Proceedings
4th Microcomputer Applications in 
Fish & Wildlife Conference
October 24-27, 1999
Stateline, Nevada

Garrett L. Schairer*, Fish and Wildlife Information Exchange, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 203 W. Roanoke St., Blacksburg, VA 24061-0534, (540) 231-7348, gschaire@vt.edu

Randolph H. Wynne, Department of Forestry, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0324, (540) 231-7811, wynne@vt.edu

Michael L. Fies, Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, P. O. Box 996, Verona, VA 24482, (540) 248-9360, mfies@dgif.state.va.us

Scott D. Klopfer, Fish and Wildlife Information Exchange, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 203 W. Roanoke St., Blacksburg, VA 24061-0534, (540) 231-7348, sklopfer@vt.edu

A detailed understanding of the spatial arrangement of northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) habitats would allow more focused efforts by wildlife managers. We used a 4-year average of northern bobwhite call count data in conjunction with remotely-sensed habitat maps to study landscape-level habitat associations. Landscape metrics were calculated for the landscape surrounding each stop and were used in two modeling exercises to differentiate between high and low northern bobwhite populations. Both pattern recognition (PATREC) and logistic regression models predicted levels of northern bobwhite abundance well for the modeled (73.5% and 73.9% respectively) and independent (74.6% and 76.6% respectively) data sets. The revised models were applied to the remotely-sensed habitat maps of the eastern 2/3 of Virginia to develop maps expressing the quality of a landscape for supporting a high population of bobwhite based on existing land cover. Both models predicted similar percentages in each of the quality classes.

Jonathan Brooks, Oregon State University, Department of Forest Resources, Peavy Hall 002A, Corvallis, OR 97331-5703, phone: (541) 737-1596; fax: (541) 737-3049, brooksj@cof.orst.edu

I analyzed the relationship between avian abundance and landscape structure at five spatial resolutions for 30 subbasins in the central Oregon Coast Range using remotely sensed data and a geographic information system (GIS). I developed maps of forest successional stages from Landsat TM data at a spatial resolution of 25 meters, or 0.06 hectares (ha) and aggregated pixels to produce images at minimum mapping units (MMU) of 0.25, 1, 4, and 16 ha. Using a spatial pattern analysis program, I quantified the landscape structure of each subbasin at the five MMU’s. I used bird abundance data from a previous study to model the relationships between the landscape structure at each MMU and abundance of five bird species: brown creeper, gray jay, Hammond’s flycatcher, red-breasted nuthatch, and song sparrow. At all MMU’s, the patch composition (the proportional abundance of each subbasin in a particular patch type) explained 42-78% of the variation in abundance for all species. Mean patch size of mixed and conifer large sawtimber was a significant predictor of brown creeper and red-breasted nuthatch abundance at some MMU’s. Percentage of subbasin in mixed small sawtimber was a significant predictor of Hammond’s flycatcher abundance. For the range of species and MMU’s I analyzed, patch composition seemed to be more important for determining bird-habitat relationships than attributes of patch structure.

Thomas A. O’Neil*, Northwest Habitat Institute, Corvallis, OR  97339, (541) 929-6330 habitat@nwhi.org, World Wide Web Site: www.nwhi.org

David H. Johnson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091, (360)-902-2603; FAX: (360)-902-2946, johnsdhj@dfw.wa.gov

Work under this project will further develop the species-habitat relationship information for 738 species of terrestrial and marine bird, mammal, reptile, and amphibian species found in Oregon and Washington. Several well-used publications have provided the baseline information to date: Thomas et al. (Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests - The Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington, 1979), Brown (Management of Wildlife and Fish Habitats in Forests of Western Oregon and Washington, 1985), and Maser, Thomas, and Anderson (Relationship of Terrestrial Vertebrates to Plant Communities and Structural Conditions, 1984). Since the time of these publications, significant new information has become available. This new information is, however, piecemeal and not generally available to the broad array of resource managers, landscape planners, and others who routinely use such information. A cohesive document which integrates this new species-habitat information, across all vegetation and aquatic zones in the two states, is appropriate at this time. Further, having this information available in a digital format (e.g., Internet, CD-ROMs) would enhance its utility, and thereby strengthen the conservation efforts of its users.

NOTE: * indicates presenter