Modeling Pronghorn Migration Corridors in the Northern Great Plains
Abstract
While terrestrial seasonal migrations worldwide continue to decline, the migrations
of pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) in the Northern Great Plains remain
poorly studied. Development due to energy exploration and extraction within this region
has recently increased, possibly placing restrictions on pronghorn movement. In this
study, I used two habitat modeling methods, maximum entropy and Analytical Hierarchy
Process (AHP), to identify suitable pronghorn habitat, and two corridor modeling methods,
circuit theory and least-cost path, to identify seasonal migration corridors. I used
pronghorn locations during the 2008 spring and fall migration seasons to identify
which habitat and corridor models perform the best based on pronghorn occupancy and
area included in the corridor. The maximum entropy model performed better than AHP,
resulting in corridors that included more pronghorn locations than those created using
AHP. Additionally, corridors derived from circuit theory included more pronghorn locations
within a smaller area than those created using the least-cost path method. I recommend
using the maximum entropy cost surface and the area of overlap between the two corridors
at 15% habitat suitability level for future management actions. Without further study
and conservation efforts built on this new knowledge, pronghorn populations may eventually
decline and the functioning and biodiversity of the Northern Great Plains may be greatly
impaired.
Type
Master's projectPermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/2171Citation
Poor, Erin E. (2010). Modeling Pronghorn Migration Corridors in the Northern Great Plains. Master's project, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/2171.Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Nicholas School of the Environment
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info