Habitats Occupied By Elk (<i>Cervus elaphus</i>) in Desert Grassland–Scrublands of Northwestern New Mexico

Bender, Louis C.; Baldwin, Roger A.; Piasecke, Jessica R.

doi:10.1894/0038-4909-57.4.361

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bender et al. () reported that elk ( Cervus canadensis ) in New Mexico foraged in shrub‐dominated sites, but that bed sites generally were under conifer trees in areas of greater overstory cover, and daytime that activity was avoided when temperatures exceeded thermal tolerance. In the Great Basin, ambient mid‐day temperatures often exceed 30°C and decreased movement of mule deer mid‐day—when temperatures were the hottest, in addition to greater use of tree cover—are consistent with behaviors that minimize costs associated with thermoregulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resource selection of mule deer in a shrub‐steppe ecosystem: influence of woodland distribution and animal behavior

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ungulates inhabiting arid ecosystems are reliant on productive forb and shrub communities during summer months to meet nutritional demands for survival and reproduction. In the western United States, expansion of woodland vegetation into shrub-dominated communities and the potential loss of habitat are of concern with regard to animal populations reliant on robust sagebrush shrub and forb vegetation. We used mixed-effects logistic regression to model resource selection of female mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) during the summers of 2005-2008. We considered selection at two spatial scales, and during three daily activity periods (night, crepuscular, and mid-day) corresponding to resting and foraging. We evaluated habitat variables related to vegetation type, site productivity, terrain attributes, and fine-scale abundance of pinyon-juniper cover. Those attributes allowed us to account for variation in site productivity and animal behaviors that could obscure the true relationship between density of pinyonjuniper woodland and habitat use by mule deer. We detected observable differences in habitat use by mule deer among the three activity periods with significant differences in movement rates. Deer were most active during crepuscular periods corresponding with foraging activity, and least active mid-day when temperatures were highest. Summer habitat consisted of sites with high potential productivity, greater shrub abundance, and greater proximity to riparian areas. Deer avoided high levels of tree cover (>40% coverage) at all spatial and temporal scales, and in general selection declined with increasing pinyonjuniper cover, particularly during foraging periods. Nonetheless, mule deer selected areas with low to intermediate tree cover (10% to 40%) during resting periods and avoided areas of productive shrub and forb vegetation and riparian areas, when surrounded by denser stands of pinyon-juniper cover. These results emphasize the importance of productive shrub and forb vegetation to mule deer inhabiting semi-arid regions and suggest that low levels of tree cover are beneficial, especially during resting periods. Nevertheless, dense pinyon-juniper cover was generally avoided even in areas of high site productivity. These relationships lend support to the concern that increases in large, dense stands of pinyon-juniper reduce availability of summer habitat and alter patterns of resource selection for mule deer, a shrubdependent ungulate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resource selection of mule deer in a shrub‐steppe ecosystem: influence of woodland distribution and animal behavior

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of the within‐group variation we observed might have been due to variation in quality of summer ranges and movement between hunt zones prior to winter and behavioral traits that influence how individual elk optimized their foraging through factors such as social interactions, intolerance to disturbance, or group leadership. For example, cover and refugia can be more important for habitat selection than forage quality for some elk (Bender et al 2012, Spitz et al 2019). Genetic potential, injury, and morbidity caused by a variety of toxins, parasites, and diseases could also contribute to intra‐annual variation in IFBF (Davies 1979, Wolfe and Lance 1984, James et al 1992).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing productivity and recruitment of elk in northern New Mexico

Watkins¹,

Bergman

Dhaseleer³

et al. 2022

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Declining recruitment in elk (Cervus canadensis) populations is a common issue faced by managers in western North America. To better understand a decline in calf:female (≥1 yr) ratios in northern New Mexico, USA, we investigated the influence of bottom‐up factors on the condition and productivity of 1,885 adult (≥2 yr), female Rocky Mountain elk (C. c. nelsoni) harvested on the Vermejo Park Ranch during December and January, 2009–2016. We used ingesta‐free body fat (IFBF) estimated from kidney fat mass as a measure of condition. Based on maximum likelihood model selection, age, harvest date, hunt zone, pregnancy status, lactation status (as determined in Dec–Jan), June–August precipitation, and December–March mean temperature were important variables for predicting IFBF and field‐dressed mass (FDM). Age, IFBF, FDM, harvest date, and June–August precipitation were important variables for predicting conception date, pregnancy rate, and lactation rate. Pregnancy status and lactation status were also important for predicting lactation rate and pregnancy rate, respectively. Older females (≥12 yr) had progressively lower IFBF and FDM and later conception dates than prime females (3–11 yr) and their pregnancy rates declined an average of approximately 9%/year after age 11. The probability of pregnancy in prime females generally exceeded 0.95 when IFBF was ≥12% and FDM was ≥155 kg in late December and early January. Lactating females had lower IFBF, FDM, pregnancy rates, and later conception dates than nonlactating females. The mean IFBF of females harvested on 1 December was generally 2.3–2.7 percentage points higher than values of females harvested on 31 January within age and lactation categories. There was strong evidence that greater IFBF and FDM, higher pregnancy rates, and earlier conception dates in nonlactating females and all adult females were related to increased June–August precipitation (P < 0.01) during the conception year, but, with the exception of conception date, there was little evidence in lactating females. Greater conception year June–August precipitation (P = 0.04) and greater mean annual IFBF of nonlactating females (P < 0.01), but not conception year IFBF of lactating females (P = 0.94), were related to higher subsequent September calf:female ratios. There was also strong evidence that earlier mean conception dates and higher pregnancy rates of adult females (P < 0.01) were related to higher calf:female ratios. The only birth year variables at least moderately related to higher calf:female ratios were lower mean IFBF (P = 0.03) and FDM (P = 0.02) of adult females that likely reflected negative lactation effects. Based on our bivariate models, September calves/100 females increased 10.7 calves per 0.1 increase in the annual adult pregnancy rate and 10.9 calves per 10‐cm increase in June–August precipitation during the conception year. Our results indicated that bottom‐up factors related to summer precipitation the previous year and age structure of the adult female population had meaning...

show abstract

“…Additionally, Chung-MacCoubrey (2005) found that bat diversity was higher in pinyon and juniper woodlands than in nearby ponderosa pine forests in New Mexico, and that pinyon and juniper woodlands may provide important breeding habitat for several bat species. Pinyon and juniper ecosystems may also supply critical wintering habitat for mule deer by providing thermal and security cover (Bender et al 2007, Anderson et al 2012, and important habitat for elk (Cervus elaphus), by providing bedding sites (Bender et al 2012). Open pinyon and juniper stands with high understory herbaceous cover are particularly favorable to deer, elk, and many other wildlife species (Short and McCulloch 1977).…”

Section: Wildlife Use Of Pinyon and Juniper Woodlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of pinyon and juniper woodland reduction for wildlife in North America

Bombaci

Pejchar

2016

Forest Ecology and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pinyon and juniper (Pinus spp., Juniperus spp.) woodlands are expanding into shrublands and grasslands throughout much of western North America. Woodland reduction is frequently used to mitigate the effects of conifer encroachment on game species (e.g. mule deer Odocoileus hemionus) and shrub and grassland-obligate species (e.g. sage grouse Centrocercus spp.). Although these practices are widespread, previous studies on the effects of woodland reduction on animal communities have not yet been synthesized, making it difficult to set priorities for future research and practice. To address this gap, we first summarize the history of pinyon and juniper reduction in western North America and characterize known wildlife habitat associations in pinyon and juniper ecosystems. We then review and synthesize evidence from the scientific literature on wildlife responses to pinyon and juniper woodland reduction. We tallied the outcomes of these studies to determine the relative proportions of positive, negative, and nonsignificant responses by different taxonomic groups and functional groups. The majority (69%) of animal species responses to woodland reduction treatments were non-significant. However, particular groups of species (taxonomic and/or functional) were more likely to respond positively or negatively, depending on the woodland reduction treatment method. Unexpectedly, investigators often found non-significant or negative responses by ungulates to woodland reduction, and non-significant responses by sagebrush obligate species. However, few studies measured effects on sagebrush obligate species, which limits inference for this group. Indeed, our review demonstrates that the effects of woodland reduction are well-understood for only a subset of taxonomic groups (e.g. birds and small mammals); whereas other groups (e.g. reptiles and terrestrial invertebrates) are consistently under-studied. Further, a shortage of large-scale and long-term research limits our ability to fully understand spatial and temporal wildlife responses to woodland reduction. We encourage practitioners to design and implement pinyon and juniper reduction projects to experimentally assess the effects of these practices on both target and nontarget species. Adopting consistent monitoring protocols across projects would also facilitate greater understanding of how factors such as treatment type, size, location and duration result in positive or negative impacts to diverse wildlife of conservation concern.

show abstract

Habitats Occupied By Elk (Cervus elaphus) in Desert Grassland–Scrublands of Northwestern New Mexico

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

Resource selection of mule deer in a shrub‐steppe ecosystem: influence of woodland distribution and animal behavior

Resource selection of mule deer in a shrub‐steppe ecosystem: influence of woodland distribution and animal behavior

Factors influencing productivity and recruitment of elk in northern New Mexico

Consequences of pinyon and juniper woodland reduction for wildlife in North America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About