Mule deer in the Boundary Region: Proposed research and discussion

Similar documents
White-Tailed Deer Management FAQ

White-tailed Deer: A Review of the 2010 Provincially Coordinated Hunting Regulation

2012 Kootenay-Boundary Mule Deer Management Plan: Outline and Background Information

Wyoming Range Mule Deer Project. Summer 2017 Update

1) Increase the deer population to 475,000 (mule, 150,000;

Mule and Black-tailed Deer

Deer Management Unit 127

PREDATOR CONTROL AND DEER MANAGEMENT: AN EAST TEXAS PERSPECTIVE

Deer Management Unit 252

Report to the Joint Standing Committee on Inland Fisheries and Wildlife

Deer Management Unit 255

Cabinet-Yaak / Selkirk Mountains 2016 Grizzly Bear Monitoring

Cariboo-Chilcotin (Region 5) Mule Deer: Frequently Asked Questions

Deer Management Unit 122

Implementing a Successful Deer Management Program. Kip Adams Certified Wildlife Biologist Dir. of Ed. & Outreach Quality Deer Management Association

Deer Management Unit 152

2009 Update. Introduction

Peace Region Wildlife Regulations Proposed Changes for Comment ( )

Introduction to Pennsylvania s Deer Management Program. Christopher S. Rosenberry Deer and Elk Section Bureau of Wildlife Management

Minnesota Deer Population Goals

021 Deer Management Unit

Full summaries of all proposed rule changes, including DMU boundary descriptions, are included in the additional background material.

Monitoring Population Trends of White-tailed Deer in Minnesota Marrett Grund, Farmland Wildlife Populations and Research Group

Kootenay (Region 4) Mule Deer: Frequently Asked Questions

DMU 056 Midland County Deer Management Unit

Status Report on the Yellowstone Bison Population, August 2016 Chris Geremia 1, Rick Wallen, and P.J. White August 17, 2016

2015 Deer Population Goal Setting

DMU 065 Ogemaw County Deer Management Unit

DMU 072 Roscommon County Deer Management Unit

BLACK GAP WMA/ECLCC MULE DEER RESTORATION PROJECT UPDATE. February 2, 2016

Deer Management Unit 249

DMU 038 Jackson County

Job Title: Game Management, Subsection B Game Management Mountain Lion. SPECIES: Mountain Lion

Copyright 2018 by Jamie L. Sandberg

Deer Management Unit 349

DMU 006 Arenac County Deer Management Unit

A pheasant researcher notebook:

2018 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Research Project Request Descriptions

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PENTICTON COUNCIL REPORT. DATE: 9 th January 2012 RES:

A Review of Mule and Black-tailed Deer Population Dynamics

Job Title: Game Management, Subsection B Game Management Mountain Lion. SPECIES: Mountain Lion

FIVE YEAR SUMMARY OF EAST REGION WILDLIFE RESEARCH PROGRAM

DMU 008 Barry County Deer Management Unit

Annual Report Ecology and management of feral hogs on Fort Benning, Georgia.

BLACK GAP WMA/ECLCC MULE DEER RESTORATION PROJECT UPDATE. October 1, 2017

Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations

Mitigating Vehicle Collisions with Large Wildlife

ALTERNATIVE DEER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR GAME MANAGEMENT UNITS. 12A, 12B, 13A, 13B, 16A, 45A, 45B, 45C, and White-tailed Deer Units

IN PROGRESS BIG GAME HARVEST REPORTS FISH AND WILDLIFE BRANCH Energy and Resource Development

DMU 073 Saginaw County Deer Management Unit

make people aware of the department s actions for improving the deer population monitoring system,

DMU 332 Huron, Sanilac and Tuscola Counties Deer Management Unit

Job Title: Game Management, Subsection B Game Management Mountain Lion

DMU 053 Mason County Deer Management Unit

RANCHING Wildlife. Texas White-Tailed Deer 2017 Hunting Forecast

Michigan Predator-Prey Project Phase 1 Preliminary Results and Management Recommendations. Study Background

MOUNTAIN CARIBOU INTERACTIONS WITH WOLVES AND MOOSE IN CENTRAL BRITISH COLUMBIA

Agriculture Zone Winter Replicate Count 2007/08

2008 WMU 359 moose, mule deer, and white tailed deer

Questionnaire for Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge Interviews on Boreal Caribou LONG VERSION

Minnesota Deer Population Goals

NORTH DAKOTA STATE REPORT June 2016

CHARLES H. WILLEY PHOTO. 8 November/December 2006 WILDLIFE JOURNAL

2009 WMU 527 Moose, Mule Deer, and White tailed Deer

DMU 057 Missaukee County Deer Management Unit

Recommendations for Pennsylvania's Deer Management Program and The 2010 Deer Hunting Season

The Importance of Radio-collared Bears

Rangewide Status of Black-tailed and Mule Deer

REBOUND. on the. It was the winter of 2000/2001, and it seemed like the snow

Minnesota Deer Population Goals. East Central Uplands Goal Block

DMU 047 Livingston County Deer Management Unit

FISH AND WILDLIFE BRANCH NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

Deer Management in Maryland. Brian Eyler Deer Project Leader Maryland DNR

DMU 082 Wayne County Deer Management Unit

Deer-Elk Ecology Research Project

NEW YORK STATE WHITETAIL MANAGEMENT COALITION, INC. PO Box 191,Grahamsville, New York

LEAPS BOUNDS. Growing up hunting as a kid in New Hampshire, I didn t. by Dan Bergeron

Job Title: Game Management, Subsection B Game Management Mountain Lion. SPECIES: Mountain Lion

Big Game Allocation Policy Sub-Committee Recommendations to AGPAC

Black Bear Quota Recommendations CR 17-13

Saguache Mule Deer Herd Data Analysis Unit D-26 Game Management Units 68, 681 and 682 March 2008

WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM

Salida Urban Deer Task Force Recommendations

WADE WEST INCENTIVE TAGS 2016 NDOW- REPORTING BIOLOGIST SCOTT ROBERTS

Final Review of New Information Appendix E AMPs-Sheep Allotments in Gravelly Mountains. c,llorttarta 'Fisft, MADISON RANGER DISTRICT.

DMU 043 Lake County Deer Management Unit

Quality Deer Management and Prescribed Fire Natural Partners in Wildlife and Habitat Conservation

Summary report on all harvested species on Patuxent Research Refuge from September 1 - January 31, 2017 Deer Harvest

April Nisga a Fisheries & Wildlife Department

Management History of the Edwards Plateau

Jeffrey M. Ver Steeg Colorado Parks and Wildlife. December 14, 2016

DMU 361 Fremont Deer Management Unit Newaygo, Oceana, N. Muskegon Counties

Competition. Competition. Competition. Competition. Competition. Competition. Competition. Long history in ecology

2010 Wildlife Management Unit 510 moose

2017 LATE WINTER CLASSIFICATION OF NORTHERN YELLOWSTONE ELK

DEER AND ELK POPULATION STATUS AND HARVEST STRUCTURE IN WESTERN NORTH AMERICA: A SUMMARY OF STATE AND PROVINCIAL STATUS SURVEYS.

22 Questions from WildEarth Guardians - September 19, 2016

2018 RANGE-WIDE STATUS OF BLACK-TAILED AND MULE DEER

REVELSTOKE MOUNTAIN CARIBOU RECOVERY:

5/DMU 069 Otsego County Deer Management Unit

Transcription:

Mule deer in the Boundary Region: Proposed research and discussion Sophie Gilbert, U. of Idaho Adam Ford, UBC Okanagan Jesse Zeman, BC Wildlife Federation

The Boundary Deer Herd (it is) difficult to cast the mind to those earlier days when deer roamed through the foothills in bands of thirty or forty (Martin Burrill, Grand Forks Gazette, Dec 23, 1905) 1914 first Fish and Game Protective Association Formed Concern of over-harvest related to mule deer led to Spalding report (1968) The Boundary must be considered as one of the best mule deer and whitetail deer areas of the Province

History Large fires 1908 and 1930s Very good hunting in 1930s, hunters couldspot their game from the Cochrane ranch. Nowadays, this same sidehill is so thichly over-grown with second-growth fir and pine that game cannot beseen from the bottom of the valley. (Spalding, 1968) Successive changes in regulations from no regulations; 4 deer; 100+ day buck, 20 day antlerless; draw for antlerless; 60 day 4 pts or better

Boundary MD Harvest 40 yrs of Reg Changes 1966-67 2011 Buck Antlerless Total 1755 1170 2925 Buck Antlerless Total 660 75 735

Mule deer declined across the west for several decades, including in BC

But recently, many herds have increased or stabilized:

But recently, many herds have increased or stabilized:

Advances in mule deer research:

Bottom-up: nutrition pathway Predation + Nutrition

Nutrition: affects survival and reproduction

Improving nutrition Increased survival and pop growth Bishop et al. 2009

Removing predators No change in survival or pop growth Hurley et al. 2011

The rise of the white-tail: A mule deer competitor?

Top down: Predation pathway Predation + Predation Nutrition

Bottom up: Compete for nutrition + + Nutrition

Our proposed research: How do mule deer in the Boundary respond to landscape change?

Forest loss (2000-2014) A dynamic, mosaic of regeneration Forest gain (2000-2012)

Areas within 500m of access

Urbanization; Tree encroachment

Heyerdahl et al. 2012

Heyerdahl et al. 2012

Burned Unburned

2014 2015 Rock Creek Fire

Proposed research focus: 1. Identify key drivers of mule deer population dynamics in the Boundary Region 1. Focus on how landscape change affects nutrition and survival of females and fawns.

Proposed research questions: 1. How does deer nutrition on the landscape change following disturbance (fire and timber harvest)?

Proposed research questions: 2. How does deer habitat selection, exposure to predators, and seasonal migration of deer change following disturbance?

Proposed research questions: 3. What are the effects of disturbance on deer survival, reproduction, and population growth?

Proposed research questions: 4. How does disturbance affect mule deer mortality from starvation, disease, predation, and hunting mortality?

Proposed research questions: 5. How does weather interact with disturbance to affect deer?

Approach: A. Capture & monitor adult female deer (~90) and fawns (~150) deer. - Fit adult female with GPS collars - Fit fawns at birth with VHF radio collars Need for volunteers in monitoring for birth/death events

Approach: B. Measure deer nutrition in different habitat types This info will be used to make a mule-deer food map. Need for volunteers in measuring veg

Approach: C. Use remote cameras to measure: - Relative abundance of muleys, whitetails, and predators - Group composition (doe:fawn ratios) Need for volunteers in deploying and checking cameras

Approach: D. Collect detailed weather data, including: - Temperature - snow depth Need for volunteers in winter weather monitoring

Approach: E. Using all this information (A-E), plus satellite imagery, model optimal landscape configurations that meet both forestry and wildlife objectives under different wildfire scenarios

Collaborators, Funders, Partners BC Wildlife Federation Government Granby Guides & Outfitters Grand Forks Wildlife Association Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation Industry Okanagan Nation Alliance Okanagan Region BC Wildlife Federation The Wildlife Stewardship Council University of British Columbia University of Idaho

Discussion: 1. What do you think drives the mule deer in the Boundary region? 2. How can we improve this project s design?