Trevor Golden | Geology Reports

USGS2021

Dynamic selection for forage quality and quantity in response to phenology and insects in an Arctic ungulate

Spatiotemporal variation in forage is a primary driver of ungulate behavior, yet little is known about the nutritional components they select, and how selection varies across the growing season with changes in forage quality and quantity. We addressed these uncertainties in barren-ground caribou ( Rangifer tarandus ), which experience their most important foraging opportunities during the short Arctic summer. Recent declines in Arctic caribou populations have raised concerns about the influence of climate change on summer foraging opportunities, given shifting vegetation conditions and insect harassment, and their potential effects on caribou body condition and demography. We examined Arctic caribou selection of summer forage by pairing locations from females in the Central Arctic Herd of Alaska with spatiotemporal predictions of biomass, digestible nitrogen (DN), and digestible energy (DE). We then assessed selection for these nutritional components across the growing season at landscape and patch scales, and determined whether foraging opportunities were constrained by insect harassment. During early summer, at the landscape scale, caribou selected for intermediate biomass and high DN and DE, following expectations of the forage maturation hypothesis. At the patch scale, however, caribou selected for high values of all forage components, particularly DN, suggesting that protein may be limiting. During late summer, after DN declined below the threshold for protein gain, caribou exhibited a switch at both spatial scales, selecting for higher biomass, likely enabling mass and fat deposition. Mosquito activity strongly altered caribou selection of forage and increased their movement rates, while oestrid fly activity had little influence. Our results demonstrate that early and late summer periods afford Arctic caribou distinct foraging opportunities, as they prioritize quality earlier in the summer and quantity later. Climate change may further constrain caribou access to DN as earlier, warmer Arctic summers may be associated with reduced DN and increased mosquito harassment.

Alaska↗

USGS2019

Caribou use of habitat near energy development in Arctic Alaska

Increasing demands for energy have generated interest in expanding oil and gas production on the North Slope of Alaska, raising questions about the resilience of barren-ground caribou populations to new development. Although the amount of habitat lost directly to energy development in the Arctic will likely be relatively small, there are significant concerns about habitat that may be indirectly impacted due to caribou avoidance behaviors. Behavioral responses to energy development for wildlife have been well-documented, but such responses are often assumed to dissipate over time, despite scant information on the ability of animals to habituate. To understand the long-term effects of energy development on barren-ground caribou we investigated the behavior of the Central Arctic Herd in northern Alaska, which has been exposed to oil development on its summer range for approximately 40 years. Using recent (2015-2017) location data from GPS collared females, we conducted a zone of influence analysis to assess whether caribou reduced their use of habitat near energy development, and if so, the distance the effects attenuated. We conducted this analysis for the calving, post-calving and mosquito harassment periods when caribou exhibit distinct resource selection patterns, and contrasted our results to past research that investigated the responses of the Central Arctic Caribou Herd immediately following the construction of the oil fields. Despite the long-term presence of energy development within the Central Arctic Herd summer range, we found that female caribou exhibited avoidance responses to infrastructure during all time periods, although the effects waned across the summer. Caribou reduced their use of habitat within 5 km of development during the calving period, within 2 km during the post-calving period, and within 1 km during the mosquito harassment period, areas which were predicted to overlap 12%, 15% and 17% of important calving, post-calving, and mosquito habitat areas, respectively. During the calving period, the indirect effects we observed were similar to those observed in past research, whereas during the post-calving and mosquito periods, we detected avoidance responses which had not been previously reported. These findings corroborate a growing body of evidence suggesting that habituation to industrial development in Arctic caribou is likely to be weak or absent, and emphasizes the value of minimizing the footprint of infrastructure within important seasonal habitat areas to reduce behavioral impacts to barren-ground caribou.

Alaska↗