Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Oregon Wildlife Movement Data
CETAS MeetingJune 16, 2009
• Land use changes
• Invasive species
• Changes in fire, flood regimes
• Water quality and quantity
• Institutional barriers to voluntary conservation
• Barriers to fish and wildlife movement
Six Key Conservation Issues
Oregon Wildlife Movement Strategy
• Provide a framework for cooperation• Promote wildlife movement and habitat permeability• Reduce the social, economic and environmental impacts of transportation and wildlife conflicts
Oregon Wildlife Movement Strategy
• ODFW data collection
Oregon Wildlife Movement StrategyWildlife Linkages
““Best place to provide Best place to provide
for animal for animal
movement needs, movement needs,
with an emphasis on with an emphasis on
areas that cross roads”areas that cross roads”
ODFW convened four workshops in 2007ODFW convened four workshops in 2007– Review session at The Wildlife Society annual meeting– Bend, Roseburg, La Grande & Alsea
Linkage areas
Oregon Wildlife Movement StrategyODFW linkage workshops
• Breakout sessions worked Breakout sessions worked with existing maps and with with existing maps and with GISGIS
• Product: Identified linkage Product: Identified linkage areas that cross areas that cross transportation corridors transportation corridors throughout the statethroughout the state
Linkages Data Forms
1. What type of linkage is provided for the focal species: Landscape – level; migratory; population (provides for genetic interchange);
historic (“missing linkage”); etc.
2. What are the most significant barriers to animal movement within the linkage area:
Development; roadways; natural barriers; etc.
3. Score the value of this linkage for this focal species: 1 (low value) 2 3 4 5 (critical value)
4. Score the overall threat to connectivity: 1 (no threat/secure) 2 3 4 5 (severe threat/loss imminent)
5. What specific opportunities are available to restore, establish or protect the linkage (i.e., known local support for restoration, land management, or acquisition)?
6. What existing features facilitate animal movement through the linkage area:
Waterway; under bridge; continual habitat; etc.
• Linkages map/data export
* exaggerated for visual aid
WILDLIFE LINKAGES
Oregon Wildlife Movement Strategy
• ODOT data collection
ODOT Wildlife Collision Hot Spot Analysis
• Conducted by Mason, Bruce and Girard, Inc.
• Existing carcass pick-up records
• Statewide, analytical approach
• Mapped high frequency wildlife-vehicle collision zones
• 12 years of data; deer/elk & ≤0.5 mi. only
USHwy
Data Preparation
Original # Records 31,595 (100%)
Step 1 - Data Processing• Narrowing Acceptable Parameters 25,216 (80%)
– Cut out records older than 1995, duplicate records, non deer/elk, low precision (> 0.5 mi)
• Tabular Information Problems 21,335 (68%) – Not enough information in recorded data
Step 2 - Linkage to GIS
• GIS Mapping Problems 17,824 (56%)*Route ≠ ODOT Highway number
* Final number of "good" records used in data analysis
Data Analysis
Nearest Neighbor AnalysisNearest Neighbor Analysis• Z-statistic to determine statistical significance of dispersion. Z-statistic to determine statistical significance of dispersion.
Monte Carlo simulations (100 random data sets). Modified for Monte Carlo simulations (100 random data sets). Modified for linear nature of data (highway system)linear nature of data (highway system)
• Results: NNI < 1.0 (indicates clustering)
Neither test identifies where the clusters occurNeither test identifies where the clusters occur
Ripley's K-Function10 distance bands (d = 1 mile)
0500
100015002000250030003500400045005000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scale distance (d) in miles
K-v
alu
e Observed
Low er CI
Upper CI
Ripley’s K-StatisticRipley’s K-Statistic• K-statistic (Levine, 2000), K-statistic (Levine, 2000),
modified for linear datamodified for linear data• Gives indication of the scales at Gives indication of the scales at
which the clusters occurwhich the clusters occur• Results: Highly significant at all Results: Highly significant at all
scalesscales
Kernel Density Evaluation
• Produces an estimate of risk for each point– Relative density of
points– Relative proximity of
points• Shows where clusters
occur• Subjective
classification– Method of categorizing– Ranking or # “bins”
* exaggerated for visual aid
Wildlife Collision Hot Spots
Oregon Wildlife Movement Strategy
• Prioritization
Integrate and set priorities
• By WMS working group• Workshop data:
– High value for focal species
– High Threat value
• Land Ownership• In a Conservation
Opportunity Area• In an ODOT Roadkill
hotspot
Result: linkages dataset with current priorities for Oregon
Next Steps
Crossing Improvements
• Hot Spot & Linkage data; precursor to more focused studies– Condition assessment, road kill surveys, wildlife
monitoring, etc.
• Typically not regulated• Competitive funding:
– FHWA Enhancement program (Category 11) – Oregon Transportation Plan (Goal 4.1.1)– Safety Funding: SAFETEA-LU Section 148
• Must take into account long-term maintenance, monitoring
• Partnerships very important
Next Steps: Implementation
• ODFW Actions– Regional coordination (District Wildlife and Fish bios)– Western Governors’ Initiative– Challenges
• Desire for web-based tool
• Monitoring & information needs
• Coordinate with Fish Passage Program
• ODFW/ODOT Liaison Program– Provide a resource to assist with project scoping– Develop site and species specific passage actions– Monitoring
• WMS – Training/outreach– Project development
For More Information on the Oregon Wildlife Movement Strategy
• Audrey Hatch, 541 – 757 – 4263 x 242; [email protected]
• Mindy Trask, (503) 986-3504 [email protected]
• www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/...
Thanks to our photographers
• Stephen Anderson
• Jason Blazar• Bruce Campbell• Claire Fiegener• Lori Hennings• Bob Hooten• Brome McCreary• Michael Murphy• Bruce Newhouse• Bruce Taylor• Jennifer Thompson• USFWS
