Delusions in Habitat Evaluation: Measuring Use, Selection, and Importance - Research Techniques in Animal Ecology - page 153

survival and reproduction are not obtainable or too scant for making compar-
isons with habitat use, surrogates (e.g., body size, home range size) may, in
some cases, be appropriate and could add measurably to assessments of habi-
tat quality.
Surprisingly, even intensive, long-term studies of radiocollared animals
with detailed data on both habitat use and demographics have typically not
attempted to relate the two. This should be a goal for the future.
Acknowledgments
I thank K. V. Noyce and T. K. Fuller for many thoughtful discussions about this subject,
and participants of the workshop for their input following my presentation. K. V. Noyce,
P. L. Coy, M. S. Boyce, and W. F. Porter provided helpful suggestions on the manuscript.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources supported my study of black bears,
which stimulated my thinking about habitat evaluation and prompted me to use a study
design like that described at the end of this chapter.
Literature Cited
Aanes, R. and R. Andersen. 1996. The effects of sex, time of birth, and habitat on the vul-
nerability of roe deer fawns to red fox predation. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74:
1857-1865.
Adler, G. H. and M. L. Wilson. 1989. Demography of the meadow vole along a simple
habitat gradient. Canadian Journal of Zoology 67: 772-774.
Aebischer, N. J., V. Marcström, R. E. Kenward, and M. Karlbom. 1993a. Survival and habi-
tat utilisation: A case for compositional analysis. In J. D. Lebreton and P. M. North,
eds., Marked individuals in the study of bird populations, 343-353. Basel, Switzerland:
Birkhauser Verlag.
Aebischer, N. J., P. A. Robertson, and R. E. Kenward. 1993b. Compositional analysis of
habitat use from animal radio-tracking data. Ecology 74: 1313-1325.
Alldredge, J. R. and J. T. Ratti. 1986. Comparison of some statistical techniques for analy-
sis of resource selection. Journal of Wildlife Management 50: 157-165.
Alldredge, J. R. and J. T. Ratti. 1992. Further comparison of some statistical techniques for
analysis of resources selection. Journal of Wildlife Management 56: 1-9.
Andersen, R., O. Hjeljord, and B.-E. Sæther. 1992. Moose defecation rates in relation to
habitat quality. Alces 28: 95-100.
Armleder, H. M., M. J. Waterhouse, D. G. Keisker, and R. J. Dawson. 1994. Winter habi-
tat use by mule deer in the central interior of British Columbia. Canadian Journal of
Zoology 72: 1721-1725.
Arthur, S. M., B. F. J. Manly, L. L. McDonald, and G. W. Garner. 1996. Assessing habitat
selection when availability changes. Ecology 77: 215-227.