Drivers of White-Tailed Deer (Odocoileus Virginianus) Behavior, Survival, and Population Growth in the Piedmont of South Carolina

Prey species adjust behaviors in response to various stimuli, responding to both top-down and bottom-up pressures. Large herbivores must attempt to avoid predation either through adjusting behaviors or seeking spatial or temporal refugia, which can scale up to influence individual fitness and ultimately population dynamics. Specifically, predation risk has a great potential to influence ungulate populations by impacting behaviors and survival. Our objective was to quantify ungulate behavioral and population response to a regionally important predator through a case study – white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) responses to coyotes (Canis latrans) on private lands in the Piedmont of South Carolina at multiple spatial, temporal and behavioral scales. In Chapter 1, we simultaneously examined three deer behaviors: spatial activity patterns, diel activity patterns, and vigilance, and tested for evidence deer modify these behaviors in response to various abiotic and biotic factors including different scales of coyote encounter risk. We found that multiple deer behaviors were responsive to different scales of coyote encounter risk, but behavioral responses varied among demographics. Specifically, does increased vigilance at sites with greater long-term coyote encounter risk, but does’ spatial activity was positively related to short-term coyote encounter risk. Contrary to our predictions, does did not increase vigilance in the presence of juveniles, and does with fawns (nursery groups) did not increase vigilance at sites with greater long-term nor short-term coyote encounter risk. We also found that invasive competitors (wild pigs; Sus scrofa) variably impacted behaviors among deer demographics, potentially increasing risk of does with fawns encountering coyotes. Further, we found that nursery groups were significantly more diurnal compared to bucks and does travelling alone, indicating does with fawns attempt to seek temporal refugia in order to reduce coyote predation risk for their offspring. In Chapter 2, we investigated the effects of deer maternal behaviors and long-term coyote encounter risk on fawn survival. We found that fawn survival was positively related to doe core home range size, but negatively related to the interactive effects of long-term coyote encounter risk and doe-fawn visitation rates. Further, we found that fawn survival was negatively related to the proportion of nocturnal doe-fawn visits. In Chapter 3, we quantified the effects of abiotic and biotic factors on the deer maternal behaviors important to fawn survival. We found that edge density within doe core home ranges was positively related to the size of doe core home ranges and the average distance between doe-fawn pairs. Collectively, these results suggest that habitat conditions impacted maternal behaviors whereas long-term coyote encounter risk did not influence maternal behaviors. In Chapter 4, we developed population models to project population growth rate under current conditions and theoretical scenarios representing specific management actions. We found that the population was gradually declining under current conditions, but even modest increases in fawn survival could stabilize the population. We found that increased availability of alternative coyote food items (and associated reduction in fawn predation) could lead to a stable population, and we showed how managers can likely use a combination of strategies (i.e., reduced doe harvest and increased alternative food for coyotes) to achieve population goals without the need for attempts to eliminate or limit coyote populations. Our study adds to the mounting evidence that coyotes can impact southeastern deer populations, and provide novel insights into how deer are behaviorally responding to coyote predation risk and how those behaviors scale up to population dynamics. Does in our study area likely perceive coyote predation risk and seek temporal refugia for their fawns, yet did not adjust fine-scale maternal behaviors in response to long-term coyote encounter risk. While it is possible that does modify behaviors at other scales, such as birth site selection, our results collectively suggest that does are not exhibiting fine-scale maternal behaviors during the rearing of vulnerable fawns as would be expected based on other studies of ungulates under similarly high levels of predation risk. Further, given population-level declines, our findings collectively suggest deer are not able to modify their behaviors to maximize their reproductive fitness and novel coyotes are outpacing deer in the predator-prey arms race. Fawn survival is paramount to deer population growth in the Southeast, and because coyote predation on fawns likely will remain omnipresent in the region despite any eradication efforts, our study provides important insights into potential ways managers can help sustain and grow deer populations despite coyote presence on the landscape. More broadly, our study highlights the importance of understanding population-specific responses to a novel predator and provides guidance on potential management strategies to increase fawn survival and achieve population goals

Why humans kill animals and why we cannot avoid it

Killing animals has been a ubiquitous human behaviour throughout history, yet it is becoming increasingly controversial and criticised in some parts of contemporary human society. Here we review 10 primary reasons why humans kill animals, discuss the necessity (or not) of these forms of killing, and describe the global ecological context for human killing of animals. Humans historically and currently kill animals either directly or indirectly for the following reasons: (1) wild harvest or food acquisition, (2) human health and safety, (3) agriculture and aquaculture, (4) urbanisation and industrialisation, (5) invasive, overabundant or nuisance wildlife control, (6) threatened species conservation, (7) recreation, sport or entertainment, (8) mercy or compassion, (9) cultural and religious practice, and (10) research,education and testing. While the necessity of some forms of animal killing is debatable and further depends on individual values, we emphasise that several of these forms of animal killing are a necessary component of our inescapable involvement in a single, functioning, finite, global food web. We conclude that humans (and all other animals) cannot live in a way that does not require animal killing either directly or indirectly, but humans can modify some of these killing behaviours in ways that improve the welfare of animals while they are alive, or to reduce animal suffering whenever they must be killed. We encourage a constructive dialogue that (1) accepts and permits human participation in one enormous global food web dependent on animal killing and (2) focuses on animal welfare and environmental sustainability. Doing so will improve the lives of both wild and domestic animals to a greater extent than efforts to avoid, prohibit or vilify human animal-killing behaviour. Animal ethics Conservation biology Culling Factory farmingpublishedVersio

Why humans kill animals and why we cannot avoid it

Killing animals has been a ubiquitous human behaviour throughout history, yet it is becoming increasingly controversial and criticised in some parts of contemporary human society. Here we review 10 primary reasons why humans kill animals, discuss the necessity (or not) of these forms of killing, and describe the global ecological context for human killing of animals. Humans historically and currently kill animals either directly or indirectly for the following reasons: (1) wild harvest or food acquisition, (2) human health and safety, (3) agriculture and aquaculture, (4) urbanisation and industrialisation, (5) invasive, overabundant or nuisance wildlife control, (6) threatened species conservation, (7) recreation, sport or entertainment, (8) mercy or compassion, (9) cultural and religious practice, and (10) research,education and testing. While the necessity of some forms of animal killing is debatable and further depends on individual values, we emphasise that several of these forms of animal killing are a necessary component of our inescapable involvement in a single, functioning, finite, global food web. We conclude that humans (and all other animals) cannot live in a way that does not require animal killing either directly or indirectly, but humans can modify some of these killing behaviours in ways that improve the welfare of animals while they are alive, or to reduce animal suffering whenever they must be killed. We encourage a constructive dialogue that (1) accepts and permits human participation in one enormous global food web dependent on animal killing and (2) focuses on animal welfare and environmental sustainability. Doing so will improve the lives of both wild and domestic animals to a greater extent than efforts to avoid, prohibit or vilify human animal-killing behaviour. Animal ethics Conservation biology Culling Factory farmingpublishedVersio

Why humans kill animals and why we cannot avoid it

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT : All data associated with this article is available and contained within the article.Killing animals has been a ubiquitous human behaviour throughout history, yet it is becoming increasingly controversial and criticised in some parts of contemporary human society. Here we review 10 primary reasons why humans kill animals, discuss the necessity (or not) of these forms of killing, and describe the global ecological context for human killing of animals. Humans historically and currently kill animals either directly or indirectly for the following reasons: (1) wild harvest or food acquisition, (2) human health and safety, (3) agriculture and aquaculture, (4) urbanisation and industrialisation, (5) invasive, overabundant or nuisance wildlife control, (6) threatened species conservation, (7) recreation, sport or entertainment, (8) mercy or compassion, (9) cultural and religious practice, and (10) research, education and testing. While the necessity of some forms of animal killing is debatable and further depends on individual values, we emphasise that several of these forms of animal killing are a necessary component of our inescapable involvement in a single, functioning, finite, global food web. We conclude that humans (and all other animals) cannot live in a way that does not require animal killing either directly or indirectly, but humans can modify some of these killing behaviours in ways that improve the welfare of animals while they are alive, or to reduce animal suffering whenever they must be killed. We encourage a constructive dialogue that (1) accepts and permits human participation in one enormous global food web dependent on animal killing and (2) focuses on animal welfare and environmental sustainability. Doing so will improve the lives of both wild and domestic animals to a greater extent than efforts to avoid, prohibit or vilify human animal-killing behaviour.A CIB Fellowship by the inter-institutional Centre for Invasion Biology (CIB) Centre of Excellence in South Africa, co-funded principally by the South African Department of Science and Technology through the National Research Foundation (DST-NRF).http://www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenvam2024Mammal Research InstituteZoology and EntomologyNon

Drivers of White-Tailed Deer (Odocoileus Virginianus) Behavior, Survival, and Population Growth in the Piedmont of South Carolina

Prey species adjust behaviors in response to various stimuli, responding to both top-down and bottom-up pressures. Large herbivores must attempt to avoid predation either through adjusting behaviors or seeking spatial or temporal refugia, which can scale up to influence individual fitness and ultimately population dynamics. Specifically, predation risk has a great potential to influence ungulate populations by impacting behaviors and survival. Our objective was to quantify ungulate behavioral and population response to a regionally important predator through a case study – white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) responses to coyotes (Canis latrans) on private lands in the Piedmont of South Carolina at multiple spatial, temporal and behavioral scales. In Chapter 1, we simultaneously examined three deer behaviors: spatial activity patterns, diel activity patterns, and vigilance, and tested for evidence deer modify these behaviors in response to various abiotic and biotic factors including different scales of coyote encounter risk. We found that multiple deer behaviors were responsive to different scales of coyote encounter risk, but behavioral responses varied among demographics. Specifically, does increased vigilance at sites with greater long-term coyote encounter risk, but does’ spatial activity was positively related to short-term coyote encounter risk. Contrary to our predictions, does did not increase vigilance in the presence of juveniles, and does with fawns (nursery groups) did not increase vigilance at sites with greater long-term nor short-term coyote encounter risk. We also found that invasive competitors (wild pigs; Sus scrofa) variably impacted behaviors among deer demographics, potentially increasing risk of does with fawns encountering coyotes. Further, we found that nursery groups were significantly more diurnal compared to bucks and does travelling alone, indicating does with fawns attempt to seek temporal refugia in order to reduce coyote predation risk for their offspring. In Chapter 2, we investigated the effects of deer maternal behaviors and long-term coyote encounter risk on fawn survival. We found that fawn survival was positively related to doe core home range size, but negatively related to the interactive effects of long-term coyote encounter risk and doe-fawn visitation rates. Further, we found that fawn survival was negatively related to the proportion of nocturnal doe-fawn visits. In Chapter 3, we quantified the effects of abiotic and biotic factors on the deer maternal behaviors important to fawn survival. We found that edge density within doe core home ranges was positively related to the size of doe core home ranges and the average distance between doe-fawn pairs. Collectively, these results suggest that habitat conditions impacted maternal behaviors whereas long-term coyote encounter risk did not influence maternal behaviors. In Chapter 4, we developed population models to project population growth rate under current conditions and theoretical scenarios representing specific management actions. We found that the population was gradually declining under current conditions, but even modest increases in fawn survival could stabilize the population. We found that increased availability of alternative coyote food items (and associated reduction in fawn predation) could lead to a stable population, and we showed how managers can likely use a combination of strategies (i.e., reduced doe harvest and increased alternative food for coyotes) to achieve population goals without the need for attempts to eliminate or limit coyote populations. Our study adds to the mounting evidence that coyotes can impact southeastern deer populations, and provide novel insights into how deer are behaviorally responding to coyote predation risk and how those behaviors scale up to population dynamics. Does in our study area likely perceive coyote predation risk and seek temporal refugia for their fawns, yet did not adjust fine-scale maternal behaviors in response to long-term coyote encounter risk. While it is possible that does modify behaviors at other scales, such as birth site selection, our results collectively suggest that does are not exhibiting fine-scale maternal behaviors during the rearing of vulnerable fawns as would be expected based on other studies of ungulates under similarly high levels of predation risk. Further, given population-level declines, our findings collectively suggest deer are not able to modify their behaviors to maximize their reproductive fitness and novel coyotes are outpacing deer in the predator-prey arms race. Fawn survival is paramount to deer population growth in the Southeast, and because coyote predation on fawns likely will remain omnipresent in the region despite any eradication efforts, our study provides important insights into potential ways managers can help sustain and grow deer populations despite coyote presence on the landscape. More broadly, our study highlights the importance of understanding population-specific responses to a novel predator and provides guidance on potential management strategies to increase fawn survival and achieve population goals

Seasonal activity patterns of bats in the Central Appalachians

Two threats to bats are especially pervasive in the central Appalachian Mountains of the eastern United States: a fungal disease called White-nose Syndrome (WNS) and wind energy development. White-nose Syndrome has caused the death of millions of bats in North America, and multiple hibernating bat species are affected in the central Appalachians. Wind energy is one of the most rapidly-growing energy sources in eastern United States, and bats are often killed when they fly near wind turbines. Fatality rates at wind turbines is highest in bat species that migrate instead of hibernate. There is limited data on bats during the autumn and spring seasons in the central Appalachian Mountains, and the impacts of WNS and wind energy development may be exacerbated during these seasons. Therefore, I sought to determine patterns and drivers of activity for hibernating bat species during autumn and spring around hibernacula. Similarly, I set out to determine patterns and drivers of activity for migratory bat species during autumn and spring along mountain ridgelines in the central Appalachians. Lastly, I searched for evidence of potential WNS-induced changes in the summer ecology of the once common northern long eared bat. This study can help elucidate patterns of bat activity during largely understudied seasons. Furthermore, it can provide useful information needed by land managers to implement actions that could help alleviate and/or avoid potential additive negative impacts on bat species with existing conservation concerns.MSTwo threats to bats are especially pervasive in the central Appalachian Mountains of the eastern United States: a fungal disease called White-nose Syndrome (WNS) and wind energy development. White-nose Syndrome has caused the death of millions of bats in North America, and multiple hibernating bat species are affected in the central Appalachians. Wind energy is one of the most rapidly-growing energy sources in eastern United States, and bats are often killed when they fly near wind turbines. Fatality rates at wind turbines is highest in bat species that migrate instead of hibernate. There is limited data on bats during the autumn and spring seasons in the central Appalachian Mountains, and the impacts of WNS and wind energy development may be exacerbated during these seasons. Therefore, I sought to determine patterns and drivers of activity for hibernating bat species during autumn and spring around hibernacula. Similarly, I set out to determine patterns and drivers of activity for migratory bat species during autumn and spring along mountain ridgelines in the central Appalachians. Lastly, I searched for evidence of potential WNS-induced changes in the summer ecology of the once common northern long eared bat. This study can help elucidate patterns of bat activity during largely understudied seasons. Furthermore, it can provide useful information needed by land managers to implement actions that could help alleviate and/or avoid potential additive negative impacts on bat species with existing conservation concerns

Deer Behavioral Responses Data

These data include deer vigilance, spatial activity, coyote activity, and wild pig activity from passive wildlife trail cameras in McCormick County, South Carolina, in May & June, 2019, 2020, and 2021. </p

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management

Many central Appalachian ridges offer high wind potential, making them attractive to future wind-energy development. Understanding seasonal and hourly activity patterns of migratory bat species may help to reduce fatalities at wind-energy facilities and provide guidance for the development of best management practices for bats. To examine hourly migratory bat activity patterns in the fall and spring in Virginia in an exploratory fashion with a suite of general temporal, environmental, and weather variables, we acoustically monitored bat activity on five ridgelines and side slopes from early September through mid-November 2015 and 2016 and from early March through late April 2016 and 2017. On ridges, bat activity decreased through the autumn sample period, but was more variable through the spring sample period. In autumn, migratory bat activity had largely ceased by mid-November. Activity patterns were species specific in both autumn and spring sample periods. Generally, migratory bat activity was negatively associated with hourly wind speeds but positively associated with ambient temperatures. These data provide further evidence that operational mitigation strategies at wind-energy facilities could help protect migratory bat species in the Appalachians; substantially slowing or locking wind turbine blade spin during periods of low wind speeds, often below where electricity is generated, and warm ambient temperatures may minimize mortality during periods of high bat activity.Joint Fire Science Program through the U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Research Unit Program [G14AC00316]; U.S. Geological Survey Disease Program through the U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Research Unit Program [G15AC00487]Funding was provided by the Joint Fire Science Program Grant #G14AC00316 and U.S. Geological Survey Disease Program Grant #G15AC00487 through the U.S. Geological Survey Cooperative Research Unit Program. We thank the U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service for allowing site access for this research. Acoustic monitoring equipment was provided by Bat Conservation International. S. Sweeten and L. Austin performed invaluable field assistance. This manuscript was greatly improved by the thoughtful comments of the Associate Editor and three anonymous reviewers.Public domain – authored by a U.S. government employe

Activity Patterns of Bats During the Fall and Spring Along Ridgelines in the Central Appalachians

AbstractMany central Appalachian ridges offer high wind potential, making them attractive to future wind-energy development. Understanding seasonal and hourly activity patterns of migratory bat species may help to reduce fatalities at wind-energy facilities and provide guidance for the development of best management practices for bats. To examine hourly migratory bat activity patterns in the fall and spring in Virginia in an exploratory fashion with a suite of general temporal, environmental, and weather variables, we acoustically monitored bat activity on five ridgelines and side slopes from early September through mid-November 2015 and 2016 and from early March through late April 2016 and 2017. On ridges, bat activity decreased through the autumn sample period, but was more variable through the spring sample period. In autumn, migratory bat activity had largely ceased by mid-November. Activity patterns were species specific in both autumn and spring sample periods. Generally, migratory bat activity was negatively associated with hourly wind speeds but positively associated with ambient temperatures. These data provide further evidence that operational mitigation strategies at wind-energy facilities could help protect migratory bat species in the Appalachians; substantially slowing or locking wind turbine blade spin during periods of low wind speeds, often below where electricity is generated, and warm ambient temperatures may minimize mortality during periods of high bat activity.</jats:p

Activity Patterns of Cave-Dwelling Bat Species during Pre-Hibernation Swarming and Post-Hibernation Emergence in the Central Appalachians

In North America, bat research efforts largely have focused on summer maternity colonies and winter hibernacula, leaving the immediate pre- and post-hibernation ecology for many species unstudied. Understanding these patterns and processes is critical for addressing potential additive impacts to White-nose Syndrome (WNS)-affected bats, as autumn is a time of vital weight gain and fat resources are largely depleted in early spring in surviving individuals. Our study sought to examine autumn and spring bat activity patterns in the central Appalachian Mountains around three hibernacula to better understand spatio-temporal patterns during staging for hibernation and post-hibernation migration in the post-WNS environment. From early September through November 2015 and 2016, and from early March through April 2016 and 2017, we assessed the effects of distance to hibernacula and ambient conditions on nightly bat activity for Myotis spp. and big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) using zero-crossing frequency division bat detectors near cave entrances and 1 km, 2 km, and 3 km distant from caves. Following identification of echolocation calls, we used generalized linear mixed effects models to examine patterns of activity across the landscape over time and relative to weather. Overall bat activity was low at all sample sites during autumn and spring periods except at sites closest to hibernacula. Best-supported models describing bat activity varied, but date and ambient temperatures generally appeared to be major drivers of activity in both seasons. Total activity for all species had largely ceased by mid-November. Spring bat activity was variable across the sampling season, however, some activity was observed as early as mid-March, almost a month earlier than the historically accepted emergence time regionally. Current timing of restrictions on forest management activities that potentially remove day-roosts near hibernacula when bats are active on the landscape may be mismatched with actual spring post-hibernation emergence. Adjustments to the timing of these restrictions during the spring may help to avoid potentially additive negative impacts on WNS-impacted bat species