Characteristics of ungulate behavior and mortality associated with wire fences

Wildlife Society Bulletin

Volumn 34, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 1295-1305

  Harrington, Justin L ^a   Conover, Michael R ^a  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Antilocapra americana; Cervus elaphus; Elk; Habitat fragmentation; Highways; Human wildlife conflicts; Mortality; Mule deer; Odocoileus hemionus; Pronghorn; Wire fences

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; DEER; MORTALITY;

COLORADO; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; UTAH;

ANIMALIA; ANTILOCAPRA AMERICANA; ANTILOCAPRIDAE; CERVIDAE; CERVUS ELAPHUS; ODOCOILEUS HEMIONUS; UNGULATA;

EID: 33846786658     PISSN: 00917648     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[1295:COUBAM]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Anderson, L. D. 1980. Adjustable wire fences for facilitating big game movement. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Technical Note 343, Denver, Colorado, USA.
2. Andrews, B., and H. K. Rowley. 1998. 1997 Oregon wildlife damage survey. Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service, Portland, USA.
3. Bauman, P. J., J. A. Jenks, and D. E. Roddy. 1999. Evaluating techniques to monitor elk movement across fence lines. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:344-352.
4. Byrne, A. E. 1989. Experimental applications of high-tensile wire and other fencing to control big game damage in northwest Colorado. Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop 9:109-115.
5. Clevenger, A. P., B. Chruszez, and K. E. Gunson. 2001. Highway mitigation fencing reduces wildlife-vehicle collisions. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29:646-653.
6. Conover, M. R. 1997. Monetary and intangible valuation of deer in the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25:298-305.
7. Conover, M. R. 2002. Resolving human-wildlife conflicts: the science of wildlife damage management. Lewis, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
8. Conover, M. R., W. C. Pitt, K. K. Kessler, T. J. DuBow, and W. A. Sanborn. 1995. Review of human injuries, illnesses, and economic losses caused by wildlife in the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23:407-414.
9. Denney, D. 1964. Fences and big game. Colorado Outdoors 13(2):3-6.
10. Environmental Systems Research Institute. 1999. ARCVIEW GIS Version 3.2. ESRI, Redlands, California, USA.
11. Forman, R. T., D. Sperling, J. A. Bissonette, A. B. Clevenger, C. D. Cutshall, V. H. Dale, L. Fahrig, R. France, C. R. Goldman, K. Heanue, J. A. Jones, F. H. Swanson, T. Turrentine, and T. C. Winter. 2003. Road ecology: science and solutions. Island, Washington, D.C., USA.
12. Hobbs, N. T. 1989, Linking energy balance to survival in mule deer: development and test of a simulation model. Wildlife Monographs 101.
13. Kie, J. G., V. C. Bleich, A. L. Medina, J. D. Yoakum, and J. W. Thomas. 1996. Managing rangelands for wildlife. Pages 663-688 in T. A. Bookout, editor. Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. Fifth edition. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
14. Kindschy, R. R., C. Sundstrom, and J. D. Yoakum. 1982. Wildlife habitats in managed rangelands - the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon, USA.
15. Knight, J. E., E. J. Swenson, and H. Sherwood. 1997. Elk use of modified fence-crossing designs. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25:819-822.
16. Lacey, J. R., K. Jamtgaard, L. Riggle, and T. Hayes. 1993. Impacts of big game on private land in southwestern Montana: landowner perceptions. Journal of Range Management 46:31-37.
17. Loomis, J., M. Creel, and J. Cooper. 1989. Economic benefits of deer in California: hunting and viewing values. Institute of Ecology Report 332, University of California, Davis, USA.
18. Mackie, R. J. 1981. Interspecific relationships. Pages 487-507 in O. C. Wallmo, editor. Mule and black-tailed deer of North America. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, USA.
19. Mapston, R. D. 1970. Casper antelope pass studies. Proceedings of the Antelope States Workshop 4:116-124.
20. Papez, N. J. 1976. The Ruby-Butte deer herd. Nevada Department of Fish and Game, Biological Bulletin Number 5, Reno, USA.
21. Parker, K. L., M. P. Gillingham, T. A. Hanley, and C. T. Robbins. 1996. Foraging efficiency: energy expenditure versus energy gain in free-ranging black-tailed deer. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74:442-450.
22. Parker, K. L., C. T. Robbins, and T. A. Hanley. 1984. Energy expenditures for locomotion by mule deer Odocoileus hemionus and elk Cervus elaphus nelsoni. Journal of Wildlife Management 48:474-488.
23. Reed, D. F., T. M. Pojar, and T. N. Woodard. 1974. Use of one-way gates by mule deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 38:9-15.
24. Rouse, C. H. 1954. Antelope and sheep fences. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, preliminary report, Washington, D.C., USA.
25. SAS Institute. 2001. SAS software: usage and reference. Version 8.02. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
26. Scott, M. D. 1992. Buck-and-pole fence crossings by four ungulate species. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:204-210.
27. Spillett, J. J., J. B. Low, and D. Sill. 1967. Livestock fences - how they influence pronghorn antelope movements. Utah State University, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 470, Logan, USA.
28. Sundstrom, C. 1967. Effects of livestock fencing on antelope. Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, Federal Aid Report FW-3-R-14, Cheyenne, USA.
29. United States Bureau of Land Management. 1985. Fencing. U.S. Bureau of Land Management Manual Handbook, H-1741-1, Washington, D.C., USA.
30. Urness, P. J. 1976. Mule deer habitat changes resulting from livestock practices. Pages 21-35 in G. W. Workman and J. B. Low, technical coordinators. Mule deer decline in the West: a symposium. Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, Logan, USA.
31. Wickstrom, M. L., C. T. Robbins, T. A. Hanley, D. E. Spalinger, and S. M. Parish. 1984. Food intake and foraging energetics of elk. Journal of Wildife Management 48:1285-1301.