Effects of human activity on the habitat utilization of Himalayan marmot (Marmota himalayana) in Zoige wetland

Abstract

Human activity is increasingly and persistently disturbing nature and wild animals. Affected wildlife adopts multiple strategies to deal with different human influences. To explore the effect of human activity on habitat utilization of Himalayan marmot ( Marmota himalayana ), habitat utilization patterns of three neighboring marmot populations in habitats affected differently by human activities were recorded and compared. We found that (a) distance between reproductive burrows (a represent of reproductive pairs) becomes shorter under the influence of human activities, and more burrows were dug as temporary shelters, resulting in shorter distance between those shelters and shorter distance flee to those shelters and, consequently, shorter flight initiation distance when threatened. More burrows that are closer to the disturbed habitats improve the ability to escape from threats. (b) Reproductive burrow site selection of the species is determined by the availability of mounds in the habitat, and breeding pairs selectively build reproductive (also the hibernation) burrows on mounds, potentially to improve surveillance when basking and the drainage of burrows. Human activities generally drive breeding pairs away from the road to dig their reproductive burrows likely to reduce disturbance from vehicles. However, even heavy human activity exerts no pressure on the distance of reproductive burrows from the road or the mound volume of the high disturbance population, potentially because mounds are the best burrowing site to reproduce and hibernate in the habitat. Marmots deal with disturbance by digging more burrows in the habitat to flee more effectively and building reproductive burrows on mounds to gain better vigilance and drainage efficiency.

Temporal activity patterns of North China leopards and their prey in response to moonlight and habitat factors

“…Human activities also significantly influenced leopards and wild boar but had less effect on roe deer and tolai hare activity. Other studies also revealed that leopards avoided human settlements, and wild boar are considered a pest animal or otherwise are negatively perceived by people including because of crop damage (Zhou et al, 2021 ; Zhu et al, 2021 ); wild boar may, therefore, adopt spatiotemporal avoidance behaviors. However, species interactions and activities may be context specific as others have found that ungulate herbivores during daytime overlap with humans on foot in different habitats (Yang et al, 2021 ).…”

The Long and Winding Road in the Cross-Process among Authors and Editors must not Fall into Pandora's Box: The Role of Reviewers

“…However, our findings are in contrast to those by Holmes [78] for hoary marmots in south-central Alaska (49.9 m) and for yellow-bellied marmots in California (up to 300 m (Arey and Moore [50]). Such differences are most likely associated with environmental conditions or habitat disturbances, such as Himalayan marmot (Marmota Himalayan) in Zoige wetland China [45] and further associated energy constraints, and predation risk such as golden marmots in Khunjerab national park northern Pakistan [25]. In this study, marmots exhibited short movement patterns for low disturbance due to rich food availability surrounding of pup burrows (zaman personal observation).…”

“…For each marmot site, we determined frequency of occurrence index (FOI) of continuous disturbances from anthropogenic activities calculated based on the following characteristics (Figure S1): 1) Existence of livestock, or humans on foot, with donkeys, tree cutting, milking or guarding livestock (shepherds or herders), as well as local hikers (assumed livestock owners) [19,45]; 2) Distance to each livestock corral or shepherd huts [14] and;…”