1 Cougar Puma concolor use of wildlife crossing structures on the Trans-Canada highway in Banff National Park, Alberta Vanessa Hays
2 Large Mammals (Chapter 8)Large home ranges Require more food Greater mobility Extensive spatial requirements Seasonal migrants We have learned in class, that larger mammals have different requirements than smaller mammals. They have larger home ranges Require more food Have greater mobility Extensive spatial requirements And some are seasonal migrants which means they require more resources in other locations as well. Not only do large mammals have these but they are also impacted by roads
3 Road Impacts Disrupt movement Eliminate and alienates habitatSource of mortality Mortality statistics 9 brown bears Slovenia Florida Panther Southern California Some of these impacts include All 3 on slide Here are just a few statistics to better show how roads impact large predators A highway in Slovenia resulted in the deaths of 9 brown bears in less than 20yr span Highways are responsible for nearly half of all mortalities among the Florida Panther And in California, the single most important cause of cougar related mortality is from vehicles.
4 Common Studies Increase barrier permeabilityEffective highway mitigation plans Ungulates Predators Many studies look at barrier permeability, effective highway mitigation plans, have only been conducted on ungulates. There is not much known about how effective crossing structures are for large predators This study focuses on how effective these wildlife crossings are for mountain lions and how this research can improve highway mitigation measures
5 Objectives 1. Seasonal patterns 2. Movement of prey3. Cougars and humans 4. Structure selection The researchers came up with 4 objectives they wanted to observe in this study: Whether there was a seasonal pattern to cougars use of wildlife crossing structures Whether a correlation existed between the crossing structures cougars use, and those of their main prey, white-tailed deer and mule deer How cougars reacted to crossing structures that were heavily used by humans Finally whether cougars selected for a particular type of crossing structure
6 Methods Study area Traffic Wildlife structure Data collectionhere are the methods they used to observe their objectives: This was a four year study from They conducted research along the trans-Canada highway in the bow river valley of BNP. Daily traffic averaged about 14,000 vehicles/day in 1998 Increasing 3%/yr
7 Figure 1 The first 45km of the hwy from the eastern gate is a 4 lane highway with a 2.4m high exclusionary fence on either side. This was the study area Phases indicate when the fence was completed 1&2 completed in 1988 3 completed in 97’ The fence can be a potential barrier to large mammal movement To mitigate the effects of this barrier, 22 wildlife structures were created along the highway. 20 underpasses 2 overpasses
8 Open-span bridge There are 4 different designs to the underpass wildlife structure: 7 open-span bridge underpasses 3 creek bridge underpass 6 metal culvert underpasses 4 concrete box culvert 2 wide overpasses
9 Creek bridge
10 Metal culvert
11 Concrete box culvert
12 Overpass
13 Methods: data collection & analysisTrack sections Infra-red Camera 3-4 day interval Test statistics Chi-square Pearson’s correlation To observe effectiveness of the structures, the researchers’ set up track sections Track sections – 2m long and as wide as the structures. Set at both ends to detect movement Species presence (cougar & deer), Their abundance And human activity counts were recorded at each track section 3-4 day intervals the track sections were evaluated. Tracks were classified as adequate or not depending on their ability to read tracks clearly. Overpasses contained infra-red cameras as a supplement, not replacement, of track section monitoring.
14 Table 1 Table 1 Shows the frequency of passage cougars used. It indicates which phase the structure was completed in, design, number of passes and habitat quality
15 Table 2 𝑿 𝟐 = 95.40, df = 9, p < 0.0001 Table 2 (chi square)Hyp 1 – seasonal patterns? Used structures More than expected in winter and less in summer (x^2 = 95.40, df = 9, p < .0001) Spring and autumn were not sig. from expected values of without seasonality 𝑿 𝟐 = 95.40, df = 9, p <
16 Objectives 2 & 3 Correlation between movement of cougar and deer?Positive correlation ( r = 0.624, p < 0.002) Correlation between cougar and human use? Not correlated ( r = 0.274, p = 0.216) Hyp 2 (pearsons) Movement of cougar and both deer species Significant positive correlation R = .624, p < .002 Hyp 3 (pearsons) Cougar and human use of crossing structures Not correlated R = .274, p = .216
17 Table 3 𝑿 𝟐 = 48.34, df = 4, p < 0.0001 Table 3 (chi square)Hyp 4 – selection for type of structure Total 377 cougar passages were used to determine their response to different types of structures. Use of structure types differed more than expected X^2 = 48.34, df = 4, p <.0001 Open span underpass were used more than expected (+) Creek bridge in proportion to availability (0) All other were used less than expected (-) 𝑿 𝟐 = 48.34, df = 4, p <
18 Discussion Seasonal pattern Correlation between prey and cougarNo correlation between human and cougar Frequent use of open-span underpass There was a clear seasonal pattern where cougars used crossing structures more than expected in the winter and less in the summer. There was a correlation between crossing use of cougars and their prey However there was no correlation between cougars and a crossing structure heavily used by humans And lastly they observed that cougars used the open-span underpass significantly more than other structure designs
19 Mitigation Planning Efficacy of design Overpass vs underpass CostReduce road mortality Increase barrier permeability Maintenance Fence and crossing designs This study observed how efficient wildlife crossing structures are, and how these results can be used for highway mitigation plans. Important factors for highway mitigation are: efficient deisgn type cost of structure The overall goal for mitigation is to reduce road related mortality and increase barrier permeability Cougars used the crossing structures significantly more than expected, and they used open-span underpass more than the costly overpasses, they made some observations as to why cougars might prefer the underpass to the overpass: Overpass issues Obstructs cross-highway view for cougars Feels like ‘unknown’ Important for cougars to view habitat on opposite side – cant do that with overpass Lack of dense vegetation – just 10 native plants Preferred cover of underpasses For future mitigation planning it may be useful to refer to this data and note which structures were used more often than others. Cougars were able to successfully move with these structures and reduce any road related mortalities.
20 Sources Cited Gloyne, Claire C., and Anthony P. Clevenger. "Cougar Puma Concolor Use of Wildlife Crossing Structures on the Trans-Canada Highway in Banff National Park, Alberta." Wildlife Biology 7 (2000): Web. Primack RB Essentials of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates, sunderland, MA. Beier, P. & Barrett, R.H. 1991: The cougar in the Santa Ana mountain range, California. - Final report. Orange County co-operative mountain lion study, 51 pp. Maehr, D.S., Land, E.D. & Roelke, M.E. 1991: Mortality pat- terns of panthers in southwest Florida. - Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Southeast Game and Fish and Wild- life Agencies 45: Kaczensky, P., Knauer, F., Huber, T., Jonosovic, M. & Adamic, M. 1996: The Ljubljana-Postojna highway - a deadly bar- rier for brown bears in Slovenia? - Journal of Wildlife Re- search 1:
21 Questions?