gray wolf range analysis: michigan and wisconsin

29
Gray Wolf Range Analysis: Michigan and Wisconsin Masters Project Presentation November 8, 2002 Damon Hearne, Karen Lewis, Marisa Martin, Beth Mitton, Carly Rocklen

Upload: aldan

Post on 14-Jan-2016

28 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Gray Wolf Range Analysis: Michigan and Wisconsin. Masters Project Presentation November 8, 2002. Damon Hearne, Karen Lewis, Marisa Martin, Beth Mitton, Carly Rocklen. Background. Client: National Wildlife Federation Great Lakes Field Office, Ann Arbor. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Gray Wolf Range Analysis: Michigan and Wisconsin

Masters Project Presentation

November 8, 2002

Damon Hearne, Karen Lewis, Marisa Martin, Beth Mitton,

Carly Rocklen

Page 2: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Background

• Gray wolf federally listed as Endangered in 1974• Down-listing to Threatened

underway• Complete delisting imminent

Client: National Wildlife Federation Great Lakes Field Office, Ann Arbor

Advisors: Steve Yaffee and Bobbi Low

Is additional long-term wolf range protection necessary if permanent recovery is to be successful?

Page 3: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Historic1974Current

Wolves are top carnivores without specific habitat requirements.

Page 4: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Population Status

• Michigan: ~280/200 (5 years)• Wisconsin: ~300/250 (1 year)

Page 5: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Range: Regionally specific areas of land that can function as gray wolf territory

Should not be confused with distribution:

Applied Definitions

Page 6: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Spatial Analysis Model

Project Overview

Sufficient range conserved

Insufficient range conserved

Question: How can range for a long-term viable wolf

population be ensured?

Recommendations

Future studies show insufficient range

Is additional long-term wolf range protection necessary if permanent recovery is to be successful?

Page 7: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Spatial Analysis Model Components

Goal: To predict future wolf range and population size.

Establish Factors Affecting Conversion of range (FACs)

Use FACs to predict Probability Of Conversion (POC)

Determine number of wolf packs supported

Suitability filter

Phase A

Phase B

Page 8: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Primary Factors Affecting

Conversion (FAC)

Stability

Conversion Rate in Region

Nat Park =-2

Private = 2

Low = - 2

High = 2

Zoned for Development No = - 2

Yes = 2

Physiography conducive to conversion No = - 2

Yes = 2

Urban pixel filter

Probability of Conversion

(POC)

( -2, -1, 0, 1, 2 )

Spatial Analysis

Phase A

Weighting

AgricultureRevert =-2

Develop = 2

Page 9: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

• Ownership

• Legal protection

• Federal—Forest Legacy Program

• State—conservation easements; forest tax incentives

Factor Affecting Conversion:

Stability as Undeveloped

Page 10: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

• Land Use Change Analysis

• LUDA 1980

• NLCD 1992

• Regional Planner Predictions

• Population Change

Development Attractors Urban Center Lake Highway/major roads

Factor Affecting Conversion:

Growth Rate in Region

Page 11: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Factor Affecting Conversion:

Agricultural Reversion

• Occurs at varying rates depending on economic status and primary land use of county

• Land use change

• Difficult to build into current model because it is reverse conversion

Page 12: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

• Home rule—land use planning at the lowest level of government in Wisconsin and Michigan

• Town comprehensive plans—Smart Growth (Wisconsin)

• Buildout analysis

Factor Affecting Conversion:

Zoning

Page 13: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Factor Affecting Conversion:

Physiography Conducive to Conversion

• Presence of wetland • Federal, state and local protection

• Wetlands as building sites

• Soils – percolation test

Page 14: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Overlay FAC Layers

Sum values across layers using

weighting and BOOLEAN operations

Each pixel has Probability of Conversion #

Spatial Analysis

Phase B

Page 15: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

County- wide

zoning = #Federal Lands

= #

High conversion

rate = #

Low POC

High POC

Medium POC

Spatial Analysis

Page 16: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Spatial Analysis - Suitability Filter

Suitable range area

# potential territories supported in future

Viability proxies:

Road Density and others

Results from POC phase

High POC filter

Page 17: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Road Density

Proxy for wolf-human interactions• Frequency of interactions• Outcome of interactions

Used to determine areas suitable for wolves (~ <.5km/km2)

Improved human attitudes towards wolves

may allow survival in areas of higher road

density

Page 18: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Spatial Analysis - Suitability Filter

Suitable range area

# potential territories supported in future

Viability proxies:

Road Density and others

Results from POC phase

High POC filter

Page 19: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Number of potential territories (= packs) supported by Suitable

Range Area

Number of Wolves Supported by Suitable Range Area

Determine average territory size given prey density

Number of wolves supported by Suitable Range Area

Viable Population

Yes No

Page 20: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Less Pressure 

Less Conversion of Land

More Pressure 

More Conversion of Land 

Secondary Drivers

Economic Pressures

-Prey Base-Human attitudes/road density

Suitability

Page 21: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Multiple Scenarios of Model

Establish Factors Affecting Conversion of

range (FACs)

POC Assigned

# Wolves

Suitability filter

POC Assigned

Suitability filter

POC Assigned

Suitability filter

Secondary Drivers of Conversion Multiple scenarios

# Wolves

# Wolves

# Wolves

# Wolves

Page 22: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Spatial Analysis Model

Sufficient range conserved for long

term wolf pop

Insufficient range conserved for long

term wolf pop

Question: How can range for a viable wolf population

be ensured?

Recommendations

Future studies show insufficient range

Project Overview

Page 23: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

• Legal– ESA litigation– State statutes

• Policy– Access of federal, state and county

lands– Zoning changes– Forest Legacy and Smart Growth in

Michigan

Recommendations – Legal and Policy

Legal and policy avenues may lead to protection of wolves

and wolf habitat.

Page 24: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Recommendations – Education

• Barriers to information distribution

• Education programs

• Target audiences

Public education regarding wolves leads to greater tolerance of wolves, and thus to higher cultural carrying

capacities for the land.

Page 25: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Recommendations – Land Conservation

• Type & quantity of land to conserve

• Tools for protection

• Integration of land conservation and land use planning

• Major players/stakeholders

Conserved undeveloped lands provide areas of relatively low probability of

wolf-human conflict.

Page 26: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Spatial Analysis Model

Sufficient range conserved

Insufficient range conserved

Question: How can range for a viable wolf population

be ensured?

Recommendations

Future studies show insufficient range

Project Overview

Page 27: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

Thank you very much

Page 28: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

PRELIMINARY MAP

Page 29: Gray Wolf Range Analysis:  Michigan and Wisconsin

PRELIMINARY MAP