Is harvest size a valid indirect measure of abundance for evaluating the population size of game animals using harvest‐based estimation?

Abstract

Indirect measures of abundance are essential for evaluating temporal and spatial trends in animal populations under hunting pressure and hence for evaluating the impact of hunting on the population stock. Recently, harvest‐based estimation has received attention due to its capacity to estimate population size, hunting mortality and population growth parameters based on the responses of indirect measures to hunting pressure. Although harvest size is a widely used statistic for game animals and its validity as an indirect measure of abundance has been intensively investigated, its applicability to harvest‐based estimation has rarely been studied. In this study, we applied a simulation approach to examine the accuracy of harvest‐based estimation when harvest size is used as an indirect measure under different temporal patterns of capture effort (constant, increasing and decreasing). We simulated a dataset using a Poisson‐binomial surplus‐production model that explicitly considers the effect of capture effort on harvest size and tested the estimation accuracy and model identifiability (i.e. whether there is sufficient statistical information in a dataset to specify model parameters) when harvest size is used as an indirect measure. We then compared the estimates with those of the original Poisson‐binomial surplus‐production model. We found that estimates of the population size and intrinsic growth rate were severely biased when the temporal heterogeneity in capture effort was large. When capture effort was constant and harvest size was thus proportional to the population size, on average, only 10% of iterations were identifiable. The use of harvest size as a population index in harvest‐based estimation can result in seriously biased estimates of population size and growth rate or low identifiability of parameters. Our results highlight the importance of monitoring capture effort and unbiased population indices, in addition to harvest sizes, to evaluate the population status of game animals by harvest‐based estimation.