appendix c – northern goshawk...

Appendix C – Northern Goshawk Report

2011 Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) Survey Report

Woodland Lake Park Tract, Pinetop-Lakeside, AZ

Prepared for:

Town of Pinetop-Lakeside, AZ

Prepared by:

TEC Inc.

Tucson, AZ

June 2011

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ASNF Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests

EA Environmental Assessment

m meter

MIS Management Indicator Species

PFA post-fledgling area

TEC TEC Inc.

USFS United States Forest Service

The Town Town of Pinetop-Lakeside

WLPT Woodland Lake Park Tract

Goshawk Survey Report-Woodland Lake Park Tract

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................... Inside Front Cover

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 OVERVIEW OF SURVEY AREA ................................................................................................... 1

1.2.1 General Study Area Habitat Characteristics ................................................................. 3 1.2.2 Wildlife Occurrence in Project Area ............................................................................ 3 1.2.3 Goshawk Habitat .......................................................................................................... 5

2.0 SURVEY METHODS ............................................................................................................. 5

3.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. 7

4.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 7

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS .......................................................................................................... 8

List of Figures

Figure Page

1 Town of Pinetop-Lakeside Land Use ................................................................................................... 2

2 Broadcast Survey Stations .................................................................................................................... 6

List of Tables

Table Page

1 Wildlife Species Observed during Spring 2011 Woodland Lake Park Site Visits ............................... 3


ii

[This page intentionally left blank.]


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

The Town of Pinetop-Lakeside (the Town), has proposed to purchase the Woodland Lake Park Tract

(WLPT) from the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests (ASNF). The Town’s interest in and efforts toward

acquiring the WLPT go back to the 1980s. During this approximately 25-year period, legislation was

passed that authorizes the ASNF to sell the tract only to the Town, which can purchase the tract under the

Townsite Act of 1958. The 583-acre WLPT includes 4 subparcels: Big Springs Environmental Study

Area, Walnut Creek Node, Woodland Lake Park, and Woodland Lake Forest (Figure 1). To support the

potential land transfer, an Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared by the Town and the U.S.

Forest Service (USFS).

Goshawks tend to nest in mature forests (conifer in the west, deciduous in the east), building large nests

that are used by the original pair or successors for many years (Reynolds et al. 1992, 1994, 2006). A

variety of forest types and structural stages are used as foraging habitat, but the important role of mature

forests as long-term nesting sites has placed considerable attention on the goshawk.

The goshawk has been designated a sensitive species in most of the USFS administrative regions within

its geographic range. Because of sensitive species status, national forests are required by USFS policy

(Forest Service Manual 2670 and 2672) to evaluate the effects of proposed management actions on

goshawks. In addition to sensitive species status, 53 national forests (as of 2004) have designated the

goshawk as a "Management Indicator Species" (MIS) in their land and resource management plans

developed under the National Forest Management Act.

As part of preparation of the EA, and the fact that the northern goshawk is a Forest Service Sensitive

Species and potentially occurs within the area, the USFS requested a habitat assessment and broadcast

survey be conducted on WLPT in support of the EA. Although during the initial habitat assessment USFS

and TEC Inc. (TEC) wildlife biologists determined that the habitat was poor and unlikely to support

nesting or foraging goshawks, the USFS requested that at least one broadcast survey be conducted to

conclusively determine if goshawks were utilizing the area, either for nesting or foraging. This report

presents the results of the broadcast survey conducted on June 7, 2011.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF SURVEY AREA

The WLPT is surrounded by paved roads, residential, and light commercial development on all sides.

Highway 260 forms the tract’s eastern margin while Woodland Lake Road runs along the western and

southern boundaries. The Big Springs Environmental Study Area occupies 40 acres in the northwest

corner of the tract and includes an overlook and picnic areas. Improved trails on the subparcel loop a

spring-fed pond and small meadow. Other trails connect to a larger network that spans the entire tract

including the Walnut Creek and Pinecrest Trail. Woodland Lake Park comprises 98 acres in the

southernmost portion of the 583-acre WLPT. The park includes extensive recreational development. A

paved trail circles Woodland Lake and connects to other improved trails. Multiple structures are present

including picnic ramadas, ball fields, tennis courts, playground equipment, boat launch, and fishing dock.


2

Figure

1 Town of Pinetop-Lakeside Land Use


3

1.2.1 General Study Area Habitat Characteristics

The WLPT is predominantly characterized by upland ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa)-Gambel oak

(Quercus gambelii) forest with small inclusions of pinyon/juniper woodland and Arizona interior

chaparral vegetation communities. Ponderosa pine dominates a moderately open canopy while the

understory is generally sparse. Midstory tree and shrub vegetation is dominated by Gambel oak with

interspersed alligator juniper (Juniperus deppeana). Blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) is the dominant

herbaceous species. Other graminoids and forbs commonly associated with ponderosa pine forest are

interspersed throughout the tract. Non-native saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) and Russian olive

(Elaeagnus angustifolia) also occur within the project area.

Woodland Lake, Big Springs, and Walnut Creek provide limited aquatic habitats. Woodland Lake is a

man-made reservoir with steep banks and no woody riparian vegetation, although small areas of dense

wetland vegetation are present. Woodland Lake is stocked with rainbow trout and channel catfish. Non-

native, invasive bullfrogs and crayfish inhabit aquatic areas across the tract. Sunfish and largemouth bass

populations are also present in Woodland Lake. All four species prey on native fish and amphibian

species and likely preclude their occurrence.

A narrow corridor of patchy riparian vegetation occurs along Walnut Creek, connecting Rainbow Lake to

the north and Woodland Lake to the south. Big Springs supports some riparian vegetation and a large

meadow. Riparian patches support limited stands of Goodding’s willow (Salix gooddingii). Herbaceous

components include rushes and cattails.

In 2005, the USFS completed vegetation thinning in accordance with Wildland-Urban Interface fuels

reduction and restoration efforts. Approximately 545 acres of the WLPT received treatment. Snags,

woody debris, pines, and junipers were thinned and removed to reduce fuel loads and lower risk of

wildfires. Dispersed, 2- to 4-acre openings were created throughout the tract.

1.2.2 Wildlife Occurrence in Project Area

Wildlife found within the WLPT are those typically associated with ponderosa pine communities. Table 1

lists those species that were observed during site surveys in March and June 2011. The occurrence and

abundance of wildlife within the tract is influenced by human disturbance associated with visitor use of

extensive hiking trails throughout WLPT, and surrounding development and noise from traffic on

adjacent roads.

Table 1. Wildlife Species Observed during Spring 2011

Woodland Lake Park Tract Site Visits

Common Name Scientific Name

Birds

Double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus

Pied-billed grebe Podilymbus podiceps

Ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis

Mallard Anas platyrhynchos

Cinnamon teal Anas cyanoptera

Gadwall Anas strepera

Northern shoveler Anas clypeata

Lesser scaup Aythya affinis

Bufflehead Bucephala albeola


4

Table 1. Wildlife Species Observed during Spring 2011

Woodland Lake Park Tract Site Visits

Common Name Scientific Name

Turkey vulture Cathartes aura

Osprey Pandion haliaetus

Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus

American kestrel Falco sparverius

Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus

Wild turkey Meleagris gallopavo

American coot Fulica americana

Mourning dove Zenaida macroura

Rock dove Columba livia

Band-tailed pigeon Patagioenas fasciata

Great-horned owl Bubo virginianus

Broad-tailed hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus

Acorn woodpecker Melanerpes formicivorus

Harry woodpecker Picoides villosus

Northern flicker Colaptes auratus

Cordilleran flycatcher Empidonax occidentalis

Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans

Steller’s jay Cyanocitta stelleri

Common raven Corvus Corax

Purple martin Progne subis

Violet-green swallow Tachycineta thalassina

Barn swallow Hirundo rustica

Tree swallow Tachycineta bicolor

Mountain chickadee Poecile gambeli

White-breasted nuthatch Sitta carolinensis

Pygmy nuthatch Sitta pygmaea

Ruby-crowned kinglet Regulus calendula

Western Bluebird Sialia mexicana

Mountain bluebird Sialia currucoides

American Robin Turdus migratorius

Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronata

Grace's warbler Dendroica graciae

Common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas

Black-headed grosbeak Pheucticus melanocephalus

Spotted towhee Pipilo maculatus

Song sparrow Melospiza melodia

Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis

Brown-headed cowbird Brown-headed Cowbird

Yellow-headed blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus

Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus

Great-tailed grackle Quiscalus mexicanus

American goldfinch Spinus tristis

Red crossbill Loxia curvirostra

Mammals

Abert’s squirrel Sciurus aberti

Mule deer Odocoileus hemionus

Northern raccoon* Procyon lotor

*Sign only, not directly observed.


5

1.2.3 Goshawk Habitat

Descriptions of forests and woodlands used for breeding by goshawks show great variation in horizontal

and vertical vegetation structure. Thus, the old growth or late seral habitat type that this species is usually

associated with and the reason for selection as an MIS is not necessarily the species preferred habitat type.

Instead, old growth may be just one of many versions of forest types that fit into the broader structural

context of its preferred breeding habitat. However, despite the wide diversity of habitats occupied by

goshawks, within a habitat type, goshawk nest areas are consistently comprised of mature and older

forests. These mature and older forests include, but are not limited to, old growth, and are typically

concentrated within 30 acres surrounding the nest. Typically, nest areas are composed of large, dense

trees, closed canopies created by a variety of tree sizes, and open understories, but exact structure depends

on forest type, elevation, and growth site potential (Reynolds et al. 1992, 1994, 2006; Andersen et al.

2004; Foster et al. 2010). In Arizona, Crocker-Bedford and Chaney (1988) reported goshawks nested in

ponderosa pine stands with >70% canopy cover, but Lang (1994) found pairs occupying territories with

31-33% canopy cover. Although variable, habitat structure is more important than composition in the

goshawk’s nest area. Nests are built in coniferous or deciduous trees, but western populations typically

use conifers such as ponderosa pine, Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), white fir (Abies concolor),

California red fir (Abies magnifica), western larch (Larix occidentalis), western hemlock (Tsuga

heterophylla), and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) although some deciduous trees are used such as aspen

(Populus tremuloides). In the southwest, goshawks use ponderosa pine extensively (Reynolds et al. 1992,

1994, 2006; Andersen et al. 2004; Foster et al. 2010).

Pre-Survey Goshawk Habitat Assessment

A goshawk habitat assessment was conducted by the USFS (David Seery, Wildlife Biologist, ASNF) and

TEC (Rick Spaulding, Wildlife Biologist) on March 30, 2011. It was determined that the potential habitat

at the WLPT was very poor for northern goshawks since the area was too open, the trees were too small,

and there were very few patches of larger trees. However, the WLPT area could provide marginal

foraging habitat for goshawks occupying the post-fledgling area (PFA) that lies east of the Park and east

of White Mountain Road. Although the habitat was considered poor, the USFS requested that at least one

broadcast survey be conducted to conclusively determine if goshawks were utilizing the area, either for

nesting or foraging.

2.0 SURVEY METHODS

The goal of the survey was to determine if goshawks are nesting or otherwise utilizing the project area.

The survey was conducted during the fledging period in accordance with the Northern Goshawk

Inventory and Monitoring Technical Guide (Woodbridge and Hargis 2006). The survey was a Broadcast

Acoustical Survey with biologists conducting visual searches as well as broadcast calls.

The habitat assessment conducted in March 2011 provided an opportunity for the subsequent broadcast

survey to be focused on the habitat with the greatest potential to support goshawks and allowed the

optimal placement of call stations. Although standard broadcast surveys are conducted with the maximum

distance between parallel transects of 250 meters (m) and call stations located 200 m apart along each

transect, given the overall openness and lack of high quality goshawk habitat within the project area, it

was decided that the survey transect should focus on the riparian area of Walnut Creek which contained

the best potential goshawk habitat. The survey was conducted on June 7, 2011. Broadcast calls began at

approximately 0515, ended at 0815, and included a total of 16 call stations (Figure 2).


6

Figure 2 Broadcast Survey Stations


7

The survey utilized broadcast calls of the fledgling food-begging call using a FoxPro NX3 digital game

caller. At each calling station, the call was broadcast at 60 degrees from the transect line for 10 seconds,

the two surveyors then listened and watched for 30 seconds. This sequence was repeated two more times,

rotating 120 degrees from the last broadcast. After the last sequence, the surveyors moved to the next

station. Walking between stations was at an easy pace and surveyors listened and watched carefully for

goshawk calls and signs, and calls and signs of other species.

3.0 RESULTS

No goshawks were seen or heard during the survey period. In addition, no other sign (e.g., prey remains

or feathers at plucking posts) was observed to indicate that goshawks or other raptors have used the

surveyed area. The broadcast calls did attract four common ravens at call Station #1. The ravens arrived

quietly and remained quiet throughout the call sequence at Stations #1 and #2. Two additional ravens

were attracted by the broadcast call at Station #11. These two individuals were very vocal and continued

to follow the surveyors up to Station #12. Based on their very vocal and aggressive behavior, it is

assumed that they had a nest nearby. No other species were brought in by the broadcast calls.

4.0 REFERENCES

Andersen, D.E., S. DeStefano, M.I. Goldstein, K. Titus, C. Crocker-Bedford, J.J. Keane, R.G. Anthony,

and R.N. Rosenfield. 2004. Status of Northern Goshawks in the Western United States. Technical

Review 04-1. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, MD. February.

Crocker-Bedford, D.C. and B. Chaney. 1988. Characteristics of goshawk nesting stands. Pages 210-217

in R. Glinski, B.G. Pendleton, M.B. Moss, B.A. Millsap, and S.W. Hoffman, eds. Southwest Raptor

Management Symposium and Workshop, National Wildlife Federation Science and Technical Series

No. 11.

Foster, V.S., B. Noble, K. Bratland, and R. Joos. 2010. Management Indicator Species of the Kaibab

National Forest: An Evaluation of Population and Habitat Trends. Version 3.0. U.S. Forest Service,

Kaibab National Forest,

Lang, P.A. 1994. Spatial analysis of northern goshawk ponderosa pine nest site habitat in east-central

Arizona. M.S. Thesis, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.

Reynolds, R.T., R.T. Graham, M.H. Reiser, R.L. Bassett, P.L. Kennedy, D.A. Boyce, G. Goodwin, R.

Smith, and E.L. Fisher. 1992. Management recommendations for the northern goshawk in the

southwestern United States. General Technical Report RM-217. U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experimental Station, Fort Collins, CO.

Reynolds, R.T., S.M. Joy, and D.G. Leslie. 1994. Nest productivity, fidelity, and spacing of northern

goshawks in northern Arizona. Studies in Avian Biology 16:106-113.

Reynolds, R.T., J.D. Wiens, and S.R. Salafsky. 2006. A review and evaluation of factors limiting northern

goshawk populations. Studies in Avian Biology 31:260-273.

Woodbridge, B. and C.D. Hargis. 2006. Northern Goshawk Inventory and Monitoring Technical Guide.

General Technical Report WO-71. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC.

July.


8

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS

This survey report was prepared by TEC Inc. for the Town of Pinetop-Lakeside. Members of the

professional staff are listed below.

Rick Spaulding, SR. WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST

M.S., Wildlife and Fisheries Science

Jason Thomas, WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST

B.A., Field Ecology

appendix c – northern goshawk...

Documents