Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDeStefano, S.
dc.contributor.authorSchmidt, S. L.
dc.contributor.authorDeVos, J. C.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-18T14:54:44Z
dc.date.available2020-09-18T14:54:44Z
dc.date.issued2000-05-01
dc.identifier.citationDeStefano, S., Schmidt, S. L., & DeVos, J. C. (2000). Observations of predator activity at wildlife water developments in southern Arizona. Journal of Range Management, 53(3), 255-258.
dc.identifier.issn0022-409X
dc.identifier.doi10.2307/4003428
dc.identifier.doi10.2458/azu_jrm_v53i3_destefano
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/643757
dc.description.abstractWildlife water developments have been constructed and maintained throughout the arid western United States to benefit big game and upland gamebird populations. There is debate, however, over possible detriments to wildlife from artificial water sources in deserts and other arid environments. One concern is that water developments attract predators, which then impact the prey populations that these developments are intended to benefit. To examine the extent of predator activity around water developments, we examined 15 paired water and non-water (random) sites for sign (scats, tracks, visual observations, animal parts such as feathers and bones, and carcasses) of predators and prey. Predator sign was 7x greater around water sites than non-water sites (P = 0.002). Coyote (Canis latrans Say) sign accounted for 79% of all predator sign and was 7x greater near water than away from water (P = 0.006). Amount of sign for all prey species combined was not different between paired sites (P = 0.6), but results for individual species and groups of species was variable; passerine and gallinaceous bird sign was greater around water sites (P = 0.008), ungulate sign was not different between water and non-water sites (P greater than or equal to 0.20), and lagomorph sign was almost 2x greater away from water than near water (P = 0.05). Predators were probably attracted to wildlife water developments to drink rather than hunt; without water developments, predators may be even more concentrated around the fewer natural water sites.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSociety for Range Management
dc.relation.urlhttps://rangelands.org/
dc.rightsCopyright © Society for Range Management.
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectdrinkers
dc.subjectbirds of prey
dc.subjectwater resources
dc.subjectgame birds
dc.subjectcoyotes
dc.subjectpredator-prey relationships
dc.subjectwildlife management
dc.subjectArizona
dc.subjectcarnivores
dc.subjectdesert ecology
dc.subjectraptors
dc.subjectpredator-prey relationships
dc.subjectungulates
dc.subjectwildlife management
dc.titleObservations of predator activity at wildlife water developments in southern Arizona
dc.typetext
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Range Management
dc.description.collectioninformationThe Journal of Range Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.description.admin-noteMigrated from OJS platform August 2020
dc.source.volume53
dc.source.issue3
dc.source.beginpage255-258
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-18T14:54:45Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
9512-9393-1-PB.pdf
Size:
34.54Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record