Wildlife-habitat relationships
To effectively manage and conserve wildlife populations, a comprehensive understanding of the space, habitat, and dietary requirements of species is critical. Much of my work has focused on building predictive habitat models, comparing use (derived from GPS telemetry) to availability with respect to remotely-sensed landscape covariates. I am also particularly interested in quantifying how space and habitat use varies across individuals and landscape contexts to provide managers with a more holistic picture of the breadth of behavioral strategies and syndromes present in a given population.
Movement ecology
With the advent of emerging tracking technologies, researchers have the ability to ask new questions about the drivers and consequences of wildlife movement patterns, especially within the context of a rapidly-changing world. I aim to leverage tracking data to uncover how animals are responding to climate and land use change, and how we can conserve movements across diverse landscapes and jurisdictions, while gaining insight into the behavioral and demographic processes that lead to observed movements.Â
Drivers of vital rates and population dynamics
Parameters such as reproduction and mortality drive animal population dynamics. Unbiased estimates of survival, pregnancy, fetal survival, and post-natal survival are required to model mammal populations and inform management activities such as harvest and habitat improvement. I am mostly interested in the role that nutritional condition and habitat quality play in modulating reproductive and survival rates, thereby linking the environment to broader population processes.
Forest management for wildlife populations
Forest-dwelling wildlife species are highly sensitive to several important forest characteristics, such as stand age, species composition, and spatial configuration. Forest landscapes often consist of a mosaic of various silvicultural treatments, stand sizes, and levels of disturbance, so managers interested in promoting wildlife populations in these ecosystems must consider the diverse needs and preferences of multiple species. I aim to understand how different wildlife species respond to forest management treatments, and how to strike a balance between forestry practices and the animals that call these landscapes home.
Wildlife field capture
Field work remains the core of wildlife research, and is what initially drew me to the discipline. In addition to analytical advances for deepening our understanding of wildlife ecology, I am also interested in developing, improving, and implementing field techniques, especially those related to the safe and ethical capture of animals in the wild. Whether it is to affix a tracking device or collect a biological sample, capture can allow researchers to gain incredibly valuable information about wildlife populations, but must be done in a way which limits stress and the possibility for injury. Developing more efficient methods of capture also has the added benefit of reducing the time and cost needed to carry out research, which is often expensive.
Wildlife research is always a collaborative effort, and is often very expensive. I would be amiss without acknowledging the agencies and institutions that have provided funding and logistical support for the projects I've been involved in, including: Washington State University, the Washington Department of Natural Resources, the University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Several projects have been primarily funded through the Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration program, administered by the respective state agencies.
I would also like to thank the professionals who I've had the good fortune to work with on these projects, who include advisors, professors, graduate students, and agency biologists.