Return to search

Characteristics of Ungulate Behavior and Mortality Associated with Wire Fences

I studied the characteristics of fence mortality in pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and elk (Cervus elaphus) along roads in Colorado and Utah from June 2004 to June 2005. I defined a direct-fence mortality as a carcass caught directly in a fence and an indirect-fence mortality as a carcass on the ground within 10 m of a fence. I estimated an average annual direct mortality occurrence of 0.25 mortalities/km (0.078 mule deer mortalities/km, 0.113 pronghorn mortalities/km, and 0.061 elk mortalities/km). The highest fence-mortality rates for ungulates occurred during August, which coincided with weaning of fawns on my study area. Mule deer and pronghorn both jumped fences in >81% of observed crossings and did not differ in their crossing methods (P = 0.37). Getting caught between the top 2 wires was the leading cause of death for fence mortalities. Mule deer suffered higher fence-mortality rates than elk or pronghorn because they crossed fences more frequently and fed in the right-of-way of the road more often (P < 0.001). Juveniles were 8 times more likely to die in fences than adults. Woven-wire fence types were more lethal to ungulates (especially juveniles) than other fence types (P < 0.001). Woven wire with a single strand of barbed wire above it was significantly more lethal to ungulates than woven wire with 2 strands of barbed wire above it, or 4-strand barbed-wire fence (P < 0.001). There was a direct relationship between the frequency of fence-mortalities and ungulate abundance (P < 0.001 ). Traffic volumes had an inverse relationship with fence mortality frequencies (P < 0.001) and ungulate densities along the right-of-way (P < 0.001). Indirect mortality (i.e., carcasses within 10 m of fences) composed 66% of fence-related mortality, whereas direct-fence mortality (i.e., carcasses in fences) composed a mere 33%. Additionally, indirect-fence mortality was found to be greater along woven-wire fences, when compared to barbed-wire fence types (P = 0.003).

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:UTAHS/oai:digitalcommons.usu.edu:etd-7669
Date01 May 2005
CreatorsHarrington, Justin L.
PublisherDigitalCommons@USU
Source SetsUtah State University
Detected LanguageEnglish
Typetext
Formatapplication/pdf
SourceAll Graduate Theses and Dissertations
RightsCopyright for this work is held by the author. Transmission or reproduction of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. Works not in the public domain cannot be commercially exploited without permission of the copyright owner. Responsibility for any use rests exclusively with the user. For more information contact digitalcommons@usu.edu.

Page generated in 0.0013 seconds