DOCSLIB.ORG

A Few Minutes Taken to Carefully Read This Section Will Facilitate the Use of These Maps and Tables in This Report. Colony Numbe

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Few Minutes Taken to Carefully Read This Section Will Facilitate the Use of These Maps and Tables in This Report. Colony Numbe Breeding populations of seabirds in California, 1989-1991. Volume I - population estimates Item Type monograph Authors Carter, Harry R.; McChesney, Gerard J.; Jaques, Deborah L.; Strong, Craig S.; Parker, Michael W.; Takekawa, Jean E.; Jory, Deborah L.; Whitworth, Darrell L. Publisher U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Download date 05/10/2021 11:10:39 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/1834/27469 BOW TO USE MAPS AND TABLES A few minutes taken to carefully read this section will facilitate the use of these maps and tables in this report. Colony Numberinq Systems Varoujean (1979) and Sowls et al. (1980) identified the location of each breeding colony known in California on 1 of 11 u. s. Geological survey (USGS) maps which cover the entire California coast. An index to these maps has been presented in Figure 53. Colonies were numbered under a u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) colony numberinq system covering the entire united States. The first three digits of the six-digit USFWS catalog number for each colony was the map number, whereas the last three digits were colony identifiers (each specific for a nesting colony area within that map) • However, because seabird colonies were discovered over a period of time, USFWS colony numbers within each of the maps were not sequential along the coast. Many new colonies were identified by Sowls et al. (1980) and 1989-1991 (This study), after colony numbers were assigned initially by Varoujean (1979). As did Sowls et al. (1980), we retained these original USFWS colony numbers and added new colony numbers as necessary. In this way, survey data for specific colonies over time always was attributed to the same colony site. While it was critical to have this standardized USFWS colony numbering system and for it not to change over time, it has become more difficult and confusing to access data from the Catalog as new colonies were discovered. Colony numbers increasingly have become out of numerical and north-to-south order along the coast. These data have been recently computerized, alleviating this problem to some extent for those who have access to this, previous, and future data sets. However, many users of this report will not have this flexibility. Thus, we developed the California ( CA) colony numbering system that: 1) ordered all known and historical colonies in 1989-1991 from north to south; 2) allowed for additions of new colonies in the future without jumbling the numerical or north-to-south order of colony numbers over a large section of coast; and 3) separated colonies into political units (i.e. county) as well as more natural geographic units (e.g. Channel Islands). We recognized that the CA system must be not only more useful than the USFWS system but also must be compatible with the USFWS system. Thus, we built the CA system as a subdivision of the USFWS system. We also recognized that the CA system will only apply to California and will not be adopted at the national level. For this reason, we cross referenced USFWS and CA colony numbers in the tables and appendices such that the user can choose to use either system. In Figure 54, we presented the 29 CA system map blocks (plus separated blocks for the Farallon Islands (FAI); San Francisco Bay I-276 (SFB); Channel Islands National Park Area; and the Southern Channel Islands. When juxtaposed with the 11 larger map blocks of the USFWS system (Figure 53), one will notice the relationship to the CA blocks and latitude. The 29 blocks were 20' latitude subdivisions of the coast. Each block's number referred to it's latitude and thus has inherent· value in describing a colony's location (e.g. 384 = 38°40' to 39°00'N). However, since several counties may occur within this latitude block, we have prefaced it with a two-letter coastal county code (Table 48). Thus, all colonies were first assigned a county code. This designation was especially important for the four separated blocks where the latitude block number was omitted. In the Channel Islands, we replaced the latitude identifier with abbreviations for each island: san Miguel Island (SMI), Santa Rosa Island (SRI), Santa cruz Island (SZI), Anacapa Island (ANI), Santa Barbara Island (SBI), San Nicolas Island (SNI), santa catalina Island (CAI) and San Clemente Island (CLI). For the Channel Islands, colonies were presented in the above island order and colonies were numbered in a clockwise direction starting at the northwest corner of each island. In San Francisco Bay, we prefaced colony numbers with SFB to prevent confusion with colonies in some of the same counties (Sonoma, Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo) on the outer coast. Similar ·to the Channel Islands, colonies in San Francisco Bay were not presented in north to south order. Instead, colonies were ordered in a clockwise direction starting at the north end of the Golden Gate Bridge. The two-digit suffix was the colony identifier (each specific for a colony area within the county and 20' latitude block or other block). Since these blocks were much smaller than the USFWS system maps, we felt that it was necessary to assign only two digits since fewer than one hundred colonies could occur within a county or island in a CA system map block. To demonstrate differences between the USFWS and CA colony numbering systems, we considered the following example: USFWS system 325-006 Castle Rock CA systein DN-414-06 Castle Rock If unfamiliar with the USFWS system, one would know nothing about where castle Rock was located and would be confused between castle Rocks in Del Norte, Monterey, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties. Even once familiar with the USFWS system, we still would only know that this colony occurred somewhere between 40° and 42° N latitude. Using the CA system, we know that this colony was located in Del Norte (DN) county, between 41° 40' and 42° OO' N latitude, was the sixth colony from the north end of the county coast and undoubtedly was Castle Rock National Wildlife Refuge. I-277 Tables: Estimates of numbers of breedinq birds by species and colony For each colony, we have presented non-rounded estimates of the number of breeding birds (not breeding pairs) for each species under the "TOTAL BIRDS" column-. In a few cases, "X" or "P" indicated that birds were breeding or probably/possibly breeding but an estimate of the number of breeding birds was not available. Actual raw numbers obtained during censuses were presented under 1 11 11 the "NEST ', 11 BIRD , and 11 SITE columns (see methods for how raw numbers were treated to obtain breeding bird estimates). Raw numbers will be more valuable for some users' purposes. The letters 11 ND 11 indicated that no data were collected or a complete count was not available. Numbers of nests included: nests that were empty, attended by an adult in incubating posture, attended by adult(s) standing in or beside a nest, or eggs/chicks were present. Sometimes, the numbers of nests could not be or were only partially determined, usually due to poor observing conditions, large chicks creching or leaving nests or ·nests were not visible (e.g. Common Murres). Numbers of birds included: birds in nesting areas only (i.e. Double-crested and B~andt's Cormorants, Western Gull, and Common Murre); all birds combined from nesting areas, on the ocean near land, and flying over water/land (i.e. Black Oystercatcher, Pigeon Guillemot, Rhinoceros Auklet, and Tufted Puffin); birds in the nesting area plus roosting birds at active subcolony sites only (i.e. Pelagic Cormorant); or birds mist-netted, heard, or otherwise found at colonies (.i.e. storm-petrels) . Sometimes, numbers of birds could not be or were only partially determined, usually due to poor observing conditions, large chicks mixing with adults, flushing of adults, etc. Numbers of sites included: possible nest sites where birds were recorded in a probable/possible nest location but nests were not observed (i.e. Black oystercatcher, Western Gull); potential nest sites attended by birds but nests were not present or when these were not distinguished from active nests (i.e. Pelagic Cormorant); burrow/crevice entrances counted on nesting islands (i.e. Pigeon Guillemot, Xantus' Murrelet, Cassin's Auklet, Rhinoceros Auklet, and Tufted Puffin); or (usually) burrow/crevice entrances attended by birds that were counted from boats (i.e. Pigeon Guillemot, Tufted Puffin). All CENSUS DATES were in 1989-1991, except where historical or other data were substituted due to incomplete coverage. CENSUS METHODS were coded as in Table 49. When colonies and/or subcolonies were censused more than once, we selected the census with the highest number of nests, birds, andfor sites for estimating numbers of breeding birds. When more than one census date and/or method was indicated for a species in tables, numbers of nests, birds, and sites have been summed from different subcolonies or different parts of the same subcolony. ' To assist comparisons between 1975-1980 and 1989-1991 surveys, we asterisked newly-discovered colony numbers, newly-discovered I-278 nesting species at previously-known colonies and newly-rediscovered historical information. In addition, when a species was not found nestinq at a colony in 1989-1991 where it had nested previously, we appended information on the most recent nesting of historically­ nesting species. We have not included data on rocks, islands, or mainland points where either only roosting or no birds were observed in 1989-1991 or 1979-1980 surveys. In 1989-1991, we combed almost the entire coast so that any rock that has not been listed as a colony can be considered to have been checked at least once dur.inq the main part of the breeding season.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sausalito's Vision for 2040
    The introductory chapter provides an overview of the General Plan, describing the purpose of the plan and its role for the City of Sausalito. The Introduction includes Sausalito’s Vision for 2040, the Authority and Purpose, Organization of the Sausalito General Plan, Implementation of the Plan, Public Participation in Creating the Plan, Sausalito’s History, and Future Trends and Assumptions. SAUSALITO’S VISION FOR 2040 VISION STATEMENT Sausalito is a thriving, safe, and friendly community that sustainably cultivates its natural beauty, history, and its arts and waterfront culture. Due to sea level rise and the continuing effects of climate change, the city seeks to bridge the compelling features and attributes of the city’s past, particularly its unique shoreline neighborhoods, with the environmental inevitabilities of its future. Sausalito embraces environmental stewardship and is dedicated to climate leadership while it strives to conserve the cultural, historic, artistic, business and neighborhood diversity and character that make up the Sausalito community. OVERALL COMMUNITY GOALS The General Plan Update addresses the new and many continuing issues confronting the city since the General Plan was adopted in 1995. The General Plan Update also responds to the many changing conditions of the region, county, and city since the beginning of the 21st century. The following eleven broad goals serve as the basis for more specific policies and implementation strategies. 1. Maintain Sausalito’s small-scale residential neighborhoods, recognizing their geographical, architectural, and cultural diversity, while supporting a range of housing options. 2. Recognize and perpetuate the defining characteristics of Sausalito, including its aesthetic beauty, scenic features, natural and built environment, its history, and its diverse culture.
    [Show full text]
  • China Camp State Park 101 Peacock Gap Trail San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 456-0766
    Our Mission The mission of California State Parks is to provide for the health, inspiration and an Pablo Bay’s education of the people of California by helping S China Camp to preserve the state’s extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and intertidal salt marshlands cultural resources, and creating opportunities State Park for high-quality outdoor recreation. provide ideal habitat for grass shrimp and shorebirds near the remnants of a former California State Parks supports equal access. Chinese fishing village. Prior to arrival, visitors with disabilities who need assistance should contact the park at (415) 456-0766. If you need this publication in an alternate format, contact [email protected]. CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS P.O. Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 For information call: (800) 777-0369 (916) 653-6995, outside the U.S. 711, TTY relay service www.parks.ca.gov China Camp State Park 101 Peacock Gap Trail San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 456-0766 www.parks.ca.gov/chinacamp © 2010 California State Parks (Rev. 2015) M agnificent panoramic views and miles The Coast Miwok land at Point San Pedro were able of multi-use trails greet visitors to China was eventually taken from them through to continue Camp State Park. History buffs, water a Spanish land grant called Rancho San harvesting enthusiasts, hikers, cyclists, and equestrians Pedro, Santa Margarita y las Gallinas. The shrimp, aided will all find unforgettable experiences here. grant was given to Timothy Murphy. After by a new net Murphy’s death in 1850, that land was designed PARK HISTORY divided and sold to the McNear family, the in 1924 by Native People owners until the mid-1900s.
    [Show full text]
  • Goga Wrfr.Pdf
    The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top: Golden Gate Bridge, Don Weeks Middle: Rodeo Lagoon, Joel Wagner Bottom: Crissy Field, Joel Wagner ii CONTENTS Contents, iii List of Figures, iv Executive Summary, 1 Introduction, 7 Water Resources Planning, 9 Location and Demography, 11 Description of Natural Resources, 12 Climate, 12 Physiography, 12 Geology, 13 Soils, 13
    [Show full text]
  • Birding Northern California by Jean Richmond
    BIRDING NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Site Guides to 72 of the Best Birding Spots by Jean Richmond Written for Mt. Diablo Audubon Society 1985 Dedicated to my husband, Rich Cover drawing by Harry Adamson Sketches by Marv Reif Graphics by dk graphics © 1985, 2008 Mt. Diablo Audubon Society All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means without prior permission of MDAS. P.O. Box 53 Walnut Creek, California 94596 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . How To Use This Guide .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Birding Etiquette .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Terminology. Park Information .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 One Last Word. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 Map Symbols Used. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 Acknowledgements .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 Map With Numerical Index To Guides .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 The Guides. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 Where The Birds Are. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 158 Recommended References .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 165 Index Of Birding Locations. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 166 5 6 Birding Northern California This book is a guide to many birding areas in northern California, primarily within 100 miles of the San Francisco Bay Area and easily birded on a one-day outing. Also included are several favorite spots which local birders
    [Show full text]
  • China Camp State Park
    1 San Francisco Bay Area Water Trail Site Description for China Camp State Park Location, Ownership, and Management: China Camp State Park, owned by the California State Parks and operated by Friends of China Camp, is located on the San Rafael shoreline of San Pablo Bay off of North San Pedro Road Road. Boaters can launch from a scenic beach located next to the pier and historic China Camp Village. The site is popular with kayakers and stand up paddlers because it is very scenic and is a good launch spot to explore the Marin shoreline. Contact Name: Maria Mowrey Contact Phone: (707) 769-5652 Contact E-mail: [email protected] Village Beach (south) Boat Launch Path Village Beach (north) Facility Description: China Camp State Park offers an exceptionally scenic setting for non- motorized boating from the sandy shoreline near the China Camp village. The beach near China Camp village is a sand and pebble beach that extends 0.25 miles, with a designated boat launch area located in the southern portion of the village area parking lot. China Camp village has an unpaved parking lot, restrooms, picnic tables, boat rinse, and showers. The Quan Bros. snack shop at China Camp village is open on weekends. Food, beverages, and ice cream are available. The museum and remaining historic structures from the village and a pier are also located here. Paved parking is also available at the top of the hill leading down to China Camp village, approximately 600 feet from the boat launch area. In addition to facilities at the village, China Camp State Park offers swimming, windsurfing, wildlife-watching, hike-in / bike-in camping, picknicking and 15 miles of mountain biking, hiking, and equestrian trails.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Bay Plan
    San Francisco Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission In memory of Senator J. Eugene McAteer, a leader in efforts to plan for the conservation of San Francisco Bay and the development of its shoreline. Photo Credits: Michael Bry: Inside front cover, facing Part I, facing Part II Richard Persoff: Facing Part III Rondal Partridge: Facing Part V, Inside back cover Mike Schweizer: Page 34 Port of Oakland: Page 11 Port of San Francisco: Page 68 Commission Staff: Facing Part IV, Page 59 Map Source: Tidal features, salt ponds, and other diked areas, derived from the EcoAtlas Version 1.0bc, 1996, San Francisco Estuary Institute. STATE OF CALIFORNIA GRAY DAVIS, Governor SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 50 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2600 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111 PHONE: (415) 352-3600 January 2008 To the Citizens of the San Francisco Bay Region and Friends of San Francisco Bay Everywhere: The San Francisco Bay Plan was completed and adopted by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission in 1968 and submitted to the California Legislature and Governor in January 1969. The Bay Plan was prepared by the Commission over a three-year period pursuant to the McAteer-Petris Act of 1965 which established the Commission as a temporary agency to prepare an enforceable plan to guide the future protection and use of San Francisco Bay and its shoreline. In 1969, the Legislature acted upon the Commission’s recommendations in the Bay Plan and revised the McAteer-Petris Act by designating the Commission as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the Act and the Bay Plan for the protection of the Bay and its great natural resources and the development of the Bay and shore- line to their highest potential with a minimum of Bay fill.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Whole-Colony Counts of Common Murres, Brandt’s Cormorants and Double-crested Cormorants at Sample Colonies in Northern and Central California, 1996-2004 Phillip J. Capitolo, Gerard J. McChesney, Harry R. Carter, Michael W. Parker, James N. Hall, Richard J. Young, and Richard T. Golightly Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California; and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Newark, California Final Report - March 2006 Whole-Colony Counts of Common Murres, Brandt’s Cormorants and Double-crested Cormorants at Sample Colonies in Northern and Central California, 1996-2004 Phillip J. Capitolo1, Gerard J. McChesney2, Harry R. Carter3, Michael W. Parker4, James N. Hall1, Richard J. Young1, and Richard T. Golightly1 1Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 USA 2U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, P.O. Box 524, Newark, California 94560 USA 3Carter Biological Consulting, 1015 Hampshire Road, British Columbia V8S 4S8 Canada 4Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 27820 South Centennial Road, Lima, Montana 59739 USA Final Report Intergovernmental Agreement # MOA-2004-183/1274 (DOI/FWS Agreement Code CRA-2004-1971-1102) between National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Cooperative Agreement #14-48-0001-96502 between U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, and Humboldt State University Foundation March 2006 Suggested Citation: Capitolo, P. J., G. J. McChesney, H. R. Carter, M. W. Parker, J. N. Hall, R. J. Young, and R.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council
    Sonoma-Marin Coastal Regional Sediment Management Report Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council February 2018 Report Citation GFNMS Advisory Council, 2018. Sonoma-Marin Coastal Regional Sediment Management Report. Report of the Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council for the Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. San Francisco, CA. 197 pp. Cover photos (top left) Bodega Harbor Dredging, Cea Higgins (top right) Gleason Beach area, Doug George (bottom left) Aerial view of Stinson Beach and Seadrift, Bob Wilson (bottom right) Bolinas Highway revetment, Kate Bimrose This work was made possible with support from: i Sonoma-Marin Coastal Regional Sediment Management Working Group Members Chair: Cea Higgins, Sonoma Coast Surfrider; Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS) Advisory Council Hattie Brown, Sonoma County Regional Parks Jon Campo, Marin County Parks Clif Davenport, Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup Ashley Eagle-Gibbs, Environmental Action Committee of West Marin Brook Edwards, Wildlands Conservancy Leslie Ewing, California Coastal Commission Luke Farmer, Wildlands Conservancy Shannon Fiala, California Coastal Commission Stefan Galvez, Caltrans Brannon Ketcham, National Park Service, Point Reyes National Seashore John Largier, UC Davis Bodega Marine Lab, Sanctuary Advisory Council chair Neil Lassettre, Sonoma County Water Agency Bob Legge, Russian Riverkeeper Jack Liebster, County of Marin Planning Department Jeannine Manna, California Coastal Commission Abby Mohan,
    [Show full text]
  • HARBOR SEAL, Phoca Vitalina Richardsi, CENSUS in CALIFORNIA, MAY - JUNE, 1987
    fi National Marine Fisheries Service g fi g SOUTHWEST REGION 300 S. Ferry Street Terminal Island, CA 90731 HARBOR SEAL, Phoca Vitalina richardsi, CENSUS IN CALIFORNIA, MAY - JUNE, 1987 Doyle A. Hanan, John P. Scholl, and Sandra L. Diamond June 1988 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT SWR 88- 2 This Administrative Report is issued as an informal document to ensure prompt dissemination of preliminary results, interim reports, and special studies. We recommend that it not be abstracted or cited. HARBOR SEAL, PHOCA VITULINA RICHARDSI, CENSUS fig IN CALIFORNIA, MAY-JUNE, 1987 by Doyle A. Hanan California Department of Fish and Game c/o Southwest Fisheries Center La Jolla, California 92038 John Scholl and Sandra Diamond California Department of Fish and Game 1301 West Twelfth Street Long Beach, California 90813 December 1987 Final Report Submitted to: National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region 300 South Ferry Street Terminal Island, California 90731 in partial fulfillment of COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NO. NA86ABH00018 LIBRARY APR 3 1992 | N.O.A.A. I LIS. Dept, of Commerce j EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Harbor seals were censused along the California coast and off-shore islands during May and June, 1987. Vertical photographs were taken of the seals from an airplane flying directly above, as the seals rested on shore. Counts of the seals were then made from the photographic negatives. Seals were also counted at 27 resting sites by shore based observers. The California total was 19,622 seals which is higher than any previous census. HARBOR SEAL, PHOCA VITULINA RICHARDSI, CENSUS IN CALIFORNIA, MAY-JUNE 1987 by Doyle Hanan, John Scholl, and Sandra Diamond INTRODUCTION AND METHODS California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) initiated a harbor seal, Phoca vitulina richardsi, census along the mainland California coast in 1981 as part of a cooperative marine mammal assessment program with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
    [Show full text]
  • Changes in Breeding Population Size of Brandt's and Double-Crested
    Changes in Breeding Population Size of Brandt’s and Double-crested Cormorants in California, 1975-2003 Phillip J. Capitolo1, Harry R. Carter1,4, Richard J. Young1, Gerard J. McChesney2, William R. McIver1,5, Richard T. Golightly1, and Franklin Gress3 1Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California 95521 USA 2San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 524, Newark, California 94560 USA 3California Institute of Environmental Studies, 3408 Whaler Avenue, Davis, California 95616 USA Final Report for Contract # 10154-2-G106 between Humboldt State University Foundation and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service July 2004 4Current Address: 5700 Arcadia Road, Apt. #219, Richmond, British Columbia V6X2G9 Canada 5Current Address: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, California 93003 USA Suggested Citation: Capitolo, P. J., H. R. Carter, R. J. Young, G. J. McChesney, W. R. McIver, R. T. Golightly, and F. Gress. 2004. Changes in breeding population size of Brandt’s and Double- crested Cormorants in California, 1975-2003. Unpublished report, Department of Wildlife, Humboldt State University, Arcata, California. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 2 METHODS ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • China Camp State Park State Camp China
    groups, came to California with the prospect of mining of prospect the with California to came groups, often had sweathouses and dance houses. Sir Francis Sir houses. dance and sweathouses had often a catch a in ng bringi Quan Frank history. fishing. The Chinese, like many other immigrant other many like Chinese, The fishing. dome framework of light poles. Larger settlements Larger poles. light of framework dome forgotten in California in forgotten 1860s when the Chinese immigrants began shrimp began immigrants Chinese the when 1860s Houses were built of grass and tule thatching over a over thatching tule and grass of built were Houses life that has been generally been has that life A significant era began for China Camp in the mid- the in Camp China for began era significant A ous sites have been found in the park. the in found been have sites ous visitors to imagine a way of way a imagine to visitors THE CHINESE THE ten individuals living in each. The remains of numer- of remains The each. in living individuals ten exhibit makes it easy for easy it makes exhibit consisted of ten or twelve households, with eight to eight with households, twelve or ten of consisted informative museum informative t Rock Cove looking south (ca early 1900s) early (ca south looking Cove Rock t Ra from Lake County tribes. Their village site typically site village Their tribes. County Lake from been preserved, and an and preserved, been locally unobtainable resources as high-grade obsidian high-grade as resources unobtainable locally historic structures have structures historic beads from clamshells, and traded them for such for them traded and clamshells, from beads in San Francisco Bay Francisco San in Camp State Park.
    [Show full text]
  • James P. Delgado
    JAMES P. DELGADO Forty-four years of working to explore, locate, study and preserve history for the benefit of all people by encouraging public access, involvement, and appreciation. EDUCATION Ph.D. (Archaeology), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, 2006. M.A. History (Maritime History and Underwater Research), East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, 1985. B.A. History (American History), San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California, magna cum laude, 1981. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Senior Vice President, SEARCH, Inc., Jacksonville, Florida, May 2017- Member of the senior leadership team. Responsible for the scientific integrity of the company. Oversees international initiatives. Develops new business opportunities. Provides creative input and guidance. Director of Maritime Heritage, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland-October 2010-April 2017. Developed and implemented programs that interpreted and characterized maritime heritage resource in the sanctuary system. Designed and executed projects to locate and identify maritime heritage resources within and outside national marine sanctuaries. Promoted a wide application of program results through publications, presentations, or authoritative reports or policies. Managed the maritime heritage program and served as a senior member of the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries leadership team. Established policies on the protection of maritime heritage resources. Independently
    [Show full text]