Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70042480

Lewis and Clark National Historical Park Elk Monitoring Program Annual Report 2010

Abstract

Fiscal year 2010 was the second full year of elk monitoring protocol implementation at Lewis and Clark National Historical Park (LEWI), part of the North Coast and Cascades Network (NCCN) Inventory and Monitoring program. Elk monitoring at Lewis and Clark NHP includes two components. Fecal pellet surveys at a systematic sample of points in the Fort Clatsop unit are intended to give quantitative estimates of relative use by elk in that unit. Driving surveys on specified routes in and near the Fort Clatsop unit are intended to provide an index of elk viewing opportunities on those roads. Fecal pellet surveys include a fall clearing session and a late winter sampling session. Fall clearing from November 9 to November 17, 2009 included visits to 67 survey points. Late winter sampling from March 1 to March 8 2010 included repeat visits to 65 of those same points, but not to two others that had hazardous access or were under water. We detected elk fecal pellets in 30 points in the fall and at 30 points in the late winter. Three to four road surveys per month were conducted in each of the 12 months of fiscal year 2010 (i.e., October-December 2009 and January-September 2010). Data from those surveys will be entered, validated, certified, and analyzed following the acceptance of the peer-reviewed protocol and associated database. Data from FY09, FY10, and FY11 will be useful in the formal analyses of trend. Those three years of data will contribute to the preparation of a four-year analysis and report after only one more year. Quantitative estimates of relative use by elk throughout the Fort Clatsop unit will be provided in the four-year report in 2012. Those estimates will account for detection bias, which comes from an incomplete count of elk pellets that were present in the subplots at the time of survey.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 46.117811095069584° to 46.138273893429385° latitude; -123.92123222351074° to -123.87840270996094° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Carla Cole, Paul Griffin, Kurt Jenkins. 2012. Lewis and Clark National Historical Park Elk Monitoring Program Annual Report 2010. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70042480

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Vascular plant and vertebrate species richness in national parks of the eastern United States

Given the estimates that species diversity is diminishing at 50-100 times the normal rate, it is critical that we be able to evaluate changes in species richness in order to make informed decisions for conserving species diversity. In this study, we examined the potential of vascular plant species richness to be used as a surrogate for vertebrate species richness in the classes of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Vascular plants, as primary producers, represent the biotic starting point for ecological community structure and are the logical place to start for understanding vertebrate species associations. We used data collected by the United States (US) National Park Service (NPS) on species presence within parks in the eastern US to estimate simple linear regressions between plant species richness and vertebrate richness. Because environmental factors may also influence species diversity, we performed simple linear regressions of species richness versus natural logarithm of park area, park latitude, mean annual precipitation, mean annual temperature, and human population density surrounding the parks. We then combined plant species richness and environmental variables in multiple regressions to determine the variables that remained as significant predictors of vertebrate species richness. As expected, we detected significant relationships between plant species richness and amphibian, bird, and mammal species richness. In some cases, plant species richness was predicted by park area alone. Species richness of mammals was only related to plant species richness. Reptile species richness, on the other hand, was related to plant species richness, park latitude and annual precipitation, while amphibian species richness was related to park latitude, park area, and plant species richness. Thus, plant species richness predicted species richness of different vertebrate groups to varying degrees and should not be used exclusively as a surrogate for vertebrate species richness. Plant species richness should be included with other variables such as area and climate when considering strategies to manage and conserve species in US National Parks. It is not always appropriate to draw conclusions about analyses of taxonomic surrogates from one area to another. Two patterns evident from the linear regressions were the increase in species richness with the increase of park area and with increase of vascular plant species richness. To test whether there were differences in these patterns among networks, we used analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Differences among networks were detected only in bird species richness versus plant species richness and for all taxa except mammals for vertebrate species richness versus park area. Some of these results may be due to small sample size among networks, and therefore, low statistical power. Other factors that could have contributed to these results were differences in average park area and habitat heterogeneity among networks, latitudinal gradients, low variation in mean annual precipitation, and different use of vegetation by migratory species. Based on these results we recommend that management of biodiversity be approached from local and site specific criteria rather than applying management directives derived from other regions of the US. It is also recommended that analyses similar to those presented here be conducted for all national parks, once data become available for all networks in the US, to gain a better understanding of how vascular plant species richness, area, and vertebrate species richness are related in the US.

Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCR/NCRO/NRT