non-invasive survey of forest carnivores in the …€¦ · non-invasive survey of forest...

NON-INVASIVE SURVEY OF FOREST CARNIVORES IN THENORTHERN CASCADES OF OREGON, USA

JAMIE E MCFADDEN-HILLER1

Oregon Wildlife, PO Box 30406, Portland, OR 97294 USA

TIM L HILLER1

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Division, 4034 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, Salem, OR97302 USA

ABSTRACT—Several species of forest carnivores are of state or federal concern in Oregon and are

or may be sensitive to timber management practices, wildfires, climate change, and other large-

scale disturbances. We implemented a non-invasive survey of forest carnivores in the northern

Cascades of Oregon during fall–spring, 2012–2014. We collected 111,148 images from 21 elevated

and 39 ground-level baited camera stations located from 586 to 2237 m in elevation. We detected

($1 image) Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) at 9 ground stations, of which 4 also detected Coyote (Canis

latrans). We detected American Marten (Martes americana) at 63% of all stations (elevation range 5

1252–2237 m), including 5 of 7 stations located in areas that experienced wildfires since 1996 that

covered .5000 ha. Other forest carnivores detected included Bobcat (Lynx rufus), Black Bear (Ursus

americanus), Mountain Lion (Puma concolor), Northern Raccoon (Procyon lotor), American Mink

(Neovison vison), weasel (Mustela spp.), and skunk (Mephitis mephitis, Spilogale gracilis); but we did

not detect Wolverine (Gulo gulo), Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis), Fisher (Martes pennanti), or Gray

Wolf (Canis lupus). Future periodic non-invasive surveys of forest carnivores may provide

information about changing species composition and distribution, especially in relation to climate

change, vegetation succession, and potential recolonization by Gray Wolves.

Key words: American Marten, camera survey, carnivore, Cascades, Gulo gulo, Martes americana,

Martes caurina, Sierra Nevada Red Fox, Oregon, Vulpes vulpes necator, Wolverine

Several species of forest carnivores in thePacific Northwest (OR, WA) are consideredsensitive because there is evidence of significantcurrent or predicted decreasing trends in pop-ulation abundance or in existing distribution ofthe species of interest (US Forest Service 2005).Factors considered detrimental to many forestcarnivore species include forest fragmentationthrough clear-cutting, landscape-scale wildfires,and climate change (Ruggiero and others 1994;McKelvey and others 2011). Carnivore speciesthat may be particularly susceptible to suchlarge-scale disturbances include Sierra NevadaRed Fox (Vulpes vulpes necator), Wolverine (Gulogulo), and American Marten (Martes americana).

Two indigenous subspecies of Red Fox occu-py Oregon, but non-native Red Foxes (e.g.,

eastern U.S. subclade) are also present in Oregon(Statham and others 2012). The native RockyMountain Red Fox (V. v. macroura) is distributedin montane systems within many Rocky Moun-tain states, and extends into the WallowaMountains in northeastern Oregon (Ables1975). In Oregon, the native Sierra Nevada RedFox was lumped with the Cascades subspecies(V. v. cascadensis) of Washington until recentevidence suggested the current classificationbased on their closer phylogenic relationshipwith Sierra Nevada Red Fox in California (Sacksand others 2010). This montane subspecies wasonce widespread throughout high-elevationareas of California in the southern Cascadesand the Sierra Nevada, but its distribution inOregon is largely unknown. In California, thereare only 2 known populations with totalnumbers estimated to be ,50 individuals(Statham and others 2012). Sympatric Coyotes(Canis latrans) may compete with and exhibit

1 Current address: Forest and Wildlife ResearchCenter, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State,MS 39762 USA

NORTHWESTERN NATURALIST 96:107–117 AUTUMN 2015

107

agonistic behavior toward Red Foxes, althoughthis is largely unknown for montane subspecies(Perrine 2005). The Sierra Nevada Red Fox waspetitioned for listing under the federal Endan-gered Species Act (ESA) during 2011, witha listing determination currently under review(US Fish and Wildlife Service 2011).

In 1936, the Wolverine was thought to havebeen extirpated from Oregon; however, therehas been at least 1 record per decade during1960–1999 based on information collected by theOregon Department of Fish and Wildlife([ODFW]; Hiller 2011). Three individuals weredetected in the Eagle Cap Wilderness duringa 2011–2012 survey in northeastern Oregon,although there was no evidence that any ofthese individuals were female (Magoun andothers 2013). Wolverines have been protected inOregon since 1967, were listed as threatenedunder the Oregon ESA in 1987, and at the timeof this writing, were not considered threatenedin the contiguous US under the federal ESA (USFish and Wildlife Service 2014).

Habitat for American Marten typically in-cludes late successional coniferous and mixedforests with .30% canopy cover (see Clark andothers 1987; Strickland and Douglas 1987). ThePacific Northwest has experienced intensivelogging during the past century and thedistribution of martens in this region is largelydiscontinuous because of fragmented patches offorest cover (Gibilisco 1994). Based on stateagency harvest data, the average annualnumber of martens harvested in the OregonCascades (and statewide) has decreased sub-stantially during recent decades, but disentan-gling the potential factors such as decreasingabundance and decreasing harvest effort caus-ing changes in harvest levels continues to provedifficult (Hiller 2011; Hiller and others 2011).

We implemented a 2-y non-invasive survey tocollect data on forest carnivores in the OregonCascades. We concentrated our efforts in wil-derness areas specifically to collect presenceand distribution data using baited camerastations for Red Fox, Wolverine (if present),and American Marten, but also to collecthair and scat samples for DNA analysis forRed Fox and Wolverine. Our objective with thispaper is to describe our detections of forestcarnivores, with additional efforts to providemore detailed information on Red Fox. We also

describe published and unpublished informa-tion on relatively rare forest carnivores thathave historically been detected on or near ourstudy area, although information available oncarnivore surveys in Oregon was limited.

METHODS

Study Area

Our study area included portions of theWillamette (about 6900 km2) and Deschutes(about 7300 km2) National Forests in thenorthern Cascade Range of Oregon, with ourefforts concentrated in the Mt. Jefferson, Mt.Washington, and Three Sisters wilderness areas(Fig. 1). Within Oregon, the Cascade Rangeextends the full distance from north to southborders and is divided into 2 ecoregions: theWest Cascades and the East Cascades. Withinthe wetter West Cascades ecoregion (west slopeof the Cascades), forests are dominated byDouglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). This ecore-gion experienced a substantial reduction in old-growth Douglas-fir during the past century, butoverall this ecoregion is considered to berelatively healthy within the state (ODFW2006). The drier East Cascades ecoregion (eastslope) is dominated by Ponderosa Pine (Pinusponderosa) and Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta)and has experienced major forest structural andcomposition changes through altered fire re-gimes (fire suppression, wildfires), changingforest practices, and increasing urbanizationand recreational use (ODFW 2006). Othervegetation on our study area included SilverFir (Abies amabilis), Sub-alpine Fir (Abies lasio-carpa), Mountain Hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana),Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), andalpine meadows. Our study area has had 2stand-replacing burns .5000 ha since 1996. TheB & B Complex fires in summer 2003 coveredapproximately 36,720 ha between Mt. Jeffersonand Cache Mountain, and the Pole Creek fire insummer 2012 involved approximately 10,760 hain northeastern Three Sisters Wilderness andextending east outside of the wilderness area.Santiam Pass (1468 m in elevation), between theMt. Jefferson and Mt. Washington wildernessareas, generally experiences snowfall during 10mon of each year, with a monthly peak of 262cm of snow depth during March (WesternRegional Climate Center 2013). Snowfall andsnow depth typically increase with increasing

108 NORTHWESTERN NATURALIST 96(2)

elevation in the study area. Average minimum(26.96C) and maximum (22.86C) daily tempera-tures occur during January and July, respec-tively (Western Regional Climate Center 2013).

Field Methods

Our study was conducted during October2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014,

using non-invasive survey methods primarily tocollect data (presence and distribution) onmammalian forest carnivores within the studyarea. We used 2 types of baited camera stations,elevated and ground, with the former designedfor mammalian carnivores capable of climbing(American Marten, Wolverine) and the latterdesigned for both climbing and non-climbingmammalian carnivores (Red Fox). Elevated

FIGURE 1. Locations of baited camera stations (solid circles) implemented as part of a non-invasive survey offorest carnivores in 3 US Forest Service wilderness areas (hashed areas) and adjacent areas in the Deschutes andWillamette National Forests, Cascade Range, Oregon, October 2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014.

AUTUMN 2015 MCFADDEN-HILLER AND HILLER: OREGON FOREST CARNIVORE SURVEY 109

stations included a wire cable secured between2 trees and about 3 to 4 m aboveground, baitsuspended by cable 2 to 3 m aboveground (orabove snow, depending on presence of snow)near one of those trees, and during the 1st fieldseason, a climbing platform and hair-snaggingdevice designed to collect samples from Wol-verine (Fig. 2; Magoun and others 2011).Ground stations consisted of bait wrapped inpoultry fencing and secured about 1 m above-ground to the bole of a tree, with hair-snaggingdevices installed if Red Fox were suspected orknown to be in the vicinity. Hair-snaggingdevices consisted of a series of gun brushesmounted horizontally around the tree baseusing corrugated plastic (Fig. 3; Figura andKnox 2010). Cameras were mounted 2 to 3 m(elevated) or about 2 m (ground) abovegroundto nearby trees and positioned to obtain imagesthat maximized the area where target specieswould likely be positioned while visiting eitherstation type, but also allowing visual identifica-tion of species. Three stations consisted of bothelevated baits and ground baits, which we referto as ground stations because of increasedaccess offered to wildlife species.

We non-randomly selected station locationsbased on topographical and ecological featuressuch as avalanche chutes and the presence ofMountain Goats (Oreamnos americanus), winteraccess, and historical detections and currentdetections or reported sightings of carnivores,particularly Wolverines and Red Fox, to in-crease the probability of detections. However,we also selected other station locations in anattempt to distribute stations within our largestudy area, but within time and budgetaryconstraints, and to meet our objectives for otherforest carnivores such as American Marten.Clumped locations of stations during our studygenerally were the result of increasing ourability to collect data (images, DNA samples)where Red Fox were known to occur or selectinga station location during the 2nd field seasonthat was relatively close to a station that hadbeen used during the 1st field season (Fig. 1).

We used infrared Bushnell Trophy Cam HD(Overland Park, KS) and non-infrared TrailWatcher model 2035 and 2040 (Monticello,GA) motion-sensing digital cameras at stationsusing bait that typically consisted of 5- to 20-kgportions of salvaged Black-tailed or Mule Deer

(Odocoileus hemionus), Elk (Cervus canadensis), orAmerican Beaver (Castor canadensis), dependingon site location, station design, and availabilityof bait. We also used a skunk-essence- basedlure (Gusto, Minnesota Trapline Products, Pen-nock, MN) as an attractant applied about 2 maboveground on nearby trees. We recordedlocation (UTM) and elevation of each stationusing a handheld GPS unit. Bait and equipmentwere transported by non-mechanical means(horse, human) within wilderness areas. Weattempted to monitor cameras every 2 to 6 wk,depending on weather conditions, avalancherisk, and other factors. Using digital images, weattempted to identify every mammalian speciesthat visited each station, but we did not attemptto identify all smaller non-Carnivora mammals(such as Sciuridae). We did not attempt toestimate number of individuals of any givenspecies at any given station, but rather defineddetection at a given station as $1 image, wherespecies identification was confirmed at thatstation.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We collected a total of 111,148 digital imagesfrom 21 elevated and 39 ground stations over3555 camera-days during both field seasons.Disparities between the 1st and 2nd fieldseasons (i.e., first field season 5 24% of totalnumber of images, 53% of total number ofstations, 60% of total camera-days) were relatedto camera malfunctions, differences in amountof volunteer assistance, and our increasingknowledge of the study area. During the 2ndfield season, 5 stations were located #400 mfrom the nearest station active during the 1stfield season because those locations wereassumed to be of high importance for detectingWolverines, if present. Due to an error witha camera setting, 1 camera collected only digitalvideos, which we used to identify speciesdetected at that station. Cameras were activeat stations for an average of 59.3 d (SE 5 6.9,range 5 2 to 212). A minimum of 12 cameraswere active at any given time during our studyexcept during the first (construction of stations)and last (removal of stations) months of eachfield season. Elevation of stations ranged from586 to 2237 m (median 5 1548 m; Fig. 4).Stations were located, based on NatureServeExplorer (2014) ecological classification system,


in Silver Fir-Mountain Hemlock forests (50.0%),subalpine forests and woodlands (10.0%), west-ern Oregon Douglas-fir-hemlock forests (10.0%),coastal and valley lowland riparian forests andshrublands (5.0%), Lodgepole Pine forestsand woodlands (5.0%), Ponderosa Pine forestsand woodlands (5.0%), Siskiyou mixed coniferforests and woodlands (5.0%), mixed coniferforests (3.3%), old field-clearcut (3.3%), alpineand subalpine habitats (1.7%), and lava flows(1.7%). Three and 4 stations were located in thePole Creek burn area and B & B Complex burnarea, respectively. At least 15 different mam-malian species, of which 12 were of the OrderCarnivora, were detected during our study(Table 1).

We detected Red Fox at 23% of groundstations (Table 1, Fig. 3; n 5 9 of 39 total groundstations: 27% of ground stations during 1stseason, 21% during 2nd season; elevation range5 1545–1988 m for all detections). Our detec-tions (and other evidence not reported here) ofRed Foxes included areas near high human use(such as Hoodoo Ski Area, Mt. Bachelor SkiArea), and of each of the 3 primary pelagecolorations (silver, cross, red). Ground stationswith detections of Red Fox were located inSilver Fir-Mountain Hemlock montane forests(77.8%), Lodgepole Pine forests and woodlands(11.1%), and subalpine forests and woodlands(11.1%). Of the 5 ground stations locatedin previous stand-replacing burns, 2 stations

FIGURE 2. American Marten detected at an elevated baited camera station with hair-snagging devicedesigned for climbing carnivores during non-invasive forest carnivore survey, Deschutes and WillametteNational Forests, Cascade Range, Oregon, October 2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014.


located in the Pole Creek burn resulted ina detection of $1 Red Fox. Preliminary geneticanalysis provided additional evidence to sug-gest that Red Foxes on our study area are theindigenous Sierra Nevada subspecies (TL Hill-er, unpubl. data).

Coyotes were detected at 4 of the groundstations that also detected Red Fox, includingthose located in the Pole Creek burn. Stationswith detections of Coyotes were located inSilver Fir-Mountain Hemlock forests (41.7%),Lodgepole Pine forests and woodlands (25.0%),old field-clearcut (16.7%), mixed conifer forests(8.3%), and western Oregon Douglas-fir-Hem-lock forests (8.3%).

We detected American Marten at 63% of allstations (Table 1, Fig. 2; n 5 38 of 60 stationstotal: 72% of stations during 1st season, 54%

during 2nd season; elevation range 5 1252–2237m for all detections). Martens seemed welldistributed on our study area based on themajority of stations resulting in detections(Table 1). Stations with marten detections oc-curred in Silver Fir-Mountain Hemlock forests(73.7%), subalpine forests and woodlands(13.2%), Lodgepole Pine forests and woodlands(5.3%), alpine and subalpine habitats (2.6%),Siskiyou mixed conifer forests and woodlands(2.6%), and western Oregon Douglas-fir-Hem-lock forests (2.6%). The percentage of totalcameras with $1 marten detection by monthwas relatively consistent, but highest duringJanuary and lowest during May (Fig. 5). Mar-tens typically avoid large, open expanses (suchas those resulting from clearcuts or stand-replacing fires), but such areas may be traversed

FIGURE 3. Red Fox detected at a ground-level baited camera station with hair-snagging device designed forclimbing and non-climbing carnivores during non-invasive forest carnivore survey, Deschutes and WillametteNational Forests, Cascade Range, Oregon, October 2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014.


or serve as sink habitat and become increasinglyused about 15 y post-disturbance (Soutiere 1979;Slough 1989; Paragi and others 1996; Gosse andothers 2005). We had detections of martens in 3of 4 stations within the area of the B & BComplex burn (about 10 y post-burn) and 2 of 3

stations within the area of the Pole Creek burn(1 to 2 y post-burn). Each of these was a stand-replacement burn with relatively little cover.

Unusual detections included Northern Rac-coon (Procyon lotor) at an elevated station at1814 m elevation in the Pole Creek burn area in

TABLE 1. Wildlife species detected using non-invasive survey methods (2 types of baited camera stations),northern Cascades of Oregon, October 2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014.

OrderSpecies

Number of elevatedstations (n 5 21)

Number of groundstationsa (n 5 39)

CarnivoraAmerican Marten (Martes americana) 19 19Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) 0 9American Mink (Neovison vison) 0 1Long-tailed Weasel (Mustela frenata) 0 2Short-tailed Weasel (Mustela erminea) 0 2American Black Bear (Ursus americanus) 2 5Coyote (Canis latrans) 3 9Bobcat (Lynx rufus) 3 8Northern Raccoon (Procyon lotor) 1 0Mountain Lion (Puma concolor) 0 1Striped Skunk (Mephitis mephitis) 0 1Western Spotted Skunk (Spilogale gracilis) 0 2

RodentiaSciuridae 7 31

LagomorphaSnowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus) 0 9

ArtiodactylaMule or Black-tailed Deer (Odocoileus hemionus) 0 4

a All ground stations had bait generally accessible to terrestrial mammals, but 3 ground stations also had elevated baits.

FIGURE 4. Distribution of elevations of baited camera stations implemented as part of a non-invasive surveyof forest carnivores in the Deschutes and Willamette National Forests, Cascade Range, Oregon, October 2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014.


the Three Sisters Wilderness during January2013; alternating detections of Northern Rac-coon and American Marten occurred at thisstation. Northern Raccoons have been describedin Oregon as ‘‘. . . common along the coast andfoothill streams and lakes. . . but absent fromthe higher parts of the mountains’’ (Bailey1936:315). Kaufmann (1982) stated that North-ern Raccoons are rarely found in mountainsabove 2000 m. We are aware of 2 other NorthernRaccoon detections within Oregon under con-ditions similar to ours. A detection occurred at1535 m in elevation in the southern Cascadesduring a mustelid survey (Farrell and others1996), and a recent detection occurred withinthe Eagle Cap Wilderness in northeasternOregon at a baited camera station duringJanuary 2014 (B Ratliff, ODFW, Baker City,OR, pers. comm.). The latter detection occurredat 1810 m in elevation, and American Martenand Wolverine were also detected at thislocation during winter 2013–2014. We speculatethat our detection was a potential dispersalevent rather than a translocation because: (1) itwas 19 km from the small town of Sisters,Oregon (human population 5 2100); (2) rac-coons have been documented to move $266 km(Priewert 1961; Lynch 1967); and (3) the trans-location of raccoons is illegal in Oregon (ODFW

2012) and translocation to such a remote androadless location seemed unlikely. Other un-usual detections included Striped (Mephitismephitis) and Western Spotted (Spilogale gracilis)skunks (elevation 5 1559 and 1475 m, respec-tively) at ground stations about 8 km south ofCamp Sherman, Oregon during November2013, also at elevations much higher thanexpected.

During our study, we did not detect Wolver-ine, Fisher (Martes pennanti), Gray Wolf (Canislupus), or Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis), thelast of which included only 17 records statewideduring 1897–1993 (Hiller 2011). Verts and Carr-away (1998) considered Wolverine observationsin Oregon to be associated with unusualdispersal events by individuals and not repre-sentative of self-sustaining populations. Despiteseveral efforts, no Wolverines have been con-firmed in Oregon since 1992 based on ODFWrecords until Magoun and others (2013) de-tected 3 in northeastern Oregon. A Wolverinewas confirmed in northern California during2008, with evidence suggesting it was of RockyMountain origin, but no evidence confirmingwhether it dispersed, and if so, its dispersalpath (Moriarty and others 2009). We had noevidence of Wolverines occurring within thenorthern Cascades of Oregon during our study,

FIGURE 5. Percentage of baited camera stations with $1 marten detection during the respective month,Deschutes and Willamette National Forests, Cascade Range, Oregon, October 2012–May 2013 and October 2013–June 2014. Sample size (n) equals total number of baited camera stations active by month.


although the Cascades may at minimum haveserved historically as a dispersal corridor basedon documentation of individuals during pastdecades in California and Oregon (Aubry andothers 2007).

During January–March 2014, ,22 km south ofour nearest baited camera station, $1 Fisherwas confirmed through digital images at a bai-ted camera station (elevation 5 1080 m) near theMiddle Fork Willamette River in the WillametteNational Forest (B. Wolfer, ODFW, Springfield,OR, pers. comm.). This detection was approxi-mately 19 km north of locations obtained during2000 from a radiomarked Fisher from thenearest of 2 known populations in Oregon(J Kittrell, US Forest Service, Crescent, OR, pers.comm.; Lofroth and others 2010). During June2014, the 1st documented reproduction of GrayWolves in the Oregon Cascades since the 1940soccurred (ODFW 2014a). Oregon’s wolf popu-lation has steadily increased in both distributionand abundance (2013 estimated minimum 5 64wolves) since 2009 (ODFW 2014b). If thispattern continues, as has occurred in otherwestern states, it would be logical to assumethat the Oregon Cascades may have some levelof resident packs during the coming decades.

The composition and distribution of mamma-lian carnivore communities in Oregon (andother states) has changed substantially duringthe past century and may continue to do so.Changes in forest management practices andthe cessation of unregulated harvest (such asmarket hunting) and state or federal protectionshave benefitted wildlife species such as sensi-tive forest carnivores to varying degrees. Aspopulations of Gray Wolves continue to recoverin western states, a restructuring of predatorcommunities may result (Dekker 1989; Levi andWilmers 2012). Species such as Coyotes andNorthern Raccoons have experienced rangeexpansions for decades through anthropogeniclandscape-scale effects, and potentially climatechange (Moore and Parker 1992; Gehrt 2003,Lariviere 2004). It is possible that these gener-alist species will also increase latitudinal distri-bution should climate change continue to createfavorable conditions for them in areas pre-viously unoccupied. In addition to our results,we also discussed detections that were not partof our study. As a whole, this further illustratesthe importance of monitoring forest carnivore

populations in an effort to collect data onpresence and distribution in Oregon and withinthe Pacific Northwest. For example, additionalresearch on Sierra Nevada Red Fox in theOregon Cascades is critical to ascertain distri-bution, abundance, habitat requirements,potential hybridization with non-native sub-species, and assess ecological relationships withCoyotes (and potentially Gray Wolves) to makeinformed conservation and management deci-sions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the US Forest Service Deschutes and

Willamette National Forests biologists, especially M

Gregg and J Doerr; ODFW biologists, especially theMarion Forks Fish Hatchery; Camp Sherman Hasty

Team (search and rescue), especially K Beardsley; E

Weidner and J Nelson, Oregon State University; andnumerous other individuals for assistance with field

work. We also thank A Magoun (Wildlife Research

and Management), B Sacks (University of California,Davis), and D Pedersen for assistance with field

methods. Our research was funded by the Oregon

Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and WildlifeService, Oregon Wildlife (Heritage Foundation), US

Forest Service Deschutes and Willamette National

Forests, CM Bishop Jr Family Fund of the Oregon

Community Foundation, The Wolverine Foundation,Oregon Zoo, The Norcross Foundation, and the

Oregon Trappers Association. Our study was con-

ducted under US Forest Service Special Use Permit#SIS515 and Minimum Requirements Decision Guide.

M Gregg and J Doerr provided comments that

improved an early draft of our manuscript. Commentsfrom the Associate Editor and 2 anonymous reviewers

were appreciated and also improved our manuscript.

LITERATURE CITED

ABLES ED. 1975. Ecology of the red fox in North

America. In: Fox MW, editor. The wild canids:

Their systematics, behavioral ecology and evolu-tion. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold

Company. p 216–236.

AUBRY KB, MCKELVEY KS, COPELAND JP. 2007.Distribution and broadscale habitat relations of

the Wolverine in the contiguous United States.

Journal of Wildlife Management 71:2147–2158.

BAILEY V. 1936. The mammals and life zones of

Oregon. North American Fauna No. 55. US De-

partment of Agriculture, Bureau of Biological

Survey, Washington, DC.

CLARK TW, ANDERSON E, DOUGLAS C, STRICKLAND M.

1987. Martes americana. American Society of

Mammalogists, Mammalian Species 289:1–8.


DEKKER D. 1989. Population fluctuations and spatial

relationships among Wolves, Canis lupus, Coyotes,

Canis latrans, and Red Foxes, Vulpes vulpes, in

Jasper National Park, Alberta. Canadian Field-

Naturalist 103:261–264.

*FARRELL T, WIDMANN M, DAVIS R. 1996. Report on

the 1995-1996 survey to determine the occurrence,

distribution and habitat association of Wolverine,

Fisher and Marten in the Umpqua National Forest.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and

Umpqua National Forest, Report no. 95-2-04.

*FIGURA P, KNOX L. 2010. A lightweight, tree-mounted

hair snare for mesocarnivores. Redding, CA:

California Department of Fish and Game.

GEHRT SD. 2003. Raccoon. In: Feldhamer GA, Thomp-

son BC, and Chapman JA, editors. Wild mammals

of North America: Biology, management, and

conservation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Uni-

versity Press. p 611–634.

GIBILISCO CJ. 1994. Distributional dynamics of modern

Martes in North America. In: Buskirk SW, Harestad

AS, Raphael MG, Powell RA, editors. Martens,

Sables, and Fishers: Biology and conservation.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. p 59–71.

GOSSE JW, COX R, AVERY SW. 2005. Home-range

characteristics and habitat use by American Mar-

tens in eastern Newfoundland. Journal of Mam-

malogy 86:1156–1163.

HILLER TL. 2011. Oregon furbearer program report,

2010–2011. Salem, OR: Oregon Department of

Fish and Wildlife. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/

resources/hunting/small_game/docs/_furbearer_

report.pdf. Accessed 21 February 2014.

HILLER TL, ETTER DR, BELANT JL, TYRE AJ. 2011.

Factors affecting harvests of Fishers and American

Martens in northern Michigan. Journal of Wildlife

Management 75:1399–1405.

KAUFMANN JH. 1982. Raccoon and allies. In: Chapman

JA, Feldhamer GA, editors. Wild mammals of

North America: Biology, management, and eco-

nomics. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University

Press. p 567–585.

LARIVIERE S. 2004. Range expansion of raccoons in the

Canadian prairies: Review of hypotheses. Wildlife

Society Bulletin 32:955–963.

LEVI T, WILMERS CC. 2012. Wolves-Coyotes-Foxes: A

cascade among carnivores. Ecology:921–929.

LOFROTH EC, RALEY CM, HIGLEY JM, TRUEX RL,

YAEGER JS, LEWIS JC, HAPPE PJ, FINLEY LL, NANEY

RH, HALE LJ, KRAUSE AL, LIVINGSTON SA, MYERS

AM, BROWN RN. 2010. Conservation of Fishers

(Martes pennanti) in south-central British Colum-

bia, western Washington, western Oregon, and

California, volume I: Conservation assessment.

Denver, CO: USDI Bureau of Land Management.165 p.

LYNCH GM. 1967. Long-range movement of a Raccoonin Manitoba. Journal of Mammalogy 48:659–660.

MAGOUN AJ, LONG CD, SCHWARTZ MK, PILGRIM KL,LOWELL RE, VALKENBURG P. 2011. Integratingmotion-detection cameras and hair snags forWolverine identification. Journal of Wildlife Man-agement 75:731–739.

MAGOUN AJ, VALKENBURG P, LONG CD, LONG JK.2013. Monitoring Wolverines in Northeast Oregon,January 2011–December 2012, final report. Kuna,ID: The Wolverine Foundation, Inc. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/docs/Wallo-wa%20Wolverine%20Final%20Report_2013_pro-tected.pdf. Accessed 21 February 2014.

MCKELVEY KS, COPELAND JP, SCHWARTZ MK, LITTELL

JS, AUBRY KB, SQUIRES JB, PARKS SA, ELSNER MM,MAUGER GS. 2011. Climate change predicted toshift Wolverine distributions, connectivity, anddispersal corridors. Ecological Applications 21:2882–2897.

MOORE GC, PARKER GR. 1992. Colonization by theEastern Coyote (Canis latrans). In: Boer AH, editor.Ecology and management of the Eastern Coyote.Fredericton, NB: Wildlife Research Unit, Universi-ty of New Brunswick. p 23–37.

MORIARTY KM, ZIELINSKI WJ, GONZALES AG, DAWSON

TE, BOATNER KM, WILSON CA, SCHLEXER FV,PILGRIM KL, COPELAND JP, SCHWARTZ MK. 2009.Wolverine confirmation in California after nearlya century: Native or long-distance immigrant?Northwest Science 83:154–162.

NATURESERVE EXPLORER. 2014. Ecological classifica-tions. http://explorer.natureserve.org/classeco.htm#usvegclassification. Accessed 17 October2014.

[ODFW] OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.2006. The Oregon conservation strategy. Salem,OR: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.http://www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/contents.asp#spec. Accessed 24 February 2013.

[ODFW] OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.2012. Oregon administrative rules, division 044.Holding, propagating, rehabilitating, and protectedwildlife. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/OARs/44.pdf. Accessed 2 June 2014.

[ODFW] OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.2014a. Pups for wolf OR7. ODFW resources, pressreleases, June 4, 2014.Salem, OR: Oregon Depart-ment of Fish and Wildlife. http://dfw.state.or.us/news/2014/june/060414.asp. Accessed 9 June2014.

[ODFW] OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE.2014b. Oregon wolf conservation and management2013 annual report. Salem, OR: Oregon Depart-ment of Fish and Wildlife. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/commission/minutes/14/03_march/* Unpublished


Exhibit%20E_Attachment%202_OR%20Wolf%20Conservation%20&%20Management_2013%20Annual%20Report.pdf. Accessed 24 June 2014.

PARAGI TF, JOHNSON WN, KATNIK DD, MAGOUN AJ.1996. Marten selection of postfire seres in theAlaskan taiga. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74:2226–2237.

PERRINE JD. 2005. Ecology of Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) inthe Lassen Peak Region of California, USA[dissertation]. Berkeley, CA: University of Califor-nia, Berkeley. 236 p.

PRIEWERT FW. 1961. Record of an extensive movementby a Raccoon. Journal of Mammalogy 42:113.

RUGGIERO LF, AUBRY KB, BUSKIRK SW, LYON LJ,ZIELINSKI WJ, editors. 1994. The scientific basis forconserving forest carnivores: American Marten,Fisher, Lynx and Wolverine in the western UnitedStates. General Technical Report RM-254. FortCollins, CO: US Department of Agriculture, ForestService, Rocky Mountain and Range ExperimentStation. 186 p.

SACKS BN, STATHAM MJ, PERRINE JD, WISELY SM,AUBRY KB. 2010. North American montane redfoxes: Expansion, fragmentation, and the origin ofthe Sacramento Valley Red Fox. ConservationGenetics 1523–1539.

SACKS BN, MOORE M, STATHAM MJ, WITTMERS HU.2011. A restricted hybrid zone between native andintroduced Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) populationssuggests reproductive barriers and competitiveexclusion. Molecular Ecology 20:326–341.

SLOUGH BG. 1989. Movements and habitat use bytransplanted marten in the Yukon Territory.Journal of Wildlife Management 53:991–997.

SOUTIERE EC. 1979. Effects of timber harvesting onmarten in Maine. Journal of Wildlife Management43:850–860.

STATHAM MJ, RICH AC, LISLUS SK, SACKS BN. 2012.Discovery of a remnant population of SierraNevada Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes necator). NorthwestScience 86:122–132.

STATHAM MJ, SACKS BN, AUBRY KB, PERRINE JD,WISELY SM. 2012. The origin of recently established

red fox populations in the United States: transloca-

tions or natural range expansions? Journal of

Mammalogy 93:52–65.

STRICKLAND MJ, DOUGLAS CW. 1987. Marten. In:

Novak M, Baker JA, Obbard ME, Malloch B,

editors. Wild furbearer management and conser-

vation in North America. Toronto, ON: Ministry of

Natural Resources. p 530–546.

US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 2011. Endangered

and threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day finding

on a petition to list Sierra Nevada Red Fox as endan-

gered or threatened. Federal register, volume

77, number 1. http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/

outreach/2011/12-30/documents/SNRF-90day

finding.pdf. Accessed 21 February 2014.

US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 2014. Endangered and

threatened wildlife and plants; threatened status

for the Distinct Population Segment of the North

American Wolverine occurring in the contiguous

United States; establishment of a nonessential

experimental population of the North American

Wolverine in Colorado, Wyoming, and New

Mexico. Federal register, volume 79, number 156.

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/

mammals/wolverine/. Accessed 17 October 2014.

US FOREST SERVICE. 2005. Forest Service manual, FSM

2600: Wildlife, fish, and sensitive plant habitat

management, chapter 2670: Threatened, endan-

gered and sensitive plants and animals. http://

www.fs.fed.us/im/directives/dughtml/serv_fsm.

html. Accessed 9 June 2014.

VERTS BJ, CARRAWAY LN. 1998. Land mammals of

Oregon. Berkeley, CA: University of California

Press. 668 p.

WESTERN REGIONAL CLIMATE CENTER. 2013. Period of

record, monthly climate summary, Santiam Pass,

Oregon (357559). http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-

bin/cliMAIN.pl?or7559. Accessed 25 June 2013.

Submitted 2 July 2014, accepted 21 November 2014.Corresponding Editor: Denim Jochimsen.


non-invasive survey of forest carnivores in the …€¦ · non-invasive survey of forest...

Documents