1999-287 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I t Plan Area (Thaxton and Hingtgen 1996; Breininger 1999). However, males appear to infrequently move among habitat fragments (Breininger 1999). The entire study s metapopulation does not meet a patchy metapopulation structure where patches function as a single unit because many of the patches are not close enough for r;, frequent dispersal by males, especially in the study populations (Harrison and Taylor 1987; Stith et a/. 1996). Although, females might be the limiting factor in the entire metapopulation because of differential survival between males and females along the Atlantic Coast, males may become the limiting sex in many habitat fragments, especially residential landscapes (Breininger 1999). One can hypothesize that most habitat fragments not near other fragments will rarely be recolonized if all males expire in those fragments. Variation in patch habitat quality and size also prohibits the application of original metapopulation structure of extinction and recolonization theory (Levins 1969) to describe Florida scrub -jay population dynamics, In large natural landscapes, Florida scrub -jays generally retain their territories and attract new replacement breeders following the death of their spouse (Woolfenden and Fitzpatrick 1984; Breininger et aL 1996a). This appears to be true for most study sites. However, in fragmented populations, females often move after the death of their spouse until they find a mate in another fragment (Breininger 1999). Typical source -and -sink theory does not always explain Florida scrub-iay dynamics in fragmented systems (Breininger 1999). Florida scrub -jays from small fragments that are sinks are temporarily sources of new breeders to larger fragments that can be sinks until no more jays are in population sinks (Breininger 1999). Thaxton and Hingtgen (1996) reported that Florida scrub -jays nearly always moved from small suburban patches of low demographic success into larger reserve areas and not from large reserves into small habitat fragments. Therefore, the type of metapopulation structure, where large reserves support many small reserves, may not predict Florida scrub -jay population dynamics. Another metapopulation structure (Harrison and Taylor 1997; Stith et aL 1996) proposed is a nonequilibrium structure where patches are too small and too far apart so that extinction is inevitable. This structure does not define dynamics of South Brevard metapopulation core because occupied patches are close together and there is an exchange of individuals. However, this metapopi.rlation structure may accurately define the structure of most subpopulations south of the Sebastian study population. Implementation of the conservation measures set torth under this Sebastian HCP are expected to contribute, in tite long-term, to the recovery of the fourth largest scrub -jay population across the remaining range. Proposed NCP actions will also serve to benefit other species of conservation concern residing within tate Atlantic w Coastal Ridge scrub landscapes covered under this HCP. 64