Reconciling local control with appropriate scale in Norwegian moose management

Hoffman, Matthew; Flø, Bjørn Egil

doi:10.1080/1523908x.2016.1188371

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In rural areas they may have <1,000 but more commonly around 2,000–3,000 inhabitants. Wildlife managers have extensive contact with land owners, hunters, forest managers, and the public as part of deer hunting management (e.g., setting quotas, reporting harvest data, setting management aims in cooperation with land owners) and as part of their obligations of reporting the number and cause of incidental mortalities of deer (e.g., deer‐vehicle accidents, animals found dead) in their municipality (Hoffman and Flø ). They are usually also the person in the municipality that organizes any public feeding, alone or in cooperation with landowners (those having hunting rights), and the one that on behalf of the municipality or together with the Norwegian Public Roads Administration or the National Rail Administration, finances the feeding.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal regulation of supplementary cervid feeding facing chronic wasting disease

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The supplementary feeding of cervids is a widespread practice across the northern hemisphere. There are few studies, however, regarding the extent of feeding in space and time. There are adverse effects of supplementary feeding, of which the most severe are increased parasite and disease transmission. With the recent emergence of chronic wasting disease (CWD) among cervids in Norway, a legal regulation was issued that banned all supplementary cervid feeding. We quantified the spatial extent and intentions of feeding cervids across all of Norway using a questionnaire at the municipality scale. We also compared spatial extent of feeding before and after the feeding ban to shed light on the ability of regulations to control supplementary feeding. Supplementary feeding to increase winter survival and targeting roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) was more common (48.4% of the municipalities) than the feeding of red deer (Cervus elaphus; 20.5%) and moose (Alces alces; 7.4%). The main feeding period was January–March, but extensive feeding also occurred from November to December and in April. Reducing traffic accidents was also a motivation, particularly for the feeding of moose (14.5%), and this was the main motivation (86%) for public feeding. Among the 65.7% that responded, 53.3% reported they knew about supplemental feeding of cervids in their municipality. In the region with the first feeding ban, 80.2% of municipalities were feeding in 2015–2016 before the ban, which was reduced to 68.4% in 2016–2017 and remained at 68.4% in 2017–2018. In the remainder of Norway, 81.4% were feeding in 2015–2016, and 72.6% were feeding in 2016–2017, but after the ban, this increased to 78.6% in the harsh winter of 2017–2018. Our study highlights that regulations across broad scales may not be followed and that more spatially targeted regulations and increased enforcement are required for disease transmission to be more effectively combated. © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Wildlife Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal regulation of supplementary cervid feeding facing chronic wasting disease

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Currently, the role of local authorities in environmental management, including hunting, is being strengthened [55,56]. Management of cervids is implemented in large management areas, each of which comprises of a number of areas, jaktvalds [57]. Each jaktvald has a steering committee and management plans.…”

Section: Moose Populations and Management Examples In Some European Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Municipal goals should correspond to the county, i.e., to the broader territorial and administrative extent [58]. After approving the plan, the municipality issues permits for moose (numbers of bulls, cows and calves), which are distributed to the hunting teams by the jaktvald steering committee [57]. Such a multi-level management is specific to the country and differs from Lithuania.…”

Section: Moose Populations and Management Examples In Some European Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moose Management Strategies under Changing Legal and Institutional Frameworks

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Moose (Alces alces) management strategies in Lithuania, East Europe, were analyzed. The study was intended to show the (un)sustainability of the current management approach in relation to changes in hunting rules, hunting organization and development of the responsible administrative bodies. Moose population and bag dynamics were analyzed using I index in connected scatterplots and compound annual growth rates (CAGR). In 1962–2020, the CAGR of the moose population was 3.84%, resulting in a population size increase of nearly 10 times. The seesaw principle in moose management was confirmed, showing three periods of population decrease (1973–1977, 1989–1995, 2000–2005), and two periods of hunting bag decrease (1976–1978 and 1990–1993). All decline phases were related to legal and administrative issues in the country. Since 2006, population growth has not been controlled. Lithuania has no long-term strategy of the moose population management at any administrative level. The current management approach is not sustainable, as it has not ensured long-term stability of the moose population. The current continuous growth of population, followed by only a moderate increase in the hunting bag, is related to the possibility for owners to adopt long-term planning of the hunting plot units.

show abstract

“…The level at which knowledge-based decisions are made and implemented is significant. Local knowledge about ungulate population species composition, size and structure provides information for improved game management (Hoffman and Flø 2016;Martinez and Martin 2019), and simultaneously gives an opportunity for better collaboration between stakeholders (Dressel et al 2020), and the possibility to avoid conflicts with other sectors such as forest management and agriculture (Bugmann and Weisberg 2003;Gerhardt et al 2013;Linnel et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A case study for best suitable methods of monitoring demographic structure in cervid populations to predict increasing forest damages

Done,

Ozoliņš,

Bagrade

et al. 2024

Silva Fenn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The overall increase of ungulate populations in modern Europe has contributed to conflicts in national economies, particularly between game management and the forestry sector. This study assessed damage risks to young pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), spruce (Picea abies (L.) H. Karst.) and aspen (Populus tremula L.) stands at two spatial scales. One level assessed the interaction between sex-age structure of cervid populations, measured by pellet group density, and forest damages, measured as the percentage of heavily browsed trees in 2040 stand surveys distributed proportionally throughout the country. The second level compared pellet counts and trail-camera-based records of moose (Alces alces L.) and red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) presence in a pilot study area. We examined whether 1) there is a correlation between damage amount and ungulate population structure and 2) are the data from trail cameras suitable for wider use in monitoring ungulate population structure. The study confirmed significantly higher moose pellet group densities in pine than in spruce and aspen stands. Pine damages were greater in stands with higher moose pellet group density, especially with female moose prevailing over male moose density index. The red deer pellet group densities were significantly higher in heavily damaged pine and spruce stands, regardless of sex-age structure. In most cases, there were no statistically significant differences between the two survey methods of ungulate population structure by using pellet count transects and trail camera fixations. Both methods provide comparable data on sex-age structure in moose and red deer populations if seasonal and habitat-predicted biases are considered. However, trail cameras are more widely applicable and easier to use by hunters than pellet counts.

show abstract

Reconciling local control with appropriate scale in Norwegian moose management

Cited by 4 publications

References 35 publications

Legal regulation of supplementary cervid feeding facing chronic wasting disease

Legal regulation of supplementary cervid feeding facing chronic wasting disease

Moose Management Strategies under Changing Legal and Institutional Frameworks

A case study for best suitable methods of monitoring demographic structure in cervid populations to predict increasing forest damages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About