Evaluating the Efficacy of Protected Habitat Areas for the California Spotted Owl Using Long-Term Monitoring Data

The USDA Forest Service has adopted a management strategy for the California spotted owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis) in the Sierra Nevada that relies on protecting habitat (Protected Activity Centers [PAC]) around suspected owl territory centers. We discuss the history of the PAC concept and evaluate its efficacy by comparing owl core areas of use, derived from usage distributions based on long-term location data of territorial owls, with their associated PACs. The average size of core areas used by spotted owls (334.7 ac; SE 40.2; N 29; 95% usage distribution for roost and nest locations) was similar to the average PAC size (287.5 ac; SE 4.3; N 29; t 1.16; P 0.25; 28 df). The 50 and 90% usage distributions for owl use area were smaller than their corresponding PACs (t 38.88, P 0.0001, and 28 df; t 2.31, P 0.03, and 28 df, respectively). The spatial overlap between owl core areas of use and PACs was also high. The average proportions of each core area that coincided with a PAC area was 0.84, 0.70, and 0.61 for the 50, 90, and 95% usage distributions, respectively. Moreover, there were more owl locations found inside (x 36.0; range, 8‐76; SE 2.96) than outside (x 6.9; range, 0‐26; SE 1.03) of PACs (t 9.289; P 0.0001; 68 df). We concluded that PACs, even though derived through an ad hoc but reasoned method, appear to be a key element for conservation of California spotted owls because owls have used these areas over long periods of time (up to 24 years). We also suggest that location data collected during long-term monitoring programs may be useful for identifying core areas for habitat protection not only for spotted owls but also for other species.

[1]  W. H. Burt Territoriality and Home Range Concepts as Applied to Mammals , 1943 .

[2]  Michael D. Samuel,et al.  Identifying areas of concentrated use within the home range , 1985 .

[3]  B. Worton Kernel methods for estimating the utilization distribution in home-range studies , 1989 .

[4]  B. Noon,et al.  Assessment of the current status of the California spotted owl, with recommendations for management , 1992 .

[5]  R. J. Gutiérrez Changes in the distribution and abundance of spotted owls during the past century , 1994 .

[6]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Methods for collecting and analyzing demographic data on the northern spotted owl , 1996 .

[7]  B. Noon,et al.  Mitigation of Habitat “Take”: Application to Habitat Conservation Planning , 1997 .

[8]  Joshua J. Millspaugh,et al.  Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates , 1999 .

[9]  William J. Ripple,et al.  OLD-FOREST DISTRIBUTION AROUND SPOTTED OWL NESTS IN THE CENTRAL CASCADE MOUNTAINS, OREGON , 1999 .

[10]  Joshua J. Millspaugh,et al.  Radio Tracking and Animal Populations , 2001 .

[11]  E. Forsman Methods and Materials , for Locating and Studying Spotted Owls , 2004 .

[12]  Jon S Horne,et al.  Selecting the best home range model: an information-theoretic approach. , 2006, Ecology.

[13]  Status and Trends in Demography of Northern Spotted Owls, 1985–2003 , 2006 .

[14]  M. Seamans,et al.  HABITAT SELECTION IN A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HABITAT ALTERATION AND SPOTTED OWL TERRITORY OCCUPANCY AND BREEDING DISPERSAL , 2007 .

[15]  James E. Hines,et al.  Population Dynamics of Spotted Owls in the Sierra Nevada, California , 2010 .

[16]  Scott L. Stephens,et al.  Challenges and Approaches in Planning Fuel Treatments across Fire-Excluded Forested Landscapes , 2010, Journal of Forestry.

[17]  Jeffrey D. Brawn,et al.  Meta‐analysis of transmitter effects on avian behaviour and ecology , 2010 .

[18]  Perry J. Williams,et al.  Home Range and Habitat Selection of Spotted Owls in the Central Sierra Nevada , 2011 .