Coefficient estimates (β) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the best model (M8) explaining female wolf and grizzly bear movement rate in west-central Alberta, Canada, between 2003 and 2009.

<p>Coefficient estimates (β) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the best model (M8) explaining female wolf and grizzly bear movement rate in west-central Alberta, Canada, between 2003 and 2009.</p

Relative probability of step selection by grizzly bears in west-central Alberta during spring.

<p>Relative probability of step selection by grizzly bears in west-central Alberta between 2005 and 2009 during spring in relation to distance to seismic lines (represented as an exponential decay (1-exp^{-0.002* Distance (m)})), seismic line vegetation height (visualised using the mean of the lower (Low), middle (Mod), and upper (High) quantiles), and landcover intersecting seismic lines (Non-forest, Mixed, Conifer). Shaded areas are 95% confidence intervals around relative predicted probabilities of step selection.</p

Vegetation height on seismic lines in west-central Alberta, Canada.

<p>Legacy seismic line footprint (15,588 km) within the range of west-central Alberta, Canada, caribou herds attributed with vegetation heights (33%, 66% and 100% quantiles) using LiDAR.</p

Relative probability of step selection by female grizzly bears in west-central Alberta during summer and fall.

<p>Relative probability of step selection by female grizzly bears in west-central Alberta between 2005 and 2009 during summer and fall in relation to distance to seismic lines (represented as an exponential decay (1-exp^{-0.002* Distance (m)})), seismic line vegetation height (visualised using the mean of the lower (Low), middle (Mod), and upper (High) quantiles), and landcover intersecting seismic lines (Non-forest, Mixed, Conifer). Shaded areas are 95% confidence intervals around relative predicted probabilities of step selection.</p

Relative probability of step selection by male grizzly bears in west-central Alberta during fall.

<p>Relative probability of step selection by male grizzly bears in west-central Alberta between 2005 and 2009 during fall in relation to distance to seismic lines (represented as an exponential decay (1-exp^{-0.002* Distance (m)})) and seismic line vegetation height (visualised using the mean of the lower (Low), middle (Mod), and upper (High) quantiles). Results are shown for the reference category of landcover intersecting seismic lines (Non-forest). Shaded areas are 95% confidence intervals around relative predicted probabilities of step selection.</p

Relative probability of step selection by male grizzly bears in west-central Alberta during spring.

<p>Relative probability of step selection by male grizzly bears in west-central Alberta between 2005 and 2009 during spring in relation to distance to seismic lines (represented as an exponential decay (1-exp^{-0.002* Distance (m)})), seismic line vegetation height (visualised using the mean of the lower (Low), middle (Mod), and upper (High) quantiles), and seismic lines wetness (represented as an exponential decay (1-exp-1.55*WAM(m)) and visualised using the mean of the lower (Wet), middle (Mesic), and upper (Dry) quantiles. Shaded areas are 95% confidence intervals around relative predicted probabilities of step selection.</p

Appendix B. Description of GIS-based spatial resource data.

Description of GIS-based spatial resource data

Appendix A. Defining seasons according to migration parameters.

Defining seasons according to migration parameters

Appendix E. Area-adjusted frequencies of validation locations within ordinal bins of SRSF-predicted values per scale, population, and season.

Area-adjusted frequencies of validation locations within ordinal bins of SRSF-predicted values per scale, population, and season

Appendix C. Resource selection functions for three orders of selection, nine populations, and two seasons.

Resource selection functions for three orders of selection, nine populations, and two seasons