DOCSLIB.ORG

Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan 2019 Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan Version III April 2019 Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan Version III Suggested Citation: Alaska Shorebird Group. 2019. Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan. Version III. Alaska Shorebird Group, Anchorage, AK. The Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan and updates can be viewed and downloaded at: https://www.fws.gov/alaska/mbsp/mbm/shorebirds/plans.htm Cover: Male Red Knot on breeding territory, Seward Peninsula, Alaska. Photo by Lucas DeCicco. i Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan Contents DEDICATION v BCR 1: Aleutian/Bering Sea Islands 35 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vi Priority Species 36 Important Shorebird Areas 37 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Primary Conservation Objectives 37 PART I: ALASKA SHOREBIRD 6 Priority Conservation Issues and Actions 38 CONSERVATION PLAN Emerging Conservation Issues 39 Introduction 6 Evaluation of Conservation Progress 40 Vision of the Alaska Shorebird Group 7 BCR 2: Western Alaska 41 Shorebirds in Alaska 7 Priority Species 42 Conservation Issues Facing Shorebirds 14 Important Shorebird Areas 43 Climate Change 14 Primary Conservation Objectives 44 Energy Production and Mining 16 Priority Conservation Issues and Actions 45 Pollution 16 Emerging Conservation Issues 48 Residential and Commercial Development 17 Evaluation of Conservation Progress 48 Agriculture and Aquaculture 17 BCR 3: Arctic Plains and Mountains 50 Transportation and Service Corridors 17 Priority Species 51 Biological Resource Use 18 Important Shorebird Areas 52 Human Intrusions and Disturbance 18 Primary Conservation Objectives 54 Invasive and Problematic Species, Pathogens, 18 and Genes Priority Conservation Issues and Actions 54 Summary of Conservation Threats Across 19 Emerging Conservation Issues 59 Alaska Evaluation of Conservation Progress 60 Conservation Strategy for Alaska 21 BCR 4: Northwestern Interior Forest 62 Research 21 Priority Species 63 Population Inventory and Monitoring 24 Important Shorebird Areas 63 Habitat Management and Protection 26 Primary Conservation Objectives 64 Environmental Education and Public Outreach 26 Priority Conservation Issues and Actions 65 International Collaborations 27 Emerging Conservation Issues 68 Implementation, Coordination, and Evaluation 27 Evaluation of Conservation Progress 68 of the Plan BCR 5: North Pacific Rainforest 70 Shorebird Species Conservation Priorities in 28 Alaska Priority Species 71 Prioritization Process 28 Important Shorebird Areas 72 PART II: ALASKA’S BIRD CONSERVATION 31 Primary Conservation Objectives 72 REGIONS Priority Conservation Issues and Actions 73 The Alaska Environment 31 Emerging Conservation Issues 75 Alaska’s Bird Conservation Regions 34 Evaluation of Conservation Progress 77 LITERATURE CITED 78 ii Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan APPENDICES Alaska Stewardship Species 134 Appendix 1. Common name, scientific name, 103 Black-bellied Plover 134 and status of shorebirds in Alaska Ruddy Turnstone 134 Appendix 2. Primary wintering areas and 105 Surfbird 135 primary migratory flyways of shorebird species commonly occurring in Alaska Sharp-tailed Sandpiper 136 Appendix 3. Important shorebird migration 108 Western Sandpiper 136 and nonbreeding sites within each Bird Long-billed Dowitcher 137 Conservation Region of Alaska Solitary Sandpiper 137 Appendix 4. Key groups or initiatives 113 Wandering Tattler concerned with shorebird research, 138 monitoring, and conservation efforts that Red-necked Phalarope 138 include populations of shorebirds in Alaska FIGURES Appendix 5. Breeding shorebird surveys within 115 each Bird Conservation Region of Alaska Figure 1. Overview of Alaska, detailing some of 9 the state’s important shorebird sites Appendix 6. Ecoregions of Alaska relative to 122 boundaries of Bird Conservation Regions Figure 2. Distribution of land governed by 32 the major state, federal, and Alaska Native Appendix 7. Habitat preferences of shorebirds 123 organizations within Bird Conservation Regions in Alaska during breeding, migration, and of Alaska winter seasons Figure 3. Bird Conservation Regions in Alaska 33 Appendix 8. Species accounts for priority 125 species in Alaska Figure 4. Aleutian/Bering Sea Islands Bird 35 Greatest Conservation Concern 125 Conservation Region 1 Figure 5. Western Alaska Bird Conservation Bristle-thighed Curlew 125 41 Region 2 Bar-tailed Godwit 125 Figure 6. Arctic Plains and Mountains Bird 50 Red Knot 126 Conservation Region 3 High Conservation Concern 126 Figure 7. Northwestern Interior Forest Bird 61 Black Oystercatcher 126 Conservation Region 4 Figure 8. Northern Pacific Rainforest Bird American Golden-Plover 127 69 Conservation Region 5 Pacific Golden-Plover 127 TABLES Whimbrel 128 Table 1. Estimated population size, population 10 Hudsonian Godwit 128 trend, conservation status, and percent Marbled Godwit 129 occurrence of shorebirds that regularly occur Black Turnstone 129 in Alaska Table 2. Seasonal importance of Bird 12 Dunlin 130 Conservation Regions to Alaska’s regularly Rock Sandpiper 131 occurring shorebird species Buff-breasted Sandpiper 131 Table 3. Identification and characterization 20 Pectoral Sandpiper 132 of primary, secondary, and emerging conservation issues affecting shorebirds Semipalmated Sandpiper 132 among Alaska BCRs Short-billed Dowitcher 133 Table 4. Conservation status of shorebird 30 Lesser Yellowlegs 133 species of conservation concern that regularly occur in Alaska iii Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan TABLES (continued) Table 5. Area of land managed within each 32 Bird Conservation Region by seven primary groups or agencies Table 6. Priority shorebird species that 36 commonly breed, stage during migration, or winter in the Aleutian/Bering Sea Islands Bird Conservation Region 1 Table 7. Priority shorebird species that 42 commonly breed, stage during migration, or winter in Western Alaska Bird Conservation Region 2 Table 8. Priority shorebird species that 51 commonly breed or stage during migration in Arctic Plains and Mountains Bird Conservation Region 3 Table 9. Priority shorebird species that 63 commonly breed, stage during migration, or winter in Northwestern Interior Forest Bird Conservation Region 4 Table 10. Priority shorebird species that 70 commonly breed, stage during migration, or winter in Northern Pacific Rainforest Bird Conservation Region 5 Red Knots Lucas DeCicco Semipalmated Sandpiper Lucas DeCicco iv Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan Dedication Photo credit: Alaska Department of Fish and Game. students’ work on the ecology of Black Oystercatch- ers. He published two key reports, “Black Oyster- catcher Conservation Action Plan” for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and “A Global Assessment of the Conservation Status of the Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani” for the International Wader Study Group. He also co-authored several peer-re- viewed journal articles, presented his findings at professional conferences, and wrote many agency Photo credit: Marian Snively reports on his oystercatcher work. David would often This third version of the Alaska Shorebird Conser- say, “My knowledge is a mile wide and an inch deep,” vation Plan is dedicated to the memory of David but this modesty belied the tremendous scope and Fair Tessler in appreciation for his contributions depth of Dave’s interests, especially those related to shorebird science and conservation in Alaska. to biology or ecology. He was easy to talk to, cu- David approached his shorebird research like he rious about people and what they had to say, and did everything else in life—with deep passion, com- was a good listener, traits that earned David many mitment, and an undeniable joy. He embraced his friends. David was a mentor to many and shared oystercatcher research with fearless enthusiasm, his knowledge and insight with easy enthusiasm. careful design, and his uncanny ability to have fun, no Dave lived large, loved to travel, and was an outdoor matter the weather or work conditions. His positive, enthusiast. He was an accomplished skier, climber, can-do, and upbeat personality, as well as his quick and avid surfer. He was a devoted father and hus- wit and sense of humor are legendary. David often band, and was especially fond of camping in Prince reduced people to tears of laughter with his antics; William Sound with his wife, Tracey, and their two people loved to work and be around him. He was children, River and Sierra. David loved his family also highly intelligent and hardworking, as demon- dearly, and was most happy when sharing the natu- strated by his many professional accomplishments. ral world together. In 2015, Dave and his family left As non-game Wildlife Biologist and Coordinator of Alaska to pursue new adventures in Hawaii, where the Wildlife Diversity Program at Alaska Department he took a position with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife of Fish and Game, David’s contributions advanced Service as the Deputy Field Supervisor for Geo- Black Oystercatcher research and conservation in graphic Operations. He and his family loved their Alaska. For example, David was instrumental in the new island life and spent time camping and island formation of the Black Oystercatcher Working Group. hopping. However, he remarked that part of his heart He also mentored and supported several graduate always remained in Alaska. Dave’s humor, charm, enthusiasm, and love of life are greatly missed. v Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan Tom Rothe, Pacific Birds Habitat Joint Venture Acknowledgments Sarah T. Saalfeld, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service SPECIES ACCOUNT AUTHORS EDITORS Megan
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015)
    IUCN Red List version 2015.4: Table 7 Last Updated: 19 November 2015 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2014 (IUCN Red List version 2014.3) and 2015 (IUCN Red List version 2015-4) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2014) List (2015) change version Category Category MAMMALS Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC NT N 2015-2 Ailurus fulgens Red Panda VU EN N 2015-4
    [Show full text]
  • Nordmann's Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi
    Final Report Nordmann’s Greenshank Population Analysis, at Pantai Cemara Jambi Cipto Dwi Handono1, Ragil Siti Rihadini1, Iwan Febrianto1 and Ahmad Zulfikar Abdullah1 1Yayasan Ekologi Satwa Alam Liar Indonesia (Yayasan EKSAI/EKSAI Foundation) Surabaya, Indonesia Background Many shorebirds species have declined along East Asian-Australasian Flyway which support the highest diversity of shorebirds in the world, including the globally endangered species, Nordmann’s Greenshank. Nordmann’s Greenshank listed as endangered in the IUCN Red list of Threatened Species because of its small and declining population (BirdLife International, 2016). It’s one of the world’s most threatened shorebirds, is confined to the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (Bamford et al. 2008, BirdLife International 2001, 2012). Its global population is estimated at 500–1,000, with an estimated 100 in Malaysia, 100–200 in Thailand, 100 in Myanmar, plus unknown but low numbers in NE India, Bangladesh and Sumatra (Wetlands International 2006). The population is suspected to be rapidly decreasing due to coastal wetland development throughout Asia for industry, infrastructure and aquaculture, and the degradation of its breeding habitat in Russia by grazing Reindeer Rangifer tarandus (BirdLife International 2012). Mostly Nordmann’s Greenshanks have been recorded in very small numbers throughout Southeast Asia, and there are few places where it has been reported regularly. In Myanmar, for example, it was rediscovered after a gap of almost 129 years. The total count recorded by the Asian Waterbird Census (AWC) in 2006 for Myanmar was 28 birds with 14 being the largest number at a single locality (Naing 2007). In 2011–2012, Nordmann’s Greenshank was found three times in Sumatera Utara province, N Sumatra.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Identification of Smaller Sandpipers Within the Genus <I
    Field identification of smaller sandpipers within the genus C/dr/s Richard R. Veit and Lars Jonsson Paintings and line drawings by Lars Jonsson INTRODUCTION the hand, we recommend that the reader threeNearctic species, the Semipalmated refer to the speciesaccounts of Prateret Sandpiper (C. pusilia), the Western HESMALL Calidris sandpipers, affec- al. (1977) or Cramp and Simmons Sandpiper(C. mauri) andthe LeastSand- tionatelyreferred to as "peeps" in (1983). Our conclusionsin this paperare piper (C. minutilla), and four Palearctic North America, and as "stints" in Britain, basedupon our own extensivefield expe- species,the primarilywestern Little Stint haveprovided notoriously thorny identi- rience,which, betweenus, includesfirst- (C. minuta), the easternRufous-necked ficationproblems for many years. The hand familiarity with all sevenspecies. Stint (C. ruficollis), the eastern Long- first comprehensiveefforts to elucidate We also examined specimensin the toed Stint (C. subminuta)and the wide- thepicture were two paperspublished in AmericanMuseum of Natural History, spread Temminck's Stint (C. tem- Brtttsh Birds (Wallace 1974, 1979) in Museumof ComparativeZoology, Los minckii).Four of thesespecies, pusilla, whichthe problem was approached from Angeles County Museum, San Diego mauri, minuta and ruficollis, breed on the Britishperspective of distinguishing Natural History Museum, Louisiana arctictundra and are found during migra- vagrant Nearctic or eastern Palearctic State UniversityMuseum of Zoology, tion in flocksof up to thousandsof
    [Show full text]
  • Migratory Shorebirds Management Plan
    Report GLNG Curtis Island Marine Facilities Migratory Shorebirds Environmental Management Plan 17 MARCH 2011 Prepared for GLNG Operations Pty Ltd Level 22 Santos Place 32 Turbot Street Brisbane Qld 4000 42626727 Project Manager: URS Australia Pty Ltd Level 16, 240 Queen Street Angus McLeod Brisbane, QLD 4000 Senior Ecologist GPO Box 302, QLD 4001 Australia T: 61 7 3243 2111 Principal-In-Charge: F: 61 7 3243 2199 Chris Pigott Senior Principal Author: Angus McLeod Senior Ecologist Reviewer: Date: 17 March 2011 Reference: 42626727/01/03 Status: Final Chris Pratt Principal Environmental Scientist j:\jobs\42626727\5 works\draft emp\for tina 17.3.11\3310-glng-3-3 3-0065_shorebirds_final_17 03 2011.doc Table of Contents Abbreviations............................................................................................................iii Executive Summary..................................................................................................iv 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................1 1.1 Project Background .........................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose of the Migratory Shorebirds Environment Management Plan ...................................................................................................................1 1.3 Aims and Objectives ........................................................................................3 1.4 Study Area ........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • To View the Apr/May Issue of the Sandpiper (Pdf)
    The andpiper APRIL/MAY 2018 Redwood Region Audubon Society www.rras.org S APRIL/MAY FIELD TRIPS Every Saturday: Arcata Marsh and Wildlife Sanctuary. Sunday, April 8: Humboldt Bay National Wildlife carpooling available. Walks generally run 2-3 hours. All These are our famous, rain-or-shine, docent-led fi eld trips at Refuge. This is a wonderful 2-to 3-hour trip for people ages, abilities and interest levels welcome! For more the Marsh. Bring your binocular(s) and have a great morning wanting to learn the birds of the Humboldt Bay area. It information, please contact Melissa Dougherty at 530-859- birding! Meet in the parking lot at the end of South I Street takes a leisurely pace with emphasis on enjoying the birds! 1874 or email [email protected]. (Klopp Lake) in Arcata at 8:30 a.m. Trips end around 11 a.m. Beginners are more than welcome. Meet at the Refuge Walks led by: Cédric Duhalde (Apr 7); Cindy Moyer (Apr Visitor Center at 9 a.m. Call Jude Power (707-822- 3613) Saturday, April 14: Shorebird Workshop, Part 14); Michael Morris (Apr 21); Christine Keil (Apr 28). If you for more information. III at Del Norte Pier. Meet at 10 a.m. to watch the are interested in leading a Marsh walk, please contact Ken rising tide at the foot of W. Del Norte St. bring in waves Burton at [email protected]. Sunday, April 8: Shorebird Workshop, Part II of godwits, willets, turnstones, and curlews. Tide will turn at South Spit. First we’ll look for beach-loving around noon; we hope to see a good show by then.
    [Show full text]
  • Upland Sandpiper: a Flagship for Jack Pine Barrens Restoration in the Upper Midwest? R
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Upland Sandpiper: A Flagship for Jack Pine Barrens Restoration in the Upper Midwest? R. Gregory Corace III, Jacob L. Korte, Lindsey M. Shartell and Daniel M. Kashian ABSTRACT Fire-dependent ecosystems have been altered across much of North America, and their restoration has the potential to affect many wildlife species, including those of regional conservation priority such as the upland sandpiper (UPSA, Bartra- mia longicauda). In the Upper Midwest, fire-dependent jack pine (Pinus banksiana) barrens were once common and are now a focus of restoration by state, federal, and non-government agencies and organizations. Given UPSA’s association with terrestrial ecosystems such as pastures, hayfields, and barrens, we determined the location of UPSA-occupied areas across multiple states, with special focus on Michigan, to illustrate distributional relationships with specific ecoregions, soils, and land covers while considering what role the species may have as a flagship for barrens restoration. With the exception of Michigan, UPSA-occupied areas in all states studied had greater proportions of agricultural land (National Land Cover Data: pasture/hay and cultivated crops) than other openland cover types. In Michigan, 66% of long-term occupied areas were found in the northern Lower Peninsula, and most often consisted of anthropogenic grasslands pro- viding stable habitat on higher-quality soils. In contrast, short-term occupied areas had a greater proportion of native openlands that were often located on poorer, xeric soils associated with jack pine ecosystems that succeed to closed- canopy forests or shrublands in the absence of fire. Openlands with no UPSA breeding evidence were characterized by intensive agriculture (row crops).
    [Show full text]
  • Arcata Marsh & Wildlife Sanctuary Bird Checklist
    Arcata Marsh & Wildlife Sanctuary Bird Checklist Arcata, Humboldt County, California (Updated Fall 2014) The following list of 327 species was updated by Rob Fowler and David Fix in 2014 from the list they compiled in 2009. Data came from sightings entered in eBird; Stanley Harris's Northwest California Bird (2005, 1996, 1991); historical records in North American Birds magazine and its supporting unpublished Humboldt County summaries; the 2006 edition Arcata Marsh bird checklist (Elias Elias); the 1995 edition Arcata Marsh bird checklist (Kristina Van Wert); and personal communications with many birders. Formatting by Camden Bruner. Call the Northwest California Bird Alert at (707) 822-5666 to report or hear reports of rare birds! Abbreviations: A - Abundant; occurs in large numbers C - Common; likely to be found U - Uncommon; occurs in small numbers, found with seearching R - Rare; expected in very small numbers, not likely to be found Ca - Casual; several records, possibly may occur regularly Ac - Accidental; 1-3 records, not reasonably expected to occur Sp - Spring (Marsh - May) S - Summer (June to mid-July) F - Fall (mid-July through November) W - Winter (December through February) Here Waterfowl: Breeds Spring Summer Fall Winter _____ Greater White-fronted Goose R R R _____ Emperor Goose Ac _____ Snow Goose Ca Ca Ca _____ Ross's Goose Ca Ca Ca _____ Brant U Ac U R _____ Cackling Goose A U C _____ Canada Goose C C C C yes _____ Tundra Swan Ca Ca _____ Wood Duck U U U U yes _____ Gadwall C C C C yes _____ Eurasian Wigeon R U R _____
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Reanalysis of Strauch's Osteological Data Set for The
    TheCondor97:174-196 0 The Cooper Ornithological Society 1995 PHYLOGENETIC REANALYSIS OF STRAUCH’S OSTEOLOGICAL DATA SET FOR THE CHARADRIIFORMES PHILIP c. CHU Department of Biology and Museum of Zoology The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Abstract. Strauch’s (1978) compatibility analysisof relationshipsamong the shorebirds (Charadriifonnes) was the first study to examine the full range of charadriifonn taxa in a reproducibleway. SubsequentlyMickevich and Parenti (1980) leveled seriouscharges against Strauch’s characters,method of phylogenetic inference, and results. To account for these charges,Strauch ’s characterswere re-examined and recoded, and parsimony analyseswere performed on the revised matrix. A parsimony analysison 74 taxa from the revised matrix yielded 855 shortesttrees, each length = 286 and consistencyindex = 0.385. In each shortest tree there were two major lineages,a lineageof sandpiper-likebirds and a lineageof plover- like birds; the two formed a monophyletic group, with the auks (Alcidae) being that group’s sister taxon. The shortest trees were then compared with other estimates of shorebird re- lationships, comparison suggestingthat the chargesagainst Strauch’s results may have re- sulted from the Mickevich and Parenti decisions to exclude much of Strauch’s character evidence. Key words: Charadrilformes; phylogeny; compatibility analysis: parsimony analysis; tax- onomic congruence. INTRODUCTION Strauch scored 227 charadriiform taxa for 70 The investigation of evolutionary relationships characters. Sixty-three of the characters were among shorebirds (Aves: Charadriiformes) has a taken from either the skull or postcranial skel- long history (reviewed in Sibley and Ahlquist eton; the remaining seven involved the respec- 1990). Almost all studies used morphology to tive origins of three neck muscles, as published make inferences about shared ancestry; infer- in Burton (1971, 1972, 1974) and Zusi (1962).
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal for the Inclusion of Species on the Appendices of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals
    1 / 2 Proposal II/7 PROPOSAL FOR THE INCLUSION OF SPECIES ON THE APPENDICES OF THE CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF MIGRATORY SPECIES OF WILD ANIMALS A. PROPOSAL: Listing the entire population of Glareola nuchalis on Appendix II. B. PROPONENT: Government of Kenya. C. SUPPORTING STATEMENT: 1. Taxon: 1.1 Class: Aves 1.2 Order: Charadriiformes 1.3 Family: Glareolidae 1.4 Genus/species/subspecies: Glareola nuchalis 1.5 Common names: English: Rock Pratincole, White-collared Pratincole French: Glarède aureole 2. Biological data 2.1 Distribution Distributed in West and central Africa. Scarce in eastern Africa. 2.2 Population No detailed census data available, but the best guess information available puts the number at >25,000 within its distribution range. 2.3 Habitat Exposed rocks in large rivers and streams used for breeding. May rest on sandbars, when rivers flood. Also found in coastal localities and other inland waters. 2.4 Migrations Locally common resident and regular intra-African migrant. Migrates within its distribution range. Most post breeding dispersal occurs during the wet season. 3. Threat data 3.1 Direct threats Unpredictable fluctuations of water levels of local rivers during breeding seasons affect the breeding performance. Sand mining along rivers has severe impacts on the availability of suitable habitats in the riparian areas for nesting. 3.2 Habitat destruction Riparian land use activities within the range states limits the availability of suitable roosting and nesting areas along rivers. 3.3 Indirect threats The loss and degradation of catchments for all wetlands within its range. 3.4 Threats connected especially with migrations None known.
    [Show full text]
  • Birdlife International for the Input of Analyses, Technical Information, Advice, Ideas, Research Papers, Peer Review and Comment
    UNEP/CMS/ScC16/Doc.10 Annex 2b CMS Scientific Council: Flyway Working Group Reviews Review 2: Review of Current Knowledge of Bird Flyways, Principal Knowledge Gaps and Conservation Priorities Compiled by: JEFF KIRBY Just Ecology Brookend House, Old Brookend, Berkeley, Gloucestershire, GL13 9SQ, U.K. June 2010 Acknowledgements I am grateful to colleagues at BirdLife International for the input of analyses, technical information, advice, ideas, research papers, peer review and comment. Thus, I extend my gratitude to my lead contact at the BirdLife Secretariat, Ali Stattersfield, and to Tris Allinson, Jonathan Barnard, Stuart Butchart, John Croxall, Mike Evans, Lincoln Fishpool, Richard Grimmett, Vicky Jones and Ian May. In addition, John Sherwell worked enthusiastically and efficiently to provide many key publications, at short notice, and I’m grateful to him for that. I also thank the authors of, and contributors to, Kirby et al. (2008) which was a major review of the status of migratory bird species and which laid the foundations for this work. Borja Heredia, from CMS, and Taej Mundkur, from Wetlands International, also provided much helpful advice and assistance, and were instrumental in steering the work. I wish to thank Tim Jones as well (the compiler of a parallel review of CMS instruments) for his advice, comment and technical inputs; and also Simon Delany of Wetlands International. Various members of the CMS Flyway Working Group, and other representatives from CMS, BirdLife and Wetlands International networks, responded to requests for advice and comment and for this I wish to thank: Olivier Biber, Joost Brouwer, Nicola Crockford, Carlo C. Custodio, Tim Dodman, Roger Jaensch, Jelena Kralj, Angus Middleton, Narelle Montgomery, Cristina Morales, Paul Kariuki Ndang'ang'a, Paul O’Neill, Herb Raffaele and David Stroud.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Mississippi Bird EA
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Managing Damage and Threats of Damage Caused by Birds in the State of Mississippi Prepared by United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Wildlife Services In Cooperation with: The Tennessee Valley Authority January 2020 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wildlife is an important public resource that can provide economic, recreational, emotional, and esthetic benefits to many people. However, wildlife can cause damage to agricultural resources, natural resources, property, and threaten human safety. When people experience damage caused by wildlife or when wildlife threatens to cause damage, people may seek assistance from other entities. The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services (WS) program is the lead federal agency responsible for managing conflicts between people and wildlife. Therefore, people experiencing damage or threats of damage associated with wildlife could seek assistance from WS. In Mississippi, WS has and continues to receive requests for assistance to reduce and prevent damage associated with several bird species. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to incorporate environmental planning into federal agency actions and decision-making processes. Therefore, if WS provided assistance by conducting activities to manage damage caused by bird species, those activities would be a federal action requiring compliance with the NEPA. The NEPA requires federal agencies to have available
    [Show full text]
  • Disaggregation of Bird Families Listed on Cms Appendix Ii
    Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 2nd Meeting of the Sessional Committee of the CMS Scientific Council (ScC-SC2) Bonn, Germany, 10 – 14 July 2017 UNEP/CMS/ScC-SC2/Inf.3 DISAGGREGATION OF BIRD FAMILIES LISTED ON CMS APPENDIX II (Prepared by the Appointed Councillors for Birds) Summary: The first meeting of the Sessional Committee of the Scientific Council identified the adoption of a new standard reference for avian taxonomy as an opportunity to disaggregate the higher-level taxa listed on Appendix II and to identify those that are considered to be migratory species and that have an unfavourable conservation status. The current paper presents an initial analysis of the higher-level disaggregation using the Handbook of the Birds of the World/BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World Volumes 1 and 2 taxonomy, and identifies the challenges in completing the analysis to identify all of the migratory species and the corresponding Range States. The document has been prepared by the COP Appointed Scientific Councilors for Birds. This is a supplementary paper to COP document UNEP/CMS/COP12/Doc.25.3 on Taxonomy and Nomenclature UNEP/CMS/ScC-Sc2/Inf.3 DISAGGREGATION OF BIRD FAMILIES LISTED ON CMS APPENDIX II 1. Through Resolution 11.19, the Conference of Parties adopted as the standard reference for bird taxonomy and nomenclature for Non-Passerine species the Handbook of the Birds of the World/BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, Volume 1: Non-Passerines, by Josep del Hoyo and Nigel J. Collar (2014); 2.
    [Show full text]