Abstract
(wolverines/1,000 km 2 ) that were higher in South-central (0.35) than in Arctic/West (0.11; P 5 0.009) and Interior (0.19; P 5 0.001), but no other regional comparisons were significant. Geographic region, time period and number of harvesters were all significant covariates for describing wolverine harvest (P , 0.001 for each). Wolverine harvest densities at the local level indicated that areas with higher harvest densities were well distributed, but that areas with light or no reported harvest also were common and widespread. Our results also indicated that proximity to human population centers or roadways did not necessarily affect harvest densities at a local level. We reviewed the importance of areas with no or light harvest as potential refugia to maintain a sustainable harvest of wolverines.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
