Large Omnivore Movements in Response to Surface Mining and Mine Reclamation

Abstract

Increasing global demands have resulted in widespread proliferation of resource extraction. Scientists are challenged to develop environmental mitigation strategies that meet societal expectations of resource supply, while achieving minimal disruption to sensitive “wilderness” species. We used GPS collar data from a 9-year study on grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) (n = 18) in Alberta, Canada to assess movements and associated space use during versus after mining. Grizzly bear home range overlap with mined areas was lower during active mining except for females with cubs, that also had shortest movements on active mines. However, both females with cubs and males made shorter steps when on/close to mines following mine closure and reclamation. Our results show differences in bear movement and space-use strategies, with individuals from a key population segment (females with cubs) appearing most adaptable to mining disturbance. Preserving patches of original habitat, reclaiming the landscape and minimizing the risk of direct human-induced mortality during and after development can help conserve bears and other wildlife on industrially modified landscapes.

Resource selection and movement of male moose in response to varying levels of off‐road vehicle access

“…), and surface mining (Cristescu et al. ). We hypothesized that moose have longer step lengths (i.e., displacement or movement away from disturbance) during the hunting season in areas with more trails.…”

“…However, after hunting season, this relationship was reversed, and moose step lengths decreased in areas with high trail densities. Animal step lengths have been applied to examine whether behaviors vary in response to anthropogenic features such as roads (Roever et al 2010, Chen and Koprowski 2016, Kite et al 2016), trails (Whittington et al 2004, and surface mining (Cristescu et al 2016). We hypothesized that moose have longer step lengths (i.e., displacement or movement away from disturbance) during the hunting season in areas with more trails.…”

Consequences of brown bear viewing tourism: A review

“…Nellemann et al 2007;Elfström et al 2014 a,b,c). For example, avoidance of bear viewing sites by mature males in British Columbia, Canada, created temporal refuges for subordinate bears, as well as enhanced feeding opportunities and cub safety (Nevin and Gilbert, 2005a;Elmeligi and Shultis, 2015;Cristescu et al, 2016). Peaks of activity of females with cubs occurred when neither people nor adult males were present, supporting the possibility that humans might not be perceived as entirely risk free (Nevin and Gilbert, 2005a).…”

Evaluating methods for estimating home ranges using GPS collars: A comparison using proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus)

“…Nevertheless, the comparison is valuable alongside other studies comparing home range methods in an increasing diversity of single species (e.g. Canis familiaris [32]; Carcharhinus melanopterus [71]; Papio hamadryas ursinus [44] ; Ursus arctos horribilis [72]). Furthermore, proboscis monkeys are a good model species for home ranging comparisons as they naturally occur in habitats that have sharp barriers (water-bodies) against which to test the edge-finding ability of different range estimators and, as one of the largest monkey species, are able to wear relatively large GPS collars that can collect high quality data over long periods of time.…”