![Page 1: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Historical and Current Assessment of SixCovered and Three Evaluation Bird Species
Dawn Fletcher1, Milind Bunyan1, Jef Jaeger1
& Ross Haley2On behalf of Lead Agency:
Lake Mead National Recreation Area
Clark County MSHCP Annual Project Progress Report Symposium, 11 August 2010, Project: 2005-NPS-542-P & 609A
1. Public Lands Institute & School of Life Sciences, UNLV2. Resource Management, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, NPS
![Page 2: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Project Need and Objectives
Needs– Insufficient information for bird
species in Clark County
– Provide data to assess status of targeted species
Goals– Conduct Intensive area
surveys (completed in 2009)
– Compile historical observations, and conduct surveys and assessments
– Create habitat models
Gary Kuiper
![Page 3: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Targeted Species
– Arizona Bell’s Vireo– Blue Grosbeak– Bendire’s Thrasher– Gray Vireo– Le Conte’s Thrasher– Phainopepla– Summer Tanager– SW Willow Flycatcher– Vermillion Flycatcher
Robert Schnase
![Page 4: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Compiled and Reviewed Historical Observations (Historical Observation Mining)
– Researched taxonomic history using ITIS– ~ 75 different sources (museums, databases, agency
records, and publications)– Selected all data but focused our historical
assessments on pre-1994 observations. – Filtered results for eligible records, and removed
duplicate observations– Georeferenced and estimated error for each
observations
![Page 5: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
60 records discarded:
– Error buffer > 6km
– Observation within error margin of another observation
214 Total Observations within Clark County for the 9 species
Example of georeferenced observations and associated error buffer
Georeferenced observation surveyedGeoreferenced observation not surveyedError buffer for the georeferenced observation
![Page 6: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Summary of Historical (pre-1994) Observations in Clark County
– Arizona Bell’s Vireo: 10– Blue Grosbeak: 12– Bendire’s Thrasher: 6– Gray Vireo: 14– Le Conte’s Thrasher: 26– Phainopepla: 53– Summer Tanager: 9– SW Willow Flycatcher: 9 – Vermillion Flycatcher:15– Total 154
![Page 7: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Field Survey Approach
– Surveys conducted within 1km of georeferenced historic observation
– Species specific call-broadcast every 150 to 300m at ~ 5 points within buffer
– Calls of target species played twice for 30 seconds with 1 minute break
![Page 8: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Survey Area 1.8km
Error Buffer 1100m
Presence
Phainopepla
![Page 9: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Habitat Assessment
Habitat conditions assessed at each siteData collected in three main categories:
– Vegetation/habitat categories & dominant plant species – Presence of species-specific indicators (e.g. mistletoe for
Phainopepla)
– Qualitative indicators of human disturbance (i.e. presence of a road, buildings)
![Page 10: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Phainopepla 53 sites
25 Present– All had Mistletoe– 16 disturbed or heavily
disturbed – 4 moderately disturbed– 5 limited or no disturbance
28 Absent– 17 disturbed or heavily
disturbed– 3 moderately disturbed– 8 limited disturbance
Present in breeding habitatAbsent in breeding habitat
Absent, not breeding habitat
Total area surveyed = 34.9km2
![Page 11: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Bendire’s Thrasher6 sites
Present in breeding habitat
Absent in breeding habitat
Total area surveyed = 1.43km2
Dorothy Crowe
1 Present– Limited or no disturbance
5 Absent– 4 limited disturbance– 1 moderate disturbance
![Page 12: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Gray Vireo14 sites
Present in breeding habitatAbsent in breeding habitat
Absent, not breeding habitat
Total area surveyed = 10.6 km2
5 Present– 5 limited or no disturbance
9 Absent– 7 sites areas not
considered breeding habitat (eg. creosote/ bursage)
– 2 highly disturbed
![Page 13: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Blue Grosbeak12 sites
Present in breeding habitatAbsent in breeding habitat
Absent, not breeding habitat
Total area surveyed = 9.9 km2
4 Present (3 likely sites visited twice each) – 3 disturbed – 1 limited disturbance
8 Absent– 7 disturbed or heavily
disturbed– 1 no or light disturbance
(not breeding habitat)
![Page 14: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Present in breeding habitatAbsent in breeding habitat
Absent, not breeding habitat
Total area surveyed = 8.12km2
Bell’s Vireo10 sites
2 Present– 1 On golf course, heavily
disturbed
6 Absent in breeding habitat– 4 Disturbed or Heavily
Disturbed– 2 Moderately Disturbed
![Page 15: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Absent in breeding habitat
Summer Tanager9 sites
9 Absent in breeding habitat– 7 Disturbed or Heavily
Disturbed– 2 in limited disturbance,
in marginal habitat
Total area surveyed = 6.08km2
![Page 16: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Absent in Breeding Habitat
Total area surveyed = 15.1km2
Vermilion Flycatcher15 sites
15 Absent in breeding habitat– 12 sites disturbed or highly
disturbed– 1 moderate disturbance– 1 limited disturbance– 1 no disturbance
![Page 17: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Le Conte’s Thrasher25 sites
Total area surveyed = 20.4km2
Present in breeding habitat
Absent in breeding habitat
7 Present – 4 limited disturbance– 3 moderate disturbance
18 Absent – 11 disturbed or heavily
disturbed– 3 moderately disturbed– 4 light disturbance
![Page 18: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher
9 sites
Total area surveyed = 7.13km2
Present in breeding habitat
Absent in breeding habitat
9 Absent sites (2 not breeding habitat)– 5 disturbed or heavily
disturbed– 2 moderate disturbance
![Page 19: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
![Page 20: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Outline• Development of conceptual models for habitat
modeling• Acquisition of data layers• Collation of observation records• Habitat modeling process
Bendire’s Thrasher Bell’s Vireo Blue Grosbeak Crissal Thrasher Gray Vireo LeConte’s Thrasher Phainopepla Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Vermilion Flycatcher
Conceptual and Habitat Models for Six Covered and Three Evaluation Bird Species
![Page 21: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Development of Conceptual models
• Draft conceptual models delivered to County • Final conceptual models based on biologically
relevant variables– Direct influence– Indirect influence
![Page 22: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Development of Conceptual models
Predictor Biological relevance Data source(s)
Influence
Elevation Present within 1830- 2100 m, influenced by Pinyon-Juniper and separation (elevation) from Plumbeous and Bell’s vireos
Clark County DEM
Direct
Wash (Arroyos)
Presence of important vegetation types found in high-elevation washes
LAME GIS Wash layer
Direct
Vegetation Associated with: Pinyon-Juniper, bitterbrush (Purshia sp.) or cliff rose (Cowania sp.). Also with Scrub oak and Manzanita.
SWReGAP, LANDFIRE EVT
Direct
Temperature Potential upper/lower limit (present in southern NV Apr-Aug)No direct association from literature
BioClim data
Indirect
Gray vireo (Vireo vicinior)
![Page 23: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Acquisition of data layers
• Vegetation (e.g. LANDFIRE, SWReGAP, Ecosite)
• Climatic variables (e.g. BIOCLIM, SNODAS)
• Soil & Geomorphology (e.g. SSURGO, USGS & County Geomorphology datasets)
• Terrain (e.g. DEM, Slope Aspect)
• Development (e.g. County Parcel data, TIGER, BLM Designated routes)
• Landform (SWReGAP, Ph.D. dissertation)
• Hydrology (e.g. Washes, Lake Level, Minor & major streams)
Data layers evaluated for adequacy for modeling purposes, new layers generated in some instances
![Page 24: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Acquisition of data layers
SW ReGAP
LANDFIRE
County ‘98Cluster analysis in R�
Example: Pinyon-Juniper
![Page 25: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Collation of Occurrence records
Data sourcesAgency records and databasesField observationsResearch databases
Incidental observations
Species Occurrences
Bendire’s Thrasher 28Bell’s Vireo 118Blue Grosbeak 129Crissal Thrasher 248Gray Vireo 190LeConte’s Thrasher 145Phainopepla 317Southwestern Willow Flycatcher
42
Vermilion Flycatcher 16
Quality assurance(points checked against
‘real world’ location)
![Page 26: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
• Maxent algorithm (Phillips et al. 2004, 2006)
• Presence points weighted to reduce sampling bias
• Covariates selected based on conceptual models
Habitat modeling process
![Page 27: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Habitat modeling process
Covariates Percent contribution
NDVI 54.6D2 Pinyon-Juniper 10.1Precipitation 8.7D2 Creosote-Bursage 6.1Elevation 5.9D2 Rocky Canyons 3.3Blackbrush 3.3Fire history 2.8Topography 1.8D2 Washes 1.2Geomorphic Landforms 1.2D2 Joshua Tree 1.1
Example: Gray Vireo
![Page 28: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Habitat modeling process
Covariates Percent contribution
NDVI 54.6D2 Pinyon-Juniper 10.1Precipitation 8.7D2 Creosote-Bursage 6.1Elevation 5.9D2 Rocky Canyons 3.3Blackbrush 3.3Fire history 2.8Topography 1.8D2 Washes 1.2Geomorphic Landforms 1.2D2 Joshua Tree 1.1
• Models evaluated– Contribution of variables to
overall model– Assessment of variable
importance– Response of predicted
habitat suitability to model variables
• Iterative process
![Page 29: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Habitat modeling process
Fire historyD2 Creosote-BursageD2 Joshua TreeD2 WashesD2 Pinyon-JuniperD2 Rocky CanyonsElevationNDVIPrecipitationGeomorphic LandformsTopographyBlackbrush
Test Gain
![Page 30: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Habitat modeling process
Covariates Percent contribution
NDVI 55.9D2 Pinyon-Juniper 12.6D2 Creosote-Bursage 8.6Elevation 7.5Precipitation 6.0D2 Rocky Canyons 3.6Blackbrush 3.3Topography 2.1Geomorphic Landforms 0.4
Example: Gray Vireo
![Page 31: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Habitat modeling process
D2 Creosote-BursageD2 Pinyon-JuniperD2 Rocky CanyonsElevationNDVIPrecipitationGeomorphic LandformsTopographyBlackbrush
Test Gain
![Page 32: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Habitat modeling processExample: Gray Vireo
12 variables 9 variables
![Page 33: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
AcknowledgmentsAgency Cooperators: Public Lands Institute UNLV,
Great Basin Bird Observatory, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Bureau of Land
Management, and Clark County
Field and Technical Assistance: Joe Barnes, Erinn Birmingham, Dorothy Crowe, Ashley Fisher, Calias Fossier, Joe Hutcheson, and Mitch Urban
Technical Advice and Assistance: Elisabeth Ammon,, Jen Ballard, Joe Hutcheson, Rich Inman, Doug Merkler, Ken Nussear, Morgan Raskin, Mark Sappington,Cheryl Vanier
![Page 34: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Soil survey fieldwork took place in 1982
Map of Clark County with the vegetation of Las Vegas classified from Soil Survey Database
![Page 35: Historical and Current Assessment of Six Covered and Three](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022071613/61570b2da097e25c76507fb5/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Creosote Bur SageMojave Mixed ScrubMesquite Salt Bush ShadscaleBlackbrushJoshua TreeUrban WashJuniper
Work in progress, still a few holes we need to fill in