CDC Logo

BC Conservation Data Centre: Species Summary


Alces alces
Moose

 
Scientific Name: Alces alces (Linnaeus, 1758)
Scientific Name Synonyms: Alces alces
Alces americanus
English Name: Moose
 
Classification / Taxonomy
Scientific Name - Concept Reference: Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.
Classification Level: Species
Taxonomy Comments: Jan. 2007 - changed from Alces alces as per NatureServe (DDW).
2021: NatureServe will be following the ASM Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) and Hundertmark (2016) in recognizing the moose as Alces alces.
Species Group: Vertebrate Animal
Species Code: M-ALAM
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Artiodactyla Cervidae
   
Conservation Status / Legal Designation
Global Status: G5 (Nov 1996)
Provincial Status: S5 (Feb 2015)
BC List: Yellow
Provincial FRPA list:   
Provincial Wildlife Act:
COSEWIC Status:
SARA Schedule:
General Status Canada: 4 - Secure (2005)
   
Ecology & Life History
General Description:
Global Reproduction Comments: Breeds September-late October; peak in mid-September. Gestation lasts 240-246 days. One calf (less commonly 2) born late May-early June. Sexually mature in 1.5 years, though females do not reach peak productivity until age 4 years and most males do not breed until 5-6 years old due to intrasexual competition.
Global Ecology Comments: Depending on habitat, home range may be up to several thousand hectares (Lawson and Rodgers 1997). Population density has been reported as up to 1-3 per sq mile (= 11.6 per 10 sq km) (Peterson 1955), but 18-20 per 10 sq km in unhunted area in eastern Quebec (Crete 1989). May herd in winter.

Winter weather (snow accumulation) may strongly affect populations, even more so than wolf density (Mech et al. 1987); however, Messier (1991) found that competition for food, but not wolf predation and snow, had a regulatory impact on moose. Van Ballenberghie and Ballard (1994) found that in naturally regulated ecosystems predation by bears and wolves often is limiting and may be regulating under certain conditions. See also Messier (1994, Ecology 75:478-488) for population models of moose-wolf interactions.

Under favorable conditions, capable of large annual increases (20-25%) in population size; large populations may degrade habitat, resulting in population crash. See Albright and Keith (1987) for study of population dynamics of introduced population in Newfoundland (poor winter condition but high calf-survival [few predators]).

See Nudds (1990) for discussion of relation between white-tailed deer, moose, and meningeal (brain) worms. Brainworm may limit moose populations in areas where white-tailed deer are common. Deer are not negatively impacted by the brainworm, the larval stage of which is passed in deer feces. Snails, often inadvertently ingested by moose feeding on vegetation, are the intermnediate host for the worm. Deer, through worm-mediated impacts, commonly are believed to exclude moose and caribou from areas where deer occur; however, an analysis by Schmitz and Nudds (1994) concluded that moose may be able to coexist with deer, albeit at lower densities, even in the absence of habitat refuges from the disease. Whitlaw and Lankester (1994) found that the evidence that brainworm has caused moose declines is weak.

Moose may alter the structure and dynamics of boreal forest ecosystems. At Isle Royale, Michigan, moose browsing prevented saplings of preferred species from growing into the tree canopy, resulting in a forest with fewer canopy trees and a well-developed understory of shrubs and herbs; also, browsing may have caused an increase in spruce and a decrease in balsam fir (McInnes et al. 1992).
Migration Characteristics:
(Global / Provincial)		 
    Nonmigrant:
    Local Migrant:
    Distant Migrant:
    Within Borders Migrant: 		Y /
Y /
N /
na /
Global Migration Comments: May make short elevational or horizontal migrations between summer and winter ranges.
Habitats:
(Type / Subtype / Dependence) 		Agriculture / Cultivated Field / Facultative - occasional use
Agriculture / Hedgerow / Facultative - occasional use
Agriculture / Pasture/Old Field / Facultative - occasional use
Alpine/Tundra / Tundra / Facultative - frequent use
Forest / Conifer Forest - Dry / Facultative - occasional use
Forest / Conifer Forest - Mesic (average) / Facultative - frequent use
Forest / Conifer Forest - Moist/wet / Facultative - frequent use
Forest / Deciduous/Broadleaf Forest / Facultative - frequent use
Grassland/Shrub / Shrub - Natural / Facultative - frequent use
Lakes / Lake / Facultative - frequent use
Lakes / Pond/Open Water / Facultative - frequent use
Riparian / Gravel Bar / Facultative - frequent use
Riparian / Riparian Forest / Facultative - frequent use
Riparian / Riparian Herbaceous / Facultative - frequent use
Riparian / Riparian Shrub / Facultative - frequent use
Stream/River / Stream/River / Facultative - occasional use
Wetland / Bog / Facultative - frequent use
Wetland / Fen / Facultative - frequent use
Wetland / Marsh / Facultative - frequent use
Wetland / Swamp / Facultative - frequent use
Global Habitat Comments: Prefers mosaic of second-growth forest, openings, swamps, lakes, wetlands. Requires water bodies for foraging and hardwood-conifer forests for winter cover. Avoids hot summer conditions by utilizing dense shade or bodies of water. Mineral licks may be important sodium source, used in early summer in Alaska. In the northern Yellowstone ecosystem, depends on old growth forest in winter (see Maxwell, Audubon, May-June 1994, p. 112). Young are born in protective areas of dense thickets.
Food Habits: Herbivore: Adult, Immature
Global Food Habits Comments: Summer: prefers to browse on new growth of trees and shrubs (leaves, twigs, and bark), and vegetation associated with water (attracted to high-sodium aquatic plants). Winter: typically restricted to conifer and hardwood twigs.
Global Phenology: Circadian: Adult, Immature
Global Phenology Comments: Active day or night, though mainly crepuscular.
Provincial Phenology:
(1st half of month/
2nd half of month)
Colonial Breeder: N
Length(cm)/width(cm)/Weight(g): 279/ / 630000
Elevation (m) (min / max): Global: 
Provincial: 
   
 
Distribution
Endemic: N
Global Range Comment: Alaska and Canada south through Rockies, northern Great Lakes, and New England; Russia, east of the Yenisei River, east to Anadyr region (eastern Siberia) and south to northern Mongolia and northern China; introduced but now extirpated in New Zealand (Boyeskorov 1999; Grubb, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). This range does not include that of the Eurasia elk (Alces alces) here recognized as a distinct species, following Boyeskorov (1999) and Grubb (in Wilson and Reeder 2005).

A. a. americana occurs in eastern North America; A. a. andersoni in western and central Canada and north-central USA; A. a. gigas is found in Alaska, USA and the Yukon Territory, Canada; A. a. shirasi in the Rocky Mountains straddling the USA-Canada border (Hundertmark 2002b).

Arrived in North America from Asia about 11,000-14,000 years ago, shortly before flooding of the Bering land bridge (Hundertmark et al. 2003).
 
Authors / Contributors
Global Information Author: Hammerson, G.
Last Updated: May 27, 1994
Provincial Information Author:
Last Updated:
   
References and Related Literature
Albright, C. A., and L. B. Keith. 1987. Population dynamics of moose, ALCES ALCES, on the south-coast barrens of Newfoundland. Canadian Field-Nat. 101:373-387.
Baker, R. H. 1983. Michigan mammals. Michigan State University Press. 642 pp.
Banfield, A. W. F. 1974. The mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. 438 pp.
Blood, D.A. 2000. Moose in British Columbia, Ecology, Conservation and Management. B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch. 6pp.
Crete, M. 1989. Approximation of K carrying capacity for moose in eastern Quebec. Can. J. Zool. 67:373-380.
Cronin, M. A. 1991a. Mitochondrial-DNA phylogeny of deer (Cervidae). J. Mamm. 72:533-566.
Cronin, M. A. 1992. Intraspecific variation in mitochondrial DNA of North American cervids. J. Mammalogy 73:70-82.
Gasaway, W. C., et al. 1989. Response of radio-collared moose to a large burn in central Alaska. Can. J. Zool. 67:325-329.
Godin, A. J. 1977. Wild mammals of New England. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 304 pp.
Hall, E. R. 1981a. The Mammals of North America, second edition. Vols. I & II. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. 1181 pp.
Hamilton, W. J., Jr., and J. O. Whitaker, Jr. 1979. Mammals of the eastern United States. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, New York. 346 pp.
Kraus, F., and M. M. Miyamoto. 1991. Rapid cladogenesis among the pecoran ruminants: evidence from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Systematic Zoology 40:117-130.
Lawson, E. J. G., and A. R. Rodgers. 1997. Differences in home range size computed in commonly used software programs. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25:721-729.
LeResche, R. E. 1974. Moose migrations in North America. Naturaliste Canadien 101:393-415.
McInnes, P. F., et al. 1992. Effects of moose browsing on vegetation and litter of the boreal forest, Isle Royale, Michigan, USA. Ecology 73:2059-2075.
Mech, L. D., et al. 1987. Relationship of deer and moose populations to previous winters' snow. J. Anim. Ecol. 56:615-627.
Messier, F. 1991. The significance of limiting and regulating factors on the demography of moose and white-tailed deer. J. Animal Ecology 60:377-393.
Nudds, T. D. 1990. Retroductive logic in retrospect: the ecological effects of meningeal worms. J. Wildl. Manage. 54:396-402.
Peterson, R.L. 1955. North American moose. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto. 280 pp.
Peterson, R.L. 1981. North American moose. 280 pp.
Schmitz, O. J., and T. D. Nudds. 1994. Parasite-mediated competition in deer and moose: how strong is the effect of meningeal worm on moose? Ecological Applications 4:91-103.
Tankersley, N. G., and W. C. Gasaway. 1983. Mineral lick use by moose in Alaska. Can. J. Zool. 61:2242-2249.
Van Ballenberghie, V., and W. B. Ballard. 1994. Limitation and regulation of moose populations: the role of predation. Canadian Journal of Zoology 72:2071-2077.
Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1992. Draft moose management plan 1992-1996. 31 pp.
Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department. 1991. Vermont's moose status 1991. 5 pp.
Wemmer, C. M., editor. 1987. Biology and management of theCervidae: proceedings of a symposium. Smithsonian Inst. Press, Washington, D. C. 1000 pp.
Whitlaw, H. A., and M. W. Lankester. 1994b. A retrospective evaluation of the effects of Parelaphostrongylosis on moose populations. Can. J. Zool. 72:1-7.
Williamson, S. J. No date. Forester's guide to wildlife habitat improvement. Cooperative Extension Service, Univ. of New Hampshire. 56 pp.
Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.
 

Please visit the website Conservation Status Ranks for definitions of the data fields used in this summary report.

Suggested Citation:

B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 1994. Species Summary: Alces alces. B.C. Minist. of Environment. Available: https://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/ (accessed Apr 25, 2024).