Seasonal Movement of Mule Deer on the Santa Rita Experimental Range
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Seasonal movement of mule deer on the Santa Rita Experimental Range Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Rodgers, Kenneth J. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 01/10/2021 05:24:02 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/566595 SEASONAL MOVEMENT OF MULE DEER ON THE SANTA RITA EXPERIMENTAL RANGE by Kenneth Joseph Rodgers A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the SCHOOL OF RENEWABLE NATURAL RESOURCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 19 7 7 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfill ment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowl edgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judgment the proposed use of the material is in the inter ests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR This thesis has been approved on the date shown below: Management ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my appreciation to Dr. Peter F. Ffolliott, my advisor, for his guidance and suggestions in the field work and preparation of this thesis. Special acknowledgment is extended to Drs. David R. Patton and S . Clark Martin of the Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station in Tempe for their support during the study in the provision of equipment, housing, financial assistance, use of the study area, and critical review of the manuscript. Appreciation is also expressed to Dr. Charles R. Hungerford for his suggestions on field procedures, and encouragement and advice on the writing of the thesis. I wish to thank the fellow students who assisted in the collection of field data, especially David Payne, Mark Maley, and John Goodwin. I am indebted to my wife, Wendy, for her companion ship, encouragement, and assistance in the field work and preparation of the manuscript. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ........................... vi LIST OF TABLES . vii ABSTRACT............ viii INTRODUCTION.............. .......................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY ...................... ........ 3 Objectives................................. 3 Study A r e a ................................. 3 Location ................ .......... 3 Climate . .................. ....... 5 Vegetation............ ...................... 5 Water ......................... .. 8 Status . ..................................... 8 Field Procedures........................ .. 8 Capture and Handling Techniques ....... 9 Telemetry Equipment ............. 9 Monitoring Procedures ...................... 10 Census S u r v e y ........................ 11 Analytic Methods ................................. 12 Home Range and Movements .................... 12 Census S u r v e y .......................... 12 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .................... ..... 14 Capture Techniques ........................ 14 Home R a n g e s .................................. , 15 M o v e m e n t s .......... 21 Seasonal , .............. 21 D a i l y ....................................... 22 Other Movements ............................ 25 External Factors Influencing Movements ...... 26 Cover and F o o d ............................... 26 Water Availability.................... 32 Weather ........................ ...... 34 Human Disturbances .......... ........ 36 Notes on the Reproductive Cycle ......... 40 R u t ......................................... 40 F a w n i n g ..................................... 41 iv V TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued Page Sociality ....................................... 42 Population Dynamics ............................ 47 D e n s i t y ......................................... 48 Management Implications ........................ 52 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ............................ 54 APPENDIX A. SEX, AGE, MEASUREMENTS, AND WEIGHT OF CAPTURED DEER ..................... 57 APPENDIX B. DEER RELOCATION DISTANCES BETWEEN CONSECUTIVE DAYS AND WITHIN CERTAIN DAYS ................................ 59 LITERATURE CITED 60 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Location of study a r e a ........................ 4 2. Aerial view of Santa Rita Experimental Range showing broad aspect of the desert bajada and mesquite lined washes . , , 6 3. View looking south across Santa Rita Experimental Range showing mountains rising abruptly from gentle sloping plain and invading s h r u b s .................. 7 4. "Minimum area" home ranges of 5 desert mule deer and water distribution patterns on the Santa Rita Experimental R a n g e ................................ 18 5. Yearly and seasonal home ranges of 2 desert mule d e e r ................................... 20 6. Whitehouse series soils have fine textured subsoils; Ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens) and falsemesquite are dominant shrubs .... 29 7. Sonoita series soils have coarse subsoils; mesquite, cholla, and burroweed are predominate s h r u b s ...................... .. , 30 8. Average deer group size by mo n t h ............... 46 9. Location and flight pattern of aerial census for d e e r ............ ............... 50 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Home range estimates for 5 radio- collared d e e r ........ ..................... 17 2. Average minimum deer movement between consecutive days and within single days . 24 3. Sex and age composition ratios of mule deer on the Santa Rita Experimental Range and in Game Management Unit 34A .... 47 4. Results of pre-hunt horseback surveys for mule deer on the Santa Rita Experimental Range, 1968-1973 .......................... 51 vii ABSTRACT Five desert mule deer were captured by drug immobili zation, radio collared, and monitored on the Santa Rita Experimental Range between May 1975 and June 1976. Home ranges were determined using 5 capture points, 38 sightings, and 84 telemetry fixes. Home ranges averaged 2.9 square miles, but varied from 1.5 to 4.8 square miles depending on season, sex, and age class. The availability of permanent water was found to be a primary determinant of home range size. The radio-location technique was found to be workable and capable of quantifying some elements of mobility derived by earlier researchers only through indirect evidence. Mule deer on the SRER were found to be essentially non-migratoryI Deer activities changed seasonally and with local weather conditions, but were normally confined to their home range areas with the exception of the rut. Cattle presence and vegetation-soil associations had no noticeable effect on habitat use patterns of deer. Mesquite lined washes pro*- vided preferred cover for deer year-round. Social aggregations of deer centered around the family unit. Mature bucks tended to form their own associa tions. viii ix Moderate recruitment rates and low densities may be a reflection of the limitations of semidesert grass-shrub rangelands as habitat for mule deer. INTRODUCTION The desert mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus crooki) is an inhabitant of the desert grasslands and desert shrub communities in the Southwest. Hoffmeister (1962) reports that this mule deer subspecies ranges through southern Arizona and New Mexico into west Texas and northern Mexico. Many of the desert grasslands that this mule deer currently inhabits have changed over the last century. Cactus and woody shrubs have invaded or increased in abundance on these lands as a consequence of climatic changes and overgrazing (Hastings and Turner 1965, Humphrey 1958). The change from grassland to shrub has been especially well documented on the Santa Rita Experimental Range (Martin and Reynolds 1973). Researchers have postulated that these vegetational changes enhanced these grasslands as habitat for mule deer, and have been influen tial in the extension of mule deer range into new areas (Truett 1971, Anthony 1972, Short 1976). Cognizant of the needs of management, investigations pertaining to the life history, ecology, food habits, and behavior of desert mule deer have been conducted in southern Arizona (Clark 1953, Truett 1971, Anthony 1972). The areas selected for these investigations were primarily mountainous habitat with relatively high deer densities to facilitate 1 2 numerous observations. Deer populations on the surrounding desert plains and grasslands, a significant portion of the desert mule deer range, have been practically unstudied due to "low" deer densities. Knowledge of seasonal movements and activities within and between habitats is necessary in the proper management of mule deer in these grass-shrub rangelands. This study was designed to provide data on deer home ranges, movements, activities, and habitat relationships. This knowledge may enhance the interpretation and usefulness of a recently completed investigation of seasonal food habits of mule deer in grass-shrub habitats.