Effectiveness of population-based recovery actions for threatened southern mountain caribou.

Habitat loss is affecting many species, including the southern mountain caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) population in western North America. Over the last half century, this threatened caribou population's range and abundance have dramatically contracted. An integrated population model was used to analyze 51 years (1973-2023) of demographic data from 40 southern mountain caribou subpopulations to assess the effectiveness of population-based recovery actions at increasing population growth. Reducing potential limiting factors on threatened caribou populations offered a rare opportunity to identify the causes of decline and assess methods of recovery. Southern mountain caribou abundance declined by 51% between 1991 and 2023, and 37% of subpopulations were functionally extirpated. Wolf reduction was the only recovery action that consistently increased population growth when applied in isolation, and combinations of wolf reductions with maternal penning or supplemental feeding provided rapid growth but were applied to only four subpopulations. As of 2023, recovery actions have increased the abundance of southern mountain caribou by 52%, compared to a simulation with no interventions. When predation pressure was reduced, rapid population growth was observed, even under contemporary climate change and high levels of habitat loss. Unless predation is reduced, caribou subpopulations will continue to be extirpated well before habitat conservation and restoration can become effective.

Fall supplemental feeding increases population growth rate of an endangered caribou herd.

Most woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) populations are declining primarily because of unsustainable predation resulting from habitat-mediated apparent competition. Wolf (Canis lupus) reduction is an effective recovery option because it addresses the direct effect of predation. We considered the possibility that the indirect effects of predation might also affect caribou population dynamics by adversely affecting summer foraging behaviour. If spring and/or summer nutrition was inadequate, then supplemental feeding in fall might compensate for that limitation and contribute to population growth. Improved nutrition and therefore body condition going into winter could increase adult survival and lead to improved reproductive success the next spring. To test that hypothesis, we fed high-quality food pellets to free-ranging caribou in the Kennedy Siding caribou herd each fall for six years, starting in 2014, to see if population growth rate increased. Beginning in winter 2015-16, the Province of British Columbia began a concurrent annual program to promote caribou population increase by attempting to remove most wolves within the Kennedy Siding and the adjacent caribou herds' ranges. To evaluate the impact of feeding, we compared lambdas before and after feeding began, and to the population trend in the adjacent Quintette herd over the subsequent four years. Supplemental feeding appeared to have an incremental effect on population growth. Population growth of the Kennedy Siding herd was higher in the year after feeding began (λ = 1.06) compared to previous years (λ = 0.91) and to the untreated Quintette herd (λ = 0.95). Average annual growth rate of the Kennedy Siding herd over the subsequent four years, where both feeding and wolf reduction occurred concurrently, was higher than in the Quintette herd where the only management action in those years was wolf reduction (λ = 1.16 vs. λ = 1.08). The higher growth rate of the Kennedy Siding herd was due to higher female survival (96.2%/yr vs. 88.9%/yr). Many caribou were in relatively poor condition in the fall. Consumption of supplemental food probably improved their nutritional status which ultimately led to population growth. Further feeding experiments on other caribou herds using an adaptive management approach would verify the effect of feeding as a population recovery tool. Our results support the recommendation that multiple management actions should be implemented to improve recovery prospects for caribou.

Grizzly bear habitat selection is scale dependent.

The purpose of our study is to show how ecologists' interpretation of habitat selection by grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) is altered by the scale of observation and also how management questions would be best addressed using predetermined scales of analysis. Using resource selection functions (RSF) we examined how variation in the spatial extent of availability affected our interpretation of habitat selection by grizzly bears inhabiting mountain and plateau landscapes. We estimated separate models for females and males using three spatial extents: within the study area, within the home range, and within predetermined movement buffers. We employed two methods for evaluating the effects of scale on our RSF designs. First, we chose a priori six candidate models, estimated at each scale, and ranked them using Akaike Information Criteria. Using this method, results changed among scales for males but not for females. For female bears, models that included the full suite of covariates predicted habitat use best at each scale. For male bears that resided in the mountains, models based on forest successional stages ranked highest at the study-wide and home range extents, whereas models containing covariates based on terrain features ranked highest at the buffer extent. For male bears on the plateau, each scale estimated a different highest-ranked model. Second, we examined differences among model coefficients across the three scales for one candidate model. We found that both the magnitude and direction of coefficients were dependent upon the scale examined; results varied between landscapes, scales, and sexes. Greenness, reflecting lush green vegetation, was a strong predictor of the presence of female bears in both landscapes and males that resided in the mountains. Male bears on the plateau were the only animals to select areas that exposed them to a high risk of mortality by humans. Our results show that grizzly bear habitat selection is scale dependent. Further, the selection of resources can be dependent upon the availability of a particular vegetation type on the landscape. From a management perspective, decisions should be based on a hierarchical process of habitat selection, recognizing that selection patterns vary across scales.

Foraging across a variable landscape: behavioral decisions made by woodland caribou at multiple spatial scales.

We examined the foraging behavior of woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) relative to the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of their environment. We assessed (1) whether caribou altered their behavior over time while making trade-offs between forage abundance and accessibility; and (2) whether foraging decisions were consistent across spatial scales (i.e., as scale increased, similar decision criteria were used at each scale). We discuss whether caribou adjusted their behavior to take advantage of changing forage availability through time and space. At the scale of the feeding site (as revealed by discriminant function analyses), caribou in both forested and alpine (above tree-line) environments selected sites where the biomass of particular lichen species was greatest and snow the least deep. Caribou did not select those species with the highest nutritional value (i.e., digestible protein and energy) in either area. Where snow depth, density, and hardness limited access to terrestrial lichens in the forest, caribou foraged instead at those trees with the greatest amount of arboreal lichen. Selection of lichen species and the influence of snow differed across time, indicating that in this system the abundance or accessibility of forage temporally influenced foraging behavior. A path analysis of forest data and multiple regression analysis of alpine data were used to test the hypothesis that variables important at the scale of the feeding site explained foraging effort at the scale of the patch. For forest patches, our hypothesized model reliably explained foraging effort, but not all variables that were statistically important at the scale of the feeding site were significant predictors at the scale of the patch. For alpine patches, our hypothesized model did not explain a statistically significant portion of the variation in the number of feeding sites within the patch, and none of the individual variables from the feeding site remained statistically significant at the patch scale. The incongruity between those variables important at the scale of the feeding site and those important at the patch showed that spatial scale affects the foraging decisions of woodland caribou. At the scale of the landscape, there was a trade-off between forage abundance and accessibility. Relative to the alpine environment, caribou in the forest foraged at feeding sites and patches with greater amounts of less variably distributed lichen, but deeper less variable snow depths. Considering the behavioral plasticity of woodland caribou, there may be no distinct advantage to foraging in one landscape over the other.

Predicting grizzly bear density in western North America.

Conservation of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) is often controversial and the disagreement often is focused on the estimates of density used to calculate allowable kill. Many recent estimates of grizzly bear density are now available but field-based estimates will never be available for more than a small portion of hunted populations. Current methods of predicting density in areas of management interest are subjective and untested. Objective methods have been proposed, but these statistical models are so dependent on results from individual study areas that the models do not generalize well. We built regression models to relate grizzly bear density to ultimate measures of ecosystem productivity and mortality for interior and coastal ecosystems in North America. We used 90 measures of grizzly bear density in interior ecosystems, of which 14 were currently known to be unoccupied by grizzly bears. In coastal areas, we used 17 measures of density including 2 unoccupied areas. Our best model for coastal areas included a negative relationship with tree cover and positive relationships with the proportion of salmon in the diet and topographic ruggedness, which was correlated with precipitation. Our best interior model included 3 variables that indexed terrestrial productivity, 1 describing vegetation cover, 2 indices of human use of the landscape and, an index of topographic ruggedness. We used our models to predict current population sizes across Canada and present these as alternatives to current population estimates. Our models predict fewer grizzly bears in British Columbia but more bears in Canada than in the latest status review. These predictions can be used to assess population status, set limits for total human-caused mortality, and for conservation planning, but because our predictions are static, they cannot be used to assess population trend.