The Spatial Ecology of the Güiña (Oncifelis Guigna) in Southern Chile
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Spatial Ecology of the Güiña (Oncifelis guigna) in Southern Chile by Rachel A. Freer Department of Biological Sciences, University of Durham, UK 2004 This thesis is submitted in candidature for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Declaration The material contained in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree at the University of Durham or any other university. The field research presented within this thesis was conducted with the help of Raleigh International volunteers, expeditions 1997H, 1998A, 1998H, 1999A, 1999I, 2000A, 2000I and 2001A. All data collation was conducted by the author apart from expeditions 1997H and 1998A, which were overseen by Dr L. Durbin and Dr I. Wyllie, respectively. All analyses were conducted by the author. © The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without the author’s written consent, and information derived from it should be acknowledged. ii Cats no less liquid than their shadows Offer no angles to the wind They slip, diminished, neat through loopholes Less than themselves; will not be pinned A.S.J.Tessimond This thesis is dedicated to anyone who has ever attempted to track a cat in its element. iii Abstract This thesis describes the diet, activity, home range and habitat utilisation of güiña (Oncifelis guigna) within two populations located inside regions of minimal anthropogenic disturbance in southern Chile. Fieldwork was comprised of several components: güiña captured in live traps were fitted with radio collars and monitored on foot using standard radiotelemetry techniques; landcover maps were created for each study area from satellite data, aerial photography and ground truthing, and the relative abundance and diversity of potential small mammal prey were assessed by means of grid-based live-trapping studies and tree-mounted hair-traps. The behavioural data obtained from the radiotelemetry study were analysed using RANGES V to assess the area requirements of the güiña and to determine how the home ranges and movements of individuals were distributed with respect to those of conspecifics. This data was also investigated with reference to the landcover maps generated for each site to identify habitat categories that were preferentially utilised or avoided by güiña. The diet of this species was determined via faecal analysis. The composition of the güiña diet within each site was then related to small mammal relative abundances determined in the field. Small mammals, particularly rodents represented the major component of the güiña diet, and no evidence of prey selection was determined. Trapping surveys indicated both sites had abundant prey resources in the form of relatively dense rodent populations. Radiocollared güiña were largely arrhythmic in their activity pattern and neighbouring individuals within both populations showed a high degree of spatial overlap, both within and between sexes. Core use areas also overlapped extensively, and no evidence was found to indicate that güiña actively avoid conspecifics. These cats exhibited a consistent preference for relatively dense, thicket-forest habitat over less complexly structured vegetation, including stands of Nothofagus forest, the habitat category previously assumed to be key for this species. The results of this study are discussed within the context of conservation management for the continued survival of this endangered felid. iv Acknowledgements Financial assistance for my studies was provided by the Marion Zunz Award and the Bank of Dad. This project also benefited from grants awarded by WWF UK, WWF US, the Darwin Initiative, the People’s Trust for Endangered Species and the Ernest Kleinwort Charitable Trust. I am eternally grateful to all who assisted me in completing this study, especially those who joined me in the field over the years. Particular thanks must go to all at Raleigh International Chile, to Nigel Dunstone, Sam Rose and Sergio Herrera for getting the ball rolling, and to Leon Durbin and Ian Wylie who supervised the collection of the radiotelemetry data in the first year. I am much obliged to the guardeparque stationed at both Parque Nacional Laguna San Rafael and Parque Nacional Queulat for their insight, tolerance, and general good humour. Graham and Carmen Gloria Hornsey’s invaluable logistics skills have not been forgotten, nor have the makers of Goretex® and Hunter wellies, lest we forget what 5,000 mm of rain a year feels like. Dennis Aldridge, Daniella Castro and Patricio Contreras at CONAF smoothed the way for obtaining the relevant research permits, and also generously provided landcover and topography data. Soraya Corales and Jaime Rau made available their high resolution photographs and feather key for the identification of avian remains and Soraya also braved our first small mammal trapping study. Fellow biologists Lucia Galvez, Linda Swankie, Dawn Scott, Rodolfo Figueroa and Olaf, our East German engineer and bridge-maker provided further entertainment and assistance in the field. I am indebted to Hannah Hodgson, Peter McCauley and Angela Rabley, who assisted with the monotonous and unglamorous task of faecal analysis, and to Russ Hoezel and Dan Engelhaupt for their preliminary analyses of the güiña genotype. Chris Thomas introduced me to both compositional analysis and BioMapper, for which he has not yet been entirely forgiven, and Marcello Mazzolli gave me my first lesson in using RANGES V. v Nicholas Aebischer kindly provided advice regarding the calculation of compositional analyses the old fashioned way and Dr Mel Sunquist and Vittoria Elliot both helped me crystallise a few thoughts at the eleventh hour during writing up. Steve Oswald’s help with proof reading earlier drafts went above and beyond the call of duty and was very much appreciated. Thanks are due also to my comrades and fellow caffeine dependents in Lab. 15, Manuel Weber, Damian Bubb, Ruth Cox and Andy Dean, and to my good friends Thomas Hase, Amanda Hunter, Paul Gordon, Simon Dimmock and Professor Tobes, for their moral support, distractions and chivvying in equal quantities. Finally I wish to thank my family for their tolerance and support, for lending me Gerald Durrell books in my formative years and for learning not to ask when I intend to complete my PhD. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION……………………………………………..……….………….………..ii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………..………….………………..iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………...……………….…………….v TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………..………………….…………vii TABLE OF FIGURES …………………………………...……………………….…...…xi TABLE OF TABLES …………………………………...………………………….…...xiii TABLE OF PLATES…………………………………………………………………… xv CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction…...………………………………………………………………………...1 1.2 The güiña, Oncifelis guigna …...……………………………………………………….4 1.2.1 Physical description …...……………………………………………………...4 1.2.2. Taxonomy …...……………………………………………………………….5 1.2.3 Ecology and behaviour…...…………………………………………………...6 1.2.4 Diet…...……………………………………………………………………….7 1.2.5 Distribution and habitat associations….………………………………………7 1.2.6 Population status and principal threats….………………….………………….9 1.2.6 Conservation and management …...………………………….……………...11 1.3. The Study Region …...………………………………………………………………..12 1.3.1 Location and general description …...………………………………………12 1.3.2 Regional community assemblages…...……………………………………...13 1.3.2.1 Mammals of the North Patagonian rainforest …...……………..…14 1.3.2.2 Birds of the North Patagonian rainforest ………………….....……15 1.3.3 Anthropomorphic influences…...……………………………………………15 1.4 The study sites …...……………………………………………………………………17 1.5 Scope and aims of study…...…………………………………………………………..21 CHAPTER 2: FIELD METHODS AND MAP CONSTRUCTION 2.1 Methods …...………………………………………………………………………….22 2.1.1 Creation of a land cover (habitat) map …...……………………………….…22 2.1.2 Capture and handling of güiña…...……………………………………….…23 2.1.3 Determination of movements via radio-telemetry….………………….……24 2.1.4 Estimation of bearing error…...……………………………………………..25 2.2 Results…...…………………………………………………………………………….27 2.2.1 The land cover (habitat) map…...……………………………………………27 2.2.2 Study animals…...…………………………………………………………...27 2.2.3 Determination of movements via radio-telemetry…...………………………29 vii CHAPTER 3: PREY AVAILABILITY AND THE GÜIÑA DIET 3.1 Introduction …...……………………………………………………………………...31 3.1.1 The felid diet …...………………………………………………….………....31 3.1.2 Determination of dietary components from prey remains….……….…….…32 3.1.3 Chapter Aims …...…………………………………………………………...32 3.2 Methods …...…………………………………………………………………………..33 3.2.1 Estimation of small mammal field abundances…...…………………………33 3.2.2 Determination of prey components in the güiña diet….……………….……35 3.2.3 Quantification of the güiña diet…...…………………………………………37 3.2.4 Relative utilisation of available prey…...……………………………………39 3.3 Results…...…………………………………………………………………………….40 3.3.1 Small mammal occurrence and density estimates…...………………………40 3.3.1.1 Live-trap estimates…...……………………………………………40 3.3.1.2 Hair tube trap results…...………………………………………….42 3.3.2 The güiña diet in PNLSR and PNQ…...……………………………………..44 3.3.3 The güiña diet - seasonal comparisons…...………………………………….46 3.3.4 Comparison of small mammal species occurrence in the güiña diet with field indices of relative availability …...………………………………………………..50 3.4 Discussion …...……...………………………………………………………………...51 3.4.1 Dietary composition…………………………………………………………..51 3.4.2 Relative estimates of small mammal abundance…...………………………..52 3.4.3 Potential sources of bias…...………………………………………………...54 Summary