Affiliation:
1. California State Polytechnic University
2. California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Abstract
In northern California, Roosevelt (Cervus canadensis roosevelti) and Rocky Mountain (C. c. nelsoni) elk occupy a wide variety of habitats over a large extent, including the Marble Mountains Elk Management Unit (MM EMU). Dense forest canopy and steep, mountainous terrain present significant challenges for monitoring elk populations using traditional aerial and ground-based methods. These constraints have resulted in inadequate spatial and temporal research and monitoring. To address the need for comprehensive and reliable elk abundance estimates, we implemented a landscape-level camera trap study within the MM EMU. We deployed 180 cameras and applied a time-to-event model to estimate elk abundance. This method uses the movement rate, area in front of each camera, and leverages the latency time to detection for a given species. Analysis yielded an estimate of 1,415 (95% CI: 1,044–1,919) elk across the management unit. Here, we present the use of a recently developed method to non-invasively estimate the abundance of unmarked elk at the landscape-level in northern California. Implementation of this method can provide reliable information to aid management decisions for the continued recreational, ecological, and economic benefits of elk and wildlife in general.
Publisher
California Fish and Wildlife Journal, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Subject
Polymers and Plastics,General Environmental Science
Reference39 articles.
1. Alison, B. L., M. R. Creasy, M. K. Ford, A. Hacking, R. Schaefer, J. R. West, and Q. Youngblood. 2007. Elk management strategy: Klamath National Forest. U.S. Forest Service, Klamath National Forest, Happy Camp, CA, USA.
2. Batter, T. J., R. H. Landers, K. Denryter, and J. P. Bush. 2022a. Use of aerial distance sampling to estimate abundance of tule elk across a gradient of canopy cover and comparison to a concurrent fecal DNA spatial capture-recapture survey. California Fish and Wildlife Journal 108:129–157.
3. Batter, T. J., J. P. Bush, and B. N. Sacks. 2022b. Robustness of fecal DNA spatial capture-recapture to clustered space-use by tule elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 86 (7):e22290. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22290
4. Bowyer, T. R. 1981. Activity, movement, and distribution of Roosevelt elk during rut. Journal of Mammalogy 62:574–582. https://doi.org/10.2307/1380404
5. Bowyer, T. R. 2004. Sexual segregation in ruminants: definitions, hypothesis, and implications for conservations and management. Journal of Mammalogy 85:1039–1052. https://doi.org/10.1644/BBL-002.1