Grizzly bear response to human development and activities in the Bow River Watershed, Alberta, Canada

Gibeau, Michael L.; Clevenger, Anthony P.; Herrero, Stephen; Wierzchowski, Jack

doi:10.1016/s0006-3207(01)00131-8

Cited by 161 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

116

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, elk might need to minimize the risk of being predated upon also by other predators, including cougars (Kortello et al 2007) and black and grizzly bears (Herrero 2005). Whereas little is Ecology and Society 16(3): 16 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss3/art16/ known for cougars and black bears, a large body of information demonstrates grizzly bear spatial avoidance of humans at higher levels of use in the study area (Gibeau et al 2002, Chruszcz et al 2003. Therefore, similar speculation is warranted for wolves, grizzly bears, and perhaps other predators of elk, because large mammalian predators are known to avoid humans in other areas (Kasworm and Manley 1990, Trombulak and Frissell 2000, George and Crooks 2006.…”

Section: Wolf and Elk Avoidance Of Human Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Activity Differentially Redistributes Large Mammals in the Canadian Rockies National Parks

Rogala¹,

Hebblewhite²,

Whittington³

et al. 2011

E&S

142

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. National parks are important for conservation of species such as wolves (Canis lupus) and elk (Cervus canadensis). However, topography, vegetation conditions, and anthropogenic infrastructure within parks may limit available habitat. Human activity on trails and roads may lead to indirect habitat loss, further limiting available habitat. Predators and prey may respond differentially to human activity, potentially disrupting ecological processes. However, research on such impacts to wildlife is incomplete, especially at fine spatial and temporal scales. Our research investigated the relationship between wolf and elk distribution and human activity using fine-scale Global Positioning System (GPS) wildlife telemetry locations and hourly human activity measures on trails and roads in Banff, Kootenay, and Yoho National Parks, Canada. We observed a complex interaction between the distance animals were located from trails and human activity level resulting in species adopting both mutual avoidance and differential response behaviors. In areas < 50 m from trails human activity led to a mutual avoidance response by both wolves and elk. In areas 50 -400 m from trails low levels of human activity led to differential responses; wolves avoided these areas, whereas elk appeared to use these areas as a predation refugia. These differential impacts on elk and wolves may have important implications for trophic dynamics. As human activity increased above two people/hour, areas 50 -400 m from trails were mutually avoided by both species, resulting in the indirect loss of important montane habitat. If park managers are concerned with human impacts on wolves and elk, or on these species' trophic interactions with other species, they can monitor locations near trails and roads and consider hourly changes of human activity levels in areas important to wildlife.

show abstract

Section: Wolf and Elk Avoidance Of Human Activitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Human Activity Differentially Redistributes Large Mammals in the Canadian Rockies National Parks

Rogala¹,

Hebblewhite²,

Whittington³

et al. 2011

E&S

142

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, investigators are only just beginning to identify the implications of this negative environmental factor for acoustically communicating species. Anthropogenic noise may affect the behaviour in several taxa, including birds (Slabbekoorn and Peet, 2003), mammals (Myrberg, 1990;Richardson et al, 1995;Lesage et al, 1999;Morton and Symonds, 2002;Gibeau et al, 2002;Rabin et al, 2006), anurans (Sun and Narins, 2005) and fishes (Fernandes et al, 2000), with direct or indirect consequences on their ecology and fitness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of ship noise on the detectability of communication signals in the Lusitanian toadfish

Vasconcelos

Amorim²,

Ladich

2007

Journal of Experimental Biology

204

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Underwater noise pollution is an increasing environmental problem which might affect communication, behaviour, fitness and consequently species'survival. The most common anthropogenic noises in aquatic habitats derive from shipping. In the present study we investigated the implications of noise pollution from a ship on the sound detectability, namely of conspecific vocalizations in the Lusitanian toadfish, Halobatrachus didactylus. Ambient and ferry-boat noises were recorded in the Tagus River estuary(Portugal), as well as toadfish sounds, and their sound pressure levels determined. Hearing sensitivities were measured under quiet lab conditions and in the presence of these masking noises at levels encountered in the field,using the auditory evoked potentials (AEP) recording technique. The Lusitanian toadfish is a hearing generalist, with best hearing sensitivity at low frequencies between 50 and 200 Hz (below 100 dB re. 1 μPa). Under ambient noise conditions, hearing was only slightly masked at lower frequencies. In the presence of ship noise, auditory thresholds increased considerably, by up to 36 dB, at most frequencies tested. This is mainly because the main energies of ferry-boat noise were within the most sensitive hearing range of this species. Comparisons between masked audiograms and sound spectra of the toadfish's mating and agonistic vocalizations revealed that ship noise decreased the ability to detect conspecific acoustic signals. This study provides the first evidence that fishes' auditory sensitivity can be impaired by ship noise and that acoustic communication, which is essential during agonistic encounters and mate attraction, might be restricted in coastal environments altered by human activity.

show abstract

“…Indeed, sound has been subject of intense scientific research. For example, acoustic techniques have been successfully applied to determine constraints upon acoustic communication in the aerial environment (Ellinger and Hödl 2003), for studying social communication among organisms (Slater and Catchpole 1990;Ruiz-Miranda et al 2002;Da Cunha and Jalles 2007), and for determining the effect of anthropogenic noise on birds (Reijnen et al 1997;Forman et al 2002), bears (Gibeau et al 2002;Dyck and Baydack 2004), amphibians (Sun and Narins 2005), and squirrels (Rabin et al 2006). Research has also examined the human perception of sound (Southworth 1969;Carles et al 1999), coupling visual and acoustic preferences (Anderson et al 1983;Porteous and Mastin 1985;Yang and Kang 2005), in order to better understand noise as an impairing sound (Kariel 1990;Staples 1997;Gramann 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A flume experiment to examine underwater sound generation by flowing water

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hydrogeomorphology and ecology of rivers and streams has been subject of intensive research for many decades. However, hydraulically-generated acoustics have been mostly neglected, even though this physical attribute is a robust signal in fluvial ecosystems. Physical generated underwater sound can be used to quantify hydro-geomorphic processes, to differentiate among aquatic habitat types, and it has implications on the behavior of organisms. In this study, acoustic signals were quantified in a flume by varying hydrogeomorphic drivers and the related turbulence and bubble formation. The acoustic signals were recorded using two hydrophones and analyzed using a signal processing software, over 31 third-octave bands (20 Hz-20 kHz), and then combined in 10 octave bands. The analytical method allowed for a major improvement of the signal-to-noise ratio, therefore greatly reducing the uncertainty in our analyses. Water velocity, relative submergence, and flow obstructions were manipulated in the flume and the resultant acoustic signals recorded. Increasing relative submergence ratio and water velocity were important for reaching a turbulence threshold above which distinct sound levels were generated. Increases in water velocity resulted in increased sound levels over a wide range of frequencies. The increases in sound levels due to relative submergence of obstacles were most pronounced in midrange frequencies (125 Hz-2 kHz). Flow obstructions in running waters created turbulence and air bubble formation, which again produced specific sound signatures.

show abstract

Grizzly bear response to human development and activities in the Bow River Watershed, Alberta, Canada

Cited by 161 publications

References 11 publications

Human Activity Differentially Redistributes Large Mammals in the Canadian Rockies National Parks

Human Activity Differentially Redistributes Large Mammals in the Canadian Rockies National Parks

Effects of ship noise on the detectability of communication signals in the Lusitanian toadfish

A flume experiment to examine underwater sound generation by flowing water

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About