The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA417SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT PHASE II PROGRESS REPORT J BIG GAME STLIDIES Volume VII WOLVERINE Jackson S.Whitman and Warren B.Ballard TK 142~.sa B~4 no.417 ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Submitted to the Alaska Power Authority April 1983 - SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 1982 ANNUAL REPORT BIG GAME STUDIES VOLUME VII.WOLVERINE Jackson S.Whitman and Warren B.Ballard Alaska Department of Fi sh &Game April,1983 Submi tted to the Alaska Power Autho.ri ty A.RI.JIS .Alaska ResQu.rces LIbrary &:blfonnation ServIces Anchorage,Alaska ~ I if;}':; .;;~ 8SQ flo,'11? PREFACE In early 1980,the Alaska Department of Fish and Game contracted with the Alaska Power Authority to collect information useful in assessing the impacts of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project on moose,caribou,wolf,wolverine,"black bear,brown· bear and Dall sheep. The studies were broken into phases which·conformed to the anticipated licensing schedu~e.Phase I studies,January I,1980 to June 30,1982,were intended to provide information needed to support a FERC license application.This included general studies of wildlife populations to determine how each species used the area and identify potential impact mechanisms.Phase II studies continued to provide additional information during the" anticipated 2 to 3 year period between application and final FERC approval of the license.Belukha whales were added to the species being studied.During Phase I I,we are narrowing the focus of our studies to evaluate specific impact mechanisms, quantify impacts and evaluate mi tigation measures. This is the first annual report of ongoing Phase II studies.In some cases,objectives of Phase I were continued to provide a more complete data base.Therefore,this report is not intended as a complete assessment of the impacts of the Susi tna Hydro- el.ectric Proj ect on the selected wildlife species. The information and conclusions contained in these reports are incomplete and preliminary in nature and subject to change with further study.Therefore,information contained in these reports is not to be quoted or used in any publication without the wri tten permission of the authors. The reports are organized into the following 9 volumes: Volume I. Volume II. Volume I I I. Volume IV. Volume V. Volume VI. Volume VI I. Volume VI I I. Volume IX. Big Game Summary Report Moose -Downstream Moose -Upstream Caribou Wolf Black Bear and Brown Bear Wolverine Dall Sheep Belukha Whale ""'" M 0 0) .-M """"""0 0 0 l!) l!) r--. M M i SUMMARY This report summarizes data collected during Phase I,but is updated to include data and analysis through November 1982 of the Phase II studies.Since inception of the project in April 1980, 17 wolverine have been captured a total of 19 times.All were captured by darting from a helicopter and were fitted with trans- mitter-equipped collars to allow investigators to gather certain - ecological data.A total of 303 point locations have been made on wolverine in the middle Susi tna River Basin.One hundred ninety-four locations were gathered by radio telemetry,and the rest were from harvest records,track sightings and uncollared wolverine observations. Calculations have shown that estimates of wolverine home ranges increase in size depending upon the length of time of radio contact.Thus,calculations that have relied on data -gathered for less than 1 year probably underestimate annual home range size.Only one wolverine has been monitored for an entire year (adult male·no.116040)and he occupied a home range of 627 km 2 (242 mi 2).Using this figure,it ··-was estimated that 78 wolverine inhabit the 16,319 km~(6301 mi 2 )Susitna River Basin, averaging one wolverine per 209 km 2 (81 mi 2). Elevational movements by instrumented wolverine showed significant differences between summer and winter ranges, averaging 969 m (3,178 ft)and 842 m (2,761 ft)elevation, respectively.It was suspected that this was due to differences in prey distribution and availabili ty on a seasonal basis. ii Potential impacts on wolverine residing in the Devil Canyon and Watana impoundment zones are difficult to quantify.Studies should continue in order to gather baseline.data on ali aspects of wolverine ecology,aiming primarily at home range size, distribution,population densi ty and food habi ts. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ,~ · .ii · . v . . .vi 1 · 1 · 2 · 3 3 · . 6 ·.11 . . . ....15 . . . . . .18 . .....19 . ..22 ·.23 Sex and Age of Captured and Harvested Wolverine . Movements and Home Range . . . . .. . . Distribution . . . . ...... Population Characteristics Food Habits . Potential Impacts . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .. L,ITERATURE CITED .. SUMMARY . . . . LIST OF TABLES . [lIST OF FIGURES INTRODUCTION METHODS . . . . . Study Area . . . . . . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . - - iv Table 1. LI ST OF TABLES Wolverine capture and telemetry data from the middle Susitna River Basin from April 1980 through November 1982.. . . . . 4 Table 2.Sex and age class and method of harvest or capture ~f wolverine in the middle Susitna Basin,1980-1982 .. Table 3.Data sources used to estimate wolverine distribution in the Susitna Basin,Alaska,1980- 1982. Table 4.Summer and winter diets of wolverine based on aerial observations of wolve~ine with prey in the Susitna Basin, Alaska,1980-1982. v . • . . . 5 . .12 . . . . . . ..20 LIST OF FIGURES E'igure 1.Minimum home ranges of 12 instrumented wolverine in the middle Susitna River Basin,1980-1982.. . . . . . . • . . . • 7 Figure 2.Regression line of home range size with length of time monitored for 12 wolverine instrumented on the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,1980-1982..9 Figure 3.Number of locations and home range size for male wolverine no.116040 from 15 April 1980 to 15 April 1981 in the middle Susitna River Basin,Alaska. vi . . . . . . . .10 LI ST OF FIGURES .(cont'd) Figure 4.Monthly changes in elevational distribution for 12 instrumented wolverine on an annual basis in the Susitna River Basin, - - 1980-1982. Figure 5.Winter and summer elevational distribution of 12 wolverine in the Susitna River Basin, 1980-1982. vii . . . . . . . .13 . . .14 • INTRODUCTION As a licensing requirement for.the Susitna Hydroelectric Project, the Alaska Power Authority contracted the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)to provide baseline data on big game spe- cies including wolverine (Gufo gufo).Baseline data on wolverine ecology were collected during Phase I feasibility studies (Gardner and Ballard 1982).Wolverine studies have continued during Phase II to provide additional information to be used by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in assessing the Susitna Proj ect license application.This report summarizes data col- lected during Phase I (op.cit.)but is updated to include data and analyses from July 1981 through November 1982 of Phase I I studies. METHODS Efforts to capture wolverine have continued from April 1980 to present.Capture methods followed Ballard et of.(198lb). Immobilization of wo.lverine (Ballard et of.1982)was done utilizing one of three chemical combinations:(1)0.25 cc phencyclidine HCl (100 mg/ml Sernylan,Bioceutic Lab.,Inc.)and 0.20 cc Xylazine HCl (100 mg/ml Rompun,Barrett Division of Cutter Laboratories,Inc.);(2)0.4 cc etorphine (1 mg/cc M-99, D-M Pharmaceuticals,Inc.)and 0.5 cc Rompun (100 mg/ml);(3)0.5 cc Sernylan and 0.5 cc promazine HCl (50 mg/ml Sparine,Wyeth 1 Laboratories,Inc.).Once immobilized,each wolverine was fitted wi th a radio-collar (Gardner and Ballard 1982),measured,ear tagged,and sex and an estimate of age were recorded. Instrumented wolverine were located an average of once every 10 days utilizing methods described by Mech (1974).Point locations were recorded on 1:63,360 U.S.G.S.topographical maps and the following _parameters were recorded:date,time,activity,number of associates,elevation,aspect,slope,and vegetation type. From these locations,seasonal and annual home ranges were cal- culated (Mohr 1947).Habitat utilization calculations have been described by Gardner and Ballard (1982).Many of the data were insufficient for statistical analysis or revealed no preferences by the wolverine,and thus are not discussed herein. Carcasses of harvested wolverine were purchased from trap- pers at $10/carcass in an effort to gain additional data on dis-. tribution,morphology and reproduction.Also,harvest records- and track sightings by project personnel and the public were used to supplement tracking data. Study Area The study area boundary has been described by Gardner and Ballard (1982).Vegetation,topography and climate were described by Skoog (1968),Bishop and Rausch (1974),and Ballard and Taylor (1980),and by Subtask 7.12. 2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Sex and Age of Captured and Harvested Wolverine A total of 97 wolverine have been examined either alive during capture operations or as carcasses purchased from Unit 13 hunters and trappers (Table 2).Sex ratios were not significantly dif- ferent (Chi 2 =0.269,P<O.OS)from 1:1 (49 males,44 females,1 unknown). The age structure of the population is not known.Data gathered from wolverine carcasses suggest that about 40 percent of the population is made up of juveniles «2 years old).However, weights of juvenile females (N =7)were higher than weights of ~ adult females (N =20).This ~as not expected and may be due to incorrect aging of these carcasses.Investigators have relied on f".$'· a subjective estimate of tooth wear to categorize wolverine into either juvenile or adult age classes.Until tooth sectioning or some other reliable aging technique is performed,reliable ages cannot be obtained. 3 )I j i })}i J )))j )1 J j Table 1.Wolverine capture and telemetry data from the middle Susitna River Basin from April 1980 through November,1982.• Wolverine Weight Contact N"o.Home Range #Sex Age (kgs)Date Instrumented Days*Relocations (m2 )Present Status 116040 Male Adult 14.5 10 April 1980 371 40 627 Dead -natural mortality 116041 Male Adult 15.5 19 April 1980 ---------Dead -tagging mortality 116042 Female Adult 9.5 19 April 1980 114 18 86 Unknown 116043 Male Unknown 17.7 6 May 1980 213 26 272 Unknown 116044 Male Unknown ---7 May 1980 177 ~3 378 Unknown 116050 Male Juvenile 17.7 6 March 1981 19 5 89 Unknown 116066 Male Adult 12.7 13 November 1981 53 7 244 Dead -trapper harvest 116067 Male Juvenile 14.5 4 December 1981 167 13 259 Transmitter malfunction 116068 Male Adult 16.3 4 December 1981 218 18 549 Transmitter malfunction 116069 Female Adult 10.4 5 December 1981 38 4 ---Status unknown 116070 Male Adult 17.2 6 December 1981 235 20 241 Transmitter malfunction 116071 Male Juvenile 15.9 8 December 1981 8 3 ---Dead -trapper harvest 116088 Female Adult 11.3 9 April 1982 67 8 145 Transmitter malfunction 116089 Female Adult 11.8 9 April 1982 75 7 122 Transmitter malfunction .po 116090 Male Adult •19.1 10 April 1982 84 6 479 Status unknown 116091 Male Adult 16.8 10 April 1982 74 2 ---Status unknown 116092 Female Adult (?)13.2 14 October 1982 48 4 ---Monitoring continuing " Totals 1961 194 *Number of days between date of ipstrumentation and date of final contact. )1 1 1 i j 1 I ]J ]1 } Table 2.Sex and age class,and method of harvest or capture of wolverine in the middle Susitna Basin,1980-1982. Age Unknown Total Adult Adult All Juv.Juv.All Sex Unknown Unknown Total Total Total Unknown Total Males Females Adults Males Females Juveniles Unknown Age -Male Age -Female.Unknown Age Males Females Sex Trapping 11 14 25 5 5 10 0 10 12 23 26 32 0 58. Helicopter 8 3 11 2 1 3 0 2 1 3 12 5 0 17 tagging Ground shooting 1 1 2 3 0 3 0 0 1 1 4 2 0 6 Suspected Aerial Shooting 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 2 0 3 Roadkill 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Unknown 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 4 1 6 6 2 1 9 Totals 22 20 42 10 7 17 1 17 16 35 49 44 1 94 Percent 23 21 45 11 7 18 1 18 17 37 52 47 1 100 VI -F Movements and Home Ranges Since April 1980 1 17 wolverine (12 males,5 females)have been located a total of 194 times from fixed wing aircraft (Table 1). At least 5 locations were gathered on each of 12 individuals (9 males,3 females),and their home ranges were mapped (Fig.1). The following results and discussion are based on those wol- verine. Problems with wolverine transmitters prior to November 1982 reduced the possibility of tracking those animals for more than 5 ",.. or 6 months.However l transmitter design modifications have been made,so long-term monitoring ()6 months)of the .same individual, before transmi tter replacement becomes necessary,is now pos- -sible.Recaptures of instrumented wolverine have shown that the antenna lead-in wi re to the transmitter package was becoming worn,with subsequent erosion of the wire and transmitter fai- lure.New transmitters with redesigned antenna lead-ins are now being attached to captured wolverine. Because of these transmitter malfunctions,only one wolverine (adu1 t male #116040)·has been repeatedly monitored for a year. Wolverine utilize large home ranges (Magoun 1979,Hornocker and Hash 1981),and to accurately describe that area,location records probably should be obtained for at least an entire year. Thus,calculations of home range size based on less than one year's data are minimum areas (Table 1). .6 .c-•.. CD •... ::I l:lI U. •>-•:It- c:- •Eo .I: E ::I E c ~ (I,J G3 at-Io G3 at- - -o ••l:lI C II... ...•>-a: IIc--•:::J CD •-." ."-E •.I:- •~...•>-o :It ."•.-c•E ::I...-•c ••_.•E•- ••-•e ,- In an attempt to quantify how long a wolverine must be monitored to determine an accurate home range size,two statistical methods were applied.In the first,the total number of contact days (number of days between instrumentation and date of last con- tact),was plotted with the area of their home range polygon,a?d a simple regression line was calculated (Fig.2).All wolverine that were monitored long enough to gather at least 5 data points (locations)were used in the test.A positive correlation (r =0.696 )existed between length of contact and home range size,supporting the hypothesis that 5 or 6 months of radio contact is inadequate to accurately determine home range size. In the second test,point locations of individual wolverine were plotted,and areas encompassed wi thin these circumscribed poly- gons were successively calculated (i.e.locations 1 through 3, 1 through 4,and so on to 1 through n.)After the first 6 months· of radio contact with male wolverine no.116040,home range size continued to increase but at a decreasing rate (Fig.3).When the curve becomes more·horizontal with little or no area being added,an accurate home range is probably attained (Fuller and Keith 1980;Ballard et 0/.In Review). Twelve instrumented wolverine were subjected to the second test, and all displayed similar increases in home range size.However, because of inadequate transmitter life,most calculated lines did not show indications of reaching an inflection point and there- fore,the average home range size of Susi tna wolverine has not been adequately described. 8 ""'" 700 .65Q 600 550 ,-500Oil E ~-450 w N 400-C/) w 350 C' Z <300 a: w 250 ~ 0 J:200 150 100 50 0-1--....,.---.--.....-.....-..,..-....,.---.-..... o 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 ~ CONTACT DAYS Figure 2.Regression line of home range size with length of time monitored for twelve wolverine Instrumented or:!the Susltna Hydroelectric Project.1980-1982. 9 650 600 550 500 .- N 450~E ~-400 W N ,~~350rJ) w ~ c:J 300 Z « a: 250 w ~ 0 200- :I: 150..... 100r_ 50 o---........-....-I-.....-.....-...-...-....-....-....-...-t--t MaN T H Figure 3.Number of locations and home range size for male wolverine'"118040 from 15 April,1980 to 15 April,1981 In the middle Susitna River 8asln,Alaska. 10 I~ Distribution A total of 303 locations of marked and unmarked wolverine have been collected within the middle Susitna Basin since April 1980 (Table 3 )'0 Available data suggest that wolverine,although never "abundant",are distributed throughout the basin. Observations of instrumented wolverine indicate that annual fluc- tuationsoccur in distribution.In late spring through late summer (April through September)instrumented wolverine exhibited a tendency to iI1habit upland mat-cushion tundra habitats. Monthly elevation averages were calculated for all instrumented wolverine (Fig.4),and 95%confidence interval s were applied. Ai though sample sizes were low,tlie trend indicates an upward movement in spring followed by a downward trend in fall.When the sample was lumped,i.e.October through March,and April through Septembe r ,and then sub j ec ted to the same stati sti c al test,there was no overlap in the elevations used (P<O.05) (Fig.5)~ This elevational shift between seasons is probably induced by differences in prey distributio~and abundance (van Zyll de Jong 1975,Gardner and Ballard 1982).Ai though we have not quanti- tatively sampled prey remains in gastro-intestinal tracts of wolverine,telemetry observations have led to some insights into seasonal diets.Gardner and Ballard (1982)suggested that wolverine may frequent caribou calving areas at the time of 11 Table 3.Data sources used to estimate wolverine distribution in the Susitna Basin,Alaska.1980-1982. ,- Year Location Type 1980 1981 1982 Total Harvest points 21 7 5 33 ;<1""Track observations 9 23 30 62 Radio-location points 85 42 67 194 -6Wolverineobservations 3 5 14 Total point locations 121 75 107 303 _. 12 c:J 90%conHdence Interval-mean ....- - M 0 NTH Figure 4.Monthly changes In elevatlonal distribution for twelve Instru,mented wolverine on an annual basis In the Sus Una River Basin,1980-1982. 13 3400 3300 3200 <tl~ --3100 .~-- ~ Z 3000 """0 l-• <2900 > w ...J 2800 w ~ 2100 2600 D 90%confidence interval -mean ..... 2500 ........-.....-+-~~-+--+-...........-+--+--I----t--+-.... SUMMER Figure 5 .W Inter and summer ele vstlonal distribution of tYi el ve wolverine In the Susltna River Basin.1980-1982. 14 ,~ I~ ,~ calving to scavenge upon dead calves.They also described move- ments and observations of wolverine utilizing moose carcasses that died from wolf predation or winter-kills.These winter car- casses were located in the lower elevational areas with rela- tively high winter moose densities (Ballard et 01.1981a). A third prey item that probably influences movements and conse- quent elevational distribution of wolverine is Arctic ground squirrels (Spermophilus porryii).We suspect,as did Gardner and Ballard (1982),that wolverine coincide their upward spring move- ments with timing of ground squirrel emergence from hibernation (MacDonald 1981).On many occasions in early spring,wolverine were found on open snow fields that contained many ground squir- rel holes and trail networks,and indeed,we frequently observed wolverine carrying freshly captured squirrels (see Food Habits section). Population Characteristics Wolverine populations may exhibit different social structures depending on level of hunting and trapping.Hornocker and Hash (1981)and Magoun (1980)have ~uggested that in wolverine popu- lations subjected to little or no exploitation,mutually exclu- sive home ranges may exist among adult females and among adult m~les,with territorialism exhibited among the sexes.However, 15 when exploitation occurs,the strict territorialism probably breaks down to some degree as a result of behavioral instabi Ii ty.·-'~. The social structure of the Susitna Basin wolverine population is not well known.A more concerted effort in the Susi tna Basin should be undertaken to instrument and monitor additional wolve- rine of all sex and age classes with adjacent or overlapping home ranges to determine the social organization status. Assuming that the level of hunting and trapping is low enough in the Susi tna Basin to not disrupt terri torialism among the sexes, and further assuming that the 627 km 2 home range exhibited by male No.116040 is accurate,extrapolation for the entire middle Susi tna Basin (16,319 km 2 )yields an estimate of 26 adult male wolverine within the core area.Further,assuming that adult female wolverine occupy similar-sized home ranges that overlap the males',a total of 52 adults would be present.Approximately half (53%)of adult female wolverine in the Susi tna Basin are reproductively active each year (Gardner and Ballard 1982),pro- ducing at least 2 kits per Ii tter,(Rausch and Pearson 1972, Liskop et.al.1980)which woul'd add an ad9.itional 26 wolverine .. to the population,bringing the total to 78 individuals. Arriving at the above estimate of 78 wolverine that inhabit the 16,319 km 2 Upper SusitnaBasin (1 wolverine per 209 km 2 )required several assumptions,some of which may not be entirely valid. Those assumptions,with discussions,are as follows: 16 --------------------~-~- Assumption 1:The estimate of a 627 km 2 territory for wolverine' :1*116040 is indicative of the home range size of all adu1t- males in the population.Because of transmitter failure,we- have been unable to test this assumption.As indicated above,the transmitter problem has been rectified,and further moni toring will support or disprove this assumption. Assumption 2:All habitats are used according to availability, i.e.,there is no avoidance or preference for certain types. Research by Gardner and Ballard (1982)shows that certain types are avoided or preferred,which would probably serve to lower the population estimate. Assumption 3:Home range sizes are constant regardless of sex and age of wolverines.Research has shown that female ,~ wolverine utilize smaller home ranges than males (Magoun 1979,Hornocker and Hash 1981,Gardner and Ballard 1982). We suspect that if female home ranges were known,the popu- """1ation estimate would probably be somewhat higher. Assumption 4:The wolverine population in the Susi tna Basin is ~relatively unexp1oited,and individuals of the same sex and age classes inhabit mutually exclusive territories.This is 1""'\ probably a valid assumption for the study area.Mapped terri tories do overlap (Fig.1),but the overlap occurred during different time periods.Gardner and Ballard (1982) indicated that in the peripheral areas,exploitation was "".., 17 relatively high in comparison to the level within the study area.As mentioned above,social organization is dynamic depending on level of exploitation. Our estimate of 1 wolverine per 209 km 2 compares favorably with Gardner and Ballard's (1982)estimate of one wolverine per 136 to 248 km 2 for the core study area.However,it is evident from the above assumptions that a paucity of data exists concerning wolve- rine population status in the Susi tna Basin or elsewhere.To accurately determine the density of wolverine in the study area, research must be carried out to support or rebuke the above assumptions.If it is determined that mitigation practices are warranted,the dynamics of the population prior to construction must be better understood. Food Habi ts Although 48 digestive tracts have been collected from harvested wolverine,the contents have not yet been analyzed.However, during radio-tracking flights,28 observations have been made of wolverine either actively pursuing prey or feeding.No quanti- tative analysis is possible because of the small sample size,but some trends are noticeable. As mentioned altitudinal response to in the "Distribution"section,wolverine show shift between winter and summer,undoubtedly food availability.To test this hypothesis, 18 an in all ..-, recorded kills or active pursuits were listed as being either in summer (April through September)or winter (October through March).Although sample sizes were small,it is evident that moose and caribou consumption (probably scavenged)is greater than 4 times more prevalent in winter than in summer (Table 4). Similarly,arctic ground squirrel and other small animal con- sumption is more than 10 times higher in summer,when wolverine are at higher elevations. Potential Impacts The inherent elusiveness and low densities of wolverine through- out their present range have made it largely impractical to conduct ecological studies (van Zyll de Jong 1975).However, throughout most of Alaska,wolverine numbers are probably com- parable to what they were a century ago simply because of minimal human activity in the state.Additionally,technological advances in radio telemetry equipment and techniques have enabled researchers to gather previously unobtainable data on movements and other ecological parameters necessary for making sound man- agement deci sions regarding predators. Van Zyll de Jong (1975)and Hornocker and Hash (1981)have suggested that one factor leading to decreased wolverine numbers is probably human disturbance.The recent focus on resource development in Alaska may cause parallel reductions. 19 ~, -~ - Table 4.Summer and winter diets of wolverine based upon aerial observations of wolverine with prey in the Susitna Basin, Alaska,1980-1982. (Oct.-March)(April -Sept.) WINTER·SUMMER TOTAL MOOSE 10 3 13 CARIBOU 3 0 3 GROUND SQUIRREL 1 9 10 OTHER 0 2 2 Total 14 14 28 20 Telemetry data suggest that the Susitna River presents no impe- diment to wolverine,and many crossings were documented.The use of elevations below the high pool level (.2200 feet)was mainly during the period November through January,when scavenging on big game is an important portion of the diet,and that food source is distributed largely in the impoundment zone. Although actual loss of habitat through inundation and facilities development will reduce habitable land areas,this factor alone is not likely to significantly alter the wolverine population. However,of much greater concern is the effect th~s w~ll have on r winter food supplies,thus secondarily impacting wolverine dis- tribution,productivity and abundance. Ballard et al.(1982)estimated that approximately 2,400 moose will be severely impacted by the proposed p~oject.Three scen- arios are possible to describe what that moose population will ul timately do.(1)Moose wi 11 be concentrated in the remaining habitat along the reservoir borders.This will probably lead to deterioration of the existing habitat,by overuse of the range, and ultimately,a reduction,through winter kill,of the moose population.Should this scenario happen,the~e would probably be an increase in wolverine numbers for a period of 3-5 years,fol- lowed by a substantial reduction in the population because of a lack of winter carrion.(2)Moose will migrate out of the Basin in search of better range.This would probably result in lower .-wolverine densi ties,as winter carrion would not be as available. 21 -- - (3 )Massive dieoffs of moose would occur during inundation and immediately after maximum pool level is attained,mainly from accidental deaths (i.e.shifting and thin ice,drownings, concentration of individuals with increased predation resulting). Should this occur,wolverine numbers will probably increase for 1-3 years followi!1g inundation,with subsequent reduction in numbers when carrion is no longer available in such quanti ties. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to express their thanks to ADF&G employees Larry Aumiller,Jim Dau,John Westlund,Craig Gardner and Polly Hessing for their efforts in wolverine collaring and radio- tracking operations.In addition,Sterling Miller,Dennis McAllister and Enid Goodwin assisted in one or more aspects of the study. Vern and Craig Lofstedt,Kenai Air Service,piloted the heli- copters and participated in the processing of immobilized wolverine.Harley and Chuck McMahan,Al and Jerry Lee,and Ken Bunch piloted fixed-wing aircraft during collaring and/or radio- tracking.All their efforts wer~extremely helpful;their exper- ience and knowledge contributed much to the success of this pro- ject. 22 - Karl Schneider,ADF&G,provided guidance and support throughout the project,and he added the final editing touches to this report.Albert Franzmann (ADF&G)necropsied the tagging-related mortality. Special thanks go to Renee Whitman'for putting up with resear- chers marching through her house during the collaring operations and for providing her time to feed the hungry hordes.Also, deserved appreciation goes to Kathy Adler,Susan Lawler and Penny Miles for typing and editing this manuscript. LITERATURE CITED Agricultural Experimental Station.-1981.Vegetation studies. Susi tna Hydroelectric Proj ect Subtask 7.12 Ballard,W.B.and K.P.Taylor.1980.Upper Susitna Valley moose population study.Alaska Dept.Fi sh and Game.P-R ,,,,",,,, Proj.Final Rept.,W-17-9,W-17-20and W-17-11.102 pp. P\'!ml>, Ballard,W.B.,D.A.Cornelius and C.L.Gardner._1981a. Moose-Upstream Studies.Susitna Hydroelectric Project Sub- task 7.11.91 pp. Ballard,W.B.,R.o.Stephenson and T.H.Spraker.1981b. Nelchina Basin wolf studies.Alaska Dept.Fi sh and Game. P-R Proj.Final Rept.W-17-8,W-17-9,W-17-l0,and W-17-11. 201 pp. 23 = I~ "'"' Ballard,W.B.,A.W.Franzmann,and C.L.Gardner.1982.Com- parison and assessment of drugs used to immobilize Alaskan gray wolves (Canis lupus)and wolverines (Gulo gulo)from a helicopter.J.Wi1dl.Dis.18(3):339-342. Bishop,R.H.and R.A.Rausch.1974.Moose population fluc- tuations in Alaska,1950-1972.Nat.Can.101:559-593. Fuller,T.K.and L.B.Keith.1980.Wolf population dynamics and prey relationships in northeastern Alberta.J.Wi1d1. Manage.44(3):583-602. Gardner,C. Project 43 pp. L.and W.B.Ballard. Phase I Final Report. 1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Volume VII Wolverine. Hornocker,M.G.and H.S.Hash.1981.Ecology of the wolverine in northwestern Montana.Can.J.Zool.59:1286-1301. Liskop,K.S.,R.M.S.F.Sadlier and B.P.Saunders.1980. Reproduction and harvest of wolverine (Gulo gulo)in British Columbia.P.469-477 in Vol.I of Proc.First Worldwide Furbearer Conference.Frostburg,Maryland. 24 --~~~>"'"'~-~--------~._-------------- MacDonald,S.o.1981.Species and abundance of small mammals. Abstract to T.E ..S.Magoun,A.J.1979.Studies of wolverines on and adj acent to NPR-A.Chap.4 in Studies of Selected Wildlife and Fish and Their Use of Habitats on and Adjacent to NPR-A,1977-78.U.S.Dept.Interior. Magoun,A.J.1980.Ecology of wolverines in an Arctic ecosystem.Alaska Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit,Univ. of Alaska.Progress Report.27 pp. Mech,L.D.1974.Current techniques in the study of elusive wilderness carnivores.Proc.of XI Intl.Congress of Game Biologists.P.315-322. • Mohr,C.o.1947.Table American small mammals. of eqUivalent populations Am.Midl.Nat.37:223-249. of North of caribouSkoog,R.O. g ran ti)in Berkeley. 1968.Ecology Alaska.PhD 699 pp. Thesis,Univ. (Rangifer tarandus of California, van Zyll de Jong,C.G.1975. the wolverine (Gulo gulo) 89(4):431-437. The distribution and abundance of in Canada.Canadian Field-Nat. 25