Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations

ABSTRACT The practice of feeding cervids in winter, either as a supplement to enhance nutritional status or to divert animals away from roads, railways, or vulnerable habitats, is rising noticeably. Moose ( Alces alces ) densities in Scandinavia are currently at historically high levels, resulting i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of Wildlife Management
Main Authors: VAN BEEST, FLORIS M., LOE, LEIF EGIL, MYSTERUD, ATLE, MILNER, JOS M.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-109
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-109
id crwiley:10.2193/2009-109
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.2193/2009-109 2024-06-23T07:45:12+00:00 Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations VAN BEEST, FLORIS M. LOE, LEIF EGIL MYSTERUD, ATLE MILNER, JOS M. 2010 http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-109 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-109 en eng Wiley http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor The Journal of Wildlife Management volume 74, issue 2, page 219-227 ISSN 0022-541X 1937-2817 journal-article 2010 crwiley https://doi.org/10.2193/2009-109 2024-06-06T04:24:48Z ABSTRACT The practice of feeding cervids in winter, either as a supplement to enhance nutritional status or to divert animals away from roads, railways, or vulnerable habitats, is rising noticeably. Moose ( Alces alces ) densities in Scandinavia are currently at historically high levels, resulting in amplified damage to economically important young Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris ) forest stands. Nevertheless, there is limited information as to how diversionary feeding affects herbivore space use and habitat selection. We followed 32 female moose marked with Global Positioning System collars to evaluate 1) if feeding stations serve as attraction points to the extent that habitat‐selection patterns resemble those of central‐place foragers (i.e., high usage and more uniform selection close to the attraction point), and 2) if moose using feeding sites select young pine stands less than those not using feeding sites. Moose that used diversionary forage concentrated their space use around feeding stations and selected habitats as predicted for a central‐place forager with a decreasing probability of using areas away from feeding sites and a low degree of habitat selectivity close to feeding sites. However, moose that used feeding sites continued to select young pine stands to the same extent as moose that did not use feeding sites. Feeding sites were, therefore, not successful in diverting moose away from valuable natural browse, so we recommend wildlife managers establish feeding sites in sacrifice areas where moose browsing is permissible and, if possible, >1 km from young pine plantations. Article in Journal/Newspaper Alces alces Wiley Online Library The Journal of Wildlife Management 74 2 219 227
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description ABSTRACT The practice of feeding cervids in winter, either as a supplement to enhance nutritional status or to divert animals away from roads, railways, or vulnerable habitats, is rising noticeably. Moose ( Alces alces ) densities in Scandinavia are currently at historically high levels, resulting in amplified damage to economically important young Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris ) forest stands. Nevertheless, there is limited information as to how diversionary feeding affects herbivore space use and habitat selection. We followed 32 female moose marked with Global Positioning System collars to evaluate 1) if feeding stations serve as attraction points to the extent that habitat‐selection patterns resemble those of central‐place foragers (i.e., high usage and more uniform selection close to the attraction point), and 2) if moose using feeding sites select young pine stands less than those not using feeding sites. Moose that used diversionary forage concentrated their space use around feeding stations and selected habitats as predicted for a central‐place forager with a decreasing probability of using areas away from feeding sites and a low degree of habitat selectivity close to feeding sites. However, moose that used feeding sites continued to select young pine stands to the same extent as moose that did not use feeding sites. Feeding sites were, therefore, not successful in diverting moose away from valuable natural browse, so we recommend wildlife managers establish feeding sites in sacrifice areas where moose browsing is permissible and, if possible, >1 km from young pine plantations.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author VAN BEEST, FLORIS M.
LOE, LEIF EGIL
MYSTERUD, ATLE
MILNER, JOS M.
spellingShingle VAN BEEST, FLORIS M.
LOE, LEIF EGIL
MYSTERUD, ATLE
MILNER, JOS M.
Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations
author_facet VAN BEEST, FLORIS M.
LOE, LEIF EGIL
MYSTERUD, ATLE
MILNER, JOS M.
author_sort VAN BEEST, FLORIS M.
title Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations
title_short Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations
title_full Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations
title_fullStr Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Space Use and Habitat Selection of Moose Around Feeding Stations
title_sort comparative space use and habitat selection of moose around feeding stations
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2010
url http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/2009-109
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.2193%2F2009-109
genre Alces alces
genre_facet Alces alces
op_source The Journal of Wildlife Management
volume 74, issue 2, page 219-227
ISSN 0022-541X 1937-2817
op_rights http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor
op_doi https://doi.org/10.2193/2009-109
container_title The Journal of Wildlife Management
container_volume 74
container_issue 2
container_start_page 219
op_container_end_page 227
_version_ 1802638048554385408