Proposal to Conduct Mammal Surveys in

George Washington Birthplace National Monument,

Thomas Stone National Historic Site,

and Colonial National Historical Park

Ronald E. Barry

Department of Biology

Frostburg State University

Frostburg. MD 21532-1099

Cooperative Agreement

National Park Service

Northeast Region

August 2001

**Overview**

The National Park Service (NPS) has identified the need for surveys of
mammals in three coastal national parks in the Northeast Region.
Acquiring such natural resource information is in compliance with the
Vail Agenda mandate to the NPS\'s Natural Resource Inventory and
Monitoring Program (NPS 1998). One of the five long-term goals
established by this program is to complete baseline inventories of basic
biological and geophysical natural resources for the national parks.
During Phase I of the natural resource inventory the NPS has set an
objective of documenting the presence of at least 80% of all plant and
animal species (excluding invertebrates) occurring within a park\'s
boundaries; the stated objective for the mammal survey of the parks of
the Northeast Region is 90%. Surveys will confirm the existence of
currently listed species and document the presence of new ones. The data
collected provide important baseline information that can be used by
natural resource specialists in monitoring programs to note changes and
quantify trends in resources and relate variation in time to potential
causes. Such monitoring programs can result in management decisions that
effect proper stewardship of the park system by NPS.

I propose to conduct surveys of mammals in 3 coastal parks: George
Washington Birthplace National Monument (GEWA), Thomas Stone National
Historic Site (THST), and Colonial National Historical Park (COLO). GEWA
consists of 551 acres (223 ha) on the coastal plain east of
Fredericksburg, Virginia, in Westmoreland County. The monument was
authorized in 1930 and opened under the administration of the NPS in
1932. It consists chiefly of open grasslands and forests, with 25 acres
of marshes and estuaries. THST consists of 297 acres (120 ha) in Charles
County, Maryland, approximately 4 miles west of La Plata and 25 miles
south of Washington, D.C. The park opened in 1992 and is comprised
largely of forests and open fields.

COLO encompasses approximately 9,327 acres (3,776 ha). It is located in
southern, coastal ***plain region of T***idewater Virginia and is
composed of Jamestown Island, Yorktown Battlefield, ***Swann's Point and
Green Spring*** and the ***24*** ~~23~~-mile (38-km) Colonial Parkway
that connects the island and battlefield. More than one-half of the area
consists of forest. Over 30% is floodplain; ***26% is*** wetlands
(including forested) and managed fields constitute much of the park.
COLO contains ***approximately*** 30 miles (49 km) of shoreline along
the James and York rivers, 24 miles (39 km) of perennial streams, and 30
miles (49 km) of intermittent streams and drainages.

The NPFauna (2001) database lists records of 22 species of mammals
(orders Marsupialia, Insectivora, Chiroptera \[2 species\], Rodentia,
Lagomorpha, Artiodactyla and Carnivora) in the GEWA. The database lists
0 records of mammals for the THST and 26 species (orders Insectivora,
Chiroptera \[3 species\], Rodentia, Artiodactyla, and Carnivora) for the
COLO.

**Project Description**

*Goal*

The primary goal of the proposed project is to survey the mammals
(excluding bats) of GEWA, THST and COLO with the purpose of documenting
[\>]{.underline} 90% of the species that occupy each of these parks and
describing the relative abundance ***does abundance, below he does
mention distribution, include distribution is this part of this
proposal?*** of species of concern ***what is meant by spp of concern is
this just another way to mean small mammals? And is it mammals or small
mammals that he is surveying, does it include deer, need to clarify
this***. A secondary goal associated with graduate student thesis
projects is to provide information on mammal communities of the parks.

*Objectives*

[Primary]{.underline}

1\. Review all natural resource studies that have occurred within the
parks' boundaries and all historical scientific material stored in the
parks to develop a database of mammal species (excluding bats) that
possibly occur in the parks. ***Shouldn't studies adjacent to the park
on adjoining public and private lands, e.g. US Navy, Newport News
Waterworks, Newport News Park also be surveyed? Shouldn't local
universities be checked for any student thesis that might not have been
also deposited with the park?***

2\. Conduct extensive surveys of the parks for, and catalog, the
presence, distribution, and relative abundance (for species of concern)
of mammal species in forests, grasslands, agricultural fields, riparian
areas, marshes, rock outcrops, etc. at GEWA, THST and COLO.

[Secondary (graduate student theses)]{.underline}

1\. Describe habitat-specific species diversity in the 3 parks.

2\. Assess the status of mammals within each of the parks and provide
recommendations for monitoring mammal populations.

*Methods*

[Historical records]{.underline}**.-**Initially we will establish an
electronic database (Microsoft Access 2000) ***is this redudent vs. just
getting an Access version of NPSpecies. Note below that NPFauna should
be changed to NPSpecies. The park also has a GIS database with wildlife
observations. I would think a GIS database should also be established or
I guess coordinates in the MS Access database that can be converted into
our GIS?*** of records of mammal species for each of the 3 parks from
existing databases such as NPFauna (2001), park records, records of
museums such as the U.S. National Museum (Smithsonian),
university/college and local collections and museums, and published
literature. The database should be compatible with that of other
national park units and NPFauna (2001) so that information can be used
at the ecosystem and landscape levels (NPS 1998). The database will
contain at least the complete taxonomy (Wilson and Reeder 1993; Jones et
al. 1997) and common name of each species, location (park) of each
species, and source of the record.

[Delineation of habitats]{.underline}.-The recognition of major habitat
types will allow stratification of the sampling effort in the 3 parks.
This will ensure a representative and comprehensive survey of the small
mammal fauna by increasing the efficiency with which individual species
are detected, particularly those that are rare. Habitats will be
identified by GIS cover maps, if available, or aerial photos. ***Will
this be redudent with the NVC project for COLO, or should we at least
have him use NVC classification? Or is that finer detail than needed. At
a min. we have to be sure his habitats can be "crosswalked" to the NVC
ecological classification.*** Topographic maps will be important ***WE
also have aerial photography true color and hopefully by then leaf off
and leaf on infrared aerial photography*** in identifying habitat
potentially important to (or avoided by) certain species. Major habitat
types should include, but not be limited to, forests (deciduous,
coniferous, mixed, and wetland), grasslands, agricultural fields, rock
outcrops, riparian zones, and marshes ***also include for COLO woodlots,
maintained lawn areas, ravines***. In addition, recognizable corridors
(of various habitat types) will be identified and sampled. Strata will
be ground-truthed before final selection of sampling sites. Because
habitat changes over time, permanent boundaries of original strata will
be delineated on GIS maps to permit long-term monitoring of animal
populations and vegetation (NPS 2000). ***What role will GPS play in
identifying locations for the GIS, what level of accuracy?***

[Sampling protocol]{.underline}.-Sampling sites will be located within
well-defined habitat types (see above) to permit stratified sampling for
developing a representative list of species and an efficient means for
monitoring and managing populations. In addition, unusual or less common
or expansive habitats (e.g., bogs) will be sampled because they often
harbor small populations or rare species important in monitoring the
health of an ecosystem or landscape. The number of sampling locations
(sample units) within any single park will be dependent on the number,
size and distribution of habitat types and constraints imposed by
accessibility, equipment and personnel. Historical records and site
visits to a park, once habitats are defined, will be factors in
determining the number of sampling locations. Sampling on private
property will occur only with the permission of the landowner.

To identify sampling points, systematic grids will be superimposed on
park maps that depict habitat types (NPS 2000). Points on a grid, within
a habitat type, will be selected without replacement by the generation
of random numbers (either computer-generated or from a random numbers
table) representing grid cells (Rudran and Foster 1996). Edge areas
(habitat edge, roads, etc.) known to influence species richness and
abundance of mammals (e.g., Cummings and Vessey 1994), portions of parks
frequented by the public ***some spp of "concern" such as groundhogs in
earthworks, deer in field are in public use area***, and areas
inaccessible to ground personnel ***we have a lot of wetlands with
muskrats, minks etc. will they be using canoes or flat boats?*** will be
removed from consideration as sampling locations. Once selected on a
map, a sampling location will be located in real space using
differentially corrected GPS ***what level of accuracy, the park GIS is
+/- 5 ft***. Before sampling begins, a review of sampling locations and
times will be solicited ***I love it when they use that word...just
kidding seeing if you read all of our BS*** from park management.

Sampling will rely on capture of small mammals using primarily Sherman
and Tomahawk live traps (for larger shrews, mice and voles, squirrels,
etc.) and pitfall trap arrays (for shrews and small mammals \< 10 g \--
Kirkland and Sheppard 1994). Traps will be arrayed at sampling points in
randomly positioned linear transects or grids, with the number of traps
and trap spacing dependent on habitat type and patch size (Jones et al.
1996). The trapping effort needed to account for [\>]{.underline} 90% of
all species within each habitat will be determined by a species
accumulation curve; once a plateau (asymptote) is reached, sampling will
cease, at least for that sampling period. This sampling regime will
permit a measure of species richness and relative abundance for each
park. Locations for sampling small mammals will generate observations
and signs of larger mammals; species, location and date for each such
mammalian encounter will be recorded on data sheets for inclusion in the
database for the park. Tomahawk traps used for capturing larger mammals
for species identification will be placed in locations where sign is
detected or where habitat features suggest the presence of these
species. Remote cameras will be used to document the presence of large,
secretive and elusive species.

Habitat at each sampling location will be characterized by such features
\[at randomly selected sites\] as dominant vegetation, percent canopy
cover, abundance of shrub and ground cover, degree of disturbance (e.g.,
primary or secondary forest or plantation, agricultural use of
grassland, frequency of fire or flooding), substrate and soil type,
presence of rock piles, topography and elevation (Barry et al. 1999;
Boyce 2001; McDiarmid and Wilson 1996). Temperature and precipitation
for sampling dates will be obtained from the park weather station or the
nearest available weather station if none exists within the park.

Captured individuals of small species (those in Sherman and pitfall
traps) will be removed from traps (Jones et al. 1996), identified to
species, weighed using a Pesola scale, and examined for age, sex, and
reproductive condition. Individuals captured in Tomahawk traps will be
identified to species, and, if practical, weighed using a Pesola scale
and examined for age, sex and reproductive condition. Because
recognition of individuals is necessary for determining relative
abundances (NPS priority for species of concern) and measures of species
diversity (graduate student theses projects), captured individuals may
be marked by spot-shaving, hair-dyeing, ear-tagging (Monel #1 tags,
National Band and Tag Co., Newport, Kentucky) or toe-clipping, (ASM
1998; Rudran 1996). Release will be immediate at the capture location.
Live-trapping and handling procedures will be administered humanely
(Rudran and Kunz 1996) and be consistent with the animal handling
guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists (ASM 1998). Also,
proper precautions will be taken by investigators to prevent human
injury and exposure to disease, especially rabies, Lyme disease,
hantaviral pulmonary syndrome (HPS), and human ehrlichiosis (Gage et al.
1995; Kunz et al. 1996; Mills et al. 1995).

[Compilation and analysis of data]{.underline}.-Data on habitat and all
mammals captured or observed (including sign) will be stored in an
electronic database (Microsoft Access; see **Deliverables** below).
These data will be combined with historical data to determine the number
of species in a park. Current data will be used to determine
distribution and habitat of species. Associations of species with
habitat type and variables, and determination of relative abundance,
will rely on such customary statistical procedures as regression, ANOVA,
chi-square, and log-likelihood analyses (Zar 1999). Estimates of species
diversity, richness and evenness for graduate student thesis projects
will derive from customary models (e.g., Shannon-Wiener index,
rarefaction, and Pielou's J' -- Krebs 1999) to facilitate comparisons
among habitats, parks and investigators and at various sample sizes.
Statistical analysis will be conducted at Frostburg State University
(FSU). The final report will include, for each park, records of all
mammal species and their distributions, relative abundances of species
of concern, survey methods and weather conditions, locations of voucher
specimens, and recommendations for long-term monitoring for use by park
management.

**Project Coordination**

Project personnel will include the project director (cooperator) and 3
graduate student investigators, one assigned to GEWA/THST and the other
two to COLO. The project director will oversee all activities. Park
staff will be notified beforehand by phone or e-mail of all project
activities to be undertaken in the park. Monthly schedules, developed in
coordination with park management, will be produced by project
investigators. Schedules will be adhered to as closely as possible but
be subject to change due to weather or unforeseen personnel
circumstances; changes in schedule will be communicated in advance by
project investigators. The project director will obtain park permits and
a state scientific research and collecting permit for conducting the
research, collecting specimens, and depositing specimens in the mammal
collection at Frostburg State University; investigators (subpermittees)
will carry copies of the permits during sampling. In addition, the
project director will obtain approval from the Institutional Review
Board/Animal Care and Use Committee at Frostburg State University to
conduct the research. Where park housing is available, project
investigators may submit requests for overnight stays when this is
necessary for survey work. The project director will negotiate with park
management and natural resource personnel any use of park equipment
(e.g., GPS) that can facilitate data collection and contribute to the
successful completion of the project.

**Deliverables**

*Project description*

The complete description of the project will submitted by 31 August
2001.

*Species data*

Field forms will be provided, upon request, to the NPS I & M Program.

Digital data sets will be produced in Microsoft Access format, using the
NPS I & M template (www1.nature.nps.gov/im/apps/template/) or one
specifically developed for the particular project.

*GPS data*

GPS coordinates, differentially corrected, will be provided in ArcInfo
***prefer the format be for AV3.2, AV8.1, shapefiles with associated
attributes. NOTE: COLO has an SOP for creating new
shapefiles/attributes, it would be a real time saver if our minimum
fields are added to their field.*** format or as an ArcView file for all
sampling locations and observation sites.

*Metadata*

Metadata will be provided in Dataset Catalog format (nonspatial data)
or, with the cooperation of NPS data managers, in Federal Geographic
Data Committee (FGDC) format (spatial data) found at
www.fgdc.gov/metadata/metadata.html.

*Voucher specimens*

The mammal collection of the Department of Biology at Frostburg State
University will be the repository of voucher specimens (Reynolds et al.
1996) and any salvagable individuals encountered in traps or as
roadkills. Where possible, individuals found dead will be prepared as
voucher specimens. Otherwise, voucher specimens of small mammals
(shrews, voles, mice and rats) will be obtained from individuals
captured live and euthanized by cervical dislocation or thoracic
compression (ASM 1998) or selective kill trapping using Museum Special
snap traps (Woodstream Corporation, Lititz, Pennsylvania). Specimens of
only those species for which no record exists for the park will be
sought. Moles, medium- and large-sized mammals will be documented as
photo vouchers; photo vouchers or specimen vouchers from trap
mortalities, roadkills or individuals found dead; or collection of sign.
Threatened and endangered species will not be sacrificed for voucher
specimens; photo documentation will be made where possible and/or hair
samples will be collected. Specimens deposited at FSU will be catalogued
in the University\'s database.

*Reports*

Progress reports will be submitted annually. A draft of the final report
will be submitted digitally to the Northeast Region, I & M Program. The
final report will be submitted digitally and in hard copy. Any graduate
student theses incorporating the work done to comply with the
requirements of this agreement will be submitted in hard copy.
***Normally Karish et al require quarterly update reports and the annual
submission to the RPRS website (the old IAR). The quarterly reports are
sent as emails or email attachments. Final report format is important,
use of Word 97/2000, font size, formatting for automatic TOC, page
numbering. Also we have required a complete report submitted in Adobe
PDF format, 600 dpi, color. How will the digital photographs, databases
etc. be provided?***

***If the funds are available some other outputs should include a
PowerPoint presentation suitable for conversion to the web and showing
to park management and staff. Draft brochure checklist etc. Also, we
should at a min. require at least a Park Science article.***

*Bibliographic citations*

A reprint will be provided for each publication or thesis based on work
completed under this agreement.

**Project Timetable**

[Dates]{.underline} [Activities]{.underline}

31 August 2001 Submit proposal

January-May 2002 Obtain historical records of mammals for GEWA and THST,
outline and ground-truth strata and establish sampling sites, establish
sampling protocol, design database (template)

March-November 2002 Conduct survey of mammals at GEWA and THST, refine
sampling protocol, establish procedures for data analyses

August -- December 2002 Obtain historical records of mammals of COLO,
outline and ground-truth strata and establish sampling sites, establish
sampling protocol, design database (template), conduct survey of mammals

November 2002-January 2003 Prepare progress report

March-November 2003 Complete survey of mammals at GEWA and THST, compile
data; conduct survey of mammals at COLO, refine sampling protocol,
establish procedures for data analyses

November 2003-January 2004 Analyze data, prepare progress report

March -- November 2004 Complete survey of mammals at COLO, compile and
analyze data

November 2004-January 2005 Analyze data, prepare final report (with
species data, GPS data, metadata)

**Literature Cited**

ASM. 1998. Guidelines for the capture, handling, and care of mammals as
approved by the American Society of Mammalogists. Journal of Mammalogy
79:1416-1431.

Barry, R. E., K. A. Boyce, and A. C. Sucke. 1999. Local distribution,
habitat, and home range of the Appalachian cottontail (*Sylvilagus
obscurus*) at Dolly Sods. Final report submitted to the Nongame Wildlife
and Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of Natural
Resources.

Boyce, K. A. 2001. Distribution, seasonal home range, movements and
habitat of the Appalachian cottontail, *Sylvilagus obscurus*, at Dolly
Sods, West Virginia. M. S. thesis, Frostburg State University,
Frostburg, Maryland.

Cummings, J. R., and S. H. Vessey. 1994. Agricultural influences on
movement patterns of white-footed mice (*Peromyscus leucopus*). American
Midland Naturalist 132:209-218.

Gage, K. L., R. S. Ostfeld, and J. G. Olson. 1995. Nonviral vector-borne
zoonoses associated with mammals in the United States. Journal of
Mammalogy 76:695-715.

Jones, C., W. J. McShea, M. J. Conroy, and T. H. Kunz. 1996. Capturing
mammals. Pp. 115-122 in Measuring and monitoring biological diversity:
standard methods for mammals (D. E. Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D. Nichols,
R. Rudran, and M. S. Foster, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington, District of Columbia.

Jones, C., R. S. Hoffmann, D. W. Rice, M. D. Engstrom, R. D. Bradley, D.
J. Schmidly, C. A. Jones, and R. J. Baker. 1997. Revised checklist of
North American mammals north of Mexico, 1997. Occasional papers, Museum
of Texas Tech University 173:1-20.

Kirkland, G. L., Jr., and P. K. Sheppard. 1994. Proposed standard
protocol for sampling of small mammal communities. Pp. 277-283 in
Advances in the biology of shrews (J. F. Merritt, G. L. Kirkland, Jr.,
and R. K. Rose, eds.). Special Publication of the Carnegie Museum of
Natural History 18, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Krebs, C. J. 1999. Ecological methodology. Second edition. Addison
Wesley Longman,Inc., Menlo Park, California, 620 pp.

Kunz, T. H., R. Rudran, and G. Gurri-Glass. 1996. Appendix 2: Human
health concerns. Pp. 255-264 in Measuring and monitoring biological
diversity: standard methods for mammals (D. E. Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D.
Nichols, R. Rudran, and M. S. Foster, eds.). Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, District of Columbia.

McDiarmid, R. W., and D. E. Wilson. 1996. Data standards. Pp. 56-60 in
Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: standard methods for
mammals (D. E. Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D. Nichols, R. Rudran, and M. S.
Foster, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, District of
Columbia.

Mills, J. N., T. L. Yates, J. E. Childs, R. R. Parmenter, T. G. Ksiazek,
P. E. Rollin, and C. J. Peters. 1995. Guidelines for working with
rodents potentially infected with hantavirus. Journal of Mammalogy
76:716-722.

NPFauna. 2001. Species in parks: flora and fauna database.
[http://ice.ucdavis.edu/nps/](http://endeavor.des.ucdavis.edu/NPS/).

NPS. 1998. Natural resource inventory & monitoring in national parks.
NPS Inventory and Monitoring Informational Brochure.
<http://www.nature.nps.gov/im/imbroch.htm>.

NPS. 2000. Guidance for the design of sampling schemes for inventory and
monitoring of biological resources in national parks. National Park
Service Inventory and Monitoring Program.

Reynolds, R. P., R. I. Crombie, R. W. McDiarmid, and T. L. Yates. 1996.
Voucher specimens. Pp. 63-68 in Measuring and monitoring biological
diversity: standard methods for mammals (D. E. Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D.
Nichols, R. Rudran, and M. S. Foster, eds.). Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, District of Columbia.

Rudran, R. 1996. General marking techniques. Pp. 299-304 in Measuring
and monitoring biological diversity: standard methods for mammals (D. E.
Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D. Nichols, R. Rudran, and M. S. Foster, eds.).
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, District of Columbia.

Rudran, R., and M. S. Foster. 1996. Conducting a survey to assess
mammalian diversity. Pp. 71-79 in Measuring and monitoring biological
diversity: standard methods for mammals (D. E. Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D.
Nichols, R. Rudran, and M. S. Foster, eds.). Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, District of Columbia.

Rudran, R., and T. H. Kunz. 1996. Appendix 1: Ethics in research. Pp.
251-254 in Measuring and monitoring biological diversity: standard
methods for mammals (D. E. Wilson, F. R. Cole, J. D. Nichols, R. Rudran,
and M. S. Foster, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington,
District of Columbia.

Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (eds.). 1993. Mammal species of the
world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Smithsonian Institution
Press, Washington, District of Columbia.

Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical analysis. Fourth ed. Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey.

**Budget**

Agency FSU [Request]{.underline} [Match]{.underline}

**I. Personnel assignments and costs**

A. Dr. Ron Barry's release time/summer stipend - \$7,900/mo./yr.
**\$15,800 \$15,800**

B. GEWA and THST: 2-semester research assistantship (\$5,000) +

1-summer assistantship (\$2,000) + January stipend (2^nd^ yr. @ \$1000)

for 1 graduate student **8,000 7,000**

C. COLO: 2-semester research assistantship (@\$5,000) + 1-summer

assistantship (@\$2,000) + January stipend (2^nd^ yr. @ \$1,000) for 2

graduate students **16,000 14,000**

D. Tuition waiver for 3 graduate students @ \$3,600/yr./student for 2
yrs. each **21,600**

E. Rabies vaccine -- (3 series @ \$240) + (1 booster @ \$80) **800**

F. Student health insurance (Sentry Student Security Plan -- E. J. Smith
&

Associates) for 3 graduate students @\$300/yr./student for 3 students
for

2 yrs. each **1,800**

**I. Total \$42,400 \$58,400**

**II. Transportation\***

A. Roundtrip to GEWA and THST -- (30 trips @ 505 mi/trip) +

(60 mi/trip local travel X 4/trip X 30 trips) = 22,350 mi @ \$0.32/mi

(FSU institutional rate) + (120 bridge tolls @ \$1.50/toll) **\$6,259
\$1,073**

B. Roundtrip to COLO -- (40 trips \@504 mi/trip) +

(22 mi/trip local travel X 4/trip X 40 trips) = 23,680 mi @ \$0.32/mi
**6,441 1,137**

C. Dr. Ron Barry's travel -- 12,000 mi @ \$0.32/mi **3,840**

**II. Total \$12,700 \$6,050**

**III. Lodging\*\***

Supplied by NPS. If not, lodging expenses are needed for 90 nights

for GEWA/THST and 240 nights for COLO.

**IV. Equipment, supplies, services, etc.**

A. Sherman live traps -- 300 @ \$14.00 (-5%) + \$100 shipping
**\$4,300**

B. Tomahawk single-door, collapsible (squirrel size) -- 30 @ \$30.00
**900**

C. Tomahawk single-door, collapsible (raccoon/feral cat size) -- 6 @
\$70.00 **420**

D. Tomahawk single-door, collapsible (bobcat size) -- 2 @ \$170.00
**340**

E. TrailMaster TM 1500 Active IR trail monitor -- 2 @ \$260 **520**

F. TrailMaster TM 35-1 Camera Kit -- 2 @ \$290 **580**

G. TrailMaster TM Data Collector -- 2 @ \$250 **500**

H. SONY MVC-CD 1000 CD Mavica digital camera **1,000**

I. Dell Inspiron 2100 notebook computer with 20 GB hard drive, 256 MB
RA,

and extra battery **2,150**

J. 3 Nokia 5185i cell phones @ \$100 **300**

K. Pesola scales (3 ea. 30-g and 100-g, 2 ea. 10-g and 600-g) **340**

L 5 silt fences (for pitfall arrays); 2' X 100' @ \$18.00 **100**

M. Miscellaneous supplies (flagging, bait, stakes, sampling bags, trap
bedding,

specimen preparation supplies, map acquisition, ear tags, dye, computer

supplies, field gear, EpiPen epinephrine kits, photocopying, etc.),
shipping

expenses for traps and other equipment and supplies, etc. **1,000**

N. Equipment, supplies, and additional support (traps, densiometers,

compasses, measuring tapes, ear tags, Pesola scales, binoculars,
night-vision

binoculars, aerial photo stereoscope, specimen storage and maintenance,

graduate faculty support, secretarial and technician support,
photocopying

and duplicating services, mail, etc.) **\$4,000**

O. Computer services (data compilation and statistical analysis, report

preparation, e-mail, etc.) **4,000**

P. Attendance, paper presentation at professional meetings @ \$1,000/yr.
for

2 yrs. **2,000**

**IV. Total \$14,450 \$8,000**

**Project Subtotal \$69,550**

**Indirect costs (15%) \$10,433**

**PROJECT TOTAL \$79,983 \$72,450**

**\* Based on 15% of mileage provided by FSU (plus Ron Barry's travel)**

**\*\* If park lodging is not available, additional support is sought
for local lodging for**

**investigators**

**Budget Justification**

[Item \#]{.underline} [Justification]{.underline}

I. A Support for the project director (cooperator) for either course
release and/or summer salary for 2 years for project coordination, field
work, data analysis, report preparation, etc.

I. B, C, D Three graduate students are needed to conduct the proposed
work within the proposed period. Support in the amount of a stipend for
1 academic year, summer, and January is requested for each of 3
students. FSU will provide a 2nd year (including summer) of stipend for
each student.

I. D Graduate tuition and fees @ \$200/credit X 36 credits/ student X 3
students

I. E For 3 graduate students and project director (booster only)

I. F Basic coverage (maximum \$3,000 benefit/yr.) for graduate students

II\. A, B Reimbursement for use of vehicles by investigators to travel
to, from, and within study sites. FSU provides 15% of mileage.

II\. C FSU provides mileage for project director.

III\. If NPS lodging is not available, NPS support for such will be
sought.

IV\. A, B Traps needed for simultaneous trapping of small mammals at 3
national parks

IV\. C, D Traps needed for simultaneous trapping of medium-sized mammals
at 3 national park

IV\. E, F, G Remote detection units and cameras needed for documentation
of larger, secretive and elusive mammals

IV\. H Camera needed for voucher specimens, confirmation of
identifications of amphibians and reptiles in pitfall traps, etc.

IV\. I Computer needed for compilation, manipulation, storage,
integration, and analysis of species data, GPS data, metadata, and field
data

IV\. J Needed for safety and convenience of 3 graduate students who will
be in the field simultaneously

IV\. K Additional scales needed for simultaneous trapping at 3 national
parks

IV\. L Fencing needed to establish pitfall trap arrays (for capturing
shrews and other small mammals \< 10 g) at 3 national parks

IV\. M Self-explanatory

IV\. N Support from FSU's Department of Biology

IV\. O Support from FSU's Computing Services, Academic Computing, and
departments of Biology and Mathematics

IV\. P Travel, registration, lodging, and meals for 3 graduate students
and project director for 2 yrs.