Evaluating Responses by Sympatric Ungulates to Fence Modifications Across the Northern Great Plains

Advancing fence datasets: Comparing approaches to map fence locations and specifications in southwest Montana

Fencing is a major anthropogenic feature affecting wildlife distributions and movements, but its impacts are difficult to quantify due to a widespread lack of spatial data. We created a fence model and compared outputs to a fence mapping approach using satellite imagery in two counties in southwest Montana, USA to advance fence data development for use in research and management. The model incorporated road, land cover, ownership, and grazing boundary spatial layers to predict fence locations. We validated the model using data collected on randomized road transects (n = 330). The model predicted ~34,700 km of fences with a mean fence density of 0.93 km/km2 and a maximum density of 14.9 km/km2. We also digitized fences using Google Earth Pro in a random subset of our study area in survey townships (n = 50). The Google Earth approach showed greater agreement (K = 0.76) with known samples than the fence model (K = 0.56) yet was unable to map fences in forests and was significantly more time intensive. We also compared fence attributes by land ownership and land cover variables to assess factors that may influence fence specifications (e.g., wire heights) and types (e.g., number of barbed wires). Private land fences had bottom wires that were closer to the ground and top wires higher from the ground when compared to fences on public lands, with sample means at ~22 cm and ~26 cm, and ~115 cm and ~111 cm, respectively. Both bottom wire means were well below recommended heights for ungulates navigating underneath fencing (≥ 46 cm), while top wire means were closer to the 107 cm maximum fence height recommendation. We found that both fence type and land ownership were correlated (χ2 = 45.52, df = 5, p = 0.001) as well as fence type and land cover type (χ2 = 140.73, df = 15, p = 0.001). We provide tools for estimating fence locations, and our novel fence type assessment demonstrates an opportunity for updated policy to encourage the adoption of “wildlife-friendlier” fencing standards to facilitate wildlife movement in the western U.S. while supporting rural livelihoods.

Effects of fences and fence gaps on the movement behavior of three southern African antelope species

Globally, migratory ungulates are affected by fences. While field observational studies reveal the amount of animal–fence interactions across taxa, GPS tracking-based studies uncover fence effects on movement patterns and habitat selection. However, studies on the direct effects of fences and fence gaps on movement behavior, especially based on high-frequency tracking data, are scarce. We used GPS tracking on three common African antelopes (Tragelaphus strepsiceros, Antidorcas marsupialis, and T. oryx) with movement strategies ranging from range residency to nomadism in a semi-arid, Namibian savanna traversed by wildlife-proof fences that elephants have regularly breached. We classified major forms of ungulate–fence interaction types on a seasonal and a daily scale. Furthermore, we recorded the distances and times spent at fences regarding the total individual space use. Based on this, we analyzed the direct effects of fences and fence gaps on the animals’ movement behavior for the previously defined types of animal–fence interactions. Antelope-fence interactions peaked during the early hours of the day and during seasonal transitions when the limiting resource changed between water and forage. Major types of ungulate–fence interactions were quick, trace-like, or marked by halts. We found that the amount of time spent at fences was highest for nomadic eland. Migratory springbok adjusted their space use concerning fence gap positions. If the small home ranges of sedentary kudu included a fence, they frequently interacted with this fence. For springbok and eland, distance traveled along a fence declined with increasing utilization of a fence gap. All species reduced their speed in the proximity of a fence but often increased their speed when encountering the fence. Crossing a fence led to increased speeds for all species. We demonstrate that fence effects mainly occur during crucial foraging times (seasonal scale) and during times of directed movements (daily scale). Importantly, we provide evidence that fences directly alter antelope movement behaviors with negative implications for energy budgets and that persistent fence gaps can reduce the intensity of such alterations. Our findings help to guide future animal–fence studies and provide insights for wildlife fencing and fence gap planning.

How did the deer cross the fence: An evaluation of wildlife-friendlier fence modifications to facilitate deer movement

Fences are a common feature throughout the landscape of North America’s Great Plains region. Knowledge surrounding the harmful implication that fences have on the movement of wildlife, specifically ungulates, is expanding. Across the region, it is accepted that there is a need to mitigate the impacts of barbed wire fencing and that “wildlife-friendlier” fence designs are emerging as a practical tool to meet these goals. Here we evaluate the response of sympatric deer species to the implementation of two fence modifications, fastening the top two wires together using clips and the installation of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe to encompass the top two wires. We also aim to determine the optimal top wire height to allow for successful crossing by deer, with the goal to provide a more robust understanding of effective wildlife-friendlier fence standards. We used remote trail cameras to capture crossing events and recorded responses for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Using generalized linear mixed modelling, we tested the influence modifications had on crossing success and decisions prior to and after the modifications were installed compared to control sites. We found that these modifications had little impact on deer crossing behavior. We determined that wire height had the greatest impact on the permeability of fences, but that deer permeability was strongly influenced by species and sex. We found that the current maximum recommended top wire height of 102 cm (40 inches) is adequate to allow individuals of both deer species to cross over the fence, with the exception of female mule deer. Our results also indicate as the top wire height reaches 110 cm (43 inches) or higher, that the probability of successfully jumping over the fence dramatically drops off, with the exception for male mule deer. We recommend the installation of clips as a cost-effective method to lower top wire height and PVC pipe to improve fence visibility and potentially reduce entanglement events, all while effectively keeping livestock in intended pastures.

Animal use of fence crossings in southwestern rangelands

Net-wire fencing built to confine livestock is common on rangelands in the Southwestern USA, yet the impacts of livestock fencing on wildlife are largely unknown. Many wildlife species cross beneath fences at defined crossing locations because they prefer to crawl underneath rather than jump over fences. Animals occasionally become entangled jumping or climbing over fences, leading to injury or death. More commonly, repeated crossings under net-wire fencing by large animals lead to fence damage, though the damage is often tolerated by landowners until the openings affect the ability to enclose livestock. The usage, placement, characteristics, and passage rates of fence crossings beneath net-wire fencing are poorly understood. We monitored 20 randomly selected fence crossings on net-wire livestock fencing across two study sites on rangelands in South Texas, USA, from April 2018 to March 2019. We assessed the characteristics of fence-crossing locations (openings beneath the fence created by animals to aid in crossing) and quantified crossing rates and the probability of crossing by all species of animals via trail cameras. We documented 10,889 attempted crossing events, with 58% (n = 6271) successful. Overall, 15 species of medium- and large-size mammals and turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) contributed to crossing events. Crossing locations received 3-4 crossing attempts per day on average, but the number of attempts and probability of successful crossing varied by location and fence condition. The probability of crossing attempts was most consistently influenced by the opening size of the crossing and season; as crossing size (opening) increased, the probability of successful crossing significantly increased for all species. Peaks in crossing activity corresponded with species' daily and seasonal movements and activity. The density and size of fence-crossing locations were dependent on fence maintenance and not associated with vegetation communities or habitat variables. However, crossing locations were often re-established in the same locations after fence repairs. This is one of the few studies to monitor how all animal species present interacted with net-wire livestock fencing in rangelands. Our results will help land managers understand the impact of net-wire livestock fencing on animal movement.

Is it the road or the fence? Influence of linear anthropogenic features on the movement and distribution of a partially migratory ungulate

BACKGROUND

Anthropogenic linear features change the behavior and selection patterns of species, which must adapt to these ever-increasing features on the landscape. Roads are a well-studied linear feature that alter the survival, movement, and distribution of animals. Less understood are the effects of fences on wildlife, though they tend to be more ubiquitous across the landscape than roads. Even less understood are potential indirect effects when fences are found in tandem with roads along transportation corridors.

METHODS

We assessed how the spatial configuration of fences and roads effect the movement (crossing effect) and distribution (proximity effect) of a partially migratory pronghorn population (Antilocapra americana) on the grasslands of southern Alberta, Canada. We used data from 55 collared pronghorn within a step-selection function framework to assess the influence of 4 linear features: (1) pasture fences, (2) roads not fenced, (3) roads fenced on one side, and (4) roads fenced on both sides on the selection pattern of migratory and resident animals. We examined whether steps along a movement pathway (i.e., crossing effect) were influenced by the type of linear feature animals attempted to cross and, whether these features affected the distribution of pronghorn (i.e., proximity effect) across the landscape.

RESULTS

The top model for crossing effect for both movement tactics contained all 4 linear features and land cover. Regression coefficients were negative for all linear features, indicating that individuals were less likely to chose steps that crossed linear features. For the proximity effect, migrant animals avoided all linear features except roads fenced on both sides, where they selected areas closer to this feature. Resident animals, on the other hand, were found closer to pasture fences but further from roads without fences.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that both fences and roads are indirectly affecting pronghorn resource use spatially and behaviorally, whether each linear feature is found separately or in tandem. Modifying existing fences and roads to account for responses to these distinct linear features could facilitate more successful crossing opportunities and/or shifts in distribution. Allowing pronghorn to freely move across the landscape will maintain functional connectivity to ensure population persistence of this endemic ungulate.

Causes, Consequences, and Conservation of Ungulate Migration

Our understanding of ungulate migration is advancing rapidly due to innovations in modern animal tracking. Herein, we review and synthesize nearly seven decades of work on migration and other long-distance movements of wild ungulates. Although it has long been appreciated that ungulates migrate to enhance access to forage, recent contributions demonstrate that their movements are fine tuned to dynamic landscapes where forage, snow, and drought change seasonally. Researchers are beginning to understand how ungulates navigate migrations, with the emerging view that animals blend gradient tracking with spatial memory, some of which is socially learned. Although migration often promotes abundant populations—with broad effects on ecosystems—many migrations around the world have been lost or are currently threatened by habitat fragmentation, climate change, and barriers to movement. Fortunately, new efforts that use empirical tracking data to map migrations in detail are facilitating effective conservation measures to maintain ungulate migration.

Fence Ecology: Frameworks for Understanding the Ecological Effects of Fences

Investigations of the links between human infrastructure and ecological change have provided eye-opening insights into humanity's environmental impacts and contributed to global environmental policies. Fences are globally ubiquitous, yet they are often omitted from discussions of anthropogenic impacts. In the present article, we address this gap through a systematic literature review on the ecological effects of fences. Our overview provides five major takeaways: 1) an operational definition of fencing to structure future research, 2) an estimate of fence densities in the western United States to emphasize the challenges of accounting for fences in human-footprint mapping, 3) a framework exhibiting the ecological winners and losers that fences produce, 4) a typology of fence effects across ecological scales to guide research, and 5) a summary of research trends and biases that suggest that fence effects have been underestimated. Through highlighting past research and offering frameworks for the future, we aim with this work to formalize the nascent field of fence ecology.