MOVEMENTS AND HABITAT

LLETIN NO. 95-18 IDAHO BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT NOVEMBER 1995 BLM LIBRARY 88069231

MOVEMENTS

AND

HABITAT

SELECTION

OF

THE

LONGNOSE

SNAKE

fRhinocheilus

lecontei)

IN

SOUTHWESTERN IDAHO

by

JonathanM.Beck andCharlesR.Peterson

Departmentof Biological Sciences IdahoStateUniversity Pocatello,Idaho 83209

\55'K*

QL

84.2

.

L352

no

.

95-18

GL

pc>.

T5

"

.MOVEMENTS

AND

HABITAT SELECTION

OF

THE

LONGNOSE SNAKE

(

Rhinocheilus

lecontei

)

!N

SOUTHWESTERN

IDAHO

by:

JonathanM.Beck and Charles R. Peterson DepartmentofBiological Sciences

IdahoState University Pocatello, Idaho

83209

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Movement

andhabitatselection studies arenecessaryfortheconservationand proper

management of reptile species. Such data are required when dealing with threatened,

endangered, sensitive, ordeclining species to aid inthe maintenance orrecovery ofthat species. BecausetheLongnose Snake(Rhinocheiluslecontei)islistedinIdahoasa U.S.D.I.

BureauofLand ManagementSensitiveSpeciesandasan IdahoDepartmentof Fishand

Game

Speciesof Special Concern,

we

undertookthisproject todeterminemovementpatternsand

habitat selectionofLongnoseSnakesinsouthwestern Idaho.

We

used datafroman extensive trappingsurveythat

we

conductedforIdahoPower

Company

todetermineLongnoseSnake macrohabitatuse.

We

thenused radiotelemetrytomonitormovementsand microhabitat use of

threeLongnoseSnakesatBruneauDunesState Park.

We

measuredmicrohabitatvariablesat

eachsitewhereasnakewasrelocated(i.e.,itslocationwasredetermined)toquantify"used" microhabitat.

We

alsomeasuredmicrohabitatvariables atrandomlyselected sites toobtainan estimateofthe distributionof"available"microhabitat. TodetermineifLongnoseSnakes were

selecting certainmicrohabitatcharacteristics,

we

comparedusedto availablemicrohabitat and

testedforsignificantdifferences.

We

determinedthatLongnoseSnakesatBruneau Dunes

StateParkselectretreatsitehabitatswithburrows and shrubcover. Therefore,

we

feelthat

burrows and shrubsarean important aspect ofLongnose Snakemicrohabitatand should be considered

when

managingfor this sensitivespecies.

Longnose Snake(Rhinocheiluslecontei) capturedatBruneau DunesStatePark.

TABLE OF

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

i

LONGNOSE

SNAKE PHOTOGRAPH

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii

INTRODUCTION

1

METHODS

2 StudyArea 2 Trapping 2 Movements 3 MicrohabitatMeasurements 3 DataAnalysis 4

RESULTS

5 Trapping 5 Movements 4 Microhabitat Selection 5

DISCUSSION

6 Trapping 6 Movements 6 Microhabitat Selection 6 ManagementImplications 7

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

7

LITERATURE

CITED

8

TABLES

10

FIGURES

12

APPENDIX

1 Macrohabitatcategoriesand cover typedefinitions. 26

Appendix

1A

Photograph oftheShrub SavannaSite. 27

Appendix IB Photograph oftheForblandSite. 28

APPENDIX

2 1994ShrubSavannalineintercept data. 29

APPENDIX

3 1994 Forblandlineintercept data. 30

INTRODUCTION

Movement

andhabitatselectionstudies arenecessaryfortheconservationand proper

managementofreptilespecies.Theecologicalreactionsofreptilestomanagementpractices areoftenhighlysitespecific,dependingonthe detailsofthe localenvironment. Therefore,site

specific habitatandmovementdataneedtobecollected toconstructpredictivemodelsofthe effectsofmanagementpracticesonreptiles(Buryet.,al.1980). Unfortunately,the secretive

natureof

many

snake species hasresulted inalackof dataon movementandhabitatselection

(ReinertandKodrich1982).Suchdataarerequiredwhendealingwiththreatened,endangered,

sensitive,ordeclining speciestoaid in themaintenanceorrecoveryofthat species. Because

theLongnose Snake(Rhinocheilus lecontei)islistedinIdahoasa U.S.D.I. BureauofLand Management Sensitive Speciesand asan IdahoDepartment of Fish and

Game

Speciesof SpecialConcern (ConservationData Center 1994),

we

undertookthisprojectto determine

movementpatternsandhabitatselectionofLongnoseSnakesinsouthwestern Idaho.

A

necessaryrequirementforany study ofhabitat utilizationorhabitatselection isto assesssnakedistributions intheenvironment accurately without observationalbias insampling (Reinert 1993). In the springandsummerof 1993and 1994

we

conductedan extensive trappingsurvey ofthe C.J. StrikeReservoirAreaforIdahoPower

Company

todeterminethe distribution,abundance, and macrohabitatassociationsoftheNight,Ground, andLongnose

Snakes. Intwofieldseasons,

we

installed47driftfenceand funneltrap arraysoverthelength ofthestudy area(Fig.1)insix differenthabitattypes(DeserticHerbland/Forbland,Desertic

Shrubland, Grassland, Shrubland,Shrub Savanna,and Talus) (SeeAppendix1for definitions

ofhabitat types).

We

capturedLongnose Snakesinfourofthesixhabitattypes(Desertic

Herbland/Forbland, Desertic Shrubland, Shrubland,and Shrub Savanna).

Common

toallsites

where

we

capturedLongnoseSnakes,weresandytosandyloamysoilsandashrub component.

Although

we

foundthatLongnoseSnakeswereselectingcertainhabitatpatches,

we

did not

know

whatspecificfeaturesofthatpatchtheywereselecting.

Thegoalofthisstudywastodetermine microhabitatselection forLongnoseSnakesin

southwestern Idaho. Toachievethisgoal,

we

neededtoaccomplishthefollowingspecific objectives: (1) determine Longnose Snake movement patterns via radiotelemetry; (2) characterize individualLongnose Snakemicrohabitat useinthe habitatpatcheswherethey were captured;(3) characterize microhabitatavailableinthathabitatpatch;and(4)compareused

toavailablemicrohabitattodetermineifmicrohabitatselectionhad occurred.

Because radiotelemetry provides concise information onthespatialbiologyof snake

species(Reinertand Kodrich 1982),

we

usedittomonitorthemovementsand microhabitat use ofthreeLongnoseSnakes withintheirlarger habitatpatches.Miniature,radiotransmitterswere implantedintothreeLongnoseSnakesatBruneauDunesStatePark.

We

collectedaseriesof

habitatmeasurementsaround eachrelocationsite (i.e.,eachsitewherethesnake’slocationwas

redetermined) to characterize thesite. Themicrohabitat aroundtherelocatedsnake was

consideredasbeingusedbythatsnake. Thus, radiotelemetry allowed ustomonitorLongnose SnakemovementsandtodetermineLongnose Snakemicrohabitatuse.

Todetermine ifLongnoseSnakeswereselectingspecificmicrohabitatcharacteristics,

we

compared thecharacteristicsoftheused microhabitat tothe characteristicsofavailable

microhabitat. Available microhabitatwasdeterminedbymeasuring microhabitatvariablesat randomlyselectedsites.

We

thencomparedtheused microhabitatto availablemicrohabitatto

look for differences. If significant differences were evident, then

we

concluded that

microhabitatselectionhad occurred(Manlyet.al.1993).

Thisreportprovides:(1) relevant resultsfromthetrapping studyundertakenforIdaho

Power

Company

byIdahoStateUniversity;(2) resultsonmicrohabitatselectionofLongnose

Snakes;and(3)implicationsforLongnose Snake management.

We

feel thecombinedresults

ofthese projects willbeuseful in themanagementofLongnoseSnakesinsouthwestern Idaho.

METHODS

StudyArea

We

conductedthetrapping portionofthestudyforIdahoPower

Company

inthe C.J. StrikeReservoirAreainsouthwestern Idaho. Thestudy areawasapproximately40kilometers (25 miles)long,andiscomprised ofsectionsoftheSnakeandBruneauRivers(Fig.1). The

easternboundaryofthestudy areawas Crane RockandthewesternboundarywastheBorden Lake CooperativeWildlifeManagement Area. The studyareawas comprised of U.S.D.I

BureauofLand Management,Idaho Fish andGame,IdahoPower, andprivate lands.

We

conducted the movements and microhabitat selection portion ofthisstudy at Bruneau DunesStatePark becauseitwastheonlysitewhere

we

capturedLongnoseSnakes

thatwere largeenough toaccommodate radiotransmitters.

An

added advantage was that

Bruneau Dunes contained tworelatively extensive patches of Desertic Herbland/Forbland

(referred to asForblandhereafter)andShrubSavanna. Fromthetrappingstudy,

we knew

that

thesemacrohabitat typeswerebeingutilizedbyLongnoseSnakes,and

we

wantedtoseeif

therewerespecificmicohabitatcharacteristicsinthese habitattypesthatwerebeingselected (Fig.2).SeeAppendix 1foradescriptionof Forblandand Shrub Savanna.

Trapping

We

installed44driftfenceswith funneltraps inthe sixmajorhabitattypesoccurring

intheC.J.StrikeReservoir Area. Fifteenwereinstalledduringthefirstyear (1993) and 29

wereinstalledduringthesecond year (1994). Duringthesecondyear,

we

repeatedthreeof

the1993 sites,so the totalnumberof arrays usedfortrapping dataanalysiswas47. Each

array consisted of four7.5

m

sections of 50.8

cm

metalflashing arranged inacapital

T

configuration(Fig. 3).This arrayisamodified version ofthetrappingarraysproposedby Campbell and Christman (1982), Jones (1986), and Karns (1986).

We

constructed funneltrapswithfineenoughhardwarecloth (1/8", 3.2

mm)

toprevent

theescape of smallsnakes. One91

cm

x 61

cm

pieceof hardwarecloth yieldsonetrapbody

(61

cm

x55 cm),one funnel(41

cm

x 36cm),and a door (15

cm

x23 cm);twoadditional

funnelsmeasuring 41

cm

x37.6

cm

werecutfrompiecesofhardwarecloth91

cm

x 37.6 cm.

We

rolledthe61

cm

x 55

cm

piecesofhardwareclothintocylinders and fastenedthem

togetherwith1/8inch(3.2

mm)

poprivetswithrivetbacks. The41x36

cm

pieceswere

rolledintofunnels,popriveted together,insertedintotheendsofthetrapbodies,andpop

riveted into place.

We

thencutadoorwayinthetopofthe trap toaccessanimals without havingtoremovethe trapfromitsplaceinthe array.Theedgesofthedoorway werecovered with duct tapetopreventcuttingourselvesorharmingtheanimals

when

removingthem from

the trap. Thedoorwassecuredtothe trapbodywithwire,andhookswith rubber bandstied tothemheldthedoorshut.

A

completedtrapmeasures approximately 95

cm

x 17cm,varying

slightlydueto differencesthatoccurred duringassembly(Fig. 3). To minimize trapping

mortality,

we

outfitted eachtrapwithanexternal cardboardor

wood

cover,provided an

internalcardboardcover,and provided approximatelythree

cm

ofsoil substrateinsideeachtrap

(LowellDiller,pers.comm.).

Movements

We

used radiotelemetrytodetermineLongnose Snake movements. Miniature, 1.7g

BD-2GT

Temperature-Sensingradiotransmitters(HolohilSystemsLTD.,Ontario,Canada)were

surgicallyimplantedintothreeLongnoseSnakesthatwerelargeenoughtoaccommodatethe transmitter(snout-vent length 61-64cm,mass 69-72g).

We

allowedthesnakestorecover

fromsurgeryforseveraldaysand then releasedtheminthe vicinityofthetrapping arraywhere

theywerecaptured.

We

relocatedeachindividualevery twotothreedays duringtheday.

Eachtime asnakewasrelocated

we

markedthesitewithacoloredflagshowingthedateof

the relocation.

When

asnakemoved,

we

measuredtheangleand distancebetweenconsecutive

locationsso

we

couldplotmovements.

MicrohabitatMeasurements

UsedMicrohabitat:

We

quantifiedthemicrohabitatateachsitewhereasnakewasrelocated usingquadratandlineinterceptmethodsmodifiedfromReinert(1984 aandb) forthe desert

environment. Thesesiteswillhereafterbereferred to assnakelocationsites.

A

one meter square quadratwascenteredovereach snakelocationsite(Fig. 4). In thequadrat,

we

counted

ormeasured: (1)numberof burrows,(2)burrowdiameter,(3)numberofshrubs,(4)shrub

height,and(5) relativecanopyclosure(lengthx width of eachshrub).

We

alsocollected line interceptdataonfourrandomlyselectedone metertransects,insidethequadrat, toquantifythe

following:(1)bareground,(2)litter,(3)moss,(4)forb cover,(5) grasscover,and(6)shrub

cover.

Inadditiontothequadratmeasurements,

we

collecteddataaround each snakelocation

siteby randomlyselecting four five-metertransectsalongaten-meteraxis thatbisectedthe

quadratparallel tothetrappingarraywherethesnakewascaptured(Fig. 4). Alongeach

five-metertransect,

we

counted or measured: (1)numberof burrows, (2)burrowdiameter, (3)

numberofshrubs,(4)shrubheight,and(5) relativecanopyclosure(lengthxwidth of each shrub) along aone-half meterstrip oneach site ofthetransect.

We

alsocollected the

following lineinterceptdataonthefourrandomly selectedtransects: (1)bareground,(2)

litter,(3)moss,(4)forbcover, (5) grass cover,and(6)shrubcover.

Available Microhabitat:

We

quantified available microhabitat by measuring the same

microhabitatcharacteristics atrandomlyselectedsites. Eachtime

we

collecteddataatasnake

locationsite,

we

alsomeasuredmicrohabitatcharacteristics atarandomly chosensite.

We

usedarandom numberstable togeneratearandomdistance (nolessthantenmeters and no

greaterthan350meters)andarandomanglefromthesnakelocationsite. Thisprovided us withanestimate ofthe distribution ofavailable microhabitat to compare with the used microhabitattodetermineifselectionwasoccurring.

DataAnalysis

Trapping:

We

calculatedpooled captureratesper100trap nightsforeachsitewhere

we

capturedLongnoseSnakesin 1993and 1994. Capturerateswerecomputed bydividingthe totalnumberofLongnoseSnakes captured persite(includingrecaptures)bythe totalnumber

oftrapnights for thatsite.

We

generated bar graphsforcomparison of captureratesbetween

habitattypes(Fig.5).

Theareasaroundalltrappingarrays(1993and 1994)were assignedtoone ofsix

macrohabitatclasses(Appendix1)byDr.Anthonie Holthuijzen (IdahoPowerCompany)using datacollected ateach trappingarraybytheIdahoPowerfieldcrew. Eachsitewasassigned

toa particular habitatcover type(DeserticHerbland, Desertic Shrubland, Grassland, Shrubland, Shrub Savanna,or Talus).

We

comparedthenumberofarrays ineachhabitattype withthe

numberof thosehabitatswhereLongnoseSnakeswerecaptured.

By

dividingthe totalnumber

of trappingsitesineachhabitat classwhere LongnoseSnakes occurredbythe totalnumberof

siteswheretrappingwasconductedforeachhabitat classand multiplyingby100tostandardize

the index,

we

generatedtheprobability(%)of trappingLongnoseSnakesineachhabitattype

(Fig.6).

Movements:

We

plottedeachindividualsnake’smovementpatternand generatedindividual

home

ranges usingtheconvexpolygon method.

We

usedtheconvexpolygonmethodbecause

itismostcommonlyusedtodefineanimalactivityrangesandthereforemostcomparableto

previousstudies(Reinert1992). Totestfordirectionalityof eachindividual’smovements

we

calculated Rayleigh’s Z. Rayleigh’s

Z

determined ifthe direction ofeach individual’s

movements wereuniformlydistributedarounda circle(Zar1984). Ifthesampleisevenly

distributedaroundthe circle (p>0.05) thenthereisnodirectionalityinmovements.

MicrohabitatSelection:Although during our surveyforIdahoPower

we

undertook possibly

the largest reptiletrappingeffort in the state’shistory,

we

only capturedthreeLongnoseSnakes

thatcould be usedin thisstudy. Because ofthesmallsamplesizeand highvariance,itwas

impossible to generate an omnibusF statistic to determine ifthe used microhabitat was

significantlydifferentthanthe availablemicrohabitat. Thesnakeswerealso in different habitat types,ForblandandShrubSavanna,so

we

could notjustifypoolingfor analysis. Therefore,

we

reducedthemicrohabitat datatocategoricaldataand plotted toseeifdifferenceswere

evident.

We

thenanalyzed the data,variable byvariable,using Fishers Exact Testfor2x2 contingency tablesand generated exactprobabilitiesfor

Row

xColumncontingency tables

(Conover 1971).

We

analyzedthequadrat dataseparatelyfromthe line intercept data.

RESULTS

Trapping

We

capturedLongnoseSnakesinfourofthe six habitat types: Forbland, P(c)=22%,

DeserticShrubland, P(c)=29%,Shrubland,P(c)=10%,and Shrub Savanna, P(c)=

29%

(Fig.

6). Allareaswhere

we

capturedLongnoseSnakeswereuplandsiteswithsandytosandyloam

soilsthathadsomeshrubcomponentatthesite. CapturerateswerehighestinShrub Savanna, followedbyDeserticShrubland, DeserticHerbland and Shrubland(Fig.5).

Movements

We

telemeteredthreeLongnoseSnakes (snakes #11,5,and6) atBruneauDunesState

Park duringthesummersof 1993 and 1994 (Table 1). Snake#11 wasradio-tracked atthe

ShrubSavannasitefrom28July1993to11September1993, but

we

wereunableto relocate

itafterthewinter of 1993. Snake#11 had a

home

rangeof 15,337

m

2

(Fig.7). Snake# 6was

capturedatthesame Shrub Savannasitein1994and

we

trackeditsmovements from7July

1994to25September 1994. Snake# 6 hada

home

rangeof 73,494nr(Fig.8). Snake#5

wastrackedfrom7 July1994to25September1994.Snake#5had a

home

rangeof 30,845

m

2

(Fig.9).

None

ofthesnakesdemonstrateddirectionalityintheirmovements(Figs.10,11,

and12).

MicrohabitatSelection

We

detectedsignificantdifferences infouroftheeleven microhabitatvariablesbetween usedandavailablequadrats(Table2). AttheShrubSavannasite,noneoftherandomquadrats had anyburrowsor shrubs,whilethreeofthesnakelocation siteshadburrows andtwoofthe sites had shrubs. Therefore, there were differences between the used and available

microhabitat. ThesnakeintheShrubSavannahabitat atBruneau DunesStateParkselected siteswithBurrowsand Shrubs(Fig.13). Therewereno othersignificantdifferencesbetween

availableand usedvariables at thissite. AttheForblandsite,thenumberof burrowsatused andavailable microhabitatappearstobedifferentwhenplottedasahistogram(Fig.14A)

(FishersExact Test p

=

0.057). Forbland quadrat dataalsoindicatedthatburrowdiameterat

snakelocationsiteswassignificantlydifferentfrom burrowdiameter atrandom sites(p

=

0.003). ThesnakeintheForblandhabitattypesselectedsiteswith burrowsinthe1-3

cm

rangeor larger.

We

alsodetected significantdifferences intwooftheeleven transect microhabitat

variables collected at theForblandsite(Fig.14

C

andD). The numberof burrows and shrub heightatthesnakelocation sitesweresignificantlydifferentthanthenumberofburrows and shrub heightatrandomsites(p=0.007and0.024respectively)(Appendix2and3).

DISCUSSION

Trapping

Duringthetwoyear studyforIdahoPower Company,noLongnoseSnakeswereever capturedinrockyareasontherim or adjacenttotalus.This suggestsa greaterassociationwith shrub orherbland habitattypes thanwithrockyareas. However, inastudy conducted between 1977 and 1980byDillerand Wallace (1981)insouthwestern Idaho,LongnoseSnakes

werereportedtobethe collectedinrockyaswellas theshruband herblandhabitat types.

Movements

OurmovementdatasuggestthatLongnoseSnakesatBruneauDunestendtoremainin

an areaiftheyare inappropriatehabitat.Longnose Snakes appeartobemoderate movers

(hundredsofmeters),when comparedto Western Rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis)thathave

movesof overakilometer(Cobb1994). Therelativelysmall

home

rangesof eachindividual

Longnose Snakesuggest that

when

asnakeisinappropriatehabitatittendsto staythere.

However, LongnoseSnakesarecrepusculartonocturnaland

we

were unabletotrack individual

snakemovementscontinuouslytoseeiftheyweremakingforays outofthereported

home

range area duringthe night.

MicrohabitatSelection

Ourmicrohabitat dataindicatethatsiteswith shrubswereselectedbytheLongnose

SnakesintheShrubSavannaand Forblandhabitat types. Ourquadrat dataalsoindicate that siteswithburrowswereselectedbythesnakeintheShrubSavannahabitattypeand suggest

thatburrowswereselected in theForblandsite.

We

feelthemarginallysignificant resultfrom

thequadratmeasurements wasanartifactofthesampling method. Eachtimeasnakewas

relocateditwasinaburrow,and a quadratwascenteredoverthesite. Theopeningtothe

burrowwasnotalwaysinthequadrat,andtherefore,somequadrat countsatsnakerelocation sitescontainedno burrows.

We

feelthelineinterceptdataaremoreindicativeofwhatis

happeningattheForblandsite. These dataindicatethatLongnoseSnakesintheForbland

habitattypeselect siteswith

many

burrows.

Ourresults are consistent withwhat is reported in the literature for thisspecies.

LongnoseSnakesarea crepusculartonocturnalsnakethatusesburrows(Dillerand Johnson 1982;Nussbaumet.,al. 1982; Stebbins1985). BecauseLongnoseSnakesare nocturnal,they

useburrows duringthe day.Theextensive

mammal

burrowsystemsatbothsitesinthepark provideretreat sitesaway fromtheextreme surface temperatures andsomepredators.

Management

Implications

Macrohabitat Management:

A

prerequisite forthepropermanagement of anyspecies is knowledge ofitsdistribution, relativeabundance,andhabitatassociationsintheareatobe

managed. Aftertwoyearsofintensetrappingand vegetation measurements,

we

have an increasedunderstandingof thesethreeparametersforLongnoseSnakesinthe C.J. Strike area.

We

have identified one factorthat

may

behaving anegative influence on thereptile

populationsinthestudyarea;theconversionofnativebunchgrassand shrubhabitats to exotic

grasslands oragriculture.

We

didnot capture targetspecies inanyof our trappingsites situated in exotic grassland.

MicrohabitatManagement: Because

we

wererelocatingeach individual duringtheday,

we

actuallydeterminedretreatsitemicrohabitatselection. BecauseLongnoseSnakes spendmost

oftheirtimeinretreat, thesesites areespecially important. Therefore,

we

conclude that

burrows and shrub coverarean important aspect ofLongnose Snakehabitatand should be protected

when

managingfor thisSensitiveSpeciesinsouthwestern Idaho.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We

wouldliketothankThe IdahoBureauofLandManagement and IdahoPower

Company

forfinancialandlogisticalsupport,withoutwhichthisprojectwouldnothave been

possible.

We

wouldespecially like tothank Allan Anselland Anthonie Holthuijzen of Idaho

Power

Company

forallowing ustousethe1993and 1994Longnose Snaketrapping datafrom

the C.J. Strikestudyin this report.

Many

otherpeople helped: IdahoDepartmentof Fishand

Game

gave us permissiontoconductthisstudy;IdahoDepartmentof FishandGame, Jerome

office,providedfinancialsupport;KellyWilde,Holly Hovis,

Rob

Marsh, Peter Peconi,

Von

Pope,and Craig Rebish providedassistance inthe fieldorcollectedvegetation dataateach trappingarray;HollyHovisprovided herplantknowledge and moral support;BillDoering

assistedwith datacollection;DickWallace provided expert advice;LowellDillerhelpedtoget thetrapping studyofftheground; Mike Dorcasassisted withsnake surgeries; andWess WitworthofBruneauDunesStateParkgave us permissiontoworkinthe park.

LITERATURE CITED

Bury,R.B.,H.W. Campbell., andN.J. Scott. 1980.Role and importance ofnongamewildlife.

Transactions of NorthAmericanWildlifeand Natural Resources Conference. 45:197-207.

Campbell, H. W., andS.P.Christman. 1982.Fieldtechniquesforherpetofaunalcommunity

analysis,pp.193-200. In: Scott,N.J.,Jr.ed. Herpetologicalcommunities. U.S. Fish and WildlifeserviceWildlifeResearch Report13,Washington, D.C.,

USA.

Cobb, V.A. 1994. The ecology of pregnancy infree-ranging GreatBasin Rattlesnakes

(Crotalusviridislutosus). Pocatello: IdahoStateUniversity. Dissertation.

Conover,W.J. 1971. Practicalnomparametric statistics2ed.

New

York:JohnWileyand Sons.

ConservationDataCenter.1994.Rare,threatened,and endangeredplantsandanimalsof Idaho. Thirdedition. IdahoDepartmentof Fish andGame,Boise,Idaho.39p.

Diller,L. V.,and D.R.Johnson. 1982. Ecology ofthe reptilesinthesnakeriverbirdsof preyarea. U.S.DepartmentofInteriorBureauofLandManagementsnakeriver birdsof prey researchprojectBoise, Idaho.

Diller,L. V.,andR.L.Wallace. 1981. Additional recordsandabundanceofthreespeciesof snakesinsouthwestern Idaho. TheGreatBasinNaturalist41(1):154-157.

Jones,K.B. 1986. Amphibiansandreptiles, pp.267-290.In:Cooperrider,A.Y.,R.J.Boyd, and H.R. Stuart(eds.),Inventoryand monitoring ofwildlifehabitat. U.S.Department of

InteriorBureauofLand ManagementServiceCenter,Denver, Co. 858pp.

Karns,D. K. 1986. Fieldherpetology: methodsforthestudyofamphibians andreptilesin

Minnesota. JamesFordBell

Museum

of Natural History occasional paper: number18._pp

25-88. Universityof Minnesota, Minnesota.

Manly,B.;Mcdonald,E.;D.Thomas. 1993.Resourceselectionbyanimals.Boundary Row, London:

Chapman

Hall.

Nussbaum,R. A.,Brodie,E. D.,Jr.,andR.M.Storm. 1983. Amphibians andreptilesofthe pacificnorthwest. Moscow,ID: University Pressof Idaho.

Reinert,H. K.and

W.

K

Kodrich. 1982.Movementsandhabitat utilizationbytheMassasuaga,

Sisturuscatenatuscatenatus.Journalof Herpetology. 16:162-171.

Reinert,H.K. 1984a. Habitatseparationbetween sympatricsnakepopulations. Ecology. 65:478-486.

Reinert, H. K. 1984b. Habitat variation within sympatric snake populations. Ecology. 65:1673-1682.

Reinert, H.K. 1992. Radiotelemetric fieldstudies offieldpitvipers: dataacquisition and

analysis,pp.185-197. In:Campbell,J.andE.

D

BrodieJr.(eds.).Biology ofthe Pitvipers. Selva.Tyler Texas.

Reinert,H. K. 1993. Habitatselection insnakes,pp.201-240. In: Seigel,R.A., andJ.T.Collins (eds.).SnakesEcologyandBehavior.

McGraw

Hill.

New

York.

Stebbins, R. C. 1985.Westernreptilesand amphibians. Boston: HoughtonMifflinCompany.

Zar,J.H.1984. Biostatistical Analysis. EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall,Inc.

Table1. Distancesmovedanddatesof detectionforeachLongnoseSnake'smovements.

Move

# Anglemoved Distancemoved(m) Dateof

move

Detection

Number

ofDays

at

Same

Site

Shrub

Savanna

1994

Released no

move

no

move

07-Jul-94 12

1 129 143 25-Jul-94 7 2 30 21 29-Jul-94 ? 3 192 197 04-Aug-94 ? 4 30 74 12-Aug-94 9 5 271 301 05-Sep-94 ? 6 161 226 17-Sep-94 8 "’Recaptured 14October1994 Forbland1994

Released Released Released 07-Jul-94 2

1 208 122 09-Jul-94 6 2 170 47 19-Jul-94 ? 3 135 182 25-Jul-94 ? 4 119 110 29-JUI-94 ? 5 288 140 04-Aug-94 ? 6 331 132 12-Aug-94 ? 7 14 128 17-Aug-94 ? 8 235 75 21-Aug-94 ? 9 145 120 05-Sep-94 20

Shrub Savanna

1993

Released Released Released 28-Jul-93

1 159 17 28-Jul-93 2 2

240

70 02-Aug-93 2 3 358 113 05-Aug-93 ? 4 146 147 10-Aug-93 ? 5 330 137 11-Aug-93 ? 6

264

5 14-Aug-93 ? 7 330 8 17-Aug-93 ? 8 108 194 21-Aug-93 4 9 242 194 02-Sep-94 9 10

Table2. 1994 ShrubSavanna and Forbland one meter quadratdata.

Site #Burrows Brw.Dia.(cm) #Shrubs Ht.(cm) Canopy(cm2

) Bare (cm) Litter(cm) Moss(cm) Forbs(cm) Grass (cm) Shrubs (cm)

Shrub Savanna 1994 Quadrat

Used 0 0.0 0 0 0 22 188 0 0 190 0 Used 4 3, 1,4.5, 3 1 99 7252 48 260 0 33 59 0 Used 3 3,3,4 1 173 45750 0 123 0 4 2 271 Used 0 0.0 0 0 0 61 304 0 0 35 0 Used 0 0.0 0 0 0 245 132 0 23 0 0 Used 0 0 0 0 0 179 201 0 17 3 0 Used 1 2 0 0 0 10 239 0 10 141 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 115 135 0 0 50 100 Random 0 0 0 0 0 79 229 35 57 0 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 102 149 0 31 118 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 52 213 0 0 135 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 18 341 0 41 0 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 151 169 0 21 46 0 Random 0 0.0 0 0 0 53 304 0 4 39 0 Forbland 1994 Quadrat Used 6 5, 3, 3, 4,3,3 0 0 0 173 164 3 29 31 0 Used 3 2,1,3 1 35 2144 192 169 0 0 39 0 Used 2 7,1 2 69,64 4800,2100 94 86 0 14 0 206 Used 3 7,2,2 1 74 18 129 146 48 0 0 77 Used 4 7,7, 2, 3 0 0 0 128 187 67 0 0 18 Used 0 0.0 0 0 0 332 39 0 29 0 0 Used 1 5.0 1 63 8740 0 102 0 3 0 295 Used 1 9.0 0 0 0 252 51 3 30 64 0 Used 0 0.0 0 0 0 110 207 0 20 63 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 24 292 0 55 29 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 238 57 0 34 71 0 Random 5 2, 2, 2, 3, 3 0 0 0 202 99 11 19 69 0 Random 1 5 0 0 0 298 50 43 6 3 0 Random 0 0 2 22,24 144,432 235 78 53 0 0 34 Random 0 0 0 0 0 220 110 0 49 21 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 190 137 0 9 64 0 Random 0 0 0 0 0 118 220 0 22 14 26 Random 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 391 0 11

C.

J.

Strike

Reservoir,

Idaho

=LongnoseSnake CaptureSites

Figure1. Longnose Snakedistribution in the C.J. StrikeReservoir Area. Blackstars

represent trappinglocations,andgraystarsindicate siteswhere LongnoseSnakeswere

captured.

BRUNEAU

DUNES,

IDAHO

BRUNEAU DUNES

STATE

PARK

1

km

i 1

=

Longnose

Snake

activitycenter

Figure2. 1993and 1994Longnose Snakeactivitycenters atBruneauDunesState Park.

The

map

wasscannedfron theBruneauDunesQuadrangle Idaho,7.5minuteseries

(Topographic)1978 map.Thered starscorrespondto the activity areas ineachhabitat

typeforeach telemeteredLongnoseSnake.

TrappingArray

Figure3. Schematic diagram ofthe"T" trappingarrayand funneltrapused duringthe

1993 and 1994 trapping seasonsatC.J.Strike.

5m

Figure4.

A

representationofthe

Imxlm

vegetation sampling quadrat located overa

relocatedsnake(star)withthe four, fivemetertransects.Theshaded area representsthe

meterstrip census.Not drawnto scale.

Capture Rate

(

#

of snakes /1 00 trap nights Habitat

Type

Figure5. Average Longnose SnakecaptureratesforeachhabitattypesampledatC.J.

StrikeReservoirduringthespringandsummerof 1993 and 1994. n= numbertrapping

arrays ineachhabitat type.

Probability of Capture (%) for each Habitat Type

DeserticShrubland Shrubland

Habitat

Type

Figure6. Probabilityof capturingaLongnose Snakeineachhabitattype sampledatC.

J.StrikeReservoir duringthespringandsummerof 1993 and 1994. Fractions represent

thenumberofsiteswhereLongnoseSnakeswerecaptured overthe totalnumberofsites

trappedineachhabitat type.

Movements

of

Longnose Snake #

11

Bruneau

Dunes

Shrub

Savanna

1993

Convex

Polygon

Home

Range:

15337

m

2 0.015337

km

2

Figure7.Movementsand

home

range ofLongnose Snake #11 atthe1993Shrub

Savannasite. Thearrows representassumeddirectionofmovement.

Movements

of

Longnose Snake #

6

Bruneau

Dunes

Shrub

Savanna 1994

100

m

!

Convex

Polygon

Home

Range:

73494

m

2 0.073494

km

2

Figure8. Movementsand

home

range ofLongnose Snake# 6atthe1994 Shrub

Savannasite. Thearrows representassumeddirectionofmovement.

Movements

of

Longnose Snake #

5

Bruneau

Dunes

Forbland

1994

Convex

Polygon

Home

Range:

30845

m

2 0.030845

km

2

Figure9.Movementsand

home

range ofLongnose Snake#5 atthe1994 Forblandsite. Thearrows representassumeddirectionofmovement.

Figure10. Circularscattergram ofLongnose Snake#1l'smovementsinthe1993Shrub

Savannahabitat. Snake #1 1exhibitednodirectionality initsmovements.

180

°

Figure11.CircularscattergramofLongnose Snake#6'smovementsin the1994Shrub

Savannahabitat. Snake#6exhibitednodirectionality initsmovements.

90

Figure12. Circular scattergram ofLongnose Snake#5'smovementsinthe1994 Forblandhabitat. Snake#5exhibitednodirectionality initsmovements.

ShrubSavanna Quadrat Numberof Sites RandomSitesvs.Used

A

Random

Shrub Savanna QuadratNumberofSites RandomSitesvs.Used

c

Shrub Height

ShrubSavanna Quadrat NumberofSites RandomSitesvs.Used

B

NumberofBurrows

ShrubSavanna QuadratNumberofSites RandomSitesvs.Used

D

NumberofShrubs

Figure13. Comparisonofavailableand used quadrathabitat characteristics at theShrub Savannasite. Thereweresignificantdifferences inburrowdiameter(A),numberofburrows(B),

shrub height(C),andnumberof shrubs (D)betweenused andrandomsitesbecauseallrandom

siteshad counts ofzero.

A

ForblandQuadrat:Numberof Sites

Randomvs.Used ForblandQuadrat NumberofSites Randomvs.Used FisherExact Test Random P= 0.057 NumberofBurrows

B

p = 0.003 NoBurrows 1-3 Burrow Diameter (cm)

ForblandTransectNumberof Sites Randomvs.Used

NoBurrows 1-3 >4

BurrowNumber

ForblandTransectNumberof Sites Randomvs.Used

D

p = 0.024 warn 1 wmm , NoShrubs 1-50 >50 ShrubHeight (cm)

Figure14. Comparisonofavailableand used quadrat andtransect habitat characteristics at the

Forblandsite. Thereweremoderatelysignificant differences innumberofburrows(A),and

significantdifferences inburrowdiameter (B)for thequadratdata. Therewerealso significant differences inburrow number(C),and shrubheight(D)forthe line transect data.

Appendix1. Macrohabitat categoriesanddefinitionsof cover types used during 1993and 1994. Typeinboldindicatesmacrohabitats usedin thisstudy.

Adjacent to Talus/Cliff: Consistsof nearly vertical rockorbaresoil faces,or slopesof unconsolidatedrockmaterialwithtotalvegetationcover of

5%

orless.

Barren: Isan undisturbed (bydirect

human

influence)upland areathathas atotalvegetation cover of

5%

orless.

*DeserticHerbland/Forbland:

An

uplandcommunitywith

1-25%

totalvegetationcover ofnon-woody plants(includinglichensandmosses) formingthedominantvegetation stratum. Itincludes sparselyvegetatedsitesinnon-desert areas.

Desertic Shrubland:

An

uplandcommunitywith1-25%totalvegetationcoverwith shrubs (includingsmalltrees<5m)formingthedominantvegetationstratum.

Forbland:

An

uplandcommunitywitha totalvegetationcover ofatleast

25%

and dominated

bynon-woodyplants(includinglichensand mosses) ofwhichforbs (native orintroduced)are

dominant.

Grassland:

An

uplandcommunitywithatleast

25%

totalvegetation cover,dominatedby

non-woody

plants (includinglichens and mosses) ofwhichgrasses (nativeorintroduced) are

dominant.

Shrubland:

An

upland vegetationcommunitydominatedbyshrubs (including smalltrees<5

m)with a shrubcanopyofatleast25%. Total vegetationcoverisgreaterthan25%.

*Shrub Savanna:

An

upland community with

5%

to

25%

canopy cover of shrubs (includingsmall trees<5 m). Total vegetation coveris atleast

25%,

and thearea

between shrubsistypicallydominated bygrassesor otherherbaceousvegetation.

Appendix2. 1994 ShrubSavannalineintercept data.

Site # Burrows Brw. Dia. (cm) #Shrubs Ht.(cm) Canopy(cm2

) Bare(cm) Litter(cm) Moss(cm) Forbs(cm) Grass(cm) Shrubs(cm)

ShrubSavanna 1994LineTransect

Used 6 2,16,3,3,9,2.5 1 113.0 1440 339 549 198 104 614 190 Used 3 1,4.5, 2 5 83,100,92,92,100 5146,10712, 4290,136,7200 254 1229 22 75 280 140 Used 2 4,2 2 120,170 4350,21600 320 940 0 382 101 257 Used 1 4 0 0.0 0 346 903 0 242 509 0 Used 13 3,2,12,2,3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3,1,2,1 0 0.0 0 743 881 0 91 30 255 Used 5 6, 8, 6, 6, 4 0 0.0 0 627 957 0 192 224 0 Used 2 6,4 0 0.0 0 12 1729 0 5 254 0 Rand 0 0.0 2 185,147 374,768 85 530 0 140 1245 0 Rand 1 2.0 0 0 0 666 1062 0 272 0 0 Rand 6 3, 4, 2, 1,2, 8 2 100,125 20140,16000 673 779 50 16 325 158 Rand 4 4,4,1, 1.5 3 95,139,104 7056,21140,11948 62 426 79 442 529 462 Rand 0 0 6 120,80,150, 110,124,120 15000,7000,5000, 4000,5600,8400 126 1303 84 38 449 0 Rand 3 4,5,3 0 0 0 937 821 0 166 27 0 Rand 3 3,4,9 0 0 0 952 465 0 576 7 0 29

Appendix3. 1994 Forblandlineintercept data.

Site #Burrows Brw. Dia. (cm) #Shrubs Ht.(cm) Canopy(cm2

) Bare(cm) Litter(cm) Moss(cm) Forbs(cm) Grass(cm) Shrubs(cm)

Shrub Savanna 1994LineTransect

Used 0 0 0 0 0 987 521 59 255 178 0 39,96,100,15, 4275,7400,152,1496, Used 7 2,8, 4, 7, 6, 3, 4 8 54,108,75,100 7332,2700,4700,4572 807 509 317 33 283 51 92,68,69,66, 9506,9024,6935,19364, Used 4 3, 3, 4, 7 8 36,70,50,57 925,14950,1680,5344 812 637 25 136 255 135 Used 4 3, 4, 5, 8 2 88,63 516,2822 612 672 509 73 39 95 Used 4 5, 2, 2, 5 4 50,48,45,73 1500,840,740,9100 973 519 252 93 73 90 Used 5 4, 3, 7, 3, 5 0 0.0 0 846 540 0 559 55 0 Used 5 3, 9, 4, 2, 7 2 40,58 360,2052 835 662 129 221 153 0 Used 6 2, 3, 3, 1,2, 3 5 45,68,50,33,19 1425,2176,620,120,352 1020 489 6 232 206 47 Used 0 0.0 4 67,33,31,64 7154,2021,6480 794 560 188 64 257 137 Rand 6 1.5,11,8,11,1,9 0 0 0 559 527 0 670 244 0 Rand 2 5,4 0 0 ' 0 986 483 43 50 429 9 1904,527,1219,2244, Rand 4 4, 3, 3, 4 6 81,23,50,45,92,1714880,2680 617 674 66 322 63 258 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 100,70,34,6,20,32,4 221 00,24700,1147,2000,840, Rand 13 5, 5, 6, 2, 7, 5, 7 11 5,50,44,30,38 408,810,2400,1520,1600,2150 1015 441 205 20 0 319 68,40,44, 3420,1176,2146,1296, Rand 1 2 7 43,41,30,41 1225,360,1242 594 542 503 119 77 165 125,127,140, Rand 4 2, 3, 3, 2 5 140,56 1312,44400,44400,9191,8316 568 826 49 83 226 248 Rand 1 6 0 0 0 1030 508 0 364 49 49 Rand 3 1,3,6 2 30,45 840,1610 1310 275 115 228 72 0 Rand 2 4,2 1 74 180 0 56 0 0 1896 48 30

BureauofLand Management

Idaho State Office

3380AmericanaTerrace Boise,Idaho83706 BLM/ID/PT-96/002+1150