Translocations are frequently used to restore extirpated carnivore populations. Understanding the factors that influence translocation success is important because carnivore translocations can be time consuming, expensive, and controversial. Using population viability software, we modeled reintroductions of the fisher, a candidate for endangered or threatened status in the Pacific states of the US. Our model predicts that the most important factor influencing successful re-establishment of a fisher population is the number of adult females reintroduced (provided some males are also released). Data from 38 translocations of fishers in North America, including 30 reintroductions, 5 augmentations and 3 introductions, show that the number of females released was, indeed, a good predictor of success but that the number of males released, geographic region and proximity of the source population to the release site were also important predictors. The contradiction between model and data regarding males may relate to the assumption in the model that all males are equally good breeders. We hypothesize that many males may need to be released to insure a sufficient number of good breeders are included, probably large males. Seventy-seven percent of reintroductions with known outcomes (success or failure) succeeded; all 5 augmentations succeeded; but none of the 3 introductions succeeded. Reintroductions were instrumental in reestablishing fisher populations within their historical range and expanding the range from its most-contracted state (43% of the historical range) to its current state (68% of the historical range). To increase the likelihood of translocation success, we recommend that managers: 1) release as many fishers as possible, 2) release more females than males (55–60% females) when possible, 3) release as many adults as possible, especially large males, 4) release fishers from a nearby source population, 5) conduct a formal feasibility assessment, and 6) develop a comprehensive implementation plan that includes an active monitoring program.

No abstract

No abstract

Invasive mammalian carnivores contribute disproportionately to declines in global biodiversity. In California, nonnative red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) have significantly impacted endangered ground‐nesting birds and native canids. These foxes derive primarily from captive‐reared animals associated with the fur‐farming industry. Over the past five decades, the cumulative area occupied by nonnative red fox increased to cover much of central and southern California. We used a landscape‐genetic approach involving mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences and 13 microsatellites of 402 nonnative red foxes removed in predator control programs to investigate source populations, contemporary connectivity, and metapopulation dynamics. Both markers indicated high population structuring consistent with origins from multiple introductions and low subsequent gene flow. Landscape‐genetic modeling indicated that population connectivity was especially low among coastal sampling sites surrounded by mountainous wildlands but somewhat higher through topographically flat, urban and agricultural landscapes. The genetic composition of populations tended to be stable for multiple generations, indicating a degree of demographic resilience to predator removal programs. However, in two sites where intensive predator control reduced fox abundance, we observed increases in immigration, suggesting potential for recolonization to counter eradication attempts. These findings, along with continued genetic monitoring, can help guide localized management of foxes by identifying points of introductions and routes of spread and evaluating the relative importance of reproduction and immigration in maintaining populations. More generally, the study illustrates the utility of a landscape‐genetic approach for understanding invasion dynamics and metapopulation structure of one of the world's most destructive invasive mammals, the red fox.

In the western United States, wolverines (Gulo gulo) typically occupy high‐elevation habitats. Because wolverine populations occur in vast, remote areas across multiple states, biologists have an imperfect understanding of this species' current distribution and population status. The historical extirpation of the wolverine, a subsequent period of recovery, and the lack of a coordinated monitoring program in the western United States to determine their current distribution further complicate understanding of their population status. We sought to define the limits to the current distribution, identify potential gaps in distribution, and provide a baseline dataset for future monitoring and analysis of factors contributing to changes in distribution of wolverines across 4 western states. We used remotely triggered camera stations and hair snares to detect wolverines across randomly selected 15‐km × 15‐km cells in Idaho, Montana, Washington, and Wyoming, USA, during winters 2016 and 2017. We used spatial occupancy models to examine patterns in wolverine distribution. We also examined the influence of proportion of the cell containing predicted wolverine habitat, human‐modified land, and green vegetation, and area of the cluster of contiguous sampling cells. We sampled 183 (28.9%) of 633 cells that comprised a suspected wolverine range in these 4 states and we detected wolverines in 59 (32.2%) of these 183 sampled cells. We estimated that 268 cells (42.3%; 95% CI = 182–347) of the 633 cells were used by wolverines. Proportion of the cell containing modeled wolverine habitat was weakly positively correlated with wolverine occupancy, but no other covariates examined were correlated with wolverine occupancy. Occupancy rates (ψ) were highest in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (ψ range = 0.8–1), intermediate in the Cascades and Central Mountains of Idaho (ψ range = 0.4–0.6), and lower in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (ψ range = 0.1–0.3). We provide baseline data for future surveys of wolverine along with a design and protocol to conduct those surveys. © 2020 The Authors. The Journal of Wildlife Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The Wildlife Society.