Status and Trends of Minnesota’s Moose

Populations

Glenn D. DelGiudice, Ph.D

Forest Wildlife Populations & Research Group, Minnesota Department of Natural

Resources, and Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, & Conservation Biology, University

of Minnesota-St. Paul

St. Louis

Itas caLak e

Polk

Beltrami

Pine

Aitkin

Cook

Kooc hic hing

Ros eau

Otter Tai l

Becker

Marshal l

Stearns

Todd

Kittson

Pope

Swift

Lyon

Morrison

Renvil le

Car lton

Hubbard

Ric e

Wilkin

Nor man

MartinNobles

Wright

Grant

Fi llm oreMower

Crow Wing

Sibley

Murray

Redwood

Clearwater

Lak e of the Woods

Brown

Roc kJacks on

Douglas

Goodhue

Meek erKandiyohi

Winona

Isanti

Dak ota

Faribau lt Freeborn

Olmsted

Stevens

Scott

Steele

Lincoln

Blue Earth

Houston

Wadena

Dodge

Travers e

Mille Lacs

Kanabec

Wabasha

McLeod

Benton

Chippewa

Nic ollet

Waseca

Lac Qui Parle

Pennington

Chisago

Car ver

Big Stone

Cottonwood

Mahnom en

Le Sueur

Pipestone

Red Lak e

Sher bur ne

Yellow Medicine

Washington

Watonwan

Hennepin

Ram sey

Clay

Cas s

Anok a

St. Louis

Itas caLak e

Polk

Beltrami

Pine

Aitkin

Cook

Kooc hic hing

Ros eau

Otter Tai l

Becker

Marshal l

Stearns

Todd

Kittson

Pope

Swift

Lyon

Morrison

Renvil le

Car lton

Hubbard

Ric e

Wilkin

Nor man

MartinNobles

Wright

Grant

Fi llm oreMower

Crow Wing

Sibley

Murray

Redwood

Clearwater

Lak e of the Woods

Brown

Roc kJacks on

Douglas

Goodhue

Meek erKandiyohi

Winona

Isanti

Dak ota

Faribault Freeborn

Olmsted

Stevens

Scott

Steele

Lincoln

Blue Earth

Houston

Wadena

Dodge

Travers e

Mille Lacs

Kanabec

Wabasha

McLeod

Benton

Chippewa

Nic ollet

Waseca

Lac Qui Parle

Pennington

Chisago

Car ver

Big Stone

Cottonwood

Mahnom en

Le Sueur

Pipestone

Red Lak e

Sher bur ne

Yellow Medicine

Washington

Watonwan

Hennepin

Ram sey

Clay

Cas s

Anok a

St. Louis

Itas caLak e

Polk

Beltrami

Pine

Aitkin

Cook

Kooc hic hing

Ros eau

Otter Tai l

Becker

Marshal l

Stearns

Todd

Kittson

Pope

Swift

Lyon

Morrison

Renvil le

Car lton

Hubbard

Ric e

Wilkin

Nor man

MartinNobles

Wright

Grant

Fi llm oreMower

Crow Wing

Sibley

Murray

Redwood

Clearwater

Lak e of the Woods

Brown

Roc kJacks on

Douglas

Goodhue

Meek erKandiyohi

Winona

Isanti

Dak ota

Faribault Freeborn

Olmsted

Stevens

Scott

Steele

Lincoln

Blue Earth

Houston

Wadena

Dodge

Travers e

Mille Lacs

Kanabec

Wabasha

McLeod

Benton

Chippewa

Nic ollet

Waseca

Lac Qui Parle

Pennington

Chisago

Car ver

Big Stone

Cottonwood

Mahnom en

Le Sueur

Pipestone

Red Lak e

Sher bur ne

Yellow Medicine

Washington

Watonwan

Hennepin

Ram sey

Clay

Cas s

Anok a

7___

l/

_

______

‘I_LJ_L||U L:__‘N+

‘FWl_|T_

>Jll_JVl‘I7'7

Fl_||__‘_l|l

___

‘IIIr_V|:L___Lfi__:_]‘__

_J___

_

__1(I_ lT}y|";‘_\||:_“_|_i|4_(4.__

_In_l1

1|I“__

r)“l'L4||(J:||"__Ll|_I1r“l|‘’||‘_w____‘VI’!’___H:\ll_u‘ i[ ‘J

WV

ll_____[|\|‘_"|_[|__|Ii____ _

1I_k_1"

I‘ r‘_T“_l7_

/

l_:_|_|+jL|H L1

Q2q“I%iii?

______|_Ui

“L\|_"L|)fl|‘|_JFTHTIH_j__

_

___|‘_|,,'|__

_‘IL4}"‘_||L_

J]I V‘IIWIIIN

_

N|__:J__‘_‘_F“‘L_|L______:+‘_‘_I:_L‘:__I]

__4:_1[;VH,||'_I\i[U‘"El.(

‘ A_FJ__‘|{_::1

_V“I____

%"EM

Northwestern Minnesota

Moose population estimate

Mid-1980s: 4,000+

2007 : < 100 (last State survey in the NW)

J’ I\|‘\{t‘J~"-€__;_ -K ‘r ‘1 ‘ ¢ K

*1!

W. ,.

- 4

5 '-

Q

. .g fife-yr ,.__, fp _ “L

w - .4 ~- K " 3. _

-Y’: '. J17 I‘--"\:__" ;‘*"“_\‘u. \ Y W , ,ix; -.i.;|_) ‘ mi - . -

'\L"~7: ‘

W.‘

. uh g,‘ ,IF

xi?‘ "5:‘; S_“'-I ‘ _ >151,

\ In:»>--1 Q». *A ~.V 1(- --:1--rs

1 -x . . ..4‘QM .'q1;‘~ , 1?‘-1 , 1""!‘§"'.1', ~§_»- l . +3 5 L '¢;1v,-,.~_\.vfi;-; ("7' y,‘”*“A =1. ~ . .;;?@;

’> 7 I’-1 _ . .'. V '1‘.

(4~_>‘-

-v~. "..;’, - _‘ “_‘T:‘ q|,IL:""- __f‘-_ - "“'.'

.: ‘____-.‘_ -J,“-:...._

\ u"' g1; .' nk'b~ I‘,-.-mrrr». - ~.-+-~-’~8* - p _ - -~

-;

ilIII \.'

. ;~~- - .u-‘ uq

._" uul .

‘Hit_ _ A? "-

IF'_"‘|"'~ __‘_ 1'. ' M.‘ ' -.* —;-;‘.

, .. .‘ _ .,. 'Y'_r - Q

I

1:1-ck‘*1

I-.

nu-1-11:

Northwestern MN Moose Population Population crash – >4,000 moose in the 1980’s, by the 1990’s, things started to change……. • Stopped hunting in 1997 • Habitat management efforts • Radiocollared (VHF) adult mortality study

• Climate change correlation • Health related (liver flukes and

brainworm)

Liver Flukes

likely

31%

Brainworm likely

5%Accidents

4%

Poaching

3%

Unknown

25%

Predation

7%

Disease/Starved

likely

25%

EstmatedMoosePopulaton

5000

4500

2[AI U1ZZ

2|\J U1ZZ

00

G8

1000

500

0

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2M2 ZCO4 2006 2008

W I I I I I I I I I |§| [LI

Year

‘-2

Additional research findings:

1. Low mean annual survival of

ad (0.79) and yrl (0.64), but

high calf survival (0.66)

2. Low pregnancy rates (48%)

3. Annual pop. growth rate

related negatively to mean

summer temperature

Murray et al. (2006): study period 1995-2000

Northeastern Minnesota January 2014

Pop. estimate: 4,350 Calves:cow: 0.44

Bulls:cow: 1.24

QK5K_

__

QV‘"________,___j___‘___UVgq_’j__AZ___‘_¥_(__{;_____AH___Q(wkIV?3?__I3JJ:

9_'_ _____:___if__.‘tK _'__

*3Kk____\__‘___*_

‘I‘_3'‘Q>T

__:_

__‘_______1),_

_______

___V_______,’!-__\-v'_-_iI_||Il'.‘-l_}__l-___‘.___31___

___r

_______I

____

_

_

___V__

___QI‘_

L:I

___:jg:__)7_->_fa?if_

_________55:5’rm;

‘_r__\‘ii_ ___'_rS____ __‘___’,IV, |_¢\______'___;__‘I?7_§_________lgM*__

_‘

i§z__’____N___,‘'_ _‘_,_

‘Ire__fi‘_L

_u:_fi___@_____ _______:___

F_;

_____K‘ ___,>t___

’__h~,"___d__V‘;‘v‘__

_:

_>:__V,________‘__‘_J_I_‘_Pr_________vl_____U?___k‘_‘

,_7_ L’

__

__.

__ _|_»___”

__1__I___I__:_ ___

jI_ _,‘»

/____fixif‘u

I‘_,5‘)?‘Ff

I_‘

‘_“___?

/’

P__;_‘>_7Q}_‘‘J1?_

_{______J}‘*_F‘___.V__V___‘___

/__ ____fl‘M‘_‘{H5__ _‘_'(__

_‘__i'__%’_I______‘_Hi_

_____

1

’__ ______q_?_j_“‘ k __ _

_i_

_1_ _____

_%_HI>(IJ

____‘

1%:F_____

|_I!

I‘*\_‘!i|“

U‘‘

'1'__ ____'_|___\\

W‘__‘l_‘|‘4JN\i‘3__'H"r'__\_-_\

\$

\

Minnesota’s annual aerial moose survey method Consistency and standardization

StMPE5OOMH_nEA__-Et53M41_U2

‘IVIn-II

_____:_::@::::__m

G

_I““m“Ifi;‘1I“*-I-11-|_v|‘___-‘-III-I‘?

31D2aFm

_:_____:“_m

tSWN

______:::______1_?u;I__::_____m__:_

1Mm%flm%““__:;___

SS?

::_*:::__:

:::____

I%1m1Xm%mmi__

MPMbMMM310231rW

___:1_mm_N

M

-ummu.—@—__——n§-

___11'11111

““§..H‘

___________

J?

___1::;KKmHKLim

__"_

q__H

$CC§l‘“QC“§$Z__Z__$Z$

__Jm

fl—__u____I__

__

2-?-

_“

_|_n_|""_____|_L.-ML

_]J_-wfi_|

i__Q

___l____

_!W___$m#m_"mwH_r!‘1_

‘__-

Minnesota’s annual aerial moose survey method

liiqugh:2014 Aer|al Moose Survey

Li-5/Ifllil ,-1:365 J66!‘/r _

1iZ§flI'I6fl:!/Irfi?4'.7’I' '9.‘/la"/J I §s$0:IaaéI‘-':|nz.I-za/..-=.».,,mI—|--a-.122-:/.'.'/.1-91¢:-zif/wwanmw*-wmw Iiing-:;:;-1|:v//37116I—|--II1-2":-mm0lI§|I5:!l=%—_ I-I-:=a-—In:.z-'

ii

ll$&Q8

IFI17013‘HIE;‘III!“IR

,1 ...=;-7.-a@Ii|.vz0zwZfi!—/Jyaflfinflfivnav/Zlil/ZwvnfjfirilLfiififlflldfzi? 7/(9I:|fZI9'I_$IIfiiMfz/07/4vZ|!"4§I%':aZ//I92%!’/)9I:|f)fl9ZZ"'/.514 I6!(:97/J'iZI§/A66’/39? '1'?‘Z’?/{Z71V19/flfiiifififi

L.

=I-==--III-II.I%'i{7§,!-'ir|!-:,~:5;.'-.=-IIIII"E."

‘P’

I—_I-III_l----——I_1I.

hinne-scIl.a Counfies

2014 Survey Plots |:| sway Harem| LDw.Den5|ty

|:] Med“-.n Dam” Ei0|.l13?_ry\fiLate|'s CanoeArea Ilclerness

I"I High Density I i I 1 Range

Permanent Habitat Pint

II

1|"'L“I.‘I1

n.

-0 -0! -5

Minnesota’s annual aerial moose survey method

’/I/Zi

.-

nIi.JIL.... -.a.;..‘-.-. . .1»... u»&\ ."l“0i_,»n.lLIl 1. .....-.... -..__

‘ . , _.»I7'

' ~\ /

@_

1 t-_ _ "Md ii" -I '11 ‘kl;-1| vim Ii; .- wait:/an/~\\

"‘f"'

:—i|w-as

I

I»,

\::~..wJw:.x

.-1\vIrrn<xr-\.z'IrI§4lnr

Minnesota’s annual aerial moose

survey method

2004 – detection probabilities are estimated using a Sightability Model (Giudice et al. 2012)

“.fi‘Iz'*E)‘_I15‘!il!‘>a’i:Dfi

‘H‘;!

L, ‘L_/Mfg

5

_‘

1‘

i\_%_L&___

\M

Ifi‘'

:H_!__“___‘P‘S'_

‘ ‘is_6‘“MM

‘_LTH_FA1N‘F\

k"./

/

r>

_ 9‘‘_

‘RH,

f

Eh

Northeastern Minnesota’s Moose Population, 2005-2014

Survey Estimate

90% Confidence

Interval

2005 8,160 5,960 – 11,170

2006 8,840 6,670 – 11,710

2007 6,860 5,230 – 9,000

2008 7,890 5,970 – 10,420

2009 7,840 6,190 – 9,910

2010 5,700 4,480 – 7,250

2011 4,900 3,810 – 6,290

2012 4,230 3,190 – 5,600

2013 2,760 2,120 – 3,580

2014 4,350 3,220 – 6,210

_+_I

UWOOE_u0u_fiE_HWm_

______________|00000000000000000000004208642111

4102310221021102010290D280027002600250024002

Northeastern Minnesota’s Moose Population, 2005-2014 Estimated calf:cow ratios (solid diamonds)

Percent calves (solid squares)

Estimated bull:cow ratios

Cafcowrat0

-a-6-4-2

-I I I I I I I I I I I

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

cowrat'oSQ

0

1 .80

1 .60

1 .40

_\ NO

1 .00

.°ono

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.002004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 201 0 201 1 201 2 201 3 201 4

-20-1a-16

Percentcaves

-14-12

_\O

Northeastern Radiocollared (VHF) Moose Study

Results, 2002-2008 (Lenarz et al. 2009)

Vehicle 8% Train

2%

Hunters 14%

Poached 2%

Wolves 9%

Bacterial Meningitis

1%

Unknown Health Related

31%

Unknown 33%

Northeastern Minnesota’s Moose Population

Additional research findings: Lenarz et al. (2009, 2010): Study period 2002-2008

1. Models based on Jan temperatures above a critical physiological

threshold were inversely correlated with subsequent adult survival

2. Explained >78% variability in spring, fall, and annual survival, and 55%

for the next winter’s survival

4. Mean annual adult survival rates were 0.81 (0.68-0.96)

5. No difference in male and female survival

Research, Management, and Future of Northeastern Minnesota’s Moose Population

Aggressive research efforts studying:

1. Specific causes of adult and calf mortality relative to intrinsic and

extrinsic factors, seasonal and annual survival rates relative to

environmental variables, and reproductive performance

2. Nutrition and use of habitat before and after forest manipulations

3. White-tailed deer-moose interactions and potential of disease

transmission

4. Thermoregulation by moose relative to behavior, habitat type, and

ambient temperature

5. Wolf-moose interactions, seasonal wolf diet composition and impacts on

the moose population

6. And more….

Research, Management, and Future of Northeastern Minnesota’s Moose Population

Management efforts:

1. Ongoing annual aerial moose survey, with recent inclusion of

assessments of moose use of disturbed areas in northeastern Minnesota

2. Development of Minnesota Moose Research & Management Plan

3. Cancelled the State’s annual moose harvest (2013) until further notice

4. Moose listed by the State as a Species of Concern

5. Fond du Lac Indian Band, 1854 Treaty Authority, and Grand Portage

Band of Chippewa cancelled moose harvests until further notice

6. Annual research/management moose meeting

7. Moose habitat inventory and development of Habitat Suitability Index

(HSI)

Research, Management, and Future of the Northeastern Minnesota’s Moose Population

7. Ongoing habitat manipulation projects by the many landownerships for

moose habitat improvement (including Habitat Collaborative projects)

8. Development of moose management and research websites, frequent

presentations to the public and special interest groups

9. Development of a moose biennial work plan and a climate change

biennial work plan (including a focus on moose)

Acknowledgements

Cooperating parties:

Fond du Lac Resource Management

Division

1854 Treaty Authority

Natural Resources Research Institute, University of Minnesota-Duluth

Voyageurs National Park, U. S. National Park Service

Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, The Nature Conservancy

Grand Portage Band of Chippewa

Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, & Conservation Biology, University of Minnesota-St.

Paul

U. S. Forest Service

U. S. Geological Survey

Hi‘;‘flI_!nhI\GI‘€-BIPuH‘

VN“_'W I>‘»_

__

‘W7

\‘__\__,_':_,>_\(1_M___

\

J’____1l‘E___1‘__:Z_\é‘_»_____1___’I‘__u_L_‘__

__n_’ ___’_____‘

_“_J_____V__T_'3

‘Z;}_7 V

$3k“,V____1“;_,__

‘_,__p_u_,___“,,I‘Ix__>_____‘_~‘_

Q_wHx5_\;_i L__%H_‘§‘\____\‘_____ ‘___>_q_@_§;l__\ __>___ _/f‘_____7 ___‘*»&fl_i‘fr

__

___Z-(__/PZ“__*W

l _<_>_:__’_‘

_,_,____;,___._