DOCSLIB.ORG

An Assessment of Habitat Suitability for Pronghorn Populations of the Central Valley Region of California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Assessment of Habitat Suitability for Pronghorn Populations of the Central Valley Region of California AN ASSESSMENT OF HABITAT SUITABILITY FOR PRONGHORN POPULATIONS OF THE CENTRAL VALLEY REGION OF CALIFORNIA A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Agriculture by Virginia Burroughs December 2013 © 2013 Virginia Burroughs ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: An assessment of habitat suitability for pronghorn populations of the Central Valley region of California AUTHOR: Virginia Burroughs DATE SUBMITTED: December 2013 COMMITTEE CHAIR: Marc Horney, PhD Assistant Professor of Animal Sciences COMMITTEE MEMBER: John Perrine, PhD Associate Professor of Biological Sciences COMMITTEE MEMBER: Bob Stafford, Environmental Scientist California Department of Fish and Wildlife COMMITTEE MEMBER: Michael White, PhD, Conservation Science Director Tejon Ranch Conservancy iii ABSTRACT An assessment of habitat suitability for pronghorn populations of the Central Valley region of California Virginia Burroughs Efforts to reintroduce and maintain populations of pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) to the California Central Valley, specifically the Carrizo Plain National Monument (CPNM) and the Mojave Desert (Antelope Valley) portion of Tejon Ranch, have largely been unsuccessful due to dwindling numbers of translocated animals. The objective of this study was to improve upon previous models for the CPNM using aerial survey data and then apply the model to the Tejon Ranch. Aerial survey data collected from 2000-2010 on the CPNM was used to establish “use” and “non-use” areas in the model. Model variables included vegetation type (forest, shrub, grassland, semi-desert scrub, crops, and bare areas), slope, and road density. Vegetation and road density variables were treated categorically and slope as a continuous variable. Kernel density estimation (KDE) was used to estimate utilization distributions and home ranges (Fieberg 2007). An 80% isopleth was used to define “used” and “unused” habitat areas within the study site. Binary logistic regression was used to detect correlations between habitat variables and habitat use by pronghorn. Results of the regression analysis indicated overall significance with a p-value of < 0.0001 (testing that all slopes = 0). Each habitat variable comparison was made after adjusting for the other variables (e.g., slope effects were evaluated after adjusting for road density and vegetation type) and was found to be significant. Each variable coefficient was then included in a predictive equation and entered into GIS to generate a map to predict where pronghorn would likely be observed. Similar layers were created for the Tejon Ranch and the predictive equation was run with the CPNM statistical analysis. Limited conclusions about habitat suitability on the CPNM or the Tejon Ranch can be made based on the habitat data available for this model. While slope, road density, and vegetation type are all significant habitat variables influencing pronghorn habitat use, further study is needed to understand the mechanisms driving these relationships. With additional data expansion of the current habitat suitability model would help to further define pronghorn habitat use, specifically the creation of a focused model of a particular season, life history period, or individual animal use to identify more detailed habitat use patterns. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 3 General Ecology and Life History of Pronghorn ................................................... 5 Habitat and Range .................................................................................................. 8 Pronghorn and Free Water ........................................................................ 8 Estimating Pronghorn Home Range Size ............................................... 10 Fawning Habitat Characteristics ............................................................. 11 Birth Site Fidelity ................................................................................... 13 Pronghorn Diet ..................................................................................................... 14 Diet Composition .................................................................................... 15 Diet Composition and Overlap ............................................................... 16 Pronghorn Mortality and Recruitment ................................................................. 19 Predation Effects ..................................................................................... 20 Climate and Precipitation Effects ........................................................... 26 Forage Effects ......................................................................................... 31 Tracking and Monitoring ..................................................................................... 32 Aerial Survey Techniques ....................................................................... 33 Using GPS Collars .................................................................................. 36 Habitat Suitability Modeling ............................................................................... 38 Examples of Pronghorn Habitat Suitability Models ............................... 38 Evaluating Habitat Suitability Models .................................................... 43 v Kernel Density Estimation ...................................................................... 50 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 53 III. METHODS ....................................................................................................................... 55 Study Areas .......................................................................................................... 55 Carrizo Plain National Monument ....................................................................... 56 Input Data ............................................................................................... 56 Development of GIS Habitat Layers....................................................... 57 Reproduction of Previous Carrizo HSM ................................................. 59 Defining “Use” Areas ............................................................................. 60 Statistical Analysis .................................................................................. 61 Tejon Ranch ......................................................................................................... 63 IV. RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 65 Carrizo Plain National Monument ....................................................................... 65 Tejon Ranch ......................................................................................................... 67 V. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 69 Carrizo Plain National Monument ....................................................................... 69 Tejon Ranch ......................................................................................................... 72 VI. RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 74 Carrizo Plain National Monument ....................................................................... 74 Tejon Ranch ......................................................................................................... 76 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................................... 78 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 82 I. APPENDIX I: GIS Map Images ....................................................................................... 82 II. APPENDIX II: Model Building Documentation .............................................................. 92 Part I: Application of Penrod Model .................................................................... 92 Part II: ArcGIS Documentation/Input Layer Development ................................. 92 Part III: Application of Aerial Survey Data ......................................................... 99 Part IV: Statistical Analyses Output .................................................................. 100 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page Table 1: Binary logistic regression output for model habitat variables. Vegetation category significance values are based on comparison to forestland. CI’s are based on odds ratios of the variables. .................................................................................................................................. 68 Table 2: USGS Gap Land Cover class and merged VegClasses for Carrizo project area. ...........
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cervid Mixed-Species Table That Was Included in the 2014 Cervid RC
    Appendix III. Cervid Mixed Species Attempts (Successful) Species Birds Ungulates Small Mammals Alces alces Trumpeter Swans Moose Axis axis Saurus Crane, Stanley Crane, Turkey, Sandhill Crane Sambar, Nilgai, Mouflon, Indian Rhino, Przewalski Horse, Sable, Gemsbok, Addax, Fallow Deer, Waterbuck, Persian Spotted Deer Goitered Gazelle, Reeves Muntjac, Blackbuck, Whitetailed deer Axis calamianensis Pronghorn, Bighorned Sheep Calamian Deer Axis kuhili Kuhl’s or Bawean Deer Axis porcinus Saurus Crane Sika, Sambar, Pere David's Deer, Wisent, Waterbuffalo, Muntjac Hog Deer Capreolus capreolus Western Roe Deer Cervus albirostris Urial, Markhor, Fallow Deer, MacNeil's Deer, Barbary Deer, Bactrian Wapiti, Wisent, Banteng, Sambar, Pere White-lipped Deer David's Deer, Sika Cervus alfredi Philipine Spotted Deer Cervus duvauceli Saurus Crane Mouflon, Goitered Gazelle, Axis Deer, Indian Rhino, Indian Muntjac, Sika, Nilgai, Sambar Barasingha Cervus elaphus Turkey, Roadrunner Sand Gazelle, Fallow Deer, White-lipped Deer, Axis Deer, Sika, Scimitar-horned Oryx, Addra Gazelle, Ankole, Red Deer or Elk Dromedary Camel, Bison, Pronghorn, Giraffe, Grant's Zebra, Wildebeest, Addax, Blesbok, Bontebok Cervus eldii Urial, Markhor, Sambar, Sika, Wisent, Waterbuffalo Burmese Brow-antlered Deer Cervus nippon Saurus Crane, Pheasant Mouflon, Urial, Markhor, Hog Deer, Sambar, Barasingha, Nilgai, Wisent, Pere David's Deer Sika 52 Cervus unicolor Mouflon, Urial, Markhor, Barasingha, Nilgai, Rusa, Sika, Indian Rhino Sambar Dama dama Rhea Llama, Tapirs European Fallow Deer
    [Show full text]
  • Climate-Change Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Strategies for Africa's
    CLIMATE-CHANGE VULNERABILITIES AND ADAPTATION STRATEGIES FOR AFRICA’S CHARISMATIC MEGAFAUNA CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS Jonathan Mawdsley Martha Surridge RESEARCH SUPPORT Bilal Ahmad Sandra Grund Barry Pasco Robert Reeve Chris Robertson ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Deb Callahan Matthew Grason Anne Marsh Ralph and Alice Mawdsley Christine Negra Thomas Nichols Conn Nugent Stacia Van Dyne REVIEWERS Matthew Lewis, WWF Shaun Martin, WWF Dennis Ojima, Colorado State University Robin O’Malley, USGS Wildlife and Climate Change Science Center Karen Terwilliger, Terwilliger Consulting, Inc. Cover photo credit: Martha Surridge CITATION OF THIS REPORT The Heinz Center. 2012. Climate-change Vulnerability and Adaptation Strategies for Africa’s Charismatic Megafauna. Washington, DC, 56 pp. Copyright ©2012 by The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment. The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment 900 17th St, NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20006 Phone: (202) 737-6307 Fax: (202) 737-6410 Website: www.heinzctr.org Email: [email protected] Climate-change Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Strategies for Africa’s Charismatic Megafauna TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Introduction 3 Methods 6 Results and Discussion 8 Future Directions 10 Species Profiles The Big Five African Elephant 11 African Lion 13 Cape Buffalo 15 Leopard 17 Rhinoceros, Black 19 Rhinoceros, White 21 African Wild Dog 23 Bongo 25 Cheetah 27 Common Eland 29 Gemsbok 31 Giraffe 33 Greater Kudu 35 Hippopotamus 37 Okapi 39 Wildebeest, Black 41 Wildebeest, Blue 43 Zebra, Grevy’s 45 Zebra, Mountain 47 Zebra, Plains 49 Literature Cited 50 Climate-change Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Strategies for Africa’s Charismatic Megafauna EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The phrase “African animals” brings to mind elephants, lions and other iconic large mammals often referred to as “charismatic megafauna.” The powerful appeal of these animals is demonstrated in the many African wildlife documentaries on television and enduring public support for zoos and museums featuring African animals.
    [Show full text]
  • The U.K. Hunter Who Has Shot More Wildlife Than the Killer of Cecil the Lion
    CAMPAIGN TO BAN TROPHY HUNTING Special Report The U.K. hunter who has shot more wildlife than the killer of Cecil the Lion SUMMARY The Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting is revealing the identity of a British man who has killed wild animals in 5 continents, and is considered to be among the world’s ‘elite’ in the global trophy hunting industry. Malcolm W King has won a staggering 36 top awards with Safari Club International (SCI), and has at least 125 entries in SCI’s Records Book. The combined number of animals required for the awards won by King is 528. Among his awards are prizes for shooting African ‘Big Game’, wild cats, and bears. King has also shot wild sheep, goats, deer and oxen around the world. His exploits have taken him to Asia, Africa and the South Pacific, as well as across Europe. The Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting estimates that around 1.7 million animals have been killed by trophy hunters over the past decade, of which over 200,000 were endangered species. Lions are among those species that could be pushed to extinction by trophy hunting. An estimated 10,000 lions have been killed by ‘recreational’ hunters in the last decade. Latest estimates for the African lion population put numbers at around 20,000, with some saying they could be as low as 13,000. Industry groups like Safari Club International promote prizes which actively encourage hunters to kill huge numbers of endangered animals. The Campaign to Ban Trophy Hunting believes that trophy hunting is an aberration in a civilised society.
    [Show full text]
  • The Potential Role of Safari Hunting As a Source of Revenue for Protected Areas in the Congo Basin
    Cn,x Vo! 33 No i Octocs' 1999 The potential role of safari hunting as a source of revenue for protected areas in the Congo Basin David S. Wilkie and Julia F. Carpenter Abstract In sub-Saharan Africa conservation of bio- Tourism is only economically viable where charismatic diversity is increasingly predicated on finding ways species exist in 'safe' areas that are not more than a to ensure that the economic value of maintaining a few hours drive in a 4x4 vehicle from an interna- landscape in its 'natural' state meets or exceeds the tional airport—ostensibly excluding tourism from expected returns from converting the area to an alter- most of central Africa. In contrast, a review of avail- native land use, such as agriculture. 'Wildlands' in able information suggests that safari hunting could Africa must generate, directly or from donor contribu- offer a significant and sustainable source of financ- tions, funds sufficient to cover both the operating costs ing to offset some of the costs of maintaining pro- of conservation, and the opportunity costs of forgoing tected areas in central Africa. However, better quanti- other forms of resource use. Government and donor tative data are needed to assess whether trophy investments currently meet less than 30 per cent of the hunting is both ecologically sustainable and economi- estimated recurring costs required to manage the pro- cally competitive over the long term relative to other tected-area network within central African countries land uses. effectively, and cover none of the growing opportunity costs incurred to maintain protected areas. Unfortu- Keywords Congo, conservation, protected areas, sa- nately, few additional sources of funding are available.
    [Show full text]
  • Exotic Hoof Stock Anesthesia and Analgesia
    NAVC Conference 2008 ______________________________________________________________________________________________ EXOTIC HOOF STOCK ANESTHESIA AND provide the basis for non-domestic hoof stock ANALGESIA: BEST PRACTICES anesthesia and analgesia today. With these pharmaceuticals, the standard of care in non-domestic anesthesia and analgesia must include William R. Lance, DVM, MS, PhD, Diplomate ACZM rapid non-traumatic induction, adequate muscle Wildlife Pharmaceuticals, Inc. relaxation for manipulation, acceptable levels of Fort Collins, CO cardiovascular and respiratory function, adequate anxiolysis and analgesia, rapid and safe recovery, and Veterinary care of non-domestic hoof stock has proper levels of post procedure analgesia or sedation if become more common practice through the integration required. The veterinarian and staff must have the of veterinary medicine in state and federal natural knowledge, pharmaceuticals and support equipment to resource management programs, zoological collections, achieve a “best practice” outcome. exotic animal ranching expansion, and hobby collections of exotics. Likewise, veterinarians are expected to have CERVIDS the knowledge and capability to safely anesthetize and The family Cervidae is represented as an indigenous handle these animals. group on all major continents except Africa and Anesthesia of exotic hoof stock requires the Australia. The cervids vary greatly in size, environmental knowledge of not only the pharmacology of the drugs adaptations, and response to anesthesia protocols. used but also the variation in dose response among The selection of the protocol to be used in a given families, genera, species, and, in some cases, even sub- species will be dictated by whether rapid induction is species of this group of animals. The second challenge absolutely essential and, if rapid recovery is required, by is matching the pharmaceutical tools available with the the animal’s situation.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Dynamics and Control of Exotic South African Oryx in the Chihuahuan Desert, South-Central New Mexico Louis C
    Human–Wildlife Interactions 13(1):158–166, Spring 2019 • digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi Population dynamics and control of exotic South African oryx in the Chihuahuan Desert, south-central New Mexico Louis C. Bender, Extension Animal Sciences and Natural Resources, New Mexico State University, P.O. Box 30003, MSC 3AE, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA [email protected] Patrick C. Morrow, Environmental Stewardship Division, U.S. Army White Sands Missile Range, WSMR, NM 88002, USA Mara E. Weisenberger, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Andres National Wildlife Refuge, 5686 Santa Gertrudis Drive, Las Cruces, NM 88012, USA Bryce Krueger, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, New Mexico State University, P.O. Box 30003, MSC 4901, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA Abstract: Introductions of exotic species can benefit certain publics but can also have many unanticipated consequences. South African oryx (Oryx gazella gazella) were introduced into the Chihuahuan Desert on White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), New Mexico, USA to alleviate a perceived lack of large mammal hunting opportunities. Because of conflicts with oryx as the population increased, we modeled population growth and determined survival of radio-collared oryx to identify rates of population increase, limiting factors to population growth, and levels of harvest necessary to control population growth. Following introductions in 1969–1977, oryx significantly increased their range and showed a rate of increase of approximately λ = 1.22 through 2000, reaching approximately 3,500 individuals. This rate was marginally positively influenced by total precipitation received the previous year and near the species maximum based on fecundity (approx. λ = 1.26–1.29).
    [Show full text]
  • Ente Di Gestione Delle Aree Protette Della Valle Sesia Chamois Scientific Classification Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Clas
    Ente di Gestione delle Aree Protette della Valle Sesia Chamois Scientific classification Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Artiodactyla Family: Bovidae Genus: Rupicapra Species: R. rupicapra Binomial name Rupicapra rupicapra (Linnaeus, 1758) The chamois, Rupicapra rupicapra, is a goat-antelope species native to mountains in Europe, including the Carpathian Mountains of Romania, the European Alps, the Gran Sasso region of the central Italian Apennines, the Tatra Mountains, the Balkans, parts of Turkey, and the Caucasus. The chamois has also been introduced to the South Island of New Zealand. Chamois are strictly protected animals under the European Habitats Directive. There are two species of chamois in the genus Rupicapra: R. rupicapra (the type species) is replaced in the Pyrenees by the Pyrenean chamois, R. pyrenaica. The chamois are in the goat-antelope subfamily (Caprinae) of the family Bovidae, along with sheep and goats. The usual pronunciation in English is /ˈʃ æmw ʌ / ("shamwa"), but when referring to its leather (and in New Zealand often for the animal itself) it is pronounced / ˈʃæm ɨ / ("shammy"), and sometimes spelt "chamy". As with many quarry species, the plural is the same as the singular. Names The English name is from the French chamois. This is derived from Latin camox, borrowed from Gaulish, itself perhaps a borrowing from Iberian or Aquitanian akin to modern Basque ahuntz "goat". The Dutch name for the chamois is gems, and the male is called a gemsbok. In Afrikaans, the name gemsbok came to refer to a species of Subsaharan antelope of the genus Oryx and this meaning has been adopted in English.
    [Show full text]
  • Trophy Hunting by the Numbers
    Trophy Hunting by the Numbers THE UNITED STATES’ ROLE IN GLOBAL TROPHY HUNTING 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY We undertook a study to determine the impact of American trophy hunters on wildlife in other countries. To conduct this research, we examined wildlife trophy import trade data obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS). Between 2005 and 2014, more than 1.26 million wildlife trophies were imported to the U.S., with an average of more than 126,000 trophies every year. Most originated in Canada and South Africa, but other top countries of origin included Namibia, Mexico, Zimbabwe, New Zealand, Tanzania, Argentina, Zambia and Botswana. Trophies of more than 1,200 different kinds of animals were imported during the decade studied, including nearly 32,500 trophies of the Africa Big Five species: approximately 5,600 African lions, 4,600 African elephants, 4,500 African leopards, 330 southern white rhinos and 17,200 African buffalo. The top ten species imported during the decade were snow geese, mallards, Canada geese, American black bears, impalas, common wildebeests, greater kudus, gemsboks, springboks and bonteboks.2 The top five ports of entry for wildlife trophies during the decade were: New York, NY; Pembina, ND; Chicago, IL; Dallas/Fort Worth, TX; and Portal, ND.3 These ports provide an entry point for the trophies, which should interest local lawmakers concerned about trophy hunting. The African lion is listed as Vulnerable on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN Red List) and Endangered and Threatened under the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Increasing Attention Is Being Paid to the Quality of Meat As Living
    Volwasse manlike blesbokke. elande, gemsbokke. rooi hartebeeste. rooibokke. springbokke en swart wildebeeste is twee-maandeliks g~ oes en die volgende vleiskwaliteitseienskappe vergelyk: vet- en vog-inhoud. kleur, taaiheid. spierveseldeursnee, intensiteit en aangenaamheid van smaak. Statisties betekenisvoUe verskille tussen die soorte is vasgestel ten opsigte van die meeste vleiskwaliteitseienskappe. Die springbokke het in sommige van die kwaliteitstoetse beter as die ander spesies gevaar. Adult male blesbok. eland. gemsbok, red hartebeest, impala, springbok and black wildebeest were cropped bimonthly and meat quality tests carried out with regard to fat and moisture content, colour, tenderness. muscle fibre diameter, intensity and acceptability of "avour, Several statistically significant interspecies differences were established. The springbok venison was better in several tests than that of the other species. Increasing attention is being paid to the quality of Muscle fibre diameter was measured according to meat as living standards rise and this tendency is accentuat- Joubert (1956) on a sample preserved in 10% formalin and ed in game meat. Whereas game meat is a common and taken from the m. longissimus dorsi at the fourth lumbar essential component of the human diet in some countries, vertebra after the carcass had been dressed. A loin piece it is considered a delicacy in highly developed countries and taken in toto and including the first three lumbar vertebrae for this reason stronger emphasis is placed on the character- was wrapped in a plastic bag and taken to the meat istic quality of different species. As meat quality is a vague laboratory for overnight storage at 20C. The following description of a conglomerate of traits found in meat, it analyses were done taking sub-samples according to a will for the purpose of this study be defined as including strictly adhered to routine to eliminate differences related colour, tenderness, fat and moisture content, coarseness to the locality of the sub-sample: meat colour (modifica- of grain.
    [Show full text]
  • Outstanding Male Hunter of the Year Award Criteria & Form
    OUTSTANDING MALE HUNTER OF THE YEAR AWARD APPLICATION CANDIDATE NAME: EMAIL ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: YEAR OF ENTRY: NOMINATED BY: EMAIL ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: The purpose of this award is to recognize the Outstanding Male Hunter of the Year for Houston Safari Club Foundation. ENTRY CRITERIA 1. The applicant must have hunted at least 100 species across 4 continents. 2. Prospective recipients must submit their application by November 1st of the year prior to the Award being given. 3. The applicant must be 21 years of age. 4. The applicant must be a voting, active member of Houston Safari Club Foundation, in good standing. 5. The applicant must be of good character and have a known ethical hunting standard. 6. Applicants will be judged on the following categories: a. Hunting Accomplishments: Number of hunts, quality of species; difficulty of hunts b. Membership/History with Houston Safari Club Foundation: Length of time as member of HSCF; service to HSCF and our programs by attendance at annual convention; monthly meetings, club events. c. Wildlife Conservation/Education and Humanitarian Efforts 7. Please submit your entry by mail or email to: Joe Betar HSCF Executive Director Houston Safari Club Foundation 14811 St. Mary’s Lane Suite 265 Houston, TX 77079 [email protected] Houston Safari Club Foundation 14811 St. Mary's Lane, Suite 265 Houston, TX 77079 I. Please list any accomplishments of merit, special awards and related activities in the field of big game hunting that you have received. Houston Safari Club Foundation 14811 St. Mary's Lane, Suite 265 Houston, TX 77079 II.
    [Show full text]
  • TEXAS SPECIALTY HUNTS EXOTICS Divided Find Ranch
    T E X A S SPECIALTY HUNTS EXOTICS Divided Find Ranch THUNDERSTIK • ROOSTER RIDGE • GAGE OUTDOOR www.GAGEOUTDOOR.com 763-595-5936 TEXAS EXOTICS HUNTING Personal service sets Texas Exotic Hunting apart at our ranch near San Angelo, TX. Hunters are cared for from the moment they reach the ranch, through the time they harvest an animal until they leave the facility and all its luxury. With numerous different species on the ranch we can offer what no other ranch in Texas can. A selection of multiple species in one great hunt. With 20+ years of hunting experience, first class lodging, gourmet meals and a great staff, we have the elements in place for a hunt like no other. Our service and attention to our hunters is second to none. You will get a one-on-one treatment with us. Stepping on the ranch is like stepping into Africa with Texas Exotic Hunting. African plains game is what we specialize in. We use several different hunting methods safari-style, blind and spot-and-stalk hunts can be provided. THUNDERSTIK • ROOSTER RIDGE • GAGE OUTDOOR www.GAGEOUTDOOR.com 763-595-5936 AXIS DEER Texas Exotic Hunting has the best Axis Deer Hunting in the world. Axis hunting takes place on our immense hunting property. You will see numerous Axis Bucks per day. Many of these axis deer will be over the 30" mark. Axis Deer hunting is conducted by traditional spot and stalk method of hunting: Bow Hunting, Rifle Hunting, Black Powder, Safari Style Hunting and Handgun. AOUDAD SHEE P Aoudad sheep live in very rugged terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Unit Equivalent Chart - Texas Domestic Livestock, Native Wildlife, and Exotic Wildlife
    Animal Unit Equivalent Chart - Texas Domestic Livestock, Native Wildlife, and Exotic Wildlife Body Daily Ave Annual Head Kind of Animal Weight Intake Forage Intake AU per per AU Pounds % of BW Pounds Head (Rounded) Domestic Livestock Beef Cattle (Cow) * 1000 2.6 9490 1 1 Horse 1100 3.0 12045 1.27 1 Domestic Sheep (Ewe) 130 3.5 1661 0.18 6 Spanish Goat (Nanny) 90 4.5 1478 0.16 6 Boer x Spanish Goat (Nanny) 125 4.0 1825 0.19 5 Angora Goat (Nanny) 70 4.5 1150 0.12 8 Native Wildlife White-tailed Deer 100 3.5 1278 0.13 7 Mule Deer 135 3.5 1725 0.18 6 Pronghorn Antelope 90 4.0 1314 0.14 7 Exotic Wildlife Axis Deer 150 3.5 1916 0.20 5 Sika Deer 145 3.5 1852 0.20 5 Fallow Deer 130 3.5 1661 0.18 6 Elk 800 3.0 8760 0.92 1 Red Deer 350 3.5 4471 0.47 2 Barasinga Deer 350 3.5 4471 0.47 2 Sambar Deer 400 3.5 5110 0.54 2 Pere David's Deer 400 3.5 5110 0.54 2 Sable Antelope 500 3.0 5475 0.58 2 Blackbuck Antelope 75 4.0 1095 0.12 9 Nilgai Antelope 350 3.5 4471 0.47 2 Scimitar-horned Oryx 400 3.5 5110 0.54 2 Gemsbok Oryx 400 3.5 5110 0.54 2 Arabian Oryx 150 3.5 1916 0.20 5 Addax 250 3.5 3194 0.34 3 Ibex x Boer Goat 125 4.5 1825 0.19 5 Impala 130 3.5 1661 0.18 6 Common Eland 1000 2.5 9125 0.96 1 Greater Kudu 450 3.5 5749 0.61 2 Sitatunga 200 3.5 2555 0.27 4 Waterbuck 500 3.0 5475 0.58 2 Thompson's Gazelle 85 4.0 1241 0.13 8 Mouflon/Barbado Sheep 120 3.5 1533 0.16 6 Auodad Sheep 200 3.5 2555 0.27 4 This chart is based on the standard concept of an Animal Unit being one 1000 pound beef cow consuming an average of 2.6% of her body weight daily throughout her yearly production cycle.
    [Show full text]