Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl - DRAFT

Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl - DRAFT Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl - DRAFT

10.07.2015 Views

Parameter Estimatesfor Individual Study AreasThe estimation of X was based on the Leslie-Lefkovitch approach summarizedin USDI (1990). Under this method, estimates of age-specific survival andfecundity are needed for the female component of the population. Modelselection for the estimation of survival probabilities relied on the AkaikeInformation Criterion (AIC), however some use of likelihood ratio tests wasmade. Data from the five study areas supported only two age-classes forannual survival estimates Uuvenile and all older classes = 'adults"). Estimatesof these parameters and measures of their precision are presented in TableC.2.Estimates of age-specific fecundity of females also followed the procedures inUSDI (1990), and these are summarized in Table C.3. with a measure of theprecision of the estimates.Estimates of X, computed from the estimates in Tables C.2. and C.3., estimatedprecision, and test statistics related to the null hypothesis (above) appear inTable C.4. While there are several potential biases in these estimates, it isclear from Table C.4. that the population of resident, territorial females hasdeclined in each of the five study areas. The simple average of the estimateswas X = 0.9022 which indicates a rate of decline of approximately 10 percentper year during 1985-199 1. Thus, the resident population was not replacingitself in any of the five large study areas. This is a critical finding. In eachcase, X is significantly less than 1 (see test statistics and P-values in TableC.4.). No statistical inference is made concerning x prior to these years ofstudy or in the future. These estimates of X represent a 5- or 6-year "snapshot"of the average annual change in the female component of these five populations.The t-test is based on the empirical variance among the five independentestima es of X, while the z-test is based on the theoretical standard error of X(i.e., IF var(,) /5). The t-test allows for significant variation in X within the fivestudy areas, however, a test for such variation was not significant (K2=5.1409,4 df, P=0.2731, (see Burnham et al. 1987:264-269). The estimated standardTable C.2. Estimates of age-specific annual survival rates for female northernspotted owls.Study Area First Year All Later YearsV322hid SC 0 J) $j se($J)Northwest California 0.1946 0.0509 0.8507 0.0224H.J. Andrews (western Oregon) 0.3112 0.1033 0.8365 0.0312Medford (southwestern Oregon) 0.2002 0.0513 0.7854 0.0258Roseburg (southwestern Oregon)a 0.2829 0.0366 0.8583 0.0131Olympic Peninsula (northwestern Washington)a 0.0707 0.0282 0.8603 0.02641. . - - - ---...- - 11 .......................... 1.. ..- ..-------.....a No sex-specific differences in adult survival were detectable, thus, the estimate of adult female survival includes adult males.

Table C.3. Estimates of age-specific fecundity (b) for female northern spotted owls(number of juvenile females/female of age x).Subadult 1 (12 mos.) Subadult 2 (24 mos.) Adult (36 mos.)Study Area (6i) se(b 1 ) (62) ie(62) (6) se(b)Northwest California 0.1154 0.0576 0.2286 0.0659 0.3576 0.0245H.J. Andrews (western Oregon) 0.1430 0.0780 0.1430 0.0780 0.3270 0.0500Medford (southwestern Oregon) 0.1110 0.0386 0.1110 0.0386 0.3233 0.4880Roseburg (southwestern Oregon)a 0.0938 0.0547 0.0938 0.0547 0.3304 0.0385Olympic Peninsula 0.1000 0.0667 0.1000 0.0667 0.3327 0.0784(northwestern Washington)a* Year-specific differences in (b).b ___~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~........., ., ... ....error of the true x across the five study areas (cJ was 0.0267 (95 percentconfidence interval is 0.0 to 0. 1073). Both tests indicate a strong rejection ofthe null hypothesis, and one must conclude that these populations are declining.Capture-recapture methods allow estimates, of the number of new entries intothe population of resident, territorial females (standard Jolly-Seber estimates,see USDI(1990:35-36)). Estimates of this quantity, averaged over years, areTable C.4. Estimates of the finite rate of annual population change (X) for femalenorthern spotted owls in five independent study areas throughout their range. Alsoshown are test statistics and P values for the test of the null hypothesis that X > 1vs.X< 1.A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Study Area s(e) t or z PNorthwest California 0.9153 0.0433 -1.9561 0.0252H.J. Andrews (western Oregon) 0.9276 0.0437 -1.6567 0.0488Medford (southwestern Oregon) 0.8444 0.0304 -5.1184 0.0000Roseburg (southwestern Oregon) 0.9405 0.0182 -3.2692 0.0005Olympic Peninsula (northwestern Washington) 0.8828 0.0280 -4.1857 0.0000Simple average and t-test 0.9021 0.0173 -5/7532 0.0024Simple average and z-test 0.9021 0.0153 -6.4155 0.0000323

Table C.3. Estimates of age-specific fecundity (b) <strong>for</strong> female nor<strong>the</strong>rn spotted owls(number of juvenile females/female of age x).Subadult 1 (12 mos.) Subadult 2 (24 mos.) Adult (36 mos.)Study Area (6i) se(b 1 ) (62) ie(62) (6) se(b)Northwest Cali<strong>for</strong>nia 0.1154 0.0576 0.2286 0.0659 0.3576 0.0245H.J. Andrews (western Oregon) 0.1430 0.0780 0.1430 0.0780 0.3270 0.0500Med<strong>for</strong>d (southwestern Oregon) 0.1110 0.0386 0.1110 0.0386 0.3233 0.4880Roseburg (southwestern Oregon)a 0.0938 0.0547 0.0938 0.0547 0.3304 0.0385Olympic Peninsula 0.1000 0.0667 0.1000 0.0667 0.3327 0.0784(northwestern Washington)a* Year-specific differences in (b).b ___~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~........., ., ... ....error of <strong>the</strong> true x across <strong>the</strong> five study areas (cJ was 0.0267 (95 percentconfidence interval is 0.0 to 0. 1073). Both tests indicate a strong rejection of<strong>the</strong> null hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, and one must conclude that <strong>the</strong>se populations are declining.Capture-recapture methods allow estimates, of <strong>the</strong> number of new entries into<strong>the</strong> population of resident, territorial females (standard Jolly-Seber estimates,see USDI(1990:35-36)). Estimates of this quantity, averaged over years, areTable C.4. Estimates of <strong>the</strong> finite rate of annual population change (X) <strong>for</strong> femalenor<strong>the</strong>rn spotted owls in five independent study areas throughout <strong>the</strong>ir range. Alsoshown are test statistics and P values <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> test of <strong>the</strong> null hypo<strong>the</strong>sis that X > 1vs.X< 1.A~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Study Area s(e) t or z PNorthwest Cali<strong>for</strong>nia 0.9153 0.0433 -1.9561 0.0252H.J. Andrews (western Oregon) 0.9276 0.0437 -1.6567 0.0488Med<strong>for</strong>d (southwestern Oregon) 0.8444 0.0304 -5.1184 0.0000Roseburg (southwestern Oregon) 0.9405 0.0182 -3.2692 0.0005Olympic Peninsula (northwestern Washington) 0.8828 0.0280 -4.1857 0.0000Simple average and t-test 0.9021 0.0173 -5/7532 0.0024Simple average and z-test 0.9021 0.0153 -6.4155 0.0000323

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!