Journal of Wildlife Management最新文献

{"title":"An open letter to graduate students","authors":"Paul R. Krausman","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22634","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22634","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this brief statement, Leopold emphasizes enthusiasm, using tools from related fields, and cooperation and interaction. How well do you fit Leopold's personal qualifications for a career in wildlife? Other questions you should ask yourself are why you are in graduate school and why you want to be in the wildlife profession. Only you know the answers, but I can tell you that the profession needs dedicated individuals with bright young minds.</p><p>Here are some other items to consider. First, understand that you were selected from a broad pool of applicants for graduate school after careful consideration by the university, graduate committee, and your major professor. In some cases, the number of applicants has been in the hundreds and thousands (e.g., at the Wildlife Institute of India, ≥7,000 applicants applied for ~7 graduate positions in a single year). Thus, upon acceptance to a graduate program, you have an obligation (to the wildlife you are studying, yourself, your major professor, and the many students that were not selected) to succeed and excel. Your major professor has put a lot of effort into selecting you and may have even had to argue for your acceptance over other applications that were ranked higher by the admissions criteria. If you are in a wildlife or natural resources graduate program, consider it a privilege you should take seriously and honor.</p><p>Second, why are you in graduate school? The answer should be to keep learning so you can advance knowledge and understanding in the wildlife profession as a scientist. Learn, learn, learn, and that includes learning as much as you can about the subjects related to your main interest including biology, human dimensions, and habitat. That means taking classes you are not particularly interested in because they do not appear to tie directly to wildlife (e.g., statistics, quantitative studies, R, and others you may be unfamiliar with). Do not think for a minute that they should be considered secondary. A biologist that is armed with a solid biological background and the latest quantitative skills to analyze data will be well suited to face the challenges wildlife must overcome. Too many biologists rely on statisticians for data analysis and do not understand the methods they are using to test hypotheses. Do not be the student that has to run to statisticians for the simplest of tests; be the one that others come to for help. You were likely selected because of a strong undergraduate program and are already well versed in animal biology, ecology, and management (especially if you meet The Wildlife Society Certification requirements). Quantitative skills will take you beyond the basics and allow you to delve deeper into biology, ecology, management, and conservation with insightful analysis of data. Do not shy away from the quantitative sciences.</p><p>I also encourage you to go beyond your assigned research. You are in graduate school to learn. For example, your major professor m","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22634","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141522728","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Woman Among Wolves: My Journey Through Forty Years of Wolf Recovery By \u0000 Diane K. Boyd, \u0000Vancouver, British Columbia: \u0000Greystone Books. \u0000 2024. pp. \u0000 240. $26.95 (hardcover). ISBN: 978-1778401138","authors":"L. David Mech","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22629","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22629","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141522729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on parturition and reproductive output in wolverines","authors":"Henrik Brøseth","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22632","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22632","url":null,"abstract":"<p>One of the selective advantages of delayed implantation in carnivores is the flexibility to decouple the time between mating and parturition, allowing both to occur when conditions are most favorable. Terrestrial carnivores with delayed implantation have evolved reduced maternal energy expenditure through shorter gestation length, smaller neonates, and smaller litters, with a possible linkage between maternal body condition and time of birth or litter size. Using data on wolverine (<i>Gulo gulo</i>) females and cubs from management removals covering the entire latitudinal gradient of the Scandinavian population in 2001-2022, I assessed the effect of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on variation in parturition date and litter size. Timing of parturition varied over 2 months, where 90% of the litters were born between 5 February and 11 March, with a birth peak on 23 February. Females living in winter grazing pastures of semi-domestic reindeer (<i>Rangifer tarandus</i>) gave birth earlier than those outside, and along an elevation gradient parturition date was delayed at higher altitudes. I did not find evidence of an effect of latitude on parturition date. Furthermore, older females had greater odds than younger females of having litters with 3 cubs rather than 1 cub. To minimize the risk of harvesting lactating females, management regulations should implement harvest seasons that extend no longer than the end of January.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22632","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141509572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The genetics of the European polecat in the Iberian Peninsula","authors":"Rafael Barrientos,&nbsp;Guillermo Carmona,&nbsp;Tamara Burgos,&nbsp;Sara Martin-Garcia,&nbsp;Marta Vargas-Ramírez,&nbsp;Javier Hernández-Hernández,&nbsp;Victor J. Bandeira,&nbsp;Pablo Quiles,&nbsp;Carlos Palacín,&nbsp;Carlos A. Martín,&nbsp;Emilio Virgós,&nbsp;Jose L. Horreo","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22628","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22628","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Volunteer-based roadkill monitoring schemes, including road carcass sampling, can represent considerable advances with respect to classical methods employed in conservation biology. We studied the genetic diversity, structure, and dynamics of the European polecat (<i>Mustela putorius</i>) across the Iberian Peninsula. We used samples of road carcasses collected by volunteers because this carnivore is an elusive species otherwise difficult to monitor with standard field protocols. We gathered 238 samples obtained from 2004 to 2022 from 13 different areas (8–31 samples/area). Using microsatellite loci, we identified 4 genetic units with gene flow among 3 of them in the Iberian Peninsula. The genetic variability was steadily low in 1 of the areas (Girona) for all the parameters evaluated. This area is also genetically isolated from the other studied areas. The inbreeding coefficient was significant in the north- and south-Iberia units, and we did not detect a bottleneck signature in any of the 4 genetic units. Future conservation actions should consider the genetic dissimilarity among detected units and elucidate the ecological factors that have led to the observed genetic patterns.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22628","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141522715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Special issue: Indigenous research and co-stewardship of wildlife","authors":"Jonathan H. Gilbert,&nbsp;Michel T. Kohl","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22625","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22625","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Indigenous People have occupied the North American continent since time immemorial, and yet, most North Americans are unaware of the sheer number or diversity of Indigenous groups or the scale of the landscape they manage and influence (Thorstenson <span>2023</span>). To provide some context, the Indigenous groups of just the United States and Canada oversee over 850,000 km² of land, an area larger than all but 34 of the world's countries. These vast landscapes hold a plethora of culturally and economically important natural resources. For example, in the United States, Indian Nations manage over 178,000 km² of rangelands, 72,000 km² of commercial forests, and 16,000 km of streams and rivers, all of which provide important habitat for fish and wildlife populations, including &gt;500 threatened and endangered species (Thorstenson <span>2023</span>).</p><p>The management of these resources varies because of the diversity of values, goals, and perspectives of the unique groups that have resided here for millennia. To exemplify this, we briefly describe the diversity of Indigenous groups that reside in North America within the context of government recognitions. Each of these groups are considered sovereign entities with government-to-government relationships. Thus, differences in Indigenous culture, history, policy, and legal designations all merge to create diversity and complexity across Indigenous Fish and Wildlife Management agencies responsible for the management of these wildlife resources (Stricker et al. <span>2020</span>, Hoagland and Albert <span>2023</span>).</p><p>In the United States, Indigenous Peoples are generally divided into 3 groups: those that belong to a state or federally recognized tribe, descendants of state or federally recognized tribes without membership or recognition from the tribe, or descendants of a tribe that has no legal recognition. There are 574 federally recognized tribes, which are commonly separated into 2 groups: those within the contiguous states (i.e., Native American, Indian) and Alaskan Native. This delineation is due to the recent timing in which Alaska was settled, and the lack of treaties established between Alaskan tribes and the United States Government. These groups are separate from other non-federally recognized Indigenous groups such as Native Hawaiians, which are of Polynesian descent.</p><p>In Canada, Indigenous groups are commonly identified as First Nations, Inuit, or Métis. First Nations refers to the Indian people recognized by the Canadian Constitution, regardless of their status as federally recognized. The governing units that make up First Nations groups, referred to as bands, are the equivalent of Native American tribes in the United States. Inuit are the Indigenous groups that reside across Arctic Canada who did not sign treaties with the Canadian Government but have negotiated modern land claims. Métis are people of mixed First Nation and European a","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22625","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141522717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Correlating male white-tailed deer antler size with female body mass across multiple spatial scales","authors":"Mark A. Turner,&nbsp;Craig A. Harper,&nbsp;Bronson K. Strickland,&nbsp;Marcus A. Lashley,&nbsp;Mark Q. Wilber,&nbsp;William McKinley","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22626","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22626","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Managers use morphometric data collected from harvested animals as indicators of nutritional condition. Antler or horn size often are considered in ungulates, but there are problems associated with biased and limited harvest data available from male animals in many populations. Adult female body mass also may be collected, but little information exists on how male antler size scales with female body mass. We evaluated the relationship between property-specific mature male white-tailed deer (<i>Odocoileus virginianus</i>) antler size and adult female body mass from harvest data collected at 2 spatial scales. Regression predicted a 4.4-cm increase in average mature male antler size for every 1-kg increase in female body mass from 31 properties across the eastern United States, 2015–2023. Adult female mass explained 64% of the variation in mature antler size, and including latitude as a covariate did not improve model fit. When we considered data from 174 properties in Mississippi, USA, 1991–1994, we predicted a 4.7-cm increase in average mature male antler size for every 1-kg increase in adult female body mass. Including soil resource region in the Mississippi model explained 48% of the variation in mature male antler size by accounting for differences in average sizes across regions. Our results indicate average female body mass correlates with mature male antler size at multiple spatial scales. We recommend managers collect body mass and age from harvested female deer, as female mass represents a useful metric to track management progress and predict changes in antler size.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141967996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Yurok–wildlife relationship through the context of Traditional Ecological Knowledge","authors":"Seafha C. Ramos,&nbsp;Tiana Williams-Claussen,&nbsp;Celina Natoyiipoka Gray","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22624","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22624","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Various aspects of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) continue to be integrated in the wildlife conservation and management discourse; however, there may be challenges in cross-cultural understanding of the complex social-ecological systems that make up the fabric of TEK. In a 2-phased approach, we implemented research to better understand an Indigenous perspective of human–wildlife relationship. In phase 1, we conducted 16 semi-structured interviews with Yurok and Yurok-affiliated people about the relationship of Yurok people with wildlife and Yurok community hunting values. In phase 2, we conducted a secondary analysis of a subset of 10 interviews from phase 1. Permissions were obtained from the Yurok Tribe, under the project's previously established Institutional Review Board process, to access archived interview data for subsequent research relevant to the original research goals. We identified the following themes: Yurok conceptualizations of wildlife, cultural understanding of animals as people, animal harvesting protocols, cultural guidelines that maintain wildlife populations, and consequences for not following cultural guidelines as related to hunting. We explored how the terms wildlife and wildlife management are difficult to interpret within the context of Yurok TEK, as wildlife, in the same meaning as Western wildlife management, does not exist in the Yurok cultural paradigm. A fundamental, multifaceted aspect of the Yurok–wildlife relationship through a TEK context is the concept of animals as people, which we discuss in relation to Yurok spirituality. As Indigenous Knowledge continues to be recognized in scientific discourse, there may be opportunities to reconceptualize, Indigenize, and shift approaches to research, wildlife and wildlife habitat management, and conservation. Results of our study may support Yurok Tribe wildlife managers, Western-trained biologists, and others in their considerations of Indigenous Knowledge in wildlife management and conservation.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141584116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Designing count-based studies in a world of hierarchical models","authors":"Quresh S. Latif,&nbsp;Jonathon J. Valente,&nbsp;Alison Johnston,&nbsp;Kayla L. Davis,&nbsp;Frank A. Fogarty,&nbsp;Adam W. Green,&nbsp;Gavin M. Jones,&nbsp;Matthias Leu,&nbsp;Nicole L. Michel,&nbsp;David C. Pavlacky Jr.,&nbsp;Elizabeth A. Rigby,&nbsp;Clark S. Rushing,&nbsp;Jamie S. Sanderlin,&nbsp;Morgan W. Tingley,&nbsp;Qing Zhao","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22622","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22622","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Advances in hierarchical modeling have improved estimation of ecological parameters from count data, especially those quantifying population abundance, distribution, and dynamics by explicitly accounting for observation processes, particularly incomplete detection. Even hierarchical models that account for incomplete detection, however, cannot compensate for data limitations stemming from poorly planned sampling. Ecologists therefore need guidance for planning count-based studies that follow established sampling theory, collect appropriate data, and apply current modeling approaches to answer their research questions. We synthesize available literature relevant to guiding count-based studies. Considering the central historical and ongoing contributions of avian studies to ecological knowledge, we focus on birds as a case study for this review, but the basic principles apply to all populations whose members are sufficiently observable to be counted. The sequence of our review represents the thought process in which we encourage ecologists to engage 1) the research question(s) and population parameters to measure, 2) sampling design, 3) analytical framework, 4) temporal design, and 5) survey protocol. We also provide 2 hypothetical demonstrations of these study plan components representing different research questions and study systems. Mirroring the structure of hierarchical models, we suggest researchers primarily focus on the ecological processes of interest when designing their approach to sampling, and wait to consider logistical constraints of data collection and observation processes when developing the survey protocol. We offer a broad framework for researchers planning count-based studies, while pointing to relevant literature elaborating on particular tools and concepts.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141340075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Issue Information - Cover","authors":"","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22438","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22438","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22438","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141308845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Indigenous co-stewardship of North American moose: recommendations and a vision for a restoration framework","authors":"Seth A. Moore,&nbsp;William J. Severud,&nbsp;Tiffany M. Wolf,&nbsp;Katharine Pelican,&nbsp;Joseph Bauerkemper,&nbsp;Michelle Carstensen,&nbsp;Steven K. Windels","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22623","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jwmg.22623","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Moose (<i>Alces alces</i>; mooz [singular], moozoog [plural] in Anishinaabemowin, Ojibwe language) are an important species to many Indigenous rights-holders and stakeholders throughout their circumpolar range. Management of moose can often lead to conflict when various perspectives of Indigenous nations are not recognized or appreciated. During the 55th North American Moose Conference and Workshop held in Grand Portage, Minnesota, USA, we held a workshop with 145 participants centered around co-stewardship of moose among various Indigenous nations, federal, state, and provincial governments, academia, and non-governmental agencies. Using a facilitator, the participants identified opportunities and challenges surrounding issues related to moose management. Participants then further identified priority improvements and action steps for co-stewardship. Six core principles of Indigenous co-stewardship were developed: 1) recognition of Indigenous Sovereignty, which specifies that co-stewardship must begin with a recognition of the sovereignty of Indigenous nations and their inherent rights to manage, conserve, and preserve natural and cultural resources within their ancestral lands; 2) shared responsibility, where co-stewardship is a shared responsibility between Indigenous nations, federal governments, and state governments; 3) cultural and ecological respect, which stipulates that co-stewardship should honor the cultural significance of moose to Indigenous nations and recognize the ecological importance of moose within the broader ecosystem; 4) inclusive decision-making, which details that co-stewardship requires inclusive and equitable decision-making processes that involve meaningful consultation and consent from Indigenous nations; 5) resource sharing and capacity building, where co-stewardship involves the sharing of resources and knowledge between Indigenous and non-Indigenous partners; and 6) adaptive management and sustainability, specifying that co-stewardship should embrace adaptive management principles, where management strategies are continuously evaluated, adjusted, and improved based on new information and changing conditions. Some of the key takeaways from the workshop included that it will be essential to integrate Indigenous ways of knowing into an equitable and inclusive management system, there are existing models of co-stewardship that can be built upon, it is critical to build trust among all key stakeholders and rights-holders, and it will be important to establish formal and informal collaborative systems among all partners to support co-stewardship at all levels. We discuss a study and synthesis on Indigenous co-stewardship of moose and offer a synopsis and recommendations to advance restoration of moose in North America.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jwmg.22623","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141358863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}