The Journal of Wildlife Management 80(4):691–707; 2016; DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.1046 Research Article Demographic Response of Northern Spotted Owls to Barred Owl Removal LOWELL V. DILLER,1 Green Diamond Resource Company, Korbel, CA 95550, USA KEITH A. HAMM, Green Diamond Resource Company, Korbel, CA 95550, USA DESIREE A. EARLY, Green Diamond Resource Company, Korbel, CA 95550, USA DAVID W. LAMPHEAR, Green Diamond Resource Company, Korbel, CA 95550, USA KATIE M. DUGGER, U.S. Geological Survey, Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA CHARLES B. YACKULIC, U.S. Geological Survey, Southwest Biological Science Center, Flagstaff, AZ, USA CARL J. SCHWARZ, Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada PETER C. CARLSON, Colorado Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA TRENT L. MCDONALD, Western EcoSystems Technology, Laramie, WY, USA ABSTRACT Federally listed as threatened in 1990 primarily because of habitat loss, the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) has continued to decline despite conservation efforts resulting in forested habitat being reserved throughout its range. Recently, there is growing evidence the congeneric invasive barred owl (Strix varia) may be responsible for the continued decline primarily by excluding spotted owls from their preferred habitat. We used a long-term demographic study for spotted owls in coastal northern California as the basis for a pilot barred owl removal experiment. Our demography study used capture–recapture, reproductive output, and territory occupancy data collected from 1990 to 2013 to evaluate trends in vital rates and populations. We used a classic before-after-control-impact (BACI) experimental design to investigate the demographic response of northern spotted owls to the lethal removal of barred owls. According to the best 2-species dynamic occupancy model, there was no evidence of differences in barred or northern spotted owl occupancy prior to the initiation of the treatment (barred owl removal). After treatment, barred owl occupancy was lower in the treated relative to the untreated areas and spotted owl occupancy was higher relative to the untreated areas. Barred owl removal decreased spotted owl territory extinction rates but did not affect territory colonization rates. As a result, spotted owl occupancy increased in the treated area and continued to decline in the untreated areas. Prior to and after barred owl removal, there was no evidence that average fecundity differed on the 2 study areas. However, the greater number of occupied spotted owl sites on the treated areas resulted in greater productivity in the treated areas based on empirical counts of fledged young. Prior to removal, survival was declining at a rate of approximately 0.2% per year for treated and untreated areas. Following treatment, estimated survival was 0.859 for the treated areas and 0.822 for the untreated areas. Derived estimates of population change on both study areas showed the same general decline before removal with an estimated slope of –0.0036 per year. Following removal, the rate of population change on the treated areas increased to an average of 1.029 but decreased to an average of 0.870 on the untreated areas. The results from this first experiment demonstrated that lethal removal of barred owls allowed the recovery of northern spotted owl populations in the treated portions of our study area. If additional federally funded barred owl removal experiments provide similar results, this could be the foundation for development of a long-term conservation strategy for northern spotted owls. Ó 2016 The Wildlife Society. KEY WORDS barred owl, competition, demography, northern spotted owl, removal experiment. The northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina)isa Columbia to northern California. It is primarily a nocturnal medium-sized owl that inhabits structurally complex forests forager of small mammals, has relatively large home ranges, in the coastal and Cascade ranges from southwestern British and actively defends space around its nest and roosting area from conspecifics (Courtney et al. 2004). Extensive research on northern spotted owl habitat requirements, conducted Received: 12 May 2015; Accepted: 16 January 2016 during the past 4 decades, focused on understanding the structural characteristics and spatial requirements of nesting, 1E-mail: [email protected] roosting, and foraging habitat for this species. These studies Diller et al. Barred Owl Removal Experiment 691 have been conducted primarily in landscapes with significant barred owls may ultimately limit, and potentially extirpate, amounts of mature or old forests, the principal seral stages populations of spotted owls throughout their range used by this species in most areas where it has been studied (Gutierrez et al. 2007, Yackulic et al. 2014). (Courtney et al. 2004). The underlying ecological premise As part of a monitoring commitment for a northern spotted behind these habitat studies was that northern spotted owl owl Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Green Diamond populations were limited by the amount and distribution of Resource Company (Green Diamond) has conducted a habitat (Franklin et al. 2000, Olson et al. 2004, Dugger et al. demographic study for this species since 1990 within its 2005). approximately 1,600-km2 ownership in northwestern Cal- As early as 1990 when the United States Fish and Wildlife ifornia. A 2008 meta-analysis of northern spotted owl Service (USFWS) listed the northern spotted owl as a populations, including study areas from across the subspecies’ threatened species (USFWS 1990), barred owls (Strix varia) range, concluded that the population on the Green Diamond were recognized as a potential threat to spotted owl study area was apparently stable or increasing until 2001, populations. Similar in appearance but somewhat larger in when it began to decline (Forsman et al. 2011). The 2008 size, the barred owl is also a territorial forest owl that meta-analysis could not determine cause and effect relation- historically occurred east of the Great Plains in North ships. However, the presence of barred owls was negatively America. Since the listing of the spotted owl, there has been associated with fecundity and apparent survival of spotted ever increasing concern about the range expansion (Livezey owls. On the Green Diamond study area, the apparent 2009) and increasing local populations (Yackulic et al. 2012) decline in spotted owls coincided with an increase in barred of the closely related barred owl. The Revised Recovery Plan owl numbers (Dugger et al. 2016). for the Northern Spotted Owl (USFWS 2011:vi) stated “... Although it was the most probable hypothesis for the it is becoming more evident that securing habitat alone decline on our study area, experimental studies had not been will not recover the spotted owl. Based on the best available conducted to isolate the effect of barred owls from other scientific information, competition from the barred owl potential sources that may contribute to spotted owl (S. varia) poses a significant and complex threat to the population declines. A panel of scientists reviewed potential spotted owl.” experimental designs and concluded that a demographic Barred owls may negatively affect spotted owl detectability, approach with a paired before-after-control-impact (BACI) site occupancy, reproduction, and survival. Barred owls experiment design where removal of barred owls was the decreased detectability of spotted owls (Olson et al. 2005, treatment provided the greatest inference and statistical Crozier et al. 2006, Dugger et al. 2009, Wiens et al. 2011), power (Johnson et al. 2008). The revised recovery plan for and spotted owl occupancy was significantly lower in the northern spotted owl (USFWS 2011) expressed the need territories where barred owls were detected within 0.8 km for such barred owl experimental removal experiments to be of the territory center (Kelly et al. 2003). Other relationships conducted. between barred owl detections and reduced site occupancy by We report the results from the first such barred owl removal spotted owls have been reported (Pearson and Livezey 2003, experiment to address this critical research need. In 2009, the Gremel 2005, Olson et al. 2005, Kroll et al. 2010, Dugger Green Diamond demographic study was partitioned into et al. 2009) and Olson et al. (2004) reported that spotted owls treated (barred owls lethally removed) and untreated (barred had lower reproductive success on sites where barred owls owls undisturbed) areas to estimate the impact of the had been detected. A recent range-wide analysis by Forsman treatment on spotted owl occupancy, fecundity, survival, and et al. (2011) reported that the barred owl covariate, an annual rate of population change. Green Diamond’s demographic estimate of the proportion of spotted owl territories study has been ongoing since 1990, and they have influenced by barred owls, entered the top models with a contributed their data to the regularly conducted northern negative coefficient for survival and fecundity in some spotted owl meta-analysis since 1996 (Anthony et al. 2006, demographic study areas throughout the owl’s range. Forsman et al. 2011). Green Diamond’s demographic data Occasional hybridization between the species is