| dc.description.abstract | I studied the population dynamics, movements and home range of moose {Alces alces) in
the Greater Pukaskwa Ecosystem, Ontario, during 1995-1999. My study compared two
landscapes experiencing different management regimes: Pukaskwa National Park (PNP),
a wilderness park, and the adjacent Wildlife Management Unit #33 (WMU33), a multiuse
forest with commercial timber harvest (part of the White River Forest). I
hypothesized that because PNP was not disturbed (i.e., by fire or timber harvest) and
WMU33 was, the condition of moose and moose habitat carrying capacity would be
better in WMU33 than PNP. I used 5 triennial aerial moose surveys to assess population
dynamics and distribution, and 35 radio-collared adult female moose to assess
productivity, survival, marrow condition, blood condition, morphometries, movements
and home range. I found the mean moose density per plot in the most recent aerial
surveys to be slightly higher but not statistically different in WMU33 than PNP (0.332
and 0.273 moose/km2, respectively), and kriging demonstrated that most of the high
moose densities occurred in WMU33 and were increasing more than in PNP. Survival
rates were not significantly different between landscapes (93% in PNP and 89% in
WMU33), and were similar to findings of other studies. Marrow fat showed differences
among seasons, being highest in summer and lowest in late winter, but was not
significantly different between landscapes. Movements in PNP were greater than in
WMU33, and PNP moose showed distinct movements between summer and winter
ranges, which was not seen in WMU33. Seasonal movements were significant, with
summer being the greatest (22.0 m/hr in PNP and 20.1 m/hr in WMU33) and winter the
smallest (6.9 m/hr in PNP and 5.5 m/hr in WMU33). Annual MCP home range sizes were
significantly larger in PNP than WMU33 (70 and 43 km2, respectively). Home ranges
also showed significant season effects, being largest in summer and smallest in winter. In
my study, I found that moose occupying the WMU33 landscape have shown a slight
positive response to forest disturbance, caused by timber harvest, through increased
population density. I did not find statistically important differences in physical condition
of moose between the two landscapes, but moose in WMU33 made smaller movements
and had smaller home ranges than moose living in the undisturbed landscape of PNP. | |
