Major threats, status. Major threats, status. Major threats, status. Major threats, status

Transcription

1 Conservation and management of large carnivores, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke) at Rovaniemi History & recent changes in population sizes and distribution Seppo Ronkainen Once exterminated from huge areas Southern species such as tigers, lions and cheetahs have disappeared most of their historical distribution range, 4 subspecies of tiger and 2 subspecies of lion got extinct as wild populations Recent population recoveries & expansion to human dominated landscapes, e.g wolf in Europe Major threats, status Loss of habitat, decreasing living space Major threats, status Habitat loss, decreasing living space Poaching Major threats, status Major threats, status Habitat loss, decreasing living space Poaching Owing to low human densities, northern species have been doing better Habitat loss, decreasing living space Poaching Owing to low human densities, northern species have been doing better None of the LC species living in Finland are globally endangered (IUCN red data book) 1

2 Major threats, status Habitat loss, decreasing living space Poaching Owing to low human densities, northern species have been doing better None of the LC species living in Finland are globally endangered (IUCN red data book) Populations can be endangered (e.g. Sierra Moreno s wolves & Cantabrian s brown bears) > 2 (Ripple et al. 214, Science) (Russia: 18 ; increasing; Bragina et al. 215, Conservation Biology) Ursus arctos arctos Globally 18 (Ripple et al., Science) In Russia 49 (stable; Bragina 215; R, Soc. Proc. Ser. B) Ursus arctos horribilis Wolverine Globally about 5 (in Eurasia 2-22, in Europe 2 2) 5 globally (Ripple et al. 214; Science) (2 in Russia; decreasing; Bragina et al. 215, Cons. Biol.) 2

3 Sweden Population estimates Population estimates Sweden 2 8 (Jonas Kindberg/SLU) Norway 15 (Rovdata) Finland 1 5 (Luke) Finland Bear harvest in Sweden and Finland Sweden Management Hunting Hunting quota 2 15 Finland High genetic diversity in Northern Finland, rapid change and increased diversity in Southern Finland Sex ratio of shot bears Genetic clusters 8 7 Swe: 683 Fin: 928 % males 6 5 Hagen, Kopatz, Aspi, Kojola, Eiken 215 (Royal Soc. Proc. Ser B) Tammeleht et al. 21 (Mol. Ecol.) > 3 Age (years) Sweden Finland 3

4 WOLF Present 5 Number of wolf family packs 4 Family packs 3 2 Chapron et al. 214 (Science) Scandinavia Finland Most wolves moving to Finland s reindeer husbandry area have reindeer as a prey image High proportion of sub-adult dispersersin Finnish reindeer husbandry area Outside reindeer husbandry 8 8 % % Reindeer husbandry Percentage 6 4 Percentage Seppo Ronkainen Age of the shot wolf (years) 4

5 Natural immigration by wolves from east to Scandinavia non-reproduced reproduced Norway Population trends, Eurasian lynx (as number of family groups) Finland Sweden -> Finland s lynx population is doubling that of Scandinavia for Due to population bottleneck (1 ind. in 194s), only one haplotype found in Scandinavian lynx Norway 35-4, Sweden 45-5 (based on confirmed reproductions) Finland 25 (quesstimate) Ratkiewicz ym. 214: (Plos ONE) Lights and forests in Europe Permanent distribution of wolves (28-211) 5

6 Bear presence (1x1 km, logistic regression, effects of forest cover, elevation, coordinates) Return of large carnivores, ecological effects Data&model Data Model Prey populations, space use by prey animals Cascade effect (Yellowstone, not in Scandinavia s human-modified ecosystems) Ecology of fear Mesopredator density (e.g. wolf-coyote, lynxred fox; Ripple et al. 214, Science) Conflict mitigation Hunting for conservation? Conflict mitigation Hunting for conservation? Protective measures such as livestock quarding dogs, electric fences, fladderies, public information probably decrease depredations, but statistical evidence is scarce Conflict mitigation Hunting for conservation? Protective measures such as livestock quarding dogs, electric fences, fladderies, public information probably decrease depredations, but statistical evidence is scarce Compensation good or not good? Conflict mitigation Hunting for conservation? Protective measures such as livestock quarding dogs, electric fences, fladderies, public information probably decrease depredations, but statistical evidence is scarce Compensation good or not good? Innovative compensation systems might bring about population recovery (wolverine, lynx in Sweden s reindeer husbandry area) Wolves kill hunting dogs how could this major conflict be mitigated? (public net link helps only in territories where wolves are collared with GPS transmitters) 6

7 Hunting for conservation It works when the species is valuable as a game animal and damages are a tiny problem, such as with sport hunting for brown bear in Finland and Sweden With the wolf this is more or less questionable because wolf is still primarily regarded as a risk for hunting dogs and livestock Management needs reliable estimates about population size and demography a big challenge Management needs reliable estimates about population size and demography a huge challenge transboundary cooperation in real world management is nationwide Management needs reliable estimates about population size and demography a huge challenge transboundary cooperation in real world management is nationwide various stakeholders contribution farmers, nature conservation groups, managers, reindeer herders, hunters etc. Monitoring methods Opportunistic hunter observations (Fi) family groups filtered Snow-tracking, mapping of lynx family groups (Fi, Swe, No), wolverine in Finnish Lapland, wolf packs and territory-marking pairs) Mapping wolf territory boundaries by use of transmitters (the most common method worldwide) Non-invasive genetics (all except lynx) Non-invasive genetics + effort-corrected observation index (brown bear, Sweden) Lynx tracks in wildlife triangles (tracks/1 km transect line) Wildlife triangles I.Kojola 7

8 Re-introductions Large areas with low human activity (few livestock farms, roads) Re-introductions Large areas with low human activity (few livestock farms, roads) Prey basis Re-introductions Large areas with low human activity (few livestock farms, roads) Prey basis Connectivities Re-introductions Large areas with low human activity (few livestock farms, roads) Prey basis Connectivities Social aspects Done: red wolf (N-Carolina, with captive-bred animals, wolf (Yellowstone, Idaho, Sweden), wolverine (Finland), brown bear (Austria, French Alps, Finland), Iberian lynx (Spain, Portugal), Eurasian lynx (Alps, Finland), tiger (Sariska NP, India) Re-introductions Large areas with low human activity (few livestock farms, roads) Prey basis Connectivities Social aspects Done: red wolf (N-Carolina, with captive-bred animals, wolf (Yellowstone, Idaho, Sweden), wolverine (Finland), brown bear (Austria, French Alps, Finland), Iberian lynx (Spain, Portugal), Eurasian lynx (Alps, Finland), tiger (Sariska NP, India) Discussed: wolf into Scotland, wolverine into Quebec, cheetah into India, Asiatic lion from Gir forest to other locations in India Translocations as a management tool Problem bears American black bear management Success is related to the distance Homing rate is high The translocation of a bear or a problem? 8

9 Translocations as a management tool Problem bears Translocations as a management tool Problem bears American black bear management Translocations as a management tool Problem bears American black bear management Rates of returning depends on translocation distance) Percentage of bears homing (translocation range in km) Black bear 81 (8-64), 48 (64-12), 33 (12-23), 2 (23-271) 67 (6-47), 69 (16-99),45 (14-64), 21 (64-17) 75 (<64), 2 (64-11) 67 (1-16), 13 (17-48), 9 (49-8), (>8) 47 (< 65), (3-4) Brown bear 6 ( ) 83 (<75) 62 (1-25), 79 (25-5), 59 (5-75), 21 (75-1), 33 (1-125) NORWAY: 1 (12-25) Linnell et al 1997 (Biodiv. & Conservation) Large carnivore tourism Large carnivore tourism Photo Photo 9

10 When wolves visit your backyard? Thank you! (1) 25 territories (2) Locations < 15 from the nearest house (1) Density of houses (2) Time of the day (3) Wolf s status *season Kojola et al. 215, Biological Conservation (tentatively accepted) Photo 1