1. Deliverables: Finalizing the final Product Nick Young (largely taken from Randy Boone’s advice)

2. Posters Take some time to look at examples (search the halls of your college) You will (almost) always have too much text. Remember be clear but concise and then take out more text. 24 point font or larger ( This is 24 point font ) Each section of your poster should be easily identified and flow

3. Posters Make the poster smaller than the plotter Picture backgrounds may be nice if properly done but often increase the size of the poster. Also makes the poster busy. Leave plenty of time for formatting and print early!

4. Posters Print out a 8.5x11 copy and review Have your (trusted) friends ask you about the poster to practice answering questions and describing your poster

5. Presentations What are some things you have control over? What may you not have control over? Standard form: Tell them what your going to tell them, tell them, tell them what you told them….

6. Presentations Try not to speak to the screen Keep hand out of pockets and don’t read your notes (ok to have them, just don’t read them) Spend some time on key slides (animations, detailed graphics, charts graphs). You will most likely use these again

7. Presentations Avoid backgrounds where anything is hard to read Don’t use a lot of words Give credit to anything used that’s not yours

8. Presentations Pick a style and stick with it so that you can combine presentations in the future (light background with dark text) As always, consider your audience and the purpose And remember practice, practice, practice!

9. Circular Plot 50m 9m 5m Comparison of Survey Methods to Measure Mammal Biodiversity in the Bale Mountains The Bale Mountains region in Ethiopia (figure 1 and 2) is one of the few remaining forested landscapes where people and wildlife co-exist (figure 3 and 4). Measuring and monitoring mammal diversity in this region is critical due to increasing human population growth and associated land-use activities. However, the Bale Mountains primarily consist of dense tropical forests. In this environment, using one of the more conventional methods to measure mammal biodiversity is not possible. In these cases an index of animal presence may be more appropriate for measuring mammal biodiversity. A common index used for mammal presence is fecal counts. Fecal surveys are used for estimating mammal abundance, density, distribution, and biodiversity. There are two general fecal survey methods practiced; belt transects and circular plots (Neff 1968). Background We would like to thank The Murulle Foundation, Ethiopian Rift Safaris, and the helpful staff at the Demaro camp for their contributions to this study. Acknowledgements (1) Evaluate two fecal survey methods and compare differences in setup time, survey time, total time, total number of sign detected, and number of species detected (2) Gain understanding of the system to guide future mammal studies in the region Objectives Two fecal survey methods were used; circular plots and transect belts. While fecal samples were the primary focus, the surveys were not limited to only fecal samples and any spore that provided an index of a mammal’s presence were recorded (Boddicker et al. 2002). The surveys were subjectively placed to include the different vegetation types located in the study area. The line transect belts were 50m long and were surveyed for mammal sign 2.5m on either side for a total survey area of 250m per transect (figure 5). The circular plots were 9m in diameter for a total survey area of 254m. The observers would form a line from the center of the plot to the outside edge recording any mammal sign while surveying in a circular pattern (figure 6). The circular plots were centered at the 25m mark of the line transects (figure 7). One crew member held one end of a 9m tape at the 25m mark while another member held the other end and would mark the outside edge of the circular plot. A paired t-test was used to compare the two survey methods. Methods -There were no significant differences between the two methods for time or species detection (Table 1) -A total of 10 wildlife mammals were detected during the surveys -Further analysis reveled that mountain nyala are negatively correlated with cattle presence (figure 8) Findings -Less emphasis should be placed on deciding which survey method to implement. Distance between surveys is generally the most time consuming (Marques et al. 2001) -Observations reveled that circular plots were difficult to systematically survey compared to the transect belts -Even with a small sample size, a negative correlation between cattle and mountain nyala stresses future research should investigate impacts of livestock on wildlife distribution Discussion Set Up Time (min) Survey Time (min) Total Time (min) Mountain Nyala Menelik’s BushbuckCattle Total Sign Detected Total Wildlife Sign Detected Transect Belt (SE) 6.6 (3.6) 20.7 (3.2) 27.3 (6.1) 9.5 (2.3) 18.7 (5.7) 8.5 (2.1) 42.6 (7.4) 33.7 (8.0) Circular Plot (SE) 7.5 (1.4) 13.4 (5.2) 19.9 (4.7) 6.9 (2.2) 13.3 (3.8) 6.1 (1.8) 30.5 (5.6) 24.3 (6.1) p-value0.820.260.350.430.440.410.210.36 Transect Belt Survey Orientation Transect BeltCircular Plot Log Nyala Detection Log Cattle Detection Table 1. Paired t-test arithmetic means and p-values for times and mammal detection for transect belts and circular plots Figure 8. Least squares regression on log mountain nyala detections and log cattle detections for circular plots and transect belts Figure 7. Survey measurements and orientation for circular plots and transect belts each covering approximately 250 square meters Figure 5. Field crew surveying a transect belt for mammal sign Figure 6. Field crew lining up to survey a circular plot Figure 1 (left) Demaro study area located in Ethiopia. Figure 2 (above) montane forests of the Bale Mountains Cattle graze in a meadow (figure 3, left) which is also used by native wildlife like the mountain nyala (figure 4, right). Nicholas Young 12, Paul Evangelista 1, Dave Swift 1 and Tom Stohlgren 1 02/24/2010 Author: Nicholas Young References: Marques, F. F.C., Buckland, S. T., Goffin, D., Dixon, C. E., Borchers, D. L., Mayle, B. A. Peace, A. J. (2001) Estimating deer abundance from line transect surveys of dung: sika deer in southern Scotland. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 349-363 Nceff, D.J. (1968) The pellet-group count technique for big game trend, census, and distribution: a review. Journal of Wildlife Management, 32: 597-614 Boddicker, M, Rodriguez, J.J., Amanzon, J. (2002) Indices for assessment and monitoring of large mammals within an adaptive management framework. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 76: 105-123 1 Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 2 Contact: neyoung@rams.colostate.edu