USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

John Bissonette

Publications and source records attributed to John Bissonette.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Relative influence of human harvest, carnivores, and weather on adult female elk survival across western North America

Well-informed management of harvested species requires understanding how changing ecological conditions affect demography and population dynamics, information that is lacking for many species. We have limited understanding of the relative influence of carnivores, harvest, weather and forage availability on elk Cervus elaphus demography, despite the ecological and economic importance of this species. We assessed adult female survival, a key vital rate for population dynamics, from 2746 radio-collared elk in 45 populations across western North America that experience wide variation in carnivore assemblage, harvest, weather and habitat conditions. Proportional hazard analysis revealed that 'baseline' (i.e. not related to human factors) mortality was higher with very high winter precipitation, particularly in populations sympatric with wolves Canis lupus. Mortality may increase via nutritional stress and heightened vulnerability to predation in snowy winters. Baseline mortality was unrelated to puma Puma concolor presence, forest cover or summer forage productivity. Cause-specific mortality analyses showed that wolves and all carnivore species combined had additive effects on baseline elk mortality, but only reduced survival by <2%. When human factors were included, ‘total’ adult mortality was solely related to harvest; the influence of native carnivores was compensatory. Annual total mortality rates were lowest in populations sympatric with both pumas and wolves because managers reduced female harvest in areas with abundant or diverse carnivores. Mortality from native carnivores peaked in late winter and early spring, while harvest-induced mortality peaked in autumn. The strong peak in harvest-induced mortality during the autumn hunting season decreased as the number of native carnivore species increased. Synthesis and applications. Elevated baseline adult female elk mortality from wolves in years with high winter precipitation could affect elk abundance as winters across the western US become drier and wolves recolonize portions of the region. In the absence of human harvest, wolves had additive, although limited, effects on mortality. However, human harvest, and its apparent use by managers to offset predation, primarily controls overall variation in adult female mortality. Altering harvest quotas is thus a strong tool for offsetting impacts of carnivore recolonization and shifting weather patterns on elk across western North America.

Colorado;Idaho;Montana;Utah;Washington;Wyoming↗

Does small-perimeter fencing inhibit mule deer or pronghorn use of water developments?

Wildlife water development can be an important habitat management strategy in western North America for many species, including both pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). In many areas, water developments are fenced (often with small-perimeter fencing) to exclude domestic livestock and feral horses. Small-perimeter exclosures could limit wild ungulate use of fenced water sources, as exclosures present a barrier pronghorn and mule deer must negotiate to gain access to fenced drinking water. To evaluate the hypothesis that exclosures limit wild ungulate access to water sources, we compared use (photo counts) of fenced versus unfenced water sources for both pronghorn and mule deer between June and October 2002–2008 in western Utah. We used model selection to identify an adequate distribution and best approximating model. We selected a zero-inflated negative binomial distribution for both pronghorn and mule deer photo counts. Both pronghorn and mule deer photo counts were positively associated with sampling time and average daily maximum temperature in top models. A fence effect was present in top models for both pronghorn and mule deer, but mule deer response to small-perimeter fencing was much more pronounced than pronghorn response. For mule deer, we estimated that presence of a fence around water developments reduced photo counts by a factor of 0.25. We suggest eliminating fencing of water developments whenever possible or fencing a big enough area around water sources to avoid inhibiting mule deer. More generally, our results provide additional evidence that water development design and placement influence wildlife use. Failure to account for species-specific preferences will limit effectiveness of management actions and could compromise research results.

Utah↗