Oecologia

, Volume 164, Issue 1, pp 265–275 | Cite as

Are migrant and resident elk (Cervus elaphus) exposed to similar forage and predation risk on their sympatric winter range?

  • Barry G. Robinson
  • Mark Hebblewhite
  • Evelyn H. Merrill
Ecosystem ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

Partially migratory populations, where one portion of a population conducts seasonal migrations (migrants) while the other remains on a single range (residents), are common in ungulates. Studies that assess trade-offs between migratory strategies typically compare the amount of predation risk and forage resources migrants and residents are exposed to only while on separate ranges and assume both groups intermix completely while on sympatric ranges. Here we provide one of the first tests of this assumption by comparing the amount of overlap between home ranges of GPS-collared migrant and resident elk and fine-scale exposure to wolf predation risk and forage biomass at telemetry locations on a sympatric winter range in west-central Alberta, Canada. Overlap between migrant and resident home ranges increased throughout the winter, and both groups were generally intermixed and exposed to equal forage biomass. During the day, both migrants and residents avoided predation risk by remaining in areas far from timber with high human activity, which wolves avoided. However, at night wolves moved onto the grasslands close to humans and away from timber. Resident elk were consistently closer to areas of human activity and further from timber than migrants, possibly because of a habituation to humans. As a result, resident elk were exposed to higher night-time predation risk than migrants. Our study does not support the assumption that migrant and resident elk are exposed to equal predation risk on their sympatric range when human presence alters predation risk dynamics and habituation to humans is unequal between migratory strategies.

Keywords

Habituation Home-range overlap Partial migration Ungulates Wolf predation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The project was funded by the Alberta Conservation Association, Alberta Cooperative Conservation Research Unit, Alberta Enhanced Career Development, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, the Canon National Parks Science Scholarship for the Americas (MH), Center for Mathematical Biology, Challenge Grants in Biodiversity, Foothills Model Forest, Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Marmot, Mountain Equipment Co-op Environment Fund, National Sciences and Engineering Research Council CRO grant no. 261091-02, Parks Canada, Patagonia, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Sundre Forest Products Limited, Weyerhauser Inc., and the University of Alberta. We thank the Ya Ha Tinda Ranch staff and the biologists of Parks Canada and Alberta Fish and Wildlife. For their valuable feedback during the preparation of this manuscript, we thank C. Cassady St. Clair, R. Hudson, and C. White. Finally, we thank B. van Moorter for helping us develop code in R to calculate the volume of intersection index.

References

  1. Albon SD, Langvatn R (1992) Plant phenology and the benefits of migration in a temperate ungulate. Oikos 65:502–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andriaensen F, Dhondt AA (1990) Population dynamics and partial migration of the European robin (Erithacus rubecula) in different habitats. J Anim Ecol 59:1077–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atwood TC, Gese EM, Kunkel KE (2009) Spatial partitioning of predation risk in a multiple predator–multiple prey system. J Wildl Manag 73:876–884. doi:10.2193/2008-325 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball JP, Nordengren C, Wallin K (2001) Partial migration by large ungulate: characteristics of seasonal moose Alces alces ranges in northern Sweden. Wildl Biol 7:39–47Google Scholar
  5. Basille M, Herfindal I, Santin-Janin H, Linnell JDC, Odden J, Andersen R, Høgda KA, Gaillard J-M (2009) What shapes Eurasian lynx distribution in human dominated landscapes: selecting prey or avoiding people? Ecography 32:683–691. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05712.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berger J (2004) The last mile: how to sustain long-distance migration in mammals. Conserv Biol 18:320–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beschta RL, Ripple WJ (2007) Wolves, elk, and aspen in the winter range of Jasper National Park, Canada. Can J For Res 37:1873–1885. doi:10.1139/X07-017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beyer H (2006) Wolves, elk and willow in Yellowstone National Park. MSc thesis. University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  9. Caro T (2005) Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  10. Childress MJ, Lung MA (2003) Predation risk, gender and group size effect: does elk vigilance depend on the behaviour of conspecifics? Anim Behav 66:389–398. doi:10.1006/anbe.2003.2217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE, Albon SD (1982) Red deer: behavior and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  12. Creel S, Winnie JA, Maxell B, Hamlin K, Creel M (2005) Elk alter habitat selection as an antipredator response to wolves. Ecology 86:3387–3397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duong T (2008) KS: Kernel smoothing. R package version 1.5.9Google Scholar
  14. Fieberg J, Kochanny CO (2005) Quantifying home-range overlap: the importance of the utilization distribution. J Wildl Manag 69:1346–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fischhoff IR, Sundaresan SR, Cordingley J, Rubenstein DI (2007) Habitat use and movement of plains zebra (Equus burchelli) in response to predation danger from lions. Behav Ecol 18:725–729. doi:10.1093/beheco/arm036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fryxell JM, Greever J, Sinclair ARE (1988) Why are migratory ungulates so abundant? Am Nat 131:781–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gitzen RA, Millspaugh JJ, Kernohan BJ (2006) Bandwidth selection for fixed-kernel analysis of animal distributions. J Wildl Manag 70:1334–1344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hebblewhite M (2006) Linking predation risk and forage dynamics to landscape-scale ungulate population dynamics. MSc thesis. University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  19. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH (2007) Multiscale wolf predation risk for elk: does migration reduce risk? Oceologica 152:377–387. doi:10.1007/s00442-007-0661-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH (2008) Modelling wildlife-human relationships for social species with mixed-effects resource selection functions. J Appl Ecol 45:834–844. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01466.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH (2009) Trade-offs between predation risk and forage differ between migrant strategies in a migratory ungulate. Ecology 90(12):3445–3454Google Scholar
  22. Hebblewhite M, Pletscher DH (2002) Effects of elk group size on predation by wolves. Can J Zool 80:800–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hebblewhite M, Paquet PC, Pletscher DH, Lessard RB, Callaghan CJ (2004) Development and application of a ratio estimator to estimate wolf killing rates and variance in a multiple prey system. Wildl Soc Bull 31:933–946Google Scholar
  24. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH, McDonald TL (2005a) Spatial decomposition of predation risk using resource selection functions: an example of wolf-elk predator-prey systems. Oikos 111:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hebblewhite M, White CA, Nietvelt CG, McKenzie JA, Hurd TE, Fryxell JM, Bayley SE, Paquet PC (2005b) Human activity mediates a trophic cascade caused by wolves. Ecology 86:2135–2144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH, Morgantini LE, White CA, Allen JR, Bruns E, Thurston L, Hurd TE (2006) Is the migratory behavior of montane elk herds in peril? The case of Alberta’s Ya Ha Tinda elk herd. Wildl Soc Bull 34:1280–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hebblewhite M, Merrill EH, McDermid G (2008) A multi-scale test of the forage maturation hypothesis in a partially migratory ungulate population. Ecol Monogr 78:141–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Houston AI, McNamara JN, Hutchinson JMC (1993) General results concerning the trade-off between gaining energy and avoiding predation. Philos Trans R Soc Lon B Ser 341:375–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jenkins KJ, Starkey EE (1982) Habitat use by Roosevelt elk in the unmanaged forests of the Hoh Valley, Washington. J Wildl Manag 48:642–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaitala A, Kaitala V, Lundberg P (1993) A theory of partial migration. Am Nat 142:59–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kauffman MJ, Varley N, Smith DW, Stahler DR, MacNulty DR, Boyce MS (2007) Landscape heterogeneity shapes predation in a newly restored predator–prey system. Ecol Lett 10:690–700. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01059.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Kittle AM, Fryxell JM, Desy GE, Hamr J (2008) The scale-dependent impact of wolf predation risk on resource selection by three sympatric ungulates. Oecologia 157:163–175. doi:10.1007/s00442-008-1051-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Kjellander P, Gaillard J-M, Hewison M, Liberg O (2004) Predation risk and longevity influence variation in fitness of female roe deer (Capreolus capreolus L.). Proc R Soc of Lond B Ser 271:S338–S340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kunkel KE, Pletscher DH (2000) Habitat factors affecting vulnerability of moose to predation by wolves in southeastern British Columbia. Can J Zool 78:150–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Loudon ASI, McNeilly AS, Milne JA (1983) Nutrition and lactational control of fertility in red deer. Nat 302:145–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lundberg P (1987) Partial bird migration and evolutionarily stable strategies. J Theor Biol 125:351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lundberg P (1988) The evolution of partial migration in birds. Trends Ecol Evol 3:172–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. McInenly LE (2003) Seasonal effects of defoliation on montane Rough Fescue (Festuca campestris Rydb.). Dissertation, University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  40. McKenzie JA (2001) The demographic and nutritional benefits of urban habitat use by elk. MSc thesis. University of Guelph, GuelphGoogle Scholar
  41. Mech LD, Boitani L (2003) Wolves: behavior, ecology and conservation. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Millspaugh JJ, Gitzen RA, Kernohan BJ, Larson MA, Clay CC (2004) Comparability of three analytical techniques to asses joint space use. Wildl Soc Bull 32:148–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Morgantini LE (1995) The Ya Ha Tinda: an ecological overview. Canadian Heritage, CalgaryGoogle Scholar
  44. Pérez-Tris J, Tellería JL (2002) Migratory and sedentary blackcaps in sympatric non- breeding grounds: implications for the evolution of avian migration. J Anim Ecol 71:211–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pigden PJ (1953) The relation of lignin, cellulose, protein, starch and ether extract to the “curing” of range grasses. Can J Agric Sci 33:364–378Google Scholar
  46. Pulliam HR (1973) On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol 38:419–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  48. Ripple WJ, Beschta RL (2006) Linking a cougar decline, trophic cascade, and a catastrophic regime shift in Zion National Park. Biol Conserv 133:397–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Robinson BG (2009) Foraging-predator avoidance trade-offs mad by migrant and resident elk (Cervus elaphus) on their sympatric winter range. MSc thesis. University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  50. Seaman DE, Millspaugh JJ, Kernohan BJ, Brundige GC, Raedeke KJ, Gitzen RA (1999) Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates. J Wild Manag 63:739–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Seidel KD (1992) Statistical properties and applications of a new measure of joint space use for wildlife. MSc thesis. University of Washington, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  52. Spaedtke HR (2009) Aversive conditioning on horseback: a management alternative for grassland systems threatened by sedentary elk populations. MSc thesis. University of Alberta, EdmontonGoogle Scholar
  53. Swingland IR (1983) Intraspecific differences in movements. In: Swingland IR, Greenwood PJ (eds) The ecology of animal movement. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 102–115Google Scholar
  54. Taylor CZ, Norris DR (2007) Predicting conditions for migration: effects of density dependence and habitat quality. Biol Lett 3:280–283. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0053 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Theuerkauf J, Jedrzejewski W, Schmidt K, Gula R (2003a) Spatiotemporal segregation of wolves from humans in the Bialowieza Forest (Poland). J Wildl Manag 67:706–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Theuerkauf J, Jedrzejewski W, Schmidt K, Okarma H, Ruczynski I, Sniezko S, Gula R (2003b) Daily patterns and duration of wolf activity in the Bialowieza Forest, Poland. J Mammal 84:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Thouless CR (1990) Feeding competition between red deer hinds. Anim Behav 40:105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tucker CJ (1979) Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation. Remote Sens Environ 8:127–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Valeix M, Fritz H, Loveridge AJ, Davidson Z, Hunt JE, Murindagomo F, Macdonald DW (2009) Does the risk of encountering lions influence African herbivore behaviour at watering holes? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1483–1494. doi:10.1007/s00265-009-0760-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. von Haartman L (1968) The evolution of resident versus migratory habit in birds: some considerations. Ornis Fenn 45:1–7Google Scholar
  61. Weckerly FW (1999) Social bonding and aggression in female Roosevelt elk. Can J Zool 77:1379–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Worton BJ (1989) Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home range studies. Ecology 70:164–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barry G. Robinson
    • 1
  • Mark Hebblewhite
    • 1
    • 2
  • Evelyn H. Merrill
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Wildlife Biology Program, College of Forestry and ConservationUniversity of MontanaMissoulaUSA

Personalised recommendations