My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE67136
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE67136
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:12:55 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 9:44:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
NH1 TAB 11 ADDENDUM 11-1 WILDLIFE BASELINE REPORT
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ferret signs on foot. All burrow openings were exanuned for signs of ferret <br />• diggings, trench formations, scats, marmals exhibiting evidence of having been <br />killed by a ferret and freshly covered entrances. For each colony surveyed, <br />the number of prairie dogs observed, t'~e number of burrow entrances and an <br />estimate of the size of the colony (acres) were recorded on standard field <br />data sheets. <br />WZIDLIPE ORIFNPID RECREATION <br />Since hunting is a principal recreational opportunity in the vicinity of the <br />study area, the extent to which this opportunity is exploited was determined <br />by first formulating a list of potentially huntable game species. This list was <br />based on a dilation of wildlife field data obtained during all field activities. <br />Criteria for identifying wildlife species in the Nucla study area as huntable were: <br />1. Whether the species is legally a game aninal in Colorado <br />2. Whether the species occurs in sufficient numbers to attract hunters <br />3. Whether there is sufficient primary habitat within the project area to <br />support the species <br />"Hunting pressure" or exploitation of each potential game species in the study <br />• area was determined using DOr] data. Game hunting and harvest data for the hunt <br />area in which the project area occurs were accessed to determine hunter use. <br />localities receiving more hunting pressure within the hunt area were determined <br />from the available data (see Results, page 50). <br />DATA ANALYSIS <br />Computer Facilities. All quantitative data were analyzed on a Cyber 730 cony <br />puter. Data were entered on keypunch cards that had been double punched and <br />verified. Outer print-outs of the raw data were generated in the same format <br />as the original field data sheet to expedite the data checking process. All <br />data were permanently stared on magnetic tape to facilitate subsequent data manip- <br />ulations and checking of original results. Data were analyzed using specially <br />developed programs and output was generated in a format that facilitated inter- <br />pretation. <br />Relative Abundance Indices. Estimates of population size for the different groups <br />of an;,.wls surveyed in the study area are provided by relative abundance indices. <br />These indices are based on percent sampling effort (e.g., k of small mammals per <br />• 100 trap nights) to ensure oongaaribility of data collected by varying sampling <br />-13- <br />J'J H 1 1 1980 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.