Regulating overabundant ungulate populations: An example for elk in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado

被引:20
|
作者
Bradford, John B. [1 ]
Hobbs, N. Thompson [2 ]
机构
[1] USDA, US Forest Serv, No Res Stn, Grand Rapids, MN 55744 USA
[2] Colorado State Univ, Nat Resource Ecol Lab, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.12.005
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In many areas of the world, populations of native ungulates have become so abundant that they are believed to be harming vegetation and disrupting ecosystem function. Methods for controlling overabundance populations include culling animals from the population and controlling fertility using contraceptives. However, understanding the feasibility these alternatives requires insight into their long-term effects on populations. We constructed a simulation model to evaluate options for regulating elk populations in and around Rocky Mountain National Park and used the model to compare different treatment options. Methods were evaulated with respect to the time required to reduce the population to a target level, the number of animals treated and/or culled and the risk of extinction. We contrasted culling with lifetime-effect contraceptives and yearlong contraceptives. Lifetime contraceptives required treating the fewest animals to maintain the population at desired targets. However, this approach also causes the greatest population variability and potential risk of extinction. Yearlong contraceptives required treatment of dramatically more animals but had essentially no extinction risk whereas culling produced intermediate levels of both extinction risk and number of animals treated. These results characterize the risks and benefits of alternative control strategies for overabundant wildlife. They emerge from a modeling approach that can be broadly useful in helping managers in choose between alternatives for regulating overabundant wildlife. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:520 / 528
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Model-based assessment of aspen responses to elk herbivory in Rocky Mountain National Park
    Weisberg, PJ
    Coughenour, MB
    SUSTAINING ASPEN IN WESTERN LANDSCAPES: SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS, 2001, (18): : 183 - 183
  • [32] Den-Site Characteristics of Black Bears in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
    Baldwin, Roger A.
    Bender, Louis C.
    JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2008, 72 (08): : 1717 - 1724
  • [33] Visitor Perceptions of Bark Beetle Impacted Forests in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
    Sumner, Christa Cooper
    Lockwood, Jeffrey A.
    CONSERVATION & SOCIETY, 2020, 18 (01): : 50 - 62
  • [34] Lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) ecotones in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, USA
    Stohlgren, TJ
    Bachand, RR
    ECOLOGY, 1997, 78 (02) : 632 - 641
  • [35] Mercury transport in a high-elevation watershed in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
    Mast, MA
    Campbell, DH
    Krabbenhoft, DP
    Taylor, HE
    WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION, 2005, 164 (1-4): : 21 - 42
  • [36] Aluminum Activity in Alpine Tundra Soil, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, USA
    Evans, Andrew, Jr.
    Jacobs, Michael B.
    SOIL SCIENCE, 2016, 181 (08) : 359 - 367
  • [37] Phytosociology and gradient analysis of a subalpine treed fen in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
    Johnson, JB
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE BOTANIQUE, 1996, 74 (08): : 1203 - 1213
  • [39] Mercury Transport in a High-Elevation Watershed in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
    M. Alisa Mast
    Donald H. Campbell
    David P. Krabbenhoft
    Howard E. Taylor
    Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 2005, 164 : 21 - 42
  • [40] Foods and nutritional components of diets of black bear in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
    Baldwin, Roger A.
    Bender, Louis C.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE ZOOLOGIE, 2009, 87 (11): : 1000 - 1008