Class Instructor: Alison Anderson Authors: Corrie
Biggerstaff, Alaya Binder, Shelsea Boden, Cory Booth, Tal
Haimovitch-Gal, Patrick McConnell, Susan Meier, Jessica Norton, Dawn
Palumbo, Brian Polivka
Graduate field assistants: John Chalekian, Christian
Manion, Gretchen Small
ArcView files and consultation: Bruce Nyden
Web Consultant: Jeanne Burch
Subject idea and background information: Robert Fisher
Field trip assistance and consultation: Kevin Contreras
Field trip assistance and consultation: Jim Zimmer
General support: Sedra Shapiro
This page format is simply instructions/suggestions for writing the paper. You will fill in the text and references. Next week we will meet to review our work, and our writing will be incorporated here as an on-line publication.
Use beaver paper from Robert and other literature/web sites.
Objectives:
1) Collect descriptive baseline data, map dams & collect
associated data.; 2) look for patterns in vegetation and topography
that predict where beavers build dams. 3) Look for patterns in
vegetation and associated wildlife that indicate an effect of beavers
and dams on other species such as trees, crawdads, native and exotic
fish, and birds.
Hypotheses:
1) Landscape-scale patterns in topography and vegetation can help
predict where beavers will locate dams, and 2) Exotic lousiana swamp
crawdads more abundant in beaver ponds than other pools.
|
Beaver image from the Sevilleta
Long-Term Ecological Research web site. |
||
Methods
Section of river surveyed, site (SMER) info. Tools: GPS units (see photo/link below) maps: topographic (see photo/link below), aerial photos, digital geo-referenced hillshade, rangefinder, soil samples and analysis, PH/temp meter, diameter tape, counting crawdads (QuickTime movie), ArcView/GIS program (see photo/link below).
|
|
|
Results
GIS/ArcView maps of dam and coot locations. 3-D flyby of Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve. Observations: heron droppings full of crawdad parts (Quicktime movie), crawdad density, tree species cut by beavers (willow and sycamore), beaver slides and lodges, scattered flowering plants, frogs, butterfly species sited, Water PH and temp, jumping spiders, bobcat and other tracks, oak apple galls w/larvae. (Table of data, see ArcView photo/link above.)
Patterns to look for using GIS maps: 1) similarities in vegetation and topography associated with dam locations (and not with other locations). 2) similarities in vegatetion and dam location associated with coot locations (and not others).
Question I want you to answer: The location of dam 1 is in question. The mark on the hillshade does not agree with the mark on the topographic map or the GPS unit coordinates (see above photos/links to hillshade map, topo map, and photo). Where is your best estimate of where the dam is actually located (use all available information)? Icons for dam and coot locations on the ArcView hillshade map (link in results section) may be offset from the actual location marked on the hardcopy hillshade map we used in the field (link in methods section) because the geographic coordinates on our hardcopy are plotted in "NAD 27" and the coordinates on the ArcView file are plotted in the more current "NAD 83" (Bruce Nyden & Kevin Contreras, personal communication). Check the geographic features and dam location on the scanned image of our hardcopy map against the features and location on the ArcView map to investigate this further.
Conclusions
Patterns you found, possible explanations for patterns (cite beaver, coot, and other literature), and hypotheses/questions for future research.
Robert Fisher and (499 student). (In progress). Beaver activities and their effects on the ecosystem in the Santa Margarita River. San Diego State University Field Stations publication.
Include web sites.
If you have comments or suggestions, email me at anderson@sunstroke.sdsu.edu