Delegated Aerial Ungulate Surveys 2009/2010 Survey Season

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6.7.2 Survey methodsAn aerial ungulate survey following methodology adapted from the Gasawaysurvey technique (Gasaway et al. 1986) as described in the Northern MooseManagement Program Moose Survey Field Manual (Lynch 1997b) and the ASRD‐AUS protocol manual (ASRD 2010) was conducted in February, 2010. A Cessna185 and Cessna 206 fixed‐wing aircraft, each with a crew consisting of a pilot andthree observers, were used for the stratification flights on the 1 ‐ 2 February, 2010.Stratification crews in each aircraft flew east‐west transects across the WMU atone minute of latitude intervals skipping latitude lines at 5 minute intervals. Airspeed during stratification flights was approximately 150 km/h, and flight altitudewas maintained between 60 ‐ 90 m AGL. Locations of moose and other wildlifewere marked using a Garmin GPSmap 60CSx.The WMU was then divided into low, medium and high density blocks(measuring 5 minutes longitude x 5 minutes latitude) based on moose densitiesobserved during the fixed‐wing stratification flights. As a result, 20 blocks wereclassified as low, 53 as medium, and 19 as high for a total of 92 blocks. A randomsample of five blocks from each stratum was initially selected for intensive moosesurveys. Two Bell 206B helicopters were used to assess the number of moosewithin each of the intensive survey blocks on 3 ‐ 8 February, 2010. Each block wasflown east to west on flight lines spaced approximately 400 m apart at speeds of80 ‐ 110 km/h and elevations of 45 ‐ 75 m. Flight crews consisted of one pilot andthree observers on all flights. Based on the analysis of the results when all initialblocks had been flown, an additional four medium and one high block wererandomly selected and surveyed to reach our precision target of less than +/‐ 20%for a 90% confidence limit.All moose were classified as bulls, adult cows with or without calves, lone calves,or unclassified. Bull moose still retaining their antlers were further classified intosize classes based on antler development (Table 1). We did not correct forsightability; therefore, overall counts should be considered as minimum estimatesand direct comparisons of survey results among years may be difficult.64
A fresh snowfall of 2 ‐ 5 cm on top of older snow was initially judged to beadequate for aerial survey purposes, but was not ideal. Snow depths were lessthan 30 cm over much of the unit with the exception of higher elevation lowdensity pine stands where snow depth was approximately 50 cm. Flyingconditions throughout the stratification were excellent with no turbulence, flatlight, and good visibility. Winds were generally calm (0 ‐ 10 km/h) and skies were100% overcast. Snow condition deteriorated progressively throughout theintensive surveys such that south facing slopes and benches as well as the base ofconifers at lower elevations were often bare of snow. Low ground fog on the 3 – 4 thof February and on the morning of the 5 th of February prevented crews fromflying. However, flying conditions for the reminder of the survey were excellentwith little to no turbulence, good visibility, generally calms winds (0 ‐ 10 km/h)and clear skies.6.7.3 ResultsAfter intensively flying 18 sample units, the Quadrat Survey Method Programgenerated a moose population estimate of between 1803 and 2411 (Table 14). Ofthe cows and calves observed during detailed block surveys, 55.7% were singlecows, 43.3% were cows with a single calf, and 1.0% were cows with twins for anobserved twin rate of 2.2%. Of the observed bulls, 93% had already shed theirantlers (80 out of 86 observed bulls). Therefore no inferences regarding thedistribution of bulls by antler class can be made. Two medium stratum blockswere removed from the analyses due to discrepancies between stratification andintensive survey observations. Localized movements of moose that wereconcentrated near survey unit boundaries may have caused such discrepancies.With consideration of these factors, we present results both with and without thetwo additionally survey blocks. Based on results from 20 sampled units, theQuadrat Survey Method Program estimated a moose population of between 1535and 2199 (Table 14).65
Page 1 and 2:
Delegated Aerial Ungulate Surveys20
Page 3 and 4:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYAlberta Conservati
Page 6 and 7:
LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1. Location o
Page 8 and 9:
Table 18. Comparison of aerial surv
Page 10 and 11:
moose (Alces alces), elk (Cervus el
Page 12 and 13:
surveys do not necessarily allow th
Page 14 and 15:
3.5 ClassificationBeginning in 2008
Page 17 and 18:
4.1.1 Survey methodsFollowing stand
Page 19 and 20:
4.2 Southern mountain goatsPhoto: S
Page 21 and 22: 4.2.1 Survey methodsWe searched mou
Page 24 and 25: ecorded for each group of goats. Th
Page 26 and 27: 5.0 WINTER RANGE TREND SURVEYS5.1 H
Page 28 and 29: Figure 4.Location of the Hay‐Zama
Page 30 and 31: In general, survey conditions were
Page 32 and 33: 5.2 Wildlife Management Unit 136/14
Page 34 and 35: Figure 5.Location of Wildlife Manag
Page 36 and 37: 5.2.3 ResultsDuring the rotary‐wi
Page 38 and 39: 5.3.1 Study areaAll probable sheep
Page 40 and 41: Figure 6.Location of the Wildlife M
Page 42 and 43: 6.0 RANDOM STRATIFIED BLOCK SURVEYS
Page 44 and 45: 6.1.2 Survey methodsThe study area
Page 46 and 47: 6.2 Wildlife Management Unit 305 mu
Page 48 and 49: Figure 8.Location of Wildlife Manag
Page 50 and 51: The navigator was responsible for a
Page 52 and 53: 6.3 Wildlife Management Unit 326 el
Page 54 and 55: (~34,800 ha) of the WMU. In general
Page 56 and 57: classified. We then randomly select
Page 58 and 59: Table 11. Comparison of aerial moos
Page 60 and 61: on the southeast, Highway 40 on the
Page 62 and 63: 6.5.2 Survey methodsWMU 340 was sur
Page 64 and 65: 6.6 Wildlife Management Unit 347 mo
Page 66 and 67: Figure 11.Location of Wildlife Mana
Page 68 and 69: were present to confirm gender. Wol
Page 70 and 71: 6.7.1 Study areaWMU 351 is delimite
Page 74 and 75: Table 14.Comparison of aerial surve
Page 76 and 77: unit is bordered by highway 49 to t
Page 78 and 79: 6.8.2 Survey methodsWildlife staff
Page 80 and 81: Table 15.Comparison of aerial surve
Page 82 and 83: Cold Lake. Oil and gas extraction a
Page 84 and 85: surveyed from January 9 ‐ 11, 201
Page 86 and 87: 6.10 Wildlife Management Unit 510 m
Page 90 and 91: without antlers and classified acco
Page 92 and 93: 6.11 Wildlife Management Unit 536 m
Page 96 and 97: (Table 1). We did not correct for s
Page 98 and 99: Frair, J.L., E.H. Merrill, and M.S.
Page 100: Saker, K. 2000. WMU 501 Deer / Moos
show all

Delegated Aerial Ungulate Surveys 2009/2010 Survey Season

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?