Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes Vulpes) in the Lassen Peak Region of California, USA

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes Vulpes) in the Lassen Peak Region of California, USA Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) in the Lassen Peak Region of California, USA by John D. Perrine Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management University of California, Berkeley Fall 2005 Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) in the Lassen Peak Region of California, USA by John Dixon Perrine III B.S. (Vanderbilt University) 1991 M.S. (Miami University) 1995 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Science, Policy and Management in the GRADUATE DIVISION of the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Committee in charge: Professor Reginald H. Barrett, Chair Professor Stephen R. Beissinger Professor James L. Patton Fall 2005 Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) in the Lassen Peak Region of California, USA © 2005 by John Dixon Perrine III 1 Abstract Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) in the Lassen Peak Region of California, USA by John Dixon Perrine III Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Science, Policy and Management University of California, Berkeley Professor Reginald H. Barrett, Chair The red fox population inhabiting California’s Cascade and Sierra Nevada mountains (Vulpes vulpes necator) is listed as a State Threatened species, but its management has been hindered by a lack of basic ecological information. I conducted a comprehensive study of the red foxes in the Lassen Peak region to quantify their local distribution, resource utilization, activity patterns, niche overlap with likely competitors and genetic affinity with other red fox populations. The population was restricted to the region’s highest elevations, occurring >1300 m and primarily within the western half of Lassen Volcanic National Park. Red fox detections at camera traps in summer were positively correlated with elevation, highway density and the detection of coyotes, and were negatively correlated with shrub and herbaceous cover; in winter, detections were positively correlated with elevation, highway density and mature closed-canopy forest cover. Their diet was predominantly mammals, especially rodents and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), supplemented by birds, insects and manzanita (Arctostaphylos nevadensis) berries as seasonally available. Lagomorphs were virtually absent from the 2 fox diet. Collared red foxes (n = 5) had large seasonal home ranges (95% MCP; mean = 2,564 ha in summer and 3,255 ha in winter). On average, summer locations were 479 m higher than winter locations. Their summer range is likely unsuitable in winter due to deep soft snow and the lack of lagomorphs, a critical winter food for many other red fox populations, and these factors may limit the Lassen red fox population. Marten (Martes americana) used the same habitat as the foxes but preyed upon smaller rodents and were more diurnal. Coyotes (Canis latrans) were nocturnal like the foxes but were generally at lower elevations and ate larger prey. The Lassen foxes all had the same mtDNA haplotype, which was the most common haplotype among historic V. v. necator specimens and was rare in the exotic fox populations from California’s lowlands. Ecological and genetic evidence indicates that the Lassen red foxes are the native, threatened V. v. necator, not exotic foxes dispersed from the lowlands. Additional research is necessary to locate additional mountain red fox populations in California and to identify the factors preventing their dispersal to the lowlands and vice versa. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents..................................................................................................................i List of Tables.......................................................................................................................ii List of Figures.....................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements.............................................................................................................vi Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: Seasonal Food Habits of Red Fox, Coyote and Marten in the Lassen Peak Region of Northern California..................................................15 Chapter 2: Distribution and Habitat Associations of Red Fox, Coyote and Marten in the Lassen Peak Region as Indicated by Camera Trap Surveys................53 Chapter 3: Activity Patterns of Sympatric Red Fox, Coyote and Marten in the Lassen Peak Region...........................................................................109 Chapter 4: Home Range and Habitat Use of Radio-Collared Mountain Red Foxes....................................................................................131 Chapter 5: Red Fox Population Structure in California..................................................166 Conclusions: Niche Overlap Among Red Fox, Coyote and Marten in the Lassen Region..........................................................................................190 Literature Cited................................................................................................................196 Appendix A: Measurements of Scats of Known Species Identity..................................215 Appendix B: TrailMaster Camera Protocol....................................................................217 Appendix C: Red Fox Locations and Home Ranges by Season.....................................221 Appendix D: Parasites of Lassen Red Fox.....................................................................233 Appendix E: Historical Taxonomy of California’s Mountain Red Foxes......................235 ii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Field identity versus cytochrome-b identity of scats..........................................38 Table 2: Seasonal diet composition for Lassen red fox, coyote and marten.....................39 Table 3: Dietary niche overlap between pairs of Lassen carnivores................................42 Table 4: Seasonal dietary overlap among all three carnivores.........................................43 Table 5: Annual camera sampling effort in the Lassen region.........................................89 Table 6: CWHR communities represented in general cover types...................................89 Table 7: Variables used in the grid cell analyses..............................................................90 Table 8: Distribution of camera traps and carnivore detections by CWHR community type....................................................................................91 Table 9: Detection of red fox and marten at camera traps in varying cover types...........92 Table 10: Detection statistics for each target species.......................................................93 Table 11: Univariate analysis of landscape variables in 2.6 km² cells.............................94 Table 12: Pairwise Pearson correlations among cell-level variables................................97 Table 13: Parameter estimates and odds ratios for terms in the landscape-only model resulting from the stepwise logistic regression...................................100 Table 14: Comparative fit of models by species and season..........................................101 Table 15: Parameter estimates and odds ratios for the most parsimonious multivariate models for red fox and coyote...................................................103 Table 16: Pairwise species associations at cameras within grid cells where both species of the pair were detected.................................................104 Table 17: Number of telemetry fixes and monitoring dates for radio-collared Lassen red fox.........................................................................123 Table 18: Distribution of seasonal detections of carnivores at baited camera stations....................................................................................123 iii Table 19: Was the number of detections proportional to the amount of time in each diel period?............................................................................124 Table 20: Follow-up tests of whether species pairs were similarly distributed within diel periods.......................................................................125 Table 21: Physical measurements at first capture for Lassen red foxes.........................157 Table 22: Number of locations, by type, for each collared red fox................................158 Table 23: Seasonal locations and home range size per collared red fox........................159 Table 24: Dates for seasonal home ranges......................................................................160 Table 25: Selection of cover types by individual red fox in summer.............................161 Table 26: Elevation of independent locations, by season...............................................162 Table 27: Elevation of aerial telemetry locations, by season..........................................162 Table 28: Vegetation characteristics of occupied rest sites in summer and winter........163 Table 29: Locality data for red fox specimens used in the genetic analysis...................185 Table 30: Distribution of cytochrome-b haplotypes among putative red fox sub-populations..................................................................................188 Table 31: Matrix of pairwise FST values for California sub-populations with ≥4 specimens..........................................................................................189
Recommended publications
  • MINNESOTA MUSTELIDS Young
    By Blane Klemek MINNESOTA MUSTELIDS Young Naturalists the Slinky,Stinky Weasel family ave you ever heard anyone call somebody a weasel? If you have, then you might think Hthat being called a weasel is bad. But weasels are good hunters, and they are cunning, curious, strong, and fierce. Weasels and their relatives are mammals. They belong to the order Carnivora (meat eaters) and the family Mustelidae, also known as the weasel family or mustelids. Mustela means weasel in Latin. With 65 species, mustelids are the largest family of carnivores in the world. Eight mustelid species currently make their homes in Minnesota: short-tailed weasel, long-tailed weasel, least weasel, mink, American marten, OTTERS BY DANIEL J. COX fisher, river otter, and American badger. Minnesota Conservation Volunteer May–June 2003 n e MARY CLAY, DEMBINSKY t PHOTO ASSOCIATES r mammals a WEASELS flexible m Here are two TOM AND PAT LEESON specialized mustelid feet. b One is for climb- ou can recognize a ing and the other for hort-tailed weasels (Mustela erminea), long- The long-tailed weasel d most mustelids g digging. Can you tell tailed weasels (M. frenata), and least weasels eats the most varied e food of all weasels. It by their tubelike r which is which? (M. nivalis) live throughout Minnesota. In also lives in the widest Ybodies and their short Stheir northern range, including Minnesota, weasels variety of habitats and legs. Some, such as badgers, hunting. Otters and minks turn white in winter. In autumn, white hairs begin climates across North are heavy and chunky. Some, are excellent swimmers that hunt to replace their brown summer coat.
    [Show full text]
  • May 2002. the Internet Journal
    Vol. 5 / No. 1 Published by Friends of the Monk Seal May 2002 Guest Editorial: The plight of the monk seal Henrique Costa Neves reflects on the monk seal’s remarkable recovery in Madeira after centuries of persecution and near-extinction. International News Hawaiian News Mediterranean News Cover Story: Endgame – the fight for marine protected areas in Turkey by Cem. O. Kiraç and Yalcin Savas. In Focus: Homeward Bound – are monk seals returning to Madeira’s São Lourenço Peninsula? by Alexandros A. Karamanlidis, Rosa Pires, Henrique Costa Neves and Carlos Santos. Guest Editorial: Sun basking seals on Madeira’s Desertas Islands Perspectives: Challenge in the Ionian An interview with Ioannis D. Pantis, President of the National Marine Park of Zakynthos, Greece. Monachus Science: Bree, P.J.H. van. Notes on the description and the type material of the Hawaiian monk seal or Laysan Seal, Monachus schauinslandi Matschie, 1905. Kiraç, C.O., Y. Savas, H. Güçlüsoy & N.O. Veryeri. Observations on diving behaviour of free ranging Mediterranean monk seals Monachus monachus on Turkish coasts. Monachus Science Posters: Cover Story: MPAs in Turkey – in desperate need of management Androukaki E., E. Fatsea, L. 't Hart, A.D.M.E. Osterhaus, E. Tounta, S. Kotomatas. Growth and development of Mediterranean monk seal pups during rehabilitation. 16th European Cetacean Society Conference, Liège, Belgium, 7-11 April, 2002. Dosi, A., S. Adamantopoulou, P. Dendrinos, S. Kotomatas, E. Tounta, & E. Androukaki. Analysis of heavy metals in blubber and skin of Mediterranean monk seals. 16th European Cetacean Society Conference, Liège, Belgium, 7-11 April, 2002. Letters to the Editor Including – Killing sharks at French Frigate Shoals is unacceptable, by Ian L.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan
    DRAFT Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, Washington January 2013 In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the Draft Washington State Status Update and Recovery Plan for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. It summarizes what is known of the historical and current distribution and abundance of the Mazama pocket gopher in Washington and describes factors affecting known populations and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for down-listing to state Sensitive are identified. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the draft recovery plan is available for a 90-day public comment period. Please submit written comments on this report by 19 April 2013 via e-mail to: [email protected], or by mail to: Endangered Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, 0.5% STRYCHNINE MILO for HAND
    Jl.l!l€' 23, 1997 Dr. Alan V. Tasker Acting Leader, rata Support Teaill Tec.'mical and Sciemtific Services USDA/AHflS/BBEP Unit ISO ) 4700 River Foad Rivcreale, ND 20737 Dear Dr. Tasker, Subject: 0.5% Str.fclmine Mlo rex Ha.'ld Baiting fucket C,ophers EPA Registratirn No. 56228-19 Your Slil;;nissions of Septemb€r 23, 19%, and June 2, 1997 ~Je nave reviewed ,YOUr sl.ibmi~sicn of Sept€T."'~r 19, 1996:. ThE' cnongp--s in tl"le inert ingredients a'ld t..'1e revised basic and alte..."7late Confidential StatC1"~nts of Forl'1Ula (CSFs) ;;.r8 acceptable. He 1=1<: fort-l;;.rd to receiving the product chemistry data on the nc-w formulation. Your letter of SepteJl'J::>er 23, 19%, imicates thClt some of these studies ~Jere underway at that tire. The proposed revis20 label stibIcJ tted 00 June 2, 1997, is J:-.asically ) acceptC!ble, but the change identified l.-elow must be made. 1. In the "NOI'E TO PHYSICIAN", change "CI\UrION," to "NOrrcp.:" so as not to conflict with the label's required signal Nord "I'i"lNGFR". 8u.1:'mit one r:::q:y of the fin.-J.l printed label before releasing this prcrluct for shipment. :;;~x¥~~ COP~ E William H. JacObs BEST AVA'LAB\.. i\cting Product 1<1a.'l8.ger 14 Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch Reo.istration Division (7505C) :::::, ~.. ..w·-1······ _.. ._-j.. ......w. ··1· "~'~"·Tm--I··· ·1· ............ ·····1· _............. DATE ~ •......••.•....... .........•..••.• ....... ~ ..•....... ..........................................................................................- ....... EPA Form 1320-102-70) OFFICIAL FILE COpy r.. PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS 0.5% STRYCHNINE r~1.0 HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND FOR HAND BAITING STORAGE AND DISPOSAL I -, DOMESTIC ANIMALS Do not contaminate water, food, or POCKET GOPHERS feed by storage or disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Red and Gray Fox
    The Red and Gray Fox There are five species of foxes found in North America but only two, the red (Vulpes vulpes), And the gray (Urocyon cinereoargentus) live in towns or cities. Fox are canids and close relatives of coyotes, wolves and domestic dogs. Foxes are not large animals, The red fox is the larger of the two typically weighing 7 to 5 pounds, and reaching as much as 3 feet in length (not including the tail, which can be as long as 1 to 1 and a half feet in length). Gray foxes rarely exceed 11 or 12 pounds and are often much smaller. Coloration among fox greatly varies, and it is not always a sure bet that a red colored fox is indeed a “red fox” and a gray colored fox is indeed a “gray fox. The one sure way to tell them apart is the white tip of a red fox’s tail. Gray Fox (Urocyon cinereoargentus) Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) Regardless of which fox both prefer diverse habitats, including fields, woods, shrubby cover, farmland or other. Both species readily adapt to urban and suburban areas. Foxes are primarily nocturnal in urban areas but this is more an accommodation in avoiding other wildlife and humans. Just because you may see it during the day doesn’t necessarily mean it’s sick. Sometimes red fox will exhibit a brazenness that is so overt as to be disarming. A homeowner hanging laundry may watch a fox walk through the yard, going about its business, seemingly oblivious to the human nearby.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Fur Harvester Digest 3 SEASON DATES and BAG LIMITS
    2021 Michigan Fur Harvester Digest RAP (Report All Poaching): Call or Text (800) 292-7800 Michigan.gov/Trapping Table of Contents Furbearer Management ...................................................................3 Season Dates and Bag Limits ..........................................................4 License Types and Fees ....................................................................6 License Types and Fees by Age .......................................................6 Purchasing a License .......................................................................6 Apprentice & Youth Hunting .............................................................9 Fur Harvester License .....................................................................10 Kill Tags, Registration, and Incidental Catch .................................11 When and Where to Hunt/Trap ...................................................... 14 Hunting Hours and Zone Boundaries .............................................14 Hunting and Trapping on Public Land ............................................18 Safety Zones, Right-of-Ways, Waterways .......................................20 Hunting and Trapping on Private Land ...........................................20 Equipment and Fur Harvester Rules ............................................. 21 Use of Bait When Hunting and Trapping ........................................21 Hunting with Dogs ...........................................................................21 Equipment Regulations ...................................................................22
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Ecology of the Raccoon Dog (Nyctereutes Procyonoides) in Europe
    A review of the ecology of the raccoon dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides) in Europe Jaap L. Mulder De Holle Bilt 17, NL-3732 HM De Bilt, the Netherlands, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The raccoon dog (Nyctereutes procyonoides) was introduced from East Asia into the former USSR between 1928 and 1957. Since then it has colonised a large part of Europe and is considered an invasive alien spe- cies. This paper reviews the current knowledge on the ecology of the raccoon dog in Europe, undertaken as a basis for a risk assessment. The raccoon dog is about the size of a red fox (Vulpes vulpes). In autumn it accumulates fat and, in areas with cold winters, it may stay underground for weeks. It does not dig and often uses badger (Meles meles) setts and fox earths for reproduction. Raccoon dogs are monogamous. Each pair occupies a fixed home range the periphery of which often overlaps with that of neighbours. Pre-breeding population density usually is between 0.5 and 1.0 adults/km2. Habitat use is characterised by a preference for shores, wet habitats and deciduous forests. Foraging raccoon dogs move quite slowly, mostly staying in cover. They are omnivorous gatherers rather than hunters. Their diet is variable, with amphibians, small mammals, carrion, maize and fruits being important components. There is no proof of a negative effect on their prey populations. Raccoon dogs produce a relatively large litter of usually 6 to 9 cubs. After six weeks the den is left and the whole family roams around. From July onwards the cubs, still only half grown, start to disperse.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammalia, Felidae, Canidae, and Mustelidae) from the Earliest Hemphillian Screw Bean Local Fauna, Big Bend National Park, Brewster County, Texas
    Chapter 9 Carnivora (Mammalia, Felidae, Canidae, and Mustelidae) From the Earliest Hemphillian Screw Bean Local Fauna, Big Bend National Park, Brewster County, Texas MARGARET SKEELS STEVENS1 AND JAMES BOWIE STEVENS2 ABSTRACT The Screw Bean Local Fauna is the earliest Hemphillian fauna of the southwestern United States. The fossil remains occur in all parts of the informal Banta Shut-in formation, nowhere very fossiliferous. The formation is informally subdivided on the basis of stepwise ®ning and slowing deposition into Lower (least fossiliferous), Middle, and Red clay members, succeeded by the valley-®lling, Bench member (most fossiliferous). Identi®ed Carnivora include: cf. Pseudaelurus sp. and cf. Nimravides catocopis, medium and large extinct cats; Epicyon haydeni, large borophagine dog; Vulpes sp., small fox; cf. Eucyon sp., extinct primitive canine; Buisnictis chisoensis, n. sp., extinct skunk; and Martes sp., marten. B. chisoensis may be allied with Spilogale on the basis of mastoid specialization. Some of the Screw Bean taxa are late survivors of the Clarendonian Chronofauna, which extended through most or all of the early Hemphillian. The early early Hemphillian, late Miocene age attributed to the fauna is based on the Screw Bean assemblage postdating or- eodont and predating North American edentate occurrences, on lack of de®ning Hemphillian taxa, and on stage of evolution. INTRODUCTION southwestern North America, and ®ll a pa- leobiogeographic gap. In Trans-Pecos Texas NAMING AND IMPORTANCE OF THE SCREW and adjacent Chihuahua and Coahuila, Mex- BEAN LOCAL FAUNA: The name ``Screw Bean ico, they provide an age determination for Local Fauna,'' Banta Shut-in formation, postvolcanic (,18±20 Ma; Henry et al., Trans-Pecos Texas (®g.
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Term Trends in Food Habits of the Raccoon Dog, Nyctereutes Viverrinus, in the Imperial Palace, Tokyo
    Bull. Natl. Mus. Nat. Sci., Ser. A, 42(3), pp. 143–161, August 22, 2016 Long-term Trends in Food Habits of the Raccoon Dog, Nyctereutes viverrinus, in the Imperial Palace, Tokyo Akihito1, Takako Sako2, Makito Teduka3 and Shin-ichiro Kawada4* 1The Imperial Residence, 1–1 Chiyoda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100–0001, Japan 2Imperial Household Agency, 1–1 Chiyoda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100–8111, Japan 3Field Work Office, 4–29–2 Asahi-cho, Akishima, Tokyo 196–0025, Japan 4 Department of Zoology, National Museum of Nature and Science, 4–1–1 Amakubo, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305–0005, Japan *E-mail: [email protected] (Received 31 March 2016; accepted 22 June 2016) Abstract The food habits of the raccoon dogs in the Imperial Palace were examined by fecal analysis focused on the long term trend for five years. A total of 95 taxa (including 58 taxa identi- fied as genera or species) of plant seeds were detected from 163 collected feces in 164 weekly sur- veys. Among them, eight taxa were selected as the food resources for the raccoon dogs in the Imperial Palace. The intakes of these taxa showed seasonal succession, i.e. Aphananthe aspera in January, Idesia polycarpa in February, Rubus hirsutus from May to July, Cerasus spp. in May and June, Morus spp. in June, Machilus thunbergii in July and August, Aphananthe aspera from Sep- tember to December until the following January, and also Ficus erecta in September and Celtis sinensis in December. In March and April, plant harvest is rather poor, and therefore raccoon dogs feed on the inside endosperm of Ginkgo biloba and family Fagaceae to supply the insufficient nutrients as observed by broken seed coats from feces.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature of Teller Coyotes Physical Description Coyotes (Canis Latrans
    The Nature of Teller Coyotes Physical Description Coyotes (Canis latrans) are members of the canine family. Of the 19 subspecies, the mountain coyote is the one you’ll encounter in Teller County. They have gray, white, tan, and brown fur. The coyote in the photograph was taken from Edlowe Road. They are about the size of a medium-size dog, weighing 20 to 50 pounds. Their long, bushy tails are helpful species identifiers. Coyotes run with their tails down while domestic dogs run with tails up and wolves run with tails straight out. Life History In many areas, coyotes are solitary outside of the breeding season; but their social organization is influenced by prey size. In populations where the majority of prey are small rodents, coyotes tend to be solitary. In populations where larger animals are available (elk and deer), large groups of coyotes (packs) may form. Like other canines, coyotes do not hibernate. A male and female will pair off and remain together for several years, although they may not be life mates. Mating occurs between January and March. They establish dens abandoned by other animals, or dig one themselves. Litters of 5-7are born sightless and hairless two months after mating. Their eyes open after 10 days, and they leave the den between 8-10 weeks of age. Movement of pups from one den to another is common. The reason is unknown, but disturbance and infestation by parasites may be factors. Coyotes in captivity may live as long as 18 years, but in wild populations few coyotes live more than 6 to 8 years.
    [Show full text]
  • TROUBLE-MAKING BROWN BEAR URSUS ARCTOS LINNAEUS, 1758 (MAMMALIA: CARNIVORA) – Behavioral PATTERN ANALYSIS of the SPECIALIZED INDIVIDUALS
    Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle © 30 Décembre Vol. LIV (2) pp. 541–554 «Grigore Antipa» 2011 DOI: 10.2478/v10191-011-0032-0 TROUBLE-MAKING BROWN BEAR URSUS ARCTOS LINNAEUS, 1758 (MAMMALIA: CARNIVORA) – BEHAVIORal PATTERN ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIALIZED INDIVIDUALS LEONARDO BERECZKY, MIHAI POP, SILVIU CHIRIAC Abstract. In Romania more than 500 damage cases caused by large carnivores are reported by livestock owners and farmers each year. This is the main reason for hunting derogation despite the protected species status. This study is the result of detailed examination of 198 damage cases caused by bears in 2008 and 2009, in the south- eastern Carpathian Mts in Romania. The goal of the study was to examine whether an individual-specific behavioural pattern among problematic bears exists. We looked for bears which showed repeated killing of livestock, a phenomenon claimed by livestock owners to indicate the presence of a problematic individual in the area. In 27% of the observed cases the problematic bears exhibited specific behaviour patterns: clear specialization on a certain type of damage, high degree of tolerance for humans, selectivity for certain prey items, returning back to the damage site in less than 8 days. Fast adaptation and taking advantage of easily obtainable food around human created artificial sources is characteristic for all bear species, due to their high learning capacity and ecological plasticity, but from the conservation and management point of view dealing with individuals which specialize to live mainly around artificial areas becomes a “problem”. Thus defining and identifying individual behaviour patterns oriented towards conflicting behaviour might be useful for wildlife managers in identifying “problem individuals” in order to apply the proper control methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S
    FOREST PROTECTION EC 1255 • Revised May 2003 $2.50 Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S. deCalesta, K. Asman, and N. Allen Contents ocket gophers (or just plain Gopher habits and habitat.............. 1 P “gophers”) damage conifer seed- Control program ........................... 2 lings on thousands of Identifying the pest ......................2 acres in Washington, Assessing the need for treatment ...3 Idaho, and Oregon Damage control techniques ...........3 annually. They invade clearcuts and Applying controls .......................... 7 clip (cut off) roots or Figure 1.—Typical Oregon pocket gopher. Christmas tree plantations .............7 girdle (remove bark from) the bases of conifer seedlings and saplings, causing significant economic losses. Forest plantations ........................ 7 This publication will help you design a program to reduce or eliminate Summary .................................... 8 gopher damage to seedlings and saplings in your forest plantation or Christmas tree farm. Sources of supply ......................... 8 First, we describe pocket gophers, their habits, and habitats. Then we For further information .................. 8 discuss procedures for controlling pocket gopher damages—control techniques, their effectiveness and hazard(s) to the environment, and their use under a variety of tree-growing situations. Gopher habits and habitat Three species of pocket gopher can damage conifer seedlings. The two smaller ones, the northern pocket gopher and the Mazama pocket gopher, are 5 to 9 inches long and brown with some white beneath the chin and belly. The northern gopher is found east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington and in Idaho; the Mazama lives in Oregon and Washington west of the Cascades. David S. deCalesta, former Exten- The Camas pocket gopher is similar looking, but larger (10 to 12 inches) sion wildlife specialist, and Kim than the two others.
    [Show full text]