Jones J.L. Habitat use of fisher in northcentral Idaho. 1991 Masters thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, May 1991

Study

“I studied habitat use, movements, and diets of radio-collared fishers (Martes pennanti) in northcentral Idaho from 1985-1988” (Abstract, p. iii)

Home Range

“Median year-long home-range sizes were 82.6 square kilometers and 40.8 square kilometers for males and females, respectively (range = 28.8—119.5 and 6.0—75.4 square kilometers, respectively); the medians were not statistically different (U=19, P=0.20)” (Abstract, p. iii)

Status
“The fisher is being used as an ecological indicator species for old-growth communities on the Nez Perce National Forest (USDA 1987).” p. 117

Diet

“Snowshoe hares (Lepus americanus), voles (Clethrionomys gapperi and Microtus spp.), red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) , and carrion were the most frequent items in the diet.” (Abstract, p. iii)

Habitat Use
“A broader range of habitats was used for hunting relative to resting activities. During summer, mature or old growth forests occupied 92% and 74% of resting and hunting sites, respectively. Fewer differences between resting and hunting observations were evident in winter. Fishers had a strong affinity for forested riparian habitats during summer and winter; stream courses also appeared to be used for travel.” (Abstract, p. iii)

Management Implications

“... as Harris (1984) suggested, fisher habitat management must involve the management of a ‘system’ of mature forests as opposed to the management of individual stands. Management at a landscape scale should incorporate a variety of young to mid-successional stages, to promote a diversity of prey species, in conjunction with late successional stages to provide key resting habitat. In a managed forest, the most likely factor limiting fisher populations would be the availability of mature and old-growth forests to provide optimal resting habitat.” (p. 111)

“ ... the fisher appears to be a forest interior species that is dependent not only on patch size, but patch insularity as well.” (p. 112)

“I believe it is crucial that preferred resting habitat patches be linked together by closed-canopy forest travel corridors. ... These corridors should ideally be located along streamside riparian areas.” (p. 112)

“Habitat structure required to maintain quality summer and winter fisher habitat:

Variable 75% Quantile
Canopy Cover
Live Trees
1.3-11.4 cm dbh 1475/ha
11.4-21.6 cm dbh 188/ha
21.6-34.3 cm dbh 240/ha
34.3-47.0 cm dbh 106/ha
47.0-62.2 cm dbh 54/ha
>62.2 cm dbh 27/ha
Snags
14.0-24.1 cm dbh 69/ha
24.1-34.3 cm dbh 44/ha
34.3-52.1 cm dbh 20/ha
>52.1 cm dbh 10/ha
Logs
14.0-21.6 cm diameter 40 m3/ha
21.6-34.3 cm diameter 76 m3/ha
34.3-47.0 cm diameter 57 m3/ha
47.0-54.6 cm diameter 0 m3/ha
>54.6 cm diameter 35 m3/ha


| Home | Join Us | Clearinghouse Main Menu |

| Fisher Clearinghouse | Fisher Information |

Copyright © 2000 Predator Conservation Alliance. All Rights Reserved.

P.O Box 6733
Bozeman, MT 59771
Phone: (406) 587-3389 | Fax (406) 587-3170 |
Email