Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Robert M. Inman

Publications and source records attributed to Robert M. Inman.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Monitoring wolverine (Gulo gulo) distribution across the western United States for regional and national assessment

Population monitoring of at-risk species is fundamental to directing effective and timely conservation actions. For wide-ranging threatened species, such as the wolverine ( Gulo gulo ), monitoring across multiple jurisdictions is necessary to track their distribution to inform collaborative regional and national management and policy. We repeated a landscape-scale, multi-jurisdictional remote camera survey first completed in 2017 to evaluate wolverine occupancy throughout the western United States in 2022. Our objectives were to 1) expand the sampling frame to include areas of potential recolonization (Colorado, Oregon, Utah, USA), 2) evaluate whether overall and state-specific occurrence has changed from 2017 in the common sampling frame of Idaho, Montana, Washington, and Wyoming, USA, and 3) evaluate spatial drivers of wolverine occurrence in 2022. From a sampling frame of 770 sites (15 × 15-km cells) identified as potential wolverine habitat, 229 sites were surveyed in 2022; no wolverines were detected in Colorado, Oregon, or Utah. We predicted wolverine occupancy and 95% highest posterior density intervals (HPDI) in states with detections to be 0.47 (0.37–0.58) in Idaho, 0.35 (0.21–0.52) in Montana, 0.29 (0.09–0.54) in Washington, and 0.35 (0.27–0.47) in Wyoming. We found weak to moderate evidence of a small decline in overall occupancy ( 𝜓 ) from the common sampling frame (2017: 0.44 [0.37–0.52]; 2022: 0.39 [0.30–0.49]; P( 𝜓 2022 <𝜓 2017 ) = 0.81), driven by lower occurrences in Montana and Washington. However, this finding is complicated by a change in detection methodology that may have contributed to lower occurrences in Montana and Washington. Lastly, we found strong support (probability of an effect >0.95) that within areas of predicted wolverine habitat, increasing habitat connectivity and the proportion of a site that was previously burned (2001–2015) were associated with increased wolverine occupancy, while increasing normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) was associated with decreased wolverine occupancy. Our expanded sampling frame provides the means to track wolverine occupancy and range extent—including recolonizations and contractions—across the western United States, providing insights at both the state and national scales.

Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington↗

Evidence of economical territory selection in a cooperative carnivore

As an outcome of natural selection, animals are probably adapted to select territories economically by maximizing benefits and minimizing costs of territory ownership. Theory and empirical precedent indicate that a primary benefit of many territories is exclusive access to food resources, and primary costs of defending and using space are associated with competition, travel and mortality risk. A recently developed mechanistic model for economical territory selection provided numerous empirically testable predictions. We tested these predictions using location data from grey wolves ( Canis lupus ) in Montana, USA. As predicted, territories were smaller in areas with greater densities of prey, competitors and low-use roads, and for groups of greater size. Territory size increased before decreasing curvilinearly with greater terrain ruggedness and harvest mortalities. Our study provides evidence for the economical selection of territories as a causal mechanism underlying ecological patterns observed in a cooperative carnivore. Results demonstrate how a wide range of environmental and social conditions will influence economical behaviour and resulting space use. We expect similar responses would be observed in numerous territorial species. A mechanistic approach enables understanding how and why animals select particular territories. This knowledge can be used to enhance conservation efforts and more successfully predict effects of conservation actions.

Montana↗