Mountain sheep Ovis canadensis and helicopter surveys: Ramifications for the conservation of large mammals

Abstract Mountain sheep Ovis canadensis respond dramatically to helicopter disturbance. Significantly more animals abandoned sampling blocks and moved farther during helicopter surveys than on nonsurvey days throughout the year. Likewise, mountain sheep changed the vegetation type they occurred in more often after than before helicopter surveys; however, this difference was only significant during spring. Mountain sheep did not habituate or become sensitized to repeated helicopter overflights: time since capture was not related to their movements. The negative influence of the helicopter was extreme and may override variables that might otherwise be correlated with movement patterns of mountain sheep: this outcome also may hold for other ungulates. Further, sampling with helicopters may result in the violation of fundamental assumptions of population estimators routinely employed in conservation efforts for large mammals. The consequences of disturbing mountain sheep, such as altering use of habitat, increasing susceptibility to predation, or increasing nutritional stress, need additional study. These factors all have ramifications for the conservation of mountain sheep and other large mammals disturbed by helicopter sampling.

[1]  A. Agresti,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis , 1991, International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science.

[2]  W. M. Sullivan,et al.  Potential of LORAN-C for Wildlife Research along Coastal Landscapes , 1988 .

[3]  W. Dixon,et al.  BMDP statistical software , 1983 .

[4]  K. Parker,et al.  Energy expenditures for locomotion by mule deer and elk , 1984 .

[5]  M. Kock,et al.  THE SAFETY AND COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF NET-GUN CAPTURE OF DESERT BIGHORN SHEEP (OVIS CANADENSIS NELSONI) , 1988 .

[6]  J. Wehausen,et al.  Desert-dwelling Mountain Sheep: Conservation Implications of a Naturally Fragmented Distribution , 1990 .

[7]  J. Berger,et al.  Pregnancy incentives, predation constraints and habitat shifts: experimental and field evidence for wild bighorn sheep , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[8]  R. Bowyer.  Activity, Movement, and Distribution of Roosevelt Elk during Rut , 1981 .

[9]  N. Holmgren,et al.  A flora of southern California , 1974 .

[10]  J. Berger,et al.  Persistence of Different‐sized Populations: An Empirical Assessment of Rapid Extinctions in Bighorn Sheep , 1990 .

[11]  M. Grzimek,et al.  Census of Plains Animals in the Serengeti National Park, Tanganyika , 1960 .

[12]  V. Bleich,et al.  Genetics and the conservation of mountain sheep ovis canadensis nelsoni , 1986 .

[13]  J. Neter,et al.  Applied linear statistical models : regression, analysis of variance, and experimental designs , 1974 .

[14]  W. J. Conover,et al.  Practical Nonparametric Statistics , 1972 .

[15]  A. Veitch,et al.  Short-Term Impacts of Low-Level Jet Fighter Training on Caribou in Labrador , 1991 .

[16]  W. G. S. Hines,et al.  Statistics with Applications to the Biological and Health Sciences , 1970 .

[17]  V. Geist.  Validity of Horn Segment Counts in Aging Bighorn Sheep , 1966 .

[18]  P. Krausman,et al.  CAPTURING DEER AND MOUNTAIN SHEEP WITH A NET-GUN , 1985 .

[19]  G. Monson,et al.  The bighorn of Death Valley , 1961 .

[20]  R. Terry Bowyer,et al.  Sexual Segregation in Southern Mule Deer , 1984 .

[21]  J. Berger,et al.  Conflicts in national parks : a case study of helicopters and bighorn sheep time budgets at the Grand Canyon , 1991 .