The conservation of large carnivores is a formidable challenge for biodiversity conservation. Using a data set on the past and current status of brown bears (Ursus arctos), Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx), gray wolves (Canis lupus), and wolverines (Gulo gulo) in European countries, we show that roughly one-third of mainland Europe hosts at least one large carnivore species, with stable or increasing abundance in most cases in 21st-century records. The reasons for this overall conservation success include protective legislation, supportive public opinion, and a variety of practices making coexistence between large carnivores and people possible. The European situation reveals that large carnivores and people can share the same landscape.

No abstract

Restrictions on roaming Until the past century or so, the movement of wild animals was relatively unrestricted, and their travels contributed substantially to ecological processes. As humans have increasingly altered natural habitats, natural animal movements have been restricted. Tucker et al. examined GPS locations for more than 50 species. In general, animal movements were shorter in areas with high human impact, likely owing to changed behaviors and physical limitations. Besides affecting the species themselves, such changes could have wider effects by limiting the movement of nutrients and altering ecological interactions. Science , this issue p. 466

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. British Ecological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Animal Ecology. Summary 1. Summer home range size variation and habitat selection of 35 radio-collared adult female roe deer was studied, using kernel home range estimation and compositional analysis of habitat use. 2. Female roe deer adjust the size of their home range in response to decreasing food supply, and the hypothesis that female roe deer utilize the minimum area that sustain their energy requirement cannot be rejected. Home range size increased with the visibility in the home range (the average distance at which sight is blocked by intervening vegetation). This supports thehypothesis that cover is important in reducing the risk of predation and thereby increasing adult survival. 4. Female roe deer spend more time near habitat edges, supporting the hypothesis that different habitat types contain complementary resources, e.g. food and cover or different nutrients. Simultaneous access to several habitat types did not have any effect on home range size, possibly because variation in heterogeneity between different home ranges was too low. 5. Females without fawns had smaller home ranges, possibly because they only need to sustain their own energetic requirements. 6. The analyses of habitat selection inside each home range showed that the forest types, characterized by high densities of food and low visibility, were preferred, suggesting that habitat use is allocated in proportion to either food or cover or both. Variation in home range size has long been a subject of ecological interest. Interspecific variation in home range size has been related to body-size-dependent metabolic requirements (McNab 1963), declining rates of utilizable energy in the environment with increasing body weight (Harestad & Bunnell 1979), species overlap (Damuth 1981), biological time (Lindstedt, Miller & Buskirk 1986) and rate of home range use (Swihart, Slade & Bergstrom 1988). Intraspecific variation in home range size is less well understood. Our first hypothesis (Hi) is that an animal utilizes the minimum area that can meet its energy requirement. If the metabolic requirement of an individual is R and the production of the environment is P then home range size H is H = RP-' (Harestad &Bunnell 1979). Thus, variation in home range size can be caused by both individual variation in metabolic requirements R due to, for example, variation in number offspring or body weight, or by spatial variation in productivity P of the environment.Traditionally, in foraging-predation trade-off models (Krebs & Kacelnik 1991), availability of cover is important in that it reduce the risk of predation and th...

Ungulate populations exhibiting partial migration present a unique opportunity to explore the causes of the general phenomenon of migration. The European roe deer Capreolus capreolus is particularly suited for such studies due to a wide distribution range and a high level of ecological plasticity. In this study we undertook a comparative analysis of roe deer GPS location data from a representative set of European ecosystems available within the EURODEER collaborative project. We aimed at evaluating the ecological factors affecting migration tactic (i.e. occurrence) and pattern (i.e. timing, residence time, number of migratory trips). Migration occurrence varied between and within populations and depended on winter severity and topographic variability. Spring migrations were highly synchronous, while the timing of autumn migrations varied widely between regions, individuals and sexes. Overall, roe deer were faithful to their summer ranges, especially males. In the absence of extreme and predictable winter conditions, roe deer seemed to migrate opportunistically, in response to a tradeoff between the costs of residence in spatially separated ranges and the costs of migratory movements. Animals performed numerous trips between winter and summer ranges which depended on factors influencing the costs of movement such as between‐range distance, slope and habitat openness. Our results support the idea that migration encompasses a behavioural continuum, with one‐trip migration and residence as its end points, while commuting and multi‐trip migration with short residence times in seasonal ranges are intermediate tactics. We believe that a full understanding of the variation in tactics of temporal separation in habitat use will provide important insights on migration and the factors that influence its prevalence.