Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-fg9bn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-06T13:38:26.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - The census and management of populations of ungulates in Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2011

By
Nicolas Morellet ,
François Klein ,
Erling Solberg  and
Reidar Andersen
Edited by
Rory Putman ,
Marco Apollonio  and
Reidar Andersen
Nicolas Morellet
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique
François Klein
Affiliation:
Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage
Erling Solberg
Affiliation:
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research
Reidar Andersen
Affiliation:
Trondheim, Norway
Rory Putman
Affiliation:
Manchester Metropolitan University
Marco Apollonio
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Sassari, Sardinia
Reidar Andersen
Affiliation:
Museum of Natural History and Archaeology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Over recent decades managers have had to cope with populations of ungulates which have substantially increased both their range and density in Europe (see Apollonio et al.,2010, and references therein). In fact, of the 20 different species of free-ranging ungulates in Europe, only fallow deer Dama dama populations have remained comparatively stable in the last decades. This situation has been perceived by some people as a positive change, leading to greater opportunities for observation of native ungulates by the general public, as well as increased opportunities for those interested in hunting. Unfortunately this marked change in status also has some drawbacks where there is perceived to be an increase in ungulate–human conflicts. Ungulates may cause significant damage to farming and forestry (see Chapter 6 this volume), collisions with vehicles (see Chapter 8), and the spread of disease (Simpson, 2002; Chapter 7 this volume). In addition, there is a growing concern that large populations of ungulates may have a substantial effect on ecosystem function (e.g. Danell et al., 2006). Consequently, in many countries society considers that managers should control ungulate populations through hunting in order to meet specific management objectives (Sinclair, 1997). In practice, the management of most populations of ungulates consists of setting harvest quotas for hunting.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Ungulate Management in Europe
Problems and Practices
 , pp. 106 - 143
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aanes, R., Sæther, B. E., Solberg, E. J., et al. (2003) Synchrony in Svalbard reindeer population dynamics. Canadian Journal of Zoology–Revue Canadienne de Zoologie 81, 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, J. (1953) Analysis of a Danish roe-deer population (Capreolus capreolus (L)) based upon the extermination of the total stock. Danish Review of Game Biology 2, 127–155.Google Scholar
Anderson, D. R. (2001) The need to get the basics right in wildlife field studies. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29, 1294–1297.Google Scholar
Anderson, D. R. (2003) Response to Engeman: index values rarely constitute reliable information. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31, 288–291.Google Scholar
Andersone-Lilley, Z., Balciauskas, L., Ozolins, J, Randveer, T. and Tonisson, J. (2010) Ungulates and their management in the Baltics. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R., and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 103–128.Google Scholar
Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (2010) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 604 pp.Google Scholar
Bartmann, R. M., Carpenter, L. H., Garrott, R. A. and Bowden, D. C. (1986) Accuracy of helicopter counts of mule deer in pinyon-juniper woodland. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14, 356–363.Google Scholar
Bartoš, L., Kotrba, R. and Pintíř, J. (2010) Ungulates and their management in the Czech Republic. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 243–261.Google Scholar
Beasom, S. L., LeonIII, F. G. and Synatzske, D.R. (1986) Accuracy and precision of counting white-tailed deer with helicopters at different sampling intensities. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14, 364–368.Google Scholar
Bobek, B., Perzanowski, K. and Zielinski, J. (1986) Red deer population census in mountains: testing of an alternative method. Acta Theriologica 31, 423–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonenfant, C., Gaillard, J.-M., Klein, F. and Hamann, J.L. (2005) Can we use the young:female ratio to infer ungulate population dynamics? An empirical test using red deer Cervus elaphus as a model. Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 361–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boutin, J. M., Gaillard, J.-M., Delorme, D. and Laere, G. (1987) Suivi de l'évolution de la fécondité chez le chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus) par l'observation des groupes familiaux. Gibier Faune Sauvage 4, 255–265.Google Scholar
Brittas, R. and Karlbom, M. (1990) A field evaluation of the Finnish 3-man chain: a method for estimating forest grouse numbers and habitat use. Ornis Fennica 67,18–23.Google Scholar
Buckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P. and Laake, J. L. (1993) Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Buckland, S. T., Goudie, I. B. J. and Borchers, D. L. (2000) Wildlife population assessment: past developments and future directions. Biometrics 56, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, D., Swanson, G. M. and Sales, J. (2004) Comparing the precision and cost-effectiveness of faecal pellet group count methods. Journal of Applied Ecology 41, 1185–1196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carranza, J. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Spain. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 419–440.Google Scholar
Caughley, G. (1974) Bias in aerial survey. Journal of Wildlife Management 38, 921–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caughley, G. (1977) Analyses of Vertebrate Populations. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Caughley, G., Sinclair, R. and Scott-Kemmis, D. (1976) Experiments in aerial survey. Journal of Wildlife Management 40, 290–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cederlund, G., Bergqvist, J., Kjellander, P., et al. (1998) Managing roe deer and their impact on the environment: maximising the net benefits to society. In Andersen, R., Duncan, P. and Linnell, J. D. C. (eds.) The European Roe Deer: The Biology of Success. Oslo: Scandinavian University, pp. 337–372.Google Scholar
Cogan, R. D. and Diefenbach, D. R. (1998) Effect of undercounting and model selection on a sightability-adjustment estimator for elk. Journal of Wildlife Management 62, 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collier, B. A., Ditchkoff, S. S., Raglin, J. B. and Smith, J. M. (2007) Detection probability and sources of variation in white-tailed deer spotlight surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management 71, 277–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, T., Catchpole, E. A., Albon, S. D., et al. (2001) Age, sex, density, winter weather and population crashes in Soay sheep. Science 292, 1528–1531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Csányi, S. and Lehoczki, R. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Hungary. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 291–318.Google Scholar
Danell, K., Bergström, R., Duncan, P. and Pastor, J. (2006) Large Herbivore Ecology, Ecosystem Dynamics and Conservation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, M. J. (2006) Estimating red deer Cervus elaphus populations: an analysis of variation and cost-effectiveness of counting methods. Mammal Review 36, 235–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhardt, L. L. (2002) A paradigm for population analysis of long-lived vertebrates. Ecology 83, 2841–2854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhardt, L. L. and Pitcher, K. W. (1992) A further analysis of the Nelchina caribou and wolf data. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20, 385–395.Google Scholar
Engeman, R. M. (2003) More on the need to get the basics right: population indices. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31, 286–288.Google Scholar
Ericsson, G. and Wallin, K. (1999) Hunter observations as an index of moose Alces alces population parameters. Wildlife Biology 5, 177–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fafarman, K. R. and DeYoung, C. A. (1986) Evaluation of spotlight counts of deer in south Texas. Wildlife Society Bulletin 14, 180–185.Google Scholar
Ferguson, S. H. (1993) Use of cohort analysis to estimate abundance, recruitment and survivorship for Newfoundland moose. Alces 29, 99–113.Google Scholar
Forsyth, D. M., Barker, R. J., Morriss, G. and Scroggie, M. P. (2007) Modeling the relationship between fecal pellet indices and deer density. Journal of Wildlife Management 71, 964–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fry, F. E. J. (1949) Statistics of a lake trout fishery. Biometrics 5, 27–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fryxell, J. M., Mercer, W. E. and Gellately, R. B. (1988) Population dynamics of Newfoundland moose using cohort analysis. Journal of Wildlife Management 52, 14–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaillard, J.-M., Boisaubert, B., Boutin, J. M. and Clobert, J. (1986) L'estimation d'effectifs à partir de capture-marquage-recapture: application au chevreuil (Capreolus capreolus). Gibier Faune Sauvage 3, 143–158.Google Scholar
Gaillard, J.-M., Delorme, D., Boutin, J. M., Laere, G. and Boisaubert, B. (1996) Body mass of roe deer fawns during winter in 2 contrasting populations. Journal of Wildlife Management 60, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaillard, J.-M., Festa-Bianchet, M., Yoccoz, N. G., Loison, A. and Toïgo, C. (2000) Temporal variation in fitness components and population dynamics of large herbivores. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31, 367–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaillard, J.-M., Loison, A. and Toïgo, C. (2003) Variation in life history traits and realistic population models for wildlife management. In Festa-Bianchet, M. and Apollonio, M. (eds.) Animal Behavior and Wildlife Conservation. Washington, DC: Island Press, pp. 115–132.Google Scholar
Garel, M., Cugnasse, J.-M., Gaillard, J.-M., et al. (2005) Effect of observer experience on the monitoring of mouflon population. Acta Theriologica 50, 100–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasaway, W. C., Dubois, S. D. and Harbo, S. J. (1985) Biases in aerial transect surveys for moose during May and June. Journal of Wildlife Management 49, 777–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, R. M. A., Thomas, M. L. and Stocker, D. R. (1997) The use of portable thermal imaging for estimating deer population density in forest habitats. Journal of Applied Ecology 34, 1273–1286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulland, J. A. (1965) Estimation of mortality rates. In Annex to Arctic Fisheries Working Group Report. ICES C.M. Doc. 3. Copenhagen: International Council for the Exploration of the Sea.Google Scholar
Harestad, A. S. and Bunnell, F. L. (1987) Persistence of black-tailed deer fecal pellets in coastal habitats. Journal of Wildlife Management 51, 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herfindal, I., Sæther, B.-E., Solberg, E. J., Andersen, R. and Høgda, K.-A. (2006) Population characteristics predict responses in moose body mass to temporal variation in the environment. Journal of Animal Ecology 75, 1110–1118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hewison, A. J. M., Vincent, J. P., Bideau, E., Angibault, J. M. and Putman, R. J. (1996) Variation in cohort mandible size as an index of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) densities and population trends. Journal of Zoology 239, 573–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jędrzejewska, B., Okarma, H., Jędrzejewski, W. and Milkowski, L. (1994) Effects of exploitation and protection on forest structure, ungulate density and wolf predation in Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 31, 664–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kjellander, P. (2007) Utvärdering av ÄBIN. (In Swedish) Report 1. Jönköping, Sweden: Skogstyrelsen, 90 pp.Google Scholar
Lancia, R. A., Braun, C. E., Collopy, M. W., et al. (1996) ARM! For the future: adaptive resource management in the wildlife profession. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24, 436–442.Google Scholar
Langvatn, R., Mysterud, A., Stenseth, N. C. and Yoccoz, N. G. (2004) Timing and synchrony of ovulation in red deer constrained by short northern summers. American Naturalist 163, 763–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavsund, S., Nygren, T. and Solberg, E. J. (2003) Status of moose populations and challenges to moose management in Fennoscandia. Alces 39, 109–130.Google Scholar
LeResche, R. E. and Rausch, R. A. (1974) Accuracy and precision of aerial moose censusing. Journal of Wildlife Management 38, 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberg, O., Bergström, R., Kindberg, J. and Essen, H. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Sweden. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 37–70.Google Scholar
Lindén, H., Helle, E., Helle, P. and Wikman, M. (1996) Wildlife triangle scheme in Finland: methods and aims for monitoring wildlife populations. Finnish Game Research 49, 4–11.Google Scholar
Loison, A., Appololinaire, J., Jullien, J.-M. and Dubray, D. (2006) How reliable are total counts to detect trends in population size of chamois Rupicapra rupicapra and R. pyrenaica?Wildlife Biology 12, 77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, V. P. W. (1969) Population dynamics of the red deer (Cervus elaphus L.) on Rhum. Journal of Animal Ecology 38, 425–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, V. P. W. and Thompson-Schwab, J. D. D. (2003) Using cohort analysis to reconstruct the size and structure of deer populations in forestry with special reference to roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.). Forestry 76, 437–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacCracken, J. G. and Ballenberghe, V. (1987) Age- and sex-related differences in fecal pellet dimensions of moose. Journal of Wildlife Management 51, 360–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maillard, D., Boisaubert, B. and Gaillard, J.-M. (1989) La masse corporelle: un bioindicateur possible pour le suivi des populations de chevreuils. Gibier Faune Sauvage 6, 57–68.Google Scholar
Maillard, D., Gaultier, P. and Boisaubert, B. (1999) Revue de l'utilisation des différentes méthodes de suivi des populations de chevreuils en France. Bulletin Mensuel de l'Office National de la Chasse 244, 30–37.Google Scholar
Maillard, D., Gaillard, J-M., Hewison, M., et al. (2010) Ungulates and their management in France. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 441–474.Google Scholar
Malgras, J. and Maillard, D. (1996) Analyse spectrale et biologie des populations: analyse de l'activité de brame chez le cerf élaphe (Cervus elaphus L.). Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences III: Science de la Vie 319, 921–929.Google Scholar
Mandujano, S. (2005) Track count calibration to estimate density of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in Mexican dry tropical forest. Southwestern Naturalist 50, 223–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mandujano, S. and Gallina, S. (1995) Comparison of deer censusing methods in tropical dry forest. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23, 180–186.Google Scholar
Marques, F. F. C., Buckland, S. T., Goffin, D., et al. (2001) Estimating deer abundance from line transect surveys of dung: sika deer in southern Scotland. Journal of Applied Ecology 38, 349–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayle, B. A. and Staines, B. W. (1998) An overview of methods used for estimating the size of deer populations in Great Britain. In Goldspink, C. R., King, S. and Putman, R. J. (eds.) Population Ecology, Management and Welfare of Deer. Manchester, UK: British Deer Society/Universities' Federation for Animal Welfare, pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
Mayle, B. A., Peace, A. J. and Gill, R. M. A. (1999) How Many Deer? A Field Guide to Estimating Deer Population Size. Forestry Commission Field Book 18. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Mayle, B. A., Putman, R. J. and Wyllie, I. (2000) The use of trackway counts to establish an index of deer presence. Mammal Review 30, 233–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzarone, V., Siemoni, N., Pedone, P., Lovari, C. and Mattioli, L. (1991) A method of red deer (Cervus elaphus L.1758) census during the roaring period in a forested area of the northern Apennines (central Italy). In Csányi, S. and Ernhaft, J. (eds.) XX Congress International Union of Game Biologists, Transaction Part 1. Gödöllö, Hungary: University of Agricultural Sciences, pp. 140–145.Google Scholar
McCullough, D. R. (1979) The George Reserve Deer Herd: Population Ecology of a K-selected Species. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
McCullough, D. R. (1982) Evaluation of night spotlighting as a deer study technique. Journal of Wildlife Management 46, 963–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCullough, D. R. and Hirth, D. H. (1988) Evaluation of the Petersen-Lincoln estimator for a white-tailed deer population. Journal of Wildlife Management 52, 534–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messier, F. (1991) The signifiance of limiting and regulating factors on the demography of moose and white-tailed deer. Journal of Animal Ecology 60, 377–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Micu, I., Náhlik, A., Neguş, S., Mihalache, I. and Szabó, I. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Romania. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 319–337.Google Scholar
Morellet, N., Champely, S., Gaillard, J.-M., Ballon, P. and Boscardin, Y. (2001) The browsing index: new tool uses browsing pressure to monitor deer populations. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29, 1243–1252.Google Scholar
Morellet, N., Ballon, P., Boscardin, Y. and Champely, S. (2003) A new index to measure roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) browsing pressure on woody flora. Game and Wildlife Science 20, 155–173.Google Scholar
Morellet, N., Gaillard, J. M., Hewison, A. J. M., et al. (2007) Indicators of ecological change: new tools for managing populations of large herbivores. Journal of Applied Ecology 44, 634–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mysterud, A., Langvatn, R., Yoccoz, N. G. and Stenseth, N. C. (2001a) Plant phenology, migration and geographical variation in body weight of a large herbivore: the effect of a variable topography. Journal of Animal Ecology 70, 915–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mysterud, A., Yoccoz, N. G., Stenseth, N. C. and Langvatn, R. (2001b) Effects of age, sex and density on body weight of Norwegian red deer: evidence of density-dependent senescence. Proceedings of the Royal Society B–Biological Sciences 268, 911–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mysterud, A., Meisingset, E.L., Veiberg, V., et al. (2007) Monitoring population size of red deer Cervus elaphus: an evaluation of two types of census data from Norway. Wildlife Biology 13, 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neff, D. J. (1968) The pellet-group count technique for big game trend, census, and distribution: a review. Journal of Wildlife Management 32, 597–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, J. D. (1992) Capture-recapture models: using marked animals to study population dynamics. BioScience 42, 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, J. D., Johnson, F. A. and Williams, B. K. (1995) Managing North American waterfowl in the face of uncertainty. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 26, 177–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellikka, J., Hannu, R. and Linden, H. (2005) Monitoring wildlife richness: Finnish applications based on wildlife triangle censuses. Annales Zoologica Fennica 42, 123–134.Google Scholar
Piggott, M. P. and Taylor, A. C. (2003) Remote collection of animal DNA and its applications in conservation management and understanding the population biology of rare and cryptic species. Wildlife Research 30, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollock, K. H. and Kendall, W. L. (1987) Visibility bias in aerial surveys: a review of estimation procedures. Journal of Wildlife Management 51, 502–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pope, J. G. (1972) An investigation of the accuracy of Virtual Population Analysis using cohort analysis. Research Bulletin of the International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries 9, 65–74.Google Scholar
Potvin, F. and Breton, L. (2005) Testing 2 aerial survey techniques on deer in fenced enclosures: visual double-counts and thermal infrared sensing. Wildlife Society Bulletin 33, 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putman, R. J. (1984) Facts from faeces. Mammal Review 14, 79–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putman, R. J. and Bailey, R. E. (1981) Estimation of large ungulate populations from faecal accumulation; an evaluation of the various methods using fallow deer. Journal of Applied Ecology 18, 697–702.Google Scholar
Putman, R. J. and Langbein, J. (1999) Deer and their Management in the New Forest. Technical Review and Management Plan developed for the Deputy Surveyor, New Forest. London: Forestry Commission, 152 pp.Google Scholar
Putman, R. J., Langbein, J., Hewison, A. J. M. and Sharma, S. K. (1996) Relative roles of density-dependent and density-independent factors in the population dynamics of British deer. Mammal Review 26, 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratcliffe, P. R. (1984) Population density and reproduction of red deer in Scottish commercial forests. Acta Zoologica Fennica 172,191–193.Google Scholar
Reby, D., Hewison, A. J. M., Cargnelutti, B., Angibault, J. M. and Vincent, J. P. (1998) Use of vocalizations to estimate population size of roe deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 62, 1342–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redfern, J. V., Viljoen, P. C., Kruger, J. M. and Getz, W. M. (2002) Biases in estimating population size from an aerial census: a case study in the Kruger National Park, South Africa. South African Journal of Science 98, 455–461.Google Scholar
Ricker, W. E. (1940) Relation of ‘catch per unit effort’ to abundance and rate of exploitation. Journal of Fishery Resource Board, Canada 5, 43–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, L. L. (1987) Seasonal changes in defecation rates of free-ranging white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 51, 330–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runge, M. C. and Johnson, F. A. (2002) The importance of functional form in optimal control solutions of problems in population dynamics. Ecology 83, 1357–1371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruusila, V. and Kojola, I. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Finland. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 86–102.Google Scholar
Samuel, M. D., Garton, E. O., Schlegel, M. W. and Carson, R. G. (1987) Visibility bias during aerial surveys of elk in northcentral Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 51, 622–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, C. J. and Seber, G. A. F. (1999) Estimating animal abundance: review, III. Statistical Science 14, 427–456.Google Scholar
Shea, K.,and the NCEAS Working Group on Population Management (1998) Management of populations in conservations, harvesting and control. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, 371–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silveira, L., Jácomo, A. T. A. and Diniz-Filho, J. A. F. (2003) Camera trap, line transect census and track surveys: a comparative evaluation. Biological Conservation 114, 351–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, V. R. (2002) Wild animals as reservoirs of infectious diseases in the UK. Veterinary Journal 163, 128–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sinclair, A. R. E. (1997) Carrying capacity and the overabundance of deer. In McShea, W. J., Underwood, H. B. and Rappole, J. H. (eds.) The Science of Overabundance: Deer Ecology and Population Management. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, pp. 380–394.Google Scholar
Smart, J. C. R., Ward, A. I. and White, P. C. L. (2004) Monitoring woodland deer populations in the UK: an imprecise science. Mammal Review 34, 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solberg, E. J. and Sæther, B. E. (1999) Hunter observations of moose Alces alces as a management tool. Wildlife Biology 5, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solberg, E. J., Sæther, B.-E., Strand, O. and Losion, A. (1999) Dynamics of a harvested moose population in a variable environment. Journal of Animal Ecology 68, 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solberg, E. J., Jordhoy, P., Strand, O., et al. (2001) Effects of density-dependence and climate on the dynamics of a Svalbard reindeer population. Ecography 24, 441–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solberg, E. J., Loison, A., Ringsby, T. H., Sæther, B. E. and Heim, M. (2002) Biased adult sex ratio can affect fecundity in primiparous moose Alces alces. Wildlife Biology 8, 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solberg, E. J., Grotan, V., Rolandsen, C. M., Broseth, H. and Brainerd, S. (2005) Change-in-sex ratio as an estimator of population size for Norwegian moose Alces alces. Wildlife Biology 11, 163–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solberg, E. J., Rolandsen, C. M., Heim, M., et al. (2006a) Elgen i Norge sett med jegerøyne – En analyse av jaktmaterialet fra overvåkingsprogrammet for elg og det samlede sett elg-materialet for perioden 1966–2004. (In Norwegian with an English summary) Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Rapport 125, 197 pp.Google Scholar
Solberg, K. H., Bellemain, E., Drageset, O.-M., Taberlet, P. and Swenson, J. E. (2006b) An evaluation of field and non-invasive genetic methods to estimate brown bear (Ursus arctos) population size. Biological Conservation 128, 158–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solbraa, K. (1987) Elgbeite på busker og trær i nordre Østfold og Åsnes. In Myrberget, S. (ed.) Elgen og skogbruket. (In Norwegian). Oslo: Norsk Skogbruk.Google Scholar
Solbraa, K. (1998) Elg og skogsbruk: biologi, økonomi, beite, taksering, forvaltning. (In Norwegian). Biri, Norway: Skogsbrukets Kursinstitutt.Google Scholar
Southwell, C. (1994) Evaluation of walked line transect counts for estimating macropod density. Journal of Wildlife Management 58, 348–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephens, P. A., Zaumyslova, O. Y., Miquelle, D. G., Myslenkov, A. I. and Hayward, G. D. (2006) Estimating population density from indirect sign: track counts and the Formozov-Malyshev-Pereleshin formula. Animal Conservation 9, 339–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strandgaard, H. (1967) Reliability of the Petersen method tested on a roe deer population. Journal of Wildlife Management 31, 643–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sylvèn, S. (2000) Effects of scale on hunter moose Alces alces observation rate. Wildlife Biology 6, 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sæther, B.-E. (1997) Environmental stochasticity and population dynamics of large herbivores: a search for mechanisms. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12, 143–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sæther, B.-E., Engen, S., Filli, F., et al. (2002) Stochastic population dynamics of an introduced Swiss population of the ibex. Ecology 83, 3457–3465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taberlet, P., Waits, L. P. and Luikart, G. (1999) Noninvasive genetic sampling: look before you leap. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14, 323–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toïgo, C., Gaillard, J.-M., Laere, G., Hewison, A. J. M. and Morellet, N. (2006) How does environmental variation influence body mass, body size and body condition? Roe deer as a case study. Ecography 29, 301–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ueno, M. (2008) Analyses of population dynamics and establishment of harvest-based population estimation methods in the sika deer (Cervus nippon) in Hokkaido, Japan. PhD thesis, Division of Environmental Resources, Graduate School of Agriculture, Hokkaido University, Japan.Google Scholar
Ueno, M., Matsuishi, T., Solberg, E. J. and Saitoh, T. (2009) Application of cohort analysis to harvest data of large terrestrial mammals. Mammal Study 34, 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, J. P., Gaillard, J.-M. and Bideau, E. (1991) Kilometric index as biological indicator for monitoring forest roe deer populations. Acta Theriologica 36, 315–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, J. P., Bideau, E., Hewison, A. J. M. and Angibault, J. M. (1995) The influence of increasing density on body weight, kid production, home range and winter grouping in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus). Journal of Zoology 236, 371–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, J. P., Hewison, A. J. M., Angibault, J. M. and Cargnelutti, B. (1996) Testing density estimators on a fallow deer population of known size. Journal of Wildlife Management 60, 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vucetich, J. A. and Peterson, R. O. (2004) The influence of top-down, bottom-up and abiotic factors on the moose (Alces alces) population. Proceedings of the Royal Society B–Biological Sciences 271, 183–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waller, D. M. and Alverson, W. S. (1997) The white-tailed deer: a keystone herbivore. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25, 217–226.Google Scholar
Wawrzyniak, P., Jędrzejewski, W., Jędrzejewska, B. and Boro, T. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Poland. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 223–242.Google Scholar
White, G. C. and Eberhardt, L. E. (1980) Statistical analysis of deer and elk pellet-group data. Journal of Wildlife Management 44, 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. K., Nichols, J. D. and Conroy, M. J. (2002) Analysis and Management of Animal Populations. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wotschikowsky, U. (2010) Ungulates and their management in Germany. In Apollonio, M., Andersen, R. and Putman, R. (eds.) European Ungulates and their Management in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 201–222.Google Scholar
Yoccoz, N. G., Nichols, J. D. and Boulinier, T. (2001) Monitoring of biological diversity in space and time. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16, 446–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×