Wildlife Management Test 3

Front 1

four flyways from west to east

Back 1

Pacific - Central -Mississippi - Atlantic

Front 2

amount of wetlands

Back 2

-1800 = 215 million acres contiguous U.S.
-2000 = 99 million (only 46% remains)

Front 3

of 99 million acres of wetlands remaining

Back 3

-5.2 million acres estuarine wetlands
-39.0 million acres emergent vegetation, scrub shrub
-49.7 million acres forested

Front 4

natural causes of wetland loss

Back 4

-subsidence
-drought
-hurricanes

Front 5

human-caused wetland losses

Back 5

-agriculture, urbanization, open water
-primarily agricultural on freshwater systems
-primarily open water on freshwater systems (canals, port and marina development, erosion control)

Front 6

specific areas of severe wetland loss

Back 6

-California - once had 4-5 million acres, now have less than 500,000 acres
-Iowa - once 2.3 million acres, 26,500 in 1980
-Prairie Potholes (N and S Dakota) - had 7 million, now 3 million
-lower Miss. River Valley - only 20% of original bottomland hardwoods remain

Front 7

wetlands gained

Back 7

-107.7 million acres
-mostly in East/Central

Front 8

Reesources Inventory - 4 methods

Back 8

1. Breeding population size estimates
2. Predicting production
3. Check on last year's production estimates (includes the parts survey)
4. Fall and winter surveys

Front 9

Breeding Population Size estimate

Back 9

-aerial surveys begun in 1947, standardized in 1955
-May-June survey of breeding area for pop. and # ponds
-July survey for broods
-cooperative effort between Canadian WS and USFWS (May)

Front 10

more about Breeding Population Size estimate

Back 10

-1/4 mile wide transects, 150 feet above ground at 100 mph
-pilot counts to left, observer to right, 1/8 mile strip
-record species, sex, group size of 20 species
-total transect length 85000 miles
-transects 14 miles apart in potholes, up to 60 miles apart in forests
-covers 2-3% total breeding habitat, 3.5 million km2
-some birds missed, so ground routes cover 100 ponds (5 miles long) to correct for count

Front 11

correction factor

Back 11

-air:ground ratio
1-air/ground ratio is CF
-creates visibility index
-1.3 for scoters, go up to 10 for green-winged teal

Front 12

Predicting Production

Back 12

-Waterfowl Production and Habitat Survey
-since 1950, usually July 12-15
-estimates broods on 2 million km2, # wetlands still holding water, # ducks still nesting
-survey done by plane, observer only covers 1/16th of mile
-no ground truthing

Front 13

Predicting Population - 4 types of data collected

Back 13

a. # of class I, Class II, and Class III broods by species
b. mean # ducklings in class II and III broods
c. # paired and single (male and female) ducks by species
d. # of ponds

Front 14

Check on last year's production estimates

Back 14

Waterfowl Harvest Survey
-mail questionnaire
-parts survey (Cooperative Parts Collection Survey)

Front 15

Fall and Winter Survey (Midwinter survey)

Back 15

-began in 1930s
-fall aerial surveys for snow geese, brants, swans (better because of differences in plumage)
-winter - aerial surveys in Dec. and Jan
-not done by transects, but by water body
-only 1/3 to 1/2 breeding counts, but useful for wintering distribution of birds
-best for geese

Front 16

Fall and Winter survey attempts to get estimates of numbers in what areas?

Back 16

-areas with lots of birds
-National Wildlife Refuges, state areas, major lakes and rivers, Gulf Coast, other wintering places

Front 17

fall flight

Back 17

-adults in fall + young
-ranges from 80-100 million birds

Front 18

objectives of annual regulations concerning migratory waterfowl

Back 18

1. regulate harvest to protect migratory bird populations
2. maintain acceptable pops and reproductive capabilities by recreationa/harvest opportunities
3. prevent crop degradation by migrating game birds
4. distribute hunting opps for migratory birds as equitably as possible along migration routes
5. limit accidental take of nontarget species where confusion might exist

Front 19

Habitat management for waterfowl - 2 major aspects

Back 19

1. production
2. wintering

Front 20

When is predator management justified in wildlife management context?

Back 20

1. reintroductions or introductions
2. t & e species management
3. intensive harvest of game (private land and economics)
4. subsistence values (north)
5. marginal habitat conditions around small areas
6. when biopolitics get severe enough that something must be done

Front 21

1930s attitude about predator control

Back 21

-science as basis for management
-Leopold's work
-still, pred control not really questioned

Front 22

1950s - 70s

Back 22

-Post-war Paradigm Shift
-predator control vs. harvest management
-lots of studies
- agencies quit translocating captive animals, went to wild animals

Front 23

examples of predator control studies

Back 23

-Isle Royale moose and wolves
-Jackrabbits and coyotes in Curlew valley
-cougar work in ID - Hornocker
-pheasants and predators in midwest

Front 24

80s and 90s and today

Back 24

-conflicting goals and management strategies
-what is natural community?
-what role should agency biologists have?
-acceptability of predator control

Front 25

what do we have to manage?

Back 25

-people
-predators
-prey
-habitats

Front 26

what is pred-prey controversy?

Back 26

1. if predators are unchecked, they keep prey numbers low and may even wipe out (pred. pit idea)
2. predation has no real effect because it removes only those individual prey that would have died from other causes
3. predators actually benefit prey populations by selectively culling less fit members

Front 27

components of predation

Back 27

-for predation to limit a prey population, preds must keep prey below level it would reach if preds were absent
-for preds to regulate prey pop, food supply, weather, or something else affects prey pop so that it varies despite predators but predation might partially check changes in # of prey

Front 28

age classes in predation

Back 28

-random with respect to age (ambush predators)
-disproportionately kill young or old, shift age structure to middle class animals (prey that tire in chase)

Front 29

what is impact of reducing number of old animals in a breeding population?

Back 29

-often increases production of remaining females and possibly increases survival of young

Front 30

prey characteristics to consider when examining predator impact

Back 30

-is prey irruptive?
-is prey territorial?

Front 31

when prey numbers increase fast, predation can intensify for two reasons

Back 31

-functional response
-numerical response

Front 32

functional response

Back 32

-predators take more prey per individual

Front 33

numerical response

Back 33

-additioonal predators come to feed or predator population increases

Front 34

muskrats

Back 34

-territoriality sets upper limit on numbers in a marsh
-excess move, disperve, starve, likely higher predation
-animals killed by predation likely would not reproduce anyway
-predation largely compensatory

Front 35

buffer species

Back 35

-post predators rely on more than 1 prey spp.
-influence of predation on any 1 prey species is function of availability of other prey
-buffering occurs when preds exort more pressure on more numerous prey, less on scarcer prey

Front 36

predator characteristics that affect impact on prey

Back 36

-is predator population affected by other factors than food supply, it may be unable to produce numerical response
-social behavior

Front 37

diminishing returns

Back 37

-hunting largely self-regulating
-past certain point, hunting unrewarded
-leads to fewer hunters

Front 38

doomed surplus

Back 38

-number of animals produced that exceed capacity of habitat to support and keep secure from predators

Front 39

harvestable surplus

Back 39

-most animals produce more young than necessary to maintain population
-extra number can be removed by hunting without affecting population

Front 40

inversity

Back 40

-density dependence
-productivity and abundance have inverse relationship

Front 41

Opening Day Phenomenon

Back 41

-most mortality occurs on opening day
-most hunters afield

Front 42

Threshold of Secutiry

Back 42

-population size above which some animals are not secure from predators
-carrying capacity concept indicating habitat ultimately decides population size

Front 43

1962

Back 43

Durwood Allen - our Wildlife Legacy

Front 44

harvest management components

Back 44

-inventory of populations
-identification of population and harvest goals
-development of regulations that allow goals to be met

Front 45

changes in hunting ideas

Back 45

before 1980 - largely believed to be compensatory
-1980s to present - evidence that hunting may be additive for some species