Increased levels of natural gas exploration, development, and production across the Intermountain West have created a variety of concerns for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) populations, including direct habitat loss to road and well‐pad construction and indirect habitat losses that may occur if deer use declines near roads or well pads. We examined winter habitat selection patterns of adult female mule deer before and during the first 3 years of development in a natural gas field in western Wyoming. We used global positioning system (GPS) locations collected from a sample of adult female mule deer to model relative frequency or probability of use as a function of habitat variables. Model coefficients and predictive maps suggested mule deer were less likely to occupy areas in close proximity to well pads than those farther away. Changes in habitat selection appeared to be immediate (i.e., year 1 of development), and no evidence of well‐pad acclimation occurred through the course of the study; rather, mule deer selected areas farther from well pads as development progressed. Lower predicted probabilities of use within 2.7 to 3.7 km of well pads suggested indirect habitat losses may be substantially larger than direct habitat losses. Additionally, some areas classified as high probability of use by mule deer before gas field development changed to areas of low use following development, and others originally classified as low probability of use were used more frequently as the field developed. If areas with high probability of use before development were those preferred by the deer, observed shifts in their distribution as development progressed were toward less‐preferred and presumably less‐suitable habitats.

Projections of polar bear (Ursus maritimus) sea ice habitat distribution in the polar basin during the 21st century were developed to understand the consequences of anticipated sea ice reductions on polar bear populations. We used location data from satellite‐collared polar bears and environmental data (e.g., bathymetry, distance to coastlines, and sea ice) collected from 1985 to 1995 to build resource selection functions (RSFs). RSFs described habitats that polar bears preferred in summer, autumn, winter, and spring. When applied to independent data from 1996 to 2006, the RSFs consistently identified habitats most frequently used by polar bears. We applied the RSFs to monthly maps of 21st‐century sea ice concentration projected by 10 general circulation models (GCMs) used in the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report, under the A1B greenhouse gas forcing scenario. Despite variation in their projections, all GCMs indicated habitat losses in the polar basin during the 21st century. Losses in the highest‐valued RSF habitat (optimal habitat) were greatest in the southern seas of the polar basin, especially the Chukchi and Barents seas, and least along the Arctic Ocean shores of Banks Island to northern Greenland. Mean loss of optimal polar bear habitat was greatest during summer; from an observed 1.0 million km2 in 1985–1995 (baseline) to a projected multi‐model mean of 0.32 million km2 in 2090–2099 (−68% change). Projected winter losses of polar bear habitat were less: from 1.7 million km2 in 1985–1995 to 1.4 million km2 in 2090–2099 (−17% change). Habitat losses based on GCM multi‐model means may be conservative; simulated rates of habitat loss during 1985–2006 from many GCMs were less than the actual observed rates of loss. Although a reduction in the total amount of optimal habitat will likely reduce polar bear populations, exact relationships between habitat losses and population demographics remain unknown. Density and energetic effects may become important as polar bears make long‐distance annual migrations from traditional winter ranges to remnant high‐latitude summer sea ice. These impacts will likely affect specific sex and age groups differently and may ultimately preclude bears from seasonally returning to their traditional ranges.

As habitat loss and fragmentation increase across ungulate ranges, identifying and prioritizing migration routes for conservation has taken on new urgency. Here we present a general framework using the Brownian bridge movement model (BBMM) that: (1) provides a probabilistic estimate of the migration routes of a sampled population, (2) distinguishes between route segments that function as stopover sites vs. those used primarily as movement corridors, and (3) prioritizes routes for conservation based upon the proportion of the sampled population that uses them. We applied this approach to a migratory mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) population in a pristine area of southwest Wyoming, USA, where 2000 gas wells and 1609 km of pipelines and roads have been proposed for development. Our analysis clearly delineated where migration routes occurred relative to proposed development and provided guidance for on-the-ground conservation efforts. Mule deer migration routes were characterized by a series of stopover sites where deer spent most of their time, connected by movement corridors through which deer moved quickly. Our findings suggest management strategies that differentiate between stopover sites and movement corridors may be warranted. Because some migration routes were used by more mule deer than others, proportional level of use may provide a reasonable metric by which routes can be prioritized for conservation. The methods we outline should be applicable to a wide range of species that inhabit regions where migration routes are threatened or poorly understood.

Summary1. Impermeable barriers to migration can greatly constrain the set of possible routes and ranges used by migrating animals. For ungulates, however, many forms of development are semi-permeable, and making informed management decisions about their potential impacts to the persistence of migration routes is difficult because our knowledge of how semi-permeable barriers affect migratory behaviour and function is limited. 2. Here, we propose a general framework to advance the understanding of barrier effects on ungulate migration by emphasizing the need to (i) quantify potential barriers in terms that allow behavioural thresholds to be considered, (ii) identify and measure behavioural responses to semi-permeable barriers and (iii) consider the functional attributes of the migratory landscape (e.g. stopovers) and how the benefits of migration might be reduced by behavioural changes. 3. We used global position system (GPS) data collected from two subpopulations of mule deer Odocoileus hemionus to evaluate how different levels of gas development influenced migratory behaviour, including movement rates and stopover use at the individual level, and intensity of use and width of migration route at the population level. We then characterized the functional landscape of migration routes as either stopover habitat or movement corridors and examined how the observed behavioural changes affected the functionality of the migration route in terms of stopover use. 4. We found migratory behaviour to vary with development intensity. Our results suggest that mule deer can migrate through moderate levels of development without any noticeable effects on migratory behaviour. However, in areas with more intensive development, animals often detoured from established routes, increased their rate of movement and reduced stopover use, while the overall use and width of migration routes decreased. 5. Synthesis and applications. In contrast to impermeable barriers that impede animal movement, semi-permeable barriers allow animals to maintain connectivity between their seasonal ranges. Our results identify the mechanisms (e.g. detouring, increased movement rates, reduced stopover use) by which semi-permeable barriers affect the functionality of ungulate migration routes and emphasize that the management of semi-permeable barriers may play a key role in the conservation of migratory ungulate populations.

Conversion of native winter range into producing gas fields can affect the habitat selection and distribution patterns of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). Understanding how levels of human activity influence mule deer is necessary to evaluate mitigation measures and reduce indirect habitat loss to mule deer on winter ranges with natural gas development. We examined how 3 types of well pads with varying levels of vehicle traffic influenced mule deer habitat selection in western Wyoming during the winters of 2005–2006 and 2006–2007. Well pad types included producing wells without a liquids gathering system (LGS), producing wells with a LGS, and well pads with active directional drilling. We used 36,699 Global Positioning System locations collected from a sample (n = 31) of adult (>1.5‐yr‐old) female mule deer to model probability of use as a function of traffic level and other habitat covariates. We treated each deer as the experimental unit and developed a population‐level resource selection function for each winter by averaging coefficients among models for individual deer. Model coefficients and predictive maps for both winters suggested that mule deer avoided all types of well pads and selected areas further from well pads with high levels of traffic. Accordingly, impacts to mule deer could probably be reduced through technology and planning that minimizes the number of well pads and amount of human activity associated with them. Our results suggested that indirect habitat loss may be reduced by approximately 38–63% when condensate and produced water are collected in LGS pipelines rather than stored at well pads and removed via tanker trucks. The LGS seemed to reduce long‐term (i.e., production phase) indirect habitat loss to wintering mule deer, whereas drilling in crucial winter range created a short‐term (i.e., drilling phase) increase in deer disturbance and indirect habitat loss. Recognizing how mule deer respond to different types of well pads and traffic regimes may improve the ability of agencies and industry to estimate cumulative effects and quantify indirect habitat losses associated with different development scenarios.