Citizen based monitoring and the charismatic megafauna of Wisconsin

Timothy Van Deelen

David MacFarland

University of Wisconsin at Madison

ALLposters.com

Charismatic megafaunacharismatic megafauna noun. Animals that have popular appeal and so can form the basis of conservation campaigns and fundraising drives.

ALLposters.com

White-tailed deer in Wisconsin

Early population influences

• Native American hunting

• Fur trade• Logging• Settlement• Market hunting

Early 20th Century to now

• Increasing regulation• Ecologically meaningful

DMUs• Mandatory harvest

registration• Variable quotas• Sex-Age-Kill

Plastic food habits...

Survey of National Park Managers:98 species of plants threaten by overabundant deer in human-influencedlandscapes (Miller et al. 1992)

Waller and Alverson 1997

“This effect of too many deer on the ground flora of the forest deserves special mentionbecause it is an elusive burglary of esthetic wealth, the more dangerous because unintentional and unseen…” - Leopold

University of Wisconsin-Madison Archives

Recent population trend

R. Rolley WI DNR

Sex-Age-Kill

Sex-Age-Kill

Wolves

Changes in Wisconsin Gray Wolf Population:

1980-2006

115

465

435

373

335327

257248

205

178

148

9983

57404540343128

1816151719272125

1131089483

70665747

35281814121312117655445455

1980 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89

1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99

2000 01 02 03 04 05 06

Number of Wolves

Number of Packs

2005 – 2006 Wolf Packs

Citizen wolf trackers

Black Bears

Large animal life table, r = -0.10x f(x) S(x) l(x) d(x) q(x) p(x)

age count temporal dist. cohort survival cohort mortality age sp. motality age sp. survival

f(x)/f(0) S(x)e^rx l(x) - l(x+1) d(x)/l(x) 1-q(x)

0 1000 1.00 1.00 0.28 0.28 0.72

1 801 0.80 0.72 0.08 0.11 0.89

2 789 0.79 0.65 0.07 0.11 0.89

3 776 0.78 0.57 0.06 0.11 0.89

4 764 0.76 0.51 0.07 0.13 0.87

5 734 0.73 0.45 0.07 0.15 0.85

6 688 0.69 0.38 0.06 0.16 0.84

7 640 0.64 0.32 0.06 0.19 0.81

8 571 0.57 0.26 0.08 0.30 0.70

9 439 0.44 0.18 0.09 0.48 0.52

10 252 0.25 0.09 0.06 0.66 0.34

11 96 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.94 0.06

12 6 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.45

13 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00

14 0 0 0 0 undefined undefined

Notation follows Caughley, 1977. Analysis of vertebrate populations

The expanded life tablex l(x) p(x) m(x)

cohort survival age.sp survival age sp. birth rate

l(x+1)/l(x) l(x)m(x) l(x)m(x)x

0 1.00 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.00

1 0.80 0.50 2.00 1.60 1.60

2 0.40 0.25 3.00 1.20 2.40

3 0.10 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.30

4 0.00 undefined 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.90

Generation time: G=Σl(x)m(x)x/Σl(x)m(x)

Net reproductive rate: Ro= Σl(x)m(x)

r ≈ ln(Ro)/G Euler-Lotka equation: Σl(x)m(x)exp(-rx) = 1

CBM-Sponsored bear project(you want HOW much tetracycline?)

Citizen contributed rib samples

Petersen Population Estimate from Tetracycline Marking

No. bears in pop. (N) No. samples examined (n)

—————————— = ————————————

No. marked in pop. (M) No. marked in sample (m)

Nest = M * (n/m)

Increasing management problem: bears and agriculture

Wisconsin moose

Wisconsin cougar

Next generation payoffs of Citizen-Based MonitoringSome examples

What’s more effective baiting or T-zones?

Baiting T-zone

Cha

nge

in h

arve

st

Does feeding increase the growth of the deer population?

How large will the wolf population get?

How do wolves impact the growth of the deer population?

(± 1 SE)

Where will bears conflict with farmers and how soon?

Thank you.