Restoration Potential: In general, recovery may be possible if large tracts of forest are preserved, degraded habitat is restored, and habitat fragmentation is minimized.
Subspecies SHERMANI: Recovery potential is low due to the squirrel's low rate of reproduction and recruitment. Preferred habitat, the longleaf pine/wiregrass sandhills, has potential for recovery if the ground cover of wiregrass and associated herbs is relatively intact and if a natural fire regime is initiated. Longleaf pine and wiregrass can be replanted, but little is known about the restoration of other herbs.
Preserve Selection and Design Considerations: Adequate land-use restrictions (buffer zones) around protected populations, and protection of the habitat between protected populations (wildlife corridors), are important considerations in selecting and designing preserves (Cox, unpublished manuscript, 1990).
Kantola (1986) cited the Ordway/Swisher Preserve (Putnam County, Florida) as a good example of a minimum refuge of more than 10 sq km necessary to sustain a viable population of about 200 fox squirrels.
The typically low diversity and seasonality of resource availability in fox squirrel habitat in the southeastern U.S. means that large areas are needed to support fox squirrel populations and reduce potential conflicts with gray squirrels, which are better adapted to exploit hardwood forest and wetland areas. Kantola and Humphrey (1990) and Kantola (1992) suggested the preservation/reclamation of large (at least 25 sq km) areas of heterogeneous natural sandhills vegetation, including both uplands and lower slopes. U.S. Forest Service plans to preserve management areas of greater than 10,000 acres (approximately 40 sq km) for red-cockaded woodpeckers should go far toward the maintenance of fox squirrel populations, with certain caveats.
Management Requirements: Effective land protection in the southeastern U.S. depends upon the protection and restoration of mature longleaf pine-turkey oak sandhill habitats (Weigl et al. 1989, Kantola and Humphrey 1990). Active management of existing intact stands of mature longleaf pine is necessary to restore or maintain the open, parklike understory and prevalence of mast-producing trees. Land management should aim to protect large areas of longleaf pine, as well as associated habitats, notably hardwood bottomlands of suitable age to insure the production of mast, in order to promote the mosaic of habitat types most beneficial to the squirrel (Weigl et al. 1989).
Forest management that mimics natural disturbance regimes should benefit the squirrel. Fire regimes that approach historic patterns (e.g., fire return period of 1-5 years) are necessary to control hardwood understory, prepare a suitable seed bed for longleaf pine, and provide the open, parklike stands required by fox squirrels in the Southeast. Fire exclusion results in an altered canopy, reduced mast production, and creation of habitats that tend to place fox squirrels at a competitive disadvantage compared to coexisting gray squirrels. However, the presence of mature oaks should be encouraged to provide mast and suitable nest cavities (Weigl, pers. comm.).
Means and Grow (1985) concluded that the only hope for longleaf pine is to save and properly manage forests on public lands (e.g., Florida's national forests). They suggested a need for significant change in the management of the national forests. Changes would include such strategies as increases in summer burns, road closures, and reforestation with longleaf pine.
Widespread modification of mature pine-oak communities have also led to fragmentation of squirrel populations and reduced quality of remaining habitats. Efforts are needed to ensure that habitat patches are joined by suitable movement corridors. Changes in timber rotations and control of firewood cutting are critical to a sustained supply of suitable nest cavities (Weigl, pers. comm.). In Florida, traditional management for bobwhite has damaged habitat for fox squirrel (Kantola and Humphrey 1990).
Concern for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker generated increased interest in the preservation and restoration of the longleaf pine forest ecosystem. Because of its large size, and consequent large home range, and its dependence on mature forest stands, the fox squirrel integrates the needs of many other plants and animals dependent on this shrinking resource.
In general, management recommendations for woodpecker habitat, as outlined in the U.S. Forest Service Regional Wildlife Habitat Management Handbook, would apply equally well to the fox squirrel. In particular, institution of a regime of growing season fires on a 2-3-year rotation to control the hardwood midstory, maximize the regeneration and growth of groundcover, and prepare a suitable seedbed for longleaf pine, is important to the maintenance of fox squirrel habitat as well. Reducing physical impediments to burning, including roads and habitat fragmentation, would help reduce the isolation of squirrel subpopulations. Also, the use of uneven-aged timber management based on a rotation age of 70 to 120 years, depending on the pine species, would help provide contiguous areas of foraging habitat for both squirrels and woodpeckers. Williams (1994) pointed out that mechanical site preparation (e.g., roller chopping) should avoid removal of scrub oaks more than 10 inches in diameter.
However, Weigl et al. (1989) pointed a number of instances where woodpecker management and fox squirrel management may conflict. The primary difference between the woodpecker and the fox squirrel lies in the provision of hardwood forest habitats for the squirrel. Removal of all or most of the larger oaks and hickories from among the older pine-oak stands would have a devastating effect on food supply and nest cavity availability for fox squirrels. While hardwood mid-story control would be beneficial, managers should strive to maintain scattered oak trees at least 30 years old or oak groves. A minimum of 10 to 12 large oak trees per acre (25 to 30 trees per hectare) should be left (Weigl, pers. comm.). Fox squirrels prefer nesting in larger hardwood snags and, if such substrates are available, should not compete with woodpeckers for cavity sites (Weigl, pers. comm.). Removal of hardwoods may also increase competition between the woodpecker and other cavity-dependent species.
Preservation of the mature pine-oak forest must also include protection for adjacent lowland habitats. Mature pine forest is not the only habitat type used or required by the squirrel and it need not occur in single large units. A mosaic of habitats, with a substantial mature pine-oak component and access to bottomland forest, appears as beneficial to squirrels as large unbroken tracts of pine forest. Hardwood stringers should be maintained, since fox squirrels heavily utilize lower-lying hardwood areas during dry periods. However, if only stringers are preserved for fox squirrels, with no other hardwood habitats in the upland, fox squirrels may be outcompeted by gray squirrels (Weigl, pers. comm.).
Mixed stands of mast-producing trees are recommended to compensate for variable seed production (Goodrum et al. 1971, Sork 1983). In addition, it should be borne in mind that longleaf pine, upon which fox squirrels depend, have heavy mast crops at intervals of five to seven years, suffer complete crop failures only once or twice every five years, and are only moderately productive in intervening years (Wahlenberg 1946, Schopmeyer 1974, Maki 1952). Land managers can predict mast years from the number of green cones in June, leaving several months to burn in those years best for pine production (Kantola and Humphrey 1990).
Another management consideration is the fox squirrel's status as a game animal across most of its range. Given the possible detrimental effect of hunting on fox squirrels (Wood 1987; Weigl et al. 1989; Noss, pers. comm., 1990), many biologists believe that no hunting of subspecies SHERMANI should be permitted until shown justifiable based on adequate demographic data. Weigl et al. (1989) stated that squirrel populations in the southeastern U.S. probably can support moderate hunting pressure (low bag limit), since low squirrel densities discourage hunters from specifically targeting fox squirrels (Weigl et al. 1989). However, hunting should be confined to the late fall and should be closely monitored. However, as fox squirrel habitat becomes smaller, more fragmented, and more degraded, hunting pressure conceivably could extirpate small relictual populations. Incidental take by sportsmen hunting other species of game might be another deleterious effect of allowing hunting in fox squirrel habitat (Brady 1976).
Because fox squirrels are relatively slow and easy to catch (Noss, pers. comm., 1990), domestic dogs should not be allowed to range freely in occupied fox squirrel habitat.
Management plans need to be developed for many populations of subspecies CINEREUS. Efforts to reintroduce populations of this subspecies into suitable unoccupied habitat should be continued. Bendel and Theres (1994) reported the following results of a translocation in Maryland. Of 20 wild-trapped, translocated squirrels, at least nine died during the first few months after release. All translocated squirrels remained on the release site. The mean distance moved fom the release point was 589 m. Squirrels released in mid-spring moved farther from the release point than did those released in mid-autumn.
See Teaford (1986) for specifications for the construction and placement of wooden nest boxes and rubber tire shelters.
Fox squirrels may be repelled from holes in wooden walls and roof shingles by using paradichlorobenzene or napthalene (moth balls of crystals). Gnawing of plant stems or tree bark may be reduced with the application of tetramethylthiuram disulfide. Methyl nonyl ketone crystals and paradichlorobenzene are used to repel animals from garden and property borders but effectiveness is questionable (see Koprowski 1994).
See also Nixon and Hansen (1987) and files for subspecies.
Management Research Needs: There has been considerable research on fox squirrels over much of the range in the west. The ecology of southeastern populations has been much less well studied, although Weigl et al. (1989) presented a detailed and comprehensive review of the current state of our understanding. The distribution of habitat types on the southeastern Coastal Plain landscape has important consequences for fox squirrels. Additional research is required on the relationships between fox squirrels and longleaf pine habitats, as well as on viable population sizes. Research should address how the size and distribution of habitat patches affects dispersal pattern and, ultimately, gene exchange among local populations.
Biological Research Needs: See MGMT.RSRCH.NEED in element stewardship (ES) files.