American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 6.4 Growth of the Jackson Valley plains bison population in Wyoming between 1969 and 2007 (39 years) starting with 9 bison (upper panel) and between 1980 and 1993 (14 years) starting with 37 bison (lower panel). The highest rate of increase reported for a bison population under natural conditions was for the Mackenzie population in the Northwest Territories. It increased at a maximum exponential rate of 0.26, and averaged an annual exponential rate of 0.21 during the first three decades following its establishment (Calef 1984; Gates and Larter 1990). 54 American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010
Chapter 7 Numerical and Geographic Status 7.1 Introduction The “Great Contraction”, a term used by Flores (1996) to describe the destruction of bison in North America, has been chronicled by numerous authors (Dary 1974; Isenberg 2000; Reynolds et al.; 2003; Roe 1970) and was summarised in Chapter 2 of this document. Fewer than 300 wood bison and perhaps only 200 plains bison remained at the turn of the 19th Century. The numerical recovery of plains bison began with the efforts of private citizens in the U.S. and Canada to save a few remaining animals (Freese et al. 2007). Governments later became involved in the conservation of plains and wood bison. Protective legislation was implemented first in Canada in 1877 (Gates et al. 2001). The first legislation providing specific protection for bison in the U.S. was the National Park Protective Act (Lacey Act) signed on 7 May 1894 by President Cleveland (Boyd and Gates 2006). It imposed a jail sentence and fine for anyone found guilty of killing game in Yellowstone National Park, the range of the last free-ranging plains bison. Between 1900 and 1970, modest progress was made, increasing the number and populations of bison, largely in public herds. Then in the mid-1980s, the commercial bison industry began to prosper (Freese et al. 2007; Renecker et al. 1989); the number of bison in North America increased rapidly to more than 430,000, the vast majority of which are under private ownership (Boyd and Gates 2006; Freese et al. 2007). However, numerical progress alone cannot be equated with the security of bison as a wildlife species. Conditions under which privately owned bison are raised are commonly motivated by market objectives and there are no regulations or government-supported guidelines requiring private owners to contribute to bison conservation. Domestic bison (those raised for captive commercial propagation) may be subject to small population effects, selection for domestication and market traits including docility, growth performance, conformation and carcass composition, and intentional or unmanaged introgression of cattle genes (Freese et al. 2007). Although some private owners exercise their legal property right to manage bison for conservation of the species and/or for their ecological role, the conservation practices of such owners are a matter of personal choice, with no guarantee of persisting beyond the owner’s interest in the herd. Currently there are no well-developed regulatory or market-based incentives for managing private commercial herds for species conservation (e.g., independent conservation management certification). Lead Authors: C. Cormack Gates and Kevin Ellison Contributors: Curtis H. Freese, Keith Aune, and Delaney P. Boyd Unless effective private-sector incentives are developed, bison populations managed in the public interest as wildlife represent the most secure opportunity for their conservation, adaptation in the evolutionary sense, and viability of bison as an ecologically interactive species in the long term. Some North American aboriginal communities and individuals also own bison herds. As with other private bison populations, the management of Native-owned bison is not necessarily consistent with conservation policies. Management practices vary from intensive management for commercial production to semi free-ranging herds hunted for subsistence and retention of culture. It was beyond the scope of this status report to evaluate the management of individual privately owned herds for their conservation value, whether owned by aboriginal or non-aboriginal people. The IUCN Bison Specialist Group acknowledges the important opportunity that Aboriginal Governments, the Intertribal Bison Cooperative, and the Native American Fish and Wildlife Society have to develop guidelines for enhancing the conservation value of herds managed by aboriginal peoples. Similarly, the commercial industry could play a role by providing standards and guidelines and developing incentive-based programmes, such as independent formal certification, for conservation management. Contemporary conservation is focussed on ensuring long- term persistence and maintaining the potential for ecological adaptation through the effects of natural selection operating in viable populations in the wild (Soulé 1987; IUCN 2003; Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992). Viability relates to the capacity of a population to maintain itself without significant demographic or genetic manipulation by people for the foreseeable future (Soulé 1987). In wild populations, limiting factors, such as predation, resource limitation and mate competition, contribute to maintaining the wild character, genetic diversity, and heritable traits that enable a species to adapt to and survive in a natural setting without human interference (Knowles et al. 1998). Therefore, viable wild populations, subject to the full range of natural limiting factors, are of pre-eminent importance to the long-term conservation, security and continued evolution of bison as a wildlife species. We consider the three conservation biology principles proposed by Shaffer and Stein (2000), resiliency, representation, and redundancy, to be relevant for evaluating the geographic and American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010 55
Page 1 and 2:
American Bison Status Survey and Co
Page 3 and 4:
American Bison Status Survey and Co
Page 5 and 6:
Table of Contents Acknowledgements
Page 7 and 8:
6.3 Demographics ..................
Page 9 and 10:
9.6 Active Management: Handling, He
Page 11 and 12:
This manuscript is the product of m
Page 13 and 14:
ABS American Bison Society ABSG Ame
Page 15 and 16:
The publication of this IUCN Americ
Page 17 and 18:
and foothills. Bison have a profoun
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter 1 Introduction: The Context
Page 21 and 22: composition and function, as well a
Page 23 and 24: Chapter 2 History of Bison in North
Page 25 and 26: Figure 2.1 Original ranges of plain
Page 27 and 28: Charles Alloway (Manitoba), Charles
Page 29 and 30: nomadic “Plains Indian Culture”
Page 31 and 32: Chapter 3 Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Page 33 and 34: demonstrate that Bison and Bos were
Page 35 and 36: from their original habitat near th
Page 37 and 38: Chapter 4 Genetics As a science, po
Page 39 and 40: Selection for diversity in one syst
Page 41 and 42: cross, however, the latter is more
Page 43 and 44: the conservation of the wild specie
Page 45 and 46: Chapter 5 Reportable or Notifiable
Page 47 and 48: one) followed by its widespread dis
Page 49 and 50: cattle at similar levels to S19 (Ch
Page 51 and 52: long as 156 days post-infection. So
Page 53 and 54: and elk herds migrate across severa
Page 55 and 56: These concepts are being developed
Page 57 and 58: Chapter 6 General Biology, Ecology
Page 59 and 60: leave the herd prior to calving or
Page 61 and 62: historically dependent on a combina
Page 63 and 64: 6.2.1.2.1 Northern mixed grasslands
Page 65 and 66: woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus
Page 67 and 68: season: Wolfe and Kimball (1989) re
Page 69 and 70: Table 6.4 Age-specific reproductive
Page 71: 6.3.4 Population growth rates The r
Page 75 and 76: Sixty-two plains bison and 11 wood
Page 77 and 78: Figure 7.4 Representation of plains
Page 79 and 80: Plate 7.3 Male plains bison sparrin
Page 81 and 82: Chapter 8 Legal Status, Policy Issu
Page 83 and 84: administrations, and the increasing
Page 85 and 86: Table 8.1 Current legal status of p
Page 87 and 88: Table 8.1 (continued) Country/ Stat
Page 93 and 94: 8.4 Legal and Policy Obstacles Hind
Page 95 and 96: 8.5 Overcoming Obstacles to the Eco
Page 97 and 98: indigenous peoples’ land (Dudley
Page 99 and 100: 3) Develop outreach to state and fe
Page 101 and 102: 8.5.5.3 Mexico Since the original r
Page 103 and 104: Chapter 9 Conservation Guidelines f
Page 105 and 106: animals are proportionately removed
Page 107 and 108: 6. Maintenance number and growth ra
Page 109 and 110: 4. Health and disease All attempts
Page 111 and 112: Table 9.4 Important considerations
Page 113 and 114: northern bison herds, managers shou
Page 115 and 116: may not have been validated. Testin
Page 117 and 118: 2) A tendency to flee if approached
Page 119 and 120: 2. Determine the required scope of
Page 121 and 122: Chapter 10 Guidelines for Ecologica
Page 123 and 124:
• Creating education, awareness a
Page 125 and 126:
10.3 The “Ecosystem Approach” f
Page 127 and 128:
anywhere without engaging stakehold
Page 129 and 130:
Interventions (e.g., supplemental f
Page 131 and 132:
Agabriel, J. and Petit, M. 1996. Qu
Page 133 and 134:
Byerly, R.M., Cooper, J.R., Meltzer
Page 135 and 136:
Dragon D.C. and Rennie, R.P. 1995.
Page 137 and 138:
Gilpin, M.E. and Soulé, M.E. 1986.
Page 139 and 140:
Joern, A. 2005. Disturbance by fire
Page 141 and 142:
Matthews, S.B. 1991. An assessment
Page 143 and 144:
Possingham, H.P., Davies, I., Noble
Page 145 and 146:
Shaw, J.H. 1995. How many bison ori
Page 147 and 148:
van Zyll de Jong, C.G. 1986. A Syst
Page 149 and 150:
Appendix A North American conservat
Page 151 and 152:
Plains bison (continued) State/Prov
Page 154:
INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATIO
show all

American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?