HOME RANGE AND HABITAT USE OF A REINTRODUCED POPULATION OF COLLARED PECCARIES IN THE LLANO UPLIFT ECOREGION OF TEXAS THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of Texas State University-San Marcos in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of SCIENCE by Rachel E. Richter, B.S. San Marcos, Texas December 2012 HOME RANGE AND HABITAT USE OF A REINTRODUCED POPULATION OF COLLARED PECCARIES IN THE LLANO UPLIFT ECOREGION OF TEXAS Committee Members Approved: _________________________ Thomas R. Simpson, Chair _________________________ M. Clay Green _________________________ John T. Baccus Approved: _________________________ J. Michael Willoughby Dean of the Graduate College COPYRIGHT by Rachel Elizabeth Richter 2012 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Rachel Richter, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I would like to thank the Texas State University-San Marcos Biology Department and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department for providing funding. I thank Dr. Simpson for accepting me as a student and for all of the opportunities he has given me. I could not have completed this research without his constant patience, guidance, wisdom and support. I thank Dr. Green for his willingness to help and all of his guidance throughout the analysis process. I thank Dr. Baccus for all of his help, useful advice, and for being willing to continue with this project from a distance. Thanks to Dr. Weckerly for his suggestions and assistance with my data analysis. I would like to thank all of the TPWD employees that helped me throughout this project, especially the staff at Mason Mountain WMA: Mark Mitchell, Jeff Forman, Kelsey Behren, and Ryan Reitz. I am eternally grateful to them for allowing me access to the property and facilities, and for their patience, assistance and advice. I also thank them for their willingness to sacrifice their time and risk injury to trap and tag the animals for my study. I would also like to recognize and thank Jason Singhurst for allowing me to use his research and Justin Foster for offering his equipment for this project. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their support and for believing in me. I especially thank my mom and my husband for their constant optimism and patience. This manuscript was submitted on November 14, 2012. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... ix ABSTRACT .........................................................................................................................x CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................1 II. MATERIALS AND METHODS ........................................................................5 Study Area .....................................................................................................5 Trapping ........................................................................................................6 Telemetry .......................................................................................................8 Analysis .........................................................................................................9 III. RESULTS ........................................................................................................13 IV. DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................21 Management Implications ...........................................................................26 APPENDIX A: 95% MINIMUM CONVEX POLYGON MAP FOR THE BLUE, GREEN, ORANGE, PURPLE, WHITE AND YELLOW HERDS ......................28 APPENDIX B: MAP OF THE FIXED KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATOR FOR THE BLUE HERD .........................................................................................................29 APPENDIX C: MAP OF THE FIXED KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATOR FOR THE GREEN HERD ......................................................................................................30 APPENDIX D: MAP OF THE FIXED KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATOR FOR THE ORANGE HERD ...................................................................................................31 APPENDIX E: MAP OF THE FIXED KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATOR FOR THE PURPLE HERD .....................................................................................................32 vi APPENDIX F: MAP OF THE FIXED KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATOR FOR THE WHITE HERD .......................................................................................................33 APPENDIX G: MAP OF THE FIXED KERNEL DENSITY ESTIMATOR FOR THE YELLOW HERD ...................................................................................................34 LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................................35 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Number of observations for each herd, the trap sites animals, the number of animals tagged in each herd over the course of the study, the mean number of individuals recorded per herd and the greatest number of individuals recorded per herd ...............................................................14 2. Results of the 95% minimum convex polygon and the fixed kernel density estimator, expressed in hectares .....................................................15 3. Results of the 95% minimum convex polygon for individuals within the White Herd. Mean home range size is 43.7, standard deviation is 7.53 and coefficient of variation is 0.17 .............................................16 4. Results of the Neu’s method for habitat use analysis at the site level ..........................17 5. Results of the Neu’s method for habitat use analysis for the Green Herd at the home range level ......................................................................18 6. Results of the Neu’s method for habitat use analysis for the White Herd at the home range level ......................................................................18 7. Results of the Neu’s method for habitat use analysis for the Yellow Herd at the home range level ....................................................................19 8. Proportion of activities observed when peccaries were located ...................................20 9. Proportion of activity type with reference to habitat type ............................................20 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Former, current, and introduced range of collared peccaries in Texas. Taken from Taylor and Synatzske 2008 ..................................................................2 2. Trap used to capture collared peccaries at Mason Mountain Wildlife Management Area, Mason County, Texas ...............................................................7 3. Collared peccary tagged with a model M3610 transmitter manufactured by Advanced Telemetry Systems (ATS; 470 First Ave. Isanti, MN 55040) ....................................................................................................7 4. Map of Mason Mountain Wildlife Management Area indicating pastures and trap sites .............................................................................8 5. Vegetation associations of Mason Mountain Wildlife Management Area, Mason County, Texas. Modified from Singhurst et al. 2007...............................12 ix ABSTRACT HOME RANGE AND HABITAT USE OF A REINTRODUCED POPULATION OF COLLARED PECCARIES IN THE LLANO UPLIFT ECOREGION OF TEXAS by Rachel E. Richter, B.S. Texas State University–San Marcos December 2012 SUPERVISING PROFESSOR: THOMAS R. SIMPSON The collared peccary (Pecari tajacu) is a medium-sized New World ungulate with a range extending from Argentina northward into southern Arizona, New Mexico, and eastward to central Texas. The collared peccary has been extirpated from much of its historic range in Texas due to habitat loss, pelt trade, and extermination. Collared peccaries were reintroduced to Mason Mountain Wildlife Management Area in the Llano Uplift region of Texas in 2004. The collared peccary population has increased in number since the initial release of 29 individuals, established several distinct herds, and expanded throughout the property. The goals of my study were to 1) describe habitat use relative to vegetation association and type of activity; and 2) define the home range size of each of the tagged herds. A total of 291 radio telemetry locations were collected from 6 herds. The mean calculated home range size (95% minimum convex polygon) for the 6 herds was 45.5 ha. The results of a fixed kernel density estimator indicated mean home range x sizes of 100.6 ha, 45.6 ha, and 20.9 ha for isopleths of 95%, 75% and 50%, respectively. Collared peccaries avoided the Blackjack