DOCSLIB.ORG

Prairie Dog and Burrowing Owl Habitat Analysis Throughout Nebraska

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prairie Dog and Burrowing Owl Habitat Analysis Throughout Nebraska Rainwater Basin Joint Venture Rainwater Basin JV GIS Lab 2550 N Diers Ave Suite L 203 W 2nd St. second floor Grand Island, NE 68801 Grand Island, NE 68801 (308) 382-8112 (308) 382-6468 x33 Prairie Dog and Burrowing Owl Habitat Analysis throughout Nebraska By the Rainwater Basin Joint Venture Andy Bishop1, Laura Achterberg1, Roger Grosse1, Ele Nugent1, Christopher Jorgensen1,2 1Rainwater Basin Joint Venture, 2550 North Diers Ave, Grand Island, NE 68801 2Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, 422 Hardin Hall, 3310 Holdrege Street, Lincoln, NE 68583 This work was funded in part by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission through a Department of Energy grant to the Western Governors' Association [DOE Grant # DE-OE0000422 "Resource Assessment and Interconnection-Level Transmission Analysis and Planning (for the Western Interconnect)"] A special thanks to Mike Fritz, Joel Jorgensen, Jeff Lusk, Rick Schneider, Rachel Simpson, and Kristal Stoner for providing comments and support during the project. Introduction The following project sought to identify potential available habitat for burrowing owls in Nebraska. Burrowing owls are considered a Tier 1 at-risk species (i.e., a species globally or nationally most at risk of extinction) by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC; Schneider et al. 2005). We developed a conceptually based, spatially explicit habitat suitability index to determine the remaining suitable habitat for burrowing owls in Nebraska. Model development was based on a previous modeling exercise geared towards identifying suitable habitat for black-tailed prairie dogs in Nebraska, which was performed by the GIS Workshop, Inc. for the NGPC in 2003. Given that burrowing owls form a symbiotic relationship with prairie dogs and their habitat, and often make use of prairie dog burrows for nesting, the previous prairie dog model was adapted and updated using current data to locate areas suitable for burrowing owls. Methods We created the burrowing owl habitat suitability index using six GIS raster layers for inputs, including: soils range site, soil psamment, depth to water table, slope, vegetation landcover, and wetlands/hydrology. Habitat suitability values were assigned to each of the six GIS raster layers based on NGPC biologists’ recommendations, utilizing a 3-teir classification scheme. Suitable 1 habitat was considered the highest priority and was assigned a value of 2, while marginally suitable habitat was assigned a value of 1, and unsuitable habitat was assigned a value of 255. Individual Layer Suitability Score Habitat Suitability 2 Suitable 1 Marginal 255 Unsuitable The values for each of the six suitability layers were added together. However, if any pixel within the raster layer was classified as unsuitable (i.e., a habitat suitability value of 255), the combined habitat index for that specific area was required to be “unsuitable”. The possible output raster values for the habitat suitability index were as follows: Final Output Suitability Score Habitat Suitability 12 Highly Suitable 11 Very Suitable 10 Suitable 8-9 Marginal 0 Unsuitable Soils We derived the soil data from the Soil Survey Geographic Database 2.2 (SSURGO), which is highly considered to be the most detailed level of geospatially referenced soil data available through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). SSURGO data layers were created by following national standards. Soils were digitized using a line segment (i.e., vector) format following the NRCS digitizing guidelines. SSURGO data are distributed as a complete geographic coverage for a specified soils survey area. Mapping scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360, which are designed for use by landowners, townships, and county natural resource planning and management. SSURGO is linked to a National Soil Information System (NASIS) attribute database, which provides the proportionate extent of the component soils and their properties for each map unit. One to three soil components are assigned to each SSURGO map unit. For this analysis, we downloaded SSURGO data on a county-by-county basis from Soil Data Viewer 5.2 using ArcGIS 9.2. We merged multiple data layers together into a single shapefile to provide a statewide coverage. Each polygon in the dataset represented a single SSURGO map unit. The attribute “MUKEY” was used to associate the map unit with the soil characteristics information from the related tables which are accessible through the NRCS’s Soil Data Viewer Extension for ArcGIS. We extracted the soil map unit name and the range site name from the Soil Data Viewer. Specifically, the soil map unit name provides the soil series name, which is a brief descriptive name for the soil and non-soil areas delineated in a soil survey. The range site 2 name is a functional name identifier that was developed by the NRCS to uniquely identify each map unit in a particular soil survey area. The rangeland ecological site name provides a general description of a particular ecological site (e.g., "Loamy Upland). More specifically, an "ecological site" is the product of all the environmental factors responsible for its development. It has characteristic soils that have developed over time, a characteristic hydrology (particularly infiltration and runoff that has developed over time) and a characteristic plant community. The vegetation community, soils, and hydrology are all interrelated. The plant community on an ecological site is typified by an association of species that differs from other ecological sites in the kind and/or proportion of species, or in total production. A single range site name includes many different soil types while, conversely, a single soil series can have different subgroups that belong to many different range site names. Descriptions of ecological sites are provided in the Field Office Technical Guide, which is available in local offices of NRCS. Descriptions of those displayed in this map and summary table may also be accessed through the Ecological Site Assessment tab in Web Soil Survey. Burrowing owls are known to occupy burrows 200 cm below the soil surface in Washington (Conway et al. 2006) and 69 cm in Oklahoma (Butts and Lewis 1982). We took the average of these two estimates, establishing burrow preference of 136 cm below the soil surface. A generous leeway in marginal suitability was given for depth to impervious layers, lithic contact, and depth to water table. Table 1. Habitat suitability classifications for burrowing owl assigned to each soil type. The majority of suitability classifications are based on original prairie dog model created by GIS Workshop, Inc., however, certain categories have changed to reflect burrowing owl habitat preference. Range Site Name Suitability Platte Comments Suitability Choppy Sands 255 255 Sands 2 2 Sandy 2 2 Sandy Lowland 2 2 Shallow Sandy 255 255 Impervious within 20 in (50cm) Clayey 1 1 Clay Upland 2 2 Shallow water table 60 cm Clayey Overflow 1 1 Water table varies, often too high, rely on flood/pond layer Dense Clay 2 2 Impervious Shallow Clay 2 2 Impervious, Lithic contact 20cm Silty 1 1 Silty Lowland 1 1 Water table varies, rely on flood/pond layer Silty Overflow 1 1 Water table varies, rely on flood/pond layer Loamy 1 1 Loamy Upland 1 1 Loamy Terrace 1 1 Water table varies, rely on flood/pond layer Loamy Overflow 1 1 Water table varies, rely on flood/pond layer Loamy Lowland 1 1 Water table varies, rely on flood/pond layer 3 Limy Upland 1 1 Shallow Limy 2 2 Impervious, Lithic contact 10-20in (25-50cm) Shallow 255 255 Clean Gravel 10-20 in from surface Shallow to Gravel 2 2 Consider 255 Gravelly 2 2 Gravelly Hills 2 2 Closed Upland Depression 255 255 Flooded/Ponded No Site 2 2 Panspots 1 1 Thin Breaks 2 2 Loess Breaks 2 2 Thin Loess 2 2 Thin Upland 2 2 Wet Land 255 *2 Subirrigated 255 *2 High Water Table 61cm + Wet Subirrigated 255 *2 Saline Subirrigated 255 *2 Saline Lowland 2 2 Saline Upland 2 2 Impenetrable ground Udarents/Ustorthents 255 255 Cut and Fill Urban Land 255 255 Mine or Gravel Pit 255 255 * Areas within Platte River Valley affected by the adjusted water table suitability values Depth to Water Table The water table, or saturation zone, is highly variable within and among years, and therefore ranges between a minimum and maximum value over time. We estimated the upper limit of the water table based on local observations at a select number of sites by looking for evidence of a saturation zone (i.e.,redoximorphic features in the soil). We defined a water table to be any area that remained saturated for longer than a month. The soil saturation zone is recorded as three separate values in SSURGO, a minimum, maximum, and representative value. The minimum and maximum values indicate the range, and thus, the potential variation within the water table over time. For this analysis, we focused solely on the representative value, which is the expected depth of the water table at any given time. Given that burrows cannot persist below the water table, we specified suitability for soils with a representative water table greater than 121 cm (~4 ft) below the surface. We also considered water tables within the upper 60 cm of the soil as unsuitable. This pertained mainly to soils with range site names of “Overflow” and “Lowland” categories. Significant high water tables also existed in “Clay Upland.” In areas with a moderate depth to the water table (i.e., 61 – 121 cm), burrowing owls may create shallower burrows if deeper sites are unavailable (Mike Fritz, NGPC, personal communication). Therefore, these sites were assigned marginal habitat suitability values. Values were assigned as follows: 4 Suitability Depth to Water Table 2 > 121 cm 1 61 – 121 cm 255 0 – 60 cm Wetlands/Hydrology Wetland and hydrological data are based on the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) digital wetlands maps of wetland locations and types as defined by the U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Do the Winter Diets of Sympatric Burrowing Owl and Short-Eared Owl Overlap in West-Central Mexico?
    Proceedings of the Fourth International Partners in Flight Conference: Tundra to Tropics 96–101 DO THE WINTER DIETS OF SYMPATRIC BURROWING OWL AND SHORT-EARED OWL OVERLAP IN WEST-CENTRAL MEXICO? HÉCTOR E. VALDEZ-GÓMEZ,1,3 GEOFFREY L. HOLROYD,2 HELEN E. TREFRY,2 AND ARMANDO J. CONTRERAS-BALDERAS1 1Laboratorio de Ornitología, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Ciudad Universitaria CP 66451, A.P. 425 San Nicolás de los Garza, Nuevo León, México; and 2Environment Canada, Room 200, 4999-98 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta T6B 2X3, Canada Abstract. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) and Short-eared Owl (Asio fl ammeus) are widely dis- tributed but uncommon species during winter in Mexico. Information about their winter ecology is limited, particularly in areas where both species are present. Knowledge of their diet is an important component to understand the nocturnal raptors’ habitat requirements. We analyzed 179 pellets of Burrowing Owl and 354 pellets of Short-eared Owl collected in 2002-2003, at the Military Airbase of Zapopan, Jalisco. The owls shared three main prey categories: invertebrates, small mammals, and birds. Small mammals provided the highest proportion of biomass in the Short-eared Owl diet and invertebrates in the Burrowing Owl diet. Food-niche breadth was lower in Short-eared than in Burrowing Owl refl ecting the diversity of invertebrates in the Burrowing Owl’s diet. The dietary overlap included items of relative low mass such as Northern Pigmy Mouse (Baiomys taylori) and the Gray Bird Grasshopper (Schistocerca nitiens). Zapopan Airbase is important for these two species and others adjacent to a large metropolitan city and should be managed as wildlife habitat that is compat- ible with its function for military training.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Evaluation of Petroleum Impacts to Soil
    Integrated Evaluation of Petroleum Impacts to Soil Randy Adams, D. Marín, C. Avila, L. de la Cruz, C. Morales, and V. Domínguez Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco, Villahermosa, Mexico [email protected] 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 R2 = 0.9626 0.50 0.40 1-IAFcorr 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Conc. hidrocarburos (mg/Kg) Actual Modelo BACKGROUND U J A T •Clean-up criteria for petroleum contaminated soils developed in US in 60’s and 70’s on drilling cuttings •1% considered OK – no or only slight damage to crops, only lasts one growing season •Bioassays confirmed low toxicity of residual oil •Subsequenty used as a basis for clean-up criteria for hydrocarbons in soils in many countries does not consider kind of hydrocarbons does not consider kind of soil SISTEMATIC EVALUATION U J A T •Selection of light, medium, heavy and extra-heavy crudes •Selection of 5 soil types common in petroleum producing region of SE Mexico •Contamination of soil at different concentrations •Measurement of acute toxicity (Microtox), and subchronic toxicity (28 d earthworm) •Measurement of impacts to soil fertility: water repellency, soil moisure, compaction, complemented with in situ weathering experiments •Measurement of plant growth: pasture, black beans Crude Petroleum Used in Study U J A T 100% 80% 60% Aliphatics Aromatics 40% Polars + Resins Asphaltenes 20% 0% Light Crude Medium Crude Heavy Crude Extra-heavy Crude 37 ºAPI 27 ºAPI 15 ºAPI 3 ºAPI U J A T FAO: FLUVISOL VERTISOL GLEYSOL ARENOSOL ACRISOL USDA: FLUVENT
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Soils/Land Use Study Resources
    2021 NCF Envirothon Soil Test Study Guide Lincoln, Nebraska 2021 NCF-Envirothon Nebraska Soils and Land Use Study Resources Key Topic #1: Physical Properties of Soil and Soil Formation 1. Describe the five soil forming factors, and how they influence soil properties. 2. Explain the defining characteristics of a soil describing how the basic soil forming processes influence affect these characteristics in different types of soil. 3. Identify different types of parent material, their origins, and how they impact the soil that develops from them. 4. Identify and describe soil characteristics (horizon, texture, structure, color). 5. Identify and understand physical features of soil profiles and be able to use this information interpret soil properties and limitations. Study Resources Sample Soil Description Scorecard – University of Nebraska – Lincoln Land Judging Documents, edited by Judy Turk, 2021 (Pages 3-4) Soil Description Field Manual Reference – University of Nebraska – Lincoln Land Judging Documents, edited by Judy Turk, 2021 (Pages 5-17) Correlation of Field Texturing Soils by Feel, Understanding Soil Laboratory Data, and Use of the Soil Textural Triangle – Patrick Cowsert, 2021 (Pages 18-21) Tips for Measuring Percent Slope on Contour Maps – Excerpt from Forest Measurements by Joan DeYoung, 2018 (Pages 22-23) Glossary – Excerpts from Geomorphic Description System version 5.0, 2017, and Field Book for Describing Soils version 3.0, 2012 (Pages 24-27) Study Resources begin on the next page! Contestant Number Sample Soil Description Card Site/Pit Number Host: University of Nebraska – Lincoln Number of Horizons Lower Profile Depth 2021 –Scorecard Nail Depth A. Soil Morphology Part A Score __________ Moist Horizons Boundary Texture Color Redox.
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetofauna and Aquatic Macro-Invertebrate Use of the Kino Environmental Restoration Project (KERP)
    Herpetofauna and Aquatic Macro-invertebrate Use of the Kino Environmental Restoration Project (KERP) Tucson, Pima County, Arizona Prepared for Pima County Regional Flood Control District Prepared by EPG, Inc. JANUARY 2007 - Plma County Regional FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT MEMORANDUM Water Resources Regional Flood Control District DATE: January 5,2007 TO: Distribution FROM: Julia Fonseca SUBJECT: Kino Ecosystem Restoration Project Report The Ed Pastor Environmental Restoration ProjectiKino Ecosystem Restoration Project (KERP) is becoming an extraordinary urban wildlife resource. As such, the Pima County Regional Flood Control District (PCRFCD) contracted with the Environmental Planning Group (EPG) to gather observations of reptiles, amphibians, and aquatic insects at KERP. Water quality was also examined. The purpose of the work was to provide baseline data on current wildlife use of the KERP site, and to assess water quality for post-project aquatic wildlife conditions. I additionally requested sampling of macroinvertebrates at Agua Caliente Park and Sweetwater Wetlands in hopes that the differences in aquatic wildlife among the three sites might provide insights into the different habitats offered by KERF'. The results One of the most important wildlife benefits that KERP provides is aquatic habitat without predatory bullfrogs and non- native fish. Most other constructed ponds and wetlands in Tucson, such as the Sweetwater Wetlands and Agua Caliente pond, are fuIl of non-native predators which devastate native fish, amphibians and aquatic reptiles. The KERP Wetlands may provide an opportunity for reestablishing declining native herpetofauna. Provided that non- native fish, bullfrogs or crayfish are not introduced, KERP appears to provide adequate habitat for Sonoran Mud Turtles (Kinosternon sonoriense), Lowland Leopard Frogs (Rana yavapaiensis), and Mexican Gartersnakes (Tharnnophis eques) and Southwestern Woodhouse Toad (Bufo woodhousii australis).
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Waterlogging on Soil Biochemical Properties and Organic Matter Quality
    26 Effect of waterlogging on soil biochemical properties and organic matter quality 27 in different salt marsh systems 28 29 Chiara Ferronatoa, Sara Marinarib, Ornella Franciosoa, Diana Belloc, Carmen Trasar-Cepedac, Livia 30 Vittori Antisaria 31 32 a Dipartimento di Scienze e Tecnologie Agro-Alimentari, Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di 33 Bologna, Via Fanin 44, 40127 Bologna, Italy 34 b Dipartimento per l’ Innovazione dei Sistemi Biologici, Agroalimentari e Forestali, Università della 35 Tuscia, Via S. Camillo de Lellis, 01100 Viterbo, Italy 36 c Departamento de Bioquímica del Suelo, Instituto de Investigaciones Agrobiológicas de Galicia- 37 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Apartado 122, 15780 Santiago de Compostela, 38 Spain 39 40 Abstract 41 This study investigated the effects of hydroperiod on soil organic matter quality in three different salt 42 marshes in the Baiona lagoon (N Italy) representing terrestrial, intertidal and subaqueous ecosystems 43 in the area. The study specifically aimed to gain some insight into how soil waterlogging 44 (hydroperiod) affects the chemical and biological properties of soils as well as the quality and 45 structure of the soil organic matter (SOM). Total contents of selected nutrients, total organic carbon 46 and carbon stable isotope (δC 13) were measured in all soil profiles. The results of these analyses 47 enabled us to define the different origin of the SOM by discriminating between terrestrial and aquatic 48 SOM sources. The findings also show that accumulation of nutrients and SOM is significantly 49 magnified in intertidal systems, in which pedoturbation effects induced by water movements are 50 particularly strong. In addition, DRIFT spectra of humic acids revealed the changes in the main 2 51 functional groups in relation to increased waterlogging, highlighting the lower aromaticity and 52 complexity in subaqueous soils (SASs), which is possibly due to the effect of the soil water saturation 53 on the chemical and biological SOM transformation processes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Burrowing Owl Athene Cunicularia Gained Its Name from a Particular Behaviour: It Nests Underground
    Introduction This owl • is smaller than a pigeon • hunts as much in the day as at night in the summer • mimics the hiss of a rattlesnake • is one of the most endangered birds in western Canada Description The Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia gained its name from a particular behaviour: it nests underground. But contrary to the impression given by the bird’s scientific name, which means “little digger,” this owl rarely digs its own burrow. Instead, it constructs its nest in burrows vacated by small mammals like ground squirrels, badgers, and prairie dogs. The adult Burrowing Owl is smaller than a pigeon. It weighs between 125 and 185 g and stands from 19 to 20 cm tall. Its body is generally brown, mottled with white flecks and barred across the chest. This earth-coloured plumage provides good camouflage in the grasslands where the owl lives. The Burrowing Owl’s head is rounded, and its eyes and beak are yellow. The sexes look similar, but the male is slightly lighter in colour. While they resemble the adults for the most part, the young have rusty-coloured throats and buff-coloured breasts without barring; they acquire their adult-like plumage during the late summer. Signs and sounds To discourage predators, the Burrowing Owl can make a noise like the rattling hiss of a rattlesnake’s tail. Males will repeat a doleful coo-coooo, mainly to attract females. Otherwise, Burrowing Owls make a variety of sounds to each other that are rarely heard by humans. Habitats and Habits On the dry short-grass prairie, the Burrowing Owl is found on flat-to-gently-undulating, treeless plains.
    [Show full text]
  • Town of Superior Raptor Monitoring 2019 Summary
    Town of Superior Raptor Monitoring 2019 Summary Sponsored by the Open Space Advisory Committee Introduction: In late 2018, the Town of Superior Open Space Advisory Committee initiated a program to monitor the presence and activity of raptors (eagles, hawks, falcons, and owls) in and near Superior. The program has several goals: determining what raptor species are present in Superior, learning what areas raptors use at different times of the year, monitoring any nesting activity, working to prevent unnecessary disturbance to raptors, identifying habitats to protect, and providing relevant education to the Town’s residents. Nine volunteer observers, all Superior residents, monitored seven general locations approximately weekly during the 2019 nesting season and identified eight species of raptors in the target areas. Some of these species use open spaces in Superior only intermittently, for hunting or migration. However, monitors determined that four species nested in or adjacent to Superior in 2019; ten nests were located and at least nine of them produced fledglings. The nesting species were Great Horned Owl, Red-tailed Hawk, Cooper’s Hawk, and American Kestrel. Background: Southeast Boulder County, and especially the prairie dog colonies along Rock Creek west of Hwy 36, historically supported significant densities of several raptor species, especially during winter. As late as the mid-1980s, winter bird counts showed that our area had one of the highest populations of Ferruginous Hawks in the entire U.S. [3,4]. With the loss of open space due to increasing development in the 1990s and the additional reduction of prairie dogs due to intermittent plague epidemics, populations of large open-country raptors in Figure 1 - Cooper's Hawk by Barbara Pennell and near Superior declined precipitously [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Prairie Dog and Burrowing Owl Habitat Analysis Throughout Nebraska: Summary
    Prairie Dog and Burrowing Owl Habitat Analysis throughout Nebraska: Summary Rainwater Basin Joint Venture Report. 2012. Andy Bishop1, Laura Achterberg1, Roger Grosse1, Ele Nugent1, and Christopher Jorgensen1,2 1Rainwater Basin Joint Venture, 2550 North Diers Ave, Grand Island, NE 68801 2Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, 422 Hardin Hall, 3310 Holdrege Street, Lincoln, NE 68583 Introduction For this analysis, we downloaded SSURGO data on a county by Identifying suitable habitat in the landscape for rare and elusive county basis from Soil Data Viewer 5.2 using ArcGIS 9.2. We species can assist wildlife managers in forming conservation merged multiple data layers together into a single shapefile to plans and can even facilitate new discoveries of species provide a statewide coverage. Each polygon in the dataset populations. The following project sought to identify available represented a single SSURGO map unit. We extracted the soil habitat for Burrowing Owls in Nebraska. Burrowing Owls are map unit name and the range site name from the Soil Data considered a Tier 1 at-risk species (i.e., a species globally or Viewer. nationally most at risk of extinction) by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC). We developed a conceptually Burrowing Owls are known to occupy burrows 200 cm below based, spatially explicit habitat suitability index to determine the the soil surface in Washington (Conway et al. 2006) and 69 cm remaining suitable habitat for Burrowing Owls in Nebraska. in Oklahoma (Butts and Lewis 1982). We took the average of Model development was based on a previous modeling exercise these two estimates, establishing burrow preference of 136 cm geared towards identifying suitable habitat for Black-tailed below the soil surface.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural History and Protection of Burrowing Owis
    NATURAL HISTORY AND PROTECTION OF BURROWING OWIS CLARKS. WINCHELL, Natural Resources Office, Naval Air Station North Island, P.O. Box 357040, San Diego, California 92135. ABSTRACT: Burrowing owls (Speotyto cunicularia) were monitored over a four year period at Naval Air Station North Island, a developed area at the north end of San Diego Bay, California. Protection of the nest burrows and a burrow marking program were initiated in 1991. The breeding population increased from 14 to 27 nests after this marking program began. Burrow types and ways to differentiate burrows used by owls from those used by California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi) are outlined. The importance of burrows and their management is discussed with reference to the natural history of the owl. Proc. 16th Vcrtcbr. Pest Conf. (W.S. Halverson& A.C. Crabb, Eds.) Published at Univ. of Calif., Davis. 1994. INTRODUCTION NATURAL HISTORY Burrowing owls (Speotyto cu11icularia) are semi­ Burrowing owls range from North America, southern colonial nesting raptors whose densities depend on a Canada and western United States, into South America, commensal relationship with rodents that maintain southern Argentina and western Chile. An isolated complex burrow systems. In southern California, subspecies occurs in the southern panhandle of Florida burrowing owls depend upon California ground squirrels and West Indies (Bent 1938). The species is migratory (Spermophilus beecheyi) to develop such systems. Since throughout the northern portion of its range, however, in the early 1970s, burrowing owl populations have been southern California burrowing owls are year round reported in decline (Zam 1974, Collins 1979), where the residents. In the United States, this non-migratory pattern primary causes have been loss of habitat (Howie 1980) begins in central California, extends along the coast and and rodent control (Butts 1973).
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Mammal Manure by Nesting Burrowing Owls: a Test of Four Functional Hypotheses
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2006 Use of mammal manure by nesting burrowing owls: a test of four functional hypotheses Matthew D. Smith University of Arizona, [email protected] Courtney J. Conway University of Arizona, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Part of the Geology Commons, Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology Commons, Other Earth Sciences Commons, and the Other Environmental Sciences Commons Smith, Matthew D. and Conway, Courtney J., "Use of mammal manure by nesting burrowing owls: a test of four functional hypotheses" (2006). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 571. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/571 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, 2007, 73,65e73 doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.05.012 Use of mammal manure by nesting burrowing owls: a test of four functional hypotheses MATTHEW D. SMITH & COURTNEY J. CONWAY USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Natural Resources, The University of Arizona, Tucson (Received 30 August 2005; initial acceptance 30 November 2005; final acceptance 24 May 2006; published online 2 November 2006; MS. number: A10234) Animals have evolved an impressive array of behavioural traits to avoid depredation. Olfactory camouflage of conspicuous odours is a strategy to avoid depredation that has been implicated only in a few species of birds.
    [Show full text]
  • Burrowing Owl
    Burrowing Owl The Burrowing Owl’s grassland habitat is being lost to agriculture and urban development. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks What is their status? modification, pesticide use, traffic lthough information on the histori- mortality and related factors. Recent cal occurrence of Burrowing Owls in declines in eastern Saskatchewan and British Columbia is limited, we in Manitoba, where it may now be Why are Burrowing Owls Aknow there were several small extinct, are particularly alarming. As a at risk? nesting colonies present in the result of these trends, the owl’s national his diminutive owl has a very Okanagan and Thompson valleys from status was upgraded from Threatened restricted distribution and small 1900 to 1928. Numbers dwindled after to Endangered by the Committee on population in British Columbia. The that, with only four nesting sites being the Status of Endangered Wildlife in T overall abundance of Burrowing recorded between 1928 and 1980, at Canada () in 1996. Owls is limited by the availability of suit- which time they were thought to be The Burrowing Owl is widely distrib- able habitat. The grasslands in which extirpated as a breeding species in the uted outside of Canada, occurring in all they live are restricted to the dry valley province. Historical nesting areas states west of the Mississippi, in Florida, bottoms of the Southern Interior and include Osoyoos, Oliver, Penticton, and south into Mexico, Central America comprise less than one percent of the White Lake, lower Similkameen Valley, and South America. Populations have area of the province. This already small Coldstream, Vernon Commonage, declined in many of these areas due to area of natural grassland is being further Okanagan Landing, Knutsford, Savona, the loss or alteration of habitat.
    [Show full text]
  • On Tropical Soils?
    AJCS 13(11):1777-1785 (2019) ISSN:1835-2707 doi: 10.21475/ajcs.19.13.11.p1562 Could 137Cs remediation be accomplished with stable cesium (CsCl) on tropical soils? Riviane Maria Albuquerque Donha1*, Mário Roque2, Antônio Enedi Boaretto2, Antonio Sergio Ferraudo1, Elcio Ferreira Santos2, Fernando Giovannetti Macedo1, Wanderley José Melo13, José Lavres Junior2 1UNESP – São Paulo State University, Postal Code 79560-000, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil 2USP – University of São Paulo, Center for Nuclear Energy in Agriculture. Postal Code 13416-000, Piraicaba, SP, Brazil 3Brasil University, Postal Code 13690-000, Descalvado, SP, Brazil *Correspondence authorl: [email protected] Abstract Stable cesium can be considered as the best element for desorption of soil radio-cesium. It is considered an element that slightly absorbed by plants, so that the application of high doses to the soil could increase the absorption of 137Cs, which is desired for the remediation of contaminated soils. There is shortage of knowledge on remediation of tropical and subtropical soils contaminated with 137Cs. The aim of this work was to evaluate the use of 133Cs for the remediation of Brazilian tropical and subtropical soils contaminated with 137Cs. In addition, we investigated the Cs uptake by bean plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown in Cs contaminated soil. The experiment was carried out in pots under greenhouse conditions. Seven soil types were used in the experiment (Oxisol, Udox, Psamment, Ochrept; Aquoll; Udox and Udult), which received the application of four doses of 133Cs (0, 5, 10 and 20 mg/pot in a completely randomized design arranged in a factorial scheme (7 soil types x 4 doses of 133Cs) with three replicates.
    [Show full text]