Advertisement

Mammalian Biology

, Volume 77, Issue 4, pp 293–298 | Cite as

High-use movement pathways and habitat selection by ungulates

  • William D. NewmarkEmail author
  • Eric A. Rickart
Original Investigation

Abstract

The cumulative movements of large mammals are expressed in many areas as semi-permanent wildlife trails. The mapping of semi-permanent trail networks offers a direct approach to assess habitat selection of high-use movement routes at relatively fine spatial scales across a landscape. Here we examine an ungulate trail network in north-central Utah created and maintained by the repeated movements of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and elk (Cervus elaphus). In a resource selection analysis using multivariable spatial regression analysis, we show that at a spatial scale of 70m open and low cover and distance to water are important predictors of movement pathway density. We also demonstrate at a scale of 10m that elk and deer movement pathways are less steep than adjacent terrain. The mapping of trail networks should be a particularly useful technique for examining functional connectivity among resource patches across a landscape and identifying important high-use movement routes.

Keywords

Elk GPS mapping Mule deer Spatial regression analysis Ungulate trail network 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beers, T.W., Dress, P.E., Wensel, L.C., 1966. Aspect transformation in site productivity research. J. Forestry 64, 691–692.Google Scholar
  2. Berger, J., 2004. The last mile: how to sustain long-distance migration in mammals. Conserv. Biol. 18, 320–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolger, D.T., Newmark, W.D., Morrison, T.A., Doak, D.F., 2008. The need for integrative approaches to understand and conserve migratory ungulates. Ecol. Lett. 11, 63–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Burnham, K.P., Anderson, D.R., 1998. Model Selection and Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chetkiewicz, C.L., St Clair, C.C., Boyce, M.S., 2006. Corridors for conservation: integrating pattern and process. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 37, 317–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Craighead, F.C., Craighead, J.J., Davies, R.S., 1963. Radiotracking of grizzly bears. In: Slater, L.E. (Ed.), Biotelemetry. Pergamon Press, New York, pp. 133–148.Google Scholar
  7. Creel, S., Winnie Jr., J., Maxwell, B., Hamlin, K., Creel, M., 2005. Elk alter habitat selection as an antipredator response to wolves. Ecology 86, 387–3397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crooks, K.R., Sanjayan, M. (Eds.), 2006. Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  9. Dasmann, R.F., Taber, R.D., 1956. Behavior of Columbian black-tailed deer with reference to the population ecology. J. Mammal. 37, 143–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Department of Natural Resource Sciences, 2008. The Wildlife Habitat Nutrition Lab. Washington State University, https://doi.org/www.nrs.wsu.edu/research/wildlifehabitat.html/research/wildlifehabitat.html, accessed February 2010.
  11. D’Eon, R.G., 2001. Using snow-track surveys to determine deer winter distribution and habitat. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 29, 879–887.Google Scholar
  12. Douglas-Hamilton, I., Douglas-Hamilton, O., 1975. Among the elephants. Collins, London.Google Scholar
  13. Ehleringer, J.R., Arnow, L.A., Arnow, T., McNulty, I.B., Negus, N.C., 1992. Red Butte Canyon Research Natural Area: history, flora, geology, climate, and ecology. Great Basin Nat. 52, 95–120.Google Scholar
  14. Fagan, W.F., Calabrese, J.M., 2006. Quantifying connectivity: balancing metric performance with data requirements. In: Crooks, K.R., Sanjayan, M. (Eds.), Connectivity Conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 297–317.Google Scholar
  15. Forman, R.T.T., 1995. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  16. Fortin, D., Morales, J.M., Boyce, M.S., 2005a. Elk winter foraging at fine scales in Yellowstone National Park. Oecologia 145, 335–343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fortin, D., Beyer, H.L., Boyce, M.S., Smith, D.W., Duchesne, T., Mao, J.S., 2005b. Wolves influence elk movements: behavior shapes a trophic cascade in Yellowstone National Park. Ecology 86, 1320–1330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frair, J.L., Merrill, E.H., Visscher, D.R., Fortin, D., Beyer, H.L., Morales, J.M., 2005. Scalesof movementby elk Cervus elaphus in response to heterogeneity inforage resources and predation risk. Landscape Ecol. 20, 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frankel, O.H., Soulé, M.E., 1981. Conservation and Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Fryxell, J.M., Hazell, M., Börger, L., Dalziel, B.D., Haydon, D.T., Morales, J.M., McIntosh, T., Rosatte,R.C., 2008. Multiplemovement modesbylarge herbivoresatmultiple spatiotemporal scales. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 105, 19114–19119.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fuller, M.R., Millspaugh, J.J., Church, K.E., Kenward, R.E., 2005. Wildlife radiotelmetry. In: Braun, C.E. (Ed.), Techniques for Wildlife Investigations and Management. , 6th ed. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD, pp. 377–417.Google Scholar
  22. Haining, R., 1990. Spatial Data Analysis in the Social and Environmental Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  23. Harestad, A.S., Bunnell, F.L., 1979. Home range and body weight–a reevaluation. Ecology 60, 389–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holechek, J.L., Vavra, M., Pieper, R.D., 1982. Botanical composition determination of range herbivore diets: a review. J. Range Manage. 35, 309–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Houston, D.B., 1982. The Northern Yellowstone Elk: Ecology and Management. MacMillan Press, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  26. Johnson, C.J., Parker, K.L., Heard, D.C., Gillingham, M.P., 2002. Movement parameters of ungulates and scale-specific responses to the environment. J. Anim. Ecol. 71, 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson, D.H., 1980. The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 61, 65–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Laundré, J.W., Hernández, L., 2003. Winter hunting habitat of pumas Puma concolor in northwestern Utah and southern Idaho, USA. Wildl. Biol. 9, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Legendre, P., Legendre, L., 1998. Numerical Ecology, 2nd e. Elsevier Press, New York. Lichstein, J.W., Simons, T.R., Shriner, S.A., Franzreb, K.E., 2002. Spatial autocorrelation and autoregressive models in ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 72, 445–463.Google Scholar
  30. Manly, B.F.J., McDonald, L.L., Thomas, D.L., McDonald, T.L., Erikson, W.P., 2002. Resource Selection by Animals: Statistical Analysis and Design for Field Studies. Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  31. Marzluff, J.M., Millspaugh, J.J., Hurvitz, P., Handock, M.S., 2004. Relating resources to a probabilistic measure of space use: forest fragments and Stellar’s Jays. Ecology 85, 1411–1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Murie, A., 1936. Following fox trail. Univ. Mich. Mus. Zool. Misc. Publ. 32, 1–45. Nagelkerke, N.J.D., 1991. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrikia 78, 691–692.Google Scholar
  33. Natural Resource Conservation Service, undated. Utah Web Soil Survey, https://doi.org/www.ut.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/soils/index.html/technical/soils/index.html, accessed October 2009.
  34. Newmark, W.D., 1985. Legal and biotic boundaries of western North American national parks: A problem of congruence. Biol. Conserv. 33, 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Newmark, W.D., 2008. Isolation of African protected areas. Front. Ecol. Environ. 6, 321–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nichol, A.A., 1938. Experimental feeding of deer. Univ. Ariz. Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bull. 75, 3–39.Google Scholar
  37. Nicholson, M.C., 1997. Habitat selection and survival of mule deer: tradeoffs associated with migration. J. Mammal. 78, 484–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peinetti, H.R., Menezes, R.S.C., Coughenour, M.B., 2001. Changes induced by elk browsing in the aboveground biomass production and distribution of willow Salix monticola Bebb: their relationships with plant water, carbon, and nitrogen dynamics. Oecologia 127, 334–342.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Preisler, H.K., Ager, A.A., Wisdom, M.J., 2006. Statistical methods for analysing responses of wildlife to human disturbance. J. Appl. Ecol. 43, 164–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Reichman,O.J., Aitchison, S., 1981. Mammal trails on mountain slopes:optimal paths in relation to slope angle and body weight. Am. Nat. 117, 416–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ripple, W.J., Beschta, R.L., 2004. Wolves and the ecology of fear: can predation risk structure ecosystems? Bioscience 54, 755–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Robel, R.J., 1960. Determining elk movements through periodic aerial counts. J.Wildl. Manage. 24, 103–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Saher, D.J., Schmiegelow, F.K., 2005. Movement pathways and habitat selection by woodland caribou during spring migration. Rangifer 16, 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sawyer, H., Kauffman, M.J., Nielson, R.M., Horne, J.S., 2009. Identifying and prioritizing ungulate migration routes for landscape-level conservation. Ecol. Appl. 19, 2016–2025.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sawyer, H., Kauffman, M.J., 2011. Stopover ecology of a migratory ungulate. J. Anim. Ecol. 80, 1078–1987.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scott, T.G., 1943. Some food coactions of the northern plains red fox. Ecol. Monogr. 13, 427–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Skovlin, J.M., Zager, P., Johnson, B., 2002. Elk habitat selection and evaluation. In: Toweill, D.E., Thomas, J.W. (Eds.), North American Elk. Ecology and Management Smithsonian Press, Washington D.C, pp. 531–553.Google Scholar
  48. Soulé, M.E., Terborgh, J. (Eds.), 1999. Continental Conservation: Scientific Foundations of Regional Reserve Networks. Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  49. Stephens, P.A., Zaumyslova, O.Y., Miquelle, D.G., Myslenkov, A.I., Hayward, G.D., 2006. Estimating population density from indirect sign: track counts and the Formozov–Malyshev–Pereleshin formula. Anim. Conserv. 9, 339–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Thomas, D.L., Taylor, E.J., 1990. Study designs and tests for comparing resource use and availability. J. Wildl. Manage. 54, 322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thomas, D.L., Taylor, E.J., 2006. Study designs and tests for comparing resource use and availability II. J. Wildl. Manage. 70, 324–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Unsworth, J.W., Lonn, K., Garton, E.O., Butterfield, B.R., 1998. Elk habitat selection on the Clearwater National Forest, Idaho. J. Wildl. Manage. 62, 1255–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vanleeuwe, H., Gautier-Hion, A., 1998. Forest elephant paths and movements at the Odzala National Park, Congo: the role of clearings and Marantaceae forest. Afr. J. Ecol. 36, 174–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Whitehouse, S.J.O., 1977. Movement of dingoes in western Australia. J. Wildl. Manage. 41, 575–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutsche Gesellschaft für Säugetierkunde 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Natural History Museum of UtahUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations