# Presentation: 153390

## Managing for Other Late-successional Species in Dry Forest Environments, the Fisher

**Laura Finley, US Fish and Wildlife Service**
**Yreka Fish and Wildlife Office**

- R. Truex

- M Higley

## Objectives

- Compare and contrast resource use by northern spotted owls and fisher in dry forest ecosystems.
- Provide data to support landscape project planning and site specific implementation for retention of fisher habitat components.
- Introduce project design criteria to minimize treatment effects on fisher and their habitat.
- Accuracy in conveying research results.

## Landscape Level

**of Home Ranges**

**Abiotic Features**
** ****of Home Ranges**

**Resting Habitat**
** ****Suitability**

- Home Range

**Foraging **

**Rest**

- Rest/Den Site Stand Features

- Den Structures

- Prey Diversity/Density

- Rest Structures

- Abiotic Features

- Patch Size?

**Rest**

**Rest**

**Den**

**Rest**

## Landscape Assessment

- Abiotic Features: elevation, water ?
- Territoriality: polygnous mating system, competitors, juvenile dispersal (?)
- Habitat Features: distribution of forest community types, past disturbance relative to key habitat structures

## Abiotic factors may influence the distribution of NSO territories

- Fisher home ranges are correlated with elevation.
- 			Low to mid-elevation forests 				without frequent deep snow fall.
- Abiotic features such as distance to stream, steep slopes or lower slope position may be important for rest site locations.
- 			Yaeger 2005, Zielinski et. al. 2004, 		Mazzoni 2002, Seglund 1995.

## Fisher Home Range Size & Distribution, Hoopa Valley 

- Female 175 ha SD 50 (n = 7)
- Male 745 ha SD 183 (n = 2)

- Higley 2005

## Home Range Area

|  |  |  | Home Range Area  (acres) |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Study Area | N | Sex | MMCP | 95%Adaptive Kernel | Source |
| Sierra | 8 | F | 1302 (160) |  | Zielinski
et al 2004 |
|  | 4 | M | 7405 (1932) |  |  |
| Trinities, CA | 2 | F |  | 13310 (8398) | Dark 1997 |
|  | 4 | M |  | 13313  (12350)
 |  |
| Oregon | 3 | F | 6520  (864) |  | Aubry 1998 |
|  | 1 | M | 9880 |  |  |

## Home Range Habitat Characteristics in the Sierra Nevadaa

|  | Canopy Closure | Size Class
Avg. dbh (inches) | % Hardwood & Hardwood, Conifer |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Males | 40-59%,  27%(11)
60-100%, 56%(16) | 11-24, 60%(20)
24+, 13% (4) | 10.7% (7) |
| Females | 40-59%,  20%(7)
60-100%, 72%(9) | 11-24, 61%(21)
24+, 13% (13)
 | 20% (19%) |
| Total | 40-59%,  22%(9)
60-100%, 66%(14) | 11-24, 61%(20)
24+, 13% (11)
 | 16% (16) |

- Zielinski et. al. 2004.  Habitat Variables from CWHR

## Resting Habitat Characteristics

| Location | Canopy Cover | Mean dbh (in) 4 largest trees  | # Hardwood Species |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Hoopa  Valley
(n=129)a | >50%; 91% >75%; 79% | 18.7  (0.7) | 3.1 + 0.1 |
| Shasta Trinity, east
(n=66) a | >50%; 75% >75%; 44% | 17.4  (0.9) | 1.2 + 0.1  |
| Sierra
(n ~ 336) b | 92% + 6.4% | Avg. conifer > 22.5 (4.7) | BA 13.3 (7.5) |

- a: Yaeger, 2005.  0.04ha plots	b: Zielinski et.al., 2004.  variable radius plots

## Rest Structures

| Location | Conifer
dbh, inches | Hardwood | Snags |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Hoopa
(n=218) a | 43 (2), 65%
C=1%, P=59% | 30 (1), 35%
C=99%, P=41% | 10% |
| Shasta-Trinity
(n=296) a | 40 (1), 84%
C=30%, P=99% | 28 (2), 16%
C=70%, P=1% | 11% |
| Sierra
(n=78) b | 37 (12), 86% | dbh not reported
14% | 46 (18) |

- a: Yaeger, 2005	b: Mazzoni, 2002

## Den Structures

| Location | Conifer | Hardwood
 | dbh (in) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Hoopa
(n=12) a | Snag, N=1
 | Snag, N=1
Live, N=10 | Mean: 26 (2)
Range 18-33 |
| Shasta-Trinity
(n=6) a | Snag, N=1
 | Live, N=5 | Mean: 29 (4)
Range 16-49 |

- a: Yaeger, 2005

## Project Design Criteria to Minimize Treatment Effects on Fisher and Their Habitat

- Maintain habitat elements such as large hardwoods and snags that take decades to create and are more susceptible to fire.
- If burning before mid-May, avoid habitats with high densities of den structures.
- Disperse treatments over time and space within the size of a home range area.
- Leave patches of resting habitat (higher canopy closure) dispersed across the landscape.
- Evaluate specific forest management alternatives and monitor change using FIA data to asses resting habitat

- Truex & Zielinski 2005. 	Zielinski et. al. 2006.

## Hoopa Valley Fisher Den Trees

- 8 of 22 den trees had fire scars at the base

- 7 of 33 den cavities the result of fire scars