Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Speaking of Moose, back in Minnesota...

Moose population continues free fall
Article by: DOUG SMITH , Star Tribune


No definite cause has been found to explain the decline, but wolves and hunters don't appear to be driving the trend.

Minnesota's moose population has dropped by half in the past five years, and officials say the iconic animal could be gone from the state in 20 years.

"It's clear that moose are continuing to go down, down, down,'' said Department of Natural Resources researcher Mark Lenarz. "I'm very pessimistic.''

An aerial moose survey this winter showed a population of 4,230, down 14 percent from last year. The population was 8,840 as recently as 2006.

No smoking gun has been found to explain the decline despite years of research, including the radio-collaring of 150 moose. "I don't think it's a single thing,'' Lenarz said. "The majority of mortality appears to be related to disease and parasites.''

Despite suggestions from the public that wolves -- or hunters -- are to blame, Lenarz said his research shows those factors definitely aren't driving the downward trend. "When we started the project in 2002, our first mortality was a wolf kill, and we assumed we'd see that on 90 percent of our mortalities,'' he said. "But we didn't.'' Of the 119 collared moose that died, just 11 were confirmed to be from wolf predation.

"We found most carcasses intact; they hadn't been touched by wolves,'' he said.

But what about moose calves, which haven't been radio-collared? "No one disagrees wolves are killing calves,'' Lenarz said. "That's exacerbating the problem, but it's not the whole problem.''

The cow-calf ratio is considerably lower today than it was in the mid-1990s, though it increased this year to 36 calves per 100 cows. But even if those numbers were boosted back to 1990s levels, it wouldn't stem the population slide, Lenarz said. The bottom line: Based on his research, even if there were no wolves preying on calves, the moose population would continue to fall.

"The key problem is adult mortality,'' Lenarz said.

Hunters also aren't to blame, he said, and closing the hunting season won't reverse the downward spiral. Hunters killed 53 moose last fall. Still, the DNR announced on Thursday that it will decide in coming weeks whether to hold a 2012 moose season.

"If we stopped hunting tomorrow, it wouldn't stop the decline in the population,'' Lenarz said. "We're harvesting only bulls.'' If so many bulls were killed so that cows weren't getting bred, that could affect the population. "But we're certainly not seeing that,'' he said.

As with deer, one male moose can and often does breed several females.

"As long as all the cows are being bred, the harvest of excess bulls won't affect the rate of increase or decrease in the population,'' Lenarz said.

Last fall, the DNR cut the number of moose-hunting permits from 213 in 2010 to 105. The state's moose-management plan has triggers for closing the hunting season. One is if the bull-to-cow ratio drops below 0.67 bulls per cow for three consecutive years. While that ratio fell to 0.64 bulls per cow in 2011, it went up this year to 1.08.

Meanwhile, Lenarz said he believes the warmer temperatures that northeastern Minnesota has experienced in recent decades also may be a factor.

"I still believe there is a link between climate change and the mortality we're seeing,'' he said. Even slightly warmer temperatures, he said, may be making moose more vulnerable to disease and parasites.

"It's not that moose are dying because of heat stress on a hot day; it's likely a cumulative process. Perhaps their immune system is compromised.''

Research has shown that cattle, which, like moose, are ruminants, will stop eating and produce less milk when exposed to hot temperatures. "If they stop eating, they stop growing and they stop putting on fat reserves,'' Lenarz said. The immune system could be weakened.

"If you have an impaired immune system, you're more vulnerable to disease and parasites,'' Lenarz said. "If it's happening in cattle, it seems logical it's happening to moose as well.''

That moose at similar latitudes in New England and North Dakota seem to be fairing better than Minnesota's moose could be due to regional differences, said Lou Cornicelli, DNR wildlife research manager. "There could be some other variables there that makes them less susceptible to temperatures,'' he said.

Doug Smith � dsmithstartribune.com

Yup. But that won't stop the tirades.

Keeerist!!! Global warming is killing the moose now??!!! Not killing the moose in ND but in MN its deadly. That is some thoroughly scientific thought right there! There just isn't much that global warming doesn't effect. Wait... Isn't it global climate change now?? Either way it's some nasty chit. Sure hope it doesn't start killing people. Maybe if gas prices were the same as they are Europe that would save the moose in MN???

We'll start killing some wolves this fall. They're talking 400 the first year, altho by their numbers we can safely take 1600 and still be above management goals.

Then watch the moose population "remarkably" start to recover...

Maybe .....

Not likely. Not until you kill off a pile of whitetails first.

You think the whitetails are killing and eating the moose?

No, they are a host for a disease that is killing moose.

That explains why there are more sightings of moose in northern Wisconsin recently...there are no deer.

What is not being talked about is the fact that where wolves appear the parasites also appear.Read what some of the scientist
have to say about the wolves in Montana and surrounding areas,
and the increases infections . Just saying. Cheers NC

Got a citation for that? I'd be interested to see it.

I think what you are refering to is this tapeworm - which appears to be no big deal to moose
http://leg.mt.gov/content/Committee...Documents/March/echinococcus-schuler.pdf

What I was referring to was this - a very big deal to moose:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteer/sepoct97/brainworm.html

BrentD
That is one of the articles I was referring to, the other I read a year or two ago was about infection of some parasite(worm like) that gather in the head of moose and causes lose of body parts(in the head) like nose or lips etc. Wish I could recall where I read it at this time. Some of the pictures that were shown were absolutely gross. Cheers NC

Yeah, but wolves aren't the cause of brainworm, nor are they a host.

You bought into that too, eh?

10 years ago, brainworm played a role. A partial role. Recovery, or continual population decrease is not attributed to brainworm, or any other parasites anymore. When the huge population of wolves in northern MN is continually killing and eating calves AND adults, the moose population can't increase.

There's more wolves than moose. Which population is going to go up, and which is going to go down?

Keep workin' it yuker. The data surely ain't on your side, but don't let that stop it. Your sucked up by the anti-wolf craze, that has to be it. Probably why rabbits are so rare down here in Iowa too. Them nasty wolves are to blame.

That'd be [ you're ] sucked up.

Not sucked up at all. I just realize, as does the MN DNR, and the Federal Govt., that the wolf population has to be controlled and managed, as does any other big game species. Once their population is within the parameters set by the MN DNR, the entire eco-system should start to balance. And according to their most recent findings/admissions, the moose population will hopefully start to increase.

Is it really that hard to understand:

There are 2-3 times as many wolves in MN as there are moose.
Wolves eat moose-not the other way around.
We hunt moose in MN.
We don't hunt wolves (yet) in MN.

Can you seriously tell me that you don't think the wolf population in MN (that is now estimated to be 1500 animals ABOVE the recovery goal-when put on the endangered list) is a major reason for the declining moose population?

That parasite deal played out years ago.

And no need to take personal shots at me. I'm just giving you the facts that are given to the proffesional publications that I read, by the MN DNR. If you have current facts that you can give me, I'd love to hear them, so that I can be better informed.

Something that affects the moose population in Saskatchewan is winter ticks. When winters are mild, the moose suffer. A few years ago, after a series of mild winters, we found 9 dead adult moose on our land alone during the spring melt. All died to tick infestations. The sort of mortality that the biologist reported, dead adults that have not been preyed upon, might be partly explained by winter ticks as a contributing factor. Just a thought.
Our winters have recently returned to normal early freeze up and snow. Very few tick problems now.

Just north of MN and what is hitting our herd up here is brain worm. Deer are a carrier of the brain worm, and our deer herd is thriving. Moose in decline over it. Also the cancellation of the spring bear hunt here has increased the calf mortality rate in the spring.

All of the above....

Since Minn is on the southern end of the mooses temperature range already, they are surviving on a thin margin as it is. Factor in a perhaps aging population gradually dying off, little calf recruitment (stress/bears/wolves), more stress from deer ticks, brainworm, and climate warming, and a declining population should not come as a surprise.

I suspect wolves are taking few adults there unless they are caught at a severe disadvantage, such as deep crusted snow that the wolves can run on, and the moose can't, making for an easy and safe kill. If there are deer available, or moose calves, the wolves will prefer these to large, more dangerous animals that will likely injure or kill some of them in the taking. Not to say they can't take them if they are hungry enough, but it's gonna cost 'em - and they know it.