Laserfiche WebLink
C <br />At each station, a small perforated plastic capsule containing about 1 gram <br />of a synthetic attractant (supplied by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, <br />Pocatello, Idaho) was positioned at the center of a circle of sifted earth <br />3 ft in diameter. The capsule was supported two inches above the ground by <br />a shall wooden stick. Stations were placed adjacent to the road edge <br />and alternated from left to right sides of the road to reduce the influence <br />of wind direction. The survey route was checked daily for four consecutive <br />days. Animal visits based on tracks were recorded for each'station on a <br />staneA rd field data form. <br />Mammalian predator sightings and'sign were recorded on standard wildlife <br />observation forms during all other field activities. All sightings or sign <br />were recorded by species, location, and habitat type. <br />t-MRPE 'OFAUNA <br />Reptiles noted during surmer_ surveys were recorded according to species, location <br />and macro and micro- habitat type. Potential amphibian breeding sites (ponds,' <br />streams, etc.) were visited during two nights in May, 1979 to determine the <br />species and abundance of amphibians utilizing the study area (see Results, <br />page 44). <br />ANIMAL DISTRIBUTION STUDTRS AND UME TTATION OF ANIMAL PRESENCE <br />Animal distribution on the study area was determined on the basis of a corn - <br />pilation of wildlife observation data obtained during field investigations <br />and from previous data obtained by the DOW, Peabody'Coal Company, and others. <br />Compiled information was plotted on study area maps to depict the distribution <br />of the following important wildlife groups; <br />1. Mule deer <br />2. Raptors and raptor nest sites <br />3. Waterfowl <br />4. Upland game birds <br />5. Mammalian predators <br />-10- <br />JLS)i1iISM <br />