An observational study conducted by: Nicholas Blaine Wassam (Undergraduate Student, The Pennsylvania State University)

Eastern Grey Squirrel, Sciurus carolinesis Active during morning Can be found in various habitats
Rural areas Urban areas

http://images.northrup.org/picture/xl/grey-squirrel/easterngrey-squirrel-in-grass.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sciurus_carolinensis_range_map. svg Innes and Lavigne, 1978

State College Area has varying levels of human activity

Parks and small woodland areas Downtown State College Penn State University Campus

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_EPDvrCIZi9g/S8vf1sQotFI/AAAAAAAACrk/RMrUPWYFUk/s1600/DSC_3445_crop_tag_small.jpg http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/state-of-retail-in-state-college-collegeavenue-683670/ http://www.maxkade.psu.edu/OldMain1.jpg

Interactions between humans and squirrels Different levels of human activity and development Approach distance of the squirrels

http://neuroanthropology.file s.wordpress.com/2010/07/sq uirrel-human.jpg

Hypothesis and Expectations of the study Squirrel Activity

Decrease with increase in human development Decrease with increase in human activity

Approach Distance
Decrease with increase in human activity

http://lindachorney.files.wordpress.com/2 012/02/elmer-j-fudd.jpg

Observe 4 plots
Wooded area near Walnut Springs HUB lawn Across the Street from McLanahans Corner of College Ave and High Street

Each plot was 10m by 10m

Had varying amounts of pavement

Observe for 10 minutes at a time

Record the number of:
Squirrels Humans and Vehicles

Approach distance when a squirrel was spotted in plot

Approach and observe distance

Observations normally made between 10am and 12pm Made note of weather and behaviors

Approach distance was classified by a 0-5 scale:

0 1 2 3 4 5 = = = = = = Less than 5 ft 5 ft 5-10 ft 10 ft 10-15 ft 15 or more ft

Average Number of Squirrels at Four Locations of Study

Average Number of Squirrels 2.500 2.000 1.500 1.000 0.500 0.000 1 2 3 4 20.000 15.000 10.000 Vehicles 5.000 0.000 1 2 3 4 Location Total Humans Location Number y = 5.5385e-1.035x R = 0.9873

Average # of Squirrels Expon. (Average # of Squirrels)

Average Human Activity at Four

Locations of Study
Average Number of Humans and

Average Categorical Approach

Distance of Squirrels at Four
Avergae Categorical Approach Distance

Locations
5

4
3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 Location Number Categorical Spook Distance

One-way ANOVA: Squirrels versus Location Source DF SS MS F P Location 3 24.077 8.026 10.10 0.000 Error 48 38.154 0.795 Total 51 62.231 S = 0.8916 R-Sq = 38.69% R-Sq. (adj) = 34.86%

One-way ANOVA: Distance versus Location Source DF SS MS F P Location 3 8.84 2.95 1.66 0.200 Error 27 48.00 1.78 Total 30 56.84 S = 1.333 R-Sq. = 15.55% R-Sq. (adj) = 6.17%

Results show that:

Location does effect squirrel activity Location does not effect approach distance Human activity does not effect approach distance

Reasons:
Less habitat Adapted to human activity and presence

My hypotheses:
Squirrel Activity
Decrease with increase in human development Decrease with increase in human activity

Approach Distance
Decrease with increase in human activity

Relation to hypotheses:
Squirrel activity did decrease Activity had no effect on approach distance

Big Picture
The presence of humans

Future Directions
Adolescent vs adults Native vs Non-native Similar to the lizard study by Dr. Langkilde

http://www.virginiaherpetologicalsociety. com/reptiles/lizards/eastern-fencelizard/sp_eastern%20fence%20lizard%20( Sceloporous%20undulatus)001.jpg