Monitoring Population Size of Red Deer Cervus Elaphus: An Evaluation of Two Types of Census Data from Norway
Monitoring Population Size of Red Deer Cervus Elaphus: An Evaluation of Two Types of Census Data from Norway
复制标题
监测红鹿马鹿的种群规模：对挪威两种类型的人口普查数据的评估
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
N. Stenseth
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Mysterud;Erling L. Meisingset;V. Veiberg;R. Langvatn;E. Solberg;L. Loe;N. Stenseth
野生动物的合理管理依赖于种群发展指标。通常，最好的评估技术对于大规模的管理来说太昂贵了。在海洋渔业中，通常使用单位渔获量，但由于空间渔获量或生境利用随密度变化而变化，可能会出现问题。挪威的管理人员正处于早期阶段，在收获期间实施“见鹿”，并在农田上实施“春季计数”，作为监测马鹿鹿角种群的一种手段。我们通过将结果与使用队列分析获得的种群估计值进行比较，并通过分析鹿的数量在季节内的变化，对这些方法的适用性进行了首次评估。“见过的鹿”很好地预测了每年数量的增长。由于随着鹿群数量的增加，相对于鹿群数量的增加，对收获努力的调整提供了不太好的估计。日见鹿数在季节开始时迅速下降，然后在发情期趋于平稳或略有增加，特别是在农田。鹿的数量随着采集者数量和采收时间的增加而增加，但呈递减趋势。目前的“春季计数”在预测人口变化方面并不成功，可能是由于缺乏可复制性。事实上，在春季的统计中，日期对鹿的数量有很大的影响。虽然“看到的鹿”似乎是一个非常有前途的监测马鹿种群规模的工具，但由于与收获努力的复杂关系，在斯堪的纳维亚对驼鹿Alces Alces实施的实践存在一些局限性。我们的研究强调，采集者观察野生动物的大量时间可以为种群监测提供有用的工具。然而，这些指数的使用可能因物种和收获技术而异，因此在实施前应谨慎评估。
Abstract Proper management of wildlife relies on metrics of population development. Typically, the best estimation techniques are too expensive for coarse-scale management. In marine fisheries, catch-per-unit effort is commonly used, but problems may arise due to changes in spatial harvest effort or in habitat use as density changes. Managers in Norway are in the early phases of implementing ′seen deer′ during harvesting and ′spring counts′ on farmland as a means of monitoring red deer Cervus elaphus populations. We provide a first evaluation of how suitable these methods are by comparing the results with population estimates obtained using cohort analysis, and by analysing the within-season variation in number of seen deer. ′Seen deer′ predicted annual increases in populations fairly well. Adjusting for harvesting effort provided less good estimates, due to a proportionally larger increase in effort relative to deer population size as population size increased. The number of seen deer per day decreased rapidly at the beginning of the season, and then levelled off or increased slightly during the rut, especially on farmland. The number of seen deer increased both with the number of harvesters and hours harvested, but at a diminishing rate. The current practice of ′spring counts′ was not successful in predicting population changes, probably due to a lack of replication. Indeed, date strongly affected the number of deer seen during spring counts. While ′seen deer′ seems to be a very promising tool for monitoring population size of red deer, there are some limitations to the practice as implemented for moose Alces alces in Scandinavia due to a more complex relationship with harvesting effort. Our study highlights that the large number of hours harvesters observe wildlife can provide a useful tool for population monitoring. However, the use of such indices may vary between species and according to harvest techniques and should thus be assessed with care before implementation.