Movement and Spread of a Founding Population of Reintroduced Elk (<i>Cervus elaphus</i>) in Ontario, Canada

Yott, Adelle; Rosatte, Rick; Schaefer, James A.; Hamr, Josef; Fryxell, John M.

doi:10.1111/j.1526-100x.2009.00639.x

Cited by 48 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, both holding time and year of study were strong predictors of elk survival in Ontario. Increasingly, the method of release is recognized as an important factor in the success of wildlife restoration programs, with soft release involving holding animals through an acclimation period being beneficial (Haydon et al ; Yott et al ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only models with <5Δ i are provided. the success of wildlife restoration programs, with soft release involving holding animals through an acclimation period being beneficial (Haydon et al 2008;Yott et al 2010). In Ontario, the length of time that elk were held prior to release varied from 16 weeks in the LHNS region to no acclimation in the BNH region, following an escape/release from the enclosure the day they were placed in the holding pen.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Patterns of Mortality and Factors Influencing Survival of a Recently Restored Elk Population in Ontario, Canada

McIntosh

Rosatte

Hamr

et al. 2014

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined patterns of mortality and determinants of survival among elk recently restored to four sites in Ontario, Canada (1998Canada ( -2005. We predicted that: (1) elk located in release sites closer to the core of their historic range would have higher survival; (2) survival would increase as an animal's time and experience on the landscape increased; and (3) survival rates would decline as animals moved farther away from the release site. During the study, 443 elk were radiocollared and released; 218 mortalities were documented. Predation by wolves was the most important proximate cause of mortality, followed by death due to injuries from translocation and/or capture myopathy, accidents, emaciation, poaching, and Parelaphostrongylus tenuis infection. Overall, annual survival of elk across Ontario ranged from 0.45 (0.37-0.53) to 0.81 (0.66-0.90), with rates being lowest in the years immediately following release and highest in the final years of the study; this pattern was due to high initial mortality from translocation injuries and/or capture myopathy and possibly lack of familiarity with novel habitat. Model-averaged hazards further support this finding, as the most important factor influencing elk survival was the length of holding period, with elk released after limited holding being less likely to survive than those held for longer periods. Our results suggest that mortalities caused by capture myopathy and transportation-related injuries are important sources of risk for translocated elk. The method of introduction to the novel landscape and behavior in the first year should be accommodated via soft-release and appropriate release areas.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Mortality and Factors Influencing Survival of a Recently Restored Elk Population in Ontario, Canada

McIntosh

Rosatte

Hamr

et al. 2014

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To facilitate this unification, we need tools that can provide simultaneous information about the movement, energy expenditure and behavior of the studied organisms, and the environmental conditions they Acceleration, behavior and movement ecology encounter en route. The primary focus to date has been on integrating movement and environmental data (Boettiger et al, 2011;Dalziel et al, 2008;Fryxell et al, 2008;Getz and Saltz, 2008;Sapir et al, 2011;Vanak et al, 2010;Yott et al, 2011). The link between movement, energy expenditure and behavior has been tested less often in free-ranging animals in the wild (but see Green et al, 2009a;Sapir et al, 2010;Wilson et al, 2006).…”

Section: Movement Ecology and The Integration Of Ecology Behavior Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using tri-axial acceleration data to identify behavioral modes of free-ranging animals: general concepts and tools illustrated for griffon vultures

Nathan

Spiegel

Fortmann-Roe

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Biology

399

530

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Movement ecology and the integration of ecology, behavior and biomechanicsRecent advances in mechanistic modeling and tracking technology have enriched our capacity to disentangle the key parameters affecting movement processes and to characterize movement patterns accurately. These advances set the stage for integrating the four existing paradigms for studying movement -the random, biomechanical, cognitive and optimality approaches ( Fig.1) -in the form of a new cohesive 'movement ecology' framework . The biomechanical paradigm elucidates the machineries that enable individuals or propagules to move, including their physical mechanics, energetics and physiology, and thus focuses on the study of the motion capacity of individual organisms. The cognitive paradigm explores the mechanisms of gathering, processing and responding to the environment in a way that produces nonrandom movement in time and space and thus focuses on the navigation capacity of the individual. The optimality paradigm examines the relative efficacy of different movement strategies in optimizing some particular fitness currencies (e.g. energy gain or survival) over ecological or evolutionary timescales, and thus focuses mostly on the external factors affecting the internal state of the individual. The random paradigm analyzes the fit of observed animal tracks to various random walk models to assess, for example, search efficiency and thus focuses exclusively on the movement patterns. The movement ecology framework explicitly combines these basic components of movement and the links among them ( Fig.1) , which can be identified across all movement types and taxonomic groups . Thus, this framework offers a template for transdisciplinary integration of the four existing movement research paradigms ( Fig.1) to create jointly the new paradigm of movement ecology, devoted to the comprehensive study of all biological (whole-organism) movement phenomena. Movement ecology thus aims at unifying organismal movement research and aiding the development of a general theory of wholeorganism movements . To facilitate this unification, we need tools that can provide simultaneous information about the movement, energy expenditure and behavior of the studied organisms, and the environmental conditions they SummaryIntegrating biomechanics, behavior and ecology requires a mechanistic understanding of the processes producing the movement of animals. This calls for contemporaneous biomechanical, behavioral and environmental data along movement pathways. A recently formulated unifying movement ecology paradigm facilitates the integration of existing biomechanics, optimality, cognitive and random paradigms for studying movement. We focus on the use of tri-axial acceleration (ACC) data to identify behavioral modes of GPS-tracked free-ranging wild animals and demonstrate its application to study the movements of griffon vultures (Gyps fulvus, Hablizl 1783). In particular, we explore a selection of nonlinear and decision tree methods that include support vector mach...

show abstract

“…Extensive dispersal away from the release site is among the main obstacles that reduce the likelihood of translocation success (Moehrenschlager & MacDonald ; Tuberville et al ; Kingsbury & Attum ; Roe et al ; Terhune et al ; Yott et al ). When animals are hard‐released (without any prior experience or acclimation to their new environment), they often immediately undergo long, linear, dispersal away from the release site, which suggests that the animals are unfamiliar with the release site or are homing to their original activity range (Bright & Morris ; Reinert & Rupert ; Plummer & Mills ; Moehrenschlager & MacDonald ; Kingsbury & Attum ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Extensive movement is also undesirable for translocations because release sites are often chosen for their high habitat quality and prey density, or reduced predator abundance and anthropogenic disturbance (Pinter-Wollman et al 2009;Roe et al 2010;Yott et al 2010). There is often a negative relationship between release-site dispersal distance of hard-released animals and survival, with extensive movements leading to greater predation risk and deadly anthropogenic encounters (Jones & Witham 1990;Eastridge & Clark 2001;Moehrenschlager & MacDonald 2003;Sullivan et al 2004;Butler et al 2005;Pinter-Wollman et al 2009;Attum et al 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Movement of translocated turtles according to translocation method and habitat structure

Attum

Cutshall

2015

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dispersal away from the release site is among the main obstacles that reduce translocation success. Scientists should therefore test a variety of translocation methods to reduce dispersal when moving wildlife between sites. The objective of this research was to examine how translocation method (hard-vs. soft-release) and habitat structure (continuous vs. patchy) affect movement of translocated turtles. A hard-release consists of releasing individuals to their new environment without any prior acclimation, whereas a soft-release forces animals to spend time at the release site prior to release. Our results suggest that the most effective translocation technique depends upon habitat structure. A soft-release was effective in minimizing post-release dispersal of translocated turtles in a continuous lotic habitat as there was no difference in the movement of soft-released and resident turtles. However, hard-released turtles undergo extensive movement when translocated to a continuous lotic habitat as hard-released turtles had greater movement than resident turtles. When the release site consists of a patchy wetland complex, a hard-release translocation may be effective as there was no difference in the movement between resident and hard-released turtles. Our study suggests that both the habitat structure of the release site and translocation method play a role in the movement patterns of translocated wildlife. Semi-aquatic turtles or species with poor vagility may make better candidates for hard-release translocations in patchy habitats because these species may be less likely or unable to disperse long distances as result of their behavior, physiology, or the structure of the release site.

show abstract

Movement and Spread of a Founding Population of Reintroduced Elk (Cervus elaphus) in Ontario, Canada

Cited by 48 publications

References 55 publications

Patterns of Mortality and Factors Influencing Survival of a Recently Restored Elk Population in Ontario, Canada

Patterns of Mortality and Factors Influencing Survival of a Recently Restored Elk Population in Ontario, Canada

Using tri-axial acceleration data to identify behavioral modes of free-ranging animals: general concepts and tools illustrated for griffon vultures

Movement of translocated turtles according to translocation method and habitat structure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About