Response of moose to a high‐density road network

Zeller, Katherine A.; DeStefano, Stephen

doi:10.1002/jwmg.21459

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Warmer winters associated with climate change are hypothesized to negatively influence moose survival (Murray et al 2006, Lenarz et al 2009, Monteith et al 2015, Severud et al 2015). Moreover, temperature‐dependent habitat selection increases moose fitness by reducing energy expenditure on thermoregulation (Wattles et al 2018). We observed a positive correlation between moose abundance and areas with increasing elevation and days with snow cover (PC1) but a weak negative relationship with proximity to large bodies of water (PC3).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and opportunities for estimating abundance of a low‐density moose population

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monitoring large herbivores across their core range has been readily accomplished using aerial surveys and traditional distance sampling. But for peripheral populations, where individuals may occur in patchy, low‐density populations, precise estimation of population size and trend remains logistically and statistically challenging. For moose (Alces alces) along their southern range margin in northern New York, USA, we sought robust estimates of moose distribution, abundance, and population trend (2016–2019) using a combination of aerial surveys (line transect distance‐sampling), repeated surveys in areas where moose were known to occur to boost the number of detections, and density surface modeling (DSM) with spatial covariates. We achieved a precise estimate of density (95% CI = 0.00–0.29 moose/km2) for this small population (656 moose, 95% CI = 501–859), which was patchily distributed across a large and heavily forested region (the 24,280‐km2 Adirondack Park). Local moose abundance was positively related to active timber management, elevation, and snow cover, and negatively related to large bodies of water. As expected, moose abundance in this peripheral population was low relative to its core range in other northern forest states. Yet, in areas where abundance was greatest, moose densities in New York approached those where epizootics of winter tick (Dermacentor albipictus) have been reported, underscoring the need for effective and efficient monitoring. By incorporating autocorrelation in observations and landscape covariates, DSM provided spatially explicit estimates of moose density with greater precision and no additional field effort over traditional distance sampling. Combined with repeated surveys of areas with known moose occurrence to achieve viable sample sizes, DSM is a useful tool for effectively monitoring low density and patchy populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and opportunities for estimating abundance of a low‐density moose population

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Smaller body sizes are beneficial in warmer climates, but are also associated with lower reproductive rates in moose (Hoy et al., 2018; Pekins, 2020; Sand, 1996). Similarly, moving to thermal refuges might require crossing roads (Wattles et al., 2018b), which poses a significant mortality risk for moose (Musante et al., 2010). Accordingly, as temperatures increase with climate change, moose may be able to adapt in multiple ways, but this plasticity could also constrain their population sizes or vital rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Smaller body sizes are beneficial in warmer climates, but are also associated with lower reproductive rates in moose (Hoy et al, 2018;Pekins, 2020;Sand, 1996). Similarly, moving to thermal refuges might require crossing roads (Wattles et al, 2018b), which poses a significant mortality risk for moose (Musante et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this behaviour presents a trade‐off between thermoregulation and foraging in early successional forests, which are optimal for foraging but tend to be less shaded and warmer (van Beest et al., 2012). Moving between thermal refuges and foraging habitat can also increase energy expenditure and mortality risk (e.g., in Alpine ibex: Brivio et al., 2019; Mason et al., 2017), such as road crossing (Wattles et al., 2018b). Further, future temperatures could exceed moose thermal optima even within thermal refuges, because the differences in temperature between habitat types can be relatively small (Lowe et al., 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Habitat use as indicator of adaptive capacity to climate change

Teitelbaum

Sirén

Coffel

et al. 2021

Diversity and Distributions

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Populations of cold‐adapted species at the trailing edges of geographic ranges are particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of climate change from the combination of exposure to warm temperatures and high sensitivity to heat. Many of these species are predicted to decline under future climate scenarios, but they could persist if they can adapt to warming climates either physiologically or behaviourally. We aim to understand local variation in contemporary habitat use and use this information to identify signs of adaptive capacity. We focus on moose (Alces alces), a charismatic species of conservation and public interest. Location The northeastern United States, along the trailing edge of the moose geographic range in North America. Methods We compiled data on occurrences and habitat use of moose from remote cameras and GPS collars across the northeastern United States. We use these data to build habitat suitability models at local and regional spatial scales and then to predict future habitat suitability under climate change. We also use fine‐scale GPS data to model relationships between habitat use and temperature on a daily temporal scale and to predict future habitat use. Results We find that habitat suitability for moose will decline under a range of climate change scenarios. However, moose across the region differ in their use of climatic and habitat space, indicating that they could exhibit adaptive capacity. We also find evidence for behavioural responses to weather, where moose increase their use of forested wetland habitats in warmer places and/or times. Main conclusions Our results suggest that there will be significant shifts in moose distribution due to climate change. However, if there is spatial variation in thermal tolerance, trailing‐edge populations could adapt to climate change. We highlight that prioritizing certain habitats for conservation (i.e., thermal refuges) could be crucial for this adaptation.

show abstract

“…Perhaps the most effective mechanism for influencing ungulate space use and hunter harvest, however, is managing road access. Effects of roads and motorized vehicle access on ungulate distributions (Rowland et al 2005, Meisingset et al 2013, Montgomery et al 2013, Wattles et al 2018) and vulnerability to harvest (Unsworth et al 1993, Gratson and Whitman 2000 b , Plante et al 2017) are well‐documented. Together these researchers illuminate the pronounced ecological effects of land management and hunting on target and non‐target segments of ungulate populations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Landscape Characteristics on Hunter Space Use and Success

Rowland

Nielson²,

Wisdom

et al. 2021

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sport hunting of ungulates is a predominant recreational pursuit and the primary tool for managing their populations in North America and beyond, given its influence on ungulate distributions, social organization, and population performance. Similarly, land management, such as motorized vehicle access, influences ungulate distributions during and outside hunting seasons. Although research on ungulate responses to hunting and land use is widespread, knowledge gaps persist about space use of hunters and what landscape features discriminate among hunt types and between successful and unsuccessful hunters. We used telemetry location data from hunters (n = 341) to estimate space use from 2008–2013 during 3 types of controlled, 5‐day hunts for antlered mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and elk (Cervus canadensis) in northeastern Oregon, USA: archery elk, rifle deer, and rifle elk. To evaluate space use, we developed utilization distributions for each hunter, created core areas (50% contours) for groups of hunters, and derived several metrics of space‐use overlap between successful and unsuccessful hunters. We also modeled predictors of space use using resource utilization functions with beta regression and stepwise model building. Hunter space use was compressed, with even the largest core area (unsuccessful rifle elk hunters) encompassing <16% (1,178 ha) of the area. We found strong similarities in space use of rifle hunters compared to archers, and core areas of successful hunters were markedly smaller than those of unsuccessful hunters (e.g., truex ̅ = 104 ha vs. 681 ha, respectively, for archers). Percentage cover and distance from open roads were the most consistent covariates in the 6 final models (successful vs. unsuccessful for each of 3 hunts) but with different signs. For example, predicted use of archery and rifle elk hunters increased with cover but decreased for rifle deer hunters. Although the same covariates were in the final models for unsuccessful and successful rifle elk hunters, their negligible spatial overlap suggested they sought those features in different locales, a pattern also documented for rifle deer hunters. Our models performed well (Spearman's rank correlation coefficients = 0.99 for 5 of 6 models), reflecting their utility for managing hunters and landscapes. Our results suggest that strategic management of open roads and forest cover can benefit managers seeking to balance hunter opportunity and satisfaction with harvest objectives, especially for species of special concern such as mule deer, and that differences in space use among hunter groups should be accounted for in hunting season designs. © 2021 The Wildlife Society. This article has been contributed to by US Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

show abstract

Response of moose to a high‐density road network

Cited by 12 publications

References 36 publications

Challenges and opportunities for estimating abundance of a low‐density moose population

Challenges and opportunities for estimating abundance of a low‐density moose population

Habitat use as indicator of adaptive capacity to climate change

Influence of Landscape Characteristics on Hunter Space Use and Success

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About