Beaver Presentation Research 2005

8/14/2019 Beaver Presentation Research 2005

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/beaver-presentation-research-2005 1/35

Beaver

and

Paul W Saunders

Wildlife Division

Newfoundland and Labrador



•

beaver populations has been raised inrevious Furbearer Mana ement lans.

• These concerns were brought forth

primarily by trappers on the NorthernPeninsula, Zone 11, and indicated thatpopulations in this area had declined to a

po n w ere ecame uneconom ca opursue further trapping activities.



•

catch rates could be explained by changesin the avera e beaver rice aid b ear.

• Hypothesis 2: The breakdown in

relationship between price and catch rateafter 2002 could be explained if existingpopulations declined to the point where

arves cou no e ncrease even w asubstantial increase in price.



• –

sufficient information for the analysis of

on the island of Newfoundland.



•

– Active Trappers per Year

•

– Area Trapped by Zone• Trapper Returns

• Furbearer Management Working Files

– Average Pelt Prices

– Catch Rates er Zone



• ,

difference in beaver management zones,

rate per Km2 for each zone by year.

apparent in the data, trendlines using forth

,constructed and plotted using excel



Fig. 1 Catch Rate of Beaver per km2 of Active Traplines by Zone

Catch /KM2 Active Traplines

0.25

Zone 11 Active KM2 Zone 10 Active KM2 Zone 9 Active KM2 Zone 8 Active KM2

Zone 7 Active KM2 Zone 6 Active KM2 Zone 5 Active KM2 Zone 4 Active KM@

Zone 3 Active KM2 Zone 2 Active KM2 Zone 1 Active KM2

0.2

0.15

R a t e

/ K M 2

0.1 C a t c h

0

0.05

- - - - - - - - - -

Year





Fig. 3 Average Beaver Pelt Price for the Period 1995-2004

verage r ce eaver

35

Average Price

Poly. (Average Price)

R2

= 0.737525

30

15

20

P r i c e

10

0

5

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

ear



Fig. 4 Beaver Harvest 1963 – 2004

Beaver Harvest 1963 - 2004

4500

5000

3500

4000

2500

3000

m b e r H a r v e s t e d

Series1

1000

1500

N

0

500

6 3 - 6 4

6 5 - 6 6

6 7 - 6 8

6 9 - 7 0

7 1 - 7 2

7 3 - 7 4

7 5 - 7 6

7 7 - 7 8

7 9 - 8 0

8 1 - 8 2

8 3 - 8 4

8 5 - 8 6

8 7 - 8 8

8 9 - 9 0

9 1 - 9 2

9 3 - 9 4

9 5 - 9 6

9 7 - 9 8

9 9 - 0 0

0 1 - 0 2

0 3 - 0 4

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2

Year



Table 1 Regression Analysis Catch Rate km2 and Annual Beaver Pelt Price

Regression Analysis

1995-2002 1995-2004

Zone R Square P-Value R Square P-Value

1 0.13856 0.363847 0.003244 0.875788

2 0.459559 0.064656 0.129894 0.306279

3 0.192984 0.276149 0.220607 0.170792

4 0.404221 0.090195 0.392131 0.052748

5 0.241301 0.216394 0.069794 0.460766

6 0.332128 0.134846 0.112165 0.344172

7 0.531048 0.040302 0.185927 0.213441

8 0.440591 0.072675 0.064902 0.477497

9 0.6712 0.012831 0.285175 0.111836

10 0.573787 0.029486 0.182625 0.218006

11 0.650475 0.015581 0.188432 0.210038

AllNF 0.574724 0.029275 0.192732 0.204326



•

Newfoundland have experienced a decline incatch rates since 1995.

• 1995 – 2004 catch rate was positively related to

price (r 2 = 0.19, P = 0.20) but did not show asignificant relationship.

• 1995 -2002 a strong positive relationship

ecomes apparent r = .57, = . .



’ •

zones for the period 1995 -2002 but for onl 1 zone when data for 2003 and 2004was added.

• Average price for beaver was the highestin 2003, $32.33.

• Did not approach the catch rates seen in

1995 and 1996 when the average pricewas lower.



’

•

trapped on the island has increased since= =. , .

• The corresponding catch rate per km

2

for , . , .



Fig. 5 Total Area of Beaver Taplines Trapped on the Island 1995 – 2004

Total Area Trapped km2

All Zones

56000

Total Area Trapped km2

Linear (Total Area Trapped km2)

R = 0.6389

54000

55000

51000

52000

k

m 2

49000

50000

47000

48000

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

ear



Fig. 6 Catch Rate per km2 Island of Newfoundland, 1995 -2004

Island of Newfoundland

0.09

0.1

Linear (Catch Rate km2)

0.07

0.08

0.05

0.06

r C a u g h t p e r k m

R2

= 0.61880.03

0.04

N u m b

0

0.01

.

1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Year



•

beaver population densities and its

representative survey of beaver traplines.

• Surveys to be coupled with personal

.



•

using helicopter. –

• Trapline # 568 (80.9 km2) and 334 (101.1 km2)

–

• Trapline# 598 (88.8 km2) and 287 (80.2 km2)









•

derived according to Bergerud et. al.,.

– <1 inactive lodge/active lodge – Increasing

– - –

– >2 inactive lodges/active lodges - declining



•

derived according to Bergerud et. al.,.

– Low <.2 active lodges Km2

– . -.

– High >.4 active lodges Km2



Zone Trapline Area Active Active/km2 Inactive Ratio inactive/active Density Status

11 568 80.9 2 0.02 11 5.50 low declining

11 334 101.1 9 0.09 21 2.33 low declining

10 598 88.8 17 0.19 57 3.35 low declining

10 287 80.2 18 0.22 22 1.22 medium stable

Zone Year Location Active/Km2 Ratio inactive/active Density Status

11 1961 Salmon River 1.16 1.70 High Stable

11 1969 Ten Mile Lake 0.08 1.90 Low Stable

11 1969 Main Brook 0.23 1.30 Medium Stable

10 1961 Deer Lake 0.15 1.60 Low Stable

10 1969 Silver Mountain 0.04 1.00 Low Stable



•

declining 1 is borderline stable.•

but some improvement can be seen in

Zone 10.• The ratio of inactive lodges/active lodges

has not changed significantly since the

1960’s.(x2=6.00, df=4, zone 11 andx2=1.65, df=4, Zone 10)



Beaver Km2

Zone 10 and Zone 11

1.4

1

.

0.8

e a v

e r K m

2

1938

1940

1941

1961

0.4

. B

2005

0.2

10 11

Fur Zone



•

11.

or coniferous. In Zone 10 main species,

shrub.



Beaver Survey 2005

50

40

s

30

m b

e r o f L o d g

Zone 11 334

Zone 11 568

Zone 10 598

Zone 10 287

20

N u

10

fir spruce alder birch aspen popular other

Main Browse Species



Beaver Survry 2005

60

50

e

30

40

c e n

t C o v e r a g

Zone 11 334

Zone 11 568

Zone 10 598

Zone 10 287

20

P e

10

0

coniferous deciduous cutover shrub grass

Species Composition



•

small ponds located in the center of bogs.

browse.

located on streams. This is not the same

have become meadows.



Beaver Survey 2005

45

35

s

25

b e r o f L o d g e

Zone 11 334

Zone 11 568

Zone 10 598

Zone 10 287

15

N u

5

10

0

stream pond bog barren

Lodge Locaion



•

from historical levels. Densities in Zone10 have remained stable or sli htlincreased.

• Habitat differences between Zone 11 andZone 10 were apparent.

• Movement of into bogs in Zone 11 could

be related to lack of available browsespecies.



•

traplines are does not reflex lodge density.

traplines appears to be a function of lodge.



Beaver Catch by Trapline

35

25

30

s

20

b e r o f B e a v e

Zone 11 334

Zone 11 568

Zone 10 287

Zone 10 598

10

15 N u

5

0

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year



•

conducted in January.

Zone 11 to be evaluated in the Spring and.

• Beaver productivity to be determined in

o ones n .

Documents

Beaver Presentation Research 2005