A framework for understanding semi-permeable barrier effects on migratory ungulates

Summary 1. Impermeable barriers to migration can greatly constrain the set of possible routes and ranges used by migrating animals. For ungulates, however, many forms of development are semi-permeable, and making informed management decisions about their potential impacts to the persistence of migration routes is difficult because our knowledge of how semi-permeable barriers affect migratory behaviour and function is limited. 2. Here, we propose a general framework to advance the understanding of barrier effects on ungulate migration by emphasizing the need to (i) quantify potential barriers in terms that allow behavioural thresholds to be considered, (ii) identify and measure behavioural responses to semi-permeable barriers and (iii) consider the functional attributes of the migratory landscape (e.g. stopovers) and how the benefits of migration might be reduced by behavioural changes. 3. We used global position system (GPS) data collected from two subpopulations of mule deer Odocoileus hemionus to evaluate how different levels of gas development influenced migratory behaviour, including movement rates and stopover use at the individual level, and intensity of use and width of migration route at the population level. We then characterized the functional landscape of migration routes as either stopover habitat or movement corridors and examined how the observed behavioural changes affected the functionality of the migration route in terms of stopover use. 4. We found migratory behaviour to vary with development intensity. Our results suggest that mule deer can migrate through moderate levels of development without any noticeable effects on migratory behaviour. However, in areas with more intensive development, animals often detoured from established routes, increased their rate of movement and reduced stopover use, while the overall use and width of migration routes decreased. 5. Synthesis and applications. In contrast to impermeable barriers that impede animal movement, semi-permeable barriers allow animals to maintain connectivity between their seasonal ranges. Our results identify the mechanisms (e.g. detouring, increased movement rates, reduced stopover use) by which semi-permeable barriers affect the functionality of ungulate migration routes and emphasize that the management of semi-permeable barriers may play a key role in the conservation of migratory ungulate populations.

[1]  Markus Neteler,et al.  Partial migration in roe deer: migratory and resident tactics are end points of a behavioural gradient determined by ecological factors , 2011 .

[2]  J. Berger,et al.  Connecting the dots: an invariant migration corridor links the Holocene to the present , 2006, Biology Letters.

[3]  Greg Baxter,et al.  Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation , 2007 .

[4]  M. Hebblewhite,et al.  Multiscale wolf predation risk for elk: does migration reduce risk? , 2007, Oecologia.

[5]  C. Whyte,et al.  Blue wildebeest population trends in the Kruger National Park and the effects of fencing , 1988 .

[6]  M. Boyce,et al.  Global declines of caribou and reindeer , 2009 .

[7]  E. Post,et al.  Climate change reduces reproductive success of an Arctic herbivore through trophic mismatch , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  John M. Fryxell,et al.  Why are Migratory Ungulates So Abundant? , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[9]  R. D. Jakimchuk,et al.  MIGRATORY MOVEMENTS OF THE NELCHINA CARIBOU HERD IN RELATION TO THE TRANS-ALASKA PIPELINE , 1987 .

[10]  J. Berger,et al.  Global decline in aggregated migrations of large terrestrial mammals , 2009 .

[11]  B. Nolet,et al.  Habitat use throughout migration: linking individual consistency, prior breeding success and future breeding potential. , 2012, The Journal of animal ecology.

[12]  Stan Boutin,et al.  Quantifying barrier effects of roads and seismic lines on movements of female woodland caribou in northeastern Alberta , 2002 .

[13]  S. McNaughton,et al.  Ecology of a Grazing Ecosystem: The Serengeti , 1985 .

[14]  N. Bunnefeld,et al.  A model-driven approach to quantify migration patterns: individual, regional and yearly differences. , 2011, The Journal of animal ecology.

[15]  K. Parker,et al.  Nutrition integrates environmental responses of ungulates. , 2009 .

[16]  Göran Ericsson,et al.  From migration to nomadism: movement variability in a northern ungulate across its latitudinal range. , 2012, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[17]  H. Dingle.  Migration: The Biology of Life on the Move , 1996 .

[18]  J. Hilty.  Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation , 2006 .

[19]  Hall Sawyer,et al.  Stopover ecology of a migratory ungulate. , 2011, The Journal of animal ecology.

[20]  B. P. Farm,et al.  Spatial distribution of Serengeti wildebeest in relation to resources , 1999 .

[21]  Bart Kranstauber,et al.  A dynamic Brownian bridge movement model to estimate utilization distributions for heterogeneous animal movement. , 2012, The Journal of animal ecology.

[22]  A. Sinclair,et al.  Can parks protect migratory ungulates? The case of the Serengeti wildebeest , 2004 .

[23]  A. Sinclair,et al.  Causes and consequences of migration by large herbivores. , 1988, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[24]  C. Spinage.  The decline of the Kalahari wildebeest , 1992, Oryx.

[25]  J. Williamson,et al.  Botswana's fences and the depletion of Kalahari wildlife , 1984, Oryx.

[26]  H. Beyer,et al.  Thresholds in landscape connectivity and mortality risks in response to growing road networks , 2008 .

[27]  G. Matthews..  Animal Migration , 1955, Nature.

[28]  Stephen M. Krone,et al.  Analyzing animal movements using Brownian bridges. , 2007, Ecology.

[29]  Robert D. Holt,et al.  Predicted Impact of Barriers to Migration on the Serengeti Wildebeest Population , 2011, PloS one.

[30]  M. Kauffman,et al.  Animal migration amid shifting patterns of phenology and predation: lessons from a Yellowstone elk herd. , 2013, Ecology.

[31]  R. Ben-Shahar,et al.  Does fencing reduce the carrying capacity for populations of large herbivores? , 1993, Journal of Tropical Ecology.

[32]  Navinder J. Singh,et al.  Saiga antelope calving site selection is increasingly driven by human disturbance , 2010 .

[33]  Atsushi Tsunekawa,et al.  Preliminary Evidence of a Barrier Effect of a Railroad on the Migration of Mongolian Gazelles , 2005 .

[34]  Amy Pocewicz,et al.  Mapping Oil and Gas Development Potential in the US Intermountain West and Estimating Impacts to Species , 2009, PloS one.

[35]  D. Doak,et al.  The need for integrative approaches to understand and conserve migratory ungulates. , 2007, Ecology letters.

[36]  Ryan M. Nielson,et al.  Influence of Well Pad Activity on Winter Habitat Selection Patterns of Mule Deer , 2009 .

[37]  J. Calabrese,et al.  How landscape dynamics link individual‐ to population‐level movement patterns: a multispecies comparison of ungulate relocation data , 2011 .

[38]  D. Keisler,et al.  Influence of Summer and Autumn Nutrition on Body Condition and Reproduction in Lactating Mule Deer , 2010 .

[39]  Mark Hebblewhite,et al.  Demographic balancing of migrant and resident elk in a partially migratory population through forage–predation tradeoffs , 2011 .

[40]  John M. Fryxell,et al.  Opposing Rainfall and Plant Nutritional Gradients Best Explain the Wildebeest Migration in the Serengeti , 2009, The American Naturalist.

[41]  John G. Cook,et al.  EFFECTS OF SUMMER‐AUTUMN NUTRITION AND PARTURITION DATE ON REPRODUCTION AND SURVIVAL OF ELK , 2004, Wildlife Monographs.

[42]  R. Hilborn,et al.  Road will ruin Serengeti , 2010, Nature.

[43]  Simon Benhamou,et al.  Dynamic Approach to Space and Habitat Use Based on Biased Random Bridges , 2011, PloS one.

[44]  F. Sandegren,et al.  Migratory behavior of related moose , 1988 .

[45]  Joshua J. Millspaugh,et al.  Comparability of three analytical techniques to assess joint space use , 2004 .

[46]  S. Harris,et al.  Will reconnecting ecosystems allow long-distance mammal migrations to resume? A case study of a zebra Equus burchelli migration in Botswana , 2011, Oryx.

[47]  B. Scurlock,et al.  Elk Parturition Site Selection at Local and Landscape Scales , 2011 .

[48]  J. Berger,et al.  The Last Mile: How to Sustain Long‐Distance Migration in Mammals , 2004 .

[49]  M. Hebblewhite,et al.  Is the Migratory Behavior of Montane Elk Herds in Peril? The Case of Alberta's Ya Ha Tinda Elk Herd , 2006 .

[50]  N. Hobbs.  Modification of Ecosystems by Ungulates , 1996 .

[51]  L. Mech,et al.  Twenty-year home range dynamics of a white-tailed deer matriline , 1999 .

[52]  Jon S. Horne,et al.  Identifying and prioritizing ungulate migration routes for landscape-level conservation. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.