Red deer behavioural response to hiking activity: a study using camera traps

Abstract

With increasing levels of outdoor recreation activities, consequences for wildlife through interactions with recreationists are highly variable. Behavioural changes in wildlife are one potential consequence of interactions with outdoor recreationists. In ungulate populations, vigilance and flight responses are well-known antipredator behaviours, and an increase in their level indicates a more intense stress level which, ultimately, can have consequences for animal fitness. In Scotland, the geographical distribution of red deer (Cervus elaphus) overlaps greatly with areas used for popular outdoor activities such as hill walking. In this piece of research, we studied red deer time allocation, vigilance, and flight behaviours near a popular hiking path using camera traps. We positioned the cameras in transects at different distances (25, 75, and 150 m) from the path and recorded hiking activity using an automated people counter. Red deer behaviour was categorized from photo analysis as (1) no response (e.g. feeding and resting), ( 2) vigilant (i.e. upright head position), and (3) flight response. We also investigated demographic variables (group size and sex) and the direction of red deer movement relative to the trail. We used generalised linear mixed models to analyse behaviour in relation to the distance from the hiking track, hiking activity, time of the day, demographic, and environmental variables. We did not find an increase in vigilance or flight behaviour in relation to the distance from the hiking path or the hiking activity. These results suggest that red deer, in our study area, are habituated to the presence of hikers and may spatially avoid areas close to the hiking path instead of displaying costintensive behaviour (i.e. flight or vigilance behaviour).

Mammal responses to human recreation depend on landscape context

“…Several different methods of directly quantifying recreation pressure have been attempted in the literature, such as the number and type of human activities detected by camera trap photos [ 12 ], or trail counters [ 35 ]. However, such methods can be labour intensive and require camera traps or counters to be set on recreation trails to obtain accurate measures, and thus risk potential tampering or concerns about privacy [ 56 ].…”

“…(2023) [ 33 ] found that human presence had different impact on wildlife nocturnality depending on the species. Similarly, human disturbance can lead to cascading effects that can alter community structure and ecosystem functioning such as inter-species interactions [ 34 , 35 ]. Long-term exposure to human disturbance can impact animal fitness (i.e., survival and reproduction success) [ 36 , 37 ].…”

Quantifying impacts of recreation on elk (Cervus canadensis) using novel modeling approaches

“…Elsewhere, elk have been less likely to inhabit areas of greater human presence, but more likely to inhabit areas with a greater human footprint (Suraci et al, 2021). Prior studies also indicate that elk are sensitive to recreation (Marion et al, 2021(Marion et al, , 2022Stankowich, 2008;Wisdom et al, 2018), and recreation is increasing rapidly in the Cascades (Balk, 2018;Nelson & Bailey, 2021). This is problematic given that elk provide recreational and economic opportunities such as viewing and hunting (Chapagain & Poudyal, 2020;Donovan & Champ, 2009), are important prey for large carnivores (Clark et al, 2014), and exert substantial top-down pressures on vegetation via herbivory (Kaye et al, 2005;Peinetti et al, 2001).…”