4212(89-109).pdf ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 89 COMPLEXITY AND INFORMATION GAPS IN RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE (ALCES ALCES AMERICANA) IN NOVA SCOTIA, CANADA Karen Beazley1, Mark Ball2, Lisa Isaacman1, Scott McBurney3, Paul Wilson2, and Tony Nette4 1School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, 6100 University Avenue, Suite 5010, Halifax, NS, Canada B3H 3J5; 2 3Canadian Cooperative C1A 4P3; 4Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, 136 Exhibition Street, ABSTRACT: In 2003, the Eastern moose (Alces alces americana) on mainland Nova Scotia was declared an endangered species under the Nova Scotia Endangered Species Act. Subsequently, as required by the Act, a recovery team was established and the recovery planning process was initiated. Very early in this process, it was recognized that developing a recovery strategy for this moose population was - tion size, structure, reproduction, and mortality are not current for the population, and the assessment methodologies are inconsistent. The ability to evaluate potential factors limiting the population is hindered by a lack of information, primarily in the subject areas of genetic structure, health, illegal effect relationships, as well as verifying the potential cumulative and synergistic effects of the factors impacting the moose population. Answering these questions is challenging and will require substantial requisite data. Until the information gaps can be addressed, it is prudent to adopt a precautionary and adaptive approach to the recovery of this species. ALCES VOL. 42: 89-109 (2006) Key words: access, climate change, demographics, disease, disturbance, fragmentation, genetics, habitat suitability, population viability, road effects Beginning in the late 1700s, and accelerat- ing through the 1800s, the southern range limits of eastern moose (Alces alces americana) retreated north from most New England states Bontaites and Gustafson 1993, Morris and Elowe 1993, Vecellio et al. 1993). In New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, moose met a similar, although delayed, fate (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). Moose numbers in pre-European main- land Nova Scotia may have been in the range of 0.38 moose/km2 animals, but declined to a low of several thou- sand by 1825 (Peterson 1955). A 3-year closed hunting season enacted in 1874 was followed shortly by a prohibition on snaring and hunting with dogs; restrictions that may have saved Scotia 1934). Greater legislative protection and increased enforcement allowed moose to slowly increase throughout the mainland; by 1908, their numbers may have rivaled those of the pre-European era. Moose in Nova Scotia declined through the 1920s and 1930s and the hunting season was closed in 1938 (Benson and Dodds 1977). In eastern and northeast- RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 90 ern mainland Nova Scotia, where densities season was opened from 1964 to 1974, closed in 1975 and 1976, and re-opened from 1977 to 1981 (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). The season has been closed since 1981 due to concerns about declining moose numbers. Recent surveys on mainland Nova Scotia, although somewhat abated, has continued in spite of the hunting season closure and moose probably now only number between 1,000 and 1,200 animals (Parker 2003; Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). Moose 1800s, reintroduced in the late 1940s (from moose transplanted from Elk Island National Park in Alberta), and are common throughout the northern two-thirds of the Island, where hunting is currently permitted (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpub- lished data). In 2003, following the preparation of a status report (Parker 2003), mainland Nova Scotia moose were declared ‘endangered’ un- der the Nova Scotia Endangered Species Act. In accordance with an endangered status under the Act, the moose receives full protection, which includes a prohibition on all hunting, a recovery team has been established, and a recovery plan is currently in preparation. This paper describes some of the chal- lenges facing the recovery planning process for the endangered mainland Nova Scotia and gaps in knowledge about, population dynamics and cause-effect relationships with potential threats and limiting factors related to habitat, viability, genetics, health, and climate change. DEMOGRAPHICS AND VIABILITY Demographics For over 200 years, the highly fragmented and discontinuous moose habitat remaining in the area of the Chignecto Isthmus, at the border between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, is believed to have minimized movement of moose between the two provinces. This near absence of connectivity has resulted in these different genetic characteristics (see Genetics section). Similarly, there does not appear to 3 remaining localized groups1 of moose on mainland Nova Scotia and the reintroduced Cape Breton Island population, which cur- rently numbers about 8,000 animals (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data) (Fig. 1). Efforts by Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources biologists have been less than successful in achieving an overall population estimate with on mainland Nova Scotia. However, based on of moose remaining on the mainland has been estimated at between 1,000 and 1,200 (Parker 2003; Nova Scotia Department of Natural suggest that cow:bull ratios of moose on main- land Nova Scotia are within normal values (Dodds 1963, Benson and Dodds 1977, Bran- nen 2004; Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). However, far as moose management efforts in the province have focussed on determining abundance and distribution, hunter success rates, kill per area, 1We use the term localized groups rather than subpopulations because there are currently insuf- distinct populations or subpopulations; from a as individuals within a given larger population level of relatedness; since this is not clearly more general term, localized groups. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 91 - ments of hunter-harvested animals (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). According to the limited and varied sources available, there appear to be widely differing values on calf numbers reported both spatially and temporally. Prior to 1956, abundance of moose in Nova Scotia was determined through hunter success rates and observation reports, wildlife and forest ranger reports, and casual observa- tion (Peterson 1955, Dodds 1963, Benson and Dodds 1977). Big game hunter moose observation reports for eastern mainland Nova Scotia between 1950 – 1952 indicated that the number of calves to 100 cows was 14 in 1950, 47 in 1951, and 32 in 1952 (Dodds 1963). Observational data submitted by “un- successful” eastern mainland moose hunters in 1964, 1977, and 1978 indicated that the number of calves to 100 cows in those years were 14.5, 38, and 50, respectively, in that region (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). According to wildlife sanctuary warden moose observation reports for the period 1934-1953, the number of calves to 100 cows for the 4 largest wildlife sanctuaries on mainland Nova Scotia (Fig. 1) ranged from a low of 15 in the Waverley Sanctuary during the period 1949-1953, to a high of 62 in the Tobeatic Wildlife Man- agement area during the period 1934-1938 (Dodds 1963). Vukelich (1977) analysed the reproductive tracts of moose of known age, Fig. 1. General location and size of largest remaining localized groups of moose on mainland Nova Island populations, and mainland Nova Scotia localized groups has not been found. RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 92 which were killed by hunters in the eastern mainland in 1973 and 1974. Fifty percent of yearling cows were found to be pregnant (all carrying single fetuses), while 85.3% of adult cows were pregnant (25% with single fetuses and 75% carrying 2 fetuses). According to this study, “comparison of the Nova Scotia data with that from other regions indicate that the moose in Nova Scotia are as productive as any other North American moose herd aerial survey of moose in Nova Scotia was conducted by D. W. Benson in the late winter of 1956 (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). However, little data were gathered on calf:cow ratios in early surveys since they focused on density and distribution. Recent moose surveys on mainland Nova Scotia have observed so few animals that little insight could be gained on - tion of: (1) a January 1993 aerial survey of the Tobeatic area, which documented 50 calves per 100 cows (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data); and (2) a 1999-2001 study conducted in the same area, which documented 22 calves per 100 cows (Brannen 2004). The limited and infrequent data available long-term rates of reproduction, calf survival, recruitment, or overall population structure of moose on mainland Nova Scotia. There is no apparent consistent pattern and, with insuf- calf representation between years within the same localized group of moose and between different localized groups remain unclear. Acquiring adequate data on this subject will be challenging and costly. Conducting moose surveys in Nova Scotia is arduous, not only be- cause of low moose densities on the mainland, but also due to unpredictable weather condi- tions (including frequent winter rain storms), poor snow conditions near coastal areas, and sporadic availability of government-owned helicopters (Pulsifer and Nette 1995). Population Viability A viable population is one that will con- reproductive rates are higher than or equal to mortality rates (Salwasser et al. 1984, New- mark 1985). A minimum viable population (MVP) is the population size below which high, but above which the probability of over a given period of time (Shaffer 1981, Samson 1983, Lehmkhul 1984, Gilpin and Soulé 1986). Population viability analysis is a method used to determine MVP, which can be used to identify threatened populations and quantitative targets of population size for recovery efforts (Salwasser et al. 1984, Shaf- fer 1990, Boyce 1992). Population viability analyses are data intensive since viability is a function of genetic (i.e., to prevent inbreed- ing depression), demographic (i.e., birthrate, mortality, reproductive age, and fecundity), environmental (i.e., stochasticity), and spatial (i.e., distribution) factors (for an overview see Snaith and Beazley 2002). Nova Scotia to conduct viability analyses even using simple computer-based models such as VORTEX (for an assessment of such models see Lindenmayer et al. 1995). Nonetheless, it is important to understand viability issues since the remnant localized groups of moose in mainland Nova Scotia are small (< 500 individuals per group) and thus may not be viable. Although small founder groups are available (Timmermann and McNicol 1988) and some have grown to widely distributed populations (Pulsifer 1995, Basquille and Thompson 1997, Wangersky 2000), since het- erozygosity is likely reduced (as is the case in Newfoundland and Cape Breton, Nova Scotia), long-term viability may be compromised due ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 93 to reduced genetic variability (Broders at al. 1999). While moose in mainland Nova Scotia formerly constituted a continuous population, remnant localized groups are currently isolated from each other by distances of 200-300 km, highways, and areas of low habitat suitability (Snaith and Beazley 2002). Thus, it is unlikely (at least one reproductively successful migrant per generation [Soulé 1980, Brussard 1985, Reed et al. 1986, Beier 1993]) for these groups to function and persist as a metapopulation (i.e., localized groups loosely associated by 1970, Fahrig and Merriam 1994, Beissinger and Westphal 1998]). conducted a rough estimate of moose MVP using a 50/500 rule-of-thumb proposed by Franklin (1980) and Soulé (1980) as an alter- native to data-intensive analysis. The 50/500 rule suggests that effective or ideal breeding populations (Ne) of 50 and 500 individuals are required to maintain short-term (decades) and long-term (centuries) viability, respectively, based on inbreeding considerations alone. To estimate the size of census populations (N) required to support Ne for moose, an average 10:1 ratio of N:Ne was assumed from ratios reported by Ryman et al. (1981) and Arsenault (2000). Accordingly, census populations for short- and long-term viability were calculated as 500 and 5,000 individuals, respectively. Although such coarse estimates are subject to criticism, several empirical, modeling, and genetic studies have found consistent results, and thus they may serve as a general guideline in the absence of more precise data (Brussard 1985, Samson et al. 1985, Lande 1987, Thomas 1990, Henriksen 1997, Belovsky et al. 1999). These estimates indicate that current isolated, localized groups of less than 500 individuals each are unlikely to persist over the short- term. If connectivity among localized groups is such that they do collectively function as a metapopulation, at less than a total of 5,000 individuals, they are unlikely to persist over the long-term. Nonetheless, considerable population viability and in devising strategies - tirpation caused by the small size and isolated locations of localized groups. GENETICS between landscape features and population dynamics is the impact on the movement of - cant role in the persistence of a species. It which is necessary for the maintenance of genetic diversity, thus enabling individuals to adapt to their environments, while rendering the species as a whole more resilient to changes such as disease and climate (Hedrick and Miller 1992, Wayne et al. 1992, O’Brien 1994, Haig 1998). The movement of individuals may also promote the persistence of populations where their net reproductive rate is less than replacement (Watkinson and Sutherland 1995, Dias 1996, Novaro et al. 2000). In such cases, population viability is dependant upon not only its own population parameters, but also the population dynamics of neighboring patches and ease of movement among these patches (Caprio 2001). Alternatively, the movement of individuals can also be a detriment to a spe- among areas can promote the spread of disease or could potentially introduce animals into - culty adapting. Either of these scenarios could have devastating consequences for population recovery. In Nova Scotia, understanding the dispersal dynamics of resident and neighbor- ing moose populations, subpopulations, and localized groups is essential for any potential recovery efforts. The relationship between the landscape RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 94 address using traditional methods of popula- tion and landscape ecology. However, with the advent of molecular genetic tools, new questions regarding population structure and evolutionary processes, such as genetic drift - namics (Manel et al. 2003). In 2002, analysis of microsatellite data derived from a limited number of moose from mainland Nova Scotia (n = 35) and neighboring Cape Breton Island (n = 23) and New Brunswick (n = 16) showed - areas. In addition, the analysis showed little from the Cumberland region with those col- lected from both the Guysborough and Tobe- atic regions, presenting the likelihood of two genetically structured populations occurring on mainland Nova Scotia (Fig. 1). Measures of genetic variability of moose on mainland Nova Scotia showed that the levels were Breton and Northern Ontario where there are genetic variability in moose from mainland Nova Scotia could be a response to 2 factors: (1) non-assortive mating; and (2) pooling of samples from locally structured populations within the geographic area, otherwise known as the Wahlund effect. Discriminating among raise important concerns regarding the highly fragmented nature of localized moose groups on the mainland of Nova Scotia. Acknowl- edging the analytical limitations of our low sample sizes and high dispersion of sampling areas, a more comprehensive genetic analysis could be obtained with additional samples from a greater number of areas. The current low numbers of mainland moose and their obtaining additional tissue and blood samples for DNA analysis. As a result, a non-invasive approach has been developed that involves the collection of moose fecal material as a source of DNA. This method, which has proven highly successful for woodland caribou (Ball augment the data set and could be used for future population monitoring. The development of conservation and recovery plans to increase moose movement Scotia will prove to be an arduous task in light of many of the problems confronting Nova Scotia moose. The danger of population fragmentation and isolation increases concerns about progressive genetic deterioration, which would reduce individual health and popula- tion productivity and potentially eventually considering limitations on the available moose habitat remaining on mainland Nova Scotia, as well as the presence of a parasite (Pare- laphostrongylus tenuis) potentially fatal to moose throughout the province, facilitating the effective movement of migrant moose through either the creation of interconnecting habitat corridors or translocation of effective breeders from neighboring New Brunswick originated from moose transplanted from Al- berta, the reintroduced Cape Breton moose is a distinct subspecies from those inhabiting the mainland (Pimlott and Carberry 1958, Dodds 1975). Therefore, the effectiveness of Cape Breton moose as breeders with the mainland population may be limited, and even if suc- cessful, would change the genetic identity of the mainland moose. With this said, a clear assessment of moose population structure, habitat and disease data, will prepare managers to identify threats to moose population dynam- ics and implement appropriate solutions. HEALTH The study of mortality factors, including those that are directly related to disease and ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 95 those that are not (e.g., predation, trauma, and environmental conditions), provides es- sential information that can lead to a greater understanding of processes contributing to the decline of any wildlife population. Therefore, since 1998, opportunistic moose mortalities and euthanized sick or injured moose have been utilized to assess the health of the mainland Nova Scotia moose population. Whenever possible, entire carcasses were necropsied at the post mortem facilities of the Atlantic Vet- erinary College, University of Prince Edward Island or the Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, Nova Scotia Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. When this could not occur, necrop- Department of Natural Resources staff, and the entire head, spinal column, heart, lungs, liver, and kidneys, together with a section of quadriceps muscle and an intact femur from one of the hind legs were collected and frozen were live captured and transported to Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources’ wildlife park in Shubenacadie, Nova Scotia. These individuals were held in quarantine for a 1 – 2 month period of clinical assessment, and subsequently, due to the progression of their clinical disease and a continued deterioration of their body condition, both animals were - nation of the carcasses and tissues submitted for necropsy was combined with ancillary diagnostic testing, including histology and, when required, parasitology, bacteriology, and Also, the incisor bar was collected for aging, and the liver and kidneys were sampled for inclusion in a cervid trace element study initi- ated by Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, Canadian Wildlife Service, and Environment Canada. pregnant, and 6 male moose were necropsied. class, 8 were in the 2 – 8-year-old age class, and 2 were in the > 8-year-old age class. Two males were in the 0 – 2-year-old age class and 4 were in the 2 – 8-year-old age class. Trauma was the most common cause of mortality. Vehicular collision was the cause of death in 6 animals, another 2 were killed by gunshot, and 1 died as the result of an ac- cidental fall from a cliff. All of the affected condition with normal skeletal muscle mass and abundant adipose tissue stores. Under- - ing that the accident causing the trauma was the result of a simple mishap. - cant mortality factor affecting the population. A diagnosis of parelaphostrongylosis was P. tenuis adults, larvae, or - tral nervous system (CNS) neuropil. In cases where there were random multifocal, linear areas of necrosis, and/or degeneration of the CNS neuropil associated with nonsuppurative were considered compatible with parasitic tracts and strongly suggestive of an infection with P. tenuis despite the absence of nema- tode adults, larvae, or eggs. Based on these as the cause of death in 2 animals and was the most likely cause of death in an additional 5 cases. In one of the affected moose, P. tenuis eggs were present in the interstitium of the pulmonary alveolar septa, which is consistent with a patent infection. In 2000, 3 moose were euthanized because animal was uncoordinated and circling, and the other 2 were unable to rise due to hind limb paralysis. All affected individuals were adult females in very good body condition and had a diffuse, nonsuppurative encephalomyelitis. During that same year, 2 moose from the other Nova Scotia moose population in Cape Breton RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 96 were euthanized due to similar neurological abnormalities. These moose, an adult male and a yearling female, were in very good body changes in the CNS. In all cases, the lesions were suggestive of a viral etiology, but the cause was not determined. Additional cases have not been observed in either of the Nova Scotia moose populations since that time. and pulmonary hemorrhage post-collaring due to capture-related complications. The cause of death could not be determined in 2 mortalities. a small number of the moose necropsied in- cluded the presence of Dictyocaulus viviparous (lungworm), Dermacentor albipictus (winter tick), and antler deformities. The parasitic infections were of low intensity and only found in animals affected by neurological disease. There were 6 cases of mild dictyocaulosis and 5 cases of winter tick infestation with alopecia affecting 0 – 10% of the affected animal’s body surface, primarily the head and neck in 2 of the 6 males necropsied, 1 healthy and 1 with parelaphostrongylosis. Also, similar antler deformities were observed in 3 of the 9 males necropsied from the Cape Breton moose population. Calf survival was considered as a potential measure of population health. A concurrent study on a localized group of moose in main- land Nova Scotia’s Tobeatic region indicated that calf survival for the radio-collared females was very low during the years 1998 – 2001 (Brannen 2004). The causes of calf mortal- ity were not investigated in this study, and it remains to be determined if calf survivorship is similar in the other localized groups of mainland Nova Scotia moose. The data from the cervid trace element study are analyzed in another report (Pollock 2005). The kidney and liver samples were analyzed for arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, cop- per, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, and zinc. Kidney cadmium concentrations were high in some Nova Scotia moose and, relative to reference values for cattle, cobalt, copper, manganese, selenium, and zinc levels in some (Pollock 2005). However, gross or microscop- or cobalt, copper, manganese, selenium, and of the moose necropsied, suggesting clinical disease associated with these trace elements is not occurring in Nova Scotia moose. Accidental random vehicular trauma is a frequent and often unavoidable cause of mortality in wildlife populations. However, in the case of endangered species, these losses may be considered unacceptable and may need to be mitigated, if possible. Two of the a section of a 4-lane Nova Scotia provincial highway known as the Cobequid Pass. This piece of highway has been a common site of moose-vehicle collision since its completion through necropsy, there are 8 known moose mortalities from this area (T. Nette, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). Therefore, as in other juris- dictions, investigation of management options, such as strategic fencing, implementation of signage, creation of wildlife underpasses or overpasses, and reduction of speed limits, is required to address this problem. mortality factor affecting the moose popula- tion of mainland Nova Scotia. There is ample support in the literature demonstrating the affect of this parasite on the population dy- namics of moose and other cervid species in Nova Scotia and elsewhere in North America (Benson 1958a, b; Smith et al. 1964; Smith and Archibald 1967; Anderson 1971, 1972; Thomas and Dodds 1988). The refugia hy- pothesis (Kearney and Gilbert 1976) was used ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 97 white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) when P. tenuis is present in the environment. This hypothesis and the role P. tenuis plays in regulating cervid populations has been chal- lenged in the literature (Nudds 1990, Whitlaw and Lankester 1994, Bender et al. 2005), but parelaphostrongylosis is regulating moose on mainland Nova Scotia, and the localized groups are surviving in refugia. This evidence includes the following observations: 1. The current decline of the Nova Scotia mainland moose population began subse- population growth that occurred in the late 1920s through the early 1950s and has - ing but persistently high white-tailed deer population density (Benson and Dodds 1977; T. Nette, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data); 2. The remnant localized groups of moose appear to be geographically limited to the elevated regions of the province, in areas where white-tailed deer are absent or in low density (T. Nette, Nova Scotia Depart- ment of Natural Resources, unpublished data); 3. The remnant localized groups of moose are also geographically limited to a granitic soil type that is not compatible with the presence of the intermediate molluscan hosts of P. tenuis (R. Cameron, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). It is clear that further research is required mainland Nova Scotia moose population dy- namics. Selectively decreasing the populations of white-tailed deer or molluscan intermediate hosts of P. tenuis are management tools that could be utilized to address this problem in certain areas of critical moose habitat. Antler deformities were relatively com- mainland and Cape Breton moose popula- tions. In cervids, antler deformities have been associated with genetic abnormalities; traumatic skeletal injuries; copper, calcium, physiological factors such as failure of the antler’s testosterone receptors during growth and testosterone imbalances due to testicular atrophy (Marburger et al. 1972, Gogan et al. 1988, Carrasco et al. 1997, Tiller et al. 1997, O’Hara et al. 2001). Injuries to the antler or the cases. In a mortality study like this one, because it requires observation of an individual and/or his offspring with the same deformity over several consecutive years. The potential involvement of nutritional or physiological etiologies remains to be determined. Based on the available data, calf mortal- ity appears to be a problem in at least one localized group on mainland Nova Scotia. In other North American moose populations, calf mortality is most often associated with regulator, it is strongly suggested to require sympatry with both wolves (Canis lupus) and a bear species (Ursus americanus or U. arctos) (Franzmann et al. 1980, Ballard et al. 1981, Boer 1988, Crête and Courtois 1997). in the province (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, unpublished data). Histori- cally, the Eastern wolf (C. l. lycaon) was rare 1969, Lohr and Ballard 1996). However, the Eastern coyote (Canis latrans) is present in the Scotia during the mid-1970s (Moore and Parker 1992). While coyotes are reported to be a predator of large cervids in other studies RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 98 (Smith and Anderson 1996), the combined impact of bear and coyote predation on the Nova Scotia mainland moose population has yet to be assessed. As in other cervid popula- tions, health related stressors such as infectious diseases and nutritional problems could also affect the survivability of moose calves (Smith and Anderson 1996). However, the potential involvement of disease in the death of calves can only be documented through post mortem - ously in this paper, from what limited data are available, reproduction and calf survival in the mainland Nova Scotia moose appear to vary temporally and spatially. However, it is - mortality can be a major factor in the decline of a moose population. Therefore, a moose calf mortality study is required to address this Despite the lack of supporting evidence of clinical disease associated with trace ele- copper, manganese, selenium, and zinc and/ or high levels of cadmium may impact the health of individual animals, either directly or through interactions with other factors (e.g., infectious and noninfectious diseases, harsh environmental conditions, and habitat limita- tions), cannot be dismissed (Pollock 2005). Therefore, ongoing trace element monitoring, especially in cases of natural mortality, is es- sential to discover the potential role of these compounds in the ongoing decline of the Nova Scotia mainland moose population. In conclusion, 22 animals represent a small sample size. However, the necropsy results be contributing to the decline of the mainland moose population or impeding the recovery process. Continued disease surveillance, with complete necropsies when possible, integrated with additional targeted research designed to - lighted above, is essential to determine the impact of health-related issues on the recov- ery of the endangered mainland Nova Scotia moose population. HABITAT SUITABILITY AND AVAILABILITY Moose have a relatively small home range (Youmans 1999). Use of selected areas is learned and traditional with the home range of individual animals encompassing adequate resources to meet their basic year-round needs of water, food, cover, and security. Required habitat features for moose related to thermal relief, security, and aquatic resources, as well setting. A review of research in Nova Scotia and Maine indicates that key habitat compo- nents vary seasonally and biogeographically distances are required to meet annual and life- history needs, especially for cows (Prescott 1987, Miller 1989, Brannen 2004). Winter moose range is reported as being unimpeded by average snow depth in mainland Nova Scotia greater than 13 m in height with 40 – 50% canopy closure (of mature softwood in years and areas with deep snow), young or suc- cessional forage stands nearby (less than 30 years since disturbance), and/or partial cuts with remaining overstory and residual stands Miller 1989, Brannen 2004). Moose avoid poorly drained lowlands, and hardwood and hardwood-softwood stands in winter (Thomp- (Abies balsamea), paper (Betula papyrifera) and yellow birch (B. alleghaniensis), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), mountain maple (A. spicatum), aspen (Populus spp.), willow (Salix spp.), and other shrubs (Prescott 1968, ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 99 by cows of wet lowlands and softwoods, hard- and softwood with canopy closure ranging from 0 to 60%, aquatic areas and licks, residual stands, areas with dense to moderate overstory for hiding and cover, and an interspersion of 1986, Thompson 1987, Miller 1989, Brannen 2004). For calving, cows select secluded, undisturbed, poorly-drained lowlands, which have young stands nearby for food and are less than 100 m from water (Leptich 1986, Thompson 1987, Miller 1989). Minimum Critical Habitat Area of habitat required to support a viable popu- lation or metapopulation of moose in Nova Scotia. Minimum critical area (MCA) is a rough measure of the quantity (spatial-area) of suitable habitat required to support a vi- able population over time, and is calculated as a function of viable population size, home range size, and moose density. It is a useful measure for setting habitat targets for species recovery and conservation. Snaith and Beazley (2002) conducted coarse MCA calculations for moose in mainland Nova Scotia using two methods: (1) multiplying short- and long-term N by home range size; and (2) dividing N by density. N (500/5,000) multiplied by the mean (40 km2) annual home range size for moose in mainland Nova Scotia (~55 km2) (D. Brannen, Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources, personal communication) and in the Acadian forest region (~25 km2) (Dunn 1976, Crossley and Gilbert 1983, Crête 1987, Leptich and Gilbert 1989, McNicol 1990) re- sults in short- and long-term MCAs of 20,000 and 200,000 km2, respectively. N (500/5,000) divided by mean density (0.05 / km2) of moose in mainland Nova Scotia (0.01 – 0.09 / km2) (Pulsifer and Nette 1995) results in short- and long-term MCAs of 10,000 and 100,000 km2, respectively. Obviously there is consider- able uncertainty in such simple and coarse estimates and the range of MCA calculations they produce. Nevertheless, they indicate that to maintain viable populations of moose in Nova Scotia over both short and long terms, and that long-term viability is likely dependent upon continued habitat connectivity to New Brunswick since the total area of mainland Nova Scotia is ~45,000 km2, which is well below long-term MCA estimates. Habitat Suitability Analysis life-history variations in habitat requirements - ability and availability and to manage forests for moose. However, preliminary assessments of the availability of forage, security, thermal cover, and aquatic habitat components in mainland Nova Scotia have been conducted, though they are relatively coarse, localized, and/or incomplete (Snaith 2001, Snaith et al. 2002, Brannen 2004, Kwan 2005). Snaith (2001) (also see Snaith et al. 2002) conducted a coarse-scale habitat suitability analysis to quantify the proportional availability of 4 habitat components (forage, softwood cover, Model II. The results indicated little optimal habitat according to all 6 theoretical models 2 of very good and good habitat (Snaith et al. 2002). Logistic regression analysis indicated no HSI values and moose pellet presence/absence on pellet group inventory (PGI) transect lines (Nova Scotia Department of Natural Re- sources, unpublished data); however, forage - ence/absence. This obviously raises questions about the validity of the model, its assump- tions, and application in mainland Nova Scotia importance of habitat components for moose RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 100 regions. Although HSI values alone were unable to predict moose pellet presence/ab- sence, in subsequent multivariate regression analyses, Snaith et al. (2002) found statistically P < 0.05) between moose pellet presence/absence and: (1) road density alone; (2) HSI values and road density combined; (3) road density after HSI values are accounted for; and (4) 2 of the 6 HSI equations after road density is accounted for. These results must be interpreted with caution since pellets indicate only winter habitat use, and the PGI data are incomplete and contain sampling biases. Nonetheless, it appears that higher road densities may reduce the effective- ness of otherwise suitable habitat for moose (see Beazley et al. 2004 for a review), though between roads, habitat suitability, and moose distribution in Nova Scotia are not known. Habitat Disturbance and Human Access in moose or demographic changes in moose populations in response to human activities (Youmans 1999). According to a review of to North American ungulates provided by Youmans (1999), responses of these animals to human-induced disturbances may include areas of desirable habitat. Moose have been by cross-country skiers, snowmobilers, and hunters (Forman et al. 1997, Jalkotzy et al. adapt to and tolerate disturbances caused by human activities that are predictable and non- threatening (Geist 1971, Shank 1979, West- worth et al. 1989), backcountry recreational pursuits in the form of hiking, mountain biking, angling, snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, off-highway-vehicle use, and snowmobiling are not highly predictable either spatially or temporally (Shank 1979, Ferguson and Keith 1982, Rudd and Irwin 1985). Although moose hunting is illegal on mainland Nova Scotia, poaching and hunting of other species may be major sources of human-induced disturbance. in the province are unknown, these activities not only cause a direct loss of animals, but may, even at low frequencies, effectively elevate the level of disturbance associated with other back-country human activities. The inunda- tion of moose winter habitat by recreational snowmobilers over the past 40 years is not unique to Nova Scotia, nor is the more recent invasion of moose spring, summer, and fall new generation of recreational off-highway wheeled vehicles. The impact of these vehicles on Nova Scotia's natural environment may be - tions because of the province's relatively small small privately owned parcels, and very large number of access roads and trails, combining to make regulation and control of this form of There is considerable debate on the direct and indirect effects of roads, trails, and other linear developments relative to direct mortality from vehicle collisions, habitat fragmentation and avoidance, displacement and disturbance, browse on the vegetation along road verges, they also suffer direct mortality from collisions and indirect effects resulting from the access afforded to humans and other species, which opportunities (Timmermann and Gollat 1982, Lyon 1984, Boer 1990, Jalkotzy et al. 1997, Gucinski et al. 2001). The fact that vehicular the mainland Nova Scotia moose population is supported by data discussed in the Health Section of this paper. Roads and their use ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 101 also provide predators, such as the Eastern coyote, and other species, such as white-tailed deer, access into moose habitat. Facilitating deer movement into moose habitat refugia serves to decrease the spatial separation between moose and deer, and consequently increases the likelihood of transmission of P. tenuis moose (see Health section). While indirect, these effects may nonetheless be substantial, especially in combination; yet, a direct cause- to establish or prove. Nonetheless, it is well documented that moose and other ungulates are negatively affected by roads, trails, and other linear developments (for summaries see Beazley et al. 2004, Jalkotzy et al. 1997, and Gucinski et al. 2001). Habitat loss, conversion, degradation, and fragmentation result from roads and related human activities and developments such as agriculture, forestry, mining, and urbaniza- suitable habitat are eliminated or reduced to small, isolated patches that can no longer support viable localized groups of moose over time. For species that are sensitive to human activities, such as herbivores, road density is often the most accurate predictor of habitat effectiveness (Lyon 1983, Thiel 1985, Noss et al. 1999). Consequently, this factor has been counter-indicator for suitable habitat for large vertebrates and ecological integrity (Forman 1995, Noss 1995, Rudis 1995, Forman et al. 1997, Noss et al. 1999). Although statistical analyses have indicated a correlation between road density and moose pellet presence/ab- sence in mainland Nova Scotia (Snaith et al. 2002, Beazley et al. 2004), it is unclear whether this is as a consequence of direct or indirect effects of the roads themselves, the access that roads provide to humans, or some other factor for which road density may serve as a surrogate, such as human settlement, popu- lation density, forest harvesting intensity, or other activities or developments. Nonetheless, Brannen (2004) also found that the length of primary and secondary roads in study areas in mainland Nova Scotia had a negative effect on moose presence. The level and type of use of the road or trail affects the nature and magnitude of the associated impact, thus limiting our ability to come to general conclusions about cause-ef- fect relationships and potential management options. Nonetheless, given the necessity other linear corridors for recreation, forestry, urban and rural developments, and many other uses, the challenges in deriving politically acceptable and defensible solutions are not insubstantial. Approaches to minimize direct and indirect human-related disturbances to moose and the conversion and fragmentation Public awareness and budgetary enhance- ments will be necessary to achieve effective - tions and to undertake habitat restoration and conservation efforts. DISTRIBUTION AND CLIMATE CHANGE the southern limit of their natural distribution on the North American continent. Issues of heat stress, thermal cover, snow depth, moose/ deer separation, and temperature and precipita- tion changes associated with climate change raise questions about the persistence of moose at this latitude. Climate change scenarios for mainland Nova Scotia project that by 2080 mean annual temperatures will rise from cur- in the southwest (i.e., Tobeatic localized group) - ized group) (Canadian Institute for Climate Change, Canadian Climate Impact Scenarios, cgi?Scenarios). Temperature rises are likely to RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 102 result in increased thermal stress, particularly in summer. Consequently, moose may spend more time under thermal cover during the heat of the day and travel at night to feed, thereby and therefore potential risks to calves and calf mortality. Aquatic resources, thermal cover areas and at higher-elevations are likely to become increasingly important. While further warming would be to the detriment of moose in terms of thermoregu- greater abundance and distribution of deer P. tenuis. Total annual days with snow are projected to be less than half of current rates in both the southwest and northeast (from 51 to 23 and 42 to 19, respectively), while days with rain are predicted to increase (Canadian Institute for Climate Change, Canadian Cli- mate Impact Scenarios, http://www.cics.uvic. in annual days-with-snow, increases in days- with-rain, and increases in mean winter tem- lower snow depths. Lower snow depths may also facilitate deer movement into areas from - ing habitat refugia for moose from white-tailed to P. tenuis. A direct positive relationship has been established between warmer climates, higher winter precipitation, and prevalence of a lungworm parasite similar to P. tenuis (Ball et al. 2001), thus suggesting a potential increase in the prevalence of P. tenuis as a consequence of warming. Potential climate-change-induced in- creases in direct and indirect factors, such as thermal stress and P. tenuis-related mortality, While climatic changes may ultimately limit the ability for moose recovery in Nova Sco- tia, the predictions indicate that measures for increasing thermal cover and for addressing P. tenuis-related mortality will be even more criti- cal in the future than at present. Furthermore, if genetic diversity is valued as a component of biodiversity conservation, measures to retain genetic material of localized groups of A. a. americana (i.e., as a species and as individu- als hypothetically adapted for persistence at the southern limits of their contemporary range) may be warranted even if the material does not reside in mainland Nova Scotia. In the ability of moose to persist in mainland Nova Scotia, portions of the genetic material translocations of individuals to more northerly regions. Regardless, the uncertainties around the projections and the consequent impacts on moose require a precautionary and adaptive approach to recovery planning. CONCLUSION It is apparent that the number of moose in mainland Nova Scotia is in decline and that it may be as a consequence of one or all of several direct and indirect factors related to habitat suitability and effectiveness, human access and disturbance, population demographics and viability, genetics, health, and climate and knowledge gaps with respect to these fac- tors and their interrelationships that present a challenge to recovery planning. While areas of apparently suitable habitat remain, there are questions as to their effec- tiveness for moose where road densities are high and white-tailed deer are present, since moose appear to be only occupying a small portion of otherwise suitable habitat (possibly in refugia), which is isolated from deer and limit human access and to monitor and prevent illegal activities due to the proliferation of roads, trails, and off-highway vehicles, which facilitates access into otherwise remote areas, some of which may currently be functioning ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 103 moose consist of small numbers of individuals that are isolated from each other and unlikely to be functioning as a metapopulation. These localized groups are at population levels that are well below estimates of minimum viable population size, especially for the long term, suggesting negative implications for genetic viability and an unacceptably high probability - ing isolated groups through physical habitat restoration at the landscape and regional scales are limited due to physical barriers such as long distances, major highways, and the small numbers of remnant moose. Opportunities for increasing the number of individuals within localized groups are hindered by vari- ous mortality factors related to trauma from vehicular collisions and gunshots, P. tenuis, - icity effects, and our lack of understanding of the interrelationships among these and genetic and environmental factors. Climate southern limit of their range and predictions of future climate change indicate increases in temperature and decreases in snow cover, both of which may increase heat stress and transmission of P. tenuis. Moose recovery in mainland Nova Scotia will increasingly need to address thermal cover requirements and P. tenuis-related mortality. effect relationships between these factors and moose decline, since it is likely that the decline is the result of synergistic and cumulative effects of several, if not all, of the factors. Addressing these challenges will require support to acquire the requisite data and to adopt a precautionary and adaptive approach to recovery planning. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Gerry Parker for contributions to the introductory section, other members of Nova Scotia’s American Moose Recovery Planning Team whose discussions and ideas - ment, the editors of Alces, and anonymous reviewers. REFERENCES ALEXANDER, C. E. 1993. The status and management of moose in Vermont. Alces 29: 187-195. ALLEN, A. W., P. A. JORDAN, and J. W. TER- RELL models: Moose, Lake Superior region. U.S. Department of the Interior Biologi- cal Report 82 (10.155). U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C., USA. ANDERSON, R. C. 1971. Neurologic disease in reindeer (Rangifer tarandus tarandus) introduced in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology 49: 159-166. _____. 1972. The ecological relationships of meningeal worm and native cervids in North America. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 8: 304-310. ARSENAULT, A. A. 2000. Status and manage- ment of moose (Alces alces) in Saskatch- ewan. Fish and Wildlife Branch Tech- nical Report 00-1:1-84. Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management. Saskatchewan Environment, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada. BALL, M. C., M. W. LANKESTER, and S. P. MA- HONEY. 2001. Factors affecting the distri- bution and transmission of Elaphostron- gylus rangiferi (Protostrongylidae) in caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) of Newfoundland, Canada. Canadian Jour- nal of Zoology 79: 1265-1277. _____, R. PITHER, M. MANSEAU, J. CLARK, S.D. PETERSEN, S. KINGSTON, N. MORRILL, and P. WILSON. 2007. Characterization of target RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 104 nuclear DNA from faeces reduces techni- cal issues associated with the assumptions of low-quality and quantity template. Conservation Genetics 8: 577-586. BALLARD, W. B., T. H. SPRAKER, and K. P. TAY- LOR. 1981. Causes of neonatal moose calf mortality in south central Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Management 45: 335-342. BASQUILLE, S., and R. THOMPSON. 1997. Moose (Alces alces) browse availability and utilization in Cape Breton Highlands National Park. Parks Canada Technical Report in Ecosystem Science 10:1-37. Parks Canada, Historical Properties, BEAZLEY, K. F., T. V. SNAITH, F. MACKINNON, and D. COLVILLE. 2004. Road density and potential impacts on wildlife species such as American moose in mainland Nova Scotia. Proceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of Science 42: 339-357. BEIER, P. 1993. Determining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for cougars. Conservation Biology 7: 94-108. BEISSINGER, S. R., and M. I. WESTPHAL. 1998. On the use of demographic models of population viability in endangered spe- cies management. Journal of Wildlife Management 62: 821-841. BELOVSKY, G. E., C. MELLISON, C. LARSON, and P. A. VANZANDT 286: 1175-1177. BENDER, L. C., S. M. SCHMITT, E. CARLSON, J. B. HAUFLER, and D.E. BEYER, JR. 2005. Mortality of Rocky Mountain elk in Michi- gan due to meningeal worm. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 41: 134-140. BENSON, D. A. 1958a. Moose “sickness” in Nova Scotia – I. Canadian Journal of Comparative Medicine 22: 244-248. _____. 1958b. Moose “sickness” in Nova Scotia – II. Canadian Journal of Com- parative Medicine 22: 282-286. _____, and G. D. DODDS. 1977. The deer of Nova Scotia. Department of Lands and Forests, Cat/77/126/5M. Department of Scotia, Canada. BOER, A. H. 1988. Moose, Alces alces, calf mortality in New Brunswick. Canadian Field-Naturalist 102: 74-75. _____. 1990. Spatial distribution of moose kills in New Brunswick. Wildlife Society Bulletin 18: 431-434. BONTAITES, K. M., and K. GUSTAFSON. 1993. The history and status of moose and moose management in New Hampshire. Alces 29: 163-167. BOYCE, M. S. 1992. Population viability analysis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23: 481-506. BRANNEN, D. C. 2004. Population parameters and multivariate modeling of winter habi- tat for moose (Alces alces) on mainland Nova Scotia. M.Sc. Thesis, Acadia Uni- versity, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada. BRODERS, H. G., S. P. MAHONEY, W. A. MON- TEVECCHI, and W. S. DAVIDSON. 1999. Population genetic structure and the effect of founder events on the genetic vari- ability of moose, Alces alces, in Canada. Molecular Ecology 8: 1309-1315. BRUSSARD, P. F. 1985. Minimum viable popula- tions: How many are too few? Restoration Management Notes 3: 21-25. CAPRIO, M. A. 2001. Source-sink dynamics between transgenic and nontransgenic habitats and their role in the evolution of resistance. Journal of Economic Entomol- ogy 94: 698-705. CARRASCO L., Y. FIERRO, J. M. SÁNCHEZ-CAS- TILLEJO, J. HERVÁS, J. PÉREZ, and J. C. GÓMEZ-VILLAMADOS. 1997. Abnormal antler growth associated with testicular hypogonadism in red deer. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 33: 670-672. CIOFFI, P. J. 1981. Winter cover and browse selection by moose in Maine. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, USA. CRÊTE, M. 1987. The impact of sport hunting ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 105 on North American moose. Swedish Wild- life Research Supplement 1: 553-563. _____, and R. COURTOIS. 1997. Limiting factors might obscure population regula- tion of moose (Cervidae: Alces alces) in unproductive boreal forests. Journal of Zoology (London) 242: 765-781. CROSSLEY, A., and J. R. GILBERT. 1983. Home range and habitat use of female moose in Northern Maine - a preliminary look. Transactions of the Northeast Section of the Wildlife Society 40: 67-75. DIAS, P. C. 1996. Sources and sinks in popu- lation biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11: 326–330. DODDS, D. G. 1963. The present status of moose (Alces alces americana) in Nova Scotia. Proceedings of the Northeast Wildlife Conference 2: 1-40. _____. 1975. Distribution, habitat and status of moose in the Atlantic provinces of Canada and northeastern United States. Naturaliste Canadien 101: 51–65. _____, E. MULLEN, and A. MARTELL. 1969. Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia Department of Lands and Forests, Internal Report. Department of Natural Resources Library, DUNN, F. 1976. Behavioural study of moose. Maine Department of Inland Fish and Wildlife Project W-66-R-6 Job 2-1. Maine Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wild- life, Augusta, Maine, USA. FAHRIG, L., and G. MERRIAM. 1994. Con- servation of fragmented populations. Conservation Biology 8: 50-59. FERGUSON, M. A. D., and L. B. KEITH. 1982. of moose and elk in Elk Island National Park, Alberta. Canadian Field-Naturalist 96: 69-78. FORMAN, R. T. T. 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. _____, D. S. FRIEDMAN, D. FITZHENRY, J. D. MARTIN, A. S. CHEN, and L. E. ALEXANDER. 1997. Ecological effects of roads: Toward three summary indices and an overview of North America. Pages 40-54 in K. Canter, editor. Habitat Fragmentation and Infrastructure. Minister of Transport and Public Works and Water Management, Delft, Netherlands. FRANKLIN, I. R. 1980. Evolutionary change in small populations. Pages 135-150 in Conservation Biology: An Evolutionary- Ecological Perspective. Sinauer Associ- ates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. FRANZMANN, A. W., C. C. SCHWARTZ, and R. O. PETERSON. 1980. Moose calf mortal- ity in summer on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Management 44: 764-768. GEIST, V. 1971. A behavioral approach to the management of wild ungulates. Pages 413-424 in E. Duffey and A. S. Watt, Animal and Plant Communities for Con- servation. Eleventh Symposium of the British Ecological Society, University of East Anglia, Norwich, July 7-9, 1970. GILPIN, M., and M. E. SOULÉ. 1986. Minimum viable populations: Processes of species in M. E. Soulé, editor. Conservation Biology: The Sci- ence of Scarcity and Diversity. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. GOGAN, P. J. P., D. A. JESSUP, and R. H. BAR- RETT. 1988. Antler anomalies in Tule elk. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 24: 656-652. GUCINSKI, H., M. FURNISS, R. ZIERMER, and M. BROOKES. 2001. Forest service roads: a States Department of Agriculture, Forestry Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-509.1. RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 106 HAIG, S. M. 1998. Molecular contributions to conservation. Ecology 79: 413-425. HEDRICK, P. W., and P. S. MILLER. 1992. Rare alleles, MHC and captive breeding. Pages 187-204 in V. Loeschcke, J. Tomiuk, and S. K. Jain, editors. Conservation Genetics. Birkhauser, Basel, Switzerland. HENRIKSEN and critique of minimum viable population size. Fauna Norvegica 18: 33-41. JALKOTZY, M. G., P. I. ROSS, and M. D. NASSERDEN. 1997. The effects of linear developments on wildlife: A review of Services Limited, prepared for Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Cal- gary, Alberta, Canada. KEARNEY, S. R., and F. F. GILBERT. 1976. Habitat use by white-tailed deer and moose on sympatric range. Journal of Wildlife Management 40: 645-657. KWAN - sence of established moose (Alces alces) populations in southeastern Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia. MES Thesis, Dal- Canada. LANDE in demographic models of territorial populations. American Naturalist 130: 624-635. LEHMKHUL, J. F. 1984. Determining size and dispersion of minimum viable popula- tions for land management planning and species conservation. Environmental Management 8: 167-176. LEPTICH, D. J. 1986. Summer habitat selec- tion by moose in Northern Maine. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, USA. _____, and J. R. GILBERT. 1989. Summer home range and habitat use by moose in Northern Maine. Journal of Wildlife Management 53: 880-885. LEVINS in M. Gerstenhaber, editor. Some Math- ematical Questions in Biology. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. LINDENMAYER, D. B., M. A. BURGMAN, H. R. AKCAKAYA, R. C. LACY, and H. P. POS- SINGHAM. 1995. A review of three models for metapopulation viability analysis -- ALEX, RAMAS/Space and VORTEX. Ecological Modeling 82: 161-174. LOHR, C., and W. B. BALLARD. 1996. Histori- cal occurrence of wolves, Canis lupus, in the Maritime provinces. Canadian Field- Naturalist 110: 607-610. LYON, L. J. 1983. Road density models describing habitat effectiveness for elk. Journal of Forestry 81: 592-595. _____. 1984. Road effects and impacts on In 7th Proceedings of the Forest Transportation Symposium, Casper, Wyoming, USA. December 11- 13, 1984. MANEL, S., M. K. SCHWARTZ, G. LUIKART, and P. TABERLET. 2003. Landscape genet- ics: Combining landscape ecology and population genetics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 189-197. MARBURGER, R. G., R. M. ROBINSON, J. W. THOMAS, M. J. ANDREGG, and K. A. CLARK. 1972. Antler malformation produced by leg injury in white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 8: 311-314. MCNICOL, J. 1990. Moose and their environ- ment. Pages 11-18 in M. Buss and R. Truman, editors. The Moose In Ontario, Book 1. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. MILLER, B. K. 1989. Seasonal movement patterns and habitat use of moose in Northern New Hamphire. M.Sc. Thesis, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, USA. MOORE, G. C., and G. R. PARKER. 1992. Colonization by the Eastern coyote (Ca- nis latrans). Pages 23-37 in A. H. Boer, editor. Ecology and Management of the ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 107 Eastern Coyote. Wildlife Research Unit, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada. MORRIS, K., and K. ELOWE. 1993. The status of moose and their management in Maine. Alces 29: 91-97. NEWMARK, W. D. 1985. Legal and biotic boundaries of western North American national parks: A problem of congruence. Biological Conservation 33: 197-208. NOSS, R. F. 1995. Maintaining Ecological Integrity in Representative Reserve Net- works. World Wildlife Fund Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. _____, E. DINERSTEIN, B. GILBERT, M. GILPIN, B. J. MILLER, J. TERBORGH, and S. TROM- BULAK. 1999. Core areas: Where nature reigns. Pages 99-128 in M. E. Soulé and J. Terborgh, editors. Continental Regional Reserve Networks. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA. NOVARO, A. J., K. H. REDFORD, and R. E. BODMER. 2000. Effect of hunting in source-sink systems in the neotropics. Conservation Biology 14: 713-721 NUDDS, T. D. 1990. Retroductive logic in retrospect: The ecological effects of meningeal worms. Journal of Wildlife Management 54: 396-402. O’BRIEN, S. J. 1994. A role for molecular genetics in biological conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 91: 5748-5755. O’HARA, M. T., G. CARROLL, P. BARBOZA, K. MUELLER, J. BLAKE, V. WOSHNER, and C. WILLETTO. 2001. Mineral and heavy metal status as related to a mortality event and poor recruitment in a moose population in Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 37: 509-522. PARKER, G. 2003. Status report on the Eastern moose (Alces alces americana Clinton) in mainland Nova Scotia. Report pre- pared for the Nova Scotia Department of Canada. PETERSON, R. L. 1955. North American Moose. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. PIMLOTT, D. H., and W. J. CARBERRY. 1958. North American moose transplantations and handling techniques. Journal of Wildlife Management 22: 51–62. POLLOCK, B. 2005. Trace element status of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and moose (Alces alces) in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia Department of Natural Resources and Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre, Final Report. Department of Natural Resources Library, PRESCOTT, W. H. 1968. A study of winter concentration areas and food habits of moose in Nova Scotia. M.Sc. Thesis, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova Sco- tia, Canada. PROVINCE OF NOVA SCOTIA. 1934. Report of the Department of Lands and Forests 1933. Minister of Public Works and Mines, PULSIFER, M. D. 1995. Moose herd perseveres. Nova Scotia Conservation 19: 6-7. _____, and T. L. NETTE. 1995. History, status and present distribution of moose in Nova Scotia. Alces 31: 209-219. REED, J. M., P. D. DOERR, and J. R. WALTERS. 1986. Determining minimum population sizes for birds and mammals. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14: 255-261. RUDD, L. T., and L. L. IRWIN. 1985. Winter- ing moose vs. oil/gas activity in western Wyoming. Alces 21: 279-298. RUDIS, V. A. 1995. Regional forest fragmentation effects on bottomland hardwood community types and resource values. Landscape Ecology 10: 291- 307. RYMAN, N., R. BACCUS, C. REUTERWALL, and M. H. SMITH. 1981. Effective population size, generation interval, and potential loss of genetic variability in game species RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA – BEAZLEY ET AL. ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 108 under different hunting regimes. Oikos 36: 257-266. SALWASSER, H., S. P. MEALEY, and K. JOHNSON. 1984. Wildlife population viability: A question of risk. North American Wild- life and Natural Resources Conference 49: 421-439. SAMSON, F. B. 1983. Minimum viable popu- lations - a review. Natural Areas Journal 3: 15-23. _____, F. PEREZ-TREJO, H. SALWASSER, L. F. RUGGIERO, and M. L. SHAFFER. 1985. On determining and managing minimum population size. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: 425-433. SHAFFER, M. L. 1981. Minimum population sizes for species conservation. BioScience 31: 131-134. _____. 1990. Population viability analysis. Conservation Biology 4: 39-40. SHANK, C. C. 1979. Human related behavioral disturbance to northern large mammals: A bibliography and review. Report prepared for Foothills Pipe Lines (South Yukon) Limited, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. SMITH, B. L., and S. H. ANDERSON. 1996. Patterns of neonatal mortality of elk in northwest Wyoming. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74: 1229-1237. SMITH, H. J., and R. M. ARCHIBALD. 1967. Moose sickness, a neurological disease of moose infected with the common cervine parasite Elaphostrongylus tenuis. Cana- dian Veterinary Journal 8: 173-177. _____, _____, and A. H. CORNER. 1964. Elaphostrongylosis in Maritime moose and deer. Canadian Veterinary Journal 5: 287-296. SNAITH, T. V. 2001. The status of moose in mainland Nova Scotia: population viability and habitat suitability. MES Nova Scotia, Canada. _____, and K. BEAZLEY. 2002. Application of population viability theory to moose in mainland Nova Scotia. Alces 38: 193-204. _____, _____, F. MACKINNON, and P. DUINKER. 2002. Preliminary habitat suitability analysis for moose in mainland Nova Scotia, Canada. Alces 38: 73-88. SOULÉ, M. E. 1980. Thresholds for survival: potential. Pages 151-169 in M. E. Soulé Biology: An Evolutionary-Ecological Per- spective. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. THIEL, R. P. 1985. Relationship between road densities and wolf habitat suitability in Wisconsin. American Midland Naturalist 113: 404-407. THOMAS, C. D. 1990. What do real population dynamics tell us about minimum viable population sizes. Conservation Biology 4: 324-327. THOMAS, J. E., and D. G. DODDS. 1988. Brainworm, Parelaphostrongylus tenuis, in moose, Alces alces, and white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus, of Nova Scotia. Canadian Field-Naturalist 102: 639-642. THOMPSON, M. E. 1987. Seasonal home range and habitat use by moose in Northern Maine. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, USA. TILLER, B. L., G. E. DAGLE, and L. L. CADWELL. 1997. Testicular atrophy in a mule deer population. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 33: 420-429. TIMMERMANN, H. R., and GOLLAT, R. 1982. related to season manipulation and access. Alces 18: 301-328. _____, and J. G. MCNICOL. 1988. Moose habitat needs. Forestry Chronicle 64: 238-245. VECELLIO, G. M., R. D. DEBLINGER, and J. E. CARDOZA. 1993. Status and manage- ment of moose in Massachusetts. Alces 29: 1-7. VUKELICH, M. F. 1977. Reproduction and pro- ALCES VOL. 42, 2006 BEAZLEY ET AL. - RECOVERY PLANNING FOR MOOSE IN NOVA SCOTIA 109 ductivity of moose in Nova Scotia. M.Sc. Thesis, Acadia University, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada. WANGERSKY, R. 2000. Too many moose? Canadian Geographic Nov/Dec: 44-56. WATKINSON, A. R., and W. J. SUTHERLAND. 1995. Sources, sinks, and pseudo-sinks. Journal of Animal Ecology 64: 126–130. WAYNE, R. K., N. LEHMAN, M. A. ALLARD, and R. L. HONEYCUTT. 1992. Mitochondrial DNA variability of the gray wolf: Genetic consequences of population decline and habitat fragmentation. Conservation Biol- ogy 6: 559-569. WESTWORTH, D., L. BRUSNKY, J. ROBERTS, and H. VELDHUZIEN. 1989. Winter habitat use by moose in the vicinity of an open pit copper mine in north-central British Columbia. Alces 25: 156-166. WHITLAW, H. A., and M. W. LANKESTER. 1994. A retrospective evaluation of the effects of parelaphostrongylosis on moose popula- tions. Canadian Journal of Zoology 72: 1-7. YOUMANS, H. 1999. Project overview. Pages 1.1-1.18 in G. Joslin and H. Youmans, coordinators. Effects of Recreation on Rocky Mountain Wildlife: A Review for Montana. Committee on Effects of Recreation on Wildlife, Montana Chap- ter of the Wildlife Society. (accessed March 2006).