Plumas - Lassen Administrative Study Small Mammal Module

advertisement
Plumas-Lassen Administrative Study
Small Mammal Module
Project Leader
Robin J. Innes1
Graduate Student
Jaya R. Smith1
Principal Investigators
Douglas A. Kelt1, Dirk H. VanVuren1, and Michael L. Johnson2
1University
of California Davis
Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology
2University
of California Davis
John Muir Institute of the Environment
Module Objectives
„
Evaluate management effects on
small mammals
„ Trends in abundance
„
Develop and test predictive models
„ Habitat
associations and spatial
organization
Outline
„
„
Module objectives
Methods and results
Long-term grids
„ Landscape transects
„ Biology of focal species
„
Dusky-footed woodrat
„ Northern flying squirrel
„
Outline
„
„
Module objectives
Methods and results
Long-term grids
„ Landscape transects
„ Focal species biology
„
Dusky-footed woodrat
„ Northern flying squirrel
„
Methods: Long-term Grids
„
Trapping array
„
„
„
„
„
100 Sherman traps, 10-m spacing
72 Tomahawk traps, 30-m spacing
2.25 ha
4 nights
Sampled biannually
Methods: Long-term Grids
„
Pre- and Post Treatment Canopy Cover
„
„
100
„
Pretreatment
Post treatment
80
Canopy Cover (%)
21 grids in 5 habitat
types
„
„
60
„
40
20
12 placed in
experimental plots
„
„
0
Control
Light thin
Heavy thin Group select
Treatment Type
Mixed-conifer
Mixed-fir
White fir
Pine-cedar
Red fir
„
„
3 control
3 light thin
3 heavy thin
3 group select
Results: Long-term Grids
„
„
2007 marked 5th year of data collection, 1st year of
post-treatment data
In 2007, captured 732 individuals of 10 species
„
Deer mice and chipmunks most common
Results: Trends in Deer Mouse
Abundance
T re n d s in D e e r M o u s e A b u n d a n c e in F iv e F o re s t T yp e s
Deer Mouse
Peromyscus maniculatus
Mean Deer Mouse Abundance (N)
50
M ix e d -c o n ife r
M ix e d -fir
P in e -c e d a r
R e d fir
W h ite fir
40
30
20
10
0
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Year
Brush Mouse
Peromyscus boylii
„
Forest type & year explained 93% of variation
„
Microhabitat & year explained 69% of variation
Results: Trends in Deer Mouse
Abundance
do
s uins eDAe be ur nMdoaun sc e A
nd
e s t T yp e s
T re n d s in DTe reernM
inbFuiv
e aFnocre
Deer Mouse
Peromyscus maniculatus
5500
M ix e d -c o n ife r
M ix e d -fir
P in e -c e d a r
R e d fir
W h ite fir
Mean
Mouse
Abundance(N)
(N)
DeerDeer
Mouse
Abundance
D eer M ouse
4400
3300
2200
1100
00
22000033
2 20 0 0
44
2 02 0050 5
2 020060 6
2 020070 7
era r
YY
ea
Brush Mouse
Peromyscus boylii
„
Forest type & year explained 93% of variation
„
Microhabitat & year explained 69% of variation
Results: Fall Conifer Cone Production
Trends in Cone Production
80
Conifer Cone Abundance
60
40
20
0
2003
2004
2005
Year
2006
2007
Results: Fall Conifer Cone Production
Trends in Deer Mouse Abundance Relative to Cone Production
80
Conifer Cone Abundance
Deer Mouse Abundance
60
40
20
0
2003
2004
2005
Year
2006
2007
Results: Annual Snow Fall
Trends in Total Snow Fall
80
Total Snow Fall
60
40
20
0
2003
2004
2005
Year
2006
2007
Results: Annual Snow Fall
Trends in Deer Mouse Abundance Relative to Snow Fall
80
Deer Mouse Abundance
Total Snow Fall
60
40
20
0
2003
2004
2005
Year
2006
2007
Results: Trends in Deer Mouse Abundance
Trends:
„ Forest type
„ Microhabitat
„ Year
Deer Mouse
Peromyscus maniculatus
Winter severity
„ Fall cone production
„
Trends in Northern Flying Squirrel Abundance
Mean Flying Squirrel Abundance (N)
1.4
Results: Trends in
Abundance
Flying Squirrel
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Year
Trends in Dusky-footed W oodrat Abundance
T re n d s in D e e r M o u se A b u n d a n ce
30
0.8
D e e r M o u se
Deer Mouse Abundance (N)
W oodrats
Mean Abundance (N)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
25
20
15
10
5
0
2003
2004
2005
Year
2006
2007
2003
2004
2005
Ye a r
2006
2007
Results: Impacts of Treatments on
Deer Mouse Abundance
Pre- and Post Treatment Deer Mouse Abundance
Mean Deer Mouse Abundance (N)
25
20
Group select
Heavy thin
Light thin
15
10
5
0
Pre
Post
Treatment (time)
Results: Impacts of Treatments on
Deer Mouse Abundance
Pre- and Post Treatment Deer Mouse Abundance
Mean Deer Mouse Abundance (N)
25
20
Group select
Heavy thin
Light thin
Control
15
10
5
0
Pre
Post
Treatment (time)
Results: Impacts of Treatments on
Deer Mouse Abundance
Pre- and Post Treatment Deer Mouse Abundance
Mean Deer Mouse Abundance (N)
25
20
Group select
Heavy thin
Light thin
Control
15
10
5
0
Pre
Post
Treatment (time)
„
Need to continue monitoring efforts for 2-5+ yrs post-treatment to effectively
measure treatment effects
Outline
„
„
Module objectives
Methods and results
Long-term grids
„ Landscape transects
„ Focal species biology
„
Dusky-footed woodrat
„ Northern flying squirrel
„
Methods: Landscape Transects
TU-3
1
2
3
4
5
Methods: Landscape Transects
„
„
Placed in various forest
types throughout
Plumas National Forest
Trap design
„
„
„
4 points, 3 traps at each
point
50-m spacing, 0.25 ha
2 sessions, 4 nights
Results: Landscape Transects
ƒ 2007 marked 2nd and final year of data collection
ƒ Captured 2,513 individuals of 14 species at
367 census points across 4 treatment units
Outline
„
„
Module objectives
Methods and results
Long-term grids
„ Landscape transects
„ Focal species biology
„
Dusky-footed woodrat
„ Northern flying squirrel
„
Focal Species:
Dusky-footed woodrats
Neotoma fuscipes
Natural History
ƒ Semi-arboreal, nocturnal
rodent
ƒ Oak specialist
ƒ Build “houses”
ƒ Used for:
ƒFood storage, nurseries,
& protection
ƒBuilt:
ƒGround, cavities &limbs
of trees
Objectives
To determine habitat associations
„
Forest type
„
„
Relationship with California black oak
Microhabitat
„
Tree and ground house site selection and use
To determine spatial organization
„
„
Home range
Overlap
Results: Habitat Associations of
Woodrats
„
„
„
„
↑ oak density = ↑ woodrat density
Ground house sites:
↑ large logs, ↑ large stumps, and ↑ slope
Tree house sites:
large oaks, large snags
House use:
↑ use of tree houses in the fall
Results: Woodrat Home Range
„
„
„
Home range size was 1.2-3.8 ha (3.0-9.4 acres)
Lack of overlap indicates territoriality
Relative to other populations:
↑ home ranges, ↓ woodrat density
Forage availability?
„ Suggests home ranges likely to be ↑ in winter
when resources are scarce
„
Download