Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon January 2011 – December 2012 Final Report Authors: Audrey J. Magoun Patrick Valkenburg Clinton D. Long Judy K. Long Submitted to: The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. February 2013 Cite as: A. J. Magoun, P. Valkenburg, C. D. Long, and J. K. Long. 2013. Monitoring wolverines in northeast Oregon. January 2011 – December 2012. Final Report. The Wolverine Foundation, Inc., Kuna, Idaho. [http://wolverinefoundation.org/] Copies of this report are available from: The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. [http://wolverinefoundation.org/] Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife [http://www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/publications.asp] Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation [http://www.owhf.org/] U. S. Forest Service [http://www.fs.usda.gov/land/wallowa-whitman/landmanagement] Major Funding and Logistical Support The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation U. S. Forest Service U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wolverine Discovery Center Norcross Wildlife Foundation Seattle Foundation Wildlife Conservation Society National Park Service 2 Special thanks to everyone who provided contributions, assistance, and observations of wolverines in the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest and other areas in Oregon. We appreciate all the help and interest of the staffs of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation, U. S. Forest Service, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Conservation Society, and the National Park Service. We also thank the following individuals for their assistance with the field work: Jim Akenson, Holly Akenson, Malin Aronsson, Norma Biggar, Ken Bronec, Steve Bronson, Roblyn Brown, Vic Coggins, Alex Coutant, Cliff Crego, Leonard Erickson, Bjorn Hansen, Mike Hansen, Hans Hayden, Tim Hiller, Janet Hohmann, Pat Matthews, David McCullough, Glenn McDonald, Jamie McFadden, Kendrick Moholt, Mark Penninger, Jens Persson, Lynne Price, Brian Ratliff, Jamie Ratliff, John Stephenson, John Wyanens, Rebecca Watters, Russ Westlake, and Jeff Yanke. James Short generously provided a snowmachine trailer for field work. Daarla Klages was indispensable in keeping everything running smoothly. Keith Aubry and Cathy Raley generously provided snow cover maps and unpublished data and reports. Finally, thanks to Dale Pedersen and Rod Brobeck who were our most enthusiastic cheerleaders and never doubted we would find wolverines in Oregon. Photo by Jens Persson 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................5 STUDY AREA .............................................................................................................................................................6 METHODS...................................................................................................................................................................8 Integrated Motion-detection Cameras and Hair Snags.............................................................................................8 Winter....................................................................................................................................................................8 Summer..................................................................................................................................................................9 Snow Tracking from the Air.......................................................................................................................................9 RESULTS...................................................................................................................................................................10 Winter 2010-2011....................................................................................................................................................10 Camera Deployment ............................................................................................................................................10 Wolverines Detected at Camera Stations.............................................................................................................10 DNA Analysis of Hair .........................................................................................................................................12 Snow Tracking from the Ground.........................................................................................................................13 Snow Tracking from the Air................................................................................................................................13 Winter 2011-2012....................................................................................................................................................13 Camera Deployment ............................................................................................................................................13 Wolverines Detected at Camera Stations.............................................................................................................14 Snow Tracking from the Ground.........................................................................................................................16 Snow Tracking from the Air................................................................................................................................16 Summer 2012...........................................................................................................................................................17 Camera Deployment ............................................................................................................................................17 Wolverines Detected at Summer Camera Stations ..............................................................................................17 Other Species Photographed at Camera Stations ...................................................................................................17 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................................20 Deployment of Camera Stations ..............................................................................................................................20 Winter..................................................................................................................................................................20 Summer................................................................................................................................................................21 Wolverine Detections at Camera Stations...............................................................................................................21 Understanding Reasons for the Low Density of Wolverines in the Study Area .......................................................23 Habitat Quality ....................................................................................................................................................23 Size and Connectivity with Adjacent Wolverine Populations .............................................................................24 Time Needed for Population Recovery................................................................................................................26 LONG-TERM MONITORING OF WOLVERINES IN NORTHEAST OREGON...........................................28 LITERATURE CITED .............................................................................................................................................29 TABLES .....................................................................................................................................................................33 FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................................................51 Appendix A.................................................................................................................................................................76 4 INTRODUCTION Wolverine range in the contiguous United States had contracted substantially by the mid 1900s, probably because of high levels of human-caused mortality and very low immigration rates (Aubry et al. 2007). The species is currently listed as Threatened in Oregon by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Oregon Conservation Strategy lists the wolverine as a species for which status is unknown but habitat may be suitable to support the species in the Blue Mountains, East Cascades, and West Cascades Ecoregions of Oregon (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2006; pages 367−368). At the federal level, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has recently proposed to list the wolverine as a threatened species in the contiguous U.S. under the federal Endangered Species Act (http://federalregister.gov/a/2013-01478). In their historical review of wolverine distribution in the western states, Aubry et al. (2007) concluded that wolverines detected in Oregon in recent decades “probably represent extreme dispersal events that were not representative of self-sustaining populations” because “there is no evidence of wolverine occurrence in eastern Washington or Oregon currently.” These authors used
Recommended publications
  • Forests of Eastern Oregon: an Overview Sally Campbell, Dave Azuma, and Dale Weyermann
    Forests of Eastern Oregon: An Overview Sally Campbell, Dave Azuma, and Dale Weyermann United States Forest Pacific Northwest General Tecnical Report Department of Service Research Station PNW-GTR-578 Agriculture April 2003 Revised 2004 Joseph area, eastern Oregon. Photo by Tom Iraci Authors Sally Campbell is a biological scientist, Dave Azuma is a research forester, and Dale Weyermann is geographic information system manager, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, 620 SW Main, Portland, OR 97205. Cover: Aspen, Umatilla National Forest. Photo by Tom Iraci Forests of Eastern Oregon: An Overview Sally Campbell, Dave Azuma, and Dale Weyermann U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station Portland, OR April 2003 State Forester’s Welcome Dear Reader: The Oregon Department of Forestry and the USDA Forest Service invite you to read this overview of eastern Oregon forests, which provides highlights from recent forest inventories.This publication has been made possible by the USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program, with support from the Oregon Department of Forestry. This report was developed from data gathered by the FIA in eastern Oregon’s forests in 1998 and 1999, and has been supplemented by inventories from Oregon’s national forests between 1993 and 1996.This report and other analyses of FIA inventory data will be extremely useful as we evaluate fire management strategies, opportunities for improving rural economies, and other elements of forest management in eastern Oregon.We greatly appreciate FIA’s willingness to work with the researchers, analysts, policymakers, and the general public to collect, analyze, and distrib- ute information about Oregon’s forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Wolf Interactions with Non-Prey
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center US Geological Survey 2003 Wolf Interactions with Non-prey Warren B. Ballard Texas Tech University Ludwig N. Carbyn Canadian Wildlife Service Douglas W. Smith US Park Service Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsnpwrc Part of the Animal Sciences Commons, Behavior and Ethology Commons, Biodiversity Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, Recreation, Parks and Tourism Administration Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Ballard, Warren B.; Carbyn, Ludwig N.; and Smith, Douglas W., "Wolf Interactions with Non-prey" (2003). USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. 325. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsnpwrc/325 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 Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 10 Wolf Interactions with Non-prey Warren B. Ballard, Ludwig N. Carbyn, and Douglas W. Smith WOLVES SHARE THEIR ENVIRONMENT with many an­ wolves and non-prey species. The inherent genetic, be­ imals besides those that they prey on, and the nature of havioral, and morphological flexibility of wolves has the interactions between wolves and these other crea­ allowed them to adapt to a wide range of habitats and tures varies considerably. Some of these sympatric ani­ environmental conditions in Europe, Asia, and North mals are fellow canids such as foxes, coyotes, and jackals. America. Therefore, the role of wolves varies consider­ Others are large carnivores such as bears and cougars.
    [Show full text]
  • IMBCR Report
    Integrated Monitoring in Bird Conservation Regions (IMBCR): 2015 Field Season Report June 2016 Bird Conservancy of the Rockies 14500 Lark Bunting Lane Brighton, CO 80603 303-659-4348 www.birdconservancy.org Tech. Report # SC-IMBCR-06 Bird Conservancy of the Rockies Connecting people, birds and land Mission: Conserving birds and their habitats through science, education and land stewardship Vision: Native bird populations are sustained in healthy ecosystems Bird Conservancy of the Rockies conserves birds and their habitats through an integrated approach of science, education and land stewardship. Our work radiates from the Rockies to the Great Plains, Mexico and beyond. Our mission is advanced through sound science, achieved through empowering people, realized through stewardship and sustained through partnerships. Together, we are improving native bird populations, the land and the lives of people. Core Values: 1. Science provides the foundation for effective bird conservation. 2. Education is critical to the success of bird conservation. 3. Stewardship of birds and their habitats is a shared responsibility. Goals: 1. Guide conservation action where it is needed most by conducting scientifically rigorous monitoring and research on birds and their habitats within the context of their full annual cycle. 2. Inspire conservation action in people by developing relationships through community outreach and science-based, experiential education programs. 3. Contribute to bird population viability and help sustain working lands by partnering with landowners and managers to enhance wildlife habitat. 4. Promote conservation and inform land management decisions by disseminating scientific knowledge and developing tools and recommendations. Suggested Citation: White, C. M., M. F. McLaren, N. J.
    [Show full text]
  • Life History Traits for Common Blue Mountains Conifer Trees 1
    WHITE PAPER F14-SO-WP-SILV-42 Life History Traits for Common Blue Mountains Conifer Trees 1 David C. Powell; Forest Silviculturist Supervisor’s Office; Pendleton, OR Initial Version: OCTOBER 2004 Most Recent Revision: MARCH 2017 INTRODUCTION There are two basic philosophies with respect to plant succession – one is based on popula- tion or community dynamics, and the other is rooted in interactions between individual plants or species (Huston and Smith 1987). A community-based model shares many similarities with a relay floristics pattern of plant succession; an individual-based model has much in common with initial floristics (Powell 2000, pages 26-30, provides a discussion about relay and initial floristics). A community model was favored early in the 20th century, an era when mutualism and in- ter-species dependence were being emphasized in plant ecology. Beginning with the latter half of the 20th century, succession has been viewed primarily as a plant-by-plant or species-by-spe- cies replacement process, and dynamics of plant succession are understandable in those terms. If we assume that succession, a species-by-species replacement process, is controlled by the life history characteristics of plants making up a community, then understanding these charac- teristics will help us grasp how succession might progress. Forest succession, for example, is controlled largely by five traits (life history characteristics) influencing competition among trees: growth rate, size, longevity, rate of seedling establish- ment, and shade tolerance. These traits have an important bearing on a tree species’ capability to compete for site resources collectively referred to as growing space.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Landscape Change in High Mountains of Northeastern Oregon from Long-Term Repeat Photography
    United States Department of Interpreting Landscape Change in High Agriculture Forest Service Mountains of Northeastern Oregon from Pacific Northwest Research Station Long-Term Repeat Photography General Technical Report Jon M. Skovlin, Gerald S. Strickler, Jesse L. Peterson, PNW-GTR-505 May 2001 and Arthur W. Sampson Photo by Harley Richardson 1920 Photo by David Jensen 1992 Authors Jon M. Skovlin (retired) was a principal research scientist, Forestry and Range Sciences Laboratory, 1401 Gekeler Lane, La Grande, OR 97850. He now is a consultant on renewable natural resources, P.O. Box 121, Cove, OR 97824. Gerald S. Strickler (deceased) was a range scientist, Forestry and Range Sciences Laboratory, 1401 Gekeler Lane, La Grande, OR 97850. Jesse L. Peterson (deceased) was range examiner, Wallowa National Forest, Wallowa, OR, and later chief range examiner, Whitman National Forest, Baker City, OR. Arthur W. Sampson (deceased) was the pioneer range scientist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and later Professor of Forestry, University of California, Berkeley, CA. This publication was prepared under contract with the Blue Mountains Natural Resources Institute, La Grande, OR. All photos not otherwise credited were taken by the senior author. Cover Photos Glacier Peak is a satellite point along Eagle Cap Ridge, which is the central watershed feature of the Wallowa Mountain batholith. Upper–This photo of Benson Glacier looking south from Glacier Lake was taken in about 1920. The conspicuous glacier flow lines and crevasses affirm its activity, which had been in recession since about 1870 after the end of the Little Ice Age in about 1850. Harley Richardson captured the Benson Glacier on film when it was in rapid retreat.
    [Show full text]
  • Noah Grunzweig
    This Route is Prepared For: Noah Grunzweig December 13, 2013 Travel Beginning in Portland, OR www.betterworldclub.com Dear Noah Grunzweig: Here´s your CustomMaps travel packet from Better World Club. It includes specially prepared maps with narrative driving directions and a thick shaded line indicating a suggested route for your trip. Before you leave, you´ll probably want to become familiar with the packet. As you look at it, you´ll notice that some maps have only major roads and towns on the maps, to make them easy to read. In some instances, secondary highways may not appear on the map. However, the narrative directions and the shaded line will easily guide you to the road. If you desire a more detailed map, please call and we will provide you with a map of that particular area or state. As you flip through your travel packet, you´ll also see that the narrative directions provide time estimates, which you can use to figure approximate hours of drive time per day. In addition to the state maps, you´ll find we´ve also included some city maps showing more detail, to help you get your bearings. Finally, at the back end of your travel packet, you´ll find a "Places of Interest" section. Here we´ve indicated several sites for each state you´ll be driving through, just in case you´d like to stop and see something special on your way to or from your final destination. Below is your Travel Itinerary, or list of requested destinations. We trust you´ll have a safe and pleasant drive.
    [Show full text]
  • VOLATILE COMPOUNDS from ANAL GLANDS of the WOLVERINE, Gulo Gulo
    Journal of Chemical Ecology, Vol. 12, No. 9, September 2005 ( #2005) DOI: 10.1007/s10886-005-6080-9 VOLATILE COMPOUNDS FROM ANAL GLANDS OF THE WOLVERINE, Gulo gulo WILLIAM F. WOOD,1,* MIRANDA N. TERWILLIGER,2 and JEFFREY P. COPELAND3 1Department of Chemistry, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA 95521, USA 2Alaska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Biology & Wildlife, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA 3USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT 59801, USA (Received February 12, 2005; revised March 24, 2005; accepted April 20, 2005) Abstract—Dichloromethane extracts of wolverine (Gulo gulo, Mustelinae, Mustelidae) anal gland secretion were examined by gas chromatographyYmass spectrometry. The secretion composition was complex and variable for the six samples examined: 123 compounds were detected in total, with the number per animal ranging from 45 to 71 compounds. Only six compounds were common to all extracts: 3-methylbutanoic acid, 2-methylbutanoic acid, phenylacetic acid, a-tocopherol, cholesterol, and a compound tentatively identified as 2-methyldecanoic acid. The highly odoriferous thietanes and dithiolanes found in anal gland secretions of some members of the Mustelinae [ferrets, mink, stoats, and weasels (Mustela spp.) and zorillas (Ictonyx spp.)] were not observed. The composition of the wolverine’s anal gland secretion is similar to that of two other members of the Mustelinae, the pine and beech marten (Martes spp.). Key WordsVWolverine, Gulo gulo, Mustelinae, Mustelidae, scent marking, fear-defense mechanism, short-chain carboxylic acids. INTRODUCTION The wolverine (Gulo gulo) is the largest terrestrial member of the Mustelidae and is part of the subfamily, Mustelinae, which includes ferrets, fishers, martens, mink, stoats, weasels, and zorillas.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Western Wyoming: a Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and Educators
    USDA United States Department of Agriculture Research Natural Areas on Forest Service National Forest System Lands Rocky Mountain Research Station in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, General Technical Report RMRS-CTR-69 Utah, and Western Wyoming: February 2001 A Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and E'ducators Angela G. Evenden Melinda Moeur J. Stephen Shelly Shannon F. Kimball Charles A. Wellner Abstract Evenden, Angela G.; Moeur, Melinda; Shelly, J. Stephen; Kimball, Shannon F.; Wellner, Charles A. 2001. Research Natural Areas on National Forest System Lands in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Western Wyoming: A Guidebook for Scientists, Managers, and Educators. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-69. Ogden, UT: U.S. Departmentof Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 84 p. This guidebook is intended to familiarize land resource managers, scientists, educators, and others with Research Natural Areas (RNAs) managed by the USDA Forest Service in the Northern Rocky Mountains and lntermountain West. This guidebook facilitates broader recognitionand use of these valuable natural areas by describing the RNA network, past and current research and monitoring, management, and how to use RNAs. About The Authors Angela G. Evenden is biological inventory and monitoring project leader with the National Park Service -NorthernColorado Plateau Network in Moab, UT. She was formerly the Natural Areas Program Manager for the Rocky Mountain Research Station, Northern Region and lntermountain Region of the USDA Forest Service. Melinda Moeur is Research Forester with the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain ResearchStation in Moscow, ID, and one of four Research Natural Areas Coordinators from the Rocky Mountain Research Station. J. Stephen Shelly is Regional Botanist and Research Natural Areas Coordinator with the USDA Forest Service, Northern Region Headquarters Office in Missoula, MT.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon – 2011
    Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon – 2011 Submitted by The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. Title: Monitoring Wolverine in Northeast Oregon – 2011 Authors: Audrey J. Magoun, Patrick Valkenburg, Clinton D. Long, and Judy K. Long Funding and Logistical Support: Dale Pedersen James Short Marsha O’Dell National Park Service Norcross Wildlife Foundation Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Seattle Foundation The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. U.S. Forest Service Wildlife Conservation Society Special thanks to all those individuals who provided observations of wolverines in the Wallowa- Whitman National Forest and other areas in Oregon. We also thank Tim Hiller, Mark Penninger, and Glenn McDonald for their assistance in the field work. This document should be cited as: Magoun, A. J., P. Valkenburg, C. D. Long, and J. K. Long. 2011. Monitoring wolverines in northeast Oregon – 2011. Final Report. The Wolverine Foundation, Inc., Kuna, Idaho, USA. 2 INTRODUCTION The Oregon Conservation Strategy lists “species data gaps” and “research and monitoring needs” for some species where basic information on occurrence and habitat associations are not known (ODFW 2006; pages 367-368). For the Blue Mountains, East Cascades, and West Cascades Ecoregions of Oregon, the Strategy lists wolverine as a species for which status is unknown but habitat may be suitable to support wolverines. ODFW lists the wolverine as Threatened in Oregon and the USFWS has recently placed the species on the candidate list under the federal Endangered Species Act. Wolverine range in the contiguous United States had contracted substantially by the mid-1900s, probably because of high levels of human-caused mortality and very low immigration rates (Aubry et al.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bill to Designate Certain National Forest System Lands in the State of Oregon for Inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for Other Purposes
    97 H.R.7340 Title: A bill to designate certain National Forest System lands in the State of Oregon for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Weaver, James H. [OR-4] (introduced 12/1/1982) Cosponsors (2) Latest Major Action: 12/15/1982 Failed of passage/not agreed to in House. Status: Failed to Receive 2/3's Vote to Suspend and Pass by Yea-Nay Vote: 247 - 141 (Record Vote No: 454). SUMMARY AS OF: 12/9/1982--Reported to House amended, Part I. (There is 1 other summary) (Reported to House from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs with amendment, H.Rept. 97-951 (Part I)) Oregon Wilderness Act of 1982 - Designates as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System the following lands in the State of Oregon: (1) the Columbia Gorge Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (2) the Salmon-Huckleberry Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (3) the Badger Creek Wilderness in the Mount Hood National Forest; (4) the Hidden Wilderness in the Mount Hood and Willamette National Forests; (5) the Middle Santiam Wilderness in the Willamette National Forest; (6) the Rock Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (7) the Cummins Creek Wilderness in the Siuslaw National Forest; (8) the Boulder Creek Wilderness in the Umpqua National Forest; (9) the Rogue-Umpqua Divide Wilderness in the Umpqua and Rogue River National Forests; (10) the Grassy Knob Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou National Forest; (11) the Red Buttes Wilderness in and adjacent to the Siskiyou
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Invasives Rapid Response Environmental Assessment
    DRAFT DREISSENID MUSSEL RAPID RESPONSE ACTION PLAN PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division PPLPL-C-2018-0062 July 2019 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background Information ..................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Dreissenid Mussel Presence and Life History in North American ................ 2 1.1.2 Invasion Risk ............................................................................................... 4 1.1.3 Effects of the Establishment of Dreissenid Mussels in the Four State Area 7 1.1.4 Current Prevention Efforts ......................................................................... 13 1.1.5 Need for coordinated action and path forward ........................................... 14 1.1.6 Authority .................................................................................................... 15 1.2 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................... 16 2 Alternatives ............................................................................................................ 17 2.1 Alternative 1 – No Action (Current Practice)..................................................... 17 2.1.1 Action Area ................................................................................................ 18 2.1.2 Alternative Description ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Anorectal Abscess, Fistula-In-Ano, and Rectovaginal Fistula Jon D
    PRACTICE GUIDELINES Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Anorectal Abscess, Fistula-in-Ano, and Rectovaginal Fistula Jon D. Vogel, M.D. • Eric K. Johnson, M.D. • Arden M. Morris, M.D. • Ian M. Paquette, M.D. Theodore J. Saclarides, M.D. • Daniel L. Feingold, M.D. • Scott R. Steele, M.D. Prepared on behalf of The Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons he American Society of Colon and Rectal Sur- and submucosal locations.7–11 Anorectal abscess occurs geons is dedicated to ensuring high-quality pa- more often in males than females, and may occur at any Ttient care by advancing the science, prevention, age, with peak incidence among 20 to 40 year olds.4,8–12 and management of disorders and diseases of the co- In general, the abscess is treated with prompt incision lon, rectum, and anus. The Clinical Practice Guide- and drainage.4,6,10,13 lines Committee is charged with leading international Fistula-in-ano is a tract that connects the perine- efforts in defining quality care for conditions related al skin to the anal canal. In patients with an anorec- to the colon, rectum, and anus by developing clinical tal abscess, 30% to 70% present with a concomitant practice guidelines based on the best available evidence. fistula-in-ano, and, in those who do not, one-third will These guidelines are inclusive, not prescriptive, and are be diagnosed with a fistula in the months to years after intended for the use of all practitioners, health care abscess drainage.2,5,8–10,13–16 Although a perianal abscess workers, and patients who desire information about the is defined by the anatomic space in which it forms, a management of the conditions addressed by the topics fistula-in-ano is classified in terms of its relationship to covered in these guidelines.
    [Show full text]