Population characteristics, threats, and habitat of teen of 19 areas where huemul occurred were huemul in central Chile are evaluated by addressing the periodically re-examined. The work was conducted by issue of population viability. Based on the analysis, teams of 2-20 people trained to detect huemul, and measures for huemul recovery are proposed. normally lasted from 2-7 days depending on team size and terrain. Teams systematically surveyed along ridges and mountain tops, descending for 100-300 m to exam- 2. Study area and methods ine preferred huemul locations: ravines, rocky areas and cliffs, and associated Nothofagus spp. forest and shrub Central Chile's huemul population is located in the (Povilitis, 1979). Nevados de Chill/m Mountains-Polcura Valley area Minimum counts of huemul were derived from sight- (hereafter referred to as the Nevados area; Fig. l) The ings and indirectly through track analysis. The typically area covers 3000 km 2 bordered by Chile's central valley open volcanic soils of ridges and mountain tops in the on the west, Argentine steppe highlands on the east, and Nevados area aided in tracking huemul. Distinct track the Rio iquble and Rio Laja valleys to the north and sets and fresh discontinuous track sets separated by more than 1 km were recorded as separate animals. o Huemul groups were defined as sets of individuals in 75° 7O I I spatial proximity and presumed to be interactive. Hue- i • Santiago mul groups typically consisted of an adult female and t dominant adult male often with associated juveniles / 35 °_ and/or subdominant males (Povilitis, 1979, 1983b, 1985). i J 70=30' 71 ° 15" Area I I Chile 36o30 , -- Argentina ~'~4)6 ~ 40°~ ~6/e C "13 C ¢0 N -- ~ .,,,,/~ ~.Gei"trudis~ 36° 45~ _ /,- tO t i s <( 4s°... oo : I o Chill~n"~ o@ 400 km I I I O- Ig" Ren~ / N i Former range 37°00 S _ (- - ~/J t Ponce"') C~koados ~.~ \ xt 10 km Infiernillo" / ~ 50° __ C.-" L,a~lnas /c.~nposa s ,, / ( Atrav~d~ 0..~ (/~___henque 'Tierra 37° 15" -- vi,,~0~.~ ~ / CoJor~do) ..,, f/ I t I o 170o 75 Fig. 1. Geographic range of huemul in the south Andes .(based on Fig. 2. Distribution of primary huemul sites in the Nevados de Osgood, 1943; Cabrera and Yepes, 1960; Serret, 1992; Diaz, 1993; Chill~.n area of Chile. Sites believed occupied by huemui in 1997 are Frid, 1994). hatched. A. Povilitis/Biological Conservation 86 (1998) 97-104 99 Based on previous research on habitat selection by ! 6 huemul in the Nevados area (Povilitis, 1979), primary habitat sites (Fig. 2) were defined as predominantly O O north-facing, generally 30--40 degrees in slope, and attaining at least 1750m elevation. Upper south-facing ); 18 ~ • Huemul group slopes within 500m of such terrain and major ridges 0 i extending southward were included as potential summer } ~ Multiple groups habitat. To qualify as primary, sites needed to include at '~, 0 Vacated site least 100 ha of north-facing terrain below 1500 m elevation, 8~•'* ,~ Shortest cross-vaJley where winter snow accumulation would be light. Habitat ,q route between groups 0 sites were delineated on 1:50,000-scale topographic maps. 6 .............. Shortest highland Habitat sites were assessed by size, quality, and spa- 4 rb~ route between groups tial configuration. Habitat size was ranked according to total map area and potential winter range (north-facing slopes below 1500 m elevation). Sites of > 2000 ha were assigned a value of 1; those > 1200-2000ha, a 2; and those <1200ha, a 3. Similarly, for winter range, sites Fig. 3. Dispersion of huemul in the Nevados de ChillOn area, Chile, with > 500 ha were assigned a 1; those > 300-500 ha, a based on recent field surveys. Numbers indicate shortest cross-valley 2; and sites with <300ha, a 3. Total site size and winter distances (kin) between nearest groups. range scores were averaged to assign overall size rank as follows: score of 1.0=rank 1; 1.5=rank 2; 2.0=rank 3; Of 13 sites surveyed at least twice, the total minimum 2.5 =rank 4; and 3.0=rank 5. count from the latest surveys was 58% less than earliest Habitat quality was ordinally ranked in which surveys (23 versus 55) (Table 2). Minimum counts A = excellent; B = very good; and C = good, on the basis dropped at 10 sites, were essentially unchanged at 1, of combined habitat criteria: degree of rockiness; abun- declined and partially recovered at 1, and increased at 1 dance of cliffy sites and ravines; extent of shrub and (p < 0.01, Wilcoxon signed rank test). forest cover; and cover type heterogeneity (Povilitis, The number of huemul for primary sites was esti- 1979). Rankings were based on visual assessments, and mated at 52 individuals, based on the minimum count on sites descriptions by Lopez (1994). of 40 huemul for the latest surveys (all sites, Table 2) plus 31%--an average difference between minimum counts and probable number derived from repetitive 3.