Geology topics

Douglas McWhirter

Publications and source records attributed to Douglas McWhirter.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Multi-level thresholds of residential and agricultural land use for elk avoidance across the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

1. Conversion of land for settlements and agriculture is increasing globally and can influence wildlife space use. However, there is limited research to identify the thresholds of land-use change that incur wildlife avoidance and how these thresh-olds might vary across levels of selection. 2. We evaluated multi-level avoidance thresholds of elk Cervus canadensis impacted by residential development and irrigated agriculture across the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Using GPS data from765 elk in 21 herds, we estimated habitat selection in relation to development and agriculture at three levels (home range selection, within home range selection and movement path selection). Next, using individual selection covariates and as-sociated measures of land-use availability, we used functional-response models to evaluate how selection varied based on availability, and in turn, to estimate avoidance thresholds. 3. We found individual and level-specific variation in elk responses to environmental factors. Elk exhibited stronger responses (either selection or avoidance) when selecting home range locations (i.e. second-order selection) than when selecting areas within home ranges (i.e. third-order selection) or selecting movement paths (i.e. fourth-order selection). Importantly, elk avoidance of development and agriculture changed as the amount of land in these categories changed. Across all levels of selection elk exhibited neutral selection for human development at low levels of availability (<1.1%–2.2% developed) but avoided areas that were >1.1%–2.2% developed. Conversely, elk selected positively for irrigated agriculture at low to moderate levels of availability (<52.0%–66.2% agriculture) but exhibited neutral selection in areas that were >52.0%–66.2% agriculture. 4. Synthesis and applications . Elk avoidance of low levels of human development suggests conservation efforts such as restrictions on future development or conservation easements could focus on areas that are still below 2% developed. Additionally, because elk selection was strongest at the landscape scale, conservation actions that are based on information about the overall landscape structure may be most impactful. Our results highlight the importance of under-standing variability in wildlife habitat selection at multiple levels, particularly in relation to land-use change, and highlight how functional response modelling can help inform landscape conservation.

Montana, Wyoming↗

USGS2022

Wildlife migrations highlight importance of both private lands and protected areas in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Formally protected areas are an important component of wildlife conservation, but face limitations in their effectiveness for migratory species. Improved stewardship of working lands around protected areas is one solution for conservation planning, but private working lands are vulnerable to development. In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), ungulates such as elk ( Cervus canadensis ) use both protected areas and private lands throughout their annual migrations. We studied patterns of landownership, protection, and conservation challenges within the ranges of migratory elk in the GYE. We used GPS data from 1088 elk in 26 herds to define herd-level seasonal ranges, and extracted covariates related to landownership and protection, land use, and human infrastructure and development. All elk herds used land encompassing >1 ownership type. Most elk herds (92.3 % of herds, n = 24) used the highest proportion of private land in the winter (mean = 36.2 % private land). Most elk herds' winter ranges contained the highest building densities (mean = 1.24 buildings/km 2 ), fence densities (mean = 1.02 km fence/km 2 ), and cattle grazing (mean = 1.9 cows/km 2 ), compared to migratory and summer ranges. Out of all ranges, 36.5 % of ranges did not have any zoning regulations, indicating the potential for future development. Our results show that elk in the GYE rely on habitat outside of protected areas, and face landscape-scale conservation challenges such as habitat fragmentation from human development, particularly in winter ranges. Future conservation strategies for wildlife in this system need to encompass coordination across both public and private land to ensure migratory connectivity.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗

USGS2012

Elk migration patterns and human activity influence wolf habitat use in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Identifying the ecological dynamics underlying human–wildlife conflicts is important for the management and conservation of wildlife populations. In landscapes still occupied by large carnivores, many ungulate prey species migrate seasonally, yet little empirical research has explored the relationship between carnivore distribution and ungulate migration strategy. In this study, we evaluate the influence of elk ( Cervus elaphus ) distribution and other landscape features on wolf ( Canis lupus ) habitat use in an area of chronic wolf–livestock conflict in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, USA. Using three years of fine-scale wolf ( n = 14) and elk ( n = 81) movement data, we compared the seasonal habitat use of wolves in an area dominated by migratory elk with that of wolves in an adjacent area dominated by resident elk. Most migratory elk vacate the associated winter wolf territories each summer via a 40–60 km migration, whereas resident elk remain accessible to wolves year-round. We used a generalized linear model to compare the relative probability of wolf use as a function of GIS-based habitat covariates in the migratory and resident elk areas. Although wolves in both areas used elk-rich habitat all year, elk density in summer had a weaker influence on the habitat use of wolves in the migratory elk area than the resident elk area. Wolves employed a number of alternative strategies to cope with the departure of migratory elk. Wolves in the two areas also differed in their disposition toward roads. In winter, wolves in the migratory elk area used habitat close to roads, while wolves in the resident elk area avoided roads. In summer, wolves in the migratory elk area were indifferent to roads, while wolves in resident elk areas strongly avoided roads, presumably due to the location of dens and summering elk combined with different traffic levels. Study results can help wildlife managers to anticipate the movements and establishment of wolf packs as they expand into areas with migratory or resident prey populations, varying levels of human activity, and front-country rangelands with potential for conflicts with livestock.

Wyoming↗