Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

J. D. Clark

Publications and source records attributed to J. D. Clark.

15 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2011

Population viability analysis to identify management priorities for reintroduced elk in the Cumberland Mountains, Tennessee

We used an individual-based population model to perform a viability analysis to simulate population growth (λ) of 167 elk ( Cervus elaphus manitobensis ; 71 male and 96 female) released in the Cumberland Mountains, Tennessee, to estimate sustainability (i.e., λ > 1.0) and identify the most appropriate options for managing elk restoration. We transported elk from Elk Island National Park, Alberta, Canada, and from Land Between the Lakes, Kentucky, and reintroduced them beginning in December 2000 and ending in February 2003. We estimated annual survival rates for 156 radio-collared elk from December 2000 until November 2004. We used data from a nearby elk herd in Great Smoky Mountains National Park to simulate pessimistic and optimistic recruitment and performed population viability analyses to evaluate sustainability over a 25-year period. Annual survival averaged 0.799 (Total SE = 0.023). The primary identifiable sources of mortality were poaching, disease from meningeal worm ( Parelaphostrongylus tenuis ), and accidents (environmental causes and unintentional harvest). Population growth given pessimistic recruitment rates averaged 0.895 over 25 years (0.955 in year 1 to 0.880 in year 25); population growth was not sustainable in 100% of the runs. With the most optimistic estimates of recruitment, mean λ increased to 0.967 (1.038 in year 1 to 0.956 in year 25) with 99.6% of the runs failing to be sustainable. We suggest that further translocation efforts to increase herd size will be ineffective unless survival rates are increased in the Cumberland Mountains.

Tennessee↗
USGS2010

Identifying sites for elk restoration in Arkansas

We used spatial data to identify potential areas for elk ( Cervus elaphus ) restoration in Arkansas. To assess habitat, we used locations of 239 elk groups collected from helicopter surveys in the Buffalo National River area of northwestern Arkansas, USA, from 1992 to 2002. We calculated the Mahalanobis distance ( D 2 ) statistic based on the relationship between those elk-group locations and a suite of 9 landscape variables to evaluate winter habitat in Arkansas. We tested model performance in the Buffalo National River area by comparing the D 2 values of pixels representing areas with and without elk pellets along 19 fixed-width transects surveyed in March 2002. Pixels with elk scat had lower D 2 values than pixels in which we found no pellets (logistic regression: Wald &chi; 2 = 24.37, P < 0.001), indicating that habitat characteristics were similar to those selected by the aerially surveyed elk. Our D 2 model indicated that the best elk habitat primarily occurred in northern and western Arkansas and was associated with areas of high landscape heterogeneity, heavy forest cover, gently sloping ridge tops and valleys, low human population density, and low road densities. To assess the potential for elk&ndash;human conflicts in Arkansas, we used the analytical hierarchy process to rank the importance of 8 criteria based on expert opinion from biologists involved in elk management. The biologists ranked availability of forage on public lands as having the strongest influence on the potential for elk&ndash;human conflict (33%), followed by human population growth rate (22%) and the amount of private land in row crops (18%). We then applied those rankings in a weighted linear summation to map the relative potential for elk&ndash;human conflict. Finally, we used white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) densities to identify areas where success of elk restoration may be hampered due to meningeal worm ( Parelaphostrongylus tenuis ) transmission. By combining results of the 3 spatial data layers (i.e., habitat model, elk&ndash;human conflict model, deer density), our model indicated that restoration sites located in west-central and north-central Arkansas were most favorable for reintroduction.

Arkansas↗
USGS2010

Testing a Mahalanobis distance model of black bear habitat use in the Ouachita Mountains of Oklahoma

Regional wildlife&ndash;habitat models are commonly developed but rarely tested with truly independent data. We tested a published habitat model for black bears ( Ursus americanus ) with new data collected in a different site in the same ecological region (i.e., Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma, USA). We used a Mahalanobis distance model developed from relocations of black bears in Arkansas to produce a map layer of Mahalanobis distances on a study area in neighboring Oklahoma. We tested this modeled map layer with relocations of black bears on the Oklahoma area. The distributions of relocations of female black bears were consistent with model predictions. We conclude that this modeling approach can be used to predict regional suitability for a species of interest.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2010

Challenges of DNA-based mark-recapture studies of American black bears

We explored whether genetic sampling would be feasible to provide a region-wide population estimate for American black bears ( Ursus americanus ) in the southern Appalachians, USA. Specifically, we determined whether adequate capture probabilities ( p >0.20) and population estimates with a low coefficient of variation (CV <20%) could be achieved given typical agency budget and personnel constraints. We extracted DNA from hair collected from baited barbed-wire enclosures sampled over a 10-week period on 2 study areas: a high-density black bear population in a portion of Great Smoky Mountains National Park and a lower density population on National Forest lands in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. We identified individual bears by their unique genotypes obtained from 9 microsatellite loci. We sampled 129 and 60 different bears in the National Park and National Forest study areas, respectively, and applied closed mark&ndash;recapture models to estimate population abundance. Capture probabilities and precision of the population estimates were acceptable only for sampling scenarios for which we pooled weekly sampling periods. We detected capture heterogeneity biases, probably because of inadequate spatial coverage by the hair-trapping grid. The logistical challenges of establishing and checking a sufficiently high density of hair traps make DNA-based estimates of black bears impractical for the southern Appalachian region. Alternatives are to estimate population size for smaller areas, estimate population growth rates or survival using mark&ndash;recapture methods, or use independent marking and recapturing techniques to reduce capture heterogeneity.

Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee↗
USGS2009

A habitat assessment for Florida panther population expansion into central Florida

One of the goals of the Florida panther ( Puma concolor coryi ) recovery plan is to expand panther range north of the Caloosahatchee River in central Florida. Our objective was to evaluate the potential of that region to support panthers. We used a geographic information system and the Mahalanobis distance statistic to develop a habitat model based on landscape characteristics associated with panther home ranges. We used cross-validation and an independent telemetry data set to test the habitat model. We also conducted a least-cost path analysis to identify potential habitat linkages and to provide a relative measure of connectivity among habitat patches. Variables in our model were paved road density, major highways, human population density, percentage of the area permanently or semipermanently flooded, and percentage of the area in natural land cover. Our model clearly identified habitat typical of that found within panther home ranges based on model testing with recent telemetry data. We identified 4 potential translocation sites that may support a total of approximately 36 panthers. Although we identified potential habitat linkages, our least-cost path analyses highlighted the extreme isolation of panther habitat in portions of the study area. Human intervention will likely be required if the goal is to establish female panthers north of the Caloosahatchee in the near term.

Florida↗
USGS2005

American black bears and bee yard depredation at Okefenokee Swamp, Georgia

We studied American black bears ( Ursus americanus ), on the northwest periphery of Okefenokee Swamp in southeast Georgia, to assess landowner attitudes toward bears, estimate the extent of damage to commercial honey bee operations by bears, and evaluate methods to reduce bear depredations to apiaries. We collected 8,351 black bear radiolocations and identified 51 bee yards on our study area. Twenty-seven of 43 home ranges contained ≥1 bee yard, averaging 11.3 and 5.1 bee yards/home range of males ( n = 7) and females ( n = 20), respectively. From 1996 to 1998, we documented 7 instances of bears raiding bee yards within our study area and 6 instances in adjacent areas. All but 1 of the 13 raided yards were enclosed by electric fencing. In the 12 cases of damage to electrically fenced yards, however, the fences were not active because of depleted batteries. Based on compositional analysis, bear use of areas 800–1,400 m from bee yards was disproportionately greater than use 0–800 m from bee yards. Bears disproportionately used bay (red bay: Persea borbonia , loblolly bay: Gordonia lasianthus , and southern magnolia: Magnolia virginia ), gum (water tupelo: Nyssa aquatic and black gum: N. sylvatica ), and cypress ( Taxodium spp.) and loblolly bay habitats, however, compared with slash pine ( Pinus elliottii ) or pine–oak ( Quercus spp.), where bee yards usually were placed. The distribution of bear radiolocations likely reflected the use of those swamp and riparian areas, rather than avoidance of bee yards. Distances to streams from damaged bee yards ( x̄ = 1,750 m) were less than from undamaged yards ( x̄ = 4,442 m), and damaged bee yards were closer to unimproved roads ( x̄ = 134 m) than were undamaged bee yards ( x̄ = 802 m). Our analysis suggests that bee yard placement away from bear travel routes (such as streams and unimproved roads) can reduce bear depredation problems. Our results strongly indicate that working electric fences are effective deterrents to bear damage to bee yards, even in areas frequented by bears. A survey of beekeepers indicated that apiarists often relied on more expensive, less effective, and sometimes illegal methods to protect their bee yards from bears. Beekeepers within bear range should be urged to consider electric fencing, which can almost eliminate bear damage to their yards.

Georgia↗
USGS2005

Factors affecting settling, survival, and viability of black bears reintroduced to Felsenthal National Wildlife Refuge, Arkansas

We used radiotelemetry and population modeling techniques to examine factors related to population establishment of black bears ( Ursus americanus ) reintroduced to Felsenthal National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Arkansas. Our objectives were to determine whether settling (i.e., establishment of a home range at or near the release site), survival, recruitment, and population viability were related to age class of reintroduced bears, presence of cubs, time since release, or number of translocated animals. We removed 23 adult female black bears with 56 cubs from their winter dens at White River NWR and transported them 160 km to man-made den structures at Felsenthal NWR during spring 2000–2002. Total movement and average circuity of adult females decreased from 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year post-emergence ( F 2,14 =19.7, P < 0.001 and F 2,14 =5.76, P =0.015, respectively). Mean first-year post-release survival of adult female bears was 0.624 (SE = 0.110, SE interannual = 0.144), and the survival rate of their cubs was 0.750 (SE = 0.088, SE interannual = 0.109). The homing rate (i.e., the proportion of bears that returned to White River NWR) was 13%. Annual survival for female bears that remained at the release site and survived >1-year post-release increased to 0.909 (SE = 0.097, SE interannual =0.067; Z=3.5, P < 0.001). Based on stochastic population growth simulations, the average annual growth rate (λ) was 1.093 (SD = 0.053) and the probability of extinction with no additional stockings ranged from 0.56-1.30%. The bear population at Felsenthal NWR is at or above the number after which extinction risk declines dramatically, although additional releases of bears could significantly decrease time to population reestablishment. Poaching accounted for at least 3 of the 8 adult mortalities that we documented; illegal kills could be a significant impediment to population re-establishment at Felsenthal NWR should poaching rates escalate.

Arkansas↗
USGS2005

Ecology of Florida black bears in the Okefenokee-Osceola ecosystem

The population status of the Florida black bear ( Ursus americanus floridanus ) is problematic within many portions of its range and its potential listing as a federally threatened species has been the subject of legal debate. We studied Florida black bears in 2 areas in the Okefenokee-Osceola ecosystem in southeast Georgia (i.e.,Okefenokee) and north Florida (i.e., Osceola) from 1995 to 1999 to evaluate relationships between population characteristics, habitat conditions, and human activities. Bears in Okefenokee were hunted and those in Osceola were not. We captured 205 different black bears (124M:81F) 345 times from June 1995 to September 1998. We obtained 13,573 radiolocations from 87 (16M:71F) individual bears during the study. In Okefenokee, black gum ( Nyssa sylvatica ) and saw palmetto ( Serenoa repens ) fruits were the most important foods for bears based on scat analysis. In Osceola, corn from white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) feeders was the most stable food source but saw palmetto was heavily used when available. Corn from deer feeders was not available in Okefenokee. Adult bears in Osceola were 29% heavier than those in Okefenokee ( t 82 = 3.55, P <0.001). The mean annual home-range size for Osceola females ( x̄ =30.3 km 2 &plusmn; 4.0 [SE], n =53) varied little seasonally or annually and was almost half that of Okefenokee females (55.9 km 2 &plusmn; 6.9, n = 69; Z = &ndash;2.47, P = 0.014). In contrast, radiocollared females in Okefenokee expanded their home ranges during years of poor black gum production. That expansion was most apparent between autumn 1998 and 1999, when mean home-range size for Okefenokee females increased from 14.5 km 2 to 78.4 km 2 , respectively, and included a larger proportion of upland areas open to sport hunting. As a result, 5 females were harvested in the Okefenokee study area during the 1999 bear hunting season compared with only 7 harvested from 1996 to 1998. Home ranges of adult female bears were located in areas with disproportionately high loblolly bay ( Gordonia lasianthus ) and gum-bay-cypress ( Taxodium spp.) vegetation associations in Okefenokee and gum-bay-cypress associations in Osceola. The pine vegetation association ranked lower than most other associations within the home ranges of bears in both study areas even though much of the summer and autumn diets of bears included food items found almost exclusively in pine. Sixteen mortalities of radiocollared bears were documented in Okefenokee; hunting accounted for 11 (68.8%) of these deaths. The annual survival rate of radiocollared males in Okefenokee was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.53&ndash;0.88) whereas survival of females in Okefenokee was higher ( Z =18.87, P <0.001) at 0.89 (95% CI = 0.83&ndash;0.95). The survival rate for females in Osceola was 0.97 (95% CI = 0.92&ndash;1.00). Overall, 67 bears (51M:16F) were killed by hunters in the Okefenokee study area from 1995 to 1999. Based on all radiocollared bears in Okefenokee, many of which resided within areas closed to hunting, we estimated an annual harvest rate of 0.22 (95% CI = 0.03&ndash;0.37) for males and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.01&ndash;0.12) for females. When we excluded those bears that were not in areas open to hunting, however, the annual harvest rate rose to 0.37 (95% CI = 0.07&ndash;0.58) for males and 0.39 (95% CI = 0.09&ndash;0.58) for females. Following a black gum shortage in autumn 1995, only 1 of 15 radiocollared females in Okefenokee produced cubs in winter 1996. That low reproductive rate was in contrast to winter 1997, which followed heavy black gum production, when 21 of 22 radiocollared females produced cubs. Reproductive output was more consistent in the Osceola study area, with 46 cubs being produced from 8, 5, and 9 litters in 1997, 1998, and 1999, respectively. To estimate population size, we maintained 88 and 94 barbed-wire hair traps during 1999 in the Okefenokee and Osceola study areas, respectively. Using DNA collected at the hair traps, mark&ndash;recapture models produced estimates of 71 bears (95% CI = 59&ndash;91) in Okefenokee and 44 bears (95% CI = 40&ndash;57) in the Osceola study area during 1999. The estimated densities in the Okefenokee and Osceola study areas were 0.12 and 0.14 bears/km 2 , respectively. Alternative density estimates based on the amount of time bears spent within study area boundaries were similar (0.11 and 0.14 bears/km 2 on Okefenokee and Osceola, respectively). We used a population model to estimate the effect of harvest in the Okefenokee bear population. Excluding harvest, bears at Osceola experienced higher average annual population growth (&lambda; = 1.184 &plusmn; 0.002) than those at Okefenokee (1.064 &plusmn; 0.002; t 18 = 3.93, P = 0.001), most likely due to protection from hunting and higher recruitment. Including the effects of emigration and immigration, we estimated an average annual sustainable harvest at Okefenokee of approximately 9 bears (12.6%), which was slightly less than the average 1995&ndash;1999 annual harvest of 9.4. That level of hunting in Okefenokee is sustainable but likely represents the highest exploitation rate in the region. Our mark&ndash;recapture data from Osceola suggest a high dispersal rate by subadult bears, and our population modeling data support this hypothesis; we documented bears in Okefenokee that originated from Osceola but not the reverse. We speculate that bears from the interior of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge (ONWR), and to some extent northern Florida, served as a source to the population sink caused by hunting mortality in Okefenokee and in the surrounding Georgia counties. Corn from deer feeders was the most probable reason for smaller home-range sizes and greater body masses and reproductive output at Osceola. Changes in management to eliminate or reduce baiting for deer with corn would negatively affect the Osceola bear population. On Okefenokee, sporadic black gum and palmetto production influenced harvest rates and cub production and, thus, governed bear population dynamics. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concluded in 1998 that listing the Florida black bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 was not warranted. That decision was largely based on the stability and protection afforded to a few subpopulations within the range of the subspecies, which includes the Okefenokee-Osceola subpopulation; our results support that conclusion. However, we suggest that metapopulation processes among the various subpopulations be given greater consideration, with the ultimate goal of managing the sub-species as a unit rather than as an assemblage of independent components. Our study illustrates the importance of travel corridors for maintaining metapopulation processes.

Florida, Georgia↗
USGS1998

A female black bear denning habitat model using a geographic information system

We used the Mahalanobis distance statistic and a raster geographic information system (GIS) to model potential black bear ( Ursus americanus ) denning habitat in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas. The Mahalanobis distance statistic was used to represent the standard squared distance between sample variates in the GIS database (forest cover type, elevation, slope, aspect, distance to streams, distance to roads, and forest cover richness) and variates at known bear dens. Two models were developed: a generalized model for all den locations and another specific to dens in rock cavities. Differences between habitat at den sites and habitat across the study area were represented in 2 new GIS themes as Mahalanobis distance values. Cells similar to the mean vector derived from the known dens had low Mahalanobis distance values, and dissimilar cells had high values. The reliability of the predictive model was tested by overlaying den locations collected subsequent to original model development on the resultant den habitat themes. Although the generalized model demonstrated poor reliability, the model specific to rock dens had good reliability. Bears were more likely to choose rock den locations with low Mahalanobis distance values and less likely to choose those with high values. The model can be used to plan the timing and extent of management actions (e.g., road building, prescribed fire, timber harvest) most appropriate for those sites with high or low denning potential.

Arkansas↗
USGS1997

Imperiled mammalian fauna of aquatic ecosystems in the Southeast: A historical perspective

About 100 species of mammals are endemic to the southeastern United States, an area of diverse habitat types and high biodiversity. Many of these species are either formally considered aquatic or semi-aquatic, or they are otherwise closely associated with aquatic ecosystems. In the southeastern United States, greater than 80 percent of mammalian species are listed in some category of concern throughout all or at least a portion of their ranges (i.e., endangered, threatened, under review for possible listing as endangered or threatened, species of special concern, species deemed in need of management, etc.). Almost all of these species are imperiled because their populations have declined to dangerously low levels due to habitat loss, habitat degradation, or other human-related factors. Most imperiled mammal taxa can be categorized as belonging to one of two general groups: habitat generalists or habitat specialists. Typically, habitat generalists have become imperiled mainly due to human exploitation, while habitat specialists have suffered primarily from habitat loss or habitat degradation. The passage of the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973 resulted in an increased need for information concerning distribution and status of all native species. However, relatively little is known concerning the historical distribution and current status of many mammalian taxa, and this is particularly so for small non-game species. In this chapter we provide species accounts of mammals commonly associated with aquatic ecosystems that we consider to be imperiled in the southeastern United States. In these accounts we have included information which we feel is valuable toward best understanding the threats that challenge each considered taxon.

Book chapter↗
USGS1997

Imperiled mammalian fauna of aquatic ecosystems in the Southeast: A management perspective

Management of imperiled mammals associated with aquatic ecosystems in the southeastern United States ranges from almost no management for some species to intensive, high-profile programs for others. Aquatic mammals are notoriously difficult to census because they are often secretive, trap-wary, relatively rare, or have extensive movement patterns. As a result, conservation efforts aimed at these animals often have been greatly hampered by a general lack of comprehensive population data. Historically, certain high-profile, "flagship" species have been the primary beneficiaries of management efforts. One of the earliest examples involves beaver, Castor canadensis , which had been reduced to a low ebb due to unregulated harvest and were subsequently live-trapped by state game officials in the 1940s and repatriated throughout the southeastern states. The success of this restocking program has exceeded expectations, and today beaver numbers have reached what many consider to be nuisance proportions in most states. Similar restocking stories can be told for muskrats ( Ondatra zibethicus ) and, to a limited extent, for river otters ( Lutra canadensis ). Unfortunately, other imperiled species of lesser economic or recreational value have not been as fortunate. Efforts to conserve these lower-profile species have been minimal or conservation problems so immense that their complete recovery has been unsuccessful. Wilson (1992) suggested that 20 percent of all species on earth may be lost to extinction in the next four decades. If this disaster should occur, it would rival the greatest geological extinction episodes. Certainly, conservationists need to explore new methods for preserving mammalian diversity. In this chapter we will discuss the resource management history of aquatic mammals which are imperiled in the Southeast. In doing so we define an aquatic mammal as any mammal that is directly or indirectly associated with aquatic ecosystems. Imperiled mammals are any mammalian species, subspecies, or population listed as endangered, threatened, or of special concern on any state or federal list, and also includes mammals experiencing long-term population declines or significant range contractions.

Book chapter↗