Fire effects on tinajas and amphibian habitat at Saguaro National Park Don Swann, Kara O Brien, and Chuck Perger Saguaro National Park, Tucson, Arizona
Thanks to: Mike Sredl (Arizona Game and Fish) Ann Youberg (Arizona Geological Survey) Adam Springer (Chiricahua National Monument) Eric Wallace, Erin Zylstra, Kris Ratzlaff (UA) Cecil Schwalbe, John Parker (USGS) Dennis Caldwell (Tucson Herpetological Society) Josh Taiz, Tom Skinner (USNFS) Mike Ward, Perry Grissom (Saguaro National Park)
Outline
Saguaro National Park east and west
Saguaro National Park east Rincon Mountain District
Saguaro NP Rincon Mountain District Sky Island ecological zones
Fire in Rincon Mountains and other Sky Islands Historic fire return interval ~ 10 years Periodic fire stimulates regeneration, promotes nutrient recycling, protects forests from catastrophic fire Ponderosa pine (7000-8700 feet) Increase in very large wildfires during past few decades Mixed Conifer (7500-9500 feet)
Surface water - intermittent streams Springs and tanks
Tinajas earthenware jar in Spanish
Major source of water in Rincons during dry season
Value for people, past and present
Essential for wildlife Canyon treefrog Bobcats Single-celled algae Dragonfly Mallard Gary Slaten photo
Lowland leopard frog (Lithobates [Rana] yavapaiensis) tadpoles ~ 9 months in water webbed feet Jumps!
Declining amphibians globally and locally Tarahumara frog (extirpated in US)
Local declines of the lowland leopard frog Major known populations of Lowland Leopard Frogs extirpated since 1940s near Tucson
Crayfish (non-native) American bullfrog (non-native) Disease Habitat loss
Lowland leopard frog habitat in Saguaro National Park
Saguaro National Park Arizona Tamarisk: Follow-Up Surveys ^_ ^_^_^_ Loma Verde ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_^_ Wildhorse ^_^_ ^_ ^_^_ Tanque ^_ Verde/Joaquin ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_ ^_^_^_^_ National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Leopard frog monitoring in Saguaro, 1996-present Rock Spring L. Verde South Turkey ^_!@ Legend ^_ Undergoing Treatment Features Drainages Surveyed Drainages 5000ft elevation 6000ft elevation State Trust Land Private Inholding RMD Boundary Forest Service Land Private Land ^_ ^_ Box Park-wide, biannual surveys ^_^_^_^_ ^_ Lower Rincon Chimenea ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_^_ ^_ ² Madrona ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_ ^_ ^_ Rincon ^_ ^_ Rincon North ^_ 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 Miles
Visual encounter surveys for leopard frogs and other aquatic species Photograph and record water status of each tinaja (>240)
Results 1996-2011 (Zylstra et al. 2015) Average # Lowland Leopard Frogs Per Survey 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Adults Spring 96 Fall 96 Spring 97 Fall 97 Spring 98 Fall 98 Spring 99 Fall 99 Spring 00 Fall 00 Spring 01 Fall 01 Spring 02 Fall 02 Spring 03 Fall 03 Spring 04 Fall 04 Spring 05 Fall 05 Spring 06 Fall 06 Spring 07 Fall 07 Spring 08 Fall 08 Spring 09 Fall 09 Spring 10 Fall 10 Spring 11 Fall 11 Mean frog counts per biannual survey, 1996-2012
Pools where frogs observed, 1996-2011 (green); pools where frogs always observed (red)
More water = more frogs Juveniles surviving Figure 1. Predicted number of recruits (a) and monthly survival (b) of adult lowland leopard frogs (with 95% confidence intervals) as a function of surface water availability, with other model variables held constant. Zylstra et al. 2015. Adults surviving
Water available to frogs in tinajas is related to rain, but not always Before 1999 Box Canyon fire 2001 Post Fire
Example: Box Canyon Fire - 6,500 acres June 16 1999 NPS photo
NPS photos Large areas of moderatehigh severity
March 12 1997 Loma Verde Pool 10, below fire perimeter
July 7 1997 ash in water, water temps 35-36 0 C (95-97 0 F), tadpole mortality
October 14 1999 (filled after rain of 1.2-2.7 on July 15 1999)
July 12 1999 Nov. 30 1999 March 15 2001 Pool 1 (about 1 mile downstream of Pool 10) filled with ash on July 12, 1999 but did not receive sediment until winter rains of 2000.
June 2002 all pools in Loma Verde dry due to 1-2 meters of sediment last leopard frogs died
Number of frogs observed, Loma Verde Canyon, 1996-2013 450 Loma Verde Lowland Leopard Frog Survey Data: 1996-2013 400 350 Box Canyon Fire July 1999 300 250 200 150 100 50 All pools dry; Frogs disappear Spring 2002 Total Adults Juveniles Tadpoles Frogs re-appear fall 2007 Disappear early 2012 0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Example: 2003 Helen s 2 Fire 3,600 acres NPS photo
2003 Helen s 2 Fire Joaquin Canyon Parker 2006
Course, poorly-sorted overbank deposits, Joaquin Canyon Erosion pillars created by sheetwash From Parker (2006)
Repeat photos Joaquin Canyon (2003 Helen s 2 Fire) July 4 2003 July 19 2003 November 2, 2005
Number of adult and juvenile frogs observed on surveys in Joaquin Canyon following 2003 Helen s 2 Fire 12 10 Helen s 2 Fire, June 2003 8 6 Summer 2005, no frogs detected 2007-2009; frogs returned, then disappeared again 4 2 0 01-Sep-02 14-Jan-04 28-May-05 10-Oct-06 22-Feb-08 06-Jul-09 18-Nov-10 01-Apr-12 14-Aug-13
How long does sediment persist in tinajas? Sediment surveys at SNP, 2005-present
Sediment surveys Bedrock contours, Madrona #2
Sediment surveys 42% Bedrock contours, Madrona #2 Sediment contours 2005 79% 33% Sediment contours 2007 Sediment contours 2010
How long does sediment persist? Shorter duration high energy areas, larger watersheds 2001 2006 2008 2013 Repeat photos Loma Verde Canyon (1999 fire)
Longer duration pools in smaller, less steep watersheds 2001 2006 2008 2011 Repeat photos Loma Verde Canyon (1999 fire)
Longer duration pools in low energy areas 1988 2007 Repeat photos Wildhorse Canyon (1989 Chiva Fire) 2012
Mean sediment volume/pool by stream, 2005-2013 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 Loma Verde 68% burned (1999 fire) 0.60 0.50 0.40 Rincon 73% (1994 fire) 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Chimenea 11.8% (misc. small fires) Wildhorse 31% 1989 fire) 2005/2006 2007 2010 2013
Changes in tinaja sediment volume, all combined 2005-2013 50 Percent Sediment Volume Average for All Pools (+/- one standard error) 45 40 41.0 Percent Sediment Volume (%) 35 30 25 20 15 34.8 36.9 28.3 10 5 0 2005-2006 2007 2010 2013 Year of Survey
Fire, floods, and sediment good for frogs issue of scale
Fire effects on other frogs in Arizona Chiricahua leopard frog - threatened Photo by J. Rorabaugh Tarahumara frog extirpated/reintroduced AGFD photo.
Management what can we do as land, fire, and wildlife managers?
a. Measures to prevent post-fire erosion Staw bale erosion barrier **Wood strand mulch Log erosion barrier Robichaud (2009) Robichaud et al. (2012)
b. Habitat restoration Miller Canyon frog habitat restoration (AGFD photo).
b. Habitat restoration Pool 1 being excavated partially (left) and fully (right) in 2005
Pool 1 on July 8, 2006 Pool 1 dry on June 6, 2013 Lowland Leopard Frog in Loma Verde on October 15, 2006
c. Salvage and re-introduction Chiricahua leopard frog salvage and release, Miller Canyon. Glendale Community College photos.
Backyard pond project near Saguaro National Park
d. Pre-fire actions
Letting natural fires burn Deer Head Fire, 2014
General concepts for conservation/management How great is the risk? How important is the population? Consider the no-action alternative where ever possible Erik Enderson photo
Long-term view ecological change and management Time s circle: What are the natural patterns over time? Time s arrow: What are the long-term trends? Potential threats When to respond Time s arrow, time s circle
Healthy forests, healthy frogs
Stand on Tanque Verde Ridge in Saguaro National Park and see, in one compelling panorama, all that makes fire management in the western U.S. problematic Saguaro will have to be lucky as well as good. --Steve Pyne, A Fire History of America (2012)