Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts

ABSTRACT We determined the optimum transect length and spacing for detecting snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) from snow‐track surveys in a fixed area. We also evaluated the utility of the most reliable and efficient designs for indexing hare density. We constructed enclosures (∼6.1 ha) at 2 location...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: David M. Burt, Gary J. Roloff, Dwayne R. Etter, Eric Clark
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2016-03-01
Series:Wildlife Society Bulletin
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.630
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850115824890675200
author David M. Burt
Gary J. Roloff
Dwayne R. Etter
Eric Clark
author_facet David M. Burt
Gary J. Roloff
Dwayne R. Etter
Eric Clark
author_sort David M. Burt
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT We determined the optimum transect length and spacing for detecting snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) from snow‐track surveys in a fixed area. We also evaluated the utility of the most reliable and efficient designs for indexing hare density. We constructed enclosures (∼6.1 ha) at 2 locations in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA, and populated the enclosures with radiocollared hares. Hare densities ranged from 0.2 to 1.5 hares/ha in the enclosures, comparable to low and high densities recorded at the southern extent of snowshoe hare range. During winters of 2012–2014, we conducted snow‐track surveys along 9 transects spaced 25 m apart in the enclosures 12–65 hr after a snowfall and mapped the location of every track that intersected a transect. After standardizing the track maps by time since last snowfall, we simulated different transect lengths and spacing and evaluated whether hares were documented on the resultant transect segments. We deemed transect configurations reliable if >90% of the 10,000 simulations correctly denoted the site as occupied. Of the 28 possible transect configurations, only 10 combinations were found to reliably detect hares. We refined the 10 reliable configurations based on efficiency, where efficiency was based on the distance traversed by a surveyor. We recommend using transects that are 150 m in length with 100‐m or 75‐m spacing, or 125 m in length with 75‐m spacing to reliably and efficiently survey a fixed area for snowshoe hares. © 2016 The Wildlife Society.
format Article
id doaj-art-33bc10dade03400588bc9bfe0fcba371
institution OA Journals
issn 2328-5540
language English
publishDate 2016-03-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Wildlife Society Bulletin
spelling doaj-art-33bc10dade03400588bc9bfe0fcba3712025-08-20T02:36:28ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402016-03-0140112212910.1002/wsb.630Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track countsDavid M. Burt0Gary J. Roloff1Dwayne R. Etter2Eric Clark3Department of Fisheries and WildlifeMichigan State UniversityEast LansingMI48824USADepartment of Fisheries and WildlifeMichigan State UniversityEast LansingMI48824USAMichigan Department of Natural ResourcesLansingMI48909USAInland Fish and Wildlife DepartmentSault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa IndiansSault Ste. MarieMI49783USAABSTRACT We determined the optimum transect length and spacing for detecting snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) from snow‐track surveys in a fixed area. We also evaluated the utility of the most reliable and efficient designs for indexing hare density. We constructed enclosures (∼6.1 ha) at 2 locations in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA, and populated the enclosures with radiocollared hares. Hare densities ranged from 0.2 to 1.5 hares/ha in the enclosures, comparable to low and high densities recorded at the southern extent of snowshoe hare range. During winters of 2012–2014, we conducted snow‐track surveys along 9 transects spaced 25 m apart in the enclosures 12–65 hr after a snowfall and mapped the location of every track that intersected a transect. After standardizing the track maps by time since last snowfall, we simulated different transect lengths and spacing and evaluated whether hares were documented on the resultant transect segments. We deemed transect configurations reliable if >90% of the 10,000 simulations correctly denoted the site as occupied. Of the 28 possible transect configurations, only 10 combinations were found to reliably detect hares. We refined the 10 reliable configurations based on efficiency, where efficiency was based on the distance traversed by a surveyor. We recommend using transects that are 150 m in length with 100‐m or 75‐m spacing, or 125 m in length with 75‐m spacing to reliably and efficiently survey a fixed area for snowshoe hares. © 2016 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.630Lepus americanusMichigansnowshoe haresnow‐track surveyssurvey methodologytransect configuration
spellingShingle David M. Burt
Gary J. Roloff
Dwayne R. Etter
Eric Clark
Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
Wildlife Society Bulletin
Lepus americanus
Michigan
snowshoe hare
snow‐track surveys
survey methodology
transect configuration
title Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
title_full Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
title_fullStr Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
title_full_unstemmed Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
title_short Reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
title_sort reliably detecting snowshoe hares with winter track counts
topic Lepus americanus
Michigan
snowshoe hare
snow‐track surveys
survey methodology
transect configuration
url https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.630
work_keys_str_mv AT davidmburt reliablydetectingsnowshoehareswithwintertrackcounts
AT garyjroloff reliablydetectingsnowshoehareswithwintertrackcounts
AT dwayneretter reliablydetectingsnowshoehareswithwintertrackcounts
AT ericclark reliablydetectingsnowshoehareswithwintertrackcounts