United States

Department of 

Agriculture

Forest Service

Northeastern 

Research Station

Research Paper NE-727

Response of Eastern Chipmunks 

to Single Application Spring 

Prescribed Fires on 

the Fernow Experimental Forest

Ella L. Rowan

W. Mark Ford

Steven B. Castleberry

Jane L. Rodrigue

Thomas M. Schuler
Published by: For additional copies:

USDA FOREST SERVICE USDA Forest Service 

11 CAMPUS BLVD SUITE 200 Publications Distribution

NEWTOWN SQUARE PA 19073-3294 359 Main Road

Delaware, OH 43015-8640

August 2005 Fax: (740)368-0152

Visit our homepage at: http://www.fs.fed.us/ne

Authors

ELLA L. ROWAN is a graduate research assistant, D.B. Warnell School of Forest Resources, 

University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602.

W. MARK FORD is a research wildlife biologist, USDA Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station, Parsons, WV 26287.

STEVEN B. CASTLEBERRY is an associate professor, D.B. Warnell School of Forest 

Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602.

JANE L. RODRIGUE is an ecologist, USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service 

Northeastern Research Station, Parsons, WV 26287.

THOMAS M. SCHULER is a research silviculturist, USDA Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station, Parsons, WV 26287.

Abstract

We used radiotelemetry to examine the effects of spring prescribed fire for preharvest oak 

(Quercus spp.) shelterwood management on eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus) home-range 

attributes and burrow use on the Fernow Experimental Forest in the central Appalachian 

Mountains of West Virginia. Results for 21 chipmunks showed that prescribed fire had little 

discernable effect on home-range or core-area size, extent of conspecific overlap, or burrow 

use. Fire tolerance of this common forest rodent provides additional evidence supporting 

the use of prescribed burning to achieve vegetation management objectives in the central 

Appalachians where appropriate. 

Manuscript received for publication 25 April 2005

Cover Photo: Eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus) that has been ear-tagged.
1

Introduction

Composition in many central Appalachian forest 

stands has been shifting from oak-dominated species 

to mast-poor, shade-tolerant species. This shift has 

occurred through natural processes and anthropogenic 

influences such as fire suppression and timber harvesting 

without regard for regeneration. The resulting stands 

dominated by red maple (Acer rubrum), sugar maple 

(A. saccharum) and American beech (Fagus grandifolia) 

often are less beneficial to many wildlife species (Schuler 

and Gillespie 2000, Schuler 2004). Future reductions 

in acorn production from a declining oak component 

and/or the failure to successfully recruit oak into future 

forests will have serious implications for both game and 

nongame species in the region (Wentworth et al. 1992, 

Wolff 1996, McShea 2000, Castleberry et al. 2001). 

Regionally, forest managers are experimenting with 

preharvest and postharvest prescribed fires to: 1) reduce 

or inhibit advance regeneration of shade-tolerant, late 

successional species prior to harvest; 2) select against 

mast-poor, shade-intolerant species such as yellowpoplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) that show rapid growth 

characteristics following harvest; and 3) promote oak 

seedling recruitment preharvest and competitive oak 

stem retention postharvest (Barnes and Van Lear 1998, 

Brose and Van Lear 1998, Brose et al. 1999). Although 

the maintenance or enhancement of the oak component 

usually is beneficial to forest wildlife, the reintroduction 

of fire in moderate to mesic communities after decades 

of suppression has unknown effects on many ecosystem 

attributes, including wildlife (Brose et al. 2001).

Eastern chipmunks (Tamias striatus; hereafter 

“chipmunk”) could represent a potential model species 

for assessing prescribed fire effects on common grounddwelling fauna in eastern deciduous forest types. 

Chipmunk diets include understory vegetation, soft 

fruits, fungi and inverterbrates in the spring and summer 

and they rely heavily on acorns and other hard mast in 

the fall and winter (Aldous 1941, Martin et al. 1961, 

Elliott 1978, Wrazen and Svendsen 1978, Mahan and 

Yahner 1996, Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). As larder 

hoarders, chipmunks serve valuable functions in forest 

ecosystems as dispersers of acorns and other plant seeds 

(Steele et al. 2001). Moreover, they are an important prey 

for numerous other vertebrate (Whitaker and Hamilton 

1998).

Although numerous live-trapping studies have estimated 

home-range size for chipmunks in undisturbed habitats 

(Blair 1942, Smith 1942, Manville 1949, Yerger 1953 

and 1955, Forbes 1966, Dunford 1970, Forsyth and 

Smith 1973, Ickes 1974, Mares et al. 1976, Elliott 1978, 

Lacher and Mares 1996), reliable radiotelemetry data on 

home-range structure and variability are lacking for 

chipmunks in eastern deciduous forests treated with 

prescribed fire. Moreover, Hackett and Trevor-Deutsch 

(1982) and Bergstrom (1988) found live-trapping greatly 

underestimated chipmunk and various other Tamias spp. 

home-range size when compared to radiotelemetry 

estimates. Generally, there is considerable amount of 

overlap among individual chipmunk home ranges at the 

local scale (Blair 1942, Yerger 1953, Forsyth and Smith 

1973, Ickes 1974, Elliott 1978, Getty 1980, Getty 

1981a), although to date no research actually has 

quantified overlap extent or whether this is in response to 

resource availability.

Nonetheless, chipmunk home ranges are not static, with 

home-range size fluctuating with resource availability 

(Allen 1938, Mares et al. 1976 and 1982, Mares and 

Lacher 1987, Getty 1981b, Bowers et al. 1990) and 

reproductive condition (Bowers and Carr 1992). As 

larder hoarders, hard-mast caches are vital to their 

survival during low-forage availability periods, such 

as early spring prior to green-up and substantial soft 

fruit production. Cache defense and predation risk 

may limit distances animals will venture from their 

burrows, thereby confounding the resource availability 

hypothesis to some degree (Elliott 1978, Anderson 

1978, Taylor 1988). Chipmunk use of plants and fungi 

during the spring and early summer might be impacted 
2

severely in the initial growing seasons after a prescribed 

fire. Additional reduction in vegetative cover also 

could increase their exposure to avian and mammalian 

predators. In the near term, spring fires often decrease 

initial growing season forage resources to force increased 

home-range size for rodent species with some ecological 

similarity to chipmunks (Harestad and Bunnell 1979, 

Mares et al. 1982, Ostfield 1986, Ims 1987, Jones 1990, 

Castleberry et al. 2001). Accordingly, the objectives of our 

study were to examine the impact of spring prescribed fire 

on: 1) chipmunk home-range and core-area size; 2) extent 

of home-range and core-area overlap among conspecifics; 

and 3) temporal attributes of burrow use.

Materials and Methods

Study Area

Our study was conducted on the 1900 ha Fernow 

Experimental Forest in Tucker County, West Virginia 

(39.03° N, 79.67° W). Located within the Allegheny 

Mountains portion of the Central Appalachian Broadleaf 

Forest (McNab and Avers 1994), elevations range from 

530 to 1115 m, the growing season is approximately 

145 days, and annual precipitation averages 143 cm. 

The forest stands used were mid-elevation (730 to 

800 m) oak-dominated Allegheny hardwood sites 

containing an overstory mix of northern red oak (Q. 

rubra), chestnut oak (Q. prinus), white oak (Q. alba), 

yellow poplar, American beech, sugar maple and eastern 

hemlock (Tsuga canadensis). The midstory shrub layer 

consisted of sugar maple, American beech, striped 

maple (Acer pensylvanicum), and rosebay rhododendron 

(Rhododendron maximum). The groundcover was 

dominated by a mixture of Christmas fern (Polystichum 

acrostichoides), hay-scented fern (Dennstaedtia 

punctilobula), wood fern (Dryopteris spp.) and groundpine 

(Lycopodium spp.) along with patches of greenbrier 

(Smilax spp.), blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), violet (Viola

spp.), wood nettle (Laportea canadensis) and wild yam 

(Dioscorea quaternata).

We chose one control (unburned) and one burn stand 

as study sites in 2002 and 2003 (four stands total). Our 

criteria for stand selection (i.e., to match burn treatment 

with control stands) included the presence of chipmunk 

and similarity in overstory composition, size classes, stand 

age, and topography. All stands were established from 

natural regeneration and ranged from 70 to 95 years 

old (Schuler and Gillespie 2000). Our 2003 burn stand 

had been thinned approximately 20 years prior to the 

study to a 60 to 75 percent stocking level (Schuler and 

Miller 1995). Each burn stand had undergone a lowintensity, single-day prescribed fire in April preceding our 

research for that year. The 2002 and 2003 burn stands 

encompassed 12 ha and 19 ha, respectively. The 2002 

control stand encompassed approximately 5 ha and was 

located approximately 400 m from the 2002 burn stand 

on a portion of the Fernow not assigned to any past or 

current research effort. The 2003 control consisted of the 

7 ha upper portion of a watershed1 (known as Watershed 

4) that serves as an unmanaged control for the forest’s 

watershed research program. 

Capture and Radiotelemetry

In late spring through mid-summer of 2002 and 2003, 

we maintained 0.35 ha trapping grids in each control and 

treatment stand. Our trapping grids consisted of six by 

eight arrays of #102 Tomahawk traps (Tomahawk Live 

Trap, Tomahawk, WI)2 spaced 10 m apart (48 traps/

stand) and baited with peanut butter and rolled oats. 

We trapped chipmunks on an ad hoc basis to maintain 

three to five radio-collared individuals per study stand 

that could be adequately monitored simultaneously. 

For all captured chipmunks, we determined their sex, 

weight, and reproductive condition. Female reproductive 

condition was assessed by palpating the abdomen 

and/or examining the mammary glands for signs of 

lactation. Male reproductive condition was determined 

by scrotal size and position. We classified all chipmunks 

as juvenile, subadult, or adult based on weight, external 

measurements, and sexual characteristics (Forbes 1966, 

Tryon and Snyder 1973).

We marked all chipmunks with uniquely numbered 

Monel #1 ear tags (National Band and Tag Co., Newport, 

KY), and attached radio collars to all adults or subadults 

1

For watershed description, see www.fs.fed.us/ne/parsons/

feft00.htm

2

The use of trade, firm, or corporate names in this report is for 

the information of the reader. Such use does not constitute an 

official endorsement or approval by the USDA Forest Service 

of any product or service to the exclusion of others than may 

be suitable.
3

(≥ 70 g). Each chipmunk was lightly anesthetized with 

halothane (Halocarbon Laboratories, River Edge, NJ) 

and fitted with PD-2, whip antenna radio transmitters 

(Holohil Systems, Ontario, Canada) attached like a 

necklace with either light wire and rubber tubing or with 

a plastic zip-tie. The combined mass of the transmitter 

and collar attachment (3.5 to 4.2 g) was ≤ 5 percent of 

body weight. We allowed each individual chipmunk 

caught approximately 48 hours to adjust to their collars 

and all traps and bait were removed from the stand before 

telemetry efforts commenced.

We determined chipmunk locations by simultaneous 

triangulation using TRX 2000-S radio receivers and 

handheld three-element Yagi antennas (Wildlife 

Materials, Carbondale, IL). Recording stations were 

established to maintain triangulation angles as near 90 

degrees as possible. Our telemetry efforts were conducted 

from June through August of 2002 and 2003, for 1 

to 3 hours/day between 1000 and 1800 hours when 

chipmunks were most active. To ensure independence 

among individuals’ locations, readings were taken on 

each tracked individual no more than every 10 minutes 

during each telemetry session. We determined telemetry 

error by estimating locations on test transmitters located 

on the study area (White and Garrott 1990). Our mean 

telemetry error was 22 degrees (SD = 18.6; n = 16) at a 

mean distance of 84 m from the test transmitters.

Home Range Analysis

We obtained Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) 

coordinates for all telemetry observer stations with 

a mobile global position system unit (GPS; Trimble 

Navigation Ltd., Sunnyvale, CA) and PathFinder 

software (PathFinder Software, Glendale, AZ). All GPS 

locations were differentially corrected. We used program 

LOCATE (J.G. Kie, Fresno, CA) to determine chipmunk 

locations by converting compass bearings from known 

observer station UTM coordinates into location UTM 

coordinates. We entered these locations into ArcView 

3.2 (ESRI, Redlands, CA) and applied the Animal 

Movement Extension (Hooge and Eichenlaub 2000) 

to calculate chipmunk home ranges and core areas. We 

defined home range as the estimated area of about 95 

percent of a chipmunk’s recorded locations. Similarly, we 

defined the core area as the smallest area surrounding a 

chipmunk’s burrow area that contained 50 percent of a 

chipmunk’s recorded locations and therefore accounted 

for the highest proportional use of all of the individual’s 

recorded locations.

To improve accuracy, we only accepted chipmunk’s 

locations that created intersection angles between 

observers of 35 to 145 degrees. Each individual’s 

acceptable locations then were subject to a 5 percent 

outlier removal using the harmonic mean method 

(Dixon and Chapman 1980). We only retained data 

on chipmunks possessing a minimum of 28 acceptable 

locations for subsequent home-range analysis (Seaman 

et al. 1999). We then used the fixed kernel method with 

least squares cross validation as a smoothing parameter 

to construct our 95 percent (home range) and 50 percent 

(core area) contour utilization distributions (UD) 

(Silverman 1986, Worton 1989). We used Neil’s Ute 

Extension (Free Software Foundation, Inc., Boston, MA) 

in ArcView 3.2 to determine the Overlap Coefficient 

(area overlapping between pairs of individuals as a 

percentage of the total union of the areas) between home 

ranges (95 percent UD), and core areas (50 percent UD) 

for each possible pair of chipmunks collared within the 

same trapping grid.

Burrow Use

We tracked radio-collared chipmunks to their burrow 

chambers after sunset between May and August of 2002 

and 2003. Because we were constrained to locate burrow 

chambers also on an ad hoc basis, we only retained data 

from chipmunks with ≥ 30 days of burrow chamber use. 

We georeferenced and permanently marked all burrow 

chambers. 

Results

Home-Range and Core-Area Size

We tracked 19 chipmunks in 2002 (11 males and 8 

female) and 16 in 2003 (6 males, 10 females). Nontarget 

captures were limited to a single southern red-backed vole 

(Clethrionomys gapperi), grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) 

and ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus). The final number of 

control chipmunks retained for complete home-range 

analyses was three males in 2002, and two males and 

three females in 2003. In the burned stands, the final 

number chipmunks was four males and four females in 
4

2002, and two males and two females in 2003. Overall 

fate of the 35 chipmunks radio-collared was as follows: 

three individuals were confirmed trap-related mortalities; 

two individuals’ fates were unknown, but their radio 

collars were found intact; one individual was killed by 

a predator; 13 individuals were never recaptured after 

radio-collar transmitter failure; and 16 individuals were 

recaptured prior to transmitter failure. For both years 

combined, mean home-range size for males in the burn 

was 0.39 ha (SE = 0.16; Table 1) and 0.55 ha (SE = 

0.13) in the control. Mean female home-range size in the 

burn was 0.58 ha (SE = 0.14) and 0.76 ha (SE = 0.10) 

in the control. Mean core-area size for males in the burn 

was 0.04 ha (SE = 0.01) and 0.08 ha (SE = 0.03) in the 

control. Mean female core-area size in the burn was 0.09 

ha (SE = 0.02) and 0.16 ha (SE = 0.06) in the control. 

The small number of tracked chipmunk and lack of 

treatment replication prevented the use of interferential 

statistics.

Extent of Home-Range and Core-Area Overlap

For both years combined, mean male-male home-range 

overlap coefficient was 0.60 (SE = 0.06; Table 2) in the 

burn and 0.50 (SE = 0.06) in the control. Mean femalefemale home-range overlap coefficient was 0.46 (SE = 

0.04) in the burn and 0.54 (SE = 0.05) in the control. 

Mean male-male core-area overlap coefficient was 0.40 

(SE = 0.14) in the burn and 0.30 (SE = 0.09) in the 

Table 1.—Mean (SE) home-range size and mean (SE) core-area size 

between burn and control treatments for eastern chipmunks on the 

Fernow Experimental Forest, WV, 2002 and 2003.

Treatment n Home Range Core Area 

-----------------ha-----------------

Burn

 Male 6 0.39 (0.16) 0.04 (0.01)

 Female 7 0.58 (0.14) 0.09 (0.02)

Control

 Male 5 0.55 (0.13) 0.08 (0.03)

 Female 3 0.76 (0.10) 0.16 (0.06) 

Table 2.—Mean (SE) overlap coefficients for control and burn treatments for 

chipmunk home ranges (95 percent utilization distribution) and core areas (50 

percent utilization distribution), including male-male overlap, female-female 

overlap, and combined-sex (male-male, male-female, female-female) overlap on 

the Fernow Experimental Forest, WV, 2002 and 2003.

Treatment n Home Range Core Area

Burn

 Male-male 4 0.60 (0.06) 0.40 (0.14)

 Female-female 5 0.46 (0.04) 0.35 (0.08)

 Combined-sex 23 0.53 (0.02) 0.37 (0.05)

Control

 Male-male 4 0.50 (0.06) 0.30 (0.09)

 Female-female 3 0.54 (0.05) 0.15 (0.05)

 Combined-sex 13 0.51 (0.03) 0.21 (0.03)
5

control. Mean female-female core-area overlap coefficient 

was 0.35 (SE = 0.08) in the burn and 0.15 (SE = 0.05) 

in the control. The combined sexes mean home-range 

overlap coefficient was 0.52 (SE = 0.02) in the burn and 

0.51 (SE = 0.03) in the control. The combined sexes 

mean core-area overlap coefficient was 0.37 (SE = 0.05) 

in the burn and 0.21 (SE = 0.03) in the control.

Burrow Use

The final number of control chipmunks used for burrow 

analysis was four males and two females in 2002, and 

two males and five females in 2003. The final number of 

chipmunks used for burrow analysis in the burned stands 

was three males and two females in 2002, and three 

males and four females in 2003. Control males averaged 

1.33 (SE = 0.21) burrows/30 days (Table 3) and control 

females averaged 1.14 burrows/30 days (SE = 0.14). Burn 

males averaged 1.33 (SE = 0.21) burrows/30 days and 

burn females averaged 1.33 burrows/30 days (SE = 0.21). 

Discussion

Eastern chipmunks on the Fernow Experimental Forest 

continued to use forest stands treated with a spring 

prescribed fire. Marked individuals rarely were observed 

moving into adjacent unburned forest stands, and for 

those living on the periphery of a burn, no telemetry 

locations outside of the burned stand were recorded. 

Our home-range estimates derived from telemetry fell 

within the wide range of values for chipmunks from 

live-trapping studies within the eastern deciduous forests 

of North America (Blair 1942, Smith 1942, Manville 

1949, Yerger 1953 and 1955, Forbes 1966, Dunford 

1970, Forsyth and Smith 1973, Ickes 1974, Mares 

et al. 1976, Elliott 1978, Lacher and Mares 1996). 

Although unusual for most mammals (Harestad and 

Bunnell 1979, Swingland and Greenwood 1983), the 

lack of home-range contrast between male and female 

chipmunks also is consistent with previous research 

(Blair 1942, Bowers et al. 1990, Lacher and Mares 

1996). Although chipmunks adjust home-range size 

according to resource availability (Mares et al. 1976, 

Getty 1981b, Mares et al. 1982, Mares and Lacher 

1987, Bowers et al. 1990), the functional similarity 

of home-range and core-area sizes between burn and 

control areas that we observed indicates little substantial 

resource availability differential. 

Although these fires killed much of the understory 

woody vegetation (< 2 m), especially red maple, striped 

maple and rosebay rhododendron (Rhododendron 

maximum) and the early emergent forbs and grasses that 

were already present, there was copious woody seedling 

and herbaceous plant growth by late spring and early 

summer following both fires. Aboveground fruiting 

bodies of fungi were observed routinely in the stands 

some weeks after the fires and throughout thereafter (but 

not quantified). It did appear that soft-mast production 

also was depressed within the burned stands during the 

first post-fire growing season in both burned stands 

(Rowan 2004). In the burn stands, individuals may have 

relied on remaining hard-mast caches or belowground 

resources (i.e., hypogeal fungi) until aboveground 

resources reappeared. The open ground in the burn 

treatments may have facilitated chipmunk foraging 

for seeds and arthropods (Ahlgren 1966, Sullivan and 

Boateng 1996, Ford et al. 1999). As an additional 

benefit, the nutritional content of forages and soft fruits 

in the burned areas may have exceeded that of prefire 

or unburned area values later in the growing season or 

subsequent growing seasons (Johnson et al. 1992).

Eastern chipmunks are known to have broadly 

overlapping home ranges (Blair 1942, Yerger 1953, 

Forsyth and Smith 1973, Ickes 1974, Elliott 1978, 

Getty 1980 and 1981a) and our results demonstrate 

that spring prescribed fires did not alter overlap 

among individuals. Studies of other rodents (genera 

Clethrionomys and Microtus) have shown that 

Table 3.—Mean (SE) number of burrows used per 

30 days by chipmunks on the Fernow Experimental 

Forest, WV, 2002 and 2003.

Treatment n Burrows

Burn

 Male 6 1.33 (0.21)

 Female 6 1.33 (0.21)

Control

 Male 6 1.33 (0.21)

 Female 7 1.14 (0.14)
6

conspecifics maintain less overlap in times of low 

resource availability (Jones 1990) whereas high degrees 

of tolerance and overlap occurred when resource 

availability was high (Ostfield 1986, Ims 1987). Our 

chipmunk data suggests no increased territoriality and 

no additional competition for resources in the burn 

areas.

We found that both sexes used one to two burrow 

systems/30 days. Of the seven chipmunks that used two 

burrows, four individuals made permanent changes to 

the newer burrow. Three chipmunks switched to a new 

burrow for a few days (< 7 days) prior to returning to 

their previous burrow. Chipmunks quickly will overtake 

a “better” burrow if the original occupant dies or 

emigrates (Elliott 1978, Yahner 1978). We witnessed this 

phenomenon with two of our radio-collared animals. 

For example, a female that died following recapture to 

remove her radio collar had her burrow overtaken by 

a neighboring radio-collared male the following day. 

Animals that switched burrows temporarily may have 

moved to new burrows to escape ectoparasites (Yahner 

1978). Some burrow chambers we found were within 

the mound portion of pit and mound topographic 

features near wind-thrown trees. However, most 

chambers we documented were not associated with any 

discernable microhabitat feature (Peterson et al. 1990).

Over the short term, spring prescribed fire in oakdominated Allegheny hardwood stands on the Fernow 

Experimental Forest appeared to have no discernable 

impact on chipmunks. Although our inferences are 

limited by small sample sizes and the small geographic 

scope of our work, we believe the conclusions of this 

case study could be extended to other small mammal 

species with similar forage requirements and population 

dynamics in the central and southern Appalachian region 

following spring burning. Other small mammal species, 

such as the southern red-backed vole, that do not larder 

hoard and that must rely mainly on seeds (assuming 

burned ground does not enhance seed apparency) or 

emergent vegetation, might be temporarily negatively 

affected by spring prescribed fire (Beck and Vogel 1972, 

Merritt 1981), although this was not observed in similar 

southern Appalachian forest habitats with more intense 

spring burns (Ford et al. 1999).

If intense enough, prescribed burning conceivably could 

reduce the amount of downed coarse woody debris 

on the forest floor to the detriment of small mammals 

(Loeb 1996, Van Lear 1996, Ford et al. 1999, McCay 

and Komoroski 2004). However, we believe this did 

not occur because we noted few instances of larger 

coarse woody debris being consumed whereas numerous 

large pieces from collapsed snags or tree mortality were 

added. Similarly, Sanders and Van Lear (1988) noted 

that even intense fires consumed ≤ 40 percent of the 

volume of downed coarse woody debris in southern 

Appalachian mixed pine-hardwood clearcuts. We concur 

with the findings of Vreeland and Tietje (2002) that if 

volume of coarse woody debris already exceeded usable 

thresholds for small mammals, then light prescribed 

burns in the cool season will have little impact on most 

small mammals. Fire effects on parameters that we did 

not measure, such as reproductive success, remains 

unknown. Given the small extent of the burns and the 

lack of home range response, coupled with chipmunks’ 

high reproductive capacity and high level of vagility, the 

demographic influences of these burns probably were 

minimal for the species. Future research being planned for 

the Fernow Experimental Forest3 will provide a template 

to address the response of chipmunks, as well as other 

small mammal species, to repeated spring burning and/or 

fall burning when acorn crops are on the ground. 

Acknowledgments

The funding for this study was provided by the USDA 

Forest Service Northeastern Research Station to the 

University of Georgia D.B. Warnell School of Forest 

Resources through Cooperative Agreement #01-CA11242343. R. Rosier and R. Hovatter provided invaluable 

field assistance throughout the duration of this study.

3

Adams, M.B., Edwards, P.J., Ford, W.M., Kochenderfer, J.A., 

Menzel, J.M., Rodrigue, J.L., Schuler, T.M., Wood. F. 2005. 

Fernow Experimental Forest: environmental impact statement. 

Final Report on file at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, 

Pennsylvania. 
7

Literature Cited

Ahlgren, C.E. 1966. Small mammals and reforestation 

following prescribed burning. Journal of Forestry. 

64: 614-618.

Aldous, S. 1941. Food habits of chipmunks. Journal of 

Mammalogy. 22(1): 18-24.

Allen, E. 1938. The habits and life history of the 

eastern chipmunk, Tamias striatus lysteri. Bulletin 

of the New York State Museum. 314: 1-122.

Anderson, M. 1978. Optimal foraging area: size and 

allocation of search effort. Theoretical Population 

Biology. 13: 397-409.

Barnes, T.A.; Van Lear, D.H. 1998. Prescribed fire 

effects on hardwood advanced regeneration in 

mixed hardwood stands. Southern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 22: 138-142.

Beck, A.M.; Vogl, J. 1972. The effects of spring 

burning on rodent populations in a brush prairie 

savanna. Journal of Mammalogy. 53: 336-346.

Bergstrom, B.J. 1988. Home ranges of three species of 

chipmunks (Tamias) as assessed by radiotelemetry 

and grid trapping. Journal of Mammalogy. 69: 190-

193.

Blair, W.F. 1942. Size of home range and notes on 

the life history of the woodland deer-mouse and 

eastern chipmunk in northern Michigan. Journal of 

Mammalogy. 23: 27-36.

Bowers, M.A.; Welch, D.N.; Carr, T.G. 1990. Home 

range size adjustments by the eastern chipmunk, 

Tamias striatus, in response to natural and 

manipulated water availability. Canadian Journal of 

Zoology. 68: 2016-2020.

Bowers, M.A.; Carr, T.G. 1992. Home range shifts 

accompanying breeding in the eastern chipmunk, 

Tamias striatus (Rodentia: Sciuridae). Zeitschrift für 

Säugetierkunde. 57: 288-293.

Brose, P.H.; Schuler, T.M.; Van Lear, D.H.; Berst, J. 

2001. Bringing fire back: the changing regimes 

of the Appalachian mixed-oak forests. Journal of 

Forestry. 99: 30-35.

Brose, P.H.; Van Lear, D.H. 1998. Responses of 

hardwood advance regeneration to seasonal 

prescribed fires in oak-dominated shelterwood 

stands. Canadian Journal Forest Research. 28: 331-

339.

Brose, P.H.; Van Lear, D.H.; Cooper, R. 1999. Using 

shelterwood harvests and prescribed fire to 

regenerate oak stands on productive upland sites.

Forest Ecology and Management. 113: 125-141.

Castleberry, S.B.; Ford, W.M.; Wood, P.B.; Castleberry, 

N.L.; Mengak, M.T. 2001. Movements of Allegheny 

woodrats in relation to timber harvesting. Journal 

of Wildlife Management. 65: 148-156.

Dixon, K.R.; Chapman, J.A. 1980. Harmonic mean 

measure of animal activity areas. Ecology. 61: 1040-

1044.

Dunford, C. 1970. Behavioral aspects of spatial 

organization in the chipmunk, Tamias striatus.

Behaviour. 36: 215-231.

Elliott, L. 1978. Social behavior and foraging ecology 

of the eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus) in the 

Adirondack Mountains. Smithsonian Contributions 

to Zoology. 265: 1-107.

Forbes, R.B. 1966. Studies of the biology of 

Minnesotan chipmunks. American Midland 

Naturalist. 76: 290-308.

Ford, W.M.; Menzel, M.A.; McGill, D.W.; Laerm, 

J.; McCay, T.S. 1999. Effects of a community 

restoration fire on small mammals and 

herpetofauna in the southern Appalachians. Forest 

Ecology and Managment. 114: 233-243.
8

Forsyth, D.J.; Smith, D.A. 1973. Temporal variability 

in home ranges of eastern chipmunks (Tamias 

striatus) in a southeastern Ontario woodlot.

American Midland Naturalist. 90: 107-117.

Getty, T. 1980. The utilization of space by neighboring 

eastern chipmunks with overlapping home ranges.

Ecological Society of America Bulletin. 61: 134-135.

Getty, T. 1981a. Territorial behavior of eastern 

chipmunks (Tamias striatus): encounter avoidance 

and spatial time-sharing. Ecology. 62: 915-921.

Getty, T. 1981b. Structure and dynamics of chipmunk 

home range. Journal of Mammalogy. 62: 726-737.

Hackett, D.F., Trevor-Deutsch, B. 1982. An evaluation 

of several grid-trapping methods by comparison 

with radio-telemetry in a home range study of the 

eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus). Biotelemetry 

Patient Monitoring. 9: 213-226.

Harestad, A.S.; Bunnell, F.L. 1979. Home range and 

body weight - a re-evaluation. Ecology. 60: 389-402.

Hooge, P.N.; Eichenlaub, B. 2000. Animal movement 

extension to ArcView. Version 2.2. Anchorage, AK: 

U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Biological Science 

Center.

Ickes, R.A. 1974. Agonistic behavior and the use of 

space in the eastern chipmunk, Tamias striatus.

Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh. 235 p. Ph.D. 

dissertation.

Ims, R.A. 1987. Responses in spatial organization and 

behaviour to manipulations of the food resource in 

the vole Clethrionomys rufocanus. Journal of Animal 

Ecology. 56: 585-596.

Johnson, A.S.; Hale, P.E.; Osborne, J.S.; Anderson, O.F.; 

Ford, W.M. 1992. Deer in pocosin habitat after 

catastrophic wildfire. Proceedings of the Annual 

Conference of the Association of Southeastern Fish 

and Wildlife Agencies. 46: 118-127.

Jones, E.N. 1990. Effects of forage availability on 

home range and population density of Microtus 

pennsylvanicus. Journal of Mammalogy. 71: 382-389.

Lacher, T.E.; Mares, M.A. 1996. Availability of 

resources and use of space in eastern chipmunks, 

Tamias striatus. Journal of Mammalogy. 77: 833-

849.

Loeb, S.C. 1996. The role of coarse woody debris in 

the ecology of southeastern mammals. In: McMinn, 

J.W.; Crossley, D.A., eds, Biodiversity and coarse 

woody debris in southern forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE94. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 108-118.

Mahan, C.G.; Yahner, R.H. 1996. Effects of forest 

fragmentation on burrow-site selection by the 

eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus). American 

Midland Naturalist. 136: 352-367.

Manville, R.H. 1949. A study of small mammal 

populations in northern Michigan. Miscellaneous 

Publication of the University of Michigan Museum of 

Zoology. 73: 1-83.

Mares, M.A.; Watson, M.D.; Lacher, T.E. 1976. Home 

range perturbations in Tamias striatus. Oecologia. 

25: 1-12.

Mares, M.A.; Lacher, T.E.; Willig, M.R.; Bitar, N.A.; 

Adams, R.A.; Klinger, A.; Tazik, D. 1982. An 

experimental analysis of social spacing in Tamias 

striatus. Ecology. 63:267-273.

Mares, M.A.; Lacher, T.E. 1987. Social spacing in 

small mammals: patterns of individual variation.

American Zooogist. 27:293-306.

Martin, A.C.; Zim, H.S.; Nelson, T.A. 1961. American 

wildlife and plants. A guide to wildlife food habits.

New York, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. 500 p.

McCay, T.S.; Komoroski, M.J. 2004. Demographic 

response of shrews to removal of coarse woody 
9

debris in a managed pine forest. Forest Ecology and 

Management. 189: 387-395.

McNab, W.H.; Avers, P.E. 1994. Ecological subregions 

of the United States: section descriptions. WOWSA5. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service. 267 p.

McShea, W.J. 2000. The influence of acorn crops on 

annual variation in rodent and bird populations.

Ecology. 81: 228-238.

Merritt, J.F. 1981. Clethrionomys gapperi. Mammalian 

Species Account.146: 1-9.

Ostfield, R.S. 1986. Territoriality and mating system of 

California voles (Mictrotus californicus). Journal of 

Animal Ecology. 55: 691-706.

Peterson, C.J.; Carson, W.P.; McCarthy, B.C.; Pickett, 

S.T.A. 1990. Microsite variation and soil dynamics 

within newly created treefall pits and mounds.

Oikos. 58: 39-46.

Rowan, E.D. 2004. Effect of a spring prescribed 

fire on chipmunk home ranges and a woodland 

salamander community in a central Appalachian 

forest. Athens, GA: University of Georiga. 87 p. M.S. 

thesis.

Sanders, B.M.; Van Lear, D.H. 1988. Photos for 

estimating residue loadings before and after 

burning in southern Appalachian mixed pinehardwood clearcuts. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE-49. 

Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Southeastern Research Station. 21 p.

Schuler, T.M. 2004. Fifty years of partial harvesting 

in a mixed mesophytic forest: composition and 

productivity. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 

34: 985-997.

Schuler, T.M.; Miller, G.W. 1995. Shelterwood 

treatments fail to establish oak reproduction 

on mesic forest sites in West Virginia – 10 year 

results. In: Gottschalk, K.W.; Fosbroke, S.L.C., 

eds. Proceedings, 10th central hardwood forest 

conference; 1995 March 5-8; Morgantown, WV. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. NE-197. Radnor, PA: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest 

Experiment Station: 375-387.

Schuler, T.M.; Gillespie, A.R. 2000. Temporal patterns 

of woody species diversity in a Central Appalachian 

forest from 1856-1997. Journal of the Torrey 

Botanical Society. 127: 149-161.

Seaman, D.E.; Millspaugh, J.J.; Kernohan, B.J.; 

Brundige, G.C.; Raedeke, K.J.; Gitzen, R.A. 1999. 

Effects of sample size on kernel home range 

estimates. Journal of Wildlife Management. 63:739-

747.

Silverman, B.W. 1986. Density estimation for statistics 

and data analysis. London, UK: Chapman and Hall. 

175 p.

Smith, R.A. 1942. The biology of a small mammal 

community in a central New York woodlot. Ithaca, 

NY: Cornell University. 218 p. Ph.D. dissertation.

Steele, M.A.; Smallwood, P.D.; Spunar, A.; Nelsen, E. 

2001. The proximate basis of the oak dispersal 

syndrome: detection of seed dormancy by rodents.

American Zoology. 41: 852-864.

Sullivan, T.P.; Boateng, J.O. 1996. Comparison of 

small-mammal community responses to broadcast 

burning and herbicide application in cutover forest 

habitats. Canadian Journal Forest Research. 26: 462-

73.

Swingland, I.R.; Greenwood, P.J. 1983. The ecology of 

animal movement. New York, NY: Clarendon Press. 

311 p.

Taylor, R.J. 1988. Territory size and location in 

animals with refuges: influence of predation risk.

Evolutionary Ecology. 2: 95-101.

Tryron, C.A.; Snyder, D.P. 1973. Biology of the 

eastern chipmunk, Tamias striatus: life tables, age 
10

distributions and trends in population numbers.

Journal of Mammalogy. 54: 145-168.

Van Lear, D.H. 1996. Dynamics of coarse woody 

debris in southern forest ecosystems. In: McMinn, 

J.W.; Crossley, D.A., eds, Biodiversity and coarse 

woody debris in southern forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. SE94. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Southern Research Station: 10-17.

Vreeland, J.K.; Tietje, W.D. 2002. Numerical response 

of small vertebrates to prescribed fire in California 

oak woodland. In: Ford, W.M.; Russell, K.R.; 

Moorman, C.E., eds. The role of fire in nongame 

wildlife management and community restoration: 

traditional uses and new directions. Gen. Tech. Rep. 

NE-288. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service: 100-110.

Wentworth, J.M.; Johnson, A.S.; Hale, P.E.; 

Kammermeyer, K.E. 1992. Relationships of acorn 

abundance and deer herd characteristics in the 

southern Appalachians. Southern Journal of Applied 

Forestry. 16: 5-8.

Whitaker, J.O.; Hamilton, W.J. 1998. Mammals of the 

eastern United States. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University 

Press. 583 p.

White, G.C.; Garrott, R.A. 1990. Analysis of wildlife 

radio-tracking data. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 

383 p.

Wolff, J.O. 1996. Population fluctuations of masteating rodents are correlated with production of 

acorns. Journal of Mammalogy. 77: 850-856.

Worton, B.J. 1989. Kernel methods for estimating 

the utilization distribution in home-range studies.

Ecology. 70: 164-168.

Wrazen, J.A.; Svendsen. G.E. 1978. Feeding ecology 

of a population of eastern chipmunks (Tamias 

striatus) in southeast Ohio. American Midland 

Naturalist. 100: 190-201.

Yahner, R. H. 1978. Burrow systems and home 

range use by eastern chipmunks, Tamias striatus: 

ecological and behavioral considerations. Journal of 

Mammalogy. 59: 324-329.

Yerger, R.W. 1953. Home range, territoriality, and 

populations of the chipmunk in central New York.

Journal of Mammalogy. 34: 448-458.

Yerger, R.W. 1955. Life history note on the eastern 

chipmunk Tamias striatus lysteri (Richardson) in 

central New York. American Midland Naturalist. 53: 

312-323.
Printed on Recycled Paper

Rowan, E.L.; Ford, W.M.; Castleberry, S.B.; Rodrigue, J.L.; Schuler, T.M. 2005. 

Response of eastern chipmunks to single application spring prescribed 

fires on the Fernow Experimental Forest. Res. Pap. NE-727. Newtown 

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern 

Research Station. 10 p.

We used radiotelemetry to examine the effects of spring prescribed fire for 

preharvest oak (Quercus spp.) shelterwood management on eastern chipmunk 

(Tamias striatus) home-range attributes and burrow use on the Fernow 

Experimental Forest in the central Appalachian Mountains of West Virginia. Results 

for 21 chipmunks showed that prescribed fire had little discernable effect on homerange or core-area size, extent of conspecific overlap, or burrow use. Fire tolerance 

of this common forest rodent provides additional evidence supporting the use of 

prescribed burning to achieve vegetation management objectives in the central 

Appalachians where appropriate.

Key Words: burrow, central Appalachian Mountains, chipmunk, fire, home range, 

oak shelterwood, radiotelemetry
Headquarters of the Northeastern Research Station is in Newtown Square, 

Pennsylvania. Field laboratories are maintained at:

Amherst, Massachusetts, in cooperation with the University of Massachusetts

Burlington, Vermont, in cooperation with the University of Vermont

Delaware, Ohio

Durham, New Hampshire, in cooperation with the University of New Hampshire

Hamden, Connecticut, in cooperation with Yale University

Morgantown, West Virginia, in cooperation with West Virginia University

Parsons, West Virginia

Princeton, West Virginia

Syracuse, New York, in cooperation with the State University of New York, 

College of Environmental Sciences and Forestry at Syracuse University

Warren, Pennsylvania

“Caring for the Land and Serving People Through Research”

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities 

on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, 

familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, 

reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program 

(Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternate means 

for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s 

TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20250-

9410, or call (800)795-3272 (voice) or (202)720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider 

and employer.