Lowell H. Suring

Habitat Use by Columbian White-Tailed Deer

Columbian white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus leucurus) were studied to provide information for management of habitat essential to this endangered subspecies. Vegetation was assigned to major community groupings of rush, thistle, grass, horsetail, and forest. Coverage of 85% of the 790-ha study area provided information concerning utilization of the plant communities by these animals that have adopted a diurnal activity pattern. Communities providing both cover and forage were more heavily utilized than were communities providing cover or forage alone. Communities providing forage alone were used most near adjacent cover. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) provided cover in summer and allowed deer to utilize previously unused areas. Browse was not used. Green forage was available throughout the year. Restricting visitors to periphery roads allows continuance of the diurnal activity pattern of the deer and aids public enjoyment. Establishment of patches of permanent woody cover where absent would aid in dispersion of the population throughout the refuge. J. WILDL. MANAGE. 43(3):610-619 This study provided information on habitat use by an endangered ungulate. Published information concerning the Columbian white-tailed deer documents only its discovery (Douglas 1829; Thwaites 1905, vol. 4:209-210; Douglas 1914) and subsequent decrease in numbers (Jewett 1914, Bailey 1936). Douglas (1829) reported white-tailed deer along the lower Columbia River and along the Cowlitz and Willamette rivers in Washington and Oregon, respectively (Fig. 1), and provided the original description of the subspecies. Brushy lands in river valleys and surrounding low foothills from the south end of Puget Sound in Washington to Roseburg, Oregon, were the historical habitat and range of the subspecies (Bailey 1936:91, Cowan 1936). The population was extirpated from most if its range by 1900 (Jewett 1914, Bailey 1936) during clearing and agricultural development of river valleys (Crews 1939:2). Jewett listed a small concentration of white-tailed deer near Roseburg in 1934 (Cowan 1936:203). Scheffer (1940) reported 500700 white-tailed deer along the shores of the lower Columbia River and on islands near Cathlamet, Washington and Westport, Oregon. A more recent estimate places the numbers from 250 to 300 along the lower Columbia River (Office of Endangered Species and International Activities 1973:266). Suring (1974) estimated between 200 and 230 deer on the Washington shore in 1973. The survival of the Columbian white-tailed deer in this area prior to 1940 and to the present implies that favorable habitat conditions exist. Description of the habitat utilization by the deer on the newly created Columbian White-tailed Deer National Wildlife Refuge (CWDNWR) was considered essential to provide a basis for management of this remnant population and possible reestablishment of this subspecies on portions of its former range. 1 Study supported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Refuges and the Oregon Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon State University, and the Wildlife Management Institute cooperating. Technical paper 4406, Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station, Corvallis, OR 97331. 2 Present address: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, 3530 Pan American Highway, Albuquerque, NM 87107. 3 Present address: Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74074. 610 J. Wildl. Manage. 43(3):1979 This content downloaded from 157.55.39.155 on Tue, 07 Jun 2016 06:29:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms HABITAT USE BY COLUMBIAN WHITE-TAILED DEER* Suring and Vohs 611 We acknowledge D. A. Fisher, former manager, CWDNWR, and the personnel of the Willapa National Wildlife Refuge who gave assistance throughout the study. Funding was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Refuges, through the Oregon Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit. T. A. Gavin, R. L. Linder, E. C. Meslow, J. A. Bissonette, and F. L. Knopf provided helpful comments on the manuscript.

Brown Bear Den Habitat and Winter Recreation in South-Central Alaska

Abstract Increasing demand for backcountry recreation opportunities during winter (e.g., snowshoeing, helicopter-assisted skiing, snowmobiling) in steep, high-elevation terrain has elevated concern about disturbance to brown bears (Ursus arctos) denning on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, USA. To help identify areas where such conflicts might occur, we developed a spatially explicit model to predict potential den habitat. The model indicated brown bears selected locations for den sites with steep slopes, away from roads and trails. Den sites were associated with habitat high in elevation and away from potential human contact. We then compared areas with the highest probability of providing den habitat with patterns of snowmobile and nonmotorized recreation on a portion of the Kenai Peninsula. We found limited overlap between the 2 recreation activities and potential den habitat for brown bears. At the landscape scale, however, backcountry skiing overlapped more high-quality den habitat than did snowmobile riding. Our results may be used by land management agencies to identify potential conflict sites and to minimize the potential effects of recreation activities on brown bears in dens.

Maintaining Populations of Terrestrial Wildlife Through Land Management Planning: A Case Study

ABSTRACT Regulations and directives associated with enabling legislation for management of national forests in the United States require maintenance of viable populations of native and desired non-native wildlife species. Broad-scale assessments that address ecosystem diversity cover assessment of viability for most species. We developed an 8-step process to address those species for which management for ecosystem diversity may be inadequate for providing ecological conditions capable of sustaining viable populations. The process includes identification of species of conservation concern, description of source habitats, and other important ecological factors, grouping species, selection of focal species, development of focal species assessment models, development of conservation strategies, and designing monitoring, and adaptive management plans. Following application of our screening criteria, we identified 209 of 700 species as species of conservation concern on National Forest System lands east of the crest of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington State, USA. We aggregated the 209 species of conservation concern into 10 families and 28 groups based primarily on habitat associations (these are not phylogenetic families). We selected 36 primary focal species (78% birds, 17% mammals, 5% amphibians) for application in northeast Washington State, USA based on risk factors and ecological characteristics. Our assessment documented reductions in habitat capability across northeast Washington State compared to historical conditions. To address such changes, for each focal species we developed conservation strategies that included habitat protection and restoration and amelioration of threats. We combined conservation strategies for individual species with other focal species and with management proposals for other resources (e.g., recreation, fire, and fuels management) to develop a multi-species, multi-resource management strategy. The information generated from our approach can be directly translated into land management planning through development of desired conditions, objectives, and standards and guidelines to improve the probability that desired population outcomes will be achieved. However, it should be noted by practitioners that a practical conservation planning process, such as ours, cannot remove all uncertainty and risk to species viability.

Response of the cover of berry-producing species to ecological factors on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, USA

Land managers on the Kenai Peninsula have responded to recent extensive infestations of forests by spruce beetles (Dendroctonus rufipennis (Kirby)) and associated increased fire risk with a variety of management approaches. To provide additional ecological information upon which to base these management prescriptions, we evaluated the response of the cover of berry species to variations in landscape factors and environmental conditions, including crown closure. Data were sufficient to describe the response of cover of bunchberry dogwood (Cornus canadensis), black crowberry (Empetrum nigrum), false toadflax (Geocaulon lividum), strawberryleaf raspberry (Rubus pedatus), lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea), and a combination of 24 other species through multinomial logistic regression. Crown closure and forest overstory type significantly influenced the cover of all berry species. Increasing crown closure had a negative effect on all berry species except strawberryleaf raspberry. Level of infestation by spruc...