24 



FISH AND WILDLIFE TECHNICAL REPORT 30 



A. 



B. 



Running (o 19) 



Running (a = 4) 



O 



CD 



C7 



CD 



Walking (0- 206) 



Feeding (o- 555) 



Lying ("- 385) 



Walking (o * &) 





Feeding (/? 135) 



20 



40 



60 







20 



Lying (o - 53) 



40 



60 



C. 



Moving (a 7) 



CD 

 8 



LL 



Feeding (o- 125) 



Lying (n* 230) 



20 



D. 



40 



60 



40 60 20 



Short Term Activity Index 



Fig. 20. Short-term activity index for captive animals engaged in four different activities. A. Caribou. B. Mule deer. C. Elk. D. Moose. 



We secured 414 sensor readings on the captive moose. 

 Inactive behavior usually resulted in low counts (most 

 often zero), with occasional higher counts. However, 

 standing still also produced low counts, creating some 

 overlap between the inactive and feeding categories. 

 Walking and trotting behaviors yielded high counts, and 

 feeding counts were most often intermediate (Fig. 20D). 



In summary, our calibration studies suggested that the 

 60-s activity index could be used to distinguish gross 

 patterns of activity versus inactivity for caribou, mule 

 deer, elk, and moose. Continuous movement could usually 

 be discriminated from intermittent activity (e.g., feeding). 



We obtained best discrimination from activities with the 

 mercury switch inclined at +2 for caribou, elk, and 

 moose, and at +6 to +10 for mule deer. 



Application of the Short-term Index to Free-ranging 

 Caribou 



Methods. To classify the activity of free-ranging car- 

 ibou, we developed a classification system that used the 

 series of sensor counts from each satellite overpass to 

 classify activities into types based on calibration trials 

 with captive animals. (Each overpass yielded up to 17 

 counts, based on our PTTs' transmission schedule of 1 



