BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS

Transcription

1 BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS # APPLICANT INFORMATION WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM PERSON/ORGANIZATION/AGENCY NAME CARL LACKEY ADDRESS 1 PO BOX 277 NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE TITLE BIOLOGIST CITY GENOA STATE NV ZIP PHONE CELL N/A CLACKEY@NDOW.ORG FAX NA OTHER PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT TITLE BLACK BEAR DNA SAMPLING & DISPERSAL DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT - NDOW HAS BEEN STUDYING THE STATE S BEAR POPULATION FOR OVER 15 YEARS AND THIS PROJECT IS A CONTINUATION OF THAT RESEARCH. THE QUESTION HAS OFTEN BEEN RAISED ABOUT HOW MUCH MOVEMENT EXISTS AMONG THE BEAR POPULATION BETWEEN NEVADA AND CALIFORNIA. DATA SHOWS THAT NEVADA MARKED BEARS FREQUENTLY MOVE FREELY ACROSS THE POLITICAL BOUNDARY IN THE GREATER LAKE TAHOE AREA, AND THERE IS DATA SHOWING NEVADA MARKED BEARS DISPERSING TO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND EVEN INTO OREGON. THIS LATER DATA HOWEVER IS LIMITED TO A FEW BEARS. THIS PROJECT AIMS TO SHOW THE AMOUNT OF MOVEMENT AMONG THE BEAR POPULATION IN THE SIERRA NEVADA MOUNTAIN RANGE USING DNA FROM HAIR SAMPLES COLLECTED BY NDOW AND CFG. NDOW HAS APPROXIMATELY 350 HAIR SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM 2003-PRESENT. CFG HAS APPROXIMATELY 100 SAMPLES COLLECTED IN 2011 FROM HUNTER HARVESTED BEARS IN THE STUDY AREA. MICROSATELLITE INFORMATION WILL BE ANALYZED TO MAP GENE FLOW IN THE STUDY AREA, SHOWING DISPERSAL PATTERNS AND RELATEDNESS OF BEARS IN NEVADA AND CALIFORNIA. OTHER INFORMATION GLEANED COULD INCLUDE SOURCE-SINK DYNAMICS. IT IS HIGHLY LIKELY THAT THE BEAR POPULATION IN THE SIERRA NEVADA IS VERY FLUID ACROSS STATE LINES SO INFORMATION FROM THIS STUDY IS IMPORTANT TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE SPECIES AS IT SHOULD REVEAL THE DEPTH OF CALIFORNIA S BEAR POPULATION IN NEVADA. THE NEVADA BEAR HUNT, AND BEAR HUNTING IN GENERAL, IS CONTROVERSIAL DUE TO THE EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS RAISED BY OPPONENTS. IT HAS BEEN ARGUED, UNCONVINCINGLY, THAT NEVADA S BEAR POPULATION IS A CLOSED POPULATION, AND DOES NOT RECEIVE GENE FLOW FROM THE GREATER SIERRA NEVADA BEAR POPULATION. THIS STUDY SHOULD REVEAL THE EXTENT TO WHICH GENE FLOW DOES EXIST, STRENGTHENING ARGUMENTS FOR POPULATION MANAGEMENT OF THE SPECIES. HOW DOES THIS PROJECT MEET THE OBJECTIVES OF THE WILDLIFE HERITAGE PROGRAM (NRS ) THE MANAGEMENT OF A GAME SPECIES AND THE CONSERVATION, PROPAGATION AND PROTECTION OF A GAME SPECIES. NOW THAT WE ARE HUNTING BLACK BEARS IT IS IMPORTANT TO MONITOR THIS POPULATION AND CONTINUE WITH THE RESEARCH THAT PUT US IN THIS POSITION. WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM Rev 12/1/10 Page 1

2 BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS # PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT LOCATION: SIERRA NEVADA GREATER LAKE TAHOE AREA IN NEVADA AND CALIFORNIA SUMMARY: THE PROPOSED PROJECT AREA IS LOCATED WITHIN THE GREATER LAKE TAHOE AREA OF THE SIERRA NEVADA MOUNTAINS OF NEVADA AND CALIFORNIA. IS A PROJECT MAP ATTACHED? YES XX NO (A MAP MUST INCLUDE THE PROJECT TITLE, MAP SCALE, DATE MAP WAS CREATED, AND A NORTH ARROW) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY ON WHICH THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS TO BE LOCATED (MUST INCLUDE THE PROPERTY ADDRESS, ACCESS ROADS, TOWNSHIP, RANGE AND SECTION) A PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE DOES THIS PROJECT HAVE ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF MONIES FOR FUNDING OTHER THAN YOUR HERITAGE TRUST FUND REQUEST? YES X NO **EXPLANATION AS INDICATED BELOW IN THE PROJECT FUNDING COST BREAKDOWN SECTION THERE ARE FUNDS BEING INJECTED INTO THE NEVADA STUDY FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES. THE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY HAS INDICATED THE HIGH LIKELIHOOD OF THEIR CONTRIBUTING A COUPLE THOUSAND DOLLARS TO THIS PROJECT. BIOLOGISTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME HAVE SUBMITTED AN INTERNAL PROPOSAL AS WELL. IT IS UNKNOWN HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL FUNDING WILL COME FROM THESE TWO SOURCES. DOES THIS PROJECT INVOLVE HABITAT RESTORATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF A LONG-TERM OR PERMANENT NATURE? YES NO X PLEASE DESCRIBE IN DETAIL THE REASON WHY YOU NEED HERITAGE TRUST FUNDING TO FUND THIS PROJECT THE NEVADA BEAR HUNT, AND BEAR HUNTING IN GENERAL, IS CONTROVERSIAL DUE TO THE EMOTIONAL ARGUMENTS RAISED BY OPPONENTS. IT HAS BEEN ARGUED, UNCONVINCINGLY, THAT NEVADA S BEAR POPULATION IS A CLOSED POPULATION, AND DOES NOT RECEIVE GENE FLOW FROM THE GREATER SIERRA NEVADA BEAR POPULATION. THIS STUDY SHOULD REVEAL THE EXTENT TO WHICH GENE FLOW DOES EXIST, STRENGTHENING ARGUMENTS FOR POPULATION MANAGEMENT OF THE SPECIES. PROJECT DURATION ONE YEAR TWO YEARS X THREE YEARS MORE ESTIMATED START DATE JULY 2012 ESTIMATED END DATE SUMMER OF 2013 WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM Rev 12/1/10 Page 2

3 BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS # PROJECT FUNDING (BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE FOR ONE YEAR ONLY) 1. HERITAGE TRUST FUND CASH AMOUNT REQUESTED $61, OTHER CASH FUNDING SOURCES FOR THIS PROJECT a. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY $ 2,000 EST b. $ c. $ d. $ e. TOTAL OTHER CASH FUNDING SOURCES (LINES a-d) $ $2,000 ESTIMATED 3. DONATIONS FOR THIS PROJECT a. VOLUNTEER TIME ESTIMATE $ 0 b. EQUIPMENT $ 0 c. MATERIALS $ 0 d. $ e. $ f. $ g. $ h. TOTAL DONATIONS (LINES a-g) $ 0 4. TOTAL HERITAGE TRUST FUND PROJECT FUNDING $ 61,000 WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM Rev 12/1/10 Page 3

4 BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS # PROJECT COSTS (BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE FOR ONE YEAR ONLY) HERITAGE COSTS ONLY ALL OTHER COSTS 1. LAND ACQUISITION $0 $0 2. PERSONNEL (NDOW EMPLOYEE SALARIES NOT INCLUDED) $0 ` $0 3. TRAVEL (NDOW EMPLOYEE COSTS NOT INCLUDED) a. PER DIEM $0 $0 b. MILEAGE $0 $0 c. TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS (LINES a, b) $0 $0 4. EQUIPMENT ITEMS a. $0 $0 b. $0 $0 c. $0 $0 d. $0 $0 e. TOTAL EQUIPMENT COSTS (LINES a -d) $0 $0 5. MATERIALS a. UNR GENOMIC LAB, FEES QUOTE ATTACHED $20,000 $0 b. $0 $0 c. $0 $0 d. $0 $0 e. TOTAL MATERIAL COSTS (LINES a- d) $19,720 $0 6. MISCELLANEOUS COSTS a. PRIMER OPTIMIZATION, LAB FEES, STUDENT FEES $43, 048 $0 b. FOR ANALYSIS (QUOTE ATTACHED) $0 $0 c. $0 $0 d. $0 $0 e. TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS COSTS (LINES a- d) $0 $0 7. TOTAL HERITAGE COSTS ONLY $ 62,768 (ADD LINES 1, 2, 3C, 4e, 5E, 6e) 8. TOTAL ALL OTHER COSTS $ (ADD LINES 1, 2, 3C, 4e, 5E, 6e) 9. TOTAL HERITAGE TRUST FUND PROJECT COSTS $ 63,000 (ADD LINES 7,8) WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM Rev 12/1/10 Page 4

5 BOARD OF WILDLIFE COMMISSIONERS # TOTAL HERITAGE TRUST FUND PROJECT FUNDING MUST MATCH TOTAL HERITAGE TRUST FUND PROJECT COSTS a. TOTAL HERITAGE TRUST FUND PROJECT FUNDING $ 63,000 b. TOTAL HERITAGE TRUST FUND PROJECT COSTS $ 63,000 TOTAL FROM LINE #9 ARE THERE GOING TO BE ANY ONGOING COSTS FOR THIS PROJECT? YES NO X IF THERE ARE ONGOING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT, IS THERE AN ANTICIPATED FUNDING SOURCE FOR THESE COSTS? YES X NO HOW WILL YOU GIVE CREDIT TO THE HERITAGE TRUST FUND ACCOUNT AND OTHER FUNDING SOURCES? CREDIT WILL BE GIVEN TO THE HERITAGE TRUST FRUND THROUGH ROJECT STATUS UPDATES (E.G. REPORTS, BROCHURES, PRESENTATIONS, PUBLIC COMMUNICATINS, ETC.). ALSO THROUGH PUBLISHED PROFESSIONAL PAPERS. DATE 12/1/2011, REVISED 4/3/2012 PRINT NAME: CARL LACKEY AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE REVIEWED DATE WILDLIFE HERITAGE TRUST ACCOUNT PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM Rev 12/1/10 Page 5

6 30 November 2011 Dear Carl- I m very happy to submit this letter of collaboration for your project entitled Black Bear DNA Sampling and Dispersal. With this letter I confirm that, if awarded, my laboratory would perform all DNA data collection and analysis included in your proposal and help you prepare the results for publication. My laboratory and the Nevada Genomics Center house all equipment and analytical software needed to conduct the research you propose. Likewise, I would oversee the hiring, training and supervision of the graduate researcher supported by this award. This project falls well within my group s expertise and complements our ongoing work with Nevada s bighorn sheep and mule deer. I am particularly enthusiastic about the highly informative, multi-species, landscape genetic perspective the combination of these datasets will provide. Few states could boast such detailed knowledge of functional connectivity of wildlife populations across their landscape. Please let me know if I can provide further information to facilitate the review process and I wish you luck in obtaining funding for this important research. Sincerely- Marjorie Matocq Associate Professor of Wildlife Genetics

7 Wildlife Conservation Society North America Program 301 N. Willson Ave. Bozeman, MT USA Carl Lackey Biologist Nevada Department of Wildlife 1100 Valley Road Reno, Nevada April 2012 Dear Mr. Lackey, I am pleased to submit a letter stating that the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), through my lead, has been involved with research concerning Nevada s black bears since the mid- to late-1990s. Over the past 10 years, when factoring in my time for both field data collection and analyses efforts on the various components of the research and my fundraising efforts, I have committed approximately $10,000 per year towards understanding the black bear population in the Lake Tahoe Basin and western Great Basin of Nevada. I fully anticipate WCS continuing to work with the Nevada Department of Wildlife on this on-going research effort in the coming years and I look forward to working with you and others at NDOW on the important set of research questions outlined in the two Nevada Wildlife Heritage Trust proposals. I have also committed an additional $2,000 in funding that I have raised to help complete the DNA analyses laid out in the proposal titled Black bear DNA sampling and dispersal. Please let me know if you have any further questions or comments. You can reach me at jbeckmann@wcs.org or at the address listed below. Sincerely, Jon P. Beckmann, Ph.D. Conservation Scientist Wildlife Conservation Society-North America Program 301 N. Willson Ave. Bozeman, MT USA jbeckmann@wcs.org

8 Graduate student technician: student $1, months tuition 200 per unit 24 units 4800 fees 400 per seme4 semesters ,000 Primer optimization: trial DNA extractions $ samples 228 normalize DNA conc $ samples 120 PCR optimization $ loci

9 DNA Extraction Service Cost/sample $5.68/sample Normalize DNA concentrations $2.98/sample Multiplexed PCR 10ul reaction $1.51/sample Dilute, add size standard, and 3730 run $2.68/sample Microsatellite Analysis (Genemapper) Total, Extractions thru 3730 run for 1 sample and 2 panels $0.90/sample Plus 20 primer $76/pair (2 sets) Notes: Prices quoted are good through the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012 The costs would depend upon how many primer sets are chosen and how many panels are needed to the cost for 2 panels, and these panels could have as many as 6 primer sets if the sizes and tags work assume you can have a minimum of 4 primer sets per panel. So take the number of primer sets you a you the number of panels and thus the number of PCR and 3730 runs. Be sure to consider the cost of primers (tagged primers run about $70 each and untagged primers run Also consider the cost of software necessary for data analysis.

10 11/29/2011 Per sample costs $5.68 $2.98 x 5 panels $7.55 x 5 panels $12.65 $4.50 $33.36 x 500 samples = $16, $3, = $19, o cover those primer sets. The example lists k out. A good rule of thumb for grants is to anticipate using, divide by 4, and that will give n around $6 each with shipping and handling).

11