Spatial responses to human hunting: a comparison between two sympatric populations of wild boar (Sus scrofa) and red deer (Cervus elaphus)

IUGB Congress 24/8/217 Spatial responses to human hunting: a comparison between two sympatric populations of wild boar (Sus scrofa) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) Chassagneux A.1, Calenge C. 1, Baubet B. 1 & Saïd S. 1 1ONCFS, Unité cervidés-sanglier, 133 Birieux, France

CONTEXT Population growth and spatial expansion of ungulates in the northern hemisphere Species coexistence Increasing conflicts with human activities Agricultural damage Forest damage Hunting regulation but diminution of hunters Collision with vehicle

OBJECTIVES How two sympatric populations of red deer (Cervus elaphus) and wild boar (Sus scrofa) differ in their spatial behaviour during the hunting period? Movement Space use Does drive hunt affect individual spatial behaviour? Is the individual response similar for both species? Spatial response Temporal scale of the response

SPECIES DATA Two species red deer and wild boar : Popular game species Responsible for crops and forests damage Hunting event = conjunction between an individual and a battue Individuals Hunting events Species Sex Red deer Female 98 19 Wild boar Female 14 9 monitored Similar environmental and hunting conditions

STUDY SITE One study site: National Hunting and Wildlife Reserve of La Petite Pierre (48 51 41 N, 7 19 15 E) 267 ha of unfenced forest Habitat types: forest without understorey, bushes, meadows, roadsides Hunting conditions: Multi-species battue One battue per week Mean number of hunters: 25 Mean number of dogs: 6

SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR METRICS Spatial behaviour Movement Distance Speed Sinusoity Home range X & Y Space use Forest Bushes Meadows Road Metrics Movement Total daily distance Daily maximum speed Mean sinusoity Daily home range size Daily maximum activity Space use Proportion of daily locations in each habitat types Meanings Movement Flight Flight Flight Exploration Mobility Space use Forest use Secure areas use Open areas use Disturbance areas use

SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR DESCRIPTION Projection of the variables chose to describe the spatial behaviour on the Projection of the variables chose to describe the spatial plane defined principal component behaviour by on the plane defined by principal component axes axes 1 and 2 1 and 2 Projection of individuals from both species on the plane defined by principal component axes 1 and 2 1. Meadow use Distance.5 Dim2 (18.2%) Forest use Home range size. Speed Sinusoity Y X -.5 Road use sdspeed Bushes use -1. -1. -.5. Dim1 (31.8%).5 1. Red deer before Red deer after Wild boar before Wild boar after

SPATIAL BEHAVIOUR DESCRIPTION Red deer and wild boar differ in their spatial behaviour: Meadow use and speed No clear detection of any spatial behaviour change in response to the battue for either species Refining the temporal scale Study the individual level

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES 5 3 1 Daily maximum speed (m/h) One metric describing spatial behaviour and calculated per day D-1 D+1

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES 5 Normal behaviour 1 3 Higher speed Lower speed Maximum speed per day during the hunting period (5-95 % quantiles and median) Daily maximum speed (m/h) One metric describing spatial behaviour and calculated per day D-1 D+1

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSES 5 3 Normal behaviour Lower speed Maximum speed per day for 5 days: battue (), the days before ( and D-1), the days after (D+1 and ) Higher speed 1 Maximum speed per day during the hunting period (5-95 % quantiles and median) Daily maximum speed (m/h) One metric describing spatial behaviour and calculated per day For both species and one metric per dimension D-1 D+1

6 Fifi 4 6 Lost 3 6 Pub2 4 2 2 Pub 1 6 4 4 Lost 2 2 Huitte 1 2 6 6 4 2 2 Huitte 2 2 4 Lost 1 2 6 4 2 4 Aurelie 6 Bertha 2 6 Nael 4 Female wild boar 4 Lou 6 4 6 2 4 6 Panthere Melanie 2 6 4 4 6 Gabrielle 4 2 2 6 Milka 4 2 Huguette 2 Cloe 2 6 4 6 2 4 Vanessa 4 6 Caramel 2 4 6 2 4 Fari 2 6 Female red deer 6 MAXIMUM SPEED

MAXIMUM SPEED Two responses at the individual scale: increase the speed during the drive hunt (flight?) no change in speed during or after the drive hunt (no disturbance or no detection of the hiding phase) Wild boar individuals appear to react more intensively to the drive hunt than red deer individuals.

MAXIMUM ACTIVITY 2 Fifi Pub 2 2 Pub 1 5 1 5 1 2 Huitte 2 2 Bertha 2 Lost 3 5 1 2 5 1 5 1 5 5 1 Vanessa Lost 1 5 1 5 1 Lost 2 2 5 1 1 5 1 2 Melanie 15 Romaine 2 Huitte 1 2 15 5 15 2 5 5 Catherine 1 15 Lou Female wild boar 2 2 15 5 15 5 2 Nael 1 1 5 1 5 15 Milka 2 2 Festive 1 1 5 Cloe 1 15 1 5 15 Huguette 15 2 Caramel 2 15 2 5 1 15 Fari 1 2 2 Female red deer

MAXIMUM ACTIVITY Two responses at the individual scale: increase activity during the hunt no change in activity during or after the hunt But responses less clear than for the speed metric. Wild boar individuals appear to have a higher activity than red deer individuals. But reactions during the drive hunt seem to be similar for both species.

SPACE USE For red deer, two responses at the individual scale: increasing meadows use one day after the hunt (n = 2) no change in space use during or after the hunt For wild boar, no change detected in space use during or after the hunt. Wild boar and red deer differ in their use of meadows.

CONCLUSIONS Both species differ in their spatial behaviour during the hunting period: Red deer appears to use more meadows than wild boar because of their diet. Wild boar appears to have more intense active phases. At the individual scale, changes in speed and activity the day of the drive hunt for both species (flee or hide), but no clear modification in space use. Management perspectives: multi-species drive hunt vs. Single species drive hunt.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION