Using public participation and genetic mark‐recapture data to estimate urban moose population demographics

Abstract Effective wildlife management often requires data on population size, survival, sex ratios, and site fidelity; however, obtaining these metrics can be difficult in areas or years when traditional techniques such as aerial surveys are ineffective or prohibitive, resulting in a need for alternative sampling techniques. In this study, we developed a methodology for estimating demographics of an urban moose ( Alces alces ) population by combining reports from the public and genetic mark‐recapture data. From 2018–2021, we elicited the public's help during a 3‐day period in late February to locate moose for biopsy sampling in Anchorage, Alaska, USA. Each year, >800 reports from the public allowed us to obtain 891 biopsy samples. Combined with an additional 493 samples obtained from roadkilled or harvested moose, we identified 837 unique individuals with 433 recapture events (recapture rate = 59%). Using genetic mark‐recapture techniques, we estimated there to be 306 (95% CI = 222–390) moose within Anchorage, a relatively high density (1.5 moose/km 2 ) suggesting urban areas may have perceived advantages to moose such as reduced predation risks, greater foraging opportunities, or lower snow depths on plowed roads and groomed trails. Additionally, moose exhibited high winter site fidelity and moved <3.0 km between captures on average. However, survival rates of adults (73%; 95% CI = 60–83%) and calves (i.e., individuals surviving from 9 months of age to the subsequent February survey; 48%; 95% CI = 32–65%) were low, suggesting urban areas may act as an ecological trap due to mortality risks from vehicle collisions. This study showed that by eliciting public participation in an urban environment, genetic mark‐recapture was a feasible alternative to traditional aerial surveys to estimate moose population demographics, a technique that could easily be adapted to other urban areas and wildlife species.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Wildlife Management
Published
2025-05-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.70034
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Using public participation and genetic mark‐recapture data to estimate urban moose population demographics

Sean D. Farley, Andrew W. Barclay, David Battle, Sandra L. Talbot et al.
Journal of Wildlife Management
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
article

Using public participation and genetic mark‐recapture data to estimate urban moose population demographics

Sean D. Farley, Andrew W. Barclay, David Battle, Sandra L. Talbot, Cory J. Stantorf, David T. Saalfeld, George K. Sage
article en

Abstract

Abstract Effective wildlife management often requires data on population size, survival, sex ratios, and site fidelity; however, obtaining these metrics can be difficult in areas or years when traditional techniques such as aerial surveys are ineffective or prohibitive, resulting in a need for alternative sampling techniques. In this study, we developed a methodology for estimating demographics of an urban moose ( Alces alces ) population by combining reports from the public and genetic mark‐recapture data. From 2018–2021, we elicited the public's help during a 3‐day period in late February to locate moose for biopsy sampling in Anchorage, Alaska, USA. Each year, >800 reports from the public allowed us to obtain 891 biopsy samples. Combined with an additional 493 samples obtained from roadkilled or harvested moose, we identified 837 unique individuals with 433 recapture events (recapture rate = 59%). Using genetic mark‐recapture techniques, we estimated there to be 306 (95% CI = 222–390) moose within Anchorage, a relatively high density (1.5 moose/km 2 ) suggesting urban areas may have perceived advantages to moose such as reduced predation risks, greater foraging opportunities, or lower snow depths on plowed roads and groomed trails. Additionally, moose exhibited high winter site fidelity and moved <3.0 km between captures on average. However, survival rates of adults (73%; 95% CI = 60–83%) and calves (i.e., individuals surviving from 9 months of age to the subsequent February survey; 48%; 95% CI = 32–65%) were low, suggesting urban areas may act as an ecological trap due to mortality risks from vehicle collisions. This study showed that by eliciting public participation in an urban environment, genetic mark‐recapture was a feasible alternative to traditional aerial surveys to estimate moose population demographics, a technique that could easily be adapted to other urban areas and wildlife species.

Journal of Wildlife ManagementVol. 89(5)
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (US), University of Alaska Anchorage (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.