DOCSLIB.ORG

Pronghorn Theory Manual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INL REPORT INL/EXT-18-44453 Unlimited Release Printed February 2018 Pronghorn Theory Manual April J. Novak Ling Zou John W. Peterson David Andrs Joe Kelly Rachel N. Slaybaugh Richard C. Martineau Hans D. Gougar Prepared by Idaho National Laboratory Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 The Idaho National Laboratory is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Battelle Energy Alliance for the United States Department of Energy under DOE Idaho Operations Office. Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517. Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited. Issued by the Idaho National Laboratory, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Battelle Energy Alliance. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or rep- resent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. NT O E F E TM N R E A R P G E Y •D • U N A I C T I E R D E S M T A ATES OF 2 INL/EXT-18-44453 Unlimited Release Printed February 2018 Pronghorn Theory Manual A.J. Novak∗, L. Zou†, J.W. Peterson†, D. Andrs†, J. Kelly×, R.N. Slaybaugh∗, R.C. Martineau†, and H.D. Gougar† ∗ University of California, Berkeley 3115 Etcheverry Hall Berkeley, CA 94708 ∗ Idaho National Laboratory Idaho Falls, ID 83402 × Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rockville, MD 20852 3 Contents 1 Introduction . 10 2 Physical Models. 11 2.1 Preliminary Considerations . 15 2.2 The “Math” Behind the Porous Media Equations . 16 2.2.1 Properties of Averages . 18 2.2.2 A Generic Transport Equation . 22 2.3 The Continuity Equation . 23 2.4 The Momentum Equation . 25 2.4.1 Porous Media Momentum Losses . 39 2.4.2 The Trans-Forchheimer Regime . 43 2.4.3 Anisotropic Porous Media . 46 2.5 The Fluid Energy Equation . 47 2.6 The Solid Energy Equation . 58 2.7 The Legacy Pronghorn Equations . 61 2.8 A Unified Approach to Solving the Navier-Stokes Equations . 61 2.9 Boundary Conditions . 66 2.9.1 The Continuity Equation . 67 2.9.2 The Momentum Equation . 67 2.9.3 The Energy Equation . 68 2.10 Nondimensionalization of the Governing Equations . 68 2.10.1 The Momentum Equation . 69 2.10.2 The Energy Equations . 69 2.10.3 Compressible Versus Incompressible Flows . 71 2.10.4 Definitions of Dimensionless Numbers . 74 2.10.5 Expected Values for Dimensionless Numbers. 76 2.11 Summary of Physical Models . 77 3 Kernels........................................................................................... 80 4 AuxKernels....................................................................................... 82 5 Interface Kernels . 83 6 Boundary Conditions . 84 6.1 The Conservative Equation Set . 85 6.2 The Primitive Equation Set . 86 7 Equations of State . 87 7.1 Barotropic Equation of State . 87 7.2 Stiffened Gas Equation of State . 87 7.3 Isentropic Stiffened Gas Equation of State . 88 7.4 Linear Equation of State . 88 7.5 Ideal Gas Equation of State . 88 7.5.1 Isentropic Relations . 89 8 Porosity, Coordination Number, and Tortuosity . 91 8.1 Porosity . 96 8.1.1 OscillatoryPorosityFunction ................................................ 96 8.1.2 ExponentialPorosityFunction ................................................ 96 8.1.3 AnnularExponentialPorosityFunction ......................................... 96 8.2 Coordination Number . 97 4 8.3 Tortuosity . 97 9 Friction Coefficients . 98 9.1 Pebble Bed Correlations . 98 9.1.1 Friction Coefficients Independent of the Wall . 99 9.1.1.1 ErgunDragCoefficients .............................................. 99 9.1.1.2 PiecewiseLinearDragCoefficients ....................................100 9.1.1.3 KTADragCoefficients ................................................101 9.1.2 Friction Coefficients Dependent on the Wall . 101 9.1.2.1 EisfeldDragCoefficients ............................................102 9.2 Pipe Flow Correlations . 102 9.2.1 ChurchillDragCoefficients ..................................................103 10 Heat Transfer Coefficients. 104 10.1 Pebble Bed Correlations . 104 10.1.1 Correlations Independent of Porosity Variation . 105 10.1.1.1 WakaoPebbleBedHTC ..................................................106 10.1.2 Correlations Dependent on Porosity Variation . 106 10.1.2.1 GnielinskiPebbleBedHTC .............................................106 10.1.2.2 KTAPebbleBedHTC ....................................................107 10.2 Wall-to-Fluid Correlations . ..
Recommended publications
  • Differential Habitat Selection by Moose and Elk in the Besa-Prophet Area of Northern British Columbia

    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.
  • Educator's Guide

    Educator's Guide

    Educator’s Guide the jill and lewis bernard family Hall of north american mammals inside: • Suggestions to Help You come prepared • essential questions for Student Inquiry • Strategies for teaching in the exhibition • map of the Exhibition • online resources for the Classroom • Correlations to science framework • glossary amnh.org/namammals Essential QUESTIONS Who are — and who were — the North as tundra, winters are cold, long, and dark, the growing season American Mammals? is extremely short, and precipitation is low. In contrast, the abundant precipitation and year-round warmth of tropical All mammals on Earth share a common ancestor and and subtropical forests provide optimal growing conditions represent many millions of years of evolution. Most of those that support the greatest diversity of species worldwide. in this hall arose as distinct species in the relatively recent Florida and Mexico contain some subtropical forest. In the past. Their ancestors reached North America at different boreal forest that covers a huge expanse of the continent’s times. Some entered from the north along the Bering land northern latitudes, winters are dry and severe, summers moist bridge, which was intermittently exposed by low sea levels and short, and temperatures between the two range widely. during the Pleistocene (2,588,000 to 11,700 years ago). Desert and scrublands are dry and generally warm through- These migrants included relatives of New World cats (e.g. out the year, with temperatures that may exceed 100°F and dip sabertooth, jaguar), certain rodents, musk ox, at least two by 30 degrees at night. kinds of elephants (e.g.
  • BISON Workshop Slides

    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.
  • Horned Animals

    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.
  • Pbmr-400 Benchmark Solution of Exercise 1 and 2 Using the Moose Based Applications: Mammoth, Pronghorn

    Pbmr-400 Benchmark Solution of Exercise 1 and 2 Using the Moose Based Applications: Mammoth, Pronghorn

    EPJ Web of Conferences 247, 06020 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202124706020 PHYSOR2020 PBMR-400 BENCHMARK SOLUTION OF EXERCISE 1 AND 2 USING THE MOOSE BASED APPLICATIONS: MAMMOTH, PRONGHORN Paolo Balestra1, Sebastian Schunert1, Robert W Carlsen1, April J Novak2 Mark D DeHart1, Richard C Martineau1 1Idaho National Laboratory 955 MK Simpson Blvd, Idaho Falls, ID 83401, USA 2University of California, Berkeley 2000 Carleton Street, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT High temperature gas cooled reactors (HTGR) are a candidate for timely Gen-IV reac- tor technology deployment because of high technology readiness and walk-away safety. Among HTGRs, pebble bed reactors (PBRs) have attractive features such as low excess reactivity and online refueling. Pebble bed reactors pose unique challenges to analysts and reactor designers such as continuous burnup distribution depending on pebble mo- tion and recirculation, radiative heat transfer across a variety of gas-filled gaps, and long design basis transients such as pressurized and depressurized loss of forced circulation. Modeling and simulation is essential for both the PBR’s safety case and design process. In order to verify and validate the new generation codes the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) Data bank provide a set of benchmarks data together with solutions calculated by the participants using the state of the art codes of that time. An important milestone to test the new PBR simulation codes is the OECD NEA PBMR-400 benchmark which includes thermal hydraulic and neutron kinetic standalone exercises as well as coupled exercises and transients scenarios.
  • The American Bison in Alaska

    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.
  • Pronghorn G TAG

    Pronghorn G TAG

    ANTELOPE AND ... the American “antelope”! IRAFFE Pronghorn G TAG Why exhibit pronghorns? • Celebrate our local biodiversity by displaying the last surviving species of the Antilocapridae, a mammalian family endemic to North America. • Participate in a recovery program close to home: AZA maintains a priority insurance population of the critically endangered peninsular pronghorn. • Engage guests with these “antelope” from the familiar song “Home on the Range” (even though pronghorns aren’t true “antelope” at all!). • Let visitors get hands-on with the unusual horn sheaths of pronghorns - they are keratinous like horns, but are shed annually like antlers! • Seek partnerships with local running groups: pronghorn are the fastest land animals in North America, able to cover 6 miles in 9 minutes! • TAG Recommendation: Contact the SSP for guidance regarding which pronghorn program is best suited to your facility’s climate. MEASUREMENTS IUCN LEAST Length: 4.5 feet CONCERN Height: 3 feet (CITES I) Stewardship Opportunities at shoulder Peninsular Pronghorn Recovery Project Weight: 65-130 lbs <200 peninsular Contact Melodi Tayles: [email protected] Prairies North America in the wild Care and Husbandry RED SSP (peninsular): 25.26 (51) in 7 AZA institutions (2019) Species coordinator: Melodi Tayles, San Diego Zoo Safari Park [email protected] ; (760) 855-1911 CANDIDATE Program (generic): 34.61 (95) in 21 institutions (2014) Social nature: Herd living. Harem groups with a single male are typical. Bachelor groups may be successful in the absence of females. Mixed species: Pronghorn are frequently exhibited with bison. They have also been housed with camels, deer, cranes, and waterfowl. Housing: Peninsular pronghorn are heat tolerant and do well in windy conditions, but heated shelters recommended where temperatures fall below 40ºF for extended periods.
  • GNUSLETTER Volume 37 Number 1

    GNUSLETTER Volume 37 Number 1

    GNUSLETTER Volume 37 Number 1 ANTELOPE SPECIALIST GROUP July 2020 ISSN 2304-0718 IUCN Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group GNUSLETTER is the biannual newsletter of the IUCN Species Survival Commission Antelope Specialist Group (ASG). First published in 1982 by first ASG Chair Richard D. Estes, the intent of GNUSLETTER, then and today, is the dissemination of reports and information regarding antelopes and their conservation. ASG Members are an important network of individuals and experts working across disciplines throughout Africa and Asia. Contributions (original articles, field notes, other material relevant to antelope biology, ecology, and conservation) are welcomed and should be sent to the editor. Today GNUSLETTER is published in English in electronic form and distributed widely to members and non-members, and to the IUCN SSC global conservation network. To be added to the distribution list please contact [email protected]. GNUSLETTER Review Board Editor, Steve Shurter, [email protected] Co-Chair, David Mallon Co-Chair, Philippe Chardonnet ASG Program Office, Tania Gilbert, Phil Riordan GNUSLETTER Editorial Assistant, Stephanie Rutan GNUSLETTER is published and supported by White Oak Conservation The Antelope Specialist Group Program Office is hosted and supported by Marwell Zoo http://www.whiteoakwildlife.org/ https://www.marwell.org.uk The designation of geographical entities in this report does not imply the expression of any opinion on the part of IUCN, the Species Survival Commission, or the Antelope Specialist Group concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or concerning the delimitation of any frontiers or boundaries. Views expressed in Gnusletter are those of the individual authors, Cover photo: Peninsular pronghorn male, El Vizcaino Biosphere Reserve (© J.
  • Moose Alces Americanus

    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.
  • Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan

    Utah Pronghorn Statewide Management Plan

    UTAH PRONGHORN STATEWIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN UTAH DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES UTAH DIVISION OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES STATEWIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR PRONGHORN I. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN A. General This document is the statewide management plan for pronghorn in Utah. This plan will provide overall direction and guidance to Utah’s pronghorn management activities. Included in the plan is an assessment of current life history and management information, identification of issues and concerns relating to pronghorn management in the state, and the establishment of goals, objectives and strategies for future management. The statewide plan will provide direction for establishment of individual pronghorn unit management plans throughout the state. B. Dates Covered This pronghorn plan will be in effect upon approval of the Wildlife Board (expected date of approval November 30, 2017) and subject to review within 10 years. II. SPECIES ASSESSMENT A. Natural History The pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) is the sole member of the family Antilocapridae and is native only to North America. Fossil records indicate that the present-day form may go back at least a million years (Kimball and Johnson 1978). The name pronghorn is descriptive of the adult male’s large, black-colored horns with anterior prongs that are shed each year in late fall or early winter. Females also have horns, but they are shorter and seldom pronged. Mature pronghorn bucks weigh 45–60 kilograms (100–130 pounds) and adult does weigh 35–45 kilograms (75–100 pounds). Pronghorn are North America’s fastest land mammal and can attain speeds of approximately 72 kilometers (45 miles) per hour (O’Gara 2004a).
  • Cervid Mixed-Species Table That Was Included in the 2014 Cervid RC

    Cervid Mixed-Species Table That Was Included in the 2014 Cervid RC

    Appendix III. Cervid Mixed Species Attempts (Successful) Species Birds Ungulates Small Mammals Alces alces Trumpeter Swans Moose Axis axis Saurus Crane, Stanley Crane, Turkey, Sandhill Crane Sambar, Nilgai, Mouflon, Indian Rhino, Przewalski Horse, Sable, Gemsbok, Addax, Fallow Deer, Waterbuck, Persian Spotted Deer Goitered Gazelle, Reeves Muntjac, Blackbuck, Whitetailed deer Axis calamianensis Pronghorn, Bighorned Sheep Calamian Deer Axis kuhili Kuhl’s or Bawean Deer Axis porcinus Saurus Crane Sika, Sambar, Pere David's Deer, Wisent, Waterbuffalo, Muntjac Hog Deer Capreolus capreolus Western Roe Deer Cervus albirostris Urial, Markhor, Fallow Deer, MacNeil's Deer, Barbary Deer, Bactrian Wapiti, Wisent, Banteng, Sambar, Pere White-lipped Deer David's Deer, Sika Cervus alfredi Philipine Spotted Deer Cervus duvauceli Saurus Crane Mouflon, Goitered Gazelle, Axis Deer, Indian Rhino, Indian Muntjac, Sika, Nilgai, Sambar Barasingha Cervus elaphus Turkey, Roadrunner Sand Gazelle, Fallow Deer, White-lipped Deer, Axis Deer, Sika, Scimitar-horned Oryx, Addra Gazelle, Ankole, Red Deer or Elk Dromedary Camel, Bison, Pronghorn, Giraffe, Grant's Zebra, Wildebeest, Addax, Blesbok, Bontebok Cervus eldii Urial, Markhor, Sambar, Sika, Wisent, Waterbuffalo Burmese Brow-antlered Deer Cervus nippon Saurus Crane, Pheasant Mouflon, Urial, Markhor, Hog Deer, Sambar, Barasingha, Nilgai, Wisent, Pere David's Deer Sika 52 Cervus unicolor Mouflon, Urial, Markhor, Barasingha, Nilgai, Rusa, Sika, Indian Rhino Sambar Dama dama Rhea Llama, Tapirs European Fallow Deer
  • Moose March 2014

    Moose March 2014

    Volume 27/Issue 7 Moose March 2014 MOOSE © Hagerty Ryan, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service © Steve Kraemer MOOSE There are large shadows in Idaho’s Only males grow antlers. Both the keep the calf well hidden for the forests. They are huge but hide males and females have a flap of first few weeks. A moose is very very well. These shadows love to skin and hair hanging from their protective of her calf. She will be around wet meadows, streams, throats. It’s called a bell or dewlap. charge anything that gets too close lakes and ponds. Sometimes the The bell helps moose “talk” to each by rushing forward and striking only way you may know they are other. The bell has scent glands with both front feet. there is by the rustling of leaves on it. The smells on a male’s bell and shaking of twigs. This shadow lets a female know that he likes A calf weighs between 20 to 35 is the moose (Alces americanus). her. A full grown male, called a pounds when born, but it grows bull, may stand six feet high at the quickly on its mother’s rich milk. The name moose comes from the shoulder and weigh 1,000 to 1,600 By the time the calf is one week Algonquian Indian word “mons” pounds. The female, called a cow, old, it can run faster than a man. which means twig eater. What is smaller; she may weigh between Plants become part of a calf’s diet an appropriate name; moose are 800 and 1,300 pounds.