Final: Even the squirrels are different

Jeremy Happach
Naosuke Nemoto
Lyndsey Godwin
Mike Forrester
NS Sec C
Chris Meyers

STUDENT-GENERATED LAB PROPOSAL:

ABSTRACT

Since peoples population is booming, we just recently hit the 6 billion mark, we
will need to take more and more land away from its natural state and transform it into land
we need to live on. As we grow and take land away from nature it will need to adapt. Our
goal is to study the behavior of gray squirrels in Oxford, Ohio. We will compare the
activities of squirrels that live on main campus to those that live on Western Campus. Our
group will measure their predatory response to determine which group of squirrels is more
sensitive to human presence. We will also look at the squirrelís tendency to learn and
adapt to threats and changes in their environment. We hypothesize that squirrels on Main
Campus are less likely to flee from humans than squirrels on Western Campus. We
believe this because we think that squirrel become acclimated toward people over time
and since there is a grater population density on the Main Campus we think the squirrels
will allow people to approach closer.
We also will be looking at factors that make a squirrel feel comfortable and allow
humans closer. We believe that trees, since they provide a source of shelter for the
squirrels, will make the squirrels more comfortable. Therefore, we believe that the closer a
squirrel is to a tree, the close it will allow a human to approach.
INTRODUCTION
The main diet of squirrels consist of tree seeds and masts. While in season
squirrels prefer to eat fruits, flowers, leave buds, bark, roots, fungi, and carrion (Allen 1.)
Their main source of water is from the plants they consume and pools of water near their
inhabitancy (Allen 2). Their food source also provides a home for the animals.
The gray squirrel finds its habitat in the branches of trees. They gray squirrel
makes its den in mature hardwood forests which have dense ground cover. Trees they
prefer to make a den in are ash, elm, oak, hickory, beech, bald cypress, sycamore,
sassafras, and basswood (mostly in the eastern United States) (Allen 3). These trees are
used to rear their young and to provide shelter during the winter (Allen 2). These trees
not only provide protection, but a sense of comfort and an easy place to escape. For all
animals there is the response of fight or flight. The trees allow for that option for squirrels
and often end up as the choice. It has been proven through experimentation with deer
that those who have shelter close by are less reactive to distractions (Herrmann). It is a
truth through all of animal kind that shelter makes one more comfortable. It can even be
seen in humans. Humans have a tendency to feel more uncomfortable in new and
different situations. They can be seen as nervous, jumpy and fidgety. While at home or in
familar situations they feel comfortable and have few problems.
The gray squirrel has various types of defense mechanisms to protect themselves
and their young. A gray squirrel will fiercely defend their pups and burrow and when
provoked will attack and bite. A known predator of the squirrel is a snake. Squirrels have
adapted to snakes by being able to tell the size of the snake and how likely it is to strike.
This is one of many ways in which squirrels have come to adapt to their surroundings.
(Kelly Stewart, Dept. of Anthropology, University of California, Davis,
http://www.anthro.ucdavis.edu/features/stp/stpsquir.htm)
A squirrel when startled utters a sound like ëkuksí and showing quick rigid tail
flicks. The tail may be considered an alarm response. Slow ëkuksí are an indication of
alarm and associated with tail waving and ëquaaí sounds which are vocalized at a higher
frequency. Immediately after an animal has been frightened, interval sounds are short and
as danger passes, the intervals become short. (Robert H. Horwich, The ontogeny of social
behavior in the gray squirrel, pp.28)
As areas become more humanly populated squirrels are forced to find new ways of
surviving. Squirrels are adapting in some ways almost to well for some people. They are
live in our attics, eat out of our gardens, running under our lawn mower, get trapped in
chimneys, fall in to swimming pools and drown (Wild 2). It seems that every where you
look there is a squirrel.
Its a fact that in some areas such as Washington DC ìsquirrels have become as
numerous as bureaucrats, and government buildings have put up no feeding signs. One
guy has become so aggressive about hand outs that he climbs up your leg(wreaks havoc on
you nylons) to get the food. Others will take a nut and chase you down the street for more
if they feel shortedî (Wild 1). These of course are extreme examples of what has
happened between people and our furry friends.
It is a well known fact that the population of Western Campus is smaller than the
main campus of Miami University. We have chosen to study the differences between the
squirrels on the Western Campus of Miami University and the squirrels on the main
campus. Our group wants to see that if squirrels in this area (Miami University) have been
affected by the amount of Miami students that walk by them everyday. Our hypothesis is
that since there are more people and a higher density on the main campus squirrels that
are on the main campus will let humans walk closer to them than the squirrels on the
Western Campus where there is not as high density of people. This is an interesting
subject to our group because with the explosion in the population of the human race it is
obvious that some areas of nature will need to adapt in order to survive.
We will take the measurement from where the person is standing to where the squirrel
feels threatened and starts to run. We will document the environment that the squirrel
was in when it ran in order to get a homogeneous view that our squirrels were in.

OTHER EXPERIMENTS
There have been numerous experiments which have been conducted on animals
to better understand their behavioural process. An experiment done by two scientists,
Bouissou and Vandenheede shows that there is a difference in fear reaction of ewes
towards different objects. They used humans, human-like models, and a plastic cylinder to
study the reaction of the ewes. The ewes were apparently very disturbed by humans and
the model but not the cylinder. Unfortunately there was little difference in how the ewes
reacted to the human and the human-like model. Yet it showed that some animals react
differently to significantly different objects. As the experiment waned on, they noticed that
the interactions between the different objects and the sheep led to familiarization which
helped in reducing the sheepís fear of humans. This technique of gradually building up an
animalís trust has been used for a long time now in the farming industry. Farmers usually
handle and train their livestock at an early age so that they will be easier to handle during
chores like milking, herding, and slaughtering (Bouissau).
There is another experiment which was conducted on Red Deer in order to see
whether the habitat of the animal effects their disturbance reaction. Three groups of deer
were kept in separate paddocks which had different setups. The first had no features. The
second paddock had access to a forest and the third had a shelter. The animals were
exposed to human presence, noise, and other disturbances. It was noted that the older
deer showed a significantly greater level of disturbance while the young appeared less
unsettled. Surprisingly, the animals with shelter showed much less disturbance reactions
that those exposed out in the open (Herrmann).

METHODS
Many observations need to be made before the experiments themselves can
begging to have any significance. First there must be a survey of the physical layout of the
area where the experiments will take place. We will find an average of the trees in each
area to look at the escape routes offered for the squirrels. We will do this in four areas of
main campus, Academic, South and North quads, as well as Bishop woods. There will be
three areas in Western, Boyd field, the area between Patterson and the Western Alumni
Hall, and the wooded area beside Bishop hall. ( weíll refer to this as Bishop field.)
Average population of both main and Western campus will also be found through
research and will be factored into or results. These numbers will be used to compare the
distances and adaptation of the squirrels.
The actual experimentation involving squirrels will occur in the areas above
mentioned in both Western and Main. This is when the students will be used. The
students will be used to do our squirrel counting. The class will be split up into seven
groups of three and each of these groups will be sent to one of the seven sections: McKee
field, McGuffey, the Tappan area, East quad , Bishop field, Boyd field and
Patterson/Alumni field. Each group will be given two pieces of fifty foot string, masking
tape (two pieces marked for each measurement), and a campus map. Each group will be
asked to approach and measure for at least seven different squirrels, more if time allows.
One member of the group will approach a squirrel at a somewhat slow pace while the
other two pay close attention to the squirrels current location. As soon as the squirrel
moves, the approached must stop and the distance between him/her and the previous
location of the squirrel. The measurements will be taken by using one end of the string as
the place of the approached and marking the squirrelís location with the appropriately
numbered pieces of masking tape. The distance between the squirrelís previous location
and the nearest tree will also be measured using a similar method, except making the
squirrel the end of the string and placing the masking tape at the location of the nearest
tree. This measurement will be used to look at the squirrelís feelings of safety and
security, by looking for itís nearest escape route. In addition the distances from the person
to the squirrel and from the squirrel to the tree, we will count the number of trees that are
present in each area that is to be tested. This will help look at how comfortable the
squirrels are in each area. The results from each region will then be compared to
decipher which squirrels have the smallest personal space. These results will then be used
to determine the adaptation tendencies of squirrels. We are specifically looking at
whether squirrels have the ability and do adapt, we will not be looking at the things that
affect the squirrelís tendencies to flee.
RESULTS
The first thing for some one to look at is whether the question ìIs there a
significant difference between Western Squirrels and Main Campus Squirrels,î answered?
The answer according to the P test that we did was no. There was a p value of .6229
which shows that we cannot reject the Null Hypothesis and that any difference that we
found could have happened due solely to chance. Actually we were surprised with the
results. We were able to get closer the squirrels on Western Campus than the ones on
Main Campus. We expected the squirrels to have adapted to the larger number of people
on Main campus, but found that this was not the case. The difference between the
average approach distances of Western and Main is small at .438 yards. The closest we
were able to get to a squirrel was 0.43 meters which was on Western Campus. The
squirrel that ran at the furthest distance measured at 12.27 meters on Main. The average
distances for each area were; Boyd- 2.25 m, Patterson 4.637 m, McKee 3.317 m,
McGuffey 3.348, Bishop 2.429m, Tappan 5.365 m, East Quad 4.282 m.Of all the
squirrels we measured the average distance of 3.87 meters on the whole of campus. On
Main Campus the average distance was a little over 4.047 meters. While on Western
Campus the average distance was 3.609 meters.
In addition to looking at the difference of approach distances between Main and
Western campus, we also looked at the way the squirrelís distance to a tree affected how
close a human could come. We found that the closeness of a tree had a very significant
affect on the approach distance of the human. Our P-test resulted in a value of .0241,
hence rejecting the Null hypothesis and bring our attention to the fact that this would be a
factor to be look at closely. The P value was that of .0241 showing that we need to reject
the Null hypothesis and realize that the closer the squirrel is to the tree the closer they will
allow you to come. Basically the closer a squirrel is to the tree then the closer the squirrel
will allow people to approach it. Since this was proven to be a factor, it would make sense
that the higher number of trees in an area, the closer a human could get. With a higher
number of trees, the easier it is for a squirrel to be close to a tree and therefore humans
could approach much closer. Our p-test of .4248 shows an significant correlation between
the number of trees and squirrelís distance to a tree. Bishop woods was our most densely
forested area with aproximetly 75 trees in that was tested. Not surprising we were able to
get the closest to the squirrels in this area of campus because they felt the most
comfortable with all the trees around. Boyd, while it has a significantly smaller number of
trees at about 15 allowed humans to approach almost equally as close as Bishop woods.
At the area surrounding Tappan hall the tree population is very sparse. There are only
about 5 trees in this open area so the squirrels have no little protection and therefore kept
at the furthest distances. The average distances from squirrel to tree at each location
measure; Boyd 1.65 m, Patterson 6.25 m, Mckee 3.85 m, McGuffey .540 m, Bishop
4.821 m, Tappan 4.305 m, East Quad 2.213 m.
In addition to this information, we looked at whether site had an affect on the
approach distance of the squirrel, which because the site has a certain number trees, it
does. This is a simple idea, but it adds more support to our ideas. Inversely, the site has
no influence on the squirrelís distance to a tree. Our p-test value of .7454 shows that any
differences that may be found would be purely chance.

ANALYSIS
This is the area of the report where we discuss the possible variables that could
have interfered with our data. One factor is the idea that since we used many people to
collect the data. The different people collecting the data could have affected how close
the squirrels allowed the group to get. For example is that a big person could startle a
squirrel quicker than a than a smaller person because the squirrel could perceive the larger
animal as a bigger threat. Also these people could approach the squirrels at different
speeds. These varying speeds could affect how the squirrel perceives the person as a
threat. Other possible personal characteristics that may have affected our results include
any noises that the approached may have been making such as laughing and talking. Test
have also been done that suggest that certain colors may affect a squirrelís reaction. This
leads to the idea that the colors that the approached was wearing may also affect our
results.
It has been observed that the squirrels were more likely to take flight as soon as
you stepped off of the sidewalk. The reason for this may be the fact that they are
accustomed to people sticking to their normal routes (the side walk) and they feel
threatened when people vary from their set patterns. So people are more likely to get
closer to a squirrel who is close to the sidewalk where the observer is walking and if a tree
is close by.
One group of observers noted that Miami was moving the lawns when they were
trying to observe squirrels. Obviously, large and loud machines are threatening and
frightening to nearly all animals. Most likely the lawn mower had already put a sense of
apprehension in the squirrels so when a human approached they were more likely to run
more quickly due to an already present state of fear.
Squirrels also have a tendency to be more jumping and easily moved when
protcting food or offspirng, like any other animal. So if a group was approaching a squirrel
that was on the hunt for food, carrying food, or watching its children, it is understandable
that the approachers would not be able to get as close.
When looking at the lack of difference between Main and Western campuses it
seemed slightly surprising that the squirrels on main would not let us closer due to the idea
that they would be more accustomed to more interaction with people because of the
higher traffic and population. The aspect that we did not take into consideration is the
squirrels tend to have large territory and they tend to move around a lot. This means that
the squirrels that are on main one day may be on western the next. That can then be
translated into the fact that the squirrels are not and will not adapt to one specific area of
campus. Instead, the squirrels have adapted to the general traffic of the entire campus.
This would explain the close results that we attained between the two general testing areas.
As mentioned previously in the paper, studies have shown that studies that age has
an effect on reactions to disturbances. Since there was no way for us to judge a squirrelís
age, there is no way for us to factor this variable into our results. Things such as sex,
disease and injury could also in such a way affect our data. It may be that either males or
females are more easily frightened, but we are unable to determine sex and therefore can
also not factor that in. As for disease and injury, these factors are also very difficult to
determine. Through some experience with wild animals, diseased and injured animals
tend to act one of two ways. Either they will try harder to stay away from things that are
possible threats, or they will allow the threats to come abnormally close. A possible
example of an injured squirrel that we personally encountered would be the squirrel found
with a tail that had no fuzzy hair. The group that found this specimen recorded its closest
approach distance while testing.

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu

Here is a list of responses that have been posted to this Study...

• Friends Child has been bit (5/29/00) [ Contributor: -Section: doesn't matter ]

Respond to this Submission!

IMPORTANT: For each Response, make sure the title of the response is different than previous titles shown above!

Visit the rest of the site!