Spatiotemporal responses of ungulates to hunting in a fenced multi-use area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Human activities, such as tourism and hunting, affect the spatiotemporal behaviour of wildlife. For example, it is well documented that ungulates change their spatiotemporal behaviour as a response to hunting pressure, but less is known about ungulate responses to hunting in areas where human activity is common throughout the year and ungulates are constrained by fences. Aims In this camera-trap study, we analysed the change in spatiotemporal behaviour of wild ungulates (elk, Cervus canadensis (3519 events), moose, Alces alces (1153 events), and white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus (2708 events)) in response to the hunting period in a recreational and fenced park, the Cooking Lake–Blackfoot Provincial Area, Canada. Methods We used general linear models to compare species-specific patterns of intensity of use, calculated as events per week, in response to changes in the nature of human disturbance, namely a shift from recreation to hunting activity. In particular, we compared intensity of use in and out of the hunting season to determine whether species engaged in spatial patterns of avoidance with respect to hunting. We used daily and seasonal patterns of activity to determine how ungulates shifted their temporal use in response to hunting activity and whether they became more nocturnal as a result. Key results We found that ungulates responded temporally to the hunting period by generally shifting their activity to more nocturnal hours, with white-tailed deer showing the biggest temporal shift, suggesting that the ungulates distinguish between consumptive and non-consumptive human activities. Nevertheless, temporal overlap between humans and all ungulate species increased during the hunting period as humans targeted times of increased ungulate activity. Spatially, the response was less distinctive and was species-specific. Elk showed little change in spatial behaviour in response to the hunting period. In contrast, moose decreased the use of trail areas and other areas frequented by humans, whereas deer, counterintuitively, increased the use of trail areas, albeit their use became much more nocturnal. Conclusions We have shown that responses of ungulates to hunting exceed those to non-consumptive recreational use, and whereas temporal responses (increased nocturnality) were consistent across ungulate species, spatial responses were species-specific. Implications Management in small fenced multi-use areas needs to account for shifts in the intensity of disturbance resulting from a change in human disturbance from recreational activity to hunting. Providing spatial opportunities for avoidance of humans is key for most species if hours of operation in these areas already limit the timing of human activity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".