UC Research Station at Anza Borrego How does human proximity affect animal behavior/distribution at Anza Borrego?

Our Question: Does animal abundance vary depending on distance from field station? *Related: how is wildlife distributed? We expect more evidence of animals as we move further away from the station Our results might also help us understand how wildlife distributed around the Anza Borrego Research Station

Our plan... Camera traps and water for visual evidence Scat ID for physical evidence Simple and Repeatable Our data and conclusions will be important when planning conservation projects Our experiment is simple and repeatable in different settings Our test will show us how close animals come to the research station for resources. This is relevant to conservation efforts for species of concern.

Method

Animal Detection by Camera Camera setup: 20 second clips; 30 second intervals Cameras secured with rocks and straps Aluminum pan of water placed at each camera trap location

Animal Detection by Camera Data collection: SD card data collected onto computer daily at location Footage erased from SD card Camera reset

Animal Detection by Camera Finding activity: Identifiable vertebrates were counted if they occurred at least 5 minutes apart per camera. Data entered on Excel.

Animal Detection by Scat 4 5 Collecting 3 2 1 For scats, we

Animal Detection by Scat Collecting Location (near, far, furthest) description

Animal Detection by Scat Collecting Identifying Elbroch, M., Evans, J., & Kresky, M. (2012). Field guide to animal tracks and scat of California. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Results

Animal Detection by Camera Distance from station does not significantly explain sighting abundance (ANOVA, p >> 0.05). Sighting Abundance Distance

Animal Detection by Camera Coyotes may stay farther away than rabbits. Sighting Abundance Distance

Animal Detection by Camera Abundance varies significantly between the transects (Wilcoxon, p < 0.05).

Animal Detection by Camera Abundance varies significantly between the transects (Wilcoxon, p < 0.05). ←-(Wilcoxon, p < 0.0001). Rabbits Location

Animal Detection by Camera Although not significant, coyotes show a possible tendency to prefer trails over off-trail areas (Wilcoxon, 0.3 > p > 0.2). Coyotes Location

Animal Detection by Scat Total scat count by Distance Total Scat Counting 0.10 > p > 0.05 Near Far Furthest

Animal Detection by Scat Species vs Location p<0.0001 Spotted Skunk Species Desert Woodrat Rabbit Transect Number 1 2 3 4 5

Animal Detection by Scat Rabbit Woodrat Number of Different Species Transect 1 2 3 4 5 Transect 1 2 3 4 5

Discussion No significant relationship between overall animal abundance and proximity to research station

Relationship between Blacktail Jackrabbit scat and captured videos Jackrabbits are using a specific area of the desert Diet influence Predator influence Blacktail Jackrabbit Desert Woodrat Species Abundance 1 2 3 4 5 Transect

Effect of Habitat on Scat Richness and Abundance More animals in general are using the main washes Desert Woodrat scat was common among many transects Blacktail Jackrabbit scat found on one transect Higher richness found with scat data Species Richness 1 2 3 4 5 Transect

Effect of Distance on Scat Richness and Abundance Distance from the UCI station does not influence scat abundance or richness P value .1 < P > .05 More scat data and replication needed

Confounding Variables: Human Activity

Bad Angles

Repeatability and Future Studies Specificity to environment Anza Animal behavior and adaptations Limiting factors Water Food Shade - bird article Space Camera traps at scat locations

Repeatability and Future Studies Likely to see similar results in same location Simple methods Expect to see different results in different locations Biodiversity Behavior Human “noise” Future years in same locations Dry/wet years

Conclusion Humans in nature Planning new and current sites Creating conservation habitats

Acknowledgement Dr. Dina Roberts Dr. Blake Suttles Spencer