Abstract

We examined individual heterogeneity in survival and recruitment of female Pacific black brant (Branta bernicla nigricans) using frailty models adapted to a capture–mark–recapture context. Our main objectives were (1) to quantify levels of heterogeneity and examine factors affecting heterogeneity, and (2) model the effects of individual heterogeneity on harvest dynamics through matrix models. We used 24 years of data on brant marked and recaptured at the Tutakoke River colony, AK. Multievent models were fit as hidden Markov chain using program E-SURGE with an adequate overdispersion coefficient. Annual survival of individuals marked as goslings was heterogeneous among individuals and year specific with about 0.23 difference in survival between “high” (0.73)- and “low” (0.50)-quality individuals at average survival probability. Adult survival (0.85 ± 0.004) was homogeneous and higher than survival of both groups of juveniles. The annual recruitment probability was heterogeneous for brant >1-year-old; 0.56 (±0.21) and 0.31 (±0.03) for high- and low-quality individuals, respectively. Assuming equal clutch sizes for high- and low-quality individuals and that 80% of offspring were in the same quality class as the breeding female resulted in reproductive values about twice as high for high-quality individuals than low-quality individual for a given class of individuals producing differential contributions to population growth among groups. Differences in reproductive values greatly increased when we assumed high-quality individuals had larger clutch sizes. When we assumed that 50% of offspring were in the same quality class as their mothers and clutches were equal, differences in reproductive values between quality classes were greatly reduced or eliminated (breeders [BRs]). We considered several harvest scenarios using the assumption that 80% of offspring were in the same quality class as their mothers. The amount of compensation for harvest mortality declined as the proportion of high-quality individuals in the harvest increased, as differences in clutch sizes between groups decreased and as the proportion of BRs in the harvest increased. Synthesis and applications. Harvest at the same proportional level of the overall population can result in variable responses in population growth rate when heterogeneity is present in a population. λ was <1.0 under every scenario when harvest rates were >10%, and heterogeneity caused as much as +2% difference in growth rates at the highest levels of proportional harvest for low-quality individuals and the greatest differences in qualities between classes of individuals, a critical difference for a population with λ near 1.0 such as the brant. We observed less response in overall survival in the presence of heterogeneity because we did not observe heterogeneity in the annual survival of BRs. This analysis provides a comprehensive view of overall compensation at the population level and also constitutes the first example of a survival-recruitment model with heterogeneity. Individual heterogeneity should be more explicitly considered in harvest management of vertebrates.

Highlights

  • The harvest of wildlife and fisheries populations has been the subject of considerable debate for almost a century (Baranov 1918; Beverton and Holt 1957)

  • Difficulty with monitoring fish stocks and unexpected changes in harvest encouraged the use of modeling (e.g., Getz and Haight 1989) and the development of theory to guide harvest management, which was applied to a number of North American waterfowl populations (Anderson and Burnham 1976)

  • Harvest mortality may be compensated through density-dependent increases in survival or reproduction postharvest, such that harvest mortality may have no effect on overall survival or growth rate of the population

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The harvest of wildlife and fisheries populations has been the subject of considerable debate for almost a century (Baranov 1918; Beverton and Holt 1957). Harvest management of most waterfowl, in North America, is currently guided by the assumption that harvest mortality is at least partially additive (Johnson et al 1993; Conn and Kendall 2004), and if compensation occurs, it is primarily through density dependence in survival probability and reproduction (Anderson and Burnham 1976; Nichols et al 1995). The evidence for additive or compensatory harvest mortality is mixed (Nichols et al 1984; Rexstad 1992; Smith and Reynolds 1992; Gauthier et al 2001; Williams et al 2002; Sedinger et al 2007; Sedinger and Herzog 2012) and is least compensated in populations with higher inherent survival probability. Distinguishing between the effects of harvest and density on abundance is difficult because harvest regulations are typically liberal when abundance is high and conservative when abundance is low (Smith and Reynolds 1992; Sedinger and Rexstad 1994; Sedinger and Herzog 2012)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call