Project ID #004-09
CALIFORNIA DEER ASSOCIATION
PROJECT COMMITTEE
COVER SHEET
PROJECT NAME: Tehama/Bucks Mtn. and Mooretown Deer Herd Migration Corridor
Project
PROJECT START DATE: Summer 2009
REQUESTED CDA FUNDS:
MATCHING:
TOTAL:
PROJECT END DATE : Summer 2012
$30,000.00
$65,000.00
$95,000.00
APPROVED CDA FUNDS:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
PROJECT SUBMITTED BY: Henry Lomeli, CDF&G
1. PROJECT CATEGORY: Research.
2. PROJECT COLLECTION AGREEMENT RECEIVED: _________________
3. PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: ___________________________________
4. PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT RECEIVED: _____________________
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Department of Fish and Game - Butte County
Deer Winter Range and Parcels
TEHAMA
PLUMAS
Paradise
Chico
Berry Creek
GLENN
Forbestown
Oroville
40 Parcel Scale (acres)
Biggs
Parcels
Lake Oroville
Gridley
Deer Winter Range
Not in Deer Herd, Development Permitted
In Deer Herd Area, Development Permitted
Winter Herd Area, 20 Acre Minimum Lot
YUBA
COLUSA
Critical Winter Range, 40 Acre Minimum Lot
SUTTER
Deer herd winter range habitat and
parcels provided by Butte County.
Deer herd time period: 1980's.
Parcel time period: June 30, 2005.
Map Date: Feb. 22, 2006.
0
2.5
5
10 Miles
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
CAPTURE PLAN
Butte County Migratory Deer Herds
Bucks Mountain/ Mooretown and
East Tehama (Butte Co. segment) Deer Herd
Spring/Summer 2009
Introduction
The North Central Region (NCR) proposes to capture and collar up to 15 adult female deer from
the three migratory deer herds that winter in eastern Butte County during April-Aug 2009. Fifteen Advanced Telemetry Systems G2000 GPS collars will beattached and used to assist in pinpointing deer migration routes, holding areas, and summer population centers, along with all
critical road crossings along Highway 32, Hwy. 162, Forbstown Rd, and Marysville Rd. in Butte
County.
This effort has developed over the last 10 years and is now supported by a dedicated working
group. Members of the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG or Department); California Deer Association, United States Department of Agriculture- Forest Service, Butte County
Fish and Game Commission, Butte County BOS, Butte County Agricultural Commission, Butte
County Water Resources, Resource Conservation District, and Gallaway Consulting Inc.. Gallaway Consulting Inc. completed the initial study as part of the Butte County General Plan contract. This group is working to reduce impacts to winter range habitat by identifying key areas of
immediate conservation priority. County planners will then use this data to implement changes
in zoning restrictions as part of the new Butte County General Plan. We believe that this data is
vital to that effort and will have a key role in protecting the viability of these three migratory
deer herds.
Capture Location
Eastern Tehama Deer Herd
Approximately 40 percent of the critical winter range in Butte County has been severely impacted due to residential encroachment since the mid 1960's. The Eastern Tehama deer herd is
the largest migratory deer herd in the County and occupies a range considered to be the most extensive in the state. The range of the herd includes portions of Tehama, Plumas, Lassen, Shasta,
and Butte counties. Winter range is approximately 520,000 acres; migratory and summer ranges
total approximately 920,500 acres and migration routes to and from seasonal ranges are the
longest in the state, covering a distance of 50 to 100 miles.
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Bucks Mountain Deer Herd
The Bucks Mountain deer herd range extends from eastern Butte County to western Plumas
County. Winter range is approximately 200,600 acres; migratory and summer ranges total approximately 265,600 acres. Approximately 28 percent of the critical winter range in Butte
County has been lost to residential encroachment since the mid 1960's.
Mooretown Deer Herd
Mooretown deer herds occupy a range extending from the southern boundary of the Bucks
Mountain deer herd into northwestern Sierra and northeastern Yuba counties. Winter range is
approximately 232,000 acres; migratory and summer ranges total approximately 217,950 acres.
Approximately 50 percent of the critical winter range in Butte County has been lost to residential
encroachment since the mid 1960's.
Capture Objective
The objective of this effort is to successfully capture, collar, and release up to 15 female deer.
Each selected deer will be fitted with a GPS collar. These collars will collect location information every hour during migration periods and every 21 hours otherwise for a period of one year.
At that time WLM personnel will release and collect the collars for data download.
Capture Methods
Chemical immobilization through free-range darting with Pneu Dart compression rifles will be
the primary capture method for this project. Adult deer will be immobilized via a dart filled with
a mixture of Telazol® and Xylazine. After chemical immobilization, the doe will be restrained,
hobbled and blindfolded. Vital signs will be monitored every 10 minutes throughout processing.
Water and blankets will be available for use during capture to maintain body temperature within
the desired range. Blood will be drawn from each animal. Antibiotics and vitamin/mineral (Vitamin E, selenium) supplements will be administered via intramuscular injection. After processing the radio collar and ear tags wil be applied. The doe will be administered a reversal drug
(Tolazoline) 60 minutes post chemical immobilization drug administration. The doe will be
monitored until full recovery occurs.
Drug dose will vary depending on the size of the deer but previously we have used a 1:1 ratio of
Xylazine to Telazol with a dose of 1.3 mg/kg. The range of dosage will fall within the following; 2.2-3.3 mg/kg Telazol® and 2.0-3.3 mg/kg Xylazine. Mule deer from this area typically
have an average body weight of 120 pounds. 1.3-1.5 cc of mix will be used per 120 pound deer.
Initial doses will be used for a range of 90-110 pounds. All deer will be weighed. If weights are
larger than anticipated, then dose will be increased.
If any mortalities occur, Dr. Swift must be contacted to discuss details prior to any further capture efforts.
Table 1. Drug types, concentrations, and approximate dosages to be used for mule deer in Loyalton-Truckee Deer Herd
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Drug
Recommended Dosage (mg/lb)
Telazol
Xylazine
Tolazoline
2mg/lb
1mg/lb
2.0 mg/lb
Field
Dosage (mg/lb)
1-2mg/lb
1mg/lb
2.0 mg/lb
Drug Needs
The following drugs are requested to complete this capture: 10 vials of Telazol, 60 ml of Xylazine, 15 ml of Telazoline, 1 bottle of Mu-se, 1 bottle of vitamin E, one bottle of penicillin.
Data and Biological Sample Collection
Data collected from each deer will be recorded on individual data sheets and will include at least
the following:
1. Location of capture – descriptive and GPS coordinates
2. Sex
3. Age – based on visual assessment of body conformation and tooth wear patterns.
4. General body condition – body fat, parasite load, abnormalities.
5. Neck circumferences (base, mid, and top).
6. Weight – estimated with torso tape.
7. Blood – Approximately 35-60 cc of blood will be collected from each animal and
placed into red-top and lavender top tubes. Blood collected in red-top tubes will be
centrifuged and serum will be frozen for submittal to the DFG Wildlife Investigations
Lab (WIL). Purple top tubes will be frozen for submittal to WIL.
8. Ear tag types and numbers
9. Radiocollar information (type, serial number, frequency)
The project leader will provide the WIL with complete records of the use of chemical immobilization drugs. An Immobilization Data Sheet (Appendix E) will be filled out at the time of the
immobilization attempt, including the following information: date, location, animal identification number, species, sex, actual or estimated age and weight, health status/condition, drug(s)
used, dosage(s), route of administration, and response to drug. The completed data sheet will be
submitted to WIL the following business day (fax 916-358-2814; or by e-mail:
[email protected]). In addition, the project leader will compile and submit a quarterly drug inventory to WIL. All losses (missed darts) will be accounted for and attempts will be made to
collect the missed darts.
Supplemental Capture Needs
A supplemental capture will occur annually for three seasons until a total of 30 (15 collars x
2deployments). Beginning in 2009 and ending in 2011
Data Collection
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Standard biological samples will be collected from animals handled during the collaring operation. The final sampling protocol will be worked out with other Department collaborators, to
ensure a maximum return on our efforts.
Blood samples will be collected from all captured deer for disease testing and archiving purposes. 30-35 cc’s of blood will be drawn from live deer. Lavender top tubes will be refrigerated
and sent to the WIL. Red top tubes will be spun within 24 hours. Serum will be placed in serum
vials, labeled, and frozen. Frozen samples will be provided to the WIL in batch shipments.
All mortalities during the study period will be examined, necropsied, and immediately reported
to WIL. A heart blood sample on any deer mortality will be collected using a 30 or 60 cc syringe
and placed in one lavender top and four red top tubes.
Tissues (including samples for chronic wasting disease testing; obex, retropharyngeal lymph
nodes and tonsil) of deceased deer will be collected from the organs and placed in 10% formalin.
After 24 hours the fixed tissues will be placed in a container of fresh formalin. Samples will be
provided to the WIL. Another sample of tissues will be placed in whir-pak bags, labeled and
frozen. Each sample set will be placed in a large zip lock bag, labeled and frozen.
No conflicts with telemetry collars in other areas are anticipated. The collar frequencies being
used in this study are in the 159-160 MHz range.
Funding Sources
5 GPS collars have been paid for by a Butte County DFG Commission, the other 10 are waiting
for funds. WLM will be paying for drugs. Supplemental equipment will be supplied by the
DFG’s Wildlife Investigations Lab. Wildlife Management personnel involvement falls under
normal job duties and has been improved by the Supervising Biologist.
Media Coverage
No media coverage will occur.
Key Personnel Needs
Personnel will handle their own arrangements for state vehicles, lodging, food, and drinking water. If necessary, the Project Leader will assist with arrangements. Staff assignments are listed in
the attached Appendix A.
Personnel and Animal Safety
A planning and safety meeting will be held prior to the capture effort. Initial assignments, animal handling protocols, and other pertinent aspects of the operation will be discussed. All participants will have prior experience in capturing and collaring deer. Emergency contact information will be on-site and readily available during operations (found in Appendix B).
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
The objective will be to safely capture mule deer while minimizing potential hazards to animals
and capture personnel. Safety and medical considerations listed on pages 3-1 through 3-3 and 91 through 9-13 of the DFG Wildlife Investigations Laboratory’s Wildlife Restraint Handbook
will be followed (included in Appendix C).
Standard methods of animal restraint will incorporate hobbles and eye covers. The captured animals’ temperatures will be monitored to ensure that investigators are aware of the physical status
of the animals as processing occurs. Ample water will be carried for cooling of animals and other
needs. Reversal drugs will be used as needed and personnel will stay near the darted animal until it has recovered.
Literature Cited
Jessup, D.A., W.E. Clark, and M.A. Fowler. 2001. Wildlife Restraint Handbook. 8th ed. California Department of Fish and Game, Rancho Cordova. Pp. 3-1through 3-3, 9-1 through 913.
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Technical Study and GIS Model for
Migratory
Deer Range
Habitat
Butte
County Migratory
Deer
Range
Butte
County,
California
Project
Name
Butte County, California
July 2007
(Revised
Nov. 2007)
June 2007
Prepared for:
Design, Community
& Environment
Prepared for:
And
Butte
County
Butte County Planning
Department
Preparedby:
by:
Prepared
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Table of Contents
Title............................................................................................................................1
Author .......................................................................................................................1
Abstract.....................................................................................................................1
Introduction..............................................................................................................1
Data Selection for Habitat Analysis .......................................................................1
Methods.....................................................................................................................3
Data Selection ............................................................................................................................ 3
Data Filtering for Temporal Habitat Requirements ............................................................. 4
Weighting Assignments and Modeling.................................................................................... 4
Selection of Modeling Environment ........................................................................................ 5
Parcel Based Evaluation........................................................................................................... 6
Draft Results.............................................................................................................7
Draft References.......................................................................................................8
Appendix A .............................................................................................................10
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 1 of 11
Title
Technical Study and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Model for Migratory Deer Range
Habitat.
Author
Gallaway Consulting, Inc. – Jody Gallaway and Kevin Sevier
Abstract
The existing data relied upon by planning agencies to identify migratory deer habitats were
developed in the early 1980’s by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
Encroachment from urban areas, development of rural lots and fire suppression has resulted in
direct and indirect changes to the landscape. These changes have resulted in areas that no longer
function as suitable critical winter and winter range, thus should not be subjected to development
regulations for the sole purpose of protecting winter range for migratory deer. Conversely, there
have been large scale efforts by private and public agencies to protect critical winter range.
Many of these areas serve as high quality functioning critical winter range. The use of GIS
provides a modeling environment, to evaluate location, physical characteristics of land, spatial
distribution of suitability zones and a database environment to assess parcel suitability, inventory
habitat loss, and prioritize conservation efforts..
Changes to the winter ranges and to a lesser extent intermediate ranges have a high level impact
on the deer herds, since food and refuge from winter weather is scarce and winter ranges tend to
be smaller than summer ranges. This analysis focuses on the habitats in which even minute
amounts of alteration or destruction can have significant consequences on deer herd habitat
suitability.
The objectives of this project were to: 1) develop a data ranking system for identification of
intermediate, winter and critical winter range habitats; 2) develop a GIS model to update the
intermediate, winter and critical winter range maps; 3) link individual parcels based on their
relation to deer habitats (critical winter and winter); 4) summarize the data inputs, techniques,
and use of the data, and 5) develop a GIS model that can be updated as new scientific data
becomes available.
The results of the GIS model which delineate the intermediate, winter and critical winter range
habitats show that, generally speaking, intermediate, winter and critical range habitats are
spatially similar to the original data set. The integration of parcel data shows that a significant
portion of the critical winter and winter range may be compromised by sub-standard lot sizes.
The identification of parcels managed for wildlife or natural resource protection shows that, for
the most part these lands are disjunct, in terms providing contiguous habitat protection, but
individually may provide critical protection zones.
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 1 of 11
Introduction
In the early 1980’s the CDFG developed management plans, including the designation of critical
winter, winter, intermediate, major migration corridor, summer and critical summer ranges for
migratory deer herds in California. Among the counties affected by these management plans was
Butte County. Butte County “informally” adopted the maps as part of the Conservation Element
of the General Plan for use in determining where development should be restricted for the
protection of migration and winter range habitats of deer.
Typically the identification of potential impacts to winter deer herd habitat is done during CEQA
review of proposed projects. The current system of identifying these impacts entails crossreferencing the location of the development to the Deer Herd GIS Database maintained by the
County. In this database, regions are defined as development permitted, Winter Herd Area: 20acre minimum lot size, and Critical Winter Range: 40-acre minimum lot size. These
requirements are derived from the management plans created by CDFG for the various deer
herds in the County. If a proposed development exists within a wintering area, mitigation
measures are applied to the project consistent with the 1984 Report of the Butte County Deer
Herd Study Panel (1984 Report). The general provisions of the 1984 Report recommend fences
in non-residential areas meet specific criteria in order to prevent barriers to deer movements on
and off a property, deer impact fees be collected, adherence to minimum parcel sizes,
enforcement of County dog control ordinances and the establishment of buffers along creeks.
Additionally, Chapter 24 Article III Section G of the Butte County Code describes which land
types are not suitable for development and identifies deer migration, fawning and winter range
areas are classified as “primary areas”. Primary areas must be avoided and reserved as permanent
open space in all instances. Dedicated open space areas shall be designated for all land not
suitable for development.
The objectives of this project were to: 1) develop a data ranking system for identification of
intermediate, winter and critical winter range habitats; 2) develop a GIS model to update the
intermediate, winter and critical winter range maps; 3) assess individual parcels based on their
relation to deer habitats; 4) summarize the data inputs, techniques, and use of the data, and 5)
develop a GIS model that can be updated as new scientific data becomes available.
Data Selection for Habitat Analysis
Working with CDFG Biologist, Henry Lomeli, vegetation, elevation, and terrain preferences,
habitat variables, of the deer herds based on seasonal variations were identified. The best
available GIS data that represented these habitat variables were obtained from the California
Department of Forestry (CDF), United States Geological Society (USGS), United States Forest
Service (USFS), and Butte County. Contrary to initial assumptions, the CDFG did not possess
current Global Positioning System (GPS) data detailing spatial and temporal deer herd
movements in Butte County.
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 2 of 11
Vegetation requirements based on consultation with CDFG and cross referenced to USFS/CDF
CALVEG vegetation classification (USFS, 2005), identified for critical winter and winter range
are as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
mixed shrubs
ceanothus chaparral
wedgeleaf ceanothus
lower montane mixed chaparral
scrub oak
manzanita
upper montane mixed chaparral
water
aspen
tan oak
willow (tree)
sycamore
interior live oak
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
upper montane mixed shrub
gray pine
canyon live oak
blue oak
white alder
Fremont cottonwood
pacific madrone
California buckeye
cottonwood alder
black oak
valley oak
Vegetation requirements identified for the intermediate range are similar to those identified for
the critical winter and winter ranges but with the incorporation of meadow and riparian habitats.
The classes, based on the CDFG consultation and cross referenced to USFS/CDF CALVEG
vegetation classification, are as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
mixed shrubs
ceanothus chaparral
wedgeleaf ceanothus
lower montane mixed chaparral
scrub oak
manzanita
water
aspen
tan oak
willow (tree)
willow (shrub)
sycamore
interior live oak
wet meadow
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
upper montane mixed shrub
gray pine
canyon live oak
blue oak
white alder
Fremont cottonwood
pacific madrone
California buckeye
cottonwood alder
black oak
valley oak
riparian mixed hardwood
interior mixed hardwood
Fire management and fire history were identified as an important component of deer habitat
suitability. The California Department of Forestry’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program
(FRAP) maintains several dataset covering a wide range of fire management issues. The dataset
labeled “Fire Environment” was selected for this analysis since it identifies distinct environments
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 3 of 11
for fire management for current and future conditions, based on fifty-years of fire management
regimes. When incorporated with vegetation data they identify the mix of fire management that
each vegetation type is likely to receive.
Elevation and aspect were identified as contributing factors in the identification of the seasonal
deer ranges and habitat suitability. Digital elevation models (DEM) are widely used in GIS for
interpreting both elevation and aspect. Southern and southwestern slopes were identified by
CDFG as the preferred habitats for all of the temporal ranges addressed in this study. Elevation
requirements were broken into three categories; 1,000 ft. – 3,000 ft. for critical winter, 500 ft. –
4,000 ft. for winter, and 4,000 ft. – 6,000 ft. for intermediate.
Due to the lack of current GPS and/or telemetry data for the deer herds, the incorporation of
some degree of empirical data was necessary. Several sources of data which shows actual
existence of the deer herds were investigated. The Wildlife Management division of the CDFG
produces maps referred to as “Spot Kills” which summarize the locations of deer taken during
hunting season. The Spot Kill maps were deemed inappropriate for this study due to the narrow
time frame in which hunting season occurs, the quality of data recorded, and the concept that
many deer are taken from resident populations and not necessarily migratory deer groups. The
California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) gathers deer road kill information, however
the information is not consistent spatially and temporally. Additionally the CalTrans data suffers
from the lack of discretion between resident and migratory populations.
Lacking current GPS and/or telemetry data of identified migratory deer herd habitat use and
essential migratory corridors, this model relied upon historic range maps as they integrated
telemetry data from the early 1980’s to identify verified existence of migratory deer herds and
recent information regarding habitat preference and suitability for wintering deer. By
incorporating the historic data into the weighting function (described later in the methods
section) this model will include the empirical data that would otherwise not be available at this
time.
Methods
Data Selection
The first step of the project was to select appropriate GIS data. The following information and
databases were obtained and used to conduct the analysis. The bulleted item is the datum
identifier, followed by the source of the data, followed by a brief description of the data .
•
•
•
Fire Environment – California Department of Forestry Fire and Resource Assessment
Program.
o Fire management environments.
Digital Elevation Model – United States Geological Society.
o Elevation
o Aspect
CALVEG – California Department of Forestry and Resource Assessment Program .
o Vegetation classification.
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 4 of 11
•
•
Historical Migratory Deer Range Map – Butte County.
o Documented historic habitats and migration areas
Assessor Parcel Database – Butte County.
o Parcel location, size, and jurisdiction.
Data Filtering for Temporal Habitat Requirements
The second step involved converting all data into a raster format. The Digital Elevation Model
(DEM) by nature contains information based on 10 square meters. The fire environment and
vegetation data were supplied in raster format at 300 square meter resolution. The historic deer
range originated from vector based data and was converted into raster at a 300 square meter
resolution. By converting the data into raster format, the ability to assign values (described
below) to each 300 square meter pixel was realized.
The third step entailed filtering and assigning values to the data based on CDFG’s identification
of temporal and spatial habitat suitability for migratory deer herds. The following describes how
filtering was performed on the GIS data per the seasonal requirements of the deer herds:
For critical winter range, areas were selected that had south and southwest slopes (aspect),
minimized fire suppression efforts (fire environment), between 1,000 ft. – 3,000 ft. (elevation),
suitable winter vegetation (vegetation classification), and existed in the historic critical winter
range (historic migratory deer range map)
For winter range, areas were selected that had south and southwest slopes (aspect), minimized
fire suppression efforts (fire environment), between 500 ft. – 4,000 ft. (elevation), suitable winter
vegetation (vegetation classification), and existed in the historic winter range (historic migratory
deer range map)
For intermediate range areas were selected that had south and southwest slopes (aspect), between
4,000 ft. – 6,000 ft. (elevation), and existed in the historic intermediate range (historic migratory
deer range map)
Weighting Assignments and Modeling
The following describes how assigning values to each filtered item was performed on the GIS
data per the seasonal requirements of migratory deer herds. Generally, preferred habitats were
assigned higher values and lesser habitats were assigned lower values. For a graphic
representation refer to Appendix A.
For critical winter range, areas that were identified with south and southwest slopes were
assigned a value of “1” and all other aspects were assigned a value of “0”, fire suppression
efforts were assigned a value of “2” for areas which receive minimal fire suppression, “1” for
areas in the mixed interface zones which receive moderate fire suppression, and “0” for
developed areas likely to receive maximum fire suppression efforts, locations between 1,000 ft. –
3,000 ft. were assigned a value of “1” and all other areas were assigned a value of “0”, areas
which met the deer herd foraging requirements were assigned a value of “1” and all other areas
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 5 of 11
received a value of “0”, and areas in the historic critical winter range were given a value of “1”
while all other areas received a value of “0”. The value assignments result in eight possible
outcomes for any given location ranging from 0 – 7. The top three outcomes (5, 6, and 7) were
then analyzed using a geostatistical model in GIS called “local polynomial interpolation” (see
“Selection of Modeling Environment” below). This surface or range area was then converted into
vector data for ease of use and better cartographic representation.
For winter range areas that were identified with south and southwest slopes were assigned a
value of “1” and all other aspects were assigned a value of “0”, fire suppression efforts were
assigned a value of “2” for areas which receive minimal fire suppression, “1” for areas in the
mixed interface zones which receive moderate fire suppression, and “0” for developed areas
likely to receive maximum fire suppression efforts, locations between 500 ft. – 4,000 ft. were
assigned a value of “1” and all other areas were assigned a value of “0”, areas which met the
CDFG identified deer herd foraging requirements were assigned a value of “1” and all other
areas received a value of “0”, and areas in the historic winter range were given a value of “1”
while all other areas received a value of “0”. The value assignments result in eight possible
outcomes for any given location ranging from 0 – 7. The top three outcomes (5, 6, and 7) were
then analyzed using the same geostatistical model as described in the above paragraph. This
surface or range area was then converted into vector data.
For intermediate range areas that were identified with south and southwest slopes were assigned
a value of “1” and all other aspects were assigned a value of “0,” fire suppression efforts were
assigned a value of “2” for areas which receive minimal fire suppression, “1” for areas in the
mixed interface zones which receive moderate fire suppression, and “0” for developed areas
likely to receive maximum fire suppression efforts, locations between 4,000 ft. – 6,000 ft. were
assigned a value of “1” and all other areas were assigned a value of “0”, areas which met the
CDFG identified deer herd foraging requirements were assigned a value of “1” and all other
areas received a value of “0”, and areas in the historic intermediate range were given a value of
“1” while all other areas received a value of “0”. The value assignments result in four possible
outcomes for any given location ranging from 0 – 3. The top three outcomes (1, 2, and 3) were
then analyzed using the same geostatistical model as described in the above paragraphs. This
surface or range area was then converted into vector data.
The combination of the critical winter, winter and intermediate vector shapefile produces a range
map for the life phases that are most sensitive to human encroachment and alteration. While the
preceding steps identified these suitable habitats based on suitability and historic information, it
does not provide a concept of habitat loss due to fragmentation of rural parcels through
development.
Selection of Modeling Environment
Geostatistical Analyst uses spatial data in a landscape and creates (interpolates) a continuous
surface and predicts values for each location in the landscape analyzed. For this modeling
exercise a “deterministic” technique was employed which uses mathematical functions for
interpolation, as opposed to a geostatistical technique which uses both mathematical and
statistical functions for interpolation and the ability to evaluate data quality. This choice was
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 6 of 11
based on the assumption that the data has no errors, as the scope of this exercise does not
included evaluating the quality of existing and widely used spatial data sets.
The deterministic interpolation method used for this analysis was local polynomial interpolation,
which uses data within localized “windows” rather than using all of the available data. This
allows the local polynomial interpolation to fit local trends and the utilization of weighting
functions. The localized “window” can be moved around, and the surface value at the center of
the window, call it µo(x,y), is estimated at each point. Weighted least squares is used by
minimizing,
Where n is the number of points within the window. Here, w, is a weight,
Where d10 is the difference between the point and the center of the window and a is a parameter
that controls how fast weights decay with distance. Finally, µo(xi,yi) is the value of the
polynomial.
For first-order polynomial:
For second order polynomial:
And so on. The minimization occurs for the parameters {βi}. The parameters are re-estimated
whenever the center point and, consequently, the window moves (ESRI, 2003). In laypersons
terms this process removes data outliers and delineates the “surface” or critical winter range
using predictions based on the trends in the data.
Parcel Based Evaluation
As a component of this study, the updated critical winter, winter and intermediate ranges were
appended to Butte County’s GIS parcel layer. The techniques employed to attribute deer range
information to the County’s GIS parcel layer are discussed below
The first step was to run a basic selection process to identify parcels that exist on critical winter,
winter and intermediate habitat ranges, and assign the habitat value to each parcel. The location
selection for this process employed the “select by location” function with the parameters
“identify ‘parcels’ whose center lies within ‘X’ habitat” where X is critical winter, winter or
intermediate range. This value is identified as “range” within the County’s GIS parcel database.
Since many parcels traverse multiple habitats a second attribute was assigned to the parcel
database to identify those parcels which contain more than one habitat. The function parameters
were “identify previously selected ‘parcels’ that intersect ‘X’ habitat” where X is the habitats not
used in the first selection process. These two actions result in parcels identified as either fully
contained by a particular habitat or identified as centered in, but overlapping multiple habitats.
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 7 of 11
Parcels that contain two or more habitats are identified by the attribute “range_int” where “int” is
used for “intersect” within the County’s GIS parcel database
The next step was to evaluate parcel sizes within each habitat consistent with the 1984 Report of
the Butte County Deer Herd Study Panel which identifies the following recommendations:
•
•
Critical Winter Range: 40-acre minimum lot size.
Winter Herd Area: 20-acre minimum lot size.
The attribute selection for this process employed the “select by attribute” function with the
parameters “ "Range" = 'X' AND "ACRES" < 'Y' “ where X is the range and Y is the
corresponding minimum acreage for lot size. This function was performed for the critical winter
range, selecting all parcels under than 40 acres and for the winter range, selecting all parcels
under than 20 acres. A new attribute parameter was added to the County’s GIS parcel database
names “suit_parce” to identify whether or not the parcel functions as suitable per the parcel size
requirements. All parcels meeting this attribute selection criteria were assign the value of “no”
and the remaining parcels, greater than or equal to 20 acres for winter range and greater than or
equal to 40 acres for critical winter were assigned a value of “yes” to identify they still met the
size requirements per the range they exist in.
Utilizing the queries of parcel size limitations, in relation to the County’s parcel database with
integrated migratory deer herd habitat status, the investigator can attribute values to each parcel.
For the purposes of this investigation the following will apply:
(“suit_parce”)
Ordinal
Value
No
Substandard Size
Parcel
Suitable Size
Yes
Parcel
Two possible outcomes
Interval
Value
0
1
Draft Results
The results of this analysis are portrayed in two GIS datasets, 1) revised deer range map
identifying critical winter, winter and intermediate habitats, and 2) a parcel database with
attributes that show each parcels deer range habitat association, whether the parcel intersects
multiple habitats, and suitability based on parcel size per the 1984 Report of the Butte County
Deer Herd Study Panel .
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 8 of 11
References
ESRI (Environmental Sciences Research Institute). ArcGIS 9 - Using ArcGIS Geostatistical
Analyst. Redlands, CA. 2003.
Butte County, 1984 Report of the Butte County Deer Herd Study Panel.
Butte County Department of Development Services. Historical Migratory Deer Range Map.
1980
Butte County Department of Development Services. GIS Assessor Parcel Database. October 30,
2006
California Department of Forestry Fire and Resource Assessment Program, Fire Management
Environments data. http://gis.ca.gov/catalog/BrowseCatalog.epl?id=83 , accessed on January 9,
2007.
US Forest Service, Existing vegetation data. http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/rsl/clearinghouse/aa-refpnf.shtml , accessed on January 9, 2007.
US Geological Society. Digital Elevation Model. http://data.geocomm.com/dem/ , accessed on
January 9, 2007.
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 9 of 11
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Page 10 of 11
Appendix A
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Critical Winter Range
Aspect
Convert to Raster
S-SW-Flat Slopes = 1
Other Slopes = 0
Data Extracted from a USGS 10 Meter DEM
Fire Environment
Convert to Raster
* Underdeveloped Areas = 2
* Mixed Interface Areas = 1
* Developed Areas = 0
7 Possible Outcomes
Geostatistical Analysis
Data provided by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (1995)
Elevation
Convert to Raster
1000 – 3000 ft. = 1
Other Elevation = 0
The top 3 outcomes were thrown into the
Geostastical Model of Local Polynomial
Interpolation.
Extracted from a USGS 10 Meter
DEM
Convert to Shapefile
Vegetation
Convert to Raster
* Suitable Vegetation = 1
Non – Suitable Vegetation = 0
Critical Winter Range
Data provided by the Fire Resource & Assessment Program (FRAP)
Historical Data
Convert to Raster
Historical Critical Winter range Layer = 1
Non Historical Critical Winter Range Layer = 0
Data provided by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG)
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Winter Range
Aspect
Convert to Raster
S-SW-Flat Slopes = 1
Other Slopes = 0
Data Extracted from a USGS 10 Meter DEM
Fire Environment
Convert to Raster
* Underdeveloped Areas = 2
* Mixed Interface Areas = 1
* Developed Areas = 0
7 Possible Outcomes
Geostatistical Analysis
Data provided by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (1995)
Elevation
Convert to Raster
500 - 400 ft. = 1
Other Elevation = 0
The top 3 outcomes were thrown into the
Geostastical Model of Local Polynomial
Interpolation.
Extracted from a USGS 10 Meter
DEM
Convert to Shapefile
Vegetation
Convert to Raster
* Suitable Vegetation = 1
Non – Suitable Vegetation = 0
Critical Winter Range
Data provided by the Fire Resource & Assessment Program (FRAP)
Historical Data
Convert to Raster
Historical Critical Winter range Layer = 1
Non Historical Critical Winter Range Layer = 0
Data provided by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG)
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft
PROJECT ID#: 004-09
Intermediate Range
Aspect
Convert to Raster
S-SW Slopes = 1
Other Slopes = 0
Data Extracted from a USGS 10 Meter DEM
Elevation
Convert to Raster
4000 – 6000 ft. = 1
Other Elevation = 0
Extracted from a USGS 10 Meter
DEM
4 Possible Outcomes
Geostatistical Analysis
The top 3 outcomes were thrown into the
Geostastical Model of Local Polynomial
Interpolation.
Convert to Shapefile
Historical Data
Convert to Raster
Historical Critical Winter range Layer = 1
Non Historical Critical Winter Range Layer = 0
Intermediate Range
Data provided by the Department of Fish and Game (DFG)
Butte County
July 2007 (Revised Nov. 2007)
Technical Study and GIS Model for Migratory Deer Range Habitat
Draft