Demographic responses of nearly extirpated endangered mountain caribou to recovery actions in Central British Columbia

R. Scott McNay, Clayton T. Lamb, Line Giguere, Sara H. Williams, Hans Martin, Glenn D. Sutherland, Mark Hebblewhite

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations

Abstract

Recovering endangered species is a difficult and often controversial task that challenges status quo land uses. Southern Mountain caribou are a threatened ecotype of caribou that historically ranged in southwestern Canada and northwestern USA and epitomize the tension between resource extraction, biodiversity conservation, and Indigenous Peoples' treaty rights. Human-induced habitat alteration is considered the ultimate cause of caribou population declines, whereby an increased abundance of primary prey—such as moose and deer—elevates predator populations and creates unsustainable caribou mortality. Here we focus on the Klinse-Za and Quintette subpopulations, part of the endangered Central Group of Southern Mountain caribou in British Columbia. These subpopulations were trending toward immediate extirpation until a collaborative group initiated recovery by implementing two short-term recovery actions. We test the effectiveness of these recovery actions—maternity penning of adult females and their calves, and the reduction of a primary predator, wolves—in increasing vital rates and population growth. Klinse-Za received both recovery actions, whereas Quintette only received wolf reductions, providing an opportunity to test efficacy between recovery actions. Between 1995 and 2021, we followed 162 collared female caribou for 414 animal-years to estimate survival and used aerial counts to estimate population abundance and calf recruitment. We combined these data in an integrated population model to estimate female population growth, total population abundance, and recovery action effectiveness. Results suggest that the subpopulations were declining rapidly (λ = 0.90–0.93) before interventions and would have been functionally extirpated (<10 animals) within 10–15 years. Wolf reduction increased population growth rates by ~0.12 for each subpopulation. Wolf reduction halted the decline of Quintette caribou and allowed them to increase (λ = 1.05), but alone would have only stabilized the Klinse-Za (λ = 1.02). However, maternity penning in the Klinse-Za increased population growth by a further ~0.06, which when combined with wolf reductions, allowed populations to grow (λ = 1.08). Taken together, the recovery actions in these subpopulations increased adult female survival, calf recruitment, and overall population growth, more than doubling abundance. Our results suggest that maternity penning and wolf reductions can be effective at increasing caribou numbers in the short term, while long-term commitments to habitat protection and restoration are made.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere2580
JournalEcological Applications
Volume32
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2022

Funding

This work was conducted within the homelands of West Moberly First Nations and Saulteau First Nations. We thank the Treaty 8 Tribal Association for their support of this work. The authors who do not live near the Klinse-Za caribou (CL, GS, MH, HM, and SW) contributed from within the homelands of the Ktunaxa, Salish, Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations. We thank the following organizations and their staff (initials) for their personal assistance in field work, access to historic data, and administration; and for provision of funds enabling the work: BC Government (JS, MB, AP, DS, DH, HS), BC Hydro (through CC and the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program North Region and through the Indigenous Relations program, grant nos. PF16-W22, PEA-F17-W-1469, PEA-F18-W-2338, PEA-F19-W-2671, PEA-F20-W-2937), Environment Canada Climate Change (through the Aboriginal Funds for Species At Risk and the Habitat Stewardship Program, JW, AL), Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation (SW, grant nos. 7-436, 7-478), Nîkanêse Wah tzee Stewardship Society (EL, JH, KB, NO-B, RW, TD, TT), Saulteau First Nations and West Moberly First Nations (BM, CB, CR, CM, DA, GN, HD, JN, LD, RD, RW, SD, SG), Universities of Montana and British Columbia (CL, AF, HM, MH, SW supported through NASA Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment Grant No. NNX15AW71A, Liber Ero Fellowship, Canadian Mountain Network, Wildlife Infometrics Inc. (BP, BS, DH, JD, JG, KL, KM, KS, LB, ME, MM, NM, TW, VB), Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (TB), and local industry including: Canfor, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., Enbridge, Mitsubishi Motors, Teck Resources Ltd., TransCanada Corp., Walter Energy, and West Fraser Mills. We also thank DH for review and helpful suggestions to improve an early draft, three anonymous reviewers, and the editor for their helpful suggestions on this work. This work was conducted within the homelands of West Moberly First Nations and Saulteau First Nations. We thank the Treaty 8 Tribal Association for their support of this work. The authors who do not live near the Klinse‐Za caribou (CL, GS, MH, HM, and SW) contributed from within the homelands of the Ktunaxa, Salish, Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil‐Waututh Nations. We thank the following organizations and their staff (initials) for their personal assistance in field work, access to historic data, and administration; and for provision of funds enabling the work: BC Government (JS, MB, AP, DS, DH, HS), BC Hydro (through CC and the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program North Region and through the Indigenous Relations program, grant nos. PF16‐W22, PEA‐F17‐W‐1469, PEA‐F18‐W‐2338, PEA‐F19‐W‐2671, PEA‐F20‐W‐2937), Environment Canada Climate Change (through the Aboriginal Funds for Species At Risk and the Habitat Stewardship Program, JW, AL), Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation (SW, grant nos. 7‐436, 7‐478), Nîkanêse Wah tzee Stewardship Society (EL, JH, KB, NO‐B, RW, TD, TT), Saulteau First Nations and West Moberly First Nations (BM, CB, CR, CM, DA, GN, HD, JN, LD, RD, RW, SD, SG), Universities of Montana and British Columbia (CL, AF, HM, MH, SW supported through NASA Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment Grant No. NNX15AW71A, Liber Ero Fellowship, Canadian Mountain Network, Wildlife Infometrics Inc. (BP, BS, DH, JD, JG, KL, KM, KS, LB, ME, MM, NM, TW, VB), Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (TB), and local industry including: Canfor, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., Enbridge, Mitsubishi Motors, Teck Resources Ltd., TransCanada Corp., Walter Energy, and West Fraser Mills. We also thank DH for review and helpful suggestions to improve an early draft, three anonymous reviewers, and the editor for their helpful suggestions on this work.

FundersFunder number
PEA‐F17‐W‐1469, PEA‐F19‐W‐2671, PEA‐F20‐W‐2937, PF16‐W22
Wildlife Infometrics Inc.
National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNNX15AW71A
Environment and Climate Change Canada
7‐436, 7‐478

    Keywords

    • Before–After
    • Rangifer tarandus
    • adaptive management
    • conservation effectiveness
    • conservation intervention
    • endangered species
    • juvenile mortality
    • maternity penning
    • natality
    • population dynamics
    • population recovery
    • predation

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Demographic responses of nearly extirpated endangered mountain caribou to recovery actions in Central British Columbia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this