<%BANNER%>

Evaluation of Remote, Infrared-Triggered Cameras as a Population Survey Technique for Wild Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110217_AAAACM INGEST_TIME 2011-02-17T21:05:15Z PACKAGE UFE0014780_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 34082 DFID F20110217_AACBAL ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH olson_j_Page_79.QC.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
1f5bc856061239202b2a4c47989995b6
SHA-1
b1784b0c1edca4eb7c8241c238c890c869ab403a
30776 F20110217_AACAYK olson_j_Page_36.QC.jpg
3fa58fac113b1f9e311f7acb6189fb7a
8de5d57260cab32f14b138d85930e9f20fb3ed93
1868 F20110217_AACATN olson_j_Page_37.txt
6c6105f4e9f6dad6568828088ed06fcc
619ec789037a06766878ff8ebc28637930f30c83
9094 F20110217_AACAOQ olson_j_Page_01.pro
bc4a37ae40d3b875de801132b5bb4fb9
5c8cda0cbd66158d5f9135cd384c69b967c98e22
404706 F20110217_AACAJT olson_j_Page_45.jp2
30576946ff174163eb90b8b3b9972c30
c2217bda9cc2132b43d7d067a3105f5af89dd84c
115422 F20110217_AACBAM olson_j_Page_80.jpg
24f947adf0d17706f3c9ad06d1fc2832
f4dbb142739a6b4667a4a0248c565a395e9dd46b
96922 F20110217_AACAYL olson_j_Page_37.jpg
3718bfe56ca3d7fa826870b2f304cf4e
d2babf209f891b1bcbaefd6c91ad9c20a975325a
1787 F20110217_AACATO olson_j_Page_38.txt
aa3587d0732643ff758680713531bb68
04bb79036781e22268f9bdbe713e1a4df66b1024
8423998 F20110217_AACAOR olson_j_Page_34.tif
1eb91b6e2ecee917dac5ea767bacb6d3
9d825c9773498ebcb4661f5ecefc3d2b811c11ed
474 F20110217_AACAJU olson_j_Page_77.txt
f25bc088eb17747fcc45cccf9cac1ae5
d2f15479b78ca4e010301560b6cdeb5df19b6554
14046 F20110217_AACBAN olson_j_Page_82.jpg
2b24fbcab3e7aeddaadd87a222217781
f9c29908fa760aace92622138d4ae79a2217ddef
31546 F20110217_AACAYM olson_j_Page_37.QC.jpg
e0fa15b77f61e5017bc4dd27885523eb
27b3bf1dfc413ad37e3c1ce06db3391d91c0ec1e
2026 F20110217_AACATP olson_j_Page_40.txt
02d576fa488fa788ddfcf0318b7ec747
18fadbe3ad33482eee8383047c7e46329b6c62e6
6910 F20110217_AACAOS olson_j_Page_06.pro
c8a8443bce22164c0f2182f612c99e07
ac3892ad69f6239021fafa5fef634334a111b2f0
9839 F20110217_AACAJV olson_j_Page_57.QC.jpg
dec2830ac16877935cf255ece9a19082
20a7a9796ef918e76882e42964673a0f4d6aa7c4
93909 F20110217_AACAYN olson_j_Page_38.jpg
b42ab0c51d74e36a27286318155beba0
ed98b92e039aa20fe133ca17bc4e195b55435ef4
1992 F20110217_AACATQ olson_j_Page_41.txt
476861fab1fc9280d8cc62c7eddc694f
b468b1481b90665c62a2121b8ae8edf396cf7942
38978 F20110217_AACAOT olson_j_Page_20.pro
df11817cd9aec679a6a9091765afcf7a
36a1db7335f3cdc55492df0e392c9405517ebf18
102536 F20110217_AACAJW olson_j_Page_41.jpg
020777524f38a819b3c46429a812adb0
6037429d3237106284924a20b3af5d6ca96bad00
84449 F20110217_AACBAO olson_j_Page_83.jpg
ee4969c76253b641c791e8558cbbffbb
0fbb601106b976a1158e0ede2b51a2d1af328bd6
30588 F20110217_AACAYO olson_j_Page_38.QC.jpg
24cb585c104bd839fcb50f95b0b10bf9
32b382ef85a9ee4de6a208507daab2771186f2bd
F20110217_AACAOU olson_j_Page_03.tif
6c087e8d293bb8cdc7dd2911df2fe3b4
06498bc513d04fa6e4011a0a9794b9850698c88c
6778 F20110217_AACAJX olson_j_Page_20thm.jpg
a56c241cf23dcfdfc456e80e8db4697e
745cbfbc482722dbce6990f486ace12fc75a0813
1800 F20110217_AACATR olson_j_Page_42.txt
213bd08b962e6e826ed3ab8fb00b72ed
93d768f3f574084f8efd8b552cbe8359ef982d06
27629 F20110217_AACBAP olson_j_Page_83.QC.jpg
f33bd06c34e7dcc9da49ec7d89b7da7d
de980cf421a367c73e5cc7d6bb599a8c4c56be9d
33068 F20110217_AACAYP olson_j_Page_39.QC.jpg
8e6bacc28ff1a590c48056654e8b1223
51644cf76f22cc02f387509d11ff2f1553f8ac07
119314 F20110217_AACAOV olson_j_Page_79.jpg
af9b86257df9c02c83a62288ab3763ba
48c7043c2c9c1cf37e571741323984f520148dd7
1088 F20110217_AACATS olson_j_Page_45.txt
b33a417c687c721fc308a640c2a158a3
b0a6015571c0ce4bda73aea2f52ddf0a09d911b3
269415 F20110217_AACBAQ olson_j_Page_01.jp2
9034441e6417baf0a70215115128890b
5a3e30adfe4c930037b71cd4f4856c8ad9ed807a
34298 F20110217_AACAYQ olson_j_Page_40.QC.jpg
f418125c024c2a4862e7f809cab3288e
c2c51cd9d3dfda38a3f53c7c919890f1d1f3fefe
5211 F20110217_AACAOW olson_j_Page_82.pro
ee57793316c596eacd102ad65897f124
eb0aede2b659fc19a849423fbb4766c7904d9f79
62313 F20110217_AACAJY olson_j_Page_43.jpg
ff13be71d1b6904e1da4ee069dc677b1
42b2902e96cc7c898d92df9e7d32577a4fc62671
759 F20110217_AACATT olson_j_Page_46.txt
c68cb5127aa170290fd3af5aa043e536
777e5dda886ab4959deef163aa3c46af89cb188d
28942 F20110217_AACBAR olson_j_Page_02.jp2
55d111c7b9640f866e9962c7a50fd242
c70c58c4ce769c011d2b1035e6e69e46d988b0a6
93008 F20110217_AACAYR olson_j_Page_42.jpg
86a08b864b933a5316e1a82cf9d844cd
9fc91f6605895b52a2bd6b4d40826598c2f9f3b3
41417 F20110217_AACAOX olson_j_Page_03.pro
821965c8643d1daa01eb8ecbd67d16cf
90e189e8a3c6f949e8ad478198f44d63b1e65b73
8569 F20110217_AACAJZ olson_j_Page_32thm.jpg
bf5fee1cbcaaa3f4b222fa40a94c3a40
a621718fcce49071fbbb92ba5a12abccd6b38d54
1000 F20110217_AACATU olson_j_Page_47.txt
5cefee2b9d5664da742881abb15f12f4
ec06e9bdfef977600e2cfb26e0f0912daee8d759
97215 F20110217_AACBAS olson_j_Page_04.jp2
6e2681f2f23b0804fb7f2abe0154fcdf
3626568ce4dbd575308a67c51667bc72fc735bbb
30227 F20110217_AACAYS olson_j_Page_42.QC.jpg
30dc741f4c31502d8c970d42caeb56d6
b27da961f5cf54f9c87c3d2980c85bcef43559b0
F20110217_AACAOY olson_j_Page_45.tif
19d92d902bc04cfaff1f7db8b5a28574
6ea43c18af9e9863ed2775e968c1d7c6b1608a4e
2052 F20110217_AACATV olson_j_Page_50.txt
b79e4bd0e031c281f8dde0efe31802cc
db263ea276f82278695d727af04217787411928e
64479 F20110217_AACBAT olson_j_Page_06.jp2
758836e959299ded07789e8fca8475d4
cac50fae808920de6f6bf8b57506bddf59f108df
10823 F20110217_AACAYT olson_j_Page_44.QC.jpg
4e5e697e02e5f0c2c0513895ff46fa51
8ee2ed05de163f4a5d725d6093137831238b0c3c
2415 F20110217_AACAMA olson_j_Page_01thm.jpg
f4147aae32d210f9fe2b4d2f3f845f7e
978fc4b177cf31489453a55995c1486d14d25051
633 F20110217_AACAOZ olson_j_Page_02thm.jpg
36e554b3238168886d6b58ae309a4e0b
c002e942aa0f8746819605bdeef69b404d8843af
326 F20110217_AACATW olson_j_Page_51.txt
854b1edd3a9f8091f820a39b0ff04acc
df87fb0f474541e734f1b1d6158a212ab0e35713
674006 F20110217_AACBAU olson_j_Page_07.jp2
c9b73788935510848136c3e96cb7091c
111ce68a4603e87edf07b61393850327bb76d584
42273 F20110217_AACAYU olson_j_Page_45.jpg
d29f7253be643eab7ceefe41fba5c1bc
b0aa6a4d56892e3b74213137ac3088ce8cf92dd5
F20110217_AACAMB olson_j_Page_77.tif
f8cbbbf9bc0672c34255c75d07ce1d18
963c4a4cf5ab8eb14c8c5f4cda65e1c773f2dd76
275 F20110217_AACATX olson_j_Page_52.txt
8d2a7d62e85316c546ee02f3557fcbd7
378230864a20d757d709632906c1ffbad52a416a
823657 F20110217_AACBAV olson_j_Page_08.jp2
b00356bc18dcb88a46b715beb5995e7e
f8d6a525689766ebd1acd000b92f0c701710747e
28504 F20110217_AACAYV olson_j_Page_46.jpg
1683ca472e2f5129ca32e84444d481e1
3f83fc76cb03968f87cfb8dba5be6f7d0703fc91
8932 F20110217_AACAMC olson_j_Page_67.QC.jpg
7c27a6dfda119d96cdaa0a1788cb6fe0
11bfb6e887bfa1c08a652498ce49a558d20d66c0
284 F20110217_AACATY olson_j_Page_54.txt
da71f9dff922d39a30f97cd62c6911b0
5ce315c09ea3391496a834d4eb8138e269274708
1051972 F20110217_AACBAW olson_j_Page_09.jp2
b257768ccd92f4d608aba436c892603f
7b7863e163ebb79002b2986fe1adc7b06eff472b
8546 F20110217_AACAYW olson_j_Page_46.QC.jpg
b04edc59c3f6e8ff885f7685b7bb4f70
75c64847a1fccd5af64598d7b55ba6745c8769b0
41449 F20110217_AACAMD olson_j_Page_30.jpg
987a93f0717cdf3b7b5ce984ca3b685a
5ae14527abdb8d43ab85359988eafeb041d25f84
134 F20110217_AACATZ olson_j_Page_55.txt
176546a5522c0deefc53734baca8182e
e8d53acb5c242acb93479be77825c37ac8f86258
958027 F20110217_AACBAX olson_j_Page_10.jp2
72fc0615944ba257da5db5df617417e0
8f05efd4544bb358c07337962af1e2f14094e489
12268 F20110217_AACAYX olson_j_Page_47.QC.jpg
d2c8cd9c5fb9f72b28bec342a42a88de
f6a0806258671264e6c6a7818b075235b38c3699
F20110217_AACARB olson_j_Page_02.tif
c34ec2160ee6f980915cff595141e7e0
77c7b5e24134b5c4de395b96779b15cc5427c6fd
175 F20110217_AACAME olson_j_Page_19.txt
8f178f753b73c3e138d1f17ddcfef487
3a4a520fae7f9dc9be71e8d454122f374a54e112
1051911 F20110217_AACBAY olson_j_Page_13.jp2
c8af7d3cb8e75a8ff114eb45b21044a5
393f66e475ec4a39d7713af8e2f19f26e8144a11
46269 F20110217_AACAYY olson_j_Page_48.jpg
cd3d64832b53b751fb27f54f3e113354
bd0d883c1122c09bdb6b66108bd48286905e613e
7995 F20110217_AACAWA olson_j_Page_66.pro
eb4c96b2c00f146f8ed03181f27e8f49
80f8ecd98affe1ae8d74b61e1b5713c1a3c0183c
F20110217_AACARC olson_j_Page_04.tif
868186bdeef90432b21694fd0765500f
f0cb706a6ae40df377dd699b41a8a03422fd1c6c
926950 F20110217_AACAMF olson_j_Page_03.jp2
66e8f06622c9669e8dbc05fefe35aeb8
890279ed5f6f1487f82c085ac37e197110fd875c
1051961 F20110217_AACBAZ olson_j_Page_14.jp2
cbcdcd413c112f105ae4e8a5a72d94e2
f03c0c33de75612205eaa1dfd9423f0b1653c3af
15805 F20110217_AACAYZ olson_j_Page_48.QC.jpg
07c56c0c5e49986ac81aa9c2b702091b
3a45efc806b61a55aff9f6a758749e2e4b3b4568
8624 F20110217_AACAWB olson_j_Page_67.pro
2e37e7bca087721794483dc3296f0789
c41f04dcadb781cc0ae92be07f58fedb3c8f1497
F20110217_AACARD olson_j_Page_06.tif
400895d640f7cc85d73217c1757a1748
d1efee182997694bfbe1fb1de56890c51a225ed6
1051930 F20110217_AACAMG olson_j_Page_23.jp2
4c5a1743b7cd897f90c55c501bd5b801
b0d56817bb770665aeba9fd0985f99c10db0fea1
9005 F20110217_AACAWC olson_j_Page_69.pro
b5bf983ac505681094102dc927865fd7
156a72f66d21625b6648f2cb0d472c95de6e8f61
F20110217_AACARE olson_j_Page_07.tif
a90e8302b5ed0bb456764975988746ed
bf7fce0449ce3619310283cc5a61a697114c76c5
F20110217_AACAMH olson_j_Page_62.tif
6a0e63d7efa0957f16e2c22fbb2458c3
f32eca3249841e985b0beac47d6ad22d79647b91
3799 F20110217_AACBDA olson_j_Page_28thm.jpg
b97d371f27f097cf6d26381c69f287b1
ab2717777189e79e0d28dabb659c114d1d3aa922
14934 F20110217_AACAWD olson_j_Page_71.pro
2ed535a9a6a3fdc091188117edac2f7c
0ca3dfe2119a166229df0e01a4d78d308293019c
F20110217_AACARF olson_j_Page_08.tif
216709b1b3178e13c5b674201cd2f381
d154721cb7ec57c15cfe4b32b54b616812f2263f
637343 F20110217_AACAMI olson_j_Page_05.jp2
bc687e97c99611f8628fba0796cffd04
21d1a8f201a6ef0ecf9b6e81a79f657705c6791f
3018 F20110217_AACBDB olson_j_Page_29thm.jpg
d92b47d346a574a2f0a1ef9dff6ad57c
e5093daf2b0ad690cf260312d6e79b7bb646ad68
10236 F20110217_AACAWE olson_j_Page_73.pro
53f3b6023701f3a0f55eac36f157fcda
8c5e6d06d7aa876e376be2526ce1483c07a7bb73
F20110217_AACARG olson_j_Page_10.tif
41de6a7c6a04314c8d73d05d9b38a32b
d4c1a59016c10f1a4a1d5b3625f0eec320e3a060
265153 F20110217_AACAMJ olson_j_Page_71.jp2
cc1dc4ea697bd5f5f9fb36e17c21f2f2
a6be7a18803286144765bd07e6ae3023d8790fbc
8376 F20110217_AACBDC olson_j_Page_33thm.jpg
b6e30418048203900eb6c58f662df0af
1d27d41c9d891ca88bee63f15bf504fd17385d63
F20110217_AACARH olson_j_Page_11.tif
e62cc47c3428db0ec4a1c824dd6982e7
b45d7ae5256e7206d00daddd825a2b6c4e4e7470
13178 F20110217_AACAMK olson_j_Page_11.pro
26470bc0144a81b65955ccb6591bab9c
816edfe13a34f281e3f710897538cdb8e66b66b6
8284 F20110217_AACBDD olson_j_Page_34thm.jpg
b2ab458f7778ece2c54e55cda942f130
b153cfe2bc2055439c8f3c9ac2bebd7a293267a0
9066 F20110217_AACAWF olson_j_Page_74.pro
3aa9374805cdb1e2e2e7fa24b5c34717
04877bec92be7dc0a84fc5ae7432570879304dae
F20110217_AACARI olson_j_Page_14.tif
efb0166dd47c93fffef1967a7a4b8230
10d8256106c675d26ec1e0392188f0b758946d8b
2431 F20110217_AACAML olson_j_Page_26thm.jpg
ad00ae3432096d295810af3090b57025
ce873d1dfd48fb67fe28e8ee363cc6b606522542
8244 F20110217_AACBDE olson_j_Page_35thm.jpg
68d548946723b131228cb756cd117a1c
cfff69a213a6bc9a753ffbef051d28a15e59ac9d
8999 F20110217_AACAWG olson_j_Page_75.pro
e54405d93cc64484fa4d046c45aa8891
997fbf4536db4c1b1adb299d281cbdf2538646c6
F20110217_AACARJ olson_j_Page_17.tif
7700c78ec890677c5e8efcb15011da51
4b3bac7cabf93ef0378b881878e09755ca28ff56
26838 F20110217_AACAMM olson_j_Page_12.QC.jpg
f3c05e6be7300a1fea8d90a3fcc6360c
edf53464fbf026630ac85e7d324eadc54ce91eb5
7684 F20110217_AACBDF olson_j_Page_36thm.jpg
b4ab9d0dfeb135ad9e5b0e972f04caf3
24fec142350fe650831a4b1433afa138bc9f33b9
9132 F20110217_AACAWH olson_j_Page_77.pro
be7de56190297985383f557cf1aa206d
6ded6300ea2f496ae9607ec75ca0795403afb6a5
F20110217_AACARK olson_j_Page_18.tif
ba8448b80b0de86d0d93cc7f29c47227
0360e3797f0787074ae14298e2b9e4af70ad6dc3
F20110217_AACAMN olson_j_Page_67.tif
665aa62e1181e4ee6e92dbd043251d5e
4034e2e4837e6df0f4f494dace2c55e74518d855
8242 F20110217_AACBDG olson_j_Page_39thm.jpg
baa7d3949599a042e46e047ded708687
aa618df9c617e1be91ce28c0d7c4aa0a8b88f721
52456 F20110217_AACAWI olson_j_Page_78.pro
dbab4551977fefdbb5dc2d118054e834
70e16f582dce4e470a77f99dea75468dc3fa8a73
F20110217_AACARL olson_j_Page_21.tif
04399800ac322a893cfd07e486cc7943
c089074080165026ba87f558358ba1289c7ecc0b
48818 F20110217_AACAMO olson_j_Page_34.pro
77684320249e61c4e096b061dab9abdf
0f3eaf8ff5606e3bc101067b9ada0a77bbe5e77a
8450 F20110217_AACBDH olson_j_Page_41thm.jpg
3ed7feba38622a03da93cb22d5bfca76
3cbb1d73765d9c8cc9efb2efdc3d5ef675e81873
58561 F20110217_AACAWJ olson_j_Page_79.pro
ea851bdb2afdffe0bcf4594d242b9031
06331a3558c946e6c402d91f0c62dd293a07657a
F20110217_AACARM olson_j_Page_22.tif
65dd87f9428c348e3eccf4aa3d2c92e0
2dec98382e98666908fc34a7f7212de73fa3b536
84194 F20110217_AACAMP olson_j_Page_12.jpg
1e60bd7f134c4e0535b55f0641cf8e9a
a67cb9d098ef851afafbce3ee495a8f73af03170
7512 F20110217_AACBDI olson_j_Page_42thm.jpg
1f8cb33883c6a4f4d0097dd20092e75c
3d7f27290f8d3152aaa0198f8b80ae0dc20992b9
57667 F20110217_AACAWK olson_j_Page_80.pro
24a560ccebeb209d325e579959233f7b
9f52dcef75f102d4956820559798913c06869eda
F20110217_AACARN olson_j_Page_23.tif
77d4e6abe66afa11425d883c847b2b97
96b820599e0f8e6cab508caf8b23bab7c7135d86
2745 F20110217_AACAMQ olson_j_Page_54thm.jpg
3555c346a1f668d082e1579a86d472a4
2ae8e607163e4ffa84d25484705a658bdc52c2ef
5079 F20110217_AACBDJ olson_j_Page_43thm.jpg
ddb0497f0506401b7b5bf594948cc3ee
1bcb146b635b05f3fff8b3133db5fed11d9eba4c
55112 F20110217_AACAWL olson_j_Page_81.pro
a5a78562a2ccdbc5cacf2f888c4e10ef
25e2267a365f1dcaf6bfbf0f04073c4cd25647ee
F20110217_AACARO olson_j_Page_24.tif
218ec54a4c759cefdfb3cc0e8b65384f
c0d7da0eb6ade4fd59bc2044ea62711c0cb8f0d4
492 F20110217_AACAMR olson_j_Page_29.txt
73472ada66a019086c74ccaa5eb7419f
546602bb95afaff91445cfa12578690eee1ff713
2716 F20110217_AACBDK olson_j_Page_44thm.jpg
07eaa5a14f79967d5b44b88e9986b129
b87b98a3018a5f90301224cf81dad2662ae85b07
27218 F20110217_AACAWM olson_j_Page_01.jpg
f2e66a6a1bc74e7226922566271524f8
69bf8f372512c560d08abbb2cbe4352c7643b889
4380 F20110217_AACAHV olson_j_Page_82.QC.jpg
6c58c1e6368ca76466c303609b90c37e
9a4346648a3cc6c00f5a69b08c22e21aad9a4b50
F20110217_AACARP olson_j_Page_27.tif
5505ead3105c7d24bd31821312f8d7c8
c5209405ac98ea0801613a50c7dd81f5910bb747
F20110217_AACAMS olson_j_Page_26.tif
4733b33157b0233c33b0bae57fa8cc51
d283b0245a2b048394cb987e59c73329b0c8faab
2204 F20110217_AACBDL olson_j_Page_46thm.jpg
a7975638aecf41b39acd4e6d06d05472
679b66f9c0a2d6923b82fd906cce29988c3b6ca2
F20110217_AACARQ olson_j_Page_29.tif
4d31d13144a3e17bd64aff9cad0a494e
f28c4fbd72bc1f6da81c9a4692fdfb70af901a74
2602 F20110217_AACAMT olson_j_Page_61thm.jpg
8b57d705829414d2fafabfd499bd6962
f86b5691af4b00bad25b4c6c76cd198289740aaf
8823 F20110217_AACAWN olson_j_Page_01.QC.jpg
a42d217d8fc387d222056d0d35acbbb6
9ca90165a09459e862059330b7c5ec7c5fe0b3f0
4949 F20110217_AACBDM olson_j_Page_49thm.jpg
c3aa1aafb454d0971ed4d2dfe496e1c8
a3e47c8c3e71a34c1c23b6a316e660edaaaf0709
7771 F20110217_AACAHW olson_j_Page_78thm.jpg
c85eea5282c08749700d49ac890b1477
88d19135262f4110e70868b6c4ccb1cf84ea06c4
F20110217_AACARR olson_j_Page_30.tif
a24c054fcadbd0ce6dde8e3bf3418328
45c627af7339d8198eccee9edbc6506d73e959de
1019909 F20110217_AACAMU olson_j_Page_42.jp2
a80c92ffff87880f6a4b8d2b0857e762
ab21e9b65c42a3fc9f31428017426d30666d0aa4
4900 F20110217_AACAWO olson_j_Page_02.jpg
a551b9f95c74e5b11a58b41e29877c25
dd13c59f3c26ac2e1e3104e02e886cac6a5c9ad4
5014 F20110217_AACBDN olson_j_Page_50thm.jpg
b4de4e8a6cfe978fe9faf8605c9d5d18
f6838f61d2827e7165af914dc57732bee5168d18
F20110217_AACAHX olson_j_Page_53.tif
6388383153ad26688f53809944a47726
6572b020dc33e1ea93a70d1e22f47a743eb14940
F20110217_AACARS olson_j_Page_32.tif
dd5442de5de46b5ee82558e46244cc22
a4f735eff96485771316eb2298f781a6ce5eced3
1028 F20110217_AACAMV olson_j_Page_25.txt
fc8d5c974b69a864ea0b384c1b552b4c
8af79c3f6f737fab9edbca156c0854628ef2f4c6
1653 F20110217_AACAWP olson_j_Page_02.QC.jpg
81399ddbfedda5ff658f39928ec0a0a4
6b5a419c7acba8b2da410cedb1b8fbfd8357b863
2647 F20110217_AACBDO olson_j_Page_51thm.jpg
1d4ae0d2734cf39b75fe15e3a825cfad
b95607f045c3de0c4cae8f81b19b02a5b6d7a829
20191 F20110217_AACAHY olson_j_Page_51.jpg
fbb25b6d1b765ba1cfdb9de289259270
398ac325cec1f762b9ad5b34f783fa6d07ad0983
F20110217_AACART olson_j_Page_36.tif
03c5c295742ad63a709b000c9979b40c
98004606329ca61c8964b0ebc1d1548a93823a36
7018 F20110217_AACAMW olson_j_Page_31thm.jpg
67501450c68ed45b7e3094cd5fc075bd
84bb81b23ad6dda2dd1c0a29b73ddd72a1142784
86767 F20110217_AACAWQ olson_j_Page_03.jpg
0584a129362cd26d766d54b8f57859fc
66ccffd725233535f4c28af6a46d5a7d01860b05
2931 F20110217_AACBDP olson_j_Page_52thm.jpg
643dbee50e82f1aa1775769cb357c579
ca8c68d5fdc7b094c6b1ac1fe0b3991837ff3e32
104820 F20110217_AACAHZ olson_j_Page_40.jpg
8deab0d5f3b3e27342af6b18faef3c44
7b256eb4169242541a7f77f6ef1537f9f37f5ea4
F20110217_AACARU olson_j_Page_37.tif
9e889669f641ad1aa6eeb512b5239945
ef408836f49c452575d4433399940a93c4cb27ed
48879 F20110217_AACAMX olson_j_Page_14.pro
0c17fc14f86399a7de4956ec47f52799
c9cf0c03af64a9d79e2ed6a7574265e41cc4a1c3
28239 F20110217_AACAWR olson_j_Page_03.QC.jpg
9ec003f5fb512f82536b99bc38885338
d84bf355612bccbb961a243901731e500cd8ebbe
1975 F20110217_AACBDQ olson_j_Page_55thm.jpg
3f2534825ee0054e9d02820ebc6c5f47
48492fa39f90a0bfd7d873ab12e5c3a56f042772
F20110217_AACARV olson_j_Page_39.tif
372eee3b30b32d68b47a0c32412cab99
7749136eac9edb3234a19c0166ed3983bd88c12e
76090 F20110217_AACAMY olson_j_Page_50.jpg
2e547ca8b9b9a0e692754eb11735a629
6537cb60b47adec972026e67534fe2e423a90810
64368 F20110217_AACAWS olson_j_Page_05.jpg
46ef9c3e5d485af5fe112018f7e97aea
3f4229cf432e1c1fb78cebf042516f36222dd998
F20110217_AACARW olson_j_Page_40.tif
f6f947814423ba1168152da1e7f592dd
74994e77c655c9c2144c4fe4ac9aa128bdbea3f5
F20110217_AACAKA olson_j_Page_16.tif
ab80dd1acdb1a7bfffd4e5e461d528d1
bf21bccce5dd1399e1e16479e6c042662b4bff8d
5892 F20110217_AACAMZ olson_j_Page_19thm.jpg
651355cda324a5641fa304e863fd33e6
b44070302831a346ae3ff25885f84b572218dd81
15285 F20110217_AACAWT olson_j_Page_05.QC.jpg
e8e6892b40d5e33d223bbf0370311b18
227e8dd28ec4eed12d66a8af1015f1d15f6ae9a8
2906 F20110217_AACBDR olson_j_Page_58thm.jpg
7d8a827b4d8fb2309213a3232d2523a5
3a6444fcd15e42e924bd272c9d430bbd921fe87b
F20110217_AACARX olson_j_Page_41.tif
b8e900e90229151d80eab9010e266dd2
ed76f5e123054af0e857443c925cac6a3afcf76d
1127 F20110217_AACAKB olson_j_Page_82thm.jpg
04537901fe8235b6a4c4f3cf6480a0ee
07f3b08bc467c5777b0ab23d231fa6672f1cf101
8935 F20110217_AACAWU olson_j_Page_06.jpg
fb7b1016d68a19b856f942cb4fafe14b
1fdce3b0bbf229a540c699b68ecc23cd42280acb
2486 F20110217_AACBDS olson_j_Page_62thm.jpg
d162e65f545373fa7229edbd3c24eb07
a6e93bb0e14086f04e267f947fb7cf687438f2a8
F20110217_AACARY olson_j_Page_43.tif
9da964fd86f9caa80d07c202a67f5a2b
147445e044eb09ac53172cb7617695eb7b3cedb9
F20110217_AACAKC olson_j_Page_01.tif
8df3ce520a686822991f4954ca1b502d
84ca9640cafa0e10e0ef45ef6c2fc728136f7ed7
2582 F20110217_AACAWV olson_j_Page_06.QC.jpg
ca25baf4102b96d274a414864703dc54
30becdfe877849dceab785b132ef034eb321a0b0
2359 F20110217_AACBDT olson_j_Page_63thm.jpg
4f5f7968d3861da2ee342a030bffc801
bb2a33040475cac1e1014441fa52114ae3e39340
F20110217_AACARZ olson_j_Page_49.tif
262d9c61b219ade548df38cca04ae88d
d2f746d4076d4bd560202dda691f950cbc894e32
545 F20110217_AACAKD olson_j_Page_62.txt
d3fd7f6d522768207f709cda435de981
fe64f748d491ff104fcc9d506c0db6831310544b
17914 F20110217_AACAWW olson_j_Page_07.QC.jpg
ff82d964cf06f70cd773e366fcb872f5
d3dc01471119afda94135212d46942314b5c7d20
76773 F20110217_AACAPA olson_j_Page_09.pro
2a5c28785054c8f20131fed3b916cacc
a33fcbfb804f89263bd648b64fc7db52bcf20a5a
2249 F20110217_AACBDU olson_j_Page_64thm.jpg
d1587daf250a37905b31e469c843a0d3
dd4c5c2aa8a9ef2e175a1ca72ea5f6d036a5d66b
8474 F20110217_AACAKE olson_j_Page_26.QC.jpg
44db17fba24f0845c779f44b2e725076
3d9c71c95a16b816fdcc983b2a88ebfd3d22054c
76137 F20110217_AACAWX olson_j_Page_08.jpg
2e922da1bf4efe158a4f4826ba49c6b3
dd7220c03e66525b6287db4d349733a5c0a49bda
50644 F20110217_AACAPB olson_j_Page_41.pro
b6923823cf8c7478479c5139911c5cff
d59132f8014452d178187efef54409a2a0e6d988
2264 F20110217_AACBDV olson_j_Page_66thm.jpg
81c2fb23caa8751cc9e8f2f9f424f090
33f036c23470e04ede77848271054a02296df630
1051900 F20110217_AACAKF olson_j_Page_17.jp2
45205e8aa97588bba7e0aff46e3ab53b
8045ef98ce0162e9f117ba88fbfd80099f57657f
551 F20110217_AACAUA olson_j_Page_56.txt
1de56ff509254a8eea8119e33341603a
92f73763fff1d7277bdb47dac14dd50010372173
21895 F20110217_AACAWY olson_j_Page_08.QC.jpg
6089d2250f686cca27f7d257c3bd7a5e
278063d1ff54af2d876a333ccc92199b827cbf73
3728 F20110217_AACAPC olson_j_Page_05thm.jpg
aa7506d5817c4f2fae8aa2be24bf5309
90677a8591c122d7495c1cbc4d82815668b34213
2985 F20110217_AACBDW olson_j_Page_67thm.jpg
1a89ab85ee18560b5ff5e69c1807f1ed
efe181ec428942e4297d49e5472c5e7480287fc7
7460 F20110217_AACAKG olson_j_Page_52.QC.jpg
d3472e318eabb3adcf57be9c3101c16c
4253f3438b71587ee57ffe2512e44b3d1c90bdd2
406 F20110217_AACAUB olson_j_Page_57.txt
0dc26d749b3aa7bf2da433890849c19f
372fe96cf77446a68a168affecaa975103316e55
116415 F20110217_AACAWZ olson_j_Page_09.jpg
ece0d005bed0ee7cc8f3222e8cad6df2
c89f9662945649d22c1fc6903b05c847ed38cf64
2503 F20110217_AACAPD olson_j_Page_11thm.jpg
4fbb94e592a53c94ac3c4ee028693860
5aed00eb2ef04ac0efb6ef1291b409e33d3437c5
2935 F20110217_AACBDX olson_j_Page_68thm.jpg
49f59299fea853bef15a8daaedd64f46
705e1205e2f3db34b69b86c42c4a976d7a65e4f1
4351 F20110217_AACAKH olson_j_Page_30thm.jpg
c91be8c5858cb2852febb3634948f4b3
e5d28cd21eba4305ff01a1b7a2d98199a360f542
464 F20110217_AACAUC olson_j_Page_58.txt
38371f0234dd3a4af2801e3798d2813c
ba0ae82b70453bb7569265fd2837c584d0d16f81
6413 F20110217_AACAPE olson_j_Page_64.pro
62de87a1e40bb30b9c957379de439b6d
8060264912b5d9152d63bf4a917f7dd324a896d1
2873 F20110217_AACBDY olson_j_Page_69thm.jpg
d0f1b82fe071f51bbd6c9c433d2a175e
ef09cffa7290d909eb5f1162276357bd8724b729
192125 F20110217_AACBBA olson_j_Page_16.jp2
c10e6a19a92af084bfd5129505ae07b5
0521dd051b05d03559e66b22784dc1ec38902b8e
73073 F20110217_AACAZA olson_j_Page_49.jpg
cd94fd03acf396a12b857e16b01fe70d
595b3a78395d6640cdc0087e83eb3713823b5271
7068 F20110217_AACAKI olson_j_Page_62.pro
10c027b8278504d63bb52c24361a4871
66999b2861e1a4b29e18d7b61eb4db36ec69bdf3
329666 F20110217_AACAPF olson_j_Page_44.jp2
88fa78274986f28c727fbb1ba23cdba0
038911e66624bce75b1b4b1ab1041897985d2fda
2859 F20110217_AACBDZ olson_j_Page_70thm.jpg
1a062556ac6c7309642e3f0e60a7b83c
b37472ed803a5320182cc4a51f78af9cd570a361
1051926 F20110217_AACBBB olson_j_Page_18.jp2
f79e48c20065c8051151c530a7e8cb4a
a7d3ab7a0fbc1bb54767464a9b4623c783eeda89
20689 F20110217_AACAZB olson_j_Page_49.QC.jpg
c81eb361676d2b6357d5767e0980f167
874ab12de449a6923de8de3819a13d8ce8d09977
2841 F20110217_AACAKJ olson_j_Page_59thm.jpg
685facfee3ef206a9e9d58893aff060e
98e31842f72f5adfdb81641dc58074b3afb22b92
472 F20110217_AACAUD olson_j_Page_59.txt
208890a2ccfa4b02cdc3a67378a3bf64
960978ed1f08c04d9fe177dbba7d16711dbb8b3e
999601 F20110217_AACAPG olson_j_Page_36.jp2
20c9870a9f9eece0eaab66a594b3f912
6c8c87bebce0c0a8055cb7d5dbed7f256960eee6
865826 F20110217_AACBBC olson_j_Page_20.jp2
3727c4cbf2854dd93effe79bbbb9a961
6c4a54e27dca6a2eaa2ca0989f9883e07783a014
21246 F20110217_AACAZC olson_j_Page_50.QC.jpg
9ed92fdf9954d654be14de5d5c5fae69
ac25a8f17e9407855e334899d3cc38f805e359d1
343 F20110217_AACAKK olson_j_Page_60.txt
f5eec7e884fa6354293f434945c5f5d7
f2ff92cd8788853b8394a79f63116c8a85e6aa8b
468 F20110217_AACAUE olson_j_Page_61.txt
141352cc3e18678c594ffff0aa55b8bb
b00df886e75637306af0163aa150cfd7617aded2
F20110217_AACAPH olson_j_Page_83.tif
b9b50b69b66da37301b026a32abf1c19
24343c308a5f9945c4c6d5435cbe9e68f98d25a3
1051927 F20110217_AACBBD olson_j_Page_21.jp2
5a0bb187a56fd92e297675b6fb2fae59
0c85f4975df333fa04d5384b973a82746c78e7f0
7378 F20110217_AACAZD olson_j_Page_51.QC.jpg
3a46dfd342d28f0bd51908e00834b65d
5e87856a9870a4bf5cbc63a048d322c5f9ddfaeb
3045 F20110217_AACAKL olson_j_Page_09.txt
c09292a5ec4eeb9b74d5f1f7399046c0
e36d99bfa2dbeef73dbced1e51477ed0ae040e46
453 F20110217_AACAUF olson_j_Page_63.txt
a00c20a0face4fdef7e3aaca0809f840
44087ae7bae46cb4f643db719fae93303054e58d
26587 F20110217_AACAPI olson_j_Page_70.jpg
faf3255b76de2ad99a4504737684e665
b0b0feadc147cc56ce3205f0dd85bfe2c939c7e1
371576 F20110217_AACBBE olson_j_Page_24.jp2
4ade501bd192543abc025e2c5a008271
54a62f03bb2c903a9b2c12e5339ae37aba7b4699
19858 F20110217_AACAZE olson_j_Page_52.jpg
c2f67aae8ce1bb1cfd912d60790beedd
4e626bfc31b09162984026f64ada689db0ab2375
7066 F20110217_AACAKM olson_j_Page_83thm.jpg
f15598a72caed210e511c48efcd7698f
afd96abab5f3d761efe47750c139ced98797279f
560 F20110217_AACAUG olson_j_Page_65.txt
4af0cc71c5c0cd9ea3d853e05f84e643
332615453ac0954c827a902c5e670b4a5106aac6
8659 F20110217_AACAPJ olson_j_Page_40thm.jpg
d6ad8a3bf3315831956ab765a475b69a
97b0109b4d8852b1db8353428e051d379372febe
294820 F20110217_AACBBF olson_j_Page_25.jp2
a569365b7f4f39453ee0228cb0cf7b63
6f7239aeeea130b775fa0c5a91b6b9fac2e1a725
20457 F20110217_AACAZF olson_j_Page_53.jpg
49fb7ad000a00d67f0e3730b584d7517
7d1f5ba3fc9bff026c6fd9e30aab2863c5930dc9
27955 F20110217_AACAKN olson_j_Page_67.jpg
cf60fb71690918973cd45c8a945ce4da
6c8b4272f266c1db151ae4314e7224f2719ba7d7
413 F20110217_AACAUH olson_j_Page_68.txt
359efc2e6a667808103023b7472a9dbf
e1beadbfa32850c1b881910fff4f4fe00d7add79
8253 F20110217_AACAPK olson_j_Page_15thm.jpg
23391ef45830ced2a33d3c6021fdd186
f1ceef44cac2bd22119022ded76bf68322127c1f
220981 F20110217_AACBBG olson_j_Page_26.jp2
4b966915a9669011fd1f8a1b986fd2fa
819535065d905af1748ba41a2b2c608b251fd1d8
8026 F20110217_AACAZG olson_j_Page_53.QC.jpg
7a58fed23435f900ed31027d5f87c659
d3420aaef9772fc70c1a339924a09f59d32969e2
2422 F20110217_AACAKO olson_j_Page_65thm.jpg
0801675bf19e29b88a7906bd48b71924
deec923c3a553a3b9f65119576f0a1f6c3fe10e6
506 F20110217_AACAUI olson_j_Page_69.txt
114d1cfb5cd8a1df2937421a96ba6a8b
5e72fb40769bb019b8bc5ff285b238cf277a1f80
2036 F20110217_AACAPL olson_j_Page_23.txt
4b9845fac96ed9efcec7ed485e274ae1
49d3ad77ebf179ecaead7ca757ea047a2444481b
520954 F20110217_AACBBH olson_j_Page_30.jp2
bde351ea419a555f90cd3de36d53e0f8
ad78069cbf00b0e5f3bae985afea284c2f5c9281
19541 F20110217_AACAZH olson_j_Page_54.jpg
3df0c6696cb544c7a6566b3b235e5eb3
9ae626daa87f3a31852498ae6b065a6849fd4d83
2854 F20110217_AACAKP olson_j_Page_56thm.jpg
494e0efb98312026b38818f8c732f964
9f8ac8a3f763b3ecde43688e12e21f7ec9d8cafe
802 F20110217_AACAUJ olson_j_Page_70.txt
91e305254d6fd9129e17ddf4290d3ba9
42505786c510d70e73b98c71b1e1a0a293604311
1225 F20110217_AACAPM olson_j_Page_02.pro
9bc6e25fe7b79f7f59b797b45e052e93
8d8ff297da650511f8ee99c00ef1abf3dcde8e25
927452 F20110217_AACBBI olson_j_Page_31.jp2
cc609665f3f1f390751cddac395fb60c
1c50084046e975d1e2c1a748e11bad7be16dc9d0
100237 F20110217_AACAKQ olson_j_Page_35.jpg
79028bf08c556fa3cda2f2820bd59a44
ef48bf083147693fc682615d11ca42c8879c04df
914 F20110217_AACAUK olson_j_Page_71.txt
ef5780aa4171c18110c797391166d1b0
cf7372975fbfd8beb9c4a9a461a2b9443c7904e0
156414 F20110217_AACAPN olson_j_Page_52.jp2
72e273a20a105fa0098209db4bc534f2
cb617e01acae770ceb429d28d05814155d3cd69d
F20110217_AACBBJ olson_j_Page_32.jp2
7f00c02ae87cf56693b336c198ffec19
239dec00a36a60b2e743fdfeb7e31540d501f417
7919 F20110217_AACAZI olson_j_Page_54.QC.jpg
ecd24e5a8c689bab4421eb66948bb902
5c27c33793fdc93832b5a1539a129aa6b7edc9bd
12457 F20110217_AACAKR olson_j_Page_24.QC.jpg
9b80e778ed428e25d86a8cd10cd5a888
5016a4b910a4a83a6a72788313b38b7d4a8d429c
558 F20110217_AACAUL olson_j_Page_73.txt
ac77ef978e4fc2f7c2616e34256b62b1
bf9ff14ae1bfd5a9e7a87be0b2e42c677fa63c76
31452 F20110217_AACAPO olson_j_Page_15.QC.jpg
9248c4d9d80b0d13c7a021a1cd89ee82
7441653f9b68f1338648ffa0db42bfa65753ea9f
1051973 F20110217_AACBBK olson_j_Page_34.jp2
ec546ee48b539e889c398ac81d6cff97
b9dedd9b8f373b182d50f03a07573e39d48da0d0
5559 F20110217_AACAZJ olson_j_Page_55.QC.jpg
f34c167752acf3b167eb5c827692c76b
3fda1eaeaf713b6dd396d13d0e2df3c26bb16f25
257278 F20110217_AACAKS olson_j_Page_59.jp2
afa0c62301380b6ac698d244fdbdde5a
44bfcf1efbf8d9c354c9201f39ab3f61c284b850
448 F20110217_AACAUM olson_j_Page_74.txt
96ce6d6ce78e0cca61f79abacbe4bc23
c9d8da69032ebdc9e987543b2e22458753e96be1
920320 F20110217_AACAPP olson_j_Page_12.jp2
74ac5095794a4d3798079ffa3d4ef963
f5c315b9ab05e9104f81451b655a5d09acb58d49
1051980 F20110217_AACBBL olson_j_Page_39.jp2
dfb42eedbbe789db72620b7c937efb32
167f20c10e166bc09c750d59fb7a838826ebf79b
28622 F20110217_AACAZK olson_j_Page_56.jpg
2faca7fedb39b427645da46325212905
cd150db7ac165eb5fdb9170693ceecd523b3f4ce
7532 F20110217_AACAKT olson_j_Page_73.QC.jpg
adde6710a1e30fdd7ce3fa0cc98c8d6f
1d5c6fc9e75d1867e880d31d4f16ff9b8ac145bf
2133 F20110217_AACAUN olson_j_Page_78.txt
6ddbfb4f8c3dee9981f907645a13b5fc
8716ea360d7de80ac945970e27f1b7ef4286b16d
3124 F20110217_AACAPQ olson_j_Page_47thm.jpg
1c648fd118d749ecf4c74e53c1d70018
2b990d09dbb0090a8af60d6200e12dd5ec0418cb
1051882 F20110217_AACBBM olson_j_Page_40.jp2
8e764edcddc714cb67bd48963f1c4c6e
2f478e134e7598924df95a1685f23b9c28dc2fe7
30059 F20110217_AACAZL olson_j_Page_57.jpg
fd2b8ddf061a772fb695815f4b0d3dc8
34ca0bb07b9a94939f1929af027dd0df6858a22f
9669 F20110217_AACAKU olson_j_Page_72.pro
7f41ae22fd98df13af9273da6d3acca1
214ed15e2f05f105f7501eebb4eaf2d6f3dd923f
2372 F20110217_AACAUO olson_j_Page_79.txt
4d1856309a8f8f71e7c4e14c794b7967
37214d3c632e5475112d5a4b520389c57ea2de59
F20110217_AACAPR olson_j_Page_68.tif
b536a66df3df91a37bc81f09296304be
3ea418055abaaf9b98b8af6a4cd1ab2330e3a292
1051916 F20110217_AACBBN olson_j_Page_41.jp2
5e05802baf1501e573d66fc5b852d65f
95fe8d3216ef166387402f5a6990b29dd2d7b1a3
30125 F20110217_AACAZM olson_j_Page_58.jpg
b1e2e45d8e662fe5272baff67a13d628
479296092d02f0c3adc6cdc5211fd0508f57bab4
9712 F20110217_AACAKV olson_j_Page_58.QC.jpg
cce312bf9fb7a3410fc6b6aed00af9c7
461fd0823fea4f401148adb44daed80e64f35e4e
2237 F20110217_AACAUP olson_j_Page_81.txt
503dacd1e43c099dfb4a3cb7d28a71cf
958e95bf76a094434ffc4b44eaed5f8dd1e1266c
3304 F20110217_AACAPS olson_j_Page_45thm.jpg
4559083ed2077c4c5c71e99884fff26e
8ba62d5f3a3c7725569691bf44ad058496532d19
241023 F20110217_AACBBO olson_j_Page_46.jp2
af659f3dbe4869c468353f3d26a28336
10c8b966dad5abfad0de8888d135491fa4477b3d
30674 F20110217_AACAZN olson_j_Page_59.jpg
20b0cf42fe61fca98fd92b252005f9dd
ff0f7657e7826eed5d05d0978ac44a07240f22ed
15316 F20110217_AACAKW olson_j_Page_44.pro
f2774640355fd186f3cdbe3e7ffcc027
9db09a0e0d96866882fea07b4a7ce45e5cc0f36a
67876 F20110217_AACAUQ olson_j_Page_05.pro
e6b6a1c31b6e00cf9b25057efface208
7768e007e87916f5c3288b6b9a4cd0dbcf42f06d
26133 F20110217_AACAPT olson_j_Page_20.QC.jpg
a3f82c89aaf4662701f0f88bc6ae9d91
e61704e951e01101ccbfe00c59e53a90d7b03149
17366 F20110217_AACAZO olson_j_Page_60.jpg
62d99fed99af612be753c1f04ca407e4
2255aefafa1defe9bad365baff3b0ea5c36919d0
F20110217_AACAKX olson_j_Page_22.jp2
4d93d878251008086754ffc2e402fd8a
dab0516d6bc8c1b344fede7836c459bf2e0f32cf
41389 F20110217_AACAUR olson_j_Page_07.pro
c65484b122c7706ef73d619f4355e54b
63bdc270ac2f8b4e7561a1cec0fe1ec9af326628
17469 F20110217_AACAPU olson_j_Page_63.jpg
70a1dc95dcf568a2bc25b3dae0ded88e
098a30d5421d72593891c29f21432ac281a6b63e
328950 F20110217_AACBBP olson_j_Page_47.jp2
3c787c06fcd0ea103b899a60e272f0c1
30001ae601580b49f5b466285cc9b18a5cc1878e
5818 F20110217_AACAZP olson_j_Page_60.QC.jpg
26bc0b09b419257fe1cd2772471ce891
75b0418603f0bc52b5fda6158ce287a9dbcbc7a4
86364 F20110217_AACAKY olson_j_Page_19.jpg
7cdea5852a7e5b7d4f51d56f438d19a7
208da040298e83ea5f5c7f2698582a06eaa16654
41086 F20110217_AACAUS olson_j_Page_10.pro
7103cd533cf66dc83f2ff8e45447d3be
245927b28ab91826d7a7f42fa7e3eea3ef3354eb
47675 F20110217_AACAPV olson_j_Page_21.pro
4eff94d124c0637d2f44b416894030e2
a6b955957912475fc4ff32984d6bff50ff3fb4eb
412695 F20110217_AACBBQ olson_j_Page_48.jp2
2729fc15de211bd6c8a16e003cfc6002
a5f17804eec7b404f26beacb60e07a0dae5fa4e3
23061 F20110217_AACAZQ olson_j_Page_62.jpg
b33fdff326d10f3f2bb34e8999af82be
e05019e72f93529316e09e55d80b8381c36d4706
40515 F20110217_AACAUT olson_j_Page_12.pro
0908d14d6b2d08c4f74dd6cc6c66efd4
6b78718fc1a69c0856ee1b49f15f024e31d5aa94
7781 F20110217_AACAPW olson_j_Page_77.QC.jpg
f43e863be00a72f2047704393118e15f
4b436ee2db92c343b2caee17462da73cadc70ec2
32868 F20110217_AACAIA olson_j_Page_14.QC.jpg
e865ec6188129c535dc53536961ccf28
4a3af1b56a732ac0bac03b046cfa5fd09956c80c
714703 F20110217_AACBBR olson_j_Page_50.jp2
aecbe507533a8c58e493293a51c79326
e75a5aad35f036516b45e340a3ad4c50534eade2
8183 F20110217_AACAZR olson_j_Page_62.QC.jpg
c88920f60138748b5ddd81d60be0995d
8b903f8cde87fdd7390cda72a4a69eb31902e172
F20110217_AACAKZ olson_j_Page_20.tif
0e01a787e1b9f85f03516b6d3927e69a
f86f431529df1e74bf76017c5b664c019444456b
3130 F20110217_AACAUU olson_j_Page_17.pro
41fe8bcec73f717d045d2ae7095b5317
6757acf9669466055dfaf7ad7926dabb96f00aac
7646 F20110217_AACAPX olson_j_Page_09thm.jpg
8b892904d007030739ba3ca7b6754019
e5872ee48855e96a95c5eb2521f9faa2ae773565
F20110217_AACAIB olson_j_Page_15.tif
460ad206b4416ee8888f742376b1886e
0258eb061d8f38c706009245c73fe67160bc404c
167718 F20110217_AACBBS olson_j_Page_51.jp2
eff7254203f49e97da9fc436e7c1f4ad
386b2715d66f89496eecfc2740d7193e02c41b74
6984 F20110217_AACAZS olson_j_Page_64.QC.jpg
498bdfbdd2725b2a37d673c6436390f0
47c918764579bcfb5390583643ebab1766471562
2770 F20110217_AACAUV olson_j_Page_18.pro
995b94729c48feb5d3f4f03d41d480c3
bfd7c0b77cac9643d737133e8026eed37281bbc7
F20110217_AACAPY olson_j_Page_48.tif
65395b83fb9433f18b124b94718b7b89
015c3eaade54f5dea5a7328420a39bbbd744d670
987322 F20110217_AACAIC olson_j.pdf
55bc44bb279f21e01c1f3fa67e136577
ea129aaa4c5e118a49f474c77923fd55f83574a6
172149 F20110217_AACBBT olson_j_Page_53.jp2
abe09f9d5ba88e9f0fc105a6cc96755c
6e041628d1f3f661715df068b80d21c9855e1cd1
20110 F20110217_AACAZT olson_j_Page_66.jpg
af989139e57ff921dd91be79a08a1d0d
f3696acda1883ba6d21e860b9c4eeadf342cb939
2562 F20110217_AACAUW olson_j_Page_19.pro
0d745c41311bc53f19994d4f07247bb9
d5c94c183c010e73aa4ba18e8d264fd2ab8a3bc4
F20110217_AACANA olson_j_Page_13.tif
2a0ab88b01eeca4168fda15708d00a23
0066cf21e63bdcc6ea0cc7ce1ac5ec7dbd4f6348
F20110217_AACAPZ olson_j_Page_65.tif
6bfec76d9eda3bad86061994dcbe3d73
1bc8cf2452f4d31e36b4cde50219659e34d6138f
38039 F20110217_AACAID olson_j_Page_47.jpg
77076874c811d039202991595858897c
d65019af19aa7ae87f6061801860e0c4db11c89b
158509 F20110217_AACBBU olson_j_Page_54.jp2
cf72f5548c8e7a011317c86da59375b4
e8acfa2be8984fc7bcff754b2f6da76d1bb7414f
25949 F20110217_AACAZU olson_j_Page_68.jpg
46fa859720902a30d4f45113cc82e1ba
bd1ef35bfbc4459ac2ef45f6c6b25ad2bc087718
50634 F20110217_AACAUX olson_j_Page_23.pro
9bc2c831946492438bd10014b312f8ba
a866df7d61184413e81f2c02896b01b3ce4ae3d0
25343 F20110217_AACANB olson_j_Page_61.jpg
e262b48834b4409388be474cd62d97a4
4e099e75634e184eb8c5bb50fffef89de1b08040
11486 F20110217_AACAIE olson_j_Page_04.jpg
40b15174d7ba1507d66e2966dafdaea9
8c5a8abe09a6b0f11bce86f8fec1139e955d0a87
143158 F20110217_AACBBV olson_j_Page_55.jp2
5ea179c2f1877c66fb346bc12c5391a6
e2001f384608e6a7bf8d2703f9c5a57d077cad7f
26832 F20110217_AACAZV olson_j_Page_69.jpg
b72b899afa30dcf7683f25712a280e77
9138f89522466fd8bca2477c4a47ff8d841cf070
16354 F20110217_AACAUY olson_j_Page_24.pro
03410c8b5bc50c9a9b1b7f35dd49526c
84f401e969ea915d113ea4286762e6e3c195ce34
471 F20110217_AACANC olson_j_Page_66.txt
8e373d15af09b54f528938dc68cf764a
6b1e270db956a44c44ce763c2cc0d38f5b21f495
F20110217_AACAIF olson_j_Page_81.tif
349a7044c79c4610b9385143ad49fc77
31389b438bf9db02f3872d94af63f7545a4ee6d5
F20110217_AACASA olson_j_Page_50.tif
c6ab5794988efb270cab49b8a8ea0986
5ebfb9973ca8e6fbbaad5feddb03db2ffb536d59
243874 F20110217_AACBBW olson_j_Page_56.jp2
41d8c23dd5982b980142896b45364930
16af4a6534b183da317880b951a88589425f2bae
8325 F20110217_AACAZW olson_j_Page_69.QC.jpg
4b7ab71dfdf970056bb564e331db970d
5b741558de9db4576d6d2aec576b6572d15fb79e
10979 F20110217_AACAUZ olson_j_Page_26.pro
3e0e89bbb3aa903b3eca9a2970e685b9
bef6d5f2578d7984aea3b80608c6c5cde976dda2
225700 F20110217_AACAND olson_j_Page_73.jp2
6b8ae27762a8cb51a45dba26048d4fee
60faa794496ff282eb390619c32335bd2e243b2f
50867 F20110217_AACAIG olson_j_Page_22.pro
8a598acbb0a2eea0c2e67887c46e276a
17e5fbb4e556e03c3de15faa1699f0ea1e37e18f
150528 F20110217_AACBBX olson_j_Page_60.jp2
6a90dec5e2f01225a95e42f2306cdee2
9226ab232ccad3e542b9aa7510ebc7be4cbf17df
8390 F20110217_AACAZX olson_j_Page_70.QC.jpg
b18edd755c454d677b7e7c0909d3439c
ba46283f9d266da9842f512ef066eebe962ebe3a
8069 F20110217_AACANE olson_j_Page_37thm.jpg
ef2400c3493536256b0612857d73b464
571d2711c3025ebef2be71eca30c162dd77a75a0
7044 F20110217_AACAIH olson_j_Page_65.QC.jpg
cb43aafd30ecf9df089025bc3229f884
736e71f6cbe598f0adccf72988ccf3d60c6c6c01
F20110217_AACASB olson_j_Page_52.tif
9ce1371fddc5c29a505f08180dff92f3
8652b959d5db9fd50e59459844c25c08da9369ef
190437 F20110217_AACBBY olson_j_Page_61.jp2
2f5b7e92330e626eb0a7174479f09776
20cf458a64d394f32524c7d3491491261afd136d
28538 F20110217_AACAZY olson_j_Page_71.jpg
c38dab1a98971d011ce58b15d5fcaca1
fc987c9cbff3231a82e1d8d6591e3a46d5179117
2020 F20110217_AACANF olson_j_Page_49.txt
b3fa149b1bd9821002d33c9d2d8d4edd
59d08749306ad9b7db5db03af38c044d4e4eab42
32165 F20110217_AACAXA olson_j_Page_09.QC.jpg
d5c66b3cb7ddf73a7ced25a25c247b73
6a643a141c764a208f6eafea7f88538bdcd1741f
F20110217_AACAII olson_j_Page_19.jp2
736e8230673b9e544d42af681a3050e9
b2b45e766143d5b6f5744bf3f527a1222a5df3ff
F20110217_AACASC olson_j_Page_54.tif
6aa7bb74dfa2360060c489ceb40d2ceb
3fefbf02fd398edb06a42c973635714e43cdaa0a
153843 F20110217_AACBBZ olson_j_Page_64.jp2
e0aec61ba652d5873794094e9dd63644
875798b260a6abecc839719262cdf3f99425b27f
9035 F20110217_AACAZZ olson_j_Page_71.QC.jpg
009918e533e90303dc77cec2eeb06d28
088f65ab8cbb829252617fc43ceb3afd777535d3
2331 F20110217_AACANG olson_j_Page_80.txt
d9d5a689bb3da21ba3843d0cc1a4e306
09a218bf490c16e683988df8652efc10f0ea4e8c
86734 F20110217_AACAXB olson_j_Page_10.jpg
fb72a82acaa93d7de42927ea5bcb670d
8ab938fc2e378383da6ab3d1ef52a63cac1a5dd9
2048 F20110217_AACAIJ olson_j_Page_22.txt
ece0ad6438c0be088feefe18e3b55a2c
419d6e0d4831275efab0acf11eb364254fbe74b4
F20110217_AACASD olson_j_Page_55.tif
038db49ae167e459644b3110fdb99646
7f57cc8678541ccf772dc0ed56c112cfa85b5483
20337 F20110217_AACANH olson_j_Page_43.QC.jpg
fb8830bfeab60bf2e46c4a20c7f24f14
a592da745abc2fb50dc2a2255de39c37165c4f00
27127 F20110217_AACAXC olson_j_Page_10.QC.jpg
40157cfdf38f56c42dc28fc397bdb32b
c17437909f6f3b96b324417c8bb73f7aa3bef229
806351 F20110217_AACAIK olson_j_Page_27.jp2
efcf5d67b1b9917351911127f05777db
cbd84fd8c2fa1f3a9461b6d4be471a461b7138bd
F20110217_AACASE olson_j_Page_56.tif
b74fb3494d5318d408ccca4186182403
cc3d8951f83222e8eaad3e5d6ce5894ecd5e54aa
2517 F20110217_AACBEA olson_j_Page_71thm.jpg
f2c28bead9bbac3e326a5b894832fd8a
41234d6719a10a463822578b047d42f7a539b4af
766 F20110217_AACANI olson_j_Page_44.txt
44a9e7bc999c680ba2367d4de2806227
1240c6f393f6a6fff1ea35aca459030cf1454a0a
9813 F20110217_AACAXD olson_j_Page_11.QC.jpg
06eb21f51ce0c4537b7f9375e0597f86
edc392636472ad5e099cf9d29ca4a0905f1200e0
2346 F20110217_AACAIL olson_j_Page_73thm.jpg
98d5170081ba8610f58fe33b003d84d0
17535d3892b9cc9ec11a501c3461c6c23405eac7
F20110217_AACASF olson_j_Page_57.tif
83155fbd54573b12d4c09680cc78b17f
e1f69675e45972630ce04fdeed86f8a2c2efecf6
2255 F20110217_AACBEB olson_j_Page_72thm.jpg
6c80911d692cd76f4b46f7cbfda88d95
563d63515fa30d588e0f7cd8ecb84b214aaa92ac
1690 F20110217_AACANJ olson_j_Page_20.txt
91e33f9e930e21c97f7fc69807bed453
3db4799a8d9b281e2c1b53fdf23e76378f2efbca
103827 F20110217_AACAXE olson_j_Page_13.jpg
9ec3d9c82dea0876b01bddb413fb0288
b923a3c8fab0508c2306724a925524b98938309b
F20110217_AACAIM olson_j_Page_12.tif
4b0465075fc655d8d478b6c05e67fcf8
3d5b42a40eccb70a9585bf2fbb73b0290015346d
F20110217_AACASG olson_j_Page_58.tif
aa1a2471486bb4c92a6c142bb829786e
e89d673a16ede045d62142a0deafa88270961f48
2326 F20110217_AACBEC olson_j_Page_74thm.jpg
b6832202a0d4ba1a29fac7d3b7d42dba
d56d6bae448689e30adbfcad9aef0b24aa27d9f3
402 F20110217_AACANK olson_j_Page_53.txt
7f99a5ee169b36d096942183180d8558
91c7bd5655f766dc1578906ca27886e71a4703e4
33405 F20110217_AACAXF olson_j_Page_13.QC.jpg
fcf431f5f3985051b55f4905cca9d7de
57e08fe9c82ed879956509aa217b25a368c681d8
33270 F20110217_AACAIN olson_j_Page_32.QC.jpg
f443c875f5f031df8c7589087b6ab47e
f6e5eaeb0fbdafaeed20816de4dc127e11ebbeee
F20110217_AACASH olson_j_Page_59.tif
48014bd897bc4019ce87a8d482db5675
b7bcc9b5805276dcecd43c6b10a0639718c77a7d
2343 F20110217_AACBED olson_j_Page_75thm.jpg
4562c2b0981890a1663543750c0638cf
760ee981d3e702f3bf10fc6f479adedc9d63d43c
179 F20110217_AACANL olson_j_Page_18.txt
4ffa513328a6ad172eb3b4ee55d44cd7
466dadb6dd71dc056213029fa2078759632b3a0c
F20110217_AACAIO olson_j_Page_33.tif
1e6f8efd767f6cd1e749e72edb736428
691cfedeb15421784035d4bb9944c645f37ca2a8
F20110217_AACASI olson_j_Page_61.tif
2a62bf4c35f861585607a2c2d891fd01
76918dd263dc0cbb80d9ce94fde873207a44c4be
2113 F20110217_AACBEE olson_j_Page_77thm.jpg
8e8dc20f5d85ad4ab5645ce0ceeb488c
c1af1ba66ba8b44e530a39a79a86c8d1af8e3265
46654 F20110217_AACANM olson_j_Page_15.pro
952e3fc7bf23792cc4057f6429751711
6373b2e490912ce31a47c4a9febae112794e9c35
99151 F20110217_AACAXG olson_j_Page_14.jpg
c3868bc61306b6a1452bfa7de075a65b
904968407ded6c377c8110a4e526ccd14f8f4eb4
1051962 F20110217_AACAIP olson_j_Page_37.jp2
e4bbae3e5c8b419c65a4dc3e987cb204
d6be15961d1ee3b85ba73a5fb8d4c4c4716f3cfb
F20110217_AACASJ olson_j_Page_63.tif
b004ed85cd41af5330f39ff99d4c040e
a30ad8147b74481efa87c90d9b391ee8b2640388
8365 F20110217_AACBEF olson_j_Page_79thm.jpg
00d912e6e0303fc586fc42878c1ae769
5150d8439b64c2c05c2ca56f58f31778f9493ead
97978 F20110217_AACAXH olson_j_Page_15.jpg
056c6dc3f4003d142e9de317ee7ccc1c
c5da89a73044fe22e872ce9bc03daffd80ce27ff
F20110217_AACANN olson_j_Page_25.tif
08621828a3aadebf9733ca1b7eeb56f7
96ea61374a4019d9c303ae47b55c10d78aaec771
1018739 F20110217_AACAIQ olson_j_Page_38.jp2
e2379ea980cfbc204d826f93ccac4425
4f5a05835eb7e137d4cd66e6ef65c386fe16667b
F20110217_AACASK olson_j_Page_64.tif
4d3af229d5efe65d5cb70f23dd183223
b5f8d8f8063c1eb107c4bec90d11c9e59ac75351
8803 F20110217_AACBEG olson_j_Page_80thm.jpg
695971532415b59a8eb1884a6e3f71b3
df5a98927d9e04b74a7734a4680ce6a3338e25e7
6594 F20110217_AACAXI olson_j_Page_16.QC.jpg
bcf62a02691fbbc06e082e9730ac1767
955c5837f9087fe32549fb96dbcc80c9f40e4bef
19248 F20110217_AACANO olson_j_Page_45.pro
b517581e6af927b0cb626fab215398d4
4f1c46240ca23361af0d67b24af6c397872bd6ea
F20110217_AACAIR olson_j_Page_31.tif
74573169e9abe3431c847cb1de6de7fc
92c921b5e6db6c3d51132c3d85af684b543d0730
F20110217_AACASL olson_j_Page_69.tif
701ad1a8a66f176c4b92cab813fbc186
814cceabbf1af52a378e8751a49164aeb281dd95
8448 F20110217_AACBEH olson_j_Page_81thm.jpg
1e3791fafe50595ff2daca5176c34fa9
3888fc05bac980bb4ca8d0384edf062dc4a103a3
61716 F20110217_AACAXJ olson_j_Page_17.jpg
942c906a8e28672f0dbf57909abf984f
d14e6a0f43afcc64aa605fe766aa5e7b478d15b5
483 F20110217_AACANP olson_j_Page_64.txt
50b04ee8beebe456a60630158ab66d1d
5a43db67b5f10d5713bc0fedf4804f21968b31b0
39841 F20110217_AACAIS olson_j_Page_83.pro
d039be3af441179bc33cff807eac756c
25b93bbf7b90205a04a27fbc2db565c9d356759c
F20110217_AACASM olson_j_Page_70.tif
b12f8d336085c13b8a3ad7a30ff52899
724d39397162b20e02158beccafd2a3c9a800207
98699 F20110217_AACBEI UFE0014780_00001.mets FULL
3ec4fc798a364ff56d3d37b88ac86b6e
ec83135acf0dc174278df5be74b980cc0940e960
17671 F20110217_AACAXK olson_j_Page_17.QC.jpg
0224a924754bed445da25e5c6dcfbfba
e4fecf2bf5a4a819e00162e86b0fdbac2a0b00f0
80978 F20110217_AACANQ olson_j_Page_20.jpg
8687c9009578bac907b4323811b235c1
c0d2bd104c4b81307b2903dc0cec37902161ff15
50262 F20110217_AACAIT olson_j_Page_13.pro
19b437f308787090b93b3c2311cac80c
a7f3d487c5cf19bb861dc85cd3c80625247bbef5
F20110217_AACASN olson_j_Page_71.tif
834369f4ba86987d6716e94ba6ed6221
0b31c71227fd92c9475e88f5cbdbf88eaf63faaf
74882 F20110217_AACAXL olson_j_Page_18.jpg
c5743b79b2af39a95771ced1d8a6e957
77199b1351d22d4898fc302d3b75f458b31e38d0
F20110217_AACANR olson_j_Page_38.tif
8088cb665fc1f929dfc5ac80d36bfb28
e3bf9cc5637ece71af3d1c62ff89e06f12ab7798
47118 F20110217_AACAIU olson_j_Page_37.pro
d47658f5ea5bc6c563a091cf028337c1
54bcb2d295cb452e8ef0ce0854422f04a0a32900
F20110217_AACASO olson_j_Page_72.tif
03d634094b73735ea17ce57ae7a8f312
1f277f7d61a254a8022412973efc066a6f1c27a9
22702 F20110217_AACAXM olson_j_Page_19.QC.jpg
409e9b713b422c6ac5a395076c3ca011
840b09dd751b542fdc31e70bff11edfd396f9328
8921 F20110217_AACANS olson_j_Page_16.pro
5d40b99e46e1da1ca6090a3a0dc00502
2010f9e756d376719386c51e2553ad43bd17aa1a
9702 F20110217_AACAIV olson_j_Page_59.QC.jpg
2ce4d8048f039b31bb40d17e72613cec
dcfefc127b421489be8540e6211edab5529e46f0
F20110217_AACASP olson_j_Page_73.tif
84ab9a115bbda3992013c4e7d7dda3e2
fdbbbd56d7d666e32e96ea70ebacf78641430452
97566 F20110217_AACAXN olson_j_Page_21.jpg
3d4f96a37b721e68e67c2261449dde90
826e8e79da27a917794867697812e48958c3eccd
F20110217_AACANT olson_j_Page_66.tif
6da43d654eafd82ac8f2edcca52f6122
ebb4ced2d862c8e3412de7d504aed1f1b8a6875d
1051960 F20110217_AACAIW olson_j_Page_35.jp2
6a3f58ced97d8242eaa29c446f30a23a
2f075d626204c43e4dd954ce530ec6bcd4f4d616
F20110217_AACASQ olson_j_Page_74.tif
d0f10813f295463e4043b3ad98dc4250
255110e89b8c6deb4b41ec50f70d7ccce495b58b
31928 F20110217_AACAXO olson_j_Page_21.QC.jpg
2f43a147ddbfab7ca253d25680c83852
a397dea2f78274037bddf0bbdb4ee0fe49d0eb36
259023 F20110217_AACANU olson_j_Page_29.jp2
0feea14bf2e82d1138b1c304af662de8
c2b3a2f6c5fc0ba6a3d53ac3f410dfd17f6eaf55
F20110217_AACASR olson_j_Page_76.tif
e7db18b6c216f6cf6007740a84e6579a
db499b757bb166d7cef7097cb1e31b8851d16195
104345 F20110217_AACAXP olson_j_Page_22.jpg
7094c6a2f848d3a75fc74becf68b8ac3
e4e834396b4f4c31a36304d36842c00ee4f01f0b
20846 F20110217_AACANV olson_j_Page_16.jpg
0e46f2b3e05ded5e36b51d9f68cc097c
3dc89686397e059404831603ebb1587abb299a26
12631 F20110217_AACAIX olson_j_Page_45.QC.jpg
a4c70b5e95792a6b3e65d3341e6ecd17
5664fb849d5f375724677765ade7bab8bd73e68d
F20110217_AACASS olson_j_Page_79.tif
a16fd95017a2e12ccbc3d1e47551e182
ffccf1bb0b838fa7c20ed764060de1399cce2d7f
33635 F20110217_AACAXQ olson_j_Page_22.QC.jpg
6be84ab396fbd9a6d72f52075efe2d97
9f642c673ae6020c75407a686bc3b272eb19bbd8
654503 F20110217_AACANW olson_j_Page_43.jp2
77fc6d5169a231d2202d5bbbca253349
c7cdde6d3211f261353d1e9cd1bd65e77104d9de
255 F20110217_AACAIY olson_j_Page_82.txt
119412e5b2b2e21ddad85e15775c0335
4d5dcebbc3549a9b34784523b601e6c6dd8f3466
F20110217_AACAST olson_j_Page_80.tif
f723e711c532a204fdaaf3525bc8f461
9190ae70715287e04bbc06464353cd9f0b154d15
102865 F20110217_AACAXR olson_j_Page_23.jpg
c33140bb3a9a0ecc7fd73146076d1dba
91501fd2d04b7996c84e7ee27eb3d07bd0312291
43634 F20110217_AACANX olson_j_Page_36.pro
4f6a9ad7d8b4d7ffe659ac1cee74182f
72aa6ba0037ffe4892f4cd5a74ade041c78d92ff
2017 F20110217_AACAIZ olson_j_Page_39.txt
c955d8e3bf3c87f4f4a7f5dcebf5d5db
82a848b4502d95e69488f621ac9639c67c166add
477 F20110217_AACASU olson_j_Page_01.txt
fe1893717fba4ece0cf5d09f44e3dbd2
9be4e73f54dd4d41a7e268f7e3d4cc7ed9ae8582
33958 F20110217_AACAXS olson_j_Page_23.QC.jpg
81db7f7e23d12d8ae30d444f1404378a
8717d82019976c3e687c809ccb3c3f991b46d463
133 F20110217_AACANY olson_j_Page_30.txt
a2df917dfec5c405f17962351e6568d7
1500c7ee0e540551f2e63a6a162feb6b8a0aa47a
1695 F20110217_AACASV olson_j_Page_03.txt
aa94532bde8dd211057369ed8322b34a
6fe109eb16394903fac6921d6dd3003549719464
36269 F20110217_AACAXT olson_j_Page_24.jpg
f935393e38bd763181dcda4078d21e26
ede812793fb1437b80811d3e3d185ece2a15d398
2834 F20110217_AACASW olson_j_Page_05.txt
8ab41b9970097cbefc25da0b8a6c6223
f37019a4173cda543b99ec87126292aa29dee258
461 F20110217_AACALA olson_j_Page_75.txt
791c2cbcaec035e521763fbe8d1d1a1d
7675cdbbf9e38cde53e2c1e77765922112a51454
30667 F20110217_AACANZ olson_j_Page_78.QC.jpg
5c645df0319b8ee641c529a0945619f1
fdec170c04feaf68269fd546057b2c6b34cdcdaa
33502 F20110217_AACAXU olson_j_Page_25.jpg
6001156ed21e891efe058510c17323d2
12e3871cb3a182972a319f2d9341feedbe94f0c4
276 F20110217_AACASX olson_j_Page_06.txt
603768013bdf894e898e58df8f17ad0e
0d885ac6b83acdc75430a631509d3e7dd2c9d8cb
24767 F20110217_AACALB olson_j_Page_26.jpg
3afc2f17b86c1f31b4d8c1be513a7d01
3bc52aa22c28e3fbae83668d68a9d6484240c407
11530 F20110217_AACAXV olson_j_Page_25.QC.jpg
01130fa7b23ffacc32766bb6aa0fd630
dca46f6284fa329e26d11a2506f00592febd3e82
2338 F20110217_AACASY olson_j_Page_08.txt
4e98c3c84079c82c704443ff613c3790
8a292c511da6e886fecf8eb321928e00945f2b29
4496 F20110217_AACALC olson_j_Page_07thm.jpg
f16813548b0201c9895d73aa2f86d1e8
ee38c9c384dde36e86e004ab055bfc24f53c55fe
80601 F20110217_AACAXW olson_j_Page_27.jpg
a6ae0feeea2b8ba085f38bbee2c0e01b
fc7ab743cb020bb5985ee4565791e347adfd07e6
F20110217_AACAQA olson_j_Page_04.txt
955a8c5e4d48d1f5752c68e018426f70
6f20c679dc9824f9f177dd0ad87c64c918d07201
1789 F20110217_AACASZ olson_j_Page_10.txt
1b354458387b3f0ada3c75359bae224f
3552d61ac6f386434199191ac065ab9935589d67
F20110217_AACALD olson_j_Page_78.tif
c27f7faf4c45748186914b87e0482e19
9f9a24a790f221e1807368f3ce069b90a20d50dc
25006 F20110217_AACAXX olson_j_Page_27.QC.jpg
4847c6d2d4ff806de19e0c762bff77cc
8bbfe07d1021c1a2e649d61b38ae69463ae59764
F20110217_AACAQB olson_j_Page_51.tif
612f49b71b4b746aa42a7387332760db
15d36359422d6f282df59a87cd1f49355fef0e24
9123 F20110217_AACALE olson_j_Page_56.QC.jpg
61471ae134cb20d0677ebb9ba9fb2ece
32365ce9d3e76ed18074cf44a446c7e11795befc
43412 F20110217_AACAXY olson_j_Page_28.jpg
22a5f59c92ebaaf5d4db3f798072d69d
428bdc5d68364971b73de4fb8e1ffb0750c90623
8347 F20110217_AACAQC olson_j_Page_23thm.jpg
e15da9b3b47ee993db2916de3eacd404
2b5dfce033133380f3a4d0c16abe2a2bfc04d638
8502 F20110217_AACALF olson_j_Page_68.pro
6f4a71c3d586e374f08c3b37bd501024
301f0c2e4c87626888895610afde75deb9b196da
3253 F20110217_AACAVA olson_j_Page_28.pro
b2b1d7f5bc60959de6f9bb4fc11cfbbe
deac70f763e141b2f120717fb3902386d6334923
35375 F20110217_AACAXZ olson_j_Page_29.jpg
4a567c7ba55dbe432b11aaa95cbcaaf0
d085f83da434e2d2f9421d395ac9bedcd81811fb
F20110217_AACAQD olson_j_Page_05.tif
f4b782e5cfd61224418ba72b841c5fea
ca7d6f64470637bcc28e3311f41c7f315dc196e1
F20110217_AACALG olson_j_Page_09.tif
e28c6645b7ab5a18d8106a1eb1336258
d89c40024aaa9d571f752e8d2569a13bcf50eb60
9397 F20110217_AACAVB olson_j_Page_29.pro
139e80100a2c56a62bd50f7a6da8cbcb
e58ded61149921d7c4ccf9152f660554ef9ff32c
8340 F20110217_AACAQE olson_j_Page_76.pro
f209f230f61ae0fe50efc03912c7764b
abaf9663f113438529d91039c55d62b4e780fb0e
20832 F20110217_AACALH olson_j_Page_65.jpg
e2dde3c3a6c92361bcbdedf5687f6b5c
415d5a1351ada23fe68631893464447f5f755c1c
2157 F20110217_AACAVC olson_j_Page_30.pro
2d2d321fd2b6494879bdcf047f1e95a4
5d41a429d6f41a1e1450bde263e79c81af4f1826
181989 F20110217_AACBCA olson_j_Page_65.jp2
d1ce06c179dd065a67e7bc5ab6983499
58fb6e2d3ddaab2cea4a76e263e8da5efdc6ccba
1903 F20110217_AACAQF olson_j_Page_35.txt
0979b5036561662ee30d9a117c2b1353
79fef634eb9e20cb75a326bb4ca17b802913725a
37789 F20110217_AACALI olson_j_Page_27.pro
509354de159762c78ab9fc3021ae84ca
ebf4b0ea1448b7ac35e6b634ec8b8f8a421bd3b9
40311 F20110217_AACAVD olson_j_Page_31.pro
3c82c55a6d26040dfd05ba58a78aff54
5bb55874c214988d8555a498ad3e744e690c5d26
174946 F20110217_AACBCB olson_j_Page_66.jp2
9165c0d97c6b354a524408b7aef333c2
8a865b8c5eb5b27b8ed7c569a14c8b705381b71f
1982 F20110217_AACAQG olson_j_Page_60thm.jpg
d27ae734f8773a16dd6fbb86c2e89891
de72adffa4637b553f249ecc4eed2efbe5d09e6c
8073 F20110217_AACALJ olson_j_Page_70.pro
8787949053e4085ab7861238c06a27fc
2b4ce3e1bd9a53ff86c6f671d27ebd7dd5c893dd
273951 F20110217_AACBCC olson_j_Page_67.jp2
deb1f2bbc9bfe6e84e98c5568a1d953a
e10089794cdf6cbab4a45692a06fe074f0b37deb
28896 F20110217_AACAQH olson_j_Page_11.jpg
20b39227713779fec2d196761109c02a
f4b09b2423054276f6baae7061ab543ce42a1beb
1862 F20110217_AACALK olson_j_Page_15.txt
fb48195c47ac4617c8cafbfcf59a0ae5
b961851c5b427bfacf2ee54e85f52b204deb5b32
50896 F20110217_AACAVE olson_j_Page_32.pro
5f416610dfd348dc4ec960197077c655
266ab5f727e43c7f985fd60c38095c3f09e1d8c1
251890 F20110217_AACBCD olson_j_Page_68.jp2
12b060c0f47ebc5e63ce1a115593fc63
48981ff6a2503772bf3211e617a0af1094f53542
F20110217_AACAQI olson_j_Page_44.tif
3f33368bfbe7f7c1bb7ff02fa7de3f8c
efc36d13529a0bbe4fae80910f60508ecb5a5858
F20110217_AACALL olson_j_Page_19.tif
5cdfc58626aad1db955bccd344d85583
6afd5e37d9bf2fbb7a72cf657d7ee844cef52530
50570 F20110217_AACAVF olson_j_Page_33.pro
670de248580c24ee454782bf011eedc1
1a47aa670f6f7d09d492581f9c0f04c66cf1fbdb
242899 F20110217_AACBCE olson_j_Page_69.jp2
407ae59c5b01451e38cd32aa300dda8e
b7ca3eb6da8105db07b210a5e1ec5fdd5d15c2e4
2141 F20110217_AACAQJ olson_j_Page_76thm.jpg
57a32738087ba672fd4d08f9e9f7c5b6
3407510357998c53fc004cf2a7fd4d33dc928adc
8621 F20110217_AACALM olson_j_Page_68.QC.jpg
eaca4b7dd06a136f79f05d8b3cfc8c9f
84e9417adefc51957029058cda5eb54a9eccb957
44928 F20110217_AACAVG olson_j_Page_38.pro
f1c0f28bb4313b0da8e60bf149cfad6b
1cd35ed66854edd59965512e329fb79c294a49eb
245197 F20110217_AACBCF olson_j_Page_70.jp2
49a7419070c9c2181e606c3879349348
daa30bf5279986c43f50c012e3e19bbf5e695296
673108 F20110217_AACAQK olson_j_Page_49.jp2
a2ef1cac066c51eafc930c0419225388
52981d822cd7c7eae39a75b1655fbced3281ef05
256400 F20110217_AACALN olson_j_Page_57.jp2
8c708a1a25e0f69457f43080f544ecda
b6e64759581af5f2917186554d11c62a70fe88a8
50242 F20110217_AACAVH olson_j_Page_39.pro
9292282ef61ec6ee0e11a8119b8f7e3a
fffdefbcb6b26f7b9a814984de7a630c278c17f7
223078 F20110217_AACBCG olson_j_Page_72.jp2
f9a1de937f1c25fef50011bfb35867ec
9914d4641bc3fd8b806de7df82596ff513c3ce05
4280 F20110217_AACAQL olson_j_Page_48thm.jpg
09878a7e1eb173d7f1bb690eba7970b3
9b92311f052b199bb3eb801934ef6e92770e471a
904836 F20110217_AACALO olson_j_Page_83.jp2
3cfa5b79098b47ceda41bbb03734b9d5
306b3d6e5b2574f5290c4aa933ebb66db2d6aba4
51462 F20110217_AACAVI olson_j_Page_40.pro
8263dbf85b125ee9f60de32162b254da
74fb1cb144850abc84c889989e851ca9cc825765
231210 F20110217_AACBCH olson_j_Page_75.jp2
5c1f664d5ac5b36255ca27ab6e9f3eb9
69ed6798f7ce5c4ad1c3ff5a81b0c679cf4b1961
407 F20110217_AACAQM olson_j_Page_76.txt
458c6e50e1acbb7a1a545a4fd82ea525
b2fdc3cf7fd2132cedb5ad78119ac6b555967012
F20110217_AACALP olson_j_Page_28.tif
6f8ac230d05d273dfa70fd6af0f4c0c4
b5be2418cef4ea57d61011ff61839bd98df2e182
45497 F20110217_AACAVJ olson_j_Page_42.pro
b9e43792b2b4709c4f92825053bfa02f
409481d6ef6796c710ff58ab7905fe634e643e40
203127 F20110217_AACBCI olson_j_Page_76.jp2
d2c9a1390ec5ce0b3a037e745272fff6
6ec6f3c48871c7d9017cfde941576e0a4d227bc2
115 F20110217_AACAQN olson_j_Page_02.txt
42a6f86193dc891a96c25978f6769481
8ca328cd5063fb2c02d0b2824b220746611f84af
1140 F20110217_AACALQ olson_j_Page_48.txt
3251f0d17bfa5063a1cb699f1bf34785
2b305b5b642def87afd4a655db75cd832268bffa
29460 F20110217_AACAVK olson_j_Page_43.pro
1871ae510687992158731fd429a02ab7
10f195ac3fec7f7d2b6566f414521830a5ba8938
1051977 F20110217_AACBCJ olson_j_Page_78.jp2
64919e38fed3ffd864c0f4b087f3569f
f48546523294c63938aaa1a8122d3a27905c6d75
1626 F20110217_AACAQO olson_j_Page_83.txt
ea596064ae885b72ec99d511692df5e4
790cf158f80c9a5697502404d2257f5316fe835a
3036 F20110217_AACALR olson_j_Page_25thm.jpg
a5e34c7a117c53ea556f99f1d7a7bcae
768c3830c3293c8d8d5c33f46b68844654f72633
13212 F20110217_AACAVL olson_j_Page_46.pro
9dd673f2212e02af8273c535f2d423a3
ce0edce6fddcaa7fb0425fb350269f3c6b40037a
F20110217_AACBCK olson_j_Page_79.jp2
be98f3d9ea1f632a52879cd9e7742576
81e8d85c4422bed0424857859f6e4f34db0e05da
742 F20110217_AACAQP olson_j_Page_67.txt
8765a08440be6e8d70bf5701a6c4f732
ac962407bf0d844c541cce059139e5ddbd4fe90c
295277 F20110217_AACALS olson_j_Page_11.jp2
9ee8332a5fa15770cf2a5b1f329d5658
4486528d831b025cc8e30d6bbaf2231c3719f444
17810 F20110217_AACAVM olson_j_Page_47.pro
d1164f578a36f8eae30d24447b548c5f
0b1f77c9336e456da1db498cff439ead3a0009ad
1051951 F20110217_AACBCL olson_j_Page_80.jp2
e61af6c4c003ffd850cd873df49d99cb
86b0acb8aca7fc69d3e3c07ce9f803976f67d8f5
16369 F20110217_AACAQQ olson_j_Page_25.pro
9203cc69ebba1df1ba6a3427c486af5d
f18ab27345481c82d47523269afc40fa9313d7da
8623 F20110217_AACALT olson_j_Page_57.pro
643acb5fa39f5eb524fa130d40eeedfc
1e9e063cd86ebdcc47cc01dffc9f43b58ec5763c
F20110217_AACAVN olson_j_Page_48.pro
c9b7bb29a67306a63af83ee93f0cd838
ef4732fa60573282dedf3eb28a9da228bfd2c1c3
1051981 F20110217_AACBCM olson_j_Page_81.jp2
152c7808d3860db319d387ae9c2dc8ba
d03b40e68538c812ae98895e093d7432d2b69a61
537 F20110217_AACAQR olson_j_Page_72.txt
069d528329f35ffef70698f35910f53f
46c1699fbfd6caf2de12080c866382f427725b11
6669 F20110217_AACALU olson_j_Page_63.QC.jpg
1b1af0e74bb696d8887a0ca21f9cc866
d6b01befc87edba201838cea0d85018e9d98f326
38901 F20110217_AACAVO olson_j_Page_49.pro
0222c2a497a96c76f4151144cad253fe
0e045c65d10dd0e26eec9c9c764384f998c11838
7311 F20110217_AACBCN olson_j_Page_03thm.jpg
a8dd0d71c9d5fcae315cfac9e8342e76
6175459d40bb211ef243d978a9db57fbc1c2c71a
2645 F20110217_AACAQS olson_j_Page_53thm.jpg
b8d7815109c83d2e74ea13c313f10baa
356960f769b64380aa61cfd64b820040fc59f9f3
7587 F20110217_AACALV olson_j_Page_66.QC.jpg
a443ebe21ff76970746a33b9572077ff
e57bdc4c6d945ac21ceef5edc5a3b90ef9297610
36800 F20110217_AACAVP olson_j_Page_50.pro
2a42e78d6e1fac004f24ad1d56be84c6
1f7dc0c5aacdf952696c25dadda235ebf1347dff
1165 F20110217_AACBCO olson_j_Page_04thm.jpg
bd16d1bfed3d83a7e6f6f9b464739efa
205abcfa662db155ff9626e07bb7e1144a40e060
640417 F20110217_AACAQT olson_j_Page_28.jp2
47f6580901b0728c6d1b45dd30d9f62a
be378a648c0afacc6799179af11d4ba366f4e814
154127 F20110217_AACALW olson_j_Page_63.jp2
3e0ab3792cf945884065998183a11ccc
8f90eeca4926a89382af49e62a0256829f156d8c
5510 F20110217_AACAVQ olson_j_Page_51.pro
528382937e24f1c65b3c1dff7c9512fe
27b5b27692cd4ebb81344461481f9e240e9beb6a
857 F20110217_AACBCP olson_j_Page_06thm.jpg
4e028320f8b47708a894d026d853764e
482e63f735dc4e0e71d5479017145ed3ee3b3484
112959 F20110217_AACAQU olson_j_Page_81.jpg
99842b7bc89a92aa488705b29a22a2d3
fc0c66c65794e62c5f252be02260a7d5c1b0fbac
F20110217_AACALX olson_j_Page_42.tif
50450e7071f04b9ff67a8e672ae351cb
262680dac65c1a4299ee517b21886b50902478bd
4547 F20110217_AACAVR olson_j_Page_54.pro
6035a78bdb3077676099c001b0552828
6ce1912f10e2ee04a0519d5c29bf555825a324e7
18922 F20110217_AACALY olson_j_Page_64.jpg
2ace13e0648f76d45e0b1f9ad3838731
f992c58d91b719a8a147ee66a24f9db502f8cefa
2349 F20110217_AACAVS olson_j_Page_55.pro
2a41090513ff67865625f04bc701235b
693b38544f7291a688677696bc6c88f286198b4d
209088 F20110217_AACAQV olson_j_Page_77.jp2
c9399d680aa51e51ea21a389ec6bbf2b
2fee5617f790ecae0f95ce67e8888ed504c2f599
5676 F20110217_AACBCQ olson_j_Page_08thm.jpg
53711808853d853bf60174c94ab4f5ef
b195091c9760d5f3ebdd4daebefb99395febde06
F20110217_AACAJA olson_j_Page_35.tif
28f855aa61a99c0ad90656b4e7c0dc92
b524fc2a6965ce816b2077fe2581e8c60dec2d78
116767 F20110217_AACALZ olson_j_Page_82.jp2
c47424c83ef5f5e83b04495381f6b723
a73953bfeffcb47c28636d7a7e192e23a2013210
10001 F20110217_AACAVT olson_j_Page_56.pro
6756b6db2b3e94d2c2beb98b5e26d7d1
63590ce13929d1aaf25a7e68831460b066524b86
4539 F20110217_AACAQW olson_j_Page_53.pro
89061c5eea93fb493a7cecdbdf8f1d0b
ed9d6ef3cb009a4845433aee463b6ec188c72523
6761 F20110217_AACBCR olson_j_Page_10thm.jpg
842d09df154e57c66cf2fa75867a66f5
d85f03c6379e9c914a1464c4cb212e306e38e790
19266 F20110217_AACAJB olson_j_Page_18.QC.jpg
788afa685fc50c7f27a90d43ddcfe848
56ab8595c87769594cecc3fc0b4caa9a4e8884ba
9182 F20110217_AACAVU olson_j_Page_58.pro
8da9bb065cf8d236b5592b187c6f07f6
102e49438d5a7630397f37681a04801933ab145d
48160 F20110217_AACAQX olson_j_Page_35.pro
678c0872a224dd2160606e3e0bdd896a
b2b362cdaf86ce3ab5675a32e1756280cdf6f3b6
7106 F20110217_AACBCS olson_j_Page_12thm.jpg
88e6c355d3ebd5846796aa18407c028a
462771cb0d9050dcf98bb1a46c61a473d9b3f26b
7527 F20110217_AACAJC olson_j_Page_38thm.jpg
102b518e3942f09c978013b1a8674943
e3893f3e1b8efdea035cce97c752439d6817fa14
8511 F20110217_AACAVV olson_j_Page_59.pro
de9da2cd5adb4cdccfb60361c8057d82
c1304531451b08623ee263ab98588f30823de356
134236 F20110217_AACAQY UFE0014780_00001.xml
cdb57e83625dd081ba7d6b62929a02c5
6e88aee2a0b6a9968e6195470b0e85f3a6ab75fa
8374 F20110217_AACBCT olson_j_Page_13thm.jpg
fd4b4f9e96a6c9e5c614b5f5830d30e8
c374ca8e4cb19cdde2b03819b859f3d0e9e99539
F20110217_AACAJD olson_j_Page_60.tif
2ab301c340293b3926813a371670cb04
bff61daa926193d3018d28d05932ea9d21fc325c
6303 F20110217_AACAVW olson_j_Page_60.pro
87c7a1568db1cefa44708cfb85ea0c1a
398514acfe775afd372bddd77b0cc9197bdcd701
F20110217_AACAOA olson_j_Page_82.tif
b1b28fb6a7e7478d0fc85665ee74ca23
cb3807cc4bb3d8e1bbf0afa6c97ddbb6013720db
7816 F20110217_AACBCU olson_j_Page_14thm.jpg
b486dbcd343554c711a8e09367c67c08
4caa78bf1b38293299e4e480b3a8ea8a7340bb91
1051934 F20110217_AACAJE olson_j_Page_15.jp2
905c7030f2b0e1cc1b1b33b07218e76d
4583e4ba399c92b5bf40d4a9f02987bce8fe3c00
7937 F20110217_AACAVX olson_j_Page_61.pro
88e5fe4a80609367d4e484f712b86ee7
54cf542d129c3d6711db0363cfc2ab6e6637bef0
161 F20110217_AACAOB olson_j_Page_17.txt
d7b85eb2b769be8cf473300a2bc0ff13
eb4593e379473bf0f451c53d94e7956416f6b530
1796 F20110217_AACBCV olson_j_Page_16thm.jpg
5367413e507f8719b0315dbc9ab79333
7b7d1944ee56c3dbd0be65a4267b8de7ddf3199e
253305 F20110217_AACAJF olson_j_Page_58.jp2
a22eb48152bb19146d7e6513fb34ca54
68ee700e1641997523f7d0fb66905a98160fa12c
525 F20110217_AACATA olson_j_Page_11.txt
b96c54fb90de6c9651fb6ca3a88035ad
950d60f969e6fd869bf3410b7bec527cdcfc2482
6416 F20110217_AACAVY olson_j_Page_63.pro
1c6486c726760f606e6d412020ba38d9
53f60870f4478de1e41b18c244cc81ef44acafc3
58487 F20110217_AACAOC olson_j_Page_08.pro
5254aa7ad3e45c0ca9962ce1267db8c8
b68092996ccb20351f94199200799bf914babbaa
5019 F20110217_AACBCW olson_j_Page_17thm.jpg
ed106b07b957cc7011c248f1d3e187f6
be54c97ae3e000f3eaf96bdfd1378a64d5d59efc
4434 F20110217_AACAJG olson_j_Page_04.pro
a1ae93fb17ecd5f180ac1b9564f410a5
8ce715a43e58d3215aaa8a9406c6a2a64f968737
F20110217_AACATB olson_j_Page_13.txt
fce8be3b92450e21ff363eee1560b3ca
58ab8d846d8f61c25abee21f49f85e26435154c8
8437 F20110217_AACAVZ olson_j_Page_65.pro
879adce4753e2b8e9945c5e2944b2068
3571fe4532d90b008b9e0374d1458d186b124788
4334 F20110217_AACAOD olson_j_Page_04.QC.jpg
67a8101a3ebbafcbc0652d58fec6c027
fe39df1f68bd6af335b3cd805c74e1ed3a865c27
5099 F20110217_AACBCX olson_j_Page_18thm.jpg
e5366b2abf30ce2813f0efebc179ce0a
2b9d672d00596ca6e11490e7e61caee1fd0214be
13788 F20110217_AACAJH olson_j_Page_28.QC.jpg
cd81fbb73bc4dacc50c2823b2c1771aa
9f3a5268079f48baf9c6e4c3386d7668b67ef21f
32710 F20110217_AACAOE olson_j_Page_33.QC.jpg
99d547955578dacf370ccade79689565
88ce50c132032403aac3b14ec5ed4831089aa18a
8541 F20110217_AACBCY olson_j_Page_22thm.jpg
c8936f528081577839fce83d738e122e
7ff8f0823390dcc676e5af348f3f6fbbbfa3ab01
25093 F20110217_AACBAA olson_j_Page_72.jpg
21555bdca5e8901cd0f3a8fe27e17602
be822964382f6ce92979b52e650308abcdde3022
11637 F20110217_AACAYA olson_j_Page_29.QC.jpg
21edd60b538152de99d2abbd6b542040
f1d4134c3ae0c142e1e5e73b76b3c10ec3f25bf8
1966 F20110217_AACATC olson_j_Page_14.txt
0aabc4d56a7e52f065c5ddfb316b263b
2e7c57b711311179596e1111dca487d2b4a7fe76
2919 F20110217_AACAOF olson_j_Page_57thm.jpg
ca323ec12dff84dae3ac7dbb63708e47
6444895d4da037c7dfa4baac400a6f80d4c2ede5
60037 F20110217_AACAJI olson_j_Page_07.jpg
fb155c0eccc9e43ac5a90b1982f5bfa1
d5c37271c429fd175630eeacfc62ddfb6fab608d
6107 F20110217_AACBCZ olson_j_Page_27thm.jpg
1d58c635cec1db582452b297857d822d
3bdb990c36cd15a3ed718d21daedf3a6f64dff2c
8120 F20110217_AACBAB olson_j_Page_72.QC.jpg
d6c46fc0c325f29be94d7f8518939cd8
6ff066497363b707ce9b4757f118afd1370c5637
13678 F20110217_AACAYB olson_j_Page_30.QC.jpg
78b9fd180fd4b148c40efbff4a7876da
3dde273d68aeb8fd8c336d5e2a91a0226ccf58ba
459 F20110217_AACATD olson_j_Page_16.txt
252bfa2514106edefb7b20c328182cbc
f09809bc9393c7e7837922f4f2d0d766354d2688
33325 F20110217_AACAOG olson_j_Page_81.QC.jpg
4c3742f0de446ca865d8f8595062542c
99f4c9719d7fe08918a5575c40cc38eed980149e
9352 F20110217_AACAJJ olson_j_Page_61.QC.jpg
c089a4e9066d739878d528914801b623
d09344c9c328a6022e68aa17146dfe6c8fd5ac9b
23593 F20110217_AACBAC olson_j_Page_73.jpg
811607dc127d9fa0555591a02c1954bc
af4fca036a175970a4986d9b0ca37347904ed419
86354 F20110217_AACAYC olson_j_Page_31.jpg
db76b7d313083afa4c6c31a85a2873fb
adc4f11c40b416eb9074746faf910da0900c59a1
1882 F20110217_AACATE olson_j_Page_21.txt
508eb69c0f6aa280b080672701b9688a
3eff53d1d9273c5bd80933f2d66242b57cf548ec
33504 F20110217_AACAOH olson_j_Page_41.QC.jpg
2b23de094725cede225634abc349c8a1
60a7113e94604a93a0abdca169f6d089a0093185
3242 F20110217_AACAJK olson_j_Page_24thm.jpg
64819e01325f8915ff373a88b335628f
12b50b6c0848956edd4730d1beeeb809346f20a5
25877 F20110217_AACBAD olson_j_Page_74.jpg
51bba5ae9226b321c7b5115eb98f3c4d
c1c746d1faadd5b1c0009df2a34deaaeaa54a590
26777 F20110217_AACAYD olson_j_Page_31.QC.jpg
111c3d6ff58b015b44e75e02e1dc9073
05b396343ba84b47a18f113236880eb3493322f2
658 F20110217_AACATF olson_j_Page_24.txt
825b6feed9a2c17af607adac3be2fc66
aa302f4bda144cb0b34f5585847f9a67fce84a61
15397 F20110217_AACAOI olson_j_Page_55.jpg
58a0d39428e29676c5339b95eed65259
ed9cc2c4d1c0af0f55ea31f83ecc2741a5f2df50
232258 F20110217_AACAJL olson_j_Page_74.jp2
1fc92c5a0fd51ed2720edef0bda3980c
672a2a5dd0224568d4459d376128eb291110d652
8163 F20110217_AACBAE olson_j_Page_74.QC.jpg
c6cb26cd005186c201dd4a69f71b47cd
6ad1f8f39b42364468ef33c0b3fec1db1b65a547
101880 F20110217_AACAYE olson_j_Page_32.jpg
215d77bb54d1ec04dd55b844bc542001
acf32aac15523c4ed10104176ecae79f7f404cb1
597 F20110217_AACATG olson_j_Page_26.txt
f4596a535ea4f356c23179c26b621a71
53af5856d6ae21bd720634d826f36ea89cf5aa04
7908 F20110217_AACAOJ olson_j_Page_21thm.jpg
508913cd5278fce0b12a7d21779d5056
2dd662dac1620470bd592bc49d10c8a97492a474
103899 F20110217_AACAJM olson_j_Page_39.jpg
26d2ffc3a297065c37111b960222f660
7b6d5dd8502d1b7bd971578e32fa20b87f881134
26059 F20110217_AACBAF olson_j_Page_75.jpg
448927bdb18f50a8b501df805bd6a94c
1193968e3aa30f94bbf9294aeb9eadf302445aac
101558 F20110217_AACAYF olson_j_Page_33.jpg
7c227f7fd46742a521d6ccc5836aaa7f
734b42ee12be717dd5a2b9c2187bc908a9ce1857
2169 F20110217_AACATH olson_j_Page_27.txt
359013c38571d5770f59c479c3113f28
53142af1c640de247da8d2fe776d94260cb0164b
F20110217_AACAOK olson_j_Page_46.tif
bf7da122420e35d89ef46cce9b273d42
40ba4971046ca377fa4c0fc973a0500882e8b5bb
33949 F20110217_AACAJN olson_j_Page_80.QC.jpg
1043a28405ce472620f72280ffa0b793
1d81fe32bc786e3938886afde61214fcefee065d
8228 F20110217_AACBAG olson_j_Page_75.QC.jpg
4efa6a9ac07fa5aae6c87a32b1aa0ff4
634a3b380a849f466945f0d8a8da48389eb716bb
100385 F20110217_AACAYG olson_j_Page_34.jpg
3845dcfced7e0c07cfb5a3412b3595f0
0e5d171735fc25ee472aa084721889b4af40fdbd
146 F20110217_AACATI olson_j_Page_28.txt
e7e842f012f487022cd37fdad2bde3cd
aad7acfe029cd5e89222d673ce0be53c8ef3c92c
1051945 F20110217_AACAOL olson_j_Page_33.jp2
125cc5acdc524b8b68516cabfb275774
21ab1fa9b54579199a84911704f972370611f44c
34895 F20110217_AACAJO olson_j_Page_44.jpg
63159c04edb7a95cc5a465e5cd9b59b2
be3d6f6fbbfcb0b05661abe03bd79daccb0bcaf5
21780 F20110217_AACBAH olson_j_Page_76.jpg
bd799b87563bac70a5f267193a1bee54
dbe66ca257ff4e912efbeda775d457a6fe4e1c54
1745 F20110217_AACATJ olson_j_Page_31.txt
24377ed3bd3c77a76afd30cc98ae2e3f
7bcb5e26ee0f7bd038d61cb2f65109b256d8ae6e
F20110217_AACAOM olson_j_Page_47.tif
439b238b7a377234dcd704d0964ee20e
6ca745085c89337673e95c74ef7668569a6c2f35
190670 F20110217_AACAJP olson_j_Page_62.jp2
c2ad70eaf86392f269c58ceee25ebdf3
cf7f946887e5302a830bf7c25b3de722b1f6bb8a
6833 F20110217_AACBAI olson_j_Page_76.QC.jpg
68e7d99cf1871572cc55da755b3ab4ae
bf2267dc2a373c670615ab586668dc683f001449
32732 F20110217_AACAYH olson_j_Page_34.QC.jpg
963a979c6817698cde7a910fb0a7a681
9940a1b75f51650044d96fd9fa2c8389c0cbe885
1996 F20110217_AACATK olson_j_Page_33.txt
6dcde0867a8d2d3feee28e819c5d340d
65aab55aa9b2fe21b5b89c938d55a215b99bf6b0
1714 F20110217_AACAON olson_j_Page_07.txt
48f3d8c42ce0dd1aaf56a21cf33d40cd
042bc9e459a5c9db5b5cf75a35512ef74b247294
5778 F20110217_AACAJQ olson_j_Page_52.pro
e3578b96c60919b27e0d018a9001a65f
1426f5a3666fa1fbcb0c8be321a447405ebb63bc
23680 F20110217_AACBAJ olson_j_Page_77.jpg
39d955415b823f7f4db02bb6859799b9
c74640585e1932bdfbe0661db0c04f8409d1320b
33145 F20110217_AACAYI olson_j_Page_35.QC.jpg
26ba7487340035ee52f50fe5bf8baf48
5f6992d5169c64198e7bc6f5a938f6e55f7cacf9
1919 F20110217_AACATL olson_j_Page_34.txt
b116a9b4f07245f51e330f8e0dfd6e6d
4fde55d37ab4629a5a860dd0e82479a14519723c
F20110217_AACAOO olson_j_Page_75.tif
eeaa91a54a5c5f6e88e2352181f0399b
0efc3d7ac9722795bb1fb35f67530a1f81f4c6af
2003 F20110217_AACAJR olson_j_Page_32.txt
6fe86f514027434ea32c99e67e766224
317551979249fbfe292a008db52d9e392223bae9
108039 F20110217_AACBAK olson_j_Page_78.jpg
376ddcb74aed1554c7b1e8ed70645230
6f1c03e3f5cbf4eeee8c70ecb9296da98aef9f5d
91719 F20110217_AACAYJ olson_j_Page_36.jpg
ad596ed237dd41b39936c62f8d272c76
0566b2727ba67366f1dee819ffce990b2f821ce9
1777 F20110217_AACATM olson_j_Page_36.txt
58b987cafe3607450eb55443da2d5e0e
87abcccd551f9b0e2d03cd07a9c0563bb3e3756d
1214 F20110217_AACAOP olson_j_Page_43.txt
47d93ee8167264a6f58c3f336a48214f
e264414cce404b16bca1d5db9c5f01076cacc0a3
1686 F20110217_AACAJS olson_j_Page_12.txt
7e9274758d7fde7b0390bb2981fcc3b6
9937b263a94e1d205c6d481b8e7595de0b8cb9be



PAGE 1

EVALUATION OF REMOTE, INFRARED-TRIGGERED CAMERAS AS A POPULATION SURVEY TECHNIQUE FOR WILD TURKEYS ( Meleagris gallopavo ) BY JEREMY TODD OLSON A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006

PAGE 2

Copyright 2006 by Jeremy Todd Olson

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project required the effort of many people for whom I am grateful. Dr. Mel Sunquist provided extensive guidance and knowledge throughout the project. Dr. Madan Oli and Dr. George Tanner provided knowledge and contacts that were invaluable in completing this study. Capturing the wild turkeys required dozens of patient volunteers. The University of Floridas Chapter of the Wildlife Society, Trailridge L ongbeard Chapter of the Wild Turkey Federation, Tall Timbers Biological Rese arch Station, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission all supplied crucial time and effort. Arpat Ozgul provided insight into the mark-resight computer programs necessary for data analysis. His willingness to help and sincere interest in the outcome of the project were extremely useful. Field technicians provided much needed help during the labor intensive cameratrap surveys. Claire Sunqui st, Clint Peters, and Patrick Deren all displayed the selfmotivated work ethic so crucial for this study. Their ability to stay on task with little supervision allowed for very efficient data collection. I would also like to thank FWC biologists Roger Shields and Larry Perrin for their effort. Both kept their good attitude and se nse of humor even when field conditions were less than ideal, and made the fieldwork seas on something to look forward to every year. Lastly, I would like to thank my parent s. They encouraged me throughout my childhood to pursue my passion for wildlife bi ology, putting up with the escaped snakes iii

PAGE 4

in the house, turtles in the pool, mysterious ba gs in the freezer, and other oddities that raising an aspiring biologist bring to the child-rearing experience. iv

PAGE 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................iii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................vii LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................viii ABSTRACT .........................................................................................................................x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 Study Sites ....................................................................................................................3 Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area ........................................................3 Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve ....................................................................4 Objectives .....................................................................................................................5 2 INITIAL CAPTURE AND MARKING TECHNIQUE...............................................9 Introduction ...................................................................................................................9 Methods ........................................................................................................................9 Results .........................................................................................................................11 Discussion ...................................................................................................................12 3 CAMERA TRAPPING TECHNIQUE.......................................................................20 Introduction .................................................................................................................20 Methods ......................................................................................................................20 Program CAPTURE ............................................................................................23 Program NOREMARK Bowdens Estimator ...................................................23 Radio Telemetry ..................................................................................................24 Determining Effective Area Sampled .................................................................25 Results .........................................................................................................................25 Discussion ...................................................................................................................28 Management Implications ..........................................................................................32 v

PAGE 6

LIST OF REFERENCES ...................................................................................................67 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............................................................................................72 vi

PAGE 7

LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1 Number of turkeys successfully tr apped and released on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve. .....................................................................................................14 2-2 Percentage of banded turkeys missing at least one colored leg band when resighted during camera-trap surveys. .....................................................................15 2-3 Condition of colored leg bands of turkeys recaptured or harvested. ........................16 3-1 Dates of camera-trap surveys. ..................................................................................33 3-2 Number of pictures collected and analyzed for each camera-trap survey. ...............34 3-3 Percentage of pictures by species using camera-traps baited with cracked corn with camera-traps active from dawn until dusk. ......................................................35 3-4 Number of marked turkeys resighted using protocol 1 and protocol 2 with percent increase of resigh tings using protocol 2. .....................................................36 3-5 Detection rates of radio-tagged bi rds on study areas during camera-trap surveys using protocol 1........................................................................................................37 3-6 Estimated number of banded turkeys on study areas during the camera-trap surveys using the null m odel in program CAPTURE. .............................................38 3-7 Estimated number of turkeys (ba nded and unbanded) on study areas during the camera-trap surveys using Bowdens estimator in program NOREMARK. ...........39 vii

PAGE 8

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Location of study sites in north-central Florida ..........................................................6 1-2 1996 aerial photograph of Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area, Putnam Co., FL. .......................................................................................................................7 1-3 1996 aerial photograph of Ordway-Swi sher Memorial Preserve, Putnam Co., FL. ...8 2-1 Technique used to hold wild turkey while bands are installed. ................................17 2-2 Temporal distribution of time from capture to release for turkeys handled on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve from 2003-2005. ........................................18 2-3 Intertwined colored leg bands on recaptured wild turkey hen. .................................19 3-1 Caravelle Ranch ca mera-trap grid, protocol 1 ..........................................................40 3-2 Ordway Preserve ca mera-trap grid, protocol 1 .........................................................41 3-3 Caravelle Ranch ca mera-trap grid, protocol 2 ..........................................................42 3-4 Ordway Preserve ca mera-trap grid, protocol 2 .........................................................43 3-5 Camera-trap dimensions, side view. .........................................................................44 3-6 Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Caravelle Ranch.......................................................................................45 3-7 Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Ordway Preserve. ................................................................................................46 3-8 Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Caravelle Ranch.......................................................................................47 3-9 Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighte d in camera-traps by day on Ordway Preserve. ....................................................................................48 3-10 Sampled area of photographs, aerial view. ...............................................................49 viii

PAGE 9

3-11 Number of times banded turkeys we re photographed per event using 5-minute delay between pictures. ............................................................................................50 3-12 Average number of pict ures as events increase. .......................................................51 3-13 Average home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys on Caravelle Ranch. ......................................................................................................52 3-14 Average home range sizes during su mmer and winter camera-trap surveys on Ordway Preserve. .....................................................................................................53 3-15 Average female home range sizes during summer and wi nter camera-trap surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve. .................................................54 3-16 Average male home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve...............................................................55 3-17 Effective area sampled by camera-tr aps on Caravelle Ranch with 1,600-meter spacing between cameras .........................................................................................56 3-18 Effective area sampled by camera-tr aps on Caravelle Ranch with 800-meter spacing between cameras. ........................................................................................57 3-19 Effective area sampled by camera-trap s on Ordway Preserve with 1,600-meter spacing between cameras. ........................................................................................58 3-20 Effective area sampled by camera-trap s on Ordway Preserve with 800-meter spacing between cameras. ........................................................................................59 3-21 Detection probabilities observed during surveys using program CAPTURE to estimate the number of banded birds on the study area du ring the surveys. ............60 3-22 Linear regression of nu mber of banded male turkey s detected and number of banded male events on Caravelle Ranc h and Ordway Preserve during summer.....61 3-23 Linear regression of nu mber of banded male turkey s detected and number of banded male events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during winter. .......62 3-24 Linear regression of nu mber of banded female turkey s detected and number of banded female events on Caravelle Ra nch and Ordway Preserve during summer. .63 3-25 Linear regression of nu mber of banded female turkey s detected and number of banded female events on Caravelle Ranc h and Ordway Preserve during winter.....64 3-26 Linear regression of estimated numb er of male turkeys on study area during summer camera-trap surveys and number of events from summer. .........................65 3-27 Linear regression of estimated nu mber of male turkeys on study area during winter camera-trap surveys and number of events from winter. ..............................66 ix

PAGE 10

Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy EVALUATION OF REMOTE, INFRARED-TRIGGERED CAMERAS AS A POPULATION SURVEY TECHIQUE FOR WILD TURKEYS ( Meleagris gallopavo ) By Jeremy Todd Olson August 2006 Chair: Mel Sunquist Major Department: Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Wild turkeys have rebounded from widespre ad overharvest and habitat destruction during the early 1900s. Increased turkey abundance has made them a popular game species, and research continues to determine beneficial habitat ma nagement practices. Presently, the effectiveness of habitat mana gement practices is difficult to quantify because there is no widely accepted method to survey wild turkey abundance. I tested a survey design used by the Fl orida Fish and Wild life Conservation Commission (FWC) that uses a grid of camera-t raps separated by at le ast 1,600 m. I used colored leg bands and mark-resight software to estimate the turkey population density on Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area and Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve during 6 surveys over 3 years. I compared detection probabilitie s between areas and years, and used linear regression to analy ze the relationship between the number of turkeys on each area and the number of events derived from the surveys. Results from the surveys showed that detection probabilities were markedly different for the two study areas, likely due to a difference in average home range size. x

PAGE 11

Estimated home-ranges were larger for turkey s on Ordway Preserve, a common correlate of inferior habitat quality. High variation in the birds response to the camera-traps once detected resulted in a poor correlation between the numbe r of events and the test population. Because of variabil ity in initial detection probability and response to the camera-traps once detected, camera-trap surv eys utilizing a grid with 1,600 m between camera-traps are of limited use to index turkey populations. xi

PAGE 12

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The wild turkey ( Meleagris gallopavo ) is a large gallinaceous bird with a historic range that extended through wh at are now 39 continental states and the Canadian province of Ontario (Schorger 1963). Ov erharvest and habitat degradation caused reduced populations in the pa st, including a complete loss of wild turkeys in 19 states during the 1940s and 1950s (Lewis 2001). Tu rkey populations have recovered in many areas due to translocation of wild turkeys and regenerating forests. The continental wild turkey population was approximately 5.4 million individuals in 1999 (Tapley et al. 2001) with viable populations in Ca nada, Mexico, and all U.S. st ates except Alaska (Dickson 2001). The successful comeback of the wild turkey has enabled state agencies to allow a limited harvest through spring and/or fall hunting seasons. In recent years, approximately 2.7 million hunters harvested 740,000 wild tu rkeys annually (Dickson 2001). The interest in turkeys and turk ey hunting have prompted land managers to focus more attention on increasing their tu rkey populations by manipulating harvest, food plots, nesting cover, brooding cover and roosting sites. The effectiveness of these activities is measured by the response of the turkey population. A problem is, however, there is presen tly no widely accepted population survey method for wild turkeys (Vangilder 1992). Bi ologists have expressed the importance of developing a survey method for turkeys for many years (Mosby 1949, Mosby 1967, 1

PAGE 13

2 Lewis 1973, Menzel 1975, Wunz and Shope 1980, Willams and Austin 1988, Williams 1992). The successful design of a turkey su rvey technique that detects changes in population size will allow managers to set hunting regulations and quantify the effectiveness of their habitat management activities with greater confidence (Williams and Austin 1988, Kurzejeski and Vangilder 1992). Population attributes for wild turkeys ha ve been estimated using the number of harvested gobblers, harvest/effort, gobblers he ard/day, and capture-re capture (Lint et al. 1995). These methodologies have their shortf alls. The number of harvested gobblers and harvest/effort indices require that the populat ion is hunted, and offer little inference about the female segment of the population in areas where only males are hunted. The number of gobblers heard per day require s intensive data collection, a road or trail system, and may not correlate with the number of gobblers in the area (Lint et al. 1995). Population estimation using capture-recapture requires extensive manpower (DeYoung and Priebe 1987). Weinstein et al. (1995) investigated 2 mark-recapture and 2 mark-resight models for turkeys in Mississippi, and had inade quate sample sizes even though they had invested substantial time and money to the e ffort. A Florida study utilizing a graduate student, 2 biologists, and a $100,000 budget was una ble to mark a large percentage of their study areas turkey populat ion (Cobb et al. 2000). When compared with harvestbased indices of turkey abundance, mark-recapture studies for turkeys have been shown to be more expensive (Lint et al. 1995). Wild turkeys respond well to baiting, and re searchers have used this to develop a survey technique that involves driving by baited sites and noting the number of turkeys (Bartush et al. 1985, Hayden 1985). This surv ey method was improved with the addition

PAGE 14

3 of infrared-triggered camera-traps, which allo wed constant surveillance of the bait site without biologists having to be present. Cobb et al. (1996) compared the cost of transect surveys with infrared camera-trap survey s and found that the infrared camera-trap surveys required less than half the time to conduct. The increasing availability and reduced prices of commercially made remote-triggered cameras has made them an attractive tool for wild turkey biologists. The wild turkey is an elusive bird that usually lacks identifiable characteristics and often avoids detection. I marked a sample of turkeys and used a mark-resight study design utilizing camera-traps to estimate th e banded turkey population on 2 study areas over a 3-year period. By comparing the birds responses to the camera-traps on different areas and in different years, th e goal was to evaluate the utility of camera-traps as a wild turkey index technique. Study Sites Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Ar ea (Caravelle Ranch) is located in Putnam County in Northeast Florida (Fi gure 1-1). My study area was on a 6,128-ha southern portion of the area (Figure 1-2). Much of the traditiona l pine flatwoods of Caravelle Ranch was logged and converted to pasture before the state purchased the land. The roads and ditches from the preceding ca ttle operation remain throughout much of the property, and the state continue s to lease grazing rights to much of the study area. The upland portion of Caravelle Ranch is characterized by an overstory of slash pine ( Pinus elliottii var. elliottii ) and scattered oak trees ( Quercus spp.). Saw-palmetto ( Serenoa repens ), gallberry ( Ilex spp.), and wax myrtle ( Myrica cerifera ) constitute much of the understory. A large portion of the uplands is moderately-grazed pasture.

PAGE 15

4 Caravelle Ranch is bordered by the Ocklawah a River to the south and the St. Johns River to the east. River swamps that are frequently inundated extend from each of these rivers into the study area. These lowland areas have a mixed overstory consisting primarily of bald cypress ( Taxodium distichum ), red maple ( Acer rubrum ) and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto ). Caravelle Ranch is open to non-motorized public access during non-hunting seasons, and allows vehicle access during hunting seasons. The area allows a limited number of turkey hunters to access the area fo r each spring turkey season. Four dovefields are planted annually with various grai ns, and several small ope nings and firebreaks are routinely planted as f ood plots on the area. Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve The Ordway Preserve-Swisher Memorial Pr eserve (Ordway Preserve) is located in Putnam County in North-central Florida (Fig ure 1-1). My study ar ea included the entire 3,528ha preserve (Figure 1-3). Ordway Pr eserve was used primarily as a hunting and fishing retreat for the Swisher family prior to being acquired by the University of Florida Foundation and the Nature Conservancy in 1980. Much of the area consists of sandh ill (1366 ha) with a longleaf pine ( Pinus palustris ) and turkey oak ( Quercus laevis ) overstory and wiregrass ( Aristida stricta) groundcover. Xeric hammock (527 ha), basin marsh (483 ha), upland mixed forest (334 ha), sandhill upland lake (303 ha), clastic upland lake (243 ha), ruderal (173 ha), pine plantation (66 ha) and ba ygall (33 ha) make up the balance of the habitat Ordway Preserve is used primarily for re search, and is not op en to the general public. No hunting of any kind is allowed, and no food plots are planted to attract wildlife.

PAGE 16

5 Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine: 1. The optimum spacing and distribution of re mote cameras to derive a reliable population estimate or index, 2. The effective radius of baited camera stations, 3. The best estimate of turkey population size, and, 4. The optimal pre-baiting a nd duration of survey.

PAGE 17

6 Figure 1-1: Location of study sites in north-central Florida

PAGE 18

7 404 K i l o m e t e r s N Figure 1-2: 1996 aerial photogr aph of Caravelle Ranch W ildlife Management Area, Putnam Co., FL.

PAGE 19

8 404 K i l o m e t e r s N Figure 1-3: 1996 aerial photogra ph of Ordway-Swisher Memori al Preserve, Putnam Co., FL.

PAGE 20

CHAPTER 2 INITIAL CAPTURE AND MARKING TECHNIQUE Introduction Physically marking any wild animal is a pr actice that should be taken seriously, as it may result in stress to the study species. I considered less intrus ive options to achieve my objectives, but determined I needed to be able to recognize unique individuals for this study. There is presently no way to mark wild turkeys without physically capturing and affixing an identifiable mark on the birds. Methods Trapping was conducted during the fall and winter months of 2003, 2004, and 2005. I began the trapping process by findi ng openings in the tree canopy large enough for rocket nets to deploy wit hout interference from trees a nd limbs. The potential trap sites were cleared of tall gra ss and brush. I baited the site and spread a continuous line of cracked corn several hundred meters away from the bait site. I monitored the sites, and re-baited them when needed. When one of the sites was consistently vi sited by turkeys, I set up a rocket net approximately 1 m from the bait, and constructed a blind nearby w ith an unobstructed view of the baited site. The net, wires, and rockets were covered w ith leaves to prevent detection by the turkeys. I used up to 5 nets per day when I had sufficient turkey activity and volunteers. I only attempted to trap birds when temper atures were below 22 C to reduce the likelihood of capture myopathy (Nicholson et al. 2000), and did not trap during or 9

PAGE 21

10 immediately after rains to mi nimize feather loss. A chase truck communicated with the blinds via radio, and responded to net firings immediately. The chase truck carried all of the supplies and manpower necessary to colle ct biological data, band, and radio-tag the turkeys. I made an effort to trap turkeys throughout both study areas. All personnel and volunteers responsible with firing the rocket net were instructed to only fire when all of the birds heads were down and feeding, and to not fire if the majority of the birds feeding on the bait were already banded. After capturing turkeys, I immediately pl aced them in cardboard holding boxes. To band turkeys, I removed them from the holdi ng box and placed a sock over their head to reduced stress. One person held the turkey with one arm under the breast and the other grasping the tarsi (Figure 2-1), while anothe r person placed bands on the legs. I placed up to 3 plastic colored leg bands on one leg, and one numbered aluminum band on the other. The plastic colored leg bands we re glued using PVC cement. All color combinations were unique within sexes. Du ring the first year of the study, both males and females were banded with size 11 colore d leg bands. It was thought that the bands would stay partially uncoiled on the males legs, while remaining tightly coiled on the females legs. This idea was abandoned after observing several males limping, favoring the leg with no colored leg bands. During year s 2 and 3, males were fitted with size 13 colored leg bands. I continued to see limping birds on a few occasions, but it was unknown which band sizes they had. Because I had limited data about how many banded birds were required to achiev e adequate confidence intervals, I banded as many birds as time and manpower would allow.

PAGE 22

11 A subset of the turkeys was equipped with backpack-style radio-transmitters. The transmitters weighted 69 g, which is less th an 2.4% of the body weight of the lightest turkey radio-tagged during this study. I used bungee cord (shock cord) to attach the transmitters to the turkeys. I weighed, aged and sexed the turkeys before releasing them at the point of capture. The durability of the colored leg bands was noted post-release by reviewing the camera-survey slides. Attempts were made to determine the identity of the turkeys missing leg bands by looking at the remaini ng leg bands, radio presence/absence, and by reviewing what known turkeys were phot ographed with the unknown turkey. Results I captured, marked and released 312 turkeys during the study (Table 2-1). Most of the turkeys were released within 90 minutes af ter capture (Figure 2-2). Eight of the 320 (2.5%) turkeys captured during the study died be fore they could be released. Five of these deaths were caused by traumatic net injuries. The 3 remaining deaths were apparently caused by acute capture myopathy, although no necropsies were conducted. Another source of capture-related mortality was caused by chronic capture myopathy, which was only detectable in radio-tagged birds. I categorized all de aths of radio-tagged birds 2 weeks or less post-cap ture as chronic capture myopa thy. This occurred in 18 of 75 (24%) radio-tagged birds that were locate d at least once after release on the 2 study areas. In total, 8% of birds captured died as a result of the trapping process. Some of the turkeys released without radi o-tags likely died of chr onic capture myopathy, but I can only guess this figure by extrapolating the per centage of radio-tagged birds that died. The durability of the colored leg bands wa s apparent after revi ewing camera-survey slides (Table 2-2) and by observing the ba nd condition of physically recaptured and

PAGE 23

12 hunter-killed birds (Table 2-3) Many of the recaptured tu rkeys had cracked bands, and some cracked outer shells of bands were se en sliding over other bands. Two hens that were recaptured appeared to be missing a band, but closer inspection revealed 2 of their colored leg bands had become in tertwined with one another (Figure 2-3). This may have been avoided by attaching all bands with the same coil-direction. Discussion The trapping process is a stressful event to wild turkeys. Many turkeys captured with rocket nets suffer feat her loss and abrasions on their backs and wingtips, and some mortality occurs. My observed mortality rates due to trapping are consistent with observations from other turkey studies. In a Colorado study, 33% of wild turkeys captured showed signs of capture myopathy (Spr aker et al. 1987). This is an important consideration to those who plan on capturing wild turkeys for research or management. Studies that require a large portion of the population captured or repeated captures of the same birds may negatively impact the populatio n and impact the results of the study. Use of plastic colored leg bands for wild turkey males is not recommended if longterm ( 1 yr) recognition is required. Other rese archers utilizing these bands with wild turkeys have reached a similar conclusion (Williams and Austin 1988). The wraparound soft plastic leg bands have the lowest durability (Anderson 1981). Band loss was recorded in both sexes, but the males were more successful in removing their bands on both study areas. A higher rate of band loss for male turkeys was also seen by Lewis (1980), who discontinued using leg bands altoge ther because band retention was so low, especially on adult gobblers. During this study, the colored leg bands sometimes cracked in two, with both pieces remaining on the turkeys leg. The larger, outer piece of the band was found to

PAGE 24

13 have slid over other bands on several occasi ons during the study. One bird with a split band may appear to be many different bird s depending on how the bands are situated when the bird is resighted. This results in a more time consuming slide analysis, and may result in incorrect re sighting results. Retention of marks may be better accomplis hed by using patagial wing tags (Knowlton et al. 1964). Patagial wing tags require the turkey to be nearly broadside to the camera-trap to facilitate recogniti on, which would reduce the likelihood of successfully identifying marked turk eys in the camera-trap photographs.

PAGE 25

14 Table 2-1. Number of turkeys successfully tr apped and released on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve. Area Age/Sex Year 1 (Winter 20022003) Year 2 (Winter 20032004 Year 3 (Winter 20042005) Total Juvenile 7 4 25 36 Adult 32 10 19 61 Juvenile 13 15 26 54 Caravelle Ranch Adult 23 13 5 41 Juvenile 24 2 4 30 Adult 25 14 10 49 Juvenile 17 7 3 27 Ordway Preserve Adult 10 0 4 14 312

PAGE 26

15 Table 2-2. Percentage of banded turkeys missing at least one colored leg band when resighted during camera-trap surveys. Winter 2003 Summer 2003 Winter 2004 Summer 2004 Winter 2005 Summer 2005 Ordway Preserve 0 0 0 0 0 6 Caravelle Ranch 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ordway Preserve 0 22 23 44 38 75 Caravelle Ranch 0 0 7 25 17 32

PAGE 27

16 Table 2-3. Condition of colored leg bands of turkeys recaptured or harvested. Bird ID Sex Method Recovered Days since banded Condition of bands C025 Recaptured and released 727 All bands present, but two bands intertwined C033 Recaptured and released 727 All bands present C046 Recaptured and released 747 All bands present, but one band (blue) cracked C066 Recaptured and released 740 All bands present, but two bands intertwined C068 Recaptured and released 682 One band (yellow) missing, one band (red) cracked C088 killed by hunter 421 One band (red) missing C091 killed by hunter 421 All bands present C110 Recaptured and released 356 All bands present but one band (orange) cracked C110 killed by hunter 57 (since recapture) One band (white) missing C119 Recaptured and released 18 All bands present C121 Recaptured and released 12 All bands present C139 Recaptured and released 17 All bands present C140 Recaptured and released 17 All bands present 67 Recaptured and released 732 All bands present 79 Recaptured and released 403 All bands present 99 Recaptured and released 381 All bands present

PAGE 28

17 Figure 2-1. Technique used to hold wild turkey while bands are installed.

PAGE 29

18 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0-151530 1630 3145 4660 6175 7690 91105 106120 121145 146160 161175 176190 191205 206220 Minutes after captureNumber of turkeys released Figure 2-2. Temporal distribution of time from capture to release for turkeys handled on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve from 2003-2005.

PAGE 30

19 Figure 2-3. Intertwined colored leg bands on recaptured wild turkey hen.

PAGE 31

CHAPTER 3 CAMERA TRAPPING TECHNIQUE Introduction Camera-traps have been used to es timate population densities of uniquely identifiable animals such as bobcats ( Lynx rufus ) (Heilbrun et al. 2003), tigers ( Panthera tigris) (Karanth and Nichols 1998) and white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus) (Jacobson et al. 1997). Unique pe lt or antler characteristics a llow individual distinction, a crucial component of all mark-resight mode ls (Minta and Mangel 1989). Camera-traps also have been used to estimate populations of animals that lack variable pelt/antler characteristics such as mice ( Microtus californicus ) (Pearson 1960), wild pigs ( Sus scrofa ) (Sweitzer et al. 2000) and lions (Leo panthera ) (Castley et al. 2002). For these studies, a sample of the population must be phys ically marked prior to the camera-survey. If turkeys respond to camera-traps in a cons istent way in different areas and different years, this technique has th e potential to determine the relative abundance of turkeys without having to mark a percentage of th e population. An effective survey technique should provide the desired precision at a reasona ble cost and effort. If these conditions are not met, the survey is not a useful research tool. By investigating the precision of this study design, my objective was to evaluate the value of camera-trapping as a survey technique. Methods I used the TRAILMASTER TM-1500 (Goodson and Associates, Lenexa, Kansas, USA) with a modified 35 mm automatic autofocus OLYMPUS camera. All cameras 20

PAGE 32

21 were loaded with ASA 200 speed 36 exposure slide film. Cameras were equipped with a date-time imprint feature. The receiver sensitivity was set at 4, and the cameras were set to be active from 45 minutes before s unrise to 45 minutes after sunset to reduce wasted film caused by nocturnal animals. I began the camera-trap process by mapping the camera-trap grid on an area map. I attempted to fit as many cameras into the area while maintaining the minimum distance between cameras outlined in the protocol. Once in the field, I used a handheld GPS to be sure that I was at least 1,600 m away from th e nearest camera-trap for protocol 1 (Figures 3-1 and 3-2). After preliminary analysis of results from the first 3 surveys, I added more camera-trap sites to the areas to derive mo re accurate population estimates. I set these cameras at least 800 m from the nearest camera (Figures 3-3 and 3-4). Surveys with the additional cameras were labeled protocol 2. The receiver and transmitter for each cameratrap were placed 9 m apart, and the infrared beam was set 38 cm from the ground (F igure 3-5). The cameras were secured to posts or trees using duct tape and Velcro stri ps. Cameras that were in high cattle use areas were protected by single-strand barbed wi re fence. Because I relied on colored leg bands to identify individual birds, I trimme d all vegetation in front of the camera to prevent bands from being obstructed in the pictures. To reduce th e time elapsed between different camera-traps being baited, I set up all of the cameras before beginning the baiting process. I baited each camera-trap with a narrow strip of bait perpendicular to the camera-trap to reduce the occurrence of turkeys obstructing the view of other turkeys legs. The bait was placed midway between the transmitter and the receiver. In accordance with the protocol, a s tringer of bait was put out 400 m in 2 directions from

PAGE 33

22 the camera-trap on the first day of the su rvey. I mowed tall grass and weeds along stringer routes to ensure the turkeys would follow them to the bait sites. When adding the additional camera-sites to the study area for protocol 2, I placed them between the existing cameras. The camera-sites for protocol 1 remained in the same places for all 6 surveys, allowing comparisons between all 6 surveys. I conducted the surveys annually in late February-March and August (Table 31).To discern the ideal survey length, I ran the first 3 surveys for 21 days. After these surveys, a preliminary analysis of the resigh t data showed relatively few new resightings occurred after the first 12 days (Figures 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9). The survey period was shortened to 12 days for the next 3 surveys, and I only analyzed the number of events from the first 12 days for each survey. I radio-tagged a sub-sample of the banded turkeys to estimate the detection rate of turkeys found within the trapping grid. Detection probability of radio-tagged birds was determ ined by dividing the number of radio-tagged birds known to be on the area during the cam era-trap surveys by the number of radiotagged birds photo-captured. Slides were analyzed using a low ma gnification microscope; date, time, and contents of the picture were noted. Only th e turkeys between the transmitter and receiver were included in the analys is (Figure 3-10). Turkeys we re often photo-captured several times during a single visit to a camera-trap site Multiple pictures of the same turkey at the same camera-trap site were combined in to a single event when no more than 1 hour had elapsed between pictures. The number of unbanded turkeys pictured in a survey was divided by the banded turkey picture/event ra tio to estimate the unba nded turkey events. This formula assumes the banded birds and unbande d birds stay at the bait site the same

PAGE 34

23 amount of time. All surveys we re compared by analyzing the total number of events from the initial cameras (protocol 1) set at 1,600-m spacing during the first 12 days of the surveys. The additional data from the adde d cameras were only used to estimate the number of banded and unbanded birds on the area. Program CAPTURE I did not know how many banded birds were on the study area due to unknown emigration and mortality rates. To estimate the number of banded birds on the study area I used the null model in program CAPTURE (W hite et al. 1978). I used 21 days from protocol 1 surveys and 12 days from protocol 2 surveys in the capture matrices. A bias of the study design was a trap-happy response from some turkeys. The estimated population size is not an identifiable parameter in an unrestricted model when a trap response is present. To avoid bias associated with tr ap response, I only included the first time a marked and identifiable turkey was photo-captu red at a specific camera-trap site in the capture matrix. Program NOREMARK Bowdens Estimator I used the Bowdens estimator (Bow den and Kufeld 1995) in NOREMARK to estimate the total number of turkeys on the study area during the surveys. The Bowdens estimator defines the finite population of N to consist of the n marked animals plus the remaining N n unmarked animals present in the study area at the beginning of the survey period (Bowden and Kufeld 1995). Assumptions of the model include: (1) each of the N animals had an equal chance of being selected for marking and the n selections for marking were made independently of one another; (2) selected animals are marked and the sighting process is conducted so that the number of times each marked animal is sighted is determined without e rror; (3) the sighting effort must be of adequate intensity

PAGE 35

24 to produce 1, and preferably many, sightings of ma rked animals; (4) the number of sightings of unmarked animals is determined without error and incl udes only sightings of the N n unmarked animals of the population of in terest; and (5) the sighting effort is conducted independently of the mark status of the animals (Bowden and Kufeld 1995). The estimator in NOREMARK uses the capture histories of marked birds to gain inference about the unmarked birds seen thr oughout the surveys. Bowdens estimator requires that the number of banded birds on the area during the survey be known to estimate the total population. I used the mean banded bird estimate from CAPTURE for this parameter. I used the first 12 days from each survey and utilized the additional cameras from protocol 2 for the last 3 su rveys to derive the most accurate population estimates. Radio Telemetry Radio-tagged turkeys were monitored with H-antennas and portable TR-2 Telonics receivers during the camera-trap surveys. At least 2 bearings were obtained for each radio-tagged turkey, and the best biangulation was used to estimate the turkeys location. All estimated locations were separated by at least 1 hour to minimize temporal autocorrelation. Turkeys with at least 25 lo cations (Jenrich and Tu rner 1969) gathered during the camera-trap survey were included in the analysis. Ho me-range sizes for the first 3 survey periods (winter 2003, summer 2003, and winter 2004) were estimated from data collected over 21 days, and those fo r the second 3 survey period (summer 2004, winter 2005, and summer 2005) home ranges we re estimated from data collected over 12 days. The estimated locations were spatially an alyzed using ARCView GIS software. Ninety percent fixed kernel home ranges (Worton 1987) were estimated for turkeys using

PAGE 36

25 the HOME RANGE ESTIMATOR extension in ARCView. Average home range sizes were compared between study sites and betw een seasons using independent samples Ttests. The survey slides were analyzed to dete rmine the detection probability of radiotagged birds during the camera-trap surveys by dividing the number of radio-tagged birds known to be on the area during the camera-tra p survey by the number of radio-tagged birds photo-captured. Determining Effect ive Area Sampled It is important for any survey technique to account for the actual area from which animals are detected. Only using the area en closed by the outermost traps is likely to overestimate the population because the traps detect some animals whose range lies partially outside the grid (Williams et al. 2002). The area effectively sampled by the camera-traps was estimated by buffering each camera-trap by one-half the average home ra nge width (Dice 1938) of radio-tagged birds for each area using ARCView. Average home range width was difficult to quantify because fixed kernel home ranges often ha ve irregular boundaries. I estimated the average width by using the radius of a circle with the same area as the home range. Results Over 14,000 slides were analyzed for th e 6 camera-surveys on the 2 study areas (Table 3-2). Protocol 2 averaged more slid es per survey on averag e (1,401) than protocol 1 (974). The baiting and camera setup e ffectively photo-captured turkeys while minimizing photo-captures of non-target animals. Wild turkeys were the most common animal photo-captured for all surveys ex cept during the Ordway Preserve summer surveys (Table 3-3).

PAGE 37

26 Number of pictures per event ranged from 1 to 17, with 48% of the events made up of only 1 picture (Figure 3-11), and 95% of the events were made up of 5 or fewer pictures. The average number of pictures per event was 2.16. The first time the turkeys were photo-captured, they averaged 1.72 pict ures/event and the average number of pictures/event increased when the turkeys were photo-captured on subsequent visits (Figure 3-12). Comparison of home ranges collected during summer surveys with those collected during winter surveys on Caravelle Ranch (Figure 3-13) found significantly larger home ranges during winter for both females and males (Independent Samples T-test: P=0.025, P=0.015, respectively) Home ranges collect ed on Ordway Preserve (Figure 3-14) showed no significant differences between the seasons for females or males (Independent Samples T-test: P=0.232, P=0.512, respectively). Female turkeys on the Ordway Preserve ha d significantly larger home ranges than Caravelle Ranch females during both su mmer and winter camera-trap surveys (Independent Samples T-test: P=0.005, P=0.044, respectively) (Figure 3-15). Male turkeys on the Ordway Preserve had signifi cantly larger home ranges than Caravelle Ranch males during both summer and winter camera-trap surveys (Independent Samples T-test: P= 0.003, P=0.003, respectively) (Figure 3-16). Differences in average home-range size resulted in different effective areas sampled for the 2 study sites. The 1,600-m camera-trap grid for Caravelle Ranch had incomplete coverage for both females and males (Figure 3-17). The effective area sampled was 2,175 ha for females and 2,933 ha for males. Protocol 2 resulted in more continuous coverage on the eastern side of the study area where more cameras were

PAGE 38

27 added to the trapping grid (Figure 3-18). Th is increased the effective area sampled 35% to 2,930 ha for females and 17% to 3,436 ha for males. Protocol 1 provided continuous coverage of Ordway Preserve for both males and females (Figure 3-19). Effective area sa mpled for females and males was 3,842 ha and 4,951 ha, respectively, using 1,600-m spacing betw een cameras. Protocol 2 did not change the effective area sampled significan tly from protocol 1 (Figure 3-20). The effective area sampled for females increased 6% to 4,058 ha and the effective area for males increased 3% to 5,117 ha. Protocol 2 resulted in a higher percent increase of resighted birds for Caravelle Ranch than Ordway Preserve for both males a nd females (Table 3-4). Detection rate of radio-tagged birds was higher on average on Or dway Preserve (Table 3-5). Estimated number of banded birds on the area (Table 3-6) compared with the number of banded birds resighted during the survey showed de tection probabilities were higher on Ordway Preserve than on Caravelle Ranch (Figure 3-21). The relationship between the number of events of banded turkeys and the number of banded turkeys resighted was not significan t for males in summer (P=0.569) and males in winter (P=0.596) using linear regression (Fig ures 3-22, 3-23). Li near regressions for females in summer (P=0.034) and females in winter (P=0.001) were significant (Figures 3-24, 3-25). The regressions using the number of banded turk ey events to predict the number of banded turkeys resighted only in cluded those individuals photo-captured at least once during the survey, so they do not acco unt for differences in detectability that may occur between the surveys.

PAGE 39

28 Linear regressions using the total number of site-visits to predict the estimated number of turkeys on the area (Table 3-7) we re not significant for males during summer surveys (P=0.716) (Figure 3-26) and winter surveys (P=0.534) (Figure 3-27). Caution must be used when reviewing these two re gressions, because the estimated number of turkeys on the area is the mean from a some times relatively imprecise output from the Bowdens estimator in program NOREMARK which uses a sometimes relatively imprecise parameter from program CAPTURE. Imprecise outputs from both programs were caused by low and/or variable detection probabilities and varia tion in the number of site visits. Low detection rates made popul ation estimates for the number of females on Caravelle Ranch inestimable (Table 3-7), so linear regressions were not analyzed. Discussion The two most crucial factors for remote, in frared-triggered cameras to be useful as a survey technique for wild turkeys are: (1 ) the initial detection probability, and (2) the number of times the turkeys are photo-capture d once detected. The more consistent these two figures are, the more prec ise the index. A key component of this survey technique is that baiting is used to lure the turkeys to the camera-trap. It is assumed that the bait greatly increased the number of turkeys photogr aphed in the camera-tr aps. Factors that affect a turkeys response to the bait may impact the number of events derived from the survey. Home range size is often an indicator of habitat quality (McNab 1963, Porter 1977). Habitat preference is usually positiv ely correlated with the availability of suitable food and cover (Williams 1955). Many researchers have noted that wild turkey home ranges depend on the suitability of av ailable resources, especially food supply (Mosby and Handley 1943, Ligon 1946, Wheeler 1948, Porter et al. 1983). The

PAGE 40

29 correlation of home-range size and habitat suit ability has been obser ved many times with wild turkeys (Exum et al. 1987, Badyaev et al. 1996, Godwin et al. 1996). Williams and Austin (1988) claimed that small moveme nt, high habitat quality, and high population density will be positively and closely correlated. Turkeys with readily accessible high-quality food are likely to have smaller home ranges and be less attracted to the baited camera-traps than turkeys with limited food. Researchers attempting to capture turkeys fo r banding using baited net sites have noticed an inverse relationship between natural f ood availability and trapping success (Bailey 1959). If researchers were able to survey the amount of natural food in the environment, they may be able to make an inference about the home range needed for wild turkeys in the area. Unfortunately, it is difficult to accurately measure the amount of natural food in the environment for wild turk eys because they are generalists (Bailey and Rinell 1967, Garver 1987). A Fl orida study that investigated crop contents of turkeys from October through February showed that acorns and pine seeds made up 68.2 percent of all food eaten by wild turk eys during the study, with gra ss seeds and leaves, cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto ) and black gum (Nyssa spp. ) seeds making up much of the balance (Schemnitz 1956). A study of 8 adult turkey crops counted seeds from 24 species of plants and animal parts from 39 species (Williams and Austin 1988). Two researchers witnessed two gobblers eat a dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis ) that was drugged with treated bait in Mississi ppi (Hurst 1992). The extraordin ary array of foods taken by the wild turkey makes food availability st udies difficult, if not impossible. The two sites in my study appeared to vary gr eatly in their quality of turkey habitat. By comparing average home-range size, the pasture and swamp lands of Caravelle Ranch

PAGE 41

30 appeared to be more fitting habitat than the upland sandhills of Ordway Preserve. Turkeys in Caravelle Ranch had smaller home ranges (Figures 3-15, 3-16) and a lower detection rate (Figure 3-21) than turkeys on Ordway Preserve. For protocol 1, the effective area sampled for Caravelle Ranch ha d large gaps in the middle of the trapping grid, where turkeys with the center of their home range inside one of these gaps had a zero probability of coming in contact with a camera-trap (Figure 3-17). This problem did not occur on Ordway Preserve (Figure 3-19) be cause of larger average home range sizes. The closer spacing of camera-traps in protocol 2 reduced the number of gaps inside the trapping grid for Caravelle Ranch (Figure 3-18 ). This difference between the areas may explain the difference in Tabl e 3-4, which shows protocol 2 resulted in many more birds being resighted at Caravelle Ra nch when compared to protoc ol 1, while protocol 2 added relatively few resighted birds on Ordway Pres erve. As detectability approaches 100%, adding more traps has a reduced impact on the number of animals detected. The difference in effective area samp led between the areas has important consequences. As the habitat improves and tu rkey home ranges constrict, this survey method samples a smaller portion of the st udy area. Sampling a smaller area will inherently result in a smaller number of even ts when compared with sampling a larger area of similar habitat quality. The negative correlation between hab itat quality and home range size has considerable ramifications for the usefulness of camera-traps as a relative abundance tool. First, it prevents comparisons of camera-trap survey results between different areas when food resources are not similar for the areas Second, it may nullify the comparison of camera-trap survey results on a specific area if the amount of alternative foods for turkeys

PAGE 42

31 changes significantly. If an area is impr oved by planting food-producing plants or by improving the understory, the number of even ts from the camera-trap surveys may actually decrease over the y ears even though the turkey population is increasing (and vice-versa). Managers making turkey habitat management decisions may be led astray by the results of a camera-trap survey in this case. A solution to this problem would be a calibration of the survey according to the confounding variable, but the highly variable food and cover preferences of the wild turkey may preven t a reliable calibration from taking place. An example of the poor relationship between the estimated number of turkeys and the number of turkeys photographed occurred during the winter 2004 survey, when an estimated 38 male turkeys on Ordway Preserve visited came ra-traps 345 times, while an estimated 122 male turkeys on Caravelle Ranch visited camera-traps 239 times. The number of events suggest there were more male turkeys on Ordway Preserve, while there were actually only one-third the number of turkeys when compared with Caravelle Ranch. The use of indices to estimate changes in populations over time has received some negative reviews (Williams et al. 2002). Their pessimism stems from routinely seeing heterogeneous detection probabilities in real -world situations. They cite research conducted by Diefenbach et al. (1994) as an example, where experime ntal evaluation of scent station indices for bobcats ( Lynx rufus ) found a large range of count statistics for similar densities. It appears that this turk ey survey technique follows a similar pattern that is nonconducive to detecting change s in the population of interest.

PAGE 43

32 Management Implications Indices useful in predicting changes in relative abundance should be linear and precise (Williams et al. 2002). Without the colored leg bands and radio-tags used in this study, I would only have the number of turkeys on pictures to estimate the relative wild turkey abundance. This is the situation managers will face when they conduct cameratrap surveys on their areas. There must be a monotonic relationship between the number of turkeys photographed and the number of wild turkeys on the area for this survey technique to be of use. An index that fluctuates because of f actors other than changes in the actual population size of interest is, with no correction factor, useless. An index that has such high variability in detection probability that a substantial change in the population would go unnoticed is of limited use. Because of the variability seen in detection probability and the poor correlation between the estimated number of turkeys on the study area and the number of events, it is not recommended to use the results from camera-trap surveys to index turkey populations.

PAGE 44

33 Table 3-1. Dates of camera-trap surveys. Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve Winter Survey Dates Summer Survey Dates Winter Survey Dates Summer Survey Dates 2003 February 27 March 13* August 5 August 25 March 4 March 24 August 5 August 25 2004 February 14 March 6 August 18 August 29 February 14 March 6 August 4 August 15 2005 March 1 March 12 August 18 August 29 February 15 February 26 August 2 August 13 *Short survey due to scheduled turkey hunt on study site

PAGE 45

34 Table 3-2. Number of pictures collected and analyzed for each camera-trap survey. Area Survey Protocol* Number of Camera Traps Pictures Analyzed Winter 2003 1 11 652 Summer 2003 1 11 1096 Winter 2004 1 11 1023 Summer 2004 2 22 1578 Winter 2005 2 22 1484 Caravelle Ranch Summer 2005 2 22 1900 Winter 2003 1 12 932 Summer 2003 1 12 686 Winter 2004 1 12 1457 Summer 2004 2 22 1079 Winter 2005 2 22 711 Summer 2005 2 22 1651 Ordway Preserve TOTAL 14249 *Total number of pictures analyzed for protocol 1 included 21 days, while protocol 2 included only 12 days

PAGE 46

35 Table 3-3. Percentage of pict ures by species using camera-traps baited with cracked corn with camera-traps active from dawn until dusk. Caravelle Ranch summer Caravelle Ranch winter Ordway Preserve summer Ordway Preserve winter wild turkey 68 84 34 72 white-tailed deer 4 2 59 24 sandhill crane 8 2 0 0 cattle 3 5 0 0 other 17 7 7 4

PAGE 47

36 Table 3-4. Number of marked turkeys resight ed using protocol 1 and protocol 2 with percent increase of resighti ngs using protocol 2. Summer 2004 Wint er 2005 Summer 2005 protocol 1 4 6 5 protocol 2 9 28 17 Caravelle Ranch % 125 367 240 protocol 1 13 17 20 protocol 2 16 30 22 Caravelle Ranch % 23 76 10 protocol 1 12 25 13 protocol 2 13 26 17 Ordway Preserve % 8 4 31 protocol 1 9 8 4 protocol 2 9 8 4 Ordway Preserve % 0 0 0

PAGE 48

37 Table 3-5. Detection rates of radio-tagged birds on st udy areas during camera-trap surveys using protocol 1. Winter 03 Summer 03 Winter 04 Summer 04 Winter 05 Summer 05 Number tracked 5 6 10 6 7 1 Caravelle Ranch % detected 40 17 10 17 14 0 Number tracked 5 5 9 8 7 5 Caravelle Ranch % detected 40 80 33 38 29 40 Number tracked 10 6 13 7 5 n/a* Ordway Preserve % detected 70 67 77 29 20 n/a* Number tracked 2 2 2 1 n/a* n/a* Ordway Preserve % detected 50 0 50 100 n/a* n/a* *no radio-tagged turkeys were locate d on the study area during survey.

PAGE 49

38 Table 3-6. Estimated number of banded tu rkeys on study areas during the camera-trap surveys using the null model in program CAPTURE. Survey (protocol) Mean Confidence Interval (95%) Precision* W03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures S03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures W04 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures S04 (2) 47 17-224 4.40 W05 (2) 50 35-85 1.00 Caravelle Ranch S05 (2) 135 39-659 4.59 W03 (1) 29 23-49 0.90 S03 (1) 27 17-64 1.74 W04 (1) 43 35-67 0.74 S04 (2) 20 18-32 0.70 W05 (2) 37 33-49 0.43 Caravelle Ranch S05 (2) 27 24-38 0.52 W03 (1) 46 35-76 0.89 S03 (1) 27 20-52 1.19 W04 (1) 39 34-52 0.46 S04 (2) 19 15-36 1.11 W05 (2) 26 26-26 0 Ordway Preserve S05 (2) 22 18-37 0.86 W03 (1) 16 15-25 0.63 S03 (1) 10 10-18 0.80 W04 (1) 14 14-17 0.21 S04 (2) 9 9-9 0 W05 (2) 8 8-8 0 Ordway Preserve S05 (2) 4 4-4 0 *precision= (upper confidence interval lower confidence interval)/mean

PAGE 50

39 Table 3-7. Estimated number of turkeys (banded and unbanded) on study areas during the camera-trap surveys using Bowdens estimator in program NOREMARK. Survey (protocol) Mean Confidence Interval (95%) Precision* W03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures S03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures W04 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures S04 (2) 700 282-1740 2.08 W05 (2) 246 134-451 1.29 Caravelle Ranch S05 (2) 772 493-1212 0.93 W03 (1) 104 69-156 0.84 S03 (1) 74 44-125 1.09 W04 (1) 122 87-173 0.70 S04 (2) 82 51-130 0.96 W05 (2) 87 72-105 0.38 Caravelle Ranch S05 (2) 80 57-114 0.71 W03 (1) 59 50-69 0.32 S03 (1) 72 50-103 0.74 W04 (1) 56 49-64 0.27 S04 (2) 50 35-71 0.72 W05 (2) 44 40-49 0.20 Ordway Preserve S05 (2) 46 36-59 0.50 W03 (1) 33 22-52 0.91 S03 (1) 25 18-37 0.76 W04 (1) 38 28-53 0.66 S04 (2) 26 18-38 0.96 W05 (2) 18 15-23 0.44 Ordway Preserve S05 (2) 21 15-32 0.81 *precision= (upper confidence interval lower confidence interval)/mean

PAGE 51

40 Camera-traps protocol 1.shp Caravelle ranch boundary.shp 404 K i l o m e t e r s N Figure 3-1. Caravelle Ranch cam era-trap grid, protocol 1

PAGE 52

41 Camera-traps protocol 1.shp Ordway preserve boundary.shp 4 0 4Kilometers N Figure 3-2. Ordway Preserve camera-trap grid, protocol 1

PAGE 53

42 Camera-traps protocol 2.shp Caravelle ranch boundary.shp 4 0 4Kilometers N Figure 3-3. Caravelle Ranch cam era-trap grid, protocol 2

PAGE 54

43 Camera-traps protocol 2.shp Ordway preserve boundary.shp 4 0 4Kilometers N Figure 3-4. Ordway Preserve camera-trap grid, protocol 2

PAGE 55

44 Figure 3-5. Camera-trap dimensions, side view.

PAGE 56

45 0 5 10 15 20 25 301 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21Day of surveyCumulative number of turkeys resighted winter 03 protocol 1 winter 04 protocol 1 winter 05 protocol 2 summer 03 protocol 1 summer 04 protocol 2 summer 05 protocol 2 Figure 3-6. Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Caravelle Ranch.

PAGE 57

46 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 351 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21Day of survey Cumulative number of turkeys resighted winter 03 protocol 1 winter 04 protocol 1 winter 05 protocol 2 summer 03 protocol 1 summer 04 protocol 2 summer 05 protocol 2 Figure 3-7. Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Ordway Preserve.

PAGE 58

47 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 351 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21Day of surveyCumulative number of turkeys resighted winter 03 protocol 1 winter 04 protocol 1 winter 05 protocol 2 summer 03 protocol 1 summer 04 protocol 2 summer 05 p rotocol 2 Figure 3-8. Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Caravelle Ranch.

PAGE 59

48 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 161 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21Day of surveyCumulative number of turkeys resighted winter 03 protocol 1 winter 04 protocol 1 winter 05 protocol 2 summer 03 protocol 1 summer 04 protocol 2 summer 05 protocol 2 Figure 3-9. Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day on Ordway Preserve.

PAGE 60

49 Receiver with camera Transmitter Sampled area Borders of photograph Line parallel with transmitter Figure 3-10. Sampled area of photographs, aerial view.

PAGE 61

50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1234567891011121314151617 Number of pictures per eventPercentage of occurance Figure 3-11. Number of times banded tu rkeys were photographed per event using 5minute delay between pictures.

PAGE 62

51 Figure 3-12. Average number of pictures as events increase. Pictures per event (95% CI) Consecutive event 3237424652576670778495104115126139155177199210225250279310369 N =EV21 EV17 EV13 EV9 EV5 EV1 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0

PAGE 63

52 Females Males Summer Winter Summer Winter 15 18 17 13 N =500 400 300 200 100 0 Hectares (95% CI) Figure 3-13. Average home range sizes during summer and wint er camera-trap surveys on Caravelle Ranch.

PAGE 64

53 Females Males Summer Winter Summer Winter Hectares (95% CI) 3 3 24 12 N =3000 2000 1000 0 -1000 Figure 3-14. Average home range sizes during summer and wint er camera-trap surveys on Ordway Preserve.

PAGE 65

54 Summer Winter Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve 24 17 12 13 N =600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Hectares (95% CI) Figure 3-15. Average female home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve.

PAGE 66

55 Summer Winter Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve 3 15 3 18 N =3000 2000 1000 0 -1000 Hectares (95% CI) Figure 3-16. Average male home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve

PAGE 67

56 Caravelle males effective area sampled.shp Caravelle females effective area sampled.shpCamera-traps protocol 1.shp Caravelle ranch boundary.shp 404 K i l o m e t e r s N Figure 3-17. Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Caravelle Ranch with 1,600meter spacing between cameras

PAGE 68

57 Caravelle males effective area sampled.shp Caravelle females effective area sampled.shpCamera-traps protocol 2.shp Caravelle ranch boundary.shp 404 K i l o m e t e r s N Figure 3-18. Effective area sampled by camer a-traps on Caravelle Ranch with 800-meter spacing between cameras.

PAGE 69

58 Ordway males effective area sampled.shp Ordway females effective area sampled.shpCamera-traps protocol 1.shp Ordway preserve boundary.shp 404 K i l o m e t e r s N Figure 3-19. Effective area sampled by cam era-traps on Ordway Preserve with 1,600meter spacing between cameras.

PAGE 70

59 Ordway males effective area sampled.shp Ordway females effective area sampled.shpCamera-traps protocol 2.shp Ordway preserve boundary.shp 4 0 4Kilometers N Figure 3-20. Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Ordway Preserve with 800meter spacing between cameras.

PAGE 71

60 Survey Winter 03 Summer 03 Winter 04 Summer 04 Winter 05 Summer 05 Protocol 1 1 1 2 2 2 Figure 3-21. Detection probabilities obser ved during surveys us ing program CAPTURE to estimate the number of banded birds on the study area during the surveys. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Ordway Preserve females Ordway Preserve males Caravelle Ranch females Caravelle Ranch males Detection probability

PAGE 72

61 20.0040.0060.0080.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 2 0.00 y = 7.67 + 0.06 x R-Square = 0.09Number of banded male turkeys detected Number of banded male events Figure 3-22. Linear regression of number of banded male turkeys detected and number of banded male events on Caravell e Ranch and Ordway Preserve during summer surveys using protocol 1.

PAGE 73

62 Number of banded male turkeys detected Number of banded male events 40.0060.0080.00100.00120.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 2 0.00 y = 10.31 + 0.04 x R-Square = 0.08 Figure 3-23. Linear regression of number of banded male turkeys detected and number of banded male events on Caravell e Ranch and Ordway Preserve during winter surveys using protocol 1.

PAGE 74

63 Number of banded female turkeys detected Number of banded female events 40.00 60.00 80.00 5.00 7.50 10.00 12.50 15.00 y = 1.88 + 0.14 x R-Square = 0.71 Figure 3-24. Linear regression of number of banded female turkeys detected and number of banded female events on Caravell e Ranch and Ordway Preserve during summer surveys using protocol 1.

PAGE 75

64 Number of banded female turkeys detected Number of banded female events 0.00 100.00 200.00 0.00 10.00 2 0.00 3 0.00 y = 0.86 + 0.11 x R-Square = 0.94 Figure 3-25. Linear regression of number of banded female turkeys detected and number of banded female events on Caravell e Ranch and Ordway Preserve during winter surveys using protocol 1.

PAGE 76

65 100.00150.00 200.00250.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 y = 21.70 + 0.16 x R-Square = 0.10Estimated male turkey population Number of events Figure 3-26. Linear regression of estimate d number of male turkeys on study area during summer camera-trap surveys and number of events from summer camera-trap surveys.

PAGE 77

66 Estimated male turkey population Number of events 150.00200.00250.00300.00350.00 25.00 50.00 75.00 100.00 125.00 y = 46.86 + 0.09 x R-Square = 0.04 Figure 3-27. Linear regression of estimate d number of male turkeys on study area during winter camera-trap surveys and number of events from winter camera-trap surveys.

PAGE 78

LIST OF REFERENCES Anderson, A. 1981. Making polyvinyl chloride (PVC) colored legbands. J. Wildl. Manage. 45:1067-1068. Bailey, R.W. 1959. Preliminary report on wild turkey banding studies as applicable to management in West Virginia. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 1:146-154. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Bailey, R.W., and K.T. Rinell. 1967. Management of the eastern turk ey in the northern hardwoods. Pages 261-302 in O.H. Hewitt, ed., The wild turkey and its management. Washington, DC: The Wildlife Society. 589 pp. Badyaev, A.V., W.J. Etges, and T.E. Martin. 1996. Ecological and be havioral correlates of variation in seasonal home ranges of wild turkeys. J. Wildl. Manage. 60:154164. Bartush, W.S., M.S. Sasser, and D.L. Francis. 1985. A standardized turkey brood survey for northwest Florida. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 5:173-182. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Bowden, D.C., and R.C. Kufeld. 1995. Generalized mark-sight population size estimation applied to colorado moose. J. Wildl. Manage. 59:840-850. Castley, J.G., M.H. Knight, M.G.L. Mills, a nd C. Thouless. 2002. Estimation of the lion ( Panthera leo ) population in the southwestern Kgal agadi Transfrontier Park using a capture-recapture survey. African Zoology 37:27-34. Cobb, D.T., D.L. Francis, and R.W. Etters. 1996. Validating a wild turkey population survey using cameras and infrared sensors. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 7:213-218. Edgefield, SC: Nationa l Wild Turkey Federation. Cobb, D.T., J.L. Kalso, and G.W.Tanner. 2000. Refining population estimation and survey techniques for wild turkeys. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:179-186. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. DeYoung, C.A., and J.C. Priebe. 1987. Co mparison of inventory methods for wild turkeys in south Texas. Proc. Annu. Conf. S outheast. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies 41:294-298. Dice, L.R. 1938. Some census methods for mammals. J. Wildl. Manage. 2:119-130. 67

PAGE 79

68 Dickson, J.G. 2001. Important findings of th e eighth national wild turkey symposium. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:14. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Diefenbach, D.R., M.J. Conroy, R.J.Warren, W.E. James, L.A. Baker, and T. Hon. 1994. A test of the scent-station survey techni que for bobcats. J. Wildl. Manage. 58:1017. Exum, J.H., J.A. McGlincy, D.W. Speake, J.L. Buckner, and F.M. Stanley. 1987. Ecology of the eastern wild turkey in an intensively managed pine forest in southern Alabama. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Res. Stn. 70 pp. Garver, J.K. 1987. The wild turkey in Il linois. Springfield, IL: Illinois Dept. Conservation, Division of Wildlife Resources. 28pp. Godwin, K.D., G.A. Hurst and B.D. Leopold. 1996. Size and percent overlap of gobbler home ranges and core-use areas in central Mississippi. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 7:45-52. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Hayden, A.H. 1985. Summer baiting as an in dicator of wild turk ey population trends and harvest. Proc. National Wild Tu rkey Symp. 4:245-252. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Hurst, G.A. 1992. Foods and Feeding. Pages 66-83 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp. Heilbrun, R. D., N.J. Silvy, M.E. Tewes and M.J. Peterson. 2003. Using automatically triggered cameras to individually identify bobcats. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 31:748-755. Jacobson, H.A., J.C. Kroll, R.W. Browni ng, B.H. Koerth and M.W. Conway. 1997. Infrared-triggered cameras for censusing white-tailed deer. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 25:547-556. Jenrich, R.I., and F.B. Turner. 1969. Measurements of non-circular home range. J. Theoret. Biol. 22:227-237. Karanth, K. U., and J. D. Nichols. 1998. Estimation of tiger densities in India using photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology. 79:2852-2862. Knowlton, F.F., E.D. Michael, and W.C. Glaze ner. 1964. A marking technique for field recognition of individual tu rkey and deer. J. Wild l. Manage. 28:167-170. Kurzejeski, E. W., and L.D. Vangilder. 1992. Population management. Pages 165-185 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp.

PAGE 80

69 Lewis, J.B. 1980. Fifteen years of wild tu rkey trapping, banding, and recovery data in Missiouri. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 4:24-31. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Lewis, J.B. 2001. A success story revisited. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:7-12. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Lewis, J.C. 1973. The world of the wild turk ey. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippencott Co. 158 pp. Ligon, J.S. 1946. History and management of Merriams wild turkey. Santa Fe, NM: New Mexico Game and Fish Commission, University of New Mexico. 84pp. Lint, J. R., B. D. Leopold, and G. A. Hu rst. 1995. Comparison of abundance indexes and population estimates for wild turkey gobbl ers. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 23:164-168. McNab, B.K. 1963. Bioenergetics and determ ination of home range size. American Naturalist 97:133-140. Menzel, K.E. 1975. Population and harvest da ta for Merriams turk eys in Nebraska. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 3:184-188. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Minta, S., and M. Mangel. 1989. A simple population estimate based on simulation for capture-recapture and capture-resi ght data. Ecology 70:1738-1751. Mosby, H.S. 1949. The present status and th e future outlook of the eastern and Florida wild turkeys. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 14:346-358. Mosby, H.S. 1967. Population dynamics. Pages 113-136 in O.H. Hewitt, ed. The wild turkey and its management. Washington DC: The Wildlife Society. 589 pp. Mosby, H.S., and C.O. Handley. 1943. The wild turkey in Virginia. Richmond, VA: Comm. Game and Inland Fish. 281pp. Nicholson, D.S., R.L. Lochmiller, M.D. Stewar t, R.E. Masters, and D.M Leslie, Jr. 2000. Risk factors associated with capture-related death in eastern wild turkey hens. J. Wildl. Dis. 36:308-315. Pearson, O. P. 1960. Habits of Microtus californicus revealed by automatic photographic recorders. Ecol ogical Monographs. 30:231-250. Porter, W.F. 1977. Home range dynamics of wild turkeys in sout heastern Iowa. J. Wildl. Manage. 41:434-437. Porter, W.F., G.C. Nelson, and K. Mattson. 1983. Effects of winter conditions on reproduction in a northern wild turkey populat ion. J. Wildl. Manage. 47:281-290.

PAGE 81

70 Schemnitz, S.D. 1956. Wild turkey food habits in Florida. J. Wildl. Manage. 20:132137. Schorger, A.W. 1963. The domestic turkey in Mexico and Central America in the sixteenth century. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. 52:133-152. Spraker, T.R., W.J. Adrian, and W.R. Lan ce. 1987. Capture myopathy in wild turkeys ( Meleagris gallopavo ) following trapping, handling and transportation in Colorado. J. Wildl. Dis. 23:447-453. Sweitzer, R. A., D. Van Vuren, I.A. Gardner, W.M. Boyce and J.D. Waithman. 2000. Estimating sizes of wild pig populations in the North and Central Coast regions of California. J. Wildl. Manage. 64:531-543. Tapley, J.L., R.K. Abernethy, and J.E. Kenna mer. 2001. Status and distribution of the wild turkey in 1999. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:15-22. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation. Vangilder, L.D. 1992. Population dynamics. Pages 144-164 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Ha rrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp. Weinstein, M., B.D. Leopold, and G.A. Hurst. 1995. Evaluation of wild turkey population estimation methods. Proc. Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and Wildl. Agencies 49:476-487. Wheeler, R.J., Jr. 1948. The wild turkey in Alabama. Ala. Dep. Conserv. 92pp. White, G.C., K.P. Burnham, D.L. Otis, and D.R. Anderson, 1978. Users manual for program CAPTURE. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. 40pp. Williams, B.K., J.D. Nichols and M.J. C onroy. 2002. Analysis and Management of Animal Populations. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 817 pp. Williams, L.E., Jr. 1992. Florida Turkey. Pages 214-231 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp. Williams, L.E., Jr. and D.H. Austin. 1988. St udies of the wild turkey in Florida. Gainesville, FL: Florida Game and Freshw ater Fish Commission. Tech. Bull. 10. 232 pp. Williams, O. 1955. Home range of Peromyscus manicalatus rufinus in a Colorado ponderosa pine community. J. Mammal. 36:42-45. Worton, B. J. 1987. A review of models of home range for animal movement. Ecological Modelling 38:277-298.

PAGE 82

71 Wunz, G.A., and W.K. Shope. 1980. Turkey bro od survey in Pennsylvania as it relates to harvest. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 4:69-75. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

PAGE 83

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Jeremy Olson was born in Jackson, Mich igan, on January 23, 1980. He and his family moved to Longwood, Florida, in 1984. He grew up on the banks of the Little Wekiva River, where he learned valuable lesso ns in reptile identification and orienteering at a very young age. He remained in L ongwood until he graduated from Lake Mary High School in 1998. Jeremy was accepted to the University of Florida in 1998, and received a B.S. degree in wildlife ecology a nd conservation in 2002. During this 4 year period, he worked temporary jobs with Katies Weki va River Landing, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gl atting Jackson Environmental Consultants, and the University of Florida. While volunteering for a wild turkey research pilot study, he realized the study would be a great o pportunity for a masters degree. In 2003 Jeremy was accepted as a masters degree candidate at the University of Floridas wildlife ecology and conservation pr ogram, and was assigned this wild turkey study. He learned a great deal both inside a nd outside of the classr oom for the next 3.5 years, and graduated in August 2006. Prior to graduation, Jeremy was offered a job as a Biological Scientist with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Co mmission. He manages Triple N Ranch WMA and Bull Creek WMA near Holopaw, Florida. He is dealing with the variety of challenges that land managers face, one of which is how to accura tely index the wild turkeys on the property. 72


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0014780/00001

Material Information

Title: Evaluation of Remote, Infrared-Triggered Cameras as a Population Survey Technique for Wild Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0014780:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0014780/00001

Material Information

Title: Evaluation of Remote, Infrared-Triggered Cameras as a Population Survey Technique for Wild Turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo)
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0014780:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text






EVALUATION OF REMOTE, INFRARED-TRIGGERED CAMERAS AS A
POPULATION SURVEY TECHNIQUE FOR WILD TURKEYS (Meleagris gallopavo)
















BY

JEREMY TODD OLSON


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2006

































Copyright 2006

by

Jeremy Todd Olson















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project required the effort of many people for whom I am grateful. Dr. Mel

Sunquist provided extensive guidance and knowledge throughout the project. Dr. Madan

Oli and Dr. George Tanner provided knowledge and contacts that were invaluable in

completing this study.

Capturing the wild turkeys required dozens of patient volunteers. The University

of Florida's Chapter of the Wildlife Society, Trailridge Longbeard Chapter of the Wild

Turkey Federation, Tall Timbers Biological Research Station, and the Florida Fish and

Wildlife Conservation Commission all supplied crucial time and effort.

Arpat Ozgul provided insight into the mark-resight computer programs necessary

for data analysis. His willingness to help and sincere interest in the outcome of the

project were extremely useful.

Field technicians provided much needed help during the labor intensive camera-

trap surveys. Claire Sunquist, Clint Peters, and Patrick Deren all displayed the self-

motivated work ethic so crucial for this study. Their ability to stay on task with little

supervision allowed for very efficient data collection.

I would also like to thank FWC biologists Roger Shields and Larry Perrin for their

effort. Both kept their good attitude and sense of humor even when field conditions were

less than ideal, and made the fieldwork season something to look forward to every year.

Lastly, I would like to thank my parents. They encouraged me throughout my

childhood to pursue my passion for wildlife biology, putting up with the escaped snakes









in the house, turtles in the pool, mysterious bags in the freezer, and other oddities that

raising an aspiring biologist bring to the child-rearing experience.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ................................................................................................. iii

LIST O F TA B LE S ................................ ....................... .... ... ... .. ............ vii

L IST O F FIG U R E S ....................................... .......... .. .......... ............ .. viii

A B ST R A C T ................. ................................................................................... ........

CHAPTER

1 IN TRODU CTION .................................... .. .......... .... ..............

Stu dy Sites ........................................................................... . 3
Caravelle Ranch W wildlife M anagem ent Area.................................... .................3
Ordway-Swisher M em orial Preserve ............................ ................................. 4
Objectives ............... ...... ............ ..... ....... ... .................... 5

2 INITIAL CAPTURE AND MARKING TECHNIQUE ............................................9

In tro d u ctio n ............ ..... .... .... ................ .................. ................ .. 9
M eth od s ........................................................................... . 9
R e su lts .............. ..... ............ ................. ................................................. 1 1
D isc u ssio n .............................................................................................................. 1 2

3 CAMERA TRAPPING TECHNIQUE .............................................. ...............20

Introduction................................... .................................. .......... 20
M eth o d s .................................................................................... 2 0
Program CA PTU RE ................................................................................. 23
Program NOREMARK Bowden's Estimator.........................................23
R adio T elem etry ...................... .............................. ........ .......... .............. 24
Determining Effective Area Sampled ...................................... ............... 25
R results ....................................... ... .................................. 25
D discussion ................................................ 28
M anagem ent Im plications ........................................ ...........................................32






v









L IST O F R E FE R EN C E S ........................................................................... .......... .......... 67

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E TCH ...................................................................... ..................72
















LIST OF TABLES


Table p

2-1 Number of turkeys successfully trapped and released on Caravelle Ranch and
Ordway Preserve. ................................... .... .. ..... .. ............14

2-2 Percentage of banded turkeys missing at least one colored leg band when
resighted during camera-trap surveys. ........................................ ............... 15

2-3 Condition of colored leg bands of turkeys recaptured or harvested......................16

3-1 Dates of cam era-trap surveys. ............................................................................33

3-2 Number of pictures collected and analyzed for each camera-trap survey................34

3-3 Percentage of pictures by species using camera-traps baited with cracked corn
with camera-traps active from dawn until dusk. ........................... .................. 35

3-4 Number of marked turkeys resighted using protocol 1 and protocol 2 with
percent increase of resightings using protocol 2 .................................................36

3-5 Detection rates of radio-tagged birds on study areas during camera-trap surveys
using protocol 1. ........................................................................37

3-6 Estimated number of banded turkeys on study areas during the camera-trap
surveys using the null model in program CAPTURE...................... ...............38

3-7 Estimated number of turkeys (banded and unbanded) on study areas during the
camera-trap surveys using Bowden's estimator in program NOREMARK. ...........39
















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure p

1-1 Location of study sites in north-central Florida .....................................................6

1-2 1996 aerial photograph of Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area, Putnam
C o ., F L ...................................... .................................. ................. . 7

1-3 1996 aerial photograph of Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve, Putnam Co., FL....8

2-1 Technique used to hold wild turkey while bands are installed .............................17

2-2 Temporal distribution of time from capture to release for turkeys handled on
Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve from 2003-2005.............. ...................18

2-3 Intertwined colored leg bands on recaptured wild turkey hen...............................19

3-1 Caravelle Ranch camera-trap grid, protocol 1............................... ..................40

3-2 Ordway Preserve camera-trap grid, protocol 1................................. .................41

3-3 Caravelle Ranch camera-trap grid, protocol 2................ ................ ............... 42

3-4 Ordway Preserve camera-trap grid, protocol 2..................................................... 43

3-5 Cam era-trap dim tensions, side view ....................................................................... 44

3-6 Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps
by day on C aravelle R anch............................................. .............................. 45

3-7 Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps by day
on O rdw ay Preserve. ........................... ................ ................... .. .....46

3-8 Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps
by day on C aravelle R anch............................................. .............................. 47

3-9 Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps
by day on Ordw ay Preserve. ............................................ ............................ 48

3-10 Sampled area of photographs, aerial view.............. .............................................. 49









3-11 Number of times banded turkeys were photographed per event using 5-minute
delay betw een pictures. ................................................................. ....................50

3-12 Average number of pictures as events increase....................................................51

3-13 Average home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys on
C aravelle R anch. ......................................................................52

3-14 Average home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys on
Ordw ay Preserve. ........................ ......... .. .. ..... .. ............. 53

3-15 Average female home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap
surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve................................. .........54

3-16 Average male home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys
on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve......... ......... ...... ................55

3-17 Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Caravelle Ranch with 1,600-meter
spacing b etw een cam eras .............................................................. .....................56

3-18 Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Caravelle Ranch with 800-meter
spacing betw een cam eras. ............................................................. .....................57

3-19 Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Ordway Preserve with 1,600-meter
spacing betw een cam eras. ............................................................. .....................58

3-20 Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Ordway Preserve with 800-meter
spacing betw een cam eras. ............................................................. .....................59

3-21 Detection probabilities observed during surveys using program CAPTURE to
estimate the number of banded birds on the study area during the surveys.............60

3-22 Linear regression of number of banded male turkeys detected and number of
banded male events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during summer.....61

3-23 Linear regression of number of banded male turkeys detected and number of
banded male events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during winter........62

3-24 Linear regression of number of banded female turkeys detected and number of
banded female events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during summer..63

3-25 Linear regression of number of banded female turkeys detected and number of
banded female events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during winter.....64

3-26 Linear regression of estimated number of male turkeys on study area during
summer camera-trap surveys and number of events from summer..........................65

3-27 Linear regression of estimated number of male turkeys on study area during
winter camera-trap surveys and number of events from winter..............................66














Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

EVALUATION OF REMOTE, INFRARED-TRIGGERED CAMERAS AS A
POPULATION SURVEY TECHIQUE FOR WILD TURKEYS (Meleagris gallopavo)
By

Jeremy Todd Olson

August 2006

Chair: Mel Sunquist
Major Department: Wildlife Ecology and Conservation

Wild turkeys have rebounded from widespread overharvest and habitat destruction

during the early 1900s. Increased turkey abundance has made them a popular game

species, and research continues to determine beneficial habitat management practices.

Presently, the effectiveness of habitat management practices is difficult to quantify

because there is no widely accepted method to survey wild turkey abundance.

I tested a survey design used by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation

Commission (FWC) that uses a grid of camera-traps separated by at least 1,600 m. I used

colored leg bands and mark-resight software to estimate the turkey population density on

Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area and Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve

during 6 surveys over 3 years. I compared detection probabilities between areas and

years, and used linear regression to analyze the relationship between the number of

turkeys on each area and the number of events derived from the surveys.

Results from the surveys showed that detection probabilities were markedly

different for the two study areas, likely due to a difference in average home range size.









Estimated home-ranges were larger for turkeys on Ordway Preserve, a common correlate

of inferior habitat quality. High variation in the birds' response to the camera-traps once

detected resulted in a poor correlation between the number of events and the test

population. Because of variability in initial detection probability and response to the

camera-traps once detected, camera-trap surveys utilizing a grid with 1,600 m between

camera-traps are of limited use to index turkey populations.














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION


The wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) is a large gallinaceous bird with a historic

range that extended through what are now 39 continental states and the Canadian

province of Ontario (Schorger 1963). Overharvest and habitat degradation caused

reduced populations in the past, including a complete loss of wild turkeys in 19 states

during the 1940s and 1950s (Lewis 2001). Turkey populations have recovered in many

areas due to translocation of wild turkeys and regenerating forests. The continental wild

turkey population was approximately 5.4 million individuals in 1999 (Tapley et al. 2001)

with viable populations in Canada, Mexico, and all U.S. states except Alaska (Dickson

2001).

The successful comeback of the wild turkey has enabled state agencies to allow a

limited harvest through spring and/or fall hunting seasons. In recent years, approximately

2.7 million hunters harvested 740,000 wild turkeys annually (Dickson 2001). The

interest in turkeys and turkey hunting have prompted land managers to focus more

attention on increasing their turkey populations by manipulating harvest, food plots,

nesting cover, brooding cover and roosting sites. The effectiveness of these activities is

measured by the response of the turkey population.

A problem is, however, there is presently no widely accepted population survey

method for wild turkeys (Vangilder 1992). Biologists have expressed the importance of

developing a survey method for turkeys for many years (Mosby 1949, Mosby 1967,









Lewis 1973, Menzel 1975, Wunz and Shope 1980, Willams and Austin 1988, Williams

1992). The successful design of a turkey survey technique that detects changes in

population size will allow managers to set hunting regulations and quantify the

effectiveness of their habitat management activities with greater confidence (Williams

and Austin 1988, Kurzejeski and Vangilder 1992).

Population attributes for wild turkeys have been estimated using the number of

harvested gobblers, harvest/effort, gobblers heard/day, and capture-recapture (Lint et al.

1995). These methodologies have their shortfalls. The number of harvested gobblers and

harvest/effort indices require that the population is hunted, and offer little inference about

the female segment of the population in areas where only males are hunted. The number

of gobblers heard per day requires intensive data collection, a road or trail system, and

may not correlate with the number of gobblers in the area (Lint et al. 1995). Population

estimation using capture-recapture requires extensive manpower (DeYoung and Priebe

1987). Weinstein et al. (1995) investigated 2 mark-recapture and 2 mark-resight models

for turkeys in Mississippi, and had inadequate sample sizes even though they had

invested substantial time and money to the effort. A Florida study utilizing a graduate

student, 2 biologists, and a $100,000 budget was unable to mark a large percentage of

their study area's turkey population (Cobb et al. 2000). When compared with harvest-

based indices of turkey abundance, mark-recapture studies for turkeys have been shown

to be more expensive (Lint et al. 1995).

Wild turkeys respond well to baiting, and researchers have used this to develop a

survey technique that involves driving by baited sites and noting the number of turkeys

(Bartush et al. 1985, Hayden 1985). This survey method was improved with the addition









of infrared-triggered camera-traps, which allowed constant surveillance of the bait site

without biologists having to be present. Cobb et al. (1996) compared the cost of transect

surveys with infrared camera-trap surveys and found that the infrared camera-trap

surveys required less than half the time to conduct. The increasing availability and

reduced prices of commercially made remote-triggered cameras has made them an

attractive tool for wild turkey biologists.

The wild turkey is an elusive bird that usually lacks identifiable characteristics and

often avoids detection. I marked a sample of turkeys and used a mark-resight study

design utilizing camera-traps to estimate the banded turkey population on 2 study areas

over a 3-year period. By comparing the birds' responses to the camera-traps on different

areas and in different years, the goal was to evaluate the utility of camera-traps as a wild

turkey index technique.

Study Sites

Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area

Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area (Caravelle Ranch) is located in

Putnam County in Northeast Florida (Figure 1-1). My study area was on a 6,128-ha

southern portion of the area (Figure 1-2). Much of the traditional pine flatwoods of

Caravelle Ranch was logged and converted to pasture before the state purchased the land.

The roads and ditches from the preceding cattle operation remain throughout much of the

property, and the state continues to lease grazing rights to much of the study area.

The upland portion of Caravelle Ranch is characterized by an overstory of slash

pine (Pinus elliottii var. elliottii) and scattered oak trees (Quercus spp.). Saw-palmetto

(Serenoa repens), gallberry (Ilex spp.), and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) constitute much

of the understory. A large portion of the uplands is moderately-grazed pasture.









Caravelle Ranch is bordered by the Ocklawaha River to the south and the St. Johns

River to the east. River swamps that are frequently inundated extend from each of these

rivers into the study area. These lowland areas have a mixed overstory consisting

primarily of bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), red maple (Acer rubrum) and cabbage

palm (Sabal palmetto).

Caravelle Ranch is open to non-motorized public access during non-hunting

seasons, and allows vehicle access during hunting seasons. The area allows a limited

number of turkey hunters to access the area for each spring turkey season. Four dove-

fields are planted annually with various grains, and several small openings and firebreaks

are routinely planted as food plots on the area.

Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve

The Ordway Preserve-Swisher Memorial Preserve (Ordway Preserve) is located in

Putnam County in North-central Florida (Figure 1-1). My study area included the entire

3,528- ha preserve (Figure 1-3). Ordway Preserve was used primarily as a hunting and

fishing retreat for the Swisher family prior to being acquired by the University of Florida

Foundation and the Nature Conservancy in 1980.

Much of the area consists of sandhill (1366 ha) with a longleaf pine (Pinus

palustris) and turkey oak (Quercus laevis) overstory and wiregrass (Aristida strict)

groundcover. Xeric hammock (527 ha), basin marsh (483 ha), upland mixed forest (334

ha), sandhill upland lake (303 ha), plastic upland lake (243 ha), ruderal (173 ha), pine

plantation (66 ha) and baygall (33 ha) make up the balance of the habitat

Ordway Preserve is used primarily for research, and is not open to the general

public. No hunting of any kind is allowed, and no food plots are planted to attract

wildlife.






5


Objectives

The objectives of this study were to determine:

1. The optimum spacing and distribution of remote cameras to derive a reliable
population estimate or index,

2. The effective radius of baited camera stations,

3. The best estimate of turkey population size, and,

4. The optimal pre-baiting and duration of survey.













N


90 0 90 180 Kilometers


Figure 1-1: Location of study sites in north-central Florida





































Figure 1-2: 1996 aerial photograph of Caravelle Ranch Wildlife Management Area,
Putnam Co., FL.







































Figure 1-3: 1996 aerial photograph of Ordway-Swisher Memorial Preserve, Putnam Co.,
FL.














CHAPTER 2
INITIAL CAPTURE AND MARKING TECHNIQUE

Introduction

Physically marking any wild animal is a practice that should be taken seriously, as

it may result in stress to the study species. I considered less intrusive options to achieve

my objectives, but determined I needed to be able to recognize unique individuals for this

study. There is presently no way to mark wild turkeys without physically capturing and

affixing an identifiable mark on the birds.

Methods

Trapping was conducted during the fall and winter months of 2003, 2004, and

2005. I began the trapping process by finding openings in the tree canopy large enough

for rocket nets to deploy without interference from trees and limbs. The potential trap

sites were cleared of tall grass and brush. I baited the site, and spread a continuous line

of cracked corn several hundred meters away from the bait site. I monitored the sites,

and re-baited them when needed.

When one of the sites was consistently visited by turkeys, I set up a rocket net

approximately 1 m from the bait, and constructed a blind nearby with an unobstructed

view of the baited site. The net, wires, and rockets were covered with leaves to prevent

detection by the turkeys.

I used up to 5 nets per day when I had sufficient turkey activity and volunteers. I

only attempted to trap birds when temperatures were below 220 C to reduce the

likelihood of capture myopathy (Nicholson et al. 2000), and did not trap during or









immediately after rains to minimize feather loss. A chase truck communicated with the

blinds via radio, and responded to net firings immediately. The chase truck carried all of

the supplies and manpower necessary to collect biological data, band, and radio-tag the

turkeys. I made an effort to trap turkeys throughout both study areas. All personnel and

volunteers responsible with firing the rocket net were instructed to only fire when all of

the birds' heads were down and feeding, and to not fire if the majority of the birds

feeding on the bait were already banded.

After capturing turkeys, I immediately placed them in cardboard holding boxes. To

band turkeys, I removed them from the holding box and placed a sock over their head to

reduced stress. One person held the turkey with one arm under the breast and the other

grasping the tarsi (Figure 2-1), while another person placed bands on the legs. I placed

up to 3 plastic colored leg bands on one leg, and one numbered aluminum band on the

other. The plastic colored leg bands were glued using PVC cement. All color

combinations were unique within sexes. During the first year of the study, both males

and females were banded with size 11 colored leg bands. It was thought that the bands

would stay partially uncoiled on the male's legs, while remaining tightly coiled on the

female's legs. This idea was abandoned after observing several males limping, favoring

the leg with no colored leg bands. During years 2 and 3, males were fitted with size 13

colored leg bands. I continued to see limping birds on a few occasions, but it was

unknown which band sizes they had. Because I had limited data about how many banded

birds were required to achieve adequate confidence intervals, I banded as many birds as

time and manpower would allow.









A subset of the turkeys was equipped with backpack-style radio-transmitters. The

transmitters weighted 69 g, which is less than 2.4% of the body weight of the lightest

turkey radio-tagged during this study. I used bungee cord (shock cord) to attach the

transmitters to the turkeys. I weighed, aged and sexed the turkeys before releasing them

at the point of capture.

The durability of the colored leg bands was noted post-release by reviewing the

camera-survey slides. Attempts were made to determine the identity of the turkeys

missing leg bands by looking at the remaining leg bands, radio presence/absence, and by

reviewing what known turkeys were photographed with the unknown turkey.

Results

I captured, marked and released 312 turkeys during the study (Table 2-1). Most of

the turkeys were released within 90 minutes after capture (Figure 2-2). Eight of the 320

(2.5%) turkeys captured during the study died before they could be released. Five of

these deaths were caused by traumatic net injuries. The 3 remaining deaths were

apparently caused by acute capture myopathy, although no necropsies were conducted.

Another source of capture-related mortality was caused by chronic capture myopathy,

which was only detectable in radio-tagged birds. I categorized all deaths of radio-tagged

birds 2 weeks or less post-capture as chronic capture myopathy. This occurred in 18 of

75 (24%) radio-tagged birds that were located at least once after release on the 2 study

areas. In total, 8% of birds captured died as a result of the trapping process. Some of the

turkeys released without radio-tags likely died of chronic capture myopathy, but I can

only guess this figure by extrapolating the percentage of radio-tagged birds that died.

The durability of the colored leg bands was apparent after reviewing camera-survey

slides (Table 2-2) and by observing the band condition of physically recaptured and









hunter-killed birds (Table 2-3). Many of the recaptured turkeys had cracked bands, and

some cracked outer shells of bands were seen sliding over other bands. Two hens that

were recaptured appeared to be missing a band, but closer inspection revealed 2 of their

colored leg bands had become intertwined with one another (Figure 2-3). This may have

been avoided by attaching all bands with the same coil-direction.

Discussion

The trapping process is a stressful event to wild turkeys. Many turkeys captured

with rocket nets suffer feather loss and abrasions on their backs and wingtips, and some

mortality occurs. My observed mortality rates due to trapping are consistent with

observations from other turkey studies. In a Colorado study, 33% of wild turkeys

captured showed signs of capture myopathy (Spraker et al. 1987). This is an important

consideration to those who plan on capturing wild turkeys for research or management.

Studies that require a large portion of the population captured or repeated captures of the

same birds may negatively impact the population and impact the results of the study.

Use of plastic colored leg bands for wild turkey males is not recommended if long-

term (>1 yr) recognition is required. Other researchers utilizing these bands with wild

turkeys have reached a similar conclusion (Williams and Austin 1988). The wrap-

around soft plastic leg bands have the lowest durability (Anderson 1981). Band loss was

recorded in both sexes, but the males were more successful in removing their bands on

both study areas. A higher rate of band loss for male turkeys was also seen by Lewis

(1980), who discontinued using leg bands altogether because band retention was so low,

especially on adult gobblers.

During this study, the colored leg bands sometimes cracked in two, with both

pieces remaining on the turkey's leg. The larger, outer piece of the band was found to









have slid over other bands on several occasions during the study. One bird with a split

band may appear to be many different birds depending on how the bands are situated

when the bird is resighted. This results in a more time consuming slide analysis, and may

result in incorrect resighting results.

Retention of marks may be better accomplished by using patagial wing tags

(Knowlton et al. 1964). Patagial wing tags require the turkey to be nearly broadside to

the camera-trap to facilitate recognition, which would reduce the likelihood of

successfully identifying marked turkeys in the camera-trap photographs.









Table 2-1. Number of turkeys successfully trapped and released on Caravelle Ranch and
Ordway Preserve.

Area Age/Sex Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total
(Winter 2002- (Winter 2003- (Winter 2004-
2003) 2004 2005)
Caravelle Juvenile 9 7 4 25 36
Ranch Adult Y 32 10 19 61
Juvenile o 13 15 26 54
Adult 3 23 13 5 41
Ordway Juvenile $ 24 2 4 30
Preserve Adult 9 25 14 10 49
Juvenile o 17 7 3 27
Adult 3 10 0 4 14
312







15


Table 2-2. Percentage of banded turkeys missing at least one colored leg band when
resighted during camera-trap surveys.

Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer
2003 2003 2004 2004 2005 2005
Ordway Preserve 0 0 0 0 0 6

Caravelle Ranch 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ordway Preserve 0 22 23 44 38 75

Caravelle Ranch 0 0 7 25 17 32
O









Table 2-3. Condition of colored leg bands of turkeys recaptured or harvested.
Bird ID Sex Method Recovered Days Condition of bands
since
banded
C025 I Recaptured and 727 All bands present, but two
released bands intertwined
C033 Recaptured and 727 All bands present
released
C046 I Recaptured and 747 All bands present, but one
released band (blue) cracked
C066 Recaptured and 740 All bands present, but two
released bands intertwined
C068 J Recaptured and 682 One band (yellow) missing,
released one band (red) cracked
C088 j killed by hunter 421 One band (red) missing
C091 j killed by hunter 421 All bands present
C110 l Recaptured and 356 All bands present but one
released band (orange) cracked
C110 l killed by hunter 57 (since One band (white) missing
recapture)
C119 $ Recaptured and 18 All bands present
released
C121 j Recaptured and 12 All bands present
released
C139 Recaptured and 17 All bands present
released
C140 j Recaptured and 17 All bands present
released
67 j Recaptured and 732 All bands present
released
79 1 Recaptured and 403 All bands present
released
99 j Recaptured and 381 All bands present
released








.,


V .4I


..K.


le bands are installed.


Figure 2-1. Technique used to hold wild turkey w


10" A-.S,2,OO'O'-00
































0-15 15- 16-
30 30


46- 61- 76- 91- 106- 121- 146- 161- 176- 191- 206-
60 75 90 105 120 145 160 175 190 205 220
Minutes after capture


Figure 2-2. Temporal distribution of time from capture to release for turkeys handled on
Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve from 2003-2005.


50

45

40

S35

S30

S25

20
o
15
E
" 10

5

0































Figure 2-3. Intertwined colored leg bands on recaptured wild turkey hen.














CHAPTER 3
CAMERA TRAPPING TECHNIQUE

Introduction

Camera-traps have been used to estimate population densities of uniquely

identifiable animals such as bobcats (Lynx rufus) (Heilbrun et al. 2003), tigers (Panthera

tigris) (Karanth and Nichols 1998) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)

(Jacobson et al. 1997). Unique pelt or antler characteristics allow individual distinction, a

crucial component of all mark-resight models (Minta and Mangel 1989). Camera-traps

also have been used to estimate populations of animals that lack variable pelt/antler

characteristics such as mice (Microtus californicus) (Pearson 1960), wild pigs (Sus

scrofa) (Sweitzer et al. 2000) and lions (Leo panthers) (Castley et al. 2002). For these

studies, a sample of the population must be physically marked prior to the camera-survey.

If turkeys respond to camera-traps in a consistent way in different areas and different

years, this technique has the potential to determine the relative abundance of turkeys

without having to mark a percentage of the population. An effective survey technique

should provide the desired precision at a reasonable cost and effort. If these conditions

are not met, the survey is not a useful research tool. By investigating the precision of this

study design, my objective was to evaluate the value of camera-trapping as a survey

technique.

Methods

I used the TRAILMASTER TM-1500 (Goodson and Associates, Lenexa, Kansas,

USA) with a modified 35 mm automatic autofocus OLYMPUS camera. All cameras









were loaded with ASA 200 speed 36 exposure slide film. Cameras were equipped with a

date-time imprint feature. The receiver sensitivity was set at 4, and the cameras were

set to be active from 45 minutes before sunrise to 45 minutes after sunset to reduce

wasted film caused by nocturnal animals.

I began the camera-trap process by mapping the camera-trap grid on an area map. I

attempted to fit as many cameras into the area while maintaining the minimum distance

between cameras outlined in the protocol. Once in the field, I used a handheld GPS to be

sure that I was at least 1,600 m away from the nearest camera-trap for protocol 1 (Figures

3-1 and 3-2). After preliminary analysis of results from the first 3 surveys, I added more

camera-trap sites to the areas to derive more accurate population estimates. I set these

cameras at least 800 m from the nearest camera (Figures 3-3 and 3-4). Surveys with the

additional cameras were labeled "protocol 2".

The receiver and transmitter for each camera-trap were placed 9 m apart, and the

infrared beam was set 38 cm from the ground (Figure 3-5). The cameras were secured to

posts or trees using duct tape and Velcro strips. Cameras that were in high cattle use

areas were protected by single-strand barbed wire fence. Because I relied on colored leg

bands to identify individual birds, I trimmed all vegetation in front of the camera to

prevent bands from being obstructed in the pictures. To reduce the time elapsed between

different camera-traps being baited, I set up all of the cameras before beginning the

baiting process. I baited each camera-trap with a narrow strip of bait perpendicular to the

camera-trap to reduce the occurrence of turkeys obstructing the view of other turkey's

legs. The bait was placed midway between the transmitter and the receiver. In

accordance with the protocol, a "stringer" of bait was put out 400 m in 2 directions from









the camera-trap on the first day of the survey. I mowed tall grass and weeds along

stringer routes to ensure the turkeys would follow them to the bait sites.

When adding the additional camera-sites to the study area for protocol 2, I placed

them between the existing cameras. The camera-sites for protocol 1 remained in the

same places for all 6 surveys, allowing comparisons between all 6 surveys.

I conducted the surveys annually in late February-March and August (Table 3-

1).To discern the ideal survey length, I ran the first 3 surveys for 21 days. After these

surveys, a preliminary analysis of the resight data showed relatively few new resightings

occurred after the first 12 days (Figures 3-6, 3-7, 3-8, 3-9). The survey period was

shortened to 12 days for the next 3 surveys, and I only analyzed the number of events

from the first 12 days for each survey. I radio-tagged a sub-sample of the banded turkeys

to estimate the detection rate of turkeys found within the trapping grid. Detection

probability of radio-tagged birds was determined by dividing the number of radio-tagged

birds known to be on the area during the camera-trap surveys by the number of radio-

tagged birds photo-captured.

Slides were analyzed using a low magnification microscope; date, time, and

contents of the picture were noted. Only the turkeys between the transmitter and receiver

were included in the analysis (Figure 3-10). Turkeys were often photo-captured several

times during a single visit to a camera-trap site. Multiple pictures of the same turkey at

the same camera-trap site were combined into a single "event" when no more than 1 hour

had elapsed between pictures. The number of unbanded turkeys pictured in a survey was

divided by the banded turkey picture/event ratio to estimate the unbanded turkey events.

This formula assumes the banded birds and unbanded birds stay at the bait site the same









amount of time. All surveys were compared by analyzing the total number of events from

the initial cameras (protocol 1) set at 1,600-m spacing during the first 12 days of the

surveys. The additional data from the added cameras were only used to estimate the

number of banded and unbanded birds on the area.

Program CAPTURE

I did not know how many banded birds were on the study area due to unknown

emigration and mortality rates. To estimate the number of banded birds on the study area

I used the null model in program CAPTURE (White et al. 1978). I used 21 days from

protocol 1 surveys and 12 days from protocol 2 surveys in the capture matrices. A bias of

the study design was a trap-happy response from some turkeys. The estimated population

size is not an identifiable parameter in an unrestricted model when a trap response is

present. To avoid bias associated with trap response, I only included the first time a

marked and identifiable turkey was photo-captured at a specific camera-trap site in the

capture matrix.

Program NOREMARK- Bowden's Estimator

I used the Bowden's estimator (Bowden and Kufeld 1995) in NOREMARK to

estimate the total number of turkeys on the study area during the surveys. The Bowden's

estimator defines the finite population of Nto consist of the n marked animals plus the

remaining N n unmarked animals present in the study area at the beginning of the

survey period (Bowden and Kufeld 1995). Assumptions of the model include: (1) each

of the N animals had an equal chance of being selected for marking and the n selections

for marking were made independently of one another; (2) selected animals are marked

and the sighting process is conducted so that the number of times each marked animal is

sighted is determined without error; (3) the sighting effort must be of adequate intensity









to produce >1, and preferably many, sightings of marked animals; (4) the number of

sightings of unmarked animals is determined without error and includes only sightings of

the N- n unmarked animals of the population of interest; and (5) the sighting effort is

conducted independently of the mark status of the animals (Bowden and Kufeld 1995).

The estimator in NOREMARK uses the capture histories of marked birds to gain

inference about the unmarked birds seen throughout the surveys. Bowden's estimator

requires that the number of banded birds on the area during the survey be known to

estimate the total population. I used the mean banded bird estimate from CAPTURE for

this parameter. I used the first 12 days from each survey and utilized the additional

cameras from protocol 2 for the last 3 surveys to derive the most accurate population

estimates.

Radio Telemetry

Radio-tagged turkeys were monitored with H-antennas and portable TR-2 Telonics

receivers during the camera-trap surveys. At least 2 bearings were obtained for each

radio-tagged turkey, and the best biangulation was used to estimate the turkey's location.

All estimated locations were separated by at least 1 hour to minimize temporal

autocorrelation. Turkeys with at least 25 locations (Jenrich and Turner 1969) gathered

during the camera-trap survey were included in the analysis. Home-range sizes for the

first 3 survey periods (winter 2003, summer 2003, and winter 2004) were estimated from

data collected over 21 days, and those for the second 3 survey period (summer 2004,

winter 2005, and summer 2005) home ranges were estimated from data collected over 12

days.

The estimated locations were spatially analyzed using ARCView GIS software.

Ninety percent fixed kernel home ranges (Worton 1987) were estimated for turkeys using









the HOME RANGE ESTIMATOR extension in ARCView. Average home range sizes

were compared between study sites and between seasons using independent samples T-

tests.

The survey slides were analyzed to determine the detection probability of radio-

tagged birds during the camera-trap surveys by dividing the number of radio-tagged birds

known to be on the area during the camera-trap survey by the number of radio-tagged

birds photo-captured.

Determining Effective Area Sampled

It is important for any survey technique to account for the actual area from which

animals are detected. Only using the area enclosed by the outermost traps is likely to

overestimate the population because the traps detect some animals whose range lies

partially outside the grid (Williams et al. 2002).

The area effectively sampled by the camera-traps was estimated by buffering each

camera-trap by one-half the average home range width (Dice 1938) of radio-tagged birds

for each area using ARCView. Average home range width was difficult to quantify

because fixed kernel home ranges often have irregular boundaries. I estimated the

average width by using the radius of a circle with the same area as the home range.

Results

Over 14,000 slides were analyzed for the 6 camera-surveys on the 2 study areas

(Table 3-2). Protocol 2 averaged more slides per survey on average (1,401) than protocol

1 (974). The baiting and camera setup effectively photo-captured turkeys while

minimizing photo-captures of non-target animals. Wild turkeys were the most common

animal photo-captured for all surveys except during the Ordway Preserve summer

surveys (Table 3-3).









Number of pictures per event ranged from 1 to 17, with 48% of the events made up

of only 1 picture (Figure 3-11), and 95% of the events were made up of 5 or fewer

pictures. The average number of pictures per event was 2.16. The first time the turkeys

were photo-captured, they averaged 1.72 pictures/event and the average number of

pictures/event increased when the turkeys were photo-captured on subsequent visits

(Figure 3-12).

Comparison of home ranges collected during summer surveys with those collected

during winter surveys on Caravelle Ranch (Figure 3-13) found significantly larger home

ranges during winter for both females and males (Independent Samples T-test: P=0.025,

P=0.015, respectively) Home ranges collected on Ordway Preserve (Figure 3-14)

showed no significant differences between the seasons for females or males (Independent

Samples T-test: P=0.232, P=0.512, respectively).

Female turkeys on the Ordway Preserve had significantly larger home ranges than

Caravelle Ranch females during both summer and winter camera-trap surveys

(Independent Samples T-test: P=0.005, P=0.044, respectively) (Figure 3-15). Male

turkeys on the Ordway Preserve had significantly larger home ranges than Caravelle

Ranch males during both summer and winter camera-trap surveys (Independent Samples

T-test: P= 0.003, P=0.003, respectively) (Figure 3-16).

Differences in average home-range size resulted in different effective areas

sampled for the 2 study sites. The 1,600-m camera-trap grid for Caravelle Ranch had

incomplete coverage for both females and males (Figure 3-17). The effective area

sampled was 2,175 ha for females and 2,933 ha for males. Protocol 2 resulted in more

continuous coverage on the eastern side of the study area where more cameras were









added to the trapping grid (Figure 3-18). This increased the effective area sampled 35%

to 2,930 ha for females and 17% to 3,436 ha for males.

Protocol 1 provided continuous coverage of Ordway Preserve for both males and

females (Figure 3-19). Effective area sampled for females and males was 3,842 ha and

4,951 ha, respectively, using 1,600-m spacing between cameras. Protocol 2 did not

change the effective area sampled significantly from protocol 1 (Figure 3-20). The

effective area sampled for females increased 6% to 4,058 ha and the effective area for

males increased 3% to 5,117 ha.

Protocol 2 resulted in a higher percent increase of resighted birds for Caravelle

Ranch than Ordway Preserve for both males and females (Table 3-4). Detection rate of

radio-tagged birds was higher on average on Ordway Preserve (Table 3-5). Estimated

number of banded birds on the area (Table 3-6) compared with the number of banded

birds resighted during the survey showed detection probabilities were higher on Ordway

Preserve than on Caravelle Ranch (Figure 3-21).

The relationship between the number of events of banded turkeys and the number

of banded turkeys resighted was not significant for males in summer (P=0.569) and males

in winter (P=0.596) using linear regression (Figures 3-22, 3-23). Linear regressions for

females in summer (P=0.034) and females in winter (P=0.001) were significant (Figures

3-24, 3-25). The regressions using the number of banded turkey events to predict the

number of banded turkeys resighted only included those individuals photo-captured at

least once during the survey, so they do not account for differences in detectability that

may occur between the surveys.









Linear regressions using the total number of site-visits to predict the estimated

number of turkeys on the area (Table 3-7) were not significant for males during summer

surveys (P=0.716) (Figure 3-26) and winter surveys (P=0.534) (Figure 3-27). Caution

must be used when reviewing these two regressions, because the estimated number of

turkeys on the area is the mean from a sometimes relatively imprecise output from the

Bowden's estimator in program NOREMARK, which uses a sometimes relatively

imprecise parameter from program CAPTURE. Imprecise outputs from both programs

were caused by low and/or variable detection probabilities and variation in the number of

site visits. Low detection rates made population estimates for the number of females on

Caravelle Ranch inestimable (Table 3-7), so linear regressions were not analyzed.

Discussion

The two most crucial factors for remote, infrared-triggered cameras to be useful as

a survey technique for wild turkeys are: (1) the initial detection probability, and (2) the

number of times the turkeys are photo-captured once detected. The more consistent these

two figures are, the more precise the index. A key component of this survey technique is

that baiting is used to lure the turkeys to the camera-trap. It is assumed that the bait

greatly increased the number of turkeys photographed in the camera-traps. Factors that

affect a turkey's response to the bait may impact the number of events derived from the

survey.

Home range size is often an indicator of habitat quality (McNab 1963, Porter

1977). Habitat preference is usually positively correlated with the availability of

suitable food and cover (Williams 1955). Many researchers have noted that wild turkey

home ranges depend on the suitability of available resources, especially food supply

(Mosby and Handley 1943, Ligon 1946, Wheeler 1948, Porter et al. 1983). The









correlation of home-range size and habitat suitability has been observed many times with

wild turkeys (Exum et al. 1987, Badyaev et al. 1996, Godwin et al. 1996). Williams and

Austin (1988) claimed that "small movement, high habitat quality, and high population

density will be positively and closely correlated."

Turkeys with readily accessible high-quality food are likely to have smaller home

ranges and be less attracted to the baited camera-traps than turkeys with limited food.

Researchers attempting to capture turkeys for banding using baited net sites have noticed

an inverse relationship between natural food availability and trapping success (Bailey

1959). If researchers were able to survey the amount of natural food in the

environment, they may be able to make an inference about the home range needed for

wild turkeys in the area. Unfortunately, it is difficult to accurately measure the amount of

natural food in the environment for wild turkeys because they are generalists (Bailey and

Rinell 1967, Garver 1987). A Florida study that investigated crop contents of turkeys

from October through February showed that acorns and pine seeds made up 68.2 percent

of all food eaten by wild turkeys during the study, with grass seeds and leaves, cabbage

palm (Sabalpalmetto) and black gum (Nyssa spp.) seeds making up much of the balance

(Schemnitz 1956). A study of 8 adult turkey crops counted seeds from 24 species of

plants and animal parts from 39 species (Williams and Austin 1988). Two researchers

witnessed two gobblers eat a dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis) that was drugged with

treated bait in Mississippi (Hurst 1992). The extraordinary array of foods taken by the

wild turkey makes food availability studies difficult, if not impossible.

The two sites in my study appeared to vary greatly in their quality of turkey habitat.

By comparing average home-range size, the pasture and swamp lands of Caravelle Ranch









appeared to be more fitting habitat than the upland sandhills of Ordway Preserve.

Turkeys in Caravelle Ranch had smaller home ranges (Figures 3-15, 3-16) and a lower

detection rate (Figure 3-21) than turkeys on Ordway Preserve. For protocol 1, the

effective area sampled for Caravelle Ranch had large gaps in the middle of the trapping

grid, where turkeys with the center of their home range inside one of these gaps had a

zero probability of coming in contact with a camera-trap (Figure 3-17). This problem did

not occur on Ordway Preserve (Figure 3-19) because of larger average home range sizes.

The closer spacing of camera-traps in protocol 2 reduced the number of gaps inside the

trapping grid for Caravelle Ranch (Figure 3-18). This difference between the areas may

explain the difference in Table 3-4, which shows protocol 2 resulted in many more birds

being resighted at Caravelle Ranch when compared to protocol 1, while protocol 2 added

relatively few resighted birds on Ordway Preserve. As detectability approaches 100%,

adding more traps has a reduced impact on the number of animals detected.

The difference in effective area sampled between the areas has important

consequences. As the habitat improves and turkey home ranges constrict, this survey

method samples a smaller portion of the study area. Sampling a smaller area will

inherently result in a smaller number of events when compared with sampling a larger

area of similar habitat quality.

The negative correlation between habitat quality and home range size has

considerable ramifications for the usefulness of camera-traps as a relative abundance tool.

First, it prevents comparisons of camera-trap survey results between different areas when

food resources are not similar for the areas. Second, it may nullify the comparison of

camera-trap survey results on a specific area if the amount of alternative foods for turkeys









changes significantly. If an area is improved by planting food-producing plants or by

improving the understory, the number of events from the camera-trap surveys may

actually decrease over the years even though the turkey population is increasing (and

vice-versa). Managers making turkey habitat management decisions may be led astray

by the results of a camera-trap survey in this case. A solution to this problem would be a

calibration of the survey according to the confounding variable, but the highly variable

food and cover preferences of the wild turkey may prevent a reliable calibration from

taking place.

An example of the poor relationship between the estimated number of turkeys and

the number of turkeys photographed occurred during the winter 2004 survey, when an

estimated 38 male turkeys on Ordway Preserve visited camera-traps 345 times, while an

estimated 122 male turkeys on Caravelle Ranch visited camera-traps 239 times. The

number of events suggest there were more male turkeys on Ordway Preserve, while there

were actually only one-third the number of turkeys when compared with Caravelle

Ranch.

The use of indices to estimate changes in populations over time has received some

negative reviews (Williams et al. 2002). Their pessimism stems from routinely seeing

heterogeneous detection probabilities in real-world situations. They cite research

conducted by Diefenbach et al. (1994) as an example, where experimental evaluation of

scent station indices for bobcats (Lynx rufus) found a large range of count statistics for

similar densities. It appears that this turkey survey technique follows a similar pattern

that is nonconducive to detecting changes in the population of interest.









Management Implications

Indices useful in predicting changes in relative abundance should be linear and

precise (Williams et al. 2002). Without the colored leg bands and radio-tags used in this

study, I would only have the number of turkeys on pictures to estimate the relative wild

turkey abundance. This is the situation managers will face when they conduct camera-

trap surveys on their areas. There must be a monotonic relationship between the number

of turkeys photographed and the number of wild turkeys on the area for this survey

technique to be of use.

An index that fluctuates because of factors other than changes in the actual

population size of interest is, with no correction factor, useless. An index that has such

high variability in detection probability that a substantial change in the population would

go unnoticed is of limited use. Because of the variability seen in detection probability

and the poor correlation between the estimated number of turkeys on the study area and

the number of events, it is not recommended to use the results from camera-trap surveys

to index turkey populations.









Table 3-1. Dates of camera-trap surveys.
Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve

Winter Survey Summer Survey Winter Survey Summer Survey
Dates Dates Dates Dates
2003 February 27 August 5 March 4 August 5 -
March 13* August 25 March 24 August 25
2004 February 14 August 18 February 14 August 4 -
March 6 August 29 March 6 August 15
2005 March 1 August 18 February 15 August 2 -
March 12 August 29 February 26 August 13
*Short survey due to scheduled turkey hunt on study site









Table 3-2. Number of pictures collected and analyzed for each camera-trap survey.


Area


Survey


Protocol*


Number of
Camera
Traps


Pictures
Analyzed


Caravelle Ranch Winter 2003 1 11 652
Summer 2003 1 11 1096
Winter 2004 1 11 1023
Summer 2004 2 22 1578
Winter 2005 2 22 1484
Summer 2005 2 22 1900
Ordway Preserve Winter 2003 1 12 932
Summer 2003 1 12 686
Winter 2004 1 12 1457
Summer 2004 2 22 1079
Winter 2005 2 22 711
Summer 2005 2 22 1651
TOTAL 14249


*Total number of pictures analyzed for protocol
included only 12 days


1 included 21 days, while protocol 2






35


Table 3-3. Percentage of pictures by species using camera-traps baited with cracked corn
with camera-traps active from dawn until dusk.
Caravelle Ranch Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve Ordway Preserve
summer winter summer winter
wild turkey 68 84 34 72
white-tailed deer 4 2 59 24
sandhill crane 8 2 0 0
cattle 3 5 0 0
other 17 7 7 4









Table 3-4. Number of marked turkeys resighted using protocol 1 and protocol 2 with
percent increase of resightings using protocol 2.
Summer 2004 Winter 2005 Summer 2005

Caravelle Ranch protocol 1 4 6 5
Protocol 2 9 28 17
% 125 367 240
Caravelle Ranch protocol 1 13 17 20
g protocol 2 16 30 22
% 23 76 10
Ordway protocol 1 12 25 13
Preserve $ protocol 2 13 26 17
% 8 4 31
Ordway protocol 1 9 8 4
Preserve 3 protocol 2 9 8 4
% 0 0 0









Table 3-5. Detection rates of radio-tagged birds on study areas during camera-trap
surveys using protocol 1.
Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter Summer
03 03 04 04 05 05
Caravelle Number 5 6 10 6 7 1
Ranch $ tracked
% 40 17 10 17 14 0
detected
Caravelle Number 5 5 9 8 7 5
Ranch g tracked
% 40 80 33 38 29 40
detected
Ordway Number 10 6 13 7 5 n/a*
Preserve tracked
S% 70 67 77 29 20 n/a*
detected
Ordway Number 2 2 2 1 n/a* n/a*
Preserve tracked
g % 50 0 50 100 n/a* n/a*
detected
*no radio-tagged turkeys were located on the study area during survey.









Table 3-6.


Estimated number of banded turkeys on study areas during the camera-trap
c1riuxc 1cinc th~ n ll mr d l in nr nrm C A PTU RE14 .J31411 I'. 1.1 11'JI.111J1'31Cii~IK


lLt V a l". Ulllt ll III 1111 vle ul l g u E F v L .
Survey (protocol) Mean Confidence Precision*
Interval (95%)
Caravelle W03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures
Ranch S03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures
SW04 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures
S04 (2) 47 17-224 4.40
W05 (2) 50 35-85 1.00
S05 (2) 135 39-659 4.59
Caravelle W03 (1) 29 23-49 0.90
Ranch S03 (1) 27 17-64 1.74
c W04 (1) 43 35-67 0.74
S04 (2) 20 18-32 0.70
W05 (2) 37 33-49 0.43
S05 (2) 27 24-38 0.52
Ordway W03 (1) 46 35-76 0.89
Preserve S S03 (1) 27 20-52 1.19
W04 (1) 39 34-52 0.46
S04 (2) 19 15-36 1.11
W05 (2) 26 26-26 0
S05 (2) 22 18-37 0.86
Ordway W03 (1) 16 15-25 0.63
Preserve S03 (1) 10 10-18 0.80
g W04 (1) 14 14-17 0.21
S04 (2) 9 9-9 0
W05 (2) 8 8-8 0
S05 (2) 4 4-4 0


*precision= (upper confidence interval -


lower confidence interval)/mean









Table 3-7.


Estimated number of turkeys (banded and unbended) on study areas during
ht e camera-trap surveys using Bowden's e K


Survey (protocol) Mean Confidence Precision*
Interval (95%)
Caravelle W03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures
Ranch S03 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures
SW04 (1) no recaptures no recaptures no recaptures
S04 (2) 700 282-1740 2.08
W05 (2) 246 134-451 1.29
S05 (2) 772 493-1212 0.93
Caravelle W03 (1) 104 69-156 0.84
Ranch S03 (1) 74 44-125 1.09
0 W04 (1) 122 87-173 0.70
S04 (2) 82 51-130 0.96
W05 (2) 87 72-105 0.38
S05 (2) 80 57-114 0.71
Ordway W03 (1) 59 50-69 0.32
Preserve S S03 (1) 72 50-103 0.74
W04 (1) 56 49-64 0.27
S04 (2) 50 35-71 0.72
W05 (2) 44 40-49 0.20
S05 (2) 46 36-59 0.50
Ordway W03 (1) 33 22-52 0.91
Preserve S03 (1) 25 18-37 0.76
g W04 (1) 38 28-53 0.66
S04 (2) 26 18-38 0.96
W05 (2) 18 15-23 0.44
S05 (2) 21 15-32 0.81


*precision= (upper confidence interval -


lower confidence interval)/mean

























N










S ICaravelle ranch boundary.shp
Camera-traps protocol 1.shp


4 0 4 Kilometers
I i


Figure 3-1. Caravelle Ranch camera-trap grid, protocol 1





41







zA
N






/V Ordway preserve boundary.shp
- I Camera-traps protocol 1.shp


4 0 4 Kilometers
Ii


Figure 3-2. Ordway Preserve camera-trap grid, protocol 1


























4 0


42








A
N





Caravelle ranch boundary.shp
Camera-traps protocol 2.shp



4 Kilometers


Figure 3-3. Caravelle Ranch camera-trap grid, protocol 2


I


















































4 0


\/Ordway preserve boundary.shp
Camera-traps protocol 2.shp


4 Kilometers


Figure 3-4. Ordway Preserve camera-trap grid, protocol 2


I























Camera


Receiver


Figure 3-5. Camera-trap dimensions, side view.


Transmutter



















30


25


20


S15
U)
- 10


5


0


- ) LO) P- 0') -


winter03 protocol 1
winter04 protocol 1
--winter 05 protocol 2
summer 03 protocol 1
-"- summer04 protocol 2
-"- summer05 protocol 2


LO) N- C0 -


Day of survey




Figure 3-6. Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps
by day on Caravelle Ranch.


I


-


-


,,A-









winter 03 protocol 1
winter 04 protocol 1
-A-wnter 05 protocol 2
summer 03 protocol 1
-e-summer04 protocol 2
-e-summer05 protocol 2


- ) LO N-_ 0) -


LO N-_ C0


Day of survey

Figure 3-7. Cumulative number of banded female turkeys resighted in camera-traps by
day on Ordway Preserve.


Is




















wnter03 protocol 1
wnter04 protocol 1
-A-wnter05 protocol 2
summer 03 protocol 1
-*-summer 04 protocol 2
-*-summer05 protocol 2


- L r Day of survey- r
Day of survey


Figure 3-8. Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps
by day on Caravelle Ranch.


>,

25
0
< 20
EC,
2 ,D 15
<'15

(o 10
E
0 5

0























winter 03 protocol 1
winter 04 protocol 1
A- winter 05 protocol 2
summer 03 protocol 1
---summer04 protocol 2
--summer 05 protocol 2


t- a- i- i- o- '- i '- o4 O- -


Day of survey




Figure 3-9. Cumulative number of banded male turkeys resighted in camera-traps

by day on Ordway Preserve.


___L_











Line parallel with transmitter Transmitter



'\ 1 - ..-... .. ---------- ----------


Sampled area


Borders of photograph


Receiver with camera

Figure 3-10. Sampled area of photographs, aerial view.







50



60

S50

0 40
o
30




e 10

0 --------*~ -*--*--*--*--*--*--*--*-- -
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Number of pictures per event


Figure 3-11. Number of times banded turkeys were photographed per event using 5-
minute delay between pictures.







51




5.0-

4.5


Q 4.0'
3.0






2.5'

0 2.0

1.5 '

1.0
N 36 310 279 250 25 210 199 177155 139 126 115 14 95 84 77 70 66 57 52 46 42 37 32

EV1 EV5 EV9 EV13 EV17 EV21
Consecutive event

Figure 3-12. Average number of pictures as events increase.







52



500




400




U 300




S200




100
00







N= 13 17 18 15
Females Males
Summer Winter Summer Winter

Figure 3-13. Average home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys
on Caravelle Ranch.







53



3000






2000






1000





0.
UC)













-1000
N= 12 24 3 3
Females Males
Summer Winter Summer Winter


Figure 3-14. Average home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap surveys
on Ordway Preserve.







54



600



500



400



300 [



200



100 .




N 13 12 17 24
Summer Winter
Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve

Figure 3-15. Average female home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap
surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve.








55




3000






2000



U
00
In,
1000
C13





0.





-1000
N= 18 3 15 3
Summer Winter
Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve Caravelle Ranch Ordway Preserve


Figure 3-16. Average male home range sizes during summer and winter camera-trap
surveys on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve.















A


V Caravelle ranch boundary.shp
Camera-traps protocol 1.shp
SCaravelle females effective area sampled.shp
| Caravelle males effective area sampled.shp



4 0 4 Kilometers



Figure 3-17. Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Caravelle Ranch with 1,600-
meter spacing between cameras



















A
N


C Caravelle ranch boundary.shp
Camera-traps protocol 2.shp
SCaravelle females effective area sampled.shp
Caravelle males effective area sampled.shp


t 0 4 Kilometers
r r


Figure 3-18. Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Caravelle Ranch with 800-meter
spacing between cameras.










































N Ordway preserve boundary.shp
Camera-traps protocol l.shp
Ordwayfemales effectivearea sampled.shp
Ordway males effective area sampled.shp


4 0 4 Kilometers
i i


Figure 3-19. Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Ordway Preserve with 1,600-

meter spacing between cameras.








































V Ordway preserve boundar.shp
Camera-trapsprotocol 2.shp
Ordway feales effectivearea sampled.shp
Ordway males effective area sampled.shp






4 0 4 Kilometers






Figure 3-20. Effective area sampled by camera-traps on Ordway Preserve with 800-

meter spacing between cameras.







60




1.2
-*-Ordway Preserve
1 -females
S0.8 -u-Ordway Preserve
males
a 0.6
.0 --Caravelle Ranch
S0.4 females
Q 0.2 Caravelle Ranch
Sales


Survey Winter 03 Summer 03 Winter 04 Summer 04 Winter 05 Summer 05
Protocol 1 1 1 2 2 2
Figure 3-21. Detection probabilities observed during surveys using program CAPTURE
to estimate the number of banded birds on the study area during the surveys.












































40.00
40.00


60.00


80.00


Number of banded male events


Figure 3-22. Linear regression of number of banded male turkeys detected and number
of banded male events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during
summer surveys using protocol 1.


y=7.67 +0.06 *x
R-Square= 0.09


20.00-

-e
CD




0150>
-e
C>












-e
5 15.00-
-c





-c


5.00"


20.00
20.00












































60.00
60.00


80.00


100.00


Number of banded male events


Figure 3-23. Linear regression of number of banded male turkeys detected and number
of banded male events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during
winter surveys using protocol 1.


y= 10.31 + 0.04* x
R-Square= 0.08


-e

g 20.00-






0 16.00-


-e
C
-e

-c





'- 12.00-






8.00-


40.00
40.00


120.00
120.00

















15.00-




12.50-




10.00-




7.50-




5.00-


y=188 +0.14*x
R-Square= 0.71


I I I
40.00 60.00 80.00
Number of banded female events


Figure 3-24. Linear regression of number of banded female turkeys detected and number
of banded female events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during
summer surveys using protocol 1.

















30.00-
C)





20.00







10.0
0.00
-e
-z








- 20.00





0.0


y=0.86 +0.11 *x
R-Square = 0.94


100.00


Number of banded female events


Figure 3-25. Linear regression of number of banded female turkeys detected and number
of banded female events on Caravelle Ranch and Ordway Preserve during
winter surveys using protocol 1.


200.00






















80.00-


60.00"







40.00-


20.00-


y=21.70 + 0.16 x
R-Square = 0.10


00.00
100.00


150.00 200.00
Number of events


250.00


Figure 3-26. Linear regression of estimated number of male turkeys on study area during
summer camera-trap surveys and number of events from summer camera-trap
surveys.
















125.00


100.0&





75.00





50.00


25.00


y = 46.86 + 0.09 x
R-Square= 0.04


I I I I 0
150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00


Number of events



Figure 3-27. Linear regression of estimated number of male turkeys on study area during
winter camera-trap surveys and number of events from winter camera-trap
surveys.















LIST OF REFERENCES


Anderson, A. 1981. Making polyvinyl chloride (PVC) colored legbands. J. Wildl.
Manage. 45:1067-1068.

Bailey, R.W. 1959. Preliminary report on wild turkey banding studies as applicable to
management in West Virginia. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 1:146-154.
Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

Bailey, R.W., and K.T. Rinell. 1967. Management of the eastern turkey in the northern
hardwoods. Pages 261-302 in O.H. Hewitt, ed., The wild turkey and its
management. Washington, DC: The Wildlife Society. 589 pp.

Badyaev, A.V., W.J. Etges, and T.E. Martin. 1996. Ecological and behavioral correlates
of variation in seasonal home ranges of wild turkeys. J. Wildl. Manage. 60:154-
164.

Bartush, W.S., M.S. Sasser, and D.L. Francis. 1985. A standardized turkey brood survey
for northwest Florida. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 5:173-182. Edgefield,
SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

Bowden, D.C., and R.C. Kufeld. 1995. Generalized mark-sight population size
estimation applied to colorado moose. J. Wildl. Manage. 59:840-850.

Castley, J.G., M.H. Knight, M.G.L. Mills, and C. Thouless. 2002. Estimation of the lion
(Panthera leo) population in the southwestern Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park using a
capture-recapture survey. African Zoology 37:27-34.

Cobb, D.T., D.L. Francis, and R.W. Etters. 1996. Validating a wild turkey population
survey using cameras and infrared sensors. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp.
7:213-218. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

Cobb, D.T., J.L. Kalso, and G.W.Tanner. 2000. Refining population estimation and
survey techniques for wild turkeys. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:179-186.
Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

DeYoung, C.A., and J.C. Priebe. 1987. Comparison of inventory methods for wild
turkeys in south Texas. Proc. Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish Wildl. Agencies
41:294-298.

Dice, L.R. 1938. Some census methods for mammals. J. Wildl. Manage. 2:119-130.









Dickson, J.G. 2001. Important findings of the eighth national wild turkey symposium.
Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:1-4. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey
Federation.

Diefenbach, D.R., M.J. Conroy, R.J.Warren, W.E. James, L.A. Baker, and T. Hon. 1994.
A test of the scent-station survey technique for bobcats. J. Wildl. Manage. 58:10-
17.

Exum, J.H., J.A. McGlincy, D.W. Speake, J.L. Buckner, and F.M. Stanley. 1987.
Ecology of the eastern wild turkey in an intensively managed pine forest in
southern Alabama. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Res. Stn. 70 pp.

Garver, J.K. 1987. The wild turkey in Illinois. Springfield, IL: Illinois Dept.
Conservation, Division of Wildlife Resources. 28pp.

Godwin, K.D., G.A. Hurst and B.D. Leopold. 1996. Size and percent overlap of gobbler
home ranges and core-use areas in central Mississippi. Proc. National Wild Turkey
Symp. 7:45-52. Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

Hayden, A.H. 1985. Summer baiting as an indicator of wild turkey population trends
and harvest. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 4:245-252. Edgefield, SC:
National Wild Turkey Federation.

Hurst, G.A. 1992. Foods and Feeding. Pages 66-83 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild
turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp.

Heilbrun, R. D., N.J. Silvy, M.E. Tewes and M.J. Peterson. 2003. Using automatically
triggered cameras to individually identify bobcats. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 31:748-755.

Jacobson, H.A., J.C. Kroll, R.W. Browning, B.H. Koerth and M.W. Conway. 1997.
Infrared-triggered cameras for censusing white-tailed deer. Wildl. Soc. Bull.
25:547-556.

Jenrich, R.I., and F.B. Turner. 1969. Measurements of non-circular home range. J.
Theoret. Biol. 22:227-237.

Karanth, K. U., and J. D. Nichols. 1998. Estimation of tiger densities in India using
photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology. 79:2852-2862.

Knowlton, F.F., E.D. Michael, and W.C. Glazener. 1964. A marking technique for field
recognition of individual turkey and deer. J. Wildl. Manage. 28:167-170.

Kurzejeski, E. W., and L.D. Vangilder. 1992. Population management. Pages 165-185
in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA:
Stackpole Books. 463 pp.









Lewis, J.B. 1980. Fifteen years of wild turkey trapping, banding, and recovery data in
Missiouri. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 4:24-31. Edgefield, SC: National
Wild Turkey Federation.

Lewis, J.B. 2001. A success story revisited. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:7-12.
Edgefield, SC: National Wild Turkey Federation.

Lewis, J.C. 1973. The world of the wild turkey. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippencott Co.
158 pp.

Ligon, J.S. 1946. History and management of Merriam's wild turkey. Santa Fe, NM:
New Mexico Game and Fish Commission, University of New Mexico. 84pp.

Lint, J. R., B. D. Leopold, and G. A. Hurst. 1995. Comparison of abundance indexes
and population estimates for wild turkey gobblers. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 23:164-168.

McNab, B.K. 1963. Bioenergetics and determination of home range size. American
Naturalist 97:133-140.

Menzel, K.E. 1975. Population and harvest data for Merriam's turkeys in Nebraska.
Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 3:184-188. Edgefield, SC: National Wild
Turkey Federation.

Minta, S., and M. Mangel. 1989. A simple population estimate based on simulation for
capture-recapture and capture-resight data. Ecology 70:1738-1751.

Mosby, H.S. 1949. The present status and the future outlook of the eastern and Florida
wild turkeys. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 14:346-358.

Mosby, H.S. 1967. Population dynamics. Pages 113-136 in O.H. Hewitt, ed. The wild
turkey and its management. Washington DC: The Wildlife Society. 589 pp.

Mosby, H.S., and C.O. Handley. 1943. The wild turkey in Virginia. Richmond, VA:
Comm. Game and Inland Fish. 281pp.

Nicholson, D.S., R.L. Lochmiller, M.D. Stewart, R.E. Masters, and D.M Leslie, Jr. 2000.
Risk factors associated with capture-related death in eastern wild turkey hens. J.
Wildl. Dis. 36:308-315.

Pearson, O. P. 1960. Habits of Microtus californicus revealed by automatic
photographic recorders. Ecological Monographs. 30:231-250.

Porter, W.F. 1977. Home range dynamics of wild turkeys in southeastern Iowa. J.
Wildl. Manage. 41:434-437.

Porter, W.F., G.C. Nelson, and K. Mattson. 1983. Effects of winter conditions on
reproduction in a northern wild turkey population. J. Wildl. Manage. 47:281-290.









Schemnitz, S.D. 1956. Wild turkey food habits in Florida. J. Wildl. Manage. 20:132-
137.

Schorger, A.W. 1963. The domestic turkey in Mexico and Central America in the
sixteenth century. Wisconsin Acad. Sci. 52:133-152.

Spraker, T.R., W.J. Adrian, and W.R. Lance. 1987. Capture myopathy in wild turkeys
(Meleagris gallopavo) following trapping, handling and transportation in Colorado.
J. Wildl. Dis. 23:447-453.

Sweitzer, R. A., D. Van Vuren, I.A. Gardner, W.M. Boyce and J.D. Waithman. 2000.
Estimating sizes of wild pig populations in the North and Central Coast regions of
California. J. Wildl. Manage. 64:531-543.

Tapley, J.L., R.K. Abernethy, and J.E. Kennamer. 2001. Status and distribution of the
wild turkey in 1999. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 8:15-22. Edgefield, SC:
National Wild Turkey Federation.

Vangilder, L.D. 1992. Population dynamics. Pages 144-164 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The
wild turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp.

Weinstein, M., B.D. Leopold, and G.A. Hurst. 1995. Evaluation of wild turkey
population estimation methods. Proc. Annu. Conf. Southeast. Assoc. Fish and
Wildl. Agencies 49:476-487.

Wheeler, R.J., Jr. 1948. The wild turkey in Alabama. Ala. Dep. Conserv. 92pp.

White, G.C., K.P. Burnham, D.L. Otis, and D.R. Anderson, 1978. User's manual for
program CAPTURE. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. 40pp.

Williams, B.K., J.D. Nichols and M.J. Conroy. 2002. Analysis and Management of
Animal Populations. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 817 pp.

Williams, L.E., Jr. 1992. Florida Turkey. Pages 214-231 in J.G. Dickson, ed. The wild
turkey: biology and management. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books. 463 pp.

Williams, L.E., Jr. and D.H. Austin. 1988. Studies of the wild turkey in Florida.
Gainesville, FL: Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission. Tech. Bull. 10.
232 pp.

Williams, 0. 1955. Home range ofPeromyscus manicalatus rufinus in a Colorado
ponderosa pine community. J. Mammal. 36:42-45.

Worton, B. J. 1987. A review of models of home range for animal movement.
Ecological Modelling 38:277-298.






71


Wunz, G.A., and W.K. Shope. 1980. Turkey brood survey in Pennsylvania as it relates to
harvest. Proc. National Wild Turkey Symp. 4:69-75. Edgefield, SC: National
Wild Turkey Federation.















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Jeremy Olson was born in Jackson, Michigan, on January 23, 1980. He and his

family moved to Longwood, Florida, in 1984. He grew up on the banks of the Little

Wekiva River, where he learned valuable lessons in reptile identification and orienteering

at a very young age. He remained in Longwood until he graduated from Lake Mary High

School in 1998.

Jeremy was accepted to the University of Florida in 1998, and received a B.S.

degree in wildlife ecology and conservation in 2002. During this 4 year period, he

worked temporary jobs with Katie's Wekiva River Landing, Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission, Glatting Jackson Environmental Consultants, and the

University of Florida. While volunteering for a wild turkey research pilot study, he

realized the study would be a great opportunity for a master's degree.

In 2003 Jeremy was accepted as a master's degree candidate at the University of

Florida's wildlife ecology and conservation program, and was assigned this wild turkey

study. He learned a great deal both inside and outside of the classroom for the next 3.5

years, and graduated in August 2006.

Prior to graduation, Jeremy was offered a job as a Biological Scientist with the

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. He manages Triple N Ranch WMA

and Bull Creek WMA near Holopaw, Florida. He is dealing with the variety of

challenges that land managers face, one of which is how to accurately index the wild

turkeys on the property.