@article{alpizar-jara_pollock_haines_2005, title={Mark-recapture estimators for dual frame population size of prominent nesting structures: the effect of uncertain detection probability}, volume={12}, ISSN={["1352-8505"]}, DOI={10.1007/s10651-005-1039-0}, abstractNote={The combined mark-recapture and line transect sampling methodology proposed by Alpizar-Jara and Pollock [Journal of Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 3(4), 311–327, 1996; In Marine Mammal Survey and Assessment Methods Symposium. G.W. Garner, S.C. Amstrup, J.L. Laake, B.F.J. Manly, L.L. McDonald, and D.C. Robertson (Eds.), A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, pp. 99–114, 1999] is used to illustrate the estimation of population size for populations with prominent nesting structures (i.e., bald eagle nests). In the context of a bald eagle population, the number of nests in a list frame corresponds to a “pre-marked” sample of nests, and an area frame corresponds to a set of transect strips that could be regularly monitored. Unlike previous methods based on dual frame methodology using the screening estimator [Haines and Pollock (Journal of Environmental and Ecological Statistics, 5, 245–256, 1998a; Survey Methodology, 24(1), 79–88, 1998b)], we no longer need to assume that the area frame is complete (i.e., all the nests in the sampled sites do not need to be seen). One may use line transect sampling to estimate the probability of detection in a sampled area. Combining information from list and area frames provides more efficient estimators than those obtained by using data from only one frame. We derive an estimator for detection probability and generalize the screening estimator. A simulation study is carried out to compare the performance of the Chapman modification of the Lincoln–Petersen estimator to the screening estimator. Simulation results show that although the Chapman estimator is generally less precise than the screening estimator, the latter can be severely biased in presence of uncertain detection. The screening estimator outperforms the Chapman estimator in terms of mean squared error when detection probability is near 1 wheareas the Chapman estimator outperforms the screening estimator when detection probability is lower than a certain threshold value depending on particular scenarios.}, number={2}, journal={ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECOLOGICAL STATISTICS}, author={Alpizar-Jara, R and Pollock, K and Haines, D}, year={2005}, month={Jun}, pages={155–168} }
 @article{brooks_alpizar-jara_pollock_steffen_pack_norman_2002, title={An online wild turkey population dynamics model}, volume={30}, number={1}, journal={Wildlife Society Bulletin}, author={Brooks, E. N. and Alpizar-Jara, R. and Pollock, K. H. and Steffen, D. E. and Pack, J. C. and Norman, G. W.}, year={2002}, pages={41–45} }
 @article{alpizar-jara_brooks_pollock_steffen_pack_norman_2001, title={An eastern wild turkey population dynamics model for Virginia and West Virginia}, volume={65}, ISSN={["0022-541X"]}, DOI={10.2307/3803093}, abstractNote={Hunting can have potentially significant impacts on wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) populations. We developed a 2-sex Leslie-type matrix model that predicts wild turkey population size for spring-summer and fall-winter periods to understand the effects of hunting on the dynamics of wild turkey populations in Virginia and West Virginia. A base model incorporates parameters derived from a large-scale radiotelemetry study (n = 1,543 hens radio-tagged) conducted over areas with different fall hunting seasons in Virginia and West Virginia from 1989 to 1994. These data made it possible to evaluate the effects of season length, season timing, and 1- versus 2-sex kills on population growth and future harvests. A sensitivity analysis confirmed that fall hunting has the strongest negative effect on the population growth rate. For the range of parameters explored, population growth rate appeared to decrease linearly with increases in fall hunting. Also, the proportion of males in the population was more sensitive to fall rather than spring hunting. These results were invariant to a wide variety of different model calibrations.}, number={3}, journal={JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT}, author={Alpizar-Jara, R and Brooks, EN and Pollock, KH and Steffen, DE and Pack, JC and Norman, GW}, year={2001}, month={Jul}, pages={415–424} }
 @inbook{alpizar-jara_pollock_1999, title={Combining line transect and capture-recapture for mark-resighting studies}, booktitle={Marine mammal survey and assessment methods: Proceedings of the Symposium on Surveys, Status & Trends of Marine Mammal Populations: Seattle, Washington, USA, 25-27 February 1998}, publisher={Rotterdam; Brookfield, VT: Balkema}, author={Alpizar-Jara, R. and Pollock, K. H.}, year={1999}, pages={99–114} }
 @article{pack_norman_taylor_steffen_swanson_pollock_alpizar-jara_1999, title={Effects of fall hunting on wild turkey populations in Virginia and West Virginia}, volume={63}, ISSN={["1937-2817"]}, DOI={10.2307/3802811}, abstractNote={The effect of fall either-sex hunting on eastern wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris) populations is a common concern of wildlife agencies. We examined the effect of fall either-sex hunting on survival of radiotagged female wild turkeys from 1989 to 1994 in Virginia and West Virginia. We tested the hypothesis that survival of female wild turkeys did not differ among areas closed to fall hunting, open to a 4-week fall season, or open to an. 8- or 9-week fall hunting season. Mean annual survival rates were higher in the area closed to fall hunting than in regions where fall hunting occurred (P = 0.05). Mean annual survival rates varied within years (P ≤ 0.05). Differences in annual survival rate among areas were attributed to legal hunting (P ≤ 0.01). Poaching was a major mortality factor. Juvenile, yearling, and adult hens had similar survival rates in the areas closed to fall hunting and with 4 weeks of fall hunting (P = 0.39), but survival rates of juveniles were lower (P = 0.03) than those of yearling and adult females in the area with an 8-9-week fall hunting season. Harvest rates of female turkeys averaged 4.3% in the 4-week fall hunted area and 12.3% on the 8-9-week fall hunted area. Higher harvests were achieved on the study area opened only to spring hunting than the combined fall-spring harvests on the other study areas. Total harvest was negatively associated with survival (r s =- 0.90, P = 0.04) on the 8-9-week fall hunted area and positively associated with survival (r s = 0.90, P = 0.04) in the area closed to fall hunting. Spring gobbler-only hunting is suggested for maximum growth in a wild turkey population. Guidelines are presented for fall harvest programs.}, number={3}, journal={JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT}, author={Pack, JC and Norman, GW and Taylor, CI and Steffen, DE and Swanson, DA and Pollock, KH and Alpizar-Jara, R}, year={1999}, month={Jul}, pages={964–975} }