Density-Dependent Habitat Selection: A Tool for More Effective Population Management
Habitats vary in quality and individuals choose them accordingly. Some species distribute themselves non-randomly among habitats so as to equalize the net reproductive rates of individuals in different habitats (Ideal Free Distribution). Habitat selectivity is greatest when population sizes are small.
Determining habitat preferences may be done in the laboratory or the field. The latter may be accomplished by studying the covariance of census and habitat qualities, or by studying the non-randomness of population distribution among habitats. All methods have confirmed the density-dependence of habitat selectivity.
Density-sensitive habitat distributions may be used to reduce the cost of regular censuses. In some cases, they may make it practical to replace censuses and yield limits with habitat reserves.
When populations decline greatly, they are supported by the most favored habitats. Substantial fractions of some populations may depend on such cradle habitats. Pest populations may be controlled most cheaply by concentrating on their cradle habitats, although natural selection might interfere.
Managers will have to take cognizance of habitat selection in order to achieve maximum sustainable yields. Sometimes, harvesting should be concentrated in habitats where death rates are naturally high or birth rates naturally low. But long-term considerations in cases where some individuals dominate others may complicate achieving maximum sustainable yields.
KeywordsHabitat Type Habitat Selection Pest Population Habitat Management Maximum Sustainable Yield
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Fagen, R. An ideal free distribution method for assessing productivity changes from habitat use statistics. Ms.Google Scholar
- Fretwell, S.D. 1972. Populations in a Seasonal Environment. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
- Hanna, S. The structure of fishing systems and the implementation of management policy. (This volume).Google Scholar
- Kirchhoff, M.D., J.W. Schoen and M. Thomas. Seasonal distribution and habitat use by Sitka black-tailed deer in southeastern Alaska. Ms.Google Scholar
- Mangel, M. Sampling surveys for a highly organized population. (This volume).Google Scholar
- Morisita, M. 1950. Dispersal and population density of a water-strider, Gerris lacustris L (in Japanese). Contr. Physiol. Ecol. Kyoto Univ. No. 65.Google Scholar
- Morisita, M. 1952. Habitat preference and evaluation of environment of an animal. Experimental studies on the population density of an ant-lion, Glenuroides japonicus M’L. (I) (in Japanese with English summary). Phys. and Ecol., Vol. 5, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
- Rosenzweig, M.L. 1974. On the evolution of habitat selection. Proc. First Intern. Congr. Ecol., pp. 401–404.Google Scholar
- Slobodkin, L.B. 1968. How to be a predator. Amer. Zool., Vol. 8, pp. 43–51.Google Scholar
- Vincent, T. and Joel Brown. Havesting an evolutionary model. (This volume.)Google Scholar
- Clark, Colin, 1982. Concentration profiles and the production and management of marine fisheries in W. Eichhorn (ed.), Economic Theory of Natural Resources. Physica-Verlag, Wurtzburg-Wien.Google Scholar
- McKelvey, Robert, 1986. The economic regulation of targeting behavior in a multispecies fishery. Natural Resource Modeling. Vol. 1, No. 1.Google Scholar