Vigilance and foraging patterns of American elk during the rut in habitats with and without predators

2003 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 266-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry O Wolff ◽  
Toni Van Horn

Animal behavior is often optimized as a trade-off between survival and reproduction. During the breeding season, mammals tend to maximize their reproductive effort within the constraints of predation pressure. When predation pressure is reduced, greater effort can be allocated to reproductive behavior and less to vigilance and predator avoidance. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that elk, Cervus elaphus, in Yellowstone National Park (YNP), with predators, would spend more time in vigilance and risk-avoidance behavior than would elk in Rocky Mountain National Park (RMNP), a predator-free environment. We further predicted that elk at Mammoth Hot Springs (MAM) in YNP would behave similarly to those at RMNP because predators were absent in that area of the park. Cow elk in YNP spent more time in vigilance and less in foraging during activity periods than did cows in RMNP or MAM. Also, elk in YNP retreated to forest cover during the midday inactive period, whereas elk in RMNP and MAM remained in open habitat. Vigilance was not correlated with group size at either site. Cows with calves spent more time in vigilance and less in foraging than did cows without calves in RMNP and YNP. Bull elk spent most of their time in courtship at all sites, but foraged more at RMNP than in YNP or MAM. Mean harem sizes were similar among the three sites: 17.0 in RMNP, 15.7 in YNP, and 19.0 in MAM. The proportion of cows with calves was significantly lower in the area with predators, YNP (0.10), than in the predator-free areas (0.24 in RMNP and 0.37 in MAM), probably because of greater calf mortality in YNP. Elk in YNP behaved in accordance with a predation risk, whereas those in RMNP and MAM showed less vigilance behavior.

2019 ◽  
pp. 68-72
Author(s):  
E. A. Volkova

A monograph “Vegetation and biotopes of the “Narochansky” National Park was published in Minsk, Belarus in 2017, edited by A. V. Pugachevsky (Grummo et al., 2017). It includes the Map of terrestrial vegetation (S. 1 : 60 000) and the Map of biotopes (S. 1 : 60 000). Some small-scale maps such as the Map of changes in forest cover of the “Narochansky” National Park for the period 1985–2016, the Map of forest loss in the “Narochansky” National Park for the period 1985–2016 and a series of inventory and analytical maps on the basin of the Naroch Lake are given. This monograph can be considered as a small regional Atlas with detailed explanatory texts to the maps. It presents the experience on vegetation mapping accumulated in the Laboratory of Geobotany and Vegetation mapping of the Institute of Experimental Botany of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Despite some critical comments, mainly concerning the biotope map, this publication of Belarusian geobotanists deserves an approval. They received the full answers to the questions posed: “What do we protect?” and “What is a current state of the vegetation of the National Park and the main trends of its dynamics? Cartographic design is made at a high level; the maps have both scientific and practical importance in the planning of environmental and economic activities.


1974 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.S. Bedinger ◽  
F.J. Pearson ◽  
J.E. Reed ◽  
R.T. Sniegocki ◽  
C.G. Stone
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document