DOCSLIB.ORG

Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America Technical Review 12-01 August 2012 The Wildlife Society Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America Technical Review 12-01 March 2012 Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America Technical Review 12-01 March 2012 The Wildlife Society Technical Review Committee on the Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America James Peek (Chair) Shane Mahoney Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Sustainable Development and Strategic Science Branch University of Idaho Department of Environment and Conservation Moscow, Idaho 83844-1136 USA St. John’s, Newfoundland A1B4J6 Canada Bruce Dale Craig Miller Alaska Department of Fish and Game Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources 1800 Glenn Highway University of Georgia Palmer, Alaska 99645 USA Athens, Georgia 30602 USA Hank Hristienko Dennis Murray Manitoba Wildlife and Ecosystem Protection Branch Department of Biology Box 24-200 Saulteaux Crescent Trent University Winnipeg, Manitoba R3J 3W3 Canada Peterborough, Ontario K9J7B8 Canada Lee Kantar Linda Olver Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Bureau of Wildlife Management Bangor, Maine 04401-5654 USA Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Madison, Wisconsin 53707 USA Kerrie Anne Loyd Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources Colleen Soulliere University of Georgia Sustainable Development and Strategic Science Branch Athens, Georgia 30602 USA Department of Environment and Conservation St. John’s, Newfoundland A1B4J6 Canada The Wildlife Society 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 200 Bethesda, MD 20814 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 http://wildlife.org/TechnicalReview ISBN: 978-1-937504-10-6 TWS106 Large center photo: Radio-collared gray wolf (Credit: William Campbell/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Top right: Collecting data from tranquilized grizzly bear in Glacier National Park prior to attaching a radio collar (Credit: National Park Service) Bottom left: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists collecting data and fitting a radio collar on a tranquilized mountain lion in Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge in Montana (Credit: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Bottom right: Coyote roaming Waterfall Glen Forest Preserve (Credit: Photo by George Joch/Courtesy Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, Illinois) Produced and distributed for The Wildlife Society by Worthy Shorts, Inc. 4 The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12–01 March 2012 FOREWORD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Presidents of The Wildlife Society (TWS) oc- We acknowledge the support of TWS Presi- casionally appoint ad hoc committees to study dents in office during preparation of this report, and report on selected conservation issues. The including President Paul Krausman and Past reports ordinarily appear as technical reviews Presidents Tom Ryder, Bruce Leopold, Tom or position statements. Technical reviews pres- Franklin, Dan Svedarsky, and John Organ. ent technical information and the views of the Members of The Wildlife Society Council Paul appointed committee members, but not neces- Krausman, John McDonald, and Bruce Leopold sarily the views of their employers. provided comments and support. The Wildlife Society editors Laura Bies, Terra Rentz, and This technical review focuses on the manage- Christine Carmichael provided encouragement, ment of large mammalian carnivores and their invaluable suggestions, and edits. This review associated impacts on prey populations and was approved for development by then-Presi- public perception across North America. The re- dent John Organ in March 2007 and approved view is copyrighted by TWS, but individuals are for publication by current President Paul Kraus- granted permission to make single copies for man in February 2012. noncommercial purposes. All technical reviews are available in digital format on the TWS web A large share of the information in this report page, www.wildlife.org, and additional cop- is available from wildlife agencies across Cana- ies may be requested from: da and the United States. Much of the informa- tion is routinely obtained to assist in managing The Wildlife Society large carnivores and their ungulate prey. An 5410 Grosvenor Lane additional share of the information is supported Bethesda, MD 20814 by various wildlife agencies and developed by Phone: (301) 897-9770 others. We received exceptional cooperation Fax: (301) 530-2471 from people in these agencies when we request- [email protected] ed information. Citation: Peek, J., B. Dale, H. Hristienko, L. Humans are primarily focused on the con- Kantar, K. A. Loyd, S. Mahoney, C. Miller, D. temporary local situation they find themselves Murray, L. Olver, and C. Soulliere. 2012. Man- in. The wildlife resource, however, is affected agement of large mammalian carnivores in by past and present conditions and multi-scale North America. The Wildlife Society Technical influences. As a result, many of the actions Review 12-1. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, intended to address an issue that is considered Maryland, USA. in unsatisfactory condition may be successful in the short term but may also have unintended future consequences. Our efforts were, thus, directed towards detecting large-scale trends over time in more reliable data sources, primar- ily harvest information, and in surveys of public attitudes towards large mammalian carnivores. The following people provided information and commentary from the various universities, organizations, provincial and state agencies, Northwest and Yukon Territories, and the Cana- dian and U. S. governments: Frank Addante, Jim Allen, Jerry Apker, Alan Baer, John Beecham, Ron Bjorge, Dean Cluff, Brad Compton, Kevin Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America 5 Craig, Vince Crichton, John DePue, Jean-Michel Jim Unsworth, Doug Updike, Victor Van Bal- DeVink, Randy Dibblee, John Elliott, Rich lenberghe, Larry VanDaele, John Vore, Nathan DeSimone, Brian Giddings, Tena Fox, Howard Webb, John Wehausen, Darrell Weybright, Golden, Barry Hale, Ian Hatter, Chris Heydon, Robert Wielgus, Wade Willis, and Karen Zhou. Jim Heffelfinger, Maurice Hornocker, Héléne Gary White suggested the statistical analysis and Jolicoeur, Maya Kepner, Eric Loft, Glenn Luther, provided the program that was used to analyze Ramona Maraj, Mike McGrath, Scott NcNay, the trends that are presented in the appendix. Robert Miller, Anthony Nette, Martin Obbard, Chad Bishop, Kim Brunt, Valerius Geist, Gerald Rolf Peterson, Ross Peck, Howard Quigley, Cal- Hales, Ian Hatter, Doug Heard, Gerry Kuzyk, vin Richardson, Eric Rominger, Larry Roy, Gary Bruce McLellan, Garth Mowat, Tom Paragi, Schroeder, Charles Schwartz, Tom Stephenson, Arthur Rodgers, and Sterling Miller provided Daniel Thompson, Ron Thompson, Conrad critical reviews of the final draft and their efforts Thiessen, Kim Titus, Brad Tokaruk, Tom Toman, are greatly appreciated. 6 The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12–01 March 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5 INTRODUCTION 10 A Brief History 10 ATTITUDES TOWARDS PREDATORS 12 Attitudes towards Wolves and Wolf Reintroduction 13 Attitudes towards Coyotes 15 UNGULATE POPULATION DYNAMICS AND PREDATION 16 NEWFOUNDLAND CARIBOU: A CASE HISTORY 18 Early Investigations of Caribou Mortality 19 The Current Predator-Caribou Circumstance 20 COYOTE PREDATION ON DEER 22 Maine Coyote and Deer Investigations 27 MOUNTAIN LION MANAGEMENT 30 WOLF HARVESTS IN CANADA AND ALASKA 35 WOLVES IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION 39 WOLVES IN THE WESTERN GREAT LAKES REGION 41 MEXICAN GRAY WOLVES 42 BEAR HARVEST AND POPULATION MANAGEMENT 42 Black Bears 42 Human-Bear Conflicts 48 Brown Bears 49 PREDATOR MANAGEMENT TO BENEFIT SMALL, ISOLATED POPULATIONS 51 Desert Bighorn Sheep 51 Caribou at the Southern Limits of Their Range 53 Black-tailed Deer on Vancouver Island 53 WOLF AND BEAR CONTROL TO ENHANCE UNGULATE POPULATIONS IN ALASKA 54 Successful Wolf Control to Increase Ungulates 57 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PREDATOR CONTROL PROGRAMS 58 RECOMMENDATIONS 60 CONCLUSION 61 LITERATURE CITED 65 APPENDIX 73 Management of Large Mammalian Carnivores in North America 7 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Mule deer harvests in selected states (AZ, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY) and provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan). The trend for AZ, CO, ID, MT, NM, OR, UT, and WY is down over the 1980-2007 period (lnTotal harvest=69.79-0.029*year, F=69.49, P=0.000, adjR2=.725). Table 2. Summary of investigations reviewed by Ballard et al. (2001) on predation effects on mule deer, black-tailed deer, and white-tailed deer. Table 3. Coyote harvests by USDA APHIS Wildlife Services by all methods, 1990-2007, for 12 states that constitute 83% of total kill. Table 4. Coyote take as fur in 9 Canadian Provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Saskatchewan), 1980-2008. Table 5. Mountain lion harvests in western North America with comparative harvests from Al- berta and British Columbia, Canada, 1990-2007. Table 6. Sex composition of mountain lion harvests in hunting units 20A, 26, and 27 in the Frank Church River-Of-No-Return Wilderness and adjacent areas of limited access in central Idaho, using 3-year averages (Nadeau 2007a, Power and Hemker 1985, Rachael and Nadeau 2002). Table 7. Wolf harvest in Alaska and Canada (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comments on NWR Hunting Proposal.Dp.Ml.Docx
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Parts 32 and 71 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–NWRS–2021–0027; FXRS12610900000–212–FF09R20000] RIN 1018–BF09 2021–2022 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Proposed rule. Attention: Shannon A. Estenoz, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Exercising the Delegated Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. Dear Ms. Estenoz, These comments are submitted on behalf of two national conservation organizations – Project Coyote and The Rewilding Institute. We appreciate the opportunity to present our review and critique of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) proposal to expand hunting and fishing on 90 National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs). The primary authors of these comments are David Parsons, Michelle Lute and Adrian Treves. Mr. Parsons is a retired career wildlife biologist with the USFWS. He has a Master of Science degree in Wildlife Ecology from Oregon State University and currently serves as a Science Advisor to Project Coyote and as the Carnivore Conservation Biologist for The Rewilding Institute. Dr. Lute is the National Carnivore Conservation Manager for Project Coyote. She has a PhD in wildlife management from Michigan State University. Dr. Treves is a Professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, founder of the Carnivore Coexistence Lab since 2007 and also serves as a Science Advisor to Project Coyote. He earned his PhD at Harvard University in 1997 and has authored >133 scientific papers on predator-prey ecology and conservation. Additional signatories include premier wildlife scientists from across North America (see below).
    [Show full text]
  • Concepts & Synthesis
    CONCEPTS & SYNTHESIS EMPHASIZING NEW IDEAS TO STIMULATE RESEARCH IN ECOLOGY Ecological Monographs, 81(3), 2011, pp. 349–405 Ó 2011 by the Ecological Society of America Regulation of animal size by eNPP, Bergmann’s rule, and related phenomena 1,3 2 MICHAEL A. HUSTON AND STEVE WOLVERTON 1Department of Biology, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666 USA 2University of North Texas, Department of Geography, Denton, Texas 76203-5017 USA Abstract. Bergmann’s rule, which proposes a heat-balance explanation for the observed latitudinal gradient of increasing animal body size with increasing latitude, has dominated the study of geographic patterns in animal size since it was first proposed in 1847. Several critical reviews have determined that as many as half of the species examined do not fit the predictions of Bergmann’s rule. We have proposed an alternative hypothesis for geographic variation in body size based on food availability, as regulated by the net primary production (NPP) of plants, specifically NPP during the growing season, or eNPP (ecologically and evolutionarily relevant NPP). Our hypothesis, ‘‘the eNPP rule,’’ is independent of latitude and predicts both spatial and temporal variation in body size, as well as in total population biomass, population growth rates, individual health, and life history traits of animals, including humans, wherever eNPP varies across appropriate scales of space or time. In the context of a revised interpretation of the global patterns of NPP and eNPP, we predict contrasting latitudinal correlations with body size in three distinct latitudinal zones. The eNPP rule explains body- size patterns that are consistent with Bergmann’s rule, as well as two distinct types of contradictions of Bergmann’s rule: the lack of latitudinal patterns within the tropics, and the decline in body size above approximately 608 latitude.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcneil River State Game Sanctuary Annual Management Report 2018
    Special Areas Management Report, ADF&G/DWC/SAMR-2019-1 McNeil River State Game Sanctuary Annual Management Report 2018 Thomas M. Griffin Edward W. Weiss ©2018 ADF&G, photo by Thomas M. Griffin 2019 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation Special Areas Management Report ADF&G/DWC/SAMR-2019-1 McNeil River State Game Sanctuary Annual Management Report 2018 Thomas M. Griffin Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, AK 99518-1565 Edward W. Weiss Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, AK 99518-1565 © 2019 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation PO Box 115526 Juneau, AK 99811-5526 The State of Alaska’s wildlife refuges, sanctuaries, and critical habitat areas are managed cooperatively by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (Divisions of Habitat and Wildlife Conservation) and the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. The McNeil River public use and viewing program, and its publications, are managed by the Lands and Refuges Program at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation. Funding comes from appropriations made by the Alaska Legislature and program receipts deposited to the State of Alaska’s Fish and Game Fund. Special areas management reports address management activities and goals within specific refuges, critical habitat areas, and sanctuaries managed by the division. Special areas management reports are intended for biologists or other technical professionals, as well as to inform the general public about the special areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 2008-RANGE-Anxiety Through the Ages
    ANXIETY THROUGH THE AGES In his new book, “Wolves in Russia,” Will N. Graves chronicles the reasons wolves are feared by the people who must live with them. Introduction only old, sick, or crippled wolves attack peo- support from the Government of Canada by Barney Nelson, Ph.D. ple. The current facts do not support that and the Alberta Foundation for the Arts. For belief.” more information, see Graves’ website at “Wolves in Russia” is a must-read book for This year, with editorial help from a Cana- www.wolvesinrussia.com. wolf advocates, ranchers, college professors, dian scientist, Graves has now published his The following are excerpts from “Wolves government agencies, and those who might life’s work on Russian wolves through Det- in Russia: Anxiety through the Ages” (2007): be camping in wolf territory. Will Graves’ bal- selig Enterprises, Ltd. of Calgary, Alberta, with anced investigation provides rare honesty and sanity in a groundbreaking and illuminating collection of Russian wolf science and docu- mented predation on humans and livestock. The book paints a vivid picture of govern- ment suppression of information; it docu- ments the effect of an unarmed population on wolf behavior; and it points to cycles of PHOTOS COURTESY WILL GRAVES terror and starvation that correspond to wolf population explosions. The author led a far-flung, adventurous life. During the Mexican outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease,he served in 1950 as chief of a horseback cattle-vaccinating brigade where he became interested in wolves spreading diseases among cloven-hoofed ani- mals. Next, he went on to careers with U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Yellowstone Grizzly Bears: Ecology and Conservation of an Icon of Wildness
    YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY BEARS ecology and conservation of an ICON OF WILDNESS EDITED BY P.J. White, Kerry A. Gunther, and Frank T. van Manen YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY BEARS Yellowstone Grizzly Bears: Ecology and Conservation of an Icon of Wildness Editors P. J. White, Kerry A. Gunther, and Frank T. van Manen Contributing Authors Daniel D. Bjornlie, Amanda M. Bramblett, Steven L. Cain, Tyler H. Coleman, Jennifer K. Fortin-Noreus, Kevin L. Frey, Mark A. Haroldson, Pauline L. Kamath, Eric G. Reinertson, Charles T. Robbins, Daniel J. Thompson, Daniel B. Tyers, Katharine R. Wilmot, and Travis C. Wyman Managing Editor Jennifer A. Jerrett YELLOWSTONE FOREVER, YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK AND U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, NORTHERN ROCKY MOUNTAIN SCIENCE CENTER Yellowstone Forever, Yellowstone National Park 82190 Published 2017 Contents Printed in the United States of America All chapters are prepared solely by officers or employees of the United States Preface ix government as part of their official duties and are not subject to copyright protection Daniel N. Wenk, Superintendent, Yellowstone National Park in the United States. Foreign copyrights may apply. National Park Service (NPS) photographs are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Foreign Introduction xv copyrights may apply. However, because this work may contain other copyrighted images or other incorporated material, permission from the copyright holder may be P. J. White, Kerry A. Gunther, and Frank T. van Manen necessary. Cover and half title images: www.revealedinnature.com by Jake Davis. Chapter 1: The Population 1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data P. J. White, Kerry A. Gunther, and Travis C.
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Bear Population Characteristics at Mcneil
    BROWN BEAR POPULATIONCHARACTERISTICS AT MCNEILRIVER, ALASKA RICHARDA. SELLERS,Alaska Departmentof Fish and Game, P.O. Box 37, KingSalmon, AK 99613 LARRYD. AUMILLER,Alaska Departmentof Fish and Game, 333 RaspberryRoad, Anchorage, AK 99518 Abstract:Observations of recognizablebrown bears (Ursus arctos) at McNeilRiver State Game Sanctuary (MRSGS) during 1963-91 provided long-termdata on populationsize, sex andage composition,reproductive success, and survival rates. Bearsusing MRSGS increased from 66 (SE = 5.8) during1969-84 to 113 (SE = 8.5) during1987-91. Adultsex ratioaveraged 121 males/100females. This reflecteda low exploitationrate and greater seasonal movements of malebears. Adultsurvival rates averaged 0.94 formales and 0.93 for females. Since1963, 31%of 168 cubsdisappeared between 0.5 and1.5 yearsof age. Kaplan-Meierestimates of summersurvival rates were 0.67 for cubsand 0.89 for yearlings. Twentyfemales, observed for a totalof 242 bear-years,raised 83 yearlingsin 47 litters. Lifetimerecruitment for 11 females observedfrom sexual maturity to presumeddeath averaged 2 (range0-8) yearlings.Despite the high ratio of adultmales to femalesand increased populationsize, we did not detecta density-dependentsuppression of cub productionor survival. Int. Conf. Bear Res. and Manage. 9(1):283-293 Brown bears are a K-selected species (Cowan et al. possible at McNeil River because of the presence of 1974). Absent substantial human-induced mortality, habituated,individually recognizable bears that visit the populations should stabilize at carryingcapacity and be site to catch salmon during mid-summer. In this paper, regulated by density-dependentmechanisms, including we build upon earlier data collected at this site and one or more of the following: lower reproductive compare contemporary values with earlier results rates, lower survival rates, and higher dispersal rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Baby Reindeer Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    BABY REINDEER PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Yu-hsuan Huang | 12 pages | 02 Aug 2016 | CHRONICLE BOOKS | 9781452146614 | English | California, United States Baby Reindeer PDF Book Bureau of Education. Alice in Wonderland. Baby Mickey Halloween Costume M. Mongalla gazelle E. Download as PDF Printable version. According to the Igloolik Oral History Project IOHP , "Caribou antlers provided the Inuit with a myriad of implements, from snow knives and shovels to drying racks and seal-hunting tools. It was first domesticated in Siberia and Scandinavia. Finally, the North American caribou has not been domesticated and is generally a wild animal. Because of the continuing decline and expected changes in long-term weather patterns, this subspecies is at imminent risk of extinction. A complex set of terms describes each part of the antler and relates it to its various uses". Restrictions apply. Retrieved 11 October These cows are healthier than those without antlers. However, Geist and others considered it valid. Allen, [Notes 2] [34] [35]. These can, with some certainty, be dated to the Migration Period , although it is not unlikely that they have been in use since the Stone Age. In the winter, the pads shrink and tighten, exposing the rim of the hoof, which cuts into the ice and crusted snow to keep it from slipping. Scotland on Sunday. Choose options. Retrieved 17 December Morris Costumes. Carl Linnaeus chose the name Rangifer for the reindeer genus, which Albertus Magnus used in his De animalibus , fol. Mickey Mouse. The reindeer is the only deer that has been domesticated. Liber 22, Cap. There are dozens of herds of wild caribou in the state of Alaska and their population there is estimated to be more than one million strong.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcneil River State Game Sanctuary Annual Management Report 2014
    Special Areas Management Report ADF&G/DWC/SAMR-2017-3 McNeil River State Game Sanctuary Annual Management Report 2014 Thomas M. Griffin Edward W. Weiss ©2014 ADF&G, photo by Thomas M. Griffin 2017 Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation Special Areas Management Report ADF&G/DWC/SAMR-2017-3 McNeil River State Game Sanctuary Annual Management Report 2014 Thomas M. Griffin Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, Alaska 99518-1565 Edward W. Weiss Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, Alaska 99518-1565 ©2017 Alaska Department of Fish and Game PREPARED BY: Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Wildlife Conservation 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage, AK 99518-1565 The State of Alaska’s wildlife refuges, sanctuaries, and critical habitat areas are managed cooperatively by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (Divisions of Habitat and Wildlife Conservation) and the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. The McNeil River public use and viewing program, and its publications, are managed by the Lands and Refuges Program at the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation. Funding comes from appropriations made by the Alaska legislature and program receipts deposited to the State of Alaska’s Fish and Game Fund. Special areas management reports address management activities and goals within specific refuges, critical habitat areas, and sanctuaries managed by the division. The special areas management reports are intended for biologists or other technical professionals, as well as to inform the general public about the special areas.
    [Show full text]
  • On “Strict Machine” by Goldfrapp
    On “Strict Machine” by Goldfrapp Sam Jowett Four months, fifteen days in. Honeymoon Phase meant to mellow out. Passion ought to neutralize. But how fucking wrong is that. Chrysalis shredding—not just clothes—but those thoughts. True selves emerge. Polyester veneer of politeness is now scraped clean. Goldfrapp The culprit: a single nail, obsidian sharp. Goldfrapp’s satin clad, ebony-gloved fingers. Needle digs into vinyl. You dig into my skin. “Wonderful Electriccccccc.” The lyric “Strict Machine” sashays over the bridge. We saunter past discarded inhibitions. The chorus awaits, an Black Cherry eruption with a single revelation: 04/2003 I’m in love! Mute I’m in love! I’m in love! “Felt Mountain,” their debut, was the bait. But just like us, hints flirted beneath the cabaret instrument gloss. Even masquerades can only hide appearances for so long. A truth awaited. Not to be whispered, but rather gasped aloud. “Strict Machine” dictates: Dressed in white noise. Little else. This is the inverse of a sophomore slump. Former trip-hop ambience is usurped by electroclash riptide. Siren synths draw us closer. Entrapping me to you. Lyrics our parents warned us about. Trent Reznor wishes he could be this lethal. Dance. It does not ask. It demands. Sitting is heresy. Head thrashing, body sweating. This is not some damn waltz. Hands do not clasp in graceful arcs. Rather, bodies meet perpendicular. Entwine inversely. Arms twist. Disorientation until we can’t tell each other apart. You tell me you can tie cherry stems with your tongue. I tell you I can whisper “Black Cherry” nothings into your ear.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Review 12-04 December 2012
    The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation Technical Review 12-04 December 2012 1 The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation The Wildlife Society and The Boone and Crockett Club Technical Review 12-04 - December 2012 Citation Organ, J.F., V. Geist, S.P. Mahoney, S. Williams, P.R. Krausman, G.R. Batcheller, T.A. Decker, R. Carmichael, P. Nanjappa, R. Regan, R.A. Medellin, R. Cantu, R.E. McCabe, S. Craven, G.M. Vecellio, and D.J. Decker. 2012. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-04. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Series Edited by Theodore A. Bookhout Copy Edit and Design Terra Rentz (AWB®), Managing Editor, The Wildlife Society Lisa Moore, Associate Editor, The Wildlife Society Maja Smith, Graphic Designer, MajaDesign, Inc. Cover Images Front cover, clockwise from upper left: 1) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) kittens removed from den for marking and data collection as part of a long-term research study. Credit: John F. Organ; 2) A mixed flock of ducks and geese fly from a wetland area. Credit: Steve Hillebrand/USFWS; 3) A researcher attaches a radio transmitter to a short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) in Colorado’s Pawnee National Grassland. Credit: Laura Martin; 4) Rifle hunter Ron Jolly admires a mature white-tailed buck harvested by his wife on the family’s farm in Alabama. Credit: Tes Randle Jolly; 5) Caribou running along a northern peninsula of Newfoundland are part of a herd compositional survey. Credit: John F. Organ; 6) Wildlife veterinarian Lisa Wolfe assesses a captive mule deer during studies of density dependence in Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • STATUS of BROWN BEARS and OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES in the Mcneil RIVER STATE GAME SANCTUARY and REFUGE in 2006
    STATUS OF BROWN BEARS AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES IN THE McNEIL RIVER STATE GAME SANCTUARY AND REFUGE IN 2006 ANNUAL REPORT TO THE ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE Submitted by: Denby S. Lloyd, Commissioner Prepared by: Lands and Refuges Program Division of Wildlife Conservation Alaska Department ofFish and Game January 2007 ... - .. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It The McNeil River State Game Sanctuary and State Game Refuge were created by the Alaska State Legislature in 1967 and 1991, respectively. The sanctuary was established primarily to provide permanent protection for brown bears and other fish and wildlife populations and their habitats and to maintain and enhance the unique bear-viewing opportunities within the sanctuary. ... The refuge was established for similar reasons and human use in the refuge is managed to maintain and enhance the bear-viewing opportunities within the adjoining sanctuary. • The sanctuary supports the largest gathering of brown bears in the world as they congregate to feed on migrating salmon. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game operates a world­ renowned bear-viewing and photography program in the sanctuary at McNeil River and nearby - Mikfik Creek. This report provides a summary of the status of brown bears and other fish and ­ wildlife resources within the sanctuary and refuge, the effects of fishing and fishery • enhancement activities on these resources, land status and management issues, and known public .. use. As many as 144 individual bears have been observed along McNeil River during summer and as .. many as 72 bears have been seen at one time at McNeil River Falls, the primary bear gathering and viewing location.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationships Between Brown Bears and Chum Salmon at Mcneil River
    RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN BROWN BEARS AND CHUM SALMON AT MCNEIL RIVER, ALASKA By Joshua M. Peirce RECOMMENDED: Advisory Committee Co-Chair Advisory Committee Co-Chair Assistant Chair, Department of Biology and Wildlife APPROVED: Dean, College of Natural Science and Mathematics Dean of the Graduate School Date RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN BROWN BEARS AND CHUM SALMON AT MCNEIL RIVER, ALASKA A THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the University of Alaska Fairbanks in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE By Joshua M. Peirce, B.S. Fairbanks, Alaska August 2007 iii Abstract Since 1967, the McNeil River State Game Sanctuary (MRSGS) has been managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to “provide permanent protection for brown bears”. Up to 144 bears have been identified in a summer at MRSGS, and 72 bears at once have been observed in the vicinity of McNeil Falls. In this study, 155 chum salmon were radio tagged as they entered McNeil River and monitored daily. In 2005 and 2006 bears killed 48% of pre-spawning tagged chum salmon and consumed 99% of all tagged chums below McNeil Falls where most of the run occurs. A retrospective analysis of 31 years of run data using a new stream life, and a correction for observer efficiency, revealed that the current escapement goal of 13,750-25,750 actually represents 34,375- 64,375 chum salmon. Considering the large removal of pre-spawning chum salmon, I recommend an additional 23,000 chum salmon be added to the escapement goal. Additionally, an annual escapement of 4,000-6,000 chum salmon above McNeil Falls should be set as an objective.
    [Show full text]