Proceedings of the fifth mountain lion workshop: 27

More documents

Recommendations

Info

80 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP there appears to be a correlation between the number of scrapes and the number of male tracks recorded, providing support for the notion that more males have been using the study area during the last two years of the track count. The increased scratching activity could indicate a higher proportion of young males vying for home areas, possibly a result of the removal of one or two established resident males from the area during the winter of 1993-1994. The value of making a second survey of the routes, based on the results listed in Table 1, is uncertain. Because care was taken only to record tracks deposited since the first survey, the accumulation period for the second survey is less than five days. It is difficult to constrain the accumulation for the first survey, but it is likely less than a week, with the exception of tracks in mud which were observed to persist for several weeks. As indicated in table 1, the number of tracks recorded during the first and second run were similar. Thus, it might be more productive to survey additional routes instead of repeating the track count along the base routes. We note, however, that while the total number of tracks recorded in 1994 were similar for the first and second surveys, more male tracks were recorded during the second survey. Many more years of data need to be collected on the Fort Huachuca track count before our interpretation of the data can be realistically considered to be meaningful. In the meantime, an important aspect of the Track Count is the increasing number of volunteer participants (39 in 1995), which provides an excellent forum for the discussion of lion issues, the study of local flora and fauna, and networking among the participants. The Fort Huachuca track count has also facilitated important spinoffs, including the formation of Keeping Track, Inc., The Juniper Institute, and the Canelo Hills track count. CANELO HILLS TRACK COUNT Starting in August 1995, the Fort Huachuca track count was expanded to identify potential corridors between the Huachuca Mountains and the neighboring mountain ranges used by lions and other large carnivores. We speculate that the Huachuca Mountains fall within the home ranges of several lions, and that there is movement by lions between the Huachuca Mountains and neighboring ranges. Each of the four closest mountain ranges to the Huachuca Mountains are within the possible range of an adult lion: the Santa Rita Mountains (with about 47 mi 2 of lion habitat) lie 27 miles northwest; the Whetstones (with 22 mi 2 of habitat) lie 15 miles north; 17 miles to the east and across the San Pedro River lie the Mule Mountains (with 23 mi 2 of habitat); and 22 miles to the west are the Patagonia Mountains (with 8 mi 2 of habitat). These estimates of lion habitat are based on areas above 5000 feet, which approximately delineate the transition from grasslands to the encinal vegetation zone. We note that even this rough estimate of the amount of lion habitat indicates that no single mountain range contains habitat for a single lion, particularly for males. The Canelo Hills, a rolling terrain varying in elevation between 4700 and 6000 feet is composed primarily of pinyon-juniper-oak woodlands, may act as a natural conduit between the Huachuca Mountains and the Santa Rita Mountains to the northeast and the Whetstone Mountains to the north (Figure 1). A number of drainages run north-south throughout the Canelo Hills, including Post Creek, O'Donnell Creek, Turkey Creek, and Lyle Creek. Four of the routes (No. 3,5,6,7) follow drainages in the area (Figure 1). The remaining routes are located between the drainages in country which is characterized by wooded mesas. The routes were chosen to transect the study area approximately parallel to the trend of the hills, thereby intersecting the hypothetical corridors passing through the area. At the present, the Canelo Hills track count (Table 2) is monitoring possible corridors along the western side of the Huachuca Mountains, where development pressures have been light. In the future, we hope to extend the track count to include possible corridors through the more heavily urbanized eastern margin of the Huachuca Mountains where Fort Huachuca and the city of Sierra Vista have impacted the connective links to the San Pedro River Valley and Mule Mountains to the east. To date fewer lion tracks have been recorded in the Canelo Hills (0.06 tracks per mile of route) compared to the track density recorded on the FHMR in 1995 (0.28 tracks per mile of route). Even when the months of adverse weather are not included in the calculation, the recorded density of tracks (0.12 tracks per mile of route) is less than half that recorded on the FHMR. Additionally the number of bear tracks recorded has been comparable to the number of lion tracks (0.15 tracks per mile of route versus 0.12). We interpret this correlation as evidence that the Canelo Hills corridors are not restricted to use by lions. Lion tracks generally have been recorded in the drainage areas (routes 3,5,6 and 7), while the bear tracks have been observed in the interdrainage areas (routes 1 and 2). The monthly scheduling of the track count has proved to be affected by adverse weather conditions. Poor weather (primarily rain), and associated poor tracking conditions resulted in no tracks being recorded for three of the eight months (September 1995, December 1995, and February 1996), which represents more than a third of the track surveys. As a possible solution to the problem, we plan to conduct the track count quarterly starting in June 1996, surveying the routes only after a week of dry weather. In addition, we plan to repeat the track counts after 3-5 days, following the method employed by the Fort Huachuca track count, to provide a more complete survey of the routes. Given the short time the Canelo Hills track count has been conducted, the interpretations presented above are
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN LION WORKSHOP 81 necessarily preliminary. Perhaps more important than the data collected (especially during the early stages of the project), is the large number of volunteers who have participated in the track count. To date, more than 110 volunteers have participated in the project. DISCUSSION In addition to the information provided by the data, the Fort Huachuca and Canelo Hills track counts have helped us to refine the basic method and to identify a number of aspects which can be improved. For example, we have found that routes of 2.5 miles or less make the best survey units. Segments of this length can be covered during the morning hours when light is suitable for seeing tracks. By running a short route out, then returning along it to the starting point, the trackers have the opportunity to search for scratches or other sign on the return run. This approach also simplified logistics, allowing survey teams to simply return to their own vehicles rather than requiring complicated schemes of vehicle exchange or arranging pick-ups. These short runs are not exhausting and allow us to conduct the track count over a long time period. 2) While the tracing of tracks onto glass plates has proved to be an excellent educational exercise, we have found it difficult to control the quality of the tracing, especially when the volunteer turnover rate is high. We will address this problem by photographing the tracks in addition to tracing. 3) Particularly in the case of the Canelo Hills project, the lack of tracks along a route is also valuable information. We have found it important to continually motivate track count participants by conducting pre-count summary of the overall objectives of the project. Care must be taken not to let the desire to see tracks lead to disappointment or distraction from the goals of the project. 4) We have found that there is a need for continual pre-survey training on tracing and identification of tracks. Perhaps the most important technical aspect of the Fort Huachuca and Canelo Hills projects is the research potential of a long-term database provided by the track counts. While several agencies have used track counts in the past, none have, as yet, stayed with them for an extended period or attempted to improve the technique. All have attempted to use them for trend counts, with varying degrees of success. We recognize the need for any interpretation of such a database to be based on many years of data, most likely more than ten. At this point it is difficult to relate the observed variation in track densities to actual trends in lion numbers. The recent initiation of a radio-collaring lion study in the Huachuca Mountains by AGFD may help us estimate the actual lion densities and provide valuable constraint on the lion densities being recorded in the Huachuca Mountains. In the long term, the data collected will establish a background measure of the average track density in the study area, which can ultimately be used to quantify gross changes in lion numbers, should they occur, or to demonstrate stable populations if no serious change happens. In the short term, such a study does not hold the promise of exciting scientific discover, however, it will become increasingly valuable over time as indices of historic conditions. Because the track counts are entirely volunteer-based, these projects have an important advantage of being flexible and serendipitous in nature. These studies are unique in that they are free of pressure form external funding sources to justify results, procedures or the research direction. The studies therefore are at liberty to change objectives, methods, and initiate new studies without the debilitating bureaucratic red tape which plagues so many agency investigations. The Canelo Hills project itself is an excellent example of the advantages of this approach, when questions about the existence of lion corridors between the Huachucas and the neighboring ranges were raised during the Fort Huachuca track count, the flexibility the track count program allowed for the immediate implementation of the Canelo Hills project. In the future, we expect many more, equally fruitful, spin offs from the track counts. In addition, the exclusive use of volunteers for the track counts has yielded valuable information about technical and logistical problems associated with the track count method which can be used to help plan similar studies in other areas. CONCLUSIONS The Fort Huachuca-Canelo Hills track counts have demonstrated that a long-term, volunteer-based track count is a viable method for monitoring the presence of mountain lions. Perhaps more important track counts function as an excellent public outreach and education tool which fosters an appreciation and understanding of mountain lions and mountain lion habitat. We have found that a sampling rate of about one mile of route per 2.3 square miles of lion habitat consistently results in the detection of lion tracks, even during the early years of the track count when routes were covered only once. Averaged over the six years of the program, the ratio of tracks per route mile is about 0.30. The participation of an increasing number of volunteers (39 at Fort Huachuca in 1995, and more than 110 during the course of the Canelo Hills project) and various organizations (e.g. The Phoenix Zoo, Keeping Track, Inc, The Sky Island Alliance, Wildlife Damage Review, and The Arizona League of Conservation Voters), underscores the important public education and outreach aspect of the track counts. In the coming years, we hope to further improve the tracking methodology, solve some of the logistical and data management problems we have encountered, and further explore the application of the track count method which has proved successful in the Fort Huachuca-Canelo Hills projects. LITERATURE CITED Hornocker, M.G. 1970. An analysis of mountain lion predation upon mule deer and elk in the Idaho primitive area. Wildl. Monogr. 21. 39pp.
Page 1:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN L
Page 4 and 5:
© Copyright 1997 The Southern Cali
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAIN
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAI
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41: 30 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTAI
Page 110 and 111: 100 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTA
Page 140 and 141:
130 PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH MOUNTA
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
show all

Proceedings of the fifth mountain lion workshop: 27

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?