Do human activity and infrastructure disturb domesticated reindeer? The need for the reindeer’s perspective

Polar Biology, Apr 2014

In recent decades, human–Rangifer (reindeer and caribou) interactions have increasingly been studied from a scientific perspective. Many of the studies have examined Norwegian wild reindeer or caribou in North America. It is often questioned whether results from these studies can be applied to reindeer in managed herds, as these animals have been exposed to domestication and are also more used to humans. In order to examine the domesticated reindeer’s reactions to various disturbance sources, we reviewed 18 studies of the effects of human activity and infrastructure on 12 populations of domesticated reindeer and compared these to studies on wild reindeer and caribou; based on this, we discuss the effects of domestication and tameness on reindeer responses to anthropogenic disturbance. We also consider the relevance of spatial and temporal scales and data collection methods when evaluating the results of these studies. The reviewed studies showed that domesticated reindeer exhibit avoidance behaviours up to 12 km away from infrastructure and sites of human activity and that the area they avoid may shift between seasons and years. Despite a long domestication process, reindeer within Sami reindeer-herding systems exhibit similar patterns of large-scale avoidance of anthropogenic disturbance as wild Rangifer, although the strength of their response may sometimes differ. This is not surprising since current Sami reindeer husbandry represents an extensive form of pastoralism, and the reindeer are not particularly tame. To obtain a true picture of how reindeer use their ranges, it is of fundamental importance to study the response pattern at a spatial and temporal scale that is relevant to the reindeer, whether domesticated or wild.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00300-014-1499-5.pdf

Do human activity and infrastructure disturb domesticated reindeer? The need for the reindeer’s perspective

Anna Skarin 0 Birgitta A hman 0 0 A. Skarin (&) B. A hman Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences , P.O. Box 7024, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden In recent decades, human-Rangifer (reindeer and caribou) interactions have increasingly been studied from a scientific perspective. Many of the studies have examined Norwegian wild reindeer or caribou in North America. It is often questioned whether results from these studies can be applied to reindeer in managed herds, as these animals have been exposed to domestication and are also more used to humans. In order to examine the domesticated reindeer's reactions to various disturbance sources, we reviewed 18 studies of the effects of human activity and infrastructure on 12 populations of domesticated reindeer and compared these to studies on wild reindeer and caribou; based on this, we discuss the effects of domestication and tameness on reindeer responses to anthropogenic disturbance. We also consider the relevance of spatial and temporal scales and data collection methods when evaluating the results of these studies. The reviewed studies showed that domesticated reindeer exhibit avoidance behaviours up to 12 km away from infrastructure and sites of human activity and that the area they avoid may shift between seasons and years. Despite a long domestication process, reindeer within Sami reindeer-herding systems exhibit similar patterns of large-scale avoidance of anthropogenic disturbance as wild Rangifer, although the strength of their response may sometimes differ. This is not surprising since current Sami reindeer husbandry represents an extensive form of pastoralism, and the reindeer are not particularly tame. To obtain a true picture of how reindeer use their ranges, it is of fundamental importance to study the response pattern at a spatial and temporal scale that is relevant to the reindeer, whether domesticated or wild. - Reindeer husbandry is a traditional and essential part of the livelihood of Sami people in Northern Europe and of major importance to the Sami culture. The reindeer (Rangifer tarandus tarandus) are herded in a pastoral system, where the animals move freely in the landscape during most of the year. One of the major threats for contemporary Sami reindeer husbandry is habitat loss due to direct or indirect impact from competing land use (Danell 2005; Pape and Loeffler 2012). The UN Environment Programme and European Union have concluded that nearly one-third of the current traditional Sami reindeer husbandry ranges in Northern Europe are severely affected by or partly inaccessible for reindeer herding due to the presence of infrastructure, industrial development or other human activity (UNEP 2001; Vistnes 2008). The loss of grazing land is accelerating due to the destruction of foraging areas, obstruction of migration routes and disturbance of reindeer (Tyler et al. 2007). This represents a major challenge for the reindeer herders and society in general. As a consequence, the number of court cases relating to industrial developments in reindeer-herding areas has been growing rapidly (O ssbo and Lantto 2011). Rangifer tarandus (reindeer and caribouhereafter generally referred to as reindeer) is a migratory species well adapted to making use of the seasonal shifts in the arctic and subarctic environment (White et al. 1981). Obstructions caused by human activity and infrastructure are likely to affect reindeers choice of seasonal ranges (Senft et al. 1987), which typically cover broad geographic extents (Nagy et al. 2011). To understand the consequences of anthropogenic disturbance on reindeer (or other large herbivores), it is thus necessary to study effects over a variety of scales. During recent decades, researchers have identified various humanreindeer interactions, including those with tourism and hunting (e.g. Aastrup 2000; Reimers et al. 2009; Skarin et al. 2010), road traffic, helicopters and aircraft (e.g. Klein 1971; Harrington 2003; Reimers and Colman 2006), infrastructure and industrial development, such as mining, hydropower and, more recently, wind power (e.g. Wolfe et al. 2000; Nellemann et al. 2003; Vistnes 2008; Colman et al. 2012; Panzacchi et al. 2012; Skarin et al. 2013). Most studies reveal a common pattern in relation to both spatial and temporal scales. When reindeer responses to human activity and infrastructure are studied at the regional scale, the results often show that reindeer avoid disturbances several kilometres away, while studies performed at the local scale close to human activity and infrastructure in most cases fail to show any response to the source of the disturbance (Vistnes and Nellemann 2008). Most research on humanreindeer interactions has involved wild reindeer in Norway and Svalbard or caribou in North America. Consequently, recent reviews (Wolfe et al. 2000; Reimers and Colman 2006; Vistnes and Nellemann 2008) refer mainly to wild reindeer. An early re (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00300-014-1499-5.pdf

Anna Skarin, Birgitta Åhman. Do human activity and infrastructure disturb domesticated reindeer? The need for the reindeer’s perspective, Polar Biology, 2014, pp. 1041-1054, Volume 37, Issue 7, DOI: 10.1007/s00300-014-1499-5