RESULTS (New): Concealment Cover at Den...

snamp.cnr.berkeley.eduSierra Nevada Adaptive Management Project

RESULTS (New): Concealment Cover at Den Trees

Photo credit: R. Green

Table. Data on concealment cover at fisher den trees. Methods adapted from KR Fisher (R. Green, 2010).

Cover estimate Mean Range

Low ground 59% 8 - 100%High ground 41% 0 - 97%Low shrub 38% 0 - 88%High shrub 36% 0 - 90%


RESULTS (New): Den Tree Habitat – Stem Plots

Might be useful in analyses of Lidar data with SNAMP Spatial

• Identify areas with similar assemblages of trees

• Estimate available den habitat on landscape?


FUTURE: Using CBI Model to Define LOPs Absent Den Tree Locations

Post-SNAMP den trees won’t be known

How can agencies identify/protect fisher denning areas in spring ?

K. Williams/G. Schroer: use CBI model to establish regional LOP

Table. Analysis of CBI predicted habitat values within 1000m radius buffers around known fisher den trees.

Total trees assessed CBI Mean CBI Low CBI High

83 0.594 0.212 1.0

*1000 m buffer around a den tree captures 776 acres


Mean elevation for SNAMP den trees = 5347 ft

RESULTS (New): Other Management Relevant Data on Fisher Den Trees

RESULTS: Carnivore Images from Survey Cameras


Table 3. Summary camera survey data on images, visits, and grid detections for fishers across the Study Area during October 2007 to July 2011. Parameter Cam Year

2007_08Cam Year 2008_09

Cam Year 2009_10

Cam Year 2011_12

Fisher photos 11,445 25,007 20,942 In prog

Fisher visits 583 794 941 In prog

Grids surveyed 219 339 403 307

“FActive grids” 113 200 183 122

RESULTS (Updating): Camera Surveys, Fisher Detections


713 unique grids surveyed, including by cooperators working in Yosemite NP

Fishers detected by cameras/traps in 376 grids

Detections focused between 4500-6500 feet

RESULTS (Updating) : Camera Surveys, Distribution of Fishers

Number of Grids with Fisher Detections

3001

- 350

0 ft

3501

- 400

0 ft

4001

- 450

0 ft

4501

- 500

0 ft

5001

- 550

0 ft

5501

- 600

0 ft

6001

- 650

0 ft

6501

- 700

0 ft

7001

- 750

0 ft

7501

- 800

0 ft

8001

- 850

0 ft

Num

ber o

f grid

s

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Percent Surveyed Grids with Fishers Detections

3001

- 350

0 ft

3501

- 400

0 ft

4001

- 450

0 ft

4501

- 500

0 ft

5001

- 550

0 ft

5501

- 600

0 ft

6001

- 650

0 ft

6501

- 700

0 ft

7001

- 750

0 ft

7501

- 800

0 ft

8001

- 850

0 ft

Perc

ent t

otal

grid

s su

rvey

ed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Camera Survey Effort within Study Area

Mean Elevation of Grid

3001 - 3500 ft

3501 - 4000 ft

4001 - 4500 ft

4501 - 5000 ft

5001 - 5500 ft

5501 - 6000 ft

6001 - 6500 ft

6501 - 7000 ft

7001 - 7500 ft

7501 - 8000 ft

8001 - 8500 ft

Num

ber

of s

urve

yed

grid

s

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

RESULTS (New): Details and Overview of American Marten Detections on SNAMP Fisher

Surveyed 713 unique grids during Oct 2007 to present

Limited surveys above 7000 feet during cam years 1 & 2

Cam Years 3 & 4: High elevation effort expanded - “Haunch Cams”

RESULTS (New): Distribution of Fisher and American Marten in SNAMP Study Area

COMPETITIVE EXCLUSION HYPOTHESIS: Distribution of American marten constrained by fisher; marten limited to higher elevation; fishers cannot manueverwell in deep, soft snow conditions and don’t occur in those areas

RESULTS (New): Evidence for Competitive Exclusion

3001

- 350

0 ft

3501

- 400

0 ft

4001

- 450

0 ft

4501

- 500

0 ft

5001

- 550

0 ft

5501

- 600

0 ft

6001

- 650

0 ft

6501

- 700

0 ft

7001

- 750

0 ft

7501

- 800

0 ft

8001

- 850

0 ft

Perc

ent g

rids

surv

eyed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


RESULTS: Fishers

Captured 82 individuals o 48 females, 34 Males o 39 collared mortalities o Fates known for 60 (73%)

Table 3. Summary of the number and status of all individual fishers captured during the SNAMP Fisher Study from Dec 2007 to July 2011.

Sex Total Known alive

Known dead

Short missing

Long missing

Female 48 14 21 4 9Male 34 7 18 6 3

Known Age Dead Fisher (n = 17)

0

1

2

3

4

Yr00

Yr01

Yr02

Yr03

Yr04

Yr05

Yr06

Yr07

Yr08

Yr09

Yr10

Yr11

Num

ber

FemaleMale

Collared fisher mortalities

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Drowning

Rodenticide

Starvation

Indeterminate

Roadkill

Pred_pending

Disease

Predation

RESULTS: Cause-specific Mortality Carcasses recovered for 39 collared, 9 noncollared fishers

Top 3 causes of mortality for collared fishers Predation: n = 19 (+5 pending) (bobcat, mountain lion, coyote) Disease: n = 6 (CDV, Bacterial, Parvo, Unk nematode) Roadkill: n = 3 (+5 noncollared in YNP)

Emerging issue: rodenticide exposure; 88% (21 of 24 livers tested)


RESULTS (New): Bobcats – Leading Source of Fisher Mortality

Bobcats have been detected in 102 of 700+ unique grids surveyed

Detections across elevation span with slight hump between 5000 & 6500 feet

Number of Grids with Bobcat Detections

3001

- 350

0 ft

3501

- 400

0 ft

4001

- 450

0 ft

4501

- 500

0 ft

5001

- 550

0 ft

5501

- 600

0 ft

6001

- 650

0 ft

6501

- 700

0 ft

7001

- 750

0 ft

7501

- 800

0 ft

8001

- 850

0 ft

Num

ber g

rids

with

bob

cats

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Percent Surveyed Grids with Marten Detections

3001

- 350

0 ft

3501

- 400

0 ft

4001

- 450

0 ft

4501

- 500

0 ft

5001

- 550

0 ft

5501

- 600

0 ft

6001

- 650

0 ft

6501

- 700

0 ft

7001

- 750

0 ft

7501

- 800

0 ft

8001

- 850

0 ft

Perc

ent g

rids

surv

eyed

0

10

20

30

40

50


RESULTS (New): 7 month to 24 month Survival (Juveniles+Subadults)

Age/Sex Rate

Females 0.52 Males 0.25 Z-Test: P = 0.023; survival lower for males than females

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

0.900

1.000

Surv

ival

SNAMP Fisher Survival 7 - 24 months

Females95% CI femalesMales95% CI Males


RESULTS (New): Adult Fisher Survival (All years combined)

Age/Sex RateAd Female 0.73Ad Male 0.74Z - Test: Not different

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

0.900

1.000

Surv

ival

SNAMP Adult Survival

Survival - Adult females95% CI Ad FemalesSurvival - Adult males95 CI Ad Males


RESULTS (New): Female Fisher Survival and Population Status

Female age class

Overall survival

Observedrange

Adult 0.73 0.92 to 0.55

Subadult 0.63 1.0 to 0.50

Juvenile 0.83 1.0 to 0.80

Mean reproductive rate: 0.82Mean Ad female fecundity: 1.6 kits/yearSex ratio: 0.5

Population growth in SNAMP Areaλ = 1.05 (range 0.86 - 1.4) a

a Calculated using standard equations and the maximum and minimum observed values for survival (= deterministic)

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

0.900

1.000

Surv

ival

SNAMP Female Survival

All adults

All Subadults

All Juveniles


Table 5. Estimated rates of survival and comparisons of survival between fishers in the SNAMP and Kings River research areas. Data derived from the Kaplan-Meier estimator, and contrasts were by Z-tests (Pollock et al. 1989). Age/Sex (data combined all study yrs)

SNAMP (95% CI)

Kings River (95% CI)

Test result or P-valuea

Comment

Adult female 0.73 (0.59-0.87) 0.75 (0.64-0.86) Similar

Adult male 0.74 (0.58-0.90) 0.76 (0.57-0.94) Similar

Subadult female 0.63 (0.45-0.81) 0.88 (0.73-1.00) Lower SNAMP

Subadult male 0.44 (0.20-0.69) 0.59 (0.36-0.82) Lower SNAMP

Juvenile female 0.83 (0.66-0.99) 0.81 (0.60-1.00) Similar

Juvenile male 0.56 (0.35-0.77) 0.68 (0.45-0.90) Lower SNAMP

7-24 month female 0.52 (0.35-0.69) 0.71 (0.53-0.88) Lower SNAMP

7-24 month male 0.25 (0.09-0.41) 0.49 (0.23-0.75) Lower SNAMP

RESULTS (New): Survival Review for SNAMP & Kings River

RESULTS: Annual Home Ranges for Adult Female Fisher (PopYr 3)

Mean Annual Home Ranges for Adult Fishers in SNAMP Study AreaMean Annual Ad Male: 81 ± SE 12.5 km2

Review SNAMP Data on Fisher Home Ranges: Adult males have larger annual, reproductive

season, summer, fall, & winter home ranges than adult females

Home range size can vary by age within and between sexes

Individuals often exhibit shifts in home range position on the landscape; could be related to underlying habitat change/mgt

Season n Area SE n Area SEReprod 38 10.1 1.6 22 107.8 10.4Summer 29 15.4 1.7 17 55.2 4.8Fall 27 22.2 2.6 17 53.7 5.4Winter 29 27.8 2.3 17 81.9 7.7

Adult Female Adult Male

Table 6. Summary data on mean seasonal home range area estimates (km2) for fishers in the SNAMP Fisher Study Area.


RESULTS: Female Home Range Movements

Annual and Denning Season Ranges

Movements during denning constrained compared to rest of year

Denning season home ranges are nested within annual home ranges

RESULTS (New): Source/Sink Parameters

Nelder_Sugar and Miami_Chowchilla support good numbers of Adult & Subadult fisher

Recruitment is much higher for Nelder_Sugar& Miami_Chowchilla than CCamp_Whisky

All Adult and Adult Female survival is highest in Nelder_Sugar region

Table. Summary data on other attributes associated with source/sink assessment.Study Area Region CBI

scoreCollaredDeaths

Deaths/100 fisher HR

Nelder_Sugar 0.575 11 18.0

Miami_Chowchilla 0.432 18 28.1

CCamp_Whisky 0.487 8 30.8

Grizzly_Jackass 0.340 - -


RESULTS (New): Home Range Contrast SNAMP vs Kings River

SNAMP Fisher: acquires 4-6 locations / collared animal / week Systematic data collection: all collared animals are located each flight Review from 2010: Mean home ranges on SNAMP appeared larger than for

any other western U.S. study

HYPOTHESIS: Difference likely due to methods, not habitat quality: ground-based telemetry may underestimate home ranges due to difficulty regularly locating animals in remote, rugged areas

Mean Min Max

Ad Fem n = 30 209 116 281 22.9 1.9 Ad Male n = 17 184 94 249 95.2 9.3

Ad Fem n = 39 36 23 69 11.1 1.0 Ad Male n = 4 84 67 110 45.2 9.7

Tabular summary of data compiled for comparing size of adult fisher home range between the SNAMP and Kings River Fisher Studies.

SENo. of Locations

SNAMP Fisher

Mean HR area (km2)

Kings River Fisher

RESULTS (New): Home Range Contrast SNAMP vs Kings River


F07 Subadult Female: Captured July 9, 2008 Tracked near continuously to present Min. straight line distance between core

range areas = 16.5 km

RESULTS: Dispersal Movements and Distances

Genetic Analyses: Identifying Natal Areas - Dispersal

Table 6. Summary of data on known dispersal for radiocollaredfishers on the SNAMP Fisher Study. Fisher ID Age Source Dispersal period Min. distance (km)

M_02 Juvenile Field Spring/Summer 29.5M_12 Juvenile Both Winter 18.2M_15 Juvenile Both Spring/Summer 10.8M_22 Juvenile Genetics Spring/Summer 4.1M_26 Juvenile Genetics Summer 5.1M_33 Juvenile Genetics Spring 8.6

Male mean = 12.3 ± SE 2.4F_07a Juvenile Genetics Unknown 12.8F_07b Subadult Field Summer 16.8F_17 Juvenile Genetics Winter 13.2F_26 Juvenile Field Winter 2.3F_34 Juvenile Field Late Winter 4.2F_36 Juvenile Field Fall/Winter 12.5F_37 Juvenile Field Winter 7.0F_38 Subad Field Winter 10F_43 Juvenile Genetics Not applicable 1.7F_45 Subad Field Winter/Spring 7.2F_46 Juvenile Genetics Winter 6.6F_47 Juvenile Genetics Not applicable 0.5F_48 Juvenile Genetics Winter 2.7

Female mean = 7.5 ± SE 1.4


SNAMP Fisher Study: Acknowledgments

USFS Aviation John Litton, Pilots Steve Forkel, Bill Bulfer, Curtis Haney, Jim Irving, Dan EnglishKings River Fisher Study: Kathyrn Purcell, Craig Thompson, Rebecca Green, Jim GarnerSierra NF Bass Lake Ranger District: Dave Martin, Anae Otto, Theresa Lowe, Kevin WilliamsUC Davis Collaborators: Mourad Gabriel, Greta Wengert, Local Housing – Bruce Persson,Yosemite National Park: Steve Thompson, Sarah Stock, April Farmer, Niki NicholasDFG: Deana Clifford D.V.M., Esther Burkett, Eric Wolters - Fresno Wildlife Rehabilitation, Lewis Wright D.V.M. – Fresno Chaffee ZooFisher Genetics: Kristine Pilgrim, Mike Schwartz

Funding & Logistics: USDA Forest Service (Mike Chapel, Peter Stine) MOU Partners & Agencies: US Fish and Wildlife Service, California Dept of Fish & Game, Yosemite National Park

SNAMP Fisher Crew & Volunteers: Joe Bridges, Brady Neiles, Carrie O’Brien, Rebekah Jensen, Taylor Gorman, Jason Massarone, Jodi Berg, Wendy Mitchell, Wendy Sicard, Thomas Thein, Geoff and Lindsay Cline, Jeff Schneiderman, Amie Vorhees, Jana Ashling, Caroline Jablonicky, Sarah Bassing, Adrianna Beaudette, Shelly Vogel, Mark Ratchford, Rob Wise, Zac Eads, Thomas Day, Kyle Wagner, Jenny Ruthven

RESULTS (New): Concealment Cover at Den...

Documents

Transcript of RESULTS (New): Concealment Cover at Den...