USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Kenneth J. Raedeke

Publications and source records attributed to Kenneth J. Raedeke.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Techniques for capturing bighorn sheep lambs

Low lamb recruitment is a major challenge facing managers attempting to mitigate the decline of bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis ), and investigations into the underlying mechanisms are limited because of the inability to readily capture and monitor bighorn sheep lambs. We evaluated 4 capture techniques for bighorn sheep lambs: 1) hand-capture of lambs from radiocollared adult females fitted with vaginal implant transmitters (VITs), 2) hand-capture of lambs of intensively monitored radiocollared adult females, 3) helicopter net-gunning, and 4) hand-capture of lambs from helicopters. During 2010–2012, we successfully captured 90% of lambs from females that retained VITs to ≤1 day of parturition, although we noted differences in capture rates between an area of high road density in the Black Hills (92–100%) of South Dakota, USA, and less accessible areas of New Mexico (71%), USA. Retention of VITs was 78% with pre-partum expulsion the main cause of failure. We were less likely to capture lambs from females that expelled VITs ≥1 day of parturition (range = 80–83%) or females that were collared without VITs (range = 60–78%). We used helicopter net-gunning at several sites in 1999, 2001–2002, and 2011, and it proved a useful technique; however, at one site, attempts to capture lambs led to lamb predation by golden eagles ( Aquila chrysaetos ). We attempted helicopter hand-captures at one site in 1999, and they also were successful in certain circumstances and avoided risk of physical trauma from net-gunning; however, application was limited. In areas of low accessibility or if personnel lack the ability to monitor females and/or VITs for extended periods, helicopter capture may provide a viable option for lamb capture.

Colorado;New Mexico;South Dakota

Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates

Kernel methods for estimating home range are being used increasingly in wildlife research, but the effect of sample size on their accuracy is not known. We used computer simulations of 10-200 points/home range and compared accuracy of home range estimates produced by fixed and adaptive kernels with the reference (REF) and least-squares cross-validation (LSCV) methods for determining the amount of smoothing. Simulated home ranges varied from simple to complex shapes created by mixing bivariate normal distributions. We used the size of the 95% home range area and the relative mean squared error of the surface fit to assess the accuracy of the kernel home range estimates. For both measures, the bias and variance approached an asymptote at about 50 observations/home range. The fixed kernel with smoothing selected by LSCV provided the least-biased estimates of the 95% home range area. All kernel methods produced similar surface fit for most simulations, but the fixed kernel with LSCV had the lowest frequency and magnitude of very poor estimates. We reviewed 101 papers published in The Journal of Wildlife Management (JWM) between 1980 and 1997 that estimated animal home ranges. A minority of these papers used nonparametric utilization distribution (UD) estimators, and most did not adequately report sample sizes. We recommend that home range studies using kernel estimates use LSCV to determine the amount of smoothing, obtain a minimum of 30 observations per animal (but preferably a?Y50), and report sample sizes in published results.

Journal of Wildlife Management