View
7
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Don Swann, Kara O’Brien, and Chuck Perger
Saguaro National Park, Tucson, Arizona
Fire effects on tinajas and amphibian habitat at Saguaro National Park
Mike Sredl (Arizona Game and Fish) Ann Youberg (Arizona Geological Survey)
Adam Springer (Chiricahua National Monument) Eric Wallace, Erin Zylstra, Kris Ratzlaff (UA)
Cecil Schwalbe, John Parker (USGS) Dennis Caldwell (Tucson Herpetological Society)
Josh Taiz, Tom Skinner (USNFS) Mike Ward, Perry Grissom (Saguaro National Park)
Thanks to:
Outline
Saguaro National Park – east and west
Saguaro National Park – east – Rincon Mountain District
Saguaro NP – Rincon Mountain District
Sky Island ecological zones
• Historic fire return interval ~ 10 years
• Periodic fire stimulates regeneration, promotes nutrient recycling, protects forests from catastrophic fire
• Increase in very large wildfires during past few decades
Fire in Rincon Mountains and other Sky Islands
Mixed Conifer (7500-9500 feet)
Ponderosa pine (7000-8700 feet)
Surface water - intermittent streams
Springs and tanks
Tinajas – “earthenware jar” in Spanish
Major source of water in Rincons during dry season
Value for people, past and present
Mallard
Bobcats
Canyon treefrog
Dragonfly
Gary Slaten photo
Single-celled algae
Essential for wildlife
Lowland leopard frog (Lithobates [Rana] yavapaiensis)
Jumps! webbed feet
tadpoles ~ 9 months in water
Declining amphibians – globally and locally
Tarahumara frog (extirpated in US)
Major known populations of Lowland Leopard Frogs extirpated since 1940s near Tucson
Local declines of the lowland leopard frog
American bullfrog (non-native)
Crayfish (non-native)
Disease
Habitat loss
Lowland leopard frog habitat in Saguaro National Park
National Park Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
Tamarisk: Follow-Up Surveys
Saguaro National Park
Arizona
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂̂_̂_
_̂_̂̂_ _̂
_̂_̂̂__̂ _̂ _̂̂__̂_̂
_̂
_̂_̂
_̂̂_̂__̂
_̂
_̂
_̂_̂
_̂_̂
_̂
_̂_̂_̂
_̂̂_̂_
_̂
_̂ _̂̂_̂_
_̂
_̂̂_̂_̂_
_̂
_̂_̂̂_̂_̂_
_̂
_̂
!@
FILE:Follow_Up_Surveys.mxd
Produced by Justin Kolb, Biological Technician Data Source: Saguaro National Park
0 1 2 3 40.5Miles
July 2011
Legend
_̂ Undergoing Treatment
Features
Drainages SurveyedDrainages
5000ft elevation
6000ft elevationState Trust Land
Private Inholding
RMD BoundaryForest Service Land
Private Land
²Park-wide, biannual surveys
Loma Verde
L. Verde South
Box
Rock Spring
Wildhorse
Chimenea
Lower Rincon
Turkey
Rincon North
Rincon
Madrona
Leopard frog monitoring in Saguaro, 1996-present
Tanque Verde/Joaquin
Photograph and record water status of each tinaja (>240)
Visual encounter surveys for leopard frogs and other aquatic species
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Spri
ng
96
Fall
96
Spri
ng
97
Fall
97
Spri
ng
98
Fall
98
Spri
ng
99
Fall
99
Spri
ng
00
Fall
00
Spri
ng
01
Fall
01
Spri
ng
02
Fall
02
Spri
ng
03
Fall
03
Spri
ng
04
Fall
04
Spri
ng
05
Fall
05
Spri
ng
06
Fall
06
Spri
ng
07
Fall
07
Spri
ng
08
Fall
08
Spri
ng
09
Fall
09
Spri
ng
10
Fall
10
Spri
ng
11
Fall
11
Ave
rage
# L
ow
lan
d L
eop
ard
Fro
gs
Per
Surv
ey
Adults
Mean frog counts per biannual survey, 1996-2012
Results 1996-2011 (Zylstra et al. 2015)
Pools where frogs observed, 1996-2011 (green); pools where frogs always observed (red)
Figure 1. Predicted number of recruits (a) and monthly survival (b) of adult lowland leopard frogs (with 95% confidence intervals) as a function of surface water availability, with other model variables held constant. Zylstra et al. 2015.
More water = more frogs Juveniles surviving
Adults surviving
Before 1999 Box Canyon fire 2001 – Post Fire
Water available to frogs in tinajas is related to rain, but not always
Example: Box Canyon Fire - 6,500 acres June 16 1999
NPS photo
NPS photos
Large areas of moderate-high severity
March 12 1997 – Loma Verde Pool 10, below fire perimeter
July 7 1997 – ash in water, water temps 35-360 C (95-970 F), tadpole mortality
October 14 1999 (filled after rain of 1.2 - 2.7” on July 15 1999)
Nov. 30 1999 March 15 2001 July 12 1999
Pool 1 (about 1 mile downstream of Pool 10) filled with ash on July 12, 1999 but did not receive sediment until winter rains of 2000.
June 2002 – all pools in Loma Verde dry due to 1-2 meters of sediment – last leopard frogs died
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Loma Verde Lowland Leopard Frog Survey Data: 1996-2013
Total
Adults
Juveniles
Tadpoles
Number of frogs observed, Loma Verde Canyon, 1996-2013
Box Canyon Fire July 1999
All pools dry; Frogs disappear Spring 2002
Frogs re-appear fall 2007
Disappear early 2012
Example: 2003 Helen’s 2 Fire – 3,600 acres
NPS photo
2003 Helen’s 2 Fire – Joaquin Canyon
Parker 2006
From Parker (2006) Erosion pillars created by sheetwash
Course, poorly-sorted overbank deposits, Joaquin Canyon
November 2, 2005
July 19 2003 July 4 2003
Repeat photos – Joaquin Canyon (2003 Helen’s 2 Fire)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
01-Sep-02 14-Jan-04 28-May-05 10-Oct-06 22-Feb-08 06-Jul-09 18-Nov-10 01-Apr-12 14-Aug-13
Number of adult and juvenile frogs observed on surveys in Joaquin Canyon following 2003 Helen’s 2 Fire
Helen’s 2 Fire, June 2003
Summer 2005, no frogs detected
2007-2009; frogs returned, then disappeared again
Sediment surveys at SNP, 2005-present
How long does sediment persist in tinajas?
Sediment surveys
Bedrock contours, Madrona #2
Sediment surveys
Bedrock contours, Madrona #2 Sediment contours 2005
Sediment contours 2007 Sediment contours 2010
42%
79% 33%
How long does sediment persist?
Repeat photos – Loma Verde Canyon (1999 fire)
Shorter duration – high energy areas, larger watersheds
2001 2008 2006 2013
2001
2011
2006
Repeat photos – Loma Verde Canyon (1999 fire)
Longer duration – pools in smaller, less steep watersheds
2008
Repeat photos –Wildhorse Canyon (1989 Chiva Fire)
Longer duration – pools in low energy areas
1988
2012
2007
Mean sediment volume/pool by stream, 2005-2013
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
2005/2006 2007 2010 2013
Loma Verde – 68% burned (1999 fire)
Rincon – 73% (1994 fire)
Chimenea – 11.8% (misc. small fires)
Wildhorse – 31% 1989 fire)
34.8
41.0
36.9
28.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2005-2006 2007 2010 2013
Pe
rce
nt
Sed
ime
nt
Vo
lum
e (
%)
Year of Survey
Percent Sediment Volume Average for All Pools (+/- one standard error)
Changes in tinaja sediment volume, all combined 2005-2013
Fire, floods, and sediment good for frogs – issue of scale
Fire effects on other frogs in Arizona
Chiricahua leopard frog - threatened Photo by J. Rorabaugh
Tarahumara frog – extirpated/reintroduced AGFD photo.
Management – what can we do as land, fire, and wildlife managers?
a. Measures to prevent post-fire erosion
Log erosion barrier
Staw bale erosion barrier
**Wood strand mulch
Robichaud (2009) Robichaud et al. (2012)
b. Habitat restoration
Miller Canyon frog habitat restoration (AGFD photo).
Pool 1 being excavated partially (left) and fully (right) in 2005
b. Habitat restoration
Pool 1 on July 8, 2006
Lowland Leopard Frog in Loma Verde on October 15, 2006
Pool 1 – dry on June 6, 2013
c. Salvage and re-introduction
Chiricahua leopard frog salvage and release, Miller Canyon. Glendale Community College photos.
Backyard pond project near Saguaro National Park
d. Pre-fire actions
Letting natural fires burn
Deer Head Fire, 2014
General concepts for conservation/management
How great is the risk? How important is the population? Consider the “no-action” alternative where ever possible
Erik Enderson photo
• Time’s circle: What are the natural patterns over time?
• Time’s arrow: What are the long-term trends?
– Potential threats
– When to respond
Long-term view – ecological change and “management”
Time’s arrow, time’s circle
Healthy forests, healthy frogs
“Stand on Tanque Verde Ridge in Saguaro National Park and see, in one compelling panorama, all that makes fire management in the western U.S. problematic…Saguaro will have to be lucky as well as good.” --Steve Pyne, A Fire History of America (2012)
Recommended