Wilderness management objectives and wildlife conservation objectives often conflict with each other, despite conservation being one of six basic reasons for which wilderness is established. Most wilderness areas appear to have been established as the result of political or societal desires, but in the absence of critical ecological thought. In an era of increasing anthropogenic impacts to wildlife populations and to wildlife habitat outside of wilderness, those ostensibly “pristine” areas in and of themselves will become less and less effective as conservation tools, particularly for large, vagile mammals. Impacts occurring outside of wilderness areas have ramifications for wide-ranging animals that use those areas during portions of their annual cycles, thereby affecting wilderness character. Similarly, impacts occurring inside of designated wilderness also have ramifications for large, vagile mammals that also utilize proximate lands. There is a need to re-ignite the debate over the value of ...

This chapter describes the numerous factors that have influenced black-tailed and mule deer and their habitats since the early 1800s including fire, habitat alteration, diseases, and anthropogenic factors. Effective changes will require the public and decision-makers to have at least some basic understanding of the multiple ecological factors that are causing these changes. Conserving threatened grassland and forest wildlife and habitat does not have to mean prohibition of grazing or logging; many species, including black-tailed deer and mule deer, can benefit from livestock grazing and timber management that is science-based. Probably the greatest existential threat to deer hunting and deer management is chronic wasting disease. Slowing the spread of this disease will require the hunting public and big game biologists to rethink expectations. Dealing with these and other issues relating to mule deer management will require funding for research and for habitat management. Healing and reconciliation regarding public land management will require respectful discussions by sportsmen, the public in general, public lands users, agency administrators, non-governmental organizations, and politicians. In the absence of such, confounding legislation, bureaucratic inertia, public advocacy, political expediency, and budgetary constraints will bode poorly for the conservation and management of mule deer and black-tailed deer.

Context: Little is known about the consequences of sexual segregation (differential use of resources by the sexes outside of the mating season) for the conservation of large mammals. Roadways (i.e. the strip of land over which a road or route passes) are ubiquitous around the world, and are a major cause of wildlife mortality, as well as habitat loss and fragmentation. Many populations of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) occur at low densities and in a metapopulation structure. Roadways could affect movements of males and females differentially, an outcome that has not been considered previously. Aims: We investigated the propensity of the sexes to cross a paved two-lane road and a single-lane, maintained dirt route and predicted that adult males, because of their life-history characteristics, would cross those roadways more often than females. Methods: We investigated movements of male and female bighorn sheep from 1986 to 1990. We used a fixed-wing aircraft with an H-antenna on each wing strut to locate individuals each week from October 1986 to December 1990. We estimated the degree of overlap among 50% core areas of use by males and females with the utilisation distribution overlap index (UDOI). Key results: We relocated male and female bighorn sheep on 948 occasions during sexual aggregation and on 1951 occasions during sexual segregation. More males than females were likely to cross both types of roadways during segregation, and the dirt route during aggregation. Propensity of males and females to cross roadways was strongly influenced by time of year (i.e. whether the period of sexual aggregation or sexual segregation). The lowest overlap in 50% core areas was between females and males during periods of segregation (UDOI = 0.1447). Conclusions: More males than females crossed Kelbaker Road and the unnamed dirt route during segregation, as well as the unnamed route during aggregation. Both of those features could affect males more than females, and could result in reductions in the use of habitat or increased mortality of bighorn sheep from vehicle collisions as a result of spatial segregation of the sexes. Implications: During environmental review, biologists should consider sexual segregation when assessing potential anthropogenic effects on movements of bighorn sheep. Biologists also should consider sexual segregation and how roadways, even lightly traveled routes, affect movements of male and female ungulates differently before manipulating habitat, translocating animals, or constructing or modifying roadways.