Population Size and Recovery Criteria of the Threatened Lake Erie Watersnake: Integrating Multiple Methods of Population Estimation

Herpetological Monographs, 20, 2006, 83–104 E 2006 by The Herpetologists’ League, Inc.

POPULATION SIZE AND RECOVERY CRITERIA OF THE THREATENED LAKE ERIE WATERSNAKE: INTEGRATING MULTIPLE METHODS OF POPULATION ESTIMATION

1 RICHARD B. KING ,ALEJANDRO QUERAL-REGIL, AND KRISTIN M. STANFORD Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA

ABSTRACT: The Lake Erie watersnake, Nerodia sipedon insularum, occurs only in the island region of western Lake Erie, an area less than 40 km in diameter. Restricted geographic distribution and declining population size resulted in this snake’s classification as Threatened in the U.S. and Endangered in Ontario and Ohio. A combination of mark-recapture methods, capture rate information, and interpolation were used to estimate the current U.S. population size of Lake Erie watersnakes. A total of 121 point estimates were generated using both ‘closed’ population (Lincoln–Petersen, Schumacher’s) and ‘open’ population (Jolly– Seber, Bailey’s triple-catch) methods to analyze data collected from 1980–2004. Paired t-tests, comparing estimates obtained using alternative methods, were consistently non-significant. Although standard errors and confidence intervals of individual estimates were often large, standard errors of mean estimates, obtained by averaging across methods and sets of consecutive years, were markedly smaller, averaging 14% (range 5 5– 25%). These analyses demonstrate the utility of mark-recapture methods even in cases where sample size and recapture rates are low, as may often be true for threatened and endangered species. Another 60 estimates were obtained by applying the Lincoln–Petersen method to samples collected in consecutive years. As expected if recruitment occurs between samples, these estimates were significantly larger than those obtained using other methods. By comparing these recruitment-biased estimates to unbiased estimates, annual adult recruitment (and by extension, adult survivorship) was estimated to be 0.63. At 11 study sites for which recent (2000–2004) mark-recapture estimates were available, population density (adults/km) was highly correlated with capture rate. The regression relationship between density and capture rate was thus used to estimate watersnake population size at 19 additional sites for which only capture rate was known. Interpolations of watersnake population size were made at another 29 sites, thus encompassing the entire U.S. range of the Lake Erie watersnake. Interpolations were based on habitat suitability, land-use practices, the observed presence of watersnakes, and density at sites for which mark-recapture or capture rate estimates were available. Lake Erie watersnake densities exceeded those of many other snakes. At 30 sites for which recent estimates were available, median density 5 141 adults/km of shoreline (range 5 11–1107 adults/km). Mark-recapture estimates encompassing 15.8 km and capture rate estimates encompassing 19.6 km of shoreline on the U.S. islands totaled more than 6500 adult watersnakes. Including interpolated numbers at 28.3 km of uncensused shoreline to encompass the entire U.S. distribution of the Lake Erie watersnake brought this total to nearly 7700 adults. This exceeds 5555 adults, the number specified in the Population Persistence criterion of the Lake Erie Watersnake Recovery Plan. Estimates also exceeded island-specific criteria for Kelleys, South Bass, and Middle Bass Island. On North Bass Island, estimated population size (385 adults) fell short of the island- specific recovery criterion (410 adults) unless interpolated numbers at uncensused sites were included (total 5 443 adults). Other criteria for delisting the Lake Erie watersnake include Habitat Protection and Management and Reduction of Human-induced Mortality. Recent land acquisitions, development of watersnake-friendly land management plans, and outreach efforts seeking to foster public appreciation and minimize watersnake- human conflicts have contributed to achievement of these goals. These actions, together with this snake’s capacity for rapid population growth, make recovery and eventual delisting of the Lake Erie watersnake a real possibility. Key words: Capture rate; Conservation; Density; Islands; Lake Erie; Mark-recapture population estimation; Nerodia; Population size; Recovery; Recruitment; Survivorship; Threatened and Endangered species; Watersnake.

QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATES OF ABUNDANCE are dangered populations and species. Unfortu- central to the recognition, management, and nately, obtaining such estimates is often recovery of vulnerable, threatened, and en- difficult, especially for rare and secretive organisms. Estimates of animal populations frequently rely on mark-recapture techniques 1 CORRESPONDENCE: telephone: 815-753-7833, e-mail: (Caughly, 1977; Krebs, 1998; Seber, 1982). [email protected] Although simple in concept, these techniques

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 15:59:36 83 84 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20 sometimes require restrictive assumptions Canada international boundary (Fig. 1). such as closed population structure and equal There are 18 islands in western Lake Erie catchability. Furthermore, sample sizes and consisting of dolomite and limestone bedrock recapture rates required for accurate esti- that resisted glaciation. They are overlain by mates (e.g., confidence limits that fall within shallow soils and range in size from less than 1 10% of the true population size) may be to more than 4000 ha (Forsyth, 1988). The unattainable for many organisms. More so- islands span an area less than 40 km in phisticated techniques for the analysis of diameter, giving the Lake Erie watersnake mark-recapture data make less restrictive one of the most restricted geographic dis- assumptions but are primarily intended to tributions of any North American vertebrate generate estimates of population vital statistics taxon. Excluding Johnson and Mouse Island, (e.g., survivorship, population growth), not where watersnakes are not protected (Fazio population size, and require even more and Szymanski, 1999), Starve Island, which is complete capture histories (White and Burn- too small and low to provide over-wintering ham, 1999). habitat, and West Sister Island, where the The primary objective of this paper is to population status of watersnakes remains provide quantitative estimates of current adult uncertain (see Discussion), the U.S. islands population size for the Lake Erie watersnake in Lake Erie comprise about 64 km of (Nerodia sipedon insularum), a U.S. federally shoreline and 2440 ha of inland habitat. The threatened and state (Ohio) and provincially Canadian islands comprise another 41 km of (Ontario) endangered species (Fazio and shoreline and 4310 ha of inland habitat. Szymanski, 1999), using data collected from Outside of hibernation, watersnake activity is 1980 to the present. This paper builds on work largely restricted to island shorelines (R.B. described in King (1986) and a series of King, K.M. Stanford, and D. Wynn; unpub- unpublished reports to the Ohio Department lished). Thus, worldwide, potential Lake Erie of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife watersnake summer habitat is comprised of (ODNR DOW) and U. S. Fish and Wildlife about 105 km of shoreline. Service (USFWS) (King, 1998a, 1998b, 2001b, Lake Erie watersnakes differ in color 2002a, 2002b, 2002c, 2004). Population esti- pattern from mainland northern watersnakes mates included in those documents contrib- (Conant and Clay, 1937), a difference main- uted to the decision to list this snake (Fazio tained by a dynamic balance between natural and Szymanski, 1999) and to the development selection favoring uniformly gray unbanded of the Lake Erie Watersnake Recovery Plan snakes in island populations and gene flow (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003). In from mainland populations where banded achieving this primary objective, we compare snakes are favored (Hendry et al., 2001; King, the performance of alternative estimation 1993b, 1993c; King and Lawson, 1995, 1997). techniques when sample size and recapture Historically, the diet of Lake Erie watersnakes rates are sometimes low. This comparison consisted of native fishes and amphibians allows estimation of the degree of bias (mudpuppies) captured from the nearshore introduced by recruitment between sample waters of Lake Erie (King, 1986, 1993a; King periods when using techniques that assume et al., 1999). A dramatic change in diet closed population structure. We also develop composition took place starting in the mid- an alternative estimation technique based on 1990’s and Lake Erie watersnakes now feed capture rate. This technique allows quantita- almost exclusively on round gobies, an in- tive population monitoring at more sites than vasive fish now abundant in the island region might be possible (e.g., due to logistic or (King et. al., 2006). Watersnake courtship and financial constraints) using only mark-recap- mating occur in spring and early summer and ture methods. offspring are born in late summer and fall. The Lake Erie watersnake is a nonvenom- Lake Erie watersnakes are sexually dimorphic ous live-bearing medium-sized colubrid snake with females exceeding males in adult body that occurs only in the island region of size. Sexual maturity is reached in 2–3 years western Lake Erie, straddling the U.S.– and longevity may exceed 10 years (Gibbons

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:09 84 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 85

FIG. 1. The island region of western Lake Erie.

and Dorcas, 2004; King, 1986; Walley et al., snakes basking in the sun’’ (Langlois, 1964, 2006). p. 11; see McDermott, 1947 for additional Early European visitors were impressed narratives). Pigs, released by settlers, may with the abundance of snakes in the region, have reduced snake populations to some dubbing the islands the ‘‘Les Isles aux degree (Hatcher, 1945; McDermott, 1947) Serpentes’’ and reporting ‘‘myriads of water- but scientific investigators in the early- to mid-

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:09 85 86 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20

1900’s reported high watersnake densities; revealed that Lake Erie watersnakes were three workers caught 234 in just four hours in present along a greater extent of island 1935 (Conant and Clay, 1937) and seven shoreline than previously realized and that workers caught about 400 in five hours in total population size was somewhat larger than 1949 (Camin and Ehrlich, 1958). Published suggested by King (1986). Mark-recapture reports raising concerns that watersnake techniques, capture rate data, and inferences populations were declining first appeared in regarding population size in shoreline areas the 1960s when Ehrlich and Camin com- where intensive field work was not possible mented that ‘‘[a] campaign of extermination is indicated that the U.S. Lake Erie watersnake being waged against the snakes’’ on Middle population numbered between 1530 and 2030 Island (Ehrlich and Camin, 1960, p. 136) and adults (Fazio and Szymanski, 1999; King, Langlois noted that ‘‘[t]he Lake Erie Water 1998a, 1998b). Snakes appear to be much less abundant now Although it is difficult to compare these around the islands than they were in 1936’’ estimates directly with qualitative reports (Langlois, 1964, p. 18). The effectiveness of regarding historic watersnake densities, evi- earlier efforts by island residents to eliminate dence of declining Lake Erie watersnake snakes from Rattlesnake Island is described by populations include the following: (1) Capture Conant (1982, 1997). Based on multiple visits rates during 1980–1985 were far lower than to the four largest U.S. islands in 1979 and those reported by earlier workers (King, 1980, Kraus and Schuett (1982) classified the 1986). (2) The adult population on Middle Lake Erie watersnake as rare (very restricted Island, a small island sampled in its entirety, in range and numbers), noting that ‘‘popula- numbered ca. 35 adults in the early 1980’s, tion densities of insular Nerodia have been whereas about 400 watersnakes were cap- drastically reduced over the past 40 years’’ tured there in 1949 (Camin et al., 1954, and suggesting that ‘‘building and clearing Erhlich and Camin, 1960). (3) No watersnakes activities along the shoreline and the in- were found on four small islands (Green, West creased influx of tourists . . . are contributing Sister, North Harbour, Middle Sister) during to the degradation of the shoreline habitat that repeated visits between 1980 and 1997 de- Nerodia inhabits’’ (Kraus and Schuett, 1982, spite their documented presence in the 1930’s pp. 38–39). Such observations were echoed in and 1940’s, suggesting that they had been comments to RBK by biologists teaching at extirpated from these islands (King et al., the Ohio State University F. T. Stone 1997). Laboratory on South Bass Island in the early Legal protection of the Lake Erie water- 1980’s. snake was first extended to Canadian popula- The first quantitative estimates of Lake Erie tions in 1977 under the Ontario provincial watersnake population size were based on Endangered Species Act. The Committee on field work at 12 study sites on 7 islands from the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada 1980–1984 (King, 1986). A combination of (COSEWIC) listed it as endangered in 1991 mark-recapture and capture rate techniques (http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/index.htm). In the were used, resulting in an estimate for all sites U.S., the USFWS designated the Lake Erie combined of 1262 adults (upper and lower watersnake as a category 2 candidate species bounds 5 523 and 4064, table 2 in King, in 1985, a category 1 species in 1991, and 1986). Of this total, an estimated 586 adults proposed it for listing as threatened in 1993. occurred on those U.S. islands where water- Listing was delayed when, in 1995, Congress snakes are currently protected under the U.S. enacted a moratorium on all final listing Endangered Species Act, an estimated 549 actions under the U.S. Endangered Species adults occurred on Canadian islands, and an Act. In 1999, a USFWS final rule designated estimated 127 adults occurred on Johnson the Lake Erie watersnake as threatened Island in Sandusky Bay. Concerns that these (Fazio and Szymanski, 1999). The Ohio De- estimates were incomplete and had become partment of Natural Resources Division of outdated led to additional field work on the Wildlife listed the Lake Erie watersnake as U.S. islands, commencing in 1996. This work state endangered in 2000. Restricted geo-

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:24 86 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 87

graphic distribution and declining population characteristics as the real population of in- size, attributed to human persecution and terest (Crandall et al., 1999; Frankham, 1995; habitat loss, were identified as primary factors Nunney, 2000; Nunney and Elam, 1994). In in extending legal protection to the Lake Erie Lake Erie watersnakes, the ratio of effective watersnake (Fazio and Szymanski, 1999; population size to census population size, McKeating and Bowman, 1977; U.S. Fish Ne/N, has been estimated to be approximately and Wildlife Service, 2003). 0.45 (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003). A recovery plan with the goal of removing This estimate is based on information on adult the Lake Erie watersnake from the Federal sex ratio, frequency of reproduction, annual list of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife survivorship, variation in offspring production, was approved by the USFWS in 2003 (U.S. and temporal variation in population size for Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003). Three both Lake Erie watersnakes and northern criteria for delisting were identified. The first, watersnakes (Brown and Weatherhead 1999; Population Persistence, sets overall and island- King, 1986; Prosser, 1999; Prosser et al., 2002) specific population size requirements for the as detailed in the Lake Erie Watersnake U.S. islands. The second, Habitat Protection Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Management, sets overall and island- 2003). In Lake Erie watersnakes, an effective specific habitat protection requirements. The population size of 2500 thus corresponds to third, Reduction of Human-induced Mortality, a census population size of 5555 (U.S. Fish seeks to reduce intentional and accidental and Wildlife Service 2003). human-induced mortality to the point where The population persistence criterion fur- such mortality no longer represents a signifi- ther specifies that ‘‘[s]ubpopulations on each cant threat. Recovery tasks designed to of the 5 small islands capable of supporting achieve these criteria include population Lake Erie watersnakes year-round (Rattle- monitoring, land acquisition, habitat manage- snake, Sugar, Green, Ballast, and Gibraltar) ment, and public outreach (U.S. Fish and persist during the same six or more year Wildlife Service, 2003). period as Criterion 1a, and the estimated It is the population persistence criterion population size reaches or exceeds the popu- that is of particular relevance to this paper. lation size stated below for the four largest This criterion specifies that ‘‘[e]stimated islands simultaneously during the same six or population size reaches or exceeds 5,555 adult more year period as Criterion 1a’’ (U.S. Fish Lake Erie watersnakes on the U.S. islands and Wildlife Service, 2003, Criterion 1b, combined (Kelleys, South Bass, Middle Bass, p. 29). Island-specific population criteria are: ; North Bass, Rattlesnake, West Sister, Green, 1. Kelleys Island—900 adults, 2. South Bass Ballast, and Gibraltar) for a period of six or Island—850 adults, 3. Middle Bass Island— more years’’ (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 620 adults, and 4. North Bass Island—410 2003, Criterion 1a, p. 28). The rationale for adults. These criteria are intended to ensure this criterion comes from the International that multiple Lake Erie watersnake subpopu- Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural lations persist as a hedge against population Resources (IUCN) Red List Categories and decline or extinction due to catastrophic or Criteria: Version 3.1 (IUCN, 2001). One stochastic events. These size criteria were IUCN criterion for the Endangered classifi- selected such that 50% (2780) of the total cation (this classification corresponds to the adult population size required for delisting is USFWS designation of Threatened, U.S. Fish distributed among the four largest U.S. islands and Wildlife Service, 2003) is that effective in proportion to the amount of shoreline population size is less than 2500 adults (IUCN habitat that they provide. The remaining 2775 Criterion EN C, IUCN, 2001). Effective adults might be found on any of these islands population size, Ne, refers to the size of an or the smaller U.S. islands in Lake Erie (U.S. ideal population (one with 1:1 sex ratio, Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003). random mating, equal contribution of all The requirement that total and island- adults to subsequent generations, constant specific population criteria are met for six or size over time) that has the same genetic more years is intended to ensure that there is

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:24 87 88 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20 sufficient time for recruitment of new adults established in the early 1980s. This led to within the recovery period (U.S. Fish and the discovery of high-density water snake Wildlife Service, 2003). Because Lake Erie populations overlooked or unappreciated in watersnakes can reach sexual maturity in 2– earlier years and resulted in establishment of 3 years (King, 1986), six years should provide additional study sites. Sites on Canadian enough time for at least two generations of islands were not visited after 1991 except for snakes to mature. a single visit in 2003. In addition to Lake Erie watersnake study sites on islands in western METHODS Lake Erie, one site on Johnson Island in Sandusky Bay and one site on the Ohio General mainland were studied. The Johnson Island Fieldwork on Lake Erie watersnakes oc- site is inhabited by watersnakes similar in curred in four blocks of consecutive years with color pattern to Lake Erie watersnakes but differing primary research objectives. During this island is not included among populations 1980–1985, efforts focused on analyzing the protected under the U.S. Endangered Species role of natural selection on color pattern Act (Fazio and Szymanski, 1999). The Ohio variation on U.S. and Canadian islands (King, mainland study site is inhabited by northern 1987, 1992). During 1988–1992, efforts fo- watersnakes (Nerodia sipedon sipedon). John- cused on collection of tissue samples and son Island and mainland sites were included estimation of rates of gene flow among U.S. to increase sample size in comparisons among and Canadian island and mainland popula- population estimation methods. Study sites tions (King and Lawson, 1995). Population and other shoreline segments on the U.S. ecological data were collected during these islands referred to in this study are illustrated periods and were used to generate population in Fig. 2. estimates (King, 1986), but this was not Watersnakes were captured by hand during a primary objective. During 1996–1998, ef- area constrained searches of suitable shoreline forts focused on determining Lake Erie habitat within defined study sites. Searches watersnake distribution and abundance on were typically conducted by a single field the U.S. islands (King, 1998a, 1998b). From worker during 1980–1991 (RBK) and by one 2000–2004, efforts focused on population to four workers in 1992–2000 (led by RBK or estimation and on documenting watersnake AQ-R). In 2001, a program of intensive annual movements and hibernation site usage (King, spring censuses was initiated. These censuses 2000, 2001a, 2001b, 2001c, 2002a, 2002b, spanned two-week periods (late May to mid- 2002c, 2003a, 2003b, 2004). June) and involved up to three teams of two During the initial years of this project, to four workers (led by RBK and KMS). much of the perimeter of the larger islands Fieldwork outside of annual census periods (Pelee, Kelleys, South Bass, Middle Bass, during 2001–2004 typically involved two North Bass) and the entire perimeter of workers (led by KMS or J. Ray). Upon a number of smaller islands (Middle, Gibral- capture, snakes were classified by sex, mea- tar, Green, East Sister, West Sister) was sured to obtain snout-vent length (SVL), and surveyed for the presence of water snakes. weighed. Watersnakes were individually Initial surveys involved walking searches of marked by scale clipping (1980–1992) or continuous stretches of shoreline or, where passive integrated transponders (PIT tags, shoreline access was limited, point-based 1996–present) and released at their site of visual searches separated by unsearched areas. capture. Watersnakes were classified as adults Based on these initial surveys, study sites were using size criteria from King (1986; male SVL established at locations that appeared to have $ 430 mm, female SVL $ 590 mm). high water snake densities and were relatively undisturbed by humans. Additional small Population Estimation Using islands (Rattlesnake, Sugar, Ballast, Middle Mark-Recapture Techniques Sister, Hen) were surveyed in later years as Mark-recapture techniques were used to were shoreline areas outside study sites estimate adult population size as follows.

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:24 88 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 89

Within-year estimates were generated for Petersen method, obtaining estimates with sites censused two or more times within only 50% accuracy requires capture of a large a year. At sites censused twice within a year, proportion of the total population, especially the Lincoln–Petersen method was used when population size is small (e.g., about 2/3 (as modified by Bailey in Caughley, 1977, of the population when n 5 100 and about 1/3 p. 142); at sites censused three or more times when n 5 1000; fig. 2.3 and 2.4 in Krebs, < within a year, Schumacher’s method was used 1998). Furthermore, this method produces (Caughley, 1977, p. 145). These methods as- biased estimates, tending to overestimate true sume that recruitment of new individuals be- population size, when sample size is small or tween census periods is negligible (i.e., they the number of recaptures is less than seven are designed for ‘closed populations’). This (Krebs, 1998). Sample size requirements for assumption seems reasonable for watersnakes other methods of population estimation have when censuses are separated by a few months been less well characterized but ‘‘Jolly–Seber or less; watersnakes require 2–3 years to reach estimates are very imprecise unless the sexual maturity, reproduce just once per year, number of marked animals in each sample is and may live for 10 or more years (King, 1986, more than 10’’ (Greenwood, 1996, p. 33). unpublished). Between-year estimates were Because one of the objectives here was to generated for sites censused in three or more provide an empirical comparison of the years using the Jolly–Seber method (as performance of alternative estimation tech- modified by Manley in Krebs, 1998, p. 42) niques when sample size and recapture rates and Bailey’s triple-catch method (Caughley, are sometimes low, the following sample size 1977, p. 146). These methods are appropriate criteria were used in generating population when recruitment occurs between census estimates. (1) The Lincoln–Petersen method periods (i.e., for ‘open populations’), as is was used only when 10 or more adults were likely when censuses span multiple years. This captured in both censuses and there was at combination of secondary (within year) and least one recapture in the second census. (2) primary (between year) sampling periods Schumacher’s method was used only when constitutes the ‘‘robust design’’ of Pollock a total of 30 or more adults were captured and (Krebs, 1998; Pollock et al., 1993). The robust recaptures were present in two or more design offers practical advantages with respect censuses. Captures separated by up to 29 days to investigator effort and provides multiple were sometimes pooled together and treated estimators of population size without assum- as a single census when using Schumacher’s ing equal catchability (these and other ad- method. (3) Jolly–Seber and Bailey’s triple- vantages are described in Pollock et al., 1993). catch methods were used only when 10 or Between-year estimates were also generated more adults were captured in the census year using the Lincoln–Petersen method despite prior to, of, and following the year for which the likely occurrence of recruitment between population size was estimated. For some years. This was done for two reasons: (1) For Jolly–Seber and Bailey’s triple-catch esti- some sites and time periods, this was the only mates, there was a gap of one year between method by which population estimates could censuses (e.g., estimates were based on be generated. (2) When recruitment occurs censuses in 1997, 1998, and 2000). between censuses, the Lincoln–Petersen Population estimates were limited to adults method is expected to be biased upward because recaptures of marked snakes con- by an amount proportional to recruitment sisted almost entirely of this age class and rate (as discussed below). Thus, comparison because it is adult population size that is of of between-year Lincoln–Petersen estimates greatest concern for conservation and man- with those generated by other methods allows agement. Twenty-two watersnakes initially estimation of this bias. marked as juveniles were recaptured as Sample sizes necessary to generate accurate adults. These snakes were treated as new and unbiased estimates of population size captures when first captured as adults for the using mark-recapture techniques are often purposes of population estimation. Out of large. For example, when using the Lincoln– more than 1000 recaptures of adult water-

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:24 89 90 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:24 90 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 91

snakes, eleven were of snakes marked at one to estimate population density. For Lake Erie study site and recaptured at another. These watersnakes, information on home range size snakes were treated as having been recap- comes from a multi-year radiotelemetry study tured when calculating population estimates involving 61 adult animals (R.B. King, K.M. for sites at which these snakes were initially Stanford, and D. Wynn; unpublished). During marked; they were treated as new captures the active season, home range of these animals when calculating population estimates for sites was linear, consisting of a narrow band of at which they were recaptured. Nine water- shoreline that averaged 256 m in length snakes were recaptured whose individual (range 5 70–1360 m). Therefore, the extent identity could not be resolved either because of shoreline to which mark-recapture popula- not all scale clips could be discerned or tion estimates apply was determined by because of apparent errors in recording PIT adding one-half home range (128 m) to each tag codes. These snakes were treated as new end of shoreline segments included within captures for purposes of population estima- study sites (256 m total) for all study sites tion. except Gibraltar and Middle Island, which When population estimates could be gen- were sampled in their entirety. Population erated by multiple methods or for more than density was estimated by dividing mark-re- one year at a given site, they were averaged to capture population estimates by this adjusted obtain a single estimate for a given block of length. years (1980–1985, 1989–1992, 1996–1998, 2000–2004). Blocks of years were treated Recruitment Bias and Annual separately because of changes in the extent Adult Survivorship of shoreline sampled and because of possible When recruitment occurs between census changes in adult population size over time. periods, population estimates generated using Between-year Lincoln–Petersen estimates the Lincoln-Petersen method are biased were not included in these averages unless upwards (Caughley, 1977). This is because this was the only method of estimation recruitment (and immigration) adds new possible for a given site and block of years. individuals to the population that were not To compare population estimates generated present during the first census and thus the by different methods, means were computed proportion of marked individuals in the for each site and block of consecutive years second sample is reduced. In contrast, mor- separately for each estimation method. These tality between census periods does not result means were compared among methods using in biased estimates provided mortality rates paired t-tests. are the same for marked and unmarked Unless populations are naturally bounded, individuals (Caughley, 1977). When both the population being estimated using mark- recruitment-biased and unbiased estimates recapture data occupies a larger area than that of population size are available, recruitment used for data collection. This is because some (and by extension, survivorship) can be individuals have home ranges that extend estimated as follows. Let M be the number outside of the study area. If home range size of individuals marked and released during the is known, the actual area to which population first census, let n be the number examined for estimates apply can be determined and used marks in the second census, and let m be the

FIG. 2. Aerial views of the U.S. islands in Lake Erie included in this study: (A) Kelleys Island, (B) South Bass Island, (C) Middle Bass Island, (D) North Bass Island, (E) small islands. Numbers denote sites refereed to in this paper (see text and Tables 1, 2, and 4). Scale varies among islands. Solid lines identify sites for which recent (2000–2004) population estimates based on mark-recapture techniques are available (Table 1). Dashed lines identify sites for which recent population estimates based on capture rate are available (Table 3). Dotted lines identify sites for which population size was interpolated (Table 4).

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:41 91 92 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20 number of marked individuals recaptured in able. Raw data consisted of the number of the second census. If recruitment occurs adult Lake Erie watersnakes captured per between censuses, then the standard Lin- area constrained search during intensive coln–Petersen method provides a recruitment- spring censuses conducted 2001–2004. From biased estimate of population size: these data, the mean and maximum number of N ~ ½M(n z 1)=(m z 1): ð1Þ captures was calculated for each site. These biased were converted into rates (adults captured per Furthermore, the n individuals examined for km) by dividing by the extent of shoreline marks at the second census should consist of included within each study site. Correlation the proportion (1 2 r) that was present and linear regression were used to charac- during the first census and the proportion r terize the relationship between population that consists of new recruits. If r were known, density and capture rate at 11 sites for an unbiased estimate of population size could which both kinds of information were avail- be calculated as: able. This relationship was used to generate density estimates for sites for which mark- ~ { z z Nunbiased ½M(n(r 1) 1)=(m 1): ð2Þ recapture estimates were lacking. Capture If population size remains constant such that rate data for the majority of these latter survivorship, s 5 1 2 r, an alternative formu- sites came from intensive spring censuses lation is provided by: conducted 2001–2004 but also included some censuses that occurred later in the ~ z z Nunbiased ½M(ns 1)=(m 1): ð3Þ summer. The ratio of unbiased to biased population estimates is then: RESULTS Population Estimation Using Nunbiased=Nbiased ~ ½M(ns z 1)=½M(n z 1)ð4Þ Mark-Recapture Techniques and Mark-recapture techniques were used to ~ z { s ½(Nunbiased=Nbiased)(n 1) 1=n: ð5Þ generate population estimates for 19 study That is, survivorship (and recruitment) can be sites on eight islands in western Lake Erie, estimated from knowledge of unbiased and one site on Johnson in Sandusky Bay, and one recruitment-biased estimates of population site on the Ohio mainland (Table 1) based on 5441 captures of 4168 adult watersnakes size and the number of individuals examined between 1980 and 2004. Most recaptures for marks during the second census. Here, occurred within one or two years of marking between-year Lincoln–Petersen estimates rep- but as many as eight years sometimes elapsed resent recruitment-biased estimates whereas between first and final capture. Individual unbiased estimates are provided by other study sites consisted of 250–2750 m of shore- methods (including within-year Lincoln– line habitat. Excluding the Johnson Island and Petersen estimates). Multiple estimates of Ohio mainland sites, a total of 25 km of Nunbiased, Nbiased, and n for a given site and shoreline habitat was included, about 18 km period of successive years were averaged to on U.S. islands and 7 km on Canadian islands facilitate calculation of s. (these totals include 128 m added to either end of study sites other than Gibraltar and Population Estimation Based on Capture Rate Middle Island, which were sampled in their To estimate population size at sites for entirety). When only estimates from 2000– which mark-recapture estimates could not be 2004 were considered, a total of 15,830 m of generated, the relationship between popula- shoreline at 11 sites on five U.S. islands were tion size and capture rate was analyzed for included. those sites for which mark-recapture estimates A total of 171 point estimates of population could be generated. This relationship was size were generated (Table 1, summary tables then used to estimate population size for sites showing each estimate are available by re- for which only capture rate data were avail- quest from RBK). Of these, 60 were Lincoln–

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:41 92 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 93

Petersen between-year estimates and hence timates were generated by equation 3. These were expected to overestimate true population unbiased Lincoln–Petersen estimates were size due to recruitment. When population similar to estimates generated by other estimates were averaged across methods and methods (mean 5 224 vs. 235 adults, P 5 within blocks of consecutive years, 31 mean 0.364, Table 2). estimates were obtained (Table 1). Lincoln– Petersen between-year estimates were exclud- Population Estimation based on Capture Rate ed from these calculations except for seven Estimated population density, mean cap- combinations of sites and blocks of years (11 ture rate, and maximum capture rate were estimates total) for which they were the only available for 11 sites in 2000–2004. Population estimates available. density estimates were based on two to nine Mean population estimates ranged from 39 mark-recapture estimates and mean and to 1036 adults per study site and density maximum capture rates were based on three estimates ranged from 18 to 1107 adults/km to eight censuses at each site. Natural log (Table 1). Estimates generated using Lincoln– transformations of all three variables were Petersen (L–P), Schumacher (S), Jolly–Seber computed to linearize their relationship and to (J–S), and Bailey’s triple-catch (B) methods normalize error variance. did not differ significantly from each other, Both mean and maximum capture rates even without adjusting P values for multi- were significantly correlated with popula- ple comparisons (P 5 0.061–0.506, Table 2). tion density (mean capture rate: r 5 0.851, Similarly, within-year estimates (generated P 5 0.001; maximum capture rate; r 5 0.807, using Lincoln–Petersen and Schumacher’s P 5 0.003). Because it was more strongly methods) did not differ from between-year correlated with population density, mean estimates (generated using Jolly–Seber and capture rate was used as the dependent Bailey’s methods) (P 5 0.368, Table 2). variable in regression analysis relating capture Although it is possible that differences rate and population density with the result among methods went undetected, power that: to detect a medium effect size (Cohen, Ln(Mean Capture Rate) 1988) was moderate to high (Table 2). Fur- thermore, the lack of consistent directional ~{0:87 z 0:81( ln (Population Density)) differences (L–P . S in 3 of 10 compari- ð6Þ sons, L–P . J–S in 6 of 13 comparisons, L– Backtransforming, P . B in 5 of 13 comparisons, S . J–S in 6 of 11 comparisons, S . B in 4 of 10 com- Mean Capture Rate parisons, J–S . B in 8 of 16 comparisons, ~ 0:81 within-year estimates exceeded between- 0:42 Population Density ð7Þ year estimates in 9 of 16 comparisons) sug- and gests that alternative methods performed equally well. Population Density ~ 1:23 ð Þ Recruitment Bias and Annual 2:93 Mean Capture Rate 8 Adult Survivorship Graphical analysis suggested that one site In contrast to comparisons among methods represented an outlier with respect to this described above, Lincoln–Petersen between- relationship (Fig. 3). Specifically, the density year estimates (recruitment-biased estimates) estimate at the Kelleys Island South Shore site exceeded estimates generated using other (site 7 in Fig. 3) was more than two times methods (unbiased estimates) in 21 of 23 higher than the next highest density estimate comparisons (mean 5 350 vs. 235 adults, P , yet mean capture rate at this site was similar 0.001, Table 2). Using equation 5, the esti- to that of sites with much lower density mated mean annual adult survivorship, s, was estimates. Regression diagnostics (Christen- 0.63 (range 5 0.32–1.06). Using this value, sen, 1996) also suggested that this site was an unbiased between-year Lincoln–Petersen es- outlier in that it exceeded all other sites in

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:42 93 94 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20

TABLE 1.—Estimates of adult Lake Erie watersnake population size based on mark-recapture methods. ‘Length’ refers to the length of shoreline habitat included within a given study site. ‘Effective Length’ refers to the length of shoreline to which a given population estimate applies and was obtained by adding 256 m to Length for all sites except islands sampled in their entirety. Within-year estimates are based on 2 or more censuses in the same year. Between-year estimates are based on censuses in two or more years. Method of estimation is abbreviated as follows: L–P 5 Lincoln– Petersen, S 5 Schumacher’s, J–S 5 Jolly–Seber, B 5 Bailey’s triple catch. ‘Mean’ refers to the mean of estimates generated by all methods within a block of successive years. Between-year estimates generated using the Lincoln– Petersen method were not included in calculating these means unless no other estimates were available (between-year Lincoln–Petersen estimates excluded from such calculations are shaded in gray). Unbiased between-year Lincoln– Petersen estimates (see text) are shown in parentheses. Density estimates were generated by dividing the mean estimate by effective length. Note that the extent of shore sampled at a given site sometimes varied among years. Locations of sites on U.S. islands are indicated by site number on Fig. 2.

Within-year estimates Between-year estimates Density Length (effective (adults Site # Island Site name length) (m) Year L–P S J–S B L–P Mean per km) 1 Kelleys Long Point 1480 (1736) 1980 75 104 (67) 1981 75 39 156 (103) 1982 80 60 83 (54) 66 38 2750 (3006) 2001 208 112 248 (160) 2002 248 (159) 160 53 4 Kelleys Southeast Shore 1000 (1256) 2001 389 617 (391) 2002 408 383 591 (375) 2003 461 449 686 663 (420) 2004 281 439 350 5 Kelleys Marina 01 (256) 1997 106 (68) 106 414 Entrance 7 Kelleys South Shore 200 (456) 1996 90 (60) 90 197 680 (936) 2001 652 997 (633) 2002 598 1013 967 1241 (788) 2003 1680 1379 2837 (1806) 1036 1107 11 Kelleys Minshall 1450 (1706) 1996 124 (80) 1997 88 98 127 (84) 1998 62 44 73 43 1250 (1506) 2000 68 185 (119) 2001 123 96 64 14 Kelleys State Park 300 (556) 2000 96 45 94 (60) 2001 124 39 173 (111) 2002 132 113 63 186 (118) 2003 122 133 169 252 201 (128) 2004 320 261 144 259 26 South Bass East Shore 1030 (1286) 2002 550 204 581 (369) 2003 733 780 504 508 (323) 554 431 28 South Bass State Park 650 (906) 1996 75 (48) 1997 60 86 264 (169) 1998 260 135 149 650 (906) 2001 427 450 394 (251) 2002 300 264 356 630 (399) 2003 105 346 404 539 455 (289) 2004 279 405 352 389 34 Middle Bass East Point (part) 750 (1006) 1983 53 105 (69) 53 53 750 (1006) 1996 138 (89) 1997 72 72 72 36 Middle Bass State Park 1045 (1301) 1982 203 (131) 1983 238 (156) 221 170 1630 (1886) 2002 309 (197) 2003 163 323 473 418 623 (397) 2004 266 401 341 181 39 Middle Bass West End 320 (576) 1996 34 132 (86) 1997 42 36 105 (69) 1998 42 39 68 320 (576) 2001 37 168 288 (184) 2002 100 128 247 (160) 108 188

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:42 94 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 95

TABLE 1.—Continued.

Within-year estimates Between-year estimates Density Length (effective (adults Site # Island Site name length) (m) Year L–P S J–S B L–P Mean per km) 1100 (1356) 2002 561 1034 (657) 2003 429 934 1009 914 (580) 2004 587 704 519 47 North Bass South Shore 1775 (2031) 1980 134 324 (206) 1981 288 232 136 328 (210) 1982 199 130 175 470 (300) 1983 270 195 231 396 (253) 1984 138 193 95 1775 (2031) 1989 122 209 (133) 1990 212 167 82 1980 (2236) 2001 350 (224) 2002 108 226 240 289 (184) 2003 121 161 367 (234) 2004 275 189 85 53 Sugar SI2, SI3A, SI3B 900 (1156) 1996 86 (56) 86 74 55 Gibraltar Entire island 900 (900) 2003 73 248 (158) 2004 173 123 152 Middle2 Entire island 2200 (2200) 1980 39 (25) 39 18 Pelee2 Fish Point-west 900 (1156) 1989 76 (49) 1990 153 (100) 115 99 Pelee2 Fish Point-south 750 (1006) 1980 164 (106) 1981 268 181 243 (156) 1982 341 138 252 (166) 232 231 Pelee2 Lighthouse 1700 (1956) 1989 115 (74) 115 59 Point Pelee2 Sheridan Point 500 (756) 1983 40 40 53 Johnson3 Quarry ‘fingers’ 250 (506) 1981 78 (51) 1982 65 176 (115) 65 128 Ohio Willow Point 740 (996) 1989 58 131 (84) mainland4 1990 63 74 69 98 (64) 1991 91 71 71

1 Snakes captured at this site were all captured from beneath a single sheet of plywood, hence Length 5 0. 2 Middle and Pelee Island are Canadian. 3 Johnson Island is located in Sandusky Bay; watersnakes here are unprotected. 4 Northern watersnakes, Nerodia sipedon sipedon, are found at the Ohio mainland site.

Cook’s D, a measure of the change in residuals Mean Capture Rate if a particular case were excluded (D 5 0.99 for Kelleys Island South Shore vs. 0.00–0.80 ~ 0:15 PopulationDensity1:02 ð10Þ for other sites), and leverage, a measure of the and influence of a point on the fit of the regression (leverage 5 0.28 for Kelleys Island South Population Density Shore vs. 0.00–0.23 for other sites). When the ~ 6:32 Kelleys Island South Shore site was omitted 6:32 Mean Capture Rate : ð11Þ from analysis, the correlation between mean Equation 11 was used to estimate popula- capture rate and population density increased tion density and population size (the product to 0.903 (P , 0.001) and regression analysis of population density and extent of shoreline) yielded: at 19 additional sites for which only capture Ln(Mean Capture Rate) rate data were available from 2000–2004 (Table 3). These included 12 sites on the four ~{ : z : ( ( )), 1 87 1 02 ln Population Density large U.S. islands, three sites on Pelee Island ð9Þ (a Canadian island) and all or the majority of

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:46 95 96 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20 ), 5 r 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.84 Power . . . . Lincoln–Petersen, S 5 0.93 0.368 0.79 4.06 0.001 0.68 0.506 0.99 0.349 0.60 0.29 0.777 0.45 1.87 0.087 0.87 1.09 0.298 0.65 2.14 0.061 the standard error of the mean 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6

FIG. 3. Relationship between population density and capture rate based on data collected during intensive nrtP ), Pearson correlation coefficient between methods (

n surveys in May and June 2000–2004. Line represents the simple linear regression of ln(capture rate) on ln(density) for all sites except site 7, Kelleys Island South Shore (see text). Sites are labeled as follows: 1—Kelleys Island Long Point, 4—Kelleys Island Southeast Shore, 7—Kelleys Island South Shore, 11—Kelleys Island Minshall, 14— Kelleys Island State Park, 26—South Bass Island East Shore, 28—South Bass Island State Park, 36—Middle Bass Island State Park, 39—Middle Bass Island West 47 (68, 1076) 23 0.97 0.93 0.364 87 (40,1242) 16 0.80 75 (105, 1692) 23 0.97 82 (36, 1173) 17 0.96 118 (69, 1173) 10 0.78 120 (68, 1310) 11 0.64 101 (36, 1173) 13 0.85 106 (42, 1311) 13 0.72 72 (73, 780) 10 0.93 End, 47—North Bass Island South Shore, 55—Gibraltar 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Island (site numbers correspond to those in Fig. 2 and Table 1). SE (range)

6 four small U.S. islands. Individual sites in- comparisons vary. cluded 420–3980 m of shoreline (nearly 23 km in total; about 20 km on U.S. islands and 3 km on Pelee Island), density estimates ranged from 11–396 adults/km, and estimated 51 (39, 1036) 224 51 (34, 688) 311 51 (39, 1036) 350 83 (42, 1311) 314 71 (61, 780) 464 69 (61, 780) 391 55 (34, 642) 376 55 (34, 642) 344 60 (122, 642) 380 population size ranged from 13–650 adults per 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 site (2762 adults total; 2427 adults at sites on 235 260 U.S. islands and 335 adults at sites on Pelee Island). Using the regression relationship between population density and capture rate for all 11 sites to estimate population size (equation 8) gave a total of 2921 at these 19 Bailey’s triple catch. Means, standard errors, and ranges vary among comparisons for a given method because sites included in sites. Thus, equation 11 provides a more con- 5 servative estimate of watersnake population size with respect to meeting recovery goals. between-year L–P (J–S & B) Between-year L–P 235 Unbiased Between-year DISCUSSION value, and power to detect a medium effect size (Cohen 1988). Method of estimation is abbreviated as follows: L–P Jolly–Seber, B Comparison Mean P Population Estimation Using 5 ), t Mark-Recapture Techniques Alternative mark-recapture techniques (Lincoln–Petersen, Schumacher, Jolly–Seber,

2.—Paired t-tests comparing population estimates generated using different methods. Shown are methods being compared, mean Bailey’s triple-catch) gave similar population Method 1 Method 2 Method 1 Method 2 estimates estimates (L–P & S) estimates for Lake Erie watersnakes as in- ABLE Mean of unbiased Mean of unbiased Within-year J–S B 297 S B 388 S J–S 364 L–P B 260 Schumacher’s, J–S L–P J–S 260 (range) adult population sizepaired via t each statistic method, number ( of sites for which estimates by both methods are available ( T L–P Sdicated by a 319 lack of significant differences

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:47 96 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 97

TABLE 3.—Estimates of adult Lake Erie watersnake population size based capture rate. Capture rate data come from intensive spring censuses 2001–2004 except as noted. Locations of sites on U.S. islands are indicated by site number on Fig. 2.

Extent of # of Mean # of Density estimate Population Site number Island Site name shore (m) censuses captures (rate) (adults/km) estimate 2 Kelleys East Shore 950 1 6 (6) 39 37 9 Kelleys Trailer Park and East 700 1 13 (19) 112 78 12 Kelleys State Park North Shore 860 1 7 (8) 50 43 16 Kelleys State Park Beach 450 1 7 (16) 94 42 17 Kelleys East of State Park Beach 420 1 9 (21) 129 54 19 Kelleys Camp Patmos 450 1 6 (14) 83 36 22 South Bass East Point 500 1 21 (42) 250 125 34 Middle Bass East Point 33001 3 39–78 (28) 163 650 38 Middle Bass West Shore 1100 1 2 (2) 11 13 40 Middle Bass West End/Burgundy Bay 1060 1 34 (32) 192 203 44 North Bass NE, E, SE Shore 2400 2 19 (8) 48 116 49 North Bass NW, W Shore 1920 3 13 (7) 41 80 50 Rattlesnake East 1500 1 51 (34) 203 304 52 Green Entire island 1150 12 9 (8) 48 55 53 Sugar South 900 22 55 (61) 358 322 56 Ballast S, W, and E Shore 670 1 45 (67) 396 266 Pelee Fish Point South 750 12 37 (49) 293 219 Pelee Lighthouse Point 1700 12 10 (6) 36 61 Pelee Mill Point 800 12 9 (11) 68 55 1 Because extent of shoreline censused varied among years, density estimates were generated separately for each year, averaged, and applied to the total extent of shoreline censused to generate a population estimate. 2 Includes capture rates from one or more censuses outside of intensive spring census periods of 2001–2004.

between pairs of methods (Table 1, 2). 35 Jolly–Seber estimates. Thus, strict applica- Furthermore, closed and open-population tion of sample size recommendations of some techniques (Lincoln–Petersen and Schu- (Greenwood, 1996; Krebs, 1998) would sug- macher vs. Jolly–Seber and Bailey’s triple- gest that few if any meaningful population catch) gave similar results (Table 2), suggest- estimates could be generated for Lake Erie ing that the assumption of no recruitment watersnakes. between within-year samples was reasonably Use of multiple methods to estimate well met. population size and then averaging these Despite consistency among estimation tech- estimates across consecutive years appears to niques, population estimates for a given site have generated more precise estimates of within a given time period often differed by population size. At 15 combinations of sites a factor of two or more (Table 1) and standard and time periods for which 4 or more mark- errors of individual estimates (available from recapture estimates were available, the stan- RBK) were frequently large. For example, dard error as a percent of the mean estimate standard errors of 26 within-year Lincoln– averaged 14% (range 5 5–25%). However, Petersen estimates averaged 38% of the accuracy of these estimates is uncertain. estimate (range 5 13–54%) and standard Simulation results suggest that small sample errors of 28 estimates generated using Bailey’s size and low recapture rate can result in triple-catch method averaged 67% of the upwardly biased estimates (Krebs, 1998). In estimate (range 5 29–100%). Large standard contrast, population estimators used here errors are expected when number of recap- consistently underestimated true population tures and sample size are low. Here, number size in painted turtles (Koper and Brooks, of recaptures exceeded seven in only four of 1997). Some insight into the accuracy of the 26 within-year Lincoln–Petersen estimates estimates presented here can be gained by and total number of captures never exceeded comparing them to numbers of individual the population estimate. Numbers of recap- adult watersnakes known to be alive. Sum- tures were $10 for the years prior to, of, and ming across the 11 sites for which recent following the year of estimate in just three of mark-recapture estimates are available, the

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:48 97 98 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20

number of individual adult watersnakes cap- TABLE 4.—Island-by-island summary of current (2000– tured each year was 50 (2000), 472 (2001), 794 2004) adult Lake Erie watersnake population size. Details for mark-recapture and capture rate estimates are shown (2002), 901 (2003), and 966 (2004). Assuming in Table 1 and 3, respectively. Extrapolated population annual survivorship of 0.63 (see Results), the sizes for uncensused sites (Table 4) and totals that include ? minimum number of adult watersnakes alive these extrapolations are shown in parentheses. at these 11 sites in 2004 is estimated to be Length 1975. In comparison, mark-recaptures esti- Island Method (km) Population mates for these 11 sites are 2.1 times larger, Kelleys mark-recapture 7.3 1875 totaling 4107 (Table 4). Given that minimum capture rate 3.8 290 number alive is almost certainly an underes- uncensused 7.2 (269) timate, it seems unlikely that mark-recapture total 18.3 2165 (2434) techniques greatly overestimate the true South Bass mark-recapture 2.2 906 capture rate 0.5 125 population size of adult Lake Erie water- uncensused 13.8 (538) snakes at these 11 sites. total 16.5 1031 (1569) Middle Bass mark-recapture 3.2 1045 Recruitment Bias and Annual capture rate 6.1 866 Adult Survivorship uncensused 4.3 (179) total 13.6 1911 (2090) Between-year Lincoln–Petersen estimates North Bass mark-recapture 2.2 189 were significantly larger than estimates gen- capture rate 4.3 196 erated by other methods (Table 2) as expected uncensused 1.9 (58) total 8.4 385 (443) due to recruitment between years. Assuming Rattlesnake capture rate 1.5 304 constant population size (recruitment 5 uncensused 1.0 (48) mortality), this difference suggests annual total 2.5 304 (352) adult survivorship of Lake Erie watersnakes Sugar capture rate 1.5 325 is about 0.63. This value is similar to that Green capture rate 1.2 55 Ballast capture rate 0.7 266 estimated from mark-recapture data for uncensused 0.3 (12) northern watersnakes in southern Ontario by total 0.9 266 (278) Brown and Weatherhead (1999), who found Gibraltar mark-recapture 0.9 123 that survivorship was 0.61 in two year old 9 U.S. Islands mark-recapture 15.8 4138 capture rate 19.6 2427 snakes, 0.63 in three year olds, and 0.48 in uncensused 28.3 (1104) older adults. Estimates of annual adult water- total 63.7 6565 (7669) snake survivorship fall between those typical of early-maturing colubrids (seven species, contribute to variation in capture rate. In mean 5 0.49, range 5 0.35–0.63) and late particular, variation in habitat characteristics maturing colubrids (six populations of five may result in differences in watersnake species, mean 5 0.71, range 5 0.62–0.80; catchability among sites. Examination of the = table 9–5 in Parker and Plummer 1986) (see 11 sites for which both capture rate and Bronikowski and Arnold 1999, Stanford and density estimates are available suggests that King 2004 for additional survivorship esti- this is true. As noted earlier, the Kelleys mates). Direct estimation of Lake Erie water- Island South Shore site (site 7 in Fig. 3) snake survivorship, based on mark-recapture differed from other sites in having an un- data presented here, is in progress. usually high population density but a mean capture rate comparable to sites with much Population Estimation based on Capture Rate lower population density. This site includes Capture rate and population density were a number of rock filled metal or wood crib highly correlated at sites where both types of docks. Such docks provide abundant basking data were available (Fig. 3), making it possible and retreat sites but also make it relatively to estimate population size at sites where only easy for watersnakes to evade capture by capture rate was known (Table 3). These diving into the lake or crawling into rock estimates assume that variation in capture crevices, perhaps resulting in reduced capture rate is due primarily to differences in popu- rate. It is also possible that this site includes lation density. However, other factors may a larger proportion of transient individuals

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:49 98 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 99

than do other sites; recapture rates here were closer to the Ohio mainland (13.4 km) than it relatively low despite moderate to large is to the nearest island occupied by Lake Erie sample sizes. The Middle Bass State Park site watersnakes (Rattlesnake Island, 21 km) (site 36 in Fig. 3) includes a section of rock (Fig. 1). Hence, it is possible that this snake rip-rap where watersnakes were frequently represents an immigrant from a mainland seen but where escape into the water or rock northern watersnake population rather than crevices was also common. In contrast, a Lake Erie watersnake (King, 2002c). Fur- a cluster of discarded pipes at the Kelleys ther fieldwork is planned for both of these Island Southeast Shore site (site 4 in Fig. 3) islands to clarify the status of watersnakes provided a favored retreat site for large found there. numbers of watersnakes and dozens of adults could be easily captured. Variation in catch- Lake Erie Watersnake Population Density ability and low numbers of censuses (fre- The density of Lake Erie watersnakes quently just one) doubtless influence esti- exceeds that of many other snake species. In mates of population size at sites for which only a review of 57 density estimates for 40 species capture rate data are available. Despite the tabulated by Parker and Plummer (1987, table errors inherent in these estimates, they are of 9–1), 21 were less than or equal to 1/ha and > value in providing a more complete picture of the median density was just 5/ha (range 5 current Lake Erie watersnake population size. #1–1289/ha). Densities of New World natri- It is worth noting that capture rate esti- cines (which include watersnakes) were mates include Green Island, an island where higher with a median of 22/ha (range 5 1– Lake Erie watersnakes were present in the 1289/ha in 14 populations of 9 species). 1930’s and 40’s but from which they were Although watersnake densities are reported extirpated prior to 1980 (none were observed here in adults/km, radiotelemetry indicates during repeated searches from 1980–1997) that Lake Erie watersnakes are rarely found (King et al., 1997). The renewed presence of more than 10 m from shore outside of Lake Erie watersnakes on Green Island was hibernation (R.B. King, K.M. Stanford, and confirmed during fieldwork conducted by C. D. Wynn, unpublished). Thus, density esti- Caldwell and S. Butterworth (ODNR–DOW) mates reported here in adults/km are roughly on 25 June 2002 when about 20 individuals comparable to those reported in adults/ha. were observed (C. Caldwell, personal com- Median Lake Erie watersnake density at 30 munication) and by KMS, M. Andre (North- sites for which recent (2000–2004) estimates ern Illinois University), A. Zimmerman, M. are available is 141 adults/km (range 5 11– Seymour (USFWS), and J. Spaeth (Ohio State 1107 adults/km) (Table 1, 3). This exceeds the University) on 23 July 2002 when nine adults median for snakes generally and for natricines were captured and marked with PIT tags in particular (table 9–1 in Parker and Plum- (King, 2002c). Green Island lies about 1.6 km mer, 1987). Even species known for high west of South Bass Island (Fig. 1) and about population density fall below the Lake Erie 1.9 km from South Bass State Park, a site watersnake; tiger snakes on Carnac Island, where Lake Erie watersnakes occur in high Western Australia have a density of 22 adults/ density (site 28 on Fig. 2). As noted earlier, ha (Bonnet et al. 2002) and brown tree snakes watersnakes were also extirpated from West on Guam achieve a maximum density of about Sister Island prior to 1980 (King et al., 1997). 50/ha (G. Rodda in Beltz, 2005). Lake Erie Fieldwork conducted on this island by KMS, watersnake densities also exceed those of M. Andre (NIU), M. Thomas, and T. Thorne conspecifics elsewhere. Population densities (Ohio State University F. T. Stone Laborato- of northern watersnakes at two ponds in ry) on 26 July 2002 resulted in the capture of Ontario were 25 adults/ha and 28 adults/ha a single adult female (King, 2002c). The color (Brown and Weatherhead, 1999). Along pattern of this snake was dark and distinctly 6.4 km of a Kansas stream, Beatson (1976) banded as is typical of mainland populations collected 197 watersnakes and estimated this of northern watersnakes (Nerodia sipedon to be 75–90% of the total population, giving sipedon). Furthermore, West Sister Island is a density of 34–41 juveniles and adults per

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:50 99 100 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20

TABLE 5.—Characteristics of uncensused segments of shoreline on U.S. islands and extrapolated adult Lake Erie watersnake population size. Population estimates for sites where habitat characteristics are unsuitable for watersnakes (sites #42 and 45) or where land use practices makes protection unfeasible (sites #6, 8, 15, 24, 31, 32) were set to 0. For other sites, population estimates were based on a density of 48 adults/km. Locations of sites are indicated by site number on Fig. 2.

Years of watersnake sightings/captures Population Site # Island Length (m) (other information on watersnake status) estimate 3 Kelleys 1570 2001 75 5 Kelleys 1515 1997–1998 73 6 Kelleys 1110 2000–2004 (downtown Kelleys Island) 0 8 Kelleys 225 2001 (commercial ferry dock) 0 10 Kelleys 1940 2000–2004 93 13 Kelleys 60 (present at adjacent sites) 3 15 Kelleys 220 (State Park swimming beach) 0 18 Kelleys 400 (present at adjacent sites) 19 20 Kelleys 120 (present at adjacent sites) 6 21 South Bass 750 2002 36 23 South Bass 905 (present at adjacent site) 43 24 South Bass 485 (Perry’s Victory & International Peace Memorial) 0 25 South Bass 2040 1996, 1997, 2000–2004 98 27 South Bass 2270 1996–1997, 2004 109 29 South Bass 1900 (present at adjacent sites) 91 30 South Bass 1400 2000–2004 67 31 South Bass 1550 (downtown Put-in-Bay) 0 32 South Bass 520 (Perry’s Victory & International Peace Memorial) 0 33 South Bass 1950 1996–1997 94 35 Middle Bass 1640 2003 79 37 Middle Bass 320 1996–1997 15 41 Middle Bass 1015 1997 49 42 Middle Bass 525 (sand shoreline) 0 43 Middle Bass 750 1998 36 45 North Bass 650 (sand shoreline) 0 46 North Bass 330 1996–1998, 2002 16 48 North Bass 885 1980–1984 42 51 Rattlesnake 1000 (present at adjacent site) 48 56 Ballast 250 (present at adjacent site) 12 km. Reasons for the high local densities of and 19.6 km for which capture-rate estimates Lake Erie watersnakes are unclear but may are available). Population estimates of either include the ameliorating effects of Lake Erie type are lacking for another 28.3 km. To on local climate (Albrecht, 1988; Bolsenga and extrapolate possible watersnake numbers, the Herdendorf, 1993), the ready availability of remaining 28.3 km was divided into 29 suitable hibernation sites perhaps facilitated shoreline segments ranging in length from by deep fissures in the bedrock that underlies 60 to 2270 m (Fig. 2) and information on the islands, and an abundance of prey in the habitat characteristics and watersnake status nearshore waters of Lake Erie. were tabulated (Table 5). Sites where current land use practices precluded watersnake pro- Current Lake Erie Watersnake Population tection or habitat characteristics and field Size and Recovery Objectives observations suggested that watersnakes were Population estimates presented here can be rare or absent were assigned a density of used to evaluate the degree to which the 0 (Table 5). Sites where habitat characteristics Population Persistence criterion of the Lake were similar to suitable watersnake habitat Erie Watersnake Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish elsewhere and field observations confirmed and Wildlife Service, 2003) has been met. On the presence of watersnakes were assigned the U.S. islands, recent (2000–2004) popula- a density of 48 adults/km (Table 5). This value tion estimates encompass 35.3 km of shore represents the median of the 10 sites with the (15.7 km for which mark-recapture estimates lowest Lake Erie watersnake density based on

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:50 100 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 101

mark-recapture and capture-rate estimates 6 or more years (U.S. Fish and Wildlife (range 5 11–68 adults/km). For comparison, Service, 2003). Intensive spring population median density at the 10 sites having in- censuses, begun in 2001, are continuing and termediate watersnake density 5 141 adults/ will allow estimation of population trends, km (range 5 83–203) and median density at taking into account potential differences in the 10 sites having the highest watersnake vital rates among sites, sexes, and years. density 5 370 adults/km (range 5 217–1107) Assuming population sizes remain stable or (Tables 1, 3). By using the median of the increase and other recovery criteria (Habitat lowest density sites, it is intended that Protection and Management, Reduction of extrapolated population numbers for uncen- Human-induced Mortality) are met, delisting sused sites should be conservative with re- of the Lake Erie watersnake might commence spect to Lake Erie watersnake recovery in the near future. Although delisting of objectives. recovered species under the U.S. Endangered Together, mark-recapture and capture rate Species Act has not been common, some estimates exceed 6500 adult watersnakes on notable examples exist, including the Ameri- the U.S. islands (Table 4), more than meeting can alligator, peregrine falcon, and brown the overall population size criterion of 5555 pelican (http://www.fws.gov/endangered/). In adults specified in the Lake Erie Watersnake addition, the USFWS is currently determining Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser- the appropriateness of delisting another vice, 2003). Including uncensused sites brings threatened watersnake, the Concho water- the total population size to nearly 7700 adults snake, Nerodia paucimaculata (R. Pine, per- (Table 4). Mark-recapture and capture rate sonal communication). Although caution is estimates also exceed island-specific criteria warranted lest delisting take place prior to on three of four islands, totaling more that true population recovery, provisions of the 2100 adults on Kelleys Island, 1000 adults on U.S. Endangered Species Act require popu- South Bass Island, and 1900 adults on Middle lation monitoring for a minimum of five Bass Island (Table 4) (island-specific popula- additional years and mandate relisting should tion size criteria for these islands are 900 populations fall below criterion levels during adults, 850 adults, and 620 adults, respective- that period (Endangered Species Act, Section ly, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003). 4; http://endangered.fws.gov/esa.html). The Mark-recapture and capture rate estimates delisting process itself also includes multiple total 385 adults on North Bass Island, falling safeguards, including a public comment peri- somewhat short of 410 adults, the population od and review at regional and national levels. size criterion for this island. However, in- In addition, protections at the state level may cluding uncensused sites brings the total remain should federal protection end. population size estimate for this island to Considerable progress has been made in 443 adults (Table 4), suggesting that even on achieving the Habitat Protection and Man- this island, population size criteria may be agement criterion specified in the Lake Erie met. Unfortunately, formal confidence limits Watersnake Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and on overall and island-specific population Wildlife Service 2003). Much Lake Erie estimates are not available, based as they are watersnake habitat is privately owned with on multiple methods of estimation. However, human population centers on Pelee, Kelleys, it is perhaps instructive to note that if the and South Bass Island, smaller numbers of standard error of 14%, reported above for permanent residents on Middle Bass, North mean estimates based on mark-recapture Bass, and Rattlesnake Island, and summer data, is taken as a guide, then the overall residents on Sugar, Ballast, Gibraltar, Hen, estimate of nearly 7700 adults exceeds the and North Harbour Island (historically, year- recovery criterion of 5555 adults by about two round or summer residents also occupied standard errors. West Sister, Middle, and Green Island). The population persistence criterion of the However, public lands managed by the Lake Erie Watersnake Recovery Plan also ODNR are found on the four larger U.S. specifies that population size goals be met for islands (South Bass Island: 25 ha, 0.6 km of

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:51 101 102 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20 shoreline; Kelleys Island: 274 ha, 1.9 km of east Shore, South Bass Island East Shore; sites shoreline; Middle Bass Island: 50 ha, 0.9 km 4 and 26 on Fig. 2) and high traffic areas (e.g., of shoreline; North Bass Island: 238 ha, adjacent to public boat launches at Kelleys 4.0 km of shoreline). These include significant Island State Park and South Bass Island State recent watersnake habitat acquisitions on Park; sites 14 and 28 on Fig. 2). In addition, Middle Bass and North Bass Island (totaling Lake Erie watersnakes appear capable of ca. 87% of the latter island). In addition, rapid population growth. Many females pro- Green Island is managed by the ODNR and duce large numbers of offspring annually and West Sister Island is part of the Ottawa sexual maturity is attained in 2–3 years (King, National Wildlife Refuge. Public lands on 1986). These characteristics, combined with the Canadian Islands include the entirety of management activities outlined in the Lake Middle Island and East Sister Island and Erie Watersnake Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish multiple preserves on Pelee Island. Manage- and Wildlife Service, 2003), should promote ment plans are being developed for public population persistence of this Lake Erie lands on the U.S. islands by both the ODNR endemic. DOW and USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Acknowledgments.—Field research spanning more Service, 2003) and once adopted, should aid than 20 years can only be accomplished with contribu- in ensuring the persistence of the Lake Erie tions from numerous individuals and institutions. We watersnake. Further progress in habitat man- graciously thank the following. For funding: F. T. Stone Laboratory, Lake Erie Protection Fund, National Science agement and protection is being achieved Foundation (DEB 9107382), Ohio Department of Natural through federally sanctioned Habitat Conser- Resources Division of Wildlife, Ohio Sea Grant, Ohio vation Plans and state sanctioned Conserva- State University, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, tion Easements involving private landowners. Sigma Xi, Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Fund of the Although listed as threatened, local popula- American Museum of Natural History, and U. S. Fish and tions of Lake Erie watersnakes are sometimes Wildlife Service. For permits: Canadian Wildlife Service, remarkably dense, creating a dichotomy of Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Parks perceptions regarding protection. Some island and Recreation, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife, Ontario Ministry of Natural Re- residents and visitors, aware of its local sources, Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge, and U. S. Fish abundance, view the Lake Erie watersnake and Wildlife Service. For Institutional Animal Care and as interfering with recreational activities and Use Committee protocol approval: Indiana University, its protection as imposing limits on local land Northern Illinois University, Ohio State University, and use practices. In contrast, other residents, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. For assistance in the field: M. Andre, K. and S. Bekker, T. Bittner, R. visitors, and wildlife managers recognize the Bradfield, M. and A. Brehm, S. Butterworth, J. Cline, T. Lake Erie watersnake as a unique component Colson, W. Flanagan, H. L. Gibbs, T. Golden, M. Grue, J. of the local biota that, despite its local Hageman, R. Hannon, T. Herman, A. Karr, J. Kerfin, R. abundance, is rare on a global scale. To these Lawson, G. Lipps, M. Mandt, T. Near, D. Osterfeld, J. Ray, K. Reider, J. and T. Robinson, A. Schneider, T. people, Lake Erie watersnake protection is Schneider, J. Schofield, M. Seymour, M. Thomas, J. seen to benefit other species and ecological Waller, T. Walsh, H. Whiteman, A. (‘little snakeman’) communities and promote awareness of local Wolf, D. Wynn, and A. Zimmerman. For logistical support environmental resources. Resolving these of many kinds: Ladd’s Marina, Lake Erie Islands State contrasting views is no small task and can Park staff, ODNR State Fish Hatchery staff, OSU Stone laboratory staff, C. Caldwell, S. Doty, K. Dress, B. Fazio, probably never be fully achieved. However, J. Hageman, M. Hathaway, the Jordans, M. Knapp, K. through outreach efforts and land use recom- Kroonemeyer, D. McTavish, R. O’Connor, M. Oldham, T. mendations, management agencies are seek- Peterkoski, J. Reutter, M. Seymour, M. Sommer, M. ing to foster greater appreciation of the Lake Thomas, L. and S. Tketch, D. Wilson, and A. Zimmerman. For access to field sites: Camp Patmos, Cleveland Erie watersnake and provide guidelines min- Museum of Natural History, Craft’s Lakeview Lane, imizing watersnake-human conflicts (U.S. Johnson Island Inc., Kelleys Island 4-H Camp, Long Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003). Point Owners Group, Lonz Winery, Paramount Distillers, Lake Erie watersnakes seem tolerant of Rattlesnake Island Club, Saunders Cottages, M. and B. Barnhill, D. Buris, G. and S. Cooper, the Dress family, J. many human activities. Medium to high and R. Eaton, G. Finger, S. and K. Hahn, P. and L. Hays, density populations occur in close proximity D. Honor, the Jones family, the Keny family, T. Kranyak, to summer homes (e.g., Kelleys Island South- T. Marsh, the Minshall family, C. Moss, C. Nerone, T.

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:51 102 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 103

Pangrace, C. and K. Schneider, and the other landowners the offshore islands of western Lake Erie. Federal of the island region. For preparation of figures: B. Ball Register 64:47126–47134. (Available electronically at and P. Ruback. http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/servlet/gov.doi.tess_public. servlets.EntryPage) FORSYTH, J. L. 1988. The geologic setting of the Erie LITERATURE CITED Islands. Pp. 11–23. In J. Downhower (Ed.). The ALBRECHT, C. W. 1988. The climate of western Lake Erie’s Biogeography of the Island Region of Western Lake island region. Pp. 24–39. In J. Downhower (Ed.). The Erie. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio, Biogeography of the Island Region of Western Lake U.S.A. Erie. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio, FRANKHAM, R. 1995. Effective population size/adult U.S.A. population size ratios in wildlife: a review. Genetic BEATSON, R. R. 1976. Environmental and genetical Research 66:95–107. correlates of disruptive coloration in the water snake, GIBBONS, J. W., AND M. E. DORCAS. 2004. North American Natrix s sipedon. Evolution 30:241–252. Watersnakes: A Natural History. University of Okla- BELTZ, E. 2005. HerPET-POURRI. Bulletin of the homa Press, Norman, Oklahoma, U.S.A. Chicago Herpetological Society 40:73–76. GREENWOOD, J. J. D. 1996. Basic techniques. Pp. 11–110. BOLSENGA, S. J., AND C. E. HERDENDORF. 1993. Lake Erie In W. J. Sutherland (Ed.). Ecological Census Tech- and Lake St. Clair Handbook. Wayne State University niques. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. Press, Detroit, Michigan, U.S.A. HATCHER, H. 1945. Lake Erie. Greenwood Press Publish- BONNET, X., D. PEARSON,M.LADYMAN,O.LOURDAIS, AND ers, Westport, Connecticut, U.S.A. D. BRADSHAW. 2002. ‘Heaven’ for serpents? A mark- HENDRY, A. P., T. DAY, AND E. B. TAYLOR. 2001. recapture study of tiger snakes (Notechis scutatus)on Population mixing and the adaptive divergence of Carnac Island, Western Australia. Austral Ecology quantitative traits in discrete populations: A theoretical 27:442–450. framework for empirical tests. Evolution 55:459–466. BRONIKOWSKI, A. M., AND S. J. ARNOLD. 1999. The IUCN. 2001. IUCN red list categories and criteria, evolutionary ecology of life history variation in the version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission, garter snake Thamnophis elegans. Ecology 80:2314– Gland, Switzerland. (Available electronically at http:// 2325. www.redlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.html) BROWN, G. P., AND P. J. WEATHERHEAD. 1999. Demogra- KING, R. B. 1986. Population ecology of the Lake Erie phy and sexual size dimorphism in northern water water snake, Nerodia sipedon insularum. Copeia snakes, Nerodia sipedon. Canadian Journal of Zoology 1986:757–772. 77:1358–1366. ———. 1987. Color pattern polymorphism in the Lake CAMIN, J. H., AND P. R. EHRLICH. 1958. Natural selection Erie water snake, Nerodia sipedon insularum. Evolu- in water snakes (Natrix sipedon L.) on islands in Lake tion 41:241–255. Erie. Evolution 12:504–511. ———. 1992. Lake Erie water snakes revisited: morph CAMIN, J. H., C. A. TRIPLEHORN, AND H. J. WALTER. 1954. and age specific variation in relative crypsis. Evolution- Some indications of survival value in the Type ‘‘A’’ ary Ecology 6:115–124. pattern of the island water snakes of Lake Erie. Natural ———. 1993a. Microgeographic, historical, and size- History Miscellanea, Chicago Academy of Sciences correlated variation in water snake diet composition. 131:1–3. Journal of Herpetology 27:90–94. CAUGHLEY, G. 1977. Analysis of Vertebrate Populations. ———. 1993b. Color pattern variation in Lake Erie water John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, U.S.A. snakes: inheritance. Canadian Journal of Zoology CHRISTENSEN, R. 1996. Analysis of Variance, Design and 71:1985–1990. Regression: Applied Statistical Methods. Chapman and ———. 1993c. Color-pattern variation in Lake Erie water Hall, New York, New York, U.S.A. snakes: prediction and measurement of natural selec- COHEN, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the tion. Evolution 47:1819–1833. Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum ———. 1998a. Distribution and abundance of the Lake Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, U.S.A. Erie water snake, Nerodia sipedon insularum, on the CONANT, R. 1997. A Field Guide to the life and times of Ohio Islands of western Lake Erie. Cooperative Roger Conant. Selva – Canyonlands Publishing Group, Research Project Final Report to the Ohio Division of Provo, Utah, U.S.A. Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. CONANT, R., AND W. CLAY. 1937. A new subspecies of ———. 1998b. Distribution and abundance of the Lake watersnake from the islands in Lake Erie. Occasional Erie water snake, Nerodia sipedon insularum, on the Papers of the University of Michigan Museum of Ohio Islands of western Lake Erie. Cooperative Zoology 346:1–9. Research Project Addendum to the Ohio Division of CRANDALL, K. A., D. POSADA, AND D. VASCO. 1999. Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Effective population size: missing measures and missing ———. 2000. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement concepts. Animal Conservation 2:317–319. Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie EHRLICH, P. R., AND J. H. CAMIN. 1960. Natural selection Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Quarterly in Middle Island water snakes (Natrix sipedon L.). Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. Evolution 14:136. Fish and Wildlife Service. FAZIO, B. B., AND J. SZYMANSKI. 1999. Endangered and ———. 2001a. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement threatened wildlife and plants; threatened status for Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie Lake Erie water snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum)on Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Annual

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:51 103 104 HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [No. 20

Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. KRAUS,F,AND G. W. SCHUETT. 1982. A herpetological Fish and Wildlife Service. survey of the coastal zone of northwest Ohio. Kirtlandia ———. 2001b. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement 36:21–54. nd Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie KREBS, C. J. 1998. Ecological Methodology, 2 ed. Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Quarterly Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco, California, Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. U.S.A. Fish and Wildlife Service. LANGLOIS, T. H. 1964. Amphibians and reptiles of the Erie ———. 2001c. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement islands. Ohio Journal of Science 64:11–25. Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie MCDERMOTT, P. W. 1947. Snake stories from the Lake Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Quarterly Erie islands. Inland Seas 3:83–88. Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. MCKEATING, G., AND I. BOWMAN. 1977. Endangered Fish and Wildlife Service. species issue. Ontario Fish and Wildlife Review 16: ———. 2002a. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement 1–24. Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie NUNNEY, L. 2000. The limits to knowledge in conservation Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Annual genetics: the value of effective population size. Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. Evolutionary Biology 32:179–194. Fish and Wildlife Service. NUNNEY, L., AND D. R. ELAM. 1994. Estimating the ———. 2002b. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement effective population size of conserved populations. Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie Conservation Biology 8:175–184. Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Quarterly PARKER, W. S., AND M. V. PLUMMER. 1987. Population Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. ecology. Pp. 253–301. In R. A. Seigel, J. T. Collins, and Fish and Wildlife Service. S. S. Novak (Eds.). Snakes: Ecology and Evolutionary ———. 2002c. Hibernation, Seasonal Activity, Movement Biology. Macmillan, New York, New York, U.S.A. Patterns, and Foraging Behavior of Adult Lake Erie POLLOCK, K. H., W. L. KENDALL, AND J. D. NICHOLS. 1993. Water Snakes (Nerodia sipedon insularum). Quarterly The ‘‘robust’’ capture-recapture design allows compo- Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and the U.S. nents of recruitment to be estimated. Pp. 245–252. In Fish and Wildlife Service. J.-D. Lebreton and P. M. North (Eds.). Marked ———. 2003a. Hibernation, seasonal activity, movement Individuals in the Study of Bird Populations. Birkhau- patterns, and foraging behavior of adult Lake Erie ser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland. water snakes. Annual Report to the Ohio Division of Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. PROSSER, M. R. 1999. Sexual selection in northern ———. 2003b. Hibernation, seasonal activity, movement water snakes, Nerodia sipedon sipedon. Ph.D. dis- patterns, and foraging behavior of adult Lake Erie sertation, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, water snakes. Quarterly Status Report to the Ohio Canada. Division of Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. PROSSER, M. R., P. J. WEATHERHEAD,H.LGIBBS, AND G. P. ———. 2004. Hibernation, seasonal activity, movement BROWN. 2002. Genetic analysis of the mating system and patterns, and foraging behavior of adult Lake Erie opportunity for sexual selection in northern water water snakes. Annual Report to the Ohio Division of snakes (Nerodia sipedon). Behavioral Ecology 13:800– Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 807. ING AND AWSON SEBER, G. A. F. 1982. The Estimation of Animal K , R. B., R. L . 1995. Color pattern variation nd in Lake Erie water snakes: the role of gene flow. Abundance and Related Parameters, 2 ed. Macmillan, Evolution 49:885–896. New York, New York, U.S.A. ———. 1997. Microevolution in island water snakes. STANFORD, K. M., AND R. B. KING. 2004. Growth, survival BioScience 47:279–286. and reproduction in a semi-urban population of the KING, R. B., M. J. OLDHAM,W.F.WELLER, AND D. WYNN. Plains garter snake, Thamnophis radix, in northern 1997. Historic and current amphibian and reptile Illinois. Copeia 2004:465–478. distributions in the island region of western Lake Erie. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 2003. Lake Erie Water- American Midland Naturalist 138:153–173. snake (Nerodia sipedon insularum) Recovery Plan. U. S. KING, R. B., A. QUREAL-REGIL,T.D.BITTNER,J.M. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Snelling, Minnesota, KERFIN, AND J. HAGEMAN. 1999. Nerodia sipedon U.S.A. (Available electronically at http://midwest.fws. insularum (Lake Erie water snake) diet. Herpetological gov/reynoldsburg/endangered/lews.html or http://ecos. Review 30:169–170. fws.gov/tess_public/servlet/gov.doi.tess_public.servlets. KING, R. B., J. M. RAY, AND K. M. STANFORD. 2006. EntryPage). Gorging on gobies: beneficial effects of alien prey on WALLEY, H., R. B. KING,J.M.RAY, AND T. L a threatened vertebrate. Canadian Journal of Zoology WUSTERBARTH. 2006. Nerodia sipedon. Catalog of 84:108–115. American Amphibians and Reptiles. In press. KOPER, N., AND R. J. BROOKS. 1998. Population-size WHITE, G. C., AND K. P. BURNHAM. 1999. Program Mark: estimators and unequal catchability in painted turtles. survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76:458–465. Bird Study 46S:120–138.

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:52 104 2006] HERPETOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 105

Authors Queries Journal: Herpetological Monographs Paper: hmon-20-00-01 Title: POPULATION SIZE AND RECOVERY CRITERIA OF THE THREATENED LAKE ERIE WATERSNAKE: INTEGRATING MULTIPLE METHODS OF POPULATION ESTIMATION

Dear Author During the preparation of your manuscript for publication, the questions listed below have arisen. Please attend to these matters and return this form with your proof. Many thanks for your assistance

Query Query Remarks Reference

1 For the in-text list of population criteria, should the numerals 1–4 be in parentheses (for consistency within the article)?

2 ‘‘fig.’’ or ‘‘figs.’’ 2.3 and 2.4 in Krebs?

3 Table ‘‘9–5’’ or ‘‘9-5’’ in Parker and Plummer?

4 Table ‘‘9–1’’ or ‘‘9-1’’?

5 In the caption of the table currently relabeled ‘‘4’’, should the parenthetical reference be changed to ‘‘Table 5’’?

Herpetological Monographs hmon-20-00-01.3d 19/9/06 16:00:53 105