Moose population dropping?

[poconoron]

Latest estimate for ADK moose is about 400. This is down significantly from previous estimates of around 1,000. Too bad - but the habitat may not be the best with older growth forest on state lands.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise...-drops-to-400/

[Woodly]

As deer do also, moose definitely need browse and older growth forests don't have much.

Is deer carried brainworm still affecting ADK moose?

[montcalm]

I'd guess the real reason is something entirely different.

Moose were able to survive in northeastern forests that were completely undisturbed and had a high % of "old growth". The fact that fires are not all that common as natural occurrences in our climate means our forests always will tend to the "old growth" state that some are approaching, but I have heard from reputable foresters the estimated number is more around 300 years for a forest in this area to return back to the way it was before disturbed.

I'd definitely suspect the answer is disease, coyotes or coywolves, climate, human encroachment, or any other number of factors.

The interesting thing to know would be what the forests in this area theoretically could support in terms of moose population given the resources that are available. I'd assume for such a large area, it has to be more than 400. Probably more than 1000 as well. So knowing that would suggest some other influence if we are starting to decline before reaching the max.

[dundee]

I've heard that ticks are a big problem for moose.

[montcalm]

If the ticks really are an issue, then climate and human factors would be the root of the issue, no?

[sleepy]

I wonder if the drop in the population is due to the more accurate method of estimating the population. Years past estimates seemed to be of the back of the envelope guestimates verse the latest round of aerial surveys and tracking. As stated in the latest report "Although the total number of moose was less than anticipated at the start of our surveys, the population appears to be in good physical condition with many calves seen accompanying females each year."

[adk]

Originally Posted by sleepy

I wonder if the drop in the population is due to the more accurate method of estimating the population. Years past estimates seemed to be of the back of the envelope guestimates verse the latest round of aerial surveys and tracking. As stated in the latest report "Although the total number of moose was less than anticipated at the start of our surveys, the population appears to be in good physical condition with many calves seen accompanying females each year."

Spot on - working with past guesstimates and even current (albeit better) guesstimates its hard to have a realistic interpretation of the true number and more importantly - the "trend" of the population. In the coming years, I assume in a few years of far better /more accurate data we can better predict a real population trend. I for one am glad a more realistic number will help prevent people pushing for a hunt. This population is far too small and sensitive to add "any" unnecessary pressure to the small Moose population within the blue line. If the erratic climate /jet stream continues (which seems to be the case) they will have a tough time in the future so we need to cherish whats here today.

[Tug Hill]

Originally Posted by montcalm

If the ticks really are an issue, then climate and human factors would be the root of the issue, no?

Have not heard of any reports of Winter Ticks in NY. They are a factor in Maine and NH, but I think are only a problem in high moose population areas. That’s why they are bad in northern ME. I hunted moose in the North Maine Woods in 2015, killed a bull in Zone 4, and saw plenty of other hunter harvested moose, at the check station, and none that I saw were infested with winter ticks.

This post is kind of funny, early est. of 1000 moose and now est. of 400 moose ?
So which estimate is correct ? Probably not either one.

[Woodly]

Probably a number of things have reduced the population and accurized the count. I've read lots of good reasons on this thread that's for sure.

[montcalm]

I had thought that the surveys might be way off as well, thank for mentioning that...

BUT... and we don't know the details, to be off that much is pretty discouraging. Perhaps the initial was an over-estimate and the recent is an under-estimate? Hard to know without knowing a lot of the details.

So if we say the population is 700 ± 300, is that more plausible? Maybe, maybe not. I'd also say that's a pretty big tolerance to slap on such a small number. But it's probably much harder to estimate small populations in such a large area.

[Buckladd]

Prior to this study, DEC never really knew how many moose were in the Adirondacks, or NYS for that matter. Now they're getting a better handle on it, at least up here. That doesn't mean it's dropping, as previously it was never really known what the population was, it was only an estimate.

Overall, the moose that are here in the Adirondacks are fairing better in terms of winter ticks and brain parasites than those in some other areas, like Minnesota, for example. The Daily Enterprise article was based on a press release. More info is sure to come once DEC releases the data.

[TCD]

Comparing "guess #1" to "guess #2." I would not put too much concern into the number change until I saw the full data, and all the methods used to go from actual data to the "estimate."

[Woodly]

Radio collaring has likely made it more accurate because counting previously was only done mostly by air over snow covered country.

[Tug Hill]

Originally Posted by Woodly

Radio collaring has likely made it more accurate because counting previously was only done mostly by air over snow covered country.

Radio collaring moose in NY is not a recent event, the DEC has been doing it for at least 30 years. So I’m not sure why radio collaring would make the recent estimate more accurate ?

[Woodly]

Originally Posted by Tug Hill

Radio collaring moose in NY is not a recent event, the DEC has been doing it for at least 30 years. So I’m not sure why radio collaring would make the recent estimate more accurate ?

The more they collar the more accurate the count becomes.

[Tug Hill]

Originally Posted by Woodly

The more they collar the more accurate the count becomes.

Actually I think the DEC has collared fewer moose in recent years than they did 20 - 30 years ago. Most collared moose were nuisance moose that were harassing dairy farms.

Years past, There was a collared bull moose that wintered near my home in region 6. DEC personnel from region 8 came here, did not ask permission to go on my neighbors land. They chased the moose off my neighbors land, and the moose headed out of the county and was hit by a motor vehicle on rt 28 near Forestport. A state trooper shot it multiple times with his handgun to put it down, but failed. So a taxidermist that lived near the accident site was contacted and he shot it with his deer rifle.

[Justin]

The DEC is also looking for public assistance when it comes to moose sightings. The DEC and its moose partners have an online form to log moose sightings. For more information on moose in New York, including the sighting form, go to www.dec.ny.gov/animals/6964.html.

If I remember correctly this has been going on for at least a few years now...no?
It’d be interesting if the public is able to view the data results...?
I wonder how many people when they see a moose (especially if its uncollared) actually report it, and what are the possibles that the same moose has been reported several times.
In any event, it does seem like more & more people are seeing moose in the Adirondacks these days, judging from news articles & social media posts over the past few years, but perhaps that’s actually just an illusion.

[Bounder45]

Originally Posted by poconoron

Latest estimate for ADK moose is about 400. This is down significantly from previous estimates of around 1,000. Too bad - but the habitat may not be the best with older growth forest on state lands.

http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise...-drops-to-400/

I think the ADK Daily Enterprise did a poor job of wording the article.

The current estimate for the ADK Moose population is 400.

The earlier estimate of 600-1000 was for NY's total Moose population.

NY's Moose population is not limited to living within the blue line.

Other than that, I think Buckladd makes some great points. The DEC had never really undertaken a serious Moose survey prior to this recent one. Prior estimates were likely based on vague parameters. Newer surveys, with more detailed methodology will yield more accurate results.

Also, I'll bet dollars-to-donuts that the new estimate of 400 for ADK's population is inherently conservative in order to have a built-in safety margin.

[cityboy]

I prefer the lower number that way I can brag to friends that 1.25% (5) of all Adirondack Moose are on my lease property.

Seriously I think this is a more accurate estimate. A drop of 600 moose is a lot of big dead animals so where's the bodies?

[poconoron]

No doubt there are a number of factors at work here. But I can't help feeling that there may be 3 prevailing reasons for the seeming discrepancy:

1. The previously noted "guestimates" which may not have relied on actual data were putting the population estimate too high...........and now actual aerial survey data is correcting that to a lower, more realisic #.

2. The aforementioned factor that state lands are not the best habitat for promoting more vigorous growth in the population.

3. Aside from state lands comprising nearly 1/2 the ADK's 6 million acres - there are roughly 3 million acres plus of possibly better habitat private lands. However, on those private lands there is also the greater opportunity for poaching to occur (I have heard several tales of this, by the way). This factor may be suppressing the overall population, I believe.